Kyle & Luke Can Be Models

edited December 2004 in The CenterTao Lounge
I was so puzzled by that scene: I know you guys have a TV and I know you enjoy watching. When Vicki asked about the TV, it was such a cheesy bit of editing to make it seem like you'd answered "No". I was confused by the edit and confused about why FOX had done it. Now I know why. It was to start making a story line for the story they wanted to present. Just as we edit our posts here, FOX cut and pasted 2 families.

I hope even doubters can look at your picture (nice evidence, btw), listen to people who know you and start to "get it". Folks: These are good people, the kids aren't hog tied to the family bed, they are master musicians that get out and about interacting with a variety of people every day (I was one of them when I lived next door). They signed up for a reality TV show! Imagine that. Who among us would be open, free and brave enough to do that? Also, if Luke is such a cool cat (and, he is, no big editing there) why is that? Could it be due in part to the careful, loving, intelligent manner in which he and Kyle were raised?

I'll tell you as someone who has watched these boys grow up: They are take charge kids, now young men, who have been fostered to do_what_they_want and do it well. I have no doubt they will continue to impress, and no doubt their strong connection to family will serve them well as they do.

Comments

  • edited December 1969
    They are sooooooooo good looking. Both of you guys. Im not the only one who thinks so....just wanted to post something i found on the other board..
    there are tons of discussion of how cute the boys are.....

    "i agree. i mean, i'm a guy, and straight, but those two boys, if they straightened up, could be VERY attractive. I was watching the show with someone, and we were commenting on how if Kyle went to school, he would have girls falling all over him and how Luke is just flat out attractive and you're right, he probably does have some serious wood haha ... but yeah, both of them are quite attractive and if they had gone to school, would have girls all over them. That's why I was angry the father didn't let them go, I mean, they haven't had their first kiss! Kyle is understandable, he's 14, but Luke!?"
  • edited December 1969
    Both boys are adorable as heck, but come on - their "love life" is not something that should be up for discussion or debate!


    Susan
  • edited December 1969
    [cite] Susan:[/cite]Both boys are adorable as heck, but come on - their "love life" is not something that should be up for discussion or debate!


    Susan

    Love life? What love life?
  • edited December 1969
    Hey, as a former teenager I can attest to the fact that teens always find a way to have a love life in some form .... even if fleeting.

    I agree, the boys are handsome and charismatic ... but I agree with the above post. Lets give them privacy on that one.
  • edited December 1969
    Hey there!

    Well, I'm not really a girl person quite yet if you know what I mean and modeling isn't my thing. I don't want girls all over me. Sorry ladies! *whistle!*

    Are you reading anything we've said on the site!? You shouldn't be angry at pap not letting us go because he says we can go whenever we want! He's not holding us down in any way! They portrayed him as a tin headed tyrant but the magic of editing can make him (anybody actually) look like anybody they want him to look like.

    I don't find looks to show a person who he/she is. I mean take for example, Oda Nobunaga (you might want to look him up on google). I saw a picture of him and he was . . . good looking (in a way) but he was a ruthless, cunning, bloodthristy Diamyo. That may be a bit over the edge but you get my point. Looks don't mean much to me and so I don't spend hours grooming my hair or getting my nails done. It must just be my irrisistable charm! :wink:
  • edited December 1969
    [cite] Tao Nut:[/cite]Hey there!


    I don't find looks to show a person who he/she is. I mean take for example, Oda Nobunaga (you might want to look him up on google). I saw a picture of him and he was . . . good looking (in a way) but he was a ruthless, cunning, bloodthristy Diamyo. That may be a bit over the edge but you get my point. Looks don't mean much to me and so I don't spend hours grooming my hair or getting my nails done. It must just be my irrisistable charm! :wink:

    This my friend, is what would make you such a "hottie" to the people who have said so :idea: Everyone knows, the truly good looking are those who don't know how good looking they are :D I should know!! :wink:
  • edited December 1969
    I see you've had experience :wink: . (not an insult 'cause some people might take that as one)
  • edited December 1969
    You boys are "hotties" (I feel as if I am going to be thrown into jail right now)lol.

    But good looks are an accident. It is definately your charm and modesty that make you irresistable, though the two of you are very handsome. Your dad is cute, what I could see under his beard. Your mom is so beautiful and full of grace, too.
  • edited December 1969
    This site also has the cutest posters of any site on the internet-it's a fact, i saw it on a fox news survey...
  • edited December 1969
    Don't even mention fox news (or lack of truth news) :evil: :twisted: . They are very right winged and full of misconceptions. YUCKY!
  • edited December 1969
    I say, what looks like flowers to some people looks like lint to others. That's my take on so called "hotties"
  • edited December 1969
    Kyle: Excellent point about lint. LOL.
  • edited December 1969
    We have a kid at work who was collecting a lint ball from the dryer because 'he'd never had a pet'...
  • edited December 1969
    Maybe I should give that a shot
  • edited December 1969
    That's kinda like the "pet rock" story that I've heard about. I've tried selling something like that once during a yard sale. One of my daring buisness ventures. :wink:
  • edited December 1969
    We had a pet rock back in the 70's...it met another rock and pretty soon there were pebbles all over the house...similar thing happened when i had mice...had so many babies, they got loose, we had to move...
  • edited December 1969
    . . . Ah. I wasn't there at that time (I wasn't even young yet at that time) so I'll take your word for it.
  • edited December 1969
    Ah, yes gather 'round chillun, let Gramps tell y'all 'bout the 70's...they sucked!
    How sucky were they: well, back then we had rocks as pets, and got excited about it!
    Nowadays, you have the internet, Koi fish, and chia pets...
  • edited December 1969
    You mean to tell me in the 70s, the first pet somebody invented was a rock? :shock: *bbooooiinnngggwowoiinnggg* (imagine cheezy spring sound effects)

    Now you can have a pet on your computer. (years ago, I got Cats3 but the novelty wore off fast)
  • edited December 1969
    Is that like those old 'pocket pets' (no, get your mind out of the gutter)-giga pets or whatever, where you had to push buttons regularly to feed them and such?

    we had slinkys in the 70's, too-sproooooiiiiing! Ow my eye! and spirographs... but mostly we just went outside and threw rocks at hippies...
  • edited December 1969
    Buddy, Have you been reading the short story, "The Lottery" by Shirley Jackson? I grew up n the 70's too. We did not throw stones at the Hippies; my parents told me not to get "stoned" like the hippies!
  • edited December 1969
    I must've seen the short film of 'The Lottery' 50 times when I was in school-that and 'An Occurance at Owl Creek Bridge' are all they ever showed, it seems...good movies, the first dozen times or so, but come on!

    That was when the projector had to be rolled in, film spool put on, etc...nowdays they have videos and big screen tv's and about a million other movies to watch...
Sign In or Register to comment.