RIP Amy Winehouse

Geez, Ace. That's a pretty ridiculous turn on whatever anyone's said here.

Geez.

 

i don't mean this to be fliipant, but why?

seriously. why? what's it to you or anybody whether i feel synpathy or a sense of loss or consider it tragic? i, and others here, prefer to save our energies/sympathies/concerns for people we know or perhaps celebs whom we hold in high regard whose talents we might miss.

if anyone close to me has a drug/alcohol problem, i'll do whatever i can to stand by them to help them wage the fight. if it proves to be a losing cause and, heaven forbid, that person passes away in connection to their addiction, i will cry and mourn and consider it tragic.

but well-known folks like amy, who i don't know nor have an appreciation for their talent? again, i wish them -- and wished for amy -- no harm. but when/if her passing turns out indeed to be drug-related, i don't argue with anyone who cries and mourns for her. but if it means zilch for me, why should anyone else care?

 

And his saying that, Ace, doesn't mean that anyone's considered an idiot if they choose to grieve a stranger. Just to be precise.

 

If you don't care, fine. But some folks seem to care enough to come on here and trash her.

What's up with that?

 

1. Because they believe she frittered her life away with drug abuse.

2. Because they don't believe her talents matched her celebrity.

3. Because her body resembled a bad Parisian art house.

4. I'm not saying that is me. I'm giving you reasons.

 

I gotta disagree with No. 2.

 

if, as you say, some around here have been dancing on her ashes, there can be only one answer: they're douchebags.

my sole complaint here (other than those folks (if there are truly a few who have been 'dancing) are those on the opposite end who seem to look down upon those who cannot cry for strangers who cannot beat their addiction and end up deceased as a result.

this is the real-life area in which we all bring somee degree of personal baggage. none of us know what's in anyone else's baggage on this board. so i prefer personal judgments be kept to themselves.

this isn't a 'hall of fame' thread. if you call me a moron for arguing joe blow should be in or out, that's all good-natured fun (i'd hope) that is forgotten in two minutes.

matters like amy's death are too important and personal for attacks to be made until lines that should be clear to all are crossed. such as above.

 

Because it sells to people who tend to spend a whole day getting a glimpse of anyone walking down a red carpet track? A waste of time in my opinion. I wouldn't even do it for athletes.

I would however go as far as to say that clean Hollywood celebs never get the same treatment as controversial ones or drug addicts.

 

So you think papers should blow out every soldier's death.

Again, what about engineers? Teachers? Doctors?

 

So a couple of days after the 1986 Draft, should the Boston papers have simply said that Len Bias was "unavailable" for the 1987 season and never mentioned it again?

 

CHICAGO (AP) - The Cubs and Cardinals were postponed today. In other news, Darryl Kile will be unavailable for his upcoming start.

 

CHICAGO (AP) - Nolan Ryan struck out six, overcoming five walks and the absence of Lymon Bostock from the lineup, as the Angels beat the White Sox 6-5 in Chicago.
Bostock will miss the rest of the season.