Somebody needs to pay for all my children, someone needs to be held accountable

[Matthanuf06]

http://youtu.be/rPRtIOmPOD0

Local goody so worthwhile.

This brings tears to my eyes. THFSG we are being held accountable for her 15 kids. On us. And food, shelter, utilities, free insurance, crazy tax write offs isn't enough...

[gatorman_07732]

pretty sad

[Lawdog88]

Somebody needs to pay for all my children and for all my pain. Somebody needs to pay.

Suggestions ?

[Dreamliner]

Somebody needs to pay for all my children and for all my pain. Somebody needs to pay.

Suggestions ?

It would probably be cheaper if someone paid to tie her tubes.

[gs_gator]

mandatory birth control for all while they receive basic home ec, childcare and suitability screenings.

once they reach the age of 21 they can they apply for a child birth cert for 1 child and have the birth control removed.

further births will require financial/mental health suitability screenings before being issued another cert...

for everyone...from the poorest of the poor to the richest of the rich...

as for dreamliners query...even AL pays for women to get their tubes tied for free..

[Lawdog88]

Yes, my Alabama friend.

But does Alabama make them ?

[G8trGr8t]

if you can't afford the one(s) you have, norplant should be mandatory until off gubmnt assistance. if you don't want it, fine, you don't qualify for any aid.....next

if baby daddy isn't paying his support, off to baby daddy debtors prison with him. plenty of crops to be harvested and roads to be mowed. option is sterilization...next

[rivergator]

Pretty horrible at every level: Her, the money we pay ... But the worst is what will happen to her kids. It's a lot harder to survive a childhood like that with all your morals, self-esteem, work ethic ... in place.

[gatorev12]

Pretty sure it's been discussed on here before since the story broke sometime last spring--but it certainly doesn't get any better upon further review. If there's ever a justification for having the state declare a person unfit to parent, this is it.

[g8orbill]

and they just keep spreading their legs

[gatordowneast]

Cute kids. I'd say adoption is the best option for the kids and Angel needs to be locked up until she has a hysterectomy. Forget tying the tubes...she may bribe someone to teach her how to untie those suckers. The one guy fathered 10 of her kids and they are unmarried. Who fathered the other 5? And the somebody that needs to be held accountable is Angel.

Some states have put a lifetime cap on "aid" at 5 years. So no welfare available once you reach 60 months. I would also say, no additional money after 2 kids. You have to put any new babies up for adoption. Tough love required here to keep taxpayers from shouldering the tab for irresponsible behavior.

[G8trGr8t]

15 votes raised on those beliefs against my 3 kids votes being taught personal responsibility and we wonder where the country is headed

[gator7_5]

15 votes raised on those beliefs against my 3 kids votes being taught personal responsibility and we wonder where the country is headed

Exactly. Anyone who can't see we're headed staright down the shitter is blind.

[gator996]

Kinda funny...

Show twitter responses of people saying stupid stuff about the POTUS and many here argue that those internet postings mean nothing.

The internet rants and raves of a few proves very little..

But give them an anecdotal video of someone who reinforces their socio-political viewpoint and its the "truth"...


What makes this any more representative than the chick who wanted Obama to be killed after the election?

Why was her internet post not representative but this one is?????

[gatordowneast]

Kinda funny...

Show twitter responses of people saying stupid stuff about the POTUS and many here argue that those internet postings mean nothing.

The internet rants and raves of a few proves very little..

But give them an anecdotal video of someone who reinforces their socio-political viewpoint and its the "truth"...


What makes this any more representative than the chick who wanted Obama to be killed after the election?

Why was her internet post not representative but this one is?????

We are not having to pay the tab for the folks critisizing Obama on these forums or elsewhere. That is the difference. We will be paying the tab for Angel and her 15 little angels for the next 70 years and likely several generations after since those little Angels are subjected to Angel's lifestyle, philosophies and government aid schemes.

I could give a damn if people want to act irresponsibly as long as they are paying for it.

[gator996]

Cute kids. I'd say adoption is the best option for the kids and Angel needs to be locked up until she has a hysterectomy. Forget tying the tubes...she may bribe someone to teach her how to untie those suckers. The one guy fathered 10 of her kids and they are unmarried. Who fathered the other 5? And the somebody that needs to be held accountable is Angel.

Some states have put a lifetime cap on "aid" at 5 years. So no welfare available once you reach 60 months. I would also say, no additional money after 2 kids. You have to put any new babies up for adoption. Tough love required here to keep taxpayers from shouldering the tab for irresponsible behavior.



This is what you get from smaller, less intrusive goverment folks...

Whatever happened to freedom & liberty?

You can cutoff her aid... fine.
But proposing government mandated adoption?

Must be modeling your public policy on China.


And you guys call Obama the communist?
:laugh:

[gatorman_07732]

This is what you get from smaller, less intrusive goverment folks...

Whatever happened to freedom & liberty?

You can cutoff her aid... fine.
But proposing government mandated adoption?

Must be modeling your public policy on China.


And you guys call Obama the communist?
:laugh:

At the same time you can't subsidize that type of behavior

[rivergator]

At the same time you can't subsidize that type of behavior

what about the kids? let them starve?

[Matthanuf06]

This is what you get from smaller, less intrusive goverment folks...

Whatever happened to freedom & liberty?

You can cutoff her aid... fine.
But proposing government mandated adoption?

Must be modeling your public policy on China.

And you guys call Obama the communist?
:laugh:

I agree.

No aid and let nature take its course. She'd either stop having kids, realize she can't afford them and give them to adoption, or commit a crime and give them up that way.

[gatorman_07732]

what about the kids? let them starve?

As much as a I hate to see this, the state should step in for an evaluation and see if she is unfit to be a mother. When you subside something you get more of it, so really there has to be another approach.

[rivergator]

As much as a I hate to see this, the state should step in for an evaluation and see if she is unfit to be a mother. When you subside something you get more of it, so really there has to be another approach.

I can see why you hate to say it, because it is everything conservatives claim they're against: A state bureaucrat making a decision about someone's life.
The bottom line though is that because of this woman's complete incompetence at life, there are absolutely no good answers. Support her or not? Take the kids away or not?

[dadx4]

This is what you get from smaller, less intrusive goverment folks...

Whatever happened to freedom & liberty?

You can cutoff her aid... fine.
But proposing government mandated adoption?

Must be modeling your public policy on China.


And you guys call Obama the communist?
:laugh:

Like he said, as long as your not taking money out of my pocket for crap like this, fine. She is the one that has the 15 kids. TAKE CARE OF THEM YOURSELF. She should be getting about 5k per month from ss, food stamps, ssi, disability, medicaid, medicare...etc...etc....where's all of that money going? Oh and yes that is money coming out of our pockets.

[gatorman_07732]

I can see why you hate to say it, because it is everything conservatives claim they're against: A state bureaucrat making a decision about someone's life.
The bottom line though is that because of this woman's complete incompetence at life, there are absolutely no good answers. Support her or not? Take the kids away or not?

The kids would have a better shot at life if they were taken away wouldn't they?

[gator996]

Like he said, as long as your not taking money out of my pocket for crap like this, fine. She is the one that has the 15 kids. TAKE CARE OF THEM YOURSELF. She should be getting about 5k per month from ss, food stamps, ssi, disability, medicaid, medicare...etc...etc....where's all of that money going? Oh and yes that is money coming out of our pockets.


Didn't I say "Cut her aid...fine."

You seem to be ducking the pint made that you want more government involved in CERTAIN people's lives...

Plan on setting up another governement agency to become the ward of all of these children prior to their adoption?

Care to deal with the report of abuse that will come out of your creation?
How about the complaints of financial waste of your creation?

To be honest...that $5K might be the cheapest way to address the problem.

You want people pumping out kids and you pay for them from birth to 18 100%???

[rivergator]

The kids would have a better shot at life if they were taken away wouldn't they?

Probably.

[HALLGATOR]

what about the kids? let them starve?

That's always the conundrum in these situations. Even if they are taken away from her, as was suggested by others, is there any guarantee there are people who will adopt them.

[gator996]

We're all for government control of these kids lives from infancy?

When did they become non-citizens?

Gotta love all of the freedom & liberty talk around here by "conservatives" when the issue is the poster's freedom or liberty...but taking it away "others" is just fine.

[gatorman_07732]

We're all for government control of these kids lives from infancy?

When did they become non-citizens?

Gotta love all of the freedom & liberty talk around here by "conservatives" when the issue is the poster's freedom or liberty...but taking it away "others" is just fine.

Uh, we are talking about the welfare of children. Lets see, child abuse vs. having a shot at life by possibly having parents that will care for them, love them, and give them what they need. Turning our back on the kids and subsidizing the mothers behavior accomplishes nothing. How could she even afford to feed those kids?

[g8orbill]

you cannot legislate morality- these people are not raised properly( it is due to a total breakdown of the family unit and a lack of morals) to have self respect and to quit giving their bodies freely to every Tom Dick and Harry- you cannot force someone to be sterilized- I trace all of this back to taking prayer and God out of our educational system in the late 60's-then add into it the entitlements and how much maney has been wasted on the war on poverty and you have a welfare society who has no morals and no motivation to be anything other than a drain on society

[gator996]

Uh, we are talking about the welfare of children. Lets see, child abuse vs. having a shot at life by possibly having parents that will care for them, love them, and give them what they need. Turning our back on the kids and subsidizing the mothers behavior accomplishes nothing. How could she even afford to feed those kids?


So the poor and disadvantaged are not worthy of the same rights as you?

You know that their mother doesn't love them?

Interesting...

[gatorman_07732]

So the poor and disadvantaged are not worthy of the same rights as you?

You know that their mother doesn't love them?

Interesting...

I never said she didn't, did I? You infered that so that takes care of that.
Can she support those kids? That is the first thing that needs to be looked at.

[Lawdog88]

That's always the conundrum in these situations. Even if they are taken away from her, as was suggested by others, is there any guarantee there are people who will adopt them.


It's obviously the government's responsibility, since somebody has to be (according to her). So let the government worry about that. That's what it's here for.

[WESGATORS]

The dynamic is simple, but I don't understand why people in our society are afraid of it:

The more government assistance you require, the less freedom you should be permitted
The less government assistance you require, the more freedom you should be permitted
At any time, an individual should be free to move towards more freedom and less government assistance.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

[G8trGr8t]

So the poor and disadvantaged are not worthy of the same rights as you?

You know that their mother doesn't love them?

Interesting...

If she loved them she would assume responsibility for them. She loves the money they get her..totally unfit to be a parent

[HALLGATOR]

It's obviously the government's responsibility, since somebody has to be (according to her). So let the government worry about that. That's what it's here for.

They key here would be "according to her." I think we can all agree that making good decisions is not her strong suit.

[Lawdog88]

The dynamic is simple, but I don't understand why people in our society are afraid of it:

The more government assistance you require, the less freedom you should be permitted
The less government assistance you require, the more freedom you should be permitted
At any time, an individual should be free to move towards more freedom and less government assistance.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS


Never heard it expressed quite that way, WES.

TOTALLY AGREE with the concept, worry about who decides these things, and how the standards and requirements would be set.

However . . . it makes total sense on how to connect freedom with personal responsibility.

Say (pick a number), 3 children and family on assistance, no male assistance in household = no more children. (Government takes measures to insure that result). Makes me take a big New York gulp, but at least, it is an idea.

[wargunfan]

Pretty horrible at every level: Her, the money we pay ... But the worst is what will happen to her kids. It's a lot harder to survive a childhood like that with all your morals, self-esteem, work ethic ... in place.

Fifteen new Democrat voters. Congratulations.

[gatorman_07732]

Fifteen new Democrat voters. Congratulations.

Lets not forget the offspring's offspring and hence, the Ole pyramid scheme

[wargunfan]

If you went back and looked at the environment this woman came out of you would find another single mother with too many kids and all on welfare. This is a self perpetuating nightmare with the government as the primary enabler. Congratulations to LBJ and the Great Society war on poverty. This is what you get when bleeding heart liberals are given a blank check.

[rivergator]

Fifteen new Democrat voters. Congratulations.

There you go. If there's a reasonable conversation going, make sure you piss on it. Congratulations.

[Gatoragman]

Wes, you make a lot of sense. I am for freedom and liberty and self reliance, once you start taking more from the government these things start to dissipate, but at any point you can go the other way if you have the means. How do some of you liberals feel about that?
Is that fair?
Do I, as a tax payer have a right to dictate to net not tax payers and entitlement users their lifestyle?

[gator996]

I never said she didn't, did I? You infered that so that takes care of that.
Can she support those kids? That is the first thing that needs to be looked at.

"Uh, we are talking about the welfare of children. Lets see, child abuse vs. having a shot at life by possibly having parents that will care for them, love them, and give them what they need. Turning our back on the kids and subsidizing the mothers behavior accomplishes nothing. How could she even afford to feed those kids?"

[wargunfan]

There you go. If there's a reasonable conversation going, make sure you piss on it. Congratulations.
I didn't realize I had broken one of your personal thread rules. There is a 97% chance I'm right. One of the intentional byproducts of keeping blacks on the Democrat plantation.

[busigator96]

Perhaps she is a victim of her subculture?

[Lawdog88]

Perhaps she is a victim of her subculture?


What precisely is that subculture, Busi ?

[gatorman_07732]

"Uh, we are talking about the welfare of children. Lets see, child abuse vs. having a shot at life by possibly having parents that will care for them, love them, and give them what they need. Turning our back on the kids and subsidizing the mothers behavior accomplishes nothing. How could she even afford to feed those kids?"

Did I say explicitly she does not love her children? Wow, just because i said they can have parents that would love them and provide a better future. You just love to infer

[Lawdog88]

Did I say explicitly she does not love her children? Wow, just because i said the can have parents that would love them and provide a better future. You just love to infer


Actually, there is not enough time in the day to give them what they need, i.e., love, on an individual level, even if she is so inclined to actually "love them."

No way.

[busigator96]

What precisely is that subculture, Busi ?

Ghetto?

[DeanMeadGator]

15 votes raised on those beliefs against my 3 kids votes being taught personal responsibility and we wonder where the country is headed

When I compare what America was like when I was 12 years old and what it is like today [68 years old], it is like two different planets.

I only wish that my children and grandchildren could experience the America I knew as a child.

[oaklandroadie]

We need more shaming, judging, and stigmatizing in this society. I got judged and shamed at my daughters 2-year checkup for admitting that I allowed her to drink a sippy cup full of OJ 1-2 times a week. Wonder if my daughter's doctor would have passed similar judgement on this pile of human excrement after say, child 6?

Cut off the govt tap. Dollars to doughnuts that families, communities, and churches will step up before too many starve to death.

[gatordowneast]

This is what you get from smaller, less intrusive goverment folks...

Whatever happened to freedom & liberty?

You can cutoff her aid... fine.
But proposing government mandated adoption?

Must be modeling your public policy on China.


And you guys call Obama the communist?
:laugh:

When animals are found in squalid conditions without food or water, libbies scream bloody murder and want all the animals put up for adoption. Yet when beautiful little babies and kids are in the same situation, libbies scream about "rights". What about the rights of those kids to have a chance at a future?

[G8trGr8t]

Lets not forget the offspring's offspring and hence, the Ole pyramid scheme

It is an exponential explosion. One person born early 60s and bred through this system has produced between 80 and 120 votes while my wife and I have created 3. Grandmothers with dozens of grandchildren at the age of 40. Either it stops or the system is going to collapse as these welfare families become more politically involved

[theorangebluewinagain]

OK, I have reconsidered my position, abortion is ok in rape and any case in which the gene pool is weakened.

[g8orbill]

A woman walks into the downtown Harrisburg welfare office, trailed by 15 kids.

'WOW,' the social worker exclaims, 'are they all yours?"

' Yep, they are all mine,' the flustered momma sighs, having heard that question a thousand times before.

She says, 'Sit down Leroy.' All the children rush to find seats.

Well,' says the social worker, 'then you must be here to sign up. I'll need all your children's names.'

''Well, to keep it simple, the boys are all named Leroy and the girls are all named Leighroy."

In disbelief, the case worker says, 'Are you serious? They're ALL named Leroy?'

Their momma replied, 'Well, yes-it makes it easier.
When it's time to get them out of bed and ready for school, I yell, 'Leroy!'
An' when it's time for dinner, I just yell 'Leroy!'

And they all comes a running.
An' if I need to stop the kid who's running into the street, I just yell Leroy' and all of them stop.
It's the smartest idea I ever had, namin' them all Leroy.'

The social worker thinks this over for a bit, then wrinkles her forehead and says tentatively,
'But what if you just want ONE kid to come, and not the whole bunch?'

'Then I call them by their last names.

[northgagator]

When animals are found in squalid conditions without food or water, libbies scream bloody murder and want all the animals put up for adoption. Yet when beautiful little babies and kids are in the same situation, libbies scream about "rights". What about the rights of those kids to have a chance at a future?

What about my rights 15 years from now when one of those kids pulls a gun on me? Wait a minute, thanks to the liberals there won't be any guns!

[gatordowneast]

Perhaps she is a victim of her subculture?

She is a victim all right...of liberal lefty well intentioned policies that have aided in destroying two parent families in the black race. When it costs nothing to have the kid and your guvmint check goes up with each child, is their a reason for protection when having sex?

[gatordowneast]

Perhaps she is a victim of her subculture?

She is a victim all right...of liberal lefty well intentioned policies that have aided in destroying two parent families in the black race. When it costs nothing to have the kid and your guvmint check goes up with each child...

[mocgator]

We are not having to pay the tab for the folks critisizing Obama on these forums or elsewhere. That is the difference. We will be paying the tab for Angel and her 15 little angels for the next 70 years and likely several generations after since those little Angels are subjected to Angel's lifestyle, philosophies and government aid schemes.

I could give a damn if people want to act irresponsibly as long as they are paying for it.

There is a 70% chance that her children are incarcerated. Even a bigger cost ahead..

[gator996]

Did I say explicitly she does not love her children? Wow, just because i said they can have parents that would love them and provide a better future. You just love to infer


Does anyone have to infer anything here?

Child abuse vs. "what they could possibly have"...


Which one represented the mother those kids have right now?

[gatorman_07732]

Does anyone have to infer anything here?

Child abuse vs. "what they could possibly have"...


Which one represented the mother those kids have right now?

Child abuse does not have to be necessarily physical, but just the concept that she could not possibly attend to the basic needs of all her children could in and of itself be child abuse.

[Swampmaster]

You need to pay up---wealth needs to be shared. She's entitled.

[Lawdog88]

Child abuse does not have to be necessarily physical, but just the concept that she could not possibly attend to the basic needs of all her children could in and of itself be child abuse.


That would be called, child neglect. Which, if supported by the facts, is unlawful.

[gator996]

When animals are found in squalid conditions without food or water, libbies scream bloody murder and want all the animals put up for adoption. Yet when beautiful little babies and kids are in the same situation, libbies scream about "rights". What about the rights of those kids to have a chance at a future?


Contrary to what you believe...

There are many stories of people who are raised in large poverty stricken famlies that rise to success.

I find it more than contradictory that those who want no infringement of freedom & liberty by the government want to infringe here and throw the kids on the responsibility of the state.

If you're bitchin' about the cost of the welfare the mother wants what can you say about the higher costs of taking her children away.

This woman needs education, job skills training, and a job more than any other type of assistance.

Personally, I don't think that woman is representative of anything on a large scale...
Other than the hopelessness of poverty, especially when the father has been incarcerated.

Is this woman any more representative than "Octo-Mom" who has 14 kids and lives off of public assistance...

...and yet isn't seen as representative of "leftie" politics, the "ghetto" subculture, etc.


To be honest, I think most of what's written here is because its a black family.

Taking the children away, forced adoption, sterilization, lack of morality, lack of god in education, etc. have all been discussed in this thread...

I just wonder if it was a white poor family of 15, if all of these topics would even have been brought up for discussion?


This black family becomes representative of the "47%" and draws all sort of political criticism but a non-black family like Octomom doesn't become representative a greater portion of white society.


Some of what is contained in this thread smacks of the breakup of the black family that occured during slavery.

[Lawdog88]

White, black, brown, or purple, I am down with what WES said.

[WESGATORS]

I find it more than contradictory that those who want no infringement of freedom & liberty by the government want to infringe here and throw the kids on the responsibility of the state.

I have a different take on it. We want to have a system that discourages irresponsible people from reproducing irresponsibly. It doesn't matter to me whether that system is privately managed or is managed by the government, but I would imagine that the more liberal among us would feel better about it and it would meet less resistance if it was a government program. The bottom line is that it would result in less of a burden on society, less children being abused (the cost savings is really insignificant in light of the clear and obvious benefits not related to cost).

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

[g8orbill]

In the end to me it is about personal responsibility and a break down on both morals and ethics and the breakdown of the family unit -being a restaurant owner and employing young people, I can tell you in crosses all racial lines- it came to ahead in the 60's with the hippy movement and if it feels good just do it, coupled with the taking of prayer and God out of our educational system

[busigator96]

Nobody is addressing the problem. Nobody normal would choose to have that many kids. I doubt she is a "whole" person and this is her way of dealing with life. Raising kids is a hard job...harder than what Uncle Sam would give her.

[gator996]

Wes, that's fine...

But look at the responses in this thread...

Sterilization, forced adoption, cries of what Angel's family is costing taxpayers, lack of morality (100% assumed), etc.

And this is from "conservatives"...

All I see here is "take her kids away, tie her tubes, cut her money"...


What this woman needs is some personal responsibility skills & job training.


Wasn't that a part of what the "republican revolution" was about?
Reformed welfare?

Funny, I watched a whole bunch of conservatives respond here....

Didn't see much about creating economic opportunity...


But splitting up the family? Hooray!!!

[gatorman_07732]

Nobody is addressing the problem. Nobody normal would choose to have that many kids. I doubt she is a "whole" person and this is her way of dealing with life. Raising kids is a hard job...harder than what Uncle Sam would give her.

Its only hard if you're doing your job

[Lawdog88]

Wes, that's fine...

But look at the responses in this thread...

Sterilization, forced adoption, cries of what Angel's family is costing taxpayers, lack of morality (100% assumed), etc.

And this is from "conservatives"...

All I see here is "take her kids away, tie her tubes, cut her money"...


What this woman needs is some personal responsibility skills & job training.

Wasn't that a part of what the "republican revolution" was about?
Reformed welfare?

Funny, I watched a whole bunch of conservatives respond here....

Didn't see much about creating economic opportunity...

But splitting up the family? Hooray!!!


Too late. And . . . there is no real family in this picture.

[gator996]

In the end to me it is about personal responsibility and a break down on both morals and ethics and the breakdown of the family unit -being a restaurant owner and employing young people, I can tell you in crosses all racial lines- it came to ahead in the 60's with the hippy movement and if it feels good just do it, coupled with the taking of prayer and God out of our educational system

bil
I don't agree but I respect your opinion...

The only thing I have a "problem" with is that you're making an assumption about that woman's morality & spirituality...you don't know.

10 of those kids were the product of her & her husband per the video.

He's incarcerated.

She doesn't appear to have much education and obviously has been busy having & raising 15 kids...probably not much in the way of job skills either.

[g8orbill]

996 I'm not sure how it can be an assumption Everywoman is having multiple children by multiple male partners and not be married

[gator996]

Too late. And . . . there is no real family in this picture.


Glad you believe that...

You want to be in charge in determining when a life becomes worthless...not worthy of help?

There's "no real family" there because they're poor?


You may be in need of more help than they will ever be...


Let me ask, I dunno...

Are you a spiritual person? Christian?

[gator996]

996 I'm not sure how it can be an assumption Everywoman is having multiple children by multiple male partners and not be married


From the video, 10 of the 15 are from one man...I think her husband.

I'm not trying to be non-realisitic here....obviously this woman needs lots of different types of assistance

Most importantly job skills since she's probably been having kids constantly since HS.

My point is not much of that was brought up on this thread.
Just alot of unamerican stuff (forced sterilization?)


She's not the norm...she's an outlier but its obviously posted for shock value & to forward a political viewpoint.

When the news media covers poor white families in the same manner as this "coverage" then maybe I won't have to question the "representative-ness" of this example.

[Lawdog88]

Glad you believe that...

You want to be in charge in determining when a life becomes worthless...not worthy of help?

There's "no real family" there because they're poor?

You may be in need of more help than they will ever be...

Let me ask, I dunno...

Are you a spiritual person? Christian?


If appointed to that position, yes I would serve. :laugh:

[northgagator]

That would be called, child neglect. Which, if supported by the facts, is unlawful.

Neglect is just another firm of abuse.

[gator996]

If appointed to that position, yes I would serve. :laugh:

Seems you appointed yourself already.... :grin:

Religous? Spiritual?

[mocgator]

Look... it's a simple fact that there is a massive growth in the anti-achievement mentality, along with a larger and larger sense of entitlement, in the looter class. It's here to stay with the leftist government we have.... because it buys votes.

We will hear that this looter, who obviously embodies the looter class' anti-achievement and entitlement mentality to a "T", is divine and in need of help from everyone... yet the producers who must pay for this fool's bad decisions are evil and greedy.

Bizarro World my friends...

[Lawdog88]

Seems you appointed yourself already.... :grin:

Religous? Spiritual?


No, but I would if appointed.

But hey, since you want to sling a little, I'll get down wid ju.

No woman having 12 children, who can't support them, got there accidentally. She got there irresponsibly, and it is laughable to suggest that she has any notion or desire to suddenly become "personally responsible," as you suggest she does. It doesn't take 12 pregnancies and children for a person to learn responsibility. In fact, she claims that all of the children are someone else's responsibility, not hers, and that they better damn sure step in and do something. So we all got her pregnant 12 times ?

Thus, the question arises, when people act irresponsibly - like her - and twelve times later society is still footing the bill (other taxpaying individuals) for their ever-increasing, unchecked irresponsibility and growing dependence, should the government have been required to intervene before it came to this ?

WES suggested that something should intervene in this kind of circumstance, where quite obviously, the woman has no sense and is breeding like a lab experiment gone bad. Should it be the government ? The Courts ? I suggested earlier, maybe after 3 children and total government dependence, prohibition might be required. I think it is a rational approach to an addiction to irresponsibility that a certain segment of society does not have the interest in controlling . . . and does not want. Hey, it's just a fact of life.

Since Big Brother is already here, IMO, so might as well get Bro to do something useful.

[gator996]

If you believe the video...

She didn't have social impact until her husband was arrested...

...AFTER having all dem kidz :grin:



How many people would be slinging "irresponsible" if there wasn't an
economic issue?


Conservatives...all for the family, freedom, liberty...
...until bad times befall someone and they have to pay for them...
...then its big government, restricted rights...

The joke here is that most of the "solutions"/comments offered would actually cost more than the current "leftist" government solution...

What's really sad is that current solution can't get their act together and actually help this family in a organized, integrated way...so the money goes "wasted".


If a large family got busted out in the mortgage mess and they're on government assistance...should we take their kids away and sterilize the mother for being stupid enough to think they couldn't go bankrupt?

If that's the case, a whole lotta women...black & white... would be lining up to get their tubes tied and kissing their kids goodbye. :wave:

[Lawdog88]

"Irresponsible" has many facets to it, economic being one of them, and having 12 dependent children = irresponsible.

So, as long as they are not economically dependent as the "creepege" occurs, you are OK with it. I too, am all for assisting those who have lived "responsibly," providing for themselves and their family, and then find themselves suddenly thrust in a crisis situation where they need temporary help.

In this case, however, I think if you looked more closely, I would bet that you would find a history of dependency on the government that just didn't suddenly occur when her total brood of 15 was whittled down to 12, and her "fiance" got arrested.

I would bet.

[northgagator]

Contrary to what you believe...

There are many stories of people who are raised in large poverty stricken famlies that rise to success.
Yes there are many such stories that you referred to. However, there are many more tragic stories where children raised in similar situations fail or never reach their potential.

Here is a recent report of children in poverty.
The U.S. Census Bureau reports on U.S. poverty rates as they relate to children and their family status. They report on individuals under 18 who are in a household by birth, marriage or adoption but are not themselves a householder. The poverty rate within this group of individuals is 21.4 percent. That’s 15.4 million children. It grows further distressing when one considers that children under six have a poverty rate of 24.5 percent. That’s 5.8 million children. Simply put, one in four young children in the U.S. are being born and raised in poverty. http://usccbmedia.blogspot.com/2013/01/children-in-poverty-shame-of-nation.html

From the same link here is data on children being raised by single mom families
The type of household in which a child is raised is a factor. Around 47 percent who lived only with a female householder were in poverty, compared to only 10 percent of related children in married couple families. Furthermore, more than half of related children under six in families with a female householder were in poverty. This statistic is four and a half times the percentage of children under the age of six in poverty within married coupled families.

Also, the demographics show that African American children are at a greater risk to be in poverty The story worsens when you consider race. African American children are among the largest race group facing child poverty; their rate is 38.2 percent, twice as high as the rate for white children.

As for the success stories that you referred to
In economics, the cycle of poverty is the "set of factors or events by which poverty, once started, is likely to continue unless there is outside intervention."[1]

The cycle of poverty has been defined as a phenomenon where poor families become trapped in poverty for at least three generations, i.e., for enough time that the family includes no surviving ancestors who possess and can transmit the intellectual, social, and cultural capital necessary to stay out of or escape poverty; in calculations of expected generation length and ancestor lifespan, the lower median age of parents in these families is offset by the shorter lifespans in many of these groups.

Such families have either limited or no resources. There are many disadvantages that collectively work in a circular process making it virtually impossible for individuals to break the cycle.[2] This occurs when poor people do not have the resources necessary to get out of poverty, such as financial capital, education, or connections. In other words, poverty-stricken individuals experience disadvantages as a result of their poverty, which in turn increases their poverty. This would mean that the poor remain poor throughout their lives.[1] This cycle has also been referred to as a "pattern" of behaviors and situations which cannot easily be changed.[3]

The poverty cycle is usually called "development trap" when it is applied to countries.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_cycle

What are the percentage of this poverty cycle? At least 40% in the US (from the same link above) Also pay attention to the bolded text.
Another paper, titled Do poor children become poor adults?, which was originally presented at a 2004 symposium on the future of children from disadvantaged families in France, and was later included in a 2006 collection of papers related to the theme of the dynamics of inequality and poverty, discusses generational income mobility in North America and Europe. The paper opens by observing that in the United States almost one half of children born to low income parents become low income adults, four in ten in the United Kingdom, and one-third in Canada. The paper goes on to observe that rich children also tend to become rich adults—four in ten in the U.S. and the U.K., and as many as one-third in Canada. The paper argues, however, that money is not the only or even the most important factor influencing intergenerational income mobility. The rewards to higher skilled and/or higher educated individuals in the labor market and the opportunities for children to obtain the required skills and credentials are two important factors. Reaching the conclusion that income transfers to lower income individuals may be important to children in the here in now, but they should not be counted on to strongly promote generational mobility. The paper recommends that governments focus on investments in children to ensure that they have both the skills and opportunities to succeed in the labor market, and observes that though this has historically meant promoting access to higher and higher levels of education, it is becoming increasingly important that attention be paid to preschool and early childhood education.[6]

I find it more than contradictory that those who want no infringement of freedom & liberty by the government want to infringe here and throw the kids on the responsibility of the state.

This statement has the strong smell of someone trolling.
In response to this statement: There are two parties here that have their rights. One party is the parents (or parent) and the other party is the children.
These children are afford the same consideration of ""Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness" and are afford rights by the US Constitution "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America".

The situation present in OP shows that the mother (or egg donor) has no concept of what her responsibility is when it comes to in the statement "provide for the common defence,promote the general Welfare" for her 15 children.

[QUOTE=gator996;6309562]If you're bitchin' about the cost of the welfare the mother wants what can you say about the higher costs of taking her children away.

Actually the cost to the community to keep these children with their mother will be far greater than it would be for the state to put them in a better situation. For one thing the odds of breaking the cycle of poverty are better. Instead of drawing public assistance as an adult and creating the next generation of poverty they will be producers and providers.

This woman needs education, job skills training, and a job more than any other type of assistance.
I hate to call anyone a loser but in this case that poor mother is a loser.
She most likely needs years of therapy, coaching, and restructuring to be a fit parent. By that time her children will be fully grown. All is not lost in that scenario. She may be rehabilited enough to be a good grand mother to her 30 to 60+ future grand children.

Personally, I don't think that woman is representative of anything on a large scale...
Other than the hopelessness of poverty, especially when the father has been incarcerated.
In this case the father you referred to is at the most a sperm donor.
You are partially wrong on your statement of misrepresentation. She is the exception when it comes to the number of children but not to the other statistics.

Prevalence: Single motherhood is very common. Around half of today’s mothers will spend at least some time as the sole custodial parent.

Update: As of 2011, 11.7 million families in the US were headed by a single parent, 85.2% of which were headed by a female.1 Prevalence: Single motherhood is very common. Around half of today’s mothers will spend at least some time as the sole custodial parent.

Update: As of 2011, 11.7 million families in the US were headed by a single parent, 85.2% of which were headed by a female.1
According to The Hamilton Project at the Brookings Institution, the annual earnings single-parent families plummet 20% between 2007 and 2010, compared to only 5% for two-parent families.3

Poverty: Two fifths of single mother families are poor, triple the poverty rate for the rest of the population. Single-mother families are nearly five times as likely to be poor than married-couple families.

The poverty rate for single-mother families is 40.7% compared to 8.8% for married-couple families.4 The majority of poor children are in single mother families with 24% of children now living in such households.5


Is this woman any more representative than "Octo-Mom" who has 14 kids and lives off of public assistance...

...and yet isn't seen as representative of "leftie" politics, the "ghetto" subculture, etc.

To be honest, I think most of what's written here is because its a black family.
I am not sure what you are getting at here. Are you saying that the Octo-Mom is getting a pass because she is white? If so that assumption is way off the mark. When the first story of the Octo-Mom (she is Assyrian/Iraqi) broke many people were disgusted with her and had concerns for her children. Many people were calling for child protective services and the Octo-Mom was getting a lot of some unwelcomed attention from these people.

Taking the children away, forced adoption, sterilization, lack of morality, lack of god in education, etc. have all been discussed in this thread...

[QUOTE=gator996;6309562]I just wonder if it was a white poor family of 15, if all of these topics would even have been brought up for discussion?
This black family becomes representative of the "47%" and draws all sort of political criticism but a non-black family like Octomom doesn't become representative a greater portion of white society.

Yes they would because the same objections were raised with the Octo-Mom
The core problem with this case is that people are just very pissed off at how irresponsible everyone has been in this situation....Nadya, her doctors, her parents and anyone else you can think of who helped to facilitate this. http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/267414

Also, in the recent news the Octo-Mom is now back on welfare. News that a lot of people do not find amusing.

Some of what is contained in this thread smacks of the breakup of the black family that occured during slavery.

Actually the breakup of the black family since the 1960's War on Poverty (thanks LBJ) makes the breakup during the slave years look like a family reunion.
Yes family were broken up durning the slave days but not to the degree we saw since the 1960's.

[gatordowneast]

Contrary to what you believe...

There are many stories of people who are raised in large poverty stricken famlies that rise to success.

I find it more than contradictory that those who want no infringement of freedom & liberty by the government want to infringe here and throw the kids on the responsibility of the state.

If you're bitchin' about the cost of the welfare the mother wants what can you say about the higher costs of taking her children away.

This woman needs education, job skills training, and a job more than any other type of assistance.

Personally, I don't think that woman is representative of anything on a large scale...
Other than the hopelessness of poverty, especially when the father has been incarcerated.

Is this woman any more representative than "Octo-Mom" who has 14 kids and lives off of public assistance...

...and yet isn't seen as representative of "leftie" politics, the "ghetto" subculture, etc.


To be honest, I think most of what's written here is because its a black family.

Taking the children away, forced adoption, sterilization, lack of morality, lack of god in education, etc. have all been discussed in this thread...

I just wonder if it was a white poor family of 15, if all of these topics would even have been brought up for discussion?


This black family becomes representative of the "47%" and draws all sort of political criticism but a non-black family like Octomom doesn't become representative a greater portion of white society.


Some of what is contained in this thread smacks of the breakup of the black family that occured during slavery.

Cut me a break. Where should I start?

I would guess most kids raised poor who make it big (other than athletes) do not come from the type of background like Angel's kids. They likely know who their daddy is and their mommy was likely married to the guy, at least temporarily.

No one wants the "state" to take over...the "state" has contributed enough to this mess. It is called adoption by placing the kids in foster families or through agencies. Give the kids a fighting chance.

No job training in the world can help this woman...I would be more concerned with breaking the cycle of dependancy for her 15 offspring. Give her a chastity belt and a mop and broom and make her work for her check but give the kids a chance elsewhere.

Octomom was critisized far more than Angel. She was every bit the skank and there is no difference.

And yes, if it was a white family of 15 with the woman making claims of "someone being accountable" the screams would have been louder as some are afraid to critisize as Angel and her little angels are black and the media and other libbie lefty nogginheads scream racisim whenever there is criticism of someone of color like our esteemed goober in the white house.

[northgagator]

bil
I don't agree but I respect your opinion...

The only thing I have a "problem" with is that you're making an assumption about that woman's morality & spirituality...you don't know.

The poster is making an assumption. However he maybe more on target than you realize.
Question: Do you think that it is moral to bring children into this world knowing that you will not have the means to provide for them and expecting the charity of people and gov't to pick up the slack?


[QUOTE=gator996;6309686]10 of those kids were the product of her & her husband per the video.

He's incarcerated.

And five of them from some other swinging penis (or penises).
The father, I mean sperm donor, is a jail bird who had no intention in providing for the children he fathered.

Do you call these actions moral.
If now, that is no problem, but then again does she and he get a free pass?

She doesn't appear to have much education and obviously has been busy having & raising 15 kids...probably not much in the way of job skills either.

No offense but that is not a earth shattering assumption.
What is probably more probable is that her mother and perhaps grand mother were in a similar situation.

The right thing any considerate and sane person would do after the first birth is to:
1, Get on birth control.
2, Get a job and job skills.
3, Hold out for a man who is going to stick around and be responsible in stead of a man who is going to stick it to her.

Not once have you questioned the mental capabilities of this woman.
Please ask your self this question.
What sane woman would want to go through 7 or even 15 pregnancies?
When you get to that answer then ask yourself this question.
Is this woman fit to be a parent?

[Matthanuf06]

Also the problem with "job skills" and "job training" is that it is still a net negative for the tax payers. Daycare/after school care for a family that size would be well over $1000 per week. Maybe she could hire some professional nanny, but that is at best $500 per week.

Even with job training she wouldn't even make enough money to pay for someone else to watch her kids. Obviously that doesn't even factor in food/housing/clothes/etc.