Just Can’t Get Enough: Sandra Bullock and Jesse James

I don’t even know what to say about this one.  Sandy Bullock recently won an Academy award for her portrayal in “The Blind Side”.  At the very top of her game, she was literally blindsided by the news that her husband had an affair with a tattoo model named Michelle “Bombshell” McGee *Paula rolls eyes*.

His statement: “The vast majority of the allegations reported are untrue and unfounded. Beyond that, I will not dignify these private matters with any further public comment. There is only one person to blame for this whole situation, and that is me. It’s because of my poor judgment that I deserve everything bad that is coming my way. This has caused my wife and kids pain and embarrassment beyond comprehension and I am extremely saddened to have brought this on them. I am truly very sorry for the grief I have caused them. I hope one day they can find it in their hearts to forgive me.”

Cheater Please.

Recently the floodgates have opened and there are as many as four (and counting) alleged mistresses (Tiger?). There were reports that both sides have begun shopping for divorce attorneys, but that was quickly poo-pooed by their reps.  Whatever Sandy decides, I’m sure Jesse will pay.

Well he is named after a bandit…

Another One Bites the Dust (The Divorce Chronicles): Kate Winslet and Sam Mendes

File this one under “amicable”. Kate & Sam have called it quits after 7 years of marriage (“the itch”, perhaps?). This one was surprising, as there were no outward indications that they were having problems. The concern here is really for the children, ages 6 (theirs) and 9 (her’s from a former relationship). The official statement: “Kate and Sam are saddened to announce that they separated earlier this year,” their lawyers say in a statement. “The split is entirely amicable and is by mutual agreement. Both parties are fully committed to the future joint parenting of their children.” Nice. Let’s hope they mean it.

The Un*Suit*able Files: Lindsay’s Loopy Lawsuit

So everyone has been discussing the ridiculousness of Lindsay Lohan’s $100 million  E*Trade lawsuit.  In case you have not heard, Lohan is suing E*Trade claiming that the company’s new commercial about a “milkaholic”, boyfriend-stealing baby (named Lindsay) — was modeled after her.  Her lawyer, Stephanie Ovadia, stated “Many celebrities are known by one name only, and E-Trade is using that knowledge to profit.”

What do you think?

Dear Lindsay – You’re no Oprah.  But you have great publicists.

I offer you two points:

1. It will be pretty hard to prove that the name “Lindsay” has the same name recognition of “Oprah”, “Madonna”, “Bono”, “Cher” or” Beyonce”.   Perhaps she’ll get a settlement?  I doubt it though, because E*Trade has already made a statement about the pending litigation:

The company’s full statement:

While E*Trade doesn’t typically comment on pending litigation, we felt it appropriate given the high level of interest in the E*Trade Baby. With the E*Trade Baby, our advertising campaign is meant to be witty and memorable, while effectively communicating the powerful investing tools and services offered by E*Trade. We believe the claims are without merit and we intend to defend ourselves vigorously in this case.

1. Merit or no merit – We ARE talking about Lindsay because of the lawsuit (at least I am) and like they say in Hollywood, “All Press is Good Press” (unless you are Tiger Woods).

That is all (Until next time…)