@ GuitarRobbie:  THAT was my question, as well.

@ Bozzz 123:  LOL.  I had never heard of her.  The article has "Rev." in front of her name. But I suppose there are some nutcase reverends, as well.

Holt ... You DIDN'T HAVE TO READ IT.   Yet, you did.  PLUS, you commented.  GO FIGURE!

"..... suit the audience"?  Haven't you heard?  Or, didn't you read?  Her 'show' BARELY HAS AN AUDIENCE.

"Pulled from prime time"?  LMAO!

@ nettcricket .... I TOTALLY AGREE!

This is appalling, actually; but it's not ALL on the man.  Those WOMEN share 99.999% of the blame.  He couldn't impregnate them if they didn't ALLOW HIM.  UNBELIEVABLE!

So, in the past three years (since his May court day ... for child support, probably), fathered NINE more children!  NINE KIDS IN THREE YEARS!  Even if some are twins, that is STILL too many for a man that want a government handout!

THIRTY KIDS???? And he want the STATE to help him support them? This is really getting old. WHAT SHOULD happen is he should be tried and convicted for child abuse. I mean, he had unprotected sex and fathered 30 kids? And the women that ALLOWED this .... this ..... this man to plant his seed should also be tried and con...more