home

Pitt and Jolie Homesteading in New Orleans

By Jeralyn, Section Media
Posted on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 05:23:43 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Say what you want about glitzy celebs, some of them put their money where their mouth is.

Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt have moved their family to New Orleans. Their kids will attend school there. Angelina has put out a request to participate in volunteer activities. Pitt is following through with plans announced a few years ago join forces with Global Green USA and build 20 environment-friendly homes.

Jolie is also hanging out at local spots and mingling. We need more like them. [hat tip Scribe.]

< Obama and Tancredo Form Exploratory Committees for President | You Go, Jane >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Pitt and Jolie Homesteading in New Orleans | 29 comments (29 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Brangelina in New Orleans (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by pax on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 09:59:42 PM EST
    Perhaps the paparazzi that follows them around can be convinced to put their cameras to good use and document the ongoing devastation in New Orleans.  Or at least to use an f stop that documents the destruction behind them in a picture, rather than blurs the background.

    Good o for them. (4.00 / 1) (#2)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 06:29:55 PM EST
    I wish them well.

    But the day the children are enrolled in a NO public school, and remain enrolled, I'll buy the coffee.

    Hmm (3.00 / 1) (#6)
    by scarshapedstar on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 06:48:33 PM EST
    I'd go to Ben Franklin over Jesuit any day.

    Parent
    Nowhere is perfectly safe (4.00 / 1) (#19)
    by jarober on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 10:15:42 PM EST
    On the other hand, that doesn't mean I should build a house on the rim of an active volcano and expect to get help from others when the lava flows.  

    Just as people shouldn't build on flood plains, they shouldn't build in most of New Orleans.

    Inner beauty is sexy (3.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Aaron on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 06:33:55 PM EST
    I'm heartened to see two of the beautiful people, top Hollywood stars, who are not afraid to get out there in the real world and get their hands dirty, take a stand for what's right, and do something about it.  I respect that and praised them.  I would like to see more people of means, people who are in the public eye especially, make these kind of commitments.  It's good for humanity and the evolution of our species.

    I always thought Angelina Jolie was pretty attractive, the whole bad girl thing has always appealed to me.  But I must say since she started adopting children from the Third World, and giving of herself, not to mention giving away huge chunk of her fortune, I must say she has become even sexier in my eyes.  That's the kind of woman I want to hook up with, I can understand what Brad Pitt sees in her.  Beautiful women, women of true beauty, are quite rare and precious, and real men should worship them wherever they find them, because they always make us better men.

    And to think, just a few years ago... (3.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Dadler on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 07:36:31 PM EST
    ...She was wearing vials of BillyBobBlood around her neck, making out with her brother at awards shows, tattooing her naughty bits, eating unicorn brains, but I digress.  And now, look at her.  I hope they bring all they can to Norlins.  There's many more useless things they could be doing with their time and money, so good for them.

    Not so much (2.33 / 3) (#1)
    by jarober on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 06:28:56 PM EST
    We actually need fewer people living in potential disaster zones - like coastland that has a history of being slammed by hurricanes, or land that is below sea level.  Or, to take California as an example, in canyons that are known to be prone to seasonal wildfires.

    Why should the rest of the country pay for the few who choose to live stupidly?  If Katrina is to have a lasting lesson, it should be that living in the danger zone is a bad idea.

    A better question (3.00 / 2) (#4)
    by scarshapedstar on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 06:45:38 PM EST
    Why can the dope-addled Dutch manage to live below sea level while we can't? For that matter, why do we judge the feasibility of an entire levee system based on shoddy construction by the Corps of Engineers?

    And why haven't we evacuated Los Angeles yet? Everyone knows the big one is coming.

    Unbelievable. After 9/11 (why do we continue to subsidize the world's biggest terror target, by the way?) we sent them a fire engine. And after Katrina, despite years of warnings that the levees were inadequate (perhaps you're ignorant, but a well-constructed levee would not have dissolved into mud the moment a wave topped it) and study after study showing that the government's response would be similarly underwhelming, not to mention that Katrina wouldn't even have topped the levees if anyone had given a sh*t about coastal erosion taking away all of Louisiana's natural storm buffers, everyone acts like it's the biggest surprise ever.

    But noooo, it would have made too much sense to actually undertake preventative measures. It's much better to stick our heads in the sand and then pay 100 times as much after the inevitable disaster strikes. I guess 15 years of warning from every expert who looked at the case just wasn't enough.

    Or maybe it's just that nobody gives a sh*t.

    Parent

    scar (4.00 / 1) (#7)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 07:07:42 PM EST
    Why can the dope-addled Dutch manage to live below sea level while we can't?

    Probably because they built the dike system before they were dope-addled.

    BTW - Who do you think should have been concerned about the dikes? A little old lady in Kansas or a guy driving by the dikes everyday??


    Parent

    Actually..... (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by kdog on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 08:50:48 PM EST
    the Dutch do less dope than we do.

    Sorry OT, had to say it.

    Parent

    kdog... and your source is?? ;-) (none / 0) (#16)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 10:04:55 PM EST


    Parent
    Here is one.... (none / 0) (#26)
    by kdog on Wed Jan 17, 2007 at 09:15:04 AM EST
    LINK

    Parent
    I don't know... (3.00 / 1) (#9)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 07:23:41 PM EST
    ...no hurricanes in Holland?

    Parent
    You... (3.00 / 1) (#11)
    by scarshapedstar on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 08:32:17 PM EST
    ...don't actually know what undermined the levees, do you.

    Parent
    scar... pullleaseeeeee (4.00 / 1) (#20)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 10:20:48 PM EST
    Rove!!!! The evil Rove did it!!!!!

    If you are really serious, do some study of earthen dams. That is what dikes are. Typically you will find a water side made of rock fill, with a back side of dirt, in an inverted V shape...

    Once the dike is topped, the earth starts to wash and the back support for the rocks is almost immediately washed away. When that happens you get a cave in effect from the front to the back and the water pours through.

    Typically the water level will fall as the break acts as a funnel, and reduces other damage to the dike.

    BTW - Do you know what the largest earthquake fault is in the US? Hint. It isn't in CA.

    Parent

    I suppose that can happen (none / 0) (#22)
    by scarshapedstar on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 11:23:20 PM EST
    But all indications are that it didn't.

    Parent
    The Northridge Quake? (1.00 / 1) (#15)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 10:04:37 PM EST
    Indian Ocean Tsunami? Global warming? Bush's re-election? Tunneling immigrants yearning to be free?

    Please.

    Parent

    Acyually some very bad North Sea storms. (3.00 / 1) (#17)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 10:05:59 PM EST


    Parent
    Impressed by your compassion (3.00 / 2) (#5)
    by Aaron on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 06:46:15 PM EST
    I suppose you live in a place where natural disasters do not occur, please tell me about this magical fantasy land where bad things don't happen, I'm ready to move right now.  :)

    I'll bet it's expensive, but no doubt the insurance rates are very low.

    I suppose it's rather dull as well, nothing like mountains or ocean to stimulate the mind and body.  I suppose that's your excuse for the utterly vapid superficiality of this comment.

    Parent

    Aaron (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 07:10:03 PM EST
    The constutution doesn't guarantee you a room with a view.

    Parent
    Doesn't guarantee you a WTC, either (1.00 / 1) (#12)
    by scarshapedstar on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 08:37:49 PM EST
    But nobody pointed out what a fool's errand it was, even though it's painfully obvious in hindsight. The bomber flying into the Empire State Building back in the 40s, and the 1993 bombing... hello, was the entire country looking the other way or what? My god, can you imagine how much better off we'd have been if we just tore that martyr-magnet down? I can't even fathom why anyone tried to build the world's tallest building in the first place.

    Parent
    scar (3.00 / 1) (#18)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 10:07:41 PM EST
    Huh?

    scar, that has to be the very best/worse defense of the terrorists who killed 3000 people I have ever seen.

    Can you say:

    Wasn't caused by nature??

    Parent

    Can you say (none / 0) (#23)
    by scarshapedstar on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 11:23:58 PM EST
    We could have built levees to withstand Katrina?

    Parent
    scar (none / 0) (#25)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jan 17, 2007 at 07:56:08 AM EST
    Can you say, it ain't my job to worry about New Orleans?

    Parent
    It's New Orleans, not Cocoa Beach (none / 0) (#29)
    by Dadler on Wed Jan 17, 2007 at 01:12:16 PM EST
    You can't be concerned, even a little, with the successful rebuilding and preservation of an American city that is one of the most culturally significant in the world?

    Jazz?  Hello?  

    But I guess it makes perfect sense, then, that you'd be so rah-rah and uncritical about a foolish, needless, failed war in a foreign country on the other side of the planet that was no threat to us at all.

    Go Saints.

    Parent

    You are correct, Dadler (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by aw on Wed Jan 17, 2007 at 02:13:13 PM EST
    Iran is clearly threatening the destruction an ally, Israel.

    link

    Parent
    The Dutch have to live below sea level (none / 0) (#21)
    by Pancho on Tue Jan 16, 2007 at 11:11:31 PM EST
    We don't.This is another reason that New Orleans should not be resettled by people who are not playing with their own money.

    I considered moving to New Orleans once, but chose not to, because I felt that the real estate was too risky, considering that the populating of New Orleans is an absolute folly of man v.nature in many ways. Read 'The Control of Nature' by John McPhee for an excellent account of the inevitable capture of the Mississippi by the Athcafalaya.

    eh??? (none / 0) (#28)
    by Dadler on Wed Jan 17, 2007 at 12:42:07 PM EST
    The Dutch who were born there have to live there, but the New Orleanians born there don't?

    Parent
    No, they don't. (none / 0) (#30)
    by Pancho on Wed Jan 17, 2007 at 01:33:45 PM EST
    Particularly not the ones that are living off of welfare.

    Parent
    Pitt and Jolie Homesteading in New Orleans | 29 comments (29 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment