“I Don’t Love Your Kid,” but I do love this article

Thank you Lorraine Devon Wilke for the best opinion article everrr. Reminds me of my post a while back about restaurants that ban kids.

We have found a mother of the year as well!

Well, we have found the perfect match for Overboard Dad. A young mom who tries to get her baby high. What a winner.

Here’s a portion of the article from Huffington Post:

Jessica Callaway, Arizona Mother, Blew Marijuana Smoke In Her Baby’s Mouth To Calm Her Down, Police Say

A 21-year-old mother was arrested by Gilbert, Az., Police on Saturday after she allegedly tried to calm her infant daughter by blowing marijuana smoke in the girl’s mouth.

Witness footage allegedly shows Jessica Callaway on Friday telling her 10-month-old to, “shut the f*** up before I kick you in the mouth,” as she repeatedly hits the baby to get her to stop crying, The Arizona Republic reported.

Callaway, whose Facebook page is “loaded with postings about pot and parties,” according to ABC-15, told police that she was frustrated because she was “having trouble finding an outfit to wear out that night.”

As if that didn’t make you want to get to know Ms. Callaway to begin with, check out her picture. What a hottie.

I sincerely hope her baby finds a new home with someone much better than this clown this gothic weirdo this young woman. It sickens me that people like this can have children.

On a lighter note, who wants to bet that Nancy Grace on HLN will nickname this idiot “Pot Mom?” She doesn’t have “Tot Mom” to talk about anymore, so I bet she’s pumped.

?!

U.S. newborn death rate tied with Qatar.

And the award to best father goes to…

Yesterday I heard about this story on the news and was abolsutely appalled. This man, Sloan Briles, supposedly got drunk on a sightseeing cruise and, when he got in an argument with his girlfriend and his 7-year-old started crying, he threw his son overboard. This is after several witnesses also said he was repeatedly hitting his son as well.

 Here is a portion of the story, as told by the Huffington Post:

Sheriff’s spokesman Jim Amormino said Briles, 35, was on the tour with his girlfriend and two sons from a previous marriage. Amormino said they got into an argument and Briles threatened to toss the boy into the water if he didn’t stop crying.

Staff members on the 42-foot boat said Briles told the boy he needed to toughen up then threw him into the water five feet below, said Charlie Maas, who oversees the tour company.

The result:

Briles was taken into custody for child endangerment and resisting arrest. He denied witnesses’ accounts that the boy was crying and said he had never hit his son.

His girlfriend told the New York Daily News that he was only “roughhousing” with his son as he often does and regretted his “stupid” judgment.

Read the article if you’d like, but you can actually watch this loser try to defend his actions in this video. Hopefully his children will stay with their mother and not have to endure any more abuse from this lunatic.

Because it’s Wednesday…

…and I need something entertaining to read at my desk.

 

Thanks USAtoday.com.

DWTS: spreading the hate?

Ok, so I don’t watch Dancing with the Stars. Maybe if I’m on the elliptical and nothing else is on. It can be entertaining, but it’s not really a show I want to tune into regularly. That being said, I can’t deny that I’ve been kind of enthralled with it during these last couple of days. Yes, I know, this season hasn’t even started yet. However, ABC just announced the participants and it seems that all hell has broken loose as a result.

Why? Because Cher’s son Chaz is a contestant. Chaz was born as Chastity — a girl — but underwent a sex change and is now legally a male. He will be be paired with Lacey Schwimmer, a female. This is making conservative heads explode (to use a recent Dick Cheney-ism).

The ABC Dancing with the Stars website has a comments section, which I was sad to see included some very not-nice comments. Examples:

These people are so nice. I really encourage them to go out for a walk, get some fresh air, and chill out. It’ll allll be okay.

Time for my view:

If you are sooo upset that you cannot watch the show, then guess what? You don’t have to watch it. It’s that simple.

But you cannot say that this is a “family friendly” show that has suddenly turned inappropriate. To begin with, there is all kind of dance (some of it a bit risque) and teeny-tiny costumes that leave little to the imagination. And now you say that you cannot let your kids watch the show because of a transgendered person — but you’re completely okay with them watching some of the past celebrity dancers?

Pamela Anderson — did you explain to your kids why she is famous? I’m sure she’s a much better role model for your little ones. And while we’re on the topic of people who posed nude and had leaked sex tapes, how about Kendra Wilkinson? Holly Madison? How about Audrina from The Hills (such a celebrity)? She had leaked nude photos.

Oh, and we can’t forget Bristol Palin (my total BFF). Conservatives love her and seem to turn a blind eye to the fact that she accidentally got pregnant in high school, has already had plastic surgery, and is a relentless fame-seeker like her mother (reality TV show, tell-all book?). I’d much rather have my kids watch her on TV than a transgendered person (gasp!).

Oh, and PS: it’s Dancing with the Stars. Just to remind you. It’s reality television. Get over it.

If you can’t already see what my views are, just read my favorite post on the ABC site:

Illinois = #massivefail

Chicago Tribune posted this lovely article the other day. All I can say is wow. I know people are pretty dumb, but I didn’t realize just how dumb. I mean, just look at the title of the article:

Sex offenders paid to baby-sit.

More words of wisdom from Granderson

Good article from LZ Granderson on CNN.com, yet again…

Huntsman, best candidate for a third party

Grand Rapids, Michigan (CNN) — As a voter, aren’t you tired of feeling as if you don’t really have a choice?

Primaries have an assortment of personalities to sort through early on, but at the end of the day, the general election often forces us into a this-or-that, the lesser-of-two-evils scenario.

Technically that scenario is still a choice, but I bet if you went to an all-you-can-eat buffet and they only served mashed potatoes and mashed potatoes with gravy, you would want your money back.

And when I look at some of the decisions President Obama has made, that’s exactly what I want, my money back.

But then I look at the field of Republican candidates and I just feel trapped, as our election process has become less about which candidate you prefer and more like which limb you want to cut off.

The only GOP candidate I find myself wanting to hear more from is Jon Huntsman, who, when I last checked, finished a hair below Lady Gaga and a handful of rocks in the latest Gallup poll.

“He’s a nice guy, but he’s out of his league,” said Bob List, a former Nevada governor and GOP strategist.

Is Huntsman a charismatic politician?

No.

But wow — a former governor who oversaw the biggest tax cut in his state’s history, maintained a surplus in the budget, speaks fluent Chinese and is a talented enough musician to play on stage with REO Speedwagon is deemed “out of his league.” But Rick Perry, the dude who got a “D” in economics and brags about creating more minimum wage jobs, many without benefits, than any other governor is not?

I don’t know what kind of league List is talking about, but it sounds nuts to me.

It’s those kinds of insider statements that have me reminiscing about the free-wheeling Ross Perot.

True, the 1992 independent candidate didn’t win. He finished third behind winner Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush. But man was he fun. He didn’t have to deal with the Lists in his party, and because of that, the nearly 20 million people who voted for him didn’t feel as trapped.

Think about it: Perot captured nearly 19% of the popular vote, more than 50% of them independents. This was at a time in which no one really paid attention to independent voters. But in 2008, independent voters were credited with being the difference makers, and today the big GOP question is whether a social conservative in the primary can appeal to moderates and independents in the general.

Huntsman’s showing a bit more personality now, and he is unveiling a jobs package ahead of Obama and Mitt Romney. But the reality is, it doesn’t matter. He effectively eliminated his chances of making conservatives swoon, and thus winning the GOP nomination, when he tweeted that he believes in evolution and global warming.

But in closing the GOP door, he opened the independent window. It would seem that if Huntsman is still serious about being the next president of the United States, then instead of trying to win over the social conservatives who never liked him anyway, he should reboot his campaign and run as an independent.

Let the Romneys and Perrys and Bachmanns slug it out and spend the next 16 months addressing voters who are not happy with Democrats or Republicans — which is likely to be a fairly high number considering only 39% of Americans approve of the job Obama’s doing and just 13% of them like Congress.

One of the reasons why Obama continues to be in a virtual tie in the polls with Perry and Romney isn’t because his economic policies are stellar, but because a lot of voters are concerned about the theocracy and overall influence of the tea party Republicans who have proven to be a group of folks not very interested in compromise.

Or science.

So even though independent voters may have questions about Obama’s ability to help the economy, and they may agree with some of the fiscal talking points of his opponents, when given the choice between him and, say, a candidate who wants to make abortions illegal, or discriminates against gays or Muslims, well he becomes a lot more appealing.

And that my friend, is the reason why the elections are technically a choice, but don’t feel like one.

When voters are forced between what they believe is right for the country and their civil rights or the civil rights of others they’re not really weighing legislative options, they’re deciding which limb to cut off.

At least for a moment Perot brought another option. Even if you felt he wouldn’t win, at least he didn’t spend his entire campaign regurgitating partisan talking points or trying to prove himself to be the most conservative or progressive option. I’m not saying he was the best person for the job — and as I recall, he said some crazy stuff too — but he was there.

Like Perot I don’t know if Huntsman is the best person for the job, but what I do know is compare his on-the-job performance with the rest of field, and you will see he is not out of his league.

He’s just playing for the wrong team.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of LZ Granderson.

 

These kids need a reality check

No. Words.

Are these jokers serious?! Take a look at this article from the Chicago Tribune, which is about two kids suing their mother because they are complete spoiled brats claim she was a “bad mother.” I have highlighted the most outrageous portions of the story by making them bold. Sorry, I just had to.

‘Bad mothering’ lawsuit dismissed

August 28, 2011|By Steve Schmadeke | Tribune reporter

Raised in a $1.5 million Barrington Hills home by their attorney father, two grown children have spent the last two years pursuing a unique lawsuit against their mom for “bad mothering” damages allegedly caused when she failed to buy toys for one and sent another a birthday card he didn’t like.

The alleged offenses include failing to take her daughter to a car show, telling her then-7-year-old son to buckle his seat belt or she would contact police, “haggling” over the amount to spend on party dresses and calling her daughter at midnight to ask that she return home from celebrating homecoming.

Last week, when the court record stood about a foot tall, an Illinois appeals court dismissed the case, finding that none of the mother’s conduct was “extreme or outrageous.” To rule in favor of her children, the court found, “could potentially open the floodgates to subject family child rearing to … excessive judicial scrutiny and interference.”

In 2009, the children, represented by three attorneys including their father, Steven A. Miner, sued their mother, Kimberly Garrity. Steven II, now 23, and his sister Kathryn, now 20, sought more than $50,000 for “emotional distress.”

Miner and Garrity were married for a decade before she filed for divorce in 1995, records show.

Among the exhibits filed in the case is a birthday card Garrity sent her son, who in his lawsuit sought damages because the card was “inappropriate” and failed to include cash or a check. He also alleged she failed to send a card for years or, while he was in college, care packages.

On the front of the American Greetings card is a picture of tomatoes spread across a table that are indistinguishable except for one in the middle with craft-store googly eyes attached.

“Son I got you this Birthday card because it’s just like you … different from all the rest!” the card reads. On the inside Garrity wrote, “Have a great day! Love & Hugs, Mom xoxoxo.”

In court papers, Garrity’s attorney Shelley Smith said the “litany of childish complaints and ingratitude” in the lawsuit is nothing more than an attempt by Garrity’s ex-husband to “seek the ultimate revenge” of having her children accuse her of “being an inadequate mother.”

“It would be laughable that these children of privilege would sue their mother for emotional distress, if the consequences were not so deadly serious” for Garrity, Smith wrote. “There is no insurance for this claim, so (Garrity) must pay her legal fees, while (the children) have their father for free.”

Messages left for Smith were not returned. Steven A. Miner, reached by phone, did not comment. In court papers he said he only filed the lawsuit after much legal research and had tried to dissuade his children from bringing the case.

The Cook County judge who ruled on the case, Kathy Flanagan, declined to assess sanctions against Miner, but said the lawsuit amounted to nothing more than children “suing their mother for bad mothering.”

DePaul University law professor Bruce Ottley, who co-wrote a textbook on Illinois tort law, said courts have long carved out an exception to family members suing each other, barring any extreme conduct.

“If junior slips on the rug in the living room and sues mom or dad, that can’t happen,” Ottley said.

He said such emotional-distress damages are a way for the legal system to address situations — sexual harassment for instance — where there is no physical harm. But those bringing a case to court must prove the conduct was outrageous.

“The fact that it is such a high standard, it doesn’t succeed very often,” Ottley said.

In court filings, Garrity’s attorney writes that “she does still love” her children but found that they wanted “the benefits afforded by a family relationship, but none of the restraints.”

Steven A. Miner wrote that the case is no different from a patient suing a physician “for bad doctoring.”

The children “do not view their (lawsuit) as an attack on mothering, but rather on accountability,” he wrote. “Everyone makes mistakes, but … there must be accountability for actions. Parenting is no different.”

Garrity called the lawsuit nothing but harassment.

“Everything … shows that these children, orchestrated by their father, will stop at nothing to embarrass and financially harm their mother,” Smith wrote in a court filing. “In the process they have embarrassed themselves and left a public record blogged about on the Internet that will shadow their every future relationship.”

Wow. If that is “bad mothering,” I don’t know what you’d call the actions of the majority of US moms. I’m sure the rest of America would love to beat some sense into these brats live in a $1.5 million dollar home, but apparently that isn’t enough for little Steven and Kathryn. 

God forbid there is no check enclosed in a birthday card. You poor things, that must have just scarred you for life.

What a terrible mom – she called her kids to check up on them after they went out partying. I hate it when my mom acts like she loves me. 

And your mom tries to keep you safe by making you put a seatbelt on? What a monster. 

You didn’t get a care package from your mommy when you were away at college? Oh my GOD, what pansies. Buy your own toothepaste and towels and random dorm crap. Are you also mad that mommy didn’t feed and bathe you during those college years too? You poor things. No wonder you guys are so collosally screwed up.

And don’t even get me started about moms who try to instill good values in their kids and try to teach them about responsible financing. If my mom ever “haggled” with me over what I could spend with her money, there would be a huge problem. Who does she think she is?!

I would love to find out what these idiots are up to now. I’m assuming that they don’t work… I mean, if they can’t handle mommy’s house rules, then I don’t know how they would ever deal with having a boss. The two of them probably pow-wow with their brilliant lawyer/father, thinking of more ridiculous ways they can humiliate their mother ways to earn money. And hey, Mr. Miner — can you say bitter? It beats me why anyone would ever want to divorce you, but at some point you’re going to have to let it go.

I always thought that our culture of entitlement has gone way too far, but this is just ridiculous.

Aaaand some more brilliance…

This is another “experiment” by Oliver Darcy. Though I like the GPA redistribution video best, this one is also very good. Darcy essentially asks college students (who oppose cutting spending) if they would pay their share of the national debt. Again, their responses are priceless.

I think what I like best about these videos is that they get people thinking & they get people talking. Reframe some of our nation’s biggest problems and people see the solutions in a very different light.