Bottom Of The Barrel

Here's my take on the "Jon & Kate" gossip that's currently floating around. Jon doesn't belong going out alone with a "female friend" at god knows what hour to a bar located hours away. It's just not appropriate for married folks to be out corrowsing alone with friends of the opposite sex in that atmosphere. Now I'm not opposed to people having friends of the opposite sex, I have quite a few myself, but you'd never see myself or husband out at 2 am alone with them, it's just setting your self up to look bad if nothing else. It's one thing to go out as a couple, or with other people, but generally two people out alone, in that atmosphere, in my eyes resembles a date. Now granted for those who've seen the show, the majority are not impressed with Kate's treatment of her husband, often referring to her as a "shrew". But that does not give Jon the pass to be drinking with college girls, and going out to bars with "female friends". Nor do I think it's particularly helpful for Kate to be across the country promoting her new book when her marriage is in trouble. Here's what Jon had to say about this situation:(From Yahoo.com news)


"Like most people, I have male and female friends, and I'm not going to end my friendships just because I'm on TV," the dad of 8 tells Extra. "However, being out with them late at night showed poor judgment on my part.....What makes me sick is that my careless behavior has put my family in this uncomfortable position," he continues..."My family is the most important thing in my life and it kills me that these allegations have hurt them."


No you shouldn't end friendships just bc you're on tv, but you should know what's appropriate and not appropriate behavior for a husband (or wife if the situation was reversed). I feel bad for the children in this situation, their parents are clearly having marriage problems, and it's displayed as national news for everyone to see, including their friends and other family members.


Next item up for the trash can: Maddy McCann's disappearance from her Portugal hotel room. Her parents fault, absolutely. I'm sorry, but who leaves their small children unattended, even if they are asleep, while on vacation?!?!? In a foreign country no less. These people are smart enough to be doctors, but lack the common sense needed for parenting? It's one thing to have your child asleep in your home, and you be in the house somewhere. But to leave your 4 year old and younger siblings while you go have dinner at your resort? I don't care how "close" you are, you don't do it. A quote from CBSnews.com:

"Without any clues confirming what happened to her, a British former detective who’s followed the case tells Roth probability points to just one conclusion.

“Within three hours,” says Mark Williams-Thomas, “74 percent of children abducted by strangers are dead, and within the first 24 hours, it’s 91 percent. So, statistically, it tells you that the chances are she’s dead, and I believe she probably is.”



And unfourtunatly this is probably the case. Apparently having dinner was more important to these people than the safety of their children. It's called room service.


Next in line: The Miss California gay marriage response. Frankly I don't think the question should've been asked, nor do I think that Perez Hilton was a appropriate canidate for a judge in the contest. He is a widely known controversial celeb-blogger, whom is openly gay. So for him to be completely un biased in the response to such question is a far stretch I'd say. I have the feeling that the pagent deliberatly set out to obtain a controversial judge in order to get more viewers. Here is Hilton's question:(from http://usconservatives.about.com)


"Vermont recently became the fourth state to legalize same-sex marriages," Hilton asked. "Do you think other states should follow suit? Why or why not?"


Now, I have gay friends, and am of the opinion that EVERYONE should have the right to legally marriage, because I feel that telling someone you may not marry your significant other based on gender is the equvilant to not allowing marriage based on race.It's ridiculous. Even so, I feel that while claiming that she believes that heterosexual marriage is "biblically correct" in a clearly un biblical vanity pagent is contridictory, she made an articulate, non derrogatory statement of her opinion, which is what she is supposed to do. Now she is being threatened with the stripping of her crown because she excerized her 1st amendment right of free speech.


However Miss California is getting on her soap box as a spokesperson for the National Organization for Marriage (NOM).She also reminded the nation at a press conference that her contemptibly ill-informed comments at the Miss America contest was "not about being politically correct, but about being 'Biblically correct.' About as biblically correct as those fake boobs and capped teeth? I'm under the impression that God "created" those mamary glands to feed newborns not fill out a bikini in a beauty pagant. Just a thought. I'm not a politcal person by anymeans, but if you're going to get on your biblical soapbox and address such a contraversal topic, you might want to make sure that you're not contradicting yourself.