[Cutter]

Time to answer to a few valid points.  No I cannot blame Ms. Spears for taking the money handed to her.  But I would be a good deal wiser about how I spend it.  Not having any money kind of does that to you.

And yes the so called Media, who no longer knows who Edward R Murrow was, latch on to anything they can and try to make a half hour report - even if someone sneezed, have pumped her to recognition levels I feel she has not earned.

When she goes out people need to leave her alone.  I myself saw Gary Coleman in Las Vegas a few weeks ago but I left him alone as he seemed very busy and needed to be somewhere (I walked right by him).

Ms. Agulara was good looking when she first came on the scene but her recent persona changes - body piercings and current look leave for me a lot to be desired.

Both seem to be trying to get away from the Mickey Mouse Club past and will do anything to achive it.

Most if not all of the above arguments are valid and true.

Thats all I have to say.

Cutter      

[RandomX]

My last comment on this...from day 1 I didnt like either of them, and I've never given a damn about **28**. I find it disgusting how the media things we care about such trivial things.

RandomX(Please TRY to your use of forum post attachments to one image per thread per user per day. The max is three, but its courtesy to do one. Not a rule YET.)

[DD_Red_Shoes]

Oh Gee where can I start with Britney.
Not only is she talentless and now returning to the gutter to where she should ly, the possibility of her posing nude for Playboy does not really suprise me.
It actually suprises me that she has not done so already, mind you I am thinking Hustler is more her thing at the moment.
Her latest music video seriously gives a bad name to Air Hostesses and I am suprised that she did not give 'other survices' while she was spilling drinks in her wannabe Thunderbird costume slut outfit. Then in true class (to her point of view) she ends the video in a have him and leave him escapade on a bed.
Now for a person who than less than a year ago, still proclaimed that she was a virgin, this is one step beyond comprehension. Of course we all did not believe in the virgin thing, so I guess it is a good thing that she is no longer pretending to be something, she could never be.
She appears to be grasping at straws to secure her popularity, so will do pretty much everything, including a **93** wedding in Las Vagas. Mom must have been proud.
So therefore as far as her trying to do anything and everything, not only will she will probably pose nude in some magazine, but her 'growth spurt' will probably grow bigger, so that she can grab even more of the spot light.

DD_Redshoes  

[Hothitter]

Quote:
She appears to be grasping at straws to secure her popularity, so will do pretty much everything, including a **93** wedding in Las Vagas. Mom must have been proud.

And I'm sure your mom is equally proud that you've posted over 200 times on a site dedicated to huge boobs, and that you list your favorite Web page as (prohibited O).com.  Start spelling.  

[F_Cup_Fitzgerald]

So, Hothitter, exactly how long have you worked as Britney Spears' official publicist/hanger-on/yes-man/ass-kisser/promoter?  

[Hothitter]

Quote:
So, Hothitter, exactly how long have you worked as Britney Spears' official publicist/hanger-on/yes-man/ass-kisser/promoter?  

Now that’s more like the reaction I was expecting.  A good old  ad hominem  attack that completely ignores the substantive issues.  Well done FCup.  You didn’t disappoint me.  

[F_Cup_Fitzgerald]

Thank you. It *is* my specialty. *blush*

BTW, *you* started it when you said: "And I'm sure your mom is equally proud that you've posted over 200 times on a site dedicated to huge boobs, and that you list your favorite Web page as (prohibited O).com. Start spelling."

The next time you get self-righteous about ad hominem attacks, make sure you haven't just made one yourself five seconds earlier. And make sure if you do that you haven't done just what you criticize in someone else ("posting . . . on a site dedicated to huge boobs"--which you yourself have done almost a hundred times to date). You toffee-nosed little pissant. Besides, you should know that no discussion of Britney Spears is ever "substantive." Now go away before I drag your mother into it.

[Hothitter]

Quote:
Thank you. It *is* my specialty. *blush*

BTW, *you* started it when you said: "And I'm sure your mom is equally proud that you've posted over 200 times on a site dedicated to huge boobs, and that you list your favorite Web page as (prohibited O).com. Start spelling."

The next time you get self-righteous about ad hominem attacks, make sure you haven't just made one yourself five seconds earlier. And make sure if you do that you haven't done just what you criticize in someone else ("posting . . . on a site dedicated to huge boobs"--which you yourself have done almost a hundred times to date). You toffee-nosed little pissant. Besides, you should know that no discussion of Britney Spears is ever "substantive." Now go away before I drag your mother into it.

Ain’t going away quite yet.

Did you major in “Missing the Point,” or do you just like to interject your transitory drivel without reading the thread?  My response was directly to the issue of the poster’s hypocrisy, and if you check back, hypocrisy was the point of my original post.  See, that wasn’t so hard.  

Lesson Two:  I’m not criticizing the fact that he posted on this site.  I love this site.  What I take issue with is the obnoxious inconsistency that it’s OK for us to look at these women, but it’s not morally OK for them to pose.  Sorry, but I don’t buy into the notion that we wank away to their pictures with one hand while writing “slut” next to their name with the other.  Apparently this poster thinks Britney Spears is a moral degenerate because he’s seen just a little too much of her, or for whatever his personal reasons.  But on the public’s slut continuum, I daresay Britney would barely register a beep compared to many of the women we ogle and admire on this site.  The difference is, I don’t judge their motives, and I certainly don’t pretend to know anything about them based on what I see or read in the tabloids.  

And now I will go away for good (waits for applause to die down).  And don’t you dare drag my mother into this or I’ll start defending Paris Hilton.  
   

[ElmerFudd]

Quote:

Quote:
Thank you. It *is* my specialty. *blush*

BTW, *you* started it when you said: "And I'm sure your mom is equally proud that you've posted over 200 times on a site dedicated to huge boobs, and that you list your favorite Web page as (prohibited O).com. Start spelling."

The next time you get self-righteous about ad hominem attacks, make sure you haven't just made one yourself five seconds earlier. And make sure if you do that you haven't done just what you criticize in someone else ("posting . . . on a site dedicated to huge boobs"--which you yourself have done almost a hundred times to date). You toffee-nosed little pissant. Besides, you should know that no discussion of Britney Spears is ever "substantive." Now go away before I drag your mother into it.

Ain’t going away quite yet.

Did you major in “Missing the Point,” or do you just like to interject your transitory drivel without reading the thread?  My response was directly to the issue of the poster’s hypocrisy, and if you check back, hypocrisy was the point of my original post.  See, that wasn’t so hard.  

Lesson Two:  I’m not criticizing the fact that he posted on this site.  I love this site.  What I take issue with is the obnoxious inconsistency that it’s OK for us to look at these women, but it’s not morally OK for them to pose.  Sorry, but I don’t buy into the notion that we wank away to their pictures with one hand while writing “slut” next to their name with the other.  Apparently this poster thinks Britney Spears is a moral degenerate because he’s seen just a little too much of her, or for whatever his personal reasons.  But on the public’s slut continuum, I daresay Britney would barely register a beep compared to many of the women we ogle and admire on this site.  The difference is, I don’t judge their motives, and I certainly don’t pretend to know anything about them based on what I see or read in the tabloids.  

And now I will go away for good (waits for applause to die down).  And don’t you dare drag my mother into this or I’ll start defending Paris Hilton.  
   

Actually, Britney can obviously do whatever she wants, and yes it's hypocritical to call her a slut on this site (not to mention sexist, probably).

I just have a big problem with Britney's  own hypocracy!  She won't quit with the obviously phony "butter won't melt in my mouth" pseudo-purity act. Makes me want to hurl!  Don't be so fake!  

[F_Cup_Fitzgerald]

Quote:
Did you major in “Missing the Point,” or do you just like to interject your transitory drivel without reading the thread?

A little from column A, a little from column B.

 

[Freddy]

Sorry about the the two pics in one day.  Guess I lost track with all the dreamscapes I have to roam.  I should go straight to hell for doing that...oh, wait, I am already here.  HA, HA, HA, HA!

[Lesbian Bob]

I once saw a picture of a brunette Britney Spears, only it turned out to be a young Nancy Reagan!  That image gives me the creeps every time I see Britney.

 

[lonelyhearts]

im assumeing everybody is watching the superbowl,
and there was this grammy clip and it showed her almost totally nude
she looked amazing  

[Freddy]

Lonelyhearts, if you look at the earlier posts in this thread, I posted a collage I found on the web of the video you speak of from her new video "Toxic."  

[Maski]

if only...