Jon and Kate Plus 8 Official Thread - Part 8

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Oops, no naked children were ever shown at Jodi's house. They did potty at her house behind a closed door with no cameramen in there with them.

anyway, is it ok to show pottying on tv no matter who does it? if it is bad for Jodi and Kevin then it's even worse for Kate. They are her children and she allowed all filming.

Actually it would be worse for Jodi--they are not their parents and then allowed filming the scene. Hmmmmm, guess they lost their discretion with that one.

 

[Dee77]

It's not illegal.

She can't be prevented it from doing it.

Got news for you--she's protected by the first amendment on that one.

Will the first amendment be there for her when all of her kids realize what she has put out there for everyone to see and read what she has in her books about them? As I have said before, Mady will be the first one to write a book and the rest will follow.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

There's a big difference between providing for your children and maintaining a very lavish lifestyle at the expense of the children's well-being. Does anyone here think that TLC will want a nice, normal non-drama format for either of the new shows? So with that said, I think that to bring in the ratings there will be some element of controversy with the new shows and I believe that the kids well being will be compromised yet again.

There is a big difference, but in this country people are allowed to pursue their interests.

There is nothing inherently wrong persuing a career in television on her own.

It isn't against the law--even if you are divorced and have primary custody.

It doesn't require a jury of your peers to decide what you should do for a living. She has the freedom to choose her path.

It is unfortunate though that she can't do it with a clean slate. I'm a bit over hearing a rehashing of all her drama.

 

[kidshop]

They've already profited by giving scoops.

They are biased and are evil. None of their testimony should be valid unless seen first hand. If the judge needs to see what was on the air--he can see it himself. He doesn't need Kevin and Jodi to regurgitate what the rest of us have seen. That's not "testimony". That's a review of a tv show.

It is good for children in the entertainment industry that something is being done....

But Kevin and Jodi shouldn't be permitted to profit from it--and they will. And they suck.

Evil?! wow! There is someone evil in this mix and it isn't Jodi or Kevin. They testified to make a change for the future and other kids. I see the harm in unregulated reality for profit shows involving minors with no say. They are trying to change that! It needs to be changed and they are doing something powerful to achieve that end. What have Kate or Jon ever done to try to protect their kids? Put them on the front lawn; keep them from family; respect their privacy; sell them to the highest bidder; live a sham life to keep up the charade of a happy family? All for money.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Will the first amendment be there for her when all of her kids realize what she has put out there for everyone to see and read what she has in her books about them? As I have said before, Mady will be the first one to write a book and the rest will follow.

Yes it will...

Same as for the other sextuplet mom who bashes Kate but then publishes a book that includes the trials and tribulations of toilet training her 6.

Same as it is for any parent who writes about teh trials and tribulations of raising a child with disability.

Same as it is for any author writing a first person "truthful" account of their lives and the people in it.


Yes. Yes. Yes. It is the same no matter what!

You don't have to like it (And do not for one second presume that this is my approval and defense of Kate's decision!)---

But that is the first amendment in this country. We do not have the right to censor.

Had she been doing strictly interviews with photographs for the 6 years--then her brood wouldn't have been protected by any law regarding privacy or profitability.

If I want to write a story about my sister and her antics at age 2--I have the first amendment right to do so. She can sue me all she wants and what I may do might be socially inappropriate--but in the end, I am protected by law.

 

[Dee77]

Evil?! wow! There is someone evil in this mix and it isn't Jodi or Kevin. They testified to make a change for the future and other kids. I see the harm in unregulated reality for profit shows involving minors with no say. They are trying to change that! It needs to be changed and they are doing something powerful to achieve that end. What have Kate or Jon ever done to try to protect their kids? Put them on the front lawn; keep them from family; respect their privacy; sell them to the highest bidder; live a sham life to keep up the charade of a happy family? All for money.

 

[kidshop]

Actually it would be worse for Jodi--they are not their parents and then allowed filming the scene. Hmmmmm, guess they lost their discretion with that one.

Please keep your eye on the truth. No naked or semi naked children were ever shown at Jodi's house. All was behind closed doors.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Evil?! wow! There is someone evil in this mix and it isn't Jodi or Kevin. They testified to make a change for the future and other kids. I see the harm in unregulated reality for profit shows involving minors with no say. They are trying to change that! It needs to be changed and they are doing something powerful to achieve that end. What have Kate or Jon ever done to try to protect their kids? Put them on the front lawn; keep them from family; respect their privacy; sell them to the highest bidder; live a sham life to keep up the charade of a happy family? All for money.

No, they didn't. And we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Please keep your eye on the truth. No naked or semi naked children were ever shown at Jodi's house. All was behind closed doors.

I never claimed they were.

 

[Dee77]

But that is the first amendment in this country. We do not have the right to censor.

I am fully aware of the protections that the first amendment offers, my point was more about the fact that in about 10 years or so right when we think Kate is living a quiet life somewhere out of the spotlight, we'll be subjected to her ranting and raving about how her kids have now quit her too. It may actually happen sooner since she made it clear during the interviews yesterday that the twins are reading the latest book right now.

 

[MAKmom]

I am fully aware of the protections that the first amendment offers, my point was more about the fact that in about 10 years or so right when we think Kate is living a quiet life somewhere out of the spotlight, we'll be subjected to her ranting and raving about how her kids have now quit her too. It may actually happen sooner since she made it clear during the interviews yesterday that the twins are reading the latest book right now.

You are following her every move that is why you are subjected to her "ranting"

Lets face it... you like the rest of us are cyber stalking Kate her family. I'm a fan of Kate's but I do not understand if you hate her why follow her every move?

 

[Dee77]

You are following her every move that is why you are subjected to her "ranting"

Lets face it... you like the rest of us are cyber stalking Kate her family. I'm a fan of Kate's but I do not understand if you hate her why follow her every move?

She's on DWTS and the people quitting her was said on that show. I've been a fan of DWTS for too long to boycott it even though she's on. It also doesn't help that she's plastered herself all over every morning show and talk show at night either. I wouldn't be surprised if I turn on Mickey Mouse Clubhouse for my daughter and she's there too!

 

[madge]

But we don't know that they haven't put aside money for the kids either. They both said they did..although Jon did say they could use that money if they needed to. That is not good.

exactly. and Kate says in her book that she should have been paying more attention to their finances... I think the potential is there for not a lot of money set aside for the children.

Someone on this thread said earlier that that was part of the deal..that some of Jon's money has been put aside. I thought I also read that Jon's lawyer said that once that money was gone, Jon couldn't afford the support.


You can't get blood from a stone. Ask any of the single mom's still waiting for their support. Once his money and 15 minutes are up, I would be surprised if there was support given.

What Jon does to earn money remains to be seen .. I guess we won't know what will happen until the ties with TLC are finally severed and he can do whatever he calls work.

And while Kate claims to be like single working moms everywhere, she's the most prominent one there is. I have no doubt if/when Jon's non-payment of child support happens, we'll hear about it.

I don't think she is that stupid, to think she can earn enough to stay at home full time, but if she saves enough, perhaps she won't have to work long long hours to keep the kids and her going. I agree she doesn't think her 15 will be up soon..but I still hope she is really saving for their futures, in addition to the money they had to put aside from the actual show.

if she's saved and invested wisely, I don't know why she couldn't stay home. If we are to believe what we're told, the children have money set aside for their education ... which eases a significant worry. For the time being, there's significant child support. If being in the kitchen and baking cookies is Kate's #1 priority, then I believe she might be able to make it work. Kate knows how to be careful with money. With that said, I don't know what Kate's debt load is now with the house. That may make it difficult.

I have no idea..just that one snippet that day from Jon saying he was spending a lot of time with the kids, and the pictures from Easter with him at the house.

have any pics of Jon surfaced since Easter?

 

[DMRick]

Oops, no naked children were ever shown at Jodi's house. They did potty at her house behind a closed door with no cameramen in there with them.

anyway, is it ok to show pottying on tv no matter who does it? if it is bad for Jodi and Kevin then it's even worse for Kate. They are her children and she allowed all filming.

It said she allowed them to open the door while the child was on the pot. I don't think any child should be shown on the pot (and that goes for other shows that have shown that and shown them naked in the tub), but don't say how bad it is, if you opened the door to the camera's in your own house. If they thought it was that bad, Jodi should not have opened the door.

 

[DMRick]

If nothing else with all our bantering back and forth (and still we stay civil!) this thread has shown what most of us don't understand. That Kate is unbelieveably popular (and you can be popular even if you aren't liked). That if you like or hate, or are in between, everyone on this thread is following what she is doing. I mean big time. That means those with talk shows want to sign her up. They know they will get a following, and they don't care if the people watching like her or not. The advertisers only care that we will see their ads. And apparently we will. DWTS has never had such good ratings. Hey, maybe next year she'll be the gal doing the interviewing, since they know people will watch her, even if they don't like her.

So, those of you that want her off the air, I don't think it's going to happen anytime too soon. Those that hate or intensely dislike her, just like those of us who think she is doing OK, you are helping to keep her on.

And you are keeping me entertained while I work. So, even if Kate doesn't appreciate what you have to say about her, I do LOL. Good or bad.

 

[mhsjax]

Let me first say that I can't stand Kate, let me secondly state that I don't like Jon much better. Now, that being said, if Kevin and Jodi are so wrong, (and I personally don't believe that they are, but who knows for sure), Then why aren't her parents or any of her other sisters stepping up to defend her. And I don't want to hear the excuse that maybe they are remaining quiet because they don't want to be hounded by the paps. I can guarantee you that if Kate isn't wrong as Kevin, Jodi and a lot of other people believe, then someone in the family should speak up. To me this speak volumes. There is no way I would let some one in my family be attacked like this if they didn't do what they are being accused of.

 

[mhsjax]

No, they didn't. And we'll have to agree to disagree.

they indicated in their testimony that they wanted laws to protect future filming of any children.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I am fully aware of the protections that the first amendment offers, my point was more about the fact that in about 10 years or so right when we think Kate is living a quiet life somewhere out of the spotlight, we'll be subjected to her ranting and raving about how her kids have now quit her too. It may actually happen sooner since she made it clear during the interviews yesterday that the twins are reading the latest book right now.

Arguing the point that she shouldn't be allowed to do it then is ridiculous and so is the banter if you know what the 1st amendment allows.


As Dave Ramsey says--there is no law against stupid.

Her right to publish or do something has little to do with whether it was wise to actually do so.

We are only subject to her ranting and raving if we expose ourselves to her avenues of said ranting and raving. She cannot be blamed b/c you read about it or listened to it. That's on you.

 

[madge]

If nothing else with all our bantering back and forth (and still we stay civil!) this thread has shown what most of us don't understand. That Kate is unbelieveably popular (and you can be popular even if you aren't liked). That if you like or hate, or are in between, everyone on this thread is following what she is doing. I mean big time. That means those with talk shows want to sign her up. They know they will get a following, and they don't care if the people watching like her or not. The advertisers only care that we will see their ads. And apparently we will. DWTS has never had such good ratings. Hey, maybe next year she'll be the gal doing the interviewing, since they know people will watch her, even if they don't like her.

I don't watch a show if she's on. everything I know, I've gotten from this thread and the internet, so she's not getting a direct TV ratings boost from me! Us Weekly & People have, though

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

they indicated in their testimony that they wanted laws to protect future filming of any children.

Of course they did.

Pardon me if I don't jump up and down for joy at their hypocrisy.