Hey Celebrities! Shut the F**K up!!!!! - Page 2 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Plaid13 · 04-25-2007, 07:45 AM

I couldnt care less about celebrities opinions but... reading that one sheet of tp thing was worth a good laugh. She thinks people should only use one sheet of tp... except for those bad times when you might need 2 or 3.... leads me to believe sharyl crow has a dirty butt. I personaly believe TP is evil and we should all have bidets but thats another story.

Sometimes its amusing when they voice there thoughts about stuff like this simply because it gives normal people something to laugh at.

pan6467 · 04-25-2007, 10:00 AM

Celebs have always voiced political views, Chaplin, Bogart, Sinatra, Lennon, etc. It's nothing new.

What amazes me is that people will bitch and moan about what they have to say. Who the fuck cares? Are you so in need of approval that you have to live by what some celeb talks. Or so unsure of your stance that you have to criticize what someone else has to say?

Now, do you believe O'Reilly (who's claim to fame was as anchor of a sleazy tabloid tv show called "A Current Affair"), Limbaugh (who was kicked out of radio and sold tickets for a MLB team), Hannity (who has a high school education and has never done anything), Stern (who is great at what he does and is the ultimate shock jock), Heston (who shortly after he said "you can have my gun after you pull it from my cold dead hand" came forward admitting he had Alzheimer's Disease) and so on are any more qualified to affect your stances or beliefs?

My point is if you allow others to affect your beliefs, you weren't that sure of them to begin with. Now, you may listen to them because they reinforce what you believe and are able to communicate it better than you and there is nothing wrong with that.

Here's a little secret for you people who get so upset over all this....... most of the "Celebs" are saying what they say because they love the attention (need the ratings) and they know the only way to get that attention (or ratings) is to be controversial, to say the stupidest things if need be.

Look how Sheryl Crow is now being talked about.... were many talking about her last week? How have her sales been doing since this?

(As an aside, from someone who has had experience back in my poor days, 1 square is possible.... you fold the square into quarters tear the center and keep it, unfold stick your finger through the hole in the center and wipe.... then use the tp to clean your finger and the little piece you torn out to clean under your fingernail...... wash hands very thoroughly.)

shakran · 04-25-2007, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mixedmedia

dude, what are you referring to here?

not you, don't worry. First off, of people who have made negative comments on the media, you don't exactly have the corner on the market, and second, you've never called us assholes

mixedmedia · 04-26-2007, 01:40 AM

whew, okay...I didn't realize that trashing your profession was such a widespread phenomena...I should not be so paranoid and self-important

guthmund · 04-26-2007, 06:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pan6467

(As an aside, from someone who has had experience back in my poor days, 1 square is possible.... you fold the square into quarters tear the center and keep it, unfold stick your finger through the hole in the center and wipe.... then use the tp to clean your finger and the little piece you torn out to clean under your fingernail...... wash hands very thoroughly.)

I've been dog-ass, dirt poor and even then it never got to the point where I had to be that frugal with the toilet paper.

Carry on.

Sultana · 04-26-2007, 06:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mixedmedia

whew, okay...I didn't realize that trashing your profession was such a widespread phenomena...I should not be so paranoid and self-important

Especially when you *are* media...mixed as it is!

pig · 04-26-2007, 07:07 AM

yeah, i almost had to ask a followup on that one gothmund, but i wasn't sure i wanted to get into the question of whether my refusal to contemplate scrubbing my asshole out with my finger stuck through a piece of toilet paper made me firmly middle-class bourgoise, and thus simply unable to "get it." i'd steal fucking newspapers from the neighbors or use leaves or pinestraw or dead cats before i cleaned my ass up with a finger. therefore, i assume this was some rather 'finger in asshole' humor from pan.

mixedmedia · 04-26-2007, 07:22 AM

Perhaps the one square law needs an amendment:

1 square for number one

2 squares for number two

ConspiracyTheor · 04-26-2007, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pan6467

(As an aside, from someone who has had experience back in my poor days, 1 square is possible.... you fold the square into quarters tear the center and keep it, unfold stick your finger through the hole in the center and wipe.... then use the tp to clean your finger and the little piece you torn out to clean under your fingernail...... wash hands very thoroughly.)

Oh wow, dude. If we ever meet, don't take offense if I take a pass on shaking your hand, eh?

RonRyan85 · 04-27-2007, 01:41 PM

Miss Mixedmedia:
You think just like me.(On this subject anyway.)

pig · 04-27-2007, 01:51 PM

holy shit. ronryan ascends from the tittyboard back to the convo. welcome back. even if its just for the duration of the single post.

pocon1 · 05-02-2007, 03:55 PM

nothing to say

alkaloid · 05-03-2007, 05:44 AM

I like what Jazz said. People should ask themselves why they get so angry about trivial stuff.

Push-Pull · 05-03-2007, 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mixedmedia

Perhaps the one square law needs an amendment:

1 square for number one

2 squares for number two

Being a guy, can I take the 1 square that I didn't use for #1 and add/use it with the 2 squares I use for #2? Is that OK? And actually, thinking about it, I drink a lot of water, so I'm going #1 a lot more than #2 during the day, so if I scrimp and save, I may actually have 7 or 8 sheets to my credit by day's end. Hmmmm.

Val_1 · 05-03-2007, 09:40 AM

If asked, they answer. It's the newspapers that keep asking them and printing it. The newspapers print it because that's what they believe their audience wants. With celebrity worship as prevalent as it is, they may be right.

fnaqzna · 05-07-2007, 08:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Push-Pull

Being a guy, can I take the 1 square that I didn't use for #1 and add/use it with the 2 squares I use for #2? Is that OK? And actually, thinking about it, I drink a lot of water, so I'm going #1 a lot more than #2 during the day, so if I scrimp and save, I may actually have 7 or 8 sheets to my credit by day's end. Hmmmm.

Being guys, I think we should get some credit for not flushing pads and tampons down the toilet.

Once you factor those in, we could be up to 10 sheets per day.

Blackthorn · 05-09-2007, 02:21 PM

Recently I witnessed an interview done by Joe Kernan, of CNBC, where he fileted Cheryl Crow and Laurie David over their stance and beliefs on global warming. Coincidentally I don't want this to be a thread-jack onto the topic of climate change so let's not go there...k?

Here is a link to a good overview of the interview and it even has a short video clip: Kernan vs. Crow

The point I wish to make is that the media doesn't always give "celebs" a free pass. They challenge views and statements and there is room for thoughtful discussion as long as they (In this case the "celebs") are willing to allow for it. To me the point of your thread is that it's the "my view or else and I'm not going to let facts get in the way of my opinions" attitude of celebs and their access to media that is willing to give them a forum without challenge to express their opinions. I agree with you argument in that context but you know what...that's life. There are countelss examples of the "STFU" phenomenae. Barbara Streisand, Sting, George Clooney, Cheryl Crow just to name a few. They are allowed to have their opinions and because of who they are they will always be able to use their status to express them to a media base that is all too willing to listen. There are also media outlets that are willing to present the opposing view and when you listen carefully you can almost always decide for yourself who is genuinely informed on any given topic and who is merely expressing an opinion.

Being of sound mind you (and I) are allowed to disagree and learn more about whatever the issue is to dispute their claims when they are wrong with such righteous indignation as was Cheryl Crow during her interview with Joe Kernan.

Joe was clearly more informed and more ready to debate the topic than was either Cheryl Crow or Laurie David. All they could resort to was attacking the interviewer which is a clear signal that they were not as knowledgeable or at all prepared to speak on the subject. It was actually quite entertaining to watch...

Celebs don't always get a free pass.

=================================
Here is the text of the story linked to above:

Quote:

CNBC Anchor Challenges Sheryl Crow and Laurie David Over Global Warming Alarmism
Posted by Noel Sheppard on April 12, 2007 - 11:49.

Most people are probably not familiar with Joe Kernan, a morning anchor for the financial network CNBC. On Tuesday, he invited singer Sheryl Crow and "An Inconvenient Truth" schlockumentary producer Laurie David on to discuss their "Stop Global Warming College Tour."

As Kernan tried to present the skeptics’ side of this debate, the ladies clearly got uncomfortable and, to say the least, a bit defensive with their interviewer.

For instance, when Kernan referenced the British documentary "The Great Global Warming Swindle," and presented evidence from it refuting anthropogenic global warming theories, David astoundingly responded (video available here, h/t NB member Sick-n-Tired):

Well, I haven't seen it, but I do believe in fact and science. I mean, this is, again, isn't my opinion. And the world has complete consensus on this. And I would just question who funded the documentary, and what their agenda is. I mean, I would ask that question, really. Because we, the debate, the debate is over.

Amazing. So, she admitted she hadn't seen the documentary, and dismissed its contents by bringing up the now-infamous "c-word," questioning the agenda of who funded the film, and declaring the debate over. Yet, she first claimed that she was interested in "fact and science." Obviously, that's not the case if "the debate is over."

Regardless, Kernan ably pushed on by reading a quote from the documentary about the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report being "politically driven" and that skeptics' views were "deliberately censored" even though their names were included in the report "leading some to even threaten legal action against the IPCC."

David responded: Let me just say this, okay. There's now more CO2 than in the last 650,000 years. Now, just basic common sense says that cannot be a good thing. And, you know, it's extreme weather in both directions. Every single day on the news, you guys are talking about extreme weather. So, there you go. 2006 was the warmest, wait a second, 2006 was the warmest on record, and they’re saying 2007 is going to be worse. Something is happening, and we really need to start acting, we really need to put the debate behind us.

Kernan then pointed out that in the past, there have been CO2 levels "fifteen and sixteen times" as high as today "without any warming." It appears David wasn't aware of this.

Furthermore, using newly updated climate calculations, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has determined that 2006 was not as warm as 1998. So much for science and fact, huh Laurie?

Kernan continued to press the issue:

Are we sure it has nothing to do with cosmic rays or sun spot activity or volcanoes? The footprint of humans for CO2 is apparently fairly small compared to volcanoes.

What was David's response? Incredibly:

You know what? I urge you to see "An Inconvenient Truth" 'cause Al Gore answers all these questions beautifully in the movie. It's the reason why this movie has had such a big impact. And I urge you and all of your viewers to watch it.

Amazing. No response about fact or science, Laurie? Just watch former vice president Al Gore – with absolutely no formal training on this subject whatsoever – and all of your questions will be answered? What unmitigated arrogance. Kernan then brought Crow into the discussion asking for her opinion on what we should use as fuel if not hydrocarbons. Crow answered:
I think there are lots of opportunities to explore wind power, solar power obviously. We can use coal. We've got to go with clean coal plants instead of these dirty coal plants. And, I guess I don't understand the reticence that people are displaying on this subject when we're living through what I feel like are perfect examples of what's happening and what we can expect in the future. And, I think there's a certain amount of arrogance with that.

Obviously there's a lot of fear there, and lots of misinformation. And, I think the longer we drag our feet, and we've got scientists all over the world who are saying the window is about ten years, and these are conservative people, that the time is now to start acting. And we can certainly wait until the outcome is on our doorstep and its affecting us in our daily life. And you're talking about disease. We don't even know disease yet. We're talking about malaria entering into Texas. We just heard the governor of Arlington talking about this. Talking about what's going to happen in health just in this country. And talking about the Andes not having ice on the mountains. And that is the water source to all the people in Peru. This is dire, and it's happening. And, to sit back and think that this is not happening, and we're just going to wait until we really see the outcomes is a dangerous, dangerous way to look at this.

Amazing. So, we should listen to the mayor of Arlington, Texas, about the future of the planet more than scientists from our finest learning institutions that, despite absurd claims of a non-existent consensus, are indeed skeptical about all this? Extraordinary.

Yet, here was Crow’s marvelous conclusion: "When you're talking about climate, when you're talking about the organism we live on, when it starts becoming sick, we're going to suffer the outcome of that.”

Amazing. The earth is an "organism" that's "becoming sick?" I yearn for the facts and science that David spoke of at the beginning of the interview, don't you? However, in reality, we learned what the real fact is, as David concluded the interview thusly:

And by the way, it's going to become a top-tier voting issue for both parties. You're going to see candidates from both parties take on global warming in a big way.

Frankly, this was the only thing that either Crow or David said that had any validity or basis in truth, and clearly demonstrated what this is all about – politics. Period. Everything else is a thinly veiled lie.

For those interested, here was what Crow had to say about this interview at her blog (emphasis added):

After a short night's sleep on the bus, Laurie and I got up early to do CNBC. We were interviewed live, via earpiece, by a militant sceptic who's [sic] sole objective seemed to be to disprove us and the theory of global warming at every turn.

Now, I'm not exactly sure what planet this guy is living on (or what planet he thinks he's living on, perhaps one that is not suffering the extreme weather patterns that planet earth is experiencing) but to argue that global warming does not exist and that the IPCC reports are a political maneuver, is irresponsible and overtly unethical…and at 7:30 in the morning, just plain irritating. Laurie David may be a great mom, a fun girlfriend and busmate, and absolutely adorable but let me tell you, when it comes to the subject of global warming, you better step back because she is not going to go down without a fight.

How delicious. Of course, here's the really inconvenient truth that Crow and David will likely also blow off as they ignore all opinions different from their own. CNBC did a poll after the interview, and published the results at its website (emphasis added): "About 80% of viewer responses sided with Kernan, many referencing the indignation that Crow and David expressed at having to answer questions about the global warming debate."

I bet all these viewers are funded by oil companies, don't you?

But we all know what this really about. Politics. The anti-capitalist variety specifically. It's just another way for the left to promote their borderline socialist agenda and if you dare disagree with them on this, you're labelled as heartless or the equivalent of a Holocaust denier.

troit · 05-10-2007, 10:48 AM

It is people like us who help sign their paychecks.

Willravel · 05-10-2007, 11:03 AM

If I ever get famous, I'll use it to educate people.

That being the case, I can't blame Sheryl Crow. I don't agree with her "one square of toilet paper" crap, which is absurdest and ruins the credibility of the green movements, but she can say what she wants. I also happen to agree with Sean Penn often, and I enjoyed him on Bill Maher last weekend. Some celebs can use their clout to bring attention to important problems in the world.

Don Cheadle, for example, has recently been bringing attention to the genocide in Darfur. I commend him on his hard work and the fact that he doesn't just relax in his LA mansion like other celebs. He did Hotel Rwanda and he's actively seeking to end a genocide.

Intense1 · 05-12-2007, 10:47 PM

As someone who lives just 30 miles out of Nashville, and whose family has lived in this area for generations, AND HAS BEEN DEMOCRAT, we are amused at how much energy Al Gore uses in his Brentwood mansion, while at the same time, urging others to conserve. It makes us laugh.

The same thing with Cheryl Crow and her plea that we all use just one square of toilet tissue as we pursue our personal business.

Ha ha, toilet tissue isn't the issue, Ms Crow. For the most part toilet tissue is biodegradable. However, the large amount of gas her bus uses in order to deliver her from place to place to preach her "one square" mantra, now that is waste.

Funny.

smooth · 05-14-2007, 02:38 AM

That article is rife with mistatements and logical errors.
I tried to watch the video to see if I'd get a different opinion, but it looks like it's a subscriber only deal.

Unless I missed something, I didn't see either respondent attack the interviewer.

I'm still amazed when people quote after-show polling results as if they mean anything other than the normal viewers sided with the person they watch/listen to every morning. In this case, it just indicates to me that 80% of Kernan's audience evidently haven't taken a logic course. It certainly doesn't tell us the amount of people in the audience who recognized that an interview format facilitates discussion (or at least should), not a debate. The fact that the participants didn't sit there and spew some facts from a teleprompter doesn't convince me that either isn't qualified to speak their opinions on a controversial issue. It just signifies to me that they didn't want to debate an issue that they've already been convinced of. Many trained experts and intelligent non-experts hold the same belief...so I don't see how thinking that global warming is true or something we ought to do something about indicates a lack of thought on the subject.

04-25-2007, 10:00 AM	#42 (permalink)
pan6467 Lennonite Priest Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA	Celebs have always voiced political views, Chaplin, Bogart, Sinatra, Lennon, etc. It's nothing new. What amazes me is that people will bitch and moan about what they have to say. Who the fuck cares? Are you so in need of approval that you have to live by what some celeb talks. Or so unsure of your stance that you have to criticize what someone else has to say? Now, do you believe O'Reilly (who's claim to fame was as anchor of a sleazy tabloid tv show called "A Current Affair"), Limbaugh (who was kicked out of radio and sold tickets for a MLB team), Hannity (who has a high school education and has never done anything), Stern (who is great at what he does and is the ultimate shock jock), Heston (who shortly after he said "you can have my gun after you pull it from my cold dead hand" came forward admitting he had Alzheimer's Disease) and so on are any more qualified to affect your stances or beliefs? My point is if you allow others to affect your beliefs, you weren't that sure of them to begin with. Now, you may listen to them because they reinforce what you believe and are able to communicate it better than you and there is nothing wrong with that. Here's a little secret for you people who get so upset over all this....... most of the "Celebs" are saying what they say because they love the attention (need the ratings) and they know the only way to get that attention (or ratings) is to be controversial, to say the stupidest things if need be. Look how Sheryl Crow is now being talked about.... were many talking about her last week? How have her sales been doing since this? (As an aside, from someone who has had experience back in my poor days, 1 square is possible.... you fold the square into quarters tear the center and keep it, unfold stick your finger through the hole in the center and wipe.... then use the tp to clean your finger and the little piece you torn out to clean under your fingernail...... wash hands very thoroughly.) __________________ I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

04-26-2007, 01:40 AM	#44 (permalink)
mixedmedia has all her shots. Location: Florida	whew, okay...I didn't realize that trashing your profession was such a widespread phenomena...I should not be so paranoid and self-important __________________ Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

04-26-2007, 07:07 AM	#47 (permalink)
pig pigglet pigglet Location: Locash	yeah, i almost had to ask a followup on that one gothmund, but i wasn't sure i wanted to get into the question of whether my refusal to contemplate scrubbing my asshole out with my finger stuck through a piece of toilet paper made me firmly middle-class bourgoise, and thus simply unable to "get it." i'd steal fucking newspapers from the neighbors or use leaves or pinestraw or dead cats before i cleaned my ass up with a finger. therefore, i assume this was some rather 'finger in asshole' humor from pan. __________________ You don't love me, you just love my piggy style

04-26-2007, 07:22 AM	#48 (permalink)
mixedmedia has all her shots. Location: Florida	Perhaps the one square law needs an amendment: 1 square for number one 2 squares for number two __________________ Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

04-27-2007, 01:51 PM	#51 (permalink)
pig pigglet pigglet Location: Locash	holy shit. ronryan ascends from the tittyboard back to the convo. welcome back. even if its just for the duration of the single post. __________________ You don't love me, you just love my piggy style

04-25-2007, 07:45 AM	#41 (permalink)
Plaid13 I want a Plaid crayon	I couldnt care less about celebrities opinions but... reading that one sheet of tp thing was worth a good laugh. She thinks people should only use one sheet of tp... except for those bad times when you might need 2 or 3.... leads me to believe sharyl crow has a dirty butt. I personaly believe TP is evil and we should all have bidets but thats another story. Sometimes its amusing when they voice there thoughts about stuff like this simply because it gives normal people something to laugh at.

04-27-2007, 01:41 PM	#50 (permalink)
RonRyan85 Insane Location: Lone Star State,USA	Miss Mixedmedia: You think just like me.(On this subject anyway.)

05-02-2007, 03:55 PM	#52 (permalink)
pocon1 Banned	nothing to say Last edited by pocon1; 07-06-2008 at 09:05 PM..

05-03-2007, 05:44 AM	#53 (permalink)
alkaloid Dead Inside Location: East Coast, USA	I like what Jazz said. People should ask themselves why they get so angry about trivial stuff.

05-03-2007, 09:40 AM	#55 (permalink)
Val_1 Addict Location: In a State of Denial	If asked, they answer. It's the newspapers that keep asking them and printing it. The newspapers print it because that's what they believe their audience wants. With celebrity worship as prevalent as it is, they may be right. __________________ I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day. -Frank Sinatra

05-10-2007, 10:48 AM	#58 (permalink)
troit Transfer Agent Location: NYC	It is people like us who help sign their paychecks. __________________ I've yet to dephile myself...

05-10-2007, 11:03 AM	#59 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	If I ever get famous, I'll use it to educate people. That being the case, I can't blame Sheryl Crow. I don't agree with her "one square of toilet paper" crap, which is absurdest and ruins the credibility of the green movements, but she can say what she wants. I also happen to agree with Sean Penn often, and I enjoyed him on Bill Maher last weekend. Some celebs can use their clout to bring attention to important problems in the world. Don Cheadle, for example, has recently been bringing attention to the genocide in Darfur. I commend him on his hard work and the fact that he doesn't just relax in his LA mansion like other celebs. He did Hotel Rwanda and he's actively seeking to end a genocide.

05-12-2007, 10:47 PM	#60 (permalink)
Intense1 Crazy Location: Music City burbs	As someone who lives just 30 miles out of Nashville, and whose family has lived in this area for generations, AND HAS BEEN DEMOCRAT, we are amused at how much energy Al Gore uses in his Brentwood mansion, while at the same time, urging others to conserve. It makes us laugh. The same thing with Cheryl Crow and her plea that we all use just one square of toilet tissue as we pursue our personal business. Ha ha, toilet tissue isn't the issue, Ms Crow. For the most part toilet tissue is biodegradable. However, the large amount of gas her bus uses in order to deliver her from place to place to preach her "one square" mantra, now that is waste. Funny. __________________ (none yet, still thinkin')

05-14-2007, 02:38 AM	#61 (permalink)
smooth Junkie Location: Right here	That article is rife with mistatements and logical errors. I tried to watch the video to see if I'd get a different opinion, but it looks like it's a subscriber only deal. Unless I missed something, I didn't see either respondent attack the interviewer. I'm still amazed when people quote after-show polling results as if they mean anything other than the normal viewers sided with the person they watch/listen to every morning. In this case, it just indicates to me that 80% of Kernan's audience evidently haven't taken a logic course. It certainly doesn't tell us the amount of people in the audience who recognized that an interview format facilitates discussion (or at least should), not a debate. The fact that the participants didn't sit there and spew some facts from a teleprompter doesn't convince me that either isn't qualified to speak their opinions on a controversial issue. It just signifies to me that they didn't want to debate an issue that they've already been convinced of. Many trained experts and intelligent non-experts hold the same belief...so I don't see how thinking that global warming is true or something we ought to do something about indicates a lack of thought on the subject. __________________ "The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann "You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman