6 kids+Octuplets=14 kids - what was she thinking? what were these doctors thinking? [Archive]

SonOfSmeagol

02-06-2009, 05:34 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/02/06/octuplets.mom/index.html?section=cnn_latest

“Suleman, a 33-year-old single mother, had the octuplets through fertility treatments, while already having six young children and no clear source of income.”

Seriously – are there any forced sterilization provisions in that “stimulus” plan?

She says - "I know I'll be able to afford them when I'm done with my schooling”
huh?

Is there a Kwik-E-Mart in her neighborhood?

http://images1.fanpop.com/images/quiz/3490_1212262541514_311_400.jpg

GreatAmericanZero

02-06-2009, 05:37 PM

shes probably going to get book deals and reality tv series and she'll end up ok for herself

joethebartender

02-06-2009, 06:01 PM

shes probably going to get book deals and reality tv series and she'll end up ok for herself

On TLC...(which I now refer to as "The Litter Channel").

A.J.

02-07-2009, 07:44 AM

The spokeswoman, Joann Killeen, told CNN's Larry King Live that Suleman "has no plans on being a welfare mom and really wants to look at every opportunity that she can to make sure she can provide financially for the 14 children she's responsible for now."

In this economy? Methinks it will eventually "take a village".

Cheers to the stupid and irresponsible!

bigredd

02-07-2009, 04:24 PM

This dizzy broad is crazier than a shithouse rat! I think by having 8 on top of the 6 she already had should automatically make her inelegible for government assistance. Fuck her if she thinks the rest of our tax payin asses are gonna pay for her fuckin litter. I think she'd better find a job that pays a shitload for very little work..maybe a high end prostitute. She obviously doesn't have a problem with things going happening to that bat cave of hers. Who's gonna raise those kids with her workin an honest 40 hours like the rest of us? Nobody.

santino

02-07-2009, 04:33 PM

this is why some species eat there young

~Katja~

02-07-2009, 04:35 PM

this is why some species eat there young

...and some just teach them spelling and grammar, educate them and raise them to be wonderful, smart human beings.

jauble

02-07-2009, 04:46 PM

...and some just teach them spelling and grammar, educate them and raise them to be wonderful, smart human beings.

http://www.forumspile.com/Misc-OhSnap.jpg

Serpico1103

02-07-2009, 04:47 PM

...and some just teach them spelling and grammar, educate them and raise them to be wonderful, smart human beings.

Yeah, Canada is great.

styckx

02-07-2009, 08:30 PM

She said she plans to go back to college to pursue a degree in counseling

You couldn't make this up if you tried

underdog

02-07-2009, 08:35 PM

this is why some species eat there young

You couldn't make this up if you tried

styckx

02-07-2009, 08:37 PM

You couldn't make this up if you tried

tried to make this up you could

Reynolds

02-07-2009, 08:46 PM

...and some just teach them spelling and grammar, educate them and raise them to be wonderful, smart human beings.

Good luck in this case, statistically at least 10 of them will be stupid.

joethebartender

02-07-2009, 09:08 PM

Well, at least she won't have any trouble picking out a car model for the nex 18 years.

http://www.biloxiautoconnection.com/inventory2007/commercial/2005chevy7002.JPG

earthbrown

02-08-2009, 03:18 PM

she is irresponsible, and should have her children taken from her because she cannot support them. My fucking taxes are paying for this cunts kids....

K

underdog

02-08-2009, 03:34 PM

she is irresponsible, and should have her children taken from her because she cannot support them. My fucking taxes are paying for this cunts kids....

K

No, they're not.

styckx

02-08-2009, 03:37 PM

Well, at least she won't have any trouble picking out a car model for the nex 18 years.

http://www.biloxiautoconnection.com/inventory2007/commercial/2005chevy7002.JPG

And when they are all grown up

http://images110.fotki.com/v551/photos/4/49373/230928/cnpca3062-vi.jpg

Farmer Dave

02-08-2009, 03:47 PM

She'll be fine because....Obama preisdent naa.

Sorry couldn't help myself. It's no fault of the kids she's a fucking nut, but how do you punnish her without hurting the kids?

styckx

02-08-2009, 04:01 PM

She'll be fine because....Obama preisdent naa.

It's no fault of the kids she's a fucking nut, but how do you punnish her without hurting the kids?

Hmmm. You could take them away and try hard to find a decent couple, that are rich, and horde children like they are collecting baseball cards and give them to em.. Hmm If only..

BTW. Here is a totally random picture

http://www.babble.com/CS/blogs/famecrawler/2008/06/01-07/brad-pitt-and-angelina-jolie.jpg

Thomas Merton

02-09-2009, 05:50 PM

What is going on with her lips? Like two worms struggling on a hook

keithy_19

02-09-2009, 06:24 PM

No, they're not.

Um, yeah they do.

:help::blink::smile::happy::banning::wub::sleep::g lurps::annoyed::wink::sad::furious::wallbash::ohmy ::flush::wacko::nono::dry::unsure::lol::drunk::ton gue::laugh::down::thumbup::king::devil2::thumbdown ::innocent::clap::surrender::huh::bye::smoke:

~Katja~

02-09-2009, 06:25 PM

Um, yeah they do.

:help::blink::smile::happy::banning::wub::sleep::g lurps::annoyed::wink::sad::furious::wallbash::ohmy ::flush::wacko::nono::dry::unsure::lol::drunk::ton gue::laugh::down::thumbup::king::devil2::thumbdown ::innocent::clap::surrender::huh::bye::smoke:

how so?

boosterp

02-09-2009, 06:42 PM

This cunt's book deal will not pay out, the talk show circuit will soon wane and she will be back in the poor house hoping her mother supports her. Yet, no guy wants to be any where near her due to that many kids and she will not be able to finish school. She will try for public assistance which will not begin to cover expenses and what ever donations will dry up. In two years she will be struggling to support all those kids and sadly the kids will suffer.

Fuck her, take the kids and adopt them out.

razorboy

02-09-2009, 07:16 PM

She lives with her parents in their three bedroom house? I'm sure the neigbors are just thrilled.

boosterp

02-09-2009, 07:20 PM

She lives with her parents in their three bedroom house? I'm sure the neigbors are just thrilled.

Her parents are not thrilled.

KnoxHarrington

02-09-2009, 09:14 PM

So in her interview with Ann Curry today, Octomom (or, to use the name Fark.com has come up with for her, "Clown Car") denied being on welfare.

I guess food stamps and disability payments for 3 of the kids she had already doesn't count.

http://strangeoc.freedomblogging.com/2009/02/09/just-in-octuplets-mom-gets-food-stamps-older-kids-disability/4908/

This story keeps getting better and better.

PapaBear

02-09-2009, 09:24 PM

KnoxHarrington

02-09-2009, 09:31 PM

Here's a better articlea bout it on MSNBC.com (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29110391/), including this truly nauseating quote:

"In Nadya's view, the money that she gets from the food stamp program ... and the resources disabilities payments she gets for her three children are not welfare," he said. "They are part of programs designed to help people with need, and she does not see that as welfare."

Then what the fuck *is* welfare then, bitch?

Slumbag

02-09-2009, 09:37 PM

Here's a better articlea bout it on MSNBC.com (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29110391/), including this truly nauseating quote:

Then what the fuck *is* welfare then, bitch?

Thanks for that link. Not only is that quote awful:
"I'm not receiving help from the government. I'm not trying to expect anything from anybody. [I] just wanted to do it on my own. Any resources that someone would really, really want to help us, I will accept, I would embrace.”
Really?

PapaBear

02-09-2009, 09:38 PM

Technically, they aren't welfare. I do see food stamps as being on the same level as welfare, but disability is not at all. Though people do sometimes receive disability when it's not justified, it's not the same thing at all. Welfare, and food stamps are for low income people. Disability is for people who are unable to work to work for physical reasons, and there is no reason at all to feel bad for receiving it (unless, of course, they receive it, and they really are physically able to work).

styckx

02-09-2009, 09:43 PM

I wonder what the kids' disability is.

Having a mother that is an attention whore.

Slumbag

02-09-2009, 11:40 PM

She lives with her parents in their three bedroom house? I'm sure the neigbors are just thrilled.

Well, it is a nice place.
http://www.radaronline.com/photos//Octuplet017420.jpg
http://www.radaronline.com/photos/2009/02/nadya_suleman_octuplet_mom_2.php (http://www.radaronline.com/photos/2009/02/nadya_suleman_octuplet_mom_2.php)
Seriously. I'm a 25 year old dirtbag, and I couldn't live with all that shit.

jafter

02-10-2009, 02:03 PM

Sorry couldn't help myself. It's no fault of the kids she's a fucking nut, but how do you punnish her without hurting the kids?

First the doctor and this woman should be locked up and the kids given up for adoption. This woman is not sane. She has no way of supporting these children and should have never been allowed to have that many embryos embedded in her.

The state of California is furlowing thousands of workers because it can't cover it's bills. Now this bitch is going to ring up one to three million dollars in doctors bills to care for these children. Her parents do not want these kids and they should not be forced to care for them.

boosterp

02-10-2009, 02:59 PM

I bet her parents spent their retirement supporting this cunt and now have to work until the day they die.

This bitch does not deserve any form of public assistance.

A.J.

02-11-2009, 03:23 AM

Thebazile78

02-11-2009, 05:08 AM

spankyfrank

02-11-2009, 05:23 AM

Judge Judy would have a field day with this woman.

mendyweiss

02-11-2009, 05:30 AM

She must have an octopussy down there

Ritalin

02-11-2009, 05:36 AM

While everyone is railing against her for birthin' all these babies, and the doctors who gave her the fertility drugs, why is nobody talking about the sperm donor she has been using for al of these kids? Doesn't this guy share some blame as well?

Good question.

As of right now, sperm donors aren't required to provide financial support for the children that result from successful IVF or artificial insemination procedures.

Can you imagine what a can of worms you'd open if a judge declared this particular donor to be responsible for these kids? Why these kids and not other kids? The legal system is simply not equipped to handle this kind of issue, nor are sperm banks looking for any type of severe judgment in this case ... think about it. Setting a legal precedent that named donors are responsible for the resultant issue is dangerous. What's to stop courts from making the leap from named donors to anonymous donors?

Even foreign courts are queasy about these kinds of things. The only IVF-type case I've read about recently was a British court's decision regarding the destruction of frozen embryos of a couple who'd broken up.

Yes, legally the donor isn't liable, but it brings up an interesting point: I had a friend who was approached by two lesbians to donate sperm for them. They were all friends, and they told him that it would be no strings attached, that they just wanted to have to kid and keep it. He asked me what he should do, and this is what I told him.

What if that kid develops some sort of medical condition and needs all the money it can get for treatment? Since you haven't been around to manage all the financial arrangements, what if that kid isn't insured or underinsured? What are you going to say when those women come back to you, desperate for any help they can get? Are you going to turn your back on them - and your biological child? You'd be stuck.

Same thing with this donor. I don't think he's anonymous. So, what is he going to do? Let those kids live in squalor?

Edit: a quote from yesterday's UK Guardian:

"The sperm donor remains anonymous, although Suleman said that he was shocked by the birth of the octuplets."

So, he does know. Is he just going to let them live like that?

Thebazile78

02-11-2009, 06:04 AM

Yes, legally the donor isn't liable, but it brings up an interesting point: I had a friend who was approached by two lesbians to donate sperm for them. They were all friends, and they told him that it would be no strings attached, that they just wanted to have to kid and keep it. He asked me what he should do, and this is what I told him.

What if that kid develops some sort of medical condition and needs all the money it can get for treatment? Since you haven't been around to manage all the financial arrangements, what if that kid isn't insured or underinsured? What are you going to say when those women come back to you, desperate for any help they can get? Are you going to turn your back on them - and your biological child? You'd be stuck.

Which is why, when you get into things like this, you need a contract similar to an adoption contract or even a surrogacy contract.

It's still a sticky point of law, but a surrogacy contract is probably closer in your friend's case ... and it's not an unknown point of law.

If your friend opts to be involved in his lesbian friends' kid's (or kids') life (lives), he'd better have a pre-adoptive kind of a contract in place to protect both his and that child's interests. There's nothing wrong with that and your friend's friends shouldn't see anything wrong with it ... it's just better to have it in writing that all he's providing is genetic material and not financial support.

Same thing with this donor. I don't think he's anonymous. So, what is he going to do? Let those kids live in squalor?

Edit: a quote from yesterday's UK Guardian:

"The sperm donor remains anonymous, although Suleman said that he was shocked by the birth of the octuplets."

So, he does know. Is he just going to let them live like that?

I never said he didn't know and never referred to him as an anonymous donor.

What I did extrapolate was the small leap it might be from a known-donor situation, legally, if he were pressed by a court to provide some sort of financial support for his issue, to impinging upon anonymous donors in anonymous donor situations to provide for their issue ... some donors have been donating sperm for decades, leading to the possibility of one man maybe "fathering" tens, if not hundreds, of offspring. They got into this under the assumption that there would be no strings attached and they wouldn't have to support these issue ... if a precedent is set with known donors, what's to stop some litigious divorcee (or whatever) from suing an anonymous donor for child support at some futur date?

Ritalin

02-11-2009, 09:39 AM

Which is why, when you get into things like this, you need a contract similar to an adoption contract or even a surrogacy contract.

It's still a sticky point of law, but a surrogacy contract is probably closer in your friend's case ... and it's not an unknown point of law.

If your friend opts to be involved in his lesbian friends' kid's (or kids') life (lives), he'd better have a pre-adoptive kind of a contract in place to protect both his and that child's interests. There's nothing wrong with that and your friend's friends shouldn't see anything wrong with it ... it's just better to have it in writing that all he's providing is genetic material and not financial support.

I never said he didn't know and never referred to him as an anonymous donor.

What I did extrapolate was the small leap it might be from a known-donor situation, legally, if he were pressed by a court to provide some sort of financial support for his issue, to impinging upon anonymous donors in anonymous donor situations to provide for their issue ... some donors have been donating sperm for decades, leading to the possibility of one man maybe "fathering" tens, if not hundreds, of offspring. They got into this under the assumption that there would be no strings attached and they wouldn't have to support these issue ... if a precedent is set with known donors, what's to stop some litigious divorcee (or whatever) from suing an anonymous donor for child support at some futur date?

Yes, I know you're right, that from a legal standpoint the donor isn't liable for anything and I don't think anything should be done to change that arrangement.

What I'm saying is that if you're the donor and you KNOW that your offspring is walking around in poor conditions, how can you walk around knowing that personally.

Example: If I were the donor and I knew for certain that those 8 - well, 14 really, because the other 6 are from the same donor - kids were mine, I couldn't live with myself if I didn't get involved somehow. I'd be under no legal obligation, but there's still the issue of personal responsibility.

Same with my friend. He turned the girls down because it didn't sit right with him, but I'm sure they would have drawn up the appropriate paperwork releasing him from financial obligation. But when - hypothetically - they knock on the door with a sick child, how can you hold a contract in their face and close the door?

Thebazile78

02-11-2009, 09:56 AM

Ritalin - I see what you mean. I agree; if I were looking at this like a parent and not a "neutral party" (passing judgment in my own way) I would definitely see things your way. I've got a blind spot when it comes to a lot of things parenting-related, mostly because I'm not a parent myself.

I haven't invested any emotional time or energy into these kids, like many of the voyeurs passing judgment on this Suleman chick. It's one thing to be married and have a large family, but it's quite another to be unmarried and unemployed and do it just because you always wanted children. At least Jim Bob & Michelle Duggar (http://www.duggarfamily.com/) made it one of their goals to get out of debt and had a firm financial plan before they started having so many children. I may not agree with their religious fanaticism, but I do admire their efforts to maintain financial stability!

I guess the next logical question is: does the donor, who's been described as a friend, have a relationship with the other kids? If so, what's the nature of that relationship? Will that relationship increase now that there are 14 children or will that relationship dissolve because the woman's not exactly practical? Will the mother need to turn to the donor-father for financial support or is she willing to continue to be impractical about this?

Ritalin

02-11-2009, 10:06 AM

Frankly, I think this woman has mental problems and I wouldn't be surprised if the state stepped in at some point.

Thebazile78

02-11-2009, 10:18 AM

Frankly, I think this woman has mental problems and I wouldn't be surprised if the state stepped in at some point.

The thing about that is I don't quite see why they haven't stepped in already, now that she's national news and it's pretty obvious that she's mentally unstable.

A.J.

02-11-2009, 10:19 AM

The thing about that is I don't quite see why they haven't stepped in already, now that she's national news and it's pretty obvious that she's mentally unstable.

I'm waiting for Gvac to certify that.

Thebazile78

02-11-2009, 10:23 AM

I'm waiting for Gvac to certify that.

He's been busy.

Serpico1103

02-11-2009, 11:35 AM

I would bet that she used the disability payments meant for her other children to pay for her fertility treatment. It is not cheap, 10K-20K.
She is probably hoping some of these kids qualify for disability so she can get more money.

Heather 8

02-11-2009, 11:42 AM

If this is legit, she's either a ballsy bitch or a clueless twat.

The Octuplet Fund (http://www.thenadyasulemanfamily.com/)

boosterp

02-11-2009, 11:51 AM

If this is legit, she's either a ballsy bitch or a clueless twat.

The Octuplet Fund (http://www.thenadyasulemanfamily.com/)

How horrible. I am beyond disgusted.

Ritalin

02-11-2009, 12:27 PM

If this is legit, she's either a ballsy bitch or a clueless twat.

The Octuplet Fund (http://www.thenadyasulemanfamily.com/)

It's real.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2009/02/11/2009-02-11_octuplets_mother_nadya_suleman_launches_-1.html

lleeder

02-11-2009, 12:54 PM

This has quickly become my favorite topic of discussion on the show. I don't know why but I love hearing Ron tear this woman apart while Fez backs her up.

ToiletCrusher

02-11-2009, 01:27 PM

Agreed. Too bad she hasn't got any tv show deals yes. I would assume CMT would pick that up. Probably hosted by Jeff Foxworthy.

Serpico1103

02-11-2009, 01:34 PM

I guess the next logical question is: does the donor, who's been described as a friend, have a relationship with the other kids? If so, what's the nature of that relationship? Will that relationship increase now that there are 14 children or will that relationship dissolve because the woman's not exactly practical? Will the mother need to turn to the donor-father for financial support or is she willing to continue to be impractical about this?

The law on donor's rights and obligations is evolving. The courts are moving more towards making donors responsible I believe. If the choice is between the state or the donor, the court will want to force the donor to pay.
If he has any relationship with the children, or helps out financially, then I think he loses his protection as an anonymous donor.
She is definitely responsible, as are the doctors. I am not sure what the donor knew.

SatCam

02-11-2009, 02:02 PM

I'll take some of those babies off her hands. They look nice and juicy..... Isaiah's clocking in at a respectable 3lb 4oz

Thebazile78

02-11-2009, 02:04 PM

If this is legit, she's either a ballsy bitch or a clueless twat.

The Octuplet Fund (http://www.thenadyasulemanfamily.com/)

We have to pick one?

It's real.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2009/02/11/2009-02-11_octuplets_mother_nadya_suleman_launches_-1.html

What happened to doing this on her own?

Thebazile78

02-11-2009, 02:15 PM

The law on donor's rights and obligations is evolving. The courts are moving more towards making donors responsible I believe. If the choice is between the state or the donor, the court will want to force the donor to pay.
If he has any relationship with the children, or helps out financially, then I think he loses his protection as an anonymous donor.
She is definitely responsible, as are the doctors. I am not sure what the donor knew.

I don't deny that the law is evolving, however, I still think that enforcing support obligations for sperm donors is a sticky argument. The entire point of anonymous donation is to encourage future donations. If support obligations are instituted and enforced, it's my opinion that you'll end up with fewer donations to sperm banks than you might if you kept the support/enforcement issue out of the equation.

Would this "responsibility" concept then be extrapolated to egg donors? People do egg donation for extra money, but it's a painful and drawn-out process, unlike masturbating into a cup (or however sperm is collected at a sperm bank) ... but it's still genetic material and half of the genetic material required to make a baby. Why should women then be less responsible than men to support any issue from their donated gametes?

What about surrogates? Do they have rights or responsibilities beyond carrying a fetus to term?

Lastly, because in the Suleman case this is a known donor and the donor has been described as a "family friend" or whatever in a good deal of the coverage, this situation seems to be more unique than "regular" sperm donor agreements. It seems to be more of an involved surrogacy type of a situation rather than a hands-off donation type of situation.

This is sticky and queasy law and not something that will be considered lightly, whether your politics are moderate, liberal or conservative. I would be incredibly wary of a legal precedent set by a ruling declaring ANY gamete donor, anonymous or named/known, to be responsible for the "maintenance" of the resultant offspring from successful insemination or implantation cycles.

Serpico1103

02-11-2009, 02:33 PM

I don't deny that the law is evolving, however, I still think that enforcing support obligations for sperm donors is a sticky argument.

I agree that it is bad policy. But, the courts want to hold someone responsible other than the state to care for the kids.
There is a landmark case about a man getting a divorce, then finding out that one of the kids is not his. The wife admits she lied to her husband. The court still enforced a support obligation on the man, who is not the father and only accepted responsibility on the premise that it was his kid. The court determined that he still had a closer relationship to the child than the state did. The court did not even require the wife to pursue the real father. It's only concerns were the child and making sure the state didn't have to pay.

Thebazile78

02-11-2009, 02:39 PM

I agree that it is bad policy. But, the courts want to hold someone responsible other than the state to care for the kids.
There is a landmark case about a man getting a divorce, then finding out that one of the kids is not his. The wife admits she lied to her husband. The court still enforced a support obligation on the man, who is not the father and only accepted responsibility on the premise that it was his kid. The court determined that he still had a closer relationship to the child than the state did. The court did not even require the wife to pursue the real father. It's only concerns were the child and making sure the state didn't have to pay.

I maintain that it'd set a dangerous precedent for gamete donors if a ruling is made, especially in a higher court (i.e. - CA Supreme Court, Circuit Court or US Supreme Court), that a donor is responsible, regardless of anonymity.

In that divorce case, the way you're describing it, genetic paternity wasn't a deciding factor. The man thought the kid was his while he & his wife were married, therefore supporting the child as if it were his own. This is a kind of a pre-existing condition, rather than a donation of gametes where no expectations about support are defined, especially if the gametes are banked in a "public" facility.

In the Suleman case, you might be able to sue for support based on paternity as the donor was not only willing but also known to the mother, but it would still be a dangerous ruling.

Serpico1103

02-11-2009, 02:43 PM

I maintain that it'd set a dangerous precedent for gamete donors if a ruling is made, especially in a higher court (i.e. - CA Supreme Court, Circuit Court or US Supreme Court), that a donor is responsible, regardless of anonymity.

In that divorce case, the way you're describing it, genetic paternity wasn't a deciding factor. The man thought the kid was his while he & his wife were married, therefore supporting the child as if it were his own. This is a kind of a pre-existing condition, rather than a donation of gametes where no expectations about support are defined, especially if the gametes are banked in a "public" facility.

In the Suleman case, you might be able to sue for support based on paternity as the donor was not only willing but also known to the mother, but it would still be a dangerous ruling.

I fully agree that it would be a horrible ruling. But, the courts are not above making bad law.

Thebazile78

02-11-2009, 02:46 PM

I fully agree that it would be a horrible ruling. But, the courts are not above making bad law.

I know (http://epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.html).

A.J.

02-12-2009, 05:30 AM

she is irresponsible, and should have her children taken from her because she cannot support them. My fucking taxes are paying for this cunts kids....

K

No, they're not.

Well Californians' will be: Taxpayers may have to cover octuplet mom's costs (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090212/ap_on_re_us/octuplets)

underdog

02-12-2009, 05:42 AM

Well Californians' will be: Taxpayers may have to cover octuplet mom's costs (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090212/ap_on_re_us/octuplets)

I just meant his specific tax dollars weren't going to her.

A.J.

02-12-2009, 05:42 AM

I just meant his specific tax dollars weren't going to her.

I know -- that's why I highlighted "Californians" for him.

OGC

02-12-2009, 04:25 PM

Not for the faint of heart. Pictures of the octuplet's mother (exposing her belly) 8 days before giving birth (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1142566/The-mother-baby-bumps-Octuplets-mum-bares-ENORMOUS-stomach-just-days-giving-birth.html)

~Katja~

02-12-2009, 04:28 PM

OGC

02-12-2009, 04:34 PM

wow, not exactly glam shots

I'm betting that someone out here will be turned on by them though.

~Katja~

02-12-2009, 04:36 PM

I'm betting that someone out here will be turned on by them though.

I am sure you are right... her lips look like she gives great head too

OGC

02-12-2009, 04:38 PM

I am sure you are right... her lips look like she gives great head too

I hadn't noticed. I'll have to look again.

edit: you are right. maybe that's why she had to use fertility techniques. The guys always wanted her to use her mouth.

Dude!

02-12-2009, 05:07 PM

hoochie mama !!!

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.tmz.com/media/2009/02/0212_octomom_pregnant_pictures_ex5.jpg

underdog

02-12-2009, 05:08 PM

I'm betting that someone out here will be turned on by them though.

I'm betting he's also a mod.

Slumbag

02-13-2009, 08:52 PM

I was just watching the MSNBC sit down interview she did.

This woman is so.......infuriating.
I wanted to yell at the TV, but didn't. She is such a clueless attention whore. I had to stop watching.

OGC

02-25-2009, 10:48 AM

Octomom offered $1M porn contract (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/02/25/state/n103410S81.DTL&tsp=1)

I can hardly wait. :glurps:

razorboy

02-25-2009, 10:59 AM

Octomom offered $1M porn contract (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/02/25/state/n103410S81.DTL&tsp=1)

I can hardly wait. :glurps:

There's seven dicks in her box, and there's always room for... well I'm sure quite a few more.

disneyspy

02-25-2009, 11:01 AM

flippin thru the channels,shes on dr phil right now

Contra

02-25-2009, 11:02 AM

I can see the title now: The Ultimate MILF

Thebazile78

02-25-2009, 11:12 AM

flippin thru the channels,shes on dr phil right now

I heard that she started to fight with her mother on that appearance, but I can't find the Yahoo! news story link.

disneyspy

02-25-2009, 11:15 AM

I heard that she started to fight with her mother on that appearance, but I can't find the Yahoo! news story link.

i'll turn the sound up and report back to you

disneyspy

02-25-2009, 11:18 AM

oh man her voice is annoyin,this is above and beyond,i'm a hero

disneyspy

02-25-2009, 11:34 AM

i dont know who is more annoyin,dr phil or this crazy chick

styckx

02-25-2009, 11:35 AM

Octomom offered $1M porn contract (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/02/25/state/n103410S81.DTL&tsp=1)

I can hardly wait. :glurps:

http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q50/leebrown88/do-not-want-dog.jpg

disneyspy

02-25-2009, 11:55 AM

man this sux,they're waitin til the last segment to show her mom

disneyspy

02-25-2009, 11:58 AM

spy report:dr phil sux,this interview goes on all week i think,no mom and her demon box on todays show,spy out

styckx

02-25-2009, 12:01 PM

You could roll her stomach flab around your cock like a burrito and add your own sour cream..

Pestz4Evah

02-25-2009, 02:19 PM

boosterp

02-25-2009, 04:00 PM

Octomom offered $1M porn contract (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/02/25/state/n103410S81.DTL&tsp=1)

I can hardly wait. :glurps:

I'll give her $2 and buy her kids a gallon of milk as long as I can take a picture and post it here.

boosterp

02-25-2009, 04:03 PM

Coach

02-25-2009, 08:48 PM

I heard that she started to fight with her mother on that appearance, but I can't find the Yahoo! news story link.They showed it on headline news at about 2:30..now She is Afraid the Hospital will not let her take her kids home because they might not think she is a fit mother....Holy fuck Hospital..Ya think?

Thebazile78

02-26-2009, 09:13 AM

They showed it on headline news at about 2:30..now She is Afraid the Hospital will not let her take her kids home because they might not think she is a fit mother....Holy fuck Hospital..Ya think?

She should've thought about that BEFORE she went for IVF.

angrymissy

02-26-2009, 09:19 AM

All those interviews with her and her mom are here, she's living in a fantasy world.

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/

styckx

02-26-2009, 09:21 AM

Ha, a porn company is offering her diapers for a year to keep her legs shut.

http://www.tmz.com/2009/02/25/octos-new-option-porn-or-diapers/

There is a serious effort underway to block OctoMom from taking a million dollar offer to do porn -- except the opposition is coming from a rival XXX company!

Fearing that Nadya Suleman "will become the subject of endless ridicule and scorn," the president of Pink Visual has offered Octo a "full year's worth of diapers" if she keeps her baby maker where it belongs ... fully covered and far away from any type of recording device.

In a letter sent to Octo, morally righteous Pink Visual warns, "There's a great deal of stigma attached to being a porn star" and that Octo needs to think "in the best interest of your children." For once.

So what's it gonna be? Do porn ... and get a million bucks, health insurance and benefits -- or keep it covered ... so you can keep your kids clean? Decisions, decisions.

Thebazile78

02-26-2009, 09:56 AM

All those interviews with her and her mom are here, she's living in a fantasy world.

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/

If looking at photos gives me the creeps, how in the name of all that is holy am I supposed to get through video???

Hell, even transcripts of the interviews get me riled up.

boosterp

02-26-2009, 10:35 AM

I heard about this later last night. I hope the cunt takes the diapers and shuts the fuck up. I, along with a lot of Americans can't stand her. While I would not wish her death I do wish her a long and miserable life while her kids are being raised by loving families.

Thebazile78

02-26-2009, 10:48 AM

styckx

02-26-2009, 10:56 AM

She should have none of these offers period. She should not be receiving any free gifts or money if she meets x-y-z criteria. These companies are essentially getting free advertising at the benefit of 14 children. I know, I shouldn't be surprised that porn companies are exploiting someone but meh, it's just going to encourage copy cats if she makes out large.

Ritalin

02-26-2009, 11:14 AM

Octomom offered $1M porn contract (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/02/25/state/n103410S81.DTL&tsp=1)

I can hardly wait. :glurps:

Ugh.

After all those kids, having sex with her would be like a midget crawling into a refrigerator box.

boosterp

02-26-2009, 11:41 AM

Ugh.

After all those kids, having sex with her would be like a midget crawling into a refrigerator box.

That many kids, most likely they were all via C-section. Imagine the scar. :glurps:

styckx

02-26-2009, 12:05 PM

http://www.corvaircorsa.com/mixed/64open.jpg

Contra

02-26-2009, 02:05 PM

I actually want to see her take the million for the porno, because I'm sick in the head.

Judge Smails

03-04-2009, 08:38 PM

What an absolute fucking wackadoo waste of life this bitch is.

LINKY To 911 call (http://www.tmz.com/2009/03/04/octomom-911-we-got-the-call/)

Octuplet mother Nadya Suleman became unhinged with fear last year when she thought she had lost one of her children, repeatedly telling an emergency dispatcher, "Oh God, I'm going to kill myself," according to a recording of her 911 call released Wednesday by police.

Suleman made the call Oct. 27 after her 5-year-old son went missing from the front yard, only to find him a few minutes later after he returned from a walk.

Suleman's repeated threats of suicide prompted a chiding from the dispatcher, who could hear children's voices in the background.

"Don't say that in front of your other child, OK?" the dispatcher tells Suleman. "Keep yourself under control for your other child; he doesn't need to hear that."

Suleman, an unemployed single mother, has come under scrutiny since giving birth to octuplets Jan. 26 when she already had six other children, ages 2 to 7. Talk show hosts, celebrities and others have weighed in on the topic, with some questioning her ability to look after 14 children.

The dramatic call Suleman made three months before the octuplets' birth resulted in a police visit to her home in Whittier, about 15 miles east of Los Angeles. It was among a number of visits authorities have made to the house in the last 14 months.

The 911 tape begins with Suleman repeatedly asking the operator, "Where's my son?" before she provides an address or any information. She eventually tells the operator she hadn't seen Joshua Jacob for an hour and he had been playing in the front yard, and she feared he was kidnapped.

The call ended with Suleman sobbing hysterically upon finding the child, saying, "He went on a walk and came back by himself."

Police and the Los Angeles County Department of Child and Family Services visited Suleman's home in July in response to a complaint that the children appeared poorly cared for, but both agencies determined the complaint was unfounded.

Suleman, in an interview with RadarOnline.com, said the neighbor who alerted police was unhappy because her family was loud and she allowed her children to play in the mud.

Police also once visited the home to let a child out of a locked bedroom.

<SCRIPT type=text/javascript>sfgate_get_fprefs();</SCRIPT>

Coach

03-04-2009, 09:02 PM

I read in the news today that she found a nice 4 bedroom house in which to raise her kids and get off food stamps after the hospital releases her kids kids in 1-2 weeks. Riiight.

keithy_19

03-04-2009, 09:10 PM

What an absolute fucking wackadoo waste of life this bitch is.

LINKY To 911 call (http://www.tmz.com/2009/03/04/octomom-911-we-got-the-call/)

I don't even know where to begin...

boosterp

03-05-2009, 03:07 AM

I read in the news today that she found a nice 4 bedroom house in which to raise her kids and get off food stamps after the hospital releases her kids kids in 1-2 weeks. Riiight.

Her parents are in trouble financially and this cunt buys a house? She better of paid them back first.

foodcourtdruide

03-05-2009, 05:15 AM

Is she mentally unstable or despicable? And what should the system do? I think taking the children away sets a dangerous precedent.

This is such an amazingly interesting story. It really makes me think.

~Katja~

03-05-2009, 05:36 AM

What an absolute fucking wackadoo waste of life this bitch is.

LINKY To 911 call (http://www.tmz.com/2009/03/04/octomom-911-we-got-the-call/)

I don't think I would categorize her as a fucking waste of life for the fear of having lost her child... my son ran away in a store last summer while my parents were with him... I found him a minute or two later but you have no idea the thoughts and fears went through my head... she is obviously a way more emotional person and clearly overreacted in panic...

other calls were made by the kids while the sitter was watching them...

anyway, she has made poor choices and is not the most stable person mentally but from any picture I have seen she loves these children, smiles and laughs with them and takes care of them.
She needs help for sure, taking them away from her is not really beneficial for the children in my eyes.

And boosterp... her parents helped her and all parents do that as a selfless act... if she bought a house from the funds raised for her... good for her, she is trying to no longer burden her parents and be independent... they also seem to have different opinions on her motherhood now, yet they never intervened when she was planning and executing this.

The media need to leave her alone and stop digging up shit like old 911 calls to make her look more wacky than she probably is.

A.J.

03-05-2009, 05:36 AM

This is such an amazingly interesting story. It really makes me think.

Me too -- about mandatory sterilization.

boosterp

03-05-2009, 05:50 AM

And boosterp... her parents helped her and all parents do that as a selfless act... if she bought a house from the funds raised for her... good for her, she is trying to no longer burden her parents and be independent... they also seem to have different opinions on her motherhood now, yet they never intervened when she was planning and executing this.

Her parents are facing foreclosure on their home, burnt up their savings, and will now have to work until they drop dead from supporting her. This was told during an interview with her mother so I tend to believe it. That is why I made the statement above.

Judge Smails

03-05-2009, 05:51 AM

I don't think I would categorize her as a fucking waste of life for the fear of having lost her child... my son ran away in a store last summer while my parents were with him... I found him a minute or two later but you have no idea the thoughts and fears went through my head... she is obviously a way more emotional person and clearly overreacted in panic...

Were you screaming about how you were going to kill yourself in front of your other kids? Did you do nothing to try to find him? Rather than go look for him she called 911 and gave them no info. - other than repeating "Where's my son?". She is obviously a psycho and self absorbed. Everything is about HER. Where's HER son? She's going to kill herself - the hell with her other five kids and eight on the way! I'm sorry - I'm sure that you're a very good, loving and self-sacrificing mother but this woman is not.

And not to get to deep into it - I know first hand - what it feels like for a little kid to grow up in an enviornment where his mother is constantly going off the deep and and threatening to kill herself without regard to what effect it is having on her child hearing it. Fuck her! Sorry - emotional rant over - back to dick jokes for me.

~Katja~

03-05-2009, 05:55 AM

Her parents are facing foreclosure on their home, burnt up their savings, and will now have to work until they drop dead from supporting her. This was told during an interview with her mother so I tend to believe it. That is why I made the statement above.

you don't think the parents will move in with her then? Do you really think she is going to leave them out in the streets after they helped her through many years? They may not see eye to eye on the baby thing (though they never stopped her) and she may be mentally not the most stable person... but she seems very caring and I doubt she would leave her parents in the cold.

See, you have to see as well that she is under a lot of media scrutiny right now.. she all of the sudden has reached celebrity status and cannot even go to the store without being followed and analyzed... (how many diapers did she buy today, is she getting the right butt paste ? Is the food she buys bad for her kids??? blah...) it is a LOT of pressure and stress piled onto a person who was not entirely stable to begin with... her mind must be racing on what she did right, what she did wrong and what the media tells her she did wrong... she has been judged by a nation and that is a lot of weight to carry on your shoulders.

~Katja~

03-05-2009, 05:59 AM

Were you screaming about how you were going to kill yourself in front of your other kids? Did you do nothing to try to find him? Rather than go look for him she called 911 and gave them no info. - other than repeating "Where's my son?". She is obviously a psycho and self absorbed. Everything is about HER. Where's HER son? She's going to kill herself - the hell with her other five kids and eight on the way! I'm sorry - I'm sure that you're a very good, loving and self-sacrificing mother but this woman is not.

And not to get to deep into it - I know first hand - what it feels like for a little kid to grow up in an enviornment where his mother is constantly going off the deep and and threatening to kill herself without regard to what effect it is having on her child hearing it. Fuck her! Sorry - emotional rant over - back to dick jokes for me.

if you listened to her call... she is looking for him while she is calling 911... she has 5 other kids in her household, just leaving them behind to go look for the missing one, not an option... and how could she know whether the kid just wandered off or actually was picked up by someone???

Jesus, she was in a panic mode and felt incredibly guilty and as if she failed her kid cause she could not protect it from walking off in that moment (sometimes that takes a split second of not watching)
Again, I agree with everybody saying she is not the most mentally stable person and needs help... taking the kids from her is not the way to go.

And how do you know that she CONSTANTLY goes off the deep end and threatens to kill herself?

boosterp

03-05-2009, 06:00 AM

you don't think the parents will move in with her then? Do you really think she is going to leave them out in the streets after they helped her through many years? They may not see eye to eye on the baby thing (though they never stopped her) and she may be mentally not the most stable person... but she seems very caring and I doubt she would leave her parents in the cold.

See, you have to see as well that she is under a lot of media scrutiny right now.. she all of the sudden has reached celebrity status and cannot even go to the store without being followed and analyzed... (how many diapers did she buy today, is she getting the right butt paste ? Is the food she buys bad for her kids??? blah...) it is a LOT of pressure and stress piled onto a person who was not entirely stable to begin with... her mind must be racing on what she did right, what she did wrong and what the media tells her she did wrong... she has been judged by a nation and that is a lot of weight to carry on your shoulders.

But why have the parents move in with her when she could of helped them get out of foreclosure so they could keep their own home? Why not help them out so they are able to retire? Really, it is a selfish act on her part if she does not do so. I understand parental love, what it's like to think you lost a child, and stress (maybe not of this magnitude though) but none of these are an excuse.

~Katja~

03-05-2009, 06:03 AM

But why have the parents move in with her when she could of helped them get out of foreclosure so they could keep their own home? Why not help them out so they are able to retire? Really, it is a selfish act on her part if she does not do so. I understand parental love, what it's like to think you lost a child, and stress (maybe not of this magnitude though) but none of these are an excuse.

they needed to get into a bigger home regardless, if they were at the verge of foreclosure they would not have been able to get another mortgage to buy a bigger home.
And no, it is not a selfish act, she is thinking of what she needs to do to take care of these kids, the parents are adults who are still capable of helping themselves... and they will not be out on the street... helpless.

Me too -- about mandatory sterilization.

and I agree, in her case that should be an option

foodcourtdruide

03-05-2009, 06:05 AM

Me too -- about mandatory sterilization.

I don't know if you're joking, but there is the bigger issue here. Should people who cannot reasonably care for their children be allowed to have them? Clearly, as a society we can't just leave this woman and her children alone without government assistance because they'd probably all die of malnutrition within a year. Having said that, in a way this woman is stealing from us. She KNOWS she can't afford these children, yet she has them anyway and what makes the story unique is 1. It was NOT by acciden 2. There are so many of them.

Its such an excessive abuse of the system that it makes me question the legality of it, however I'm affraid actions against her will rally egotists to call for action against those in situations that are not so extreme. This is the conversation I wish the news media would have, instead we get paparazzi style reporting or complete opposite ends of the spectrum screaming at eachother.

boosterp

03-05-2009, 06:18 AM

they needed to get into a bigger home regardless, if they were at the verge of foreclosure they would not have been able to get another mortgage to buy a bigger home.
And no, it is not a selfish act, she is thinking of what she needs to do to take care of these kids, the parents are adults who are still capable of helping themselves... and they will not be out on the street... helpless.

and I agree, in her case that should be an option

From what I understand (I could be wrong) she got the home with the money she got from the talk show circuit. The parents have their own problems, and yes while they are adults, they no longer have savings, are facing a life of prolonged work instead of retirement, and the possibility of loosing their own home that they worked hard to get and keep. And going from a 3 bedroom house to a four bedroom house with all those kids is not that big of an upgrade.

A.J.

03-05-2009, 06:23 AM

I don't know if you're joking, but there is the bigger issue here. Should people who cannot reasonably care for their children be allowed to have them? Clearly, as a society we can't just leave this woman and her children alone without government assistance because they'd probably all die of malnutrition within a year. Having said that, in a way this woman is stealing from us. She KNOWS she can't afford these children, yet she has them anyway and what makes the story unique is 1. It was NOT by acciden 2. There are so many of them.

Its such an excessive abuse of the system that it makes me question the legality of it, however I'm affraid actions against her will rally egotists to call for action against those in situations that are not so extreme. This is the conversation I wish the news media would have, instead we get paparazzi style reporting or complete opposite ends of the spectrum screaming at eachother.

Well this just gives ammo to those politicians who in the past railed against "welfare queens" who keep breeding kids and suckling endlessly off of the government teat to help raise them. Maybe someday we can fix this cycle by making it a crime to breed children into a life of poverty/government dependence. Why do we keep rewarding stupidity and irresponsibility instead of discouraging it and punishing it?

It's the same reaction when I see these "feed the children/save the children" informercials; it should always come down to one simple maxim:

http://rlv.zcache.com/cant_feed_em_dont_breed_em_bumper_sticker-p128356904746913633tmn6_210.jpg

Thebazile78

03-05-2009, 06:24 AM

I don't know if you're joking, but there is the bigger issue here. Should people who cannot reasonably care for their children be allowed to have them? Clearly, as a society we can't just leave this woman and her children alone without government assistance because they'd probably all die of malnutrition within a year. Having said that, in a way this woman is stealing from us. She KNOWS she can't afford these children, yet she has them anyway and what makes the story unique is 1. It was NOT by acciden 2. There are so many of them.

Its such an excessive abuse of the system that it makes me question the legality of it, however I'm affraid actions against her will rally egotists to call for action against those in situations that are not so extreme. This is the conversation I wish the news media would have, instead we get paparazzi style reporting or complete opposite ends of the spectrum screaming at eachother.

The danger of going down this road is that it starts to sound like eugenics.

I don't know that I want to go through that. I find it ethically abhorrent.

But, while we're on the subject of ethics because I find the lack of ethical judgment in this case ASTONISHING here are a few questions:

Where were the ethical checks-and-balances of the doctors at the fertility clinic?
Why did they have to create so many embryos in the first place?
Why did they HAVE TO implant so many in the octuplets' case?
Could they, legally, morally and ethically, do anything to dissuade her from doing this?
What are the implications for other women seeking IVF in the future? (See this come up as a bill in GA is being discussed in the state senate to control IVF further. From the Human Nature by William Saletan (http://www.slate.com/id/2212876/) at Slate.com)

Thebazile78

03-05-2009, 06:26 AM

foodcourtdruide

03-05-2009, 06:32 AM

Well this just gives ammo to those politicians who in the past railed against "welfare queens" who keep breeding kids and suckling endlessly off of the government teat to help raise them. Maybe someday we can fix this cycle by making it a crime to breed children into a life of poverty/government dependence. It's the same reaction when I see these "feed the children/save the children" informercials; it should always come down to one simple maxim:

http://rlv.zcache.com/cant_feed_em_dont_breed_em_bumper_sticker-p128356904746913633tmn6_210.jpg

I agree with the part in bold. Those politicians are the "egotists" I was referring to.

The danger of going down this road is that it starts to sound like eugenics.

I don't know that I want to go through that. I find it ethically abhorrent.

But, while we're on the subject of ethics because I find the lack of ethical judgment in this case ASTONISHING here are a few questions:

Where were the ethical checks-and-balances of the doctors at the fertility clinic?
Why did they have to create so many embryos in the first place?
Why did they HAVE TO implant so many in the octuplets' case?
Could they, legally, morally and ethically, do anything to dissuade her from doing this?
What are the implications for other women seeking IVF in the future? (See this come up as a bill in GA is being discussed in the state senate to control IVF further. From the Human Nature by William Saletan at Slate.com)

I agree with all you've said and that's why I wish we'd have an honest dialogue about it in this country instead of turning it into a media circus. I hate our mass media. It drives me insane.

boosterp

03-05-2009, 06:40 AM

I agree with all you've said and that's why I wish we'd have an honest dialogue about it in this country instead of turning it into a media circus. I hate our mass media. It drives me insane.

So true, kudos.

Thebazile78

03-05-2009, 08:48 AM

....

I agree with all you've said and that's why I wish we'd have an honest dialogue about it in this country instead of turning it into a media circus. I hate our mass media. It drives me insane.

I would love to have an honest dialogue about this. It just has to be reported after the fact.

The mass media, whether liberal, conservative or moderate (and everywhere in-between and on the far ends of the spectrum), would make it into Survivor-meets-Fear Factor if they were invited. Just look at what they did with the conventions last year!

boosterp

03-05-2009, 10:03 AM

I would love to have an honest dialogue about this. It just has to be reported after the fact.

The mass media, whether liberal, conservative or moderate (and everywhere in-between and on the far ends of the spectrum), would make it into Survivor-meets-Fear Factor if they were invited. Just look at what they did with the conventions last year!

And this is why I do not watch TV or read the gossip rags.

Thebazile78

03-06-2009, 06:47 AM

And this is why I do not watch TV or read the gossip rags.

I get my news online and ignore most "entertainment" releases.

So, I can probably tell you where the Secretary of State is this week.

boosterp

03-07-2009, 07:44 AM

I get my news online and ignore most "entertainment" releases.

So, I can probably tell you where the Secretary of State is this week.

On my Google home page I have somewhere like 20 news sources from Al Jazeera to VOA so I can form my own opinion.

A.J.

03-07-2009, 03:21 PM

On my Google home page I have somewhere like 20 news sources from Al Jazeera to VOA so I can form my own opinion.

Never heard of them.

boosterp

03-07-2009, 05:50 PM

Never heard of them.

Really?

A.J.

03-08-2009, 09:08 AM

Really?

I forgot to add the sarcasm tags.

Actually, when I was in Doha, I used to drive by Al-Jazeera HQ every day to and from work.

Coach

03-09-2009, 12:32 PM

Octuplet Mom's Second Publicist Quits
- The latest publicist for California octuplet mom Nadya Suleman quit on Friday, saying the mother of 14 "is nuts."
"Nadya got real greedy. This woman is nuts," the publicist, Victor Munoz, told Usmagazine.com . "It just got to be too much ... It's pretty much a free for all over there right now."

Suleman, who already had six children between the ages of 2 and 7, gave birth to the eight babies on Jan. 26. All 14 of the single mother's children were conceived using in vitro fertilization.
Skip over this content Suleman's first publicist, Joann Killeen, resigned last month after her firm received dozens of threats.
Get the full story from Usmagazine.com .
Greedy? Her? NAHHHHH! She didn't expect ANY freebies or Celebrity from her little science experiment!

boosterp

03-09-2009, 12:47 PM

Greedy? Her? NAHHHHH! She didn't expect ANY freebies or Celebrity from her little science experiment!

:lol:

Misteriosa

03-23-2009, 08:47 AM

this lady had welfare in the plans the whole time... (skip to 3:40 if you dont want to see the whole thing)

(warning: this "anchor" is VERY annoying and over uses the "octo" term)

<script src="http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/js/2.0/video/evp/module.js?loc=dom&vid=/video/showbiz/2009/03/21/sbt.octumom.confessions.cnn" type="text/javascript"></script><noscript>Embedded video from <a href="http://www.cnn.com/video">CNN Video</a></noscript>

DarkHippie

03-23-2009, 09:30 AM

Kublakhan61

03-23-2009, 11:42 AM

Spilled milk, guys. It's too late to put the babies back. So, our options now are pay for the babies (which will not impact you, with regard to this mother specifically) or kill them. Since we aren't fond of killing babies (born or unborn) we have to move on.

She is only a celebrity now because people are interested in her, be it out of anger or wonder. You can only make this go away by not paying attention to it, slowly it will fade from your view and then from the rest of the country's.

Her becoming a celeb says more about how fucked this country is then does about her doctor or herself.

Also, nothing is ruined for those in need. People who qualify for welfare are getting welfare.