Sources claim that he and long term girlfriend Muireann McDonnell have wed in a secret location after dating since 2006. The pair met at a Christmas party in Dublin and have been inseparable since, Colin is said to be smitten with his love interest even referring to her as "the one" however recent wedding claims are still unconfirmed by either Colin or Muireann.

Interestingly, enough the sexy star was said to be hiding his hand from paparazzi. I then have to ask the question why wear the ring if you have something to hide? The problem I face is am I too willing to find fault in this recent accusation?... do I simply want it to be untrue?... am I joining the chorus of woman across the UK who are screaming noooo don't let it be true?

Should we simply accept the possibility that he and long time girlfriend have made this commitment regardless of whether they have actually tied the knot?

I don't know about you but I think I'll wait for concrete evidence before I deny myself the hope of becoming the next Mrs Colin Farrell!

 

The government speaking on responsibilities is a contradiction in term to the extreme when one considers the many times and ways from the Presidency on down to the most basic of local government workers lie, cheat, steal, pass-the-buck, operates on assumptions rather than factual proof, side-steps issues, accepts pay-offs and bribes in the form of donations and gifts just to name a few.

You want to talk responsibility Senator Obama? Let's talk about the responsibility the government is suppose to have regarding the people of the United States of America.

The government is responsible for the protection of the people of the U.S.A. yet immediately following the incident on 9/11 instead of closing our boarders, inspecting all non-Americans thoroughly before allowing anyone in, our boarders remained wide open, no immigrants were checked unless they were on some list somewhere, and in many cases our boarders didn't have even that! The American people were inconvenienced in air ports, bus stations and train stations while illegal immigrants crossed our boarders through Mexico and Canada freely and at will. Not one government official much less one of us citizens can honestly say we are sure that enemies have not crossed those boarders into our country.

The government is suppose to be responsible for the safety of the medicines and foods we American's consume yet the drugs we take often times are more harmful than they are good for us because you all cater to drug companies instead of protecting us and now we Americans are continually poisoned by foods that are suppose to be checked before entering the markets because you cut the funding.

Just in these two alone Senator Obama the government has done its people a grave disservice! The government would rather stick its nose into areas it doesn't belong such as how a man acts or a family behaves, Gays and Lesbians VS Christians, what is taught in public schools, etc. all things that should be decided on the state and local authority levels and churches, not by the federal government level. The federal government should decide on what the maximum amount normal citizens can afford to pay for insurances, interest rates, rental housing costs, medicines, medical procedures, etc. and set limitations based on the average income of the average worker, regulate the cost of medical equipment being sold to the medical fields and make sure they are all in good working order and up to date equipment, keep the medicines and foods under control knowing at all times or at the very least being able to track it back through its many processes where it all comes from, make the medical for the poor so that they can get treatments close to home rather than having to travel more than ten miles to a medical facility regardless of where people live.

The government has spent more money on out-sourcing and oil companies than it has concerned itself with the affects it has had in our own country. Whether people believe in the Global Warming issue or not the fact remains if we had started doing something about the energy problems in the late nineteen seventies or early nineteen eighties when the issue first came up instead of putting it off to the last minute, we wouldn't be where we are today! We would already have alternative energy sufficient enough to not have to rely on anyone else. We wouldn't have thousands of people without jobs, we wouldn't have thousands of people loosing their homes and we would still be a strong state others could look up to with respect.

Senator Obama, how can anyone take you seriously? On the one hand you say you are a Christian with Faith Based values and beliefs yet you approve of Abortions, Christian's don't; you approve of Stem Cell research, Christian's don't; you approve of same sex marriages, Christian's don't; you disapprove of the Holy Bible being taught in the public schools, Christian's want this; you are extremely hard on your own kind considering you condemn your own men for not taking up their responsibility as fathers when the white men are just as bad, and yet responsibility is a shared problem and not just a man's problem; Christian's and churches are being discriminated against, yet we hear nothing from you on those issues; We want the boarders secured, you say it's not going to happen; We say we want the illegal immigrants sent home, you say that's definitely not going to happen, the majority of the people including those on your side asked you to please vote no on the phone issue and you even disregarded those please so what changes are you promoting?

You obviously don't care what the people truly want or you would do what the majority of the people want you to do. So are we to assume, as the government assumes that we will accept it, that you are in reality no different than any of the others and that you like the others will do as you darn well please, regardless of the wishes of the majority of the people of the United States of America?

I can't say the people of America didn't ask for it, after all the people took for granted the government was going to do and act according to the Constitution and the will of its people. People have become so greedy and self absorbed in their own personal affairs, obtaining money any way they can, suing anyone for every little thing even if it wasn't their fault, dating and marrying for money not security and love, forsaking family the fundamentals of life, practicing all forms of disobedience and relishing in their new found freedom. Some freedom people!

The government has become real good at teaching the people how to lie, be deceitful, blame others for things they were and are at fault for themselves, non-forgiveness of mistakes, nosiness into others business where they don't belong, passing-the-buck to someone else to take care of and cover-up their crap like a dog they've become. This is not intelligent human behavior and I'm actually insulting the dogs because this kind of behavior is even worse than domestic animals.

I don't know about the majority of Americans but I for one have a mind of my own, I make mistakes like everyone else but that's all part of being human. I do have a consciousness and feelings as well as compassion, understanding, love, forgiveness and a whole lot of faith in my Father God. Unfortunately many people's fears are greatly misplaced. I don't fear the government, I don't fear mankind, I don't fear the world, what I do fear is disobeying my Father God. We are our own worse enemy.

What about you Senator McCain? How about you Bob Barr? Where do the two of you stand? Why don't we ever hear anything about Bob Barr? There are three candidates running for President yet we only ever usually hear about two of them.

Personally out of the three of them Bob Barr makes the most sense. I had to go to his web site to find out anything about him, and what I learned was nice and refreshing. It's a shame the news networks won't put him on. It's even more of a shame the Christian world doesn't back him. But then too the greedy, selfish and money hungry wouldn't want to hear Bob Barr; they wouldn't like what he'd have to say. If he won it would mean people would have to start being responsible again. It would mean the lower end of the government would have to work and earn their generous income once more. It would mean people would have to learn to make decisions for themselves all over again. It would also mean more jobs. And yes it like anything else has some draw backs but those are nothing in comparison to the dangerous grounds we are headed for right now.

Why, when Friday, June 6, the economy was the top story with the Dow down for the week nearly 428 points, erasing Thursday's surge, and figures showing the number of jobless Americans on the rise being released, the highest indicators in 2 decades. Yet, the subject of the economy is softened, as we're no longer hearing rumblings of recession being forecast. The Iraq War is not as hot a topic since as unpopular as this present conflict is, the "Surge" appears to be reducing casualties and suppressing Al Qaeda and militant aggression.

The cost of petrol affects every Tom, Dick and Harry in this country. And, it affects them where it hurts, in their pocketbooks. It takes dead aim at the average American's lifestyle, and that hurts because most of us have gotten used to being comfortable. And, when John Q. Public comes nose to nose with the pain of an ever-decreasing number of dollar bills in his pocket, he starts to sound off about it to anybody that will lend an ear.

Tycoons, politicians and influentially powerful people have perfected the use of public fear in directing public response to their benefit. What has me perplexed and admittedly a little fearful is why Congress and lawmakers in general are throwing their arms up in futility. People depend on these leaders to deliver them that aforementioned lifestyle that they have long since come to believe is owed them, and they want to maintain it as their legacy. Whatever happened to the Public Service Commission? Aren't there any laws to govern high gas prices?

Where are the price ceilings when you need them?

Meanwhile, is it just me, or were the Congressional hot seat hearings a week ago for the oil barons regarding record profits, just a "make it look good" fandango? Did you buy into the excuse that it was speculators in the stock market causing crude to escalate. Hello-o-o-o-h!!! Would it ever be possible for oil barons to pay speculators to jack up the market price? Do you think petroleum company executives would ever "song and dance" U.S. Senators? If speculators are the problem would it break down the entire free trade world to put limits on public trade of crude oil?

However, the stock market doesn't dictate gasoline price hikes. That is mostly dependent on the refining of crude oil. And basically, big oil has only been operating 3 refineries in this country for the past decade. If you only refine a limited amount of distillates, it doesn't matter how much crude you purchase, and the cost of crude is lessened in importance.

Basic economics will teach you, if you limit the supply side, the demand side will increase in nearly direct proportion. If our legislators examine oil company profits the past 2 years, refinery control will stick out like a gigantic red flag. Perhaps in the short run, maybe some legal controls could be created to influence the executives to use some of those exorbitant profits to build new refineries.

Until new energy sources reach the usable stage, lawmakers should enact heavier penalties to prevent companies from buying up patents and processes from new developers to prevent more efficient uses of petrol or alternative propellants. It is humorous to me when automakers decry cars that are efficient and obtain 32 mpg. When petrol has increased 70 percent over 2 years, those auto giants should be shouting about efficiency machines achieving a minimum 42 mpg.

It is just the idea of total futility that irritates our average citizenry most of all. Where is hope in this equation? Somewhere between the death of John Kennedy and, “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country,” and the President George W. Bush era our powerful leaders have in some way lost perspective. This country used to have the reputation, “if there's a will, those "Yanks" will find a way! They didn't throw up their collective arms and say, “What can we do, gasoline is likely to go to $10.00/gallon.” They certainly didn't stand idly by and let J.P. Morgan dictate that is what will happen within 2 years.

Well, one answer is staring each and every one of us in the face. On the internet over the past year, has been the suggestion of one former Exxon/Mobil executive. He suggests that if each of us boycotted Exxon/Mobil gas pumps, the American public could take the issue of high-priced gasoline into their own capable hands.

Exxon/Mobil purchases much of their crude oil from the Mideast, and because of the company's market control clout are as a huge conglomerate able to maintain the largest degree of pump price setting. His theory is simply for each of us to stop using Exxon/Mobil products and to influence 10 of our friends to do the same. He maintained that is a chain was started it would take approximately 3 months for us to influence 320,000,000 people to stop buying from Exxon/Mobil.

His supposition from that premise was that gasoline would come down in price to level at about $1.60/gallon.

It is obvious to me that the average citizen has not boycotted Exxon/Mobil. That company had record profits again this past year. So, my question is, if we as individuals are not willing to try simple suggestions to change our dilemmas, how can we criticize the perpetrators.

Perhaps I can site a similar analogy. My father was a farmer. Farmers are an independent lot. And, when a union to help farmers unite to help control grain prices was formed, it had limited membership. Trade unions were formulated in this country to help protect tyrannies from being committed against independent people. Unions protected people from price setting and improper wages for several years until they were corrupted from within. The farm union was the NFO, National Farm Organization. It was intended that the members by sticking together and selling their commodities for a unified price, should influence the market grain prices in their favor.

The major flaw with the NFO theory, was uniting enough farmers to stick together, thereby affecting the price. My father always marveled that so very few could overlook their individual philosophy differences and fears, to believe in the cause of the majority, which had a chance to bring about their desired change.

In fairness, people in our current society are so busy getting and maintaining lives, they have little time left for public forums. During the Kennedy years, and the early years of the NFO, most people had more time for involvement in issues to try and bring about political change. Overall, people in the 60's and 70's had more disposable income to mount objections to issues of national importance.

It is my suggestion that if you are feeling wallet pain from the current high cost of petrol, you try boycotting Exxon/Mobil. At the very least, write your Representatives and Senators, and do your part to bring about change and lower energy costs. Better yet, perhaps you have your own idea. Like the Pepsi commercial says, “Wake up people,” the price of gasoline is the top gossip, and I believe you'll agree, each and every one of us needs to do our part to end this dilemma.

Two Types of Tattoo Removal

There are two basic options when it comes to tattoo removal. One option is to actually get the image completely removed using laser technology. And the other is to get the tattoo lightened and then covered up with new ink. Celebrities, like anyone else, may choose either one of these options to get rid of a tattoo that they aren't interested in keeping.

Biggest Cause for Celebrity Tattoo Removal

One of the biggest reasons that someone goes in to see a tattoo removal specialist is because they have the name of a lover inked on their bodies. Matching tattoos and tattoos inspired by a romantic partner are other big causes of tattoo regret. Relationships often just don't last as long as the ink does and people don't want those ugly reminders of failed partnerships lingering on their bodies. This is even truer for celebrities than for the average person since celebrity relationships are even more intense and quicker to fade than the common relationship. As a result, break-ups are the biggest cause of celebrity tattoo removal.

Celebrities that Have Gotten Tattoo Removal

There are too many tattoo removal celebrities to count. Here are a few of the ones that really stand out over time:

• Denise Richards

  When she was married to Charlie Sheen, Richards was inspired by the fact that he loved her enough to get her name tattooed on him. She decided to return the favor but when the relationship recently fizzled out, she opted to get the tattoo covered up with the image of a fairy.
  

• Charlie Sheen

  Richards wasn't the only half of that couple to remove tattoos. Sheen decided that his had to go as well. Sort of. His new fiancée wanted Richards' name off his body and Sheen decided to comply with the request.
  

• Angelina Jolie and Billy Bob Thornton

  Here's another couple that got each other's names tattooed and then got them removed. Hers were covered up with the birthplace names of her kids. His was covered up by an angel.
  

• Britney Spears

  Britney recently made a comeback due in no small part to a successful appearance on the television show How I Met Your Mother. She played the role of a receptionist at a tattoo removal office which is kind of ironic since she just get a tattoo removed herself. The ink was Hebrew lettering on the back of her neck and you'll notice that it's not there anymore.
  

• Tommy Lee

  This is one of the most well-known cases of celebrity tattoo removal because the tattoo was a swastika that Lee had on his body. It's been gone since the early 1990's when he decided the ink wasn't good for his image.
  

• Johnny Depp

  Depp fans appreciate the humor of his tattoo removal which took place after his split with Winona Ryder. Taking off the simple “na” from the design created an entirely new slogan that reads “Wino Forever”.
  

• Kathy Griffin

  She had a wedding band tattooed on her finger but the marriage didn't last so the ring had to be tossed out. Laser tattoo removal did the trick.
  

• Tony Danza

  Did you know that Danza used to have a Keep On Truckin' tattoo? It's been gone since the early "90s when tattoo removal first started becoming readily available.

Celebrities Who Might Want Tattoo Removal in the Future

As stated, the biggest reason that someone might get tattoo removal is because of a break-up so there are a lot of Hollywood stars out there who should keep the name of a good tattoo removal doctor handy just in case they end up in the midst of a break-up. Here are some of those stars:

• Carmen Electra

  She recently got a tattoo representing the KORN guitarist that she"s currently making music with. Since her last two marriages ended in divorce, there's a good chance the ink's going to be around longer than the guitarist will.
  

• Eva Longoria

  She's got a number nine tattooed on the back of her neck in honor of her husband's jersey number. Even if the relationship stands the taste of time, there's a good chance that she's going to realize one day that she looks like a gang member because of the tattoo.
  

• Gwyneth Paltrow

  She just decided to get a tattoo of a C in honor of her lover Chris Martin.
  

• Pink

  She's got “Tru Luv” tattooed on the inside of her wrists but since she's already split from the guy who wears the match, she might want to think about removal

The Popularity of Celebrity Tattoo Removal

Celebrity tattoos and celebrity tattoo removal are both on the rise. As a result, more and more people are interested in which stars have gotten them and which have gotten them removed. This has created a new niche market in the media for anyone who is interested in reporting on these trends.

Lately I am hear a lot regarding Britney Spears which makes it look like she or her family is masterminding all the publicity. However when I see an anxious dad asking the media to move aside so he can get to see his daughter at a clinic, I am amazed to see how the paparazzi are so keen on covering the matter in any way or form. One would think that there is an official visit coming to the hospital or that there is mini offensive against the building. It all turns me off. Again I have to say I watched this only to try and fathom why the media is so encouraged to cover these sad events especially when one can clearly see she ought to have some privacy to herself. There is no sense at barraging her family for information if she is seeking treatment; it is personal. If she has sold herself to her boyfriend that is her business be it sad to say. He says he is the only one really concerned. I would let the courts decide who should look after the celebrity. One has to be forceful with nosy journalists bent on finding the latest gossip. Every now and then this performer swings from one mood to another, do I need to know that or how she shaved her head to make a statement?

Still gossip columns will thrive for people who want to know how people are suffering when they should do so privately.

The whole purpose of gossip is to tingle the ears of the listener. A person who is good at gossiping usually strings out the punch line on a long string so as to keep the listener spellbound. Gossip is detrimental, dangerous, and is also designed to color a person's opinion of a particular person or a group of people. It's detailed and graphic, filled with "I believe," or "As far as I know..." Actually the gossiper knows very little of the situation, but is carrying the tale secondhand, or even third or fourth hand. Often conjectures are added to the tale to flavor it more pungently.

It is said that most women like to gossip, however, it is not uncommon to know about a man or two who keeps the gossip lines buzzing. Usually, they have nothing else to do, but look, listen, and report to whoever will listen. One would think in this rapid paced society nobody would have time for gossip. Quite the contrary, gossip makes for news for people who have plenty of time on their hands. Boredom is alleviated often by gossiping. It makes for conversation pieces. Often adlibbing, a gossiper does better than a stand up comedian in holding one's attention.

People who are gossipers are so known. We might say they twist the truth, or get the truth confused, or just plain lie. Gossipers carry merchandise just like stores, however their merchandise is defective and unreliable. We, in our minds, label these fallacious persons as people who cannot be trusted. We don't entrust our secrets to them--ever!

Gossip can sever friendships, and often does. Gossip profiles people without giving them a chance to prove who they really are. It has the potential to cause relationship loss, job loss, marriage loss, loss of trust, and even loss of life. It's cruel, cold, demeaning, and potentially explosive. It tends to result in gross misunderstandings, confusion, and violence. Unless it is met head on, gossip can fragment and destroy those in its wake.

A pastor once wanted to end gossiping among his members. He asked them to sign cards pledging to quit malicious gossip. Instead, he encouraged them to "gossip" about good things. Since they were going to talk, he felt their energies should be harnessed and turned into a good purpose. The woman in the congregation who was the most notorious known gossiper signed the pledge card.

To everyone's amazement, she re-channeled her gossip by saying only good things about people. She sought for every opportunity to encourage the youth and teenagers of the church by praising them and telling others to cheer them on. Gradually, everyone in the church saw the change and acknowledged her as being the most encouraging member of the church.

Those who are prone to gossip might be helped by the following questions:

1. Is the information I am spreading true?
2. Can this news help someone be a better person, or am I using this information to tear down another person's reputation?
3. Would I be willing to share this information with the person/persons I am talking about?

Both those who share gossip, and those who listen might consider not only the sources, but ask the question, "Would I like to be the subject of what is being said?" The last question to ask is "Is this information good enough to be published as a biography, or is it trash can worthy?" Hopefully, if we can take gossip to this level, our children and grandchildren will make wide detours around the practice.

First go to any search engine, and find an online dictionary for your target language. For instance, if you want to learn French, find an online French-English English-French dictionary. You can find a good one at Wordreference.com . In fact, that same web site will provide you with Spanish-English English-Spanish, Italian-English English-Italian, and several others. Just select which dictionary you want to use, and you're all set. If you want, look up a few basic words like I, you, he, she, man, woman, etc. Keep this site open in your browser window.

Next, open a new browser window or tab, and use your search engine to find newspapers in the country where the population speaks your target language. For example, enter the words "France" and "newspaper." You will get back a list of web sites that have links to online newspapers in France. Go through the list and see which ones most resemble a gossip tabloid. Keep this window open. Why use a gossip rag? Well, they all run similar stories, and they use simple language. What better for a beginner?

Now, open a third window or tab, and go to any English language tabloid (The Sun at TheSun.co.uk is excellent) and read up on Paris Hilton, Britney Spears, Victoria Beckham, or any other celebrity. Once you know the latest gossip, go back to your target language tabloid. You'll see many of the same stories. Since you already know what outrageous thing Paris had done lately, you can figure out what the words mean in your target language. For any words that give you trouble, you'll have your online dictionary handy to consult.

As long as Paris, Britney, and all the other “celebrities” keep up their antics, you'll have a supply of stories and new vocabulary. After you master the gossip rags, you can move on to mainstream newspapers. If you stay with the International News section, you'll find stories that appear in all the world's newspapers, and you'll already know what they cover. Honestly, politicians and world leaders provide much the same fodder for news as Paris and Britney do. Just keep applying the same process.

Just think, now you can read trashy gossip tabloids for educational purposes!

Lindsay Lohan has new movie debuting this Friday called "I Know Who Killed Me". It looks like a really good thriller movie but she won't be able to promote this film due to her recent problems. The title of the film actually fits the young actress current life for it appears Lindsay Lohan is killing her own career along with herself if she keeps going at the fast pace she's taking her life in right now.

It's truly sad when talent and beauty gets wasted. Lindsay Lohan has done over 16 movies since 1998 yet her chaotic personal life is more known than her films. Being barely 21 years old and addicted to alcohol and cocaine is not where any young woman should be. Her "Tonight Show" appearance had to be canceled due to this second DUI and drug possession charge.

Will Lohan ever get her life and career back on track?

Now every newspaper reports his arrest today and even blogs on celebrity pictures did not spare him, condemning his shameful behavior. Where has all the human grace gone? All those women rights activists-what is going to be your plan of protest?

Above all, Shilpa Shetty, why don't you just stay from all these public functions?

Damnimcute.com should read "Damn, I"m Cute' is an appropriately named blog on news of celebrities. Really, that Kelly Clarkson is definitely cute!

This is the second time I am encountering Hillary Duff in the cyberspace after I wrote a blog post on her for a web promotion company. This blog damnimcute features a news about a death threat to Hillary Duff outside a TV studio where was promoting her latest album in CD format.

I was captivated by the beautiful pictures of Katharine McPhee and Hayden Panettiere. My God, aren't they stunning!

A visitor to this blog of beauties can have his heart fill out with great looking beauties' pictures and news about his dream girls. He can also chat with pretty girls.