Someone sent this in today via an anonymous comment but I wanted to make sure everyone saw it. Please click here to view. Make sure you scroll to the bottom of the picture to read the comment. Thanks anonymous!
What does it prove? Also, I didn't see anything at the bottom, unless you mean the comment, but I didn't have to scroll for that so wonder if I missed something. Thanks!
You are welcome. I also posted it "you know where." LOL
But it just goes to show that she does talk to people and that she is friendly. Yeah I'm sure she has her days where she may not want to be bothered. But, I don't blame her.
You sure are a cantankerous soul aren't you? Well, I see quite a few people say "Show me proof that Kate can be human or positive." So that is why I called it Proof Positive. I knew it would get that type of response from a certain group of people. Depending on the type of monitor you have, you might need to scroll down to view the comment section under the picture. So I will change the script just for you and add "scroll to the bottom on the picture to read the comment." Thanks for stopping by and contributing.
I see Kate is wearing her FREE Gap sweatshirt, while selling items that were given to her. None of the money raised from that yard sale came out of Jon & Kates pocket.
I know we all enjoy and can appreciate this picture and comment for what it is..."nice." I'm afraid it will just get more lips flappin' on the "dark side" though.
Anon 6:09, I appreciate your comment and insight. I won a free lawnmower once and I gave it to a family in need. Now I am thinking I should have just sold it and kept the money for myself.
Well Marci, no matter what happens their lips are always flappin anyway. Hell, we could have video footage of Kate saving kids from a burning building and still the haters would find fault with it. There's just no pleasing them.
As for her Gap shirt, like I said in another thread, once items are given to someone they are then theirs to do with what they wish. And, as I asked before, should Kate keep the numbers and names handy of those that gave her stuff so that when she no longer wants the item for whatever reason she can call and ask them first what she should do with it? Get real!
Do you do that when you give someone something? Demand that they first contact you before getting rid of or passing on the item? I bet not.
"I see Kate is wearing her FREE Gap sweatshirt, while selling items that were given to her. None of the money raised from that yard sale came out of Jon & Kates pocket."
My niece has sold various items for her girl scout troop to benefit several different charitable organizations. Should I tell her that her effort didn't count because she didn't actually PAY for the items she was selling?
And how do you know what they sold and if it was or was not donated to them?
I would venture to say that the G's bought some of the things they sold and some of the things were given to them. We really have no way of knowing for certain what they buy and what is given to them.
Very nice picture. How special for the girl to have her picture taken with Kate. I have a picture of my daughter with a children's recording artist and it's a treasure.
Nina Bell said: Midnight Ramblings - You sure are a cantankerous soul aren't you?
Not really. It was a simple question. For all I knew, it was "proof positive" there was another kid in the family or something. Like I said, I guess I missed something. I'm rather new to all this.
Are you always this, um, welcoming to new posters?
Fanny said: My niece has sold various items for her girl scout troop to benefit several different charitable organizations. Should I tell her that her effort didn't count because she didn't actually PAY for the items she was selling?
--
Fanny, your niece is a child. Kate is an adult. Your niece probably did go around her house and pick things up to sell. Her mother paid for all the items that your niece sold. I do the same for my children. I have purchased my own lemonade from the children's lemonade stand, so that my children could sell some lemonade.
It is different for an adult. Adults are held to higher standards than children. If an adult sells donated clothes at a yard sale to give the money to charity, why does this show that this person is a good person. I see a person who sees an opportunity to: (1) be seen doing a good thing, (2) create an event around which an episode can be written, and (3) get paid mucho dinero for said episode. Kate is not a good person in my book. She is an opportunist.
That she stopped for a photo is no sign of her goodness. Think about it...there were cameras filming an episode. Do you think she would tell tha little girl "I don't have time for this"? Damage control at its finest.
"I knew it would get that type of response from a certain group of people."
Nina Bell, You don't need to publish this one if you don't want to. This doesn't make sense to me, and I hit submit on my last comment before getting to this. I asked a simple question because the post didn't make sense to me. Now it seems I am accused of being in a certain group, being cantankerous, etc. I know it's hard to understand tone in a written post, but I don't think I said anything that deserved this. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your tone as well. I was just hoping for a balanced discussion as the blog says. I'm new to these blogs but I'm guessing from what I've seen so far (on all the ones I have read) that true balance is going to be hard to find. Thanks for your time.
I will have to say Midnight Ramblings, felt a little like you were on the attack. So can I ask you,um, do you always present yourself that way when you enter a new home?
We do welcome your opinion and realize you have valuable insight to any discussion that goes on here. I for one do like to hear both sides and have changed my mind on some things because of it.
So yes your are welcomed and there are some people here who will keep you on your toes.
I wrote my last response before I received your comment but I do apologize and do truly hope you will stay. I think maybe we got off on the wrong foot and I took your comment the wrong way. Oh the beauty of the internet.
Well mom on the run, maybe you all should write to the pediatric cancer center (like the haters do with everything else) and tell them that they should not accept her money just because she MAY have received that money from selling items that were given to her.
Tell them that these poor dying kids shouldn't take the treatment Kate's money could be supplying. Because, I'm soooo sure they're more concerned about how they (and Kate) got the money rather than what good it is or could be doing.
PLEASE!!!!! I never heard something so asinine in my life!
So I guess that school kids and kids in the scouts that sell premade/prepackaged cookies and candy bars for good causes should be told that they aren't as worthy as say, someone who bakes their own cookies and sells them?
First of all, no one has any idea what items were sold at the yard sale. Everyone is arguing based on the assumption that they sold all free things.
There are many points about this that have already been made here like, I have no idea how many times I heard that she should give the freebies to charity. Now she does and it's not good enough.
Kate could very well have paid for the gap t-shirt and many of the items she sold. But I'm with those who say even if she didn't, who cares?
No matter what, they will not be satisfied. Good thing in the grand scheme of things, they are only a small percentage of human beings. Otherwise, I'd be afraid for our society.
I see Kate is wearing her FREE Gap sweatshirt, while selling items that were given to her. None of the money raised from that yard sale came out of Jon & Kates pocket.
SO-FREAKING-WHAT? It all still went to CHARITY and to a good cause. God, you GWoPpers are so obtuse!
Complain that they profit off the freebies and then also complain when they donate the freebies and don't profit from them.
I agree with the anon poster about gifts. Once a gift is given, it is the receivers to do with what they please. If not, it was not given in the right spirit. I know there are rumors about them selling stuff that was given to them and rumors that they said they would redonate the stuff they had received. Well, this time they did give back and lent their celebrity status to the cause. Who cares if they paid for the stuff they sold? What would make them happy? Exactly what dollar amount would it take? What does that have to do with the rights of the children? I'm glad the children are learning about charity and are around other children.
I think it's cute to see that picture. And, is shows that while some may have had a not-so-pleasant experience with Kate, others have had quite the opposite. To me, that just says she's human and has bad days like the rest of us.
As far as them selling things that were donated to them. SO WHAT!! They gave the money to a charity. If you can't see anything positive in that, then I am inclinded to believe that you will never see anything positive in them at all. Which, IMO, make you biased.
I don't think anyone is questioning Kate's ability to be nice to fan on camera or at a speaking engagement. This picture would mean more to me if it was taken at a shopping mall or somewhere that was a more private setting.
SO to all the naysayers... You're saying that you've never sold anything at a garage sale that was given to you as a gift? Did you give said money made off of a gift to a charity? Kate is damned if she does and damned if she doesn't..
Oops Nina, from the comment under the picture, I took it to be from Jon and Kate's garage sale. If it's not, I do agree that it shows a nicer side of the "private" Kate than what we heard about.
When so much is given to the Gosselins, is it too much to ask that give in return?
In the beginning, they couldn't give money because they were not financial able. They couldn't give time because, well, do I really need to state why? Donating clothes is a simple and easy way to give back. Their - the Gosselins - family mission statement says that they should be given back. Choosing to sell the clothes at a consignment store instead of donating the clothes that were donated to you...?
SO-FREAKING-WHAT? It all still went to CHARITY and to a good cause. God, you GWoPpers are so obtuse!
So freaking what is that Kate is doing something positive, being friendly (apparently not screaming "get away from me!" as so many suspect reports have claimed), and the GWoPpers cannot stand that. Literally cannot stand it. If there was some way to prove that she paid for the clothes she's wearing, they'd bitch about her hair, or bring up something else totally irrelevant.
When you ask, "is it too much to ask that give in return?", my response is that it's not really our business. There are plenty of people who are given much in this world. Think of all of the people that inherit wealth. Do you go around demanding that each of them give a certain percentage (set by you, of course) of what they have to someone else?
I'm not Christian, but I seem to remember there's some proverb about splinters' in other's eyes and logs in your own. Something like that. If people want to be charitable to the Gosselins or not, it's their business. If the Gosselins want to "give back" or not, it's their business. I understand having judgment, to a certain degree, but I don't understand thinking you have the right to DEMAND (and by you, I mean a general you, not aap specifically) or expect that they give back. Worry about yourselves, and what you're doing to make the world a better place.
It's always a little surprising to me when I see Kate relaxed and having fun like on the Games Gosselins Play episode or when she was holding Aunt Jodi's baby in another episode. It was the same in this pic seeing her look relaxed and smiling. The other side of her personality stands out so much more. I understand gossip and disliking Kate, but I don't understand the obsessive hatred and trying to pretty much ruin their lives. I can't believe that some wrote the Grain Assoc. If they wanted to help the children, they would focus on the children's rights in being filmed. To try to destroy their mother does nothing to help the family. She is their parent and they are her children. She get's to parent the way she wants. I for one was bothered that she didn't go on the boys with their day out. That doesn't mean I want her children taken away and for Kate to suffer. Other than friendly advice, I don't want anyone telling me how to raise my children. I would be afraid of those people if I were Jon and Kate.
Well, to be honest, I think Jon and Kate getting donations is different than inheriting wealth.
When you ask, "is it too much to ask that give in return?", my response is that it's not really our business.
I do see your point in this, and agree with you to a certain point. However, let me counter with it was Jon and Kate who wrote (and televised) their mission statement stating that it was their goal to give back. Because they introduced the topic, I think it's fair game for people to ask, well, how are you giving back?
Well, to be honest, I think Jon and Kate getting donations is different than inheriting wealth.
In what way? I mean, it's different, yeah, but I don't think it's different in the sense that J&K are less deserving (or more) than, say Paris Hilton. In both cases, you have someone with money who didn't earn it.
I agree that the mission statement about giving back opens the Gosselins to questions about the subject. But for myself, I don't assume that they don't give back just because I haven't seen evidence. They are damned if they do or damned if they don't. When we don't hear about it, people assume that they aren't doing anything. When we do hear about it, the anti-Gosselinites tell us that they are just doing it as damage control, that it's tacky to publicize one's own generosity, and that the money or items they give aren't theirs, anyway, so it doesn't count.
Adults (especially parents) are held to a higher standard indeed. These higher standards should include:
-setting an example -generosity -respect -compassion -responsibility -patience -forgiveness
Whether or not the Gs are following these standards, we, as adults should follow and live up to these standards as much as possible, don't you think?
We may not all agree on the ins and outs of this particular garage sale benefit, etc., but regardless of what the differing opinions are, it does show their children a small way in which they can/are giving back.
As an aunt of a four-year-old nephew living with leukemia (ALL) and a supporter of St. Jude's Hospital, I can say personally that every little dollar helps when it comes to research. My H and I can only afford to give $19 a month to St. Jude's. They (St. Jude's development staff) constantly tell us thank you and tell us how our gift is helping children in their care, as well as how the research they are doing there in Memphis is helping doctors here in the US and abroad.
For two years now, we walk in his honor at the Light the Night walk for leukemia and lymphoma society and I collect donations (cash) from friends and family.
For years I was a fundraiser for a small, grass roots AIDS service organization. As the director, I was excited about every single dollar that was donated - and I let the donors know how their gift, small or large, was helping someone living with HIV.
Personally I'm done with all the bickering and back and forth about what the Gs should or shouldn't have done with their "free" clothes. A gift is a gift. Clothes and children's products/gear aren't meant to be held on forever - they are outgrown.
In my honest opinion, what the Gs did (if indeed what we are reading is true), created a win-win situation. Parents received nice clothes and/or gear for their own children at a fraction of the price and a charity received a check.
Every year (twice annually) a local HS here in my town does a big "baby mania" sale where parents can buy and sell their kids' goods. I have sold my son's baby clothes and the money I have made helps me buy him the next season's clothes. Some of the things I sell were given as gifts and some I have purchased myself. I'm tickled pink when I can go to craigslist or one of these baby sales and find a piece of gear at a bargain price.
As far as the filming, etc. goes, of course the crew was there - it's a part of the business. I'm sure most of us can agree that the filming of some of these moments of giving can take away from the original sincerity. I try to look past that and think about the charity and how happy they are, as well as the parents who got some good deals for their children.
I am glad you posted here, as it brought to my attention how many of us on several of these blogs and boards aren't keeping to a higher standard. Where is our compassion, maturity, respect and forgiveness? Not just towards each other, but also towards the G family which includes eight precious children.
Perhaps we could all step back and remember most of what is out here in blogland is speculation. Let's all try to watch our words - agreed?
Well, to be honest, I think Jon and Kate getting donations is different than inheriting wealth.
"In what way? I mean, it's different, yeah, but I don't think it's different in the sense that J&K are less deserving (or more) than, say Paris Hilton. In both cases, you have someone with money who didn't earn it."
Yeah but would most people donate money to Paris Hilton, if she had none? I think the difference is that a large amount of people gave the Gosselin's donations out of the generosity of their heart. And because someone showed them kindness, it would be nice for them to pass it on whereever they can. Where would Jon and Kate be without the donations?
Paris Hilton was just lucky enough to land in the right gene pool. Which doesn't me I don't think she shouldn't give, just that she wasn't the recipient of the generosity of strangers.
Wow. The emotion in this blog is ... well, something. The very first message from "midnight ramblings" I totally understood. I saw the photo and was wondering if there was a story to it or something that I was missing. If it was just to show she wasn't all "screamy" at the sale, great. But I don't think that message was intitially evident, just by saying "proof positive" and can understand the question for clarification. I was thinking "positive" of what??? just simply didn't know or wondered what I was missing.
As an aunt of a four-year-old nephew living with leukemia (ALL) and a supporter of St. Jude's Hospital, I can say personally that every little dollar helps when it comes to research.
Thanks for giving a personal perspective on this, and best wishes to your nephew. I was appalled when I read (on the Princess Marie Chantal board) that some of the GWoPpers were lamenting that they hadn't had notice of the garage sale, so they could have picketed it. These women wanted to disrupt an event that raised money to fight cancer in children. There are no words to describe how twisted and wrong that is.
Are you saying that Jon and Kate haven't worked for the money they have :-)?
Aw, no fair, you put the little smiley face so I feel like I'm taking you too seriously if I feel compelled to respond. But I'll do it anyway: I do think the Gosselins have "earned" the money they've gotten from the show and from speaking engagements. If money and/or clothes, or other items were donated, I don't consider those earned.
Wow. The emotion in this blog is ... well, something.
And your post is...passive-aggressive and disingenuous. Making it pretty par for the course for GWoPpers.
Mom said...."Perhaps we could all step back and remember most of what is out here in blogland is speculation. Let's all try to watch our words - agreed?"
Mom, your entire post was spot on and I wish everyone would take the time to read it with a sincere heart.
What I want to know is...why is it so hard for people to understand that the stuff that they get is given to them in exchange for something.
What I mean by that is, in TV when you have a show like theirs sponsers GIVE you things in exchange for free or discounted airtime/mention of their product(s). That's just the way it is.
J&K are NOT the first to do this. Nor will they be the last.
The people that dislike them act like normal regular everyday people like you and I are still showing up on their doorstep with free stuff and that just ISN'T happening.
The free stuff they are getting is in exchange for advertising. And that's just the nature of the business!!!! Whether you like it or not.
How about all the audience members on shows like Oprah and Tyra? Some guests that come on those shows give ALL the audience members free stuff. Does that mean the audience members are beggers? Taking things they really don't need? Are oportunistic? NO! I highly doubt it.
The free stuff is given in order to get the word out about their product. And anyone in their right mind would take free stuff. And you (J&K haters) would too if it were offered regardless of what you say. You know you would.
Well mom on the run, maybe you all should write to the pediatric cancer center (like the haters do with everything else) and tell them that they should not accept her money just because she MAY have received that money from selling items that were given to her.
--
In my post, I was responding to the poster who mentioned her niece selling Girl Scout cookies. I wanted to point out that children can sell their familiy's stuff at a yard sale and it can be considered cute. But the Gs are selling items donated to them, filming the episode for money, and then trying to garner praise for their generosity. If the Gs wanted to be truly generous, they should donate the amount that TLC is paying them to film the episode featuring the yard sale and give the entire amount to the pediatric cancer charity.
To further clarify my post... I consign many of my children's clothes and toys at local consignment shops. I have a policy that I will not consign any toys or clothes given to me by friends. I have had neighbors hand me bags of clothes when my youngest was born. I used the clothes for my youngest, then donated them to a friend who was having a baby. I did not feel right earning money for consigning clothes that I had not purchased. I hope this clears up any misconceptions about my post.
Furthermore, I fully support pediatric cancer charities. I have several people in my life who have dealt with a cancer diagnosis. I believe that there is inadequate funding for cancer charities.
Sorry I don't have time to read everyone's posts. I was passing through and saw the nice picture. I think taking this picture really made Sams day seeing the big smile on her face. See what it is..a nice picture someone let us see..end of story!
First let me say that I feel for your nephew. Growing up, I had a friend who's brother had leukemia, so I have an idea of what you are going through. Children's diseases are the most heartbreaking. In addition, in college one of our assignments was to work with a charity, and that charity was St. Jude's so I know the good work they do, and most important, how much money raised actually goes back to the charity. I am not trying to make light of your situation, but let me put the consignment-gate situation like this.
And first let me say - I AM IN NO WAY IMPLYING DONATING CLOTHES IS ALONG THE SAME LINES AS HAVING CANCER.
Imagine that the Gosselin's had a child with leukemia, and the hospital donated 100 treatments of chemo the child (the Gosselin's own these treatments even if they don't use them. They are theirs to do what they want.) It turns out that the child wasn't responding to that treatment, so the hospital donated 100 treatments of an experiemental drug to use instead.
Now the Gosselin's have 75 chemo treatments left to do what they want with them and instead of passing it on to another family in need, they chose to sell the treatments and keep the profits for themselves.
Now the Gosselin's have a TV show because their child is miraculous cured and people are interested in their story, and word is starting to get around about how the Gosselins have sold the 75 chemo treatments and how angry people are about it. So they decided to hold a garage sale for the remaining 25 treatments of experimental treatment, as well as take pictures with people to raise money for charity. The Gosselin's are getting paid to air their garage sale on TV, so while they are raising money for charity, they are also making money for themselves, and nothing is coming personally from them.
How would you feel about the situation then?
For all you court based people (you know who you are), I know I have represented facts not in evidence :-), and I don't personally know if the Gosselin's have donated their own money on top of what they raised at the garage sale (if I was their PR person, this is what I would recommend and publicize!)
I am just using this story - to illustrate the opinions of the consignment-gate believers. And I will add that no one can 100% prove or disprove the consignment-gate story, and it is all conjecture on my part.
I am really using this story to show, if the consignment store story is true, why people would be angry over the Gosselin's donating the clothes.
But the Gs are selling items donated to them, filming the episode for money, and then trying to garner praise for their generosity. If the Gs wanted to be truly generous, they should donate the amount that TLC is paying them to film the episode featuring the yard sale and give the entire amount to the pediatric cancer charity.
Do you recognize the contradiction in your post? You know for a fact that the Gosselins are "trying to garner praise for their generosity" by filming (supposedly; I'm not sure that's been confirmed) the garage sale for their show. But then you set another standard for them to meet if they want to be considered "truly generous" by you. But if they do donate the money from the episode to the charity and you don't hear about it, you'll assume that they haven't. If you do hear about it? We're back to them "trying to garner praise."
aap, I know you're just trying to illustrate a point, but the difference between selling clothes and selling life-saving treatment is so vast that I think the comparison is unfair and loaded.
That picketing stuff is absolutely the most absurd thing I have heard yet when it comes to this benefit sale. Why in the world would anyone want to deny help to a charitable organization is beyond me. People are fogetting the other parties involved - including the parents and families of children (and adults) praying daily that doctors will discover a cure for an awful disease. My little nephew was diagnosed just prior to his 2nd birthday - in fact, he spent his 2nd bday in the hospital, all pumped up with steroids and chemotherapy drugs. He goes to treatment almost every week and has been taking some kind of chemo since the initial diagnosis. He has lost his hair, gained lots of weight due to steroids, had lots of "roid" rages (that's what we call them, when he is on certain types of steroids), lost several pounds and became anemic, ran fevers continuously for weeks, up to eat at all hours of the night, only to not want to eat at all when meds were changed.
I'm sorry to ramble people, but THIS IS reality for families of kids with cancer. This nit-picking "they should do this" and "I can't believe they did that" and "how dare they?" etc. is just getting out of hand.
Whether anyone thinks it's damage control, contrived, ill-intentioned, whatever - is your opinion....fine. But, regardless, it (gifts to Ronald McD House and pediatric cancer research) IS helping kids who are very sick and their parents who are pulling their hair out with worry and fear.
"Adults (especially parents) are held to a higher standard indeed. These higher standards should include:
-setting an example -generosity -respect -compassion -responsibility -patience -forgiveness
Whether or not the Gs are following these standards, we, as adults should follow and live up to these standards as much as possible, don't you think?"
*******
I'm a parent and I can tell you I fail at all of these things everyday. I'm glad God is forgiving, otherwise I'd be in big trouble if people on a Gosselin website were judging me in the end.
In all fairness, I did point right up front that I was in no way stating that donating clothes was the same as having cancer. I chose that because of what mom said about her nephew.
aap - sorry, I agree with Guin. I just can't even begin to debate over the scenario/comparison you presented.
I'm also asking others, PLEASE let's not get into this nit-picking crap when it comes to consignment sales that took place years ago. No one knows what what/is in their bank account then or now. To try and speculate about it is just absurd to me. If people who gave them gifts were pissed, so be it.
I explained my take on the filming in my post earlier. Of course the show is going to tape it, it's par for the course.
If they didn't tape it, there would still be speculation of their intentions.
I'm just curious, if that show never airs, how will you feel then? Technically, they are getting paid by Figure 8 regardless of what airs and what doesn't.
Whether anyone thinks it's damage control, contrived, ill-intentioned, whatever - is your opinion....fine. But, regardless, it (gifts to Ronald McD House and pediatric cancer research) IS helping kids who are very sick and their parents who are pulling their hair out with worry and fear.
In all fairness, I did point right up front that I was in no way stating that donating clothes was the same as having cancer. I chose that because of what mom said about her nephew.
aap, I acknowledged that. But the example you are using is still not appropriate because the two are such vastly different things. One is okay and the other isn't precisely because they are so different.
If were being honest - this picture shows me that Kate must have been the recipient of some nice new veneers, that she probably didn't pay for IMO.
One picture doesn't "prove" that Kate is nice. Yes she is human, and she "can" be pleasant - especially when the cameras are rolling and her reputation is in question.
King you say "One picture doesn't "prove" that Kate is nice. Yes she is human, and she "can" be pleasant - especially when the cameras are rolling and her reputation is in question."
First it's (this being said by people who dislike the G's) "Oh she's a mean and nasty woman. We see it on camera all the time. Her screaming and yelling. Etc." Now you are claiming that she's nice because she is on camera/being filmed. WTH?
So, which is it? Is she mean becauase the cameras are rolling or nice because the cameras are rolling (based on what you said that would mean Kate was NICE on every episode....because you said she is only nice on camera....and yet you all always put her down saying how mean she is during every show.....can you say contradiction?)?
Can't have it both ways unless you see it like I do. And I see it as YES, they probably have good and bad days. BOTH captured on camera at times and witnessed first hand when cameras are not around. Seems pretty normal to me.
But the Gs are selling items donated to them, filming the episode for money, and then trying to garner praise for their generosity.
How do you know this for a fact? How do you know that the charity and the organization that planned the garage sale are not thrilled beyond belief that their organization and their charity is being featured on The Learning Channel? It's called PUBLICITY and AWARENESS. How do you know that the Gosselins weren't ASKED to be there to promote the event? You don't. Period.
How stubborn and obsessed in your hatred do you have to be not to know that this was a GOOD thing for everyone involved? It taught those kids the value of giving back to those less fortunate. It earned money for pediatric cancer. It gave publicity to the organizers of the sale. After this exposure, I'll bet the amount of donated items they receive next year will go up ten fold.
If the Gs wanted to be truly generous, they should donate the amount that TLC is paying them to film the episode featuring the yard sale and give the entire amount to the pediatric cancer charity.
Yes, and then you'd all still find something to bitch about.
I'm sorry. Sorry that I cannot be nice about this subject. I cannot resist swearing or wanting to yell and shake every one of these uncaring and unfeeling "advocates." I have several family members who have died from cancer. I am involved in a charity that has many of these kind of events and donates the proceeds to childhood cancer. The foundation I volunteer for is named after a 13 year old who died of leukemia and I have helped with their golf tournaments and Vegas nights, all in the name of raising money to go to pediatric cancer research. If I saw "protesters" picketing outside an event that raises money for that cause, it would take all my willpower not to run them over with my car. Short of that, i'd certainly let them know what a sad, pathetic bunch of losers they were for doing such a thing.
Once again, sorry. I cannot be rational about this subject. The hatred directed towards these people has hit a new low.
I'm irritated too. Good thing I'm going to pick up my little one who reminds me how precious life is. In the midst of my own posts above, I wasn't even thinking of the third "win" which is the awesome publicity for the charity and church! Thanks for reminding us of that!
I don't think folks have a clue how hard it is to get good 'free' PR when you are a charity. TV is very expensive. What a blessing the pediatric cancer research org will receive if, indeed, it is broadcasted.
Win-win-win is how I see it. The Gs will always be losers in the eyes of the "hate" zealots. Unfortunately for them, they will never be seen as charitable, giving or compassionate.
Boy this post really stirred some stuff up for me - yes, I have alot of folks in my life who are living with cancer or died due to complications of cancer, but I think it the sheer ignorance of some people that has me floored.
People are writing Bill O'Reilly, Regis & Kelly, Woman's Day, Post Dispatch, and the list goes on. Boards are full of hatred and venom due to a sister of an in-law, a former helper from several years ago and the ever-so-truthful Nat'l Enquirer for Pete's sake!
It's becoming more than an obsession for some and I, too, think Fiona made a good and honest point on PM's blog about giving us a 'fix' to feed our addiction. That rings true a bit, don't you think?
Yay!! Another wackadoo (avasmommy) has emailed Bill O'Reilly (she put her link on PM's site to view it)...AND she was "smart" enough to give him the links to PM's and Julie's blogs so he can really get the full embittered housewife effect!!
There's another week I can take off from blogging. Thanks again for keeping the "looney" train going, ladies!
"Better to be thought a fool than to speak your mind and leave no doubt."
marci said: "Yay!! Another wackadoo (avasmommy) has emailed Bill O'Reilly (she put her link on PM's site to view it)...AND she was "smart" enough to give him the links to PM's and Julie's blogs so he can really get the full embittered housewife effect!!"
She forgot to spell check, also. I hope she didn't send it like that--how "embarressing."
Wow. This DID bring the misery guts out of the woodwork, didn't it? Get over it. The pic was of a smiling woman who was helping to get some community action done! And for this there is foaming at the mouth? I see what has been said here by some as proof positive that the frenzy over whatever Kate or Jon does even off the show is something that people USE to "feed their addiction". I totally agree with that! This entire thing is driven by a stalker mentality and it's enough now. How can you not be sick to death of yourselves? It's a TV show. They get paid. They sometimes get free things. So do ALL the actors you watch on every single show and movie. And you have no idea what THEY do with all of their grabbings. Did you know that many of them give to causes then make the entertainment companies they are signed with foot the bill? Don' t you know that every time a celebrity shows up at an event they are compensated for it or flown there first class and given room service, suites -whatever they want? All because they make an appearance for some charitable cause. Come ON! You can't be that provincial that you don't know this?! It is scary to read some of these posts. People can be really irrational but how far will they go? Will they hurt someone?
And how do you know about the "veneers"? If they ARE veneers, she probably paid for them. If she is as rich as all of the hate Kate people say, then she probably DID pay for them. What if a dentist chose to do it for her for his own publicity? What if, what if, what if? What if you stopped this and did something positive like collect money for a horrible disease by selling something or donating something. I have had 2 friends die within 9 months of each other from cancer. What have you done for their cause today?
I support Easter Seals because my son is on the spectrum of autism.
And I suppose it wouldn't bother you at all if a bunch of overinvested nutbars picketed a fundraiser for autism research solely because of their dislike for a complete stranger?
It bothers me that people are believing Jenny McCarthy and not vacinating their kids because of autism. I have no problem with people challenging her beliefs, instead of just accepting what she says as gospel.
And I suppose it wouldn't bother you at all if a bunch of overinvested nutbars picketed a fundraiser for autism research solely because of their dislike for a complete stranger?
Did I miss something?
I skim - but I thought what if any, people had an issue with the pretense of making a donation, to the Pediatric Cancer Foundation, with monies raised by things they didn't pay for - where is it written even if you are bothered by the guise of altruism, that it is not agreed that it was a benefit to the Foundation proper?
Are you saying that the picketeers would bring more attention to the garage sale, and draw more attention to the charity, giving the charity even more publicity, which in the end would be a good thing because What a blessing the pediatric cancer research org will receive if, indeed, it is broadcasted.
I realize twinmom put that "what have you done, etc." question out there and you answered. I'm not sure it was directed to you, but to the posters here in general (I'm just guessing here).
Guin was trying to say if people rallied and picketed a fundraiser for your cause, it would be upsetting to say the least (am I right Guin?).
I'm sure having a child with spectrum autism is challenging and probably difficult. I don't know personally, but appreciate your sharing.
I don't think anyone here was trying to discount other causes out there and I hope you don't think that.
Welcome. If you wouldn't mind making up a handle for yourself, that would be great. You don't have to register it or anyting, just type it in each time. It's really difficult addressing so many anon posts.
I see Kate is wearing her FREE Gap sweatshirt, while selling items that were given to her. None of the money raised from that yard sale came out of Jon & Kates pocket.
Oh so what! I sell stuff that came to me free too. None of the money went IN to Jon and Kate's pocket either as it was a Church Garage sale. Jeeeez. Ever think that they might get more money because it once was owned by the gosselins? People love that stuff. Seriously...Anonymous posting needs to be banned. I want to know who you are if you're going to be so snippy.
I think everyone should treat unsigned comments as if they don't exist. Ignore them. It's just rude internet practices. like using all caps or "Texteese" in chat rooms.
Jenny McCarthy is what I would consider a sound advisor-but there is research that points to high levels of aluminum in many of the vaccines and autism.
The clinic I work in has done granted research or hundreds of boys with autism. There is a link.
You can however request that vacinations be spread out so as to not to have as much aluminum at one time for tiny brains to metabolize.
Would one of you be interested in writing an article about autism? I think it is an intersting topic and I know there are alot of varying opinions out there.
Please email it to Nina. Her email is over at right side.
Please think about it.
[I deleted the previous post which was mine with a typo in it.]
I am glad that a pediatric cancer foundation benefited from this "yard sale". Also, I can understand Kate not wanting to have it on her own property. I just don't understand why Figure8 thought people would want to watch a yard sale on an episode?! I like seeing the kids, and I doubt if a yard sale would have much to do with kids, although I'll have to wait and see. In my opinion, the show has shifted to show more of Kate and less of the kids. I don't like Kate much, so I'm not as happy with the show as I used to be.
A couple of people at GWoP are now complaining that they money from the sale (which they shouldn't have made by selling things they shouldn't have been given) was donated to the wrong charity. Why do they support a pediatric cancer charity when they should be supporting PCOS and infertility and HOMs? Will they never run out of things to complain about?
And surely a yard sale couldn't be more boring than buying beds, or getting new carpeting or installing shelves in the garage. Please, tell me it can't.
A couple of people at GWoP are now complaining that they money from the sale (which they shouldn't have made by selling things they shouldn't have been given) was donated to the wrong charity. Why do they support a pediatric cancer charity when they should be supporting PCOS and infertility and HOMs? Will they never run out of things to complain about?
What I got from the accounts, was that Jon and Kate could have donated to PCOS or infertility research. Not should.
Not to say Pediatric Cancer Research is not a deserving charity, but realistically it makes sense for Jon and Kate to support PCOS since she suffers from it and infertility research since they both benefitted from it. Of course bottomline it was their choice, but for all the "wish list" items that posters here, there, everywhere would like to see - I would rather watch the show and see Jon and Kate be honest and real and be themselves rather than trying to do what the viewers would like them to do.
Honestly that's why I think a lot of what has been aired lately is "damage control" - because it comes across as fake. JMO.
That said, can some of Kate and Jon's supporters point me to a good rebuttal to the question of why is it ok for them to trample on their kids' privacy? Pls, I am trying not to be judgmental, and frankly, resent this couple. I don't care about everything else , although they are enough to raise my hackles. But I saw the episode of the kids in the bath so a Johnson and Johnson bath product could be placed. They're not babies anymore, that is to me, just felt wrong.
That episode is really what planted the seed of doubt in me. Then I read Jodi's sister's blog and PennMommy...i wish people would just stop watching and maybe this kids could have a stab at some normalcy.
That said, can some of Kate and Jon's supporters point me to a good rebuttal to the question of why is it ok for them to trample on their kids' privacy?
As soon as you re-read your post and take out all of the assumption and opinion. Assumption 1: The kids have no privacy. Assumption 2: The parents are "trampling" on it, meaning that they are completely unconcerned about their children's privacy.
Penn Mommy and Julie's blog have absolutely nothing to do with this issue. They've both jumped on the bandwagon of "protecting the children" but if Julie really cared about the Gosselin children, she wouldn't be participating in a site like GWoP.
Just FYI, the Gosselin 10 website seems to have been updated a few days ago. There is now a little blurb about the Pediatric Cancer Research and the related yard sale, as well as a link for people to donate if they so choose.
As soon as you re-read your post and take out all of the assumption and opinion.
Sorry, but if "assumption" and "opinion" are not allowed - then what is there left to post?
I think I'd like to make up a definition for Urban Dictionary as well.
GDNNOPer - one who cannot come up reasonable conclusions unless they are hit over the head with a brick of proof - and even then it must be "acceptable".
Seems that there are some people here that are allowed to assume and speculate and state their opinions at will, but once someone who has something to say that is contrary to what the group has to say - then some of you call foul and say witty things like "we all know what happens when we "assume".
That is also the case with self-diagnosis and name-calling. Some people cry foul when it's directed at Jon and Kate - but some of you have a field day with GWOPPERS - wow it's even a "rule" now - name calling of the nut bars is ok.
You fault GWOP for not "being all about the kids" - even though it's ONE thing on their laundry list of "wants" - this group came from a group of former members of TWOP - I thought the whole premise of those boards is to be able to snark about shows - and if you don't mind me saying, that Jon and Kate give the viewers a lot of material to work with. It's not ok to talk about the kids but here it's ok to call Maddy "bratty" because you're not necessarily calling out the child, but her behavior, but Maddy's bratty behavior is not proof that she is being affected by show, she's just being "Maddy".
Over at GWOP, not even there - over at the "Secret Board" who the mods here have never actually seen, but its content has been "proven" enough for them - they cite the Hannah was called "oafish" over and over and over again. Ok, among the thousands of comments, let's not forget the serial killer, drug dealer, pregnant teen comments either. These four examples among thousands. Who's beating a dead horse?
There are people on this board that post and read Marie Chantal and that board is very offensive - that's all they do is make fun of GWOP, no one here has a problem with the "mean" over there. So what is it? Don't be mean in general or it's ok to be mean to some people?
Because fair and balanced it is not; just because this blog claims to post contrary opinions on this board - it is not enough. Besides some of the mods here disregard some posts and call posters "bitches" just because they are "pissed off."
I don't agree with everything that is posted on GWOP - but over there, they post their own topics and that's where the comments stay - about their own posts. No one goes over there and says "you know what's happening over at GDNNOP?" Of course, the mods keep that stuff out. But here, when someone asks for suggestions and it is suggested that the discussion be civil and not mention what is going on elsewhere, there is a big collective "hell no" "we like talking about them".
Some of you call PennMommy and Julie gossips - what are you?
There are a lot of people here who make great talking points, yet it's not enough - it always falls back to talking about others. "remembering that behind the screen name is still a human" - how long did that last?
This post may never see the light of day - and maybe if it does, I'll get the stock answer of "you don't like it, don't come here."
But all I am saying is don't accuse other people of doing things that are done here as well. I don't want to call it "hypocritical" because God Forbid I get labeled "a saint" who makes others feel bad because of my "judgments".
Yes ducttapeoverthemouth (I guess it came off?) I did refer to you as a bitch in an email asking nomoredrama to respond to an email I had received from you. I thought I was forwarding it and I hit reply.(Don' you just hate that when that happens?) I told normoredrama at the time that I had no problem with it. That I was too old to worry about it and wanted to own up to it. But she felt I should let it go. Actually, I think normoredrama apologized to you.
I was the only mod that did that so when you say "mods" you are just trying to stir things up and make a situation look worse than it is.
And here you are talking about others. Seems like maybe we are all guilty of being hypocritical.
We are all gossips, yourself included. But are we attempting to destroy anyone? Are we making up stories and screen names in order to win an argument? Or make a point?
I don't care if you visit here or not. I think it is quite obvious to everyone that I am not profiting off of this and grow wearier of this everyday. I hardly even post anymore. I do not need this site to be popular and get a million hits. This is not my life. I work full time and have a family like most of the rest of you.
And actually there has been great discussion here from both sides. That is the one thing that I feel good about. Fair and balanced is opened to interpretation.
And I do apologize for referring to you as a bitch.
By using the word "mods" I meant it as a way of not pinpointing.
The point of my post was that EVERYTHING that is posted here, there, anywhere is opinion.
Good, Bad, it's all the same. But we can't "blame" someone else for their opinion. We can't say someone is doing something, that in our way we are doing ourselves.
I like this blog (I just don't like some of its posters) but I just ignore them.
I submitted a comment about the whole e-mail thing, that I hope you post. It explains a lot.
I accept your apology and hope you do whatever you need to do once again enjoy this blog again.
I notice that.
You (collectively) get so worked up about something that someone said and then you realize, "wait a minute" it's just a show. It begins to be something that is not for "fun" anymore.
And yes, by being here, I am a gossip too.
Have a good day. We, including myself should be out enjoying our own children!
one who cannot come up reasonable conclusions unless they are hit over the head with a brick of proof - and even then it must be "acceptable".
Laughing so hard at this one. Yes,because (for example) it's reasonable to conclude that because we see an item on a to do list, it means Kate consigns every piece of free clothing.
Or it's reasonable to conclude that because none of the kid's wanted to sit with Kate on the train, it proves she abuses them and they hate her.
Or lets talk about the reasonable conclusion that everyone outside of GWoP is a bumbling fool who can't tell that the Gosselins do not need financial help. Christians, specifically, are so uneducated that they'll give and give to the KONartists.
As far as posting at Crown Princess Marie, first of all, I think I've made one comment there in weeks. Secondly...my comments there have been about the INSANITY that goes on there. You try to say comments like "Oafish" occured on the secret board? No, it didn't. It was in one of Dew's episode recaps and was only removed after some complaining. I pretty much stopped visiting GWoP because tasteless comments can be found under every post.
- it always falls back to talking about others. "remembering that behind the screen name is still a human" - how long did that last? I take offense to this comment, sorry. I am polite to people who disagree with me and I've had many a discussion with people who have different views than my own. Ask AAP...Ask some of the others that come. There are discussions had here every day. I don't call people names but I will say that I think things like driving by the Gosselin home is nutty. Sorry.
I am not going to argue with you about the board being fair and balanced. If you don't see it that way, fine. But how many of your comments have not gotten through? Even one that could have been potentially 'damaging.' Fair and balanced doesn't mean every post is agreed with. It means every post get's a fair chance to be published and the discussion can come from both sides (read, balanced). If more people hold a pro-Gosselin opinion, there is no controlling that. This board is what it is. Period.
nomoredrama are you a politician? Here is a more direct question, because I gave a specific concern.
Privacy being trampled on: The kids in baths to place a J&J bath consumer product. So I'm not allowed to have an opinion that no kid should have their baths publicized?
More privacy being trampled on? the kids in the potty.
But I am again, so ANYONE can answer me this question, specifically talking about the kids in the bath. Even though, anyone with discernment can find so many other examples. Are you really so pro Gosselin that you can't see them nomoredrama?
Personally, I don't think it's ok to show kids in baths. Too many pervs out there. Again, that is one example among many. Is that an ok opinion to have? Will someone with a different opinion who can also be polite respond?
I am coming from a place of trying to understand both sides. I don't appreciate the hostility and condescension.
Personally, I don't think it's ok to show kids in baths. Too many pervs out there. Again, that is one example among many. Is that an ok opinion to have? Will someone with a different opinion who can also be polite respond?
Thank you....this is your opinion. How can a question be answered "why is it ok to trample on their privacy" in any meaningful way if the poster is not in agreement with you stance? It sets up an unfair bias, anyone who disagrees with you is in favor the privacy of a child being trampled on.
I'm not going to talk about potty shots and bath shots with you right now. The topic has been beaten to death either in this thread or another one. You won't have to do much digging to find the opinions you seek.
NMD this was not meant toward you. Yes you suggested it, but hardly anyone, besides yourself heeded.
Regarding "proof" - let's use consign as an example. Let's start with the clothes. I was scratching my head at the Disney episode, when Kate freaked out about the vanilla ice cream.. First of all it was vanilla ice cream, not like KoolAid or anything "red". Until my daughter was 6, I still had an "extra" stash of clothes somewhere - car, extra bag, whatever. How old were the tups? 2 or 3? You mean to tell me that Kate didn't bring extra clothes? What's the big deal about ice cream? IIRC correctly she said, "now she's ruined." The kid? (I think it was Leah). Kids don't get ruined, but clothes can.
Next it was all the explanations about stains, how important it was about any kind of stain? Personally, if I were getting free clothes from multiple sources who cares about stains? I would think Kate would have more things of importance to attend to.
In between we have the discussions of "we give back" and then Jon says they sell all the gear in a "yard" sale (what happened to giving back?). If they admit to selling gear, it is reasonable to say they sell the clothes too.
So in another episode the infamous list. Consign. All of a sudden it makes sense as to why Kate would freak out about the clothes and try to keep them as clean as possible. She consigns the clothes. She has to keep them in good condition to get a good price for them (even though any price should be a "good" price since she gets them for free).
Last point - Julie (and PennMommy (?)confirms she consigns the clothes - Ok she doesn't own the truth - but do you think she would lie about that?
That's how I got from A to B. This without diagnosing Kate with OCD (that's why she freaks out about the stains!)
My point about the "proof" thing, is almost nothing is fact. One could even say that the whole show is a ruse - Jon and Kate aren't even married, they are two actors. Maybe people are jumping to conclusions, but it's not as if they are a stretch. Like something outrageous - "Beth and Kate aren't friends anymore because Beth was having an affair with Jon." Now that would be outrageous, especially knowing that Jon prefers Blondes.
(the last bit was for levity).
NMD, Nina, you have a thankless job, you both manage to keep your wits about it, yes, you can't control who posts what (the thoughts). This is not a persoal attack, in fact, I rely on the both of you to keep the conversations in line.
I recall a while ago a poster on GWoP (I think it was Fiona, actually, but if I'm wrong, apologies to Fiona) said that the Gosselin kids were "ruined". And the poster was not just referring to their outfits, unlike Kate.
Kate overreacted about the ice cream, as she is wont to do. Just guessing, based on what my issue would have been, but six sticky little kids is a lot of sticky little kids to deal with. It doesn't mean that she should have freaked the way she did, but every mother has her moments.
I so don't want to get into the consignment issue, and you weren't asking me, but yes, I absolutely think that Julie and PennMommy would lie, or at least exaggerate. Julie in particular has shown that she really gets something out of being an "insider", and so I think she is capable of talking about stuff she doesn't know about in order to make it seem like she is in the know. Obviously, JMO.
Regarding proof and facts, I think we all *think* that we judge based on what we see on the show. But obviously, we bring our own prejudices to the table. Almost every week, I find the posters on GWoP have vastly different interpretations of the same events that I saw.
Taking the word of hangers-on such as PM and Julie just because they confirm what one wants to believe does not lend itself to the notion that one is that interested in "the truth", IMO.
98 comments:
What does it prove? Also, I didn't see anything at the bottom, unless you mean the comment, but I didn't have to scroll for that so wonder if I missed something. Thanks!
midnight ramblings - I think that she is referring to the comment under the picture so I don't think that you missed anything.
By the way, it is nice to see the picture! How cute.
You are welcome. I also posted it "you know where." LOL
But it just goes to show that she does talk to people and that she is friendly. Yeah I'm sure she has her days where she may not want to be bothered. But, I don't blame her.
Midnight ramblings,
You sure are a cantankerous soul aren't you? Well, I see quite a few people say "Show me proof that Kate can be human or positive." So that is why I called it Proof Positive. I knew it would get that type of response from a certain group of people. Depending on the type of monitor you have, you might need to scroll down to view the comment section under the picture. So I will change the script just for you and add "scroll to the bottom on the picture to read the comment." Thanks for stopping by and contributing.
I see Kate is wearing her FREE Gap sweatshirt, while selling items that were given to her. None of the money raised from that yard sale came out of Jon & Kates pocket.
Thanks for the link to this pic!
I know we all enjoy and can appreciate this picture and comment for what it is..."nice." I'm afraid it will just get more lips flappin' on the "dark side" though.
Marci,
Exactly. Just something nice.
Anon 6:09,
I appreciate your comment and insight. I won a free lawnmower once and I gave it to a family in need. Now I am thinking I should have just sold it and kept the money for myself.
Well Marci, no matter what happens their lips are always flappin anyway. Hell, we could have video footage of Kate saving kids from a burning building and still the haters would find fault with it. There's just no pleasing them.
As for her Gap shirt, like I said in another thread, once items are given to someone they are then theirs to do with what they wish. And, as I asked before, should Kate keep the numbers and names handy of those that gave her stuff so that when she no longer wants the item for whatever reason she can call and ask them first what she should do with it? Get real!
Do you do that when you give someone something? Demand that they first contact you before getting rid of or passing on the item? I bet not.
Anonymous said...
"I see Kate is wearing her FREE Gap sweatshirt, while selling items that were given to her. None of the money raised from that yard sale came out of Jon & Kates pocket."
My niece has sold various items for her girl scout troop to benefit several different charitable organizations. Should I tell her that her effort didn't count because she didn't actually PAY for the items she was selling?
And how do you know what they sold and if it was or was not donated to them?
I would venture to say that the G's bought some of the things they sold and some of the things were given to them. We really have no way of knowing for certain what they buy and what is given to them.
Very nice picture. How special for the girl to have her picture taken with Kate. I have a picture of my daughter with a children's recording artist and it's a treasure.
Thanks for sharing!
Nina Bell said: Midnight Ramblings - You sure are a cantankerous soul aren't you?
Not really. It was a simple question. For all I knew, it was "proof positive" there was another kid in the family or something. Like I said, I guess I missed something. I'm rather new to all this.
Are you always this, um, welcoming to new posters?
Fanny said: My niece has sold various items for her girl scout troop to benefit several different charitable organizations. Should I tell her that her effort didn't count because she didn't actually PAY for the items she was selling?
--
Fanny, your niece is a child. Kate is an adult. Your niece probably did go around her house and pick things up to sell. Her mother paid for all the items that your niece sold. I do the same for my children. I have purchased my own lemonade from the children's lemonade stand, so that my children could sell some lemonade.
It is different for an adult. Adults are held to higher standards than children. If an adult sells donated clothes at a yard sale to give the money to charity, why does this show that this person is a good person. I see a person who sees an opportunity to: (1) be seen doing a good thing, (2) create an event around which an episode can be written, and (3) get paid mucho dinero for said episode. Kate is not a good person in my book. She is an opportunist.
That she stopped for a photo is no sign of her goodness. Think about it...there were cameras filming an episode. Do you think she would tell tha little girl "I don't have time for this"? Damage control at its finest.
Welcome Midnight Ramblings!!! LOL
Sure we welcome new posters.
"I knew it would get that type of response from a certain group of people."
Nina Bell, You don't need to publish this one if you don't want to. This doesn't make sense to me, and I hit submit on my last comment before getting to this. I asked a simple question because the post didn't make sense to me. Now it seems I am accused of being in a certain group, being cantankerous, etc. I know it's hard to understand tone in a written post, but I don't think I said anything that deserved this. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding your tone as well. I was just hoping for a balanced discussion as the blog says. I'm new to these blogs but I'm guessing from what I've seen so far (on all the ones I have read) that true balance is going to be hard to find. Thanks for your time.
I will have to say Midnight Ramblings, felt a little like you were on the attack. So can I ask you,um, do you always present yourself that way when you enter a new home?
We do welcome your opinion and realize you have valuable insight to any discussion that goes on here. I for one do like to hear both sides and have changed my mind on some things because of it.
So yes your are welcomed and there are some people here who will keep you on your toes.
Again, thanks for stopping in.
I wrote my last response before I received your comment but I do apologize and do truly hope you will stay. I think maybe we got off on the wrong foot and I took your comment the wrong way. Oh the beauty of the internet.
Well mom on the run, maybe you all should write to the pediatric cancer center (like the haters do with everything else) and tell them that they should not accept her money just because she MAY have received that money from selling items that were given to her.
Tell them that these poor dying kids shouldn't take the treatment Kate's money could be supplying. Because, I'm soooo sure they're more concerned about how they (and Kate) got the money rather than what good it is or could be doing.
PLEASE!!!!! I never heard something so asinine in my life!
So I guess that school kids and kids in the scouts that sell premade/prepackaged cookies and candy bars for good causes should be told that they aren't as worthy as say, someone who bakes their own cookies and sells them?
*insert eyeroll*
First of all, no one has any idea what items were sold at the yard sale. Everyone is arguing based on the assumption that they sold all free things.
There are many points about this that have already been made here like, I have no idea how many times I heard that she should give the freebies to charity. Now she does and it's not good enough.
Kate could very well have paid for the gap t-shirt and many of the items she sold. But I'm with those who say even if she didn't, who cares?
No matter what, they will not be satisfied. Good thing in the grand scheme of things, they are only a small percentage of human beings. Otherwise, I'd be afraid for our society.
I see Kate is wearing her FREE Gap sweatshirt, while selling items that were given to her. None of the money raised from that yard sale came out of Jon & Kates pocket.
SO-FREAKING-WHAT? It all still went to CHARITY and to a good cause. God, you GWoPpers are so obtuse!
Complain that they profit off the freebies and then also complain when they donate the freebies and don't profit from them.
Whatever!
I agree with the anon poster about gifts. Once a gift is given, it is the receivers to do with what they please. If not, it was not given in the right spirit. I know there are rumors about them selling stuff that was given to them and rumors that they said they would redonate the stuff they had received. Well, this time they did give back and lent their celebrity status to the cause. Who cares if they paid for the stuff they sold? What would make them happy? Exactly what dollar amount would it take? What does that have to do with the rights of the children? I'm glad the children are learning about charity and are around other children.
I think it's cute to see that picture. And, is shows that while some may have had a not-so-pleasant experience with Kate, others have had quite the opposite. To me, that just says she's human and has bad days like the rest of us.
As far as them selling things that were donated to them. SO WHAT!! They gave the money to a charity. If you can't see anything positive in that, then I am inclinded to believe that you will never see anything positive in them at all. Which, IMO, make you biased.
Nina -
I don't think anyone is questioning Kate's ability to be nice to fan on camera or at a speaking engagement. This picture would mean more to me if it was taken at a shopping mall or somewhere that was a more private setting.
SO to all the naysayers... You're saying that you've never sold anything at a garage sale that was given to you as a gift? Did you give said money made off of a gift to a charity? Kate is damned if she does and damned if she doesn't..
Jenn -
I know my point with consignment-gate was that before this episode, there was no indication that the donated items they sold went to charity.
Oops Nina, from the comment under the picture, I took it to be from Jon and Kate's garage sale. If it's not, I do agree that it shows a nicer side of the "private" Kate than what we heard about.
Sara -
When so much is given to the Gosselins, is it too much to ask that give in return?
In the beginning, they couldn't give money because they were not financial able. They couldn't give time because, well, do I really need to state why? Donating clothes is a simple and easy way to give back. Their - the Gosselins - family mission statement says that they should be given back. Choosing to sell the clothes at a consignment store instead of donating the clothes that were donated to you...?
Guinevere, I just can't seem to stop myself...
SO-FREAKING-WHAT? It all still went to CHARITY and to a good cause. God, you GWoPpers are so obtuse!
So freaking what is that Kate is doing something positive, being friendly (apparently not screaming "get away from me!" as so many suspect reports have claimed), and the GWoPpers cannot stand that. Literally cannot stand it. If there was some way to prove that she paid for the clothes she's wearing, they'd bitch about her hair, or bring up something else totally irrelevant.
Guinevere, I just can't seem to stop myself...
Ack. Me neither, I guess.
When you ask, "is it too much to ask that give in return?", my response is that it's not really our business. There are plenty of people who are given much in this world. Think of all of the people that inherit wealth. Do you go around demanding that each of them give a certain percentage (set by you, of course) of what they have to someone else?
I'm not Christian, but I seem to remember there's some proverb about splinters' in other's eyes and logs in your own. Something like that. If people want to be charitable to the Gosselins or not, it's their business. If the Gosselins want to "give back" or not, it's their business. I understand having judgment, to a certain degree, but I don't understand thinking you have the right to DEMAND (and by you, I mean a general you, not aap specifically) or expect that they give back. Worry about yourselves, and what you're doing to make the world a better place.
Sweet picture. Kate looked relaxed and happy. The little girl is a cutie and looked so pleased to have her picture taken with Kate.
That's my take.
It's always a little surprising to me when I see Kate relaxed and having fun like on the Games Gosselins Play episode or when she was holding Aunt Jodi's baby in another episode. It was the same in this pic seeing her look relaxed and smiling. The other side of her personality stands out so much more. I understand gossip and disliking Kate, but I don't understand the obsessive hatred and trying to pretty much ruin their lives. I can't believe that some wrote the Grain Assoc. If they wanted to help the children, they would focus on the children's rights in being filmed. To try to destroy their mother does nothing to help the family. She is their parent and they are her children. She get's to parent the way she wants. I for one was bothered that she didn't go on the boys with their day out. That doesn't mean I want her children taken away and for Kate to suffer. Other than friendly advice, I don't want anyone telling me how to raise my children. I would be afraid of those people if I were Jon and Kate.
Think of all of the people that inherit wealth.
Well, to be honest, I think Jon and Kate getting donations is different than inheriting wealth.
When you ask, "is it too much to ask that give in return?", my response is that it's not really our business.
I do see your point in this, and agree with you to a certain point. However, let me counter with it was Jon and Kate who wrote (and televised) their mission statement stating that it was their goal to give back. Because they introduced the topic, I think it's fair game for people to ask, well, how are you giving back?
Well, to be honest, I think Jon and Kate getting donations is different than inheriting wealth.
In what way? I mean, it's different, yeah, but I don't think it's different in the sense that J&K are less deserving (or more) than, say Paris Hilton. In both cases, you have someone with money who didn't earn it.
I agree that the mission statement about giving back opens the Gosselins to questions about the subject. But for myself, I don't assume that they don't give back just because I haven't seen evidence. They are damned if they do or damned if they don't. When we don't hear about it, people assume that they aren't doing anything. When we do hear about it, the anti-Gosselinites tell us that they are just doing it as damage control, that it's tacky to publicize one's own generosity, and that the money or items they give aren't theirs, anyway, so it doesn't count.
Can someone give me a little background into the family mission statement? Do we know what (in general or specifically) their mission statement says?
Mom on the Run -
Adults (especially parents) are held to a higher standard indeed. These higher standards should include:
-setting an example
-generosity
-respect
-compassion
-responsibility
-patience
-forgiveness
Whether or not the Gs are following these standards, we, as adults should follow and live up to these standards as much as possible, don't you think?
We may not all agree on the ins and outs of this particular garage sale benefit, etc., but regardless of what the differing opinions are, it does show their children a small way in which they can/are giving back.
As an aunt of a four-year-old nephew living with leukemia (ALL) and a supporter of St. Jude's Hospital, I can say personally that every little dollar helps when it comes to research. My H and I can only afford to give $19 a month to St. Jude's. They (St. Jude's development staff) constantly tell us thank you and tell us how our gift is helping children in their care, as well as how the research they are doing there in Memphis is helping doctors here in the US and abroad.
For two years now, we walk in his honor at the Light the Night walk for leukemia and lymphoma society and I collect donations (cash) from friends and family.
For years I was a fundraiser for a small, grass roots AIDS service organization. As the director, I was excited about every single dollar that was donated - and I let the donors know how their gift, small or large, was helping someone living with HIV.
Personally I'm done with all the bickering and back and forth about what the Gs should or shouldn't have done with their "free" clothes. A gift is a gift. Clothes and children's products/gear aren't meant to be held on forever - they are outgrown.
In my honest opinion, what the Gs did (if indeed what we are reading is true), created a win-win situation. Parents received nice clothes and/or gear for their own children at a fraction of the price and a charity received a check.
Every year (twice annually) a local HS here in my town does a big "baby mania" sale where parents can buy and sell their kids' goods. I have sold my son's baby clothes and the money I have made helps me buy him the next season's clothes. Some of the things I sell were given as gifts and some I have purchased myself. I'm tickled pink when I can go to craigslist or one of these baby sales and find a piece of gear at a bargain price.
As far as the filming, etc. goes, of course the crew was there - it's a part of the business. I'm sure most of us can agree that the filming of some of these moments of giving can take away from the original sincerity. I try to look past that and think about the charity and how happy they are, as well as the parents who got some good deals for their children.
I am glad you posted here, as it brought to my attention how many of us on several of these blogs and boards aren't keeping to a higher standard. Where is our compassion, maturity, respect and forgiveness? Not just towards each other, but also towards the G family which includes eight precious children.
Perhaps we could all step back and remember most of what is out here in blogland is speculation. Let's all try to watch our words - agreed?
Well, to be honest, I think Jon and Kate getting donations is different than inheriting wealth.
"In what way? I mean, it's different, yeah, but I don't think it's different in the sense that J&K are less deserving (or more) than, say Paris Hilton. In both cases, you have someone with money who didn't earn it."
Yeah but would most people donate money to Paris Hilton, if she had none? I think the difference is that a large amount of people gave the Gosselin's donations out of the generosity of their heart. And because someone showed them kindness, it would be nice for them to pass it on whereever they can. Where would Jon and Kate be without the donations?
Paris Hilton was just lucky enough to land in the right gene pool. Which doesn't me I don't think she shouldn't give, just that she wasn't the recipient of the generosity of strangers.
Guinevere -
Just to be clear -
"In both cases, you have someone with money who didn't earn it."
Are you saying that Jon and Kate haven't worked for the money they have :-)?
Wow. The emotion in this blog is ... well, something. The very first message from "midnight ramblings" I totally understood. I saw the photo and was wondering if there was a story to it or something that I was missing. If it was just to show she wasn't all "screamy" at the sale, great. But I don't think that message was intitially evident, just by saying "proof positive" and can understand the question for clarification. I was thinking "positive" of what??? just simply didn't know or wondered what I was missing.
As an aunt of a four-year-old nephew living with leukemia (ALL) and a supporter of St. Jude's Hospital, I can say personally that every little dollar helps when it comes to research.
Thanks for giving a personal perspective on this, and best wishes to your nephew. I was appalled when I read (on the Princess Marie Chantal board) that some of the GWoPpers were lamenting that they hadn't had notice of the garage sale, so they could have picketed it. These women wanted to disrupt an event that raised money to fight cancer in children. There are no words to describe how twisted and wrong that is.
Are you saying that Jon and Kate haven't worked for the money they have :-)?
Aw, no fair, you put the little smiley face so I feel like I'm taking you too seriously if I feel compelled to respond. But I'll do it anyway: I do think the Gosselins have "earned" the money they've gotten from the show and from speaking engagements. If money and/or clothes, or other items were donated, I don't consider those earned.
Wow. The emotion in this blog is ... well, something.
And your post is...passive-aggressive and disingenuous. Making it pretty par for the course for GWoPpers.
Mom said...."Perhaps we could all step back and remember most of what is out here in blogland is speculation. Let's all try to watch our words - agreed?"
Mom, your entire post was spot on and I wish everyone would take the time to read it with a sincere heart.
Thanks for sharing your insights.
What I want to know is...why is it so hard for people to understand that the stuff that they get is given to them in exchange for something.
What I mean by that is, in TV when you have a show like theirs sponsers GIVE you things in exchange for free or discounted airtime/mention of their product(s). That's just the way it is.
J&K are NOT the first to do this. Nor will they be the last.
The people that dislike them act like normal regular everyday people like you and I are still showing up on their doorstep with free stuff and that just ISN'T happening.
The free stuff they are getting is in exchange for advertising. And that's just the nature of the business!!!! Whether you like it or not.
How about all the audience members on shows like Oprah and Tyra? Some guests that come on those shows give ALL the audience members free stuff. Does that mean the audience members are beggers? Taking things they really don't need? Are oportunistic? NO! I highly doubt it.
The free stuff is given in order to get the word out about their product. And anyone in their right mind would take free stuff. And you (J&K haters) would too if it were offered regardless of what you say. You know you would.
Well mom on the run, maybe you all should write to the pediatric cancer center (like the haters do with everything else) and tell them that they should not accept her money just because she MAY have received that money from selling items that were given to her.
--
In my post, I was responding to the poster who mentioned her niece selling Girl Scout cookies. I wanted to point out that children can sell their familiy's stuff at a yard sale and it can be considered cute. But the Gs are selling items donated to them, filming the episode for money, and then trying to garner praise for their generosity. If the Gs wanted to be truly generous, they should donate the amount that TLC is paying them to film the episode featuring the yard sale and give the entire amount to the pediatric cancer charity.
To further clarify my post... I consign many of my children's clothes and toys at local consignment shops. I have a policy that I will not consign any toys or clothes given to me by friends. I have had neighbors hand me bags of clothes when my youngest was born. I used the clothes for my youngest, then donated them to a friend who was having a baby. I did not feel right earning money for consigning clothes that I had not purchased. I hope this clears up any misconceptions about my post.
Furthermore, I fully support pediatric cancer charities. I have several people in my life who have dealt with a cancer diagnosis. I believe that there is inadequate funding for cancer charities.
Sorry I don't have time to read everyone's posts. I was passing through and saw the nice picture. I think taking this picture really made Sams day seeing the big smile on her face. See what it is..a nice picture someone let us see..end of story!
Mom -
First let me say that I feel for your nephew. Growing up, I had a friend who's brother had leukemia, so I have an idea of what you are going through. Children's diseases are the most heartbreaking. In addition, in college one of our assignments was to work with a charity, and that charity was St. Jude's so I know the good work they do, and most important, how much money raised actually goes back to the charity. I am not trying to make light of your situation, but let me put the consignment-gate situation like this.
And first let me say - I AM IN NO WAY IMPLYING DONATING CLOTHES IS ALONG THE SAME LINES AS HAVING CANCER.
Imagine that the Gosselin's had a child with leukemia, and the hospital donated 100 treatments of chemo the child (the Gosselin's own these treatments even if they don't use them. They are theirs to do what they want.) It turns out that the child wasn't responding to that treatment, so the hospital donated 100 treatments of an experiemental drug to use instead.
Now the Gosselin's have 75 chemo treatments left to do what they want with them and instead of passing it on to another family in need, they chose to sell the treatments and keep the profits for themselves.
Now the Gosselin's have a TV show because their child is miraculous cured and people are interested in their story, and word is starting to get around about how the Gosselins have sold the 75 chemo treatments and how angry people are about it. So they decided to hold a garage sale for the remaining 25 treatments of experimental treatment, as well as take pictures with people to raise money for charity. The Gosselin's are getting paid to air their garage sale on TV, so while they are raising money for charity, they are also making money for themselves, and nothing is coming personally from them.
How would you feel about the situation then?
For all you court based people (you know who you are), I know I have represented facts not in evidence :-), and I don't personally know if the Gosselin's have donated their own money on top of what they raised at the garage sale (if I was their PR person, this is what I would recommend and publicize!)
I am just using this story - to illustrate the opinions of the consignment-gate believers. And I will add that no one can 100% prove or disprove the consignment-gate story, and it is all conjecture on my part.
I am really using this story to show, if the consignment store story is true, why people would be angry over the Gosselin's donating the clothes.
But the Gs are selling items donated to them, filming the episode for money, and then trying to garner praise for their generosity. If the Gs wanted to be truly generous, they should donate the amount that TLC is paying them to film the episode featuring the yard sale and give the entire amount to the pediatric cancer charity.
Do you recognize the contradiction in your post? You know for a fact that the Gosselins are "trying to garner praise for their generosity" by filming (supposedly; I'm not sure that's been confirmed) the garage sale for their show. But then you set another standard for them to meet if they want to be considered "truly generous" by you. But if they do donate the money from the episode to the charity and you don't hear about it, you'll assume that they haven't. If you do hear about it? We're back to them "trying to garner praise."
Can't you see how unfair you are being?
aap, I know you're just trying to illustrate a point, but the difference between selling clothes and selling life-saving treatment is so vast that I think the comparison is unfair and loaded.
Guin-
That picketing stuff is absolutely the most absurd thing I have heard yet when it comes to this benefit sale. Why in the world would anyone want to deny help to a charitable organization is beyond me. People are fogetting the other parties involved - including the parents and families of children (and adults) praying daily that doctors will discover a cure for an awful disease. My little nephew was diagnosed just prior to his 2nd birthday - in fact, he spent his 2nd bday in the hospital, all pumped up with steroids and chemotherapy drugs. He goes to treatment almost every week and has been taking some kind of chemo since the initial diagnosis. He has lost his hair, gained lots of weight due to steroids, had lots of "roid" rages (that's what we call them, when he is on certain types of steroids), lost several pounds and became anemic, ran fevers continuously for weeks, up to eat at all hours of the night, only to not want to eat at all when meds were changed.
I'm sorry to ramble people, but THIS IS reality for families of kids with cancer. This nit-picking "they should do this" and "I can't believe they did that" and "how dare they?" etc. is just getting out of hand.
Whether anyone thinks it's damage control, contrived, ill-intentioned, whatever - is your opinion....fine. But, regardless, it (gifts to Ronald McD House and pediatric cancer research) IS helping kids who are very sick and their parents who are pulling their hair out with worry and fear.
I am really using this story to show, if the consignment store story is true, why people would be angry over the Gosselin's donating the clothes.
--
Well said, aap!
"Adults (especially parents) are held to a higher standard indeed. These higher standards should include:
-setting an example
-generosity
-respect
-compassion
-responsibility
-patience
-forgiveness
Whether or not the Gs are following these standards, we, as adults should follow and live up to these standards as much as possible, don't you think?"
*******
I'm a parent and I can tell you I fail at all of these things everyday. I'm glad God is forgiving, otherwise I'd be in big trouble if people on a Gosselin website were judging me in the end.
Guinevere -
In all fairness, I did point right up front that I was in no way stating that donating clothes was the same as having cancer. I chose that because of what mom said about her nephew.
aap - sorry, I agree with Guin. I just can't even begin to debate over the scenario/comparison you presented.
I'm also asking others, PLEASE let's not get into this nit-picking crap when it comes to consignment sales that took place years ago. No one knows what what/is in their bank account then or now. To try and speculate about it is just absurd to me. If people who gave them gifts were pissed, so be it.
I explained my take on the filming in my post earlier. Of course the show is going to tape it, it's par for the course.
If they didn't tape it, there would still be speculation of their intentions.
I'm just curious, if that show never airs, how will you feel then? Technically, they are getting paid by Figure 8 regardless of what airs and what doesn't.
Mom -
Whether anyone thinks it's damage control, contrived, ill-intentioned, whatever - is your opinion....fine. But, regardless, it (gifts to Ronald McD House and pediatric cancer research) IS helping kids who are very sick and their parents who are pulling their hair out with worry and fear.
I agree with you 100% on this statement.
Thank you AAP - I just read the 11:40 post, I was writing a different post which I'm sure will pop up somewhere before this one.
In all fairness, I did point right up front that I was in no way stating that donating clothes was the same as having cancer. I chose that because of what mom said about her nephew.
aap, I acknowledged that. But the example you are using is still not appropriate because the two are such vastly different things. One is okay and the other isn't precisely because they are so different.
If were being honest - this picture shows me that Kate must have been the recipient of some nice new veneers, that she probably didn't pay for IMO.
One picture doesn't "prove" that Kate is nice. Yes she is human, and she "can" be pleasant - especially when the cameras are rolling and her reputation is in question.
King you say "One picture doesn't "prove" that Kate is nice. Yes she is human, and she "can" be pleasant - especially when the cameras are rolling and her reputation is in question."
First it's (this being said by people who dislike the G's) "Oh she's a mean and nasty woman. We see it on camera all the time. Her screaming and yelling. Etc." Now you are claiming that she's nice because she is on camera/being filmed. WTH?
So, which is it? Is she mean becauase the cameras are rolling or nice because the cameras are rolling (based on what you said that would mean Kate was NICE on every episode....because you said she is only nice on camera....and yet you all always put her down saying how mean she is during every show.....can you say contradiction?)?
Can't have it both ways unless you see it like I do. And I see it as YES, they probably have good and bad days. BOTH captured on camera at times and witnessed first hand when cameras are not around. Seems pretty normal to me.
It doesn't make them good or bad. Just normal.
But the Gs are selling items donated to them, filming the episode for money, and then trying to garner praise for their generosity.
How do you know this for a fact? How do you know that the charity and the organization that planned the garage sale are not thrilled beyond belief that their organization and their charity is being featured on The Learning Channel? It's called PUBLICITY and AWARENESS. How do you know that the Gosselins weren't ASKED to be there to promote the event? You don't. Period.
How stubborn and obsessed in your hatred do you have to be not to know that this was a GOOD thing for everyone involved? It taught those kids the value of giving back to those less fortunate. It earned money for pediatric cancer. It gave publicity to the organizers of the sale. After this exposure, I'll bet the amount of donated items they receive next year will go up ten fold.
If the Gs wanted to be truly generous, they should donate the amount that TLC is paying them to film the episode featuring the yard sale and give the entire amount to the pediatric cancer charity.
Yes, and then you'd all still find something to bitch about.
I'm sorry. Sorry that I cannot be nice about this subject. I cannot resist swearing or wanting to yell and shake every one of these uncaring and unfeeling "advocates." I have several family members who have died from cancer. I am involved in a charity that has many of these kind of events and donates the proceeds to childhood cancer. The foundation I volunteer for is named after a 13 year old who died of leukemia and I have helped with their golf tournaments and Vegas nights, all in the name of raising money to go to pediatric cancer research. If I saw "protesters" picketing outside an event that raises money for that cause, it would take all my willpower not to run them over with my car. Short of that, i'd certainly let them know what a sad, pathetic bunch of losers they were for doing such a thing.
Once again, sorry. I cannot be rational about this subject. The hatred directed towards these people has hit a new low.
Kate must have been the recipient of some nice new veneers...
--
Oh, great another episiode in the making. "Kate Gets Capped"
Now you are claiming that she's nice because she is on camera/being filmed. WTH?
damage control.
MCB -
I'm irritated too. Good thing I'm going to pick up my little one who reminds me how precious life is. In the midst of my own posts above, I wasn't even thinking of the third "win" which is the awesome publicity for the charity and church! Thanks for reminding us of that!
I don't think folks have a clue how hard it is to get good 'free' PR when you are a charity. TV is very expensive. What a blessing the pediatric cancer research org will receive if, indeed, it is broadcasted.
Win-win-win is how I see it. The Gs will always be losers in the eyes of the "hate" zealots. Unfortunately for them, they will never be seen as charitable, giving or compassionate.
Boy this post really stirred some stuff up for me - yes, I have alot of folks in my life who are living with cancer or died due to complications of cancer, but I think it the sheer ignorance of some people that has me floored.
People are writing Bill O'Reilly, Regis & Kelly, Woman's Day, Post Dispatch, and the list goes on. Boards are full of hatred and venom due to a sister of an in-law, a former helper from several years ago and the ever-so-truthful Nat'l Enquirer for Pete's sake!
It's becoming more than an obsession for some and I, too, think Fiona made a good and honest point on PM's blog about giving us a 'fix' to feed our addiction. That rings true a bit, don't you think?
Yay!! Another wackadoo (avasmommy) has emailed Bill O'Reilly (she put her link on PM's site to view it)...AND she was "smart" enough to give him the links to PM's and Julie's blogs so he can really get the full embittered housewife effect!!
There's another week I can take off from blogging. Thanks again for keeping the "looney" train going, ladies!
"Better to be thought a fool than to speak your mind and leave no doubt."
marci said: "Yay!! Another wackadoo (avasmommy) has emailed Bill O'Reilly (she put her link on PM's site to view it)...AND she was "smart" enough to give him the links to PM's and Julie's blogs so he can really get the full embittered housewife effect!!"
She forgot to spell check, also. I hope she didn't send it like that--how "embarressing."
Wow. This DID bring the misery guts out of the woodwork, didn't it? Get over it. The pic was of a smiling woman who was helping to get some community action done! And for this there is foaming at the mouth? I see what has been said here by some as proof positive that the frenzy over whatever Kate or Jon does even off the show is something that people USE to "feed their addiction". I totally agree with that! This entire thing is driven by a stalker mentality and it's enough now. How can you not be sick to death of yourselves? It's a TV show. They get paid. They sometimes get free things. So do ALL the actors you watch on every single show and movie. And you have no idea what THEY do with all of their grabbings. Did you know that many of them give to causes then make the entertainment companies they are signed with foot the bill? Don' t you know that every time a celebrity shows up at an event they are compensated for it or flown there first class and given room service, suites -whatever they want? All because they make an appearance for some charitable cause. Come ON! You can't be that provincial that you don't know this?! It is scary to read some of these posts. People can be really irrational but how far will they go? Will they hurt someone?
And how do you know about the "veneers"? If they ARE veneers, she probably paid for them. If she is as rich as all of the hate Kate people say, then she probably DID pay for them. What if a dentist chose to do it for her for his own publicity? What if, what if, what if? What if you stopped this and did something positive like collect money for a horrible disease by selling something or donating something. I have had 2 friends die within 9 months of each other from cancer. What have you done for their cause today?
But, how do we know she didn't donate the money from the consignments? Wouldn't that do more good than donating the clothes?
sheesh, someone needs to lighten up on the foundation.
They sometimes get free things. So do ALL the actors you watch on every single show and movie.
JMHO The difference between actors and Jon and Kate is the actors do not misrepresent themselves as "needy" to receive the swag.
I have had 2 friends die within 9 months of each other from cancer. What have you done for their cause today?
I support Easter Seals because my son is on the spectrum of autism. What have YOU done for his cause today?
Nice picture.
I support Easter Seals because my son is on the spectrum of autism.
And I suppose it wouldn't bother you at all if a bunch of overinvested nutbars picketed a fundraiser for autism research solely because of their dislike for a complete stranger?
It bothers me that people are believing Jenny McCarthy and not vacinating their kids because of autism. I have no problem with people challenging her beliefs, instead of just accepting what she says as gospel.
And I suppose it wouldn't bother you at all if a bunch of overinvested nutbars picketed a fundraiser for autism research solely because of their dislike for a complete stranger?
Did I miss something?
I skim - but I thought what if any, people had an issue with the pretense of making a donation, to the Pediatric Cancer Foundation, with monies raised by things they didn't pay for - where is it written even if you are bothered by the guise of altruism, that it is not agreed that it was a benefit to the Foundation proper?
Anon,
Are you saying that the picketeers would bring more attention to the garage sale, and draw more attention to the charity, giving the charity even more publicity, which in the end would be a good thing because What a blessing the pediatric cancer research org will receive if, indeed, it is broadcasted.
Anon 552 -
I'm confused.
I realize twinmom put that "what have you done, etc." question out there and you answered. I'm not sure it was directed to you, but to the posters here in general (I'm just guessing here).
Guin was trying to say if people rallied and picketed a fundraiser for your cause, it would be upsetting to say the least (am I right Guin?).
I'm sure having a child with spectrum autism is challenging and probably difficult. I don't know personally, but appreciate your sharing.
I don't think anyone here was trying to discount other causes out there and I hope you don't think that.
Welcome. If you wouldn't mind making up a handle for yourself, that would be great. You don't have to register it or anyting, just type it in each time. It's really difficult addressing so many anon posts.
Thanks.
I see Kate is wearing her FREE Gap sweatshirt, while selling items that were given to her. None of the money raised from that yard sale came out of Jon & Kates pocket.
Oh so what! I sell stuff that came to me free too. None of the money went IN to Jon and Kate's pocket either as it was a Church Garage sale. Jeeeez. Ever think that they might get more money because it once was owned by the gosselins? People love that stuff. Seriously...Anonymous posting needs to be banned. I want to know who you are if you're going to be so snippy.
I think everyone should treat unsigned comments as if they don't exist. Ignore them. It's just rude internet practices. like using all caps or "Texteese" in chat rooms.
Jenny McCarthy is what I would consider a sound advisor-but there is research that points to high levels of aluminum in many of the vaccines and autism.
The clinic I work in has done granted research or hundreds of boys with autism. There is a link.
You can however request that vacinations be spread out so as to not to have as much aluminum at one time for tiny brains to metabolize.
For the record, I am pro-vacination.
Anonymous,
Where has your research been published?
And just so you know, a qualified research study needs thousands, not hundreds of participants.
Anon and anon,
Would one of you be interested in writing an article about autism? I think it is an intersting topic and I know there are alot of varying opinions out there.
Please email it to Nina. Her email is over at right side.
Please think about it.
[I deleted the previous post which was mine with a typo in it.]
Great picture. Thanks for posting the link.
I noticed the veneers, but really could care less if she got them free or paid for them, they look nice!
Also, if someone writes an autism article, please show both sides of the debate. So many people vax blindly.
I am glad that a pediatric cancer foundation benefited from this "yard sale". Also, I can understand Kate not wanting to have it on her own property. I just don't understand why Figure8 thought people would want to watch a yard sale on an episode?! I like seeing the kids, and I doubt if a yard sale would have much to do with kids, although I'll have to wait and see. In my opinion, the show has shifted to show more of Kate and less of the kids. I don't like Kate much, so I'm not as happy with the show as I used to be.
A couple of people at GWoP are now complaining that they money from the sale (which they shouldn't have made by selling things they shouldn't have been given) was donated to the wrong charity. Why do they support a pediatric cancer charity when they should be supporting PCOS and infertility and HOMs? Will they never run out of things to complain about?
And surely a yard sale couldn't be more boring than buying beds, or getting new carpeting or installing shelves in the garage. Please, tell me it can't.
A couple of people at GWoP are now complaining that they money from the sale (which they shouldn't have made by selling things they shouldn't have been given) was donated to the wrong charity. Why do they support a pediatric cancer charity when they should be supporting PCOS and infertility and HOMs? Will they never run out of things to complain about?
What I got from the accounts, was that Jon and Kate could have donated to PCOS or infertility research. Not should.
Not to say Pediatric Cancer Research is not a deserving charity, but realistically it makes sense for Jon and Kate to support PCOS since she suffers from it and infertility research since they both benefitted from it. Of course bottomline it was their choice, but for all the "wish list" items that posters here, there, everywhere would like to see - I would rather watch the show and see Jon and Kate be honest and real and be themselves rather than trying to do what the viewers would like them to do.
Honestly that's why I think a lot of what has been aired lately is "damage control" - because it comes across as fake. JMO.
Hey, as someone who is disorganizly challenged, I actually liked the garage episode. I wish I could put benches and shelves for the shoes outside.
I am a new poster, so...there.
That said, can some of Kate and Jon's supporters point me to a good rebuttal to the question of why is it ok for them to trample on their kids' privacy? Pls, I am trying not to be judgmental, and frankly, resent this couple. I don't care about everything else , although they are enough to raise my hackles. But I saw the episode of the kids in the bath so a Johnson and Johnson bath product could be placed. They're not babies anymore, that is to me, just felt wrong.
That episode is really what planted the seed of doubt in me. Then I read Jodi's sister's blog and PennMommy...i wish people would just stop watching and maybe this kids could have a stab at some normalcy.
That said, can some of Kate and Jon's supporters point me to a good rebuttal to the question of why is it ok for them to trample on their kids' privacy?
As soon as you re-read your post and take out all of the assumption and opinion. Assumption 1: The kids have no privacy. Assumption 2: The parents are "trampling" on it, meaning that they are completely unconcerned about their children's privacy.
Penn Mommy and Julie's blog have absolutely nothing to do with this issue. They've both jumped on the bandwagon of "protecting the children" but if Julie really cared about the Gosselin children, she wouldn't be participating in a site like GWoP.
Just FYI, the Gosselin 10 website seems to have been updated a few days ago. There is now a little blurb about the Pediatric Cancer Research and the related yard sale, as well as a link for people to donate if they so choose.
As soon as you re-read your post and take out all of the assumption and opinion.
Sorry, but if "assumption" and "opinion" are not allowed - then what is there left to post?
I think I'd like to make up a definition for Urban Dictionary as well.
GDNNOPer - one who cannot come up reasonable conclusions unless they are hit over the head with a brick of proof - and even then it must be "acceptable".
Seems that there are some people here that are allowed to assume and speculate and state their opinions at will, but once someone who has something to say that is contrary to what the group has to say - then some of you call foul and say witty things like "we all know what happens when we "assume".
That is also the case with self-diagnosis and name-calling. Some people cry foul when it's directed at Jon and Kate - but some of you have a field day with GWOPPERS - wow it's even a "rule" now - name calling of the nut bars is ok.
You fault GWOP for not "being all about the kids" - even though it's ONE thing on their laundry list of "wants" - this group came from a group of former members of TWOP - I thought the whole premise of those boards is to be able to snark about shows - and if you don't mind me saying, that Jon and Kate give the viewers a lot of material to work with. It's not ok to talk about the kids but here it's ok to call Maddy "bratty" because you're not necessarily calling out the child, but her behavior, but Maddy's bratty behavior is not proof that she is being affected by show, she's just being "Maddy".
Over at GWOP, not even there - over at the "Secret Board" who the mods here have never actually seen, but its content has been "proven" enough for them - they cite the Hannah was called "oafish" over and over and over again. Ok, among the thousands of comments, let's not forget the serial killer, drug dealer, pregnant teen comments either. These four examples among thousands. Who's beating a dead horse?
There are people on this board that post and read Marie Chantal and that board is very offensive - that's all they do is make fun of GWOP, no one here has a problem with the "mean" over there. So what is it? Don't be mean in general or it's ok to be mean to some people?
Because fair and balanced it is not; just because this blog claims to post contrary opinions on this board - it is not enough. Besides some of the mods here disregard some posts and call posters "bitches" just because they are "pissed off."
I don't agree with everything that is posted on GWOP - but over there, they post their own topics and that's where the comments stay - about their own posts. No one goes over there and says "you know what's happening over at GDNNOP?" Of course, the mods keep that stuff out. But here, when someone asks for suggestions and it is suggested that the discussion be civil and not mention what is going on elsewhere, there is a big collective "hell no" "we like talking about them".
Some of you call PennMommy and Julie gossips - what are you?
There are a lot of people here who make great talking points, yet it's not enough - it always falls back to talking about others. "remembering that behind the screen name is still a human" - how long did that last?
This post may never see the light of day - and maybe if it does, I'll get the stock answer of "you don't like it, don't come here."
But all I am saying is don't accuse other people of doing things that are done here as well. I don't want to call it "hypocritical" because God Forbid I get labeled "a saint" who makes others feel bad because of my "judgments".
Oh, I forgot, IMO.
Yes ducttapeoverthemouth (I guess it came off?) I did refer to you as a bitch in an email asking nomoredrama to respond to an email I had received from you. I thought I was forwarding it and I hit reply.(Don' you just hate that when that happens?) I told normoredrama at the time that I had no problem with it. That I was too old to worry about it and wanted to own up to it. But she felt I should let it go. Actually, I think normoredrama apologized to you.
I was the only mod that did that so when you say "mods"
you are just trying to stir things up and make a situation look worse than it is.
And here you are talking about others. Seems like maybe we are all guilty of being hypocritical.
We are all gossips, yourself included. But are we attempting to destroy anyone? Are we making up stories and screen names in order to win an argument? Or make a point?
I don't care if you visit here or not. I think it is quite obvious to everyone that I am not profiting off of this and grow wearier of this everyday. I hardly even post anymore. I do not need this site to be popular and get a million hits. This is not my life. I work full time and have a family like most of the rest of you.
And actually there has been great discussion here from both sides. That is the one thing that I feel good about. Fair and balanced is opened to interpretation.
And I do apologize for referring to you as a bitch.
Nina
Nina,
By using the word "mods" I meant it as a way of not pinpointing.
The point of my post was that EVERYTHING that is posted here, there, anywhere is opinion.
Good, Bad, it's all the same. But we can't "blame" someone else for their opinion. We can't say someone is doing something, that in our way we are doing ourselves.
I like this blog (I just don't like some of its posters) but I just ignore them.
I submitted a comment about the whole e-mail thing, that I hope you post. It explains a lot.
I accept your apology and hope you do whatever you need to do once again enjoy this blog again.
I notice that.
You (collectively) get so worked up about something that someone said and then you realize, "wait a minute" it's just a show. It begins to be something that is not for "fun" anymore.
And yes, by being here, I am a gossip too.
Have a good day. We, including myself should be out enjoying our own children!
one who cannot come up reasonable conclusions unless they are hit over the head with a brick of proof - and even then it must be "acceptable".
Laughing so hard at this one. Yes,because (for example) it's reasonable to conclude that because we see an item on a to do list, it means Kate consigns every piece of free clothing.
Or it's reasonable to conclude that because none of the kid's wanted to sit with Kate on the train, it proves she abuses them and they hate her.
Or lets talk about the reasonable conclusion that everyone outside of GWoP is a bumbling fool who can't tell that the Gosselins do not need financial help. Christians, specifically, are so uneducated that they'll give and give to the KONartists.
As far as posting at Crown Princess Marie, first of all, I think I've made one comment there in weeks. Secondly...my comments there have been about the INSANITY that goes on there. You try to say comments like "Oafish" occured on the secret board? No, it didn't. It was in one of Dew's episode recaps and was only removed after some complaining. I pretty much stopped visiting GWoP because tasteless comments can be found under every post.
- it always falls back to talking about others. "remembering that behind the screen name is still a human" - how long did that last?
I take offense to this comment, sorry. I am polite to people who disagree with me and I've had many a discussion with people who have different views than my own. Ask AAP...Ask some of the others that come. There are discussions had here every day. I don't call people names but I will say that I think things like driving by the Gosselin home is nutty. Sorry.
I am not going to argue with you about the board being fair and balanced. If you don't see it that way, fine. But how many of your comments have not gotten through? Even one that could have been potentially 'damaging.' Fair and balanced doesn't mean every post is agreed with. It means every post get's a fair chance to be published and the discussion can come from both sides (read, balanced). If more people hold a pro-Gosselin opinion, there is no controlling that. This board is what it is. Period.
Ducttape
Where did you submit your comment to? What post?
nomoredrama are you a politician? Here is a more direct question, because I gave a specific concern.
Privacy being trampled on: The kids in baths to place a J&J bath consumer product. So I'm not allowed to have an opinion that no kid should have their baths publicized?
More privacy being trampled on? the kids in the potty.
But I am again, so ANYONE can answer me this question, specifically talking about the kids in the bath. Even though, anyone with discernment can find so many other examples. Are you really so pro Gosselin that you can't see them nomoredrama?
Personally, I don't think it's ok to show kids in baths. Too many pervs out there. Again, that is one example among many. Is that an ok opinion to have? Will someone with a different opinion who can also be polite respond?
I am coming from a place of trying to understand both sides. I don't appreciate the hostility and condescension.
Personally, I don't think it's ok to show kids in baths. Too many pervs out there. Again, that is one example among many. Is that an ok opinion to have? Will someone with a different opinion who can also be polite respond?
Thank you....this is your opinion. How can a question be answered "why is it ok to trample on their privacy" in any meaningful way if the poster is not in agreement with you stance? It sets up an unfair bias, anyone who disagrees with you is in favor the privacy of a child being trampled on.
I'm not going to talk about potty shots and bath shots with you right now. The topic has been beaten to death either in this thread or another one. You won't have to do much digging to find the opinions you seek.
I take offense to this comment, sorry.
NMD this was not meant toward you. Yes you suggested it, but hardly anyone, besides yourself heeded.
Regarding "proof" - let's use consign as an example. Let's start with the clothes. I was scratching my head at the Disney episode, when Kate freaked out about the vanilla ice cream.. First of all it was vanilla ice cream, not like KoolAid or anything "red". Until my daughter was 6, I still had an "extra" stash of clothes somewhere - car, extra bag, whatever. How old were the tups? 2 or 3? You mean to tell me that Kate didn't bring extra clothes? What's the big deal about ice cream? IIRC correctly she said, "now she's ruined." The kid? (I think it was Leah). Kids don't get ruined, but clothes can.
Next it was all the explanations about stains, how important it was about any kind of stain? Personally, if I were getting free clothes from multiple sources who cares about stains? I would think Kate would have more things of importance to attend to.
In between we have the discussions of "we give back" and then Jon says they sell all the gear in a "yard" sale (what happened to giving back?). If they admit to selling gear, it is reasonable to say they sell the clothes too.
So in another episode the infamous list. Consign. All of a sudden it makes sense as to why Kate would freak out about the clothes and try to keep them as clean as possible. She consigns the clothes. She has to keep them in good condition to get a good price for them (even though any price should be a "good" price since she gets them for free).
Last point - Julie (and PennMommy (?)confirms she consigns the clothes - Ok she doesn't own the truth - but do you think she would lie about that?
That's how I got from A to B. This without diagnosing Kate with OCD (that's why she freaks out about the stains!)
My point about the "proof" thing, is almost nothing is fact. One could even say that the whole show is a ruse - Jon and Kate aren't even married, they are two actors. Maybe people are jumping to conclusions, but it's not as if they are a stretch. Like something outrageous - "Beth and Kate aren't friends anymore because Beth was having an affair with Jon." Now that would be outrageous, especially knowing that Jon prefers Blondes.
(the last bit was for levity).
NMD, Nina, you have a thankless job, you both manage to keep your wits about it, yes, you can't control who posts what (the thoughts). This is not a persoal attack, in fact, I rely on the both of you to keep the conversations in line.
Kids don't get ruined, but clothes can.
I recall a while ago a poster on GWoP (I think it was Fiona, actually, but if I'm wrong, apologies to Fiona) said that the Gosselin kids were "ruined". And the poster was not just referring to their outfits, unlike Kate.
Kate overreacted about the ice cream, as she is wont to do. Just guessing, based on what my issue would have been, but six sticky little kids is a lot of sticky little kids to deal with. It doesn't mean that she should have freaked the way she did, but every mother has her moments.
I so don't want to get into the consignment issue, and you weren't asking me, but yes, I absolutely think that Julie and PennMommy would lie, or at least exaggerate. Julie in particular has shown that she really gets something out of being an "insider", and so I think she is capable of talking about stuff she doesn't know about in order to make it seem like she is in the know. Obviously, JMO.
Regarding proof and facts, I think we all *think* that we judge based on what we see on the show. But obviously, we bring our own prejudices to the table. Almost every week, I find the posters on GWoP have vastly different interpretations of the same events that I saw.
Taking the word of hangers-on such as PM and Julie just because they confirm what one wants to believe does not lend itself to the notion that one is that interested in "the truth", IMO.
Since this is copy and paste night, I want to bring this comment over from PennMommy.
Thank you Unknown Account:
Everyone looks at the Tv screen differently, and applies
their own life experiences to what they think they are seeing, and
sees things in their perspective.
For instance, Michael Jackson says his father abused him. Jermaine and
a few other brothers say that was nonsense. Jermaine went so far as to
even say, "Michael was spoiled as a kid, he was the baby of the
family, he never got whupped."
See? They lived in the same household, yet saw things two different
ways.
See, if you want to have a blog, fine, but stop tearing down others to
get a readership. It makes you look gimmicky and accomplishes nothing.
Post a Comment