Kate Middleton is not normal.

I don’t refer to her as the Duchess of Cambridge –a Duchess is stuffy, she’s unrelatable and she has definitely never been pictured in sequin hot pants on roller skates.
We’re made to believe that she is just like us, not quite “The People’s Princess” like her late mother-in-law Princess Diana, but she is proving to be the most effective tool in the royal family’s arsenal when it comes to improving international relations.

Even her husband Prince William recognised her unwavering popularity in 2014 when he met American designer Ralph Lauren and said: “You probably would far rather [see] my wife.”

Her effectiveness in boosting morale has become more useful than ever to modern Britain as it embarks on a “charm offensive after Brexit”.

She enjoyed her first solo royal engagement abroad on Tuesday – a quick flight to Holland where she met King Willem-Alexander toured the historic Mauritshuis Museum and met with local teenagers who are being taught practical skills in a bid to keep them out of trouble.
“When I met her I told her my hands were dirty but she still shook it and said ‘sometimes my hands are dirty too’,” volunteer Richenel Lensa said after meeting the princess.

It’s the kind of line we have come to expect from Kate as she, William and Prince Harry as the faces of the next generation of the royal family.

The trio set up a mental health initiative called Heads Together which has brought together eight mental health charities and organisations to tackle the stigma around depression and other psychological problems.

And William and Kate in particular take these opportunities to discuss their children Prince George and Princess Charlotte to make them more relatable.

“Like most parents today, William and I would not hesitate to seek help for our children if they needed it,” she said in February with an honesty that is becoming trademark for them.

They are particularly keen to give their children a normal upbringing, but life in the royal fishbowl doesn’t allow much flexibility when it comes to controlling public interest.

They have George registered in a local €6-per-hour Montessori three days a week near their home in Norfolk.

However, their home is the palatial Amner Hall – a property gifted to them by the Queen after their 2011 wedding, which features 10 bedrooms, a tennis court, swimming pool and was subject to a two year refurbishment costing €1.7m to fit their needs.

Not exactly the starter home of the average newlywed couple.

She wore a Zara blazer to a party in May? Underneath it was a €3,750 dress by Dolce & Gabbana.
And that party was at the Queen’s 90th birthday celebrations at Windsor Castle.

During their recent tour of India, Kate was overheard affectionately referring to her husband of five years as “babe”.

In Canada, Kate and William were pictured laughing and lovingly gazing at one another as they toured the country together for seven days.

nd they earned praise from parenting experts for adopting the active listening parenting technique where they bend down to make eye contact while one of their children is speaking.

These trips create the best opportunities to portray the young royals as a “normal” couple – Kate might have looked carefree when she beat William in a boat race in New Zealand in 2014, but she’s doing it on a trip that cost an estimated $2m.

Similarly, in the Netherlands, she was pictured boarding a commercial British Airways flight to London from Rotterdam, but she did it in a custom made Catherine Walker suit dress.
Earlier as she toured the Mauritshuis, Kate came face to face with the world famous Girl With The Pearl Earring painting by Johannes Vermeer, wearing a pair of her grandmother-in-law’s pearl earrings for the perfect photo op.

The museum’s director Emilie Gordenker, remarked that Kate was already familiar with much of the artwork, which was on loan from the royal collection, from Buckingham Palace.

And yet again, your idea that Kate is just like us was brought back down to earth with a bang.

Charlize Theron is difinitely done for.

While there are certainly perks to being a successful, highly-paid celebrity, an undeniable downside is the constant presence of the paparazzi.

Shots that capture the stars in embarrassing moments are often the most successful, but it seems that OK! Magazine USA may have taken things a step too far with a set of recent photos of Charlize Theron and her son, whom the actress adopted from her home country of South Africa.

In particular, that the magazine described the actress as a “monster mom” for “dragging” her 4-year-old to the car before “wrestling the child to ground” has not been sitting well with parents, who see a very different side of the story.

Along with the photos, the magazine invited Dr. Gilda Carle, known as the “relationship expert to the stars,” to offer her analysis of the situation:

“The first rule of parenting is to motivate, not dictate. It’s clear that Charlize is dictating. ‘Get over here! Do this!’ She looks like she’s yelling at him.

Instead of telling him, she should be selling him on why he’s going to dance class. For all she knows, he doesn’t like dancing.

She’s got to find out what’s on his mind by asking him and letting him talk about his feelings. Not dragging him around.”

Though Dr. Carle may frown on Theron’s parenting style, everyday parents are making it clear that they’re not holding anything against the actress:

Kate Is Immodest…

Not even Kate Middleton can escape the dreaded wardrobe malfunction.

During last month’s Royal Tour of New Zealand and Australia, the Duchess of Cambridge experienced an embarrassing Marilyn Monroe moment when a gust of wind from a helicopter lifted her Diane von Furstenberg wrap dress up in the air, exposing her bare butt. (Don’t you hate it when that happens?)

Although the revealing moment happened in May, photo evidence surfaced on Tuesday when a German tabloid published the pics, spurring controversy about privacy rights for the royal family.


The Daily Mail called Bild’s photos “a breach of privacy” with “a series of tasteless headlines” and “crude captions” (despite the fact that the paper is known for publishing scandalous photos of women).

Duchess Kate’s photo ran alongside pics of Kim Kardashian and Khloe Kardashian, all from behind, with the caption, “Khloe, Kim and Kate—butts which have moved us these past few days.”

In the accompanying article, the paper described Catherine’s pic as: “Photos show our favorite Duchess Kate, 32, in the Australian Blue Mountains. The rotor blades of the royal helicopter swirl the air so that Kate’s summer dress blew up—giving a clear view of her beautiful bum!”

Although Kensington Palace has yet to comment on the scandalous photo, we’re sure the royal family is pretty upset, especially judging by how they reacted after a French magazine published topless photos of the Duchess in 2012.

The result was that the photographer who took the photos and the editor of Closer magazine were charged and it was ruled that the pics could never be published or sold again. Unfortunately, the Internet lives forever.

Army Wife Does It This Time..

As the wife of a Navy pilot, some might say Sarah Smiley should have known better. But when the syndicated columnist posed for a picture wearing a Navy Officer’s cover (or “hat”), she had no idea she was breaking a Federal law.
Smiley is the author of “Shore Duty,” a weekly syndicated column for military spouses. For four months, her official headshot in Pensacola News Journal (Pensacola, FL) was one of the writer wearing a Navy Officer’s hat.
Since it’s debut in September 2003, Smiley received a few complaints about the photo — mostly from people who claimed she was “disgracing the uniform” — but it wasn’t until a reader sent Smiley the contents of United States Code 10 (which makes it illegal for an unauthorized person to wear a military uniform) that the writer realized she had broken the law.
Smiley first addressed the issue of “the hat picture” (as fans now call it) in the January 13th installment of Shore Duty, which was before learning of USC 10. She wrote, “when I agreed to the hat picture, it was in no way meant to disgrace the uniform.”
In her column, Smiley also pointed out that girls wearing officers’ covers is somewhat of a tradition. At the United States Naval Academy (of which Smiley’s husband is a ’97 graduate) there is a custom of midshipmen receiving a kiss from any girl who puts on their hat.
At the end of the January 13th column, Smiley invited her readers to sound-off about the hat and vote at her website (http://www.SarahSmiley.com) as to whether or not the hat picture should stay.
Smiley received a surprising influx of feedback and response from readers all over the country, even some not in her circulation areas. People in her community began shouting “keep the hat!” to her from across restaurants and out in public. More than 95% of the responses were in favor of the hat picture.
But it was during this surge of attention when Smiley received a message from a reader containing the contents of USC 10. This was no longer a philosophical debate for her fans…it was a matter of the law.
News of the “Hat Controversy” quickly circled the country in email chains, on message boards and in news reports.
“For many,” says Smiley, “my hat picture became something more than just an issue of law. It became very personal for some as the two sides see the photo as a symbol of something they strongly believe in. My critics don’t think it’s ‘right’ for someone — even a spouse — to put on a piece of the uniform service members earn. My supporters (most of whom are servicemen, interestingly), however, think not only should it be legal for their spouse to affectionately wear the hat for a photo, after all they sacrifice and all they do as military spouse, it should be their privilege.”
Smiley states no one is arguing the law. She agrees it is never appropriate for anyone to impersonate an officer or disgrace the service in any way. In fact, the writer is removing her photo and submitting a request to the Department of Defense for official permission to use the image. But the debate over “the hat” grew in to something more…something many readers can’t let go or forget.
“Really,” says Smiley, “the argument became more about this: do spouses serve and sacrifice alongside their service-member loved ones, even though they stay behind at home? Some critics were extremely hateful toward me, which I and my supporters feel diminishes all the things military spouses have earned for their part in the armed services. I can understand why someone might feel disgraced if a civilian wore the hat and mocked the service or if someone tried to impersonate an officer, but I can’t understand why some became so angry over a military wife putting it on in a very affectionate way….and to advertise a pro-military column.”
Many supporters claim Smiley’s photo was reminiscent of an old fashioned era, bringing memories of WWII recruiting posters depicting women in men’s uniforms saying things like, “Gee I wish I were a man and I’d join the US Navy.”
Smiley’s favorite interpretation of the picture, however, came from a Navy wife in Jacksonville, FL, who wrote:
“To me the hat symbolizes you being part of the Navy, ‘for better or for worse.’ You, me and anyone else who marries someone in the Navy also becomes part of the Navy. You don’t inherit your husband’s rank, but you do ‘sign up,’ so to speak. (New brides are warned of this, right? They are swatted on the rear end and one of the swordsmen says ‘welcome to the Navy.’) When I look at your picture, it represents your relationship with the Navy perfectly. Your husband’s hat is balancing on your head (not pulled down tight) and you’re wearing civilian clothes. It says to me ‘This is part of me, I’m proud of it but it’s not mine and it doesn’t quite fit.’ Which is the purpose of your column, balancing or managing your life as a mother & wife in the Navy.”
The column and the photo have become what Smiley calls “The Hat Heard Round the Country.” In military cities everywhere, “the hat picture” sprung debates about the respect and honor showed toward military spouses.

Melania Is Finally Finished…

Could Donald Trump—a man who has predicated his entire presidential campaign on attacking the evils of illegal immigration—be married to an immigrant who entered the country under false pretenses and violated US laws?

On Thursday, Politico detonated a new controversy for Trump, with an article that reported various inconsistencies in Melania Trump’s account of how she came from Slovenia to live and work in United States in the mid-1990s. As Politico pointed out, a recent New York Post story on a nude photo shoot from Melania’s early modeling days noted that she was living and working in the United States in 1995, when the photo session took place. This contradicts her claim that she moved to the country in 1996.

More important, the Politico story reports, during various interviews Melania Trump has said that she followed immigration rules and that after her arrival in the United States, she returned home “every few months” to renew her visa. But here’s the rub, according to Politico: “Trump’s description of her periodic renewals in Europe are more consistent with someone traveling on a B-1 Temporary Business Visitor or B-2 Tourist Visa, which typically last only up to six months and do not permit employment.” Trump was indeed doing paid gigs as a model at that time. This suggests that she may have been violating her immigration status and working illegally in the United States. (And, as Politico reported, if she did violate her visa, then her subsequent green card and citizenship could be in jeopardy.)

Melania took to Twitter Thursday to deny she had done anything wrong, but she didn’t offer any specific refutations. There’s one simple thing that she could do to clear up this matter: release copies of her visa records. Even if she doesn’t have them lying around at home, she can request those records from the US government and then make them public. These documents presumably would indicate whether she had been working legally in the United States.

Donald Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment regarding whether Melania would seek and release her visa records.

Donald Trump has never been shy about requesting that others release important documents. As a leading birther, he demanded that President Barack Obama make public his long-form birth certificate. He whipped up enough of a fervor that Obama eventually did release the document. In 2012, Trump also offered $5 million if Obama would release his college transcripts.

But Trump has been less than forthcoming when it comes to his records. He has, for instance, refused to make public his tax returns. And now there’s another item to add to the list.

Kate Middleton Has Done It…

The wedding of Kate Middleton and Prince William was undoubtedly anticipated, as was the dress she would wear. Sketches by the world’s top bridal designers hit newsstands as they predicted what style of dress Kate might choose for her big day. It was Alexander McQueen by Sarah Burton that she so gracefully wore and that has influenced bridal fashion.

The controversy over the fact that the gown has it’s own Wikipedia page has sparked great debate since it’s publication on the site, and at the 2012 Wikimania conference last week. While I will concede that it could be part of Kate’s main Wikipedia page, the reasons for uproar about this are more absurd than the argument itself. This is nuts!

The page was requested for deletion immediately after it appeared. Comments included, “This is frankly trivial, and surely isn’t notable enough to be on Wikipedia.” Another commenter added, “The sheer presence of this article is one of the lowest points ever reached by Wikipedia! What amazes me is that there’s acculturated people (since the article was well written) who has such interests, and free time to lose to devoted themselves for such totally irrelevant arguments.”

Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia’s co-founder and man responsible for approving the “Wedding Dress of Kate Middleton” page defended the article at last week’s Wikimania conference. He referred to the gown’s predicted long-term impact on fashion and said, “Fashion may seem frivolous, but it’s an industry worth billions and wedding attire is a significant portion of that business.”

This iconic gown, reminiscent of Grace Kelly, will influence dress designs for years, and the article is interesting, well-written, and well-referenced for those who are interested. Wales also commented on the fact that the page is welcomed by fashion students, designers, brides-to-be, and people who are fascinated with royal history.

Sadly, some not-so-loyal royal fans have placed Kate, and her dresses, up for ridicule. I say jealousy, others may say she is part of a society that is spoiled. Regardless, her grace, charm, and poise (not to mention attractive figure and sense of style), has captivated so many others. So much so, that we want to know what she is wearing, who made it, and where we can get the look.

Trump Is Done…

Donald Trump has made us laugh, cry and cringe since announcing his presidency in June 2015.
His controversial comments on Muslims, illegal immigration, Hillary Clinton and more were all said since then, but they just may be seared into our brains for life.
Scroll down for some of Trump’s most memorable comments since announcing his candidacy.

Trump called President Barack Obama “the founder of ISIS” at a rally in Florida in early August. “ISIS is honoring President Obama,” he said. “He is the founder of ISIS.”
“And, I would say the co-founder would be crooked Hillary Clinton,” the Republican nominee added.

Speaking about Hillary Clinton’s position on gun control, Trump made what appeared to be a joke about assassinating her. He told supporters there was nothing they could do to stop her from taking guns away if she gets her pick of Supreme Court judges. “Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don’t know,” he said.

In a news conference in July, Trump encouraged Russia to hack Hillary Clinton’s email to recover emails that were deleted. “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” he said. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.” The Republican nominee later said he was being sarcastic.

After Khizr Khan, the father of a Muslim American soldier who died serving in Iraq, criticized Trump in a speech at the Democratic National Convention, the Republican nominee fired back. He refuted Khan’s claim that Trump made no sacrifices in his life, and he questioned why Khan’s wife, who stood next to him on stage, didn’t speak. “She was standing there, she had nothing to say, she probably, maybe she wasn’t allowed to have anything to say, you tell me,” he said.

At a Republican debate, Trump took the opportunity to address a comment Marco Rubio had made in February about the front-runner having “small hands.”
“Look at these hands,” Trump said, displaying his, well, hands. Then, to imply that he has no size issues, he said, “I guarantee you there is no problem.”