Hey Damon,

Don’t know if you watch Love and Hip Hop ATL but the latest episode really bothered me. Recently, Kirk and Rasheeda, who have been married for 13 years, recently got pregnant unexpectedly. The couple were already having marital and financial problems and Kirk didn’t feel like it was a good time for them to have a child.

During the episode, Kirk asks Rasheeda to get an abortion and then tells her when she has the baby he’ll want a blood test.

So my question is, is it ever appropriate to ask your wife to have an abortion? Why or why not and how do you go about getting a blood test once the baby is born.

Asking About Abortion

Read the rest of this entry »

Image Source: Instagram.com

On any given Monday, the foolery I witness on “Love & Hip-Hop Atlanta” is mindless entertainment I can delete from my thoughts by 9:01. And then there are times when the situations get a little too real and you begin to really feel for the participants who you are reminded aren’t just characters, like Stevie J and Joseline, but people with real feelings.

Watching Kirk and Rasheeda’s interaction at her photo shoot during last night’s episode was infuriating, disappointing, and frankly, just plain sad. As Rasheeda sat explaining why she was doing a photo shoot before gaining a ton of pregnancy weight, it was baffling to hear her husband of 13 years refer to their unborn child as a “that,” insinuate she was cheating and demand a blood test, and then suggest that she “X that out the picture” — again the “that” being their unborn child. I’ve written before about the right I believe any unmarried man has to request a DNA test to prove a child is his, but when that demand comes from a spouse of many years who has no reason to doubt paternity other than his own conscious, the idea of it all is preposterous and reeks of mid-life crisis and new fame.

As if it wasn’t bad enough to allow himself to be seen on camera telling his wife to get an abortion, Kirk one-upped himself when Rasheeda told him he needs to be a supportive husband, and he retorted, “I don’t wanna be a husband right now, for what?” For what? Maybe because you are a husband, even if you don’t feel like it, and because, even though you’d like to deny it, your wife is pregnant and you will have a son or daughter within the next nine months. Is that not reason enough?

As is often the case with reality TV couples, the cameras can once again be chalked up as the outside culprit contributing to the breakdown of this relationship. No, I don’t believe Kirk was putting on for the cameras — although I wish that were the case — I think he’s gotten a taste of the shine that comes with being a reality TV star (because of his wife’s fame, mind you) and now he wants more. That’s why we see this man taking Instagram shots like the one above in t-shirts that say “almost single,” as if bragging about divorcing your pregnant wife is something to be proud of. Or we see other photos of him surrounded by women who are not his wife and being grabbed in areas one who is married shouldn’t be. He’s starting to believe his own hype and is willing to sacrifice his family just to make sure he lives out every 15 minutes of fame allotted to him.

The situation isn’t new. We all probably know a husband of a friend or relative who bailed when responsibilities increased at home because his career was suddenly soaring, or someone new was paying him a little mind. It’s the basic principle of the 80/20 rule. You sacrifice the 80% of your needs that are being fulfilled to get the 20% you never had before. After all, what man wouldn’t want to hang out poolside with a bunch of half-unclothed women when his wife is at home gaining weight carrying someone that is going to be a financial burden and additional responsibility? Well I can name one type of person who wouldn’t — a man of integrity.

So what’s Rasheeda to do? The obvious answer is she will go on and have her child and be the mother she should be, with or without Kirk’s support. But that’s the simple, cookie cutter response. What’s a woman really to do when she falls into single motherhood rather than chooses it? No, Rasheeda isn’t innocent in the breakdown of the couple’s marriage. We all witnessed her inability to properly communicate her wants and needs with her husband and their struggle to separate business from the personal last season, but there’s something very startling about being in a union where support from your partner in a time like this is expected, but isn’t given, and the adjustment period won’t be easy.

In post-production interviews, both Rasheeda and Kirk have been coy about the true state of their union, but unless Kirk comes to a point of valuing family over fame, I can’t say I expect a happy ending by the season 2 reunion. In the end though, I wouldn’t be surprised if Kirk was the one left more wounded than his potentially soon-to-be ex-wife.

Check out footage of Kirk and Rasheeda’s argument in the video below. What do you think about their situation?

Shutterstock

For some women, there is nothing they wouldn’t do for their man. Although love should be unconditional, many women feel the need to prove their love to a man, even if it means compromising their beliefs, safety or even their freedom to show them what a “down A$$ chick” they are. However, a man who truly loves you will never ask you to do anything you’re uncomfortable doing in order to prove your love to him.  Your love and devotion should simply be enough, and couples who share true love will never have to prove anything to each other. However, if your man begins a sentence with, “If you loved me, you’d…,” run because most likely, nothing good can come of it. Showing your love shouldn’t be shameful, painful, humiliating or illegal, and while you may think you’re assuaging his insecurities, you’re actually just allowing him to manipulate you. Think there is no limit to showing him how far you’ll go to prove your love? Think again. Here are 10 things no woman should do for a man, simply because he asks her to.

Shutterstock

As close and in love as you may be with your current partner, I think it’s safe to say there’s something your partner doesn’t know about you. While I believe that most couples should have little to no secrets between them, revealing too much or digging up the past that has no bearing on who you are today may be irrelevant, and cause unnecessary drama in your relationship. All couples are different, and if you feel your union is so strong that it can sustain anything that you divulge about yourself, then great! But if you don’t feel obligated to reveal everything there is to know about your life, here are a few things we feel you might be able to keep close to the vest…with a few caveats of course.

I have a confession. A confession that would make my sixth grade history teacher cringe. A confession that would probably  make black suffrage advocates shake their heads in dismay.  I almost drank the Kool-aid. I almost decided not to vote in the upcoming election. Hear me out.

Prior to news breaking alleging that many black pastors were advising their congregations to opt out of voting in this election, I hadn’t really put much thought into the candidate that I would be voting for. As a young adult and a student, it just seemed to me that President Obama had my best interests in mind and at heart, and that was who I had planned on voting for. However, my firm stance was shaken as I made my rounds one morning, scanning the web to see headline after headline implying that black pastors were advising their congregations not to vote in the upcoming election because of Obama’s advocacy for issues such as same-sex marriage and abortion. Apparently, deciding between Obama and Romney was like choosing between two evils. Call me naive, but I had never really even taken those factors into consideration. Yes, his stance on the subjects directly conflict with basic biblical principles; however, I never stopped to make the correlation between my presidential candidate of choice and my religious beliefs prior to reading these headlines.

But the more I thought about it, the more conflicted I felt. Would me deciding to go to the ballot box and vote for the Democratic party be a direct contradiction of my Christian beliefs? Yet the thought of voting for Mitt Romney made me absolutely sick to my stomach. Because I couldn’t find a peace of mind with either men at the time, I decided that I would do like the other Christians mentioned in those articles I found online–I had decided not to vote. I knew it wasn’t the best choice, but what was I to do? Considering how much Christians endorsed President Obama in the fist election, comparing him to Dr. King and all, compared to the way in which they are at odds with him now was like watching two parents fighting and being unsure of which side to choose. So, I made up my mind to do what most children would do when caught in the middle of two feuding parents. Stand there and do nothing.

All was well in the world again. I didn’t have to choose between my Christian upbringing and my political party of choice. “May the best man win,” I thought as I made myself comfortable, nestling in the gray area instead of choosing sides. That is until one day, while on Twitter, I came on across this image of a man hanging from a streetlight post with a sign on his chest that read: This N-Word voted. I felt hot tears well up in my eyes as everything I’d ever learned about the Civil Rights Movement and the fight for black suffrage came rushing back to my memory. I thought of all the people who lost their lives so that I could have the right to vote. In that moment I came to my senses. Voting is a responsibility and a privilege. No one ever said that choosing between presidential candidates would be easy, but blood was literally shed so that people like you and I could be able to vote and choose. Deciding not to participate in this presidential election is a cop out that I almost took. But I am so glad that I came to my senses. While deciding between presidential candidates in this current election is a hard decision, know that someone died just so that you would have the right to make that decision. I don’t know about you, but I know where I’ll be next Tuesday…

Jazmine Denise is a freelance writer living in New York. Follow her on Twitter @jazminedenise

All photos are courtesy of Shutterstock

Source: Shutterstock

“If I always remember, then I’ll never forget and make the same mistake twice.”

Elise*, 22, paused for a moment, staring at nothing and no one in particular as she recalled the moment she was having an abortion performed. While visiting family in New Jersey, she was introduced to a guy through her cousin. The two hung out a lot, resulting in them sleeping together.  She left New Jersey to return home to Maryland, before starting college in Miami, only to find that she was pregnant at 18 years old.

“I knew what I had to do. It wasn’t one of those things you think about more than once,” she says, with a heavy sigh. “I was scared, but there was no turning back, you just do it.  I was squirming at first, and the doctor told me, ‘If you squirm again I can’t take this out.’ I laid still and just beared with the pain as he sucked it out. When he was done, I watched him pour it down the drain.”

She opted to stay awake during the operation, in order to teach herself a lesson.

Elise’s story is not unfamiliar to many young women. According to Abortion.org, 50% of women obtaining abortions in the U.S. are younger than 25: women aged 20-24 obtain 33% of all abortions; teenagers obtain 17% and girls under 15 account for 1.2%.

Women’s rights has taken center stage in the current presidential election. And, with that, the controversial issue of abortion has become an incessant point of conversation.

While President Barack Obama fully supports a woman’s right to choose, his opponent does not. Softening his initial, aggressive stance, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said he would back laws in support of protecting life. Earlier in the presidential race, he said he wanted to cut funding for Planned Parenthood and appoint judges to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

When Elise had made her decision, she went to Planned Parenthood to have her abortion performed. The procedure cost around $300. Elise says Planned Parenthood is a good resource for those who need it, and even believes the abortion numbers would be higher if taken away.

“It’s not your decision,” says Elise, referring to the constant debate between politicians over a woman’s right to an abortion.  “If I had kept my child, I would not have been able to go to school, to better myself, and provide a life— and then I would have been a statistic. My parents would not have helped me, and then I would have been looking around—mad at the world, when it was my fault.

“They’re not the ones who are quick to be a statistic,” said Elise, about the Republican party’s stance on the issue.

According to The Alan Guttmacher Institute, the most common reasons women receive abortions are due to interference with school, work, not wanting to be a single parent and not being able to afford a child.

Though this happened years ago, there are times when Elise is reminded of her decision.

“Every now and then I get a baby killer text message or phone call,” she says in reference to the guy who impregnated her. He wanted her to keep the child, but offered no assistance in wanting to help raise their child.

She now takes birth control pills and whenever she is in a relationship, she always uses protection. As of now, she’s undecided about whether she wants children someday.

Elise resides in Maryland and is finishing her last year of college. She hopes to own her own event planning business in the future.

*Name has been changed.

Jasmine Berry is a senior majoring in journalism at St. John’s University. Follow her on twitter @signedjas and her blog.

Source: AP Images

From Alternet.org

By Tracy Weitz

Once again during last night’s townhall presidential debate, even as the important subject of birth control was raised multiple times, there was a complete omission of the critical issue of abortion from program.  Yes, it was raised during last week’s vice presidential debate.  Yet, while the moderator Martha Raddatz did a fantastic job with the overall debate, her framing of the abortion question—and the answers it prompted–were disappointing to anyone concerned about the future of abortion care in the U.S and the not-quite-yet-quaint constitutional notion of a separation between church and state.

Let’s begin with a critique of the question.  Reinforcing the idea that abortion is mainly a personal and religious issue, Ms. Raddatz asked how the candidate’s religious views have shaped their positions on abortion.  While potentially interesting at a forum on personal introspection or while playing Trivial Pursuit, this was a debate concerned with what either Vice President Joe Biden or Congressman Paul Ryan would do as the second most powerful officeholder in a country in which 1.2 million women have an abortion every year.  I personally don’t care whether they believe abortion is right, wrong, moral or immoral.  I care about what they intend to do as policy makers.  Interesting how only abortion, and not economic inequality, war and peace or other matters some relatively prominent Catholics (see: Pope) have talked about as important matters of faith weren’t—and almost never are—fit under the rubric of one’s personal faith.

The question that should have been asked was what policies the candidates support or oppose related to abortion.  How would they use the apparatus of the federal government to further restrict or expand access to abortion care?  Such an approach would have reminded the audience that while the decision to have an abortion is a personal one, how abortion care is financed, provided, and accessed are all public matters.

And if Ms. Raddatz wanted the question to focus on personal beliefs, she could have asked the candidates how they would treat a woman who told them she had had an abortion.  Such an approach would have reminded the candidates that what they are accountable for in their personal lives is the level of respect or judgment they display toward women who have abortions.  Abortion is not an abstract question about one’s philosophical beliefs, it is a real experience that is a part of many American women’s lives, and how the candidates intend to treat women who have abortions matters.

Then there were the responses.  Needless to say, Paul Ryan ‘s position on abortion is well expressed in the dozens of dangerously extreme laws he has supported to restrict access to any abortion, including a bill that allow hospitals to deny emergency abortion care necessary to save a woman’s life.  But he wasn’t asked to offer justifications for these Buchananesque social-policy ideas.  Instead, he was allowed to get away with the assertion that his personal religious beliefs could explain hisprior policy record on abortion.

Yet Ryan’s willingness to now support a policy platform that will allow some abortions to remain legal, in order to become the vice president, went unchallenged.  Why, Ms. Raddatz could have asked, when his future is at stake are compromises to his abortion position acceptable—but when women’s futures are at stake, are they not?  Further Ms. Raddatz could have asked whether Ryan believes that women who have abortions when it is illegal should be criminally prosecuted.  “So Congressman Ryan, how much time should women serve in lockup for having an abortion?”

Although Vice President Biden’s strongly affirmed that he cannot tell women what to do with their bodies, he offered no proactive support for women’s access to care.  He reinforced the idea that abortion exists because of Roe v. Wade and that the future of abortion resides with the next Supreme Court nominations.  But Roe v Wade is not the prevailing constitutional standard for abortion.  Rather that was set by the 1992Casey decision, which allows the government to regulate abortion as long as it doesn’t create an “undue burden” for women (a standard defined about as clearly as pornography or the Romney/Ryan “tax plan”).

It is because of Casey that women are forced to delay their abortions due to waiting periods and have to listen to scientifically unsupported information about the harms of abortion, and that clinics must adhere to physical plant requirements that do nothing to improve the safety of abortion and everything to increase the cost.  Biden stumbled in providing a simplistic answer to a complicated social issue.  Sorry Joe, support for the right to abortion is not enough; I want to know what you are going to do to improve the situation for the women who need and have abortions.   “So Vice President Biden, what are you going to do to expand access to abortion care for all women?”

It is time to ask politicians questions that will elicit differences beyond the simple milquetoast dichotomy that democrats “support a woman’s right to choose” and republicans “support life.”  Terrific, we already know that.  We need to know how they will treat women who actually have abortions and what they will do to reduce or expand access to abortion care.

Source: Washington Post

We’ve already talked about it. President Obama had an off night the other day during the first Presidential debate. Some claim he was tired or too focused on his anniversary. President Obama said that he was just too polite. Based on President Obama’s performance and Joe Biden’s penchant for being more outspoken than a little bit, we knew that this debate was going to be a very different story.  And this time we weren’t disappointed. From the opening minutes of the debate it was clear that Joe Biden did not come to play. We wanted to interact with our Facebook and Twitter followers during this debate. So here’s what they had to say throughout the night.

MN: Who is watching the debate? Vice President Joe Biden has already proven he’s going to be more forceful than President Obama. He’s just laughing at these jokers!

But one of our Facebook followers had an interesting viewpoint, saying that Joe Biden is able to speak candidly and aggressively because, unlike President Obama, he doesn’t have to worry about negative stereotypes being assigned to his performance.

This is very true and an interesting concept. As the president of the United States, do you think that President Obama is still living his life and running this country with the fear that unfair and racist stereotypes could cost him an election? It’s plausible but for his sake, I hope unlikely. I do honestly believe that it was an off night mixed with the fairness and diplomacy he’s tried to rule the country with.

If, for some reason you missed the debate here are some of the highlights we tweeted. Obviously, we’re President Obama supporters, so our tweets are a little skewed.

From jump Joe Biden came in attacking both Paul Ryan’s and Mitt Romney’s flip flopping and less than concrete plans.

Then when the moderator, Martha Raddatz asked about foreign policy, here’s the takeaway point Joe Biden made.

But don’t think that Joe was the only one making biting comments. Paul Ryan checked Vice President Biden with a quip no one could disagree with.

Woop! But Joe Biden wasn’t letting Paul Ryan get away with anything, he made sure to respond saying, “But I always say what I mean.” Then he had his own jab for Romney and Ryan. He made sure to mention the 47 percent and then hit him with this zinger.

Aside from Biden and Ryan we also noted that moderator Martha Raddatz was not having the same foolishness that Jim Lehrer suffered from in the first presidential debate. (Does anyone else feel sorry for Jim?) There were times when Paul Ryan was close to going over his allotted time and several times when Joe Biden was hellbent on interrupting anyone who was speaking. But for the most part Martha kept both candidates in check.

When the debate shifted to foreign policy the two Vice Presidential candidates spent a significant amount of time talking about the war in Afghanistan and the next moves.

Paul Ryan argued that he and Mitt Romney were not willing to commit to a 2014 pull out date because they didn’t know how stable the Afghan government would be without American assistance. But Biden was adamant about U.S. troops leaving to give Afghans a chance to rule their own country.

Joe Biden had a crunkness about him throughout a majority of the debate until it came to the social/moral issue of Catholicism and abortion. It would be hard for anyone to argue that Biden didn’t win on the argument of women’s rights.

Those were some of the highlights we noted. What other moments did you notice from the debates? Did you feel Biden was the clear winner or was it pretty much a draw?

More on Madame Noire!

• Well, You Don’t Say: 9 Celebrities, Ballers, Authors And Vixens You Might Not Have Known Were Virgin Islanders
• If At First You Don’t Like Him, Try Again?: Should You Give Him A Second Chance?
• Be Real With Yourself: Is Your Past Behavior Causing Your Own Trust Issues?
• Heyyyy Awkward Black Girl! Issa Rae Talks Next Moves and Explains How Her Mama Put A Stop To Her Michelle O Project
• Ask A Very Smart Brotha: Why Falling In Love Is A Choice (And Why I Hate Romantic Comedies)
• An Open Letter To Men Suffering From Light-Skinned, Long Hair Syndrome: I’m Not Flattered
• Contemplating The Heart: How I Came To Understand That His Love Was Not A Pure Love

Source: abcnewradaronline.com

Rape is rape. That should be the end of discussion but in the minds of some, there are distinctions to be made specifically when the rape victim has to answer the question of whether or not to terminate a pregnancy. When it comes to this issue, I beg to differ with Republicans, specifically Todd Akin.

Rep. Todd Akin, who, as I’m writing this post, is running to be the U.S. senator from the state of Missouri. The pro life Republican declared that he was against abortions even in the case of “legitimate rape.” The New York Times reported his comments from this past weekend:

Asked in an interview on a St. Louis television station about his views on abortion, Mr. Akin, a six-term member of Congress who is backed by Tea Party conservatives, made it clear that his opposition to the practice was nearly absolute, even in instances of rape.

“It seems to me, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare,” Mr. Akin said of pregnancies from rape. “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down. But let’s assume that maybe that didn’t work or something: I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be of the rapist, and not attacking the child.”

There were so many whiplashes incurred over that statement because it really leaves one’s head spinning. Akin placed such a great importance on the hypothetical life of the unborn child that he just insinuated that if a woman got pregnant, then she really wasn’t raped. He truly defied common sense and the most basic working knowledge of Sex Ed with his comments.

Akin must be from the school of thought that science should be taken out of education because his junk logic has already been debunked by doctors and the human body. If an egg and sperm collide, a woman becomes pregnant and that doesn’t become a casualty of a GOP talking point when they make their arguments against rape.  Statistics have also shown that and as Politico reported  “Rape-related pregnancy occurs with significant frequency.” Authors of a 1990s study concluded that one out of every 20 rapes results in pregnancy, for a total of more than 32,000 rape-pregnancies each year in the United States. A separate 2003 article in the journal Human Nature estimated that rapes are twice as likely to result in pregnancies as consensual sex.”

In his efforts to clean up his remarks, Akin stood still on the quicksand of his rationale by explaining that he only meant to refer to “forcible rape” and even invoked 9/11. His insistence on continuing to be a foot soldier in the GOP’s war against women and their desire to redefine rape, even in the face of his own fellow Republicans turning against him, is further proof that he is catering to the whims of ideology rather than just admitting you are an outlier to actual facts and simple compassion for those who have suffered violations against their bodies.

It’s not just that Akin and his ilk are missing sensitivity chips. The root issue is not only their defiance of biology but denying women the courtesy of being capable of making informed decisions about their own bodies. The sheer willful arrogance and ignorance that Akin and other individuals like him hold are being codified into law. These lawmakers are diminishing the impact of sexual assaults on the altar of proving who can care most about “life.” But as soon as the umbilical cord is cut, programs deemed to help unwed mothers are demonized as systematic socialism, proving that all this talk about being “pro-life” is just that. But I digress.

This country isn’t that far removed from a time when marital rape was not considered a crime because women were viewed as belonging to their husbands and sex on command was enshrined in the vows before God. There are people who still believe that rape only occurs when force is involved. It’s even more common for some to operate under the mindset that men can’t be victims of rape which is not true. It’s a false misnomer which has been rectified and recognized for the crime that it is, but we cannot afford to take leaps backwards in progress.

Akin and those who advocate on the behalf of “legitimate rape” and “forcible rape” aren’t making gaffes or misspeaking. These are convictions they hold dear to their core and only play innocent when the world reminds them that it’s 2012. It’s the 21^st century and women don’t just exist to breed like farm animals, take abuse silently or simply remain seen as our traumatic experiences are reduced to incendiary sound bites. They’re not sorry for trying to dilute the meaning of rape and should be held accountable.

Thankfully, there are still people of conscience, decency and a grasp of high school science that rightfully condemn making excuses, apologies or creating subcategories for rape. It’s rape. There are no two sides. It shouldn’t be up for debate. One does not need to phone a friend for the right answer. It’s wrong.

President Obama made it plain to the simple minded when he declared that rape is rape and there shouldn’t be any in between. Women shouldn’t be victimized twice by being placed into categories of “legitimate.” To be violated in a manner not of your choosing shouldn’t leave anyone searching the dictionary for qualifiers to put in front of the word rape. It is strong enough all on its own.

Stephanie Guerilus is a multimedia journalist and author. Follow her @qsteph

More on Madame Noire!

• Bet You Didn’t Know: Secrets Behind The Making of “Diary of a Mad Black Woman”
• Really, Though? Who Died And Made You An Authority On What’s “Real”?
• Thank You Rihanna For Being Open About Chris Brown, Even If Some People Still Don’t Get It
• How I Lost A Friendship To Domestic Violence
• Degrees of Separation: Where To Draw The Line In Dating People Who Know Each Other?
• Girlfriend Guilt: When You’re The Only One Still On Track
• I’m Gonna Call It Like I See It: Celebs With No Filter

Image: TheClassist.com

-Another day, another crazy political gaffe. Rep. Todd Akin (MO), who is currently running for a seat in the Senate, went on a St. Louis news program and said these words when asked whether he would support abortion in cases of rape: “It seems to me first of all, from what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down,” Akin said of a rape victim’s chances of becoming pregnant.” This man votes on things that become law!

After being flayed on Twitter and in the media, Rep. Akin, of course, issued a statement in which he says he “misspoke” and his statements didn’t reflect the “empathy” he really has rape victims. The GOP Presidential ticket isn’t taking any chances, however. The Romney/Paul campaign has already issued a statement of their own saying they don’t agree with Rep. Akin and “would not oppose abortion in instances of rape.” The Democrats weren’t wasting any time either. An email signed by the Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz hit inboxes early this morning, asserting that the “misstatement” is more evidence of the Republican assault on women’s health issues. His opponent, Sen. Claire McCaskill, said in a statement, “It is beyond comprehension that someone can be so ignorant about the emotional and physical trauma brought on by rape.”

-NBC announced about two dozen layoffs at The Tonight Show over the weekend. In addition, Jay Leno took a pay cut as NBC tries to bring down costs. He was making between $25 million and $30 million per year. Now he’s only making $20 million. Jay’s foremost concern is for the wonderful people who work with him at The Tonight Show. He did what was necessary to ensure their well-being.” said Leno’s spokesperson Bruce Bobbins. Gag.

-Wal-Mart’s layaway program was so successful last year, they’re bringing it back starting September 16. Small home appliances and sporting goods will be added to the list of toys and electronics that were available to the program last year. A down payment of $10 or 10 percent plus a $15 fee to open an account is required.

-With Facebook’s stock sinking like a stone, some are wondering aloud whether Mark Zuckerberg’s time as CEO of the now public company is running out. Many call the thought of that happening “absurd.” We agree.

-Sad Hollywood news this morning: Tony Scott, the director of films like Top Gun and a number of Denzel Washington movies like Man On Fire and Unstoppable jumped from a Los Angeles bridge to his death yesterday afternoon. The details from a suicide note found later that day have not been revealed. He just finished working on a Christian Bale movie called Out of the Furnace due out in March. His brother is also a famous filmmaker, Ridley Scott. He was 68 years old. *Update: Reports now say Scott had inoperable brain cancer. **Update: ABC News may have been wrong. Tony Scott’s family denies he had inoperable brain cancer. And the Los Angeles County coroner’s office says they won’t know anything until they complete their autopsy and other tests.