Sunday, May 18, 2008

Shayne Not the Only Bachelor Contestant Who Can Act

Chelsea Wanstrath, who lost out to Shayne Lamas in the Spring 08 run of The Bachelor, was at the time heartbroken and claiming that her feelings were more genuine because it took her longer to arrive at them. See for yourself in the last half of this video.

She seems to feel that she was unfairly disadvantaged because Shayne was a "professional" actress. Chelsea says, "to me she was the falsest person here and for me to be up against her..." Matt Grant, the bachelor, comes to Shayne's defense. But despite Chelsea's allegations, an article in the Durango Herald shows us that Chelsea can do her own bit of acting.
"I think they're a better match," she nows says. "After watching the show, he's definitely not my type and not the man I thought he was. He's not athletically inclined, and I wouldn't want somebody to slow me down. When Shayne said she likes to shop, he thought that was cute. I didn't."

Sour grapes, anyone?

Then, to top it off, Wanstrath and many of her fellow contestants on the show, "thought Lamas, who is a professional actress, held an unfair advantage because of her experience in front of a camera." Wanstrath's mother adds, "we were suspicious of the whole thing - all these girls competing against a professional." (Read between the lines: "professional" means "super hot chick.")

Shayne Lamas at Rose CeremonyWhat? Being a a professional actress gives her an unfair advantage in competing for a man's heart? I'd agree if it was an audience voting thing, but what does experience being in front of the camera have to do with how much he likes her? I'm not even going to go into whether Shayne is a good actress. Sure, it might enable her to play as though she likes him when she doesn't, but he still has to like her. And I'll concede that actresses apparently turned him on. But, hey, some men like girls who are frugal and can find China on a map.

So, folks, that is what we call rationalizing in psychology terms, or just putting on a front (or acting) in street language.

Friday, January 18, 2008

Dr Phil Augers Himself In

I suppose it is heart-warming that Dr. Phil's aborted mission to save Britney Spears has finally exposed him as the media whore that he is. It kind of restores my faith in humanity.

As point of clarity on what actually happened at the hospital, TMZ gives the most credible looking report. Here's the real story.

So now Phil is trying to hold it together, but the wheels are coming off:

Tuesday, January 8, 2008

Dr Phil Charges in to Save Britney and Falls Off His Horse

Dr. Phil is probably the biggest hypocrite on the planet. You have to admit he's got it mastered though. He gives away gifts while hawking the products; he provides huge financial resources to help people while making himself out to be a knight on a white horse. He barges into practically every situation from Katrina to Natalie Holloway. He's on the news dispensing advice about the Georgia Tech shooter and never misses a chance to threaten people he doesn't like with, "you're going to have to deal with me." All the while, he spews out moralizing advice about the importance of family and children.

His latest is bid for media attention is trying to rescue Britney Spears from the hospital, by surprise to her, camera in tow. He's a media whore, and anyone who is watching him should know it. According to Celebrities Exposed tonight, and CNN, he wanted to do a taped intervention, but she wouldn't allow it.

Of course, he wants us to believe it was just altruistic effort and that he was called in by the family. But that is a bunch of fooey. First, he was called in by Lynn Spears, Britney's infamous mother who is herself addicted to media and in the process of releasing her own book. So what you've got here is a scheme by Lynn Spears and Dr. Phil to take advantage of the situation so that both can benefit from the publicity. How do we know that? Because if her daughter's welfare was first on her mind, there have to be a thousand psychologists in L.A. better than Dr. Phil who could have done it discreetly. (On the other hand, Phil might be the cheapest. You get what you pay for.) Obviously she called Dr. Phil because he is the most famous, widely publicized therapist in the world. She wanted the publicity, and he agreed to do it because he wanted the publicity too. If you still aren't convinced, he did show up with cameras didn't he? He could have gone alone and kept it private.

The huge public backlash cause him to cancel his plans to do a show and to do some serious backpedalling. Monday on CBS' The Early Show, Dr. Phil said he became involved Thursday night when he got a phone call from Spears' distraught mother. "It was Lynne. Clearly she was very upset. Any parent would be. I was first contacted by her family a year ago, and had maintained a running dialogue for the last year or so."

Later on in the day, he must have talked to The Insider tonight, where he says "I have been working with this family for a long, long time." Which in Dr. Phil-land I guess is a year. And what does he mean by "working with"? If he means doing therapy, he must have done a crappy job considering the present state of affairs. I think he really meant "working on" as in "trying to get them on my show."

I'm just pointing this out for the children and to help Phil live a productive life. Phil, you can't fix a problem that you don't admit to. Celebrity Expose tonight says "Dr. Phil wanted to do a televised intervention, but Britney wouldn't allow it."

Sorry, no Britney pics today. If I was Showbiz Tonight I would talk about how horrid it is that the news is putting Britney under the microscope, and then I would show all the footage of her. But just in the interest of not being a hypocrite for one post I'm not going to show any pictures or details of her private life. ;-)

Open Warning to Sacred Cows

To all sacred cows in the English speaking world: Take cover now because the magic of the World Wide Web has given me a pen. This means you, Dr. Phil.

I figure this blog will probably be a total waste of time. But what the fugk? There is probably only one other guy in the world who is afflicted by my bizarre obsession for watching television and news (yes, including entertainment "news") while at the same time being horrified by it. And that bloke is probably in jail for killing a TV programming executive.

Anyway, what follows is probably not safe for children, people with weak hearts, or religious fundamentalists. Be forewarned.