It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Fox Host Tells Supermodel To Shut Up About Gun Control – ‘You Have A Nice Bottom…Stick To That

page: 2
18
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 08:50 AM
link   

edit on 27-10-2014 by SpeakerofTruth because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 08:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Onslaught2996

So, pointing out the obvious things in life are faux-pa now?

She does have a nice rear end.

She should stick to things she knows. Gun Rights doesn't appear to be one of those things.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 08:57 AM
link   
a reply to: macman

It is actually the title of the story.

She never says anything about gun control just makes it clear that in the USA..a big story about guns in Canada is just another day in America.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 08:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: WP4YT
Without the 2nd, there would be no 1st.

Yes you need the second to keep the first when you are dealing with people who have a primitive mindset. Like the people at FOX.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 08:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Onslaught2996

So, not really about Gun Control.

She does however have little to no social tactics when making statements.

Just more reason for her to maybe stick to what she does best...............modeling.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 09:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: Onslaught2996

So, pointing out the obvious things in life are faux-pa now?

She does have a nice rear end.

She should stick to things she knows. Gun Rights doesn't appear to be one of those things.

Can you show where in her tweet she says anything about gun control? You sound like those idiots at FOX who couldn't comprehend what she was saying.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 09:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: Onslaught2996

So, not really about Gun Control.

She does however have little to no social tactics when making statements.

Just more reason for her to maybe stick to what she does best...............modeling.

Not it's not about gun control her comment was referring to how Americans have become desensitized when it comes to people killing each other.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 09:05 AM
link   
a reply to: macman

So attractive women shouldn't have opinions?

You have no problem giving your opinion. Why is she any different? Your comments are from the 1950's, by the way. But at least you are sticking with what you know........... sexism. Ugh.
edit on 10/27/2014 by ladyinwaiting because: repair codes



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 09:11 AM
link   
a reply to: buster2010

Already addressed.


You sound like the idiots over at Daily Kos.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 09:13 AM
link   
a reply to: ladyinwaiting

When did I state that??

I stated very clearly that her expertise seems to be within modeling and her abilities in the social realm, like when to make comments like she did, is lacking.

And yes, *eye rolling* it is soooo sexist to tell her to stick with what she knows........modeling.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 09:15 AM
link   
a reply to: ladyinwaiting

Some of the responses in this thread show how chauvinistic and misogynistic much of our membership really is (not that I needed a reminder). A woman says something about a serious situation in the country (gun violence and our desensitization to it) and they turn it into a frivolous discussion of the attractiveness of her body parts, implying that she's not smart enough to discuss a serious issue, but is rather better-suited to entertain them in a sexual and superficial way. Thank you FOX newsies...

And this is 2014? Ugh!



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 09:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Never said her looks had anything to do with her intellect.


Her social abilities are actually what I addressed.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 09:25 AM
link   
Opinions are like bottoms.

Everyone has one.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 09:26 AM
link   
a reply to: macman

Your first post in this thread states:



She does have a nice rear end.


Body Parts discussion - sexual and superficial - check!



She should stick to things she knows.


Ignoring serious discussion - check! (How do you know what she does and doesn't know??? She obviously knows that we have a serious gun violence issue in the US and that we've become desensitized to it.)


Gun Rights doesn't appear to be one of those things.


She didn't mention gun rights AT ALL. Maybe if you'd actually READ what she said instead of dreaming about her ass, and thinking of ways to demean her and her opinion, you'd know that.

And I was responding to the entire thread, not just you. Yours is just one of the posts that beautifully illustrates the points in mine.
edit on 10/27/2014 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 09:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: SubTruth

originally posted by: geldib
The 4th Amendment does protect the freedom of speech but doesn't protect you from the consequences the words you say might bring. I'm not saying it's right to threaten someone over something the say but, people tend to think they can say whatever they want without consequences because of the 4th amendment. Regardless whoever said this has absolutely no class.





It amazes me member actually starred your post. The freedom of speech is protected under the 1st amendment. If this is the level of understanding of what the founding fathers gave us it is any wonder why tyranny rules the day.



..........just........but they.......they don't understand...........................they are reacting out of emotion not reason, they don't think long term repercussions of their short term actions, they...............how does how does handcuffing the law abiding stop the law breaking?

As an example. I used to work in a convenience store. There was a guy that worked there, we will call him (John).

Halloween was all but here, much like now. He was obsessed with people not wearing makeup and taking off masks when they entered the store, like a rule requiring them to take off their mask would stop someone from robbing the place.

I asked him one day why he acted this way. He said, I kid you not, " if the aren't wearing a mask the police will be able to ID them, so they wont rob the store.".

I said, hey "John", did you ever think that the only people you will effect with this is the regular folks that wont rob us? I mean honestly here, if your going to rob the place, are you going to take of your mask because a rule tells you you have to? I mean your already breaking LAWS, with serious consequences here, to rob a place, are you really going to take your mask off because some douche put a sign on the door that says so?

He looked at me like I was retarded. He didn't understand the simple concept of criminals not following the laws. He thought he could protect himself with rules against criminals..........I just couldn't even look at him.

EVERYONE WHO DOESNY UNDERSTAND THIS< EXTREMELY SIMPLE FACT OF LIFE> NO MATTER WHAT LAWS YOU PASS< THEY WILL NOT FOLLOW THEM< HENCE THE TITLE CRIMINAL ATTACHED TO THEIR NAMES. THEY DONT FOLLOW THE RULES!!!!!!!!

Is this really so hard to understand?

I mean it seems as easy as understanding things fall if dropped. Water is wet. Dogs bark. And women are enigmas, not to be understood by the likes of men.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 09:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic


Body Parts discussion - sexual and superficial - check!

What is wrong with admiring the female form??




originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

Ignoring serious discussion - check! (How do you know what she does and doesn't know??? She obviously knows that we have a serious gun violence issue in the US and that we've become desensitized to it.)

While gun rights isn't exactly in the issue, as I rushed to make a statement, her statement leads to again..........her inability to judge when is the right time to make comments is.



originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

She didn't mention gun rights AT ALL. Maybe if you'd actually READ what she said instead of dreaming about her ass, and thinking of ways to demean her and her opinion, you'd know that.

Yep, I understand that. My mistake.


originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
And I was responding to the entire thread, not just you. Yours is just one of the posts that beautifully illustrates the points in mine.


Hey, I like the female form. Seems that my like, and her showing her's off is more of an issue then a terrible comment made at an inappropriate time.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 09:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
a reply to: ladyinwaiting

Some of the responses in this thread show how chauvinistic and misogynistic much of our membership really is (not that I needed a reminder). A woman says something about a serious situation in the country (gun violence and our desensitization to it) and they turn it into a frivolous discussion of the attractiveness of her body parts, implying that she's not smart enough to discuss a serious issue, but is rather better-suited to entertain them in a sexual and superficial way. Thank you FOX newsies...

And this is 2014? Ugh!


Not to be "that guy here', but have you ever talked to a model?

I have, I have talked to many in fact.

Sadly most deserve the stereotype.

All don't though, some are quantum physicists on the side, and others doctors( no BS, some of these ladies have badarsed bodies and extraordinary minds........seriously a few of these ladies are super smart, like Kip Thorn or Carl Sagan smart.)( I was impressed and dressed down more than once) (not so much others honestly).

So thinking them all "dumb blondes" is honestly dumb. However assuming so doesn't necessarily make you an arse, the stereotype is earned after all, not just given most of the time.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 09:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer
Opinions are like bottoms.

Everyone has one.


Apparently some are nicer than others.

Opinions, of course.




posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 10:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: macman
What is wrong with admiring the female form??


Nothing. But it's totally irrelevant to her comment and is meant as a demeaning distraction from what she said to the physical.



..her inability to judge when is the right time to make comments is.


When would be the right time (according to you) for her to make a comment on her twitter account about the problems with the culture in the US? What's "inappropriate" about the time she chose?



Hey, I like the female form.


So do I. But that's just a distraction from what she said. She wasn't modeling panties here, she was giving a serious opinion on US culture. And YOU and FOX "news" decided to make it about her physicality.



posted on Oct, 27 2014 @ 10:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic


Nothing. But it's totally irrelevant to her comment and is meant as a demeaning distraction from what she said to the physical.

So, what exactly are her credentials then?? What exactly is it that drew a news media, or anyone to listen to her comments??

Seems to be that her modeling, or use of her form, is the basis of this. So, her modeling does in fact come into play.



originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

When would be the right time (according to you) for her to make a comment on her twitter account about the problems with the culture in the US? What's "inappropriate" about the time she chose?

How about after the funerals....Just thinking.



originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
So do I. But that's just a distraction from what she said. She wasn't modeling panties here, she was giving a serious opinion on US culture. And YOU and FOX "news" decided to make it about her physicality.


Her job is just that, offering up her body in this manner.

And her comment is now considered as "serious opinion" on US culture?



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join