beachbumbabs
beachbumbabs
  • Threads: 100
  • Posts: 14260
Joined: May 21, 2013
November 26th, 2013 at 3:11:29 PM permalink
Quote: AcesAndEights

I should have kept my mouth shut, as I don't really care enough to defend Kathy Griffin's appearance.



It's all cool; it wasn't about Kathy Griffin so much as it was about a cheap shot taken at a person who wasn't in a position to defend themselves.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
EvenBob
EvenBob
  • Threads: 441
  • Posts: 28570
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
November 26th, 2013 at 3:35:10 PM permalink
Quote: beachbumbabs

It's all cool; it wasn't about Kathy Griffin so much as it was about a cheap shot taken at a person who wasn't in a position to defend themselves.



If they don't want their pics taken with no makeup,
don't go in public like that. She has no defense.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13884
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
November 26th, 2013 at 3:50:53 PM permalink
Quote: EvenBob

If they don't want their pics taken with no makeup,
don't go in public like that. She has no defense.



Way, way back in the day stars couldn't go in public without make-up and being dressed well. When the studios had them under contract they were expected to look like stars at all times. Of course at that time we didn't have stalkers trying to get a pic of them every time they went out for a pack of cigarettes.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
AxelWolf
AxelWolf
  • Threads: 164
  • Posts: 22272
Joined: Oct 10, 2012
November 26th, 2013 at 4:39:17 PM permalink
Quote: beachbumbabs

It's all cool; it wasn't about Kathy Griffin so much as it was about a cheap shot taken at a person who wasn't in a position to defend themselves.

I will take that as an admission you were in fact playing devil's advocate. I really don't think you can call defenseless cheap shot in this situation. She is a celebrity. I consider that a cheap shot. If your going to go that route, you have to defend Charles Manson since hes not here to defend himself.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
beachbumbabs
beachbumbabs
  • Threads: 100
  • Posts: 14260
Joined: May 21, 2013
November 26th, 2013 at 4:52:59 PM permalink
Quote: AxelWolf

I will take that as an admission you were in fact playing devil's advocate. I really don't think you can call defenseless cheap shot in this situation. She is a celebrity. I consider that a cheap shot. If your going to go that route, you have to defend Charles Manson since hes not here to defend himself.



False equivalency, Axel, sorry. Pass. Not sure why you seem wound up about this, though. And no, I wasn't playing devil's advocate. I think it's disrespectful and rude to stick a camera in a person's face who's on their own time simply because they're a celebrity, make money off of invading their privacy, and stick it on the internet for people to poke fun at their looks. I don't like any part of it, don't think much of the people who make their money that way, or people who perpetuate a market for it. My way of objecting to it is, well, to object to it. End of story.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
EvenBob
EvenBob
  • Threads: 441
  • Posts: 28570
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
November 26th, 2013 at 5:19:22 PM permalink
Quote: beachbumbabs

I think it's disrespectful and rude to stick a camera in a person's face who's on their own time.



Now you're changing what you said here:

"it was about a cheap shot taken at a person who wasn't in a position to defend themselves."

All that person has to do is not put themselves in
the position of being in public without makeup. If
they choose to not wear makeup and somebody
chooses to take a pic of them, you get what you
get. Don't take away the constitutional freedoms
of a photog because his subject made a bad decision.

Where's the accountability for actions? If Kathy Griffith
makes the choices that put her in a bad position, who's
fault is that? You want us to blame the photog.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
beachbumbabs
beachbumbabs
  • Threads: 100
  • Posts: 14260
Joined: May 21, 2013
November 26th, 2013 at 5:28:31 PM permalink
Quote: EvenBob

Now you're changing what you said here:

"it was about a cheap shot taken at a person who wasn't in a position to defend themselves."

All that person has to do is not put themselves in
the position of being in public without makeup. If
they choose to not wear makeup and somebody
chooses to take a pic of them, you get what you
get. Don't take away the constitutional freedoms
of a photog because his subject made a bad decision.

Where's the accountability for actions? If Kathy Griffith
makes the choices that put her in a bad position, who's
fault is that? You want us to blame the photog.



What I don't understand is why you and Axel are continuing to argue about this. I said my piece, you said yours. End of subject.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
EvenBob
EvenBob
  • Threads: 441
  • Posts: 28570
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
November 27th, 2013 at 10:47:49 AM permalink
Quote: beachbumbabs

What I don't understand is why you and Axel are continuing to argue about this. I said my piece, you said yours. End of subject.



You were implying it's somehow the photog's fault
that she went out in public and got her pic taken
with no makeup. I disagree, she knows how the
game is played, how she looks is her responsibility.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
  • Jump to: