Quote:
|
| Carl Cunningham Face it. She’s a gold-digging whore. And the only reason she finally got a judgment on her behalf was because she got a liberal California judge to over-rule the Texas case on her behalf. It will never hold up on appeal, though. This show needs to be a hit for her, if you know what I mean. |
Yeah…I can see there’s no sense in pegging you as a conservative, Carl. What a ludicrous idea.
ANYWAY…back to Anna Nicole Smith.
This is a stupid double-standard by our society. Women who go for the money are gold-digging whores, and the men fully aware of the specifics of this arrangement and who are the enablers…well, they’re just the “victims.”
BULLSHIT.
Under this criteria, most women are “gold-digging whores,” but they’re simply less ambitious than Anna Nicole Smith.
Of course, she did it for the money. Duh. He had no problem with that and their arrangement served each other’s needs. What the fuck is the problem?
As for her claims to his fortune after the fact, nobody but God, her, and the late tycoon know the deal, so why speculate? We’ll never know for sure. There’s no real evidence one way or the other. So why assume?
Quote:
|
| trippingbillie41: I managed to get through the first seven minutes before I felt the first tremors of my brain imploding. Was she in a drug-added haze or what? It was sad to the point of being annoying. |
That was how I saw this as well, it was almost uncomfortable to watch it was so sad, the phone call to her kid was just fucking strange, and he seems almost normal.
The Marshall family will never let her get a cent of that old man’s money. They’ll keep the thing in appeals court until she either gives up and excepts a considerably smaller payoff or she dies from an over dose of whatever she’s using that day or on the operating table during liposuction. I do feel sorry for her boy. It must have been bad enough to be the son of this notorious woman before, but now with the TV show everybody knows his mom is as well stupid as a fistful of dirt and has become the laughing stock of the country.
Quote:
|
| mikah912: Yeah…I can see there’s no sense in pegging you as a conservative, Carl. What a ludicrous idea. |
Because the liberal judges continue to make a mockery of our legal system pisses me off, I’m automatically a conservative on all issues? Come on, Micah. You’re not that shallow. On THIS particular issue, yes. By now, you should know that I flucuate from side to side (“right” to “left”, if you will) on a case by case basis. I consider myself to be pretty moderate on the whole. Sure, on certain issues I am definitely more conservative. However, I can tend to be quite liberal at times as well. This is bolstered by the fact that my more liberal family and friends see me as “conservative” (like you, with your friendly “Col Frank Fitz” jabs) while my truly conservative friends and family have often branded me a “pinko”.
Maybe I should indeed choose a “side” and stick with it, because I can’t win.
By the way, I was once registered to a party. It was Libertarian.
Quote:
|
| mikah912: Of course, she did it for the money. Duh. He had no problem with that and their arrangement served each other’s needs. What the fuck is the problem? |
Yes, they both got what they wanted out of the “deal” (though if the E! True Hollywood Story is to be believed, she got a hell of alot more out of it than he did because she supposedly constantly ignored and avoided him). But the problem comes when she tries to bilk the family out of his estate money after his death. Say what you will about “only her and God” knowing. Her only claim is that he told her that she could have the money… during a time when every medical practioner involved in the case says it was impossible for him to have had such a conversation, including the nurse that was in the room with them the entire time, except for all of 2 minutes when he must have “magically” made this verbal decree. ![]( "Roll Eyes (Sarcastic)")
And need I point out… again… that there are no legal documents that allow her to stake claim to the fortune (the only ones signed by him that even mention her are ones that state that she should not be awarded the fortune).
I know you like her, Micah. And that’s cool. But in this case you’d do better than blindly defend her. What she’s doing is criminal, in almost any book.
Verbs, I’m offended that you think she’s fat.
Just because someone isn’t a stick doesn’t mean that they’re fat. That ideal is far too prevalent in the media. When I was in high school, I knew some several girls who weren’t fat, but stocky. People avoided them, called them “big girls”, and made “where’s her dick?” jokes behind their back. It was very cruel, and I didn’t think they were fat at all, I found them very attractive.
Kate Winslet is another example. After Titanic hit, people (like Joan Rivers) would call her fat behind her back and apparently some hollywood types told her to lose weight. Kate Winslet is gorgeous as she is, and I think that’s why she does crap like Enigma because she became disgusted with Hollywood and their facist Lara Flynn Boyle philosophie and image style.
I know this is a complete turnaround from previous comments I have made regarding weight, but this is something that really pisses me off.
That being said, I wouldn’t get near Anna Nicole Smith if you paid me enough.
Well, maybe enough to buy AOL Time Warner…
Quote:
|
| Carl Cunningham: Because the liberal judges continue to make a mockery of our legal system pisses me off, I’m automatically a conservative on all issues? Come on, Micah. You’re not that shallow. |
Carl…how is it that this judge is liberal? Because he awarded her a “liberal” amount of money? What having to do with the dictionary definition of liberalism has anything to do with awarding a gold digger some money? That’s my point.
Quote:
|
| mikah912: Yes, they both got what they wanted out of the “deal” (though if the E! True Hollywood Story is to be believed, she got a hell of alot more out of it than he did because she supposedly constantly ignored and avoided him). But the problem comes when she tries to bilk the family out of his estate money after his death. Say what you will about “only her and God” knowing. Her only claim is that he told her that she could have the money… during a time when every medical practioner involved in the case says it was impossible for him to have had such a conversation, including the nurse that was in the room with them the entire time, except for all of 2 minutes when he must have “magically” made this verbal decree. :rolleyes And need I point out… again… that there are no legal documents that allow her to stake claim to the fortune (the only ones signed by him that even mention her are ones that state that she should not be awarded the fortune). |
Fine. The judge merely ruked that they were illegally blocking her from making inheritance claims, and by default, that means you get awarded the estate, since for the other party would only be obtaining it using illegal tactics.
The Texas judge ruled the same way just in the other direction. Why is he not liberal? There’s nothing in his will supporting EITHER side.
Quote:
|
| I know you like her, Micah. And that’s cool. But in this case you’d do better than blindly defend her. What she’s doing is criminal, in almost any book. |
"Is she a zonked-out, increasingly overweight, brain-frozen zombie who is merely a lesion on the skin of Hollywood?
Yup. Absolutely."
My love for her knows no bounds. ![]( "Roll Eyes (Sarcastic)")
I’m just saying there’s a ridiculous double standard here.
Quote:
|
| mikah912: Carl…how is it that this judge is liberal? Because he awarded her a “liberal” amount of money? What having to do with the dictionary definition of liberalism has anything to do with awarding a gold digger some money? That’s my point. |
Oh. My fault for not making this clearer. In the two news magazine documentaries I have seen on this case (one on E!, the other on CBS News’ 48 HOURS) the judge’s background was given in detail. Many anti-corporate decisions, a ton of jail sentence leniencies, time spent on the California state parole board letting convicted murders out earlier, etc. The usual M.O.
Quote:
My buddies and I have a term for women who are an easy lay with no pride (as opposed to an easy lay with pride) that term is is fuck-pig. If you do one it is called a pig-fuck.
Nasty as that is, it’s alot nicer than what came into my mind.
Anybody give any thought to the fact that the geezer and she actually may have loved one another and enjoyed each others company? She went off with Benjy Bronk on The Howard Stern show so she may really be into unappealing guys.
This bitch is dumb as a box of rocks.
She is in no way attractive-not anymore.
Why does she slur her words?
I second that pig fucking claim. She might get better looking all greased up.
I of course will be watching to see where this Darwinian Playground goes.
I have atoned, well, not atoned, but I have retracted previous statements made against fat people, and have apologized to the offended parties. That being said, I still consider my foot to be firmly planted within my mouth regarding that situation.
And with all the fat comments that some other people on these boards are making, I’m surprprised I’m the only one being taken to task.
That being said, I felt Verbal’s comments were out of line and I responded accordingly. Hey, at least I didn’t call him a Nazi or a fucksicle.
I don’t want to get in to this, but if you read the post eight ones up it clearly says that I am contrdicitoing my previous, WRONG, unfair position on matters of weight.
Rath, it’s certainly fair to call her fat after she was (I thought) a very attractive woman in Playboy.
Sure, I can understand that she gained weight because of having a child, but the truth is she deserves to be called fat because if you watched the show, she was literally ALWAYS eating when she was looking for her new house.
I will retract my statement, though, of calling her fat and replace it with overweight. Which she most certainly is.
Verbs, I respect you. You’re a cool guy.
I just thought you were sort of out of line.
I don’t think she looks overweight. She’s kind of tall.
Disgusting, yes, overweight, no.
LIke I said, I don’t want to make an argument out of it.
Moving on, how long have you been reading Playboy? I vaguly remember something about it when I was in the THIRD grade…way too young to be thinking about boobies.
Well, my Dad has always subscribed so I always sorta…sneaked peeks and stuff.
It’s not like I lived a sheltered childhood, though, so I was allowed to look at pics on the internet back in the old days when we first got AOL. Which was 5th grade or so.
LOS ANGELES (The Hollywood Reporter) — A former Playboy Playmate, a black poodle and a pink-haired assistant proved a powerful combination for E! Entertainment Television as the network’s “The Anna Nicole Show” premiered to record numbers Sunday.
The debut of the half-hour reality series, which chronicles the life of Anna Nicole Smith, her dog Sugar Pie and her entourage, posted a 5.5 overnight rating in Nielsen media Research’s 55 metered markets. If the numbers hold up when the final ratings are released today, “Anna Nicole” would rank as the highest-rated series premiere on basic cable.
For comparison, MTV’s breakout hit “The Osbournes,” which gave the E! executives the inspiration to do “Anna Nicole,” premiered to a 2.8 household rating in the spring. In June, USA Network’s “The Dead Zone” logged a 4.7 household rating, the highest ever for a drama series debut on basic cable.
The 5.5 rating for “Anna Nicole” is the highest ever for an E! show, including the cable channel’s trademark pre-Oscar coverage. It also dramatically improved E!'s performance in the Sunday 10-10:30 p.m. time period, where the cable network has averaged a 0.7 rating.
The show was most popular with Smith’s home Texas crowd, with Houston ranking as the top market with 9.7 rating. Los Angeles averaged an 8.7, while New York posted a 6.6.
I’m so sorry that I contributed to that share it received.
That said, i’m probably gonna be watching next week.