DL Hughley: “The Republican Convention literally looked like Nazi Germany”

February 28, 2009

1 woman = 2 uteri = 2 fetuses = 2 infants

February 28, 2009

Now this is a miracle of birth not associated with manufactured frozen embryos from a birthing factory.

A woman born with two uteri (uterus didelphys) conceived and an embryo implanted in each womb. She first discovered she had two uteri after a miscarriage. She then was able to have a normal health son, William, who is now 10 months old. She had been on birth control but got pregnant anyway and surprise! one fetus on each side. She carried them for 33 weeks and the delivery, by cesarean section, of course, was without complications.

There are instances of women with two cervices and two vaginas but that was not the case here. And there are bicornuate uteri that have two chambers in which separate embryos can implant.

Chances are 1 in 5,000,000 and there are only 3 other reported cases in the world.

Twin girls: Valerie Marie (4lbs 15oz) and Kaylin Joy (3lbs 15oz), were born with premature lungs but are doing well, as is mom. The uteri were different-sized, which explains the disparity in weights. The delivery took place at Marquette General Hospital and the Reinfelder’s hail from Sault St Marie, Michigan.

Upper Michigan News TV6: Heather Sawaska

Mom, Sarah, 21: I’m so excited. I couldn’t sleep at all last night. I was just thinking about the girls and how I was so happy they were healthy because nobody really knew what to expect.

Dad, Shane, ever practical: It’s still setting in here. It’s like okay, they’re here. Now what?

Double sets of twins: one white, one black, born of a white mom and a black dad – odds 2 in 1,000,000.

Pix of the day: Aurora Australis

Aurora australis appearing from Stewart Island/Rakiura at the southern point of the South Island of New Zealand.

Aurora australis appearing in the night sky of Swifts Creek, 100 km north of Lakes Entrance, Victoria, Australia

test

Octuplets: Dr Phil talks to publicist #2, Victor Munoz on Larry King

February 27, 2009

(2-3) Octuplets: Publicist Joann Killeen on Larry King
(2-16) Octuplets: Publicist Joann Killeen quits amidst death threats
(2-18) Octuplets: New agent?
(2-28) Octuplets: Dr Phil talks with new publicist, Victor Munoz, on Larry King
(3-9) Octuplets: Second publicist, Victor Munoz, quits: “This woman is nuts!”
(3-10) Octuplets: Updated list of  posts

Dr Phil is filling in for Larry King. He talks with Nadya’s new publicist Victor Munoz. He thinks she can handle things on her own with what the hospital is setting up with them. The hospital gave them a list of things they needed to fix in the house and Nadya said “I don’t believe it’s safe enough for the kids at this moment.” And yet six children have been living there. Munoz says he’s looking for a new house.

They discuss Angels in Waiting’s offer – which is free and requires no transfer of custody – and Munoz says he’s a little intimidated of Dr Phil and Gloria Allred. Gloria Allred explains her side. Munoz never explains why nadya did not accept the offer but agrees to allow Dr Phil to mediate. We’ll see.

TRANSCRIPT

MCGRAW: You’re not playing with dolls.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MCGRAW: But she’s not sorry they’re here.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP FROM “DR. PHIL,” COURTESY PETESKI/CBS TV DISTRIBUTION)

N. SULEMAN: I don’t regret it and I don’t apologize for it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MCGRAW: Is she addicted to pregnancy?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP FROM “DR. PHIL,” COURTESY PETESKI/CBS TV DISTRIBUTION)

MCGRAW: When you can’t handle the six you’ve got, having even one more seems to me to be way out of touch with reality.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MCGRAW: Could she lose her babies?

Will she resort to pornography to pay the bills?

We’ll talk about why she needs help with people who know the real Nadya Suleman, including me. The octuplet mom revealed, right now on LARRY KING LIVE.

Hey, Dr. Phil McGraw here sitting in for Larry King.

Nadya Suleman may be the most notorious mother in the world right now ever since she gave birth to octuplets last month. Don’t forget, she’s got six kids under the age of seven, as well.

Her motives and her mental state have been questioned, too.

I recently sat down with Nadya for an in-depth interview.

Here’s a little of what she said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP FROM “DR. PHIL,” COURTESY PETESKI/CBS TV DISTRIBUTION)

MCGRAW: Given the result, was it a mistake to transfer those six embryos?

N. SULEMAN: I don’t believe anything was a mistake. I believe that considering — I’m going to reiterate. Considering my own history, that the six resulted in two and then, of course, it’s — that what is the probability of that happening again?

MCGRAW: If you knew you were going to have eight, would you have done it?

N. SULEMAN: No.

MCGRAW: No?

N. SULEMAN: No.

MCGRAW: So?

N. SULEMAN: I don’t regret it and I don’t apologize for it. And I love them. So I don’t want anybody to misinterpret that as me saying I wish I hadn’t done it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MCGRAW: Well, joining me now, Nadya Suleman’s spokesman, Victor Munoz.

And in Las Vegas, host of “The Insider,” Lara Spencer. She interviewed Nadya and her mom this week.

Victor, how’s Nadya doing and how are the children doing today?

VICTOR MUNOZ, SPOKESMAN, OCTUPLETS’ A. SULEMAN. They’re doing great. Can’t complain too much.

MCGRAW: The babies are at what status at this point? I understand that three of them are bottle feeding?

MUNOZ: Yes. We actually…

MCGRAW: Has that number gone up since we talked last?

MUNOZ: Yes, we’re — they started the bottle feeding on three of them. And they’re getting real healthier, the rest of them. And they’re going to be coming home soon.

MCGRAW: Good. On Wednesday, you and Nadya called me at the studio right before we taped the last part of the interview show that we put up. And she was very concerned at that point because of a meeting that you guys had had with the Kaiser Permanente people, saying that there had to be certain standards met, of course, which makes common sense. What did they say specifically and who were you talking to and where is that now?

MUNOZ: Well, we were talking with Kaiser. We had a big meeting with, you know, basically, the whole entire staff that was helping her out. And it was one of the first meetings we had talking about releasing the babies. And it hit her. It hit her hard. She realized that she does have eight babies coming home. And she’s excited, she’s scared. And she wants to get the house ready in time for these kids to come home.

[HE JUST CONFIRMED SHE’S BEEN OUT OF TOUCH WITH REALITY.]

MCGRAW: Was there a conclusion that the house was not ready at that point, based on what they had seen with the RadarOnline.com footage and that sort of thing?

MUNOZ: There was some. The — you know, they wanted a couple of things done, obviously, because there are preemies coming home. They wanted carpets changed, fresh paint on the walls, cracks taken care of — you know, normal maintenance on the house.

MCGRAW: Is any one of the babies ready for release right now?

MUNOZ: As of today, no. We still have roughly 10 to 12 days before one will be able to come home.

MCGRAW: And who’s the likely candidate to come home first?

MUNOZ: I want to say it’s Noah, but I’m not quite sure yet. It’s going to be a surprise for me.

MCGRAW: What is the progress right now on meeting the standards and requirements that you understand to be important in terms of housing and manpower and all of the things that are required to support these children?

MUNOZ: Well, you know, I mean they did ask us to do a lot, you know, as far as refreshing up the house and getting everything ready. And we’re getting close. You know, we’re almost there. You know, we’re in the middle of finding their new home. We narrowed it down to a few and we’re getting ready to pick one. That should be picked out, you know, this weekend. And once we get into that, there’s a big — there’s a big chunk of that list is taken off, you know and…

MCGRAW: So you’re clicking things off at this point?

MUNOZ: We’re — I want to say every minute of the day I’m clicking stuff off.

MCGRAW: Is Nadya doing anything to prepare herself as a mother, in terms of any parenting, there’s logistics training, any type of therapeutic support from her through Kaiser Permanente or others to get herself ready for this challenge?

MUNOZ: You know what, at this point not. No, there’s nothing. I mean she’s already been taking care of six children. And she’s ready to jump into the new eight.

MCGRAW: How are those six children doing now?

MUNOZ: Oh, they’re doing great. I see them every day. You know, they’re happy, healthy, fun to hang around with, you know.

MCGRAW: If a child — if one of the babies was ready to be released today, would Kaiser Permanente release that child, as far as you know?

MUNOZ: Yes.

MCGRAW: So they would release the child to go to the home as it is?

MUNOZ: One child. Now we’re talking three, four or five? No.

MCGRAW: They would not.

MUNOZ: They would not.

MCGRAW: They told you they would not?

MUNOZ: They told us we would — they would not. There’s a couple of things that need to be done. There’s — we need to redo these bedrooms. We need to make sure that there’s enough room for them, you know. And we need to give them their own space. One child, yes. Eight, no.

MCGRAW: So they’ve made it clear, if multiples were ready to be released today, they could not do it?

MUNOZ: Correct.

MCGRAW: What would they do? Would they keep them at the hospital? What would they do?

MUNOZ: They would hold onto them as long as they could, you know. But they know that we’re working hard. So they really haven’t given us too many ultimatums. They did say, look, you need to get through this list. You need to take out — you need to really work on it hard and get a big chunk done. And then, you know, we’ll go from there.

MCGRAW: All right. We’ve seen some things in the media recently. One is that she’s been offered a million dollars to do a porn video with some porn producer out here.

MUNOZ: Right. Exactly.

MCGRAW: Is this anything that’s on her radar screen?

MUNOZ: No. Absolutely not. Absolutely not. She threw that away…

MCGRAW: So she wouldn’t even consider doing it?

MUNOZ: She called me up and was laughing on the phone, can you believe that they’re doing this, why would they do this?

MCGRAW: Lara Spencer is with us in Las Vegas. Lara, you’ve been following this story right along with all of us. What did — did you hear about this porn thing? Was that a surprise to you?

LARA SPENCER, ANCHOR, “THE INSIDER”: Of course it was a surprise. And I knew, having interviewed Nadya, that she would never do it. You know, I mean I think she does want help and I know she needs the money. But at the end of the day, her kids come first. And I don’t think that would be a consideration. So as I understand it — and you guys can confirm — she has walked away from that possibility.

MCGRAW: Yes. And, Victor, you’re saying that no chance, no way.

MUNOZ: No chance at all.

MCGRAW: And, you know, Lara interviewed Nadya, as well. And we’re going to see some excerpts from that in a minute. And there are going to be additional excerpts on “The Insider” over the weekend. So I hope everybody watches for that, as well.

What’s your biggest challenge right now in getting ready for these children to come home?

MUNOZ: Mine’s been housing. They’ve put a lot of pressure on me. They want — you know, Nadya and the family are asking me to get them into a new house in the next week.

MCGRAW: All right. Everybody is concerned — and, you know, of course I’ve spent my live dealing with mental illness and all types of human functioning. As you spend, probably, more time right now with Nadya than anyone, are you concerned about her level of problem solving, her level of problem recognition?

MUNOZ: You know what, I don’t. At first, before I met her and I was watching her on television and, also, I was thinking the same thing. But getting to know her and really understanding her — I mean I think I spend more time with her than just about anybody does right now. And the more I get to know her, the more I know she is level- headed. You know, there’s — I mean there’s nothing wrong with her. She’s a sweet lady.

MCGRAW: Is she prepared to accept the reality that if these children come home to her, that there has to be total transparency, where the proper authorities, agencies, nurses, whatever, can see what’s going on with those children (INAUDIBLE)?

MUNOZ: Absolutely. She knows that her life is going to be an open book.

MCGRAW: All right. Good.

Next, does Nadya watch the interviews she’s done? We’ll answer that question when we come back. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP FROM “THE INSIDER”)

SPENCER: On a serious note, how are the conditions at the house? Is it a clean, safe place?

N. SULEMAN: I don’t believe it’s safe enough for the kids at this moment.

[SHE JUST ADMITTED HER HOUSE IS NOT SAFE FOR CHILDREN. NOT EVEN THE ONES WHO HAVE BEEN LIVING THERE.]

SPENCER (voice-over): Inside the octuplet mom’s cramped home with her six older children — duct taped vents, holes in the walls, magic marker stains on the doors. “The Insider” behind closed doors at home with Nadya Suleman, where these eight tiny babies are expected to arrive soon.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MCGRAW: That picture — that obviously just looks terrible, in terms of the repair of that house at this point. So, but the plan is not to stay in that house. It’s to get to another house.

MUNOZ: Correct, we do not want to stay in that house. Obviously, it’s too small. And we’re looking at buying something larger.

MCGRAW: And you say you’re making progress on that? How close are you?

MUNOZ: We are about a week away. I mean we really need to figure out which home we’re going to be taking over in the next few days.

MCGRAW: OK.

MUNOZ: When I meant buy, I mean, actually, we’re leasing. We’re not buying.

MCGRAW: OK. All right. Now, let me ask you — and then I want to get back to what is going to be required for these children. You’ve taken over as the publicist in this situation. You were asked to do so. You didn’t ask for this, it asked for you.

MUNOZ: I never asked for this.

MCGRAW: There were death threats that were involved with Ms. Killeen before, who’s a great professional. Have you had the same thing?

MUNOZ: Absolutely not. Everybody’s been real great to me. I get phone calls…

MCGRAW: But tonight’s the first time your last name has been out there.

MUNOZ: Yes, it is. Today is the first day.

MCGRAW: Are you concerned about that?

MUNOZ: No, I’m not. I mean, people on the street, they recognize me from the news reels and stuff. They ask me how she’s doing. I’ve heard nothing but nice things from people.

MCGRAW: Yes. So you’re not concerned that something’s going to happen. What’s the hospital telling you need to take care of these children? I mean do you need nurses? Do you need nannies? What are they recommending at this point?

MUNOZ: Well, you know, we have eight babies coming home, so they’re asking that we do something. And what they’re asking for is two nurses during the day, two nurses at night. They think that’s more than sufficient to help with the kids.

MCGRAW: Two nurses for eight babies?

MUNOZ: Two nurses — it would be two nurses for eight babies, yes.

MCGRAW: Two nurses around the clock for eight babies?

MUNOZ: Around the clock for eight babies.

MCGRAW: In addition to volunteers and (INAUDIBLE) or?

MUNOZ: In addition to some volunteers to help out with the older kids, you know, with the reading and the homework and stuff like that.

MCGRAW: Do you think, at this point, she gets the challenge that’s ahead of her?

MUNOZ: Absolutely. Absolutely.

MCGRAW: When I talked — when you guys called, in the phone call that we talked about, when you indicated that the hospital had said you’re going to have to make some changes before we can release these children…

MUNOZ: Right.

MCGRAW: …you told me that the night after my interview with her, that she, for the first time since the pregnancy broke down and cried. Tell me about that.

MUNOZ: Absolutely. You know, it was — it was surreal to me, also. You know, she has been a real strong woman. She knows what she wants to do and she does it. And to — after she talked to you — she was real nervous speaking to you at first. And afterwards, she just said, you know what, I feel good. And she had herself a good cry. She realizes I have babies coming home. I have 14 children, how — you know, how awesome is that? And she cried.

[SOMEHOW I DON’T THINK SHE WAS CRYING BECAUSE IT WAS AWESOME. SHE’S CRYING FOR HERSELF BECAUSE HER LIFE IS BASICALLY OVER.]

MCGRAW: She got very tearful on the phone with me that day. What was her — what space was she in then?

MUNOZ: You know what, she was in the space of extreme reality and — and thankfulness. You know, you put an olive branch out to her and she’s accepting it. And, you know, she — she’s real strong-headed at first, as you know, and didn’t really want to ask for help from anybody. And when she called you and talked to you, had a really nice conversation with you, she realized, you know what, this is a good thing. And I stepped out of the room because she did start to tear.

MCGRAW: Yes. Lara Spencer is with us. She is one of the co-hosts of “The Insider,” who also has spent time talking with Nadya Suleman. Lara, what’s been your experience? Is this a matter of being a strong woman or is this a matter of not being in touch? What’s your take on this and hearing that she finally is maybe getting in touch with her emotions?

SPENCER: Dr. Phil, first, let me say, I thought you did a phenomenal job. I thought you handled it so well and you really made her realize — you got her to say that it wasn’t the correct decision to have more. And that’s a difficult thing to do. And I understand as a mother why you wouldn’t want to do that. You never want to call a child a mistake. But I love what you said. And I actually wrote it down. You said: “There are right decisions and then there’s a way to make decisions right.”

And that’s where we are now. I mean I think she’s been vilified in the media. And it’s time to stop that. Right or wrong, no matter what you think about Nadya Suleman or her decision to go back to the well after having six healthy kids, that doesn’t matter, because here we are. You know, there are — there are eight babies who have no say in this, in addition to the six that are already home. So, you know, the questions I keep hearing is who’s going to take care of these kids? Is this going to be taxpayer money again? It sounds like it is when you’re talking about nurses. And, you know, people want to know, is she stable? I mean, you know, was this a stable decision? I don’t think it was a good decision. But I don’t know, Dr. Phil — and you’re the guy who can — I’m certainly not the judge of that. I don’t know if she’s stable.

MCGRAW: Well…

SPENCER: My reasoning for wanting to continue on this story is for those kids. I want to be the eyes and the ears of this country, because people are passionate about this. And I don’t think…

MCGRAW: Well, they are passionate about it…

SPENCER: Yes.

MCGRAW: They are passionate about it. And we are going to have to have complete and total transparency here. This is not something — and you understand that. I mean, if these children do go home with her, people are going to be watching this. Like it or not, they’re going to have to know what’s going on behind closed doors to know that these children are OK and that she’s going to demonstrate some type of consistency and some type of mental and emotional stability. And that’s going to take some help, I know.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP FROM “THE INSIDER”)

SPENCER: Are you embarrassed by Nadya?

ANGELA SULEMAN: Yes, when she started taking out 14 little children in a bus, I will be very embarrassed. I wouldn’t want to be seen with her.

SPENCER: And how does that make you feel?

N. SULEMAN: That’s your own opinion. That’s her perspective.

SPENCER: Oh, yes?

N. SULEMAN: Many, many people would totally disagree, because there’s so many people that have actually come up to me and who is she, who is anyone to point a finger at anyone else and judge them?

A. SULEMAN: Well, I’m your mother and I’m wondering how you can possibly bring up all these 14. You don’t have a job, Nadya.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MCGRAW: Welcome back to LARRY KING LIVE. I’m Dr. Phil McGraw sitting in for Larry tonight. We’re talking about the octuplets’ mother and why she felt compelled to use her frozen embryos. Here’s what she said in a face-off with her own mother during an interview with RadarOnline.com.

SPENCER: Are you embarrassed by Nadya?

ANGELA SULEMAN: Yes, when she started taking out 14 little children in a bus, I will be very embarrassed. I wouldn’t want to be seen with her.

SPENCER: And how does that make you feel?

N. SULEMAN: That’s your own opinion. That’s her perspective.

SPENCER: Oh, yes?

N. SULEMAN: Many, many people would totally disagree, because there’s so many people that have actually come up to me and who is she, who is anyone to point a finger at anyone else and judge them?

A. SULEMAN: Well, I’m your mother and I’m wondering how you can possibly bring up all these 14. You don’t have a job, Nadya.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MCGRAW: Welcome back to LARRY KING LIVE.

I’m Dr. Phil McGraw sitting in for Larry tonight.

We’re talking about the octuplets’ mother and why she felt compelled to use her frozen embryos.

Here’s what she said in a face-off with her own mother during an interview with RadarOnline.com.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP FROM RADARONLINE)

A. SULEMAN: You should have considered your other six children.

N. SULEMAN: OK. But I still was going to — I was not going to destroy the embryos, period. Done, done. Already done.

[RIGHT THERE SHE ADMITS SHE WAS GOING TO HAVE EERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE EMBRYOS IMPLANTED NO MATTER HOW MANY CHILDREN RESULTED FROM EACH ONE.]

A. SULEMAN. Yes, but they are…

N. SULEMAN: You can’t go back…

A. SULEMAN. — frozen embryos.

N. SULEMAN: But you can’t go back and ring a bell. You can’t go back and alter the past. A. SULEMAN. No, no, no. You’re talking now…

N. SULEMAN: They’re there. They’re human…

A. SULEMAN. — that you, whatever you did is…

N. SULEMAN: But they’re human beings…

A. SULEMAN. — is past…

N. SULEMAN: …that are grow growing, that are related to you, that are healthy, strong and almost all four pounds.

A. SULEMAN. They are frozen. That’s the difference.

N. SULEMAN: They’re frozen right now?

A. SULEMAN. They were frozen. And you did not have to do anything.

N. SULEMAN: They were lives.

A. SULEMAN. And if you wanted to…

N. SULEMAN: The only thing you can do if they’re lives…

A. SULEMAN. — yes, they were lives, but…

N. SULEMAN: (INAUDIBLE) — use them or destroy them. But you either use them…

A. SULEMAN. But you…

N. SULEMAN: …or you destroy them.

A. SULEMAN. You decided…

N. SULEMAN: You use them or you destroy them. You use them or you destroy them.

A. SULEMAN. Whatever they do it’s all done.

N. SULEMAN: Do you want to know how they destroy them?

A. SULEMAN. No, no, no, no. Hold on. Hold on.

N. SULEMAN: They allow them to live…

A. SULEMAN. Well…

N. SULEMAN: They allow the cells to live…

A. SULEMAN. Let me finish…

N. SULEMAN: And then they kill them.

A. SULEMAN. Let me finish.

N. SULEMAN: You do not…

A. SULEMAN. You…

N. SULEMAN: No, I won’t.

A. SULEMAN. You had another option. You didn’t have to have them destroyed.

N. SULEMAN: OK. What could I have done?

A. SULEMAN. The other option is…

N. SULEMAN: What did — adoption.

A. SULEMAN. — give them up for adoption.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MCGRAW: The senior editor of RadarOnline will be here later in the show to tell us about the Nadya she knows. But first, why did the octuplets’ mom refuse a generous offer of help? That’s next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

N. SULEMAN: I won’t apologize for having all my children. And I never will.

A. SULEMAN: How are you going to provide for them? What are you thinking?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MCGRAW: So what are you thinking was a good question. But now I’ve got Gloria Allred here in the studio. Gloria, you — you and I known each other a long time.

GLORIA ALLRED, ATTORNEY: Yes.

MCGRAW: You’re an attorney. You’re a family rights advocate. You work for women and you work for kids tirelessly. And you are involved in this situation because of an organization called Angels In Waiting. And that offer is basically to do what?

ALLRED: Yes. Angels in Waiting is a wonderful organization of pediatric nurses. It’s been founded Linda West-Conforti, who’s been a registered nurse for 25 years and has taken care of neo-natal issues and pediatric issues for medically fragile, high-risk, premature infants — very similar to the situation that Nadya Suleman’s octuplets have been in. And they help. And they provide supportive care for those infants.

MCGRAW: So what the offer is, is to provide 24/7 care…

ALLRED: Yes.

MCGRAW: …including housing…

ALLRED: Yes.

MCGRAW: …wrap-around care — this is nursing plus others.

ALLRED: Yes.

MCGRAW: Right. Now, is there a transfer of custody involved in this? In order for — for Nadya to avail herself of this, does she have to give up custody of the children?

ALLRED: Not at all. In fact, they invite her to be there with her children and be part of it because, after all, they are her children and they all should be together.

MCGRAW: Then why has this gotten to be adversarial? Because it seems to me — because I’ve — I know you and talk to you. I know Victor Munoz and Nadya and talked to them. And I encouraged them to talk to you, as you know. But it seems to be adversarial at this point. Why is that?

ALLRED: I have no idea, Dr. Phil.

MCGRAW: It seems like a wonderful and generous offer, but yet it seems like they feel bullied and they feel pushed in this thing.

ALLRED: I have never spoken to Nadya Suleman. And I only spoke to Victor for probably a minute or two when he called to tell me that the appointment that Nadya had made with Linda — head of Angels In Waiting — to come to my office last Monday at 11:00 a.m. could not be kept because he didn’t realize that perhaps she had an appointment at Kaiser and therefore they couldn’t make it.

But that’s the only contact that I’ve had with Victor. So I don’t know why they would feel that this is anything but a golden opportunity, Dr. Phil, to provide the supportive services — the early intervention by trained, experienced professionals that all these babies would benefit from — and the other six, as well.

MCGRAW: Well, I have a note here that Victor maintains that he’s been calling Angels In Waiting. He has not heard back from them. He says he wants to deal with Angels In Waiting founder Linda West — is it Conforti?

ALLRED: Yes.

MCGRAW: Conforti — directly, not with you, for some reason. And he says that he can’t understand why you’re involved and that he feels threatened, on behalf of his client, that they’re going to be pushed or bullied into something.

ALLRED: Well, I don’t know why he feels that way. He has no basis for feeling that way. And the reason that I’m involved — and if he would ask, I’d be very happy to tell him, is simply because Angels In Waiting sent this invitation — this proposal to Nadya three different ways — to Kaiser, to him, to Nadya…

MCGRAW: So she loses no control of the children?

ALLRED: And she heard — and they heard nothing, so they asked me to get involved. I said give them a week. I know that they’re busy with other things. And then, perhaps, if they haven’t heard about it or responded then, then I will get involved and try to get the message to her.

MCGRAW: So they lose no control of the children?

ALLRED: Exactly.

MCGRAW: There’s no transfer of custodial?

ALLRED: None whatsoever.

MCGRAW: And this doesn’t have to be adversarial?

ALLRED: No.

MCGRAW: I mean, if I was able to get you and Victor and Nadya, attorneys, whoever involved, in a room and do my best Henry Kissinger about this, would you be willing to sit down and talk with them?

ALLRED: Well, I’m always happy to sit down and talk and listen, as well.

MCGRAW: Yes.

ALLRED: And Linda is an incredible person. I mean she has taken foster children in. She has literally saved their lives.

MCGRAW: Well, then I don’t know why it’s gotten off in this way, but maybe we can get it back on track and see if there’s — if there’s something there. So, all right, coming up, how likely is it that the state would come in and take custody of the octuplets? We’re going to find out, after the break.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, COURTESY RADARONLINE)

N. SULEMAN: It’s — because it’s fine. It’s fine. It’s OK, because we also have a really large backyard to play. And I love that for them.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP FROM “DR. PHIL,” COURTESY PETESKI/CBS TV DISTRIBUTION)

A. SULEMAN: It seems as if she’s obsessive compulsive and she needs to keep doing this. And I hope she’s not. I mean is 14 enough?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MCGRAW: Dr. Phil in tonight for Larry King. We’ve got another excerpt from my interview with Nadya Suleman. This one includes her mom, Angela. Watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP FROM “DR. PHIL,” COURTESY PETESKI/CBS TV DISTRIBUTION)

MCGRAW: I’m having to rely on a mother to — to help me here — I think I’ll go have another one. To me and to everybody in America, that is just, girl, this, you’re not playing with dolls.

N. SULEMAN: I know. I know.

MCGRAW: These are real people, real lives. And you’re going to have to feed them and clothe them and guide them and educate them for the rest of your life and for all of their lives.

N. SULEMAN: Absolute.

MCGRAW: And when you can’t handle the six you’ve got, having even one more seems to me to be way out of touch with reality. What do you think?

A. SULEMAN. That’s — I totally agree with you.

[AGAIN SHE ADMITTED SHE IS NOT IN TOUCH WITH REALITY.]

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MCGRAW: I’m back with Victor. You were listening to the Gloria Allred segment that I just did.

MUNOZ: Yes.

MCGRAW: What’s wrong with this offer? Why don’t you like it? Because on its face — you know, the first thing I said was is there a transfer of custody? Is she giving her kids over to someone? And the answer was no, not at all, she maintains custody, she maintains control. They’re offering housing, they’re offering nursing care, volunteer support, supplies — kind of all expenses paid to carry these children through the first six months and the mother doesn’t give up any controls here. What’s wrong with the offer?

MUNOZ: The offer itself, I don’t know. I don’t know what the whole offer is. I have tried to call Linda directly and I haven’t received a phone call back. There’s just not enough hours in the day for me to drive out and see Gloria Allred in Los Angeles and make the meeting on her time.

MCGRAW: Do you feel threatened and bullied by her with ultimatums and deadlines and that sort of thing?

MUNOZ: A little. When you hear Gloria Allred, obviously, you feel that way. And me being someone that’s never done this before, I do. And that’s pretty much it.

MCGRAW: Remember the first night this came up, I told you that I knew Gloria. And I said she was a good egg.

MUNOZ: You did. I understand.

MCGRAW: And you’re probably questioning that.

MUNOZ: I did. I’m a little scared of you too.

MCGRAW: Listen, Gloria is very passionate. There’s no question about it. But I would just like to be sure that if you guys make the decision to decline this offer, which is certainly your right to do, that you have at least heard the offer out. I mean — because, listen, I got involved in this from the beginning because of the children. I am a very passionate child advocate. So I’m interested in what’s happening. They’re not offering help for the eight children, they’re offering support and help for the 14 children. I want to make sure, before anybody walks away, that you have heard this offer. And if it’s not right and it doesn’t fit, it’s OK.

MUNOZ: You’re right. If I can get 30 seconds, basically what’s been going on in the last two weeks is I have been working hard with Kaiser. They have been really putting together a great plan to have these children come home. I’ve been getting a lot of calls, a lot of people anonymously that have been wanting to help. We have a lot of help out there.

And I just have not been able to make time to really sit down with Gloria to go over this, because Kaiser is sucking up a lot of my time right now, getting these babies to come home. So if there’s some way that I can get a hold of Linda, if she calls me, we can meet somewhere local, where I’m at, I will be more than happen to sit down. I will take Nadya with me. We will sit down. We will listen. We want to hear everything. We’re not blind. We want to see everything.

MCGRAW: I promise you, I will make that happen. I can make that happen, because I know Linda is so passionate about this. Everything I know about her, it’s all about the kids for her. And so I’ll do what I can to see if I can help facilitate that. And Victor, I know you want the best for these kids too. You and I have talked. I know where your heart is.

MUNOZ: Absolutely.

MCGRAW: You’re not getting paid for this, so I know that you’re volunteering here. And it is taking up all of your time and so I totally get that. There would be some great things to having a package put together, whether it’s from Kaiser or from them. Do you agree?

MUNOZ: Absolutely.

MCGRAW: So you don’t have to go piece this all together yourself. So we will be thinking about that. And Nadya is open to it as well?

MUNOZ: Absolutely.

MCGRAW: All right. So, if Nadya doesn’t want this help, is there other help involved? Are there other alternatives? What’s in store for all of her 14 children? Can it be done without a package of aid? Would it be possible to put all of these things together. I don’t know. We’ll talk about all that when we come back when LARRY KING LIVE returns.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MCGRAW: RadarOnline.com has exclusive coverage of Nadya and her family. I want you to listen to Nadya on the idea of having any of her kids put up for adoption.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SULEMAN: I have to disagree with anyone who would even have the audacity to say that any of these children should be adopted. I have more love for these children than I think will almost — I’m sure many parents would have just as much love.

This is something that I find to be a joke, because anyone who would say that — this is something so sensationalized, it’s not real to people. When they see them coming home and they see me doing the very best I can and giving them everything I can, plus help with family and friends, and getting together as a community to help with these children and help them thrive.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MCGRAW: Mary Margaret is here. She is a senior news editor from RadarOnline.com. You guys have been really involved in this story. You’ve been in the house and taken some pictures of the dwelling. That’s disturbing what we see in there, true?

MARY MARGARET, RADARONLINE.COM: Definitely. I mean it was definitely a shock. Obviously, you know, it’s a three bedroom house. It’s small even for a family of six children. But when you try to wrap your mind around the fact that there’s going to be eight more children possibly entering that home — yes, we know that they’re looking for a new one. That reality is jarring for any parent, for any watcher, for sure.

MCGRAW: Let’s check out more from RadarOnline. This time, another instance of Nadya and her mother at odds over this situation.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I’m worried about the future.

SULEMAN: People can’t comprehend, just like my mom can’t comprehend, really, why I’m not worried, because I do have strong faith that I will find a way through my strength, to tap into my greater inner resources and strength to find a way.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MCGRAW: You didn’t hear anything in the interviews that you guys taped that adopting these children out is anywhere on her radar.

MARGARET: No, definitely not. That’s something that is the farthest thing from her mind. One thing that she’s really adamant about is that these children are the focus of her life for her entire life. What she talked to her mother about was — you know, there was this kind of loneliness that she felt as an only child and that’s something she has spent her entire life feeling. Of course, that’s reached a level that has been criticized in the past few months.

But that’s who she is. She’s someone who loves her children, is completely dedicated to them 100 percent.

[THAT IS COMPLETE AND UTTER HORSESHIT. IF SHE WAS DEDICATED TO THE SIX SHE HAD SHE WOULD NOT HAVE DONE WHAT SHE DID.]

MCGRAW: How is she responding behind closed doors with you about the fact that people are saying, put those children in foster care, get them away from that mother? Does she feel attacked by that?

MUNOZ: She does somewhat. She just doesn’t understand. She’s not angry at anybody. She’s not mad at anybody that’s talking against her. She just does not understand. At the end of the day, it’s always, why are they saying this? Why are they doing that?

MCGRAW: One of the things I want to talk about — Michael Piraino is with us from Seattle. And Michael is very involved with the court appointed special advocates program which works with foster children. Michael, this is not always just an easy place to go in terms of foster care in finding something that kids are going to really flourish in, true?

MICHAEL PIRAINO, CEO, CASA: That’s true. It can be very complicated to try to find the right solution for them.

MCGRAW: So when you go into the foster care system, what are the dangers? Everybody is saying, look, why not just put them in foster care? That’s not always an easy fix. What are the dangers?

PIRAINO: It’s difficult. First of all, you have to find a place for these kids to be where they’re going to be cared for and nurtured. And we have not enough foster parents to do that for kids. There’s another part of it too, which is that there’s a tremendous disruption to children when you move them into foster care. That’s hard on infants just as it is on older kids.

And a lot of times in foster care, kids have to move from place to place and that’s also hard. Another part of it is that it’s not cheap. I mean, it costs quite a bit of money to put kids into foster care and if you think about where the this situation is right now, you’ve got a parent, you’ve got the kids and it’s probably wiser at this point to put some investment into keeping them together and equipping them to handle the kids, and not take them out and put them into foster care.

MCGRAW: How many children are awaiting placement with foster care families right now that you just don’t have anywhere to put?

PIRAINO: I don’t know what the actual number is, but a lot of times they have to be placed on an emergency basis with — sometimes they have to spend time in offices, the Child Protection Services. There are sometimes very short-term placements that kids can be placed in. Think about these are infants, these are babies. These babies are busy doing what babies do, trying to connect to people. Those kinds of disruptions are really hard.

MCGRAW: Margaret, you guys get a lot of comments on RadarOnline.com when they see these videos. Are people wanting these children taken away based upon your message boards?

MARGARET: It’s definitely a healthy debate. Obviously, the first notion is you never want to take away children from their mother. But at the same time, faced with the reality of the resources she needs to give them a healthy existence, that’s what a lot of people are leaning to, find a different alternative for the children.

MCGRAW: That’s what you’re hearing on the message boards on RadarOnline.com. Thanks to Victor and Mary for joining us. Back in 60 seconds with your comments. You’re watching LARRY KING LIVE.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) MCGRAW: Welcome back. I’m Dr. Phil McGraw. I’m in for Larry tonight. You have been busy on Larry’s blog and there is no shortage of opinions. Let’s check in with Sarah. So what’s everybody saying, Sarah?

SARAH SCHNARE, BLOG CORRESPONDENT: So far lots of unforgiving comments on our blog tonight, Dr. Phil. Many people are wondering if this woman has lost her marbles. Some have called her selfish and delusional, narcissistic, a young woman with no sense of reality. Most want to know how can she afford to take care of 14 kids and how much is this going to cost us all.

But one thing we do know, Dr. Phil, it’s definitely been giving comedians a lot of material. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JIMMY KIMMEL, “LATE SHOW”: An exclusive interview with Nadya via satellite. Hello, Nadya. Thank you for joining us.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you for having me. It’s great to be on the show.

KIMMEL: The first thing I want to ask is how are the babies doing?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They are wonderful. They are so great. In fact, I’m feeding some of them right now.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Please welcome Joan Rivers.

JOAN RIVERS, ACTRESS: One! Two! Three! Four!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MCGRAW: Well, thanks, Sarah. When we come back, I’ll ask infertility experts if anyone should have eight babies at once. Stick around.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(NEWS BREAK)

MCGRAW: We’re back in studio. Lisa Masterson is with us, Dr. Lisa Masterson. She is co-host of the syndicated TV talk show, “The Doctors.” And you guys do a great job on that show. I don’t say that because my son produces it. I just say it because it’s true.

We want to talk about what is going on physiologically with this mother. Is she even going to be equal to, in any way, energy wise, the challenge of taking care of these eighth babies if they do come home to her? How long does it take to snap back?

DR. LISA MASTERSON, INFERTILITY SPECIALIST: It takes four to six weeks in a normal pregnancy. Now, granted, she had eight babies. You don’t just load up the uterus and roll the dice, as it were. These are high stakes that you’re playing with. The pregnancy really takes a toll on the body. But if everything goes well, which she actually did well, she just be back normal.

MCGRAW: We’re looking now in this animation, I mean, that is — where does everything go? I mean, look at this, the organs are pushed. As an OB/GYN, that probably doesn’t shock you as much as it does me. But when you push everything around like that, how long does it take to get back?

MASTERSON: It really still only takes about four to six weeks, because what happens is everything — and we used that animation today on “The Doctors.” What happens is that everything sort of gets pushed and gets compressed. So you worry about things like the kidneys. You worry about bowel functions and things like that. But really the problem is delivery, post-partum hemorrhage. Those are the type of things that you worry about. Because she really took a risk with her life and with the babies’ lives.

MCGRAW: So and — listen, I want to introduce also Dr. Jamie Grifo. He’s program director at the New York Fertility Center, professor of obstetrics and gynecology at NYU’s School of Medicine. Dr. Grifo, thanks for joining us. There’s been so much talk about this mother’s decision to do this. Is there any theory that you can see coming forth that’s going to explain why you would implant so many embryos in this woman?

DR. JAMIE GRIFO, DIRECTOR, NYU FERTILITY CENTER: It’s not what we do. We have guidelines for these situations, and our guidelines state that we put back no more than two embryos. I was curious about that myself, and then I researched the pregnancy rate in this doctor’s clinic. And in the year before he treated Nadya, 70 embryos were transferred in women under 35 that made three babies. So less than ten percent of his embryos were making babies.

So you just do the math, the chance that six embryos would make eight babies, with that math, is about one in a billion. You say, gosh, this doctor must be crazy. But with the pregnancy rates there, I understand why he would do it.

But I don’t justify it. We don’t justify it. This is a failure of therapy. Having eighth babies is a disaster. It’s risky. This woman was very lucky that she didn’t lose her life or her children didn’t lose their lives. Our goal as fertility specialists is to help people have a single baby. In the year 2007, there were over 50,000 babies born from IVF, mostly singletons.

MCGRAW: That’s great. You talk about the risk to the babies and the mother. Dr. Masterson, what can happen with this kind of mega- multiple pregnancy to the mother? Is it stroke, heart attack? What happens?

MASTERSON: It’s really troubling the judgment that she and the IFV doctor used, because she’s really, again, taking her life and her baby’s life into her hands. Basically, she could have a stroke, heart attack because of this. The large blood volume that she had to deal with, again, post-partum hemorrhage, she can die from that. The prematurity of the babies, the risk of prematurity, pre-term delivery for them.

It’s just phenomenal what she really, really undertook. Again, she has the mindset of like a teenager, who wants 15 minutes of fame, but forgets about the 18 years of responsibility afterwards.

MCGRAW: I know we’re going to see that animation on Monday on “The Doctors.” People can tune in and look at that. Dr. Grifo, my question here, was this a failure of the system with Nadya Suleman? No question, there’s some bad decision making on her part. We have all talked about that. But did the system fail her from a medical stand point? Don’t you expect a doctor to say, I won’t let you put your life at risk?

GRIFO: Yes, indeed, that’s our responsibility. And our responsibility is to the mother and to the babies. We have more than one patient here. And that’s why we have these guidelines. And since the early ’90s, when we developed these guidelines, we have gone through three iterations. And we’ve made IVF much safer by doing that.

It requires good judgment and people need to follow the guidelines. I don’t have an answer for why the guidelines were disobeyed in this case.

MCGRAW: I don’t think there is a good answer. Michael Piraino is with us also. Michael is CEO CASA, the Court Appointed Special Advocates. Michael, is it easier to adopt out or place in foster care infants like this, than it is, I assume, a 12 or 13-year-old?

PIRAINO: There are a lot of kids in foster care who are waiting to be adopted. And any one of them would be great candidates to be adopted. But certainly as kids get older, there may be more issues that people think they will have in adopting those kids. There’s no child who’s waiting for adoption who’s not adoptable.

MCGRAW: Of course. And Dr. Masterson, we know that these children are likely to face some real developmental challenges. The chances of eight out of eight being completely healthy with no problems is pretty low, correct?

MASTERSON: It’s very low. She’s actually very lucky she got to 30 weeks. That’s phenomenal with eight babies. So kudos to the doctors who really took care of her. But these babies are going to have some difficulty.

MCGRAW: I understand they did a great job. When LARRY KING LIVE returns, what can we learn from this octuplet situation? We’ll address that after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MCGRAW: Dr. Phil here, in tonight for Larry King. We have been talking about the octuplet mother situation. And, you know, one of the things that I want to say — I’ll take a turn here and tell you that we hear of terms like octo-mom and the octuplets. And the truth is, when you put labels on folks like that, sometimes it really de- personalizes this. The octuplet mother is Nadya Suleman. She’s an individual. The children are Noah, Malia, Isaiah, Mariah, Macai, Josaiah, Jeremiah and Jonah. At this point, Dr. Lisa Masterson, the children are all doing pretty well, because she was able to get to what, 30 weeks?

MASTERSON: Yes, the doctors really took care of her, put her on bed rest early, delivered her early, which is also very important in getting these babies out healthy, because accidents can help with multiples.

MCGRAW: Are there developmental benchmarks that they’re going to be looking for to see if these children are coming along? I assume, the first one is do they feed?

MASTERSON: Do they feed? And premature babies have a harder time feeding. It’s really important to their growth and to their development. And with premature babies, you’re going to have developmental delays. But they will catch up. They’ll get there between six months to a year. And the doctors will be looking to see how they catch up.

MCGRAW: Do you expect, at some point, they will really start closing the gap? Will there be a time that they accelerate and begin to really do well?

MASTERSON: Yes, about a year, they’ll start to really get there.

MCGRAW: And is that also when you’re going seeing signs of problems if they don’t develop? And are there things you should be doing now with these children to minimize the likelihood?

MASTERSON: Just really good care, nurturing. That’s why, When these babies come out, it’s so important that they’re cared for really, really well. Because they’re behind, they’re going to need extra care, extra attention. They’re going to need extra help with their milestones. They’re going to have to go to the doctors much more frequently. It’s just really important to be on these babies.

MCGRAW: That’s all very expensive. And the question is, of course, where does this money come from? I mean, what happens? Is it insurance? Are you and I, the taxpayers, going to pay for it? Or is there going to be come solution that takes place? What we know is that there’s going to have to be a high-degree of transparency in this situation. We just know that. so if these children stay with the mother, people are going to be watching. Agencies are going to be in there. People are going to be looking. Clearly, we will be paying attention to this and see if we can get some idea of what’s going on.

Now we want to hear from you. You can go on to LARRY KING LIVE blog here. Dr. Masterson, you guys are going to be dealing with this on “The Doctors” on Monday. So people will get more information about it then. Hopefully, we’ll get some answers and we’ll continue to watch this. It’s time for Larry’s weekly salute to someone special. Our hero this week was inspired to act by the personal impact of 9/11. And what she’s done since then has affected people from all over the world. Take a look.

Octuplets: Grandmother’s first interview (Feb 9th)

February 10, 2009

(3-10) Octuplets: Updated list of  posts

I keep finding these posts in the drafts. I don’t know why they weren’t posted right away. This is the first interview the grandmother did with Radaronline. I combined the story and the video comments and the GMA video below.

Angela Suleman reveals that her daughter, Nadya, had wanted to become pregnant from early on. At 16 she got pregnant and miscarried and discovered she had blocked fallopian tubes. It is truly hard to believe that anything in this woman’s reproductive system is blocked or malfunction. 14 children in 8 years has to be a record by any means. She turned to a friend for sperm and started getting in vitro. She doesn’t exactly say when or who the sperm donor is.

ANGELA: He was in love with her and wanted to marry her. But Nadya wanted to have children on her own.

Nadya does not work and relies on her parents to care for her children. Angela says she is the primary caregiver.

ANGELA: Yes, I was practically raised her children. She really had no means to support them. They were always living in my house.

She had just found out that Nadya had received $168K in disability payments for a bad back, while she was pregnant and giving birth over and over and over..

The truth is that Nadya hasn’t worked since she started having her children, while Ed and I battled to pay her bills.

Nadya promised to help me with the bills, but she never has.

I did hear that she received money from her insurance – she never told me. But I have never seen any money. Not for house payment or feeding the kids.

We are now living in my humble 3-bedroom home. So we’re there all crowded in.

I lost a house because of it and now I’m struggling to look after her six. We had to put in bunk beds, feed them in shifts and there’s children’s clothing piled all over the house.

Only six kids and they’re already eating in shifts?

ANGELA: The older ones will sit at the table and eat, and the younger ones have their little chairs with the tables, and the autistic boy needs to be fed. So it’s a lot of work.

Why didn’t she stop her from having more babies?

ANGELA: Her dad and I were talking to the doctor and said, she’s not married, she wants children and she really does mot have any means to support them, so she really should not have any more. That’s enough.

Angela said that she and Nadya’s father, Ed, begged one doctor not to implant any more embryos in Nadya, who already had six children. But Nadya found another doctor to implant six embryos, and two split, resulting in eight more babies. “I’m really angry about that.”

The story on the doctor has changed several times. Here she says a different doctor did the octuplets. Nadya said the same one did them all. Dr. Michael Kamrava, who Nadya is seen on video with having an ultrasound with her twin pregnancy, is being investigated by the California Medical Board.

ANGELA: She has not been thinking straight. To have more is just not right.

She already has six beautiful children, why would she do this?

She really, really has no idea what she’s doing to her children, and to me.

And while the grandparents are looking after the six kids, the mother went on NBC and told Ann Curry how bad her childhood was. It didn’t make Angela very happy.

We raised her in a loving family and her father always spoiled her.

Maybe that’s the problem. Who knows. The whole situation is devastating for all involved. RadarOnline.com took pictures and video inside the home and a reporter described the interior as “filthy”, with food on the walls. (See the pix in the links below)

ANGELA: The truth is Nadya’s not capable of raising 14 children.

How she’s going to cope, I really don’t know. I’m really tired of taking care of the six children. I need her to think about what she’s going to do and how she’ll provide for all these children.

And the six kids?

They’re wonderful beautiful children, and I love them dearly. I would never let anything happen to them so I’m talking care of them. And I have been. And I don’t know what the future will bring, becausem hopefully she will get some living accommodations, because it is really a small house. And so she could take care of all her children.

And the octuplets?

She wasn’t at the octuplets’ birth because she was looking after the other six children. “But I saw the octuplets when they were two days old. They were so tiny and fragile, with bright purple skin, I was afraid to touch them but they’re all doing well. Nadya has given them all Biblical names. Seven of them are dark-haired, but one, Noah, shows my side of the family. He looked so cute with his purple skin and bright yellow hair.”

According to ABC – Nadya’s publicist was questioned about the condition of the house and he actually said it wasn’t her fault because she wasn’t there.

Nadya Suleman’s publicist Mike Furtney said that his client has been away for nearly two months, so shouldn’t be held responsible for the home’s current condition. Furtney said his client planned to move into a larger home once the octuplets were healthy enough to leave doctors’ care. He declined to comment on any of the remarks Angela Suleman made about her daughter in the interview. “Those are very personal issues between a mother and a daughter,” he said.

Hello. She is responsible for her children’s living conditions no matter where she is or they are. And how is she going to move anywhere when she has no money?

What does Angela think about the frozen embryos?

ANGELA: She justified it by saying those frozen embryos were living human beings. However, to me, anything that is frozen is not living, and she did not have to have them thawed. She could have also – if she wanted to donate them to some couples that have no children.

But to have them all is unconscionable to me.

gracefullycreated

***

(1-30) Octuplets: Ethics of fertility treatment?
(1-30) Octuplets: What is really going on?
(2-9) Octuplets: Should not go home with that woman
(2-9) Octuplets: Octuplets: already filthy house unfit for children (pix)
(2-23) Octuplets: Mother vs grandmother caught on tape
(2-24) Octuplets: Cosmetic surgery, IVF, food stamps, disability, bankruptcy & foreclosure
(2-24) Octuplets: Mother before/after plastic surgery & Angelina Jolie (pix)
(2-25) Octuplets: Grandfather on Oprah daughter “not mentally complete”
(2-25) Octuplets: Hospital questioning her ability to care for children
(2-26) Octuplets: Video of inside the home
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video(Part 1)
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video(Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Man claiming to be sperm donor
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 1)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 3)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother’s first interview (Feb 9th)
(2-29) Octuplets: What about the other children?
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* (CBS video)
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* offer (press conference)
(3-2) Octuplets: *Angels in Waiting’s* free 24/7 care for all 14 REFUSED
(3-2) Octuplets: What is it going to take?
(3-3) Octuplets: Sen Hudgens (R-GA) “Octomom Bill”

Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 3)

February 18, 2009

(3-10) Octuplets: Updated list of  posts

Part 3

Maggie Rodriguez talks with the grandmother of the octuplets, Angela Suleman about the sperm donor and Angelina Jolie.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

MAGGIE RODRIGUEZ: Tell me about the sperm donor. How did she meet him?

ANGELA SULEMAN: They were just friends. And she’s a very persuasive, well-spoken young woman. And somehow she must have talked him into it.

RODRIGUEZ: Has she been in contact with him since the babies were born?

ANGELA: I’m sure she may have spoken with him.

RODRIGUEZ:Is he part of the children’s lives – the six children?

ANGELA: Not at this point.

RODRIGUEZ: Would you like him to be?

ANGELA: I would like him to be. Yes. Every child needs a father. But my daughter wanted to raise these children by herself. So that, I think, is a kind of a little selfish act. I don’t know why she would not have a father, the father of these children in her life. I don’t.

RODRIGUEZ: Do you think he was paid for the sperm?

ANGELA: I don’t know. She’s so persuasive. I doubt that she had to pay (she laughed) for anything really. She’s a very convincing person.

RODRIGUEZ: She’s been compared to Angelina Jolie. Did Nadya ever say that she admired Jolie or wanted to be like her?

ANGELA: No. She never mentions celebrities. She’s really not into that kind of thing. People think that she, you know, admires her. But, I don’t think so.

RODRIGUEZ: People say that she even had plastic surgery to look like her.

ANGELA: No. No, I don’t think she ever did. She gained 130 pounds. So that makes a difference in the facial features, in her wherever, you know, when you gain 130 pounds, goodness, I’d hate (she laughed) this to happen to me. I probably would change a lot, too.

Is she saying she doesn’t think her daughter had any type of plastic surgery?

RODRIGUEZ: What would you like to see happen to your daughter?

ANGELA: I would like to her somehow get enough money [giggles] to get a house for these babies, but you know, she starts working, she won’t be able to take care of them because then it’s up to me and I would like start living a little too. [giggles]

RODRIGUEZ: Do you see yourself as sort of a victim of something?

ANGELA: No. I’m not a victim because I can just get up and go. And I think I’m gonna do this very soon. I’m gonna go visit my sister in Europe and my friends and just live it up a little.

RODRIGUEZ: Do you think these kids are victims?

ANGELA: Not really. You know, they are really very happy children. They’re very happy. They love their grandma and their mommy. And, you know, I think love is the main thing here. When they know they’re loved, things will work out. They’ll be normal.

14 children need more than love – they need attention. And the healthy children will get no attention other than can you be a good boy/girl and help mommy with…

***

(1-30) Octuplets: Ethics of fertility treatment?
(1-30) Octuplets: What is really going on?
(2-9) Octuplets: Should not go home with that woman
(2-9) Octuplets: Octuplets: already filthy house unfit for children (pix)
(2-23) Octuplets: Mother vs grandmother caught on tape
(2-24) Octuplets: Cosmetic surgery, IVF, food stamps, disability, bankruptcy & foreclosure
(2-24) Octuplets: Mother before/after plastic surgery & Angelina Jolie (pix)
(2-25) Octuplets: Grandfather on Oprah daughter “not mentally complete”
(2-25) Octuplets: Hospital questioning her ability to care for children
(2-26) Octuplets: Video of inside the home
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video(Part 1)
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video(Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Man claiming to be sperm donor
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 1)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 3)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother’s first interview (Feb 9th)
(2-29) Octuplets: What about the other children?
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* (CBS video)
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* offer (press conference)
(3-2) Octuplets: *Angels in Waiting’s* free 24/7 care for all 14 REFUSED
(3-2) Octuplets: What is it going to take?
(3-3) Octuplets: Sen Hudgens (R-GA) “Octomom Bill”

Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 2)

February 17, 2009

(3-10) Octuplets: Updated list of  posts

Maggie Rodriguez of The Early Show interviews Amgela Suleman the grandmother of the octuplets. Dr. Michael Kamrava, of the West Coast IVF Clinic, performed the in-vitro fertilization that led to Nadya getting pregnant with the octuplets.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

MAGGIE RODRIGUEZ: How much responsibility does the doctor have in this?

ANGELA SULEMAN: As far as I’m concerned, he shouldn’t have done it. But, he’s a doctor. When he’s asked to do something, I guess he doesn’t refuse. …so the doctor actually called and wanted to talk to Nadya, and then, when I realized that was her doctor, I pleaded with him, ‘Please, don’t do this anymore,’ and he promised.

RODRIGUEZ: Promised you?

ANGELA: [She smiles.] Fell on deaf ears.

RODRIGUEZ: What did he say?

ANGELA: Yes, I realize that, you know, she shouldn’t have that many. She’s a single mother, tah dah dah,’ and he’ll not do it anymore. And yet, next year, she had another one, and another one.

RODRIGUEZ: And now eight more.

ANGELA: Yeah.

RODRIGUEZ: At what point did you tell her to stop having babies?

ANGELA: I told her she needed to stop, because I wouldn’t be able to help her, because there was not enough room in the house. And, for some reason, she couldn’t. I guess that’s what happens when a person is obsessive compulsive.

RODRIGUEZ: What would she say to your objections?

ANGELA: She said that she’ll take care of it, and she won’t have any more. And then you see, laughs, but she is pregnant again and again.

RODRIGUEZ: Is she sick?

ANGELA: She doesn’t seem sick. She was brilliant in her studies. But as far as everyday life is concerned, she is just not really thinking things through sometimes.

RODRIGUEZ: Do you blame yourself?

ANGELA: I did, but then, I thought, ‘You know, what could I have done different?’ I was a loving mother and she had a loving father. So, I don’t know.

RODRIGUEZ: When did this start? This obsession with having children?

ANGELA: When she was a teenager.

RODRIGUEZ: What do you remember?

ANGELA: I remember that she always loved to be around children. She loved to talk about having a large family. Then when she was older, she finally realized she could not have children the regular route, so did she start having in vitro.

RODRIGUEZ: Did you support her? Having a child as a single mother?

ANGELA: I was really from a different school. I was brought up differently – very strict. But I wanted to be, you know supportive because once it’s done – you can’t undo it.

Not the first one but every one after you could have prevented.

RODRIGUEZ: In other countries there are limits to the numbers of the embryos a doctor can implant. Do you hope that a change in the lawas comes about because of your daughter’s case?

ANGELA: I hope so. There should be maybe a law to forbid a doctor to do this. However, she said she didn’t want these embryos killed, you know, done away with … Those were her children, and she wanted to try and just use the rest.

RODRIGUEZ: Let’s talk about the others – how are they? What is their feeling about the new babies?

ANGELA: Well, they were actually asked and they didn’t want them. [Laughs.]

RODRIGUEZ: They said they didn’t want them? Why?

ANGELA: They’re pretty smart. Maybe they thought they would not get the attention they really deserved.

RODRIGUEZ: Is that a concern for you?

ANGELA: Yes. But as long as I am able, I am going to help out.

RODRIGUEZ: So it’s you, the six kids and Nadya in the house?

ANGELA: Yes, but there grandfather is also helping out right now.

RODRIGUEZ: And what about Nadya?

ANGELA: Nadya’s not working right now. She gets some disability. She was getting disability because she was injured on her job. But that’s also gone.

RODRIGUEZ: So now she has no money – you have very little.

ANGELA: Very limited amount.

RODRIGUEZ: And now you have eight more.

ANGELA: Yeah.

RODRIGUEZ: What will you do?

ANGELA: I don’t know. I haven’t thought about that yet. But I hope something will come up, because lots of neighbors have been very generous and nice.

RODRIGUEZ: Does she realize the huge responsibility this is?

ANGELA: I’m sure she’s realizing it more and more.

RODRIGUEZ: Is there any sense of remorse for her?

ANGELA: I didn’t hear it because those babies are here now, and it’s too late, really, to have remorse. But she loves children. What can I say? She probably should have been a teacher like I was!

RODRIGUEZ: Have you been surprised by the hate mail and the death threats?

ANGELA: Yes, It was kind of scary.

RODRIGUEZ: What was the scariest thing you read?

ANGELA: What should happen to her – how she should be hacked up. This is a mother who’s trying to take care of her children, and she’s a loving mother, so I don’t think anything should happen to her, heaven forbid, you know — because then, who’s gonna take care of all these children?

RODRIGUEZ: If you could speak directly to the people who are tormenting ou and your daughter, what would you say to them?

ANGELA: Please stop it, you know. There’s no reason to do this. Because it’s, it’s not necessary. She is going to have a tough life, with all these children. She is going to be punished. She believes in God so, you know, God is gonna take care of all this.

RODRIGUEZ: How do you think she will be punished?

ANGELA: Well, can you imagine, to be a single mother and having 14 children. It’s a horrendous job. She wants to do a good job and she’s been doing a good job. It’s going to be very difficult, to say the least.

Her children are the one who have been punished. They spoke up and said they didn’t want any more. And God is as much as an excuse as the human detonators use in the Arab world to sanction their brand of evil. She has sentenced each one of these kids to a life of neglect. That is child abuse. Period. God had nothing to do with sending her these children. She went to a lab and had them implanted out of her own selfishness. Even the children figured that out.

***

(1-30) Octuplets: Ethics of fertility treatment?
(1-30) Octuplets: What is really going on?
(2-9) Octuplets: Should not go home with that woman
(2-9) Octuplets: Octuplets: already filthy house unfit for children (pix)
(2-23) Octuplets: Mother vs grandmother caught on tape
(2-24) Octuplets: Cosmetic surgery, IVF, food stamps, disability, bankruptcy & foreclosure
(2-24) Octuplets: Mother before/after plastic surgery & Angelina Jolie (pix)
(2-25) Octuplets: Grandfather on Oprah daughter “not mentally complete”
(2-25) Octuplets: Hospital questioning her ability to care for children
(2-26) Octuplets: Video of inside the home
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video(Part 1)
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video(Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Man claiming to be sperm donor
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 1)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 3)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother’s first interview (Feb 9th)
(2-29) Octuplets: What about the other children?
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* (CBS video)
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* offer (press conference)
(3-2) Octuplets: *Angels in Waiting’s* free 24/7 care for all 14 REFUSED
(3-2) Octuplets: What is it going to take?
(3-3) Octuplets: Sen Hudgens (R-GA) “Octomom Bill”

Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 1)

February 16, 2009

(3-10) Octuplets: Updated list of  posts

Maggie Rodriguez of the Early Show interviews Angela Suleman, grandmother of the octuplets.

MAGGIE RODRIGUEZ: Angela’s is a tale of an overworked, financially-taxed woman having to put her life on hold to care for her grandchildren, angry at her daughter’s obsession with having so many kids, and resentful of the eight new babies — until she met them. Her daughter, Nadya, a single mother, had six kids already, all by in-vitro fertilization, when she had eight more embryos implanted.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

ANGELA SULEMAN: I was actually very upset that my daughter had gone and done this in-vitro, but, after I saw them, you know, I thought, ‘My goodness, these are my grandchildren. They’re so tiny and fragile. I’ll have to be there for them.

RODRIGUEZ: Did she tell you before she went to get this last round of in vitro that she wanted to get pregnant again?

ANGELA: She didn’t tell me, because she knew I didn’t want her to do it.

RODRIGUEZ: So she went and did it…

ANGELA: Yes.

RODRIGUEZ: …unbeknownst to you. Did she tell you when it was successful?

ANGELA: Well, [laughs], when I saw that it was successful, she admitted to it.

RODRIGUEZ: Oh, so it’s not until she was visibly pregnant that she told you?

ANGELA: Yes.

RODRIGUEZ: When she had just the six, were there days when you felt, ‘this is too much. I’m overwhelmed’?

ANGELA [Laughs.]: Every day.

RODRIGUEZ: I can’t do this.

ANGELA: Yes.

RODRIGUEZ: How are you handling these kids financially?

ANGELA: Well, my retirement check goes every month. It’s just gone.

RODRIGUEZ: I know you live in a three bedroom house – who sleeps where?

ANGELA: There are two bunk beds in one bedroom. I mean a bunkbed. The other one has a crib and has a nice little bed. Then there’s the master bedroom. One boy sleeps on the mattress and the little ones each have a crib in that bedroom. So it’s crowded.

RODRIGUEZ: How will you accommodate 8 more babies?

ANGELA: Not in that house! I’ll have to do something to, you know, help her get another one.

RODRIGUEZ: Do you resent her already?

ANGELA: I did, but, you can resent your daughter for just so long, and then you see that she’s trying so hard, you know, to take care of these children. And she’s a good mother.

RODRIGUEZ: What is she like as a mother?

ANGELA: She’s a very good mother. [She laughs.] And she had a good example!

[They laugh.]

RODRIGUEZ: I’m sure she did.

ANGELA: There must be a reason, you know, why this happened, and that they’re all healthy. That is a miracle, a total miracle.

***

(1-30) Octuplets: Ethics of fertility treatment?
(1-30) Octuplets: What is really going on?
(2-9) Octuplets: Should not go home with that woman
(2-9) Octuplets: Octuplets: already filthy house unfit for children (pix)
(2-23) Octuplets: Mother vs grandmother caught on tape
(2-24) Octuplets: Cosmetic surgery, IVF, food stamps, disability, bankruptcy & foreclosure
(2-24) Octuplets: Mother before/after plastic surgery & Angelina Jolie (pix)
(2-25) Octuplets: Grandfather on Oprah daughter “not mentally complete”
(2-25) Octuplets: Hospital questioning her ability to care for children
(2-26) Octuplets: Video of inside the home
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video(Part 1)
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video(Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Man claiming to be sperm donor
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 1)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 3)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother’s first interview (Feb 9th)
(2-29) Octuplets: What about the other children?
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* (CBS video)
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* offer (press conference)
(3-2) Octuplets: *Angels in Waiting’s* free 24/7 care for all 14 REFUSED
(3-2) Octuplets: What is it going to take?
(3-3) Octuplets: Sen Hudgens (R-GA) “Octomom Bill”

Octuplets: Man claiming to be sperm donor

February 27, 2009

(3-10) Octuplets: Updated list of  posts

Now a sperm donor is coming forth wanting to know if the children were manufactured using his donations. He is offering to help whether or not the kids are his.

Anyone try to explain any of this to your 90 something-year-old parents or grandparents?

The man seems very credible but how could he not know what the sperm would be used for? How many men out there stop by and make donations without knowing what is happening to them?

She could have been doling it out to her girlfriends and framing him for a crime or paternity suit.

And where did she store it? Guess.

DENIS BEAUDOIN: I just remember her saying when I donated that the doctor told her that she had to keep it warm by putting it between her — between her breasts — just to keep it warm, keep it room temperature until she took it in.

He went out with her from 1997-99 and he made three donations – she told him she had ovarian cancer and that’s why she needed it. How does he feel knowing that she lied about having cancer? He has to be wondering what else she lied about. Like the fact that she might have been married. She says “David Solomon” is the sperm donor for all 14 children (see IVF link).

After this show aired, she called and said he could take a DNA test. He had allegedly tried to contact her privately but she wouldn’t respond.

What is strange – he cries when he talks about the custody battle for his son. He says their relationship is “really hurt to this day”. So how is coming forward and claiming 14 new children going to improve that relationship? There was no custody battle. It was sperm. And if they aren’t his kids – think of the situation he put his kid in having to be associated with that woman.

GMA: CHRIS CUOMO, JONANN BRADY and RUSSELL GOLDMAN

Beaudoin said he thought it was “out of the ordinary” when she asked him to donate. “But I cared about her so much. And I mean, we were, we were in love. I mean, I loved Nadya very much.

She really had a really infectious laugh. You know, just her laugh would, it would make you crack up. It’s kind of like she had a real high-pitch, squeaky cartoon voice. And, you know, she was a lot of fun to be around. Just her whole bubbly outward personality was really, really cool.

She looks different, sounds different. You know, it’s just not the Nadya I remember.

You know, I could say this is something that’s all new. The Nadya that I knew, it never, it never came up to have such a huge family. It was just an urge to have a child because she was not able to.

Does this sound like the same Nadya? Her mother said the fascination started as a child and never subsided.

It just seems like a lot of her statements that she’s made have been really inaccurate.

I can’t take everything she says for granted. I mean when she initially told me the whole reason why, for donating sperm in the first place, you know was to get pregnant because she was not going to be able to have kids. And it, you know, has turned into this.

This. Yes this.

Either which way, you know, know that if she needs it I’ll lend a helping hand. She needs help. I mean it’s hard. It’s hard nowadays to raise two kids, let alone 14.

Beaudoin said he is coming forward now because he knew his name would eventually surface as the potential father and, considering the negative publicity surrounding Suleman, he wanted to tell his story first. Beaudoin said he tried to reach out to Suleman but she never returned his calls. Now a business owner with a wife and two sons, Beaudoin said the entire ordeal has been very hard on his family.

You know my wife, she’s not real happy about, you know, the whole situation. I mean, you can’t really blame her. I mean I kind of threw this in her lap after, you know, it kind of hit the news.

[I] just really want to know if these are [or] these are not my kids.

Either which way, you know, know that if she needs it I’ll lend a helping hand.

If it’s him – his helping hand already helped.

***

(1-30) Octuplets: Ethics of fertility treatment?
(1-30) Octuplets: What is really going on?
(2-9) Octuplets: Should not go home with that woman
(2-9) Octuplets: Octuplets: already filthy house unfit for children (pix)
(2-23) Octuplets: Mother vs grandmother caught on tape
(2-24) Octuplets: Cosmetic surgery, IVF, food stamps, disability, bankruptcy & foreclosure
(2-24) Octuplets: Mother before/after plastic surgery & Angelina Jolie (pix)
(2-25) Octuplets: Grandfather on Oprah daughter “not mentally complete”
(2-25) Octuplets: Hospital questioning her ability to care for children
(2-26) Octuplets: Video of inside the home
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video(Part 1)
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video(Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Man claiming to be sperm donor
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 1)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 3)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother’s first interview (Feb 9th)
(2-29) Octuplets: What about the other children?
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* (CBS video)
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* offer (press conference)
(3-2) Octuplets: *Angels in Waiting’s* free 24/7 care for all 14 REFUSED
(3-2) Octuplets: What is it going to take?
(3-3) Octuplets: Sen Hudgens (R-GA) “Octomom Bill”

Octuplets: Body language mother & grandmother video (part 2)

February 26, 2009

(3-10) Octuplets: Updated list of  posts

Here’s Part 2 of the interview. It is truly shocking. The birther has still not ruled out having more children. I don’t even know what to say. She has to stop and think and then she answers well “she doesn’t have any frozen embryos left”. Is this someone who understands the gravity of her situation or the impact of her selfish acts on her other children? She says the word selfishness but it has no emotion behind it.

Watch her face when she talks about having more…even one more.

What mother in her right mind – what caregiver would even consider such a thing?

What human mind could conceive of such a thing?

What hospital could actually consider releasing 8 premature infants into the custody of such a mind?

Where is DCFS?

Why aren’t they watching this?

The reasoning as to why she can’t have more? Because she “keeps hearing the word *responsibility*“.

Honestly, I cannot take this in.

The grandmother reveals that the daughter lied about her pregnancies. Lied as in more than once. Watch the daughter smile like a child in mischief. She told her mother she had a tumor (like she told the sperm donor who came forward).

Lying like that is pathological in its own right. And she said it more than once and to different people.

The grandmother is much more animated here. I wish I knew the timeline to these interviews and would sure like to watch the unedited film. I hope Kaiser Permanente is watching these. It is absolutely appalling.

All eight of the octuplets could be blind and have severe cognitive deficits and she hasn’t ruled out having more? She finds it all a joke.

What is it going to take?

She thinks this is some sort of game. There are 14 lives in her hands. 14 human souls who are subject to her (lack of) judgment.

How many of you would let her watch your child unsupervised? A child of any age?

What was your very first thought?

And she will be caring for 14:

• Octuplet 10 weeks premature infants
• 6 older children age 7 to 2 y/o twins
• 3/6 older children with neurological disabilities
• Boy with autism cannot feed himself
• Octuplets at high risk for developmental delay, including irreparable physical and cognitive deficits with just a minimum of neglect.

And she thinks she is going to finish her school degree and write books during the night to support 15 people?

And she actually had to hesitate when asked if she was going to have more?

How much more divorced from reality can one get?

jillstanek

They must have asked about when she knew her daughter was pregnant.

ANGELA: I didn’t really know in the beginning because she’s kind of, uh, [laughs], sneaky, I don’t know how to say this.

Nadya making a face at the camera.

ANGELA: She’s done the other ones, you know, without letting me know. Then all of the sudden, her stomach is growing [laughing] bigger and bigger.

More faces by Nadya.

ANGELA: And I say what’s going on and she says ‘oh, I have a tumor.’

She stares at Nadya.

ANGELA [amused]: Yeah, right.

NADYA: I don’t apologize for my children and I never would. And I love them more than I have have ever known love in my life.

That was completely unveiled attack on her mother and their is no real emotion attached.

This whole segment she tries to act how she is “supposed to”. The kids have to pick up on this resentment even when they’re not saying anything.Their dynamic goes beyond pathologic and 8 more innocent lives are being added to the mix.

ANGELA [angry]: How you gonna provide them? What’re you thinking?!

NADYA: I have another year and a half for my degree…

The camera goes to Angela who rolls her eyes, shakes her head and chuckles.

I would have loved to know what the other people in the room did at that moment.

Then she goes into alternative ways – that she’s a good writer. She said that before she was going to write a book about the challenges of raising a child with autism and the other kids. So she found one child with autism a challenge?

The more this woman talks the more she reveals she had children out of her own selfish desires. And who exactly would she be counseling?

Pregnant teens?

Again she uses impersonal to refer to her own children.

NADYA: And I always plan writing a book about the challenges of raising a child with autism, and the other kids. Now, it’s going to be bigger, cuz [she pauses – the thought attempts to register] of the eight more. So that’s another option.

ANGELA: When are you going to find time to write?

NADYA: Middle of the night.

ANGELA: You’re going to have 14 children.

NADYA: [Laughs] Middle of the night.

ANGELA: Think about it.

NADYA: I know.

ANGELA: [Laughing] The grandma is not going to be there all the time.

How delusional is this woman?

Does she think 14 children are all going to be sleeping in the middle of the night?

And where is grandma going to be?

NADYA: If I can experience something that is so extraordinary where people can’t wrap their minds around it. And I still haven’t been able to – I feel as though that is giving me the strength.

ANGELA: I hope you’re done, otherwise we really need some help. And I’m talking about…

NADYA: I believe it was…

ANGELA:…psychological. [Chuckles.]

Really do need help?

They’ve needed help for decades and the children will for decades to come unless someone steps.

And what was the *it*. The grandmother goes right to the embryos.

Why are they even needing to discuss this more than one sentence?

NADYA: …the epitome, the epitome of selfishness. I have to completely wrap myself in a bubble and my children and my family and not allow other people’s perspectives to affect me because that will drain me of my energy…

Angela makes a face and nods to someone like, do you hear this crap? She doesn’t believe it’s over.

And from Nadya’s own words – neither does she.

Here’s a view of her madness – the only true emotion I have seen from her. I would like to know who she made that look to – if she was actually looking at someone.

NADYA: …that I need to sublimate to my children. That would be the epitome of selfishness [she smiles] to even [she looks down and then up] consider [strange look-she’s already considering it] having any more – even one more. No, of course not.

If it was – “no, of course not” than all those other words weren’t necessary.

Watch this little bit over. It’s the only genuine emotion I have seen from her. Her look at *consider* was one of true madness.

ANGELA: I really hope so. As long as she is not going to continue this.

Why is she expecting her to stop?

Was she successful in stopping her before?

And why is there anything conditional related to more pregnancies?

This conversation proves it is still a possibility because the possibility of it still exists in both of their minds.

What more evidence is necessary?

Nadya makes a face at the camera. She has the behavior of an 5 y/o. They are talking about her having more children when she already has 14 and she’s making a face behind her mother’s back as it were.

ANGELA: I mean it seem as if shes obsessive compulsive and she needs to keep doing this. And I hope, she’s not.

[She leans into Nadya, weirdly chummy.]

ANGELA: Is 14 enough?

NADYA: I don’t…well…even if I..well, I don’t have any frozen embryos.

Angela sighs and rolls her eyes.

Why isn’t she screaming?

NADYA: And I think it’s my-I keep hearing the word responsibility. Yes, this isn’t necess-this isn’t a right…

[She looks at her mother to make sure she got the party line right]

…this is a responsibility. So I have no choice.

She has to say out loud that she has no choice?

She had no choice 13 children ago.

NADYA: I have to delve completely into the role of motherhood.

To delve as to live and dwell inside her mind, hence the *role*.

She has been playing the role and the grandmother has been acting like one.

She catches herself.

NADYA: I have been. But now it’s gonna be you live, you breathe, you-you, everything around you is nothing but caretaking.

She’s reading from a script. She takes a peek at her mother to make sure she got the answer right.

NADYA: And that’s a responsibility and you have to live up to that.

ANGELA: Unfortunately. Right.

So who has been caring for those kids?

DCFS would you please talk with the oldest girl to get the truth about what has been going on in this house?

Note she never said *I*. She said *you*. I have never heard he call her children by name – not even by gender. AndI have never heard her connect herself in the same sentence to as them.

The grandma is getting something out of being an aggrieved martyr or this wouldn’t still be going on.

Now listen to the fake outrage when birther talks about adoption. It’s clear who the “anyone” is – we heard it in the last video – and she puts the emphasis on the word *many* and looks at her mother basically screaming that her mother didn’t love her.

Her mother must believe it because she is clearly working overtime to make it up to the grandkids – and that is what the daughter has been relying on. The pathology is stunning.

I wonder if she has ever had to take care of her children alone as in just her and for how long.  It’s clear who the anyone is.

NADYA: I have to disagree with anyone who would even have the audacity to says that any of these children should be adopted [She refers to them as a collection of things.], because I have more love for these children than, I think – well almost, I’m sure many parents would have just as much love.

But this is something that I find to be really a joke.

She looks at her mother.

NADYA: Because anyone who would say, because this is so sensationalized – it’s not real to people. When they see them coming home, and see me doing the very best I can, and giving them everything I can. Plus help with family and friends and getting together as a community to help with these children and help them thrive.

Look at the grandmother’s face. She knows it’s all a fantasy. And again the daughter uses impersonal pronouns to refer her own children. They’re abstract things in her mind. It’s “not real” to her.

Now listen to her explanation of why she isn’t worried. She can’t even convince herself – her voice gives it away. Her oldest daughter probably has more insight than she does.

ANGELA: I’m worried.

[Nodding and looking at Nadya. She knows her daughter still does not get it.]

ANGELA: I’m worried about the future.

NADYA: People can’t comprehend, just like my mom can’t comprehend, really…

ANGELA [shakes her head and looks up]: Nope. You’re right.

NADYA: …why I’m not worried, cuz I do have strong faith that, you know, that I will find a way, or through my strength, that by God, uh, to tap into my greatest resources, inner resources and strengths, and find a way.

What does that sentence mean? She sounds like a preteen writing in a diary how she imagines motherhood would be. If interested, cut and paste just her words together. All that’s missing is the unicorn.

She is detached from reality.

***

(1-30) Octuplets: Ethics of fertility treatment?
(1-30) Octuplets: What is really going on?
(2-9) Octuplets: Should not go home with that woman
(2-9) Octuplets: Octuplets: already filthy house unfit for children (pix)
(2-23) Octuplets: Mother vs grandmother caught on tape
(2-24) Octuplets: Cosmetic surgery, IVF, food stamps, disability, bankruptcy & foreclosure
(2-24) Octuplets: Mother before/after plastic surgery & Angelina Jolie (pix)
(2-25) Octuplets: Grandfather on Oprah daughter “not mentally complete”
(2-25) Octuplets: Hospital questioning her ability to care for children
(2-26) Octuplets: Video of inside the home
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video(Part 1)
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video(Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Man claiming to be sperm donor
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 1)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 3)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother’s first interview (Feb 9th)
(2-29) Octuplets: What about the other children?
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* (CBS video)
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* offer (press conference)
(3-2) Octuplets: *Angels in Waiting’s* free 24/7 care for all 14 REFUSED
(3-2) Octuplets: What is it going to take?
(3-3) Octuplets: Sen Hudgens (R-GA) “Octomom Bill”

Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video (part 1)

February 26, 2009

Updated list of posts (3-16)

Finally found the radaronline video of the grandmother and daughter having at each other. As fas as the body language, you have to take into account the generational differences and cultural nuances, but the interaction between the two of them is pretty straightforward. They are seated at an angle from one another. The grandmother is more facing forward then toward her daughter. She won’t maintain eye contact and prefers to keep her head down and turned away but when she does look up her chin is up in a distinctly European gesture that I please wish someone would translate literally.

It is not a discussion or even a conversation. It’s a back and forth like you’d see with two first graders. Parry – thrust. Loud – quiet. Talking over the other person to drown out the truth. There is never an even exchange or even an attempt at such and it ends right where it started – the mother stuck in her delusion and the grandmother capitulating.

It will never be resolved – can never be resolved. Delusional madness met by denial always is.

The grandmother is exhausted and depressed and just wants to live in peace. There is a reason why she only had one child herself.

And the grandfather said to Oprah that his daughter is “not mentally complete” and then asked would Oprah be able to get his daughter a mental evaluation.

Why hasn’t Kaiser Permanente or Child Protective service demanded one? Her madness is on display daily for all to see. One need not be a psychiatrist to see that she is devoid of maternal instinct and completely divorced from the reality that awaits her once those octuplets enter the fray.

When they get to the point where other options are discussed – the grandmother doesn’t quite understand what an embryo is and the birther asks who would adopt an embryo. She had no idea such a possibility existed because it never existed in her brain. All this after – if what the birther says is true – 36 embryos were implanted.

And what about the kids?

How many times have they heard about wanting more children and about neglecting the children already born?

How does it make them feel, especially the oldest ones who have heard it for years?

These are the only maternal caregivers these children have. The only ones they are receiving love from. How much love and true affection in way of a maternal bond do you see between these two? Look at how little they are actually able to communicate. Birther talks over her mother and repeats the same thing like a 5 y/o would and then when she doesn’t win she giggles.

What is funny about any of this?

This is what the children have to mimic. How much SCREAMING do you think goes on in that house? And if they are this contentious in front of perfect strangers – they knew they were being videotaped and that the video would be placed online forevermore – what goes on at home in front of the children? And what about when the grandfather has had a cocktail or two?

The daughter is more open with her body language – she still doesn’t think anything she did was wrong and clearly will never be convinced. Toward the end of the confrontation she shows some measure of guilt (after the grandmother mentions her not taking into consideration the 6 children), when she describes what would be done to the embryos had she not chosen to implant them. Thing is she chose to have that many embryos manufactured and either she wasn’t told or didn’t want to hear that the embryos could in fact be donated to couples who haven’t been able to produce their own viable embryos. She admits straight out that it was her intent to use every single one of those embryos – no matter how many children they resulted in. She tried to catch herself but it was too late.

How much more pathology has to be displayed by this woman before someone intervenes?

Her admission makes clear that she did not care about the children themselves – she cared about having them – not caring for them. One would think that after she had one child with a neurological disability she would have stopped. And most definitely by the time three of them were diagnosed. She should have thought about their lives and their futures and not the potential of frozen embryos. And the more she keeps bringing that up, the more she proves that she was after collecting children for her own sake – not wanting to be a mother and caring for the ones she had already given life to.

It really is so very very sad and each day it gets worse.

She is not sitting fully on the chair on the side toward her mother and can put her hand down on the chair as her boundary – she also covers her genital region with the other hand. The grandmother is sitting in a very closed position with her hands on her lap and fingers tightly intertwined, which she always returns to. She’s heard it all before and is set in her view. She has her right shoulder up and is leaning away, her head tilted in disgust. She rarely looks at her daughter full on. I don’t know if they chose this sitting arrangement or the producers put them there. There is a couch in the background that they could have easily sat together on.

Most notable is the daughter’s affect. Does she look anything like a mother who is about to take 8 premature infants home to a 3-bedroom house that may not be there in 3 months and already contains 6 kids under seven – three of them neurologically disabled? Does she look like someone who understands she has 14 mouths to feed and 14 bodies to wash and dress?

I find her extremely detached and adolescent. She speaks the words of a parent but shows absolutely no emotion. The lives she felt so connected to as frozen embryos she refers to as things:

“that are growing. That are related to you. That are healthy, strong and almost all four pounds.”

And her affect doesn’t change at all when she talks about them. No look of concern of what pain they might be experiencing at that moment, or what she might be missing, or reference to what they’re doing that moment. Over and over she mentioned the fate of the frozen embryos but never once reflected on what she did to the ones already in existence. Not a single personal reference to any of her children. Just the abstract: frozen embryos, embryos, cells, lives, humans, human beings, “that” and “the babies”. Not a single “my child” or “your grandchildren”.

By her own words and affect you can see she is detached from the octuplets.

She is disrespectful to her mother – gesturing, talking over and interrupting her and invading her space.

How much patience do you think she has listening to her children if she disrespects like this the person who is providing care and shelter for them?

How much patience does she display in just this 2:58 conversation with an adult who isn’t hungry or tired or unable to communicate because of a neurological disability?

And when the autistic child wets his bed for the second time in one night?

When the octuplets are up around the clock?

When the grandmother finally says she’s had enough?

When the oldest girl says she wants to play with her dolls instead of watching her siblings?

The grandmother leans in and looks directly at her daughter when she feels she can make a point, but she always retreats. Compare the beginning and at the end – the grandmother is in the exact same position. At one point she puts out both of her hands in a sort of I want to shake you or choke you motion. In the end she just resigns herself to whatever happens making clear how this was allowed to continue happening.

Without a home and someone supporting her financially and caring for her children, how would the daughter have been able to have more children? She would have kept trying, most likely, but she would not have had the means.

Her mother may have said no more but she did nothing to actively prevent her from having more.

It’s sad.

Tragic, really.

Eight innocent lives could each be given a fair shot while bringing joy and hope to eight families and beyond. And six other could have their childness saved.

The mother and the grandmother are similarly complicit in this heinous crime, as is the grandfather, who admitted out loud that his daughter is not mentally complete and yet he allowed her to bring more lives into this world. These are the three adults the children have to mimic.

jillstanek

Conversation was already underway..

ANGELA: When you already have six beautiful children.

NADYA: You need to learn to let go.

ANGELA: How could you do this?

NADYA: You need to learn – you need to learn to let go.

ANGELA: So, I will never understand.

NADYA: You never will. And I will never understand your inflexibility and your inability…

ANGELA: Inflexibility?

[Does she not care for those children?]

NADYA: Yes. To be able to accept and let go. Learn to let go.

ANGELA: Yes.

NADYA: But that’s the biggest challenge I had.

[Biggest challenge?]

ANGELA: But If I could totally let go, these are my grandchildren, I would. But you know its very difficult-

NADYA: No-no-no. Not now.

ANGELA: And you have 8 more.

NADYA: Excuse me. Not now. You need to learn to let go of what I chose to do. You didn’t accept it and move forward.

ANGELA: Right. I’m-

NADYA: Stop stagnating on…

ANGELA: I’m not…

NADYA:…and being fixated.

ANGELA: …at that, uhm…

NADYA: Place. You’re not at that place, yet.

ANGELA: No. I’m not.

NADYA: I planned on one growing – at the most two. So if that that had happened, what’s the difference, cuz this is all unintentional?

[Listen to that again. She said what’s the difference. What’s the difference between one and two and 8? Where are the psychiatrists? And that it was unintentional? It was as intentional as it gets. One or two more when you have six children and the person supporting you has filed for bankruptcy and has stopped paying the mortgage is one or two too many. You put six embryos into a uterus that has already produced 6 the most recent pregnancy twins you better expect to have six. She doesn’t even grasp that even one more was wrong – whether they were frozen or not.]

ANGELA: But did you read about the statitstics?

NADYA: The statistics. This doesn’t happen. That doesn’t happen. this never ever happened.

[She says never and then admits she knew it had happened at least once – so she knew the possibility existed.]

ANGELA: Well, something.

NADYA: One person it happened to.

ANGELA SULEMAN: Something, something was [laughs] happening there.

Nadya makes a face and sighs. Shows absolutely no grasp of the gravity of the situation.

ANGELA: Because you know in the first place…

NADYA: OK.

ANGELA: You should have considered your other six children.

NADYA: OK. But I was still going to use – not going to destroy the embryos. Period. Done. Done. Done. It’s already done.

[She just said she was going to use all the embryos – not that she didn’t want them to be destroyed. Right there is all that is needed. Her own words tell you who she was thinking of – herself. Her goal was to use them all – not to use them so they wouldn’t be destroyed.]

ANGELA. Yes, but they are…

NADYA: You can’t go back…

ANGELA. — frozen embryos.

NADYA: But you can’t go back and ring a bell. You can’t go back and alter the past.

ANGELA. No, no, no. You’re talking now…

NADYA: They’re there. They’re human…

ANGELA. — that you, whatever you did is…

NADYA: But they’re human beings…

ANGELA. — is past…

NADYA: …that are grow growing, that are related to you, that are healthy, strong and almost all four pounds.

ANGELA. They are frozen. That’s the difference.

NADYA: (Mocking) They’re frozen right now?

[Is this a comment an adult in her situation would be making? Is there anything in this exchange that if you didn’t know would hint at the absolute gravity of her decisions? Turn the sound off and watch. Better yet, if you know someone who isn’t aware of the story – have them watch with the sound off and have them try to guess their relationship and what the conversation is about. And then watch their face when you tell them what it was about. That is the look the mother should have on her face. ]

ANGELA. They were frozen. And you did not have to do anything.

NADYA: They were lives.

ANGELA. And if you wanted to…

NADYA: The only thing you can do if they’re lives…

ANGELA. — yes, they were lives, but…

NADYA: (INAUDIBLE) — use them or destroy them. But you either use them…

ANGELA. But you…

NADYA: …or you destroy them.

ANGELA. You decided…

NADYA: You use them or you destroy them. You use them or you destroy them.

ANGELA. Whatever they do it’s all done.

NADYA: Do you want to know how they destroy them?

ANGELA. No, no, no, no. Hold on. Hold on.

NADYA: They allow them to live…

ANGELA. Well…

NADYA: They allow the cells to live…

ANGELA. Let me finish…

NADYA: And then they kill them.

ANGELA. Let me finish.

NADYA: You do not…

ANGELA. You…

NADYA: No, I won’t.

ANGELA. You had another option. You didn’t have to have them destroyed.

NADYA: OK. What could I have done?

ANGELA. The other option is…

NADYA: What did — adoption.

ANGELA. — give them up for adoption.

ANGELA: Given them up for adoption. There are so many, so many couples who would love-

NADYA: [She makes a face like it never entered her mind.] Give up the embryos for adoption?

ANGELA: Have them thawed, whatever they do, and have them adopted when they are, uh…

NADYA: [Mocking] Hmm, interesting.

ANGELA: …little humans.

NADYA: Who would do that?

ANGELA: Who would do that?

NADYA: Yeah. How could–I wouldn’t personally do that.

ANGELA: When you have already six.

NADYA: I couldn’t imagine…

ANGELA: Someone who thinks clearly.

NADYA: Yeah. I couldn’t fathom my own children out in the world — you have mentioned this to me a long time ago that you would never have been able to do that, knowing, for the rest of your life, that you’re gonna have your own children out in the world and you’d never know them. How could-I couldn’t personally do it and I would never judge anyone else.

ANGELA: Well, I don’t remember saying this, however…

NADYA: Ok, so when you saw the babies and you started to hold them, you were telling me that you have let go of my choice, you didn’t agree with it, and now you’re acknowledging the fact that they’re here already, and looking at you, and they’re breathing without any assistance.

ANGELA: Yes [laughs] and I felt sorry for them.

NADYA: Because they’re healthy and thriving and crying.

ANGELA: No. Because there are so many. And how are you going to be able provide for them? FOURTEEN.

NADYA: With help.

ANGELA: Think about it, Nadya.

NADYA: I have.

ANGELA: Fourteen

NADYA: I have to let go of my need to control everything, and I have to accept the help that’s been offered.

She said this like it was the party line.

ANGELA: I see. I hope you’ll get help.

NADYA: Ok.

ANGELA: I really hope so.

***(1-30) Octuplets: Ethics of fertility treatment?
(1-30) Octuplets: What is really going on?
(2-9) Octuplets: Should not go home with that woman
(2-9) Octuplets: Octuplets: already filthy house unfit for children (pix)
(2-23) Octuplets: Mother vs grandmother caught on tape
(2-24) Octuplets: Cosmetic surgery, IVF, food stamps, disability, bankruptcy & foreclosure
(2-24) Octuplets: Mother before/after plastic surgery & Angelina Jolie (pix)
(2-25) Octuplets: Grandfather on Oprah daughter “not mentally complete”
(2-25) Octuplets: Hospital questioning her ability to care for children
(2-26) Octuplets: Video of inside the home
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video(Part 1)
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video(Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Man claiming to be sperm donor
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 1)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 3)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother’s first interview (Feb 9th)
(2-29) Octuplets: What about the other children?
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* (CBS video)
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* offer (press conference)
(3-2) Octuplets: *Angels in Waiting’s* free 24/7 care for all 14 REFUSED
(3-2) Octuplets: What is it going to take?
(3-3) Octuplets: Sen Hudgens (R-GA) “Octomom Bill”
(3-4) Octuplets: Dear LA Department of Children and Family Services: re Nadya Suleman
(3-5) Octuplets: 911 call “I’m gonna kill myself!”

Octuplets: Video of inside the home

February 25, 2009

(3-10) Octuplets: Updated list of  posts

Radaronline shot a video inside the 3-bedroom house where the children are living. The house with 23K in unpaid mortgage payments that could be sold as soon as May 5th. See the links below. I wish they would have gone into the bathrooms and I wonder if Kaiser Permanente or Child Protective Services asked for a copy.

Then there’s the offer of $1M and health insurance for a year for all 14 children and the birther if she performed in a pornography film(s). Here is her exchange with radaronline. I cannot vouch the reliability of the exchange and sure wish we could watch her say “if I have more kids”.

SULEMAN: I think it’s kind of funny that I got offered a million dollars to make porn. Those guys at Vivid video must be nuts! Who wants to see me naked? Maybe in a year when the baby fat goes away.

Of course, if I have more kids I may have to ask for two million dollars.

Seriously, though, my mum didn’t bring me up like that. Besides, what will my 14 kids think when they grow up?

Despite what people think of my methods to get pregnant, I believe in love and romance. Not cheap thrills that belittle women.

***

(1-30) Octuplets: Ethics of fertility treatment?
(1-30) Octuplets: What is really going on?
(2-9) Octuplets: Should not go home with that woman
(2-9) Octuplets: Octuplets: already filthy house unfit for children (pix)
(2-23) Octuplets: Mother vs grandmother caught on tape
(2-24) Octuplets: Cosmetic surgery, IVF, food stamps, disability, bankruptcy & foreclosure
(2-24) Octuplets: Mother before/after plastic surgery & Angelina Jolie (pix)
(2-25) Octuplets: Grandfather on Oprah daughter “not mentally complete”
(2-25) Octuplets: Hospital questioning her ability to care for children
(2-26) Octuplets: Video of inside the home
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video(Part 1)
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video(Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Man claiming to be sperm donor
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 1)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 3)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother’s first interview (Feb 9th)
(2-29) Octuplets: What about the other children?
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* (CBS video)
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* offer (press conference)
(3-2) Octuplets: *Angels in Waiting’s* free 24/7 care for all 14 REFUSED
(3-2) Octuplets: What is it going to take?
(3-3) Octuplets: Sen Hudgens (R-GA) “Octomom Bill”

Pix of the day: “Eye of God”

February 25, 2009

There was no way to summarize this so here’s the whole article from The Telegraph.

“The Eye of God”

Photo: ESO

The bright blue pupil and the white of the eye are fringed by flesh-coloured eyelids – but this eye is so big that it light takes two and a half years to cross from one side to the other.

The object is actually a shell of gas and dust that has been blown off by a faint central star. Our own solar system will meet a similar fate five billion years in the future.

It lies around 700 light-years away in the constellation of Aquarius, and can be dimly seen in small backyard telescopes by amateur astronomers who call it the Helix nebula. It covers an area of sky around a quarter the size of the full moon.

The photo was taken with a giant telescope at the European Southern Observatory, high on a mountaintop at La Silla in Chile. It is so detailed that a close-up reveals distant galaxies within the central eyeball.

Burris: Not a very warm welcome back to the senate

February 25, 2009

The welcome back to the senate wasn’t very warm for Sen Burris. From the Chicago Tribune’s MIKE DORNING:

On the Senate floor, fellow senators shook his hand as they encountered him, but few walked up to greet him.

He spent most of a 15-minute vote standing by himself at a desk, apart from the throng of senators milling about in the well of the chamber catching up after the break.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) had a conversation with Burris lasting several minutes on the Senate floor. The majority leader could be seen gesturing with his hands as if enumerating points with his fingers.

A Reid spokesman said the two only exchanged courtesies and did not have a “substantive” conversation.

Asked if Reid agreed with Durbin’s recommendation that Burris resign, spokesman Jim Manley responded, “That is up to Senator Burris to decide.”

Dick Durbin and Roland Burris had a chat that didn’t go Durbin’s way. It’s his own fault. Durbin after their hour long meeting. (Video: Durbin talking with Andrea Mitchell)

What I said was, you know, if I were in your shoes, I would consider resigning.

He said he would not resign, and that was his conclusion.

I’ve made my recommendation to Senator Burris. I can’t force him out.

Durbin also said he asked Burris whether he planned on running in 2010 – no answer. Then he went on to tell Burris that it would be extremely difficult to win a primary and that he will not be supporting him if he tries.

Burris said he was under orders from his lawyers not to comment.

Burris people did. His longtime media adviser Delmarie Cobb:

Sen. Burris is in the fight of his life, not only to rehabilitate his reputation but to restore the public’s trust in the wake of a media frenzy, information leaks, and calls for his resignation by a litany of so-called ‘progressive’ Democrats.

I’ve spent many hours with Sen. Burris over the course of two statewide campaigns. During that time, I never saw or heard anything that would cause me to believe he took part in any wrongdoing, which is why I’m joining him in the fight to keep the nation’s only Senate seat held by an African American.

ROBERT GIBBS:

Sen. Burris needs to take some time and think about whether he can actually help this country, whether he can serve the constituents of Illinois.

Pres Clinton was right: barry’s Iraq was a fairy tale

February 24, 2009

“Words don’t matter”

True.

A reminder of what Mr Bill actually said – barry’s Iraq story was a fairy tale. Period.

This whole thing is the biggest fairy I’ve ever seen!

The nation is finally getting a chance to see that barry’s words mean absolutely nothing and that they never have. His road to and out of Iowa was based solely on Iraq. He stumped on his “superior judgment” in speaking out on Iraq and then never acting on his words. Folks didn’t even bother to check…until now. He was polled over and over that people voted for him because “he voted against the war”. Pundits throughout the primary – and even after – even now – said he “won” because he opposed the war.

Michelle Bernard said Hillary Clinton might well have won if she didn’t vote for the war.

Carlos Watson said Clinton’s comeback might have been complete if it wasn’t for Mr Bill’s comments.

Now the fairy tale that got him to and out of Iowa and into the general – he has completely lied about. How many time has his stance on Iraq changed?

How many times did he swear he would have all combat troops home from Iraq in 16 months?

When he announced his intention to run he said he would have them all home by March 2008 – before the primaries were over.

Are anyone other than historians ever going to actually look at his words?

Will anyone ever hold him accountable for and to them?

Both he and Clinton got 18 million votes. Exactly how many were cast for barry solely because of his Iraq fairy tale and bogus promise to get the troops home? That lie alone was the only thing separating him from Hillary Clinton. And all along she massively out-polled him in regards to handing the economy and Commander in Chief.

You don’t think the election was a cult of personality – let alone a splendid example of misogyny and sexism?

The dead chimp cartoon is an outrage and yet asking on TV “how much Hillary Clinton’s cunt is worth” gets nothing.

barry’s cabinet picks have already disproved his “superior judgment” myth. His inclusion of lobbyists has shown he lied about that, too. He was all along anyway – Axelrod is a lobbyist. Yes, folks, go check it out. Like Gibbs said about Daschle – “he’s not a lobbyist because he’s not registered as one.” Illinois rules are such that Axelrod could get around having to register – by now you have to know how things operate in Illinois.

As far as foreign policy, Clinton visited 32% of the countries in the world and all she did was sip tea with Ambassadors and now all of a suddenly Secretary of State. His first decision as the nominee was Biden and it’s clear how that went.

Admit it, folks – you voted for someone you didn’t know (and still don’t know), someone with no qualifications and someone who is a complete and utter fraud.

Fine.

Just admit to it.

barry’s Iraq 25.0

He had the choice to do what he said and said and said and said he would do – but he didn’t take it. Instead he took the middle choice. Surprise.

• At present there about 14 brigades = 142,000 troops
• All combat troops removed in 19 months (August 2010)
• 30 – 50,000 “non combat” troops left behind to advise and train Iraqi security forces and to protect US interests
• Also staying beyond the 19 months would be intelligence and surveillance specialists and their equipment, including unmanned aircraft
• Complete withdrawal of troops by December 2010

Change = Just what Bush agreed to.

Clearly words don’t matter.

Other facts from CBS:

• Congress has approved more than $657 billion so far for the Iraq war.
• 148,050 defense contractor personnel working in Iraq as of December – 39,262 of them US citizens.
• More than 200 US military installations in Iraq and it can take up to two months to shut down small outposts that hold up to 300 troops.
• Larger entrenched facilities, like Balad Air Base, could take up to 18 months to close
• At least 4,250 members of the US military have died in Iraq.
• More than 31,000 injured.
• 35,841 have received medical air transport due to non-hostile incidents.

What does “non-hostile incidents” mean?

How much is due to mental illness?

Octuplets: Hospital questioning her ability to care for octuplets

February 25, 2009

(3-10) Octuplets: Updated list of  posts

I got this video from the LA Times site. In it is a small snippet from the grandfather’s interview on Oprah.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

OPRAH to the grandfather about his daughter’s mental state: “It seems a little unstable.”

DOUD: I-I-I have to agree with you because, uh, I’m not psychiatrist, but, I questioned her-her-her-her-her, mental, uh, situation.

I beg people not to punish someone who is mentally, uh, not complete.

Then he went on to ask Oprah for help getting his daughter a psychiatric evaluation.

He just stated that his daughter is mentally not complete -> if you are mentally incomplete you are mentally incompetent -> if you are mentally incompetent you should not be anywhere near children = no octuplets.

They need to keep doing more interviews. The grandmother and the mother were fighting on video on radaronline. Nadya has already taped two shows with Dr Phil – the first set to air today. Yesterday she called Dr Phil after the hospital called her warning her that she has to prove she is capable of caring for them.

He didn’t have mention any specifics when he spoke with the LA Times’ JESSICA GARRISON & KIMI YOSHINO:

MCGRAW: What she is telling me is that unless and until she has a better living arrangement, that they are not likely to release the children to her. I haven’t talked to the hospital. I haven’t talked to the caseworkers.

I don’t think she has the money, the space, the transportation, the supplies, the manpower, I don’t think she has any of that in place at this point.

What I have said from the beginning when I first addressed this story is that you can be upset with this mother . . . [but] you can’t turn your back on the mother without turning your back on 14 innocent children. They didn’t ask for this.

And they shouldn’t have to suffer because of it. Neither the mother or the siblings are attached to the octuplets. Let them be adopted to parents who have the wherewithal to care for them in all and every way. No one knows how disabled they are going to be. The older ones reportedly were full term and 3/6 have neurological disabilities.

JIM ANDERSON, director of media relations for Kaiser Permanente Southern California:

Any conversations that the mother may or may not have had on this topic are private and we could not discuss them. In general, mothers with multiple births who have babies in the neonatal intensive care unit are given advice and counsel about what they need to have in place to care for the children when they are discharged. There is a multidisciplinary team that works with them in advance to offer advice and support.

VICKI BERMUDEZ, a regulatory policy specialist with California Nurses Assn. and a neonatal intensive care unit nurse at the Kaiser hospital in Roseville.

In all cases involving very premature babies, social workers are assigned to evaluate parents and to determine what services to which the children and family may be entitled. If they feel there’s a risk to a baby, they contact Child Protective Services and Child Protective Services would make a determination as to whether or not there’s a reason for concern. The agency could place a protective hold on a baby while determining whether the home environment is safe. The children also can be placed in temporary foster care.

***

(1-30) Octuplets: Ethics of fertility treatment?
(1-30) Octuplets: What is really going on?
(2-9) Octuplets: Should not go home with that woman
(2-9) Octuplets: Octuplets: already filthy house unfit for children (pix)
(2-23) Octuplets: Mother vs grandmother caught on tape
(2-24) Octuplets: Cosmetic surgery, IVF, food stamps, disability, bankruptcy & foreclosure
(2-24) Octuplets: Mother before/after plastic surgery & Angelina Jolie (pix)
(2-25) Octuplets: Grandfather on Oprah daughter “not mentally complete”
(2-25) Octuplets: Hospital questioning her ability to care for children
(2-26) Octuplets: Video of inside the home
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video(Part 1)
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video(Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Man claiming to be sperm donor
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 1)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 3)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother’s first interview (Feb 9th)
(2-29) Octuplets: What about the other children?
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* (CBS video)
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* offer (press conference)
(3-2) Octuplets: *Angels in Waiting’s* free 24/7 care for all 14 REFUSED
(3-2) Octuplets: What is it going to take?
(3-3) Octuplets: Sen Hudgens (R-GA) “Octomom Bill”

Octuplets: Grandfather on Oprah: Daughter “not mentally complete”

February 25, 2009

(3-10) Octuplets: Updated list of  posts

**UPDATED POST

Now the grandfather, Ed Doud (67) steps forward to tell his sob story and how he has to go back to Iraq (where he was born) to work because he has only $100. Mind you they had already abandoned a house in 2007, filed bankruptcy in March 08, have received a notice of foreclosure Feb 09 and the birther had been on disability and food stamps. In addition, and much more heinous, three of her six oldest children have neurological disabilities on the autism spectrum and have been getting federal assistance as well.

All this going on when she selfishly chose to implant 6 more embryos. See links below for details.

There is no way to spin this. What she did was premeditated child neglect, child abuse and welfare fraud. And having 14 children while on disability for a “bad back” smacks of workman’s compensation fraud. It also speaks to her lack of any type of insight and judgment – maternal or otherwise.

I tried to find a transcript/video. Here is what is available on Oprah’s website. Dr Oz lets loose as well. Listen to how defensive and how completely out of touch the grandfather is of what will be needed to care for all the children. Pay close attention to how he said he told her enough! Same lame thing the grandmother did and neither of them stopped her. All they had to do was call the State Medical Licensing Board or Child Protective Services.

No one affiliated with those children have sound judgment. Eight premature infants should not be entrusted to their care. No one mentions the six children she selfishly, willingly, willfully and with forethought and malice, did this do. She sentenced to a life without a childhood and to a life of neglect. Dr Oz goes one further and calls it “child cruelty”.

She should not be allowed to ruin any more lives.

My opinion – speaking from the bottom of a double digit family that was not artificially created.

The following is from Oprah.com

On January 26, 2009, Nadya Suleman, already an unemployed single mother of six, gave birth to eight babies in a California hospital…and a media frenzy began almost immediately.

Days after the birth, Nadya agreed to an interview with NBC News correspondent Ann Curry. “I personally do not believe I’m irresponsible. Everything I do revolves around my children. That was always a dream of mine, to have a large family, a huge family. And I just longed for certain connections and attachments with another person that I really lacked, I believe, growing up. And I personally believe that need to fill something inside that’s not there, the void, the feeling of emptiness. I think everyone has that.”

ED DOUD

Ed, who lives overseas for work, says he used most of his savings since returning to the United States and now has just $100 left. “I have either one week, maybe two weeks maximum. Then I have to go back. Do I really want to be 10,000 miles away from my grandchildren who I love so much? But I have to.”

Ed, who is now divorced from Nadya’s mother, says he thinks his daughter was not herself for the NBC interview. “They took her out of the hospital by midnight to a secret location. They did not even give her a chance to rest or sleep while she’s still under medication and not feeling well. This is not Nadya who I know. Nadya’s a very, very, very, very sophisticated young lady. Very intelligent. Very smart.”

OPRAH says many news outlets—including The Oprah Winfrey Show—competed to get the first interview with Nadya, and no one forced her to do it. “Somebody on her team, or she, made the final decision that that interview would go to NBC’s Ann Curry, who I think did a really terrific job of being sympathetic and open to her. And so are you saying that she did that now under duress?”

To most people, Ed says, Nadya may have appeared to be in control—but not to him. “I know my daughter,” he says. “When she’s under tremendous physical pain, it’s very hard to tell.”

Though she already had six children, Nadya became pregnant with octuplets through in vitro fertilization. Her doctor implanted six embryos—eggs fertilized with a donor’s sperm—in her uterus. Right up until she was in labor, doctors thought she was going to have seven babies. “[The eighth baby] was hiding somewhere,” Ed jokes. Despite her already large family, Ed says Nadya wanted to have those six embryos implanted in part for religious reasons and also because she trusted her doctor.

Oprah: Do you think the doctor was irresponsible?

Ed: Absolutely irresponsible. Exactly.

Oprah: Do you think your daughter was irresponsible?

Ed: Irresponsible, too. Yes, ma’am.

Oprah: Do you think your daughter is mentally stable?

*Ed: That’s a very good question.

How did Nadya come to want such a large family? Ed says his daughter always wanted to have kids, but she learned that though her eggs are fertile, it would be difficult for her to conceive without in vitro fertilization treatment.

When Nadya decided she wanted to get pregnant the first time, she was not married, Ed says, so she turned to a friend to be her sperm donor. After that child was born, she decided to have another baby, then a third child and a fourth.

At this point, Ed says he told his daughter she had to stop having more kids. “She loves the children and she wants more. But this is it. No more.”

“It looks like someone sitting at a bar and saying, ‘I’m going to have a drink.’ And, well, after that, ‘Well, one more.’ And then, ‘One more’. And that’s where I can’t stop her, even though I talked to her.”

One day after his fourth grandchild was born, Ed says he answered his phone—and found himself talking to Nadya’s fertility doctor. “He said, ‘I’m checking on her status to see how she’s doing.’ I said, ‘She’s doing fine. What exactly do you mean by that?’ He said, ‘Well, didn’t she tell you? She’s pregnant.’ ‘Pregnant!'”

Ed says he told the doctor how much stress Nadya’s pregnancies were causing. “Don’t you understand that enough is enough?” he says he told the doctor. “Don’t you see that you are putting so much burden on her mom and on me? Don’t you understand that what you’re doing is hurting the family?”

The doctor, Ed says, claimed he didn’t know anything about Nadya’s family situation. “After that, I thought, ‘That’s it. Over.'”

Now that Ed has 14 grandchildren, he says he plans to do what he can to help his family. “They’re my life. There is nothing that will stop me from continuing working to help as much as I can.”

For additional help, Nadya has set up a website to accept money donations. Ed says asking for help the way Nadya has was something he was never able to do. “I never in my life—and that was something maybe negative about me—I never asked for help.”

Although Ed says he never felt he could ask for a hand, he doesn’t want his daughter to suffer for doing so. “Do not punish my daughter for what she had done, and do not punish the babies, because they were given by God,” he says.

DR OZ

Dr. Oz weighs in on the the vitro fertilization controversy, saying it has become the “Dracula of medical technology.” “It sucks out all of the good stuff that medicine often provides, all the wonderful conceived children that occur every year. It also strips money out of the system.”Beyond the several million dollars Dr. Oz says it will take to get the octuplets ready to leave the hospital, he has a message for Ed. “It’s going to cost about a quarter million dollars per kid to get them to age 18, so you better start working. I hope you’re in good health.”Money aside, Dr. Oz addresses a more important issue. “I’d like to shift gears a tiny bit because we’ve been judging Nadya a lot and someone has to speak out for the kids. Because, ultimately, this is a form of child cruelty, I think, and we have a very cavalier and careless attitude to conceiving children in this country. Not just Nadya—this happens all over the place.”

Dr. Oz says Nadya’s pregnancy is a major failure in professionalism. He compares the situation to a Middle Eastern proverb. “It takes one fool to throw a coin down a well. It takes 99 wise men to pull it up. There were 46 very wise physicians and other healers getting these babies out that day at an incredible expense. Despite that, it’s hard to keep up unless someone preempts the act.”

Dr. Oz says it’s a natural gut reaction to question why there are no laws to stop in vitro fertilizations like Nayda’s. “There are some countries, like Italy, that actually have rules. You’re not allowed to implant more than three embryos, for example, there. But we don’t want the government involved in a very personal relationship that we have to have with our doctors about such a sensitive topic.”

DR JAMIE GRIFIO

Many people are asking how it’s possible that Nadya gave birth to octuplets—aren’t there regulations on in vitro fertilization? Dr. Jamie Grifo, the program director of the NYU Fertility Center, says the American Society for Reproductive Medicine has published the following guidelines for women seeking in vitro fertilization:

• Women under the age of 35 should have no more than two embryos implanted.
• Women ages 35 to 37 should have no more than three embryos implanted.
• Women ages 38 to 40 should have no more than four embryos implanted.
• Women age 40 and over should have no more than five embryos implanted.

According to the guidelines, Nadya, who is 33, falls under the two-embryo category. However, Dr. Grifo notes that these are guidelines, not laws. “Eight babies born at once is a failure of our treatment. Our goal as practitioners is to help these patients have a single healthy pregnancy, because those pregnancies have the best outcome.”

————-

*That’s all that was included on this line of questioning. I would have liked to know more – a simple follow up like, why is it just dawning on you now? Or if he ever thought she needed psychiatric help when she wouldn’t stop. Contrast those statements to his other characterizations of her. I would also like to know if Oprah asked him about the extent of cosmetic surgery, who paid for it and whether he knew she was on disability for a bad back while she was pregnant.

**UPDATE: Just saw a video snippet – see hospital link below.

OPRAH to the grandfather about the birther’s mental state: It seems a little unstable.

DOUD: I-I-I have to agree with you because, I’m not psychiatrist, but, I questioned her-her-her-her-her, mental, uh, situation.

I beg people not to punish someone who is mentally not complete.

Then he went on to ask Oprah for help getting her a psychiatric evaluation. Not included.

***

UPDATED list of posts (3-10)

(1-30) Octuplets: Ethics of fertility treatment?
(1-30) Octuplets: What is really going on?
(2-9) Octuplets: Should not go home with that woman
(2-9) Octuplets: Octuplets: already filthy house unfit for children (pix)
(2-23) Octuplets: Mother vs grandmother caught on tape
(2-24) Octuplets: Cosmetic surgery, IVF, food stamps, disability, bankruptcy & foreclosure
(2-24) Octuplets: Mother before/after plastic surgery & Angelina Jolie (pix)
(2-25) Octuplets: Grandfather on Oprah daughter “not mentally complete”
(2-25) Octuplets: Hospital questioning her ability to care for children
(2-26) Octuplets: Video of inside the home
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video(Part 1)
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video(Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Man claiming to be sperm donor
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 1)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 3)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother’s first interview (Feb 9th)
(2-29) Octuplets: What about the other children?
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* (CBS video)
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* offer (press conference)
(3-2) Octuplets: *Angels in Waiting’s* free 24/7 care for all 14 REFUSED
(3-2) Octuplets: What is it going to take?
(3-3) Octuplets: Sen Hudgens (R-GA) “Octomom Bill”

Octuplets: Mother before/after plastic surgery & Angelina Jolie (pix)

February 25, 2009

KEYES: “Obama is a radical Communist!”

February 24, 2009

Andrew Malcolm at the La Times still doesn’t know the difference between a certification of live birth and a birth certificate.

“In June, the Obama campaign released to The Ticket a copy of the then-senator’s Hawaiian birth certificate“

Kind of shows how little journalism is actually done anymore. And what’s really amazing is how folks feel free to go after people when they don’t even know what they’re talking about. They just assume it’s crazy. Nobody checks sources or investigates anything and yet they wonder how something could have gotten by the press.

Another friend of barry, Rep Bobby Rush, thinks Obama is an educated fool!

If you’ve never had the distinct pleasure of watching Ambassador Keyes speak, here you go. I was laughing listening to him – not about what he was saying – how he was saying it. His voice and his facial reactions don’t jive. He sounds outraged but keeps looking into the camera and around to see if anyone is hearing him. It’s like a grandpa scolding his grandchild and then winking at grandma.

skegy

Selected quotes.

Obama is a radical Communist!

He is going to destroy this country.

We are either going to stop him or the United States of America is going to cease to exist.

The man is an abomination!

He has advocated infanticide.

If they happen to escape the abortionist’s intention and are born alive, he actually supported the idea that those babies should be set aside and die.

That is a violation of conscience that is inconceivable.

Is he President of the United States?

I, frankly, refuse to call him that.

At the moment, he is somebody who is an alleged usurper.

He is alleged to be someone occupying that office without the constitutional warrant to do so.

He has refused to provide proof that he is in fact a natural born citizen.

I’m not even sure he is President of the United States.

No! That is not a laughing matter.

We’re in the midst of the greatest crisis this nation has ever seen. And if we don’t stop laughing about it and deal with it, we’re going to find ourselves in the the midst chaos, confusion and civil war.

It’s time we started acting like grownups.

This is insanity!

It’s as if we’ve put insane children and adolescents in charge of the country!

Where did we come up with two trillion dollars in the course of the last six months?

Did we wish for it out of the air?

Have people gone mad in this country?

You don’t have that money.

We are claiming that a bankrupt government can save a bankrupt banking system

Explain to me how that happens, because I think that’s impossible.

He presents silly ideas like this and says ‘let’s move forward now‘…

This is insane!

It’s got to lead to the collapse of our economy, and it’s going to!

***

Keyes v Bowen: Explanation and Links
11-13 Keyes v Bowen: Petition for Writ of Mandate

1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Relevant text
1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Official pdf

2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (text)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Notice of Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-20 Occidental College Subpoena: Discussion of Motion to Quash

2-24 Keyes: “Obama is a radical Communist!”

3-13 Scheduled Hearing

*3-13 Occidental College Subpoena: QUASHED

Octuplets: Cosmetic surgery, IVF, food stamps, disability, bankruptcy & foreclosure

February 24, 2009

(3-10) Octuplets: Updated list of  posts

In today’s video installment on radardonline, the octobirther says she needs to move out of her house immediately because a man two doors down threatened a photographer with a gun.

TMZ: The police were called and a report made but the neighbors said the man in question was “simply bringing the unloaded gun inside his house from his car”.

The real reason she “wants” to move is because her house is ready to be foreclosed on and because the inside of it is unfit for the six children already living there (follow link below) and certainly would not be fit for 8 preemies.

Here’s a little background.

She has been known variably as Nadya Suleman, Natalie Denise Suleman; Nadya or Natalie Suleman-Gutierrez while married; and Nadya or Natalie Denise Doud. Her DOB 10/12/75.

TMZ: All 14 children have Solomon as the last name. 4/6 oldest list “David Solomon” as the dad. The other two have no father listed. One one of the birth certificates, Solomon lists Israel as his “State of Birth.” And his DOB varies: 5/25/75, 6/25/73, 5/25/73, 6/25/75.

CBS: The grandfather (67) “a former Iraqi military man” is apparently going to head back to earn money. The grandmother (69) is a retired teacher and has divorced from the grandfather since 1999.

The 3-bedroom house the 6 children plus adults have been living in is owned by the grandparents, who filed for bankruptcy in March 2008, claiming nearly $1 million in liabilities.

No mortgage payments have been made since May 08 and they are $23,225 in arrears.

The default notice was filed on February 9 and the house could be sold at auction beginning May 5.

The grandparents also abandoned another home in late 2007.

That means that woman got pregnant knowing that she had no means to support her children, that her parents had already abandoned a home, that they had already had filed for bankruptcy, that were already not making payments and that her already born children could be homeless.

That is beyond criminal.

It gets worse.

During the time she was getting IVF and being pregnant she was receiving disability payments for a “bad back”.

TIME: Given the enormous cost and general lack of health-care coverage for IVF — one cycle can cost $10,000 or more — questions have arisen about how Suleman, who previously worked as a psychiatric technician at Metropolitan State Hospital in Norwalk, Calif., earning just $625 a week, could afford such a procedure. At the time of her IVF treatments, it does not appear that Suleman was working, owing to an injury sustained on the job.

Records obtained from the California Department of Industrial Relations show that Suleman received $167,908 in disability payments for a back injury suffered during a riot on Sept. 18, 1999, at the hospital where she worked. The payments were made between 2002 and 2008, during which time Suleman gave birth to most of her first six children, even though she was separated from her husband during part of this time.

Psychiatric evaluations of Suleman portray a well-mannered but very depressed and anxious woman who reported severe lower-back pain, which limited her ability to pick up her 15-lb. baby without first sitting down. She also had difficulty sleeping. Wrote one doctor: “Since the birth of her baby, she has become very fearful that he will be kidnapped, injured, etc. She is anxious both for herself and for him, particularly in public places to the extent that ‘somebody, my husband or my mother, has to take me almost everywhere.‘ ” (The evaluation was performed when Suleman and her husband were attempting a reconciliation, which lasted for about one month.)

She was on disability for a “bad back” the whole time she was trying and getting pregnant. How bad is a back that survives 4 regular pregnancies, a twin pregnancy and then octuplets all within 96 or so months – half of which she was pregnant?

It doesn’t. That is insurance fraud. And it’s clear where the money went – her face.

When she was interviewed by Ann Curry, she denied being on welfare.

She lied.

Joanne Killeen (her ex-publicist): She’s not on welfare, has no plans on being a welfare mom and really wants to look at every opportunity that she can to make sure that she can provide financially for the 14 children that she’s responsible for now.

No wonder she quit. She already had been a welfare mom for years.

LA Times: She gets at least $490 a month in food stamps, and three of her first six children are disabled and receiving federal benefits.

Three of her older six children are already disabled: autism, ADHD, mild autism with speech delay – and yet she went back and had more. The chance of each of the eight children growing up without long term disability is zero.

She knew all this going in and she had 6 embryos implanted each time. How was this woman ever infertile in the first place?

She knew she had no income.

She knew she was dependent on her parents.

She knew her parents had already abandoned one house.

She knew they had filed for bankruptcy.

She knew they had already defaulted on their present mortgage.

She knew she was receiving disability payments for a “bad back”.

She knew that having 6 embryos implanted at once could lead to at least 6 children.

She knew she was not going to selectively reduce.

And worst of all, she knew that three of her previous implantations had resulted in children with neurological disabilities.

And without a conscience, she did all this selfishly knowing that none of the children would have a father in their lives.

Now do the math. Remember she had no source of income, had no plans to get an income, and was already on welfare and disability since she started it all.

It costs about $210K to raise one child from birth to 18. A healthy child. Three of her children are already receiving taxpayer money and unless the diagnosis is fraudulent they will continue to receive it until they’re 18 and maybe beyond.

It is costing at least 8K/day for the octuplets to be in the NICU. That doesn’t include the special procedures or any of the doctor bills or the delivery itself where 46 doctors, nurses and other personnel were in attendance.

Now add doctor visits after they get out of the hospital and all the special care, treatments and medications they are going to require. Some might even require 24/hr nursing care.

And then realize that taxpayers are going to be paying for everything. They will be paying for everything she knew she could never pay for–wasn’t paying for. And they were already paying for her IVF that will ensure they support those children for years to come – some of the preemies maybe for life.

Her words to Ann Curry: “All I wanted was children. It turned out imperfectly.”

For whom?

And: “I’m providing myself to my children.”

And the California taxpayers are providing for all of them.

What more is needed to take those children away from her?

What kind of (lack of) judgment does she have?

And what about the grandparents who knew all this and did nothing to stop her? That is the type of environment those children have been growing up in – three adults without a clue. And 8 more premature infants are going to be added to the mix?

Child Protective Services please do your job – protect those newborns from their birther before something happens to them.

***

(1-30) Octuplets: Ethics of fertility treatment?
(1-30) Octuplets: What is really going on?
(2-3) Octuplets: Publicist Joann Killeen on Larry King
(2-9) Octuplets: Should not go home with that woman
(2-9) Octuplets: Octuplets: already filthy house unfit for children (pix)
(2-16) Octuplets: Publicist Joann Killeen quits admits death threats
(2-23) Octuplets: Mother vs grandmother caught on tape
(2-24) Octuplets: Cosmetic surgery, IVF, food stamps, disability, bankruptcy & foreclosure
(2-24) Octuplets: Mother before/after plastic surgery & Angelina Jolie (pix)
(2-25) Octuplets: Grandfather on Oprah daughter “not mentally complete”
(2-25) Octuplets: Hospital questioning her ability to care for children
(2-26) Octuplets: Video of inside the home
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video (Part 1)
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video (Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Man claiming to be sperm donor
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 1)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 3)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother’s first interview (Feb 9th)
(2-29) Octuplets: What about the other children?
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* (CBS video)
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* offer (press conference)
(3-2) Octuplets: *Angels in Waiting’s* free 24/7 care for all 14 REFUSED
(3-2) Octuplets: What is it going to take?
(3-3) Octuplets: Sen Hudgens (R-GA) “Octomom Bill”
(3-4) Octuplets: Dear LA Department of Children and Family Services: re Nadya Suleman
(3-5) Octuplets: 911 call “I’m gonna kill myself!”
(3-6) Octuplets: Nadya, Gloria Allred, *Angels in Waiting* & Dr Phil
(3-6) Octuplets: Dr Phil on The View: “Her contact with reality is fleeting at best”
(3-9) Octuplets: Nadya accepts *Angels in Waiting’s* offer
(3-9) Octuplets: Copy of agreement between Nadya, Gloria Allred, *Angels in Waiting* & Dr Phil
(3-9) Octuplets: Grandfather purchase $564,900 house
(3-9) Octuplets: 2nd publicist, Victor Munoz, quits: “This woman is nuts!”
(3-10) Octuplets: Updated list of  posts

Keyes v Bowen: Notice of Hearing (3-13)

February 24, 2009

Here’s the notice of hearing for 3-13-09.

Some of you have said you can’t get the pdf via the HTML so here’s a copy of a readable online copy.

At top right you can magnify (arrow) or full screen or you can follow the link below it.

**

View this document on Scribd

**

Keyes v Bowen: Explanation and Links
11-13 Keyes v Bowen: Petition for Writ of Mandate

1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Relevant text
1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Official pdf

2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (text)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Notice of Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-20 Occidental College Subpoena: Discussion of Motion to Quash

2-24 Keyes: “Obama is a radical Communist!”

3-13 Scheduled Hearing

*3-13 Occidental College Subpoena: QUASHED

Keyes v Bowen: Explanation and links

February 24, 2009

Updated list of birth certificate posts

I have been asked many times over the last two weeks to clarify Keyes v Bowen. Here’s a quick rundown and there are links at the bottom.

Presidential candidate Alan Keyes, Wiley S Drake and Markham Robinson of the American Independent Party are suing Debra Bowen, California Secretary of State and the California Board of Electors to prevent the certification of the vote in the Electoral College. (Obviously it already happened.)

Similar to Gail Lightfoot v Bowen.

Lawyers for Keyes et al are Gary Kreep and Orly Taitz.

Basis of suit: Secretary of State Sandra Bowen was charged with the responsibility of proving barry was eligible to be president before she put his name on the ballot. The Board of Electors have the same responsibility before they certify the vote.

The basis of barry’s ineligibility: he is not a natural born citizen as required by the Constitution.

That either he was not born on American soil or he lost his citizenship while he was living in Indonesia from age 6-10. If he was adopted by his Indonesian father – he lost his American citizenship because there was no provision for dual citizenship.

Supporting this is barry’s claim of traveling to Pakistan at a time when Americans weren’t allowed.

Supporting the claim that he was not born in Hawaii is barry grandmother Sarah Obama’s claim that he was born in Kenya.

Also that he has never released his original long form birth certificate and the possibility that the Certification of Live Birth (COLB) is a forgery.

NOTE: The claim that he is not a natural born citizen by virtue of his dual citizenship – UK & US – at birth as conferred by his father was basically quashed by the Supreme Court via Donofrio and Wrotnowski.

Keyes sent out a subpoena to Occidental College in an attempt to obtain barry’s academic and housing records. If provided, they might provide his place of birth and what he considered his citizenship to be. Such as if he received financial aid as a foreign student.

KEYES v BOWEN

California Superior Court
Case Number: 2008-80000096
Filing Date: 11/13/2008
Case Type: Writ of Mandate
Case Title: AMBASSADOR DR ALAN KEYES VS. CALIFORNIA SECRETARY OF STATE DEBRA BOWEN

Keyes v Bowen: Explanation and Links
11-13 Keyes v Bowen: Petition for Writ of Mandate

1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Relevant text
1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Official pdf

2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (text)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Notice of Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-20 Occidental College Subpoena: Discussion of Motion to Quash

2-24 Keyes: “Obama is a radical Communist!”

3-13 Scheduled Hearing

*3-13 Occidental College Subpoena: QUASHED

***

I hope that helps because it’s all I know. Other links if you need them.

Berg, Wrotnowski, Donofrio
Lightfoot v Bowen
Hollister v Soetoro
Dr Fukino on COLB
COLB vs Long form birth certificate
Birth certificate archive

Keyes v Bowen original filing (11-13)

February 24, 2009

I don’t know what happened to the original post. It’s getting a “not found” so here it is again.

Petition for Writ of Mandate Keyes et al v Bowen et al. (original pdf)

Some of you have said you can’t get the pdf via the HTML so here’s a copy of a readable online copy.

At top right you can magnify (arrow) or full screen or you can follow the link below it.

**

View this document on Scribd

**

Keyes v Bowen: Explanation and Links
11-13 Keyes v Bowen: Petition for Writ of Mandate

1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Relevant text
1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Official pdf

2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (text)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Notice of Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-20 Occidental College Subpoena: Discussion of Motion to Quash

2-24 Keyes: “Obama is a radical Communist!”

3-13 Scheduled Hearing

*3-13 Occidental College Subpoena: QUASHED

Occidental College Subpoena: Discussion of Motion to Quash

February 24, 2009

Updated list of birth certificate posts

UPDATED: There’s some confusion about the Keyes v Bowen case, the Occidental College Subpoena, the Motion to Quash it and the question of financial sanctions. See the links for everything below.

This is how I understand it.

It has been born out in previous cases that “there exists no designated official in the federal government, or the government of the states, directly charged with the responsibility of determining whether any Presidential candidate meets the qualifications of Article H of the Constitution of the United States.”

And the courts have consistently ruled that citizens, including retired military on ready reserve, have no “standing” to demand barry prove his eligibility.

So Keyes et al sued the California Secretary of State, Sandra Bowen, claiming that she had a duty to make sure the candidates she put on the ballot were in fact constitutionally eligible.

They also claimed that each California Elector has “an affirmative duty to discover whether the candidate for President for which the elector is seeking election is a ‘natural bom’ citizen.”

Specifically, they sought “to enjoin Secretary Bowen from both certifying to the Governor the names of the California Electors, and from transmitting to each presidential Elector a Certificate of Election, until such documentary proof is produced and verified showing that [President Obama] is a ‘natural born’ citizen of the United States and does not hold citizenship in Indonesia, Kenya or Great Britain.”

Basically means they wanted to stop the certification of the vote before it got to Dick Cheney.

Problem is they didn’t bring suit until November 13th and did nothing further to stop them. And then there’s the simple issue of identifying a “mandatory duty with which Respondents failed to comply with”.

There are three outstanding motions set to be heard on March 13, 2009.

And then came the Occidental College subpoena. I’m not sure how they got to that idea. I understand the intent and the potential of what might be found – but why did so much time lapse and why was the suit started 9 days after the election? I don’t know if it anything to do with Lightfoot v Bowen – wanting a back up of sorts like Wrotnowski to Donofrio.

And here is where the real screw up was – if the statute barry’s lawyers cited is valid, Kreep did not follow proper procedure for the serving of the subpoena.

Why? How could a such a simple mistake be made?

Kreep was to serve barry 5 days (in person) or 10 days (by mail) before they served Occidental College. And when they served Occidental College they should have provided proof that barry was notified in accordance with the statute. Both were sent via mail on 1-15. There is mention of a “Certificate of Compliance” when they clearly were not.

So because it was not properly served Occidental is not legally bound to comply.

Timeline:

11-13 Keyes v Bowen Petition for Writ of Mandate filed

1-15 Subpoenas were served to Occidental College and Bowen et al via US Mail.

1-16 Woocher mailed Keyes’ counsel Gary Kreep to request they “cancel or withdraw the subpoena” at least until March 13th when those three motions would be heard. The cancellation would be without prejudice and could be reinstated if the case was still alive on March 14th.

Means they wanted to prevent discovery until the case was thrown out. The same thing they did with Berg v Obama.

1-27 Woocher again contacted Kreep to ask the same thing.

2-2 Kreep emailed Woocher that he wasn’t going to withdraw or cancel the subpoena.

2-11 Woocher filed the notice and the Motion to Quash.

According to barry’s lawyers the case is moot because:

Keyes et al have not identified a single “mandatory duty” the respondents Bowen et al failed to do.

The subpoena “seeks irrelevant information that could not, under any circumstances, lead to discovery of admissible evidence in this case”. [lie]

The subpoena was not properly served.

It’s too late for a writ of mandate barring Bowen et al from certifying the vote because it has already been done and barry and Biden were sworn in “on or about” Jan 20th.

I did find these words interesting and wonder why they were included:

The central issue in this lawsuit — putting aside the significant jurisdictional and timeliness questions — is whether any Respondent had a legal duty to demand proof of natural born citizenship from the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee.

None of the documents sought by Petitioners could possibly assist in answering this question.

Now that is a blatant lie and one they should not have said out loud. It smacks of guilt – not legalese. If he was registered as barry soetoro – like his classmates knew him to be – there is plenty. And if he received financial aid for being a “foreign citizen” then the deal is sealed.

That one statement reinforced the fact that he continues to fight something that according to him and his gazillion lawyers doesn’t need fighting.

Why does a man claiming transparency need to be compelled to produce anything?

He lies every time he mentions that word.

And as far as the threat of monetary sanctions – this is what was at the end of the motion:

Respondent moving parties do not, with this motion, exercise their rights under Code of Civil Procedure sections 1987.2, 2025.410, and 2025.420 to seek recompense for their reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs necessarily incurred in bringing this motion. However, Respondent moving may do so in the future if Petitioners continue to misuse the discovery process.

Again it seems a tad desperate. If they are so certain that nothing of relevance could be obtained from the subpoena, that the subpoena was improperly served and that the case is moot – why the threat?

***

Keyes v Bowen: Explanation and Links
11-13 Keyes v Bowen: Petition for Writ of Mandate

1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Relevant text
1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Official pdf

2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (text)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Notice of Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-20 Occidental College Subpoena: Discussion of Motion to Quash

2-24 Keyes: “Obama is a radical Communist!”

3-13 Scheduled Hearing

*3-13 Occidental College Subpoena: QUASHED

Dick Durbin: Resign, Burris: No

February 24, 2009

UPDATED: video added

Sen Dick Durbin just had a meeting with Roland Burris. It didn’t go well and Senator Durbin is pist. Not sure why they thought Burris would resign. Dick and Harry should be angry at themselves because they let barry talk them down from their original stance. It is their own fault Burris is even there and Durbin didn’t admit it.

Anyway according to Durbin he met with Burris and talked about circimstances that lead up to the meeting. He said they had been relying on Burris’ testimony but Burris had not been completely forthright and that the Feb 4th supplementary affidavit also was not complete.

Durbin said he expressed his feelings of disappointment that Burris was not more forthright and that he thought Burris would not be able to be effective. He made a point of saying that Burris is limited in his ability to travel in Illinois because of the notoriety of the story. I don’t know what he means by this.

Durbin does not know exactly what happened with Blago but he wants the Blagojevich burlesque to be over and that The People of Illinois have had enough. I have had enough – of barry. barry should have never vacated his senate seat. If he hadn’t – none of this would be happening. That’s what happens when you have a rookie not raised in Illinois. Once the press finally decides to dig into barry they are going to find a viper’s nest of corruption leading back and through Tony Rezko. Maybe Rezko wasn’t so much in solitary confinement as it was protective custody so nobody could take care of the connection between blago and barry.

Durbin said that Burris called him after the election to say he was interested in the vacancy – Durbin said if it has to do with an appointment by blago don’t do it. He did and Durbin should have know he would. Durbin said that if he were in the same circumstances he would resign.

Really?

Burris said he would not resign and would continue to work hard.

Durbin to Burris: If I were in your shoes I would resign with what you are facing.

Burris: I am not going to resign.

What’s next?

Durbin said the Sangamon County states attorney is looking into Burris’ impeachment testimony for possible perjury. Never happen. That’s why Jim Durkin – the guy who cross examined Burris – is so angry. He let Burris slip through and now has the wrath of the Dems and Reps on him besides looking like an idiot in front of the whole world.

The Senate Ethics Committee will be investigating and Durbin made sure to mention that “other government agencies” might be looking into it as well. As in Patrick Fitzgerald.

barry is taking a back seat – first Gibbs said he “neglected” to speak with barry and then he said Burris needs to take some time and reflect on it.

Will barry step into the mess he caused to happen?

Don’t betcha

Burris upon leaving the meeting said his lawyers have told him to stop talking publicly about the events preceding his appointment by blago.

BURRIS: I’m under orders not to speak about this.

Unfortunately for Burris, last week’s speaking and then listening tour did him in.

Outcome: unless barry steps in or Patrick Fitzgerald has something to say – Burris finishes up the vacancy and agrees not to run in 2010.

firedoglake

Octuplets: Mother vs grandmother caught on tape

February 23, 2009

(3-10) Octuplets: Updated list of  posts

Update – found the video – see link below.

The octuplet story gets more sordid by the day. First the birther and grandmother of the 14 children go at it on radaronline and then a possible sperm donor father pops up. The radaronline interview can only be watched there. They say they will release snippets of it all week. I have the interview they did with the grandmother in the drafts somewhere that I will try to post today. Radaronline are the ones who provided the pix of the nasty un-childproofed house the six have been living in and I hope the octuplets never find their way to.

Again, I will state as clearly as I can: those 8 children should never be placed in her custody. She committed child abuse by implanting them – having already been unable to care for the 6 six children at home. She has 14 children under the age of 7. One set of twins and then the octuplets, which were 10 weeks premature. Provided the other 5 pregnancies were full term – in the span of roughly 96 months – she was pregnant for half. And the last pregnancy she was on bedrest at 23 weeks.

What type of care were the six already birthed children getting?

Why type of care was humanly possible by a non-pregnant single mother and an exhausted grandmother?

And what else was it besides premeditated welfare fraud when she willingly implanted them knowing she would have absolutely no independent means to support them. She was unable to provide basic food and shelter for the 6 she already had.

And in case you need more convincing – look at the before pictures of the birther compared with the multiple plastic surgeries face she has now. That’s tens of thousands of dollars she did not use to care for her children.

She was not a mother – she was a birthing factory and should be treated as such. She would qualify for two of Hitler’s Mother’s Crosses and she should not be allowed anywhere near those octuplets.

Have you watched her “interact” with them? Watch her and decide for yourself her (lack of) maternal attachment. Look at the pictures. of her house – taken when she supposedly has 2-3 nannies caring for the 6 children.

She has no job.

No skills.

No resources.

No father. She gave birth to 14 children knowing absolutely knowing that they would not have a father in their lives. What kind of beast does that? Certainly not a mother.

No in place support system.

No home.

No way to support any of them – financially, emotionally or in any other fashion.

No way to love each one of them without neglecting the other – thus all are and have been neglected.

That alone is criminal.

The hospital bill has already got to be over a million dollars with no end in sight.

She said in the interview that she had no idea that embryos can be “adopted”. Her absolute ignorance is limitless as is the grandmother’s. That fertility doctor needs to go to prison as well as have his medical license permanently revoked.

He swore to First do know harm. He violated that oath and should be punished by never being given the chance to violate it again.

She said she didn’t want to kill the ones that were frozen – so how many are left? And if there are some left – what is she going to do with them? She said the octuplets were a “sign from God” not to have anymore.

Why does a rational being need a sign from God to know when to stop criminal behavior? What type of judgment does that woman possess?

None – maternal or otherwise.

If she still has a functioning uterus and some embryos she will try it again. She said in the interview that 8 embryos had never developed before and that if she had just one or two what’s the difference? She is talking about them as things – not human beings with souls and feelings in need of love and nurturing.

One of her defenses is that she will love and hold them like other parents cannot. Where are her 28 arms?

She goes beyond “obsessive compulsive” to selfishness on a previously unseen pathological level. Her behavior and decision-making to have those embryos implanted demonstrates beyond a shadow of a doubt that she has absolutely no maternal instincts.

Period.

I hope Child Protective Services watches these interviews. Their absolute dysfunction is on display and they have no qualms showing it. What goes on in private?

Now imagine the six kids already at home listening to this for years. Look at how exhausted the grandmother is.

Who is going to care for any of those children?

Have they ever been cared for?

And has anyone begun to think about what the 7 y/o’s life is like?

Has always been like?

Will always be like?

***

(1-30) Octuplets: Ethics of fertility treatment?
(1-30) Octuplets: What is really going on?
(2-9) Octuplets: Should not go home with that woman
(2-9) Octuplets: Octuplets: already filthy house unfit for children (pix)
(2-23) Octuplets: Mother vs grandmother caught on tape
(2-24) Octuplets: Cosmetic surgery, IVF, food stamps, disability, bankruptcy & foreclosure
(2-24) Octuplets: Mother before/after plastic surgery & Angelina Jolie (pix)
(2-25) Octuplets: Grandfather on Oprah daughter “not mentally complete”
(2-25) Octuplets: Hospital questioning her ability to care for children
(2-26) Octuplets: Video of inside the home
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video(Part 1)
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video(Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Man claiming to be sperm donor
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 1)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 3)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother’s first interview (Feb 9th)
(2-29) Octuplets: What about the other children?
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* (CBS video)
(3-3) Octuplets: Gloria Allred & *Angels in Waiting* offer (press conference)
(3-2) Octuplets: *Angels in Waiting’s* free 24/7 care for all 14 REFUSED
(3-2) Octuplets: What is it going to take?
(3-3) Octuplets: Sen Hudgens (R-GA) “Octomom Bill”
(3-5) Octuplets: Dear LA Department of Children and Family Services: re Nadya Suleman

Occidental College subpoena: Motion to quash (text)

February 11, 2009

Hi ObamaIsAFraud2008 – clarified again for you. (2-24)

Ok since you can’t download the pdf of Official Motion to quash of the Occidental College subpoena (relevant text) / (Occidental College subpoena (pdf) of barry’s academic and housing records below is an UNOFFICIAL text version and here’s my understanding of it. [all these links below]

Scroll all the way down to the bottom to see the financial sanction footnote in red AS WRITTEN. It seems awfully desperate to me. barry has enough money to motion them to death.

I am always amazed by how the same bot tone comes through even in legal documents. My guess this was written by a woman who is infatuated with barry and thinks her efforts to protect! him from her fellow Americans who actually believe in the law – to the letter of the law – is going to be noticed. I do hope she is getting paid as much as her male counterparts.

MOTION TO QUASH

BACKGROUND

Petitioners filed this action on November 13, 2008, nine days after the November 4,2008 General Election. The Petition alleges that at least seventeen actions have been filed questioning whether the President is a “natural born citizen” under Article II, Section I, Clause 4 of the United States Constitution. (Pet. ff 62-63, 68, 73.) According to the Petition, these lawsuits suggest variously that although President Obama was bom a United States citizen he somehow lost this status by subsequently obtaining citizenship in Indonesia, or, alternatively, that he was actually born in Kenya and is therefore either a Kenyan or British citizen. (Id.fflf73,79-83.)

The Petition alleges that “[i]n the course of those lawsuits … it has been determined that there exists no designated official in the federal government, or the government of the states, directly charged with the responsibility of determining whether any Presidential candidate meets the qualifications of Article H of the Constitution of the United States.” (Id. f 73.)

The Petition then avers — without citation to any legal authority—that “[b]ased on all ofthe above [allegations], it is the duty of [the Secretary of State]… to obtain proper documentation of [former] Senator Obama’s citizenship to confirm his eligibility” to serve as President. (Id. 84.)

It also claims that each California Elector has “an affirmative duty to discover whether the candidate for President for which the elector is seeking election is a ‘natural bom’ citizen.”

The Petition prays for a peremptory writ directed to California Secretary of State Debra Bowen and to the California Electors.

Specifically, Petitioners seek to enjoin Secretary Bowen from “both certifying to the Governor the names of the California Electors, and from transmitting to each presidential Elector a Certificate of Election, until such documentary proof is produced and verified showing that [President Obama] is a ‘natural born’ citizen of the United States and does not hold citizenship in Indonesia, Kenya or Great Britain.”

With respect to the California Electors, Petitioners demand an “order barring the California Electors from signing the Certificate of the Vote” pending production of the same “documentary proof.” (Id.) But Petitioners admit in their Petition that Secretary Bowen and the California Electors will have discharged all duties associated with the November 2008 General Election on or before December 15, 2008 — which they in fact proceeded to do, without further objection or judicial action by Petitioners.

And it is judicially noticeable that President Obama and Vice President Biden have now been sworn into office.

Since filing suit nearly three months ago, Petitioners have made no effort whatsoever to obtain interlocutory relief. They originally noticed a hearing on the merits of the Petition for March 13, 2009, long after the California officials sued in this case completed all of their duties associated with the 2008 Presidential Election. This hearing date has since been continued by stipulation of all parties to allow the Court to first resolve three pending challenges to the sufficiency of Petitioners’ pleadings: a Demurrer by Secretary Bowen; a Demurrer by President Obama,Vice President Biden, and 54 California Electors; and a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings by California Elector Joe Perez.

Each of these motions identifies obvious legal deficiencies on the face of Petitioners’ pleading, including the fact that Petitioners cannot identify any mandatory duty with which Respondents have failed to comply and the fact that the entire suit has long been moot. These three motions are set to be heard by the Court on March 13, 2009.

Nevertheless, on January 15 or 16,2009, Petitioners served the business records subpoena at issue in this motion on Occidental College. (Declaration of Fredric D. Woocher in Support of Motion to Quash (“Woocher Decl.”) f 2 & Ex. 1.) On January 15, 2009, Petitioners served all Respondents, including President Obama, with a copy of the subpoena by regular U.S. Mail. (Id. U 3 & Ex. 2.)

After receiving the subpoena, on January 16, 2009, Mr. Woocher, counsel for President Obama,Vice President Biden, and the California Electors, emailed counsel for Petitioners to request that Petitioners “cancel or withdraw the subpoena, at least until such time as the Superior Court rules upon the pending demurrers and motion for judgment on the pleadings.” {Id. U 4 & Ex.

Mr. Woocher made clear that “[s]uch cancellation would be without prejudice to [Petitioners’] righttore-issue the subpoena should the litigation remain alive following the court’s ruling on those motions.” (Id.) After receiving no response, Mr. Woocher again contacted counsel for Petitioners on January 27, 2009 to inquire whether they would agree to postpone the response to the subpoena until after the hearing on March 13,2009. (Id. 1 5 & Ex. 4.)

On February 2, 2009, counsel for Petitioners informed Mr. Woocher via email that Petitioners insisted on proceeding with the subpoena, thereby necessitating the filing of the instant motion. (Id. f 6 &Ex. 5.)

BECAUSE PETITIONERS FAILED TO COMPLY WITH CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SECTION 1985.3,THE SUBPOENA IS DEFECTIVE AND MUST BE QUASHED.

As an initial matter, the subpoena is invalid for failure to abide by the strict service requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 1985.3 (“Section 1985.3”).

“Section 1985.3 protects personal records from discovery unless the requesting party complies with certain time and notice requirements.” Sasson v.Katash, 146Cal. App. 3d 119,122 (1983); see also Lantzv.Superior Court, 28Cal.App.4th 1839,1848(1994).

One such requirement is that the subpoenaing party must serve the subpoena on the consumer at least five days before service on the custodian of records. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1985.3(b)(3). If served by mail within this State, this time limit is extended pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1013(a) to require service on the consumer at least ten days before service on the custodian of records. Id.; see also Cal.Civ.Proc. Code § 1013(a).

The subpoenaing party must also serve the custodian of records with proof of service of the required notice on the consumer whose records are at issue. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code§ 1985.3(c). The Civil Discovery Act also incorporates this same requirement, mandating that a subpoena for personal records be accompanied by a proof of service establishing that Section 985.3’s consumer notice provisions have been satisfied. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2020.410(d) Failure to comply with any of Section 1985.3’s dictates “shall be sufficient basis for the witness to refuse to produce the personal records sought by the subpoena duces tecum.” Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1985.3(k).

Petitioners readily acknowledge that the procedural protections of Section 1983.5 apply here. Indeed, they complied in part with Section 1985.3, subdivision (b), by serving on the President’s counsel a “Notice to Consumer or Employee” as required by Section 1985.3. (See Woocher Decl. U 3 & Ex. 2.) They even attached to the subpoena served on Occidental College a “Certificate of Compliance,” in which they purport to have complied with the statute’s clear dictates. (Id.)

However, rather than mailing the Notice and a copy of the subpoena to the President’s counsel ten days before the subpoena was served on third-party Occidental College, the Notice and subpoena were mailed either the day before or the very same day Occidental College was served. (Id.fflf2-3 & Exs. 1-2.) This is plainly insufficient under Section 1985.3.

Accordingly, Occidental College need not comply with the subpoena, Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1985.3(k), and the subpoena must be quashed.

THE TWO CATEGORIES OF DOCUMENTS PETITIONERS SEEK ARE VAGUE, OVERBROAD, AND ARE OF NO RELEVANCE WHATSOEVER TO THIS MOOT LITIGATION.

In addition to the fact that Petitioners failed to comply with Section 1985.3, the subpoena is also vague and overbroad, and seeks documents that are irrelevant to the limited scope of this writ action — an action which, in any event, has long since been moot.

“Although the scope of civil discovery is broad, it is not limitless.” Calcor Space Facility, Inc. v.Superior Court, 53 Cal. App. 4th 216,223 (1997). Under Code of Civil Procedure section 2017.010, amatter is only discoverable if it is either “itself admissible in evidence or [if it] appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.” Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2017.10; Pacific Architects Collaborative v.State of California, 100Cal. App. 3d 110,127 (1979)(affirming trial court order denying discovery that was irrelevant); see also Calcor Space Facility, 53 Cal. App. 4th at 223 (third party deposition subpoena for documents is invalid where subpoena was overbroad and sought irrelevant information).

Petitioners cannot satisfy this most basic requirement.

Petitioners’ subpoena demands unrestricted access to all of President Obama’s “academic and housing records”at Occidental College. But Petitioners could never establish the relevance of any such documents to the subject matter of the case at hand. See Southern Pac. Co. v. Superior Court, 15Cal. 2d 206,209 (1940) (it is court’s task on such a motion “to examine the issues raised by the pleadings in the cause, and in light thereof to determine the apparent relevancy); CalcorSpace Facility, 53 Cal. App. 4th at 223 (propounding party”must be able to produce evidence from which a court may determine” whether documents sought are relevant) (emphasis in original).

The central issue in this lawsuit — putting aside the significant jurisdictional and timeliness questions — is whether any Respondent had a legal duty to demand proof of natural born citizenship from the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee. None of the documents sought by Petitioners could possibly assist in answering this question. Cf.Shaffer v.Superior Court, 33 Cal.App.4th 993,999-1003 (1995) (former law firm client who brought malpractice action against firm claiming unconscionable rates was not entitled to discovery regarding amount paid by law firm to contract staff attorney because such information is irrelevant to unconscionability claim).

The irrelevance of the documents sought is further underscored by the fact that this lawsuit is unquestionably moot. All three pending motions by Respondents seek to dismiss this action in large part because Secretary Bowen and the California Electors have long since completed their respective legal duties in connection with the November 2008 General Election in California. Secretary Bowen already placed the candidates’ names on the ballot and, of course, the November election has already taken place. The California Electors were certified by Secretary Bowen on December 1, 2008, and they met and cast their votes for President Obama and Vice President Biden on December 15,2008. The Governor of California certified those results and transmitted them to the President of the Senate on December 15,2008, and President Obama and Vice President Biden were sworn into office on or about January 20, 2009.

It is now far too late for a writ of mandate “barring Respondent Secretary of State … from both certifying to the Governor the names of the California Electors, [and] from transmitting to each presidential Elector a Certificate of Election, and it is likewise too late for a “writ barring Respondent California Electors from signing the Certificate of Vote.” (Pet. f 69.) Those are now completed acts. And there is nothing in President Obama’s “academic and housing records” from thirty years ago that could in any way aid Petitioners in reviving their case. Cf. TerminalsEquipment Co., Inc. v.City and County of San Francisco, 221 Cal. App. 3d 234, 247 (1990) (denying additional discovery following sustaining of defendant’s demurrer as irrelevant and stating that “if appellants were unable to state a viable cause of action on the basis of the facts already available to them, nothing in these disputed documents could do anything to change that”)

CONCLUSION

The records Petitioners seek are of no relevance to this moot litigation, and Petitioners failed, in any event, to properly serve the subpoena and notice. The subpoena directed to Occidental College should therefore be quashed. Alternatively, this Court should issue an order directing that the deposition of the custodian of records of Occidental College not take place.

DATED: February 11, 2009

STRUMWASSER & WOOCHER LLP
Michael J. Strumwasser
Fredric D. Woocher
Aimee Dudovitz

10940 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2000
Los Angeles, California 90024
Telephone:
(310)576-1233
Facsimile:
(310)319-0156

Attorneys for Respondents President Barack Obama, vice President Joe Biden, and the California Elector

Respondent moving parties do not, with this motion, exercise their rights under Code of Civil Procedure sections 1987.2, 2025.410, and 2025.420 to seek recompense for their reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs necessarily incurred in bringing this motion. However, Respondent moving may do so in the future if Petitioners continue to misuse the discovery process.

****

Keyes v Bowen: Explanation and Links
11-13 Keyes v Bowen: Petition for Writ of Mandate

1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Relevant text
1-15 Occidental College Subpoena: Official pdf

2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (text)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Notice of Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-11 Occidental College Subpoena: Motion to Quash (pdf)
2-20 Occidental College Subpoena: Discussion of Motion to Quash

2-24 Keyes: “Obama is a radical Communist!”

3-13 Scheduled Hearing

*3-13 Occidental College Subpoena: QUASHED

Jeff Skiles to throw Brewers’ Opening Day first pitch

February 23, 2009

Birds strike again – helicopter