Gossip BlogAds Network Bargain BlogAds Network

Archive for October, 2009

30
Oct

Oprah Stands Up for Victims of Domestic Abuse, Except When She Doesn’t

Oprah_BeBe_BeBe_OprahA couple of months ago, Oprah gave moronic woman-beater Chris Brown a bloody nose. (Not literally, unfortunately.) But now she’s taking heat for having an alleged wife-beater on her show.

According to TMZ:

The man in question is gospel singer BeBe Winans — who is accused of shoving his ex-wife Debra Winans to the ground in front of their kids back in February. BeBe was on “Oprah” on Friday to pimp out his new gospel CD — his domestic violence charge is pending until another court hearing next year.

Debra tells TMZ she’s “hurt by Oprah’s decision to have BeBe on the show” — especially after she refused to have Chris Brown on her show in the wake of the Rihanna beating.

Here’s more background on the story from WSMV-TV in Nashville, TN:

Debra Winans said her former husband BeBe Winans, 46, pushed her to the ground in front of their children. The two were married for 16 years before divorcing in 2003.

The alleged assault happened when BeBe Winans showed up at his ex-wife’s Nashville home and the two began arguing about custody issues. Debra and BeBe Winans have a 13-year-old daughter and 10-year-old son.

According to an affidavit, what started out as a “verbal altercation” turned into assault when Debra Winans was “pushed to the ground.”

It’s not as clear-cut a case as Chris Brown and Rihanna, I suppose. And certainly not as high-profile. But still, can Oprah really claim she didn’t know about it? How does she justify this?

After all, she did a show on domestic abuse that was inspired by Rihanna’s beating, and her office put out this statement when Brown whined that it was a “slap in the face” after all he’d done for her (I did mention he’s a moron, right?):

“Oprah is very appreciative that Chris Brown performed at her school but she takes domestic abuse very seriously. She hopes he gets the counseling he needs.”

If you take domestic abuse very seriously, why would you help BeBe Winans sell records when he’s been charged with domestic abuse?

30
Oct

Milla Jovovich: Blame Parents, Not Hollywood, for Violent Movies

milla-jovovichNow this is just becoming a tradition. Milla Jovovich, the star of the Resident Evil movies and so-awesomely-bad-it’s-good The Fifth Element, is saying that Hollywood bears no responsibility for putting all that sex and violence out there and parents should be the ones monitoring what their kids get into:

“I think parents need to take a lot more responsibility than they do about whether it’s OK for their children to go to Resident Evil or any other movie with violence or sex or whatever. It’s really easy to blame Hollywood for violence having an effect on kids, but movies would have no power if parents would just set their own standards. And it’s the same with video games.”

And then she immediately says without a trace of irony:

“Me and my brother Marco would play Resident Evil together and I said to him, ‘This is the perfect vehicle for me.’ I mean, Alice wears a tube top and a mini-skirt and she’s killing zombies. So when I first auditioned, I said to Paul [director Paul W. S. Anderson, her husband] ‘If I don’t get this part my brother is going to kill me because he sees a huge boost in his popularity at school if I play her.’”

School, huh? In case you were wondering, Milla’s Wikipedia page says Marco was born in 1988, making him 14 when the first Resident Evil movie came out and clearly he was well acquainted with the plot. And before that, Milla also starred in Dazed and Confused, that ode to teenage drug use.

Those both were rated R, but The Fifth Element was only PG-13 despite the graphic disemboweling of an alien opera singer and a very scantily clad Milla in about 75% of the movie, making it perfectly acceptable fare for 14-year-olds everywhere.

I can see why, as new parents, she and her husband don’t want to accept that they may be the ones exposing kids to violence in movies. But come on. It’s not like she’s making Jane Austen films to compensate.

30
Oct

Archbishop of Canterbury Paves Paradise, Puts Up Parking Lot

archbishop

In a hysterical, imploding, raucous exchange in the House of Commons two weeks ago, there was a showdown between the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Commissioner Sir Stuart Bell and several Members of Parliament.

The background:

The Church Commissioners, headed by Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, submitted a proposed housing development scheme invloving 2,000 new homes in West Sussex. Their reason?  To “meet local housing needs” … and make money.  Local MPs were upset to say the least. Especially because Williams had spent the exact same day berating lecturing, according to ReligiousIntelligence, “calling for people to rediscover their responsibility for the environment and insisting that engaging in “apparently small-scale action” in “personal habits and local possibilities” was vital to the nation’s health.

“When we believe in transformation at the local and personal level, we are laying the surest foundations for change at the national and international level,” he said. People, he added, are “dehumanized” by buying things. Apparently massive quantities of land have their own loophole.

I have reconstructed the fight in Commons here, in a mix of hearsay, direct quotes, and inference. Feel free to read the rest of this with a British accent (in your head, of course — you’re at work, remember?):

The speakers:

Mr. Nick Gibb (Conservative and  Member of Parliament for Bognor Regis and Littlehampton)

Sir Stuart Bell (Second Church Estates Commissioner, a Commission headed by Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Cantebury)

The conversation:

Mr. Gibb: What is the size of the church’s agricultural holdings?

Sir Bell: Church Commissioners hold over “109,000 acres of English farmland, spread across 44 estates and over 300 farms.”

Mr Gibb: But the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Williams, “wants more food to be grown locally and has attacked organisations driven solely by the desire to make money. Is it not therefore paradoxical that the Church Commissioners, which he chairs, wants to concrete over 3,000 acres of prime agricultural land to the west of Chalcraft lane in my constituency?  When challenged, the Commissioners say they want to build on that land because they are obliged to maximise the amount of money they make. If the Archbishop of Canterbury were a politician, would it not be fair to say that he says one thing but does another?” I find this worrying.

Sir Bell: Is is “always pleasant when the Archbishop of Canterbury is cited in the House of Commons. I am sure that he does not wish to be a politician and I would urge him not to be one.”

Members of Parliament, standing: “He is!”  “He is a Member!” “Shame!”

For a moment, I thought they were about to break into song and anoint him Pirate King. But back to the action…

Sir Bell: “The archbishop is a Member of the House of Commons now, is he?”

Members of Parliament, shouting: “He is in the Lords.”

Sir Bell: “He is a Member in Parliament.” I am “being diverted” from the matter at hand. “We have a legal duty to our beneficiaries. On this occasion, we accept that we have met some controversy in his constituency, but we have not to be distracted from our fiduciary duty. As the member are “in an enlightened mood, may I cite the scriptures? In Ezekiel, it states: ‘In controversy they shall stand in judgment…and they shall keep my laws and statutes’. We propose to keep the laws and statutes of Parliament that have been conferred upon the Church Commissioners.”

The conclusion:

The Archibishop and Co. are using scripture, “fiduciary duty,” and, well, God and money, to defend lecturing their constituents about living green while selling off millions in assets and building massive modern developments on green fields.

The actors leave the stage, practicing their best “silly walks.”

29
Oct

Doesn’t Nelson Mandela Know Who Charlize Theron Is?

charlizeRemember way back when white South Africans took advantage of black people and assumed they would do whatever was demanded of them, whether they gave their permission or not? Treated them like objects? Thank goodness those days are over, huh?

In other news:

The Nelson Mandela Foundation has accused actress Charlize Theron of selling a meeting with the former leader without permission.

Oscar-winning Theron, 34, raised £85,500 for charity last week by auctioning the chance to visit her native South Africa and meet the elderly former president…

Achmat Dangor, chief executive of the Nelson Mandela Foundation, said: ‘There is a very rigorous process that is followed to secure a meeting with Mr Mandela, and as yet, we have not have had any such request from Charlize Theron…’

Mr Mandela, who turned 91 in July, has now fully retired from public life and only grants personal audiences to a tiny proportion of those who request them.

His spokesman said he did not usually agree to be offered in charity auctions.
Mr Dangor added: ‘It should also be noted that even the charities that he created have never auctioned off time with Mr Mandela.

‘We nevertheless wish Ms Theron well in her charity work.’

Reportedly, when Theron met Mandela in 2004 after she won an Oscar for portraying an ugly person, she burst into tears and blurted, “I love you so much!” Apparently in her mind, his failure to tell her to knock it off constituted some sort of lifetime permission slip to just drop by any old time.

How presumptuous. Sure, it’s nice to raise money for charity, but why would you make a promise like that without even checking with the guy first? What, because she’s so famous? Has she done anything of note since Monster? (I’m not sure Hancock really counts. On second thought, I’m really sure Hancock doesn’t count.) Who’ll be next to presume an audience with the guy, Gretchen Mol?

At least the winner’s consolation prize was a kiss on the lips from Theron. Even better: the winner was a chick. I mean dame. Broad?

29
Oct

PETA Steamrolls Jessica Simpson But Gives Angelina Love

jessica-simpson-shamu-05Animal Times is apparently no Cat Fancy — this magazine got controversial by allowing PETA to sink its claws into Jessica Simpson for performing at Sea World in May:

In the Purrs & Grrrs column in the latest Animal Times magazine, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals shows a dour Simpson and writes that she gets “whale-sized grrrs” for performing at the park.

However, two other politically active women familiar to Washington get coos from PETA. First is Sarah Brown, the wife of the British prime minister, who is praised “for rejecting both foie gras and veal on grounds of cruel production during a banquet hosted by French President Nicolas Sarkozy.” And actress Angelina Jolie gets a purr for “choosing to wear faux fur (a synchilla-trimmed hat and cape) while on the set of her latest movie, Salt.”

Sounds like PETA is still salty over Jessica’s “Real Girls Eat Meat” tee-shirt that was, incidentally, made from cotton. Unlike Angelina’s new $3300 Michael Kors leather minidress, which was made from real dead cow. (PETA may want to notice that Angelina the real-life actress was the one who chose to wear leather — as compared to her wearing faux while in character on the set of a movie that presumably had a costume designer.)

Also, you can be sure it’s not because of Shamu that PETA used the phrase “whale-sized” in connection with Jessica Simpson. Some people never learn.

28
Oct

David Spade Sure Knows How to Shovel It

When Chris Farley died in 1997, his friend and co-star David Spade didn’t attend the funeral. Why? As he put it at the time, he “could not be in a room where Chris was in a box.” Which seemed like a weird, somewhat heartless thing to say about a friend who had just died, but everybody mourns differently.

Still, though. Now we’ve got this:

YouTube Preview Image

Hey, at least he’s not in a box, right?

There seem to be two schools of thought about this ad. One is that Spade is selling out his dead friend’s memory and it’s sorta creepy. The other is that Spade is selling out his dead friend’s memory and it’s incredibly freaking creepy.

Asylum.com was able to get a statement from Spade about the controversy:

“When DIRECT TV came to me and the Farley family with this idea about ‘Tommy Boy,’ we talked and thought it would be a cool way to remind people just how funny Chris was. It is a clever homage to my friend and a movie that we loved doing.”

Is it really? It’s a clip from Tommy Boy intercut with present-day Spade in a hairpiece shilling for satellite TV. What’s clever about that?

Maybe it wouldn’t turn my stomach if I didn’t know the two of them were friends, and that Spade was so distraught over Farley’s death that he couldn’t go to the funeral. This just seems like some sort of weird denial or something. Just another way of not dealing with it. Except this time he got paid, so that’s pretty sweet.

If you want to remember Chris Farley, his movies aren’t too hard to find. And when you watch them on DVD, the only thing he’s selling are the pratfalls.

Update: They were talking about this at AdFreak.com the other day, and a commenter named Jocelyn put her finger on it:

This one really bothers me, and I realized why this afternoon when I saw it yet again. Spade’s talking about how if you had DirecTV, he wouldn’t have to be putting up with Farley/Tommy/whatever you’d like to call the ‘character’ in the commercial. I can’t imagine that Spade would be comfortable implying that he wouldn’t give anything for the chance to hang out with his friend again.

Yep. Sure, Spade is supposed to be in character as he’s saying that, but it’s tough to get past the fact that it’s a guy talking about his dead friend. Just… oof.

Update: According to Walletpop.com, in 2006 Chris Farley’s family first approved the use of his image in advertising for Prometa, a medication used for drug and alcohol addiction. Which seems like a pretty honorable thing. It was to help other people avoid his fate, right? But check out what Farley’s brother Tom told Matt Lauer about the complaints that they were exploiting the dead:

LAUER: I guess you’ve heard some people are saying, well first of all, how do you know that this par–why–why endorse this particular drug or alcohol program? How do you know it might have helped or not helped Chris?

Mr. FARLEY: Well, we–we have no idea whether it would have helped or not helped Chris, but he–Chris was certainly open to any of the, you know, treatments. He went–he was in everything from, you know, the boot camps to the spas to everything else. So he would have probably embraced anything that would have helped him with this addiction. But you know, this is–this is something that takes into effect a lot of different aspects of the addiction, and I just think, you know, it’s a–it’s a good–good start to–to helping people, whether it, you know, works or not, that’s–you know, we’ll see. But so far it looks like the tests for Prometa look–look very promising.

LAUER: If the goal’s to help people, I guess the other question being raised is why take the $25,000?

Mr. FARLEY: Well, you know that–that’s just kind of the price for–I mean everyone, you know, knows that this is–it’s an ad campaign, and we’ve–we’ve turned down so many offers for you know, Bobbleheads and Ringtones for–for three, four, five times that. I mean it’s really not about that.

Fair enough. What’s this about, then?

You might be saying, “Farley’s family is fine with it, so who are you to judge?” Well, I’m a prospective customer of the product being sold. That’s the playing field they’ve chosen.

28
Oct

Michael Lohan Never Knows When to Stop Talking

michael-lohanI think I speak for everyone when I say, “Shut up, Michael Lohan”:

Once again proving how out of touch he is with his daughter, Michael Lohan went on the Maury Povich show [Tuesday] and delivered a televised message to LiLo in which he insulted her … and then promised to “save her life.”

First Mike called Lindsay a “hollow person” … then claimed there was “nothing left in her” — and finally said he “couldn’t even look at her.”

Then, after the dramatic plea, Michael actually had the stones to say, “I hate to speak out publicly like this…”

How many times is Michael Lohan going to hate to speak out publicly about private family matters? I mean, he’s getting called out by TMZ of all places, and you know Harvey Levin knows from publicity whores.

Do you think Daddy Dearest ever pauses to consider why Lindsay Lohan is as messed up as she is? (Doesn’t this photo just say it all?) Do you think it would help if we sent him a mirror emblazoned with our logo?

27
Oct

Brad Pitt Is a Ladykiller Planetkiller

Back in 2001, in the wake of 9/11, Brad Pitt said the following about America’s dependence on foreign oil:

“We keep going back into the history of these extremists, these fundamentalists, and understanding the Islamic culture, and understanding foreign policy. We’re embracing religion, which is a beautiful thing to see, but the thing no one is talking about is oil. Why don’t we set ourselves free? We have the technology for electric cars, and we have other power sources. Yes, it would be expensive to make the switch over, but we could, and we would have complete autonomy from our need for oil. We would not have to rape Alaska, and we wouldn’t have to be dependent on those guys over there. In the long term, if we could free ourselves from the dependency of oil, we’d be alright.”

Good idea! And according to the fine folks at Treehugger.com, “He’s swapped his fleet of conventional cars for hybrids, and was among celebrities to be a given a sneak preview of the new Lexus RX 400h luxury SUV hybrid.” Sounds like he’s really doing his part to save the planet and stuff.

Hey, wait. You know how Pitt had a bit of a motorcycle wreck the other day? He collects them, apparently. Motorcycles, not wrecks. And he just bought a new Camaro:

pitt_camaro

(Image courtesy of TMZ)

So… what happened to “setting ourselves free”? What sort of example is this setting, if he really wants “complete autonomy”?

Hey guys, I think maybe Brad Pitt is full of crap.

(Hat tip to Deceiver reader Max)

27
Oct

Twitter Should Die a Fiery, Embarassing, Photographed Death

twitter_death

We have a new Twitter account. You can now follow @Deceiver_Blog to read our tweets.

Why the cumbersome new name, you ask? Good Question. It’s because the ugly douchenozzles fine, fine people at Twitter have suspended our original account (@DeceiverBlog).

Why in the name of Screech’s taint did they do that, you ask? Another good question. We’ve asked them, but all we get back is the sound of blue wings flapping in the stinky air of a fart-filled Twitterverse.

Let’s face it: If slinging venom (especially the kind that’s deserved) got people banned from Twitter, the service wouldn’t have anyone left but @Oprah and @AshleyTisdale. So there has to be something else at work here.

I blame PETA. But then again, that’s an all-purpose answer that fits every problem.

Anyway, please follow @Deceiver_Blog and insist that everyone you know do the same. Blackmail them if necessary, using those Polaroids in your top left-hand desk drawer.

If you work at Twitter, feel free to comment. I dare you. (Stay tuned, folks. If I’ve pissed off the wrong parakeet, we may have yet another Twitter ID in a few hours.)

-hand desk drawer. your http://twitter.com/Deceiver_Blog
27
Oct

Harry Connick Jr. Calls Aussie Performers Racist

harry 2I figured there was no better way to express to each of you my dedication to the cause than to pick race and religion as my first topic. (And they told you Audrey Skepburn was classy?!)

Harry Connick Jr. found himself in the middle of a VERY uncomfortable skit in Australia on October 9th. He was a guest judge on an Aussie television variety show called Hey Hey It’s Saturday, when out walked six Sydney doctors in Afro wigs and black face to perform The Jackson 5 hit “Can You Feel It.” Aside from the whole “TOO SOON” aspect of the performance, the “tasteless” and “RACIST” elements just kept piling on.

Connick Jr. isn’t so dense that he didn’t realize how horrible it was. He gave the group a zero and then said it would be racist in America. Agreed. Watch the skit here only if you can keep yourself from passing out when you cringe for 10 minutes straight.

But, thanks to some pissed Aussie bloggers who tracked down the footage, Connick Jr. didn’t have a problem panning both race and religion in a MadTV skit in 1996 with Orlando Jones. Playing a black white southern preacher, he pitches his new record and then falls the ground shaking at the end of the sketch.

Apparently, it’s OK to cross the line if you’re promoting a record. Money is, of course, the most sacred thing. I guess it’s easy to stand up for your values when you’re halfway across the world, on a crazy, crazy-obscure TV show. Connick Jr. was practically in private.




October 2009
S M T W T F S
« Sep   Nov »
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
Deceiver Atom Feed
Bookmark and Share
About Deceiver
CafePress
  • Recent Comments

    • LN: Yeah right, they were so happy that they had a trial...
    • Anna: Was the term “not family-friendly” the...
    • coa coa: Sarah I loved this blog. There is alot of truth...
    • Jannah: Farrah’s documented pain immediately came...
    • Pastafarian: You are golden Swede that’s a big 10-4.
    • StrawberryGirl: Whenever a celebrity power couple says,...
    • StrawberryGirl: If you can already afford a smartphone,...
    • Swede0319: I got me a Smokey and the Bandit Trans Am....
    • Kelli: The sad part is, this guy actually does do some...
    • Pastafarian: Don’t forget the ‘vette Swede....
  • people like you crave deceiver

    • "When it comes to rounding up John Edwards news and links, I can’t hope to compete with Deceiver."Mickey Kaus, Slate

    • "Thank you for your awesome posts. Deceiver is by far the best new blog I discovered this year."Yeeeah!

    • "I love you. This site is like Dlisted if MK read newspapers."  – reader Nanners

    • "Thank you for having the balls to cut through the spin and hype" – reader Kim Hee

    • "OH … MY … GOD … Can I come and work for you people?" – reader Spengman

    • "There must be some hardcore vegans running this site" – reader David

    • "It is nice to get intellectual about something that really has no bearing on anyone’s life"Normality Restored

    • "Another blog filled with the angry ramblings of the jealous and envious" – reader wfc123 at Metafilter

    • "Interesting that most of the hypocrisy comes from popular and attractive women" – reader Joey at Metafilter

    • "Our new guilty pleasure blog"BigHeadDC

    • "Love your site btw, i’m so through with all that nasty perez-like gossip based on nothing…" – reader Nathalie

    • "How did I ever live without the keen insights and cutting observations of Deceiver!? And I mean that sincerely... I love your blog. " – reader Teresa

    • "Deceiver.com is our newest obsession" – reader Judi

    • "I don't visit Perez Hilton anymore. I like Deceiver for the solid content, and the lack of spelling errors. Deceiver has a head on their shoulders, whereas Perez Hilton just has head!" – reader Stella