porno

Who says there’s any bad blood between The Hills co-stars Audrina Patridge and Lo Bosworth? Not I! For how can I ever doubt the bond of friendship that exists between these obvious BFFs after seeing these new photos of the pair shopping together (whilst filming scenes for the coming season of The Hills) at the Fred Segal boutique in West Hollywood, CA (the very same store were Britney Spears recently did some shoe shopping) this earlier this week:

HMMM … there may have been some bad blood between these ladies last season on The Hills but it looks like they’ve put all that negativity behind them. At last … it looks like all well in the land of The Hills. Meh … all this lovely dovey stuff’ll prolly only last an ep or two.

[Photo credit: Splash News]

It would seem that Amy Winehouse is feeling much better since being released from the hospital just a few days ago. Despite the fact that she is showing the symptoms that might lead to the development of emphysema and despite the fact that she had to be hospitalized for about a week after passing out on her doorstep, Amy Winehouse is back into the swing of her crazy life. Here are new pics of Amy checking out some magazines before picking up a few bottles of booze (to her credit, mini bottles of booze — Smirnoff vodka and two bottles of Jack Daniels whiskey) at a convenience store in London after visiting her husband Blake Civil-Fielder in jail (on charges that he attempted to pervert justice) earlier today:

Also to her credit, she looks pretty good … better than I’ve seen her in I don’t even know how long. I understand that Amy picked up her supplies on her way to Hyde Park for rehearsals ahead of Nelson Mandela‘s 90th birthday concert scheduled for tomorrow night. I’m sure the promoters were thrilled that she thought ahead to bring her own pocket-sized booze. HMMM … does anyone else think that Nelson Mandela deserves better?

[Photo credit: Splash News]

So … there’s been a lot of hawt beef on the blog today so let’s take the hawtness level down a notch (well, depending on your tastes, this might ratchet the hawtness level up a bit) … can you guess which A-List celeb was spotted sporting all this body on the set of his new movie which is currently filming in Hawaii?

If you’ve been paying attention over the past few days around here, you might have a pretty good idea who it is. After the jump, find out if you’re right by checking out a couple new photos of this shirtless wonder …

Here’s a bit more hawtness to follow up on the new Becks bulge that we’ve been treated to already today … soccer, sorry, fútbol superstar Cristiano Ronaldo (who plays for Becks‘s old team Manchester United) was spied sunning it up in Sardinia, Italy this week and thus far I’ve been far from impressed with what I’ve been seeing … all his canoodling with his ladyfriend isn’t really all that interesting to me. I find these photos of the lad all by himself much more appealing:

You know, I’m never quite sure what goes well with short swim trunks … it’s good to know that a simple rosary adds just the right flair to the ensemble. WOOOO man, those bronzed muscles look great glistening in the sun … I have to make a note to get my ass to the beach as soon as I get back to LA. Sure, Cristiano won’t be walking around in SoCal but seeing these pictures of him has inspired me to take in the local sights available to me at home ;) When does this guy get his own underwear ad campaign? Someone needs to sign him up, like, NOW!

[Photo credit: INFdaily]

The blog We Love Beckhams has come across two more David Beckham photos from the new Fall/Winter Armani Underwear ad campaign. Previously we got to see the first two photos from this Armani Underwear campaign (HERE and HERE) and now we get two more photos from the same batch, which appear in the latest issue of Grazia magazine:

Woot! Me likey! Personally, I think this batch of Becks bulge pics for Armani Underwear are much hotter than the first batch we got at the beginning of the year. I understand that there are supposed to be 5 photos in total from this new batch … that means there should be one more pic on the way. EmporioArmani.com has been updated for the new Fall/Winter campaign but, thus far, the site only features one new photo of David Beckham (the one where he’s wearing the black undies while in repose). Must have more Beckham bulge!!! I hope the final photo does come out soon :)

[Source]

Last night Liz Phair played the first of two sold out shows at the Hiro Ballroom here in NYC and I was fortunate enough to attend last night’s show. Because my ticket came thru at the last minute (thanks Tito!), I wasn’t able to secure a plus one ticket but there was no way I wanted to miss last night’s show. Liz Phair is doing a very short tour (only 3 cities) in support of the 15th anniversary redux version of her amazing debut album Exile In Guyville. On Monday she played San Francisco, CA, on Tuesday she played her hometown of Chicago, IL and last night/tonight she plays NYC. Here are a few of my pics from last night’s show:

Liz was in fine form last night. I’ve been lucky enough to see her a few times on tour (in Detroit, Toronto, Grand Rapids) but never in such an intimate setting as last night’s concert. The Hiro Ballroom is tiny and the stage was practically in the middle of the audience … pretty much everyone in the place was close enough to reach out and touch Liz on stage. I loved every second of her performance. She played all 18 of the songs on Exile in Guyville and an extra encore set of 3 extra songs, one of which was a new as-yet untitled song. After the jump, check out more pictures from last night’s show, the full set-list, some of Liz‘s quotes from the stage and a video of her new, untitled song …

• Brangelina donate $1 million dollars to the children of Iraq.
• The Verve return with their first album in 11 years.
• Say it ain’t so! GyllenSpoon shackin’ up?
• Jamie Lynn Spears gets some help and lessons from her mama on how to be a mama.
• Sarah Jessica Parker picks her post SaTC project.
• Kid Rock is just kidding when he tells his fans to “steal” his music.
• Is Miley Cyrus putting ex-boyfriend Nick Jonas on blast in her new song?
• Has Tim Gunn‘s fear of LA driven him to Saudi Arabia?
• Waterfalls? In NYC?
• Nick Lachey soaks up the sun.
• Vanessa Minnillo hits the pool … well, the poolside.
• Xtina Aguilera does Larry King Live.
• Nelson Mandela has a bitchin’ 90th birthday party.
• George, Brad and Matt to take on Cyclones.
• Jason Schwartzman is 28, Chris O’Donnell is 38, Sean Hayes (Will and Grace) is 38, Harriet Wheeler of The Sundays is 45 and Chris Isaak is 52 years old today. Click HERE to see who else is celebrating a birthday today.
• I think Tim McGraw was a bouncer in a previous life.
• Madonna is lookin’ to adopt 10 more kids.
• Oh.My.Grossness. The thing you’ve feared in your worst dreams is a reality … the Mini Me sex tape.

Thanks to the industrious folks at the Dutch site Film Blog, who brought along their trusty cameras to the Cinema EXPO in Amsterdam this week, we now know that the new live-action GI Joe movie (which is set for release next year) will be titled GI Joe: Rise of Cobra. This title is prominently featured on a few new posters for the movie which were snapped at the Cinema EXPO event. Here is the poster which features Sargent Duke Hauser, played by Channing Tatum:

Woot! This poster looks great! It’s the perfect look for the live-action version of GI Joe. I’ve mentioned before my fears that a live-action movie version of the GI Joe cartoon might be disappointing but everything that I’ve seen thus far has waylaid those fears. I love the casting, I love the costuming and I love the title of the movie. After the jump, check out two more posters which feature Sienna Miller as The Baroness and Ray Park as Snake Eyes …

For the first time in our nation’s history, the US Supreme Court (the highest court in the land whose rulings can only be overruled by amendments to the US Constitution — which is the document that rules our body of government and law) has directly addressed the meaning of the Second Amendment to the US Constitution (“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”) and ruled that said amendment protects an individual’s right to bear arms (own guns). Previously, the Supreme Court has only taken on the issue and ruled on matters pertaining to the individual States’ rights to bear arms in order to maintain a militia but has remained silent on the rights of individuals. This silence has allowed individual states to enact various forms of gun control in order to limit (for the good of the people) individual rights of gun ownership. I realize that this sort of news isn’t usually the kind of fare that we enjoy around here but (since I am a student of political science, history and government) I find this ruling hugely important and worth discussion:

The Supreme Court declared for the first time on Thursday that the Constitution protects an individual’s right to have a gun, not just the right of the states to maintain militias. Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority in the 5-to-4 decision, said the Constitution does not allow “the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home.” In so declaring, the majority found that a gun-control law in the nation’s capital went too far in making it nearly impossible to own a handgun. The decision upheld a federal appeals court ruling that the District of Columbia’s gun law, one of the strictest in the country, went beyond constitutional limits. Not only did the 1976 law make it practically impossible for an individual to legally possess a handgun in the District, but it spelled out rules for the storage of rifles and shotguns. But the long-awaited decision did not necessarily mean that gun laws from coast to coast, many of them far less restrictive than Washington’s, would be swept aside. Joining Justice Scalia were Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Clarence Thomas, Anthony M. Kennedy and Samuel A. Alito Jr. A dissent by Justice John Paul Stevens asserted that the majority “would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons.” Joining him were Justices David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer. The high court’s ruling was the first since 1939 to deal with the scope of the Second Amendment, and the first ever to directly address the meaning of the amendment’s ambiguous, comma-laden text: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” The court concluded that the amendment protects an individual right to bear arms, but it also said that the right is not absolute, opening the door for more fights in the future. Lawmakers across the country may look to the decision as a blueprint for writing new legislation to satisfy the demands of constituents who say there is too much regulation of firearms now, or too little, depending on the sentiments in their regions.

Again, I have to stress how monumentally fascinating this is for me. I studied Constitutional Law in college (as my plan was to eventually go to law school) and I know how much of a big deal it is when the US Supreme Court makes a ruling like this. Altho the court qualified their ruling by stating that the individual’s right to bear arms “isn’t absolute”, it’s hugely significant that the court took on the specificity of how the Second Amendment applies to individual citizens. While I personally am for gun control (in that I don’t believe that any ol’ person should just be able to walk into a gun shop and purchase a weapon without some sort of screening process), I have to side with the Supreme Court on this ruling … I’ve always personally have been of the mind that the Second Amendment applies to individual citizens but prior to this ruling that was never made clear by the Supreme Court. I don’t always agree with the rulings of the court (I’m having a hard time swallowing their other recent ruling that the death penalty cannot be applied to cases of child rape because it is “cruel and usual punishment”) but I think they got this one right.

[Source]

At long last we finally have photographic proof that Angelina Jolie is still pregs and has not given birth to the twin babies that she is expected to bring forth into the world in August. As you may recall, Entertainment Tonight erroneously reported (by way of a fake source) that Angelina gave birth to her babies a few weeks ago. Despite the fact that Brangelina reps officially denied the report was true, ET remained steadfast in their conviction that their story was true … maintaining that since Angelina has not been photographed since their report came out their report still has validity. Today, In Touch magazine provides photographic proof that Angelina Jolie is still very much pregnant. Here are new photos of Angelina snapped on June 22 on the veranda (some may call it a lainai) of the new Brangelina manse in the South of France:

There has been speculation in the world media that Angelina Jolie already had her babies, but just four days ago on June 22nd, In Touch Weekly’s photographer got a rare shot of Angelina still heavily pregnant, taking a break from bed rest. These photos capture the actress hanging out with children Shiloh and Zahara outside Chateau Miraval the home she, Brad and the kids are staying at in the South of France. While her official due date is in August, insiders tell In Touch that she will deliver around July 15.

And there you have it. I *knew* that ET didn’t have a leg to stand on as their bogus story fell apart all around them (once news of the fake Angelina assistant started going around, I was sure their story was totally wrong) but they maintained their story was true based on the fact that no photos exist of Angelina still pregs since their report came out. At this point, they’ll prolly maintain that either these photos were not taken on the date claimed by In Touch or that Angelina is still faking it (by wearing a fake baby bump, a la Katie Holmes) to make people think she’s still pregs.

After the jump, check out close-ups of Angelina and her baby bump …