AmeliaBloomer
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,842
Location: USA
Jun 26, 2014 5:01:45 GMT
|
Post by AmeliaBloomer on Feb 8, 2017 5:33:55 GMT
And yet, YOU, think it's fine to make a disparaging comment about Melania and her "squinty' eyes. And not one of the liberals on this board had a problem with that at all. Not even the well respected ones that I personally enjoying discussing things with. Can you all not see the hypocrisy with this? Ugh. It's always so damn disheartening to read when you criticize a poster and then include others in the criticism in a guilt-by-ideology association - like deciding that an entire group of diverse people doesn't have a problem with a specific comment one poster wrote and must therefore all be hypocrites. It would be just as unfair to malign ANY other group here based on their silence about some goofball comment from - well, we'll just leave identities to the imagination - which they may or may not have even read. We all should be responsible for what we write here, not what we don't write.
|
|
|
Post by miominmio on Feb 8, 2017 5:51:43 GMT
Even though it was YEARS ago and even though in Europe this isn't even a blip on the radar. I do not blame her one bit for fighting back since her whole character is blackened all the time for those photos--imagine what would happen to her if people really believed she was a former escort. We are supposed to be SUPPORTING each other as women! Isn't that what the women's march was all about. Ehhhh......where do you get the opinion that "this isn't even a blip on the radar" in Europe? If you are speaking of Melania's pictures, yes, it's true that they haven't been given much attention (but they have been in the newspapers here, too). But then, she isn't the wife of a politician in any of our countries. if you think we are so comfortable about nudity that we wouldn't have a problem with soft core porn if it was the wife of one of our politicians, you are sorely mistaken. That would make headline news even here in Scandinavia.
|
|
|
Post by LavenderLayoutLady on Feb 8, 2017 11:16:16 GMT
What multimillion dollar opportunity of being famous is she referring to? Maybe they should have thought about this before he threw his hat in the ring. WT everloving F?? She wasn't famous for anything other than being his trophy wife anyway!!!
|
|
|
Post by cade387 on Feb 8, 2017 11:26:37 GMT
I'm wondering if she isn't planning on leaving him? She would certainly still 'one of the mostly photographed women' as I'm sure the media would still follow her. Maybe she is trying to protect that? I don't know. That is all I have.
|
|
|
Post by shescrafty on Feb 8, 2017 11:27:30 GMT
I don't judge Melania for her pictures, and here and other places I have said that their child should be off limits. snowsilver her past photos may be shocking, but I don't really care about them. I think she has presented herself physically in a respectful manner since becoming the wife of a politician and will just go from there. So let's start at the "clean slate" as it were. She had something said about her by a blogger. After being sued the blogger retracted the comment, apologized, and settled financially for an undisclosed sum. That should make it over. The very idea that her "brand" has somehow been tarnished by these comments to the tune of over $150million dollars is ludicrous. And to be honest this lawsuit makes her look like someone who WOULD do things just for money. Like someone who values money before anything else. There are many people who have things written or said about them that honestly DO impact their lifetime earnings, but she is not one of them. This lawsuit is ridiculous. The previous comments were never even a blip on my radar. But now I give that rumor more weight since she is clearly more about money than just clearing her name.
|
|
pudgygroundhog
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,643
Location: The Grand Canyon
Jun 25, 2014 20:18:39 GMT
|
Post by pudgygroundhog on Feb 8, 2017 14:24:33 GMT
And yet, YOU, think it's fine to make a disparaging comment about Melania and her "squinty' eyes. And not one of the liberals on this board had a problem with that at all. Not even the well respected ones that I personally enjoying discussing things with. Can you all not see the hypocrisy with this? Ugh. It's always so damn disheartening to read when you criticize a poster and then include others in the criticism in a guilt-by-ideology association - like deciding that an entire group of diverse people doesn't have a problem with a specific comment one poster wrote and must therefore all be hypocrites. It would be just as unfair to malign ANY other group here based on their silence about some goofball comment from - well, we'll just leave identities to the imagination - which they may or may not have even read. We all should be responsible for what we write here, not what we don't write. You said it much nicer than I was going to, so will just ditto this.
|
|
|
Post by LiLi on Feb 8, 2017 15:55:00 GMT
And yet, YOU, think it's fine to make a disparaging comment about Melania and her "squinty' eyes. And not one of the liberals on this board had a problem with that at all. Not even the well respected ones that I personally enjoying discussing things with. Can you all not see the hypocrisy with this? How do you assume what others have a problem with? Then judge a whole group by that assumption? Hypocrisy, indeed. I know you try to be kind, I think you don't see how your statement comes across.
|
|
|
Post by snowsilver on Feb 8, 2017 17:21:56 GMT
And yet, YOU, think it's fine to make a disparaging comment about Melania and her "squinty' eyes. And not one of the liberals on this board had a problem with that at all. Not even the well respected ones that I personally enjoying discussing things with. Can you all not see the hypocrisy with this? Ugh. It's always so damn disheartening to read when you criticize a poster and then include others in the criticism in a guilt-by-ideology association - like deciding that an entire group of diverse people doesn't have a problem with a specific comment one poster wrote and must therefore all be hypocrites. It would be just as unfair to malign ANY other group here based on their silence about some goofball comment from - well, we'll just leave identities to the imagination - which they may or may not have even read. We all should be responsible for what we write here, not what we don't write. Eh, OK, Amelia, you know I respect what you write, so I'll apologize to everyone here. There was no intent to offend anyone. I was trying to make a point which apparently did not get worded well. I'm bowing out on this one. Thanks for what you said.
|
|
Portia
Junior Member
Posts: 63
Location: Spokaloo
Aug 13, 2016 16:20:49 GMT
|
Post by Portia on Feb 8, 2017 17:29:58 GMT
OK--for what it's worth, I have been struggling with the whole staying in New York thing. Our DS has social issues, and frankly, if I thought a school move would harm him, I would advocate on his behalf. That said, I would also argue up front again putting our family in a situation where it would be detrimental for any of us. NOTHING is more important to me than my family. I also would not believe that my DH was the ONLY person who could save our country, so that would strengthen my argument even more to put our family first. We are a team (little though we may be).
Frankly, I find the idea of a FLOTUS capitalizing off of her position as FLOTUS repugnant. As a crazy progressive, I am confident that had Michelle the same intent, I would have the same opinion. Michelle choose to focus on other priorities instead of personal gain during her time in the White House. Mrs. Trump has lost any shred of sympathy she may have had from me. I find it hard to understand why she would remain with her husband for various reasons--birtherism, etc...I find it hard to understand why this personal enrichment--during her stay in the White House--is in any way normal. It is extremely disheartening to me.
|
|
twinsmomfla99
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,987
Jun 26, 2014 13:42:47 GMT
|
Post by twinsmomfla99 on Feb 8, 2017 18:34:44 GMT
I'm just chiming in to say
1). I normally wouldn't care about her naked pictures--her body, her choice--but when I hear about how she is bringing "class" BACK to the Whitehouse as an obvious insult to Michelle Obama, then yes, her pictures become relevant. Michelle endured such insane criticism from the right about every.thing.she.did, so when those same people want to hold Melania out to be so much better, I feel justified in pointing out the hypocrisy.
2. If Melania is going to follow through with her lawsuit, I hope she is prepared to have her past thoroughly inspected for any information that could have "damaged" her brand name because that is a valid defense to her claim. The defense will try to show that her brand was already damaged by the pictures as well as digging up anything that will support the truth do the original "offending" statements.
And if they find previously undisclosed "damaging" information, that will come out, too.
Quite frankly, I'm surprised she filed the lawsuit because it is just going to cause the public to focus on the less- flattering parts of her life.
|
|
pudgygroundhog
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,643
Location: The Grand Canyon
Jun 25, 2014 20:18:39 GMT
|
Post by pudgygroundhog on Feb 8, 2017 18:57:59 GMT
OK--for what it's worth, I have been struggling with the whole staying in New York thing. Our DS has social issues, and frankly, if I thought a school move would harm him, I would advocate on his behalf. That said, I would also argue up front again putting our family in a situation where it would be detrimental for any of us. NOTHING is more important to me than my family. I also would not believe that my DH was the ONLY person who could save our country, so that would strengthen my argument even more to put our family first. We are a team (little though we may be). Frankly, I find the idea of a FLOTUS capitalizing off of her position as FLOTUS repugnant. As a crazy progressive, I am confident that had Michelle the same intent, I would have the same opinion. Michelle choose to focus on other priorities instead of personal gain during her time in the White House. Mrs. Trump has lost any shred of sympathy she may have had from me. I find it hard to understand why she would remain with her husband for various reasons--birtherism, etc...I find it hard to understand why this personal enrichment--during her stay in the White House--is in any way normal. It is extremely disheartening to me. Well, I think it's on him then to think through these things before running for president and consult with his family about it. And to have taxpayers pay for it? Ridiculous. I certainly can be empathetic about having a child with special needs, but this was a situation of his own choosing and being in the position of wealth and power he has, it's not like he doesn't have resources available to him. (I realize you are not supporting him - just in case my reply sounds like I'm rebuking you - I'm not. More of a general response).
|
|
pudgygroundhog
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,643
Location: The Grand Canyon
Jun 25, 2014 20:18:39 GMT
|
Post by pudgygroundhog on Feb 8, 2017 18:58:56 GMT
I'm just chiming in to say 1). I normally wouldn't care about her naked pictures--her body, her choice--but when I hear about how she is bringing "class" BACK to the Whitehouse as an obvious insult to Michelle Obama, then yes, her pictures become relevant. Michelle endured such insane criticism from the right about every.thing.she.did, so when those same people want to hold Melania out to be so much better, I feel justified in pointing out the hypocrisy. 2. If Melania is going to follow through with her lawsuit, I hope she is prepared to have her past thoroughly inspected for any information that could have "damaged" her brand name because that is a valid defense to her claim. The defense will try to show that her brand was already dated by the pictures as well as digging up anything that will support the truth do the original "offending" statements. And if they find previously undisclosed "damaging" information, that will come out, too. Quite frankly, I'm surprised she filed the lawsuit because it is just going to cause the public to focus on the less- flattering parts of her life. I agree. I think at this point, they would not want to invite scrutiny into their pasts or financial documents as it's clear they are hiding things.
|
|
|
Post by pierkiss on Feb 8, 2017 19:08:55 GMT
If she wants to capitalize on being the FLOTUS, shouldn't she like, move in to the White House and actually do the "job"?
|
|
Portia
Junior Member
Posts: 63
Location: Spokaloo
Aug 13, 2016 16:20:49 GMT
|
Post by Portia on Feb 8, 2017 19:26:42 GMT
Hi pudgygroundhog--couldn't figure out how to quote to let you know I am responding...will get this!!
In any case, I completely agree, and no, did not think you were rebuking me--thanks for taking the time to put that note at the bottom of your post...I'm a bit new at this (hence the 'not quoting' thing)...It's easy (for me) to take things the wrong way--I'm working on trying to hear what is said, and not what I think is said!!
So...thanks! You made it easy.
|
|
|
Post by lucillebluth on Feb 8, 2017 19:33:44 GMT
This seems like such a shaky argument, setting aside the propriety of cashing in on being FLOTUS. People who would be inclined to buy her stuff are not likely to believe these rumors, and the posts have been retracted. Has real damage been done? It's hard to see that when she and her husband have damaged her "brand" more, with the plagiarizing and the lying.
I wonder if Ivanka's brand's recent setbacks will undercut her argument that she was going to make a YUGE profit?
|
|