Lady Gaga -- The Grammys

I have never really been able to work out Lady Gaga's outfits. However, one has to agree she is never short on the making a scene front. If you asked me to name a Lady Gaga song or album, then I would have to look it up. I am not a "fan" in the music sense of the word. Yet, to be honest I have not listened to any of her music that I recall.

However, she is one of those artists that you just cannot miss. And, I think it is the 'excellent' wardrobe choices that she makes for award shows, arriving at airports, or just strolling the streets, that keeps her in the public eye. More power to her for being true to herself!

Is this a barely does the trick outfit, or what?

"Scandalous" Advertising...

This could be an interesting debate, "What constitutes scandalous advertising, and should it be banned?"

Some of the names that have been approved as trade marks recently include: Knut clothing (Kunt clothing was rejected -- wonder why? Reminds me of FCUK), Hot Cock foods, Porn Star clothing, and as the picture above shows, Cocaine, which has been approved for some time as I recall.

Funnily enough, the Trade Marks Registrar would not approve religious related words as trade marks. So, words like: Jesus, Mecca, and Hallelujah did not make the cut. I wonder if Muhammad could be trade marked?

What constitutes scandalous and what scandalizes is going to very from person to person. Scandalous is clearly subjective and therefore who should be responsible for determining what is likely to scandalize us or offend us.

I am not sure that I am into eating Hot Cock foods or wearing Porn Star clothes (last time I checked porn stars tended not to wear a whole lot of clothes). Yet, I am also not scandalized by the names being trade marked or if others decide to purchase the products on offer.

Interesting times we live in.

Fashionable Veeps -- The Palin Cost

Choosing a Vice Presidential candidate does not come cheap when you are clothing a family of five kids and getting them looking all dapper to hit the campaign trail. The Republican National Committee has found this out as it has spent more than USD 150,000 since late August. Now, this is funny in that truly perverse kind of a way. The Republican ticket has been claiming how in touch it is with the problems facing America and ordinary citizens.

The problem as I would see it is that there are not many citizens earning that sort of money that they can be dropping more than 150K on accessorizing. Some of the bills that have been filed in public financial expenditure statements include an almost 50K shopping spree at Saks Fifth Avenue, a more than 75K bill from Neiman Marcus, and almost 5K in hair and make-up expenses.

This has caught the interest of campaign finance experts who have been quick to suggest that personal use items such as clothes and make-up are generally prohibited. Simply, campaign funds are not and cannot be used for personal items.

The RNC's initial response was to blow the whole thing off as politicking. However, the most recent response of the RNC has been to suggest that all of the goods that have been bought for the Palin's are going to be donated to charity after the campaign. In this case it seems that the Salvation Army store could be in for a windfall. It is not often you pick up Saks and Neiman goodies at bargain basement prices.

There is little doubt that the Democrats should get some good yards out of this one as the Democrat financial expenditure statements do not include any similar spending.

At least now the people, the citizens, those that are going to be casting ballots know how much it has cost to keep the Palins looking good!