Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Matt Roloff discusses writing tell all book, childrens books, DUI arrest and criticism of Jeremy

Matt Roloff did an interview with Smashing Interviews Magazine where he discusses a number of issues he doesn't always speak about.

Although some of the questions were the basics that most fans and followers have heard many times, Matt appeared eager to steer the interview in a different direction and opened up on some subjects that he doesn't normally speak about.

He talks about the divorce rumors, stating he's there to say they sleep in the same bedroom and in enjoy their relationship. He does say the other day Amy was talking about an episode and told him she wished he didn't say that about her, and he said the same thing to Amy about what she said about him.

Matt discusses dwarfism and genetics. He's asked about the kids and girlfriends. What we hear is actually consistent to what Matt says about Jeremy (one of the top inquiries about Jeremy always centers around "Jeremy Roloff girlfriend". Matt says Jeremy always has a circle of girls surrounding him, but doesn't have one girlfriend and he enjoys "playing the field". That's pretty much exactly what friends around Hillsboro tell us as well. He says Zach sneaks out on dates once in a while (we can confirm that too!) but Zach is very private about those types of things. Molly doesn't have a boyfriend and Jacob has Taylor, but they like to call her a friend instead of a "girlfriend" because of their age (13).

Matt sings Molly's praises. In general, Molly has always been the least criticized, most praised out of all the Roloffs, although obviously there are always going to be some differing voices, but as a general rule that's true for fan perception. Matt explains that Molly is the rock of the family and has a great relationship with every person in the family. She's the peacemaker.


Matt took the opportunity to talk about this DUI trial when he was asked if he is driving again. Matt discusses the details and says he was never in the bar, he only pulled into the parking lot to drop off one of the show's producers at the time. He's stating that the officer saw him pull out of the parking lot of the bar, saw him driving erratically because he was driving Amy's vehicle and wasn't used to it, and the officer assumed Matt had been in the bar drinking. Matt is now saying that he would have given any test the officer wanted, but the officer said he couldn't give Matt the Breathalyzer without taking him down to the station and Matt refused. Matt also says the case against him fell apart because Matt wanted the officer to give him another test - like a walking test, but the officer said he couldn't because of Matt's dwarfism. Viewers will remember that from the episode in the courtroom. Personally, I have to say that seems ridiculous. Can anyone really imagine Matt with his physical disability, being expected to walk in a straight line? But hey, that's why people have lawyers and that's the legal system -- protocols have to be followed. So the officer screwed up by not forcing Matt to perform some sort of physical walking test.

Moving on, in other subjects, Matt states he's in negotiations to write a cute children's book.

He also mentions wanting to write a behind the scenes "tell-all" type book about the show and what was real and wasn't real.

Personally, the Roloff that I would be most interested in reading a tell-all book would be from Zach, because I believe he is the most honest. As mentioned in our article about the show-ending, people connected to the show insist the things Matt said in the announcement and his subsequent remarks on Facebook were "spin".

http://smashinginterviews.com/interviews/actors/matt-roloff-interview-skydive-starts-sixth-and-final-season-of-little-people-big-world

Matt also talks about criticism on the blogs. Since there are many fans comments expressing themselves over the years on our site, I'm going to take this chance to defend their point of view and take issue with something Matt said in the interview:

Personally, I feel when Matt talks about fan criticism, he is intentionally overly simplistic about what and why they are saying whatever they are saying. For example Matt cites a criticism of Jeremy and has this to say:

"It’s hard to read critical things about the kids, particularly when they’re not true. I think what happens on blogs and forums is that they’ll say, “Jeremy’s sitting on the couch so he must be lazy.” He may have been sitting on the couch in that scene but then they’d say, “He must always be sitting on the couch.” They hypothesize based on a few snippets and most of the time they have one or two facts straight making their final hypothesis completely wrong. That’s frustrating."

As mentioned, I think when Matt responds to fan criticism, he intentionally simplifies it to make fans out to be dumb dumbs. Yes, in general, I would say that a common criticism of Jeremy among some fans is that he's either "lazy" or a "slacker", etc. However, let's really examine that. It's not because as Matt says, fans saw Jeremy sitting on the couch, for one 15 second scene and the dumb fans assume because they saw it for 15 seconds that all Jeremy ever does is sit on the couch. That is being very simplistic.

The criticism of Jeremy in that regard goes more like this: People see a 20 year old with a lot of opportunity dropped into his lap. He lives at home for reasons that are not financial. He hasn't had a real employer that wasn't his Dad and wasn't TLC/Discovery where he is paid to goof around. He doesn't do any extra promoting or interacting with fans as part of his role on the television show. Through the fall last year, he was attending community college 5 minutes from home only 2 of the 7 day week. Unlike Zach, who has his job at an indoor soccer facility where he coaches soccer and answers to a boss, and unlike some of his friends, Jeremy has no extra job. It's play, play, play. With a lot of the same friends he's been playing with since he was 4 years old. Fans heard Amy on the show saying the same thing -- "One thing I do know is they have a lot of free time on their hands." As mentioned in another item, according to some of Jeremy's friends around Hillsboro, this is what Jeremy has been up to the last few months:


*Several hikes across Oregon and Washington.
*Campfires. Almost every night
*Video games

*Exploring caves and tunnels across Oregon
*Fugitive games -- for the record, the friend says Jeremy is a "legendary" fugitive player with "mad skillz"
*Camping for the show for Father's day with Matt, brothers, and buds
*More tunnel exploring at 2am
*Seaside Beach trip
*Early mornings to watch the World Cup at Mad Greek Deli and then at the owners home for the big final games.

*Took his BMW into get restored
*Flew to Florida for Oasis of the Seas cruise -- biggest ship in the world.
*To Nashville for most of the week to party at the LPA con.
*To Pendleton to visit Mueller for a couple of days.
*Wake boarding and surfing.

*Call up his friends and hang out with the ones who aren't working. Day after day. Night after night.
*Visited Mueller again this time with Zach, Molly and a few friends.
*Sleeping on top of the Tower of Terror with friends
*Day trip to take pictures of sunrise

*Purchased another classic vehicle to play around with.

A person can disagree that that is lazy or suggest that all 20 year olds in Jeremy's position would opt for the same life style of non-stop fun and play if given the choice, but that's why there is the perception of Jeremy as being lazy or a slacker -- because it's hard-pressed to find differences between a typical day for 20 year old Jeremy and a typical day for 13 year old Jacob (with the exception of perhaps some non-PG activities ;-))

So that's why Jeremy was gets called a lazy 20 year old by some people -- because they see someone that plays constantly without responsibility. It's not because dumb fans saw Jeremy sitting on the couch for a 15 second scene and thought he never moves off of there.

You can read the full interview with Matt Roloff here:


http://smashinginterviews.com/interviews/actors/matt-roloff-interview-skydive-starts-sixth-and-final-season-of-little-people-big-world

40 comments:

Rap541 said...

That interview was nicely apologist :)

I especially like how Matt's DUI story changed *again*.

Now he was just dropping someone off and inside the bar under two minutes. And despite his earlier comments on how he drank a beer a few hours earlier, no he says there was no alcohol consumption that evening at all.

Sheri - can you explain how Matt saying he didn't drink AT ALL that evening but also had a beer earlier in that same evening? The way he said in previous interviews? Because both... can't be true btu you insist Matt always tells the truth. Did he use time travel or magic to accomplish both? :)

Also apparently Matt the *fighter* was terrified of the officer - and doesn't considering it "playing the system" when he puts the officer in the position of making a handicapped man who can't walk unaided "do a walking test".

Really Matt? You wouldn't have the officer reprimanded for treating you like you're not crippled? Matt? Can you walk a straight line unaided while *sober*? If you can't,and we know you can't, then you're "working the system" when you say your rights were denied. I can see it now - "That brute officer insisted I *walk*! Look at me! (waves crutches)"

I also like his attitude that all fans who criticize are simplistic morons. Hey Matt, people don't think Jeremy is lazy because they see him sitting on a couch. They think he's lazy because he's sitting on a couch in a completely filthy bedroom, complete with trash all over said couch. (Lil hint Matt - Jeremy and Zach qualify to be on Hoarding: Buried Alive - talk to your tlc contacts) People think Jeremy is lazy because he is 20 and has no job and barely goes to school. People think Jeremy is lazy because he can't even get up in the morning without help.

Its not just because he sits on a couch.

Shadow said...

[Molly] never takes sides, just uses logic and common sense.

Gosh Dana, and here you've been castigating Molly all this time for her decision to "take sides" over the Caribbean vacation. Guess Matt won't be sending you a Christmas card this year...

Sheri said...

Rap, proof please or be quiet.

Show me a quote from Matt Roloff where it proves he was lying? He said he did not enter the bar. Show me where he said he was drinking a beer in the bar?

If you are going to call the man a liar, have proof.

Jeremy is not lazy. Is that list of activities that Jeremy has been up to the list of someone that is lazy? He is a young Christian man enjoying the life that God has blessed him with.

Rap541 said...

He actually said he'd had a beer earlier in the evening :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Roloff

If you look under "Legal issues" it says he said he had a beer earlier in the evening and there's a cite note to an online article from KGW Portland.

http://www.realitytvworld.com/news/little-people-big-world-star-matthew-roloff-found-not-guilty-of-dui-6375.php

"When Roloff testified on Wednesday about the night he was arrested, he claimed to have had one beer at home before traveling to Rock Creek Cafe & Pub -- but only to drop off a friend in the parking lot, according to The Oregonian. "

How' that , Sheri? Explain to me how Matt *testified* he had a beer that evening but now magically "It was late at night and I was coming back from a filming event where there was no alcohol consumption at all."

And FYI - the issue that he is now saying he hadn't consumed alcohol that evening, when he *testified* he'd had a beer that evening... whether or not he was in the bar isn't actually the issue. Its the lie about how he now had no alcohol that evening. :)

Jeremy *plays*. Play isn't work, Sheri. I mean, do you really think partying at the LP con is work?

David said...

What is the value of a tell all book if the author isn't known for being honest?

Sheri said...

Rap, read. Comprehend. There is no descrepancy between your "source" and what Matt said was the truth.

In this article, Matt says he was never in the bar. In your article, it says Matt says he was never in the bar. His story is the same.

"The evening that happened I was not in that bar. I wasn’t in any bar. I pulled into a back entrance of a parking lot and dropped one of our producers off in the lot. I left two minutes later out the other exit, which was where this officer was stationed. So I was never in the bar (laughs)."

Rap541 said...

Sheri - read. Comphrehend.

Why would The Oregonian say Matt testified he had a beer earlier in the evening if he didn't?

*I* haven't raised the issue of whether Matt was *in the bar* at all. I demand you cite quotes from my comment where I did or *admit you are derailing* the conversation.

My point is that Matt testified he had beer that evening in a court. And now says he didn't have alcohol that evening. Now - how can *his sworn testimony* contradict his new interview?

Your little issue with the *bar* isn't what Matt is *lying* about. He testified about having a beer that evening. Now he says he had no alcohol.

Explain that.

Matt testified he had a beer that evening. Over a year later he now says he had no alcohol.

Explain how BOTH are true, sheri :)

*And please stop whining about the bar - the issue is that he testified he had a beer that evening, and now says he was not consuming alcohol at all. THAT is the story that has changed.*

Shadow said...

Ah, Sheri...The issue in court was NEVER whether Matt had been in the bar. The ISSUE was whether or not he consumed enough alcohol before driving to be legally impaired. You and Matt can spin in all directions, but he testified under oath he had consumed beer earlier in the evening before going to the bar, so unless he committed perjury, he had some alcohol in his system. He also refused the breathalyzer test. Whether or not he was legally impaired will remain a matter of conjecture, but those facts are irrefutable.

In his interview with Smashing, he obviously hopes to misdirect people about the drinking by trying to emphasize he was not in the bar, and also obviously hopes that by saying he was previously at a "filming event" where "no alcohol was consumed" that you will believe he had nothing to drink, his sworn testimony to the contrary.

He was found not guilty due to jury misconduct, not based on the evidence and facts presented at the trial.

Matt may be selling, but quite a few of us aren't buying.

barnaby said...

I don't have any serious issues with Jeremy. I had to work long hours to pay for college because my parents were raising three younger siblings on poverty level earnings. More power to Jer since his parents have a few bucks. I've done quite well since and don't begrudge Jer a thing.

But after reading the list of activities his dad suggests reflect Jer's some hard working dude .... Matt sounds like a classic enabler.

Perhaps Jer's new reality show will be "Intervention."

Anonymous said...

Rap, Why do you insist on saying "evening"? Over and over you wrongly refer to him as having a beer in the "evening". It was at 1:30pm in the afternoon. I really enjoy your perspective but sometimes you are worse than Matt in trying to spin the facts wrong.

Anonymous said...

Rap, I don't know if you know this or not, but after 1-2 hours, the alcohol in someone's body from 1 beer, depending on their size, gets used up from breathing and normal sweating. So Matt having a beer a couple hours before he was pulled over has nothing to do with him lying. He just knows that after a few hours, there's none left in his body. That means that the beer a few hours earlier COULDN'T have impaired his driving or anything else. Also, if you remember the episodes around his trial, Matt's dad goes over the route Matt took to leave the bar. Even Matt's dad, who was definitely sober, had trouble making a good turn.

Jim Beem said...

I am going to call it like I see it. . . and I have to go with Sheri on this one. Matt testified he had a beer at home that day, which is not inconsistent with him then attending a dry filming event and thereafter driving the friend/producer/whoever-it-was to the cafe & pub to drop him off.

As for Jeremy being lazy, I wouldn't be so hard on him. He is blessed to be in the situation he is in, no doubt about it. He has more leeway than many others in this world to spend time "finding himself" and figuring out what he wants to do. But that's life. I don't begrudge him that, and I also do not think he is even close to the worst example of someone taking their time to find their way in this world.

Anonymous said...

I agree Sheri, Rap has proven he has a reading comprehension problem on several occasions. Rap, are you capable of understanding the difference between morning, afternoon and evening?

You have totally screwed up what the interview stated. Interesting how you double talk, twist things around, make up words to spew your venom.

Anonymous said...

I agree Jim Beem.

Anonymous said...

Mat is not NOW saying he would have given any test. That is a quote from the case record.

Rap541 said...

Sorry - if Matt testified he had beer that *evening* who among us thinks evening is 1:30 pm?

Raise of hands? Anons who don't even have the courage to pick fake ids? Do you think *evening* begins at 1:30pm? Why did Matt testifiy he had a beer that evening if he had NO alcohol at all?

Where exactly - since I have been demanded and have provided links as proof - did Matt say he had alcohol at 1:30pm and NONE after the fact?

Anyone? I'm always happy to look at links.

Until then we have one link where Matt testifies in court he had a beer that evening.... and one link where Matt says he had no alcohol that evening.... How are both true?

Rap541 said...

Anon 6:51pm- in all seriousness - no hate on Matt at all - if Matt isn't capable of driving safely on the road in his wife's car that isn't especially accomadated to him... are you really ok with him driving?

Really?

The Roloffs have plenty of cars. Even at this point in the Roloff wealth, Matt had a car with pedals extended especially for him. If he had hit a child that night because he had driven his wife's car with the mis aligned pedals instead of his own, would you personally be ok with the dead or injured child that occured because Matt Roloff couldn't be bothered to adjust the pedals for his own driving needs instead of his wife's?

Seriously. Your child. Run down. Because a dwarf was driving a car he couldn't handle because he didn't adjust the pedals. Ignore the alcohol issue. Matt admits he was driving "sloppy" because of the pedal issue. Are you ok with your kid dead or crippled because Matt drives "sloppy"?

Really?

Jim Beem said...

Shadow, Matt was found not guilty on the merits by the judge . . . not due to juror misconduct. Juror misconduct does not entitle one to a not guilty verdict; it is simply grounds for a mistrial, which would leave the prosecutor free to re-try the case with another jury, In Matt's case, when the jurors disregarded the judge's instructions, Matt waived his right to a jury and asked the judge to decide the case and render a verdict. The judge found that there was reasonable doubt and entered a finding of not guilty.

Jim Beem said...

Rap, in fairness, Matt's quote in the recent interview merely says that he did not have any drinks at the filming event from which he drove to the pub. He does not categorically deny that he had any drinks that "evening"; he just says he didn't have any at the event immediately preceding his driving to the pub.

Anonymous said...

Spirit. The officer didn't screw up by not giving matt a walking test. They screwed up by not giving him one of several other test such as the count backwards or reverse alphephet test as required by law. The oregon statute has several provisions to test people with disabilities this officer did none

Anonymous said...

Rap. I used to like your post. Now you're getting ridiculous.

Rap541 said...

If we're gonna go there, jim beam, matt said in the current intereview:

"When I drove down the road I was a little sloppy, but not because of any drinking, but because of other circumstances. I was driving my wife’s car, which I never drive, and it was an old country road. It was late at night and I was coming back from a filming event where there was no alcohol consumption at all."

In fairness, that doesn't mean Matt hadn't been drinking all evening, it means he wasn't drinking *at the filming event*.

I understand doublespeak, and its very very evident that matt understands double speak as well as Matt is unwilling to state to his fans absolutely that he had not been drinking at all that evening, no double talk, no just one one one beer, no "I had a beer at 1:20 pm in the *evening* but by 11:30pm it clearly was no longer in my system.

Matt fans - I LOVE alcohol. Mmmm yum had margaritas tonight in fact. And honestly... I am more appalled that Matt trotted out "I;m a DWARF and I was driving my DWARF wife's car and her car pedals aren't especially adjusted to me so I was driving *sloppy* but I am a DWARF."

Seriously Matt fans... your kid is on the side of the road and reason is a dwarf was driving *sloppy* because he couldn't care less about adjusting his pedals.... do you give him a cuddle and a kiss for maiming your child because aw schucks its so god damn cute?

*This of course ignores all of Matt's double talk about how he had or had not been drinking. He clearly testifified (unless the Oregonian is a *hater* publiciation and I am curious to see if Matt calls out the local paper as HATERS on the safety of his persoanlly managed website) that he had a beer that evening so I am curious why everyone is up in arms about me calling Matt a liar.

Oh wait... Matt? Matt, we know you read this site since you whine like a toddler about it on *your personally managed site where dissent is not allowed as your site is not a democracy*....

How about it? Were you drinking that night or not? If you were, when did you stop? I'm not an idiot, I drink myself. I don't take chances but I know people who do. When did you STOP drinking that night? I bet your fans would love to back you up :)

Greg said...

Matt would never answer straight questions. He needs to be able to twist the criticisms.

Jim Bem said...

I don't see any doublespeak in Matt's story. He had a beer at home, and then attended a filming event for some time - and it is particularly relevant that he had nothing to drink at that event because that is what preceded his driving to the pub and being stopped.

Note also how the prosecution had 0 witnesses testifying that Matt had been drinking that evening. Had Matt not testified and been honest about drinking the beer, it would never have come out. Matt was cross examined fully on this score by a hostile prosecutor about when he stopped drinking that evening, how much he had etc. I recall he testified that he had a single beer at least several hours before driving.

Rap, please also consider that drinking a single beer at some point in the day or evening does not disqualify one under the law from driving for the rest of the entire day.

Also, I have no problem with Matt explaining his sloppy driving. He was found guilty of the "sloppy driving" charge, if you recall. Okay, he messed up in that regard, but that does not mean he should have been guilty of a DUI.

Rap541 said...

" So Matt having a beer a couple hours before he was pulled over has nothing to do with him lying. He just knows that after a few hours, there's none left in his body. That means that the beer a few hours earlier COULDN'T have impaired his driving or anything else."

Of course if that's the case, then Matt certainly should have taken the breathylzer test since he had no alcohol in his system.

Oh wait... poor widdle Matt is a *dwarf* and its not FAIR for a dwarf to take the same test as average height people... which really is rather laughable coming from Matt.

Rap541 said...

Also - Matt's spin on the show cancellation really makes no sense. So apparently now the family had planned for a year for season five to be the end. But season five "left loose ends" which is a bit odd considering the Roloffs were saying "we ar eplanning on being done" and have some control over what is presented... so they decide to sign a *two year contract* (when previously they have interviewed that they decide each year to sign a new contract) to film what....half a season of shows?

Again we have learned from the Gosselin debacle... TLC doesn't let people walk away from their contracts.

Jeffery LLP said...

Rap541, The fact that you quote wikipedia as if it were a legal deposition is hilarious, but what is even more hilarious is that you misquote it. You really need to learn the art of silence or are you a big fan of toenail soup?

Judy said...

Rap--"Why would The Oregonian say..." Really? You're kidding me, right? Are you one of those naive simple minded people who believe everything they read in newspapers, magazines, and on TV? I bet you even believe what you read on the internet? Come on. Give us a break from your misguided drivel.

Jeffery LLP said...

Tisk tisk tisk Rap, now you are an expert on contract law? The ins and outs of negotiating a talent contracts for a television show is far too complex for you. You should refrain form speaking about such things, it makes you look stupid.

Rap541 said...

Jim - Either Matt had alcohol that evening or he didn't.

Seriously, this isn't hard. He testified in court he had a beer that evening. Now he's saying he had no alcohol *at a particular event that evening* but indeed had alcohol that evening. He's implying he wasn't drinking at all when in fact he's on record testifying he did have alcohol that evening.

Did he have anything that night or not? Oh wait, he testified he did have a beer that evening, per Jim, several hours before driving to the bar parking lot at 11 at night or so. So Jim - were you *at* the trial? When did Matt have the beer?

Has anyone found a link where Matt says his last beer of the evening was 1:30 in the "evening"?

Jim - on a more serious note - I have a problem with Matt's "sloppy" driving because his attitude over it indicates how little he cares about anyone but himself. If he can't drive a car safely without adjusting the pedals for his height, he's being an irresponsible jerk. His handicap isn't new, its not like he doesn't know he can't drive Amy's car safely... but he needed to go somewhere so screw everyone else on the road. Sorry - not applauding his "I don't give a damn about anything but what I want to do" attitude. Dropping someone off in a parking lot at 11:30 at night isn't an emergency. He didn't want to be bothered with adjusting the pedals, and drove sloppy. If he had hurt someone, someone would be hurt because he couldn't be bothered to give a damn about anyone but himself.

Personally once I start drinking, that means I'm not driving for the day, and that may be why I have NO DUI arrests, while Matt Roloff has two.

Jeffrey - I assume by your wit that you're one of Matt's boardies, so let me help you. The reason I cited wikipedia is because it has links to the news articles. I also provided a direct link.

Judy - Why would the Oregonian say Matt testified he'd had a beer that evening if its not true? I don't believe everything I read (thats why I doubt some of Matt's interviews) but a newspaper reporting court testimony?

Really? You think Matt would let that go and not say something about it?

And why would the Oregonian - a local paper that has always seemed fairly friendly to the Roloff clan do such a thing? Judy? What would the *news reporting agency* gain here?

Jeffery LLP said...

Rap, you continue to misquote, misread, misinterpret... You really need to stop, we are all embarrassed for you. Maybe you need a drink to calm down. But then you may not be able to stop. You did imply that once you start you don't stop until your are drunk, therefore you don't drive once you do start drinking. Correct? That would be a correct assumption based on your own statement above. Yes.

Shadow said...

I live in the same area as Matt. I DO NOT want "sloppy" drivers on my roads, even if they are not alcohol-impaired. I DO WANT the police to stop "sloppy" drivers and determine why they are driving that way, especially at night, on an "old country road," which (per the post above) is difficult for anyone to safely negotiate. BTW, that's nonsense. Any capable, experienced driver should be able to drive that road safely if s/he is obeying the speed limit and paying attention.

MATT REFUSED THE BREATHALYZER TEST. While he has provided numerous, conflicting explanations for why he did so, the FACT is that he has NO PROOF he didn't have any alcohol in his system, as he "now" claims (contrary to his SWORN testimony in a legal proceeding).

Those of us who live around here have heard and read Matt's *many* interpretations and explanations of that night. Seems like every time he gets a new idea about how to explain it, he trots it out.

The Matt supporters should surprise me, but sadly, they don't.

Rap541 said...

Jeffrey - I'm more an expert in common sense.

If the show is profitable, and TLC wants to keep it going, why would TLC let the Roloffs out of a two year contract to do the show?

We've seen how TLC will react to talent attempting to get out of contracts. Heck, its sort of a rating bonanza. If the Roloffs geniunely wanted the show to end a year ago, as Matt is now stating.... really why would they sign a new contract at all?

There's loose ends? So what? I mean, if they wanted the show to end, then why would that matter to them? And why would matt and Amy as producers allow season five to end on a cliffhanger when they were already considering ending the show?

And please don't play the "They have no control!" card, Jeffrey. Because its obvious that they do have some control over what gets presented and if they were making noice to TLC that they wanted season five to be the end... Why would the Roloffs agree to do an extra season when they could instead do one two hour special or whatever and wrap up the loose end of "Matt didn't die, he didn't even have the fainting spell in October, it was in June and then he had fun in Europe"...

Why would Matt be *telling people in interviews* that they were planning on at least two more years this summer (spirit has them noted I believe) when he was, in November 2009 not wanting do the show after season five? (thats from Matt's own comments on his forum btw)

Forbidden by that contract for two years that he signed?

Why has Matt said for years that they make the decision each year to sign a new contract with TLC and now, when they have signed an "unusual" two year contract... they decide to quit?

And TLC lets them? Oh wait... In fact if you read between the lines, TLC contracted them for two years with a minimum opf 20 episodes and a max of 80... and TLC pulled the plug once season six A (20 episodes) was done...

And if you look at Matt's comments on his board... the entire family can't do ANY tv projects that TLC doesn't approve until the contract expires next year, and TLC can choose to extend that for an extra year... why would the Roloffs sign on for that long when they wanted out in November of last year and didn't have to do season six at all?

Jeffrey - what is being misquoted, and misinterpreted? You saying so doesn't in any way explain why yyou feel that way.

"Maybe you need a drink to calm down. But then you may not be able to stop. You did imply that once you start you don't stop until your are drunk, therefore you don't drive once you do start drinking. Correct? That would be a correct assumption based on your own statement above. "

Yes. Most of the time. That's why I don't drink outside my home or where I don't have a designated driver. Its called knowing yourself and being responsible. Thats why I probably drink as much as or possibly *more* than Matt Roloff and unlike Matt Roloff, I haven't been arrested and found guilty of one DUI, and put on trial for another.

Rap541 said...

Shadow, nicely said.

I'm also amused by how the mr boardies are whining how Spirit never allows anyone to defend Matt here and yet clearly people are allowed to be pro-Matt here.

Heck, Jeffrey is even allowed to name call me. :)

Jeffery LLP said...

Rap, you really should not drink and type. You are clearly impaired, otherwise you would be able to understand the message. I do not have the time to get you up to speed grasshopper. Does the name calling hurt your feelings? At least I didn't call you a "BITCH".

Jocelynn said...

Jeffrey, do you realize no one was actually calling Molly a "bitch"?

Dana loves Matt and Jeremy. Dana didn't like that Molly called Matt and Jeremy selfish for going to Switzerland instead of staying at the World Dwarf Games. Dana felt Molly was disloyal to her favorite Roloffs. Dana also said Molly was inconsiderate of Jeremy when she said it is nice to have an older brother that is as thoughtful as Zach.

Rap, clearly thinking that Molly was not being disloyal and was not inconsiderate, used sarcasm by referring to Molly as the "bitch" posting to Dana. Rap was making fun of Dana by for criticizing Molly for something Rap did not think was wrong in the least.

Rap541 said...

Thanks Jocelynn = You've nicely summed up the issue surrounding "Bitch".

Jeffery LLP said...

I am aware of Raps backward sentences and reverse sarcasm to try and make his point. I think that is one reason why he has difficulty in comprehension. Either way, Molly was referred to as a bitch and any point he was attempting to make was shadowed by his unfortunate use of words.

Anonymous said...

Rap- well though out and presented. I just landed here by accident so I'm no regular of this site. I just got intrigued by the comments here- you clearly and with oodles of common sense laid out your thoughts/ideas along with full blown proof. Those that disagree then proceed to throw insults and generalizations and other nonsense in an effort to "win" and to also look cool while doing so. It's just funny. Since i have no horse in this race, you can easily see what they do. it's done all day every day at every forum. I've been using the interwebs for 15 years and foruming for the same. It never changes. People just don't know how to remove the overblown emotions from an argument. don't know how to express themselves intelligently without resorting to playground style arguing.
Jeffllp demonstrates this for us. too funny.

Unknown said...

I, for one, wish to be adopted by the Roloffs! My God! Who wouldn't want to grow up there! I realize I am in my forties...but....PLEASE!!! ADOPT ME, MATT AND AMY!! I PROMISE TO PULL MY WEIGHT ON THE FARM!! :)