I Don't Want TWO Babysitters!

Well, as California's budget woes continue on, at least the legislators are paying attention to the really important matters that will save the state from fiscal insolvency. Oh, wait. No, they're not. They're busy passing bills that, if enacted into law, will provide "protections" for babysitters. I s*** you not.

According to something called The Union, Assembly Bill 889, which is the brainchild of Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, D-umbass, San Francisco, will "...provide workers' compensation benefits, rest and meal breaks and paid vacation time" for babysitters, nannies, housekeepers and caregivers. Wait. What now?! "Under AB 889, household “employers” (aka “parents”) who hire a babysitter on a Friday night will be legally obligated to pay at least minimum wage to any sitter over the age of 18 (unless it is a family member), provide a substitute caregiver every two hours to cover rest and meal breaks, in addition to workers' compensation coverage, overtime pay, and a meticulously calculated timecard/paycheck."

Could someone please explain to me HOW this is supposed to work?! Let's say that I hire a babysitter for my fictional children (who are adorable angels, by the way). Let's say that I am going to be gone for six hours. It doesn't matter what I'm doing. (I don't do a lot normally, so really, I'm just glad to be out for a while.) Does that mean that I am going to have to hire TWO babysitters? One for the regular babysitting and one to man the fort while the other regular babysitter gets to "rest" and have a "meal break"? Has the person who authored this bill have any idea what babysitting actually entails?! There's not a lot of room for things OTHER than rest and eating. Especially after my adorable fictional children go to bed! They're sleeping! And they never get up for water or anything like that. The babysitter doesn't need to REST! And what is this about workers' comp? How does that work? Do I have to take it out of their pay? What do I do with it afterward? Who do they file a claim with (if they dare)? Then what?! Have I mentioned that they're a freaking babysitter?! I have? GOOD!


This is one of the more asinine things that I have heard recently. And believe me, there's stupidity flying around this state like you would not believe. And of course, the bill has already flown straight through the Assembly and is working its way through the state Senate. (I should mention that the bill has made it as far as it has without ANY support from ANY Republicans. That's the problem with having a state with only one party in power. They get to do all of the stupid crap that they want to and there isn't anything to other party can do about it because there aren't enough of them.) It's only a matter of time before it ends up on Governor Moonbeam's desk for his signature to enact it into law. And then I'm sure that someone will already be hard at work on the next asinine thing that they think needs to be monitored and controlled by the state. Just wait for it. It will come. Sooner than I'd like.

Sphere: Related Content

Missing: Toothless, Tattooed Toddler

It's a Christmas miracle! Well, not really. But that sounded a whole lot better than "It's Christmas time stupidity!" Since I know that the folks who are reading this aren't morons, here's a little tip for them to pass along to people that they know who are morons. We all know some. I'll even phrase it as if the moron is right in front of me. "Moron, sit down. Now, listen Moron, if you ever come up with an idea that involves deceit....what's that? What does 'deceit' mean? Oh, right. You're a moron. Sorry, I'll try to keep the vocabulary down. Moron, if you ever think of an idea that involves tricking other people and you think that you can pull it off because you're just soooo smart, please don't. Just don't. You might think you have a foolproof plan there, Moron, and no one will be able to crack your code. But see, you're a moron. So if you think you're smarter than everyone else, well, you think so not because you actually are smarter than everyone else, but because you're a moron. So just forget about all of the trickery and try something else. Something less tricky."

Enter Florida! Christmas time idiocy was in full swing on Christmas. According to CBS 4 in Miami, whose report on this story could be interpreted as its own form of idiocy as well, the parents of a six-month old child (who was last seen by them with his nanny on December 23rd) reported said child missing on the 24th of December. The woman, Meagan McCormick, said that she last saw her child, a one Riley Archer Buchness, on the 23rd when the child was being cared for by the nanny. The nanny, who had babysat for McCormick for several months and was deemed "responsible" by her, is a woman named Camille who, according to McCormick, "is about 20 to 30 years old with an unknown last name and speaks with a heavy French accent. She is a white, 5 feet 5 inches tall, 130 pounds, very long brown hair, brown eyes, and a gap between her teeth." Uh-huh. Oh, did I mention that she knew what street the "nanny" lived on, but had never been to her house? Yeah, that's what was said. Do you see where this is going? Maybe. Maybe not.

The child was described as being "...about a foot tall, white...wearing a white onesie with blue jeans. His hair is in a mohawk style, he has one tooth, and a fake tattoo on his left arm of an anchor." Uh-huh. He sounds kind of like a trailer park, midget version of Popeye. A foot tall? Twelve inches? That's IT?! How did this farce make the news in the first place?! The average length of a human when it's finally forcibly expelled out of the uterus of the female host is between 17 and 22 inches. This kid was supposed to be six months old and was a towering twelve inches? Why, yes! Of course he was! (By the way, is it just assumed that everyone, including myself, is going to know what in the hell a "onesie" is? Because I have no clue. None. If it's some sort of one piece outfit that babies wear, then tell me that! They don't have to go getting all "cutsie" on us and calling it a "onesie". After all, we're NOT the child. You can give it a more grown up (or common) name and we'll catch on!) If the picture that was circulated is any indication, he's also armless as well! Behold!

Now, so far we have a nanny without a last name, that lives on a street (that much has been determined) and "for months" has babysat this woman's six-month old, twelve inch tall, mohawk sporting, nearly toothless child with a fake anchor tattoo. Had the woman practiced this story out loud before she told it to the cops, she might, just might have heard how ridiculous it sounded and thought of something else. But she didn't. Fortunately, with a story that whack-a-doo, it didn't take long for the cops to figure out she was lying. I know! What a shocker!

So what was her motive? Well, fortunately (for once, it seems) she didn't kill the kid. That's because (wait for it......) there never was a kid. Correct. She made the whole thing up. Oh, she was pregnant at one time, but she miscarried. The problem was when she told her estranged boyfriend, who was living up in Boston, that she had the baby and all was fine in La La Land! Basically, they had broken up and he wanted the relationship to stay that way. She, on the other hand, didn't like that very much and figured that a baby would lure him back. What an ingenious plan! Once that he's back, then all you have to do is get yourself a baby! It's brilliant! Oh, wait. No it isn't. Where was she planning on getting a baby, you ask? Well her plan "....was to stall Buchness (he'd be the Dad) until she could adopt a little boy and pass him off as their son." Of course! The ol' adoption/fake-out/switcher-oo/ruse plan. I should have guessed!

McCormick "...went through great lengths to make her story believable, buying baby clothes and sending herself text messages from a second phone, pretending to be the kidnapping nanny." OK, look, there are a whole lot of different kinds of crazy out there and crazy over a failed relationship is just one of them. But when you start wandering over into the delusional world creating kind of crazy and then start dabbling in the inventing of small (very small) children and kidnapping caretakers, that's an entirely different kind of crazy. That's the kind of crazy that, even though I'm sure the guy is at least a little upset that this child that he thought was his for the last six months never existed, the guy should be relieved that he actually did NOT make another human being with this woman. Please don't be mad, sir. Just be relieved that, for now, the chain of crazy stops.

She's been arrested on a misdemeanor charge of filing a false police report and is being held at the Miami-Dade County Jail. One could hope that she is getting a bit of psychiatric help, but I'm going to guess that she is not. I'm going to guess that she's just sitting there in her cell and that's unfortunate. Although she said that her plan was to adopt a kid before anyone caught on to her scheme, let's think about what she would have done if she couldn't adopt a kid. I can't see that stealing someone else's child would be out of the realm of possibilities for this woman. Whenever she goes before a judge, if the judge has any sense and can see this for what it is, there will be some sort of psychiatric intervention as part of her sentence. Screw any fine and instead have her pay for all of the manpower that was spent on freaking Christmas Eve and Christmas Day looking for a child that never existed.

Yeah, this could have ended a whole lot worse than it did. Hopefully, with appropriate intervention, it won't get worse and there won't be a "next time". But unfortunately, this happened in Florida, so I'm not holding my breath.

Sphere: Related Content

Fey-lin and Other Celebrity Spawn

Well, here's one you don't hear about every day (I hope). I guess that would depend on how many people that you kind of don't really know all that well (personally, as opposed to physically) would be offering up their teenage daughter (whom you really do not know AT ALL) to babysit for your small child when you were having a hard time finding a babysitter. If you're Tina Fey, it happens to you when you're on the set of Saturday Night LIve to make a guest appearance and give your comedic portrayal of Vice Presidential candidate, Sarah Palin. Oh, and it actually IS Sarah Palin who made the offer.

Apparently, that week that Sarah Palin was on Saturday Night Live Tina Fey needed someone to babysit her daughter, Alice (What is it with 'Alice' popping up all over the place these days?!) and was having a difficult time finding someone to do so. (All of those folks over there and no one can watch the kid? Tina Fey didn't plan ahead? I don't get it.) Well, Eskimo Governor to the rescue!! Right before the show, Caribou Barbie there went up to Tina Fey and asked if Alice was still around and Fey told her that she had found a babysitter and that Alice had gone home. That's when Caribou Barbie says, "Oh, 'cause Bristol would have babysat!" Bristol being her 17-year old pregnant teenage daughter, of course.

Now, I don't know about you, but I'm no so sure how I'd feel about my Mom offering me up as the sacrificial babysitter for someone. Granted, it's Tina Fey (and if you knew my mother, you'd know that the chances of her ever even knowing someone remotely like Tina Fey, or even someone just named Tina, are slim to none) and that might make a difference, but it's hard to really know. Oh, AND it just happened to be Bristol's 18th birthday!

Fey told this lovely tale to Conan O'Brien on his show on October 28, the video of said tale is below.

Being volunteered to do something that your Mom thinks that you should do is one thing, but on your 18th birthday? Granted, being preggers and all that does put a bit of a damper on whatever festivities might have arose if she had not been preggers. (Then again, it was probably the festivities that did arise that caused all of the preggers in the first place.) I mean, come on! You've just turned eighteen, you're on the set of Saturday Night freakin' Live, you're NOT in Alaska and your Mom, who is running for Vice President of the United States, volunteers you tospend your time on the set babysitting for a toddler whose mother just happens to make a living mocking your own mother on national TV once a week! Sure! Happy birthday!

As I was looking unsuccessfully for more pictures of Tina Fey and her daughter (Nice job, Tina! Keep that kid out of the spotlight and give her a chance at normalcy. I can't argue with that.), I came across pictures of other celebrities and their legitimate or not spawn. I was amused.

Here we have Nicole Richie and Joel Madden and their daughter Harlow. It would appear that Nicole Richie is looking for pumpkins. It would appear that Joel Madden is thinking about breasts. What is it with the multiple sets of round objects together? The pumpkins. Her glasses. Even the kid is looking around for something breast-like.

Next is Katie Holmes and Suri Cruise. The child is adorable. And it's not her fault that she came into the being of Katie and her husband, L. Tom Hubbard. But does Katie really look like she's all that into the Mom thing? Had it not been for the camera taking the photo, it's highly likely she was about the shoo the child away. "Go on! Back! Back to the nanny!"

Now, doesn't the 55 year old Dennis Quaid look just thrilled to have a pair of young twins (Thomas and Zoe) to raise? The man looks as if he could not be more angry at his fertile, fertile bride there. He has the look of "I can't believe I'm doing this crap again at my age! Stupid Viagara."

The caption on this photo read "Gwen Stefani's son Kingston Rossdale dresses as a skunk for trick or treating in Beverly Hills on Oct. 19." That explains the perplexed look on the boy's face, as no one actually HAD any candy on the 19th as they were 12 days early for Halloween.

Next, Gwyneth Paltrow goes for a walk with her son Moses Martin while they are in London. She was apparently afraid of he might stumble into the high seas and made sure that he wore a jacket that doubles as a life preserver just as a safety precaution.

This is Selma Hayek and her child, Valentina. Perhaps she should hang out with Katie Holmes, as she too seems ill-prepared and in a bit of shock at the notion of raising a child. To her credit, she does seem overly prepared to breast feed.

Of course, what list of celebrities and their spawn would be complete without a picture of a celebrity and her International Collection of Children. Angelina Jolie, in her black, long, flowing dress and fly-eye sunglasses is seen inconscpicuously walking down the street with her three children of various ethnicities, oneof whom is wearing lime green Crocs. Good thing she has on those big sunglasses so that no one will be able to recognize her! It's only because of an extremely alert photographer who just happened to have his camera with him that this snapshot was possible.

Sphere: Related Content