I’ll say something nice about Pamela Anderson to start this off – at least she hasn’t jacked her face up yet. She’s tried to cling to her youth with incredibly dated, heavy-handed makeup for years now instead of resorting to Botox and fillers like so many of her contemporaries. At least I think that’s the case. It’s hard to tell under all those layers of pink, black and orange.

In Pamela’s world it’s still 1994, she’s still on Baywatch at the height of her fame and she’s still in her late 20s. That’s the only way I can explain this outfit, that strut and that makeup and hair. Only Pamela just turned 44, which is what she’s celebrating here as we await her next nip slip. These photos are from a birthday party on Saturday in Vegas. (Although her actual birthday was July first.) She’s looking really hard and busted with those penciled in eyebrows and that super low-cut lace curtain valance dress, but again it’s nothing new from her. I like her shoes, but they need a sleeker dress and a more sophisticated look to pull off.

This reminds me of those “makeunders” that Oprah did last year. There was one Canadian mom who would go out of the house looking like a porn star, or basically like Anderson, every day. Oprah’s people redid her hair and makeup to make her look like a hot mom instead of a hooker and she claimed she liked it. I imagine the woman went right back out and tarted herself up again because she couldn’t stand the lack of attention. What I’m saying is that no style intervention with Anderson would ever work. Trying to get her to wear big people clothes would be like trying to get Hugh Hefner to ditch the robe and wear khakis. It’s not going to happen.

It was even worse from the back if you can believe it.

Photo credit: Fame and WENN

Pamela Anderson may not have the hotness factor going for her at this point, but Photoshop can erase most of her drag queen vibe and restore her to a semblance of her former Baywatch self. Anderson, 43, has earned her 13th Playboy cover with their upcoming January issue, which makes it a new record for the most covers by one woman. There’s no word as to how nude she is inside, but again technology has advanced significantly in all the time that has passed since Pammy should have put it away. Anderson did do a “Dolce Vita” themed photoshoot at the Playboy mansion grotto pool in October, and Playboy.com seems to promise that she’ll be naked inside. I guess older dudes are the only ones left buying magazines. (I am not slamming women’s post-40 hotness factor in any way, just Anderson’s. She’s over the top and has pulled so many half-dressed stunts that I’m over her. I also can’t get over how she does her makeup. She’s a mom but never seems to have advanced, style-wise, past her early 20s.)

US Weekly has some quotes from a poem Anderson pens that’s inside the magazine, and her ‘poem’ is just as ridiculous and full of sexual innuendo as you might expect.

Pam Anderson shows off more than her famous assets when she graces Playboy for the 13th time.

The actress-turned-activist displays another little-known skill: she’s a poet!

In a poem she penned to accompany the eight-page nude pictorial in the mag’s January issue, Anderson, 43, muses about the new Sexual Revolution and the need to do good.

“Our best isn’t good enough — right now our eyes are far-reaching,” Anderson, who first landed the cover of the mag in 1989. “Please let’s show the good in us. . . The brilliance. . . The wonderful. . . It’s abundant — it’s just not tapped as it should be.”

The mother of two, who refers to herself as “just a sex symbol” even calls out “All the negative ads run by our politicians,” and urges them to “Put that money to good use.”

She also shows her support for President Barack Obama, writing, “So many are with you. . . I can think of many positive parts of now. . . That you spearheaded.”

Her final thought? “May all your bombs be bombshells.”

[From US Weekly]

I’m sure Obama is thrilled to have Anderson’s support. She’s thinking of Obama’s “positive parts” that he “spearheaded.” She must be getting some awesome weed in California fueling her sexy deep thoughts about the President and life in general. She’s not as “tapped” as she should be. I’m more interested in hearing what Russian agent Anna Chapman has to say. Now she probably has some excellent seduction and spy tips that she can clearly articulate above a grade school level.

Pamela was reportedly paid only $25,000 for this pictorial. She’s going to donate the money to charity, which may not be the best idea considering that she’s rumored to be bankrupt.

Also, when are Hef’s 20-something sons going to take over Playboy? The dude is not making the best decisions at this point and should hand over the reins already.

These are photos of Pamela Anderson arriving at the Vivienne Westwood show in London a few days ago. Go Fug Yourself commended Pam for actually being covered up and not looking so blatantly like a 50-year-old hooker eating pancakes at Denny’s at 4 a.m. But I think Pam still looks like hell – look at her horrible makeup! And while the dress isn’t terrible, Pam makes any outfit look ridiculously trashy. Meh.

Anyway, Pam recently gave an interview to a television show in Romania (sure, why not?), and she discussed her history of nude modeling and how it affects her two sons now:

“My children are made fun of because I have posed naked,” confessed actress and model, Pamela Anderson while attending a Playboy party during a two day tour in Bucharest.

“When you pose, you are not thinking that one day you will have children who will see it,” added the 43 year old mother of two during an interview with Romanian channel, Pro TV.

Anderson is traveling through Europe as part of a tour for the Playboy Mansion. During the interview she also showed her commitment against animal abuse and domestic violence.

“I have known domestic abuse first hand, and so did my mother,” stated Pam who accepted to play the saxophone, an instrument she’s been playing since she was six years-old, along rumanian singer, Loredana Groza.

[From The Superficial]

Pam has admitted before that her two sons get teased about her sex tape, so I guess all of those school kids found their dads’ old copies of Playboy starring Pam. Poor boys. Is this why Pam’s sons are violent terrors? Or are they violent little bastards because Pam and Tommy suck as parents? Well, look at it this way – if Pam and Tommy had daughters instead of sons, those girls would be following in their mom’s footsteps into pornography right now. Something to think about.

Also – Hollywood Life is asking whether Pam reduced the size of her implants – I think she did.

Pamela in London on Sept. 19, 2010. Credit: Fame.

The last time we checked in with Pamela Anderson’s broke ass, she looked like hot death at some event in England. Less than a month later, she’s back in Las Vegas, and she’s looking okay. Perhaps the sunglasses are fooling my eyes? With her sunglasses on, you can’t really make out how jacked her face is, although there’s a hint of it in her drawn-on eyebrows. Oh, and she just celebrated her 43rd birthday too. Does she look good for her age? Eh.

Whoops, did I say that Pam’s face is jacked? I meant, “all natural”. That’s what Pam is claiming in a new interview in Fabulous Magazine, the Sunday magazine for The News of the World. She claims that she hasn’t done Botox because it “scares” her. All of the sketchy men she’s been with, and Botox is what scares her? The full article is here, here are some of the highlights:

On Botox and aging: “I haven’t done Botox. I don’t like all that facial stuff. It scares me. You see these people who have had it, and they all look the same. I just don’t think I should go that way, especially at 43. I think I should just age. I’ve never been the prettiest person, and I don’t feel I need to chase youth.”

On being shocking: “There are two things about me that always shocks people: I’m always on time and I can take 40 outfits in one bag,” she says. A feat of packing mastery? Or judging by today’s outfit, perhaps it’s because all her skirts are the size of a handkerchief.

On finally ending it with Tommy Lee: “I have tortured myself over it for years and was devastated and depressed for much of the last 15 years about that relationship. It’s mostly about the kids. I think I’ve just tried to attach myself to anybody who’d create a family, but the people I attracted weren’t really the fairy tale I planned. I think I’d just rather be alone and take care of my kids and wait it out. Something will happen one day. If not, my kids will look after me.”

On being single: “It’s a lot less annoying. It’s nice. I have interesting, intelligent men to flirt with and then I come home. And I enjoy it.”

Maybe she’ll get back together with Tommy? “Tommy? Life’s not over yet,” she says. She looks sad for a moment, but then rallies. “Of course we love each other. But we don’t have to live together. Romance is tragic, so let’s leave it. My parents are still together and madly in love.”

On her quickie marriage & annulment to Rick Soloman: “Well, it was annulled. So that tells you right there. He was a friend for a really long time. I think Las Vegas took its toll – too many bottles of champagne. We did something really silly and immediately rectified it.”

On the sex tape: “I still have to talk to my kids about it all the time. There was a tape and we were very much in love and obviously you regret it, but you can’t take it back and that’s what you have to deal with.” But she says she and Tommy were both happy to tape their infamous romp. “I don’t think it’s bizarre. I think a lot of people do it. I’ve never seen it. Tommy told me not to watch it. He said: ‘You’ll go crazy.’ So I would never watch it.” So, would she ever tape sex again? “No! I might never have sex again!” But she’s laughing as she says it.

On her older son Brandon being protective and sensitive: “I like that wild spirit, and that’s important. It’s the toughest thing in the world to be a parent and I haven’t given them the easiest thing in the world to deal with. They hear things in school – ‘I saw your mum in Playboy’ – and all that. Brandon is very protective. Things will get to him. He’s very emotional. He says: ‘Dad? I don’t care what they say about him. But if they say anything about my mum’ He’s very sensitive.”

On Tommy Lee as a father: Do they spend a lot of time with their dad? “No, they don’t. I think they will spend more time with him when they are older, but Tommy is eternally 16.” She says this with sadness, not frustration. Does she not like them being with him? “No, it’s not that. He spends as much time with them as he can. I just came to the realization that our relationship,” she falters, then shrugs. “It just is what it is.”

On being sued for hundreds of thousands of dollars because of her neverending Malibu home construction: “They [the contractors] were spending all this money on the house that I wasn’t intending. Then I had to pay my taxes and people who owed me money couldn’t pay me. It was my fault because I didn’t manage it properly and I think I was an easy target. But everything’s OK now.”

Does she worry about sun damage? “No.” She looks amazed. “The sun feels great. I don’t put a lot of effort into myself with beauty products and haircare,” she says. “I haven’t had a facial for a while. I like to be natural.”

[From Fabulous Magazine]

Eh. I think she’s full of sh-t, talking about how she’s not Botoxed or nip-tucked on her face, but I don’t think she’s, like, a Nicole Kidman or someone like that. I think Pam gets her lips done and she has something temporary done to her eyes, because lately, her eyes go back and forth from looking very strange to quite normal. I also think that she doesn’t really care how leathery her skin looks after years of sun damage, so if she doesn’t care, why should I? I found all of the Tommy stuff interesting too – I really think they’re still totally in love with each other, even after all of these years. Crazy.

Here’s a photo of Pam from a month ago…

Pam on July 10, 2010 in Las Vegas, and on June 10, in LA. Credit: WENN.

Pamela Anderson is one wacky broad, but I never thought she was hurting for money. Between the Playboy stuff, child support from ex Tommy Lee, and the syndication royalties from her stint on Baywatch, she should be set for life, right? Well, even with all that income and whatever she is getting paid to shimmy her pasties on ABC’s “Dancing With the Stars,” it’s apparently not enough for poor Pammie to pay her taxes. The blond bombshell has been added to a list of “delinquent taxpayers.”

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California officials say former “Baywatch” star Pamela Anderson has failed to pay $493,000 in personal income tax. Anderson is on the annual list of delinquent taxpayers released Monday by the California Franchise Tax Board.

The 42-year-old actress is currently competing on the television show “Dancing With the Stars.”

Anderson is among 250 individual and business taxpayers that owe more than $100,000 in back taxes. State records show a tax lien for $493,144 was filed against Anderson in April 2009.

Her attorney, Robert T. Leonard of Woodland Hills, says he is representing Anderson in the matter but declined to comment further.

[From NY Daily News]

I never knew that this kind of information could be made public. How embarrassing! That seems like an astronomical amount to me, but then again, I’m no Hollywood actress. Maybe Pammie should start playing the victim card on “DWTS” like fellow contestant Kate Gosselin, who keeps trying to justify her presence on the show by saying her kids need to eat, blah blah blah. At this point, it seems to me that Pam is the one who is having a harder time financially as a single mom. I wonder who manages Pam’s money? She doesn’t seem like the type who keeps track of that sort of thing, and now it looks like it’s biting her in the ass. Whatever is going on, not paying your taxes can wreak some serious havoc-don’t do it!

Here are some photos of Pamela Anderson and her busted face launching a new flavor at Millions of Milkshakes on Friday. Actually, by comparing Pam’s face to how she looks when she’s doesn’t have amazing lighting, Pam doesn’t look all that busted. But her face is certainly showing signs of wear (and crazy). Anyway, the milkshake Pam created (or had created for her) is dairy-free vegan. So, it’s not really a milkshake, it’s a tofu shake or soy shake or something. Is Pam vegan? I thought she was just vegetarian.

Meanwhile, Pamela continues to make it through week after week on Dancing With the Stars. Now, she’s not the worst dancer on the show – that honor goes to Kate Gosselin – but I expected Pam to be one of the first to go. The Daily Mail’s gossip girl Katie Nicholl has a good theory about why Pam is getting support – apparently, PETA has been urging its members to call in and vote for Pam. Here’s more:

Pamela Anderson’s friends in the animal rights movement are doing everything they can to ensure she wins Dancing With The Stars – the US version of Strictly Come Dancing.

Chums of the 42-year-old Baywatch actress at charity PETA are urging their 2million supporters to vote for her.

‘Pam’s tireless work to expose cruelty in the meat and fur trades has created a very emotional bond between her and PETA’s supporters,’ says a spokesman.

Let’s hope they haven’t been offended by Pam’s racy dance routines, which have caused some controversy on the show…

[From The Daily Mail]

First it was Panty-gate, and now it’s PETA-gate. It’s probably not all that scandalous, and who knows if PETA’s members are really so f-cking bored that they watch DWTS, much less vote for Pam.

By the way, I didn’t use these photos when they came out last week – here’s a very hammered Pam staggering out of a club after (presumably) either she spilled a drink on herself or her implants began leaking. Gross:

Pam on April 9, 2010 in LA, credit: WENN. Pam in LA on April 6, 2010, credit: WIC/Fame.

Pamela Anderson isn’t doing too badly on this season of “Dancing With the Stars.” She’s a decent dancer with some natural ability (unlike Kate Gosselin, who has all the physical grace of a department store mannequin), but she seems to be stuck in this mode where she does a lot of sexy poses, honed over years of Playboy photo shoots, in lieu of actual footwork. And even when she’s dancing well, she kind of looks like a hot trashy mess with that ratty hair and the tiny outfits. But hey – that’s Pam, and what you see is what you get. I suppose we should all be thankful that the show’s production team put their foot down and forced Pammie to wear underpants. No, I’m not making that up.

“You exude so much sex appeal,” gushed Tonioli after the former Baywatch babe channeled Marilyn Monroe for her March 29 fox-trot. That’s not by accident. With a fashion philosophy of the more titillating, the better, Anderson, 42, insisted on trimming a couple of inches from the hem of her premiere-night mini. She also balked at wearing pasties (in case of a wardrobe malfunction), says a source – not to mention panties, says another. On that last item, she relented. Adds the source: “She had to, but she didn’t want to.” Another must? Perfect lighting. To score an interview, camera crews had to have ring lights, which help hide wrinkles. Says a set insider, “I’ve never, ever seen any celeb request that before.”

[From US Weekly, print edition, April 12, 2010]

I’m thinking that Pam may be hoping for a wardrobe malfunction on national TV, so everyone will be talking about her. Because we know one thing for sure, Pammie loves attention. But what she doesn’t seem to get is, we’ve already seen what she’s got – many, many times. As for the special lighting requests, I can’t say I’m surprised. This isn’t the first time we’ve heard that “ring flash” request from Pamela. And I can see why! Pam’s face up close is a little…Cruella DeVille these days. Probably all those years on the beach in the sun.

Remember yesterday how we saw those photos of Pamela Anderson “modeling” at the Richie Rich “A*Muse” show? And remember how budget, gross, sweaty and wrong she looked? Yeah. These photos should refresh your memory. Anyway, after the show she talked to Page Six and admitted that this (above and below) is not the sweaty, gross face of a woman who is happy with the way she looks. Shocking!

Pamela Anderson donned a barely- there swimsuit on a catwalk to promote her new fashion line this week — but she doesn’t really think much of her body.

The busty former “Baywatch” babe — who joined designer Richie Rich to launch new line A*Muse — told Page Six that despite years of baring her famous flesh, she still doesn’t think she looks that good. Right after taking to the catwalk in a revealing metallic bathing suit for their show Wednesday night at Amnesia, she said, “I never feel confident. I really don’t love my body.”

But Anderson, who’s single again after splitting with electrician boyfriend Jamie Padgett, says she’ll star in the next season of ABC’s “Dancing With the Stars” starting March 22.

[From Page Six]

Now, while I will say that Pam looked like a wreck in general, I really don’t think her body is in any way bad for a woman her age. I mean, the not-plastic parts of her body look pretty good. Sure, she’s got some cellulite. It’s not the end of the world. But she should still take batter care of herself, because her face… her skin… ugh. Just… no.

But that’s not all. Gatecrasher has a story about how Pam showed up late for the event, and has some interesting behind-the-scenes gossip:

Fashion Week headed toward its end with some extra excitement on Wednesday night as chaos ensued at Richie Rich’s A*Muse show. The cause of the uproar? Pamela Anderson, aka Rich’s inspiration, was almost three hours late to the event.

“She showed up at 9:55 when the show was supposed to start at 9, and press people were there as early as 7 to interview her,” a spy at Chelsea hot spot Amnesia dished. “People were yelling at door handlers and getting incredibly antsy, especially because the standing room was so packed.

“Some guests started storming out at 9:30, when the start of the show was nowhere in sight,” the source added, noting that the madness outside on W. 29th St. was nearly as bad, if not worse.

“They had shut the doors at 8:40, since it was so crowded, so there were guests on the street who couldn’t get in. They were outraged.”

Those out-of-luck stylistas certainly won’t be happy to hear this: Although Pam did have a reason for her tardiness — her flight was delayed — the buxom blond also insisted on stopping at her hotel to prepare for the show instead of racing to the venue.

“I got dressed — well, semi-dressed — before I got here,” she admitted.

The designer himself, who refused to start the presentation without Pam, would say only, “It was a crunch.”

The drama didn’t stop — there was postshow chaos as well.

“Pamela was brought upstairs to be interviewed with Richie,” our insider explained. “The photographers were getting so crazy over scoring a shot of her that one was physically removed by security. He just got a little too close to Pam for comfort. It was a madhouse.”

Was it all worth it?

Not according to some — especially since Pam didn’t even technically “walk” in the show, instead only briefly appearing with Rich as a finale of sorts.

“It was a lot of waiting to see her onstage for just a minute,” complained the insider, before saying with a laugh: “At least she wore nothing but a sparkly leotard. That soothed some of the audience’s irritation.”

[From Gatecrasher]

It amazes me that people still get this worked up over Pamela Anderson. It kind of makes me wonder why she’s broke. I mean, if she still has these kinds of fans and people still want to see her, surely she could figure out some way of making money (and hanging on to it)?

Pamela on February 17, 2010. Credit: WENN.

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is the very definition of a catastrophe. Pamela Anderson, wearing what I can only believe is a the last gasp of this poor silver fabric, with sweaty, orange glitter pouring off of her – this is sexy? Really? At what point will Pamela’s fans just stop and really look at this woman?

Anyway, this is Pamela “modeling” at Richie Rich’s fashion show yesterday. You know why she models? Because she’s a beautiful, delicate flower. Jesus. Just how broke is Pam that she needs these gigs? This is Pam posing with the designer:

He’s on drugs, right? Or is this a post-modern masterpiece worthy of Andy Warhol? Oh, and YIKES:

I saw these photos yesterday, of Pamela Anderson walking the red carpet for a Miami club, and I barely had words to describe this mess. Beyond the fact that this is now Pam’s job – showing up to random clubs with her boobs hanging out – I have to ask, at what point does she stop applying eye shadow? Seriously? This is a mess.

Anyway, good news for Pamela! She’ll soon be able to pay off a few of those platinum pool tiles at her debt-ridden Malibu home. Pamela has signed on to appear on the next season of Dancing With the Stars. Ugh. Here’s more:

Pam Anderson has signed to be on the next season of ABC’s hit Dancing With the Stars, RadarOnline.com has learned exclusively.

In a move that’s sure to boost the male viewing audience, Pam and the show have agreed to all terms for a deal and the deal is done, a source told RadarOnline.com.

“Pam is thrilled and so is the show,” the source told RadarOnline.com

Donny Osmond was crowned champion last season of the popular show, which always features an eclectic cast of competitors.

“She really wanted to do the show and the show thought it was a great idea,” the source told RadarOnline.com.

[From Radar]

Countdown until Pamela “accidentally” falls out of her sparkly dancing outfit. No, it should be good trash television, but I won’t watch it. Even though it might be one of the few times we get to see Pamela in America! Yes, it seems the current rumor is that Pam is going to be moving to England at some point (maybe after she gets kicked off of DWTS?). I guess this goes along with rumors that she’s selling her Malibu money pit, because how else could she afford it? How much does DWTS pay, anyway? It can’t be that much.

Pamela Anderson at Club PLAY in Miami, Florida on February 2, 2010. Credit: INFevents.com