There goes Kliplimet’s plan to marry her and start up his sex-industry business.
[quote]Kuz wrote:
She was still a human being leading a sad, tragic life. Isn’t that enough? It’s “news” because she is a famous human being who led a sad, tragic life.
I’d feel the same way for any person in a similar situation. It doesn’t mean I adore them, but it also doesn’t mean I feel relieved or gleeful she’s gone.
Some cold people on here. Let’s all ease up a touch on the tough guy poses.[/quote]
I can share some sympathy for the fact that she is dead. But like the Prof said.
She was just a drugged up stripper who probably ruined more people than she ‘helped’.
No sympathy on that regard.
What about former president Ford?
What about a man who actually deserves some praise for his accomplishments throughout his life? And leading your nation through some hard(er) times?
[quote]RJ24 wrote:
I don’t judge, however I also don’t feel pity for those who screw themselves over. So, while I don’t feel bad, I’m sorry that a human life was lost, I just have a hard time feeling compassion for the idiot who killed themself.
[/quote]
Yea, you are judging. Pretty badly too. You are obviously not the type that drugs and alcohol was ever alluring too. Good for you. There are folks around that have a harder time.
Every single thing in life is a shade of gray. Addiction is a bad thing, I agree, but there is a difference between Reasons and Excuses.
If people who are lacking in willpower deserve to die, well, that’s sounding a little fascistic for my tastes. I’m glad you get to judge everyone who has demons.
First of all, it’s not, “nowadays” you dumb fuck. This is human nature, and the disparity between people with addictions and people without is probably the same as it was in Ancient Greece.
I know this might flummox you, but there are also different degrees of addiction. I’m a smoker- I’m very addicted to that, and I like it too much to quit. I make no bones about that. That’s different than the guy who smokes the occasional cigar, or who gets plowed off whiskey once in a while. Now, I’ve seen guys who literally have no control over themselves anymore, and are drinking at nine in the morning. Without help from the outside, they will die. Sometimes you lose phenomenal people because of this - writers and musicians especially.
They don’t deserve to die because they were born without the power to resist drugs. There have been many people who have been fucked up on drugs and done more creative and important things than you’ll ever likely do in three lifetimes.
I’m not defending drug addiction- I’ve never touched anything besides alcohol. But to say that it’s all easy and black and white is ignorant and…well, just dumb.
[quote]vroom wrote:
What the hell are you talking about? People don’t have to be “valuable to society” to deserve human compassion you dipshit.[/quote]
Again,
Its very sad that she is dead and that she lived a tragic life… but thats about it.
And by the way, I kind of wish she died before she reproduced, because her genetic line should have ended with her.
Comparing her to a drug addict that did something worthwhile (like a Coleridge/Dylan Thomas sort) is insane. She was nothing more than a blonde with big tits who was barely smart enough to qualify as “functioning”. Fuck’er, I won’t miss her.
[quote]brucevangeorge wrote:
What about former president Ford?
What about a man who actually deserves some praise for his accomplishments throughout his life? And leading your nation through some hard(er) times?[/quote]
Dude, blame the media, or the public, for ignoring what you judge as valuable people.
She’s dead. It’s not her fault that some segment of the public and the media are focused on her now.
However, again, people aren’t valuable only if they are great, perfect, drug free or otherwise truly and only virtuous.
I’m not directing this next “at you” but I’m too lazy to create a second post. Damn, I’m lazy, I guess that makes we worthless to society…
I remember when I was young, such as before puberty, and I saw the world extremely clearly in my little black and white spock-like logical mind.
I remember being told about willpower, by my Grandfather, and he suggested that I didn’t know what it was yet. Strangely, he was right and wrong.
At that age I could not be bent, so in a sense I had incredible willpower. However, at that age, I didn’t have vulnerabilities, or weakness, or hormonal drives, that I had to resist either.
People are driven, by boredom, by hunger, by lust, by haunting episodes in their past, by their parents, by themselves, by just about anything you can imagine. All of us have a lot of potential, most of us don’t use very much of it and a few of us lead tragic wasted lives.
Whatever we are here for, it isn’t to sit around judging other people worthless because of the decisions they made, or could not make, in their lives.
I’d understand if this person was a part of your life, impacting you negatively over some period of time, but to just hate on a stranger for no reason other than that he or she was flawed?
That’s not right.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
She was nothing more than a blonde with big tits…[/quote]
Isn’t that all that society wants these days? How does she compare to Marylin Monroe in value to society?
I honestly don’t know anything about Norma Jean, perhaps she was a saintly and worthy woman in comparison.
Wow, you guys still don’t get it.
Of course some people are victims of circumstance, of course some people are born with a certain affinity for drug use, however that still doesn’t excuse their actions.
Do drug addicts need help? Again, of course they do. They’re obviously confused enough to turn to drugs as a solution in the first place. But, if that person offs themself with the habit, without ever seeking help, then really, who is to blame?
Is it the pressures that drove them to their habits? Is it a genetic predisposition? Was it the climate in which they were raised? Or was it just that they made a horribly poor choice?
And what’s this crap about addicts often being intelligent people. Sure intelligent people get addicted, but intelligence has nothing to do with common sense and will power.
Also, for those of you who say it’s too hard to quit, my grandfather smoked for 40 years. One day, he decided to quit, and he kicked the habit right then and there. He hasn’t smoked in over 10 years. So really, you’re capable of doing anything, it’s just a matter of having the mental fortitude to see it through.
[quote]StevenF wrote:
BFBullpup wrote:
If you think it’s bad enough the national news are on it, try having to hear your girl, who reads tabolids as a hobby, react after reading the news from her mobile phone with shock and disbelief.
I say drugs and all the yo-yo dieting.
I say find a new girl with better hobbies! 
[/quote]
LOL
I read that as, “I say find a new girl with better boobies!”
I haven’t read the whole thread but here is my off-the-wall prediction:
Neither of the two men fighting for custody is the real father. She had fought the DNA testing because the real father is her best friend, the deceased son.
The son comitted suicide because he couldn’t handle the mental stain of knowing what was ahead for him.
Anna also comitted suicide in FL for the same reasons as she knew she would eventually have to have the babies DNA tested. She couldn’t face the consequences of the public being informed of how depraved she really is (was).
DNA testing will be evntually performed but it will only prove that the two bloodsuckers are not the father…not who the real father is. However, it is possible that the son’s father may step up and give a DNA sample in hopes of getting custody of the baby as the son’d closest living relative.
If the son’s father does not enter the foray, and because of the remaining unknown paternity of the baby, Anna’s mother will be appointed gaurdian ad litum of the baby and will have control of her estate in trust until the baby reaches majority.
Many books will be written but we may never know the whole story.
Anna Nicole Smith was a grieving mother, grieving the most devastating, unimaginable loss any mother could ever imagine experiencing, the loss of her child. For that, I feel for her.
Sure she was an addict, a stripper, a gold digger, made a spectacle of herself at times. She was also a human being who in essence was truly lost. It still to me doesn’t mean the media had nor has the right to treat her like the piece of meat that they do, she was a human being.
I can see why people write off serial killers, child molesters and the like; they have no redeeming value to society whatsoever. But someone like Anna Nicole, she was among the mentally and emotionally weaker segement in our society.
Didn’t God in the bible tell us to love one another, isn’t that part of being human to take care of the weaker people? In taking care I mean that the media shouldn’t have been allowed to be so cruel and invasive toward her when her son Daniel died, they should have known when to back off. And we the public should be more active in terms of speaking out against this kind of wrong- rubbing salt in the wound of a grieving mother, and demanding the media back off, and also not buying the smutty tabloids and the like who like to destroy peoples’ lives just to sell stories.
I watched my mother try to cope with my brother’s death, it’s the absolutely most devastating thing for a mother. Anna Nicole deserved the respect of any mother but instead the media made a circus of her son’s death, and I believe that the stress of Daniel’s death, as well as the strain of the media scutiny and all the people wanting a piece of her had a lot to do with why she died. She was just as human as the rest of us and had feelings, emotions, a family, hopes, dreams, etc. just as much as anyone else. Too bad her life has been cut short in such a bad way.
Rest in Peace, Anna Nicole.
[quote]Avoids Roids wrote:
I haven’t read the whole thread but here is my off-the-wall prediction:
Neither of the two men fighting for custody is the real father. She had fought the DNA testing because the real father is her best friend, the deceased son.
The son comitted suicide because he couldn’t handle the mental stain of knowing what was ahead for him.
Anna also comitted suicide in FL for the same reasons as she knew she would eventually have to have the babies DNA tested. She couldn’t face the consequences of the public being informed of how depraved she really is (was).
DNA testing will be evntually performed but it will only prove that the two bloodsuckers are not the father…not who the real father is. However, it is possible that the son’s father may step up and give a DNA sample in hopes of getting custody of the baby as the son’d closest living relative.
If the son’s father does not enter the foray, and because of the remaining unknown paternity of the baby, Anna’s mother will be appointed gaurdian ad litum of the baby and will have control of her estate in trust until the baby reaches majority.
Many books will be written but we may never know the whole story.[/quote]
You should be a screen-writer. That’s brilliant!
[quote]chinadoll wrote:
Anna Nicole Smith was a grieving mother, grieving the most devastating, unimaginable loss any mother could ever imagine experiencing, the loss of her child. For that, I feel for her.
Sure she was an addict, a stripper, a gold digger, made a spectacle of herself at times. She was also a human being who in essence was truly lost. It still to me doesn’t mean the media had nor has the right to treat her like the piece of meat that they do, she was a human being.
I can see why people write off serial killers, child molesters and the like; they have no redeeming value to society whatsoever. But someone like Anna Nicole, she was among the mentally and emotionally weaker segement in our society.
Didn’t God in the bible tell us to love one another, isn’t that part of being human to take care of the weaker people? In taking care I mean that the media shouldn’t have been allowed to be so cruel and invasive toward her when her son Daniel died, they should have known when to back off. And we the public should be more active in terms of speaking out against this kind of wrong- rubbing salt in the wound of a grieving mother, and demanding the media back off, and also not buying the smutty tabloids and the like who like to destroy peoples’ lives just to sell stories.
I watched my mother try to cope with my brother’s death, it’s the absolutely most devastating thing for a mother. Anna Nicole deserved the respect of any mother but instead the media made a circus of her son’s death, and I believe that the stress of Daniel’s death, as well as the strain of the media scutiny and all the people wanting a piece of her had a lot to do with why she died. She was just as human as the rest of us and had feelings, emotions, a family, hopes, dreams, etc. just as much as anyone else. Too bad her life has been cut short in such a bad way.
Rest in Peace, Anna Nicole.[/quote]
I liked this. Thanks, China.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/LAW/02/09/prince.paternity.ap/index.html
OK, so let me get this straight, am I actually reading this correctly? This guy was having an affair with her, then he was going to adopt her, but his wife would not sign the papers so he could adopt his mistress, and thus start fucking his own adopted daughter?
Fuck sake there are some sick people out there.
Oh, and is it just me or does she really look beautiful in this picture? Too bad she is next to the scumbag Stern dude.
[quote]RJ24 wrote:
Wow, you guys still don’t get it.
Of course some people are victims of circumstance, of course some people are born with a certain affinity for drug use, however that still doesn’t excuse their actions.
Do drug addicts need help? Again, of course they do. They’re obviously confused enough to turn to drugs as a solution in the first place. But, if that person offs themself with the habit, without ever seeking help, then really, who is to blame?
Is it the pressures that drove them to their habits? Is it a genetic predisposition? Was it the climate in which they were raised? Or was it just that they made a horribly poor choice?
And what’s this crap about addicts often being intelligent people. Sure intelligent people get addicted, but intelligence has nothing to do with common sense and will power.
Also, for those of you who say it’s too hard to quit, my grandfather smoked for 40 years. One day, he decided to quit, and he kicked the habit right then and there. He hasn’t smoked in over 10 years. So really, you’re capable of doing anything, it’s just a matter of having the mental fortitude to see it through.[/quote]
No, you don’t get it and likely never will. If the best overcoming-addiction story you can tell me is someone quitting smoking after 40 years, then you really have no idea.
[quote]RJ24 wrote:
Wow, you guys still don’t get it.
Of course some people are victims of circumstance, of course some people are born with a certain affinity for drug use, however that still doesn’t excuse their actions.
Do drug addicts need help? Again, of course they do. They’re obviously confused enough to turn to drugs as a solution in the first place. But, if that person offs themself with the habit, without ever seeking help, then really, who is to blame?
Is it the pressures that drove them to their habits? Is it a genetic predisposition? Was it the climate in which they were raised? Or was it just that they made a horribly poor choice?
And what’s this crap about addicts often being intelligent people. Sure intelligent people get addicted, but intelligence has nothing to do with common sense and will power.
Also, for those of you who say it’s too hard to quit, my grandfather smoked for 40 years. One day, he decided to quit, and he kicked the habit right then and there. He hasn’t smoked in over 10 years. So really, you’re capable of doing anything, it’s just a matter of having the mental fortitude to see it through.[/quote]
Smoking cigarettes is just like heroin abuse.
No, really.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Smoking cigarettes is just like heroine abuse.
No, really.[/quote]
I understand that they’re both very moreish.
This story was headline news on (some of) the papers here in England today. As always, a nice sordid story of a life gone wrong always makes front page news. I guess dying of a drug overdose in a big hotel makes everyone else’s life seem humdrum in comparison.
I can’t say I was much aware of the woman beyond her appearance in Naked Gun 33 1/3 with the false appendage scene. I did think some of the reports were in bad taste, but then all “entertainment” news is, so I shouldn’t be suprised that this was the same.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
RJ24 wrote:
Wow, you guys still don’t get it.
Of course some people are victims of circumstance, of course some people are born with a certain affinity for drug use, however that still doesn’t excuse their actions.
Do drug addicts need help? Again, of course they do. They’re obviously confused enough to turn to drugs as a solution in the first place. But, if that person offs themself with the habit, without ever seeking help, then really, who is to blame?
Is it the pressures that drove them to their habits? Is it a genetic predisposition? Was it the climate in which they were raised? Or was it just that they made a horribly poor choice?
And what’s this crap about addicts often being intelligent people. Sure intelligent people get addicted, but intelligence has nothing to do with common sense and will power.
Also, for those of you who say it’s too hard to quit, my grandfather smoked for 40 years. One day, he decided to quit, and he kicked the habit right then and there. He hasn’t smoked in over 10 years. So really, you’re capable of doing anything, it’s just a matter of having the mental fortitude to see it through.
Smoking cigarettes is just like heroine abuse.
No, really.[/quote]
I tell you what, this fuckin guy doesn’t get it.
I’ve known a couple heroin addicts, and no smoker has any idea what it’s like to go through withdrawl until they watch someone try to kick that shit.
But fuck’em, let’em think what he wants. Hey buddy, just like some of us are intelligent and addicted to things, there’s people like you that are idiots and not addicted. Good for you and your willpower, you’re still ignorant.
[quote]Avoids Roids wrote:
I haven’t read the whole thread but here is my off-the-wall prediction:
Neither of the two men fighting for custody is the real father. She had fought the DNA testing because the real father is her best friend, the deceased son.
The son comitted suicide because he couldn’t handle the mental stain of knowing what was ahead for him.
Anna also comitted suicide in FL for the same reasons as she knew she would eventually have to have the babies DNA tested. She couldn’t face the consequences of the public being informed of how depraved she really is (was).
[/quote]
I thought the same thing. She was a sick woman.
Zsa Zsa Gabor’s husband is now claiming he is the father.
Anna Nicole Smith was a ‘tard, and marginally a ho’, but she was still a human being. I am not happy that she is dead.
And one thing about Anna Nicole, she certainly wasn’t the sharpest tool in the shed, but I can’t recall her doing evil things, or doing harm to anyone, except for herself. She’s not on the same scale as, say, a Paris Hilton.
There’s someone I detest. Now I wouldn’t wish Paris dead, but I certainly hope she never breeds.