Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events

[GEML]

I don't plan on watching any more of the show, but I will admit I don't boycott companies. Too many flashbacks to my childhood where we were always doing that because Disney made rated R movies under their Miramax label and the ultimate: Proctor and Gamble had a moon and stars as their logo which OBVIOUSLY meant they were satanic.

I swore as a child, no boycotts. I'm sticking to that, although I don't seek out companies I'm not thrilled about. I simply don't change my shopping patterns, period

[Fuzzysox]

I'm thinking the PR team said no way, but Jim Boob said go for it.

They have been adored for so long by the leghumpers that they really don't know how NOT to be famewhores. Without famewhoring there is no "ministry."

[Vaysh]

I swore as a child, no boycotts. I'm sticking to that, although I don't seek out companies I'm not thrilled about. I simply don't change my shopping patterns, period

 I don't really boycott per se, except for a few cases (Nestlé and Chiquita, I'm talking to you). It's more that when I feel negatively about a brand, I don't want to give them my money, and there are usually half a dozen others to pick from that are just as good or better. I don't really feel any brand loyalty whatsoever so if one brand fucks up I have no problem switching to another less asshattery one.

 

Proctor and Gamble had a moon and stars as their logo which OBVIOUSLY meant they were satanic.

 

... I'm almost afraid to ask but how are moon and stars satanic? Wouldn't God have created them as well?

[asuwur]

I clicked "like" on this post because I agree with it. I do not like the content, but I believe it to be the truth. Every time we snark, and I for one can't help it, we are promoting the show. TLC knows that all the leg-humpers will be back and they're rubbing their hands with glee seeing how many haters will be tuning in as well. They don't care if we love the Duggars or hate them, as long as there's an audience for the commercials.

And there's the crux of the matter....eyes on the screen are eyes on the screen. It's the almighty dollar TLC worships, the Duggars are a just a means to an end. My God, TLC airs one exploitive/borderline offensive program after another. This is just a cog in their lucrative wheel. If they see dollar signs, they'll let it roll. If they were going to axe it permanently, we'd have heard by now IMO.

 

To me the main question is if the Smuggars are in or out.....

[Loves2Dance]

I'm not sure if TLC cares if it's negative or not. They need the die hard fans to watch, and enough hate-watchers to tune in if for no other reason, than to see just how far the Duggars/TLC are willing to go.

If I were TLC and had 60,000 likes and knew people were taking the time to frantically get rid of negative comments, I'd be pretty happy. The important thing is that we all 1) watched it and 2) took time to comment.

That's a win for TLC.

It's much easier to type a nasty comment online than it is to sit down and watch an episode. I couldn't even make it through 58 seconds before I was cringing and wanting to puke. Even I, someone who has hate watched, hate read, hate everythinged for most of her cynical born life, could not bring myself to get through a minute. I think there will be a lot less hate watching than TLC thinks. Not none, but no where near their old numbers. 

[GeeGolly]

I don't pay enough attention to commercials to remember which product was advertised during which show. The only ads I do notice are restaurant commercials, and only those when I am hungry.

TLC has many shows, and not all can be #1. They may keep the Duggars around even if the show only makes the top 3.

[Anne Elk]

TLC will keep it on the schedule somewhere. The advertisers probably love it just because they can pitch to the evangelical audience, and they are not an easy demographic to reach.

 

I think Josh is definitely out. He's too toxic. Nobody wants to watch him and his sisters pretending everything is perfectly fine and normal, and DEFINITELY nobody wants to watch him with anybody's little children. My question is, will Jim Bob and Michelle be on the show? My guess is that TLC is trying to talk the Duggars into a show that's mostly about Jill and Jessa and their families, with the other kids making frequent appearances and JB and M reduced to occasional cameos on holidays etc. And I bet Jim Bob is balking at the idea of not being the star of the show.

[Satchels of gold]

I'm not Christian so this is not a moral judgement but boy this gang has a lot of ego, no? The posts and public Father's Day greetings just scream " look at me!". Get over it folks the gravy train has ended. I didn't watch the show before and certainly would never watch it now but it would be some great karmic justice if the girls just had their own show and it was more successful. You know, girl power and all that. I really hope that at least some of those kids make it out of that cult /house. Maybe this is the beginning of the end. I certainly hope so. I also find it so interesting that Michelle said she didn't have a heart for children (just read that here a few days ago) yet she goes on to have 87 more . I know she didn't actually parent them, but that is an interesting dynamic . Also the fake baby voice, the adoring looks, etc. my guess is that inside she is a raging maniac who is barely keeping a lid on things. I would be interested in the thoughts of the regular watchers.

ETA: it's like when George figures out that everything goes better when he does the opposite of what he wants to do on Seinfeld!

Edited June 23, 2015 by nc socialworker

[Absolom]

 

Is 60,000 a lot of likes? Wasn't the viewership in the millions? Who was that, who used to post every week what the viewership had been on each show? Absolom I think.

Viewership for this last season was the best ever for the Duggars.  They probably averaged over two million viewers per episode over the entire season.  Yes, I post the ratings when I remember. :) 

[Wellfleet]

This family is so very twisted. To them child molestation is no big deal, but a young dating couple holding hands or frontal hugging is a very upsetting event.

 

If anyone here is a fan of Bill Maher [i'm a huge fan], check out his comments on the Duggars. His show was on vacation or whatever when the story actually broke, but you can see it all on YouTube. Loved what he said.

Him wearing those sunglasses bothers me.  It makes him look like he's hiding something. No one else in the picture has them on...

 

Thought the shades were very odd too - and VERY dark shades as well. Maybe he was auditioning for the next Men in Black?

[SometimesBites]

InTouch is a magazine about Jennifer Aniston being pregnant, Angelina Jolie being deathly skinny and some Kardashian being fed up with another Kardashian. They didn't blow any whistles, the people who should know what Josh did already knew what Josh did. They are certainly not heroes for disseminating, in order to sell tabloid magazines, child sexual abuse victim's statements that were given in confidence. No one benefited from this but InTouch. Certainly no Duggar benefitted.

Josh's FRC job and Michelle's robocalls are hypocritical, but they were preaching to the choir. Those who were receptive to their idiocy remain receptive to it.

There's no question what the motives of In Touch were and are; the business of magazines is to sell more magazines. But as far as I'm concerned, the entire world has benefitted, if the result is that their hypocritical, self-righteous freak show gets yanked, and a dialogue opens for survivors, as has happened on several threads here since the whole thing broke. Shining a light on the cockroaches is good. As for Jessa and Jill, they chose (or agreed) to get in front of a camera and specifically name themselves as Josh's victims. Making In Touch the perpetrator is like saying the Titanic sank because of the guy who yelled "Iceberg off the starboard bow!"

[kokapetl]

There's no question what the motives of In Touch were and are; the business of magazines is to sell more magazines. But as far as I'm concerned, the entire world has benefitted, if the result is that their hypocritical, self-righteous freak show gets yanked, and a dialogue opens for survivors, as has happened on several threads here since the whole thing broke. Shining a light on the cockroaches is good. As for Jessa and Jill, they chose (or agreed) to get in front of a camera and specifically name themselves as Josh's victims. Making In Touch the perpetrator is like saying the Titanic sank because of the guy who yelled "Iceberg off the starboard bow!"

I don't think these two situations are remotely similar. The cops already knew about what Josh did and decided there was no actionable case, and CPS also knew and have acted. InTouch got their info from the cops. Prosecuting Josh remains as untenable as it did before. No Whistleblowing took place. A sort of similar hypothetical situation would be if InTouch published footage of the interviews, with victims faces blurred out. That would have been much worse than what InTouch actually did, but it still would have been using the sexual assaults of children to sell magazines, and just because a person can disseminate that info doesn't mean it's ethical or moral to do so.

As for the survivors, after InTouch disseminated their interviews, they probably regret participating.

Edited June 23, 2015 by Kokapetl

[GEML]

God didn't create the logo which was clearly a satanic symbol!

[kokapetl]

God didn't create the logo which was clearly a satanic symbol!

How do the family feel about the Unilever logo?

[GeeGolly]

In Touch is in the business of making money - nothing wrong with that. They made money by publishing the redacted police report. However they knew when reviewing those documents they would be outing the survivors, one of which is still a minor. In Touch could have further redacted the documents and choose not to. Taking down famous people is big money we see it time and time again, and In Touch is not alone in that. IMHO In Touch should have protected the survivors identities. They could have still taken down Josh, JB & M, without re-victimizing the girls, it just wouldn't have been as salacious. 

 

 

 

Chose & choose get me every time - still not sure.

Edited June 23, 2015 by GeeGolly

[GEML]

That's how I feel. I am uncomfortable with juvenile records being released at all, to tell the truth, but if you are going to do it, not sparing the victims as much as you possibly can is what makes places like INTouch sleezy, no matter how well they do uncovering some pretty decent stories (and the tabloids DO uncover some important stories.)

[Satchels of gold]

I know many of the long term viewers are very attached to the girls and feel as though they have watched them grow up so if it's any comfort at all I still don't know who the victims are , except for the two who sat for the Megyn Kelly interview. All I know is that the girls are referred to as the j'slaves and the oldest one is always sad :(. As I have stated, I'm not Christian but I have lived long enough to know there is some order in the universe and whatever " is" is usually best. The fact that after a month ,they are testing the waters tells me they are not big on "processing" events. So perhaps this will give them all needed time to really sort through what happened with the knowledge that most people find it abhorant. That could be empowering for the girls to realize that it is a big deal and if they are angry they have the that right. And who knows maybe this is an answer to a prayer for some of those children.

[becca3891]

While I tend to agree that no-one at the miniature golf course without a very, very specific kink is going to be tempted into unwanted sexual feelings watching Jim Bob simulate mounting Michelle doggy style, I still see a disconnect there.

Thank you for the laugh! Priceless, and so true. But hey, you're right, there has to be someone with that kink. But it is FAR from modest. How they think that is less important to control than whether or not we get a flash of Michelle's knees is beyond me.

 

I don't plan on watching any more of the show, but I will admit I don't boycott companies. Too many flashbacks to my childhood where we were always doing that because Disney made rated R movies under their Miramax label and the ultimate: Proctor and Gamble had a moon and stars as their logo which OBVIOUSLY meant they were satanic.

I swore as a child, no boycotts. I'm sticking to that, although I don't seek out companies I'm not thrilled about. I simply don't change my shopping patterns, period

Plus, Disney had all sorts of evil agendas, Scar was supposedly gay, or Timon and Pumbaa, or both, S-E-X was supposedly written in the sky, and don't forget the "subliminal message" in Aladdin telling teenagers to take off their clothes. I remember all of that being discussed in hushed whispers among my fundie church friends, and it was considered shocking that a couple of us were actually allowed to watch. 

 

I have been very conflicted regarding the girls' identities being outed. I admit, I gobbled up every word of the police report. But I also did feel guilty when Jill cried and said they were victims and felt betrayed by the release. (I believe she was wrong that the law was broken -- it appears that the only requirement was to redact the names, which they did.) But still, I guess I'd feel better if they had also redacted Jim Bob and Michelle's names as being the victims' parents. It would mean that the public would not know that the molestation [snip], but it would have given the girls more privacy.

Edited June 23, 2015 by bigskygirl
No proof of incest

[Churchhoney]

 I don't really boycott per se, except for a few cases (Nestlé and Chiquita, I'm talking to you). It's more that when I feel negatively about a brand, I don't want to give them my money, and there are usually half a dozen others to pick from that are just as good or better. I don't really feel any brand loyalty whatsoever so if one brand fucks up I have no problem switching to another less asshattery one.

 

... I'm almost afraid to ask but how are moon and stars satanic? Wouldn't God have created them as well?

 

 

There was a man in the moon logo -- you can still see echoes of it in their newer logos with a crescent along the edge -- and people thought that the top and the bottom of it looked like Satan's horns. Then people started thinking they could see 6 6 6 in curlicues of the drawing.

 

Some logos here -- https://www.google.com/search?newwindow=1&q=procter+and+gamble+man+in+the+moon+logo&oq=procter+and+gamble+man+in+the+moon+logo&gs_l=serp.3..0.15262.23747.0.24030.48.28.4.4.4.3.313.3535.0j11j7j1.19.0....0...1c.1.64.serp..28.20.2212.KyZyt687HuQ

[CofCinci]

Anna looks possessed or hypnotized in that video. It's sick. What the hell is wrong with her? Run, girl. And, take your kids.

[kokapetl]

Anna looks possessed or hypnotized in that video. It's sick. What the hell is wrong with her? Run, girl. And, take your kids.

Also, there were several gulps that looked as though she was swallowing her vomit back down.

[Oldernowiser]

Here's the thing, though... if the report had been further redacted, wouldn't everyone have assumed the victims weren't family, [snip] So the girls probably would have outed themselves anyway, because otherwise there's no come back. This way they can at least go with their extraordinary theory that a certain amount of brotherly sexual groping is no big deal as long as he's really, really sorry every time...and if it doesn't bother them enough to have their cash cow slaughtered, it shouldn't bother the audience.

So it's easy to say that report should have been further redacted, but I'm thinking the results would have been the same.

Edited June 23, 2015 by bigskygirl
Incest factor-no proof incest happened

[GEML]

Yes, but in that case it really is the Duggars deciding whether to make that case to the public. I know there are people who feel that the Duggars "outed" the daughters, but I feel they only specified two of them. I think the interviews were a mistake from a PR point of view, but the police report and InTouch "outed" the daughters. Defending yourself (however awkwardly) only happens, after all, because there is something to defend.

[doodlebug]

In Touch could have further redacted the documents and choose not to. Taking down famous people is big money we see it time and time again, and In Touch is not alone in that. IMHO In Touch should have protected the survivors identities. They could have still taken down Josh, JB & M, without re-victimizing the girls, it just wouldn't have been as salacious.

 

Even if In Touch had further redacted the report, anyone who knows anything about the Duggars would've been able to figure out that some of the victims were very likely to have been his sisters.  The fact that there were 5 of them, when we all know the Duggars have very little contact with kids outside the family ad that Josh' opportunity to molest a sleeping girl other than his sisters would've been extremely limited would've been enough to point the finger at his sisters.  Do you think, if they'd simply summarized the report, that he'd fondled 5 underage girls, that the public wouldn't have speculated that at least one had to have been a relative?  I don't.  Also, In Touch had to release the actual report or the Duggars and their minions would've denied its existence.  Once the actual police report was out there, there was no way for them to deny the facts, especially since both Jim Bob and Michelle were interviewed.  Heck, the fact that the bulk of the interviews were with Jim Bob and Michelle made it fairly clear that they were probably also parents of the victims.  The public isn't that naive; there was no amount of redaction that wouldn't have made most people suspect Josh molested at least one of his sisters once the bare facts were out.  In Touch, IMO, prevented endless speculation by releasing the redacted report as is.

[bigskygirl]

Reminder: Please do not use the words incest or incestuous in your posts. Incest can mean sexual intercourse between family members. We have no proof that this happened between Josh and his sisters. Posts using these words will be edited or hidden at the discretion of the mods. Thank you.

[GEML]

I still think there is a difference between "five girls" to "four sisters and one other girl who was likely older" - the latter of which was the police report. Many of us likely would have thought sisters, but that's completely different from knowing it was four out of five, including the one who was five years old (and thus impossible to not name.)

Then if the Duggars put their own daughters out there, that's on them.

[OSM Mom]

I can't believe she's on Kid 3 and still doesn't know how to properly buckle a carseat...grrr

As for the message, barf!

At the risk of sounding stupid, what's wrong with the way the kids are buckled? They look fine to me.

And gag me, Anna. Please. The kids are cute, though.

[neece26]

The Father's Day video was not helpful to the Smuggar cause.   He seemed super creepy and Anna gazing at him the whole time was vomit inducing.  Don't even get me started on him praising Boob's parenting skills.  Very bad idea.

[zenme]

Well, many speculated that it was Jana, and not Jill, who had been one of Josh's victims.  I, for one, was surprised to find out Jill had been victimized.  One would think that given her "tattle tale" title, Josh would be way too scared to risk being caught by Jill, so when Jill appeared on the Megyn Kelly interview, I was shocked. 

[Loves2Dance]

At the risk of sounding stupid, what's wrong with the way the kids are buckled? They look fine to me.

And gag me, Anna. Please. The kids are cute, though.

The baby in the middle; his clip is too low. Not horribly low, but low.

The older two should not be able to lean in as much as they are if their straps were pulled back as tight as they should be; Mackenzie's clip is noticeable too low.

And because it's black it's really, really hard to see; but the way the strap is hitting the youngest shoulders, it could be too low. When forward facing, the strap needs to be at shoulder length or above, never below. That one could be an optical illusion though. 

[CofCinci]

Living with a repeat sexual offender, how they're buckled in is the least of their worries.

[dillpickles]

Wow, the news even reported on the Josh Duggar fathers day post.

[Ljohnson1987]

Anna, you're an idiot.

[Ljohnson1987]

Happy birthday, Anna. Hope your present to yourself is leaving your molester husband.

[Sew Sumi]

I still think there is a difference between "five girls" to "four sisters and one other girl who was likely older" - the latter of which was the police report. Many of us likely would have thought sisters, but that's completely different from knowing it was four out of five, including the one who was five years old (and thus impossible to not name.)

Then if the Duggars put their own daughters out there, that's on them.

Had we only known there were five victims, it would have been EASIER to assume that ALL of the sisters were victims. After all, there were only five at the time the molestations occurred, and we know they were in a tiny house with easy access. So, there's that. I think a scenario like that would have forced the Duggars' hand to admit the truth of the situation, eliminating one sister from the pool. In this situation, I just don't see the Duggars keeping silent; this whole mess has proven that they can only stay quiet as long as someone tells them that there's a potential paycheck to be gained from it. After that, all bets have been off. 

[NikSac]

The Father's Day video was not helpful to the Smuggar cause.   He seemed super creepy and Anna gazing at him the whole time was vomit inducing.  Don't even get me started on him praising Boob's parenting skills.  Very bad idea.

 

Do you really think it would've been any different without the whole scandal though?  He's always been kinda creepy to me, and that look from Anna is the Duggar (or is it Gothard?) adoring gaze, isn't it? Don't get me wrong, I agree it's all vomit inducing, but I think the Father's Day video would've been the same either way. I think the difference - at least in my opinion - might be perception now that we know more about Josh's history. 

[JoanArc]

On J&A's facebook page there's a comment by someone who saw Josh at Silver Dollar City today, along with Michelle (and presumably Anna). She had her pic taken with Michelle.

 

I'm really grossed out at the idea of Josh at a theme park, around little kids.

[Sew Sumi]

Nice to know that Josh is back to work for Pops....oh wait....

 

eta: Looks like this came from SDC. 

 

https://instagram.com/p/4SrdYLuWPT/?taken-by=joshduggar

Edited June 24, 2015 by Sew Sumi

[Happyfatchick]

So the haters are still blasting each other on Instagram. Wow. This is some serious hate on both sides! However, i told it to add more comments than the ones on screen, and when I scroll from THERE, everything *DING* turns positive. I guess the deleting team isn't working full time... Makes me wonder how often they check it.

My favorite this time: (paraphrasing) I say whatever the BLEEP (but not bleeped) I want. I'm sick of all the BLEEP (misspelled, and I assume not out of courtesy since they didn't misfire for the first word) and I can say what I like. I'll pray for you."

Seriously, that was in one post.

[CofCinci]

Another photo where Anna looks benzo'd out. Blow out the birthday candle and make a wish - to get another Xanax script.

[silverspoons]

On J&A's facebook page there's a comment by someone who saw Josh at Silver Dollar City today, along with Michelle (and presumably Anna). She had her pic taken with Michelle.

 

I'm really grossed out at the idea of Josh at a theme park, around little kids.

I'm sure Josh is on his best behavior these days. We have Jill, Jessa, Michelle and Jim Bob going on Fox News saying how the family is being victimized over and over again by this news and how hard their lives are now. Today we have Josh spending the day at the amusement park. I guess he isn't worried or feeling bad. I guess Michelle and the family are feeling great to get back out in public. It is one thing to go to a grocery store but at an amusement park you get stuck in long lines and people could make nasty comments in front of your kids.

 

It is also nice to be Josh, 27, unemployed and about to have baby #4 and enjoying a day at a amusement park several hours away from home. It must be nice not to have to worry about money or how he will support his growing family. When my husband was 28 he was in a bad accident at work and required multiple surgeries and was unable to work for a few months. We weren't broke but I was still scared to buy anything that wasn't a absolutely needed until he was better and back to work. I think Josh has more money socked away then we know or promises or something from his dad.

[bluebonnet]

I think this is one of the most interesting instagram comments (I'm not going to post the commenters name): The sad thing I've noticed, those defending this child molester are kids themselves !!! Omfg that's what's scares me the most. I hope these kids know right from wrong. And the ones defending him and his ignorant trailer trash family are probably just as sick. 

[Sew Sumi]

Seeing that he's firmly ensconced in the family fold, I have no doubt that he'll be working for "Pops." I read that they're already in the Siloam Spings home, which was being worked on the last time someone got pics of it (I posted them a couple of weeks ago with the moving van article). It's an easy drive down one highway to the TTH. Yes, it's further than the Mold House, but close enough for Josh to commute in every morning (18 miles from town to town). After DC and after Joshgate, he'll do that commute and LIKE it. 

[Anne Elk]

Anna really does look like she's hanging on by a very thin thread. Whatever Josh and the Duggars may have told her, she never thought she'd be signing on for this. It's got to be uncomfortable around their house.

 

Keeping Josh far away from wherever his sisters are is probably the best plan right now. 

Edited June 24, 2015 by Anne Elk

[Sew Sumi]

I agree about Anna. You could pack a small country in those bags. Josh's aren't much better. 

[SmallTownMom]

Wow, Josh and Anna's Father's Day message to Boob is very strange.  Thanks, Pops for hiding the fact that I am nothing but a pervert when I made my "mistakes."  And for teaching me about bankruptcy.  It might come in handy.

 

I can hardly stand the way these Stepford wives gaze at their husbands while they are speaking.  Do any of them EVER have a thought other than pleasing their man?  It's just so creepy.  And I don't believe that Anna knew all about Josh before she married him.  She didn't know him that long.

 

And I am so sick and tired of hearing the "fans" say that God has forgiven him.  That's fine, and when you get to heaven you will find that out for sure.  In the meantime, there are LAWS on Earth.  Oh and morals, and truth, and integrity.  And molesting your sisters then lying about it for years, all of you, is pretty damn bad.

[ginger90]

Shallow comment alert: In the birthday picture, Anna hunches like Michelle and  has Jill's mouth/teeth.

[Wellfleet]

I don't pay enough attention to commercials to remember which product was advertised during which show. The only ads I do notice are restaurant commercials, and only those when I am hungry.

TLC has many shows, and not all can be #1. They may keep the Duggars around even if the show only makes the top 3.

 

I keep saying I'm going to invent a TV remote that can be attached to a lanyard and worn around my neck, because I loathe listening to most commercials and hate being caught without the remote when a break comes on. Local ones are especially noisy and just poor. Of course, every once in a while I do hear them - and do think some are clever. My favorite for nearly 2 years now has been "Whaddaya wearing, Jake from State Farm?" Fun-nee...

[Flowers]

Random, but here's something that always bugged me about Josh and Anna's move to DC (which I've watched dozens of times, partly because I live in that area also) ---- the "bouncy seat is missing" arc. That was clearly staged. There was so much emphasis on "Sweetheart, make sure it's somewhere safe!" And then big trainer guy carrying it onto the moving truck. And then in DC, "Sweetheart, where's the bouncy seat?"

Why this bothered me so much, I don't know. We all realize reality TV isn't real. But that always made me crazy.

And along with it, the "Your parents aren't here yet?l" and Michelle telling the camera "Maybe they'll have a night quiet night in their...motor home."

Also, when Josh wakes JB up at the Bates house in the morning, before heading to DC, where is Michelle? Do she and JB not sleep in the same bed???

Edited June 24, 2015 by Flowers

[kokapetl]

Random, but here's something that always bugged me about Josh and Anna's move to DC (which I've watched dozens of times, partly because I live in that area also) ---- the "bouncy seat is missing" arc. That was clearly staged. There was so much emphasis on "Sweetheart, make sure it's somewhere safe!" And then big trainer guy carrying it onto the moving truck. And then in DC, "Sweetheart, where's the bouncy seat?"

Why this bothered me so much, I don't know. We all realize reality TV isn't real. But that always made me crazy.

Random, but here's something that always bugged me about Josh and Anna's move to DC (which I've watched dozens of times, partly because I live in that area also) ---- the "bouncy seat is missing" arc. That was clearly staged. There was so much emphasis on "Sweetheart, make sure it's somewhere safe!" And then big trainer guy carrying it onto the moving truck. And then in DC, "Sweetheart, where's the bouncy seat?"

Why this bothered me so much, I don't know. We all realize reality TV isn't real. But that always made me crazy.

It was a vibrating seat, Anna referred to it as a vibrator. I think it got so much screen time because Anna looked stupid everytime she referred to the 'vibrator'.

Anna was also the master at swallowing.

Edited June 24, 2015 by Kokapetl