Comments on: ‘Star’ Magazine Reports That Britney Spears & Jason Trawick Are Gettin Hitched’

By: hello

hello — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 01:27:51 +0000

I’m with QT, I doubt they’re even dating. No pda in any pictures.

By: jill

jill — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 12:30:15 +0000

Not engaged. Just a natural progression to news they are dating. Next week she’ll be pregnant if they can find a picture where she has a little belly.

@sue

Yep. That’s why Star Magazine did it. They could have denied the whole thing. Instead they just say they aren’t engaged. Tabloids do that all the time.

By: Sue.

Sue. — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 10:59:08 +0000

They are confirming the relationship by denying the supposed engagement.

By: QT

QT — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 08:45:32 +0000

Am I the only one who thinks they are not even dating to begin with??

By: Nadya

Nadya — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 06:48:51 +0000

i refuse to believe its true! the report from Star magazine looked like its taken off a fairytale storybook! rubbish! Spreading lies just to sell their magazine.

By: sarah

sarah — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 22:05:22 +0000

Oh Brit. I don’t think he’s handsome at all, but then again, he’s not a movie star. If he treats her good, and she’s happy, then that’s all that matters.

I hope however, this is not the calm before the storm. I’d hate to see this blow up in her face like her last marriage did. Proceed with caution Brit.

By: Devin

Devin — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 21:03:22 +0000

Well because they ARE romantically involved. They’re just not engaged.

By: Sue.

Sue. — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:20:42 +0000

Anyone noticed that they didn’t deny that they are romantically involved? ;)

By: Sandrinha

Sandrinha — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:08:34 +0000

First of all i think Jason is a good choice for Britney (from the little that we know about him off course), but i don’t think they are thinking about marrying anytime soon. She barely has any control over her own affairs, and i think she will want to have more control before venturing into another marriage.

By: Lisa

Lisa — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:46:02 +0000

If it were true, it’s NOT rushed, these 2 have been together for over a year – if the public knows about a relationship, that usually means it’s NOT new.

My friend once dated one of Drew Barrymore’s exes and when they met he swore up and down he & Drew were broken up and sure enough the tabloids found out they were broken up & ‘broke the news’ (HA) about 3 mos later.

By: Jadedkitten

Jadedkitten — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:34:35 +0000

Did anyone actually believe Star magazine?? they didn’t even use a new pix of Jason and Britney that’s ones from early 2008 and Jason is cute that’s just a bad pix .

By: SuziLee

SuziLee — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:33:40 +0000

Is it wrong that I can’t wait to run out & get this trashy magazine?? For not only the Britwick goss, but omfg everyone’s poor eyes…that chick Danielle from the Real Housewives of NJ has a sextape out of her & her boytoy that could be her son!?!?!?! I loves me the trashy Star Mag!

By: Zsofi

Zsofi — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:33:03 +0000

I hope she will not get married, soon. Their relationship need time. Brit, don’t rush!

By: Sweet_Lady

Sweet_Lady — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:31:49 +0000

well you know what they say – 3rd times the charm!

blech.

By: Ally

Ally — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 18:59:03 +0000

I like that they put a caption over his t-shirt that reads “So in Love! Britney & Jason” to make you think his shirt is really like that.

By: Lydon

Lydon — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 18:58:11 +0000

Would you really encourage her decision to get married again so soon, Trent? Let’s say it’s for real for a minute. I know I wouldn’t, at all. Not because of him, but because it would be so rushed. And wasn’t that one of the main problems with the Federfuck? Or the other one whose name I don’t know?

By: Monique

Monique — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 18:50:13 +0000

and seriously Star? good job on the turn over for that cover. that picture of RPatz is from like 2 days ago.

By: Monique

Monique — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 18:49:00 +0000

seriously… he is just plain old UNATTRACTIVE.