BJean

I keep hearing people criticize the show and say that it's boring, the talent isn't good, etc. But it's one of the most watched shows on television and we're discussing it here. I don't think it is ready for the hatchet yet. Band Box Boy Blake reminded me of a young Sting last night. He has the kind of mouth that can have that rock star sneer too, like Billy Idol. He's very entertaining. Gina was really cool. Wasn't blown away by Melinda, and ya'll don't seem to have been either. Every Lakisha performance sounds a lot like the last. She's excellent, but I think she should just go get signed today and start performing and cutting records. Go for a movie or play or something. I like Chris but I think he just doesn't have enough self-confidence to get the job done. He could surprise us like the last American Idol did. So everybody agree that Haley's going to bite the dust tonight?

I too hope that ANS's mother doesn't get the opportunity to raise her granddaughter. She obviously made a mess of things with Anna Nicole. I'd bet that Larry B. is the father too. He has a good idea of the timing and all that. But I'm not so certain that he'd be a great parent. He's much more soft-spoken than anyone else in this case, but Anna Nicole went so far as to hook up with Stern legally and set a wedding date, perhaps to get Larry B. out of her life legally. She obviously was trying to distance herself from Larry. There has to be a reason. I know most people think that Stern was telling her what to do every step of the way. I think she was probably not the brightest bulb on the porch, but she was smart enough to marry the old man with the money, go through a bad legal battle and win, get an endorsement to do jeans commericals, and get a TV reality show. Some with the help of Stern, some without his help. I think if she didn't have good reason to rely on Stern, and distance herself from Larry, she wouldn't have done what she did. Lots of people have died from over-dieting, taking diet pills, and other very strong Vitamins, and wind up with heart failure. Lots of people die when they become ill after losing a spouse or child. She was in bad shape, physically and emotionally. It will be interesting to see how the dust settles around all the characters in her life. The poor girl. May she rest in peace.

I didn't accuse you, mouse, I think it was someone else who was complaining about all the news media being too far to the left. I completely agree with you, Mark. This is plum ridiculous, as my dear father used to say. I will relieve ya'll from having to work so hard at dissing the things I believe and you won't have to worry about me dissing you. I's like to suggest is that we all calm down and Visualize Whirrled Peas.

I didn't ever say that there weren't people who embrace the extreme right and people like Bill O'Reilly. Of course they have a strong, very vocal following. Someone complained that the media is too far left in their reporting. They were talking about the biggest portion of the MAINSTREAM media, I believe.

If you lived in Iraq there's a good chance you'd be dead by now.

Well it certainly explains her slurred speech and goosy behavior.

Not too surprising that anti-war discussions in the media make you very uncomfortable and unhappy. The ones you mention could only dominate the news just so long if they were wrong. Fact is they are getting more vocal and obvious about it and to the point that even the little ladies on the view are chiming in. They're not doing it because it is an unpopular subject. The protests against our participation in Viet Nam made lots of people uncomfortable too. But they were right!

Do you really think that is what some of us are saying? That we should turn the other cheek? That's exactly what we are NOT saying. The people who believe we are right in our actions in Iraq would never go for our using billions to help the Iraqi people with rebuilding and programs that help to re-establish some decent way of life for them as Mark suggested. We are making some effort in that direction but it doesn't take away from the fact that pro-war people do however, support spending billions on weapons systems and sending our military there to maintain control. They are willing to sacrifice huge sums of money and thousands of lives because they think what? That we're preventing Muslim invasion? That we're ridding the world of terrorists? Get real! Everyone who is paying any attention at all knows that things have gotten much worse in Iraq, not better. And why is that? Well it sure isn't because we've won them over with our kindness or benevolent ways. There were many experts in Middle Eastern affairs who said before the war that this would be a likely scenario if we went to war there; things were bound to get worse and a civil war would ensue. The terrorists have become richer and better organized. You can bet your boots that while we're sitting here arguing over this, they are planning something even more spectacular and destructive than 9/11. We're too busy trying to make sure we have access and control of the oil in the region to bother with wiping out the the terrorists.

What we've been talking about here isn't about a little old lady getting robbed of her handbag and her smacking the perp back. We're not talking about defense. We've been talking about the lady looking at a guy across the street who she's decided is thinking about robbing her and she crosses the street and smacks him hard enough to break his nose.

Btw Sunta, I'm glad you didn't let them get away with their harsh comments to you. I can recognize humor. This thread is just full of it. I also think there's plenty of room for everyone to post whatever and whenever they choose, whether it is off the subject or not. Most people can handle everything with ease. It doesn't really cause all that much confusion and it can be fun and lighten the mood. Which is a difficult concept when you're talking agression, war and blood and guts. But hey, that's just me. I'm not a card-carrying member of the NO HIGHJACKING THE THREAD CLUB. So sue me.

Ooops. Wait a minute, I spoke too soon. TommyO had something nice to say.

I'm gonna say what so many said at Caruso's thread - I think it's time to shut this thread down. :heh:

Hey gang, Jack's the one who made the humorous comment about being someone who used to tip a few and was a Democrat until Clinton helped him see the light. (or some verbage to that effect.) I thought it was funny and was letting him know I got the joke. I guess no one else thought it was cute the way that he phrased it like I did, they just feel sorry for him for giving up his Democratic ways. I understand. You guys know that I am a bit passionate about love, peace, and the American way. The way of freedom from religious persecution, whether it's the Islamic religion, Methodist or LDS or any other religion. I'm on the side of good. I believe in our right to debate political and religious issues. We all say things that sound worse in print than we probably meant them. But don't ya'll go deciding that I'm a bad person or attacking me personally just because I'm a ignorant yellow-dog Democrat. Um kay? I mean if you keep that up, I'll have to take my leftist views somewhere else and I know you don't want that!!! Why who would you have that is so easily made to look ignorant? Give peace a chance, as one of my favorite Beatles of the 1960s said. Now excuse me while I go burn my bra.

"RIYADH (Reuters) - Arab leaders arrived in Saudi Arabia on Tuesday ahead of a summit set to revive a five-year-old plan to end decades of Israeli-Arab conflict at the heart of the region's problems..." Little news item today about some people trying to solve problems without bombs. At least SOMEBODY still believes in working at resolving issues without bloodshed. By the way, Bill Clinton cured you from alcoholism and being a Democrat? With regard to the comments about the Governor of Louisiana and Mayor of New Orleans playing a role in the misery suffered there: they may have played a role, but how does that in any way excuse FEMA's and Bush's actions? I wasn't talking about absolving anyone from blame who dropped the ball in the Katrina catastrophy, and no, I'm not all for rehashing it here, but your comment makes no sense. As for your comment "Sure...just as safe as the one that produced the 20 years of increasing violence by jehadi fundis culminating in the WTC....yes, that was a certainly an era of increasing dignity and security wasn't it....." A horrible terrorist act was committed on 9-11, and the bomb at the WTC before that was bad and they were acts of terrorism. How does citing those incidents prove in any way that there was as much terrorist activity going on then as there is now as a result of our actions in Iraq?

TommyO thanks a bunch for a good laugh!!!:heh: :heh: :heh:

Wow Tami! No wonder you were gettin' your freak on in the hotel room! Va, va, va, voom!

I'm just glad that some of you are so happy right now. Maybe you'll quit saying that you're outnumbered here. Looks to me like you have a full force of contingents to back up your pro-war ideology. Sunta I don't think some of these folks would really mind seeing what's happening in Iraq. I think they know what's happening and they seem to be celebrating it here. Now ya'll go ahead and jump on me with full force for that statement - there are plenty of you to tell me how wrong and stupid I am. Let's get this one thing straight though, you're pretty certain that if it weren't for Bush, we'd be forced into becoming Muslims, right? Even more comforting it is for me to know that we're in Iraq, doing what we're doing, because it is another humanitarian effort, like your boy did in New Orleans? Nice to know that I can sleep better at night knowing that all those people in Iraq, including the beheaded ones (one who worked for my husband's company) are dying for a really good humanitarian cause. You are freaking me out!

I appreciate your Canadian perspective, Tommy. Thanks.

Jack you're just making stuff up and trying to put my name on it. If you believe that what George Bush and his administration have done in Iraq and elsewhere is right and the best possible (or even the last possible) way to achieve certain American objectives, so be it. I disagree and I am not in the minority these days. You guys are going to push it until you have a snowball's chance in hell of electing a Republican president next time around.

Dude! I forgot about Blake. He really IS awesome. He's so out of the mainstream I have strong doubts that he can win. But he's much more of an "Idol" because he is so fresh and should appeal to the people who buy CDs. Plus I think he is talented. That last Diana Ross song he did was excellent. It's because of people like Blake that Howard is wrong. Howard is all about Howard though. He just likes to prove how much power he has. Lots of people play into that because he's so outrageous and irreverent. But to think that Howard cares one way or the other about American Idol is silly. That is of course, unless he has some deal with Simon to generate even more money with Howard influenced call-ins. Which wouldn't surprise me, would it surprise you?

Thank you TOM Bubble: I never said that you didn't post non-abortion scenarios. What I said was that the discussion is definitely about abortion and the morning after pill. You accuse me of changing your words. I didn't change your words or question your intentions to discuss medical providers' rights. I just observed that in addition to what you said you wanted to discuss that you had used some very hot button words to make your point and that if you use those words, you can't expect those issues not to come up in the discussion. When you reacted the way you did to my posts, it made me wonder why you used those words if the thread wasn't about them at all and if you didn't want to discuss them why didn't you use other words. I'd like to know why you got so upset that I spoke about abortion and the morning after pill when you are the one who included them in your thread? Why are you so angry? Why are you so accusatory in your remarks to me? I'm afraid your heated reaction only goes to prove what I was saying, that those words are very hot button issues and you shouldn't be surprised, or angry, if they generate some discussion in your thread.

2bethinagn: I don't know how one can lose 100 lbs. and not have loose skin. Perhaps if one is young enough and hasn't been 100 lbs. overweight long enough, but I don't know about that. I've only lost 40 lbs. and the bat wing underarms are pretty hideous. I expect them only to get worse as I lose more weight. There are some threads at LBT all about surgeries to correct this problem as well as saggy breasts, excess skin hanging on legs and tummies, etc. It obviously comes with the territory of losing so much weight.

crabcake: Not only do I have more energy, but I have bad knees and they are not nearly as painful as they were when I was 40 lbs. heavier!

Am I the only person who spoke to the issue you brought up as it relates to abortion and the morning after pill? Of course the issue of circumcision is a fairly hot topic these days too, but people didn't jump in on that too much. You're sounding very defensive and I wasn't attacking. Sometimes I think that the written word here gets us in trouble that we never meant to cause. Bubble it's YOUR topic, you can declare that it is about whatever you wish. I was just relating about how it affected me. That is obviously not important to you, so I will bow out of your thread as gracefully as possible. P.S. I did know that you were a medical provider. I also know that you say you would never have an abortion, and that you hate them, but if I remember correctly you believe in a woman's right to choose. I believe you have addressed the issue more than once on different threads. That could have had something to do with my thought that there was a current of underlying issues imbedded here, particularly since certain words were incorporated herein.

That is a cute expression: you can't blow bubbles around some people because they carry pins with them! I like that.