usual suspect wrote:
> Karen has used at least three different ages when her adult "foster son"
> was supposedly kicked out of his home: 11, 12, 13. She has no room to
> criticize this guy's parents: after all, she abandoned her own son at an
> even younger age. She didn't even meet the "foster son" until he was 19,
> so she really only has his word for it. By her own accounts, there would
> be little reason to take his word for it: he sadly had many problems
> ranging from drug abuse to homosexuality to prostituting himself.
>
> I thought I remembered something else about the prostitution involved
> and it shows yet another inconsistency in her story.
>
> My child was already away at school by the time I got to know
> any "out" pedophiles. My "foster son" ( who was already 19 when
> I first met him)had been an underage prostitute before I met
> him, and was quite clear that he enjoyed the sex itself, and
> much preferred that as a way of supporting himself to flipping
> burgers at McOffal's.
> http://snipurl.com/4nay
>
> That contradicts what she told someone else:
> My foster son was an abuser of crystal meth. He ruined his life
> in many ways. Why did he take it? Because he had problems that
> only chemical oblivion could eae. he had been tossed out when
> he was eleven years old because he was ***. He had lived and
> worked as a prostitute because that's the ONLY work a child can
> GET legally!
> http://snipurl.com/4nac
>
> Three different ages given and two different reasons for prostituting
> himself. I said it was fishy, and I was right.
>
> I don't know what the whole story is with that guy. It's sad regardless
> of how he ended up on the streets, and it's sad that his last days were
> filled with child-hating monsters like Karen and Sylvia rather than his
> own family. In reality, Karen probably befriended a couple of young
> punks and did nothing to discourage their openly risky behavior (see
> below: I wouldn't doubt if she ENCOURAGED risky behavior). What she did
> isn't foster parenting (fits in with her usual game of semantics; she
> doesn't understand the word "protestant," either).
>
> We can also conclude that her counselling of the young street urchin was
> a matter of the blind leading the blind since she isn't playing with a
> full deck, either. Consider the rest of the first snippet above:
>
> I would have had no hesitation in letting my son associate
> with the responsible pedophiles I met. Just as associating
> with a *** person will not "turn" a straight kid ***,
> associating with a _responsible_ pedophile ( meaning one
> who respects his partners and does not rape or coerce
> them against their will) will not make a child who is
> not at all interested in sexual activity of some kind with
> an older person into a "victim." In our society, I would
> be much more concerned about a furtive encounter with
> a secretive, predatory rapist than a friendship between
> members of my family and someone who is willing to come out
> as a responsible pedophile. I would tend to trust such a
> person, if I knew him well enough for him to trust me with
> the information and he had proved himself honorable and
> trustworthy.
> http://snipurl.com/4nay
>
> She was no more a "foster mother" than she was a real one. Real parents
> take care of their children rather than abandoning them; they discourage
> behavior that will cause their children problems in life; they protect
> them from bad influences rather than introduce them to pedophiles.
If you go back and read all the early references to
"foster son" appearing under her posting ID, the
majority of the posts are by the fetal-alcohol syndrome
wreckage Sylvia. It appears, strangely, that Sylvia,
the one who hates children, was the instigator of the
pseudo-fostering (of a 19-year-old). Karen, ever the
PC finger-in-the-eye self-righteous hate-spewer, was
more than happy to go along.