Miss USA: "I Don't Want to End Up Like Katie Couric"
From FOXNews:
Miss USA Rachel Smith wants to be a reporter, but she doesn't want to "end up like Katie Couric."
"I always wanted to be a reporter — maybe some TV. Who knows? Some serious news — but some modeling, too," she said at the Women in Entertainment Empowerment Network event last week, according to the New York Daily News.
"I just don't want to end up like Katie Couric. I want people to take me seriously."
[More]
UPDATE
In case anyone is thinking I removed the photos that I originally posted with this story because I believe them to be inappropriate, think again.
The purpose of this post was to poke fun at both Miss USA and Ms. Couric, but especially at the irony of Miss USA thinking she has a snowball's chance of being "taken seriously" compared to Ms. Couric. The purpose was certainly not to titilate with what looks like a fairly innocuous pageant photo of Miss USA.
But since the comments were starting to focus mainly on the photos and not the story itself, I decided the photos were becoming a distraction from the story.
That's why I deleted them. If you want to see the photos, they can be viewed here.
Labels: Culture, Humor, Media, Television
posted by Pro Ecclesia 10:08 AM
25 comments
25 Comments:
Guess you didn't hear the Catholic church doesn't support the war in Iraq.
I must say I agree on the Coric commentary-she is a ditz.
"Guess you didn't hear the Catholic church doesn't support the war in Iraq."
Huh? Who wrote anything about Iraq?
Read much?
I'm no fan of Ms. Couric by any means, but before you call someone else a "ditz", you should (1) learn to spell (it's "Couric", not "Coric"), and (2) try to avoid the non-sequitur like your innane "Iraq" comment that is apropos of nothing whatsoever.
Wow! I’m sorry, huh?
But anyway, the lovely Ms. USA would really have to let herself go to begin to end up like Katie Couric. He he…
Dear blogger,
As a convert to Catholicism, you apparently don't realize how tasteless this thread is.
In the first place, you ought not to be posting a picture of a young woman who is exposing cleavage. You "succeeded" in causing me (and probably many other male readers) to have a very bad temptation to a mortal sin of lust.
In the second place, you ought not to be posting a picture of a woman who is making an obscene gesture. Besides the disgusting nature of the photo, it too is sexually suggestive and inappropriate in any blog, not to mention a Catholic one.
If you think that I am wrong in stating the above, I encourage you to ask your pastor to look at the entire thread, including my comments, and ask him to give you some no-holds-barred advice.
Thanks.
A cousin of Norwalkers
I'm sorry you don't like this post. Some folks have a different sense of humor.
My being a convert has nothing to do with anything, by the way, and your insinuation that it does is quite uncharitable of you.
You might have a point about the photo of Miss Couric and the obscene gesture. I'll consider removing it.
But you're being overly sensitive about the other photo - I've seen women at church functions in Norwalk showing more cleavage that that. Besides, the photo that went with the story was of Miss USA in a bikini - I went with this one because it was LESS revealing.
Sometimes eliminating the option for people to post anonymously is the wise course of action.
Besides, the photo that went with the story was of Miss USA in a bikini - I went with this one because it was LESS revealing.
Is it? Considering that it isn't a very revealing bikini to begin with, and the sash casts a well-placed shadow, I tend to think that the dress is significantly more revealing.
I think they've cropped the original photo - I would've run the one they have now.
This is the photo I saw originally.
But whatever. The purpose of this post wasn't to titillate (can I say that word, or does it remind everyone of the female breast, thereby causing a near occasion of sin?)
Sheez! Some of you people need to take a cold shower.
Ahhh, to hell with it. I'll delete the damn photo.
For the record, I wasn't complaining. I just thought the (cropped) bikini photo was less revealing than the dress photo.
hehehe...you said titillate...hehehe
;)
Yeah...if you had significant problems with the photo I think Jay put up there try walking around a college campus during the Southern Louisiana summer. Think of it as a type of boot camp for practicing chaste thinking.
"As a convert..."
Hi-larious!
For a cradle Catholic, Anonymous, you do a spot-on impersonation of a 19th Century Presbyterian schoolmarm. More seriously--if you hadn't played the Cradler-Than-Thou card, I'd feel a modicum of sympathy. As it is...
I'd put the pictures back up, Jay. And end anonymous commenting. It's a temptation to sin for jackasses.
I don't think Miss USA will have to worry with what looks like an anorexia issue. I mean, she would have to start eating, and I heard that once you stop it is really hard to get the digestive track working again.
Where was anonymous when Ms. Adriana Lima was posted?
Oh, I found all the Ms. Adriana Lima posts!
Gee, thanks, PB. I can think of no better way to make this die down than to drag the lovely and talented Miss Lima into the mix.
Now the anonymous commenter is going to tell all his Norwalk cousins what a tasteless perv that convert they go to Mass with is.
Perhaps you'd better just change the name of the blog to Ribaldry & Risibility again and get it over with. :-)
Dear blogger,
My previous comment ended with these words: "If you think that I am wrong in stating the above, I encourage you to ask your pastor to look at the entire thread, including my comments, and ask him to give you some no-holds-barred advice."
I "encouraged" you to do this, instead of relying on your own judgment (or mine) and instead of letting your passions take over. So what did you do?
1. You ignored my advice, because you did not speak to your pastor.
2. You failed to understand what I meant in my reference to you as a convert, so you insulted me as a result.
3. You started a "slow burn" and then allowed it to be fanned up into a huge emotional fire, resulting in your posting multiple insults of me, none of which was justified.
I have been visiting this blog daily for several months. When I was writing my previous comment, I tried to remember whether or not you were a hothead (a super-macho guy who was incapable of taking correction from someone who knows more). I thought that maybe I had seen you fly off the handle before, but I knew that I had the duty to correct you for doing a wrong thing (as Ezekiel tells us).
I hope that this will be a learning experience for you. You really do need to speak to an elderly, orthodox priest about this matter. He should be able to help you to understand why the first photo that you posted was not "fairly innocuous."
It's the kind of thing that Catholic children learn (or, at least, used to learn) in elementary school. Since you are a convert, you didn't get the traditional Catholic-school training in dressing modestly. THAT'S why I said, "As a convert to Catholicism, you apparently don't realize how tasteless this thread is." There was nothing "uncharitable" about what I said. In fact, it was an act of charity on my part to give you an excuse (your ignorance) for doing something wrong.
Sir, as a blogger, you have a special duty not to expose readers to "near occasions of mortal sin." This is another thing that an elderly, orthodox priest could explain to you.
I am amazed, even saddened, by some of the lack of thought or understanding exhibited by people who posted after me. Examples:
(1) "I'm sorry you don't like this post. Some folks have a different sense of humor."
RESPONSE: This has nothing to do with the humor involved, but rather in the photos. Anyone who knows me would tell you that I have a perfectly normal sense of humor.
(2) "I've seen women at church functions in Norwalk showing more cleavage that that."
RESPONSE: I seriously doubt that. However, if it is true, "two wrongs don't make a right." You cannot use a Norwalk woman's sin of immodesty to rationalize your posting a photo of a second immodest woman.
(3) "... the photo that went with the story was of Miss USA in a bikini - I went with this one because it was LESS revealing."
RESPONSE: Thanks for this bit of honesty on your part. You admit that the photo you posted was "revealing." The point is that you have a duty never to post a photo that is "revealing" AT ALL -- because such photos lead to temptations that can lead to mortal sins.
(4) "Sometimes eliminating the option for people to post anonymously is the wise course of action."
RESPONSE: This is a ridiculous comment, because a person who needs to share the truth (me) would not have been deterred by having to identify himself, had it been required.
(5) "Some of you people need to take a cold shower."
RESOIBSEL No, sir. If you have a functioning, well-formed conscience, you are beginning to experience guilt at this point. To get rid of the guilt, you try to blame the person who corrected you. No one needs a cold shower. We all need a clean blog. That's all.
(6) "if you had significant problems with the photo Jay put up there, try walking around a college campus during the Southern Louisiana summer. Think of it as a type of boot camp for practicing chaste thinking."
RESPONSE: The first sentence is not a Catholic way of thinking, and the second sentence is just ludicrous. Again, two wrongs do not make a right. One cannot justify the posting of an immodest photo by appealing to the immodesty of other women on a campus. Moreover, spending a lot of time looking at a bunch of very immodest female students would tend to lead boys and men into MORE mortal sins, rather than to help them "practic[e] chaste thinking."
(7) "you do a spot-on impersonation of a 19th Century Presbyterian schoolmarm. ... I'd put the pictures back up, Jay."
RESPONSE: I went to Catholic schools for 18 years in the second half of the 20th Century, and I graduated (magna cum laude) from a Jesuit university. I'm no dummy, and I'm no prude. The person who wrote the above comment is apparently addicted to sins of the flesh, and he makes the devil very happy by urging the blogger to post immodest photos.
(8) "the lovely and talented Miss Lima"
RESPONSE: I will pray for you to begin to take this matter seriously enough that you will get your conscience better formed than it is now on sins against the Sixth Commandment. I will pray that some day you will delete every immodest photo that you have ever posted here. God will reward you for doing it.
(9) "Now the anonymous commenter is going to tell all his Norwalk cousins what a tasteless perv that convert they go to Mass with is."
RESPONSE: By now, you should realize that I would not do this, because you can see that I am charitably assuming that you have been acting out of partial ignorance of Catholic morality. I don't judge you of being a "perv" or even of sinning -- because, if you were genuinely ignorant of having done wrong, you did not incur the subjective guilt of sin. Now that I have helped you to form your conscience better, however, you are under a greater obligation.
Annonymous:
I will merely say that your comments (think tone) present more occasion for sin than Jay's original post. And I'll leave it at that.
"... I tried to remember whether or not you were a hothead (a super-macho guy who was incapable of taking correction from someone who knows more). I thought that maybe I had seen you fly off the handle before ..."
I doubt you've seen anything of the sort. Now you're just calumniating.
Furthermore, you essentially called me a liar by saying you "seriously doubt" that I've seen women showing more cleavage at church-related functions. If you so seriously doubt the veracity of this blog's host, in addition to questioning my level-headedness and tastefulness, I wonder that you should spend anytime at all here.
I have nothing more to say on this subject.
Heck, I wouldn't want to be Katie Couric either. I'd rather be Bill Moyers. Ms. Couric has become a celebrity. Mr. Moyers, though very well known, is a true journalist.
As for Miss USA, well, she has a better chance of becoming an on-air news anchor than I do even though I have stronger journalistic chops. I used to date a local news producer and he told me on-air talent is more about looks than journalistic credentials, especially for women.
"... I'd rather be Bill Moyers. Ms. Couric has become a celebrity. Mr. Moyers, though very well known, is a true journalist."
Sorry, but I'm not going to take the bait.
;-)
Okay..well maybe not Bill -Carl Rove is the Antichrist- Moyers, but perhaps Dan -it doesn't matter that the documents are forgeries, I stand by them- Rather.
Dear blogger,
To refresh your memory, please take a look at your last reply to me (so that I don't have to quote you here). Now think back and recall that, in my previous posts, I listed about ten separate points showing that you and others had taken improper positions.
I am now sad to see that, instead of having the manliness and courage to "surrender" and admit how wrong you and others have been, you demonstrated a continued immaturity. You apparently felt the need to try to "save face" by searching desperately for something in my post -- some little "nuggets" that you could try to criticize or contradict. Your philosophy seems to be ... "How DARE anyone contradict the great and infallible Jay Anderson? Vengeance must be mine!"
Well, young man, now I am CERTAIN that, in my months of reading this blog, I witnessed your hotheadedness at least once. Therefore, your charge of "calumny" is false. If you had shown any hint of humility, I would have tracked down your past bad behavior for you, but there doesn't seem to be much point in my wasting time now.
You wrote: "If you so seriously doubt the veracity of this blog's host, in addition to questioning my level-headedness and tastefulness, I wonder that you should spend anytime at all here."
Why should you "wonder" at my continued presence? Why expect me to desert you now, just because you slipped up? Did Jesus abandon sinners, or did he continue to have supper with them? I told you that I had been coming here DAILY, FOR MONTHS (without ever leaving a comment before) -- which ought to have told you that I've seen you performing a good service and usually acting as a good Catholic. You show great potential, and I prefer to seek to bring out all the best in you, rather than stop coming here. As a Catholic, I am not going to desert you in your hour of need -- i.e., your need of fraternal correction and advice.
"How DARE anyone contradict the great and infallible Jay Anderson? Vengeance must be mine!"
Well, young man, now I am CERTAIN that, in my months of reading this blog, I witnessed your hotheadedness at least once. Therefore, your charge of "calumny" is false. If you had shown any hint of humility, I would have tracked down your past bad behavior for you, but there doesn't seem to be much point in my wasting time now.
Okay, so I'll add ONE MORE thing in response, but this WILL be my last word on this subject.
In my 2-and-a-half years of blogging, I've posted over 3,500 items. You claim to have seen at least one that proves I'm a "hothead". If you're going to say things to call my entire character into question as you have in what I've excerpted above, the least you can do is provide an example of my "past bad behavior" and "hotheadedness".
I'm not even going to try to prove a negative (i.e. that what you've claimed about me is not true). But I will offer two examples of instances where I have been open to fraternal correction. Read this recent post and the ensuing comments. And then read this post and the subsequent updates, ensuing comments, and later posts on the same subject here and here. (FYI: it was that last set of posts that convinced me that this blog would not be about questioning or bashing bishops.)
I certainly have never claimed to be infallible, nor have I been averse to contradiction (see, e.g., my open comment policy). I have on multiple occasions acknowledged where I have been wrong about things and have probably apologized for something on an almost weekly basis.
But I believe you are being unfair and uncharitable to me in making a statement about my character and then failing to provide evidence to back up your assertion. Whether or not that qualifies as "calumny", I will leave up to you and your confessor. But suffice it to say that I do feel somewhat defamed by your comments. And while I appreciate the spirit of fraternal correction in which you write, I believe that your overall tone toward me has been lacking in charity. Among other things, calling me out on being a convert is just bad form.
Look, I simply disagree with you about the appropriateness of the photo of Miss USA that I originally posted. While I could be mistaken, I believe it was a fairly innocuous photo. You disagree. Okay, fine. Whatever. It wasn't posted with the intent to titilate (and I doubt it had that effect on most of my readers); rather, it was posted because I like to have illustrations to accompany the stories about which I post. I removed the photo because I didn't want the discussion over it to overshadow the story itself.
However, I probably went overboard in poking fun at your sensibilities. For that, I apologize.
Post a Comment
<< Home