Who is Paris Hilton?
Terri Shaivo! OMG!#@
No, the OP is proposing to amend the Constitution, so if it passes, the proposed amendment will, by definition, be Constitutional. QED.
If some feebs don’t have the willpower to ignore infotainment about Paris Hilton that’s their problem. I won’t support a law to make mental midgets pay attention to other things.
Can we just ban celebrity gossip posing as news, regardless of what bleached sack of hair is in question? Imagine being able to check the news and see…things that matter!
On another note I just googled Paris Hilton hoping to find out why, exactly, she was in jail in the first place, and saw a headline saying how devastated her fans were. She has fans? Fans of what? That’s like being a fan of…I don’t know, bellybutton lint.
Moving thread from IMHO to MPSIMS.
And if your amendment passes, this thread will “disappear”.
No, Lindsey Lohan is a safe substitute. Though, from what I hear, NSFW.
Anna Nicole? You’re serious?
Agreed. She was always gross IMO.
I’m not in favor of a ban (although it’s tempting) but we could enact a celebrity reporting tax. Based on the irritant quotient of the celebrity, the media would have to pay a tax to report on any celebrity. The less the person did to earn his/her celebrity status, the higher the tax. For example, Tom Cruise - irritating but an actual actor with talent, so the tax would only be $250 per article. For Paris, who has no talent and has done nothing to earn her celebrity status, the tax would be $250,000 per article.
How 'bout it?
Absolutely. Paris Hilton might be a whore for all I know, but she is infinitely better looking than Anna.
YMMV. When Anna was looking her best, she was a real woman with curves. When Paris is looking her best, she’s like Maris Crane: a coat rack that breathes.
Would it be overkill to say “different strokes,” here?
OneCentStamp: If JLo is indeed poking anybody, a videotape of it, complete with closeups of the relevant sex toys, would make a mint!
Sternvogel: New York has some interesting laws on the books. One in particular distinguishes between a “general law” passed in aid of all persons, all companies, all local governments, or groups definable by specific characteristics, and a specific law that identifies particular persons, companies, communities, etc. One application of this is that the State’s Home Rule Law entitles any local government to take advantage of a privilege granted one by a specific law. If a state law explicitly authorizes Peekskill to do something, say condemn land across the river from the city limits to build a bridge, then any municipality has the right to adopt a local law matching what the state law authorizes Peekskill to do.
In order to avoid passing specific laws empowering New York City by name, and hence allowing every other municipality in the state to do the same things, the State Legislature took to authorizing “cities with a population in excess of one million” to do things, sometimes very specific things. Hence the state officially authorizes Buffalo, if it ever passes the one-million mark in population, to regulate commercial shipping in the East River, requires it to dispose of its solid waste in specific ways involving Staten Island and incinerators in Queens, etc. 
I’m hoping someday Buffalo hits the million mark just to see what happens!