8/27/2006

 

Meanwhile, Back in Paris...

On the heels of my last post, I thought we'd take a look at the flip side of the coin.

Hear of a chick named Paris Hilton? Sure you have. Wish I hadn't. The News & Record featured a story on her Friday about her efforts to be Taken Seriously as an entrepreneur and an "artist" (her word, certainly not mine*).

Having read everything of substance and import in the paper, I took a moment to scan the article for some mention in all of that self-hype of any good this woman has done for society, particularly the poor. Hmm, mention of her expensive cars. Mention of her expensive furs. Mention of how she hasn't taken any money from her rich family (yeah, right!) But no mention of donating to charities, or volunteering any of that expanse of time to helping out, or even serving on a charitable foundation. No mention of how she hasn't even looked down long enough to notice the poor people she's walking all over every day. No mention of her even toning down the massive juggernaut of her own ego and self-promotion.

In other words, typical Paris Hilton: spoiled and selfish.

So why am I letting this get under my skin? After all, I wasn't surprised to see this creature not helping wnyone other than herself, and there are a lot of Paris Hiltons out there. Why should this bother me so?

Becuase it absolutely kills me to see people like the GIHN volunteers, the people at Mt. Zion, and the people toiling in the hot sun at a site for Habitat for Humanity breaking their backs to help others and getting no publicity for it while spoiled brats like Paris Hilton constantly pump hours and millions into inflating their own superciliousness, and the media won't shut up about them. Frankly, it makes me sick.

I suppose it's just as well. It ensures that there are always normal people like myself**, Cara Michele and Kevin Barbieux ready to stick a pin in the zeppelin of such overinflated self-importance.


-----------------------------
*I oughta know; I am one.

** Well, relatively speaking...

Comments:
You know, you've gone on long enough without comment in this vein.

Who made you arbiter of morality? The sanctimonious tone of your ranting is disappointing.

After all you've been through, you still don't get it. It's not up to you to decide who's 'good' and who's not.

You've maligned people unfairly here. I remember a recent rant about Brad Pitt the day after I had read he was in Africa.

I'm certainly not gonna argue that Paris Hilton deserves regard or respect, but your tone is just mean.
 
maybe the point he was making was that we spend too much time celebrating frivolity in our time. We put people who contribute nothing to the value of humanity on a pedestal while relegating the "saints" to the rubbish bin. I m not saying he said these things since Mike is more articulate than I could ever be, but he might.
 
The Prodigal Son has returned, and I can already hear the groans now! :)

jnccarol... Ever here of Daniel O'Connell? He was a well-known figure way back in 18th Century Ireland, and he once said that:

"Nothing is politically right which is morally wrong."

Most people will interpret the meaning of this quotation as "Politians always think they're immorality is right", and that's the point he was trying to convey when he said it... In other words, time cannot change the facts and truths about something, but it can change the morals of it.

Look, the problem with what you've said is that it's "morally" correct but politically incorrect. If you want your opinions/beliefs/theories to be considered by others in the LEAST, then you have to make them BELIEVE that YOU BELIEVE in what you're saying to them; otherwise, you're just another person who's saying the polar opposite of what they believe is correct... And the polar opposite of being 100% RIGHT is being 100% WRONG! ;)
 
Post a Comment



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?