Do you really believe that the vast majority of Hollywoodites ,with all their money and many Award partys,....truly care about the middle class and the poor?? 'most are liberals'
hazel
2012/05/11 15:27:26
|
|
|||||
|
56 votes
|
|
63% | |||
|
3 votes
|
|
3% | |||
|
30 votes
|
|
34% | |||
Obama fits nicely in to the middle of the group of narcissistc people who make hundreds of millions of dollars per year and spend the greater part of their lives preenng in front of the public and giving them selves gala ,very very expensive AWARDS shows about every two months or so.
..many of them give to CHARITY and (let it be known) and some use it as a big write off. I think these people want every one to think they are concerned ,,,,I think they are far more concerned about ....look at me look at me arent I wonderful .............I for one am very very weary of all their crap
..many of them give to CHARITY and (let it be known) and some use it as a big write off. I think these people want every one to think they are concerned ,,,,I think they are far more concerned about ....look at me look at me arent I wonderful .............I for one am very very weary of all their crap
Top Opinion
-
I have a different answer
+14They are the biggest moochers of all. Fake poseurs that have all the dough re mi, but will be the first in line for swag. What chumps. Then, the Fraud-in-Chief feels so warm and fuzzy inside to be in their inner poseur anti-American circle. To think the usurper has these bearded clams and cockle shells in his abnormally humongous ear is beyond ridiculous. Know this: Their petulant BS will come back to them 100-fold.
They're called Limosine Liberals.
ACTUALLY THEY ARE! ..........HOW? GLAD YOU ASKED!
The Movie stars get richer when you watch their Movie, buy their Merchandise
The politicians get rich when you send them Money! They get richer when you don't! How? you think they don't get kickbacks by promoting a bill for this or that?
Do they care about you? NO! Except during Election Year!
The Stars could careless about you too, they don't need you! They want your Money! They promote their own agenda's and they are for the most part spoiled and down right rude
But then again..... if they are viewing my comments here, thy might think I am too!
Oh Well !
For example the fad of adopting children overseas. What of our American children here? Why are these children forgotten by these celebrities who have the unlimited means to do this for them? It's about show more than anything.
Brad Pitt, George Clooney and Matt Damon are always playing pranks on each other, but Matt and Brad's latest prank landed George red faced on CNN.
Damon explained to David Letterman: "So this Italian journalist comes in and goes, 'Matt, is it true what Brad said?' And I have no idea what he is talking about. But you know, I go, 'Yeah, of course it's true'.
"And he says, 'Do you mean George Clooney has a boyfriend?' And now I'm trying to keep a straight face and I go, 'Yeah, of course he's got a boyfriend. And he wants to legally marry him. We've been on him about this for years."
He added that he turned on CNN on Tuesday to witness "this guy stand up and say, 'George! I am a gay'. And this guy starts peeling his clothes off and he says, 'If you musta choose, choose me!'"
Brad and Matt better watch their backs because we have a feeling George is stirring up a great comeback prank.
Do you see the funny part where he told the journalist that Clooney is gay?
Yeah... Hilarious Matt.
The funny part I guess being the shame and humiliation his "prank" caused Clooney.
These limosene liberals are such hypocrites.
A sharing-the-wealth image is good for business.
To the extent that charity helps people to escape poverty, sickness, and illiteracy, it also helps turn them into profit-generating consumers of hamburgers, movies, even computers.
The more that charity is relied upon to alleviate the ill-effects of unregulated global markets, the less the pressure on governments to take broader and more effective remedial action.
large grants and bounties always have strings attached. Are the recipients obliged to buy their relief from specified corporations? Are they expected to show their appreciation by supporting specified political leaders? If they are educational institutions, are they supposed to inculcate in their students the appropriate tenets of capitalism and free enterprise?
The donors, too, are expected to have the “right” political attitudes. Several years ago, when the Dixie Chicks offered $1 million to the American Red Cross, the Red Cross refused to accept the money because the singers had publicly criticized the foreign policies of then U.S. commander-in-chief George W. Bush, especially his invasion and occupation of Iraq. Political correctness, it seems, is insisted upon at both ends of the charity spectrum.
Bill Gates has spent a billion or more of his foundation’s dollars on American and Canadian public schools, and it would be naive to assume he doesn’t favour schools that are dedicated to graduating compliant workers and consumers rather than independent thinkers.
“A compelling case can be made for keeping corporate leaders out of our classrooms,” says Philip Kovacs. “When they shape our schools and other institutions according to their needs, their ideology undermines the democracy the schools purportedly serve.”
So Warren Buffett, the second richest American white man, gives $31 billion to Bill Gates, the richest American white man. Bravo. But why not instead give $1,000 to each of the 37 million Americans who are living in poverty?”
A pertinent question. The answer, of course, is that such a wide dispersal of Buffet’s wealth would fail to make much of a dent in the extreme U.S. poverty rates, and indeed would make the ineffectiveness of all such charity much more obvious. In an economic system that glorifies material gain rather than magnanimity, the generosity of atypical tycoons like Buffett and Gates is clearly an aberration.
scope this: http://movieline.com/2012/05/...