Topic: News, politics and Activism
I will try to make this as short and to the point as possible as my blog entries seem to run a little long, but no promises.
Octo-Mom and her Brood:
I have avoided talking about this as there is entirely too much exposure to this insane woman's story as it is, but the latest news about the "Angel's in Waiting" fiasco has finally figuratively poked me enough that I finally had to give my opinion on this ridiculous situation.
1) Nadya Suleman has claimed that she never intended to get pregnant with eight babies.... and yet, she and her fertility doctor implanted an unethical number of embryos in her womb knowing that she had six children (two of them "special needs" children, and two of them young twins) already, no job/source of income, and living in a inadequately small home provided by her father.
That's not a mistake, that's a plan.
Ms. Suleman herself has admitted via one of the MANY video interviews she's done that before she got pregnant the disability she had been living off of (She had also been living off food stamps from the state of California and receiving benefits from Med-Cal) was about the expire in few short months. How do you support six children, two of them "special needs" children when there is no money coming in anymore? A gamble of having multiple births to gain the attention of the world and, more importantly, the world media doesn't seem like a bad plan when deals involving serious money will undoubtedly come rolling in.
2) Nadya Suleman claims that she is not depending on tax payer money to support herself or her children and that she is supporting her children completely on her own and added "I don't want to depend on tax payer's money". (Source: RadarOnline.com, Nadya Suleman's Video Diaries, Entry - Exclusive: Octo-Mom Defends "Angels" Firing: "They Were Toxic" at http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2009/03/exclusive-octo-mom-defends-angels-firing-they-were-toxic)
And yet.... there is still an active website (sanctioned by Nadya Suleman herself) at http://www.thenadyasulemanfamily.com that requests donations of money and items for the family. It even provides a paypal link so that you can donate directly.
So, if she is perfectly capable of providing for her children on her own, than why is she and those under her direction still asking for money and donations? Why are friends and associates of Dr. Phil furnishing her house and the nursery? Why are non-profit nursing organizations providing care instead of paid by the hour nannies?
Either she is a liar or a con artist... perhaps even both.
3) Nadya Suleman fired the "Angels in Waiting" (An non-profit group of nannies and nurses headed by Gloria Allred) who was providing round the clock care for her premature babies. In the wake, Nadya has callled them "toxic" and they have made allegations of neglect and tuberculosis exposure.
Wow.... who do you side with on that one? On one side you have Nadya Suleman, and on the other Gloria Allred? I mean, both are pretty much media whores with their eyes mostly on the prize of dollar signs than the ideals of right and wrong. So I choose not to have an opinion either way until a more respected/reliable person or agency can thoroughly investigate the matter.
In conclusion, you can't have your cake and eat it too. For her to cry crocodile tears and say she wishes and remains hopeful that the media frenzy will die down and her life will return to normal (whatever that once was) and yet regularly appear in a video diary of her life on RadarOnline.Com (which I am sure she is getting paid handsomely for) is hypocritical at best, detrimental and permanently damaging to her children at worst, and that's the real crime in all of this mess.
The effect that all of this publicity, all this "transparency" (which seems to be the latest buzz word) is going to have on the future of all of her children, not just the babies, is going to reap devastating results that will have their therapist's ears ringing for years. I guess taxpayers will foot the bill for that one too.
Ryan Moats Detained While Mother-In-Law Died In Hospital:
For those of you who don't care for sports, Ryan Moats is a back-up running back for the Houston Texans (NFL). Even some sports fans, because he is not a "starter", are probably unfamiliar with him aside from those following the recent news this month.
While en route to a hospital, in which Moats was speeding and ran a stop sign and a blinking red stop light while exhibiting his flashing hazard lights, Officer Robert Powell pursued Moats until he came to a stop and parked in the hospital parking lot.
Four people exited the vehicle; Ryan Moats, his wife, and two relatives, at which time Officer Powell allegedly drew his sidearm and commanded them to stop. Moats' wife then said "My mother is dying" and she and another female relative ignored a repeated command to stop and entered the hospital leaving Moats and a male relative of her's behind to deal with the situation.
Ryan Moats continually tried to explain to Officer Robert Powell that his mother-in-law was dying, who seemingly seemed indifferent to his situation and in fact talked over Moats several times. Over 16 minutes, of commands to "shut up", lectures, a discussion with a Plano police officer of past pursuits and nonsense not related to Moats being pulled over, more lectures he was finally allowed to enter the hospital at the added behest of a nurse who informed Powell that Moats mother-in-law had "coded" (Code Blue, patient dying) three times. She had, sadly, died before Moats was allowed to leave the parking lot. - Source: YouTube, Robert Powell Ryan Moats Dash Cam Video 1 & 2;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQFGzaYZV2A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syF2w0u5Bos
There are, without a doubt, going to be two distinct camps on this issue. Those that believe that Officer Powell was overzealous and lorded his power unnecessarily when he detained Ryan Moats, and those that believe that Officer Powell acted accordingly within the boundaries of police procedure.
I find myself kind of in the middle on this one, with my foot firmly planted on the side of Ryan Moats.
Lets start with Officer Robert Powell. He is parked off road somewhere watching for speeders/automobile law violators. A dark colored SUV with its hazard lights flashing comes speeding past, running two stops in the process. He pulls out in pursuit with sirens active.
Rather than stopping immediately, the vehicle continues on course. So Powell's adrenaline starts to pump as a result of emotions from both anger and fear. The question of "Is he going to run?" obviously had to have popped in his brain as he is a police officer and this kind of scenario is taught in the academy. So adrenaline and mind racing, he follows the vehicle into the parking lot where it comes to a stop, and four people immediately exit rather than remaining in the vehicle (which we are all taught to do). He too exits his vehicle, allegedly with weapon drawn and commands everyone to stop.
Now given that we see officers everyday who are shot and killed while during traffic stops, everything Officer Powell does to this point makes sense to me. The vehicle failed to pull over to the side and stop immediately when Officer Powell initiated his sirens, and when it finally did stop, four people immediately exited the vehicle. So there had to be some question in the officer's mind on what potential danger he was walking into.
This is where the logic ends however.
As soon as Ryan Moats, his wife, and two relatives exit the vehicle Mrs. Moats says very clearly, "My mother is dying" and it is obvious, well at least to me, that the emotions of all four seemed to verify this.
At that point, in my opinion, a light bulb should have gone off in Officer Powell's head (Flashing hazard lights, speeding towards a hospital parking lot... hmm this must be some kind of emergency). But, rather than pausing and taking in what Mrs. Moats was saying and looking around at where they all were standing, he dismisses her and in fact continues on in ranting about the "red and blues" (sirens).
This officer was so caught up in himself and his own emotions of anger that he didn't feel the pain and emotion of Moats or his family who had a loved one that lay dying, and he had over 16 minutes to calm down and figure that out once it was clear that there was no threat or danger.
Now for some arguments of comments I have seen posted all over the internet:
1) Powell should have realized it was an emergency when he saw the flashing hazard lights.
Flashing hazard lights do not mean "I am on the way to the hospital, please ignore my traffic violations" they simply are a warning to other drivers/vehicles to exercise caution when approaching. I seriously doubt Powell has ESP. There is no way he could know what the situation was. Moats was still speeding and, to the officer's perspective, driving recklessly since he had ignored stops. This was more than enough due cause for Powell to pull over Moats.
2) Moats and his family should not have immediately exited their vehicle.
This is true as far as procedure goes, however procedure rightfully takes a back seat when the clock is ticking and your main concern is to just get to the bedside of a loved one who is dying in order to share a few precious moments in just saying goodbye. If it had been me, I too would have jumped out of that SUV and been running for the hospital door, I think anyone would.
One more thing, and then I swear I'm done... no, really.
While browsing Google News about the Ryan Moats story I happened across and op-ed piece on the Bleacher Report website by "BHL" (Whoever that is, nice to know he stands behind his opinion enough to use his full name).
The title of the piece is called "Ryan Moats Saga an Unfortunate Reality: Police Are Guilty Until Proven Innocent" (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/146534-ryan-moats-saga-an-unfortunate-reality-police-are-guilty-until-proven-innocent)
In it he sort of moderately decries the public for accusations of brutality and generally condemning the actions of police officers. Sort of an attempt to shame those refusing "to see through things through the officer's eyes before passing judgment" yadada yadada. Feel free to check out the address above if you want to read the full piece.
It's his opinion, he has a right to have it (( shrugs)).
There was only a portion of it, that I really took issue with. Upon recalling a police chase he and co-workers watched on television in which officers threw two suspects to the ground at the end he said the following (his words):
"My jaw dropped. These two dirt bags just drove through traffic at over 90 miles per hour, nearly took the lives of many innocent bystanders all while disrespecting the authority of police in leading them on what seemed like an endless chase.
And the police should be "nice" and "gentle" to these jerks? Are you kidding me?
I'd be all for the officer pummeling someone in this scenario, and even shooting them. If you're willing to drive your vehicle at over 90 miles per hour, running away from the police, through public, you do not deserve to breathe another minute, let alone be treated "nicely" by the police."
Wow... nice to know that after figuratively waving his fist in the air about the lack of perspective in looking through the eyes of someone else, he has absolutely no problem judging the suspects to the point of sentencing them to death. Classic hypocrisy.
It is the job of the police officer to "protect and serve" the public (you me, and even the suspect) and to enforce the law, not to execute the law. It they had that power, we would exist in a "Police State" (a country that maintains repressive control over the people by means of police or secret police. See also Authoritarianism.) similar to Nazi Germany and the SS, rendering the judicial court system, the right to legal defense, and due process null and void.
We are guaranteed certain rights by the Constitution, one of the most important being the sixth amendment - Rights of Accused in Criminal Prosecution. It reads as follows:
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.
As one of our founding fathers, Benjamin Franklin, once said, "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Just something to think about.
Brightest Blessings.