Posted on 08/24/2006 7:31:16 AM PDT by null and void
CONSERVATIVE: That's none of my business.
LIBERAL: She earns $100M a year? She must be one of those evil rich people that don't pay enough in taxes. How dare she vacation at the beach when millions of children are starving in inner cities. And it will serve her right, too, when global warming causes ocean levels to rise and wash away her beach home. Oh, and she didn't have a pink ribbon on her swimsuit! She must be some homophobic fascist that wants the billion gay people on this planet to die! I bet she clubs baby seals and spotted owls, too....
I couldn't agree more. I don't care for her books, but she has discovered a market niche and has produced. She has earned her money and has the right to spend it however she wishes.
It's just nice to see someone giving back!
Eastern European orphanages leave much to be desired.
Who cares what she does with her money? She earned it, she can spend it any way she wants.
Who cares?
Hopefully she would pay the government back the money that she took when she was on welfare.I have a feeling she's paid the government many times more that what she received.
You care enough to post to the thread...
Yes, she is pretty attractive, and no youngin' either. Notice how they did publish one unflattering picture. The press are a bunch of losers.
I think when people come into wealth too early, it skews their values. People who achieve wealth in middle-age after knowing what it is like to struggle, tend to handle money much better.
Stephen King makes $40M a year just on royalties, making him worth close to $1 billion. He lives modestly, plays home team baseball, and gives to many charities. He's a good role model.
I don't think she is given a choice on that.
Being annoyed by a useless topic doesn't mean I'm interested in it, but nice try.
Puh-leze! Around here, that's "loosers." I'm series.
Most gals marry men for what's inside ... really. So there's hope. :)
LOL! Love the baby seal and spotted owl part. ;^)
Thank you!
The British are socialist. They find it perfectly natural to pick at people with money. It only seems boorish over here in the provinces.
Yes, she is pretty attractive, and no youngin' either. Notice how they did publish one unflattering picture. The press are a bunch of losers.
I'm glad to hear this. I was half afraid that this was going to be a George Soros type of ending.
What feels nicer to you: someone you'll likely never personally know "giving back", or you yourself donating time and/or money to your favorite charitable organizations?
It just seems pointless to get all warm & fuzzy via celebrity projection.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.