Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt gave $8 mil to charity

**buttmunch** · March 21st, 2008, 07:15 PM

So they aren't necessarily blowing thier own horns, which will be a blow to many.

**sparkly** · March 21st, 2008, 07:26 PM

I doubt they released this info themselves. They're too busy makin' babies.

**celeb_2006** · March 21st, 2008, 07:31 PM

Originally Posted by viggofan

I am glad that people are benefiting from their generosity. I don't know why they feel the need to announce everytime they give to anything however glad for the people that receive from their donations.

What's the good of celebs to give out their money without the world knowing about it? They get so much scorn and hatred might as well trump their horn about it right?

**Novice** · March 21st, 2008, 07:32 PM

Originally Posted by buttmunch

So they aren't necessarily blowing thier own horns, which will be a blow to many.

LOL^^^

A lot of celebs do give, and I'm sure that many don't as well.
I know that Drew Barrymore gave $1m recently to a program in Africa and gives time too.
Stephen Spielburg give millions and Denziel Washington gave $1.5m to a hospital.
A lot of celebrities don't "announce" the donations, however, you can find them if you look.

N.B. this is a Bradulina-Neutral post.... just a comment....

**buttmunch** · March 21st, 2008, 07:35 PM

yeah, I'm pretty neutral as well. I remember when Sandra Bullock gave one million to the Katrina fund and everyone went on about how great that was (and she did release that info) but then, she's been playing that 'girl next door' card for years. I just don't think people like a woman who likes to fuck and doesn't care who knows it. It's just so undainty and unladylike!

**viggofan** · March 21st, 2008, 07:36 PM

Originally Posted by celeb_2006

What's the good of celebs to give out their money without the world knowing about it? They get so much scorn and hatred might as well trump their horn about it right?

Up to a certain extent it is nice to be recognized for doing a good thing. but it is also pompous at times also to hold press conferences and/ or announce in someway every time you give to something. jmo.

**Novice** · March 21st, 2008, 07:43 PM

Originally Posted by Jane Doe

Foundation contributions are not confidential and can be made public.

Yeah, the smoking Gun has a load from 1998....

Originally Posted by buttmunch

yeah, I'm pretty neutral as well. I remember when Sandra Bullock gave one million to the Katrina fund and everyone went on about how great that was (and she did release that info) but then, she's been playing that 'girl next door' card for years. I just don't think people like a woman who likes to fuck and doesn't care who knows it. It's just so undainty and unladylike!

didn't she do the same for a 9/11 fund? I didn't realise that she had so much money!

I found another one too.... I liked this one!

Jennifer Lopez

has stunned friends by asking them to donate money to charity instead of giving her birthday presents.
For her recent 35th birthday, the sexy star - renowned

for her lavish lifestyle - asked well-wishers to give cash to the Children's Hospital of Los Angeles.

**buttmunch** · March 21st, 2008, 07:45 PM

Does the Cos back that hospital?

**Novice** · March 21st, 2008, 07:50 PM

Is that rhetorical or do you really want me to find out?.....

dunno but they use a professional fund raiser that only gives them just over half to the charity...

**buttmunch** · March 21st, 2008, 08:09 PM

No, not rhetorical...go find out...immediately! I command you...

**Novice** · March 21st, 2008, 08:10 PM

b*gger! I'll pm you tomorrow with it (actually I doubt it....) time for bobos!
Happy Easter!

**cheetopia** · March 21st, 2008, 08:39 PM

Good for them! About time some positive gossip came out about someone..even if it is them.

Rosamund · March 21st, 2008, 11:10 PM

Originally Posted by pacific breeze

I sincerely doubt they are the most generous people on the planet, but how many other celebs give $8 in one year to charity, apart from Oprah? Yeah, and she gets slammed for it, too. I'll never understand why it's so very terrible to do a good thing.

It's not terrible, and it's great that they give so much. However, I find it difficult to be impressed by their goodness. I suppose it's because I doubt that their motivations for donating are entirely selfless.

**Icepik** · March 22nd, 2008, 12:17 AM

Originally Posted by Rosamund

It's not terrible, and it's great that they give so much. However, I find it difficult to be impressed by their goodness. I suppose it's because I doubt that their motivations for donating are entirely selfless.

Does it matter if their motives aren't entirely selfless when it's obvioulsy helping those that need the help? Really, when you look at the big picture, who cares WHY they donate... just as long as they DO donate

**pacific breeze** · March 22nd, 2008, 01:55 AM

Originally Posted by viggofan

Up to a certain extent it is nice to be recognized for doing a good thing. but it is also pompous at times also to hold press conferences and/ or announce in someway every time you give to something. jmo.

But that isn't what happened in this case, is it? Again, rich people routinely endow universities and hospitals and medical centres and insist that their names be on the buildings. Those names are there for a whole lot longer than a press conference. Where is the outrage over that?