Thank God!! Ashley Judd is NOT going to run for a Senate seat in 2014. Hallelujah! As you know, I’ve been keeping my eye on Ashley’s possible candidacy since the rumors began shortly after the 2012 election. Ashley, to her credit, seemed to be making all of the appropriate motions for a potential candidacy, meeting with the DNC, stopping short of forming an exploratory committee, and she was already being vetted by the party. Republicans seemed eager for Judd to run too – they were praying that Minority Leader Mitch McConnell would have to run against a divorced Hollywood type who mainly lives in Tennessee. Personally, I didn’t want Ashley to be the Democratic Party’s standard-bearer in Kentucky because I think she has mental health issues and I think her candidacy would have been a hot mess. But no more worries, she’s not running!

Ashley Judd’s campaign for Senate is over before it began. After months of speculation about her political ambitions — during which time she met with the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee in Washington, D.C. — the Olympus Has Fallen actress took to Twitter on Wednesday, March 27, to officially announce that she would not, in fact, seek Republican Mitch McConnell’s seat in Kentucky next year.

“Dear Friends,” she wrote in the first of a series of tweets explaining her decision. “Thank you for these months of remarkable support & encouragement, for your voices, exhortations & prayers…Regretfully, I am currently unable to consider a campaign for the Senate.”

“I have spoken to many Kentuckians over these last few months who expressed their desire for a fighter for the people & new leader,” she went on. “While that won’t be me at this time, I will continue to work as hard as I can to ensure the needs of Kentucky families are met by returning this Senate seat to whom it rightfully belongs: the people & their needs, dreams, and great potential.”

The star — who ended her 10-year marriage to husband Dario Franchitti in January — suggested she had personal matters to tend to before she could devote herself completely to public concerns.

“After serious and thorough contemplation, I realize that my responsibilities & energy at this time need to be focused on my family,” she wrote.

Included in that family, of course, is sister Wynonna, who told Us Weekly recently that she would support Judd’s decision either way. “I’m going to love her and give her the love of a sister, which is what we all want. And give her the right to fail or succeed,” the singer said. “I’m going to support her and tell her if she needs shelter from the storm — oh, is she going to need shelter from the storm — I’m here.”

Wynonna even said she’d vote for her sister, even though she disagrees “with pretty much everything [Ashley] says.”

“I am for Ashley,” she told Us. “I am for Ashley because…I’ve seen enough movies to know that someday, we’re going to be 80 and 84 and I’m going to look back on our memories. And what am I going to remember the most? Whether she won or lost a campaign? Or am I going to remember that I was there in the wings applauding for her?”

[From Us Weekly]

See, now I’m actually excited about Ashley potentially being a power-broker behind-the-scenes. She can still raise a lot of money for the Democratic candidate, and she can do some events in Kentucky too, without getting the personal attacks she would have gotten if she was the candidate. Pundits were analyzing this last night on MSNBC, and the basic gist of the coverage is that Ashley’s withdrawal is no big deal for the Dems. Now the party gets to run someone who actually lives in Kentucky and they get to put the focus on McConnell, who isn’t even that popular in his state.

Photos courtesy of Adriana M. Barraza/WENN.com.

Here are some photos of Ashley Judd and Gerard Butler at last night’s LA premiere of Olympus Has Fallen, that stupid-looking movie where Gerry (I think?) plays a Secret Service agent trying to save the White House from an air assault or something. All I can remember from the trailer is that a plane takes out the Washington Monument, which is probably one of the most potent “Castrated America” images in the history of filmmaking.

I didn’t even know Ashley Judd was in the movie, so this is a bit of a shock. She plays the fictional FLOTUS apparently. Ashley looked pretty good on the carpet – I can’t find the designer ID, but I’m assuming it’s Herve Leger because it looks exactly like a Herve Leger dress. It’s a pretty color on her, and I like her hair length these days.

Ashley is the reason I wanted to cover these photos – I know most of you don’t care, but I’ve been following Ashley’s movements to become the Democratic Party’s nominee for the 2014 Senate race in Kentucky. She still hasn’t announced, although she does seem to be making all the right motions – she’s meeting with DNC people, she’s gauging the interest level within Kentucky, and I think she’s probably cleaning up whatever chaos and drama remains in her personal life. I still think Ashley would be a trainwreck as a candidate for state-wide office. The issue isn’t that she’s a Hollywood actress (although that won’t help in Kentucky) – the issue is that I feel strongly that she has some mental health issues. But regardless of my concerns, it does seem like Ashley is going to do it, and as such, the right-wing media machine has already spun into action to mock her. Here’s what happened at CPAC a few days ago:

Fox News contributor and comedian Steven Crowder mocked liberal actress Ashley Judd on Saturday during a conservative gathering, claiming she was strangely fixated on rape.

“By the way, in breaking news, Ashley Judd just tweeted that buying Apple products, again, is akin to rape,” he said at the Conservative Political Action Conference. “From her iPhone. Rape — now she knows how my brain felt after Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood. Oh, she said it. What is this obsession with Ashley Judd and rape? It’s pretty unnerving.”

As Mother Jones noted, Judd was sexually abused as a young girl.

Crowder was referring to an opinion piece Judd wrote in 2010, in which the actress lamented she was inadvertently supporting rape by purchasing Apple products and other electronics. The mining industry of the Democratic Republic of the Congo frequently employs violence, including rape, to coerce workers into producing the materials needed to manufacture electronics.

“My electronics, received as gifts or purchased, profit armed militias and support slavery,” Judd wrote. “I am financing mass rape as I enjoy these ridiculously Global North ultra-efficiencies and conveniences, for large scale rape is the preferred predation mining interests use to humiliate and terrify local populations, in order to control resource areas.”

Judd is rumored to be considering a run for the U.S. Senate in Kentucky. She would face Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

[From Raw Story]

Yeah. This douche is just some Fox News “comedian” (who has a history of saying really “funny” misogynistic stuff), so it’s not like this is coming out of Mitch McConnell’s mouth. But if Ashley gets into the race and she ends up going head-to-head with McConnell… oh, God. It’s going to be so much worse for her.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Soon after the 2012 election, the pundit class began discussing the election cycle for 2014. It happens every time and we fall for it every time! No one ever stops and takes a breath anymore. Anyway, Ashley Judd was quickly named as a possible candidate for a much-agonized-over Senate seat in Kentucky. The Senate seat is currently occupied by Sen. Mitch McConnell, the Senate Minority leader. Democrats see McConnell as an obstructionist and as a leader who is incapable of controlling his caucus. Republicans see McConnell as “too friendly” to the Democratic Party and “not conservative enough.” Which means that McConnell is probably going to have a Republican primary challenge, and then if he wins that (which isn’t a sure thing), then he’ll have to face Ashley Judd in a general election.

As of December, Ashley seemed to be weighing her options, considering what it would take to run for statewide office. A few months have passed, and people are STILL talking about Ashley and what a great candidate she would make, and I’m completely astonished that no one has even brought up the fact that she would be – to put it conservatively – an extremely flawed candidate for state-wide office in the South. It’s not just that she’s in the middle of a divorce. It’s not just that she’s seen as “Hollywood”. It’s that she’s flat-out cray. But Ashley has now met with the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and OMG.

Ashley Judd 2014? The actress, 44, met this week with the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee in Washington, D.C., Politico reports. The DSCC helps support Democratic candidates running for Senate — furthering suspicions that the Double Jeopardy star may indeed be interested in running against Mitch McConnell, the current Republican Senator of her home state, who is up for re-election next year.

More clues? Judd also dined with prominent Kentucky Democrats on Thursday in Louisville, with local TV station WHAS 11 reporting that Judd is told Congressman John Yarmuth and other VIPs that she is “leaning toward” running for Senate, and may decide by Derby Day, May 6.

Judd is even targeted in an attack ad from McConnell, in which he mocks the lack of viable Democratic opponents for the Senatorial seat and characterizes Judd as a “radical.”

The buzz around Judd’s political aspiration began last November, immediately after President Barack Obama”s re-election. “I cherish Kentucky, heart and soul, and while I’m very honored by the consideration, we have just finished an election, so let’s focus on coming together to keep moving America’s families, and especially our kids, forward,” Judd told Us Weekly in a statement.

Either way, it’s a time of transition for the star. Late last month, she and race car driver husband Dario Franchitti announced the end of their 10-year marriage. “We’ll always be family and continue to cherish our relationship based on the special love, integrity, and respect we have always enjoyed,” a rep for the couple said.

[From Us Weekly]

I just don’t see how this is a good idea. At all. Too much baggage, she’s getting divorced, she can’t make it through a ten-minute interview without spouting out a jumble of nonsense words, and let’s face it – she IS “radical” for Kentucky. She’s a liberal Democrat by Hollywood standards, which makes her a communist in Kentucky. If the DSCC decides to push Judd for the Democratic primary, the GOP will be celebrating. Trust me.

And just so you don’t think it’s completely anti-woman or anti-strong-female-candidates… the Enquirer has an interesting story about Eva Longoria also considering a run for political office in her home state of Texas. Allegedly, Eva has already been in contact with the Texas Democratic Party about a possible run for a Congressional seat. And you know what? She should do it! She would be an amazing candidate and public servant.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

This is sad news no matter how you feel about Ashley Judd, because no one ever likes watching a decade-old marriage fall apart. It turns out that Ashley Judd and her race-car driver husband, Dario Franchitti, are splitting up after 11 years of marriage. They certainly looked rather happy together at last fall’s Emmy awards presentation. Or rather, Ashley looked like she was piling on the PDA while Dario was looking at whatever camera would take his picture. Yeah, these two are totally done, and here are the details:

Ashley Judd and Dario Franchitti are splitting after more than a decade of marriage.

“We have mutually decided to end our marriage. We’ll always be family and continue to cherish our relationship based on the special love, integrity, and respect we have always enjoyed,” Judd, 44, and Franchitti, 39, tell PEOPLE exclusively in a statement on Tuesday.

After being engaged for about two years, the “Missing” star and the racecar driver tied the knot in a highly private ceremony in Scotland in 2001.

Judd’s sister, Wynonna Judd, served as maid of honor, while the groom’s brother Mario was the best man.

[From People]

So Dario’s brother is named Mario? How creative of their parents. But beyond awful puns on my part, this sucks for Ashley and Dario. I’m sure he’ll be fine (he might still be looking around for the nearest camera because honestly, he doesn’t look like the brightest bulb out there), and hopefully, she’ll be okay too. I’d make a half-hearted joke about Ashley penning another wordy essay that blames her divorce on the patriarchy (and I guess I just did), but really, this is sad. All the best to Ashley and Dario as they go their separate ways.

Photos courtesy of Fame/Flynet

I heard about these rumors just after the election last month, but Politico had a new story a few days ago in which several sources are now confirming something awesome/terrible. Ashley Judd is actively considering a Senate run in 2014. The initial rumors had her considering a run in Tennessee or Kentucky, but Politico says that if she runs, it will definitely be in Kentucky (which is where she grew up). And if she runs in 2014, that means she’ll be running against the current Senate Minority Leader (and thorn in Pres. Obama’s side) Mitch McConnell. You can read the full Politico story here, and here are some highlights:

Ashley Judd vs. Mitch McConnell? It might not be as far-fetched as you think. The Hollywood movie star and eighth-generation Kentuckian is seriously exploring a 2014 run for the Senate to take on the powerful Republican leader, four people familiar with the matter tell POLITICO. In recent weeks, Judd has spoken with Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) about the possibility of a run, has discussed a potential bid with a Democratic pollster and has begun to conduct opposition research on herself to see where she’s most vulnerable in the Bluegrass State, sources say.

Whether Judd jumps into the race remains far from certain. She’s reportedly also weighing whether to wait until 2016 to instead take on freshman Sen. Rand Paul, sources say. But if Judd does become a candidate, she would be the biggest celebrity to run for the Senate since Al Franken’s successful 2008 bid for the Minnesota seat. And her entrance would add a level of star power to a race that was already poised to be the highest-profile in the country with the Senate Republican leader up for a sixth term in 2014.

“She is doing all the things that a serious candidate exploring a race should do,” Rep. John Yarmuth (D-Ky.) told POLITICO after speaking with her. “I think there are a lot of people, and I was one of them, who wanted to let her know that her candidacy would be an exciting prospect for us. That’s what I wanted her to know. A lot of the labor unions, they were telling me that too.”

A Judd spokeswoman declined to comment beyond an earlier statement when the actress said she was “very honored” by the consideration, but didn’t shut the door on a run.

Democrats privately acknowledge that recruiting isn’t easy against McConnell, as the state’s strongest Democrats may instead run for governor in 2015 rather than face the GOP leader’s machine in a bare-knuckle Senate bid. That’s why some Democrats are calling on Judd to run — she could raise a ton of cash, energize the base and would have significant name recognition in the state. Yet other Democrats are nervous about her prospective candidacy: She’d be pegged as a liberal, out of touch with conservative Kentucky; she has no experience running for office; and she now lives outside her home state.

McConnell’s campaign is already talking about how it’s prepared to tear apart any Democrat who joins the fray.

“It’s going to sting,” Jesse Benton, McConnell’s campaign manager, warned to any candidates considering a run. “We’re going to make sure that you don’t come out with your nose clean. We’re going to drive your negatives up and very aggressively and publicly litigate your record before the citizens of Kentucky.”

“This is not a free run to prime yourself for future office in ’15,” said Benton, who declined to comment on Judd specifically.

[From Politico]

Politico goes on to discuss the causes Ashley has been involved with over the years, including AIDS research, treatment and prevention, women’s right to choose, and her criticism of mountaintop removal mining. She’s a well-known and out-spoken liberal Democrat, which will help bring money to a possible race, of course, but it doesn’t even guarantee her the Democratic nomination in Kentucky, considering the more conservative demographics.

But really… this is just further evidence (in my mind) of how out-of-touch most political operatives are about “the real world”. Anyone who has read a celebrity blog over the past year would be able to tell you this is a horrible idea. Ashley Judd should be considered an extremely flawed potential candidate for state-wide office. Her speeches would be nonsensical ramblings of “big words” thrown together, and she wouldn’t be able to handle legitimate (or off-side) criticism without throwing a massive hissy fit and calling all Kentuckians “misogynists” for failing to compliment her “flawless skin”. Can you even imagine Ashley in a debate against Sen. McConnell? Good God, that would be a mess. I guess strategically, it would make sense to run Judd against McConnell if the Dems feel like they have no chance at the seat and they just want to raise money or something. But even then, surely there are better candidates?

Photos courtesy of WENN.

At last night’s Emmy awards we had Hayden Panettiere promoting her much-hyped new musical drama, ABC’s “Nashville.” Hayden wore this odd-looking gold embroidered Marchesa draped in blue tulle. It looked somewhat like a craft project, but the fact that I couldn’t immediately identify it as Marchesa is a step in the right direction for the label. Red Carpet Fashion Awards points out that it’s from a Bollywood-themed collection, which I wouldn’t have guessed. If you think of it as a full-coverage type sari it make sense. Otherwise I couldn’t really figure out what was going on with it. Kelly Osbourne said it made Hayden look matronly, but personally I just found the look underwhelming. I actually liked Hayden’s topknot and makeup, just not with that dress.

Hayden’s co-presenter and Nashville co-star, Connie Britton, was a mess from head to toe. This makes me sad because I loved Britton on “American Horror Story” and find her so pretty. She easily had the worst hair and makeup of the night with that odd half-up, half hot rolled style. Her makeup was so heavy-handed it made her look squinty. She wore heavy black eyeliner paired with pink lips! Plus the dress doesn’t flatter her at all. It was so tight along the bodice and waist and seemed cheap. The deep v-neck made her boobs all squished and fake-looking, especially on camera. She reminded me of Melissa Leo, and that’s not a good thing.

Hayden and Connie presented right after the bit where Jimmy Kimmel asked the home audience to tweet that Tracy Morgan had passed out onstage. I checked twitter and it was getting a lot of play, but the joke seemed to fall flat after that. It was funny in theory.

Ginnifer Goodwin also was a miss in this orange embroidered Monique Lhuillier gown. Fashion blogs loved it, but I found it kind of tacky-looking and overdone. Ginnifer loves to push the fashion envelope. Her makeup was ridiculous too.

Since we’re on a roll with bad fashion, I’ll include Ashley Judd in this purple Carolina Herrera dress. I usually love Hererra, they dressed Renee Zellweger for years, but this dress is so prom-like with the huge bow behind the neck, the dippy belt, and the fishtail. Plus the brooch is overkill. It’s Ashley’s styling and pose-hard that ruin this look though. Check out her poofy Bride of Frankenstein hair and giant drop earrings. Ashley’s husband, racecar driver Dario Franchitti, is super hot, though.

Gretchen Mol of “Boardwalk Empire” was lovely with beautiful hair and makeup and a striking strapless scarlet gown. The dress could have been more fitted, but some flattering shoes would have completed this look. She’s a victim of the scroll down, as our friends at Go Fug Yourself often say. Those shoes are awful! They’re lines of fussy red bows for God’s sake. “Boardwalk Empire” won an Emmy for best directing, along with technical awards like cinematography, art direction and visual effects in a supporting role.

Finally, I’m going to end with the worst dressed of the night, in my opinion, Lena Headey of “Game of Thrones.” (There’s plenty more Emmys fashion coverage to come today of course.) She bugs me so much as Queen Cersei, and I have a similar opinion of her as a person. We received a whole press release e-mail from Lena’s hairdresser on how he created her style. Her hair isn’t bad, it’s just this dress! It’s like 80s lingerie with that skimpy see-through underlay paired with a dotted lace cape thing. This is Armani Prive, but if you told me it was Fredericks of Hollywood I would believe it. You know she thinks she looks great too. Like “Boardwalk Empire,” “Game of Thrones” won some technical Emmys: for sound editing and mixing, visual effects, art direction (they tied with “Boardwalk Empire” in that category), makeup and costumes. This dress is like a bad costume for a fan convention.

Photo credit: WENN.com and FameFlynet

Here are some new photos of Ashley Judd yesterday, filming a segment for Extra. I’m sure she’s promoting Missing, but at this point, hardly anyone is talking about her show. Everyone is talking about “the puffy-face controversy” because Ashley is still talking about it too. As we previewed yesterday, Ashley gave an interview to NBC to further explain her face and excoriate her critics, just as she did in her Daily Beast essay. Interestingly enough, Ashley continues to shill her flawed (in my opinion) argument, which amounts to “People said mean things about me, and that makes them misogynists.”

Once again, I think Ashley is simply angry that people said mean things about her, and that they say harsh things about women – not that women are judged on their appearances in general. Ashley’s point is NOT “We should not say things about a woman’s appearance, good or bad, because a woman should be judged on her mind.” Ashley’s point is “People shouldn’t say mean things about my appearance in particular because it’s anti-woman to notice when I have a puffy face.” It’s absolutely fine with her if you want to compliment her “flawless skin” (her words) or say that she looks pretty.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

In the new interview, Ashley claims, “I think it’s hatred of women that invites the criticism… I think it’s the objectification of girls and women and this hypersexualization of our society that invites the criticism.” Hypersexualization? In my opinion, that’s a separate argument. Our society does hypersexualize women, and it’s especially creepy when young girls are hypersexualized. But I don’t understand the point here, with Judd. Is she saying that our culture is so sexualized that we don’t put worth in a woman if we don’t deem her “sexy”? Valid and interesting point, but is that what she’s saying? Or is it that a once-beautiful Hollywood starlet, who relied and profited from her beauty and her “sexiness” for years and years, had never before had her appearance criticized?

Judd continues, “It doesn’t have anything to do with me, really, and how I look… There was no presumption of goodwill. The conversation went straight to, ‘Oh my gosh.’ [There was a] nasty, vitriolic and gloating tone. I started to catch the double bind where, you know, my face looks puffy, ‘She’s had work,’ you know? And then, look at the same image in a different interpretation by a separate set of people is, ‘Oh, come on, she doesn’t even have any wrinkles at all, she’s clearly had work.’ So, I look bad, I’ve had work. I look too good, I’ve had work.” Except that no one was saying she looked “too good”! Sorry. That amused me. But really, no one was like, “She looks awesome, she must have had work done.” People only talked about the “puffy face” because she did look so noticeably different.

The worst part of Judd’s flawed argument (once again, in my opinion) was the part where she talks about how women try to “fix” their appearances and the cycle of seeking self-worth in beauty products and exercise equipment. This, coming from a woman who had a long-standing contract with Estee Lauder. At the very least, if you consider Ashley’s argument to be valid and without flaws, you have to admit that she was actively engaged with and profiting from this misogynistic system (that she’s now blasting) for years.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

These are some new photos of Ashley Judd and her husband Dario Franchitti at an LA screening of Ashley’s new ABC show, Missing, at the Paley Center. Can I just interject for a moment and tell how crappy that show looks? It looks AWFUL. I don’t know if the show is better than the commercials, because I haven’t watched it, but just the idea of Ashley going all Jason Bourne and running around Europe, kicking ass… it just looks horrible. Now, Ashley looks pretty good in these photos. Is that terribly misogynistic to say that? That Ashley looks healthy and pretty here? Or is it only anti-woman when you point out that a woman looks less attractive? Why are we talking about a woman’s appearance at all? Oh, right. Because she’s a film and television star who has made millions of dollars off of her appearance through Hollywood work and beauty and modeling contracts with Estee Lauder and others.

Some people took offense yesterday to CB’s coverage of Ashley Judd’s Daily Beast essay. I’d just like to say… I cosign CB’s thoughts and then some. In my opinion, Ashley was not making a larger argument about patriarchy and the objectification of women. She was just angry because people talked about how she looked puffy and waxy, much like someone who had recently gone in for fillers and Botox. She was angry because people said she looked BAD, not because people were talking about her appearance in general. And you know what? She had and has every right to be angry, and she has every right to defend herself. But I too think she’s full of it for couching her defense in a larger feminist discourse, especially when her defense includes the phrase, “When my skin is nearly flawless, and at age 43, I do not yet have visible wrinkles that can be seen on television…”

Anyway, Ashley is going to be interviewed tonight on the NBC Nightly News. She basically going to double down on her (flawed) argument, judging from this preview on Today:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Photos courtesy of WENN.

I’ve written before about how Ashley Judd rubs me the wrong way. We’ve just heard too many stories about how she’s a diva and how she treats people badly. Jason Patric, who worked with her on stage in 2003, even called her “a lazy and arrogant actress.” Well Ashley is back with a role on television in ABC’s “Missing.” She was looking a little puffy during her press duties last month and outlets pointed it out and wondered if she’d had too many fillers. Ashley’s rep responded with a statement that she was getting treatment for a sinus infection. That was in mid March and the press has long since moved on, so case closed. Not so fast. Ashley wants us to have a larger discussion about what this means for our society. At least, I think that’s what she means. You can read her essay here. It’s really long and I’m only excerpting part of it:

As an actor and woman who, at times, avails herself of the media, I am painfully aware of the conversation about women’s bodies, and it frequently migrates to my own body. I know this, even though my personal practice is to ignore what is written about me. I do not, for example, read interviews I do with news outlets. I hold that it is none of my business what people think of me. I arrived at this belief after first, when I began working as an actor 18 years ago, reading everything. I evolved into selecting only the “good” pieces to read. Over time, I matured into the understanding that good and bad are equally fanciful interpretations. I do not want to give my power, my self-esteem, or my autonomy, to any person, place, or thing outside myself. I thus abstain from all media about myself. The only thing that matters is how I feel about myself, my personal integrity, and my relationship with my Creator. Of course, it’s wonderful to be held in esteem and fond regard by family, friends, and community, but a central part of my spiritual practice is letting go of otheration. And casting one’s lot with the public is dangerous and self-destructive, and I value myself too much to do that.

That women are joining in the ongoing disassembling of my appearance is salient. Patriarchy is not men. Patriarchy is a system in which both women and men participate. It privileges, inter alia, the interests of boys and men over the bodily integrity, autonomy, and dignity of girls and women. It is subtle, insidious, and never more dangerous than when women passionately deny that they themselves are engaging in it. This abnormal obsession with women’s faces and bodies has become so normal that we (I include myself at times—I absolutely fall for it still) have internalized patriarchy almost seamlessly. We are unable at times to identify ourselves as our own denigrating abusers, or as abusing other girls and women.
A case in point is that this conversation was initially promulgated largely by women; a sad and disturbing fact. (That they are professional friends of mine, and know my character and values, is an additional betrayal.)

News outlets with whom I do serious work, such as publishing op-eds about preventing HIV, empowering poor youth worldwide, and conflict mineral mining in Democratic Republic of Congo, all ran this “story” without checking with my office first for verification, or offering me the dignity of the opportunity to comment. It’s an indictment of them that they would even consider the content printable, and that they, too, without using time-honored journalistic standards, would perpetuate with un-edifying delight such blatantly gendered, ageist, and mean-spirited content.

[From The Daily Beast]

So she didn’t really deny getting anything done. Reading that made me confused, but I don’t see a denial in there anywhere. It’s all about how other people are at fault for pointing it out, and how the media is focusing on the wrong thing. When someone gets plastic surgery and it’s noticeable people are going to point it out. Plus there’s this thing called The Internet where a lot of people talk smack. Yes it can be annoying, but it exists and it’s human nature. It’s not some horrible conspiracy to keep people down.

I do believe her that she was taking steroids and that she gained a little weight, it’s basically what I wrote at the time. She already addressed this in a statement from her rep back when we were talking about it a month ago. What changed? Did it take her this long to whip out her thesaurus and condemn everyone? She actually talks like this, and it’s just as mind-boggling, if not more so, to her her speak. As she wrote at the beginning, she’s above all this anyway so why bother? Is it because she wants to point out how above it she is and how wrong we are? When it doesn’t personally affect her, does she even care?

In related news, Ashley’s show “Missing” is likely to be canceled.

Ashley is shown on 3-14 and 3-12-12. Credit: WENN.com

Yesterday we ran a story about Ashley Judd’s face looking puffy. News outlets were speculating that she’d had fillers. I wrote that her face may have been filled out due to a medical condition and/or steroids, and a lot of you agreed. Some of you mentioned that Ashley is rumored to be bipolar, and that a side effect of bipolar medication can be weight gain and water retention. Also, Ashley had her adorable dog Buttermilk with her during an interview, and Buttermilk was seen at the airport with her wearing a “service dog” vest for some reason. So it sounds like something is going on medically with her. We do know that she sought treatment for depression several years ago as she was open about it at the time.

Ashley’s rep has issued a statement to explain his client’s changed appearance. He claims that Ashley has a sinus infection and is on medication for it. I don’t think that it explains what’s going on. They don’t owe it to us to explain or anything, but given all the coverage of this, I definitely get why they did. Here’s more:

“For the record, this is unequivocally not true,” Judd’s rep, Cara Tripicchio, told E! News. “Ashley has been battling an ongoing, serious sinus infection and flu. Therefore, Ashley has been on a heavy dose of medication to overcome it so she could get on a plane and travel to Toronto and New York to fulfill her commitment of completing four consecutive days of press to promote her new show Missing.”

Judd herself tweeted as much this morning, writing, “Thanks to all asking how I’ve been feeling. still very sick (flu + viral infection in sinuses = wicked) but staying positive & having fun.”

Hard as it may be in the wake of the speculation.

“This may have contributed to her face appearing ‘puffy’ on the talk show in Toronto, however anyone who is truly paying attention and not looking to perpetuate a ridiculous story can look online further at photos of her last night during an Apple Store event in NYC and see for themselves that there is zero sign of plastic surgery, puffiness, fillers, etc., that has become a silly and erroneous topic of conversation. Ashley is a natural beauty enjoying her 40′s gracefully.”

[From E! Online]

I googled “Tamiflu side effects,” and it’s possible that this explains why Ashley’s face is puffy. One of the side effects of an allergy to Tamiflu is “facial swelling and severe nausea.”

Well I’m not buying the “natural beauty” part of this denial, but I hope that whatever is going on with Ashley that she’s ok. She still bugs me. As I said in the earlier post, whenever I gain weight it goes straight to my face so I do feel bad for pointing it out with her.

The photos in the blue dress are from yesterday. Photo credit Wenn.com.