Jun 22, 2010 at 16:10:22
“You can call her over the top. Or you can not enjoy her music. But she has a lot of talent and was accepted at The Tisch School of the Arts. Maybe you need to research more before you make assumptions.”
Jun 14, 2010 at 10:49:40
“I disagree. I don't think Sean H's feels he has anything to "prove" nor was it what he was trying to do. He is a performer and it was a hilarious bit that got a huge reaction/laugh. That's all they wanted. And they deservedly got it.”
Jun 14, 2010 at 10:45:19
“You obviously haven't read the news for the past month, for it was in response to the Newsweek article that got a lot of buzz about him not being able to play "straight" and how Kristen responded so publically to it. Your comment above doesn't make sense in context. It was actually brilliant and very funny if you knew the story. (Which was all over the place.)”
“Wow. I have not seen this much women bashing in a long time. Nice posts people. It has to be about plane-Jane's and women who are acting sl* tty at work? Appalling.”
Ghost Dance 2010 on Jun 8, 2010 at 11:21:04
“Many women who work in the entertainment and television journalism industries must face insults, innuendo, and condescension due to their good looks, even though their performance and professional status proves their intelligence, education, work ethic, and ambition.
A majority of letters received by female television journalists consists of complaints about their hair or their clothes and mostly from other women.
There also seems to be a slight anti-latin undercurrent here as well.”
sherifffruitfly on Jun 8, 2010 at 11:17:01
“Assuming that everything a woman says is true just because she says it is asinine.
If it did happen as she says, then the company needs to pay brazillions of dollars to her.
But girls lie every bit as much as boys do (hey *that's* equality!) . I support equality of the sexes by not going for the sugarandspiceandeverythingnice BS about girls, and assuming they always tell the truth.”
It shows the difference between the power of hope and the power of nope. One side is looking towards the future while the other is trying to put up stop signs in front of any possible progress, in a angry, violent way.”
bajed on Mar 25, 2010 at 12:18:06
“Great talking points but very little value in nature of substantive dialogue. There were some great things about this bill, but there are also some very economically destructive aspects of this bill-things to be angry about.”
Dec 30, 2009 at 13:51:10
“Today the U.S. Department of Agriculture requires labels with the term ‘yam’ to be accompanied by the term ‘sweet potato’ though they are two completely different types of food. Unless you specifically search for yams, which are usually found in an international market, you are probably eating sweet potatoes... 95% of Yam crops are grown in Africa. Compared to sweet potatoes, yams are starchier and drier.”
Oct 29, 2009 at 16:00:35
“How much of that has to do with Boyle and Colson and how much has to do with their government? I can understand the outrage at their money/hosing being tied up. I think it is horrible too. I however do not understand the outrage against Boyle and Colson personally. It's not their responsibility to raise these kids because they cast them in a movie. The fact that they heard so many saying "hey, this isn't right" and stepped up is a good thing. No matter how it came about. From what I have read, it sounded like they were already very involved in those kids lives and were trying to do good by them anyway. But even they had to fight red tape on many fronts. At least these kids already have a leg up with school, a trust fund and the fact that the world has their back if needed. (At least by posting outrage on a blog.. I am guessing most people here aren't writing checks to them at the moment.....)”
Oct 29, 2009 at 14:52:38
“Boyle and Colson created a movie and gave a lot of money to help these families on the other side of it. They are not responsible for raising them now. Their own families are. I think your idea of responsibility on the behalf of a couple of artists is skewed. The kids were not only paid, but taken care of with trust funds and the offer of new housing.
As for the trust fund... they are absolutely right to have controls on it for the kids. Every child star has the exact same kind of situation so the parents can't get at the money and spend it all before the child is 18. That money is for the kids. Not the parents.
I think you should rethink your argument.”
sweetwhine on Oct 30, 2009 at 08:50:40
“Boyle opened that can of worms. He should be responsible. You just can't go about your business after something like this. They're children. They were the whole movie in my opinion.”
pixiepotpie on Oct 29, 2009 at 15:54:14
“True, however, those funds are generally free of contingencies such as attending school, etc, Payment for services rendered should be just that. However, i admit this is a Very complicated issue all the way around.”
newtom on Oct 29, 2009 at 15:28:27
“I think your argument is flawed -- no need to rethink mine, thank you very much. If, as you say, they are not responsible for raising them now -- and wwith that I agree by the way -- then why do they have conditions on their compensation? By doing so, they are creating responsibility. Let the money sit in a trust until the kids reach the age of majority (whatever that is in India) then let them have at it -- just like other child actors.
Your assumption that every child star's payment comes with strings attached may very well be true -- although I doubt very strongly that these kids have or had the kind of agents AMERICAN child actors have.
Boyle and Colson are no saints. The trust sucks because it created conditions under which they can cease compensation for services from which they have alreadty been enriched. Controls are one thing -- deferred, unfair and inequitable compensation is something else completely.”
bramapanzer on Oct 29, 2009 at 15:20:41
“I think you should recheck your facts. Come back when you find the data about how much the children were paid *BEFORE* the public outcry occurred.”
Sep 23, 2009 at 09:58:41
“Always remember. Everything posted in the HuffPo comments is true....”
traveller77 on Sep 23, 2009 at 11:12:10
“I don't know about every other coment, but this one is true. SMG is a registered Republican in California. Registries are public, and this one was checked. You can always google for the info yourself.
“Wait.... Fox's network channel wouldn't show the healthcare speech, when the other networks would. Plus, Obama may have scheduled something that conflicted with airing on Fox, which Fox wouldn't agree to. Why do they take their snakiness and try to throw it on Obama all of the time?”