It's tough being a single mom

Just ask Megan Fox. Oh wait, she isn't single, she's married. No matter, in a recent interview, the [airquote]talented[/airquote] actress spoke out about how she agonizes over splitting time between her career and motherhood:

The main thing it does is it affects how much I’m willing to work. I’ve never been an extraordinarily ambitious girl or career-oriented, but especially once I got pregnant with my first son and now [having] my second, it’s so hard to be a working mom especially when your heart is not in your work, when your heart is with your family. I have to make one movie a year because I have to invest in their future and I have to be able to pay their way through college and be able to provide for them. I’m looking for movies that will shoot in Los Angeles, for projects where I’m part of an ensemble so I can shoot in and out in 10-20 days. It’s all about trying to spend as little time away from my kids as possible.

Wow

I know exactly how she feels. Because as a single father, I've had to work six days a week, 10 hours a day, 50 weeks a year for 25 years to provide for my son, invest in his future, etc. Of course, I'm only a civil servant. Ms. Fox is an actress with a net worth over $5 million and makes more for her 10-20 days work than I'll make in a lifetime (depending on whether she's willing to wash someone's Ferrari).

F*cking hell! First Hillary complaining about how "broke" she is/was, and how she's struggled with money, and now this chick.

*groan*

So here's a few pics of Megan paying for her kid's college fund on the set of the woefully disappointing Jennifer's Body:

Did I mention that Kate's in a bikini?

Hudson, that is:

I have always loved Kate Hudson's look, from the crooked teeth to her modest chest to that world class white girl booty:

And after having a baby three years ago, she seems to have regained her delightful physique:

Best thing about having a body like Kate's is that you can rock the living hell out of a dress like this:

And because I'm all about the science, here's a couple of comparison images of that wonderful booty from her pre-baby years:

Aww, you know I had to post these . . .

When I saw these pictures of delicate flower, camera shy Kim Kardashian in totally not staged at all, hi-res see through wet t-shirt and look at my booty [airquote]candid[/airquote] paparazzi pics . . . well, what's a guy to do but share them with his one or two loyal readers:

Seriously . . . that ass! Are you kidding me?! How do I even comment on that?!

Kate Walsh in a bikini -- part 2

Okay, let's try this again:

A little more forgiving lighting, a pair of sunglasses . . . and 46 year old Kate Walsh ain't lookin' too bad in a string bikini:

Heh

Here's something we don't see enough of

Actress Kate Walsh spilling out of her bikini at the beach yesterday:

Walsh is an ardent environmentalist and Obama supporter, but I won't hold that second bit against her. Pretty bangin' bod for a 46 year old:

*yawns* Jimmie Johnson won at Michigan yesterday

Kevin Harvick won the pole setting a track record in speed and had the best car all day long. But that isn't enough for the auto racing gods who have decreed that Johnson must win the title every year that he is able to drag his ass into a car.

If you're counting at home, Johnson has won three of the last four races and though he went without a win for the first half of the year, his team never looked out of it. Now he's on a role and excepting some serious bad luck will cruise to yet another Sprint Cup title.

*sigh*

Look, I'll state it upfront in case you don't read my stuff regularly -- Tony Stewart is my guy. But frankly I'd like to see someone, anyone else but Johnson win the title. Maybe it's just me, but I find him to be phony and insincere, an almost condescending attitude in his interviews. I believe his success is primarily due to who he drives for -- Hendrick Motorsports, and who is crew chief is -- Chad Knaus.

There's an old photoshop image that shows Steven Spielberg (I think) shaking hands with the devil. I think that pic should have Knaus in Spielberg's place. Dude is simply out of this world with his setups and strategies during a race. Take Johnson out of the 48 and put Danica in there and I think she'd be winning races too.

I suppose, thinking back, I can remember races where Bill Elliot was 10-12 laps ahead and practically cruising with his arm out the window at the end. So there have been dominant performances in the past. But this is simply taking the fun out of watching a race on Sundays.

I'm figuring once Johnson gets his eighth title, Rick Hendrick will pull Knaus away and put him with someone else, probably Dale Jr. to get him a title. We'll see how good Jimmie is then.

My guess -- not as good. And the excuses will flow. Something along the lines of "Well he's got eight titles already, and he's the greatest driver ever, so even if he's slowed down a bit, blah, blah, blah . . ." The damage will have been done.

Boy, that's some unfortunate ink

Miley's in Barcelona, I suppose as part of her tour, and she's out poolside showing off her unfortunate ink and pasty white body in a sexy little red string bikini:

She's not unattractive, and though she looks like she might be better off with a couple of cheeseburgers in her, Miley's got a nice body on her. I guess I'm just old, but I'm not of fan of the overboard, random ink on young folks today. Especially the girls.

Happy Father's Day!

A bit under the weather today, so if you're really in the mood for a thoughtful essay on Fathers and such, here are links to older posts about my dad and/or being a dad:

Fathers' Day 2011
Father's Day 2012
Father's Day 2013

So this is apparently the real deal

If you don't know what I'm talking about here, either you rarely troll the celebrity blogs and/or you live a much richer and fuller life than I do. In which case, this is me smiling and nodding approvingly as I give you a respectful golf clap.

Back in black

Not exactly the little black dress, but the basic black one-piece can be just as stunning. Cases in point, Kirsten Dunst:

And Petra Nemcova:

So Miley's doing the handbra thing again

I think the above image is from Miley's Bangerz cd. What actually caught my eye was that for once she wasn't wearing those god awful high waisted mom jeans she's so fond of. But on closer inspection . . . I don't know what the eff those things are. Half jeans, half sweatpants? Kind of glad we can't see the entire outfit.

And I had this other image I was going to use in a snarky post about manly Clay Aiken tweeting about wanting to punch Ann Coulter in the face while watching her appearance on MSNBC. I never did the post, but I had the pic, so why waste it? So:

Wherein I point out that it's important . . .

. . . to know a little about whom you're quoting when in a debate.

Over at Climate Depot they have two links about the debunking of the 97% consensus paper:

The one link accompanying the above graphic is headlined: UN IPCC Lead Author Dr. Richard Tol: ‘The claim of a 97% consensus on global warming does not stand up’

Another link is titled: Prof. Ross McKitrick on Dr. Richard Tol’s reanalysis of 97% climate consensus claim: ‘Correcting for misclassification, 95% of papers are silent on the hypothesis’

While this kind of stuff is always fun for us so-called skeptics, it is important to realize who and what is being cited here. Prof. Richard Tol is a professor of Economics at the University of Sussex. Though the link above might have one thinking he is an expert in global science, weather, or some other germane discipline.

Tol's paper does in fact completely destroy the Cook et al. paper by pointing out the statistical errors in the work. And they range from an absurdly small sample size (25% or less of the total papers on the subject) to a ranking process that had the supposedly anonymous and impartial (they weren't) reviewers re-rating papers and abstracts up to 4 times to get the necessary results.

Tol's own abstract is devasting:

A claim has been that 97% of the scientific literature endorses anthropogenic climate change (Cook et al., 2013. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 024024). This claim, frequently repeated in debates about climate policy, does not stand. A trend in composition is mistaken for a trend in endorsement. Reported results are inconsistent and biased. The sample is not representative and contains many irrelevant papers. Overall, data quality is low. Cook׳s validation test shows that the data are invalid. Data disclosure is incomplete so that key results cannot be reproduced or tested.

But those who bothered to read the entire paper (I did) would have known about Tol's own proclivities on the subject of AGW:

There is no doubt in my mind that the literature on climate change overwhelmingly supports the hypothesis that climate change is caused by humans. I have very little reason to doubt that the consensus is indeed correct.

Well-publicized but faulty analyses like the one by Cook et al. only help to further polarize the climate debate.

While Tol is blasting the methodology of the Cook et al. paper, he is certainly no skeptic of AGW, but is instead quite the opposite. Those who cite this paper and hope to draw Tol into the battle on the side of resistance to climate astrology may be in for a rude awakening.

just sayin'

---

I think it is also may be worth pointing out that Keeley Hazell is fairly attractive (if you hadn't noticed already):

Okay, I'm officially old . . .

Watching today's NASCAR race at Pocono, and the announcers just mentioned that Chip Ganassi had to put rookie driver Kyle Larson in a Camaro for the week prior to the race so the kid could get used to driving a stick shift.

*sigh*

Daily Duffster

Honestly, how can someone look so sexy just getting out of a car in workout clothes:

Why, yes I am going to post the banned Eva Green / Sin City poster

But probably not for the reason you're thinking:

As I trolled around the various celeb blogs and came across the story of the poster being banned by the MPAA, I was struck by how many times I saw the MPAA called a conservative group as though a bunch of pastors had gotten together and ordered the poster be removed from movie lobbies or something.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The MPAA is Hollywood's own censoring organization, created in the 1920's by Hollywood to keep the federal government from doing it's own censorship of the movie industry. Nobody in their right mind should think that anything in Hollywood qualifies as "conservative" and yet, these idiot bloggers continue to push this falsehood on their low information readers.

This has always been a pet peeve of mine (along with actresses that get roles as strippers and refuse to show any skin, but you already know about that one, see here and here) so I'm going to vent a bit once more.

These celeb bloggers spend their days posting pics of women and making d*ck and boob jokes. They get thousands of "likes" on Facebook and "shares" on Google, and their hit counter spins furiously, and all of the sudden they think they have some deep insight into the world because their blog gets some traffic. And no one bothers to fact check them, so heaven only knows how many gullible readers will see those posts and come away thinking the banning of that poster is due to evil conservatives (as in Republicans).

Here's my thing -- just because they've got a bigger soapbox than you or I, doesn't make their opinion on anything more valid than yours or mine. And we've already seen the effect of blatant falsehoods, character assasination, and idol worship on our political system -- a stunningly unqualified junior senator elected president and re-elected four years later.

It's bad enough to get that continuously on the nightly news or in the papers without having it stealthed at the public via supposedly innocent amusement blogs.