BethFromVA

I <heart> Kat and this response!!!!

Carrie, there's no reasoning with the unreasonable. And every thread she's on gets overrun by and made about her.

Down, there, "nice christian." :biggrin:

Because she IS all of these things. And more. I'm just trying to be PG here. :biggrin:

MY wrongs never hurt, affected, or cost anybody but myself. The fact that you can't see the difference tells me that you have a logic chip missing somewhere.

I couldn't care LESS how stressed she is. I hope she never gets another wink of sleep ever again for the next 18 years for what she's done. It's about the COST, Patty, the COST to the TAXPAYERS that was unconscionably foisted on them by a deliberate act of selfishness and abuse.

MAY??? Taxpayers may have to cover octuplet mom's costs LOS ANGELES (AP) - A big share of the financial burden of raising Nadya Suleman's 14 children could fall on the shoulders of California's taxpayers, compounding the public furor in a state already billions of dollars in the red. Even before the 33-year-old single, unemployed mother gave birth to octuplets last month, she had been caring for her six other children with the help of $490 a month in food stamps, plus Social Security disability payments for three of the youngsters. The public aid will almost certainly be increased with the new additions to her family. Also, the hospital where the octuplets are expected to spend seven to 12 weeks has requested reimbursement from Medi-Cal, the state's Medicaid program, for care of the premature babies, according to the Los Angeles Times. The cost has not been disclosed. Word of the public assistance has stoked the furor over Suleman's decision to have so many children by having embryos implanted in her womb. "It appears that, in the case of the Suleman family, raising 14 children takes not simply a village but the combined resources of the county, state and federal governments," Los Angeles Times columnist Tim Rutten wrote in Wednesday's paper. He called Suleman's story "grotesque." On the Internet, bloggers rained insults on Suleman, calling her an "idiot," criticizing her decision to have more children when she couldn't afford the ones she had, and suggesting she be sterilized. "It's my opinion that a woman's right to reproduce should be limited to a number which the parents can pay for," Charles Murray wrote in a letter to the Los Angeles Daily News. "Why should my wife and I, as taxpayers, pay child support for 14 Suleman kids?" She was also berated on talk radio, where listeners accused her of manipulating the system and being an irresponsible mother. "From the outside you can tell that this woman was playing the system," host Bryan Suits said on the "Kennedy and Suits" show on KFI-AM. "You're damn right the state should step in and seize the kids and adopt them out." A call to Suleman's publicist Mike Furtney was not immediately returned. In her only media interviews, Suleman told NBC's "Today" she doesn't consider the public assistance she receives to be welfare and doesn't intend to remain on it for long. Also, a Nadya Suleman Family Web Site has been set up to collect donations for the children. It features pictures of the mother and each octuplet and has instructions for making donations by check or credit card. Suleman, whose six older children range in age from 2 to 7, said three of them receive disability payments. She said one is autistic, but she has not disclosed the other youngsters' disabilities, and refused to say how much they get in payments. In California, a low-income family can receive Social Security payments of up to $793 a month for each disabled child. Three children would amount to $2,379. The Suleman octuplets' medical costs have not been disclosed, but in 2006, the average cost for a premature baby's hospital stay in California was $164,273, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The average cost for just one cesarean birth in 2006 was $22,762 in California. Eight times that equals $1.3 million. For a single mother, the cost of raising 14 children through age 17 ranges from $1.3 million to $2.7 million, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who is struggling to close a $42 billion budget gap by cutting services, declined through a spokesman to comment on the taxpayer costs associated with the octuplets' delivery and care. Suleman received disability payments for an on-the-job back injury during a riot at a state mental hospital, collecting more than $165,000 over nearly a decade before the benefits were discontinued last year. Some of the disability money was spent on in vitro fertilizations, which was used for all 14 of her children, Suleman said. Suleman said she also worked double shifts at the mental hospital and saved up for the treatments. She estimated that all her treatments cost $100,000. A dozen states, including California, have laws requiring insurance companies to cover infertility treatment, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. But California does not require insurers to cover in vitro procedures. It's not clear what type of coverage Suleman has. In the NBC interview, Suleman said she will go back to California State University, Fullerton in the fall to complete her master's degree in counseling, and will use student loans to support her children. She said she will rely on the school's daycare center and volunteers. Taxpayers may have to cover octuplet mom's costs

Yeah, you would think. Hmmm. I don't know that you actually DID. No apologies as I still doubt that you did.

True. Then her children should be adopted out to people who are not insane and using money they don't have for plastic surgery on their faces rather than having a job and taking care of their kids and making MORE babies when she can't even afford the first SIX. :biggrin:

You mean the amount of time total the longest members are on the ranch? They've already been there six weeks and they are just now doing the individual eliminations. Six months is too long, but six weeks just passed.

He wouldn't last long at my place. :crying: I'd sew him into the sheets with one of those little hand-held sewing machines and then beat him with a baseball bat. :frown:

Wow... THAT was what was nasty??? :biggrin:

Oh, puh-LEASE!!! :biggrin:

Um, didn't I just read yesterday that California is in a financial freefall? I mean, not that that's surprising, but they are sinking fast.

Nice. Toss the taxpayers under the bus yet again for people's foolish selfishness. :biggrin:

What about this is nasty? "Um, if you are forcing others to have to come to your rescue INCLUDING the state via money, you do NOT have that right. She is not a Duggar, people who, though I think they're nuts for having so many kids, have made it work without relying on the system. They are there for their kids, seem to have a good working system in their home, and did it the right way. That's like saying I have a right to live in a five-bedroom home and force the taxpayer to pay for it. What kind of insanity are you espousing, Patty??? Oh, and by the way, did YOU at least pay back the money the state paid to you for your irresponsibility? I doubt it..." I don't have to thank God. I didn't put myself in a situation on PURPOSE where I had 14 kids out of wedlock with no job, no money, no house, and a bankruptcy under my belt. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out how NOT to be put in that situation!! There are tons of choices, Patty. IUD, the pill, condoms, spermicides, ABSTINANCE, adoption... You put yourself in that situation, but it's not even near the same as what THIS woman did. Not even close! I think the Duggars are nuts, but not insane like this freakazoid. I think they're nuts because it is a lot, but I don't begrudge them doing what they want to do and AFFORDING to do it on their own. I don't care if people have 30 kids, so long as THEY support them and not the taxpayer. You seem to think that people can just do whatever the hell they want no matter the consequences, no matter that it affects innocent taxpayers. The pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness ends when it begins to affect others who do not want to be a part of this experiment gone terribly wrong. If telling it like it is makes me nasty, then so be it. You're delusional.

Susan: Thanks. And sorry. But thanks. I finally found the ignore feature and put it on there. :crying:

Nope, not even close to alone. :crying:

It's already happening. My mom was on an insurance plan before Medicaid kicked in where they asked her weight (she had gained about five years before then but certainly nowhere like where I was) and they charged her an upcharge for being outside the weight range they wanted.

What is your problem? Seriously? You really should be on meds because you have a major MAJOR mental issue.

It's the fat little doughboy who seems to have nothing else in his life to do other than live the life of pond scum. Oh, and he puts up pictures of his mama too. No wonder he's single. *shudder*

Wow, you are a piece of work. I never said I hate men, YOU did. I never said I blame DH, YOU did. I never said I don't accept responsibility, YOU did. You sound like a woman hater who is just bound and determined to make a dick of yourself, and you succeed mightily. Were you born that way or do you practice in the mirror daily? Fucking troll... blow up your boyfriend and tell it to him.

She won't even be able to give them undivided attention.

No, it's because she's a cuckoo bird! It is NOT HER RIGHT TO FORCE THIS EXPENSE ON THE TAXPAYER!!! What do you not get about this??? If SHE was paying for them all, I say knock yourself out. Once you become beholden to the taxpayer in ANY FASHION, you LOSE your right to not be accountable. Good lord, people can't even keep housefuls of cats or dogs, but you think it's okay to have kids like this when you can't afford them?? I can only hope CPS gets involved and thins her herd and finds these kids some good, loving homes.

Very Alice in Wonderland of you. :crying: She's using these kids to try to fill a need she has. As Dr. Phil said today, kids should not be born with a job to do. Good point.