Jeepers! Danica's taking a beating at DWTS rehersals

Man, what are they practicing for? Mosh pits? Slam dancing? That must be some full contact sh*t goin' on in that place. Check out the bruises on Danica McKellar's legs and the back brace she's wearing:

But even in a fairly unflattering outfit -- still cute as a button and able to tote them monster bags with a smile:

And of course, that excellent booty:

Funny how that works

Now that she's officially out, I guess it's okay to have Ellen Page on a magazine cover in something less boring than her usual Annie Hall™ styled outerwear:

I have a theory about Ed Morrissey

I think way back in the day, he took the USPS entrance exam and wasn't sharp enough to score a grade that would get him hired on. Thus he has gone on this relentless crusade excoriating a public service over a hundred years old that besides serving every citizen of this country, offers employment to military veterans, especially disabled ones.

I believe also that now that he is in control of Hot Air, one of his requirements for writers to come on board is that they have to produce a certain amount of USPS bashing articles per year, regardless of their accuracy.

Today's horseshit from Ed is over the USPS knocking down a digital mail service that was hoping to interservice with the Post Office. Setting aside the fact that I doubt Postmaster Donahoe made the exactly worded statement attributed to him, it's idiot Ed's conclusion that I'm speaking to here (my emphasis added):

Now, let’s be clear that Outbox may well have not worked out to be the savior of the USPS, too. The cost savings may well have been outstripped by the revenue losses from junk mailers, a possibility that Khanna overlooks a little in his piece. However, his main point is solid, and perhaps understated. The reason the USPS doesn’t work well for end users is because the USPS doesn’t consider us its primary customers. It’s oriented to delivery service for junk mail, and works for those firms ahead of us. Maybe those companies should be footing the bill for the chronic deficits run by the USPS, instead of the American citizens the Postmaster deprioritized in dealing with Outbox.

Yes Ed, let's be clear -- the so-called chronic deficits started in 2006, the year that the law was passed forcing the USPS to fully pre-fund its disability retirement 75 years into the future over a ten year period. A law no other business, public or private, has applied against it. The USPS runs an operational profit nearly every quarter, but that profit is wiped out by the pre-funding payment. The federal government has refused to return USPS overpayments to other retirement programs, an amount that would cover the pre-pay and allow the Postal Service to operate without the sword of Damocles hanging over its head.

And yes, the USPS does prioritize service to it's bulk mailers, because that's where the bulk of our revenue comes from. First class mail volume is down, and through aggressive marketing the Postal Service has been able to make up that loss by drawing in advertisers to take advantage of what every business knows -- direct mail marketing is the most cost effective way to reach every customer in a given market area. Period. Add to that our superior package delivery service, and we have a solid business plan (sorry MKH and Erika -- you know nothing) that when our pre-pay ends this fiscal year will allow the USPS to enjoy the profits that are being wiped out by this singularly applied law.

Haven't done one of these in a while, but here ya go Ed:

Daily Duffster

Hilary Duff attempts to pay for parking, but can't get her hands into those tight ass jeans she's rocking:

And trust me, I'm not complaining about how her clothes fit one little bit.

Guess that pesky lawsuit isn't getting in the way of her career

So I ran across this picture of model Hailey Clauson the other day:

And it took me a minute to remember why her name sounded familiar. About a year ago, I ran across a story about Clauson's parents suing the pants off some poor photographer (to the tune of $28 million, I think) over this picture:

Now it wasn't that photog Jason Lee Parry had taken an inelegant picture of then 15 year old Hailey, or that the parents were scandalized by the photoshoot. No, much like the case of the supposedly scandalous picture of Miley Cyrus taken by Annie Leibovitz (and look how she's turned out since then, eh?), the parents were there for the shoot and had no problems with other suggestively posed images of their underaged daughter:

The problem was that Parry had sold that one image to Urban Outfitters, who had put it on a t-shirt to sell to the tragically hip who shop there looking for those iconic image shirts to wear to Starbucks or whatever. I'm sure that if the image had made the cover of Vogue or Glamour or something, mommy and daddy wouldn't have had any complaints whatsoever. But a gauche t-shirt? It's lawsuit time, baby!

I'm only peripherally familiar with those contracts that are signed between models and photographers (don't ask), but I'm a little surprised that Parry didn't have control over his own work. But I imagine that he's taken care of that legal oversight since then. And I see that hasn't affected Hailey's career one bit as she's done work for Guess Jeans, Beach Bunny and other photogs since then:

And like so many young women these days, it astonishes me how dramatically young Hailey has filled out in just a few short years. For her shoot with Parry, the then 15 year old looked like she weighed about 50 pounds soaking wet:

But now, at 19, she looks like she could get work as Kate Upton's body double:

Good genetics, or hormones in the food or something. That' some fairly impressive transformation right there.

Daily Duffster

Found some pics of cutie Hilary Duff out and about looking a bit nipular (or is that just my imagination?) the other day:

Usually immaculately styled for everyday errands, some pap caught Hilary sans fards in a soiled t-shirt . . . and she's still rockin' the adorable:

---

And speaking of braless (we weren't but it's the segue I'm using anyway, so . . .), here's Ashley Tisdale on the set of something looking a bit see-thru whilst being coiffed for a scene:

Looks like Scarlett Johansson finally got nekkid

I made mention in a previous post about how I was mystified that actresses such as Johansson would audition for roles that require nudity when they flatly refuse to get naked on screen. Guess that's changed:

*click any image for uncensored version*

For her role in Under the Skin, it looks like Scarlett has decided to go full frontal in her performance. Pretty gutsy going from modest to laying it all out there for the audience, imho. I've teased about her before, so it's only fair I give her props for being this courageous:

Especially since she doesn't have the typical "model's" body:

Johansson is always on those "Top..." whatever lists because of how fans and the media have idealized her physique in their minds. I've always admitted I like her unconventional beauty, but have been frank in pointing out that her somewhat stocky body is at odds with the relentless fawning over her by magazines and bloggers. It's different to be sure, but if my girlfriend looked like this, I certainly wouldn't be complaining  :-)

Btw, check out my review of Under the Skin here.

So Winnie's still killin' it at DWTS rehersals

Danica McKellar shows up for rehersals at DWTS rocking the leggings and showing off some impressive white girl booty:

Cute as a button and able to tote humongous bags with ease:

And did I mention that impressive booty?

Nice :-)

Boy, get off the grid for a few days . . .

... I come back, turn on my computer, and there's Miley, topless as a . . .

jaybird?!

That ain't right. Well, anyways, she's in wig sitting on a horse topless as all get out:

*click for uncensored*

Chick's not even trying to be subtle about it anymore. I'm still waiting for ole' pervy to release what he's got, because you know Miley got her freak on when she was working with Terry Richardson. That stuff should be interesting.