CHUD.com Community › Forums › CULTURE, HUMOR, & FREE FORM › Gossip › Does "fascincating" have a new definition nobody bothered to tell me?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Does "fascincating" have a new definition nobody bothered to tell me?

post #1 of 22
11/30/11 at 11:43am
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:

“Barbara Walters Presents the 10 Most Fascinating People of 2011” will air as a 90-minute ABC News special highlighting some of the year’s most prominent names in entertainment, sports and popular culture, WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 14 (9:31-11:00 p.m., ET) on the ABC Television Network.

Hosted by Barbara Walters, the special includes: American Reality Royalty, the Kardashian family; the always provocative Simon Cowell; breakout stars from television’s hit comedy, “Modern Family,” Jesse Tyler Ferguson and Eric Stonestreet; MLB star and New York Yankees Captain Derek Jeter; American business tycoon/author/television personality Donald Trump; pop singing sensation Katy Perry; and quite possibly the most famous sister in the world -- Pippa Middleton. The Number One Most Fascinating Person of 2011 will be announced on the program.

 

Not one of those people is even interesting in the slightest to me, much less fascinating.  In fact, I think the world might be better if a giant black hole appeared in the media and sucked them into it (other than Modern Family, which people tell me is great). 

 

Is this because Barbara couldn't book the people she really wanted?  How do you account with this loathsome list?  Sometimes I feel like I'm completely out of step with the world at large. 


Edited by yt - 11/30/11 at 12:02pm
Reply
post #2 of 22
11/30/11 at 11:46am

I dunno, does it have a new spelling?

 

Seriously tho, that cadre of (mostly) non-talent is far cry from Anwar Sadat, isn't it? Babs gotta eat, I guess.

Reply
post #3 of 22
11/30/11 at 11:57am

I sometimes find myself fascinated by parts of some of those folks.

Reply
post #4 of 22
11/30/11 at 12:01pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Decade View Post

I dunno, does it have a new spelling?

 

Seriously tho, that cadre of (mostly) non-talent is far cry from Anwar Sadat, isn't it? Babs gotta eat, I guess.



AHAHAHAHAH!  I didn't even see that!

Reply
post #5 of 22
11/30/11 at 12:03pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raspberry Leper View Post

I sometimes find myself fascinated by parts of some of those folks.



dat ass?

Reply
post #6 of 22
11/30/11 at 12:33pm

I don't care about any of these people, and I don't understand why anyone would give a shit about Kate Middleton's sister.  She's not ugly, but she damn sure isn't stunning, either, and the British media's drooling over her barely-there ass in that bridesmaid dress was puzzling to say the least.

Reply
post #7 of 22
11/30/11 at 12:42pm

Oh wow, not one person I'd read a paragraph about among them. That's actually quite an accomplishment.

Reply
post #8 of 22
11/30/11 at 1:17pm

The mere fact that the phrase "American Reality Royalty" was uttered without a hint of irony makes visions of chemical genocide dance in my head.

Reply
post #9 of 22
11/30/11 at 1:21pm

Daniel Craig agrees:

 

Quote:

 

b.jpg

 

"I think there's a lot to be said for keeping your own counsel. It's not about being afraid to be public with your emotions or about who you are and what you stand for. But if you sell it off it's gone. You can't buy it back—you can't buy your privacy back. Ooh I want to be alone. Fuck you. We've been in your living room. We were at your birth. You filmed it for us and showed us the placenta and now you want some privacy?

 

Look at the Kardashians, they're worth millions. I don't think they were that badly off to begin with but now look at them. You see that and you think 'what, you mean all I have to do is behave like a fucking idiot on television and then you'll pay me millions.' I'm not judging it—well, I am obviously."

 

http://gawker.com/5863755/daniel-craigs-kardashian-rant-fking-idiots

 

Reply
post #10 of 22
11/30/11 at 2:13pm

I was railing against this same phenomena in another thread last year when TIME MAGAZINE'S list of the 100 MOST INFLUENTAL PEOPLE IN THE WORLD included Taylor Swift at #56. It's all part of pulling the wool over the eyes of the public, distracting them with nonsense so they don't spend too much time thinking about the people and institutions that actually hold sway over their lives

 

And kudos to Craig for keepin' it real. The man is a real life hero, straight up

 

 

Quote:
I'm not judging it—well, I am, obviously

 

Reply
post #11 of 22
11/30/11 at 2:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarleyQuinn22 View Post

I don't care about any of these people, and I don't understand why anyone would give a shit about Kate Middleton's sister.  She's not ugly, but she damn sure isn't stunning, either, and the British media's drooling over her barely-there ass in that bridesmaid dress was puzzling to say the least.



fucking A.  She's average at best and in some shots that British Jaw of hers makes her look like a fucking bloke.  She wore an expensive fitted dress and worked out like fuck and because it was on Celebrity Wedding with Royals the world of morons became obsessed.

 

And words cannot express my absolute hatred of the bastard Kardashians.  Base rat cunning utilised to self promote is the only skill these vacuous fucks have.

 

It doubly annoys me because there is an evolutionary purpose behind "looking up to" or admiring people, i.e. because we all came from societal troops with Alpha males and females.  So we used to admire the best hunters, or runners, or nurturers.  Then post enlightenment we also added intellect as something to be admired.

 

Now we just admire some fucks because they're famous.  Humanity is doomed.

Reply
post #12 of 22
11/30/11 at 2:43pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Decade View Post

Daniel Craig agrees:

 

 

 

Yeah, I posted that quote to my fb an hour ago.  Awesome.
 

 

Reply
post #13 of 22
11/30/11 at 5:23pm

This new definition was developed by Bernard Berkman in collaboration with Raleigh St. Clair.

Reply
post #14 of 22
11/30/11 at 11:25pm

Barbara Walters and these bullshit tv interviews are a joke and have been for years and years. Its like self fellatio for Hollywood and their elite ilk.

 

Nice to see not everyone falls for it. Faith restored.


Edited by Johnny Daywalker - 11/30/11 at 11:50pm
Reply
post #15 of 22
12/1/11 at 8:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Daywalker View Post

Barbara Walters and these bullshit tv interviews are a joke and have been for years and years. Its like self fellatio for Hollywood and their elite ilk.


Yeah, literally:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rpuygH8afE&feature=related

 

The entire interview is gold, but check out 06:30 when he starts talking about Pryor and Walters.

 

Reply
post #16 of 22
12/1/11 at 11:20pm

Fascinating's best use in recent months:

 

 

I would be far more fascinated by Walters interviewing this guy than any of those people listed.

Reply
post #17 of 22
12/2/11 at 3:05am
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelios View Post

Oh wow, not one person I'd read a paragraph about among them. That's actually quite an accomplishment.


"Simon Cowell was today gruesomely beheaded by a pelican clutching a medieval mace in its beak...."

 

You're telling me you wouldn't read the paragraph that followed that opening sentence?

 

Reply
post #18 of 22
12/2/11 at 4:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Merriweather View Post


"Simon Cowell was today gruesomely beheaded by a pelican clutching a medieval mace in its beak...."

 

You're telling me you wouldn't read the paragraph that followed that opening sentence?

 



Beheading someone with a mace would take ages, but the results would be fascinating!

Reply
post #19 of 22
12/2/11 at 4:07am

I picture it getting embedded in the side of his neck and wrenching the head free.

Reply
post #20 of 22
12/2/11 at 9:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glisten View Post



Beheading someone with a mace would take ages, but the results would be fascinating!



My warrior-mage in Skyrim would have to disagree.

 

Reply
post #21 of 22
12/2/11 at 9:59am

Yeah, what kind of wimpy maces do you guys have in mind? A nice hit with a proper mace will take your head clean (not that clean) off.

 

This is a mace:

 

9Hhor.jpg

Reply
post #22 of 22
12/15/11 at 11:08am

At least she got #1 right

 

steve-jobs-1.jpg

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Gossip
CHUD.com Community › Forums › CULTURE, HUMOR, & FREE FORM › Gossip › Does "fascincating" have a new definition nobody bothered to tell me?