If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   Our baby makes the cover of People magazine? Yes, Jessica Simpson, that's a lawsuit   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 23
    More: Dumbass, Jessica Simpson, people, Queen Elizabeth I, release form, wookiees, Sealed with a Kiss, Dillard's, Calabasas  
•       •       •

6011 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 09 Jun 2013 at 10:46 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



23 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-06-09 10:59:37 AM
A) She's onlyh 32?!

B) She is WEAPONS-GRADE stupid.

That is all.
 
2013-06-09 11:05:39 AM
OK! Magazine... not People!
 
2013-06-09 11:24:23 AM
She probably could have cut a deal for $1K with the couple. "Cutest baby competition", judged by Jessica Simpson. $1K for the winner, sign away image rights.
 
2013-06-09 11:25:53 AM
What a crazy story!
 
2013-06-09 11:26:53 AM
PS It staggers me how much people will pay to see photos of something. Someone honestly picks up a magazine because they can see the first photos of a minor celebrity's crotchfruit?
 
2013-06-09 11:56:14 AM
Mah gawd, she's a whale now.
RIP, dat ass.
 
2013-06-09 12:03:30 PM
Came for pics of Jessica Simpson when she was hot, I'll be back
 
2013-06-09 12:15:02 PM
I think it's disgusting that we live in a society where celebrities make large sums of money by promising a particular publication the first pictures of their child.

I think it's equally disgusting that so many of you stupid assholes purchase crap like OK! magazine, making such exploitation possible.
 
2013-06-09 12:41:58 PM
Ugly babby's parents should have considered this before handing him over to a celebrity.
 
2013-06-09 01:00:09 PM
Sue the publications, not Jessica.
WYSIWYG and the publications went into a frenzy and made up that shiat.
 
2013-06-09 01:03:13 PM
Poor kid looks like Hunter Thompson.
 
2013-06-09 01:24:16 PM

ZeroCorpse: I think it's disgusting that we live in a society where celebrities make large sums of money by promising a particular publication the first pictures of their child.

I think it's equally disgusting that so many of you stupid assholes purchase crap like OK! magazine, making such exploitation possible.


What about the people FTFA? They're just as bad.

FTFA: "Christopher Hurst and Tracy Gregory took their teenage daughter and infant son to the Dillard's department store in Metairie on October 2011 to meet Jessica, who was promoting her clothing line, according to the lawsuit.

As they were standing in line to get the star's autograph, Hurst alleges a stranger suggested he allow Jessica - who was pregnant with her first child at the time - to hold the infant."


Let's break this down, shall we?

1. Enabling their teenager's misplaced idolatry instead of attempting to direct her attention to a worthy role model. Check.

2. Apparently this was an event that the entire family needed to share. "Hey, remember that time we stood in line at Dillard's to bask in the presence of a manufactured celebrity? Memories..."

3. Stood in line for an autograph from a person that nobody can really remember what made them famous in the first place. Totally worth it.

4. A stranger suggested they put their infant in the hands of another stranger, albeit a famous one. Take the fame out of the equation. Random guy on the street suggests you let that lady over there *points at random passerby* hold your kid. What do you do?

Everyone in this story is pants-on-head retarded, to include Jessica Simpson, the family that stood in line for this, anyone else that was there that day, they people that produce shiatty gossip rags like People, US and OK!, and most of all the folks that buy the damned things. If folks would stop trying so hard to keep caring about these talentless wastes of protein, they'd quietly go away and be worthless without the fanfare.

farking people, man.
 
2013-06-09 01:26:32 PM
I'd like to make a baby with her if you know what I mean, and I think you do.
 
2013-06-09 02:23:11 PM
So suing for over $75,000. What are the damages, exactly? Could we get this lawyer disbarred and the parents sterilized for being such wastes of life?
 
2013-06-09 02:36:39 PM
How about they sue for exactly the amount that Jessica Simpson was paid for this photo? Seems fair. If it was worth paying her that amount then its worth paying that amount to the parents.
 
2013-06-09 02:41:08 PM

farkeruk: PS It staggers me how much people will pay to see photos of something. Someone honestly picks up a magazine because they can see the first photos of a minor celebrity's crotchfruit?


Yup. Some people are obsessed with celebrities and their babies. CSS: I'm seven months pregnant. While I was waiting in line at the butcher counter the other day, a complete stranger (in her 60s, I'd guess) saw me and exclaimed, "Oh, my! You and the princess!" It took me a second, but I politely replied, "Oh, well, she's a little further along than I am." Then she said, "You know who else is having a baby, and I absolutely can't stand? That Kim Kardashian woman! She's just terrible! Why is she having a baby?!" All I could manage was a weak, "Yeah, a lot of famous people are having babies now." She just kept babbling about celebrities and babies, and I just wanted to get my steak and salmon and get out of there.

/CSS
 
2013-06-09 03:14:44 PM

Lets talk frankly about internal cleanliness: ZeroCorpse: I think it's disgusting that we live in a society where celebrities make large sums of money by promising a particular publication the first pictures of their child.

I think it's equally disgusting that so many of you stupid assholes purchase crap like OK! magazine, making such exploitation possible.

What about the people FTFA? They're just as bad.

FTFA: "Christopher Hurst and Tracy Gregory took their teenage daughter and infant son to the Dillard's department store in Metairie on October 2011 to meet Jessica, who was promoting her clothing line, according to the lawsuit.

As they were standing in line to get the star's autograph, Hurst alleges a stranger suggested he allow Jessica - who was pregnant with her first child at the time - to hold the infant."

Let's break this down, shall we?

1. Enabling their teenager's misplaced idolatry instead of attempting to direct her attention to a worthy role model. Check.

2. Apparently this was an event that the entire family needed to share. "Hey, remember that time we stood in line at Dillard's to bask in the presence of a manufactured celebrity? Memories..."

3. Stood in line for an autograph from a person that nobody can really remember what made them famous in the first place. Totally worth it.

4. A stranger suggested they put their infant in the hands of another stranger, albeit a famous one. Take the fame out of the equation. Random guy on the street suggests you let that lady over there *points at random passerby* hold your kid. What do you do?


5. Random paparazzo pushes to front of line to take photos of manufacture celebrity holding baby and offers them to publication.

6. Random pap then sells photo to publication, who does no fact-checking whatsoever to prove authenticity of said photo other than what photog told them; or worse, flat out knew it was false and didn't care either way and published it anyway.

7. Dumbass family decides it's a good idea to just sue everyone involved, when really they only have a case against the pap and the pub.
 
2013-06-09 03:34:49 PM
Disturbing/nauseating/sad that pregnancy is a pretext for celebrity.
 
2013-06-09 05:01:31 PM
Once a meatball, always a meatball.  Not just in the way she's built now, either.
 
2013-06-09 08:16:00 PM
I remember crying and wishing I had her body back in the day..

Now I laugh. I laugh all the way into my size 2 jeans
 
2013-06-09 09:46:22 PM
Who. The. fark. Cares.

She's last seasons Kardashiatian.
 
2013-06-09 11:09:20 PM
/ i.chzbgr.com
 
2013-06-10 07:38:05 AM

Forty-Two: "You know who else is having a baby, and I absolutely can't stand? That Kim Kardashian woman! She's just terrible! Why is she having a baby?!"


The correct answer to this is as functionally sterile a description of sex as you can muster. None of that special hug crap, break it down to a penis ejaculating inside a vagina after repeated thrusting, without having proper physical or chemical barriers in place to prevent the natural biological result.
 
Displayed 23 of 23 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report