Ew, i think she was always the butttts.
I understand what you're saying, but what do you expect people to do? Do you think that they should tell people they're ugly if they don't think they're gorgeous? People lie to people all the time about that shit. "Does this dress make my ass look big?" Nah, your ass is great.
No, I mean literally gushing over someone's looks. If a member here posted that exact same pic, people would go on and on about how pretty she was. So saying that chick is ugly? that's insanity to me.
I mean come the fuck on. The meth girl's before is hotter than LC, but no one is gonna fucking admit it.
There's a middleground between ugly and gorgeous! You act like there isn't!
In bowie's defense, she just said meth girl 'wasn't a horrible sea monster' but I disagree. I think she was cute.
I agree with what you're saying because it happens all the time. But, it's hard to line up your friends and say "hot, not so hot, meh, not bad, hot, scary ugly"
I only gush over Zo. To me she is strikingly hot. There are a few close competitors here, though.
I was so aggravated over the people at the Court TV message boards when Natalie Holloway went missing and how they talked trash about Joran Vander Sloot and how ugly he was. I told them if he was the victim of a crime they would all be saying what a handsome young man he was. They denied it but they were full of shit.
Oh, then I guess you saw the pics from the wedding on FB.
Yea, those people were full of shit. Ugh, Natalee followers.
Agreed, and agreed.
My point is just that "cute" isn't that big. If my friend asked about some girl, and I say "eh, she's cute." he's not gonna be jumping to meet her. She's cute....not ugly. All I'm saying.
Look, let me tell you. I bet if I posted pics of me in a death thread anonymously, people would talk shit on how I look. In other words, girls are as nice as are bitchy. No one is going to look at a member's picture and go 'man, you look like a fat mushroom fart, I had no idea.' We will say that about strangers, though.
She went from a meth head to a match head.
She wasn't attractive at all before the meth explosion. At least now she's interesting to look at.
I like the melted look a lot better than the meth look.
Toodle Loo
I'd have to check into FL's laws about this but in NC if you show up in the ER after an accident, most hospitals have funds set aside to cover expenses should they decide to do so (It's per an absolute necessity basis [ex: ectopic pregnancies, cancer patients with a hemmorhagic disorder, ect.]). It's as simple as a nod yes from a physician, and then we (the nursing staff) are required to initiate the funding paperwork.
In this melted spoon's case, the jokespital I work for would do so--I don't doubt it one bit. Anyhow, after the initial payment is drafted from these funds from the hospital the state will start picking up any further costs incurred with the continuance of care.
She could have also picked up state emergency Medicaid if something crucial that affects her daily living routine was destroyed, like if her vision or hearing was impaired after the explosion. I also don't doubt that one bit. If you want to know why certain fools like this get medical care yet dying cancer patients can't, work in an ER for a few nights. You'll quickly find your answer. The whole system is fucked.
Last edited by McMama; 11-16-2011 at 05:23 PM.
If she is on drugs, there is no reason why the Govt should pay for her plastic surgery. If anything, they should use her melted face to train new doctors fresh out of medical school. If they fuck it up, no big deal, right?
Just like Welfare, mandatory drug testing is needed. :)
That's in Florida. And that was a fail.
Single moms that need assistance don't really have the money for drugs. WHO KNEW!?!?
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/201...da-much-money/
Drug testing for people on assistance is a waste of money and resources. Ironically (money, resources) the 2 things that people who support drug testing are so worried about.
When Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R) signed the law requiring welfare recipients to pass annual drug tests to collect benefits, he justified the likely unconstitutional law by saying it would save the state money by keeping drug users from using public money to subsidize their drug habits.
Drug use, Scott claimed, was higher among welfare recipients than among the rest of the population.
Preliminary results from the state’s first round of testing, however, has seemingly proven both of those claims false.
Only 2 percent of welfare recipients failed drug tests, meaning the state must reimburse the cost of the $30 drug tests to the 96 percent of recipients who passed drug tests (two percent did not take the tests). After reimbursements, the state’s savings will be almost negligible
And a judge blocked it cause it's unconstitutional anyway: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011...g-testing-law/
haha. I know, I know.
In all fairness, since we have no state recovery program for drug addicts, are we just supposed to turn them out and then create an overwhelming force of homeless, desperate junkies? That doesn't sound like a great plan, either. "here, instead of giving you bare minimum to stay high and shut the fuck up, how about we essentially turn you into a zombie and set you loose on the public?"
There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 guests)