Thursday, June 24, 2010
Some of them are has-beens, one time "A" listers who have slipped off the radar, others are fringe celebrities, famous for something they may have done or been associated with. Others are wannabes, celebrities only because the media has made them that.
I just do not think that they deserve the attention that they get, or that even one more minute of the collective public's time, or television, or internet, or magazines, or whatever media you use should be given to them.
With this in mind, I have a solution. It's based on Survivor, with a twist.
Instead of voting each other off the island, the public gets to vote one of them off of the planet, every week, the last one standing, gets a second chance at fame and stardom, but the 1st time they become a public nuisance. they are relegated to an isolated island, with no Paparazzi to document their every move.
Here is my list for the first round.
Kate Gosselin. I think the public as a whole is fed up with her, don't feel bad for her, she helped create the situation she is in.
Lindsay Lohan, after all a good train wreck is hard to keep your eyes from.
Heidi and Spencer Montag. I mean why are they even celebrities?
Gordon Ramsay, Maybe he is a great chef, but I don't think he is as good as he thinks. And while Hell's Kitchen is entertaining, I can belittle and curse at people just as well as he can.
Sarah Palin. Just the right touch of attractive and crazy.
plus I think she has the skills to gut and skin another contestant if need be.
Any of Michael Jackson's brothers, or possibly his father. I don't think I need to elaborate on this.
Tiger Woods or Jesse James. Tiger, your professional life seems to be imploding as much as your personal life right now. Jesse, what were you thinking?
Eric Estrada.....enough said right there.
Joan Rivers only because she does not even look real anymore.
Jon Gosselin for 2 reasons 1) there would be some interesting drama between you and Kate, and 2) because you both deserve to be kicked off the planet for what you have put those kids through.
That's just the ones that come to mind right now, I am sure there are others.
Who would you want on the list?
Thursday, June 17, 2010
That being said, there are a couple of things I would never wear.
Exhibit a Crocs
Unless you are a baby or smaller child on the beach, or gardening, leave these off or at home.
Fanny packs should never be worn, by anyone, period, ever, seriously If you are a guy, get a wallet, or carry a backpack, women, get a nice purse. Wearing a fanny pack makes it seem to me that you just don't care how you are perceived, plus, when you have to dig through it to find anything, it takes forever. Just don't.
Pajama pants should only be worn if you are a) going to bed, b) are in bed c) just got out of bed, or d) are lounging around the house.
They are not for wear in public, quit being lazy and get dressed.
I have told the boys that I will never wear these items out in public. If I do they may pretend I am not with them. If I wear them in any combination, they have options
1. Ignore me and tell people they are not my kids
2. Kill me where I stand ( I consider this to be justifiable homicide, you know, for the public good)
3. Commit me to some kind of institution for the fashion lazy.
A couple of other notes.
skinny jeans and leggings/ spandex pants are a right not a privilege, if it is difficult to get them on, then don't please don't.
Boys, pull up your pants, the ass of the pants belongs on your ass, not by your knees.