ADDED: Same song, in concert, recently.
Showing posts with label Cher. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cher. Show all posts
Stripes: yes. Men in shorts: no.
And the baby agrees with me.
Now, to continue with my idiosyncratic review of fashion at the Farmers Market in Madison this morning:
1. Men in Shorts is a complex subject, and some men do better than others:
Note that the 2 men in shorts are both wearing black socks, yet only one is making a bad mistake. The other one is doing it right. Plus, carrying a kid on your shoulders is a good look for a nonsleazy guy.
2. Here are 2 women dressed completely differently, and both, I think, are completely charming:
3. I would also like to express my strong approval of this latter-day hippie look, heavy on the day-glo pink — and, in the case of "Cher," day-glo green:
And I'm giving hippie boy a pass on those knickers.
"As the Ghost of a Gentleman, dead these 260 years and more, I should be happy to welcome Mrs. Bono to the Astral Plane..."
"... upon her Departure from her Earthly Frame, which she seems greatly intent upon preserving from Decay."
Sir Archy, our ghostly commenter from the 18th century, made an appearance here in the early hours of the morning — in the Cher post.
Sir Archy, our ghostly commenter from the 18th century, made an appearance here in the early hours of the morning — in the Cher post.
The Supreme Court decides the "fleeting expletives" case.
SCOTUSblog reports:
Splitting 5-4, the Supreme Court upheld the government’s power under existing law to ban the use on radio and TV of even a single four-letter word that is considered indecent — but left open the question of whether the ban might violate the First Amendment, at least in some situations. The Court, in an opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia, said the Federal Communications Commission’s switch in policy to ban even a fleeting use of such a word was “entirely rational” under the law that governs federal administrative powers....Glitteratae... female glitterati? Cher was involved. And Nicole Ritchie.
His written opinion, in a case dealing with uses of those four-letter words during performance awards broadcasts involving celebrities, took a swipe at “foul-mouthed glitteratae from Hollywood.”
Basically, the ruling simply means that the FCC provided a sufficient explanation of why it switched from a more relaxed policy on “dirty words” to a near-total ban on “fleeting expletives.”So the constitutional free-speech question remains.
... Justice Clarence Thomas, in a separate concurring opinion, said he would be open to reconsidering two of the Court’s major precedents that allow the government the constitutional authority to treat broadcasting differently from the rest of the press for First Amendment purposes. Those two precedents — Red Lion Broadcasting v. FCC in 1969 and FCC v. Pacifica Foundation in 1978 — brought a “deep intrusion into the First Amendment rights of broadcasters”....Bring it on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
