Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anytime someone posts a nastygram celebrity photo here, I wonder if they're going to post candid, unretouched pix of themselves for appraisal. And I wonder why they don't have better ways to occupy their time.
I have never understood the sensitivity that some have when it comes to celebrities being faulted.
Most celebrities seek publicity and when one does that you get positives as well as negatives that are emphasized. It goes with the territory. Chelsea had a gig at NBC that paid her $600K annually although she had little or no experience in journalism. Good for her that she got it ........ but then when one faults her for her looks or some other aspects of her life that is also part of what she gets by virtue of her "celebrity".
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:She's always been that hideous. She's always been a hideous human being, inside and out
Are you talking about Chelsea or Hillary?
Chelsea is not attractive but she is certainly not hideous.
Anonymous wrote:She's always been that hideous. She's always been a hideous human being, inside and out
Anonymous wrote:Anytime someone posts a nastygram celebrity photo here, I wonder if they're going to post candid, unretouched pix of themselves for appraisal. And I wonder why they don't have better ways to occupy their time.
Anonymous wrote:A little tooth whitening would go a long way.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:ok I'm just gonna say it...shes always been super ugly. Her parents aren't lookers and she kinda got the worst of both of them.
I think she had a good run in her 20s. She grew out of the awkward teen stage and looked quite lovely.