Glindathegood
-
Posts
3,682 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Glindathegood
-
-
The full RaVaughn demo leaked:
http://usershare.net/tn9vcd3a15sw.htm
Can't wait to hear it with Madonna's vocals!
Thanks! The song is really catchy. I can't get it out of my head. I can definitely hear Madonna singing this.
-
she loosing interest?
Maybe she just decided she didn't like the song after all, not because it was leaked. Artists record stuff and then decide they don't want to release them all the time. Maybe the changes she made didn't work.
I think Revolver was catchy, but I think she can do a lot better.
-
I'm not a big R&B hip hop fan, but I think it's a good song. But I don't see how Madonna's vocals would work on this track. Nothing about it would suit her singing style.
Hopefully, it will stay on Lil Wayne's album.
-
I like Tori's music. but to me she sounds absolutely deranged throughout this whole interview. Is she on drugs or losing her mind?
She does on about how governments are out to get her because she has to pay taxes on her earnings? Hello, Tori we all have to pay taxes and it doesn't mean there's a government conspiracy against us. Tori was seen here in DC buying some very expensive clothes so I hardly think she's broke from paying too many taxes.
I don't know what she said about Madonna is true or not, but I find it rather rude to spread second hand gossip. If Madonna herself had been rude to her, it would be fair enough to say that.
What I like about Madonna is she always makes total sense in what she says in interviews and seems in touch with reality and says things that are logical and reasonable. Tori may be telling the truth, but I find it hard to take what she says as credible as she sound so crazy during the rest of the interview.
-
which means what? no more on this case? no mercy?
It means it hasn't been decided yet. Usually appeals court don't decide things on the day of the hearing. I don't know if that means they adjourned to think it over or they adjourned to find out more about the biological father. I would think the biological father would be an issue they would have to address before deciding either way. They would have to determine if this guy is or is not Mercy's father before deciding anything.
-
I wish she would have went to Malawi and attended the court hearing. I know she has a tight schedule, but judges like you to be in attendance or they take it that you don't care.
I'm a lawyer and that's not true when you're dealing with an appeal. Clients rarely attend appeals. Appeals are based on legal arguments, and not on anything factual that the client could contribute to. The appeals court doesn't challenge the factual findings of the lower court. There's no presentation of evidence in an appeal, just lawyers reciting the law. The judges only care what the lawyers say about the law, not whether the client is there. Judges figure if the client didn't care they wouldn't go through the expense of an appeal.
-
I think that artwork was average. It wasn't terrible, but it wasn't fantastic and iconic either. I think they were right to dump it and come up with something a little better. It certainly was anything close to how beautiful the Sticky and Sweet tour book was. The artwork might be okay for another artist, but with Madonna people expect more interesting higher quality visuals.
-
It's not like the paps freaking jumped in front of the horse to scare it off. The animal was most likely scared by a flash or something while they were taking photos.M and her camp probably thought they didn't have serios reasons to press charges.
So basically, you think that Madonna makes up a lie and blames the paparazzi for this, and yet we get photos from before and after the accident( which suggests they were present when it happened - i don;t buy the "we were there before the accident and then we were gone for a minute and came back right after she fell off the horse"
bullshit) - do you think that is just a simple coincidence? it's more than obvious what happened here.Liz and Oseary have no reason to lie about something like this, Madonna has absolutely nothing to gain from it.
Great post. I agree. If they had really left, how would they get back in time to get another picture of her sitting on the ground? I think if they actually left by the time they got back the ambulance would have taken her to the hospital, and they wouldn't be able to get a second picture.
-
I'm confused as to why the police were involved and took a report anyway. Usually when someone falls and the ambulance shows up, the police aren't generally involved because falling whether off a horse or just walking down the street is usually not considered a suspicious likely criminal event that the police feel the need to get involved in.
Now, if there's a traffic accident the police get involved because it interfers with the flow of traffic, but generally not if for example someone slips and falls walking down the sidewalk. The police usually only get involved if the person claims there was some kind of crime involved.
-
Police report no mention of paps...what really happened, then?
Madonna fell off a horse this weekend. Her camp was quick to blame a paparazzo who reportedly spooked the horse, but he denied any wrongdoing.
However, cops are now revealing that the whole incident was most likely not started by a photog.
According to Sgt. Herbert Johnson, "There is no mention of photographers [in the police report]. It's a matter of spin control that went out of control. If they felt there was something else, they would have written 'paparazzi' in the form — if they felt there was a problem."
And there you have it.
All that really says is they didn't mention photographers to the police, not that the photographer wasn't there or didn't cause it somehow. Usually you only mention something to the police, if you feel someone did something illegal or want them to be arrested. The photographer likely did spook the horse, but unless he did that intentionally to try to hurt Madonna or was trespassing on private property, it's not a crime, so why would you mention that to the police? The photographer acted irresponsibly, but didn't commit a crime as far as I can see so it's not something that you would mention to the police. The police's job is to arrest people who you think committed a crime, not necessarily get at the absolute truth of what happened.
-
I think she needs to leave the horses alone after this.
I'm scared for her. There's nothing wrong with riding horses. I've done that myself. But jumping is dangerous. She should just stick to riding them.
But you have to admire her. She really is fearless and doesn't let anything stop her from doing what she wants to do.
-
I hope that article posted above ("Madonna sobs for little Mercy") is just more tabloid nonsense.
I'm sure she's upset, but I think the tabloids are exaggerating it. If she was that upset and not eating etc, she wouldn't be able to leave her house. And we have seen plenty of pictures of her out and around. It doesn't appear like she has lost 5 pounds, if anything she looks a little heavier than she was in the past.
-
I remember seeing a clip from Malawi with a reporter asking her about the adoption and her responding it was none of their business.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/africa/03/30/nutt.qanda/
http://www.contactmusic.com/news.nsf/artic...usiness_1099066
What she actually said it was none of the business of the so-called human rights groups who challenged the adoption. They were the "they" she was referring to, not the whole world or the media or her fans. The adoption process should involve the court system, the adopting parent, and the biological parents or relatives of the child. Why do these human rights groups have the right to challenge an adoption, I really have no idea. They have no real interest in the child.
-
A friend of mine lives near there. It's not that bad. It's a pretty quiet residential type of area. There are not a lot of cool bars, restaurants or clubs, but it's a good place to live if you don't want too much hassle or craziness.
It's funny the Upper East Side has a reputation for being snobby and one of the richest areas in Manhattan. But actually outside of Harlem or Upper Manhattan, it's one of the most reasonable places in terms of price to buy an apartment.
My friend wanted to live downtown or in Chelsea, but the Upper East Side was the only place where she could find a decent sized apartment in her price range.
Real estate experts say location, location, but sometimes you have to go outside of your most desired location to find what you want on the interior of what you are buying.
-
Just cause she's 50 doesn't mean her hair has gone grey. My mom is 64 and she is just now beginning to get gray hair. It doesn't mean she doesn't have a few in there but i doubt she's a silver fox lol
Very true. Most people in their fifties that I know have a few grey streaks, but aren't all grey.
-
I'm not sure if the Greatest Hits album would be the place to debut a brand new sound. I think that the new songs should be able to stand beside the older hits so the whole album flows together. If the new songs are too different, it might be jarring.
I wouldn't mind something dance/house based because I think Madonna does club dance music so well. It would definitely be preferrable to any of the R&B/hip hop influenced stuff on HC.
-
Here's a great article that addresses not just Madonna but the issues around international adoption in general by someone who adopted a child from China.
Madonna, Malawi and adoption madness
Her adoption controversy highlights the problems when politics trumps the welfare of the child.
By Beth Nonte Russell
April 6, 2009
The controversy surrounding the attempt by Madonna to adopt a second child from an orphanage in Malawi brings to light the confusing situation in international adoption. On Friday, a judge in that nation rejected the singer's adoption request on the grounds that waiving an 18-month residency requirement would set a dangerous precedent. Madonna was granted such an exemption when she adopted a Malawian boy in 2006.
This is just another example of how the intricacies of each country's legal system, cultural mores and poverty level intersect with the guidelines of The Hague treaty on intercountry adoptions.
The result has been a decline in the number of orphans from developing countries being adopted by Americans. While adoptions become harder, the number of orphans grows, especially in Africa because of the tragedy of the AIDS crisis. Malawi has an estimated 1 million orphans, and untold numbers of orphans languish in other African countries as well as in Romania, Russia, China and Latin America.
In addition to the systemic impediments, there is a rising attitude of nationalism, which holds that children born in a country "belong" to that country and should not be adopted by foreigners. This stance is a form of modern-day slavery, which in effect holds individuals hostage to nebulous ideas of culture and race. The needs of human infants and children are universal and have no relationship to what country, racial group or political system one is born into. These orphaned children do not have a voice and are therefore used as political, financial and cultural pawns.
Research led by Charles H. Zeanah Jr. of Tulane University and Charles A. Nelson III of Harvard University and Children's Hospital in Boston and published in 2007 found that institutionalization of children results in serious adverse affects on IQ. Each day spent in an orphanage compromises the individual's long-term quality of life and exposes him or her to disease, malnutrition and severe neglect.
There is no legitimate rationale for keeping a child in an orphanage when a viable alternative exists, and yet the wait times for adoptive parents have been growing in many countries -- with adoptions from China, for example, now taking up to three years to complete. Among the Chinese regulations is one that an adoptive parent cannot have a body mass index above a certain level. Perhaps a new study could compare those raised in orphanages with those raised by overweight people, just to make sure the priorities are correct.
The concerns about Madonna's latest adoption request seem to focus on such superficial aspects as what she was wearing when she toured the orphanage, her wealth, her race and her celebrity. What difference could these things make when weighed against the reality of the life the little girl she sought to adopt might face if left in the orphanage?
The questions that should be asked -- "Does a viable alternative to the orphanage exist for this little girl in Malawi, and does it exist now? Is there someone there who is willing and able to give her the love and care that is needed by all children?" -- are subsumed by ridiculous snarking about clothes and statements about what Madonna "should" do instead of adopting this child.
Meanwhile, a flesh-and-blood child waits for someone to come to his or her senses and consider her legitimate and immediate needs.
In discussing the findings of the study by Zeanah and Nelson, Seth Pollak of the University of Wisconsin noted, "The evidence seems to say that for humans, we need a lot of responsive care-giving, an adult who recognizes our distinct cry and knows when we're hungry or in pain."
Notwithstanding the fact that it has taken centuries of human evolution and a multi-university study to come to such a no-brainer conclusion, it is heartening that the need for love and care is now being acknowledged as the preeminent issue when making decisions about what is best for an individual child.
The vast numbers of orphans suggest that adoption will only be the answer for a small minority of individuals, and for those individuals it is a blessing. But it is clear that the institutionalization of children must end and a new system must take its place. And that will happen only by honest discussion of the true realities of life lived by a child in an orphanage today.
Beth Nonte Russell is the author of "Forever Lily: An Unexpected Mother's Journey to Adoption in China" and the founder of Golden Phoenix Foundation. (goldenphoenix foundation.org)
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commen...0,4624536.story
-
I'm very happy to see P.J. Harvey and John Parish made it in at #25. I think that's excellent since it's quite an experimental avant garde album and they didn't do a lot of press.
-
What really offends me is when people like fak imply that Madonna treats the kids she wants to adopt as a fashion accessory. Anyone can see that she adores her kids and does not consider them a piece of property.
So if you want to complain about Madonna not following the law, that's fine, but don't say she didn't love Mercy or that she saw her the same as her Louis Vuitton handbag.
And it's not about Madonna getting everything she wants like #1 hits and sold out concerts. It's about giving a child a wonderful life and the love she had for that child and the child for her.
From what I've read, the law in Malawi is not cut and dried. It wasn't clearly written down that you have to live in the country 18 months or you can never adopt. Their adoption laws aren't clearly defined and are open to interpretation. One judge interepreted it one way, and another judge interpreted a different way.
And you can see from pictures that Madonna spends quite a bit of time with her kids. There are many pictures of her with them, so it's not true that they are with nannies all the time.
And it's not clear to me that Guy was against the adoption and that's what caused the divorce. It's more likely they were having problems for other reasons, and he didn't think they should bring another child into their marriage if it wasn't working well. If you are fighting with your partner, sometimes people don't want to have another child because they feel the marriage is unstable.
-
I think the reason why they scheduled 4 arena dates in the UK is because the Wembley Stadium venue pissed off a lot of people and on forums everyone kept saying that she should have done the O2, so they assumed there would be enough interest to do 4 more dates with prices like that, or at least they wanted to make sure they are milking the most out of it. Which, in the end backfired. They should have seen the signs from Madonna doing only 1 date in the Stadium instead of the predicted double...
I don't think it's true that everyone or even a majority who saw it in London were annoyed or pissed off. It's just that the few who were managed to complain the loudest. I heard from many people they loved the show in London.
And if you were annoyed, why would you rush out to buy tickets for the same artist that pissed you off? If some artist pisses me off and I hate their concert, I certainly don't fall over myself to buy another ticket for a new concert by them.
-
didnt madonna say the confessions tour was supposed to be "intimate"?
theres not enough madonna fans to sustain her high prices
a lot of the casual goers are disppointed wit her performances
There are enough Madonna fans as long as she sticks to arenas. But not enough if she tries to do stadiums as she seems to be doing on this tour extension.
Regardless of the money factor, some people just don't enjoy going to concerts in stadiums where you either have to stand up or have a seat way far back so you can't see anything.
I had a great time seeing Sticky and Sweet in MSG. I wouldn't have had as good a time if it was in a football stadium.
Madonna's shows are so visual that if you aren't close you miss alot. Whereas a lot of the stadium acts like the Stones or the U2 have more of a rock band thing, and so it's not crucial if you can't see the stage that well.
I don't think people are dissappointed with her performances. Everyone I've known have always enjoyed her shows. It's just that financially people can't afford to no matter how good it is. Plus, if you've seen something once, why do you need to see it again? No matter how much I love an artist, if I've seen them in concert once, I don't have the desire to go see the same exact show. I have such a wide variety of musical artists I like, I don't want to see one artist over and over again. I want to experience different things. I guess I have a short attention span.
-
If this is true then that is a complete disaster not to mention embarrassing. Hopefully it will give TEAM MADONNA the kick up the arse they so
badly need and make them realise her ticket prices are out of control.
I don't think it's just or primarily the ticket prices. A huge factor is this is a repeat of the same tour that was just in England last summer. I'm sure people who are big fans of Madonna in Manchester could very easily travel to London to see her at Wembley when she was there.
I'm guessing that Tina Turner probably hasn't been to England previously on this tour so it's not something people had a chance to see before. In fact, I think it's been a very long time since Tina's last tour.
Even if Madonna's ticket prices were cheaper, I don't think a second leg in places close to where she went before would do that great.
-
im scared. what if fans no longer pay the high prices?? do u think she will downgrade her venues? i have always paid top dollar when it came to madonna concerts and will continue to do so
I don't know if Madonna would consider this, but what I would like to see on the next tour, is maybe cut back on some of threatrics, special effects etc. and make it more about the music and her band. That way her expenses would be lower, so she could charge a lower ticket price but still make the same amount of profit.
I guess some fans demand the elaborate staging, but I genuinely love her music and think she could do a tour that's more focused around just the music and maybe some great dancing.
I think she went as far as she could will all the super elaborate effects and staging, that there's no further way to go with that.
The only thing left for her to do is to really focus more around the actual music which is why we all fell in love with her in the first place.
That would also really allow people to appreciate her talent as a songwriter and a singer more, an area in which she has been very underrated in my opinion.
-
Guy's not responsible for what his father says. Just because Guy didn't want another child, doesn't mean he isn't sincere in saying that he was upset for Madonna for being denied the adoption of Mercy since he knew she wanted a child.
I don't want to adopt children or get pregnant, that doesn't mean I don't feel for people who want to have children and are denied that opportunity for whatever reason if that's what they want.
Guy is probably busy with his life, and he doesn't have time to keep up on every detail of the adoption. I know the appeal was announced, but he may not have been aware of it since the announcement only came a few hours before. So I'm sure that was a harmless error, and not done with some bad intention.
As far as it being a PR statement for him, it's unlikely he was the one that sought out the media, but they contacted him. When some celebrity is involved in some controversy, the media often tries to contact their ex-partners in the hope that the ex-partners will be bitter and say something terrible about that person. I'm sure Guy realizes how tabloids work especially when you are dealing with someone like Madonna who is a big tabloid target.
Madonna was the bottom selling People cover of '08...
in ARCHIVE - Madonna
Posted
I think the Madonna cover didn't sell was not because people don't care about her but because there was nothing new in the article. It was just rehashed gossip. Their best selling covers are usually when they actually interview the person that's on the cover or have some exclusive information from them.
I'm a Madonna fan and I didn't buy the magazine with her on the cover. Obviously, I care about Madonna, but I'm not going to waste my money on boring gossip with no new information or a new interview.