Umm, really?

Posted by: MacBozo

Umm, really? - 12/18/13 04:06 PM

The local "Christian" bookstore has a section devoted entirely to "Duck Dynasty." I find that rather disturbing.
Posted by: DLC

Re: Umm, really? - 12/18/13 04:20 PM

Can you say "Cha-ching" $$ ??
WTF do they have to do with religion ?
Do they do Baptisms while out duck hunting ?? laugh
Posted by: KateSorensen

Re: Umm, really? - 12/18/13 06:40 PM

.
I wonder if the show will be cancelled?

H ow long was the star relieved of his position on the show.

I've never seen it.

.
Posted by: MrB

Re: Umm, really? - 12/18/13 09:26 PM

I watched the Snooki show the other day. It basically was a half hour of her boy friend(husband) talking on the sofa. At first I thought how dumb. But then I thought, shucks she is getting paid for this. Maybe that's pretty smart

Dave
Posted by: garyW

Re: Umm, really? - 12/20/13 11:09 AM

Rep. Bill Foster (D-IL) : Phil Robertson is "the 'Rosa Parks' of our generation." link

a southerner has an opinion about them. laugh
Posted by: KateSorensen

Re: Umm, really? - 12/20/13 11:41 AM

.

[Responding to no one in particular.]

My opinion. Free speech is free speech. A$$holes are a$$holes. He can say what he wants as far as I am concerned. People who disagree with his opinions can ignore him and/or not watch the show, which is to say if enough did that the show would be off the air. But it appears there are enough people watching who agree with him that will keep the show on the air.

I have not watched the show or any other reality show. I think that if you introduce a camera into a situation, be it a court room, reality situation or whatever, a lot of what is real becomes people realizing they are "on" and they behave as though "on stage" and know others are watching. It becomes less than reality.

I think I have enough reality in my own situations, family, town, state, United States, etc., that I don't have a need or desire to spend time watching that kind of stuff on tv. I don't object to it being on tv or others watching it, it just doesn't happen to be my cup of coffee. smile

I am sorry lots of people object to people of color, gays, different ethnic groups, Democrats [ smile ] and others, and object loudly using strong, vile language. Don't see we could ever prevent that sort of thing as it has been going on since time began.

.
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Umm, really? - 12/20/13 12:34 PM

As many have said, the guy's got a right to speak what passes for his mind; but he does not have the right to have his mind broadcast or printed. That's up to the free market to determine. If not, then I wanna know why my poems keep getting rejected by publishers. Where's free speech when you ned it?!?!
Posted by: MrB

Re: Umm, really? - 12/21/13 04:25 AM

As has been said, we have freedom of the press, as long as one owns the press

Dave.
Posted by: MrB

Re: Umm, really? - 12/21/13 04:37 AM

I enjoy the shows that deal with surviving in the elements like Surviver Man. There have been several. But, not for an instant, do I believe that they are actually surviving or in any real danger.

One that I enjoyed, was Dual Survivor . It had Cody Lundeen and Dave Canterbury in it. Then, after a big gaffe the replace Cabterbury with another guy. Supposedly because Canturbury had lied on his resume. My opinion, which of his viewers gave a hoot. He was entertaining and gave a good performance.

Kinda like not letting David Crockett stay at the Alamo because someone discovered he really hadn't killed a bear when he was only three.

Dave
Posted by: MrB

Re: Umm, really? - 12/21/13 04:56 AM

I didn't catch that issue of GQ so I didn't read the article. I don't know exactly what was printed. Anyone here read the article?

Dave