No Such Nonsense

A little of this, that and... what was I talking about again? It's TV, sports, pop culture and politics - all the stuff that really matters in life.

Monday, April 28, 2008


Have you seen the photos? No, not the obviously tarty ones of young Miley Cyrus flashing her green bra at the camera. Rather, the ones of the God-fearing fifteen-year-old posing for Vanity Fair. She went topless for Annie Liebovitz and is now saying the photos are inappropriate and embarrassing.

In a throwdown between media titans, Disney has come out in support of their Hannah Montana, saying VF went too far. Vanity Fair, for their part, explain that Miley's parents and minders were on set all day, and even saw the digital photo that very day.

What's most disturbing about the shot isn't the early sexualization of a young girl - the accompanying shots of Miley leaning against her dad are more creepily sexualized than the topless one. It's how young and innocent she looks. And how some kinds of people are going to like that picture all the more for the very fact that she looks so young. This isn't Britney in her school-girl uniform, but it's the same twisted fantasy.

And you can't help but wonder about the parents who said that, yes, their daughter could take her top off for Vanity Fair. Especially given that Oscar-night interview with Barbara Walters, in which young Miley exclaimed that she would never, even wind up like Britney or Lindsay.

If only.

Because when you want fame this badly, it is only a matter of time. And when she falls, people will look at the media and the industry and the party scene and blame them once again. But if someone asked your 15-year-old to take off her top for a photograph, what would you say?

The Obama-Clinton Divide

I've had some interesting conversations lately about the democratic race for the presidential nomination. (Why we Canadians remain so fascinated by the political process in the US is a story for another day. But suffice to say, if Stephen Harper was your leader, you'd be looking elsewhere for your political intrigue fix too)The consensus seems to be that:

1) It's dragging on way too long, and that the only person truly benefiting is McCain, because,
2) Obama stands to get only more bruised and bloodied on the way to nomination, leaving the party in a very bad position, but
3) Hillary really has no choice but to stay. Why?
4) If she stays in the race and Obama stumbles badly (always a possibility with young, new-to-the-scene candidates), she's the nominee. If she drops out before he stumbles, there's a good chance the party chooses someone else as the nominee (Al Gore, anyone?). She has no incentive to leave, and just enough money and sense of entitlement to stay.

So, it's nasty. And it will get nastier. And for Obama, who has eshewed the old Clinton-style dirty fighting, it'll get harder and harder to resist getting his hands dirty. All good for Mr. McCain.

And on the voting front, here's a chart I found fascinating. Basically, it gives the numbers behind the story we've heard before - blacks and the affluent vote for Obama. Women and the working class vote for Hillary. That's the thing. I can't for the life of me figure out what the working class see in Mrs. Clinton that they don't see in Obama. Does she feel their pain? I don't get why she connects and Obama doesn't.

For me, I still think we'll see a black male president before we see a female one. Whether it's Obama remains to be seen.

Tuesday, April 01, 2008

Bits and Bobs

It's been too long. Again. Sorry. Somehow my job keeps getting in the way of plentiful blogging. Excuses, excuses. Anyway, here's some of what's been going on:

Jose Canseco is Vindicated.
The new book is out from the guy who helped blow the lid off steroids in baseball. In Juiced, he pointed fingers and named names, all while continuing to be an apologist for those who used during the steroid era. Derided at the time, the book has gained a whole heck of lot of credibility since the Mitchell Report. Hence the name of the new book. Not much new inside though - except this: Canseco really, really hates Alex Rodriguez. Because, he says, the young A-Rod kept hitting on Canseco's wife. Gotta love it. Oh, and for those of you waiting for the day that that dirty Barry Bonds record would be obliterated by someone younger and cleaner? Well, A-Rod will likely break that record, but Canseco says he's totally juiced too. Ah, baseball.

Will the West boycott the Olympics?
Never gonna happen, my friend. Because, as the 1980 and 1984 Olympics proved, boycotts only hurt the athletes. And sometimes boycotts lead to Canadian winning medals in swimming because there are no East Germans in the mix, but that's beside the point. We may see a boycott of the opening ceremonies, though - which seems like a pretty sound move to me. Out of all this, in the end, I must give props to the Tibetan protesters. They've used China's moment in the Olympic sun to bring attention to their plight in a startlingly effective way.

What happened to Priscilla Presley's face?
Watched Dancing With the Stars last night. It may as well have been an infomercial on the scary side of plastic surgery. Steve Guttenberg loved like this was the greatest time of his life, though. How cute is that. Me, I'm cheering for Jason Taylor. I love when the football player foxtrot.

That's all for now.