Like a glove.

The thing that disappoints me about statements like these is that they're not objective. There's a general tendency among the hardcore liberals here (not you specifically but I find this to be an example of this behavior) to defend values like freedom of choice/speech/etc, but only so long as they fit certain ideals they have for their vision of a 'good society'.

I get what you're saying, I can honestly tell you that I not only sympathize but whole-heartily agree; damn shame that a woman would subject her perfectly natural, normal body to this procedure.

But here's where we part ways: so what if it disturbs me? Who the hell cares what I think? It's her choice. I don't support women's right to have abortions because I think they're the proper/healthy course of action for some women in some situations (though they definitely are), I support it because it should be their right to decide what's proper/healthy for themselves, regardless of how I feel about it.

And as for cito, his comment wasn't worth reading let alone commenting on. I would downvote but I was under the impression I have to be some special-star-mega-shiny-member to downvote stuff.

>> ^bareboards2:

No, I don't think it is irrelevant.
If every single person said to this poor woman -- your body was beautiful just the way it was, please don't deform yourself for some idea in your head, then maybe just maybe, this would stop.
And yeah, I can have an opinion. A really strong one.
And yes, doctors who deform perfectly healthy bodies should be subject to peer review.
I had a friend years ago who had breast enhancement surgery. She lost a lot of weight and was so happy to be comfortable in her body. With the weight loss, her breasts shrunk and were deformed looking. She showed me a picture of her before -- it looked like she had two deflated hot dogs laying down her chest.
Now there is a woman whose self esteem was truly enhanced by surgery.
This woman? No way.
You want to comment on someone's post? Go say something to @cito. That is the most disgusting, rank, filthy thing he wrote and I am the only one to downvote it? And you want to lecture me about my opinion?


>> ^NinjaInHeat:
The doctor is a villain and should lose his license? Did he do something wrong or is that your general stand regarding any plastic surgeon? How about tattoo artists?
Whether you approve or not is irrelevant, wouldn't you agree?

The doctor is a villain and should lose his license? Did he do something wrong or is that your general stand regarding any plastic surgeon? How about tattoo artists?

Whether you approve or not is irrelevant, wouldn't you agree?

>> ^bareboards2:

Way to miss the point, there, rotten.... that doctor is the villian here. (Although I don't understand the FFM reference, maybe you are calling out that hack of a doctor who should lose his license as a doctor and as a human being.)

>> ^rottenseed:
>> ^bareboards2:
Why the hell anyone would mess with those beautiful breasts enrages me.
What the fuck. WHAT THE FUCK.

YEA! Let's tag-team this broad!!! It'll be the world's first FFM Eiffel Tower...we'll call it the EiFFMel Tower

Thank you WYFF4 for just reporting the news objectively and letting us decide for ourselves, *salutes*.

True magicians don't use cards.

>> ^schlub:

Ahh, the old "the card was inside my ass" trick

I"m just wondering as someone who's not that well informed about US politics, has Obama ever officially addressed that "bringing the troops home" promise? Some sort of attempt at an explanation of why he's been unable to do so? It seems to really stand out as something they were confident enough about being able to do that he felt comfortable giving such an assurance only to fail miserably at following it through.

On a side note, this piece of propaganda feels cheap. And the more I listen to Ron Paul the more I get the impression that as much as some of his views may be admirable he still symbolizes tradition. What is it with Americans and their constitution? Who gives a crap what your glorious founding fathers had in mind? Is it really relevant for present-day political decisions?

No disrespect intended but it seems like there's a tendency in American politics to refer to the constitution in matters of policy as Christians refer to the Bible in matters of civil rights.

As much as I'm loving this rant, Louis is making some inconsistent arguments, especially regarding Apple. He starts by presenting Apple and Microsoft as the 'Tesla and Edison' of our age and saying how lucky we are to have escaped the clutches of Bill's inferior technology and his evil empire, then he goes on to rant about the state of online consumerism today and how we've abandoned certain ideals for the sake of comfort.

Honestly it just feels like ignorance on the subject on his part. In this argument he's making, if anything, the 'Microsoft' era would be the equivalent of the 'local businesses' and Apple would be the Starbucks. Not that I'm suggesting Microsoft is a small business, but from a consumer point of view - the rise of Apple is an exact example of the process he's describing, he even admits it by ranting about iTunes, how we all 'share' our likes, god-forbid we 'exist on the fringes'. Apple IS a big 'fuck you' to anything independent, it's the personification of the 'evil corporate empire' he's talking about. But they make a PC that looks nicer and an OS that works smoother, so fuck all that idealistic shit, let's just buy their products and welcome our new overlords in all things technology-related.

I honestly do not understand how Apple have generated this public image of excellence for themselves, a future in which these types of business practices are common-practice in silicon valley is a scary one...

Must play civ now!!!

Love that I found myself faceplanting the exact moment he did.
Wasn't even aware of this piece of crap movie, two Adam Sanlders? Seriously? ugh...

DRAMA!!!!!!!!!

I find this sort of honesty refreshing.
It's so easy to hear of these activities and point accusing fingers in shock. The guy is simply saying that this IS a morally bankrupt field, it has always been. Pretending that entire business enterprises that produce revenue off of moral bankruptcy are to be expected to adhere to some standard of decency is ridiculous.

And I don't think he's implicating himself any more than he already has, he was already caught on tape admitting most of these activities and has admitted them later, he's not trying to hide what they did, he's simply saying he was employed for an organization and industry that has used these tactics for years, that laying the blame on individual reporters is childish, and I imagine this, if anything, supports his defensive strategy.

Honestly I don't know the first thing about celebrity gossip but I imagine it's actually quite the opposite; the dedicated tabloids would probably be much more interested in some truly trashy piece of gossip to report, and like it or not, a piece about celebrity yeast infections would probably sell way better than one covering hairstyles.

Remember the whole Gizmodo iPhone debacle? Same thing. Sure Gizmodo were to blame for being completely unprofessional, but they were simply the manifestation of the Apple fanboy hoards. We can't expect the media to practice professionalism and work ethic when we don't demand it as consumers but simply frown when they go 'over the line' (and even when they do, and we frown, we still manage to make it worth their while).

>> ^dannym3141:

>> ^NinjaInHeat:
I must say I sympathize with the so called "journalist". He is doing a very poor job of defending himself and I in no way support the point he's trying to make, but he does touch on something I agree with; this whole voyeurism industry is filth by definition, what's incredible here isn't the lengths that these reporters would go to to push out more trash news, it's that there's such an overwhelming demand for this garbage.
I would much rather hear actors directing heat on these issues straight at the audiences (which of course they won't). It's much easier blaming the celebrity media, but they are simply a manifestation of the mindless consumer horde.

In a way, sure, but i don't think the public would be happy with them hacking people's private shit to get that gossip. Well, they're clearly not because i haven't heard a single person standing up for them yet, though i'm sure there's reprehensible people who would somewhere in britain.
I don't think i've ever heard someone say "i get the paper for the celebrity gossip". And whilst i know there are celebrity gossip magazines out there that sell, i'd venture a guess that it's "cheryl cole's got a new hairstyle" that they're interested in rather than "cheryl cole's booked in for a yeast infection at local clinic, phone transcript inside".

TITTIES!!!!!!

Seriously though, I also find that it's pointless to try and force political correctness, especially on the interwebs. Fact is most hetero men would probably agree that it's impossible for them not to be dominated by sexual thoughts even while watching an otherwise 'innocent' video such as this one. There are those who express it and those who choose not to, the most you could accuse the ones who don't resist the urge is a general lack of sophistication....

I must say I sympathize with the so called "journalist". He is doing a very poor job of defending himself and I in no way support the point he's trying to make, but he does touch on something I agree with; this whole voyeurism industry is filth by definition, what's incredible here isn't the lengths that these reporters would go to to push out more trash news, it's that there's such an overwhelming demand for this garbage.

I would much rather hear actors directing heat on these issues straight at the audiences (which of course they won't). It's much easier blaming the celebrity media, but they are simply a manifestation of the mindless consumer horde.

Smart thinking captain, better kill it than face an invincible borg version of it later.