|
Post by texasgal on May 4, 2009 5:57:15 GMT -5
Hmmm.....that's an odd way to put it: that her future would be a disaster for Owen as would Ryder's. #hmm# I had to read that a few times.... and still don't quite understand it. Oh well, gotta consider the source....the National Enquirer. Thanks Nala.
|
|
Vera
Ned Coleman's Partner
Posts: 172
|
Post by Vera on May 4, 2009 9:27:05 GMT -5
texasgal, I paraphrased the article since I couldn't find it online and therefore couldn't link to it. It is in the May 11 issue "Oprah: Only 3 years to live!" on page 13. I will type it out below.
"Mother Knows 2: Goldie Hawn fought hard to break up the rekindled romance of daughter Kate Hudson and troubled star Owen Wilson, reveals an insider--finally convincing Kate just before her 30th birthday that it was time to face her future honestly and understand that a man who'd attempted suicide by slitting his wrist was a bad risk for her and little Ryder, Goldie's grandson. In a tear-filled, one hour-plus sit-down, Goldie pulled out all the stops and warned Kate that life with Owen would be a disaster, and she needed to pull the plug--immediately! Kate fought back, says the source, but Mom's love and logic finally overwhelmed her. Days later, she broke it off with Owen, once and for all."
Like I said before FWIW. I don't believe Oprah's gonna die in 3 years and I don't believe this either. Just wanted to put it out there for you. (BTW, Goldie is a huge advocate for mental health through her Hawn Foundation. If she wanted them to break up, I highly doubt it would be for the reason stated, i.e. suicide attempt, since she's very highly evolved and understanding on those kinds of things.)
|
|
|
Post by texasgal on May 4, 2009 19:46:05 GMT -5
OK, well that makes a little more sense. What was originally typed indicated that Kate's future would be a disaster for Owen. The article above is saying the opposite: that it would be a disaster for Kate. Actually, knowing Kate's history with men, it could be equally as disastrous for Owen. But I'm sure that wouldn't have been Goldie's message to her daughter. IF, in fact, this conversation ever took place as reported. This is just another case of the media fabricating stories to fill their pages and make sales. They had some blank space to fill, and certainly a Kate/Owen story would fill the bill! Hey, I get it: I have to make a salary too! ;D I'm too stupid to know what FWIW means. Never mind, it's OK.
|
|
Vera
Ned Coleman's Partner
Posts: 172
|
Post by Vera on May 4, 2009 21:14:53 GMT -5
Texasgal: FWIW= for what it's worth. Sorry.
You have to wonder about this National Enquirer story...was a housekeeper pressing her ear against the door to get the goods? I mean, the "source" even *timed* the supposed conversation between Goldie and Kate. Hmmm....
|
|
|
Post by texasgal on May 5, 2009 5:44:54 GMT -5
Thanks. If the story came from an eavesdropping housekeeper, there's no way to confirm the housekeeper's story. The housekeeper may have invented the story to get some extra cash from the Enquirer. They get little compensation. (I know because I used to be a housekeeper. Low wage, no health insurance, no paid time off, etc) so I can't blame the housekeeper. But still, there's no way to verify it. There's no identified source, no date, etc. I take tabloid journalism stories with a huge grain of salt. Even stories from so-called reliable press aren't always very reliable. So my guess is the story is worth little-to-nothing.
|
|
|
Post by bluebutterfly on May 5, 2009 11:35:05 GMT -5
This thread is like a car wreck I just can't look away from.
|
|
|
Post by texasgal on May 5, 2009 18:12:19 GMT -5
I know exactly what you mean, Blue. I hate to get involved in any conversations here because I always end up talking about two people I don't know and without knowing any of the facts about them as a pair. Yet I always seem to get involved anyway. #dontknow#
I tend to believe the Enquirer story originates more from the imagination of the Enquirer staff than any alleged housekeeper. Call me a skeptic but I read these tabloid stories with a grain of salt the size of the Rock of Gibraltar. Blame it on 58 years of living and having been around the block a few times. ;D
Tabloids are smart enough to know what they can write about and get away with. The Goldie/Kate story is an insignificant innocuous thing - not a front page or centerfold story, and not really damaging to anyone (not in the career-ending sense) - so it would attract little attention. Also, that Goldie & Kate converse with each other is plausible so the details of any conversation between them would be plausible too. If it seems plausible, go ahead and print it! That seems to be the policy.
The Oprah-is-dying story is more troublesome. I would think that a likely sort of story that could get the Enquirer into hot water. 'Course, if and when she doesn't die on the Enquirer's timeline and by the cause they reported, they can always get around it by printing the headline: MIRACLE CURE FOR OPRAH!
Maybe tabloids are like shipping companies. Where shipping companies prefer to just pay the ransom for kidnapped ships, cargoes, and crew rather than fight pirates, tabloids may consider the profit gained on sales greater than expenditure of a libel suit and, therefore, worth it.
Whatever the truth is behind the Goldie/Kate heart-to-heart story, the fact remains Owen & Kate are no longer an item. I think, in the long run, that is a good thing. Had they married, I doubt the marriage would have lasted, and all three of them - Owen, Kate, Ryder - would have ended up hurt. So it's better this way.
|
|
negirl
Archer Avenue Resident
Keeper of Owen's Heart
Posts: 310
|
Post by negirl on May 6, 2009 7:07:54 GMT -5
I find the story a little hard to believe.
|
|
|
Post by lemonade on May 6, 2009 9:43:20 GMT -5
Was this the story in the mag, nala? It's from Mike Walker's column.
|
|
Vera
Ned Coleman's Partner
Posts: 172
|
Post by Vera on May 6, 2009 20:06:15 GMT -5
Yes, that looks to be word for word what I have in my above post.
|
|
|
Post by bluebutterfly on May 12, 2009 6:55:57 GMT -5
I'm not saying a voodoo doll had anything to do with this break up. But you're welcome.
|
|
|
Post by Remi on May 12, 2009 19:55:12 GMT -5
I'm not saying a voodoo doll had anything to do with this break up. But you're welcome.
|
|
|
Post by lemonade on May 14, 2009 21:12:40 GMT -5
People mag took their time but in the issue out now they have a little blurb about Owen & Kate. Caption was Owen & Kate: Off Again and quotes a source as saying they're taking different paths right now and are spending time apart. I didn't buy the issue so I'm going from memory but it was a small mention. It took them a while to say something, I thought they were going to let it slip.
|
|
Vera
Ned Coleman's Partner
Posts: 172
|
Post by Vera on May 18, 2009 11:07:10 GMT -5
Lemonade, I did get the People magazine and you got the quote pretty much right. To be exact, "Says a source, 'Right now they are taking different paths and SOME (emphasis mine) time apart.'"
To me this sounds like a carefully-worded quote from a publicist. Interestingly, they've definitely left the door open to getting back together. I wonder what their deal is...this is more intriguing than a soap opera!
|
|
|
Post by texasgal on May 18, 2009 21:26:02 GMT -5
Yes, I agree with you Nala. I read the statement the same way. Not only did I notice the use of the word 'some,' but also the way the statement began with "Right now...," implying that things are such-and-such a way right now but could change later. I think the door has been left wide open for the future.
That is, if whoever wrote the statement knows what he/she is talking about....which remains to be proved. Of course, the writer (who probably doesn't even know Kate or Owen) may have purposefully wrote it in this ambiguous way, knowing how unpredictable people are.
|
|