Fashionably Right

Fall Out Boy's Grammy Fallout

Amy Winehouse, 6
Kanye, 8
Fall Out Boy, 0
For sure Amy and Kanye deserve it. I mean, who doesn't get excited when the DJ starts spinning out Rehab or any one of Kanye's raps off his album Graduation.
But, so does Fall Out Boy! Pete Wentz and the band should be upset! They were asked to play at the nominations and then didn't get anything! I would be pissed if I was on tour with TOP single releases and then get nothing, while Taylor Swift grabs a nom! seriously?
I went to the FOB concert at MSG and they were unbelievable! The Plain White T's who are also great got a nom and they opened for FOB!

"got bitterness?"  he blogged. I would!
What Pete said,

the first reaction is jealousy mixed with a slight sense of entitlement. we just want to be a part of your club...other than the fact that we play the events for you and the right parties all the time...its kind of like being invited to a birthday party and then not allowed to eat the cake.- it shouldnt mean much. (almost) noone in this industry has vision beyond the fear that this week is their last paycheck. we want our songs to be immortal and a statue doesnt do anything to help them live forever...a fifty year old white man shouldnt decide whether we are relevant or not- and he doesn't. we wanted to thank you for making us feel relevant- for sitting up all night to get into our shows and for buying our music...this is not a disappointment, rather a revelation on what is truly important.

Pete, you are so right. So be upset! Keep blogging! and maybe the grammy committee will wake up!
For this time, the grammy's are not Fashionably Right!

Backstage with MJ

A little Fashionably Right insight...
This may be contradictory to my political leanings, but I happen to LOVE fashion by Marc Jacobs.
I do support his clothing line, but I do not support his political advocacy. But, that does not stop me from buying and wearing his line.  Also, Fashion Designer Levi Okunov, who I model for, worked for Marc in designing his lines!!!

His jackets are unbelievable (just look at the picture of me wearing one of them!) as well as his dresses...and I obviously can't leave out his shoes!
Every time I am in a store that sells Marc, those trademark buttons of his yell out to me...
"wear me, wear me!" So how can I say no...I CAN'T!

I also had the amazing opportunity to attend the NYC Marc Jacobs fashion show in February 2006!!! Ok, but even better, I went BACKSTAGE....was photographed by the magazines and newspapers...and spoke to him!!!

All in all, sometimes politics needs to be in the background because Fashion must come first!
If it didn't, then I would just be Right...not Fashionably Right!!!

picture 1: Taken by me, backstage at the Marc Jacobs Fashion Show. That is Marc...but I'm hoping you already knew that!
picture 2: That is me, backstage at the show! Of course, I am wearing Marc Jacobs!

Hopeful for 2008

Last night was not successful for the republicans. Dems---be happy as you probably are! It's a shame Nancy Pelosi will be Speaker, but I think this will shed light on the need for a Republican majority in 2008 as well as the Presidency! *which is even more important!

We're bringin' HEALTHY back!

Model dies on catwalk (Models Blog)

I'm sure by now most of you have heard that a Uruguayan model died while walking the runway. Even if you have heard the story a million times, keep reading, because I will bring to light a unique view, being that I am a runway model.

Here's a little bit about me and my experience: I am a model, and yes, I walked the catwalk during the 2006 NYC Fall Fashion Week. Since my modeling debut as a young teenager, I have been around what you can call "ultra skinny" models that have zero body fat (in some cases, negative). This has been the trend. However, lucky for me, and that is health-wise, not necessarily career-wise, I have never immersed myself so deeply to either pick up drugs to lose weight and/or develop a lettuce-based eating diet. As you can see in my pictures, I am skinny, yes, I know that. I like being skinny! Everyone likes being skinny! Admit it! However, there is a big difference between being skinny and being able to look at vs. looking like an emaciated concentration camp victim.

I have experienced rejection in the fashion industry, as everyone does. Sometimes, there is a specific look the designer is going for, and other times, it is based on body proportions. For the past few years, the emaciated models are getting the huge paychecks and campaigns. Behind the scenes, I have witnessed models snorting drugs, looking at food in frustration that they can't have it, as well as complaining that they "are fat!" I mean, come on. I look at them, then at myself, and tell them, if you are fat, then I am obese! Which, obviously, is not the case. In fact, most guys do not even like ultra-skinny girls as girlfriends. Some meat on the bones is necessary!

Reality: It is a shame that this 22-year old model died. It is a shame that no one got her help. And it is even a worse shame that she began a 3-month starvation because she was told "she could be an international sensation if she was thinner!" But, with tragedy, usually comes the realization that something needs to be changed. That is the case, here. For Spain's Fashion Week, bans were enforced on overly thin models that were below a body mass index of about 18. Apparently, modeling agencies that employ these models claimed "thin discrimination." Tough!

After effects of thin ban: Perhaps, I will get more modeling jobs! Perhaps, models will start eating again! Perhaps, celebrities such as Nicole Ritchie, Kate Moss and Posh Spice (Victoria) will go to rehab, gain some weight, and be able to grow into a size zero. However, a definite after effect (at least inSpain) is the ability for the public to be able to look at models and not want to feed them!

In the world, especially the fashion world, thin should always be in! But emaciated thinness should be out!

Therefore, for your benefit and the benefit of others, take my aforementioned advice in
'bringin healthy back' because I am Fashionably Right!

Don't let the Dems take the House!

Midterm election poll results (Reuters)

I do not believe poll results! Especially when 1) they are run by democrats and 2) they reveal democrats winning. According to recent poll results, however, democrats are expected to take back the House, and possibly, the Senate. NBC thinks the results are due to "Iraq and Bob Woodward's new book on the Bush administration's handling of the war to the unfolding scandal over former Florida Rep. Mark Foley's e-mail messages to teenage congressional aides."

First of all, Bob Woodward only analyzes what he thinks, are negative aspects of the Republican party and Republican Presidents, i.e. Nixon and Bush. Even though it does, his book should not have much of an affect on independents and those right of center, due to its extreme biasness. Secondly, the War is necessary! Even if people are not in total agreement with all the strategies employed, if a democrat was running the show, which thankgoodness that is not the case, we would either not be fighting terrorists or have left Iraq a mess. Therefore, Americans must look at the positive results, even though with the liberal media "spinning" the issues, it is hard. Thirdly, if Mark Foley is having such a negative effect for Republicans, then Clinton's scandals, should have been an even bigger negative factor for the Democrats. But, he has very high approval ratings and his wife even got elected. Thus, the reasons which were cited by NBC, should, in fact, not be what the American voter is looking at in terms of who to vote for. Also, the bankrupt Air America (as discussed in a previous post) should bring down the Democratic Party.

But--If the Dems happen to win back the House (which would be a huge disaster for America), the result would be the Republicans growing even stronger and holding onto the Presidency in 2008!
Either way--the Repubs win! However, it is usually as a remedy to fix up what the Dems screwed up!

Hopefully, this post will help those of you who may voting for a Dem this upcoming election, to realize that going left, does not equal being Fashionably Right!

Who has the looks: Elephants or Donkeys?

Who would you rather look at?
The strong, independent, manly “elephant” vs the weak, dependant, feminine “donkey”?

Sean Hannity “The elephant” vs Alan Colmes “The donkey”

Face it- the Democratic Party is in a state of turmoil. Since they have no ideology or goals, except to go against everything “Right,” they have resorted to choosing candidates based on looks.

Clearly, Sean beats Alan in the TV “looks” and “brain” departments.  But they are not running for election, so the Democrats search out “model-like” candidates. They want voters to vote for looks and not pay attention to the dearth of political substance in their methodologies. Just like voters did for Bill Clinton. The Dems are “casting the race to the realm of beauty contests.”

Mike Arcuri, NY Congressional candidate district 24, has a so-called political theory of his own: "voters have an immediate, visceral reaction to candidates that, if powerful enough, can trump ideology or party affiliation.” This, in my opinion, hurts him and his campaign. I, for one, would not vote for someone who demoralizes the intellectual capacity of a person and then expect that person to vote for you. But, like most Democrats, they don’t have anything to talk about as far as issues that will affect society in a beneficial way. Unless looks are everything.

Don’t get me wrong, looks do have power.  But they don’t have power when a politician actually references his own use of that power. Leave it up to the Libs to debase human intelligence!

Again, thank you Libs~

For making Republicans look even more Fashionably Right than they already do!

Just registered with Technorati!

Technorati Profile

Thank goodness for cold weather

Do 'Real Men' Wear Flip-flops? (FoxNews)

If you plan to ask me out on a date, just make sure 1) that you are not wearing sandals/flipflops while doing so and 2) do not show up on my doorstep in them! This brings me back to high school when a guy asked me out on a date wearing flip-flops. I said yes to the date, thinking he would be appropriately dressed to take me out that Saturday night for dinner and movie. Well, I thought wrong. He showed up in shorts! (wrong #1) and sandals (wrong #2). I don't even know what movie we saw, because the whole night I was trying not to pay attention to the hairy, dirty toenails and the exposure of his legs as well as thinking of things in advance to say during dinner so that I didn't have a case of Freudian slips.  I felt so embarrassed to be seen on a date with someone so slovenly dressed. However, I gave him another chance, since I am an understanding and genuinely sincere person. But, on one condition: he needed to wear shoes and pants on date #2, which he successfully did! I said all this in a cute and delicate way, obviously!

The flip-flop craze and ones acceptance/opposition to it, have nothing to do a girl being high or low maintenance, but first impressions are key no matter what. Regardless if the date is to the movies, dinner or a party, I try to always look my best; therefore, a guy should as well. Exposing feet or even "hair" on the feet does not constitute looking ones best. In New York, the flipflop phenom is not as bad (at least for half of the year) due to the cold winter weather, but in Miami where I am from, sneakers/shoes do not exist unless playing sports or attending a black tie event. Flipflops are out of control in that warm climate, and I for one, am not a fan.

A new era is emerging in terms of the flipflop craze. Rapper DMX recently claimed that real men don't wear flipflops. This could spark a trend away from the metrosexual, a term given to men who embrace feminine trends such as manicures/pedicures, fashion and clean-cut appearances. The trend back to masculinity for the real man is due to the advent of rappers "dissing" metrosexual men and even Jay-Z for wearing them and Arnold Schwarzeneggar referring to "girly men," who express femininity. As for me, thank goodness for the trend. I am not against a person choosing to express their individuality, but there are certain things that I just cannot deal with in the fashion world. Steve Kemble, who hosts a show in Dallas called "Stylin Steve," clearly nails the point that "The flip-flop thing for men really got out of control." He also continues with "I'm always baffled at that makes men think women will be attracted to them in a two-for-$10 pair of Wal-Mart flip-flops." Thank you Steve. You hit the head of the hammer. This brings me back to my original point: Unless you are going to the beach, do not wear flip-flops! Hair on the toes, dirt in toenails and on the bottom of the feet are in no way attractive-in fact, they are revolting!

This is not just the case with men though. The Northwestern women's lacrosse team showed up at the White House in flip-flops. What a disgrace! That is the most classless thing possible. That is just as bad as showing up to church/temple in them. Flip-flops denote disrespect. Just make it simple: don't wear them!

One more thing- if you don't listen to my advice and still think wearing flip-flops makes you seem cool, the least you could do is wash your feet before going to bed, going on a date, etc! But never and I mean never wear socks with them!

On a final note - you will get more dates if you don't wear flip-flops!

Trust me, I am always Fashionably Right!
 

LibeREALity

Air America Radio files Chapter 11 (AP)

Whether or not one wants to admit it, America is moving in the RIGHT direction! Today, October 13, 2006, Air America, filed for bankruptcy. The controversial episodes attacking the President as well as the overwhelmingly leftwing co-hosts have proven to be detrimental. Americans no longer want to hear from people like Janeane Garofalo. Being a democrat and being a left-wing extremist are not one and the same. The American public has spoken by not tuning into Anti-American liberal media outlets like Air America and CNN.  There is a reason why FOX NEWS has for the first time in about ten years SURPASSED CNN in terms of ratings. This is a sign! Rush Limbaugh listeners are higher than ever! So, Air America's goal of trying to compete with Rush, has, in actuality, resulted in Americans realizing the craziness of the left-wing and the intelligence of everything right of that. I just want to say THANK YOU to the media that has showed the public Liberal Reality!

Left-wing media can never be fashionably right!

Partisan List-serv

This was an email sent by the Columbia University political science department...

WHY VOTE?
October 21st, 10:30-5pm
Skylight Room
CUNY Graduate Center
34th St and 5th Ave

Against the War on Terror announces a new teach-in in anticipation of the upcoming mid-term elections. Why Vote? will examine what voting means and what it's worth in an age marked by terror and diminished expectations. How do we think about voting when the options seem so narrow but few alternative forms of political action seem available? Nobody wants to be mistaken for the merely apathetic non-voter, but voting for the 'least worst' option is hardly an inspiring use of our ballot. Can one be against voting in the name of real democracy, or is that a substanceless, radical pose that makes a mockery of hard won political rights?

Is it possible for the heading of this email to be any more misleading? If it is not misleading, then the purpose of the meeting should be why a person should vote, not why a person should vote "in an age marked by terror and diminished expectations." Not only is this statement extremely negative, but fosters anti-American anti-progress sentiment. If the heading of the email had read “Against the war on terror,” which, in actuality, is the REAL goal of this left-wing skewed email, I would not have  opened it. But, it was not. I understand that in America we are all granted freedom of speech and I also realize that it is within our rights to send out a partisan email. However, I do not feel that the political science department should subject its entire list-serv to a biased and partisan email, especially if:

(1) it did not originate from Columbia (it was sent to a supervisor who decided to send it out…partisan?)
(2) the event is not even taking place on Columbia’s campus (CUNY graduate center)
(3) is misleading as to the real subject matter (“Against the War on Terror”)
(4) is partisan and does not offer viewpoints from both sides
(5) in which the probability that the email would have been sent out if it was entitled “For the War of Terror” is less than, well let’s just say, would not have been sent.

If the supervisor was truly nonpartisan, if the political science department was, in fact, not one of the most liberal political science departments nationwide, then, perhaps, the email could have been forwarded to the college democrats who could have then forwarded it to their "followers."

But then again...sensible thinking...at Columbia?

The action that should have occurred, for obvious reasons, did not occur. The underlying objective is not “why vote” or even to inform the reader that mid-term elections are approaching, but to stir up anti-Iraq War, anti-rightwing sentiment.

To me, this is logical reasoning! But who can dispute me?

I am always Fashionably Right!