JAXAshby wrote:

hoary, you got to be too old iffin you no longer care to look at a bare breast.

Although.....some are much nicer than
others!

Yup, some are indeed better than others, but never found a bare one I
didn't
like. [grin]


Too much ado over a breast. What a backwards country this is.


--
Email sent to is never read.


You misunderstand. It's the "ado" over the nearly bare breast on
television I find absurd. I'm not too old to be "titillated," as it
were. Anyone who has traveled any and has tuned in to television in
Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and dozens of other
countries has seen bare female breasts during primetime hours on the
major television stations. It is Americans who are so backwards about
this they flip out when they see tits on TV. It's perfectly ok, though,
to show someone being shot.




--
Email sent to is never read.

Steven Shelikoff wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:
JAXAshby wrote:


Although.....some are much nicer than
others!

Yup, some are indeed better than others, but never found a bare one I didn't
like. [grin]

Too much ado over a breast. What a backwards country this is.

And it wasn't even a bare breast. Sheesh!

Steve

Never saw the shot, nor the endless repeats that followed, though I did
hear she was wearing some sort of pastie? Big deal.

--
Email sent to is never read.

On 03 Feb 2004 04:05:44 GMT, (JAXAshby) wrote:

her tits are disgusting.

there is no tit on the planet that is disgusting. None.

Except to a guy who finds ALL tits disgusting.


Jax, you're a little off base on this one. The tits on a boar hog are
disgusting. Jacksons don't come close to those, therefore they're more
disgusting (at least the right one). Now, in all fairness, the left
one may be a thing as beauteous as kspraker's new boat. I guess that
says something about leftits and rightits, not sure what tho.


John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

Funny...all the clips on CBS hazed over her breast as they endlessly show
the clip.
CBC showed it all in it's glory. Nothing wrong with showing a breast...as
long as it's done in good taste and not some kind of peep hole production.
One picture I saw showed a 'sun' type nipple ring...not a pasty.

Harry Krause wrote in message
...
Steven Shelikoff wrote:

Harry Krause wrote:
JAXAshby wrote:


Although.....some are much nicer than
others!

Yup, some are indeed better than others, but never found a bare one I
didn't
like. [grin]

Too much ado over a breast. What a backwards country this is.

And it wasn't even a bare breast. Sheesh!

Steve

Never saw the shot, nor the endless repeats that followed, though I did
hear she was wearing some sort of pastie? Big deal.

--
Email sent to is never read.

"John Gaquin" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message

Maybe it fits right into the NFL scheme. Buncha guys in helmets jumping
on
each other and patting each other on the ass....what a naked boob in the
larger scheme of things, when the entire sport revolves around gay men?

Interesting take. Hmmmmm.

I remember last year? maybe two years ago? A title game that had the
Ravens in it. Someone pointed out that over 50% of the players on the two
teams were convicted felons. Does that target a gay market?



Well....maybe. First of all, consider the traditional initiation into prison
life. And second, who's more butch than a guy who's knifed someone in the
shower? :-)

"John Gaquin" wrote in message
...

"Clams Canino" wrote in message

What bothers me is that if it was on purpose, they (MTV, Jackson,
Timberlake) really hosed the NFL and the agreements for that show.

IMO, there's not a doubt in the world that the whole thing was staged. I
am
at a loss to understand why anyone even remotely targeting a family
audience
would contract with MTV to produce anything. If the NFL and/or CBS
couldn't
anticipate what they could be letting themselves in for, then they have
some
truly, truly stupid people doing their planning.



My lady friend works in college admissions, at a VERY picky school. You
should see what some of the applications look like. Pathetic. And, she
employs college seniors in the admissions office. Most of these kids get
jobs there because they have high grades. They still can't write, or make
simple business decisions. Back in November, they had 35 families coming to
visit and look at the school. Total of 140 people or thereabouts. One of the
assistants was told to estimate how many pizzas they'd need, and to place
the order. She was told to order a little extra, just in case some families
brought extra siblings along. She ordered 400 large pizzas. That's 3200
slices (round pies, 8 slices each), or 22 slices per person.

This is what's graduating from college and running businesses nowadays. With
any luck, Janet's entire outfit will come off next year.

I dissagree here.

Based on history, I have a "reasonable expectation" that if I hired Janet
Jackson and Justin Timberlake to do a gig for me, that I'd likely get
"scantily" clothed bodies in a over-choriographed stage show - not indecent
exposure.

-W



"John Gaquin" wrote in message
...

"Clams Canino" wrote in message

What bothers me is that if it was on purpose, they (MTV, Jackson,
Timberlake) really hosed the NFL and the agreements for that show.

IMO, there's not a doubt in the world that the whole thing was staged. I
am
at a loss to understand why anyone even remotely targeting a family
audience
would contract with MTV to produce anything. If the NFL and/or CBS
couldn't
anticipate what they could be letting themselves in for, then they have
some
truly, truly stupid people doing their planning.

Clams Canino wrote:
I dissagree here.

Based on history, I have a "reasonable expectation" that if I hired Janet
Jackson and Justin Timberlake to do a gig for me, that I'd likely get
"scantily" clothed bodies in a over-choriographed stage show - not indecent
exposure.

And then you'd have to ask yourself... what exactly is "decent" exposure?

I figure, they haven't hit rock bottom yet as long as they haven't hired
Roseanne Barr to sing the national anthem.

DSK

Clams Canino wrote:

I dissagree here.

Based on history, I have a "reasonable expectation" that if I hired Janet
Jackson and Justin Timberlake to do a gig for me, that I'd likely get
"scantily" clothed bodies in a over-choriographed stage show - not indecent
exposure.

-W


Sheesh. And I don't even know who Justin Timberlake is... and probably
don't want to.

--
Email sent to is never read.

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Clams Canino wrote:
I dissagree here.

Based on history, I have a "reasonable expectation" that if I hired
Janet
Jackson and Justin Timberlake to do a gig for me, that I'd likely get
"scantily" clothed bodies in a over-choriographed stage show - not
indecent
exposure.

And then you'd have to ask yourself... what exactly is "decent" exposure?

I figure, they haven't hit rock bottom yet as long as they haven't hired
Roseanne Barr to sing the national anthem.

DSK


Please. I'm trying to eat lunch.