I hope for the children's sake that the People article is true and not the Enquirer. Comparing the magazines, I would tend to believe that People is the truth. We'll just have to see how all this plays out.
Daisy,I hope it is also. Jon doesn't get a pass from me. His behavior is immature to say the least.
It is great to see people standing up for Jon and Kate this time-- I think all the drama and tabloid fodder has their friends finally saying that enough is enough. I agree, Nina, that Jon was not in the right here-- but as Daisy said time will tell what is really going on. To be totally honest, its nice to hear from friends of the family. I know there are many who speculate on Jon and Kate shunning people from their lives (Carla, Bev, Aunt Jodi, etc) but we have seen that many of those people are still involved and just not on camera. Its encouraging to know they still have people around after all the whispers of Kate running them out of her life.
I hope that it was innocent. I am also glad people are standing up for Jon and Kate. I am with Nina thou. Jon needs think about what he is doing, how it is percieved, and make the appropriate adjustments.
I agree with you all. It's nice some folks are standing up for him. There are several different stories out there right now. I do hope that this was just another repeat of his stupid and reckless behavior from February and not something more serious, but I don't pretend to know for sure what occurred.I am just glad to be in a community of bloggers who aren't doing a happy dance over the possible break-up of a marriage.
The extreme anti-fans have always used the argument of "why don't their friends defend them publicly" as "proof" that their allegations are true. Wonder what they'll say to this people story...
You may want to check out those friends. One is a bouncer at the bar he goes to and the other two aren't the most upstanding folks in PA. If we heard from Kevin or Bob, I might pay attention.
It's nice to read Jon and Kate have some friends..ha :) It's good to see real people with real names stand by a friend then some article saying a security guard saw them in some stairwell making out. This articles has more credible sources to me. It doesn't excuse the behaviour.
Well, how about that? Jon has friends. It's nice to hear from them and see them stick up for their friend. I am believing Jon's friends instead of the security guard. Especially, since the articles didn't even get the part right about Jon wearing his wedding ring.
Denise said...You may want to check out those friends. One is a bouncer at the bar he goes to and the other two aren't the most upstanding folks in PA. Ok, I'll bite. What makes the other two quoted friends less than "upstanding."I actually can understand very well why Kevin and Bob don't want to be quoted. They like their privacy and don't want strangers commenting on them.
One of them is pretty deep in the music and bar scene in Wyomissing, Reading area. Not Taylor Swift approved.Did you notice the bouncer said Jon "showed up" with the girl. I am hoping she had parked her car at his house since he was apparently too drunk to drive. At least he wouldn't be lying about "so I let her drive it to her car".Folks, this looks bad and can only hurt those kids. I could just smack Jon for being so careless and stupid.He's lucky the paparazzi were stalking him and not the DUI squad.
As far as the credibility of Jon's character witness, they both apparently live in a motel. That doesn't suggest they are structured or established people.Honestly, the fat that the bouncer at a bar is standing up for him suggest one of two things- either Jon must spend a lot of time at the nightclub for him to know Jon so well ORThe bouncer is just an opportunist who wants to read his name in the paper.I know that this is a fan site, but I think it's time for people to realize that there is trouble in what you want to call paradise.To date- the only marriage that has survived a reality tv show is the Osbourne's-although their children have seemed to become causalities of it.What makes you think that Jon and Kate-can make it given the already obvious strain of 8 children?I don't think it takes a crystal ball to predict this marriage is headed for disaster and now almost every entertainment show or media is bailing out on the this genre of tv.
Martina,Who are you speaking to?
As far as the credibility of Jon's character witness, they both apparently live in a motel.Is that really apparent? How do you know this? Are you local or did you read it somewhere that we can see it? Please share.
Denise said... You may want to check out those friends. One is a bouncer at the bar he goes to and the other two aren't the most upstanding folks in PA. How can we check out those friends? there info online somewhere? Martina and/or Denise can you show us where you found that info, or maybe you're local?
I went on Legend's myspace/website. This is definetely NOT a place that a happily married father of 8 should be hanging out especially at 2:00 a.m. I can't give him a pass on this one. I feel so sorry for their kids. It is bad enough to have this sort of thing happen in your home but to have it all played out in the media is just too sad. The saddest part is that they (Jon & kate) could let it die down instead of continuing to issue statements and have so called friends speak on their behalf. How or why would they even show up at that woman's show tomorrow is beyond me.
Just one thing...if he recognized that behavior as stupid and reckless in February....why is he repeating it?
BostonBean,I agree. There are deeper issues here.
I read the article and it quotes the people who commented, and says they are long time friends.That could mean anything.When being interviewed, the guy could say "Oh yeah...I've known him for ages." and maybe he just knows him from the bar.I don't know....also would the bouncer risk his job by saying something negative about a patron? (and it's going to be broadcast everywhere?)Also, I read reports that the bar is connected to the motel. That would explain the "friends" who live there maybe. I also noticed that the bouncer said that he "arrived" with the girl. Well, the February reports say that he went from one bar to another.
Mrs. Ref, ITA. It's so sad this has happened. It's got to be so hurtful to the kids. That it's public is more salt in the wound. Jon should stop issuing statements.
J&K are supposed to be at Woman's show in PA today. Since this is hot gossip, I bet the paps will be there to try to get catch pics and some quotes. It will be interesting to see if J&K make any kind of statement at their appearance.
I think there is definitely a maturity issue here. When I think back on the episode where Jon had to work one Saturday and Kate took the kids to some Chocolate place, he was very pouty--but he hadn't even planned on going with them. He was supposed to go camping with a friend.I think Kate's abrasive personality, has overridden Jon's emotional immaturity in a lot of episodes. The public thought he was the martyr and could do no wrong.It really makes me rethink Kate. Maybe she is so driven, because Jon is not.Now Jon doesn't have the 9to5 drag that he complained about. Now he is complaining about being tied down. I know from experience of being home alone with little ones that you need to get out from time to time, but surely the ski trips, etc. provide that outlet.As far as Jon's friends standing up for him--I felt their defense was lukewarm at best.It is sad, because Jon is a young man. These days will be over before he can blink, and he will have all the "me" time he could want. Suddenly, he'll look back and think that giving lunch to eight little people was a lot more fulfilling than anything else he ever does.
IMO, maybe this incident (innocent or not) will be a wakeup call to the both of them. It may be time to reevaluate things and plan on easing back on doing the show. As I said in another thread, this incident may be Jon's passive aggressive way of sabotaging the show. JMO, but I think they are desperate need of counseling.
I read the article and I'm not impressed that a bouncer at a sleazy bar is defending Jon's behavior. I'd be very interested in hearing from Jon's two brothers, Kate's brother Kevin, or any family member. Or Beth's husband, Bob, who Jon said was still a good friend in the Utah video interview (even mentioned texting Bob while on the ski slopes). Or the pastor from the church Jon and Kate attend.I understand their family members, Bob, or their pastor may not want the media attention, but if my brother/brother-in-law/son/good friend were being falsely accused in the media, I'd be loud and clear in my defense of him. And most obvious of all, where is Kate's defense of his behavior? If she has full knowledge of what he does when she's away on trips, and doesn't have a problem with it, why hasn't she been vocal about saying that she loves her husband and trusts him? If Jon is a solid hardworking family guy and loving husband who's being maligned by the evil press, wouldn't this be the time for his family to come together to make sure the public knows he is being unjustly accused? The fact that no family members, including his own wife, have defended him is more relevant to me than the People article.
I always have to ask myself when new posters come here (at least, to actually post and not lurk) if they have actually read what most of the "regulars" have written, particularly on this latest escapade of Jon's, before calling GDNNOP a "fan" site. Although most of us still enjoy the show on some level, the Gosselins have hardly been given carte blanche on their behavior on the air or off. I think the "regular" posters here approach what we see on the show or in the media with a level head, have opinions of what we see that is both positive and negative, and are hardly the "rapid sheeple" that those who hate (and, yes, I do mean hate) the Gosselins would like to portray this site as being.About this People article, I have to say it's a lukewarm attempt at shoring up Jon's reputation at best. Quotes from his "buds" (since we don't really know how he knows these guys) aren't too convincing. Family members or fellow church members would be a little more convincing. That's just my perspective.I agree with just about everybody else in this thread, the main issue is Jon's bad choices on how he's being perceived in the media.
spanglish said...The fact that no family members, including his own wife, have defended him is more relevant to me than the People article.I agree we haven't seen Kate conducting any "Stand By Your Man" interviews. It's nearly impossible to say at this point what's being discussed behind the scenes. Between TLC and their own PR people there may be many opinions on how to handle the *bad* publicity and that could influence how much the Gosselins say in public about their marriage. My guess is they're going with a "less is more" approach with Kate and Jon not directly addressing specifics.IMO, if there IS marital trouble, I'd be surprised if that's ever discussed publicly...and I would hope that's the case if only for the kids' sake.On the other hand, if these incidents with Jon are nothing more than him acting out, rebelling, being passive aggressive...or just being immature, stupid and stubborn...I'm not sure they'd (particularly Kate) would say anything either. Although, I can imagine what's being said in private.I think at this point, between the likely resrictions that wanting to be private and being a part of the show put on them, I don't see Kate saying anything about Jon in public. I could be wrong. It just looks like one of those between-a-rock-and-a-hard-place scenarios.
That was supposed to be "rabid sheeple" up thread.
Marci,Well said. That is what bothered me the other day when first one person said that they were sorry to be a "party pooper" and the next said "now don't crucify me." Had they even read the previous comments?There are various opinions here. We are not of one mind, even though others might like to portray us that way. I get a kick out of the ones such as Martina that want to come and lecture us. Isn't that one of the reasons your comments can get rejected at another site? Who specifically are you talking to. It would be nice to know.
Guess I got my answer when I asked how people would react to named friends supporting the Gs!These are the reasons we shouldn't trust these friends: (1) They play music at bars; (2) they live in the motel; (3) they are a bar bouncer; (4) they're not family or church members.Let's tackle #1 first: So what if someone is a musician! Most of my friends are musicians, and many of them are the most true, supportive, wonderful people. Some are literally starving artists who are taking the hard road in order to make a living from their art. Others write and record "on the side." Are we back in the 1800s when people thought entertainers--like, GASP, actresses--were devils incarnate?As far as #2: Where in the article does it say that they all live in the motel? Otherwise, how did you come by this information? That seems to be complete speculation on the part of people who I don't think have ever even posted here before. Come to think of it, same with point #1. Then there's #3: While I will agree that there are some a-hole bouncers out there (particularly at pretty-people, scene-to-be-seen places), that doesn't mean all bouncers are jerks. More often than not I've met nice ones. So why judge someone's character based on what he/she does for an honest living?Finally, #4: I think we've heard in the past that the Gosselins' extended family want to avoid any and all publicity. No wonder, seeing the violent hatred shown the couple. Meanwhile, why do character witnesses HAVE to be from someone's church?! Church member does not necessarily equal a witness beyond reproach, as tales of child abuse (and I'm not just talking about priests) will tell us. No, I'm not saying everyone involved with a church is secretly evil like this--just pointing out that the term "church member" alone isn't enough, for me, to prove a character's validity.
FloridaMom, BostonBean: I agree.Spanglish: I think that Kate didn't make a statement because Jon already did, and they're considered "one camp" by typical PR standards. Plus, she'll be making her "statement" by appearing side-by-side with Jon today at that convention. Even though my interest in the Gs stops far short of attending book signings and such, I'd sure like to be in the room for that!
Oops, I meant to say that I agree with Florida Mom and BostonBean on the deeper issues that could be involved (maturity, repeating destructive behavior).
merryway said... J&K are supposed to be at Woman's show in PA today.They were both there. No fireworks. Canned speech
Florida mom wrote: I think Kate's abrasive personality, has overridden Jon's emotional immaturity in a lot of episodes. The public thought he was the martyr and could do no wrong.It really makes me rethink Kate. Maybe she is so driven, because Jon is not.BINGO! I've always thought this. IMO, it is not an issue of simply K being bossy and overbearing, but an issue of J often being clueless and immature. What really demonstrated that was the infamous trip to disney in which the kids are hungry and irritable. K and Beth are helping to feed them while Jon is on the sidelines joking and laughing with someone. K was overbearing and critical which was wrong and destructive. J was disengaged and clueless which was also wrong and destructive.
marci wrote:"My guess is they're going with a "less is more" approach with Kate and Jon not directly addressing specifics."I agree that they're avoiding the specifics of Jon's activities in both the February college partying incident as well as the most current incident. But they are addressing Jon's behavior, and not in an understated way. There was a full page photo of Jon and Kate in the March 6 issue of People, accompanied by an article with the prominent title "I Did Not Cheat on Kate," addressing the stories about partying at Juniata College in February, and that was the first time he demonstrated questionable behavior. In early April there was the very public appearance of Jon and Kate at Mr. Chow's, well known for all the paps lurking outside, where photos and resulting buzz were certain to receive attention in the media (and it did). Now that a second incident of questionable behavior has occurred just two months after the Juniata partying, People magazine, with its huge audience for both print and online editions, doesn't have a direct quote from Jon (or Kate) about this incident but instead relies on a couple of Jon's friends and a bar bouncer for the article headline, "Friends Defend Jon Gosselin as a Faithful Husband". The first time, Jon might be given the benefit of the doubt. This time, the implications are more serious than the February incident, which is the reason I think it would have been more compelling (if not convincing) to have family members, their pastor, fellow church members, neighbors defending Jon in the People article.Kuromi wrote:"While I will agree that there are some a-hole bouncers out there (particularly at pretty-people, scene-to-be-seen places), that doesn't mean all bouncers are jerks. More often than not I've met nice ones. So why judge someone's character based on what he/she does for an honest living?"I'd say it would be fair to apply this logic to the motel security guard who was named in the NE article, the one who reported seeing Jon kissing the woman he was with on the motel stairway. He could be just as fine a fellow, and have the same motives, as assumed for the bar bouncer.
Nina, I wasn't speaking to any one person in particular but responding to the collective group. Saint, as far as Jon's defenders living in a Motel I heard about it from a Cafemom member. I don't know how she does it but she is very resourceful and to date everything she has dug up has proven to be true. I suspect with a few dollars and a name search someone can find out quite a lot about a person. Bloggers/Followers here can either take it or leave it.Marci,why are you being so defensive? Are you saying this is not a fan site? I hate to break it to you but the overwhelming perception of this site is exactly that, in as much as GWOP is considered to be a non-fan site.
Martina,I don't mind my blog being called a fan site. I have no problem with that. Or being called a sheeple. That kind of nonsense really isn't that important to me.This is not a contest or a war where one side is right and the other is wrong. I have seen valid points all the way around. Certain things I have changed my mind on over the months and other things I still don't see what the big deal is. My thoughts, my opinions.In fact, even among the mods at this blog, there are various opinions about the show and the family. Same with politics, religion and entertainment. We are not of one mind.So we are good when I say that the "overwhelming perception" of WAJ is a hate site?
Marci,I am sure that many fanatics would call WAJ a 'hate' site. Many fans or middle of the roaders would call it a non-fan site, but let's not argue over semantics. If you are asking my opinion, there are certainly many more non-fans or 'haters' than supporters of the show who POST. I can't tell you what that actual MEMBERSHIP make up is.
Martina,Nina here. I posted the last comment.
Martina, I never ever look at Cafe Mom so I wouldn't have seen your insider source. Personally, I have been burned by an "insider" before, so I'd like to be careful this time and wait for the celeb news sites following the story to pick up on that. Thanks for admitting where you got your info. Denise, are you local? You sound like you might be?
I love the assessment that because the one witness is a bar bouncer, he's not the best example of a good citizen. You do realize that A LOT of off duty POLICE OFFICERS moonlight doing jobs like that because they need the extra income? Bouncers are usually second jobs, not careers, and the best ones to hire for that type of job are people with experience in crowd control or law enforcement, who are in good physical condition. Police officers, fire fighters, coaches, fitness trainers. But, I guess in the narrow minded, bigoted world of the hater, only scum bags ever need to go to a bar to unwind, and even bigger scumbags WORK in one. I bartended for nine year to supplement my main income. What a loser I must be! I'll tell you what, I sure wish I had that extra income right now!
Martina,You know, I know there's a tendency towards people being hypersentive, especially when posting on a new site for the first time, but if you took my comments about some people wanting to view GDNNOP in the same light as a "fan site" as being defensive, you've really overshot the mark.Either that, or you're trolling around for a little entertainment, and, frankly, who has the time?What the heck is WAJ anyway? At least GDNNOP *has* a reputation, fan site or not. I've never heard of your little spot in the Gosselin blogosphere.
What's WAJ? I've never heard of it before.Anyway, I think it's interesting that People is actually posting a defense.I think their excuses were flimsy at best, to be honest. I don't think any of us (for the most part) have a problem with Jon relaxing or getting out of the house, but again: 2am+bar+woman= bad idea.
Morecowbell: You have a valid point about the bouncer possibly being a cop or in law enforcement. I hope that I didn't offend you by talking about the bar. There is nothing wrong with being a bartender or a musician. That particular bar doesn't look to be the type of place for anyone one over college age. Unfortunately when you are in the public eye, you have to be more discreet about your comings and goings. It just goes with the territory.
Denise, are you local? You sound like you might be?Not anymore but I used to live right up the road and still have friends there.One thing I have in common with Kate, I hated the cold weather!
Spanglish: You're absolutely right about the motel guard in the National Enquirer article. The fact that he is willing for his name to appear in print also makes it convincing that he's speaking the truth. We all should give low-level security guys (bouncers, motel guards) the benefit of the doubt--look at what happened to poor Richard Jewel!
Not anymore but I used to live right up the road and still have friends there.Thanks, Denise. Up the road from the bar or up the road from the Gosselin's? So you know these "not the two most upstanding folks in PA" friends of Jon, or you know about them. Any idea how I can check them out myself as suggested?
morecowbell wrote:"I guess in the narrow minded, bigoted world of the hater, only scum bags ever need to go to a bar to unwind, and even bigger scumbags WORK in one. I bartended for nine year to supplement my main income. What a loser I must be!"I haven't seen anyone here accuse the bouncer of being a "scum bag". IMO the point about a bouncer defending Jon has nothing to do with the bouncer's character, it's that how would an employee of the bar know so much about Jon's life as a family man or whether he's faithful to his wife, unless Jon is such a frequent customer that the bouncer can say: "[Jon] always has his wedding band on. He talks about his kids all the time." Although the article is titled "Friends Defend Jon Gosselin…", it identifies its sources as a bouncer and two longtime friends. If the bouncer is also a friend, he should have been identified as a friend who also happens to be a bouncer at the bar.
Lurker turned commenter-I really don't see this as a defense of Jon. Maybe if family or friends were coming out and making statements it would hold a little more credance with me.Personally, I feel as though their marriage is in twouble and this is just my opionion. And I really hope they don't play that out in season 5.Just finished reading Muliple Blessings, and it really put into perspective for me what kind of person Kate is. Jon, I feel knew what he was getting into, just as Kate knew Jon's personality.Both of their behaviors have been inappropriate in my mind and I just hope they focus on their kids well being at this point.Thanks for letting me say my peace.
WAJ is the "Where's Aunt Jodi" group on Cafemom.com. It is a hate site pure and simple... so much so in fact that a fan can be booted for simply disagreeing with a non-fan. I speak from experience, because I was booted for just being there...not even posting anything. From what I have seen, the people on WAJ have just as much animosity for fans as they do for Kate Gosselin. They have "seen the light" and consider fans to be worthless sheeple....
Quiltart-Thanks for explaing that- sounds like an awesome little club. I bet you cry into your beer daily over gtting the boot.
SamanthaNC said... Quiltart- Thanks for explaing that- sounds like an awesome little club. I bet you cry into your beer daily over gtting the boot. LOL, Samantha! You've got that right! Sometimes, that group made GWOP look like fans! Negativity is not my thing.
Quiltart,I can see you think that anyone who supports the show gets 8-balled and it exclusively rabid 'haters'.As you said, you were booted even though you didn't 'posting anything', then there would be no way for anyone to know your opinion of the show. I would imagine then, you were autobooted for having an inactive account-it was nothing personal.
Liza Beth said... It is great to see people standing up for Jon and Kate this time-- I think all the drama and tabloid fodder has their friends finally saying that enough is enough. I agree, Nina, that Jon was not in the right here-- but as Daisy said time will tell what is really going on. To be totally honest, its nice to hear from friends of the family. I know there are many who speculate on Jon and Kate shunning people from their lives (Carla, Bev, Aunt Jodi, etc) but we have seen that many of those people are still involved and just not on camera. Its encouraging to know they still have people around after all the whispers of Kate running them out of her life.May 1, 2009 12:43 PM___________________________I agree with you Liza Beth. As I've said a while back (when the "where are they now" questions were abuzz), just because we don't see them, doesn't mean the kids are cut off from family and friends. And, if I were any of their family or friends, I wouldn't be visiting the blogworld on them. Too destructive.Kuromi great post. I agree with all four of your points of your post of May 2, 2009 10:13 AM
Martina,My feelings were well known to the group. I hadn't posted in the two weeks previous to being booted, but I had posted in the past.
I guess I don't see this as family friends speaking out for Jon. Truly, I think so many people are rooting for the Gosselins that some people have blinders on.This is a family in trouble and it is sad.
Illinois Mom said... I guess I don't see this as family friends speaking out for Jon. Truly, I think so many people are rooting for the Gosselins that some people have blinders on.This is a family in trouble and it is sad.I don't think any of us have blinders on at all. Yes, the Gosselins have problems, but that doesn't mean that some of us are not still rooting for them to succeed.
I think the friends that should have spoke out in favor for this couple should have been Beth, Bob, Jodi and Kevin. Saw their picture on TMZ and they really looked miserable. So sad to see a marriage crumple in front of your eyes.
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20276577,00.htmlThe girl he was seen with speaks-- she said the same thing Jon did. It was all innocent, they really are just friends, and everything was blown out of proportion.I still don't think it was necessarily the smartest move for Jon to be out with someone who is not his wife both when Kate is out of town and when their marriage is under such scrutiny.
I guess I don't see this as family friends speaking out for Jon. I just can't help but feel that if a closer friend or family member spoke out, the rules would be changed again. Even if Kevin or Bob or even St. Jodi spoke in Jon or Kate's defense, there would be some reason that their words would be dismissed.Anyway, if we're talking strictly about Jon's behavior at this bar, I'm not sure what these other people could even say about it - if they weren't there, what would they know?Truly, I think so many people are rooting for the Gosselins that some people have blinders on.I think it's the opposite - I think it's those who are rooting against the Gosselins who have blinders on. They view everything through hate-twisted glasses. With every new Gosselin story that comes out, they behave like a jury that's decided on a verdict before hearing the evidence.This is a family in trouble and it is sad.Yes, they appear to be going through a rough patch and that's unfortunate. But it's not the end of the world. Both Jon and Kate clearly love their kids; they have, presumably, a level of financial stability that will give them options in the future. I think things will be okay, however they turn out. I don't see that as a case of my having blinders on as much as it is simply having perspective and not making a mountain out of every molehill that comes along.
or even St. Jodi Thanks for the laugh Guin! I choked on my coffee.I don't know why the heck this woman is thought of as a saint (no offense to our Saint here) on the anti-Gosselin boards. Just because she's not Kate she's revered as the nice person. But, here's a woman who volunteered her services to babysit and said it in such an overtly cheery way because she only wanted to get her face on TV each week. Awww, isn't she nice? Cut me a break...here's a lady who only wanted to get on tv. She may have had good intentions, but she knew the cameras would be around and her wide eyed face would be taped.
Does making fun of Aunt Jodi level the playing field?
"She wanted to get her face on TV"? Are you kidding? The woman took care of 12 kids sick with the flu for 2 days so Jon and Kate could fly off to get free hair plugs...And took all the kids every Friday so Kate could have a break. And Kate surely responded in kind, yeah right. She kicked her in the teeth.
I don't think Aunt Jodi helped with the children to be on tv- at all. Its my understanding that she helped long before the show. Not many people would take care of 8 children- who were sick- in addition to their own kids.I like Kate - most of the time, but she was a real witch over the whole gum incident. Not to mention the way she retold the story, imitating Jodi, it came off (to me) like she was mocking her. I don't know if they have a relationship now- I hope they do, but Kate was out of line in that situationand I don't blame Jodi for being hurt.
Eileen, no it doesn't level the playing field and I was not making fun of Jodi (if that's what you were thinking). I am just going by the infamous gumgate episode. To me, she seems a little more cheery and wide-eyed than a few of the other episodes she was in. I thought it was nice she volunteered to watch the kids. And, I'm sure she helped with the kids before this episode and all along. My point was how it was being highlighted. Did it have to be on display? Was it a heads up that we'd see her in more episodes beause she had them every Friday morning. (well, who knows how long after that). To me, that came off like she wanted to be on t.v. (who knows, maybe they banned the cameras on Fridays after that). Ah, I'm doing to Jodi what everyone does to Kate...surmise her intentions. Hmmm.Just because in the episode Kate was angry at her, doesn't make her a saint. I wouldn't want my toddlers chewing gum either. Especially if they were in a bigger group than normal and with just one person watching them. After seeing Jodi's video on her sister's blog, I think that also adds to why I don't think she's all that she is portrayed to be.I honestly believe that Jodi is and has always been in their lives. (maybe a bit rough after the video she did on her sister's blog). I also believe that Beth and all the others who we don't see are and have still been in their lives. But, for those on the anti-Gosselin blogs who worship Jodi just because she isn't Kate, is unfair. We don't know her, just as much as we don't know Kate.
Did it have to be on displayWell its a show about the kids (mostly) and the weekend was featured bc of the hairplugs- I dont think they featured it for any reason other than that.I dont assume that she's a saint either but its unfair to assume selfish motivations- just like I don't assume the worst of Kate I dont assume the worst of her either.I also don't think she was trying to appear the wide eyed, innocent, martyr. She looked exhausted to me, like she was trying to apear alert. I understand why Kate didn't want the children to have gum- BUT, she called Jodi when she was angry, she was hateful and it wasn't necessary. When someone does you the colossal favor of taking your 8 children (many of whom are ill) there is a level of appreciation that should be shown. If either of them should had a "right" to be cranky, I would think it would have been Jodi after the weekend she undoubtedly had.This isn't a Team Jodi or Team Kate thing for me, I just don't think its fair to assume the worst of anyone when you (and by "you" I don't mean, you Theresa, just in general) don't have facts.
This isn't a Team Jodi or Team Kate thing for me, I just don't think its fair to assume the worst of anyone when you (and by "you" I don't mean, you Theresa, just in general) don't have facts.May 5, 2009 1:01 PMYou're right Samantha. Bingo! This in general is how I feel about Jon and Kate. Assumptions are made all the time on this couple. A lot of them are most likely not true as we don't know them. It's what people see on the show and interpret as to "why" they do stuff, "their actions", etc. No factual base. Not to mention a lot of them are just vile (on other boards).We all make assumptions (I did it in my interpretation of Jodi. Seriously, that wasn't right of me). I don't want to make it a Team Jodi or Team Kate thing either. But, just expressing my feeling...since everyone is allowed to express they don't like Kate (if they dont' like her), I'm not all there with Jodi. Just my opinion. I don't know her. She could be the sweetest person, or not. Assumptions of her being sweet is just that. So, assumptions go both ways.None of us have the facts.
Theresa :) Thats why I like it here- we can discuss without arguing and still be friends.Well Said.
I'm not in a position to defend Jodi, I don't know the woman or her motives, I just felt some remarks here about her sounded unfair and unfounded. It all sounds unfair to me. The fans get accused of idolizing Kate, the haters get accused of canonizing Jodi for Sainthood.
The Gosselins do not need my pity, but they have it today.
Your wife is out of town, you are the father of 8 small children, and you are hanging out in bars at 2 in the morning with a 22-year-old woman? That is wrong, stupid, and indefensible in my book. Jon saying he "used poor judgement" doesn't even touch the problems in this relationship. I think the next time the Gosselins are in Ladies Home Journal, it ought to be under "Can This Marriage Be Saved."
You know after Jodi's video, I would never trust her again! In my mind that didn't make Kate look "worse", it made Jodi look "worse".
Post a Comment