Jesus fucking christ... it's a vagina, not a clown car.

And when I say a total waste of oxygen, I mean the mother, not the kids. I cant believe the words that come out of her mouth. Typical of types like her, she wants the state to pay for her kids, but she doesnt want the state in her business...I say take all the kids then jail her for being a burden on society...

My favorite part was when she said someone needed to be held "accountable".

Who is to blame for her misguided notions?

Who taught her these selfish values?

Who failed her?

Her parents? Society? Both?

Jesus fucking christ... it's a vagina, not a clown car.

#1 | Posted by Dr_Icepick at 2011-12-01 05:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

Obama voter

I think my head just exploded.

I say take all the kids then jail her for being a burden on society.

Would you say that if the Duggars fell on hard times?

I say take all the kids then jail her for being a burden on society...

#2 | Posted by boaz

just fuckin' wow!

I just had a flashback to my own dear departed father, grhs, who was a committed and serious racist. He wasn't really a racist, he was just a general all purpose bigot.

He hated blacks, jews, catholics, etc.... equally. In his society, that was the way shit got done, if you know what i mean.

But, I got news for you, my friend, the prejudice then is the same as the prejudice now, socio-economic classism. the reason it was 'blacks' for 200 yrs was because blacks were at the bottom of the socio-economic structure. Now race is not as much a factor as it used to be, in terms of who is where on the socio-economic scale, but the prejudice is still there.

So yes, let's throw these very incredibly stupid people in jail, and while we're at it, let's throw all the retarded and crazy people in jail too. Old people, they're a poor and burdensome lot. Lock their old, broke, winkley asses up too. Anybody else that you can think of that we can lock up for being inconvenient to society?

Typical of types like her, she wants the state to pay for her kids, but she doesnt want the state in her business...I say take all the kids then jail her for being a burden on society...

#2 | Posted by boaz at 2011-12-01 05:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yet the RW wants to force women to have these kids. Do you see the problem in this fucked up mentality? No abortion or birth control, yet no support for children and mothers. Screw your heads on straight and see the hypocrisy in your party.

#8 | Posted by BruceBanner

She most likely popped out all these kids because she could qualify for more welfare money. I also suspect that personal responsibility never came to you on this. You liberals need us understand that blacks are not pets and voting stock but people who deserve the right to succeed or fail on their own. This woman has no idea what responsibility is because the system has rewarded her for bad behavior from birth. You have destroyed this woman's life for your parties political needs.

"You have destroyed this woman's life for your parties political needs."

Whereas Lokisfur wants to take this woman's poor decisions out on the innocent children.

*waiting for the usual suspects to bash Fox when this was originally an NBC piece*

You know it's gonna happen.

blacks are not pets and voting stock

#9 | Posted by paneocon at 2011-12-01 08:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

Who said being black had anything to do with anything?

She gets FREE condoms you ass. I suppose we taxpayers should pay for all of her abortions?

FUCKWAD

#11 | Posted by glasshouse at 2011-12-01 08:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

You didn't address my point, and it still stands unchallenged.

She most likely popped out all these kids because she could qualify for more welfare money.
Wild irresponsible speculation, irrelevant to the topic.

I also suspect that personal responsibility never came to you on this.
Actually that was the point of my comment. Personal responsibility is lost upon your kind. You want to force people to have kids, now it's your responsibility to help them with what you forced on them.

You liberals need us understand that blacks are not pets and voting stock but people who deserve the right to succeed or fail on their own.
Rich that a white supremacist would have the solution to the problems of Black America.

This woman has no idea what responsibility is
I'm sorry, do you know her personally? Excuse me then. Otherwise, keep your speculation up your ass with the gerbil and dildos shaped like Hitler's head.

because the system has rewarded her for bad behavior from birth.
Is this your idea of someone who has been rewarded from birth? If you won the lottery would you use the winnings to make your life like hers? *Winning! Duh!

You have destroyed this woman's life for your parties political needs.
It would be my contention that you did.

#9 | Posted by paneocon at 2011-12-01 08:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

Ok--she's a dimwit for not planning her family by using birth control.

She is blaming the sheriff for arresting her finacee--father of 10 of her 15 kids and putting him in jail. You would think that after 10 kids you might be married. Maybe for economics they can't marry?

It appears she is saying she was ok until the arrest. (What would help her more is early menopause).

Then there was no money, no rent, no food, no shoes, no nothing...

Thanks Goodness someone stepped in to help--the charity folks.

That was a year ago--what's going on now??

Whereas Lokisfur wants to take this woman's poor decisions out on the innocent children.

But who's responsibility are the kids? Society? She had them. She doesnt realize that a social safety net isnt a right. There are concequences to not swallowing...

She most likely popped out all these kids because she could qualify for more welfare money.

She was. They were paying $800 a month for her rent and not including food stamps and other assistance. Where is that money coming from? It's a shame. She suffered NO concequences for her actions until that judge took her kids and put her in jail. But I bet she thinks she is a "victim"...

But who's responsibility are the kids? Society? She had them.
#17 | Posted by boaz at 2011-12-01 10:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yet Republicans want to make the choice to always keep the baby. Therefore, according to your logic, it IS the responsibility of the state to take care of those children. Society decides to have the baby so society can take care of the baby. If you're a RWinger you must support this. I'm surprised to see the uproar. I'd expect to see you all asking where you can donate to help the family. After all, charity should come from individuals.

"But who's responsibility are the kids? Society?"

Yes.

Particularly considering the alternative.

#19 | Posted by BruceBanner

"...human weeds,' 'reckless breeders,' 'spawning... human beings who never should have been born." Margaret Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, referring to immigrants and poor people Margaret Sanger

Couples should be required to submit applications to have a child, she wrote in her "Plan for Peace." Birth Control Review, April 1932 Margaret Sanger

The purpose in promoting birth control was "to create a race of thoroughbreds," she wrote in the Birth Control Review, Nov. 1921 (p. 2)Margaret Sanger

Margaret Sanger, Founder of Planned Parenthood and progressive.

"Margaret Sanger, Founder of Planned Parenthood and progressive."

Next target to judge by today's standards: Mark Twain.

"Next target to judge by today's standards: Mark Twain."

Posted by Danforth at 2011-12-02 12:00 AM | Reply

Unreadable doorstop.

I just stepped outside to pee and dodged a rattlesnake.

Would you say that if the Duggars fell on hard times?

#6 | Posted by rcade

I would. How can you even have a relationship with 15 or 20 kids???

I can't even remember my own kids' names...."Hey, damnit, pick up your shoes!"

Yet the RW wants to force women to have these kids.
#8 | POSTED BY BRUCEBANNER

Bruce your one fucked up partisan hack. I haven't done the research but I'm reasonably sure birth control, in many forms, is available and legal in 57 states. Paneocon was probably dead on about more babies more entitlement. Either by her choice or her boyfriends to scam the system. And explain to me how his arrest made it all come crashing down? You don't think he was selling drugs to earn some under the table beer money do you?

She needs to have her vagina surgically sealed after removing all her reproductive organs. I would recommend stuffing her pussy with your head instead but it's so fucking empty even blind and retarded sperm would have no problem reaching their goal. I would suggest rendering all 15 kids sterile but your fucking brain would melt thinking about all the future Democrats that would never be born. I know not too PC but like they say the fruit never falls far from the tree.

You worthless fucking hack.

Oh let me guess since the birth control is now a non issue you'll throw down the abortion card. Well what can I say. Some people say it's ok others don't agree. Either way there's no law against adoption. Maybe she can sell them to earn some extra dough while her boyfriend serves his time. Then they can start all over, him being away from her and all.

I just stepped outside to pee and dodged a rattlesnake.

#24 | Posted by Zatoichi

There's a small dick joke in there somewhere...where's Kan?

I just stepped outside to pee and dodged a rattlesnake.

#24 | Posted by Zatoichi

There's a small dick joke in there somewhere...where's Kan?

I can't even remember my own kids' names...."Hey, damnit, pick up your shoes!"

#25 | Posted by Beachbuzz

Hey YOU --what's your face! Pick up your shoes! lol

Hey YOU --what's your face! Pick up your shoes! lol

#29 | Posted by MURPHY

And I only have 3 to deal with. Can you even fathom 20?

Yet Republicans want to make the choice to always keep the baby. Therefore, according to your logic, it IS the responsibility of the state to take care of those children. Society decides to have the baby so society can take care of the baby. If you're a RWinger you must support this. I'm surprised to see the uproar. I'd expect to see you all asking where you can donate to help the family. After all, charity should come from individuals.
#19 | POSTED BY BRUCEBANNER AT 2011-12-01 10:39 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

However, outside of Republicanland and in reality, there IS birth control and abortion readily available, yet this woman clearly has not utilized either. Since the state has provided legal and easily accessible alternatives to 15 kids and this woman still had them, wouldn't you then agree it is HER responsibility to take care of the children?

"wouldn't you then agree it is HER responsibility to take care of the children?"

Yes.

But let's say she won't, or can't.

Do we tell the innocent kids to go fuck themselves?

#32 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2011-12-02 02:49 AM | REPLY | FLAG:

Sorry, wasn't insinuating the the kids "go fuck themselves". Clearly someone has to take care of the kids, and if the mother won't then society will have to do it for her. However, in the video the mother seemed to want it both ways...she wants the state to financially support her and her kids, and she also wants full rights as a parent. If the state becomes responsible for the kids, then they need to inherit the rights of the parent and have the ability to tell this woman to shape up or ship out.

On a purely anecdotal note, I remember a class I had on social work policy in college where we discussed laws in some states allowing foster children to be adopted after two years. The professor argued that 2 years was simply not enough time to allow a parent to get cleaned up and that a child should be left in foster care indefinitely just in case one day the parent decided to actually take responsibility (my words, not hers). I thought that was completely crazy; if a parent is unable to parent and the state needs to step in, then I believe that after a reasonable time the state should have the ability to permanently remove parental rights. If a parent can't or won't be a parent, then full responsibility, including the ability to place kids in adoption, should be given to the state after a reasonable amount of time. I guess this video just reminded me of that conversation from a few years ago.

She suffered NO concequences for her actions ...

You don't think having 15 kids to take care of is a consequence?

You don't think having 15 kids to take care of is a consequence?

not in her mind.

was taking care of 12 kids a consequence...to her?

was taking care of 13 kids a consequence....to her?

was taking...........

at some point, you would think this woman could determine she had enough children to care for.

Do we tell the innocent kids to go fuck themselves?
#31 | Posted by Danforth

No. If she wont we take away the kids and discipline the parent. If she cant then she should be given help. It looks to me like she wont (I watched the entire video - did you?).

You don't think having 15 kids to take care of is a consequence?

Obviously not if she didnt stop after the 6,7,8,9 kid. She has no morals, so she doesnt think about her effect on the kids. So she doesnt feel concequences. She needs to have her children taken from her and she needs a hystrectomy(sp?)..

And as to the Duggers, I would say the same if Mr. Dugger went to jail and if all those kids went on public assistance. But then again, what do you think the chance of that is? Lets look at the differences here. Mrs. Dugger has a responsible Mr. Dugger not doing drugs, Baby popper and Obama voter does not. Mr. Dugger actually built his own house, you think the woman in this article's man would build a home to take care of his kids? Cmom RCADE, there is no comparison...

Two words....personal responsibility

Jesus fucking christ... it's a vagina, not a clown car.

#1 | POSTED BY DR_ICEPICK AT 2011-12-01 05:52 PM

Wife and I are still laughing.

VERY FUNNY

It may be that CPS should take away the kids for a spell, and send her to some kind of life training and require she have a job, income, ability to provide the basics before returning the kids. She'll probably just get more pissed off though...

I just stepped outside to pee and dodged a rattlesnake.

#23 | Posted by Zatoichi
Rattlesnake? That is interesting, I just call mine King Cobra...

#40 | Posted by freechoice

Zatoichi can't afford indoor plumbing or a house near civilization so it was most likely a real snake.

Wife and I are still laughing.

VERY FUNNY

#38 | Posted by glasshouse at 2011-12-02 12:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

You made it official and gave 'Inflatable Suzie' a ring? Is that legal?

Mitt Romney warned us of this kind of thing if we let gay people marry!

Leave Suzie out of this asshole.

Would you say that if the Duggars fell on hard times?

#6 | POSTED BY RCADE AT 2011-12-01 06:46 PM | REPLY | FLAG

I'd say they're poor parents regardless of their ability to financially support those children. Support, yes, but it is impossible to RAISE that many children. There is no love in that family, no parental guidance, nothing. There is only batch processing.

And for anyone who's in doubt: download a few episodes of the Duggars' TV show 17/18/19 and counting. They are awful parents. Are they as bad as some crack smoker? No, but they might as well be a state-run orphanage for all the love you can see.

Bruce your one fucked up partisan hack. I haven't done the research but I'm reasonably sure birth control, in many forms, is available and legal in 57 states. Paneocon was probably dead on about more babies more entitlement. Either by her choice or her boyfriends to scam the system. And explain to me how his arrest made it all come crashing down? You don't think he was selling drugs to earn some under the table beer money do you?

She needs to have her vagina surgically sealed after removing all her reproductive organs. I would recommend stuffing her pussy with your head instead but it's so fucking empty even blind and retarded sperm would have no problem reaching their goal. I would suggest rendering all 15 kids sterile but your fucking brain would melt thinking about all the future Democrats that would never be born. I know not too PC but like they say the fruit never falls far from the tree.

You worthless fucking hack.

Oh let me guess since the birth control is now a non issue you'll throw down the abortion card. Well what can I say. Some people say it's ok others don't agree. Either way there's no law against adoption. Maybe she can sell them to earn some extra dough while her boyfriend serves his time. Then they can start all over, him being away from her and all.

#25 | Posted by Tedly at 2011-12-02 12:14 AM | Reply | Flag:

Try walking the walk and I'll take you seriously. Watching you squirm is a pleasure. Dance bitch.

I just stepped outside to pee and dodged a rattlesnake.

#23 | Posted by Zatoichi

That what you get for dissing Mark Twain.

WTF is the matter with Mark Twain? Not pretentious enough for you?

They are awful parents. Are they as bad as some crack smoker? No, but they might as well be a state-run orphanage for all the love you can see.

You are getting into your own personal definition of parent now. I think we can all agree the black woman who is the subject of this piece is an awful parent, and you not speaking to it speaks volumes. At least the Duggars kids are getting clothes, they know who their dad is, they have a roof over their heads and they do still have two parents. There are not multiple men moving in and out of their mother's life and they are NOT on public assistance.

Again, there is no comparison...

Who is to blame for her misguided notions?

Who taught her these selfish values?

Who failed her?

Her parents? Society? Both?

#3 | Posted by BillJohnson at 2011-12-01 06:01 PM | Reply

Answer to this multiple choice question:

The left

The left

The left

The left.

I'm not defending the mother, but how does the guy father 10 children, land in jail, barely get a mention in the news article, and escape unscathed in the comments?

This kind of thing is one area where I agree with the right.

I grew up in a time when "unwed mothers" were shunned and stigmatized. Often, a pregnant kid would be sent to live with relatives and some cover story prepared, such as "Aunt Hattie needs help around the house and Suzie's gone to live with her." Once the baby came, it was put up for adoption, and the newly santized sinner returned to family and fold. All of this was very tough on everybody concerned, and to a certain extent, I'm glad we're more grown-up and less judgmental these days.

But it has gone way, way too far when girls use pregnancy as a means to get financial assistance, with more babies meaning more money, without anyone putting a foot down and saying, "This is wrong. You cannot support these kids on your own, you cannot get ahead in life because of them, you're too young and too inexperienced to be a good parent to them and you're not a good role model for them."

Personally, I wonder if assistance shouldn't be limited to the first child only. Anyone can make one mistake. But after that, tell young women that they must either raise and support their kids properly (involving the fathers, of course) or face losing them to adoption, and maybe some jail time for child neglect, since failure to make proper provisions for having a kid is about the most neglectful thing you can do.

...it has gone way, way too far when girls use pregnancy as a means to get financial assistance... -- #51 | Posted by MaryTylerWhore

Where do you get that from this story? The woman's 10 youngest were fathered by her fiance, who was thrown in jail, she claims, after family services came by to "help." According to her, that's when they lost their home.

Again, I'm not defending either parent -- 15 kids is ridiculous even for people with money. But it's remarkable that 50 of 51 comments rail against the mother and say NOTHING about the father's irresponsibility.

Phoenix:

I personally know one woman in a former workplace of mine who had six children, all by different fathers, who freely and laughingly admitted that the financial assistance was the reason she did it. I also know a couple of social workers who deal with the problem of welfare wombs, and their stories are not pretty.

I agree with you wholeheartedly about fathers; in fact, my post included this statement:

"....tell young women that they must either raise and support their kids properly (involving the fathers, of course) or face losing them to adoption...."

Phoenix: I personally know one woman in a former workplace of mine who had six children, all by different fathers, who freely and laughingly admitted that the financial assistance was the reason she did it. -- #53 | Posted by MaryTylerWhore

I know that happens, but your post implies that's what was going on in this case, and there's nothing in the story to indicate that that's true. Her "someone needs to pay for these kids" came immediately after she complained that social services' version of help was putting their father (her fiance) in jail. You're a little too bright to gobble up Faux News spin so quickly, aren't you?

Phoenix:

Look. There is probably some merit to this woman's version of events, and Lord knows there are a lot of social workers out there who are too God-damned stupid to be doing their jobs.

But any person not possessed of a damn good income who has fifteen kids is a few sandwiches shy of a picnic, seems to me.

Raising fifteen children successfully would take a very large house, some hired help, one parent not working, at least two sizable cars, and - if you would be truly responsible - one hell of a lot of life insurance, among other things. Because shit happens.

I don't see evidence this woman had resources remotely like this, and yet she continued to pop out rugrats. She placed herself on the edge, and when something bad happened, the whole house of cards collapsed. I can see where she's not responsible for the occurrence, but I still maintain she's responsible for being on the edge.

I've seen cats with fewer offspring.

This woman needs a damn hystorectomy (sp) and a fucking clue.

...any person not possessed of a damn good income who has fifteen kids is a few sandwiches shy of a picnic, seems to me.

I said as much in #52.

I don't see evidence this woman had resources remotely like this, and yet she continued to pop out rugrats... She... ...she... she... -- #55 | Posted by MaryTylerWhore

Will someone please explain to MTW how heterosexual sex works?

57...what are the chances you think abortion is just the woman's choice? In other words, the dude is responsible for shit when the chick says so, but he has no choice when she doesn't want him too...
Sorry, her body, her choice. She decided to have those booger eaters, they're her responsibility.

"Will someone please explain to MTW how heterosexual sex works?"

And will someone please explain to Phoenix how matters can be arranged so that heterosexual sex doesn't work quite so much to one's detriment?

And will someone please explain to Phoenix how matters can be arranged so that heterosexual sex doesn't work quite so much to one's detriment? -- #59 | Posted by MaryTylerWhore

Your point being that women, and women alone, are responsible for birth control?

Sorry, I don't buy the "Men are dogs who can't control themselves" line. This guy got his fiancee pregnant TEN TIMES, yet in your world, "she placed herself on the edge"?

If we're going to invent motivations (like getting pregnant to get child support), why aren't we talking about men who pride themselves on numbers like this b/c they see them as evidence of their virility? Or abusive men who threaten to abandon the family if their partners refuse sex?

50 posts with no mention of the father's role in all of this? Really? Are you guys telling me that not one of you would have figured out by the 3rd or 4th child how to use a condom?

...what are the chances you think abortion is just the woman's choice? -- #58 | Posted by 101Chairborne

Her words -- "children are a gift from God" -- seem to suggest that she doesn't believe in abortion. Can't pin that on us liberals.

Phoenix:

Yes, birth control is a woman's responsibility. She must either use it - or insist upon it. If a woman of childbearing age is not on birth control, and allows a man to have intercourse with her without a condom, she is asking for pregnancy, bottom line.

We are "talking about men who pride themselves on numbers like this b/c they see them as evidence of their virility." Women must protect themselves from men like this, because the men certainly aren't going to do it.

Sorry, this woman failed in her responsibility to herself. If you flashed an iPhone and a Rolex in a rough-ass neighborhood knowing people regularly got robbed of such things there, who do you blame when you get relieved of them? The robber has some responsibility, sure. But so does the chowderhead who could have put the phone in his pocket and left the sparkly watch at home.

We are "talking about men who pride themselves on numbers like this b/c they see them as evidence of their virility."

And through 50 posts they were given a free pass.

If you flashed an iPhone and a Rolex in a rough-ass neighborhood knowing people regularly got robbed of such things there, who do you blame when you get relieved of them? The robber has some responsibility, sure. -- #62 | Posted by MaryTylerWhore

OMG we're making progress. "The robber has some responsibility." SO DOES THE FATHER OF HER CHILDREN. That is my only point. Again, how do we get 50 posts into this thread with no mention of the FATHER's responsibility?

If a woman of childbearing age is not on birth control, and allows a man to have intercourse with her without a condom, she is asking for pregnancy, bottom line. -- #62 | Posted by MaryTylerWhore

Do you believe that gay men who get AIDS asked for it?

This guy got his fiancee pregnant TEN TIMES

So THAT's why she got pregnant! Keeping her legs closed wouldnt have worked..Nope, it wouldnt have worked...

"Do you believe that gay men who get AIDS asked for it?"

Once the cause of the disease was known, and the simple preventative of condom use found, anyone who did not avail themselves of protection was certainly guilty of foolhardy behavior.

One of the big problems for anyone dealing with a horny man - and their own horniness - is that a lot of wishful thinking takes place, on both sides. "Oh, it'll be okay this time" is a common rationalization for not using protection. Women often fudge on their fertility calculations. Horniness gets in the way of clear thinking, almost every time.

I have never known a man who would not prefer to do the big nasty without a condom. Some men are grown-up enough to put both partners' safety above that consideration. But it's the responsibility of everyone who goes to bed with men to say "NO" if the clod refuses to use protection, or tries to sweet-talk his way out of using it.

Boaz:

Your post reminds me of an old joke:

A young lady went to her doctor and asked for some means of birth control besides The Pill. She claimed they were too expensive, and she had to remember to take them exactly as prescribed.

The doctor said, "I have just the thing - you just need one of these!" and took out a bottle, which any fool could see was marked "Bayer Aspirin."

The woman asked, "How is an aspirin going to keep me from getting pregnant?"

And of course, the doctor said, "If you hold it between your knees, it works like a charm."

But it's the responsibility of everyone who goes to bed with men to say "NO" if the clod refuses to use protection, or tries to sweet-talk his way out of using it.

#66 | Posted by MaryTylerWhore at 2011-12-03 11:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

Don't worry honey I'll pull out.

Works every time.

rwd

"Who taught her these selfish values?"

The capitalist society she was raised in. Greed is good. Selfishness is a virtue. Work, consume, work, consume. Shop until you drop. You can have it all. You deserve it. Charge it. Be a patriot, go shopping.

"Who taught her these selfish values?"

Back the fuck up Nullnuts.

The do nothing society she was raised in. Welfare is good. Lazyness is a virtue. Why work when the governmemt will privide for you. Shop till your food stamp card runs out. You can get it all from the government if you are a worthless piece of shit. Have a another welfare recipient. Don't get married. Smoke crack, etc...

The capitalist society she was raised in.

I dont know how you could even type that bullshit. You know it's liberal crap that makes her have those selfish values. If it were capitalism, she would have opened her own shop or company and wouldnt have had enough time to have all those babies. She would have gotten a work ethic and a sense of responsibility...

It's the welfare state, plain and simple...

"Who taught her these selfish values?"

Where does that question even come from? It presumes that she made a rational calculation to have fifteen kids -- no coercion, no mental illness, no battered wife syndrome, etc. etc.

For those of you who have met a woman before: ask her how she would feel about being pregnant (and giving birth) 15 times, to children she would then rear.

Oooooooooooooh, I am getting such a headache.

#70, 71 72

The silence is deafening...we all must have struck a nerve.

#70, 71 72

The silence is deafening...we all must have struck a nerve.