Rest in Peace, Anna, may you find the happiness you have been seaking. ************************************************** 02-08-07, 03:46 PM mozart56 About 2 miles away from my house.At the Hard Rock casino of Hollywood. May she rest in peace. ************************************************** 02-08-07, 07:10 PM honilov May she rest in peace. ************************************************** 02-08-07, 08:17 PM Georgia85 A friend called with the news before it even hit the media wave...he heard it first hand from someone who saw the lifesaving attempt at the hotel. I didn't believe him and then I got my CNN alert 1/2 an hour later.
All I can say is I'm shocked and numb. That was one messed up woman who had a lot dumped on her. She lost the love of her life when her son died. She was named in the lawsuit against TrimSpa. She was being forced to get the paternity test done on her daughter by Feb 21. I think it was all to much for her and she snapped. It will be interesting to see what the autopsy report reveals. My guess will be drugs. Course my friend swears up and down Howard K Stern was behind her death as well as Daniel/s - he apparently was present at both events. ************************************************** 02-08-07, 09:04 PM GarColga My main concern is the effect this will have on Paris, Lindsay and Britney!
I also am numb. Numbed by having pointless stories about her pointless life all over the media for the last decade. ************************************************** 02-09-07, 05:34 AM Sherasi I am feeling compassion, fear, and regret for that baby of hers. That child will have a rough time dealing with all the attention over the next years. ************************************************** 02-09-07, 07:34 AM DorianGreyed After any paternity doubts about the daughter and the estate of Smith's last husband are settled, I think the girl will disappear from even the tabloids, unless of course she decides to become a person who is famous for being famous, like Paris Hilton. But that will have to wait until she is 13 or so. Roll Eyes ************************************************** 02-09-07, 12:03 PM juanruiz I agree with gar. She was the poster child for all the dysfunctional, self-obsessed "celebrities" that seem to haunt the airwaves, without whom, it appears, the media and many "fans" would be bereft of their daily fix. ************************************************** 02-12-07, 07:30 PM newnickname 'You know what would be really revolutionary in the world of breaking news, and news reporting in general? If, every time a soldier died in this illegal war we're mired in, the media would give them as much attention as they give so-called celebrities. If our media really supports the troops, their actions should show it. And if we really support the troops, we should demand that they do.
What if the media gave each military fatality the same attention they've given Smith? And what if they asked the following questions every single time someone died in this war? Questions like:
What took this person to war in the first place? On what grounds was he or she there? For what noble cause did they die?
The media will question at length if illegal drugs were found in a "reality" tv star's hotel room. And show video and photos of her methadone stocked refrigerator. But when it comes to a reality with far greater and crucial consequences to, arguably, all of humanity, they are mostly silent. They should be asking why faulty intelligence and manufactured reasons and ulterior motives were used to start an illegal war of aggression in a foreign land. They should be asking why this illegal war of aggression has been allowed to squander--and continues to do so daily--our military, its good men and women, our country's credibility, its ability to take care of business at home, its safety, and billions and billions and billions of our dollars.' commondreams.org ************************************************** 02-12-07, 07:43 PM clarebear I know that when she was 25 years old she married a 90 year old billionare for his money. She made him verbally agree to give her half of his money if he died. They were married for a year and he died. (surprise Roll Eyes) She was fighting his family in court for her half. I wonder what will happen to that case now. ************************************************** 02-13-07, 01:21 PM Scotty
quote: I also am numb. Numbed by having pointless stories about her pointless life all over the media for the last decade.
Ain't that the truth? ************************************************** 02-13-07, 06:37 PM FredPuli
quote: Originally posted by clarebear: She was fighting his family in court for her half. I wonder what will happen to that case now.
You need to ask? Smile ( There are lawyers involved !). The last action resulted in the Supreme Court reinstating her claim, in the sense that it said she could pursue it. Now she's gone, her child has the claim as the sole heir to her estate.The debt represented by the claim is part of the deceased's estate. And so we now have men lining up to claim that they are the child's father (five of them at the last count: make that six when I file my claim, which must be just as good as any of theirs, by the sound of it Big Grin ) It's really touching that so many men, out of the kindness of their hearts, are rushing to the aid of this poor, motherless, orphan baby.
One of the men claiming the paternity is the deceased's own lawyer. Perhaps he is motivated by a desire to cut down the legal bills. ************************************************** 02-13-07, 06:55 PM frankvan One possible solution to the paternity puzzle is this: Anna Nicole was impregnated with the frozen and stored sperm of her billionare late husband. I don't know where that rumor originated, or where I heard it, but where does that place the little orphan in the legal contest against the billionaire half-brother? The plot thickens. Roll Eyes ************************************************** 02-13-07, 06:58 PM clarebear I heard Dorian could be the father. You know, there was this one time at band camp... ************************************************** 02-13-07, 08:08 PM DorianGreyed Now that you mention it, Clare...I do seem to remember a big blonde oboe player who needed help with her embouchure. Of course, I was glad to help. ************************************************** 02-22-07, 04:35 PM mozart56 Anna Nicole Smith will be buried in the Bahamas with her son. Breaking news. ************************************************** 02-23-07, 12:50 AM SeattleRon I question my feelings about it. When someone dies it is always something to not take lightly. Everyone should show some respect regardless of who it is, because whoever died has people around them that are innocent, but will suffer. In this case a little baby, innocently thrown into this media circus. This whole thing is not what media should be about. I agree.
It's just how it is. I am not in anyway advocating the loss of our soldiers as a minor news story, but they die everyday.
It's not what sells, it's not what the people want. That is why they don't report about our soldiers, our brothers,sisters,mothers and fathers risking their lives over there. Even when they send reporters over there. It's all ratings.
Anna Nicole Smith, may she rest in peace, is nothing more to the media but a candydrop in the bucket for their sucess. and it's sad it had to be this way.....
The same for James Brown, after being dead since Christmas. Believe me, if that kind of stuff happened to me after I die, I would come back and haunt some people. It's sick and gross for people to argue over money. It is the most disgusting thing anybody can ever do. Somebody is dead, "oh lets fight over who gets the money." Thats screwed up. That IS SCREWED UP. ************************************************** 02-23-07, 10:27 AM Sherasi Arguing over money is bad enough.
To have a 3-ring circus over her BODY is just disgusting.
And the judge CRIED at the hearing!! How pathetic and contrived is that?!
And.. oh.. lets not forget about the fainting attorney! Good lord. ************************************************** 02-23-07, 01:49 PM SeattleRon Word Sher.....they have turned it into something so horrible. Let it be known, when I die, just forget me ok, don't even mention me at all. Just a simple cremation and a party with a lot of food. I don't care what you do with my ashes, just let me rest in peace for christ sake. ************************************************** 02-28-07, 09:54 AM newnickname Anna Nicole Smith died for your sins. ************************************************** 02-28-07, 10:32 AM DorianGreyed The link, Anna Nicole Smith died for your sins, was over the top, which is appropriate for an article about Smith, but, sadly, a reasonably accurate assessment. If what the article states as fact about Smith's life is actually fact, she was a far sicker person than many of us thought, assuming, of course, that we gave the matter any thought.
Has anyone given any thought to the idea that her daughter has a better chance at a normal life now than she did with her mother alive? ************************************************** 03-03-07, 10:10 AM babthrower I've given it some thought, DG, but when you consider the traits
-greed -absolutely no shame -willingness to fight publicly over a corpse to acquire the control of a fortune (and the associated little kiddie without whom they would not get the spoils.)
I have to conclude that her chances of a better life with any of them are slim to none.
Would that every little kid's dad were as keen to take over the nurturing role when the mother is unable; or even to help her out a little when she is able.
But no. Most little kiddies of single moms don't arouse the same surge of paternal love in the dads as this one does. Go figger. Frown ************************************************** 03-03-07, 10:39 AM DorianGreyed "Would that every little kid's dad were as keen to take over the nurturing role when the mother is unable; or even to help her out a little when she is able.
But no. Most little kiddies of single moms don't arouse the same surge of paternal love in the dads as this one does. Go figger."
I can't. I feel that raising my son was the single most important thing I have done in my life. It was the most rewarding and the most fun. (And a cute, bright little kid is also a babe magnet, even more so than a puppy! Big Grin) ************************************************** 03-03-07, 11:14 AM juanruiz
quote: Most little kiddies of single moms don't arouse the same surge of paternal love in the dads as this one does.
Anyone have statistics on the average age of fathers in out-of-wedlock situations? My bet is that they're pretty young and likely immature. This is not to defend them, quite the opposite. I just wouldn't expect the teens and early twenties set in this me-first society to give much of a damn about their spawn. ************************************************** 03-03-07, 11:41 AM Sarai
quote: Originally posted by Babthrower: But no. Most little kiddies of single moms don't arouse the same surge of paternal love in the dads as this one does. Go figger.
I strongly disagree with this comment. It is an unfair stereotype of fathers, and in my experience, it isn't true.
I am a stepmother and part of a community of stepmothers, and I have seen first hand how hard many mothers make it for their ex-husbands to be part of their children's lives. Since courts generally favor mothers, mothers have the power to make visitiation into a tool for control over her ex-husband's life. Since no one can continue to live as an ex wants for life and maintain any sense of happiness, eventually fathers in such situations will break the mother's rules (by, say, dating someone new or getting remarried) and then find himself in a custody battle. Some men face constant custody battles as the "rules" change constantly, until eventually they give up. Then these mothers turn and play the "poor me, I'm a single mom" role and tell their children lies about how their father doesn't want to see them. Sometimes she misuses the child support money. Sometimes she allows so little visitation that eventually the bond between father and child is broken. Court is costly and the emotional toll on everyone- including the children- is extremely high. Then society wonders why there are so many deadbeat dads.
My husband and I have a fairly decent relationship with my stepdaughter's mother. We are very involved in my stepdaughter's life, so don't get me wrong. But even my stepdaughter's mom has pulled some of these stunts, although in our case, thankfully, the've been minor enough that I've only had a small taste of what it's like to have this type of mother around - it's a terrible taste, even in small doses. It's horrible to have an ex try to dictate your life. If we had it in higher doses, I wonder how much we could take and still maintain our sense of sanity.
I can see why so many men run, realizing that this game is healthy for no one. The stories I've heard from other stepmoms would make your hair stand on end. Divorced mothers can be wicked, wicked women. And in the story of divorce and child custody cases, women are the ones in power, not men.
And yet in the end, it is always the father who is blamed when he realizes that fighting to see the child is causing nothing but pain to himself and his child.
I'm growing tired of the view of the single mom as a victim. Sometimes she is a victim, certainly. But sometimes she is a perpetrator who has victimized her own child and the child's father by making what should be a right (the right to see your children) a privilege that she "grants" her ex husband - a privilege that she can revoke at any time. This is a horrible head-game to play on any parent, and I can understand why so many fathers eventually decide the game is one they can't win. There is no doubt in my mind about that.
Sorry, I know this post is really off topic, since this post has nothing to do with Anna Nicole Smith. But I felt I had to speak up. Dads get a bad rap, and I don't think it is always deserved. ************************************************** 03-03-07, 11:47 AM DorianGreyed Speaking as a former stepfather, I have to agree with Sarai. I can't say most mothers become that way, nor can I say most fathers lose interest in their children, but the system is set up against the father. ************************************************** 03-03-07, 11:52 AM Sarai Right, DG. I don't mean that most mothers are that manipulative, or that most fathers run. I hope I didn't give that impression. My husband wouldn't run even if his ex-wife put a gun to his head, and I think most divorced fathers give their all to stay part of their child's life (and I think that most divorced moms are glad their child's father is still in their lives). But in the story of "deadbeat dads," I truly believe there is often another side to the story. ************************************************** 03-03-07, 02:17 PM babthrower As it happens, the five who claimed to be the biological fathers of Smith's daughter were all males. Oddly enough.
So my remark about thier rushing to claim responsibility was based on that. If anyone wants to turn this into a battle of the sexes, I will not take part. That was not my intent, and I will not dignify the accusation further by attempting to rebut it.
It's possible that American natural parents are quite unlike their Canadian counterparts, but I doubt it.
Here a new law has been passed to expose those natural non-custodial parents who simply refuse to pay any money at all toward the support of their natural children. All the screams of protest I have seen so far are from non-custodial fathers.
That mothers usually have the children is not because the courts always favor the mothers (although they do when the children are aged 7 or under). And it is not because women are naturally better parents that they get custody; it is because the separating parents usually do it that way. The dads are not accustomed to thinking of themselves as the primary care givers. The moms are. So it is usually the mothers who have the children with them after a separation, and to whom child support would be payable.
So I'm not talking about custody issues here. That can cut both ways.
I'm talking about uncontested custody separations/divorces where the non-custodial parent refuses to pay child support, or evades it by deceit.
And it is usually mothers who are seeking child support when the non-custodial parent refuses to pay. There are more custodial mothers than custodial fathers.
If you watch Judge Judy (who has little sympathy with parents of either sex who evade paying support)the excuses are really amazing:
Parent: "I've bought diapers and stuff. I buy clothes sometimes. Why should I pay child support?" JJ: "Show me proof of what you've spent on diapers and clothes for your children in the past year." Parent: "I didn't keep the receipts."
Parent: "She bought herself a new coat. That's what she did with the child support money I gave her. That's why I didn't pay her any more child support." JJ: "How do you know she used the money you gave her for the children, and not the money she earned from her job to pay for the coat?" Parent: "She bought it right after I gave her the cheque."
JJ: "Why didn't you pay your husband child support when he was looking after the children?" Parent: "He's the husband. He's supposed to support the children."
Fathers have been known (I knew one personally, I worked with him) who, when the children's mother gets a male friend, immediately cease all child support payments. The one I knew justified it this way: "Let him pay for the kids. I've been paying through the nose for years, and he's rich." "Paying through the nose " was $25.00 per month per child. "For years" was when his ex could catch up with him, which was seldom. "Rich" meant that the boyfriend had a steady job and drove a nice car. Luckily she had a pretty good job, so the children did not do without the basics. I got involved when he asked me to write a false statement about what his earnings were so he could avoid paying the $75 a month for his three kids. He told me he did get his doctor to give him a false statement about the expensive prescription drugs he needed each month. He sure gloated over that one - he didn't use any prescriptions on a regular basis. But I refused.
But I shouldn't be giving anecdotal evidence - it's not worth much.
Really rich people have been able to move out of Canada to avoid paying child support.
Here's a case. ************************************************** 03-03-07, 03:40 PM Sarai
quote: Originally posted by babthrower: As it happens, the five who claimed to be the biological fathers of Smith's daughter were all males. Oddly enough.
So my remark about thier rushing to claim responsibility was based on that. If anyone wants to turn this into a battle of the sexes, I will not take part. That was not my intent, and I will not dignify the accusation further by attempting to rebut it.
Your exact words were, "Would that every little kid's dad were as keen to take over the nurturing role when the mother is unable; or even to help her out a little when she is able. Most little kiddies of single moms don't arouse the same surge of paternal love in the dads as this one does. Go figger." In other words, you hinted that dads often are unwilling to take on the nurturing role, and you clearly stated that most fathers in divorce situations are not as loving as these 5 men (and I think we'd all agree that these 5 men are not necessarily paragons of parental love). I think that statement sounded totally unfair and anti-father, personally. Perhaps that wasn't your intention, but I think that if you give it some thought, you'll see how one might get that impression from what you wrote. Most fathers love their children very much- and that includes fathers in divorced families.
Most divorced fathers do pay child support. Most divorced fathers see their children on a regular basis.
None of the things you have since quoted prove your original statement that most divorced fathers are less concerned about their children than Anna Nicole Smith's lovers are.
quote: That mothers usually have the children is not because the courts always favor the mothers (although they do when the children are aged 7 or under). And it is not because women are naturally better parents that they get custody; it is because the separating parents usually do it that way. The dads are not accustomed to thinking of themselves as the primary care givers. The moms are.
I disagree. My husband wanted to fight for custody of his daughter, but his lawyer advised him not to because he would lose unless he could prove that her mother was totally unfit to parent (a drug addict or something equally horrible). I suspect this is often what men are advised. So it is usually the mothers who have the children with them after a separation, and to whom child support would be payable.
In addition, the majority of men who are ordered to pay child support do so. In fact, a higher percentage of non-custodial fathers pay child support than non-custodial mothers. Non-custodial mothers are much more likely to become "deadbeat moms" than non-custodial fathers - probably because mothers who are denied custody have already demonstrated a tremendous lack of parenting ability, since a woman will rarely lose a custody battle unless she has a very serious problem.
I agree with your wish that "every little kid's dad were as keen to take over the nurturing role when the mother is unable; or even to help her out a little when she is able." However, I would add that most little kids dad's are quite keen to take over the nurturing role when the mother is unable and to help her out when she is able. After all, you don't often hear of a mother dying and the father just not raising the kids. If the mother dies, the father almost always takes custody, even if the parents were divorced.
Most little kiddies of divorced moms do, in fact, have a father who loves them very much.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: DorianGreyed,
Posts: 9086 | Location: PA, USA | Registered: 06-05-02
