Katie is a fraud, plying her trade as the professional troll, trying to get into the same league as those Liz Jones trolling columnists.
Her problem is you know the rubbish she's going to say before she opens her mouth, what her bad cop role is going to be. The bookers know this and I expect the presenters know it well.
How long can she carry on with this line, she needs to inorder to get the gigs but when you take the line where you're story boarding a view point as if you truly believe it then at some point you'll mess it all up, like forgetting about INDIA in your argument but on a bigger scale
It was hilarious when she said that she doesn't like geographical names such as Brooklyn or London and Phil asked her was India not a geographical name
It's her kids I feel sorry for. I wish she would keep her trolling to things that don't affect them
I don't think she put her in her place, however I'm completely with her (Holly, and Phillip & the other lady) on this.
Katie Hopkins is always contradicting herself, she doesn't like children named after places but called her daughter India. She said only stupid people played tennis (in her column) while bleating on about her daughters tennis lessons.
Katie is just doing what she did on The Apprentice, i.e. playing a role. She's not convincing, and at times even she looks like she's not believing what she's saying...
If this is the only way she can make a living then it's her children I feel sorry for to be honest.
Exactly. She has developed a persona, comes out with any old crap and gets booked to appear on things like This Morning. She probably believes about 5% of what she is saying.
Katie is a fraud, plying her trade as the professional troll, trying to get into the same league as those Liz Jones trolling columnists.
Her problem is you know the rubbish she's going to say before she opens her mouth, what her bad cop role is going to be. The bookers know this and I expect the presenters know it well.
How long can she carry on with this line, she needs to inorder to get the gigs but when you take the line where you're story boarding a view point as if you truly believe it then at some point you'll mess it all up, like forgetting about INDIA in your argument but on a bigger scale
I agree completely.
This woman is purely a construct designed to make a few quid.
I don't accept for a moment that she believes in the values that she espouses; how on earth could she?
Furthermore, how does she get national airtime?
Louis Spence and the gorgeous Samantha Prick also come into this category.
I agree completely.
This woman is purely a construct designed to make a few quid.
I don't accept for a moment that she believes in the values that she espouses; how on earth could she?
Furthermore, how on earth does she get national airtime?
Louis Spence and the gorgeous Samantha Prick also come into this category.
Sod all, but I have spelled his name wrongly, presumably because I didn't pay sufficient attention to his great talent...............for self-promotion.:)
I hate the name Katie. I knew a Katie at school. She played the violin. I always had a thing for her. But she never noticed. Actually on second thought, I don't hate the name Katie. I just hate the heartbreak and melancholy it invokes.
I wonder how Hopkins feels about sharing her Christian name with Katie Price :D
Back of the net! Good one!
Personally, I also think that stripping off and having illicit sex up against the gate of a field while you're in the public eye is a bit chavvy but hey ho, each to their own. Clearly she sees herself as the exception to the rule.
Either that or posters are correct and she's on a wind-up.
She's going to fall into that crater she's digging, or someone's going to shove her in it, if she's not careful.
They know what they are getting when they book her. I view it less of a personal matter and more like Holly going "Your segment is now over, shut up, we're moving on".
I agree completely.
This woman is purely a construct designed to make a few quid.
I don't accept for a moment that she believes in the values that she espouses; how on earth could she?
Furthermore, how does she get national airtime?
Louis Spence and the gorgeous Samantha Prick also come into this category.
It's pure panto; pro wrestling without any wrestling (mores the pity. )
They had almost certainly worked out what they were going to say to each other before hand.
Katie is a fraud, plying her trade as the professional troll, trying to get into the same league as those Liz Jones trolling columnists.
Her problem is you know the rubbish she's going to say before she opens her mouth, what her bad cop role is going to be. The bookers know this and I expect the presenters know it well.
How long can she carry on with this line, she needs to inorder to get the gigs but when you take the line where you're story boarding a view point as if you truly believe it then at some point you'll mess it all up, like forgetting about INDIA in your argument but on a bigger scale
absolutely, it's all so predictable really and it's no different to her recent "clash" with katie waissel earlier on this year on the same show.:yawn: i also remember watching liz jones "debating" in a similar fashion over "sperm stealing":rolleyes: and the setup was exactly the same with two women with opposing views on the subject.:sleep: its all feels so obviously set up, the views are extreme to point that they are largely unbelievable and these segments seem scripted.
Comments
Her problem is you know the rubbish she's going to say before she opens her mouth, what her bad cop role is going to be. The bookers know this and I expect the presenters know it well.
How long can she carry on with this line, she needs to inorder to get the gigs but when you take the line where you're story boarding a view point as if you truly believe it then at some point you'll mess it all up, like forgetting about INDIA in your argument but on a bigger scale
It's her kids I feel sorry for. I wish she would keep her trolling to things that don't affect them
Katie Hopkins is always contradicting herself, she doesn't like children named after places but called her daughter India. She said only stupid people played tennis (in her column) while bleating on about her daughters tennis lessons.
She's a complete fraud.
But the even bigger question is why the hell This Morning even did the segment in the first place ?
Exactly. She has developed a persona, comes out with any old crap and gets booked to appear on things like This Morning. She probably believes about 5% of what she is saying.
That would have shut her up.
I agree completely.
This woman is purely a construct designed to make a few quid.
I don't accept for a moment that she believes in the values that she espouses; how on earth could she?
Furthermore, how does she get national airtime?
Louis Spence and the gorgeous Samantha Prick also come into this category.
What has Louis Spence done?
So you like to counter bigotry with bigotry?, nice logic you have mate *pats you on the back*
I think he was referring to the catchphrase of an odious Harry Enfield comedy character.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8Kum8OUTuk
Fail
Please don't touch me
Sod all, but I have spelled his name wrongly, presumably because I didn't pay sufficient attention to his great talent...............for self-promotion.:)
But then again, the Katie at my school was always a hoe.
Back of the net! Good one!
Personally, I also think that stripping off and having illicit sex up against the gate of a field while you're in the public eye is a bit chavvy but hey ho, each to their own. Clearly she sees herself as the exception to the rule.
Either that or posters are correct and she's on a wind-up.
She's going to fall into that crater she's digging, or someone's going to shove her in it, if she's not careful.
It's pure panto; pro wrestling without any wrestling (mores the pity.
They had almost certainly worked out what they were going to say to each other before hand.
absolutely, it's all so predictable really and it's no different to her recent "clash" with katie waissel earlier on this year on the same show.:yawn: i also remember watching liz jones "debating" in a similar fashion over "sperm stealing":rolleyes: and the setup was exactly the same with two women with opposing views on the subject.:sleep: its all feels so obviously set up, the views are extreme to point that they are largely unbelievable and these segments seem scripted.
Ironic really though. This is the woman who had sex with a married man in a field!
http://www.itv.com/thismorning/life/are-women-jealous-each-others-success/