Dave Lieber is a columnist for Fort Worth Star-Telegram who has found himself in a bizarre situation where he has been criminally charged for telling his 11-year-old son to walk home a few blocks from McDonalds. It began with an argument in McDonald’s and Lieber leaving his son to walk home. Lieber would return a short time later to find police speaking to his son and thought that the matter was closed by an amicable reunion and mutual apologies of the father and son. It wasn’t.
Lieber wrote about the experience in an August 15th column, describing how he returning after cooling off to find officers speaking with his son. He described his actions as “stupid and quite serious mistake” despite support from his readers who said that they have taken the same approach with disrespectful kids. That is when it got weird. Lieber, 51, was arrested by detectives of Watauga, Texas for child abandonment and endangerment, according to Detective Tiffany Ward.
State law defines abandonment as intentionally leaving a child younger than 15 “in any place under circumstances that expose the child to an unreasonable risk of harm.” Walking home a few blocks from McDonald’s is exposing a child to unreasonable risk of harm? How dangerous are the streets of Watauga? Yet, Lieber (who has been suspended by the newspaper) accepts that his actions “could have exposed my son to grave danger. I do know that. But in the moment of anger, I didn’t think clearly.”
I am probably the most protective, risk-adverse parent on Earth. My wife accuses me of wanting to turn the four kids into bubble babies. I would not use this type of punishment or scared straight technique. However, it is an example in my view of how we have criminalized every aspect of our lives, here.
For the full article, click here.
First of all, I don’t know what that has to do with anything.
Second, I do not respond to demands about random personal questions from clearly hostile petitioners.
Third, when you admit trying to suggest I was Zakimar, and thus an anti-semite, then maybe I’ll consider responding to your queries. In the meantime, I suggest you go help Mike hunt for his missing respect for the truth.
Maybe you lost yours in the same place.
You’ve got such a good memory, CroMM. When did you first start posting to this blog? C’mon, CroMM. Everyone remembers their first post.
Do you even remember Zakimar?
Yes.
And more importantly, I will remember you.
Mojo
1, August 31, 2008 at 9:26 pm
Holy cow, CroMM! I just asked you specifically because you were the only person posting to this thread in the past several hours
So now you add to that lie, by lying about your intent? Do you think you’re fooling anyone?
Here, let me help you out here.
—
Hey Mojo, … I’ve heard it said that someone is like Mike Spindell, in that they lie about others and when caught lying, further lie to try and deny their lies to begin with.
They are essentially liars, too proud to admit their lies.
😐
You wouldn’t.. know anyone like that… would you?
Holy cow, CroMM! I just asked you specifically because you were the only person posting to this thread in the past several hours. I figured you were still here. Geez Louise! And as far as my use of the word “also” I simply meant that as “in addition” to the other traits I’d already listed about ZAKIMAR… argumentative, obnoxious, and such. If you would take the time to re-read the posting you’ll see that I never said anything about you being an anti-semite.
Do you even remember Zakimar? Nothing I said about him is untrue.
When you guys have a point to make, that isn’t a silly baseless personal attack on me, or more lectures from liars who claim to be psychologists but can’t admit they lied and got caught in a simple debate, or other boasts about your skills, professions and anything else that apparently isn’t evident from your postings herein, and can instead refute some position I’ve taken, let me know.
In the meantime, better give your fancy colleges and universities a call to their admissions office.
😐
Not to enroll in further courses mind you, but to check on their refund policies.
You know, its one thing when you “learned scholars” (Patty, Mike, Mojo) want to debate, can’t, and then turn to bragging about your fancy educations.
Its another thing altogether, to randomly post lies about someone out of the blue, for not other reason than the ability to defeat me in a topic of debate.
And lies of such a filthy and foul nature as that.
To label someone “anti-semetic” who has never even spoken anything that could be remotely construed as anti semetic, then furthering it by declaring him “obsessed with zionism”, is beneath contempt.
Also Mojo, like your “learned” friends it seems you have a discomfort with the truth, as you claim this;
He was also highly anti-semetic and was obsessed with ‘zionists’.
Notice the use of the word, “also”, when referencing Zakimar and myself.
Thus you are claiming that I am anti-semetic, which and am obsessed with zionists.
You sir, ARE a liar. That is a bold faced lie, and you’re a liar for saying it.
Either demonstrate one single post of mine that was “anti-semetic” or even the MENTION of the word “zionists” in ANY of my posts, or admit to being a dirty liar.
You know, if you think I am Zakimar, then you are not as bright as I give you credit for.
I noticed something interesting and perhaps others could shed a little light. There was a poster named ‘Zakimar’–highly argumentative to the point of simply being obnoxious, his arguments (I’m assuming a ‘he’) often lacked logic and would more often wind up betraying a juvenile intellect at best (or a severe and constant dependency on alcohol) but this never stopped him claiming victory in whatever debate he was engaged in. He was also highly anti-semetic and was obsessed with ‘zionists’. His last post seemed to appear back on the “Pelosi: Obama Blessed By God” thread.
Nothing since.
Cro Magnum Man, any idea what ever happened to Zakimar?
Funny how you and your friend Patty there, whenever you are unable to win in a debate, always refer to your fancy colleges and careers as if they somehow make you look smarter while losing the debate.
😐
It would seem to me, with your batting average thus far, I’d want to keep my educational and professional acheivments as far from inspection as possible.
Micheal Spindell said…
I have a Masters from an Ivy League School (full scholarship),
five years postgraduate training as a psychotherapist, and the full training from the New York State Child Abuse Protection Academy and an accredited course in human sexuality. Besides that you twit, at the age of 55 I created and ran a successful housing program in the community, for people with serious mental illnesses and severe. addiction problems. When it comes to this subject, son, you’re not even in the ballpark.
Really?
😀
I’m proud of ya. I really am.
But perhaps one more “saddest thing of all” for your list of saddest things, is how all that fine education and professional training hasn’t helped you debate one comparatively undeducated blogger, without being reduced to lying, blubbering and calling them names.
Nor has it helped you to admit lying, something one would think such a vastly experienced and titled “therapist” such as yourself would have no problem doing.
😐
Perhaps some of your learned peers might lend you their couch?
Hint: Mike.
Lighten up. Its all in good fun.
Mike Spindell said…
The saddest thing of all for you is that as I write this you’ve probably posted four more times trying to defend the nonsense you spout
Really? Thats the “saddest” thing?
😐
One would think the “saddest” thing is that you fine scholars and learned folk with your fancy degrees from the best colleges and universites in the land, cannot seem keep pace with the posts of one lone non degreed blogger sporting his measly partial public school education.
“Tell me how exactly, the child was “abused” by having to walk a few blocks.”
“I understand you don’t think the case has merit.”
—
So tell me how you reconcile those two statements of yours. In one you strongly imply that I think the child was abused. In the other
you acknowledge that I didn’t think the child was abused
Well, if you look at your first comment, you started OUT by saying you agree with me, but then ended UP, saying this;
Mike Spindell
1, August 31, 2008 at 3:02 pm
I do believe the father was a jerk. If one is a competent parent of an 11 year old, you should not lose control. .
On the one hand you say you agree with me, on the other however, you accuse the father of being a “jerk” and losing “control”.
Losing control can be an actionable item, in family court.
Thus, your “agreement” with me was mired in your condemnation of the fathers actions, which is how child abuse cases start.
I didn’t accuse you of saying he should be prosecuted. I merely reiterated my case that it was not abuse. If that came off to you as my pushing you into a corner on accepting his abuse, then please, by all means, accept my apologies now, as I am aware of your statements that he should not be prosecuted and I never meant to imply otherwise. I did mean to imply that your positions on his actions, are the “SOURCE” of the Witchhunt we now live under, because it’s the constant judging of other parents methods that create the mentality that leads to such ridiculous overreaching cases as this one. But, that being said, I am aware you are at least reasonable enough to not wish prosecution on the fella.So, if you thought I was backing you into a position, or if I came across that way, then please accept my humble apologies.
But first, you might take a stroll over to the gay jesus thread, and apologize for ACTUALLY MISQUOTING me, and then repeatedly LYING about doing so.
Because you’ve yet in all your lectures to me since, found the “testosterone” to do so.
Is that the best you’ve got.
No, I’ve got more.
You know very well what I said, but as usual you interpret what you want. You then resort to “macho” insults like “blubbering” to try to impress upon me what a tough man you are
No, it was meant to be humorous.
Runt of the litter to imply your Dad was tougher than my Dad
No, you were the one who FIRST boasted of the size of your father. I merely pointed out that my dad was of similar proportions, however in my family, that is considered small. His brothers were all over 6’4. Just a fact, since you shared with me your fact about your dad.
By that I’m not referring to sexual preferences, but the need to prove somehow that you’re tough
How pray tell, does one do that using Pixels and Datagrams?
But to be fair, I’ll address these specifics.
CroMM,
I quit. You are once again frozen in your competitive loop, which means not bothering to actually read what is being said because as I said in my first post
Well I did read your posts, and I understand you offered support for not prosecuting, however you then “qualified” that support, by calling him a “jerk” and suggesting it was the dad who was out of line.
Newsflash. When your children are out in public with you, it is NEVER the parent who is out of line during disputes.
In public, an 11 year old needs to do what he is told to do, and if part of that telling is telling him to shut the hell up, he needs to do that likewise.
Mike said…
“We have reached a point in the US where as parents we have become over-protective of our children. Much of this is the fear inculcated in us by the media, mainly TV.”
Agree, 100 percent. If only you hadn’t qualified that statement by calling him a jerk.
Parents today walk a tightrope when in public, where kids, painfully aware of the public “Witchhunt” for what now constitutes “child abuse”, leverage that knowledge against their parents in ways never conceived of in my day.
When I was a young man, smarting off to my parents in a public place would have earned me a scolding right there, and if I still wanted some more, a smack upside my head.
And NO ONE would have said a thing. No one.
Because we knew back then, that the parents were the authoritarian role in the family, not the children.
But today, thats changed, and kids can and regularly manipulate the meddlings of others in “controlling” their parents in public.
This man, obviously painfully aware of the fact that a smack to the kid would or even “grabbing” him and giving him a little shake, would immediately bring the Social Circuses running with charges of abuse, so, like most parents, he was left to figure other options besides sitting there and “reasoning” with the misbehaving brat, so as to appease the masses. He chose to dismiss the child, and let him learn what it means to be in control, by letting him walk home and consider his tantrum tossing.
Calling the man a “jerk” for that is certainly your right, but it is also my right to denounce that slur.
He is a parent. Another frustrated parent.
Frustrated not at his inability to cope with his misbehaving kid, who unlike your little angelic princesses, is growing into a young man and entering the period of open rebellion that if dad doesnt’ get a grip on early, can turn into a life of crime or worse for the boy, but frustrated at the smothering society in which we live, where observers tell the parent how to raise his own kids.
Whether his choice to make the kid walk home was a good one or not, is a matter left for him to decide, not us. He had a kid who was misbehaving in a public place, and he had to find a way of disciplining that kid right then and there that he thought would not incur the wrath of the crowd, and he made the call.
You also quoted yourself saying this, which apparently you would like addressed, so I will address this statement too.
“In my opinion, given these facts without any negatives we don’t see in the story, the man should not have been charged with two felonies.”
…to which all I can say is, gee… ya THINK?
Last Reply,
“Anyway, if you’re going to start blubbering again, then I suggest you stop engaging with me in debate.”
“My father was also 6′2, and right around 220. He was the “runt” of the litter.”
“But since you didn’t raise two little boys, but two little girls by your own admission, you haven’t a clue apparently about difference, a few micrograms of testosterone make.”
crommy,
Is that the best you’ve got. You know very well what I said, but as usual you interpret what you want. You then resort to “macho” insults like “blubbering” to try to impress upon me what a tough man you are. Runt of the litter to imply your Dad was tougher than my Dad. You use testosterone alot in your material and it leads me to believe you’ve got some manhood problems. By that I’m not referring to sexual preferences, but the need to prove somehow that you’re tough.
As to the difference between boys and girls, I know a lot about that. I have a Masters from an Ivy League School (full scholarship),
five years postgraduate training as a psychotherapist, and the full training from the New York State Child Abuse Protection Academy and an accredited course in human sexuality. Besides that you twit, at the age of 55 I created and ran a successful housing program in the community, for people with serious mental illnesses and severe. addiction problems. When it comes to this subject, son, you’re not even in the ballpark.
“Tell me how exactly, the child was “abused” by having to walk a few blocks.”
“I understand you don’t think the case has merit.”
So tell me how you reconcile those two statements of yours. In one you strongly imply that I think the child was abused. In the other
you acknowledge that I didn’t think the child was abused. The kids own father admitted he behaved badly, that was the purpose of his column, which started this whole ruckus. These statements were in your peculiar thinking, similar to the “lie” you accused me of. The saddest thing of all for you is that as I write this you’ve probably posted four more times trying to defend the nonsense you spout. I could really go for the jugular and offer a full assessment of your obsession as exhibited by these “loops” you go into, but I really do feel sorry for the fact that you are so afflicted and would take no pleasure in further attacking you. Finis.
Mike Spindell said..
You, however, choose to interpret what is in your head, rather than what is written. So okay Mr. Debating Star, I quit. you win. The nature of your victory, however, is ephemeral. You bore me and waste my time trying to get me to defend positions I never took. I thought there was a possibility that you had learned something, but all you want to do is nitpick a fight.
No, I quoted you warmly and accurately. You stated discipline should not include even getting angry, and implied that corporal punishment was a bad thing, just because you don’t practice it on your girls.
Well, corporal punishment should be up to the parent, but in todays world its become a matter for everyone but the parent.
I understand you don’t think the case has merit. I also understand you called him a jerk, and I am contesting that it is not yours nor my role in calling him such for merely responding to misbehavior out of his son.
When a son is “arguing” with his father in a public place, he is misbehaving, and taking advantage of a situation where dad has to worry about busy bodies calling the cops.
So, dad let him walk home, so he could think about his misbehaving.
That the dad apologized for his actions after being surrounded by a resturaunt full of angry “concerned citizens” and police, is well… DUH!
Of course he did. What else was the poor bastard going to do?
Anyway, if you’re going to start blubbering again, then I suggest you stop engaging with me in debate.
If everyone had left it alone, the kid would have walked home, and had some new found respect for what it means to pay the bills, put food on the table and buy the cars.
The kid would always remember the day he smarted off at dad in the Mickey Dees, and found himself walking home.
Now, the kid will always remember it as the day the police made daddy submit to the HIS will, and then, came after daddy with the full weight of the criminal justice system.