Michael Jackson…OPUS tribute book great gift idea for die-hard fans!
Posted by: Julian Ayrs on: December 15, 2009
In the wake of Michael Jackson’s death there have been many Michael Jackson tributes – including a handful in book form chronicling the late pop icon’s life & times in the glare of the spotlight since he first sauntered onstage a naive young performer with the Jackson 5 decades ago.
Just recently, a thick tome aptly titled – “The Official Michael Jackson Opus” - has hit the shelves at a handful of upscale bookstores around the country.
The book carries some weight – 38 pounds of it in fact – and is comprised of 404 pages of thrilling publicity stills sure to appeal to the most discerning die-hard Jackson fan.
According to the publishers, eighty-percent of the images have never been released before and or rarely seen the light of day.
The slick eye-catching publication is priced at a whopping $249.00.
Photo editor Deborah Wald pronounced Opus as a loving tribute to Jackson’s legacy and work.
Opus highlights include four images of the superstar musician – copies of actual hand-painted portraits by artist Nate Giorgio – dashed off two weeks prior to Michael’s death.
One chapter is dedicated to Michael’s fashion sense and throws a spotlight on his innate sense of style which was world-renowned.
Producer Ken Kragen also contributed a copy of an original lyric sheet from “We Are the World to be included in the book (the original was signed by all the artists at the recording session on that auspicious occasion).
Apparently, the hit single was inspired by Jane Goodall (primatolgist) who urged that Michael write a song when he expressed an interest to “heal the world” on the occasion of her visit to Neverland ranch.
To historians and loving fans – a bevy of poignant shots of Michael taken during the course of his storied long-and-winding career – are probably of the most interest.
One photo captures an 11-year old Jackson signing an autograph in front of the Rolling Stones office in 1971 complete with Afro and dressed in Jackson 5 stage get-up.
A great Christmas gift idea for the loved one or friend in your life who had just about everything ’til now.
Nevada…calling all studs! Pay-for-play to be legal for buffed dudes…
Posted by: Julian Ayrs on: December 15, 2009
Calling all male studs!
Due to a recent change in regulations at the Health Board, Nevada brothels – who have been legally providing female prostitutes in the State for the past twenty five years – will start allowing the male animal to ply his love-making prowess for cash-on-the-dollar, too.
Until this year, men were effectively barred from hanging out a shingle to advertise flesh-for-cash because of state health law requirements that dictated that workers in the world’s oldest profession undergo frequent cervical testing for sexually transmitted diseases.
Because men were not blessed with that body part (although a transexxual or two may have purchased a fabricated one on the sly) – or the curse that comes part ‘n parcel with one - dudes were effectively barred from practising in the field of sexual healing of the earthy variety (prostitution).
County Sheriff Tony DeMeo acknowledged this past week that the ”measure” allowing men to work in one of the 24 legal brothels in the State still needs approval from the County.
DeMeo is a voting member on both the County Commission and a board that oversees alcohol, gambling, and brothel licenses.
Although optimistic that the changes will go forward, he noted for the record that there are some issues that need addressing to ensure that the industry (!) is regulated with clarity and understanding.
George Flint, a wedding chapel owner – who has also lobbied for the Nevada Brothel Owners Association – expressed a concern that allowiing men to “service” men may cause a backlash in the Legislature.
Over the years, he has worked feverishly to ensure that the Brothel business remains acceptable to both libertarians and conservatives.
Flint expects some “heartburn” over the current proposal to allow men to sell their companionship to other males, for starters.
Bobbi Davis – owner of the notorious Shady lady Ranch (!) – wants to hire on two men to work alongside three women already in her employ.
Suppose the dudes could double as bodyguards, eh?
On that note, did you know that Brad Pitt used to drive working girls around Los Angeles to client appointments, before he became famous as an actor?
The stories Brad could tell!
At last glance, it appears that the inclusion of males into the brothel scenario in Nevada, is an inevitability.
For this reason, I expect potential studly candidates are currently pumping iron and buffing up their bodies at local gyms, to ensure they have a competitive edge at brothels throughout the region when the State gives its blessing.
In the final analysis, rates may boil down to inches – not just muscle tone – if you get my drift!
In that event, Tommy Lee may be mulling over a potential career move.
Pamela Anderson can – no doubt – vouch for his qualifications.
But, will he get any respect in the morning?
Some things never change!
So You think you can dance…complexions choreography featured on Fox hit! Dec. 15th…
Posted by: Julian Ayrs on: December 15, 2009
Complexions Contemporary Ballet
Choreographers from one of my favorite dance troupes – based out of New York City – have conjured up delicious dance numbers for two of the finalists to perform tomorrow night on Fox TV’s dynamite perennial hit:
“So You Think You Can Dance” (December 15th @ 8 pm)
The two talented dancers in competition on the show will showcase the intricate dance steps of renowned choreopgraphers Dwight Rhoden and Desmond Richardson respectively.
Rhoden and Richardson head up the highly-respected “Complexions Contemporary Ballet” company.
Regular readers of the Tattler will recall that I penned a post on ” Complexions” when they last performed downtown at the Dorothy Chandlier Pavillion to sold-out audiences and critical raves from the toughest reviewers on this or any other coast!
Post: 04/11/2008
http://ijulian.blogspot.com/2008/04/complexions-contemporary-balletelectric.html
Undoubtedly, the slated dance numbers will be the highlight of the season at Fox, so try to catch their dazzling contribution to the realm of normally low-brow TV, especially if you have a soft spot in your heart for liberating performances that will literally set you free.
Contact: www.complexionsdance.org
Desmond Richardson
http://www.julianayrs.com
Terribles…Terrible Vegas Hotel! Hotel staff fail to disclose charges & engage in fraud…
Posted by: Julian Ayrs on: December 14, 2009
They don’t call Terribles Hotel & Casino (Las Vegas) Terribles for no good reason.
This place not only sucks, but openly engages in deceptive business practices.
In particular, the front desk staff place charges on customer debit and credit cards without full disclosure as required by law.
The highly irregular (illegal conduct) constitutes fraud, in fact.
For example, when a guest checked in at the front desk yesterday, a clerk requested a credit card on the grounds that she needed to take an imprint in the event there were any incidentals (phone calls, movie rentals, etc).
Understandable.
However, it was not until the next morning when the guest attempted to use their card, that they discovered (of their own accord quite by accident), that the dishonest front desk clerk actually charged the sum of $100.00 to the guests debit card without notice or warning.
The law requires that Hotels disclose charges and holds on funds for obvious reasons.
For starters, a tourist has a right to know when their accounts are being billed fees or funds are being held, so they have the option to book a room elsewhere if they do not agree with the Hotel’s policy.
From a practical point of view, you’d think Hotel staff would be able to grasp the concept, especially in view of the fact the issue takes little common sense to fathom.
On occasion, if not a large percentage of the time, tourists are also budgeting their trips – and so – must keep track of funds expended to ensure that ends meet on their jaunts away from home.
When a Hotel like Terribles puts a hold on funds or bills charges without disclosure – the results can be a disaster to a traveller who is suddenly left in a lurch without funds for gas or for food – because of the unscupulous, dishonest, and fraudulent conduct of employees like those at Terribles.
Perhaps the individuals in question are just too stupid to figure it out for themselves – or just maybe – they don’t give a da** about their clientele.
In spite of the obvious failures to disclose, which warranted immediate credit back without argument, Terribles staff proceeded to lie and distort the facts and give the hapless hotel guest the run-around while other patrons at the Hotel (and staff on the lobby floor and in the Casino) gazed on in total disbelief.
The exchange I witnessed dragged on for twenty or thirty minutes – and included a phone call to the bank – with a request that the credit be issued back right away.
During the course of that conversation on the telephone, the bank employee acknowledged that from her end the sum of $100.00 was posted as an actual charge (and was not just a hold on funds).
Of course, this information conflicted with the bold-faced statements of the manager, who alleged the $100.00 was just a hold on funds and not an actual charge (which would drop off eventually in 3-5 days).
In spite of that fact, the manager refused to issue a credit back for $100.00 right away, or reimburse the Hotel guest the sum of a hundred dollars cash-in-hand (although they were checking out and owed nothing).
Until the party asked the bank employee to put a supervisor on the line, that is.
At this juncture, the Hotel Manager and the Bank operator suddenly came to the conclusion that if Terribles charged the account $100.00 again – then issued a credit back for $100.00 right there on the spot – that the guest’s original $100.00 would magically be credited back into the account at the stroke of midnight.
Say what?
If the account was already debited $100.00 – wouldn’t another debit in the sum of $100.00 and a credit back for the sum of $100.00 – end up posting a remaining $100.00 debit on the account???
Someone’s logic is off!
Now the guest has to cross their fingers and pray that what the manager alleges will magically transpire at tonight’s witching hour will pan out according to plan.
Meanwhile, the guest is without the funds until the moolah mysteriously credits back to their account (if ever).
In addition to that bizarre scenario (which would never have gone down if the Hotel employee had of acted properly and within the full extent of the law) a guest encountered a frustrating situatiion when they checked into the same Hotel.
The reservation was promplty processed without any hitches at the front desk (or so they thought) – at which point – they shuffled off to their digs on the third floor to settle in.
About twenty minutes later, the desk clerk rang the individual up on the telephone, and asserted that the individual was booked into two separate rooms.
Huh?
When the guest noted that they only booked one room at the Hotel, the rude clerk got a little feisty with the tourist.
Well, you’d better call Expedia or Orbitz and sort it out, she harshly demanded.
Ah, suddenly a bell rang off in his head.
When the guest attempted to reserve the room earlier in the afternoon at Expedia, a pop-up message noted that the room could not booked at that time.
So, the anxious traveller surfed over to Orbitz, where a room was booked at Terribles for the same price without any problem.
In fact – in about two seconds flat – the room was booked, the credit card billed, and a confirmation e-mail zipped across the Internet to his e-mail box at Yahoo.
After a lengthly conversation with the front desk personnel – in which the hotel employee twisted and distorted the facts – a manager finally agreed to contact one of the companies to resolve the problem.
“But, we should approach Expedia, because Orbitz rarely ever gives credit back.”
Well, that excuse didn’t sit well with the guest; after all, Orbitz booked the room promplty and professionally.
Why should Orbitz ever lose business because management at Terribles doesn’t like dealing with them?
When this was pointed out, the manager reluctantly followed through, and contacted expedia to try and get a credit back for the customer.
Imagine that, Expedia called the guest in their room, and took the stand that somehow the guest and the Hotel were at fault.
But, the guest stood their ground.
For starters, Expedia alleged onliine, that the room could not be booked.
So, the guest went elsewhere.
After-the-fact (when the site glitch was resolved) it appears that Expedia went ahead and booked the room, and billed the guest’s credit card, without any legal notice or even a confirmation with a reservation number by e-mail after-the-fact.
Normally, when expedia books a room, they confirm on the reservation page that the booking has been made, note the sum billed, and follow through with a confirmation stating the terms and cnditions of the reservation, cancellation politices, etc.
Never happened!
From a legal standpoint, Expedia not only acted fraudulently, but didn’t have a pot to pi** in.
In view of the facts, the hotel quest had no legal obligation to pay for a room that was booked without his knowledge or permission.
In spite of the fact assurances were made by both Experian and Hotel management that the issue was resolved, another manager the following day started to give the guest the run-around and went so far as to allege that she didn’t think either company had billed for the room – when both, in fact – had.
The guests bank records online verified the ugly truth!
Needless to say, Terribles is not only a Terrible place to lodge for obvious reasons, but is probably the worst da** Hotel in Las Vegas.
And, the staff at the Hotel have sh** for brains.
Avoid this place like the plague, unless you want to spend hours on the phone trying to resolve fall-out from their constant fraudulent actions, and ruin your holiday in the process.
As T. Barnum once said:
“There’s a sucker born every minute.”
Blackwater…involved in sneak CIA raids in Afghanistan & Iraq!
Posted by: Julian Ayrs on: December 14, 2009
On Thursday, the New York Times published a report on their website alleging that Blackwater security guards were actively involved in clandestine CIA raids in Afghanistan and Iraq.
A representative at the company – now professionally known in industry circles as Xe Services – stated for the record that Blackwater was never under contracct with the CIA or Special Forces in those worn-torn countries.
"Any allegation to the contrary would be false," Mark Corallo asserted in no uncertain terms on behalf of Xe Services.
The key words are "under contract".
It is quite possible that Blackwater security guards were enlisted on the sly on a crisis-by-crisis basis.
In fact, one news organization was quick to point out that the roles and responsibilities of security officers and special forces often became blurred (or shifted into higher gear) in the battlefield setting at a moment’s notice out of necessity.
It is alleged that Blackwater security officers were drawn in by the powers-that-be to take advantage of their high-level skills and their familiarity with the "territory".
The CIA has remained mum to date on the issue.
Over the past year or so - I reported on a couple of Blackwater incidents (currently under investigation) - which resulted in the deaths of innocent citizens in the streets of Iraq.
Post:: 10/29/09
http://ijulian.blogspot.com/2009/10/blackwatercourt-hearing-for-trigger.html
Post: 10/24/07
http://ijulian.blogspot.com/2007/10/blackwatertrigger-happy-security-for.html
In view of the foregoing, it’s obvious why Blackwater owners changed their company name to Xe Services.
To distance themselves from their prior image - as cold-blooded mercenaries – of course!
Tiger Woods…just do it! Golf pro an oreo…
Posted by: Julian Ayrs on: December 14, 2009
On occasion, truth is stranger than fiction.
For example, Nike (a Tiger Woods sponsor) just unveiled their new slogan (amidst quite a few snickers).
What did a Madison Avenue ad agency manage to rustle up for a few million bucks?
"Just do it"
The irony of it all, eh?
I expect that if the advertising campaign hadn’t cost so much to develop before the release date, Nike may have pulled out all the stops, to bury that catchy little phrase amid a flurry of excuses.
Or, was it all a calculated ploy by Nike, to capitalize on the Tiger Woods scandal?
Enquiring minds want to know!
Meanwhile, a flurry of harsh criticims that have flooded the airwaves and internet blog sites in recent days, not only indicate a drop-off in Tiger’s popularity but appears to also underscore what a posse of African Americans have been lamenting about for a decade or two.
Tiger is an oreo!
‘Ya know, black on the outside, white on the inside.
His choice in women – waitresses, VIP hostesses, hookers – was one issue, yes, but the color of their skin was even a bigger tell-tale sign that Woods wasn’t that comfortable with his own race (or being lumped in with regular African American folks or their precious culture)
In fact, Tiger hasn’t made any sincere bold-faced effort to maintain ties with the black community.
So, it’s pay-back time, in the final analysis.
In an effort to rehabilitate his image, one wonders if Tiger might just warm up to the idea of, gettiing back to his roots.
After all, th pale faces have turned on their golf messiah, cast him out of Eden.
Will the black community receive the tarnished hero with open arms straight away or let him eat crow for a while to teach him a well-earned lesson?
News at 11!
Las Vegas…Steve Wynn jazzing up Encore! Surf’s up, dudes…
Posted by: Julian Ayrs on: December 14, 2009
Steve Wynn is jazzing up Encore!
I was out for a stroll the other morning when a ghastly mess on the strip caught my eye.
Up-front and center, outside the Encore Hotel complex – one construction crew was erecting unsightly chain-link fences and overly-bright hard plastic barriers to create a pedestrian walkway - as another shovelled up debris from a low-level structure that a wrecking ball had smashed into smithereens.
Wasn’t this parcel of land owned by Steve Wynn?
At one section of the block where two-ton trucks rumbled in and out of a make-shift entrance, I spied a worker within arm’s length of me, so I decided to go to the horse’s mouth for information so-to-speak.
"Isn’t this part of the Encore Hotel property owned by Wynn," I innocently asked the surprised female construction worker.
"Uh-huh," she grumbled back.
"He (we all know who he is, right?) is tearing down this section to put in an 18 million-dollar beach club," she shouted above he rising din.
"’Wow," was about the only response I could muster on the heels of such staggering news.
A beach club for 18 million smackeroos?
At this juncture, I put my thinking cap on.
Does Mr. Wynn intend to fabricate a beach setting – complete with rolling waves and warm sand oozing between the toes – to jazz up the Hotel complex a tad?
I expect he’ll also be simulating the soothing sounds of the surf as it crashes oh-so-gently on the shore at Wynn’s Beach.
True, the interior of the Encore is sumptuous and inviting.
But, with exception to the waterfall and grounds brimming with lush foliage, the overall outdoor image of Encore and the sister Hotel at the complex, is nothing short of the plain-Jane variety.
Moreso, me thinks that Mr. Wynn doesn’t hanker up to the idea of being left in the cold.
The Aria and Mandarin Hotels (about to swing open their doors at the CityCenter this Wednesdayon Dec. 16th) will probably steal alot of Mr. Wynn’s thunder in coming days.
Even with Garth Brooks under his house wing, the Encore is vulnerable to rapidly-changing resort trends, that are luring the tourist class, "whales", and European travellers, doww new boulevards and eye-catching vistas in sin city.
Cut-rate "room sales" online are also taking a bite out of potential revenue as well.
So, Mr. Wynn – visionary that he is – has obviously hatched up a scheme to guarantee his place in the sun alongside the big players in the Desert Oasis.
Well, you Wynn some, and ‘ya lose sum.
It will be interesting to see how the transformation pans out for the mercurial Wynn, and translates into greenbacks, eh?
</aGoogle…security alert! 9 known malicious trojans & viruses @ search site! Intruder posts anonymous drafts @ blogspot…
Posted by: Julian Ayrs on: December 12, 2009
Shortly after I logged on and checked e-mail earlier this afternoon, I surfed over to the Tattler @ Blogspot to pen a post.
When I shifted into edit mode, and the list of published posts and saved drafts popped up in the dashboard, I was quite shocked to spy approximately forty (40) posts inputted as “Untitled” items and saved as drafts.
This startling turn of events occurred at 1:30 pm (PST).
Of course, I was might curious to open the mysterious drafts, but my inner voice issued a warning.
Don’t touch ‘em!
Google’s blogspot has a help center where bloggers at the site are welcome to report issues to the technical team so that snafus and glitches in the system may be immediately addressed.
So, I posted a notice at the site about the mysterious intruder, with a request that an expert at google offer up suggestions on how to proceed.
Should I just delete the little suckers?
Or, quarantine them somehow, so they may be studied as to their origin – and most of all – their intent?
Curiously, the Norton Security software was operating at the time of the intriguing “attack”.
I have to wonder if a hacker slipped in while I was online, or somehow, came in backdoor and also infected other blogger sites.
A few minutes ago, when I zipped over to google’s search web site, a Norton Security warning flashed a warning alert on the computer screen.
According to the Norton software, there are nine (9) malicious (dangerous) viruses and trojans on the google web site search page.
Looks like I’m switching to Bing, folks!
Barbara Walters…fascinating! 1st Lady’s arms! Adam Lambert Homo status! Blushing lady Gaga
Posted by: Julian Ayrs on: December 12, 2009
Surprisingly, the one-hour Barbara Walter special opened with bodacious Pop Icon Lady Gaga,
Personally, I expected teasers throughout the night – crafted to entice fans to to remain transfixed in front of the old boob tube – in anticipation of an insightful reveal of the naughty chanteuse as promised by the undisputed Queen of insightful probes.
So, if you dashed in the front door a few minutes into the special - or sauntered out to walk the dog at the stroke of ten – you may have misssed an honor that Lady Gaga accorded the talk-show legend.
Shortly after being introduced, the platinum beauty (looking more Italian than ever) slipped off her ultra-chic dark sunglasses and confided that she rarely dropped that barrier for just any showbiz sucker.
Barbara was in top form last night - all decked out in a chic black cocktail dress which accentuated her trim toned physique- sparked up with an elegant necklace which begged closer inspection.
More importantly, Barbara WAWA didn’t beat around the “bush”.
No pun intended!
“It’s been reported that you like women,” Barbara started off slowly, as she tested the waters with Lady G.
Before the flavor of the month could respond, Barbara pounced with a second question, in a sort-of surprise sneak attack.
Have you had sex with women?
Were it not for the thick white pancake make-up, fans – for the first time ever – you may have actually caught the outrageous stage performer blushing!
For a moment, it appeared for all-the-world that she’d answer the ball*y query, too.
But, when the slightly-quirky pop star opened her sensuous lustily-painted lips to speak, for some inexplicable reason, a half-expected bona-fide no-holds-barred confession was not forthcoming.
Gosh, she appeared to utter from the depths of her soul, that’s quite a personal question.
For a split second, the poker faced lady was anything but; in fact – in essence - the chart-topper was literally reduced to a shy awkward virgin reticent about – well – talking turkey!
A disappointment, when you consider that Gaga is usually the playful sex kitten on stage, flaunting her sensual brand of passion without any qualms or holding back.
In contrast, a few moments later, Adam Lambert shot from his swivelling hips.
“Yes, I am a homosexual.”
Who knew!
On this newsbite, Barbara clearly caught the tail end of the comet.
Ho Hum!
Lambert didn’t offer up any excuses for his controversial stage persona in recent days, but frankly, admitted he let his passions get the better of him (in an unrehearsed fly by-the-crotch adrenalin rush) on stage that fateful night at the American Music Awards – which ultimately – caused the swish-buckler to be banished from ABC airwaves.
“I wear my emotions on my sleeve,” he confessed somewhat poignantly.
At the close of the interview, he had a message for American TV viewers (and critics).
“Deal with it.”
Never to be caged in (or hankering to be too predictable) Barbara spun off in a new direction at this juncture and focused for a brief duration on the sports arena.
Brett Favre’s flip-flopping football career was great fodder (and thus) established in the eyes of Barbara that he was not only a candidate for “hero and myth-maker” but ripe for the title of one of most fascinating (10) people of the year.
After all, the stud’s unique brand of rise and fall theatrics (on and off the gridiron) was the stuff that legends are made of.
When Barbara announced an upcoming spot with Sarah Palin, an announcer noted that the most-fascinating individual would follow after the spot with the perky politician.
Ah, the suspense was over; obviously, Sarah Palin was not going to be “the” most fascinating person of 2009 (just one of ten singled out by the veteran newsie).
I admit, Palin is the most intriguing gun-toter, polar-bear killer, and in-law hater.
But, one of the ten most fascinating?
Poppycock!
In the somewhat low-key segment, Barbara asked point blank if Sarah wanted to be President.
Her reply was a tad evasive.
Fresh from commerical break,the upstart from the great white north, admitted she didn’t know why people found her fascinating.
Say what?
Do they?
“There’s alot of bull-crap out there,” she guffawed, when reminded of the mean barbs she was forced to endure on the campaign trail in her rented Republican monkey-suits.
If you ask me, most of the celebrated dung was being flung from her party.
In response to a query about Dave Letterman, she was hard-nosed and to the point.
“He’s a sexist,” she retorted without batting a pretty eyelash.
T*t for tat, eh?
Her life was “kind-of a reality-show”, she sighed.
When asked what most she’d like to change about herself, her answer was swift.
“To be more patient,” for starters.
What does she dislike most about her appearance?
Bearing five children tooks its toll, she admitted, so the old bod suffered some fall-out.
“Don’t make me go into details.”
Palin’s idea of a perfect day goes something like this:
Snow is falling on the ground, it’s a wonderful beautiful Alaskan day, and all family members are at home and enjoying each other’s company.
Except for Levi Johnston, of course!
Talk about squeaky-clean bull-crap!
Time to move on, wouldn’t ‘ya say?
Michael Jackson was singled out in the top ten, too, in spite of his untimely demise.
Instead of focusing on the pop star and his music, Barbara chose to focus on his adorable kids, his conscientious efforts to provide a good home, protect the children from prying eyes of the media, and be a good father (in spite of the storms raging on outside of the family compound).
In that segment, Ms. Walters closed with one stinging criticism from Michael (which appeared to come straight from the grave).
“I didn’t like being called wacko-Jacko!”
The well-thought-out top ten list also included a talk show host notorious for being outspoken and expressing unpopular views.
A governor’s wife was also applauded for the way she handled her husband’s indiscretions.
And, the intriguing list would not have been complete without an actor in tow.
Yawn!
Finally, the big moment arrived.
The most fascinating person, in the final analysis, appeared to have been catapulted into her heady status by virtue of her muscular eye-catching arms alone!
Any ideas?
Yessir!
The prestigious title was bestowed on the 1st Lady, Michelle Obama – who, by Walters’ accounts – was shaping up to be so much more than the sum of her toned body parts.
When asked to describe the past year of her life, the Mrs. Obama was quick on the uptake, in a refreshing on-camera moment which was not unlike a breath of fresh air.
“It’s been a whirlwind. I visited eight countries, planted a garden, got a dog, and now getting ready for the first Christmas in the White House.”
But, there had been humanitarian accommplishments, too.
“We began to lay a foundation for the health of kid in this countrys. One in three children, you know, are obese. African-American children suffer most from this problem, with hispanic children right behind.”
Now, Barbara wanted to talk about the famous Michelle Obama arms.
Could they?
“Certainly.”
“Do you feel pressured about keeping them up,” Barbara amusingly quizzed in so many words.
Michelle prefaced this part of the conversation by noting that – In spite of her hectic schedule – her personal routine hadn’t changed much.
The busy homemaker started to work out and get in tip-top shape after Maria was born, in fact.
“It was a bit of revenge because Barack always found time to stay in shape and go to the gym. I was resentful of that.”
One day, it all fell into place, she explained to Barbara just like that.
“At four o’clock, I would get up to feed the baby. So, I thought, I may as well go to the gym.”
Instinctively, Michelle also knew that if she wasn’t there at the house, her hubby would get up and feed the baby in her absence.
“The arms took a lot of determination,” she asserted, in a last-ditch effort to square away the details.
By the way, Mrs. Obama looked stunning!
A coral-colored gown – which draped off one shoulder with a understated (but elegant) fashion flourish – suited her pretty looks.
A swept up “do” – somewhat reminiscent of the Victorian era – highlighted and drew attention to her distinctive facial features – in particular -a prominent forehead, high cheekbones, and strong (determined) jaw.
Kudos!
The 1st lady noted – when asked – that her downfall tended to be inherent in the realms of poor food-based habits and low-brow TV programs.
Heaven, to Michelle, is an hour of quiet time – with the dog in her lap – reflecting on life (and day-to-day matters).
In spite of the fact Michelle has resided in the White House for almost a year, the happily-married mom still marvels at the sumptuous White House environs.
Bascially, she feels blessed, when the limo purrs up the front drive of the beautiful home, and the staff greet her with two heartfelt words:
“Welcome home.”
At times, just betcha, Michelle pinches herself to fathom if it’s all a surreal dream.
In sum, the President’s wife was charming, eloquent, and projected a classy image.
Ah, a 1st lady all American should be proud of, right?
Roman Polanski…age-old law reviewed by Justices in 2nd Appellate Court! Will rapist go free…
Posted by: Julian Ayrs on: December 12, 2009
Attorneys pitching for the dismissal of the Polanski case are awaiting a decision from the 2nd Appellate Court (Appeals) on a couple of legal fine points.
Specifically, the high-profile barristers argued in their briefs that a Los Angeles Superior Court Judge erred when he denied a motion to dismiss Polanski’s criminal case in recent days.
The director’s legal eagles convinced the Judge in the lower court (Judge Peter Espinoza) that there had been substantial misconduct during the course of Polanski’s trial.
But, in the end scenario, the circumspect jurist threw up his hands in frustration – and summarily denied the motion – because he felt his hands were tied.
In denying the moving papers, the bench-warmer noted that he was bound by legal precedent, and on the grounds of fugitive disentitlement.
The Judge was relying on an old doctrine that dates back to the 1800s which stipulates – in essence – that defendants who flout the law by fleeing a jurisdiction cannot then call upon the court after-the-fact for help.
On the heels of the ruling, Polanski’s lawyers filed an appeal on the issue, which is subject matter of the higher court’s review.
The Justices agreed to take the case (many are denied review for a myriad of reasons) and proceeded to order the lower court to explain its ruling, the basis for the decision, and so forth and so on.
Yesterday afteroon, pursuant to Appellate Court procedure, both parties (defendant’s lawyers & the prosecutor’s legal team) appeared at an “Oral Argument” where they were asked to clarify the issues verbally.
The Polanski counsel didn’t mince words.
They forcefully reiterated that Judge Laurence J. Rittenband (the Judge in the original rape case about three decades ago) improperly held discussions with the prosecutor about how to punish the film director.
The lawyer also drew attention to the alleged misconduct of Rittenband.
Polanski’s reps argued at the hearing that he crossed the line when he threatened to lock up Polanski for a longer period if his attorney challenged his decision.
Sounds like judicial misconduct to moi!
But the proper forum for that charge to be addressed is at the Commissionl on Judicial Performance (based in San Francisco).
Because the alleged prosecutorial and judicial misconduct was so “alarming” (in their opinion), they urged the Justices to overturn the lower court ruling denying the motion to dismiss because the issues go beyond the Polanski case.
In a nutshell, the legal experts maintained that it was imperative the 2nd Appellate Court take action in the interests of maintaining the integrity of the state criminal justice system
Meanwhile, the opposing side scoffed at a legal notion they viewed as a dishonest underhanded attempt to free Polanski at any cost.
In a brief (filed with the court prior to oral argument) the city prosecutor stressed that Polanski’s allegations of wrongdoing in the legal system were matters of convenience for the desperate film director.
“It is not his desire to have the case formally end because of concerns for the integrity of the judicial system. His ultimate goal is to have the case dismissed,” they argued quite vigorously.
Although Polanski’s lawyers may be grasping at straws, in the final analysis, they’re just doing their job.
In the final analysis, it will all boil down to who is ”on point”, and a proper interpretation of the law.
May the best judicially-correct team win!
.jpg)
Free the coerced felons!
