Tag Archives: Chris Martin

Larb Gai and ‘Conscious Uncouplings’

article-2589383-1C94A63F00000578-64_636x382-610x366After 10 years, all of which were likely grueling for the lead singer of Coldplay, Gwyneth Paltrow and Chris Martin are splitting up.  The fact that they are splitting proves that Gwyneth may be an authority on vintage Michael Kors and Parisian concierge service, but apparently she knows zilch, zero, nada about how to keep a marriage together.

Now, in an effort to seem deeply spiritual and New Age-y, Gwyneth and Chris have taken to the Goop.com website to announce their amicable split, calling it a “Conscious Uncoupling.”

“Conscious Uncoupling?” Versus what, an “Unconscious Coupling?” The latter sounds more like a drunk couple’s wedding night than an explanation for an obnoxious, spoiled rich kid’s divorce announcement.

God help us all!  For the last 15 years or so, we’ve all been subjected to every one of little Gwynny’s trials, tribulations, fads, and endeavors to reduce boredom.  She’s like a seven-year-old girl who inflicts herself on her parents’ dinner guests by subjecting them to a half-hour of out-of-tune songs and tap dancing in a tutu.  The problem is that the soon-to-be ex-Mrs. Martin is now a grown woman with two children.

In addition, Paltrow’s father Bruce is deceased, and if you listen real closely, lately mom Blythe Danner is the only one clapping.

Gwyneth the Goop Girl has tortured America by affecting an occasional fake British lilt.  Harvey Weinstein drooled all over her, calling Paltrow his Shakespeare in Love muse.  After that she ventured into country singing, traveled to Spain on a cooking tour with Mario Batali, married a rock star, laid on a baby grand piano singing “Forget You” with CeeLo Green, sang “Happy” on Glee, doled out mothering and child-nutrition tips, wrote cookbooks, became best friends and then not best friends with Madonna, Beyoncé, and Cameron Diaz, and just recently bragged that at 41 she has the butt of a 22-year-old stripper!

Seriously Gwyneth, like, who gives a rat’s patootie?

Someone should inform Gwyn that no one really cares what she is thinking or doing. If there was a picture in the dictionary for “legend in one’s own mind,” it would be Gwyneth Paltrow’s.

On her relationship with the father of children Apple and Moses, both of whom victims of the ‘uncoupling’ of their father and mostly their self-consumed mother, in 2011 Gwyneth told Elle magazine:

Sometimes it’s hard being with someone for a long time. We go through periods that aren’t all rosy. I always say, life is long and you never know what’s going to happen. If, God forbid, we were ever not to be together, I respect him so much as the father of my children. Like, I made such a good choice. He’s such a good dad. You can never be relaxed or smug and think, ‘I’ve got this thing.’ That’s also part of it: keeping yourself on your toes. I’m not going to take this for granted.

So, “[i]t’s hard being with someone for a long time… life is long and you never know what’s going to happen?” Okey-dokey.

Anyway, the reason that Chris ‘He Likes Privacy’ Martin and Gwyneth ‘My Favorite Sex Position’ Paltrow are splitting is anyone’s guess.

There’s that Vanity Fair brouhaha and rumors that Paltrow has taken a lover or two, or maybe it’s not even that complicated. Gwyneth could have merely gotten bored to tears with Chris, and just as she’s moved on from writing cookbooks like “It’s All Good: Delicious, Easy Recipes That Will Make You Look and Feel Great,” now she’s into ‘It’s Not All That Good: Conscious Uncouplings That Will Make You Feel Horrible.’

Buy-a-Brick for Barry

Originally posted at American Thinker blog

Republicans are calling it the Buffett Rule Act, but they should have called it the Call-the-Liberals’-Bluff Act.  Democrats and Republicans in the House agreed that wealthy Americans who want to voluntarily pay more taxes to reduce the deficit can “check a box on their taxes and send in a check for more than they owe the IRS.”

Billionaire Obama supporter Warren Buffett was the inspiration for the Buffett Rule tax the Democrats, led by Obama, proposed based on Warren’s statement that he shouldn’t pay a lower tax rate on his gazillions of investment dollars than his secretary Debbie Bosanek, who earns over a quarter-million dollars a year.

According to Forbes magazine, Ms. Bosanek “served as a stage prop for President Obama’s State of the Union speech. She was the president’s chief display of the alleged unfairness of our tax system – a little person paying a higher tax rate than her billionaire boss.”

The President should have spared Debbie the 15 minutes of fame and paid his own secretary, Anita Decker Breckenridge, overtime to attend the State of the Union.  After all, Anita makes $95,000 a year, and like Debbie Bosanek, she also paid a higher tax rate than her famous tax-fairness-obsessed boss.

It was Barack Obama who pushed the “Buffett Rule.”  The goal was to force millionaires to pay at least 30% of their income in taxes.

What the President forgot to mention was that Mr. Buffett’s “investments are taxed at a lower rate than salary or wage income under the theory that they are spurring economic growth, so wealthy investors usually pay less as a percentage, though they end up paying far more in real dollar terms,” which for Democrats is a minor detail.

In response, Republicans led by Steve Scalise (R-LA) crafted the Buffett Rule Act because he and his colleagues felt that the tax code didn’t need to change and that what was needed instead was an efficient vehicle for those desiring to annually contribute more to the government.

Few would argue – especially eager-to-give liberals – that Congressman Scalise came up with a splendid idea:

If Warren Buffett and others like him truly feel they’re not paying enough in taxes, they can use the Buffett Rule Act to put their money where their mouth is and voluntarily send in more to pay down the national debt, rather than changing the entire tax code to inflict more job-killing tax hikes on hard-working Americans.

Scalise’s Buffett Rule Act, which simplifies the process for those willing to pay 50, 60, or even 95% of their income, is perfect for someone like President Obama, who keeps reminding struggling Americans about how well he’s doing and often says he doesn’t need a tax break.  So he can lead the way by giving above and beyond his fair share.

The bill presents endless possibilities for pandering liberals. This may be the opportunity the left has been waiting for.  Just think of all the wealthy Obama supporters who contributed $40K-a-plate to attend Obama 2012 fundraisers.  If he wins the election, to pay down the deficit he ran up, next year power couples like Gwyneth Paltrow and Chris Martin can send in the $35,800 each that they spent to attend a campaign fundraiser this year.

Millionaire politicians like Nancy Pelosi could do things like forego a couple of sets of Tahitian pearls for the greater good.

George Clooney, Cameron Diaz, Sarah Jessica Parker, border security expert/Obama campaign co-chair Eva Longoria, Vogue matriarch Anna Wintour, ‘Jay and Bey,’ Steven Spielberg, Jeffrey Katzenberg, and all the rest of the President’s Hollywood friends can voluntarily forfeit their salaries for awhile and instead of buying a chateau in France, they can check the extra money box on the tax form and send the loot to Washington DC.

The Buffett Rule Act could even inspire a nationwide Buy-A-Brick-for-Barry program where, in honor of Buffett-Rule Barack, Bill Gates, actors like Matt Damon and Will Smith, and horror author Stephen King can buy a brick with the money they’ve been so eager to hand over to the government for years.  Either that, or Tom Hanks and Kanye West can host a Stand Up for Government telethon or perhaps a Live Aid for Bureaucracy benefit concert.

In the meantime, despite the opportunity to act instead of talk, considering the paltry amount of charitable giving liberals are notorious for – like cheapskate Joe Biden’s $369 per year – it’s highly unlikely that any time soon ‘pay down the deficit’ money will come rolling in from the left.

 

Gwyneth Gives Philanders a Pass

Originally posted at BIG Hollywood

For a woman who claims to love the “simple life” and who swears she’s happiest when she’s cooking for her kids, lately Gwyneth Paltrow’s face and opinion are everywhere.  It seems as if Ms. Paltrow, aka Mrs. Chris Martin, hasn’t cooked very many chicken fingers for the kiddies lately, because every time you turn around she is either showcasing her eclectic talents, attending Barack Obama’s $34,000-per-plate fundraisers, or sharing her unsolicited philosophy from the left wing of every stage she happens upon.

Besides being the wife of a rock star and mother to an Apple and an actual Moses, the woman is a multitalented entertainer (at least both she and mother Blythe Danner think so). Gwyneth dances, plays guitar, and can both croon country and belt out pop.

After being featured singing on two episodes of Glee, Gwyneth will soon perish in Contagion. Upon request, Paltrow will demonstrate speaking in perfect King’s English, a talent she displayed at the tender age of 20 when she portrayed Viola de Lesseps in Shakespeare in Love.  Right out of the ingénue gate, young Gwynie with the fake British accent won an Academy Award and was promptly crowned the muse of Miramax’s Harvey Weinstein.

As if that wasn’t enough, nouveau Londoner Mrs. Martin chopped and sautéed her way across Italy with famous pony-tailed clog-wearing chef Mario Batali.  The late Bruce Paltrow’s little girl then wrote a Daddy-and-Me cookbook entitled My Father’s Daughter, and did so while hosting a website called Goop.com, where she subjects fans to her thoughts on everything from la fromagerie to post partum depression to how lucky her daughter Apple’s classmate is to have two mommies.

The woman is a virtual plethora of firsthand information, talent, experience, and insight. Had she only been born a couple of decades earlier, without a doubt Gwyneth Paltrow would have been the first to spin plates on The Ed Sullivan Show.

If it’s hot, Paltrow can be found it the thick of it, which must be why self-enamored Gwyneth decided that rather than opine on post-holiday detox menus, it was high time to enlighten the world by subjecting everyone to a full dose of her own brand of open-minded militant liberalism.

Beware! When liberal moral relativist Gwyneth Paltrow pontificates, she makes the über-opinionated Hanoi Jane “Sorry I didn’t sleep with Che Guevara” Fonda seem like an apolitical wallflower.

For instance, when it comes to sexuality, it’s not surprising that she’s a big fan of relaxed Biblical interpretations, thus Gwyneth Paltrow has a very “relaxed view on adultery.” Although married to a man she describes as “very nice,” Mrs. Martin effervesces when she says she “respects, admires and looks up to” role models who cheat, lie, sneak, and deceive.  Recently, Gwyneth shared her blasé philosophy on deceitfulness with less condemnation than she does when lecturing on the negative effects of sugar consumption.

Fancying herself a “great romantic,” Gwyneth Kate, the star of Two Lovers, said “I also think you can be a romantic and a realist.”  Maybe Gwyneth can add a section to Goop called “Romance,” where she can insert a subcategory wherein she outlines the dreamy aspects that accompany the realities associated with broken families, heartbreak, infidelity, rejection, and betrayal.

At least when it comes to homosexuality, Goop girl Gwyneth shies away from “judgment and separation,” and manages to also justify acceptance of adultery by saying, “Life is complicated and long and I know people that I respect and admire and look up to who have had extra-marital affairs.”

So, in response to life’s difficulties, people complicate matters even more by adding the noble qualities of disloyalty, anguish, brokenness, and crushing despair.  Moreover, life is long, and along life’s journey the chance to make matters worse arises every time an actress is in a movie like Sylvia and, for the sake of artistic expression, decides to get naked and roll around with a handsome actor like Daniel Craig.

Shocking? Before getting all apoplectic, let’s put Gwyneth Paltrow’s view on life in context by remembering that Mr. and Mrs. Martin, mother and father to little Apple, flew by helicopter into the Big Apple and voluntarily paid a couple’s fee of $71,600 to attend a Barack Obama fundraiser.

Barack Obama supporter Gwyneth believes: “It’s like we’re flawed. We’re human beings and sometimes you make choices that other people are going to judge,” and she was willing to pay almost $100,000 for a dinner at Harvey Weinstein’s place to prove it.

Judging a flawed, human, poor choice-making Obama is one thing.  However, not saying adultery is wrong appears to give non-judgmental Gwyneth a reason to judge those who frown upon extra-marital affairs.  Gwyneth believes that judging between right and wrong is wrong, and if a person does it, “That’s their problem.”  Gwyneth says, “I really think that the more I live my life the more I learn not to judge people for what they do.”

Granted, people make mistakes and we shouldn’t judge people, but the fruits of adultery are certainly judge worthy. And while forgiveness is admirable, condemnation of the hurtful choices that destroy lives is something Gwyneth should mention, especially if she considers herself an authority on everything from cooking to morals.

On second thought, rather than imposing her liberal worldview, Mrs. Gwyneth Martin, nee Paltrow, should stop trying to fill Jane Fonda’s orthopedic shoes by playing part time philosopher and simply stick to what she does best, which is to ‘act’ like she knows how much cilantro goes into Baja Style Shrimp Tacos.

%d bloggers like this: