The finals of the 2006 edition of Athlon’s cheerleader contest are underway. (Another hat tip: Scott Fort.) And I think it’s time to retire those “inbreeding” jokes, because once again it’s the West Virginia gal who has my vote.

Vote for Lindsey! She’s from West F***in’ Virginia!

That said, not to take anything away from the lovely Lindsey, but back in Round 3 — which was absolutely loaded with, uh, talent, yet somehow produced only one finalist — Valorie from Oregon was totally robbed!! East Coast Bias, I say!! :) I’m heartbroken: not only is she gorgeous, but she’s a Political Science & Journalism major. She coulda been a contender! I blame Pac-10 refs.

Then again, I wouldn’t be quacking so much about Valorie’s defeat if she’d lost to Gina from Minnesota or Heather from South Florida. But Caris from North Texas?! I mean, she’s okay, but c’mon! This voting makes about as much sense as the Katherine Harris Poll.

Anyway, you can choose your cheerleader here.

P.S. This post brings to mind again the need for something along the lines of a “hot babes” category on the blog. I’ll have to work on that.

P.P.S. I love you, Becky. :)

For horny heterosexual males everywhere, these may be the saddest words ever* spoken: “There is not a sex video of Kevin and Britney in existence.” So says Kevin Federline’s lawyer.

Stupid lawyers, always ruining everything.

*or at least the saddest words spoken since those NFL cheerleaders denied engaging in hot girl-on-girl action in a Tampa bar bathroom.

Who knows if this is actually true, but…

Superstar Britney Spears is facing a mega divorce payout because she did it again and again and again…on a honeymoon sex video.

Dumped husband Kevin Federline has been touting the four-hour tape for sale and has already been offered £26 million.

A film company wants to make it available online to fans around the world. …

Britney, 24, fears the raunchy footage will destroy her wholesome image unless she caves in to his demands for a £16million payoff and custody of their children Sean Preston, one, and Jayden James, eight weeks.

Her wholesome image? Heh.

So, over the weekend, I’m perusing the Notre Dame page of the AOL Fanhouse blog when I notice an intriguing headline pop up on “The Word”: Kirk Herbstreit Calls Erin Andrews “Poopsie”. I think to myself, “Yeah, I think I remember hearing that, and wondering, ‘What the hell?’” So I click the link. It says:

Kirk Herbstreit took time out of [Thursday’s Tigers-Cocks game] broadcast to apologize to South Carolina fans for wearing an orange tie. He said his wife chose the tie and had no idea what teams were playing tonight. Of course, he may just have to apologize to his wife for the sorta-flirty-and-intimate reference to sideline reporter Erin Andrews as “Poopsie”.

Not much information there. A bit of Googling, however, brings me to this post with more details and, uh, analysis of the situation:

After watching the Thursday night game between Auburn and South Carolina, I decided enough is enough. Let’s get it out there and see a show of hands – who thinks Kirk Herbstreit and Erin Andrews are getting it on? Herbstreit has been married since 1998, has 3 year-old twin boys, and a house just north of Columbus, OH. Week after week, his poor wife must witness the endless flirting on national television. In fact, I almost felt obligated to hop in the car and drive to Columbus to console and maybe sleep with his hot wife when I heard Herbstreit say to Andrews, “Poopsie, you should get back in the tent.�

Further Googling reveals that this is hardly the first time the blogosphere has engaged in shameless, gossipy Herbstreit-Andrews speculation. For instance, more than three weeks ago, Mark May Be Wrong discussed the “over/under” on “the number of times Kirk bangs the bejesus out of Erin Andrews after one of their Thursday Night games.” Hurrah for new betting opportunities! :) But the most extensive Kirk-and-Erin talk that I could find was at Barstool Sports, which has a whole discussion on the question: “Do you think Kirk Herbstreit is banging Erin Andrews?”

Now, let us all collectively wag our fingers at this awful blogospheric intrusion in the private lives of poor Mr. Herbstreit and Ms. Andrews… and then gossip about them in comments. :)

Anna Nicole Smith’s lawyer revealed yesterday that he’s the father of her newborn baby. (Hat tip: Jessica Cowans.) Bonus: the lawyer’s name is Howard Stern. No, he’s not that Howard Stern, but I almost had you with the headline, didn’t I?

Said Stern, “Anna and I have been in a relationship and we love each other, and it’s been going on for a very long time, and because of my relationship as her lawyer, we felt that it was best to keep everything hidden.” Well, that makes sense. If there’s one thing they teach us in Professional Responsibility, it’s that whenever there’s a possible conflict of interest, or any other ethical problem really, it’s always best to keep it hidden. Wait, that’s not right…

Anyway, why should we care about this? Er, I’m not sure. All I know is that Anna Nicole Smith has enormous boobs, and she once married some old rich dude for his money, and she went to the Supreme Court because of it, and Clarence Thomas stared at her chest. Okay, I don’t actually “know” that last part, but I’ll bet it happened. Also, Smith has been in the news lately because her 20-year-old son, Daniel Wayne Smith, mysteriously (and some say suspiciously) died at her bedside just days after the birth of the baby whose paternity is now in question. None of which actually makes any of this validly newsworthy, but did I mention she has enormous boobs?

Gahrie is blogging about boobies.

Boobies… I love boobies!

Meanwhile, Ann Althouse is taking a closer look at breasts. More blogger boobs here (scroll down; SFW, pretty much). (Hat tip: InstaPundit.)

UPDATE: Welcome, InstaPundit readers! Hmm… the title of this post was a joke… but maybe I will start doing a Friday “carnival of the boobies.” Why not? Check back next Friday to find out! Heh.

Anyway, since people who clicked Glenn’s link are presumably looking for, uh, boobie-related and/or hot-babe-related material, here are a few potentially relevant items, from the archives:

(more…)

Paris Hilton, arrested last night for DUI, says she just wanted a little In-’n-Out.

You know, the burger joint. What were you thinking? Jeez, get your minds out of the gutter! ;)

Hamdan, Shamdan. The really big news of the day is that Britney Spears posed naked — pregnant and black-haired — for the cover of a magazine!

Who needs serious, important debates about the Geneva Conventions and executive power in wartime when we can look at Britney’s boobies?

Seriously, my mental reaction upon seeing the headline on CNN’s homepage — “Britney Spears poses nude for cover” — was, literally, “HOLY CRAP!”

Fark.com has some more of the pictures, as well as some not-so-flattering commentary. (Personally, I think pregnant women are sexy, so the fat jokes don’t really do anything for me. … Well, okay, the picture of the manatee saying “Look at me! I’m an attention whore!” is pretty funny. But only because it’s Britney, not because she’s pregnant.)

Of course, you know what this means: Britney is officially one step closer to that Playboy shoot that every heterosexual male in this country has been hoping for since the …Baby One More Time video debuted in 1998 (though perhaps the hopes have become less fervent in the last couple of years). I predict it happens roughly 15 months from now, after Plan A (dumping K-Fed), Plan B (another weepy interview, this time with Barbara Walters instead of Matt Lauer), and Plan C (a torrid, well-publicized fling with Fabio) all fail to revive her career.

Incidentally — to tie this all together — I think it’s fair to say that Britney probably disagrees with the Hamdan decision, in light of her past statement that “I think we should just trust our president in every decision he makes and should just support that, you know, and be faithful in what happens.” Damn you, John Paul Stevens, why don’t you trust our president in every decision he makes?! WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA?! ;)

P.S. Speaking of attention whores, Paris Hilton has reportedly dumped Matt Leinart — either because she wants more “me time,” or because she’s got a new guy (or two or three), depending on who you believe. Apropos of which, the modifier “attention” in the segue to this paragraph was probably unnecessary.

P.P.S. If anyone is wondering, the title of this post is a reference to this earlier post.

Regime Change Iran covers the political aspect of today’s Iran-Mexico game — specifically, the fact that, even though this guy was at the game, “tens of Iranian fans” (which, admittedly, doesn’t sound too impressive when you put it that way) “cheered their team but also staged a significant anti-regime protest” by waving the country’s old, pre-Revolution flag. Particularly poignant (and hot!) was the sight of Iranian women — who are banned from showing skin and from going to sports stadiums in Iran — waving the old flags and cheering for their team:

(Hat tip: Charles.)

If it’s a choice between those Iranian fans and this Mexican fan, I’m totally pulling for Iran. :)

Then there were the Iranian fans wearing Israeli flags, which is sort of like being an Irish Trojan… as if such a thing even exists! Oh, wait…

Arielle Goodley is shocked, SHOCKED that St Hilda’s college at Oxford University — an all-female school — won’t let her wear her nightgown to breakfast. On the bright side, Arielle, now the entire world has seen you in your nightgown.

Ah, there’s nothing like a manufactured controversy whose entire raison d’etre is to create an opportunity to show pictures of boobies. (Hat tip: Fark.)

Speaking of which, I really need a blog category for “hot girls” or “boobies” or something. I’ll have to work on that. :)

UPDATE: I don’t mean to imply that Arielle Goodley is, in fact, a “hot girl,” because, well…

At last, a story of college-athlete misbehavior that we can all feel good about:

Northwestern University suspended its women’s soccer team Monday while the school investigates alleged hazing involving players last year. …

A Web site on Monday displayed pictures allegedly of Northwestern soccer players in T-shirts and underwear, some wearing blindfolds and others with their hands tied behind their backs. Other women had words or pictures scrawled on their bodies and clothes, and it appeared some were drinking alcohol.

The Web site in question is BadJocks.com, and when they say that college hazing rituals are seemingly becoming “more intense, more violent and more sexual in nature,” they have the photos to prove it… kinda.

(Possibly SFW — no nudity, just college girls in their underwear — but I’m putting it “after the jump,” so you can decide for yourself. Parental discretion advised, I suppose.)

(more…)

Hmm… did Matt Leinart use some money from his new NFL contract to buy his new girlfriend a pair of nice gifts? (SFW.) I don’t recall Paris looking quite so, uh, curvy before. Heh. (Hat tip: Fark.)

There, does that make up for my previous lack of cleavage photos, guys? :)

P.S. More on Paris and Matt here and here.

P.P.S. Leinart speaks. He sounds rather bitter. (Though it may not really be him speaking, according to Deadspin.) Scott Wolf is unimpressed.

After a whopping 2.33 inches of rain in less than 36 hours, Noah’s Flood turned to Noah’s Drizzle today, with a light-yet-everpresent, annoying rain plaguing Domers as they attempted to move out of their dorms. Walking across campus this afternoon, I noticed one undergrad girl, carrying a large box and trying to stay dry under her flimsy umbrella, while wearing a light, unzipped jacket over a thin, low-cut shirt that was showing a lot of cleavage, and all I could think was, heh-heh, heh-heh, boobies that’s an awfully impractical outfit to wear while moving out on a rainy day!

Alas, I did not get a picture of said girl — apologies to my lecherous male readers — but I did get pictures of several impressive piles of abandoned furniture and other junk from the dorms: the wretched refuse of another year under the Dome…

How many times were parietals violated on those couches, I wonder? Ah, if those cushions could talk, the sinful stories they’d tell! ResLife would be most interested, I’m sure. :) Anyway, yeah, if you’re looking for a free couch, and you don’t mind it being rather soggy, now would be the time to come visit Notre Dame’s campus…

Meanwhile, although many of the students moving out looked rather miserable in the conditions that they were forced to deal with, the ducks didn’t seem to mind the weather at all:

Quack, quack.

Y’all remember this sculpture of a nude Britney Spears giving birth, created as a shameless publicity stunt “pro-life” statement by a New York artist?

Well, Britney has finally spoken out about it: “I think it’s the most hysterical thing I’ve ever seen in my life. My assistant and I were totally dumbfounded when we saw it. We couldn’t believe somebody actually did this.” She added that she did not believe the sculpture was “a serious attempt to display the beauty of birth,” according to the article’s paraphrase. And she has no interest in buying the sculpture: “No thanks. They can display it somewhere, but not in my beautiful home.”

Alas, she did not say what Fark jokingly claimed she said: “No way is my ass that big.” Heh.

In a related story, my previous post about this topic has not caused a notable increase in my website’s traffic due to skeevy search-engine searches. :) My number one search term at the moment is salmon helmet.

I’m not sure how I missed this, but apparently, there’s a possible major Congressional sex/corruption/lobbyist scandal brewing… and it may have involved (Republican) member(s) of Congress having sex with prostitutes — provided by lobbyists — in the Watergate Hotel. This has led, inevitably, to Wonkette labelling the scandal “WatergateGate.” Heh. Also: “Best. Scandal. Ever.” And, in an earlier post: “Boring Ol’ Congressional Corruption Case NOW WITH HOOKERS.” Daily Kos has more — and before you dismiss this whole thing on the basis of the fact that I just linked to Daily Kos, consider that the Kos post in question actually links to an article from that Thursday’s edition of that commie pinko left-wing rag, the Wall Street Journal. Excerpt from the WSJ:

Federal prosecutors are investigating whether two contractors implicated in the bribery of former Rep. Randall “Duke” Cunningham [(R-California)] supplied him with prostitutes and free use of a limousine and hotel suites, pursuing evidence that could broaden their long-running inquiry.

Besides scrutinizing the prostitution scheme for evidence that might implicate contractor Brent Wilkes, investigators are focusing on whether any other members of Congress, or their staffs, may also have used the same free services, though it isn’t clear whether investigators have turned up anything to implicate others.

In recent weeks, Federal Bureau of Investigation agents have fanned out across Washington, interviewing women from escort services, potential witnesses and others who may have been involved in the arrangement.

As yet, it’s hard to tell if there’s really any there there, aside from the picadillos of the already-disgraced Mr. Cunningham. But if this scandal has legs (er, so to speak) and spreads (ahem) beyond Cunningham, it obviously has the potential to capture the public’s imagination in a way that mere bribery and corruption cannot. There’s nothing the public loves to pretend they hate more than good old-fashioned sex scandal… except, perhaps, a good old-fashioned sex scandal involving Republicans. (If only it were a gay sex scandal involving Republicans… alas.*) Add in the illicit nature of the sex (prostitution is illegal, after all), and better yet, the honest-to-goodness importance of the lobbyist/corruption issue, and suddenly — voila! hallelujah! — there’s a legitimate reason for the media and blogosphere to talk endlessly about all the tawdry and embarrassing details that are sure to come out if this thing progresses (kinda like how Clinton’s perjury and obstruction of justice gave us all an excuse to read Ken Starr’s glorified porno… c’mon, admit it, you scrolled past everything until “Sexual Encounter #1″). Bottom line, if this thing blows up — and if it stays confined to Republican members of Congress (not necessarily a sure bet) — it’ll damage the GOP way more than any mere lobbying scandal. And it’ll also be way more fun.

*Actually, come to think of it, if it were a gay sex scandal, the general public would probably not want to hear the gory details so much. Unless of course it involved gay women — preferably NFL cheerleaders. Conservative Republican congressmen having threesomes with the Carolina Panthers cheerleaders, provided by lobbyists, in the Watergate hotel… now that would be a sex scandal. :)