(02-14-2014, 01:13 PM)ramseycat Wrote: Addiction is a very powerful disease.

Matt was GIVEN a top notch education. He was GIVEN a $40k truck. He has a beautiful home to live in rent free until he gets his business going. He is about to be GIVEN a substantial amount of money that could be used to purchase a home or invest or whatever. You get the point. And he has an opportunity to address his "issues" in a rehab center. But no. He chooses to continue on his path of destruction.

I think you summed it up, quite nicely.

You don't wake up one morning and say to yourself: "Gee . . . my life is fantastic! I think I'll go to rehab!"

Crash had his "moment of clarity" when faced with losing his job and all that goes with it. Fear can be a powerful motivator . . . sometimes for change and sometimes to paralyze one towards change.

It appears your ex and Matt haven't hit their respective bottoms.

Some never do and die while continuing to embrace their "disease".

Now that's what I call some kinda twisted will power.

Or false pride.

I'm thinking about having a beer now and it's only 1:30, the ice cold Coronas and limes are looking good. I have two choices, drink water and work out on the revolving stair machine I bought to torture myself ( that thing is a motherfucker) or drink beer and do some yard work. Sometimes I feel like an alcoholic and sometimes I don't. Today I think the alcohol is going to win.

(02-14-2014, 02:42 PM)sally Wrote: I have two choices, drink water and work out on the revolving stair machine I bought to torture myself . . . Today I think the alcohol is going to win.

It's funny, to me, that when you state your inclination to have a beer, some members rush to accuse you as being an alcoholic.

But never an "aerobaholic" when you opt for the stair climber.

Judgmental bastards!

I'd go with yard work and a Corona too. You're being productive. Getting exercise and fresh air. It's only right that you refresh yourself with a Corona.

(02-14-2014, 02:16 PM)BlueTiki Wrote: Crash had his "moment of clarity" when faced with losing his job and all that goes with it. Fear can be a powerful motivator . . . sometimes for change and sometimes to paralyze one towards change.

I did?

:s

(02-14-2014, 03:38 PM)ramseycat Wrote: I'd go with yard work and a Corona too. You're being productive. Getting exercise and fresh air. It's only right that you refresh yourself with a Corona.

I went out there with my little hedge clippers to cut back the weed like tree that is growing over my fence from the neighbors yard and that didn't cut it. So then I tried to pull these palm like weeds growing in my rose bushes, but they are in there so deep I can't get them out. So now I'm just sitting here drinking beer and doing nothing.

You get points for trying.

(02-14-2014, 04:08 PM)sally Wrote: So now I'm just sitting here drinking beer and doing nothing.

I wish I had time to do that.

(02-13-2014, 04:01 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: We were discussing the apparently very loose definition of the phrase 'uncontrollable urge.'

Go back, find that part and re-read.

I don't need to re-read simplistic drivel.

You tried and failed to draw an analogy between the “uncontrollable urge” to drink and rape which couldn't really be anymore retarded.

(02-06-2014, 04:22 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: Now the Enquirer is reporting that Hoffman was having a homosexual relationship and struggling with his sexual identity.

That's why his ex had kicked him out of the house and I'm assuming, decided to be so reckless with his life.

Before anyone snickers at the Enquirer reference, they're the ones that caught John Edwards with the bimbo that may have cost him a shot at the presidency.

Well, the Enquirer has admitted that the story was pure bullshit, apologized, and claims they interviewed another David Katz who sounded distraught, so they ran with it. I think the "other Katz" bit is crap, but even if it's true, still not even close to being credible journalism; no vetting of sources whatsoever.

Anyway, today it was announced that the Enquirer settled the suit out of court with Hoffman's best friend, screenwriter David Bar Katz. Part of the settlement stipulates that American Media Incorporated will fund the American Playwriting Foundation, which was formed in honor of Hoffman and will grant $45,000 per year for an unproduced play.

The Enquirer may have profited way more from the false story than they're paying out in retribution - no details mentioned on that front. But, at least the record has been set straight. Good on Katz.



Katz's statement:
“The issue was never me being outraged at being accused of being gay — we’re theater guys, who cares? The issue was lying about the drugs, that I would betray my friend by telling confidences.”

Ref:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/26...gay-voices

HotD, where there's smoke there's fire.

Lying bastards.

Duchess, if it acts like a rat and smells like a rat, it is a rat.

(02-26-2014, 03:32 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: HotD, where there's smoke there's fire.

I don't understand your comment. Are you implying that the lies printed by that rag are based in truth?

(02-26-2014, 04:12 PM)Duchess Wrote:

(02-26-2014, 03:32 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: HotD, where there's smoke there's fire.

I don't understand your comment. Are you implying that the lies printed by that rag are based in truth?

Yes.

I'm saying they had (at the time) what they felt was enough to go with a story.

I had never considered the Enquirer a credible source until they outed John Edwards.

I feel like they probably had something concerning Hoffman (and maybe still do), but for whatever reason they've not pursued it. My guess is there's something going on behind the scenes.

The rag, under threat of legal action, apologized, retracted the story, and settled out of court with the complainant.

There was no fire behind the smoke in the Enquirer's initial libelous story.

Fact: Hoffman's best friend did not give The Enquirer an interview immediately following Hoffman's death claiming that the two were gay lovers, that he'd watched Hoffman do drugs, or anything of the sort. He didn't give the Enquirer an interview at all. The rag was either scammed or they lied. The rag did not check its source or attempt to verify anything that they printed - they've admitted it.

You're a gullible man, MS. That's not news.

Whether or not Hoffman was gay is of no interest to me. If you wanna gossip and believe that he must have been based on what's been proven to be bullshit, that's not really surprising to me.

(02-26-2014, 04:17 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: Yes.

I'm saying they had (at the time) what they felt was enough to go with a story.

I had never considered the Enquirer a credible source until they outed John Edwards.

I feel like they probably had something concerning Hoffman (and maybe still do), but for whatever reason they've not pursued it. My guess is there's something going on behind the scenes.

Yeah, they had enough for a story, they were interviewing an imposter who gave them every salacious detail they craved, you boob. The minute the lawsuit was brought against them they withdrew the story and apologized, they said it was an "honest mistake". Bitch please.

MS, how the hell can you pay any credence to a rag like the National Enquirer. My God. Seriously, simply because they broke the John Edwards story?

Wake up.

(02-26-2014, 04:25 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: The rag, under threat of legal action, apologized, retracted the story, and settled out of court with the complainant.

There was no fire behind the smoke in the Enquirer's initial libelous story.

Fact: Hoffman's best friend did not give The Enquirer an interview immediately following Hoffman's death claiming that the two were gay lovers, that he'd watched Hoffman do drugs, or anything of the sort. He didn't give the Enquirer an interview at all. The rag was either scammed or they lied. The rag did not check its source or attempt to verify anything that they printed - they've admitted it.

You're a gullible man, MS. That's not news.

Whether or not Hoffman was gay is of no interest to me. If you wanna gossip and believe that he must have been based on what's been proven to be bullshit, that's not really surprising to me.

I don't really care about gay people HotD, but when you come across as a know-it-all all the time, that comes off as smug, arrogant and unattractive.

I personally never would have guessed PSH was gay and don't care.

However, I do believe that if the Enquirer printed something, no matter what is occurring now, they had some sort of story.

You believe what you want and I'll believe what I want.

Being called gay when your not can be very traumatic to some people.

(02-26-2014, 04:36 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: ...when you come across as a know-it-all all the time, that comes off as smug, arrogant and unattractive.

Exactly, MS. YOU KNOW there must be fire to this story. Like YOU KNOW so many other things that are unsubstantiated and like YOU KNOW what others think and feel so often. I could rattle off several examples just from the top of my head, but I don't think your presumptuousness is in doubt.

As far as me knowing it all, if anyone has more posts here admitting "I don't know" than me, I'd be shocked. I post what I think and will take the time to do research and post that if I'm interested enough. Rarely do I claim to know anything that is not a verified fact. Knowing it all isn't something that I'd ever claim or attempt to pursue.

You think I'm smug, arrogant and unattractive. Meh. I can live without your love and affection, MS.

(02-26-2014, 04:36 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: I personally never would have guessed PSH was gay and don't care.

However, I do believe that if the Enquirer printed something, no matter what is occurring now, they had some sort of story.

You care enough to argue that the dead actor must have been gay, based on a retracted Enquirer story. The fact that you believe there had to be something valid behind a debunked rag mag piece isn't news to me at all.

(02-26-2014, 04:36 PM)Midwest Spy Wrote: You believe what you want and I'll believe what I want.

As it should be, you fish monger.