MC

It's nice he supporting someone like this but why the publicity about it unless it's for award season?

I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on this one - he's never one to self-promote in this way. Maybe he was persuaded that making it public would perhaps show people that this kind of support is possible without actually taking the child out of the country.

 

And congrats on the nominations, Leo!

As for critics who've said she should focus her efforts on the U.S., Winfrey, who has contributed to many American charities, says she was moved by the South African children's desire for an education.

 

"I really became frustrated with the fact that all I did was write check after check," the media mogul, 52, tells Newsweek of her previous charitable giving. "At a certain point, you want to feel that connection."

 

Winfrey, who devoted five years to creating the Oprah Winfrey Leadership Academy for Girls outside Johannesburg, also said of the assistance she has given at home, "I became so frustrated with visiting inner-city schools that I just stopped going. The sense that you need to learn just isn't there."

 

In America, she says, "If you ask the kids what they want or need, they will say an iPod or some sneakers. In South Africa, they don't ask for money or toys. They ask for uniforms so they can go to school."

 

Winfrey has called the Leadership Academy "the fulfillment of my work on earth."

This whole thing turns my stomach. It's about HER. I'm sorry, but 200 thread count sheets do not send the right message. What's the difference between knowing what you want (ipod) and getting what you don't ask for (beauty salon, crisp uniforms, etc.). Once again, it's all about the big O. You don't get publicity if you simply write the checks.

It almost looks like she's channeling Katie Holmes in this picture.

 

On Thursday, Walters released a statement saying: "Donald Trump is a personal friend of mine and has been a good friend to The View for many years. I'm sorry there is friction between Donald and Rosie."

 

She added: "That said, I do not regret for one moment my choice to hire Rosie O'Donnell as the moderator of The View. I certainly hope and expect that this tempest will pass quickly."

 

In response to Walters's words, Trump told Larry King: "I can tell you for a fact that is not what Barbara told me. ... Trust me, that's not what Barbara told me over the phone."

Some friend! Barbara tried to smooth things over so everyone could move on and Donald basically called Barbara a liar for all to see.

 

Team Rosie here.

I know, I saw this today, MC!

 

But what else could she dig up? She's already admitted to sex abuse, teenage pregnancy, bad relationships / domestic violence, a compusive eating disorder. I think she's a pretty open book.

 

What's Kitty gonna dig up? That Oprah is not nice behind the scenes? I bet Oprah doesn't suffer fools -- no more, no less. Big deal.

Probably something about the realities of her relationships. Although, I'm sure anyone who is close to her who even whispers anything will be hunted down and banned from her existence. Should be interesting to see what happens.

My thought was: how stupid do you have to be to take on Oprah?

Well, apparently Kitty Kelley is taking her on... WATCH OUT, OPRAH (NY Post Link)

My husband definitely doesn't like the lollipop look. We discuss this regularly as we're in the beauty business. It seems that we as a public supposedly have made our "ideal" to be what are really freaks of nature. (No, I don't mean freaks in that way). But we idolize the abnormal (or at least we're blamed for being the demand that gets the supply.)

 

Another element that we haven't discussed are the people who actually control who works. I've always wondered if there's a power trip going on. A booker (or casting director, or minion) only has power over these perfect specimens if they can somehow make them feel bad about themselves and at the same time hold the power over if they work or not. I'm pretty certain there's an element of our society that gets off on having that kind of power. Sure, they can blame it on what the camera adds, etc., but if everyone were normal looking off screen, then they'd all be the same onscreen.

While it should certainly be "her right" to refuse to hire to an overweight receptionist (although I'm guessing it's illegal to discriminate based on weight), the very fact she would choose to do so reflects badly on her and on her business sense. Vogue is about beauty and fashion and there are many heavy women who are gorgeous and stylish. But, she'll only have the incentive to change when she starts losing subscriptions and advertisers.

I own a business and I hate that I have to consider other things besides finding the perfect person to fit all of my needs - including appearance. I OWN the business and it's never my intent to offend anyone. However, it is MY business and I pay the taxes, I take the risks, I work the overtime, etc. If a young, fit person has all of the other qualifications for the job, I never want to be told that I need to give more consideration to other candidates because they have a disadvantage because of their body type, sex, etc. And it DOES matter. I went to a new doctor yesterday and all of the women working for her were extremely overweight! The message that sent to me is that they didn't promote health! Everything about a business projects an image, including the people answering the phones. And in private industry we already have too much outside regulation IMO.

 

 

Anna Wintour. The one who won't even allow an overweight person to work the reception desk at Vogue? Yeah, she's really a great person to lead the charge...

She just doesn't want someone else to regulate her. I agree with her BTW. I disagree with mob mandates, it's really getting out of hand. I'd rather the industry decide to change on its own. If it doesn't, then I disagree that laws should be put in place. This isn't a good thing in the end. IMO.

 

Then what is the answer, MC? We have kids literally dying to be skinny enough to be models and children starving so they can look like their favorite "hollywood stars". I think it has to start somewhere, and I don't think Wintour will do a damn thing, but maybe some other responsible companies start using normal looking humans for their ads...how about Target or something? I won't buy Vogue for my daughter, because I think it is revolting how thin and underfed their models are..THAT is Wintour.

 

I don't believe we should regulate personal responsibility. I see it happening way too often. One small group is offended, or is hurt by someone else's poor choices and WHAM, we have a law. It will be the end of us as individuals who can make choices, direct our own lives, and express ourselves freely. IMO.

 

Of course I think this latest pin-thin craze is stupid, but it was also stupid when Twiggy did it.

Anna Wintour. The one who won't even allow an overweight person to work the reception desk at Vogue? Yeah, she's really a great person to lead the charge...

She just doesn't want someone else to regulate her. I agree with her BTW. I disagree with mob mandates, it's really getting out of hand. I'd rather the industry decide to change on its own. If it doesn't, then I disagree that laws should be put in place. This isn't a good thing in the end. IMO.

I just realized that he reminds me of Steve McQueen.

I saw the film this weekend - the film was like "eh", with some stylish asides, but Daniel Craig was SMOKING hot. Seriously one of the sexiest men I have ever seen on film. I recommend it just to see his smokingness.

Double ditto! I was dragged to the film (I'm a Pierce fan) and although the film was way too long and just "eh", this was the best "Bond" character I've ever seen.

 

Star Jones in at the Dancing with the Stars Afterparty (11/14/06)

Did she have a little accident with the cocaine, or what the hell is all over her chest?

 

I think it's netting to hold the dress up. Imagine a halter top that looks like a strapless dress. Lots of dresses are made this way (for the Oscars, etc.). It does look wrong on her though.

Rosie is just looking for some s--t to stir up.

I think she's on a quiet campaign to be let go from her View spot.

Now I see why she looks so different! She's gone for the coathanger look.

 

 

From Mirror.co.uk:

 

1 November 2006

ZETA BONES: STAR SHEDS POUNDS

She wows fans with superslim new look

By Antonia Hoyle

 

SHE has always been big on glamour. But now it seems Catherine Zeta Jones has decided less is definitely more.

 

The Welsh beauty appeared to have dropped a couple of dress sizes as she turned up at a New York awards do.

 

One onlooker gasped: "She's gone from a 14 to a 10 virtually overnight. But she still looks amazing."

 

Mum-of-two Catherine, 37 - famous for her naturally curvy figure - wowed fans with her skinny new image.

 

She highlighted the Less-Eater Jones look in a slinky designer dress by Tory Burch and Roger Vivier stilettos.

 

The healthy tan comes courtesy of her sunshine life in the States with movie star husband Michael Douglas, 62.

 

Catherine - who won a best supporting role Oscar for Chicago - has always denied her youthful, line-free looks have anything to do with cosmetic surgery.

 

And she insists she would never try to mimic the size-zero trend of the world's top catwalk models.

 

She says she has never understood the modern obsession for women to be ultra-slim. Instead she opts for a sensible Weight Watchers eating plan to shed the extra pounds.

 

She admits: "Sure, I have to watch what eat to stay in shape. We all do. But I'm not fanatical. I've learned how to deal with diets without losing my limit."

 

The former chorus girl who shot to TV fame in The Darling Buds of May, adds: "My muscles have memory from the time I danced, and it's quick for me to get back in shape - but I'm not fanatical.

 

"I think it's awful, this competition in the US between actresses who've just had a baby to see who's first to get back to their normal weight. It's insane and I find it quite scary."

 

antonia.hoyle@mirror.co.uk

You can certainly see that Zeta's brow doesn't move when she smiles. But what's with her chin?

 

Wasn't he involved with his MUCH older manager for quite a few years, when he was in his teens/early 20s?? That's always weirded me out.....

I don't know but I can't imagine his mother letting anyone else get very close to him. She and HER mother go everywhere with him!

I never really jumped on the everyone-loves-Leo bandwagon after Titanic came out. However, after I saw The Departed, I'm so on it now.

 

He had this animal sexuality in that movie that was just too much to deal with. Whooie.

 

He did really well and I kind of want him to get an Oscar nomination from the movie. He's straight isn't he?

I was really into him at the time Titanic came out, and being new to the internet, I was all over the groups, etc. I have no idea of his orientation. You may want to rent Total Eclipse - he was excellent in it. You can also check out a site that's been around for a long time: Leofans.com or Leo's own site: Leonardo DiCaprio.com that tells about his interest in environmental issues.

She needs to check herself into a mental clinic and Paul needs to raise Bea. There is nothing this woman wouldn't do or say.

How sad. It looks like she's a pathologic liar. They will say anything to get their way! I have a sister who is one and she's good! She takes a grain of truth, or a lie that would fit if placed over reality (just by looking at a situation, her version could be possible). People tend to believe things if they're so awful that others can't relate. That way, it must be true or why would a "normal" person be telling it, and in such a scared/horrified manner? It's a hard thing to defend against because they're so good at it. At least Sir Paul has a lot of loyal friends who have been in his life for decades.

 

I think he should get custody of Beatrice and Heather should get a nice little allowance (and 24 hour mental health security) that she'll continue to get as long as she stays in treatment and stays out of his life and out of the press.

 

Poor Paul

I guess he wanted to show the other extreme. I just wish they'd use normal-sized women and not call them "plus=sized".

 

 

Catherine still has a ways to go as she's only 37.

No way she's only 37.

 

Agreed, MC. NO WAY! I put her at 42.

 

It's been long rumored she lies about her age.

 

They usually subtract 5-6 years.

It really bugs me when she continually brings up race. It's the zero's for heaven's sake. I know that race is still an issue in some places, but you'd think she'd try to set an example of just being instead of constantly going back to it. I really thought we were evolving.

Catherine still has a ways to go as she's only 37.

No way she's only 37.

Chapman writes the article is "false and defamatory" and has "caused them massive damage." The letter also states, "You have also chosen to state that Mr. Reynolds is gay. While Mr. and Mrs. Reynolds believe that everyone should be free to make their own choice concerning sexual preference and that there is nothing wrong with being gay, you have nonetheless chosen to falsely state that Mr. Reynolds is gay." Chapman also states that the Enquirer has done "grave damage to their reputations, both publicly and privately."

 

Brad Zeifman, a rep for the couple, issued the following statement to TMZ: "Mr. and Mrs. Reynolds have tried to handle these vicious lies and attempts at character assassination with quiet dignity for far too long...now they will pursue immediate legal action against anyone who makes false statements about their family."

If there is "nothing wrong with being gay," then why are they calling it "vicious lies" and "character assassination" ??

 

The next step will be that the stress of all of this has broken up their marriage.

I just saw her on an episode of Earl. I have to say, she is pretty hilarious and I love the fact that she plays a totally nutso, very unattractive character.

 

But here's another question I've got for you... It seems like a lot of Scientologist guys are gay, trying to pose as straight (Travolta, Cruise, Jason Lee, etc). But why are actresses like Mimi Rogers, Juliette Lewis and Leah Remini Scientologists? What's in it for them? Or, are they just brain-washed? I don't get it.

I've often wondered that myself. Isn't Priscilla Presley one as well? It may have to do with making them feel important. Scientology goes after celebs, and maybe these women who aren't exactly HUGE in Hollywood feel huge when they're around Scientologists?

 

I don't understand Ann Archer though.