John McCain's daughter, Meghan McCain, is becoming... a celebrity!

Sen. John McCain has  lost Paris Hilton's vote by using her image to help brand Sen. Barack Obama as just another worthless, mindless  "celebrity" in his TV ad.

But ironically, while he's comparing Obama to Paris and Britney Spears, his own daughter Meghan McCain has been busy trying to become one of them.

She's been seen sucking up to "The Hills" star Heidi Montag at a trendy Santa Monica restaurant.

And last month, she got  her hair done at a swank WeHo hair salon -- John Frieda on Melrose Place -- frequented by celebs Kate Hudson, Renee Zellweger, Meg Ryan, Jane Fonda and Lisa Rinna.

And guess who cut Meghan's hair into a hip Hollywood shape? Matthew Shields, Jane Fonda's hairstylist. But don't ask him about it. She made everyone sign a confidentiality agreement! Just like a real star!

Oh, it's' just too delish.

Hilton's rep has spoken out against the new TV ad from the presumptive Republican presidential candidate, in which images of Spears, Hilton and Democratic challenger Obama appear on the screen as a voiceover intones, "He's the biggest celebrity in the world. But is he ready to lead?"

"Miss Hilton was neither asked, nor did she give permission, for the use of her likeness in the ad, and has no further comment," her rep said in a statement to People.

And d'oh! Seems McCain's peeps must not have done their homework. Hilton's parents actually donated $4,600 to Johhny's campaign earlier this year.  Now you slam their daughter? Way to win voters and influence donations, J-Boy.

Oddly, McCain's ad did not contain images of two of his own biggest celebrity supporters, Spencer Pratt and Heidi Montag. At the time of Heidi's hearty endorsement, McCain returned the compliment by claiming he never missed an episode of her reality TV show.

"The Hills" star Heidi had a lovely lunch with McCain's daughter, Meghan, a few weeks ago at the Ivy at the Shore, a big celebrity hangout in Santa Monica.

That same week, Heidi had her hair cut and colored by celebrity stylist Matthew Shields (who also used to do Ellen DeGeneres' locks) and colorist Negin Zand (she colors Kate Hudson, Angelina Jolie, Sarah Jessica Parker, Scarlett Johansson, Cate Blanchett) to prepare for her upcoming press and TV interviews.

And she'll probably be seeing Matthew and Negin again at snipper-to-the-stars Sally Hershberger's new buzzed-about celeb hair salon, which opens later this month on La Cienega with a big star-studded bash.

So who you calling "celebrity," John? Looks to us like you've got a celebrity wanna-be in your family.

Hey, we're just saying ...

Photo: John, Meghan and Cindy McCain sure look like celebrities at the "Live From New York"  party.
WireImage

Comments

[stephen]

first

[Jeff]

Oh, its worse than that. Who are the biggest celebrity politicians of all time? Ronald Reagan, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Fred Thompson, and Sonny Bono, all Republicans. In addition, John McCain has himself been a celebrity for over a decade. He's appeared on 24, he's been on SNL and the Daily Show more than any of the candidates that run this year, and he's been featured in documentaries. Indeed John used his status as a famous POW to launch his political career. On the other hand Obama was an unknown when he launched his political career. He launched his career from being an on the ground organizer and university lecturer. He only became well known when he ran for president. Becoming a "celebrity" because of your politics isn't being a celebrity politician. A celebrity politician is someone like Reagan, Arnold, Thompson, Bono, and John McCain, someone who is famous for something else and then uses that fame to get into politics. That's what John McCain did, not Barack Obama.

[Mozart]

Elizabeth, are you really this juvenile and shallow or is this just a pathetic attempt to ingratiate yourself with your equally cerebrally vacuous zombies? Let me take the blinders off regarding your sense of self-importance: You should be a little more modest, you really do have much to be modest about.

[bill p]

Leave the kids out of it. This is what Obama has pleaded for, therefore as a Obama supporting rag, follow his command !!

[downhill240]

What's the old saying? I can't decide which one so here's the two that came to mind. You can bring a horse to water but you can't make her drink. The other is, You can't make a silk purse out of a sows ear.

[Adrian near Seattle]

So boring and childish.

McCain is desperately out of touch. Whatever integrity he once had has melted in the heat of the campaign -- because he has no other ammo.

He's hired Bush's campaign team to smear Obama in any way possible. I hope the Republican hate machine fails this time. We don't need a McBush administration.

[Jen]

Responding to this article, we can bring in Obama's little daughters appearing in the magazine as celebreties, You come after McCains daughter I expect then he can go after Obamas, daughters.

[Tom]

Could you find a worse photo of his daughter? Seriously LA times that is a terrible photo of her.

[Brandon]

I love it that anybody that attacks Obama is automatically dubbed as "out of touch" or "racist" and that the comments are uncalled for.

Obama has been in the senate for something like 140 days and has attained a celebrity status, this is a legitimate concern...

John McCain is well-known for his political leadership in the senate and bipartisan initiatives that he's run in congress as well as his military background; Obama is well known for....being barrack Obama, and that's why he's attained a "Celebrity Status" and not a prominent political status.

Obama has flip flopped much more drastically than McCain has switched positions and run a much more slanderous campaign than McCain has, most republicans biggest complaint against McCain is that he isn't being confrontational enough on Obama's positions and past

I don't know why i'm writing this because 90% of people reading this have absolutely no idea about McCain and/or Obama's positions on anything other than "Change"...

[ken]

California is out of touch and that is why your state is burning in Hell. You mindless idiots support Pelosi who is clueless and looks retarted when she talks. For a state so worried about the environment what is all that smoke from forest fires doing? California has made up its mind years ago and will vote democratic every election so shut up.

[GM]

The relationship between Barack Obama, Britney Spears and Paris Hilton is pretty clear - all three are basically media creations.

And that Meghan McCain - unlike Paris Hilton - is a legitimate heiress who has managed to stay off the tabliod radar, including Access Hollywood (the highly respected television program Obama chose for his own daughters' media debut), speaks highly to her intelligence and merely illustrates that she's a well-behaved young woman who is mentally well-balanced enough not to be pitifully desperate for media attention.

Since her fortune is either equivalent to or in excess of those of the entertainment personalities mentioned in the article, moreover, it is logical that Meghan would know, frequent and have access to the best in the business when it comes to preparing personalities for media appearances. And that she would seek them out (a la the Obamas, the Clintons and the Edwards before her) merely establishes that she's also a pretty savvy young woman!

But the fact that Meghan got a confidentiality agreement merely establishes (1) she's NOT seeking the kind of tabloid publicity that Britney, Paris and Obama seek, and (2) she's a pretty sophistical businesswoman - characteristics which, outside of Hollywood, are highly regarded.

Candidly, I think you got it backwards - Heidi was "sucking up" to her.

But I agree with the poster above that it's tasteless and declasse to drag the kids into it. I know Obama is promoting his children on Access Hollywood and the cover of People, but, despite that, no one is singling them out for cricicism - as you did with McCain's daughter here - or suggesting that he's "pimping them out" - which is how the medic characterized Hillary Clinton's treatment of her daughter - NOR SHOULD THEY.

I understand this is a tabloid column, but you would make a much more credible presentation of yourself if you directed your criticims to the candidates as opposed to their children.

[Mark]

obama is a celebrity because he's running for president without any significant experience, but just a bunch of flash. Actually, obama had 1 year in the U.S. senate when he started his quest to be emperor, I mean president, of the U.S. The order is supposed to be (1) serve your country and gain real experience, (2) become president, not (2) and then (1). Clinton should be the democratic nominee, not joke obama.

[jhimmi]

Since Mccain's daughter is not running for president, I don't give a sh*t.

[MegaWhy]

I thought it was agreat ad. Really spells out the issue. Hilton and Spears are the icons of the celebrity class..no morals, no substance, no sense.

Senator Obama is great in front of an audience without saying anything. He has accomplished nothing as a Senator. He hasn't even run a successful company. No one would hire him as a CEO.

But he does love High Gas Prices, Taxes, and supports Carbon Taxes, Evironmental nuts, Rap lyrics that demean women and blacks, he enjoys good drugs, and loves Socialism. He will be our next President..Good work America.

[Jeff]

Probably not a real effective ad... but it isn't technically bashing celebrities... just saying celebrity status does not make you a good candidate for president.

And it's certainly not the only, or most over-the-top example of people poking fun at the whole "golden child" thing. I mean, there are things to like about Mr. Obama, but c'mon.

[John M]

No one said that being a celebrity was a bad thing. It was just pointed out that it doesn't automatically qualify you to be POTUS. Popularity will take any politician a long way, but we should all think twice before electing anyone based purely on their fame.

[Duh]

Last time I checked Meghan was not campaigning for president. Is this the best you guys can come up with?
Seems the stupid add has bruised celibridiete worshipping columnists. I wish the McCain campaign would realize he does not need foolish campaign adds to beat Obama, they only lead to idiotic responses like this.

[John]

Oh No!
A kid wants to be popular!

How come it's just fine to smear McCain's daughter, but Obama's wife is off limits?

NObama08

[Alejandro from Minneapolis]

Here we go again. LaLa land is trying to find anything to make the republicans look like the enemy. Who cares where McCain's daughter got her hair cut? When it comes down to it, the rest of the USA knows that Hollywood's opinions matter as much as the daytime emmy's. Elizabeth, did you major in journalism to do a story like this. Get some real substance and write a good story about why McCain is bad.

[Pat]

AND HE SAID CHELSEY CLINTON WAS UGLY.

SOMEONE GIVE HER A BURGER.

[Cate M]

What a worthless article... attacking a man's daughter. I'm not a McCain supporter ... but this type of schlock almost makes me want to vote for the guy just to annoy Elizabeth Snide.. (oh.. did I spell your name incorrectly)

[Zerote]

Some of you people REALLY scare me with the defence here. Since when is Michelle Obama off limits? Such hypocrocy. This poor country's only hope is Obama for prez. Maybe it's time to move way to MARS with this thinking of most of you... unbelievable.

[win]

From the gossip's gossip sheet.

Can we fault the world’s worst entertainment blogger, Liz Snead, for merely living up to what her Los Angeles Times paycheck asks her to do, which is to publish on the Internet whatever thoughtless rants run through her head? Or is she culpable for trying to take the struggling Tribune paper into generation Web 2.No by leading them down a path of bumptious observation?

[Lucien BONNET]

RE:
John McCain's daughter, Meghan McCain, is becoming... a celebrity!
August 1, 2008 in John McCain
------------
Thank you for wecloming me
And allow me to congratulate you for your present article
----------------------
WESTERN UNIVERSALISM

“Color cannot be understood except in relation to the person who perceives it,” physicist Pierre Demers wrote in the Foreword to this book entitled "Bill A Ri And There Was Light ! in http://www.contact-canadahaiti.ca. He clearly confirms the relevance of this essay. First of all, in fact, we thought it would be useful to consider the civilizational (politico-religious) attitude of the West toward the Blacks, before pointing out the deficiencies of present-day science, which is predominantly Western, in its perception of the Black Universe.

The Western political attitude toward the Blacks has for many centuries been determined by the perverse ruler-servant, master-slave, exploiter-exploited relationship. In order to normalize its policy of enslaving Blacks, Judeo-Christian civilization went so far as to use Christianity to legitimize what today we generally call “crimes against humanity”, such as the racist slavery peculiar to the West. That situation was facilitated by the fact that the monotheistic religion, which had originally been universalist, soon limited its horizons to the boundaries of the Western world, while the other peoples — which it thought it had attracted — seemed to find themselves there in spite of themselves. Some might wonder whether the abandonment by the West of Christian universalism does not explain that inability of Judeo-Christian civilization to adopt a universalist attitude, not only in the political but also in the scientific realm.

As a matter of fact, present-day science, dominated for a few centuries by the West, can hardly claim to be “universal”, since it is so deeply affected by the Westerners who perceive it. These people have — as we all know — lost any authentically universalist dimension. Did they not, by using and misusing the Bible, attempt to prove the superiority of Western Whites over Blacks and other colored peoples, limiting there too the vast universalist horizons of science to the very boundaries of the West? Everything seems to indicate that science is no longer universal; it is “Western”, with all the consequences that implies for humanity and, in particular, for the Black world.

In other words, the Western approach, the Western way of thinking, is far from being scientific, neutral and objective; it is subjective and distorting. Such subjectivity and distortion manifest themselves still more obviously, as we have seen, in the realm of colors, and more specifically when dealing with the concept of “black”. One must therefore bring into play the social sciences — history, sociology, psychology, psychoanalysis, political science, etc. — to understand that Western handicap. Indeed, as soon as it has to deal with “black”, Western reasoning vacillates, making room for the irrational and its array of fantasies.

The author of the Foreword to this book, a physicist, under went a conversion in 1974, where by he would from then on wholly devote himself to the study of colors. He says that he has been attracted more and more strongly by the multidisciplinary and deeply human nature of the study of colors. He states that the “rational comprehension of colors cannot have the necessary depth, unless all the sciences are called upon: chemistry, biology, physiology, physics, and mathematics”. He even insists: “Once more the human aspect intervenes. Man is both the creator and the necessary vehicle of all sciences. It is doubly true that there is no rational knowledge of color outside of mankind.” He thus admits, as we do, though in a roundabout way, that the present understanding of colors leaves much to be desired. Is it not strongly influenced by the dominant contemporary civilization, polluted so long by prejudices against peoples of color, especially Blacks?

Such a serious Western handicap obviously hinders the forward march of universal science as well as that of all mankind. Both are victims of a racist — and therefore anti-scientific, selfish and limited — vision of the world.

Although it may still be possible to scientifically correct the erroneous vision of “blackness” fairly quickly, it is much more difficult to improve human behavior from one day to the next, since mentalities evolve rather slowly. In the meantime, we cannot help being aware that the West keeps dragging around its heavy burden of anti-Black prejudice, and that attitude is detrimental to both the Western and Black worlds.

Lucien BONNET

Author of the Book entitled
"Bill A Ri And There Was Light !" in
http://www.contact-canadahaiti.ca

LINKS (JANUARY 12, 2008)
UBC astronomer makes first map of dark matter
CTV.ca - 11 Jan 2008
For the first time, a team of UBC scientists have mapped the elusive "dark matter" in a supercluster of stars in the night sky.
New map lets scientists 'see' dark matter CBC News
Astronomers get best look yet at dark matter surrounding galaxies The Canadian Press
Ars Technica - Kazinform - InTheNews.co.uk - Daily Mail
all 26 news articles »

[Lucien BONNET]

RE:
John McCain's daughter, Meghan McCain, is becoming... a celebrity!
August 1, 2008 in John McCain
------------
Thank you for wecloming me
And allow me to congratulate you for your present article
----------------------
WESTERN UNIVERSALISM

“Color cannot be understood except in relation to the person who perceives it,” physicist Pierre Demers wrote in the Foreword to this book entitled "Bill A Ri And There Was Light ! in http://www.contact-canadahaiti.ca. He clearly confirms the relevance of this essay. First of all, in fact, we thought it would be useful to consider the civilizational (politico-religious) attitude of the West toward the Blacks, before pointing out the deficiencies of present-day science, which is predominantly Western, in its perception of the Black Universe.

The Western political attitude toward the Blacks has for many centuries been determined by the perverse ruler-servant, master-slave, exploiter-exploited relationship. In order to normalize its policy of enslaving Blacks, Judeo-Christian civilization went so far as to use Christianity to legitimize what today we generally call “crimes against humanity”, such as the racist slavery peculiar to the West. That situation was facilitated by the fact that the monotheistic religion, which had originally been universalist, soon limited its horizons to the boundaries of the Western world, while the other peoples — which it thought it had attracted — seemed to find themselves there in spite of themselves. Some might wonder whether the abandonment by the West of Christian universalism does not explain that inability of Judeo-Christian civilization to adopt a universalist attitude, not only in the political but also in the scientific realm.

As a matter of fact, present-day science, dominated for a few centuries by the West, can hardly claim to be “universal”, since it is so deeply affected by the Westerners who perceive it. These people have — as we all know — lost any authentically universalist dimension. Did they not, by using and misusing the Bible, attempt to prove the superiority of Western Whites over Blacks and other colored peoples, limiting there too the vast universalist horizons of science to the very boundaries of the West? Everything seems to indicate that science is no longer universal; it is “Western”, with all the consequences that implies for humanity and, in particular, for the Black world.

In other words, the Western approach, the Western way of thinking, is far from being scientific, neutral and objective; it is subjective and distorting. Such subjectivity and distortion manifest themselves still more obviously, as we have seen, in the realm of colors, and more specifically when dealing with the concept of “black”. One must therefore bring into play the social sciences — history, sociology, psychology, psychoanalysis, political science, etc. — to understand that Western handicap. Indeed, as soon as it has to deal with “black”, Western reasoning vacillates, making room for the irrational and its array of fantasies.

The author of the Foreword to this book, a physicist, under went a conversion in 1974, where by he would from then on wholly devote himself to the study of colors. He says that he has been attracted more and more strongly by the multidisciplinary and deeply human nature of the study of colors. He states that the “rational comprehension of colors cannot have the necessary depth, unless all the sciences are called upon: chemistry, biology, physiology, physics, and mathematics”. He even insists: “Once more the human aspect intervenes. Man is both the creator and the necessary vehicle of all sciences. It is doubly true that there is no rational knowledge of color outside of mankind.” He thus admits, as we do, though in a roundabout way, that the present understanding of colors leaves much to be desired. Is it not strongly influenced by the dominant contemporary civilization, polluted so long by prejudices against peoples of color, especially Blacks?

Such a serious Western handicap obviously hinders the forward march of universal science as well as that of all mankind. Both are victims of a racist — and therefore anti-scientific, selfish and limited — vision of the world.

Although it may still be possible to scientifically correct the erroneous vision of “blackness” fairly quickly, it is much more difficult to improve human behavior from one day to the next, since mentalities evolve rather slowly. In the meantime, we cannot help being aware that the West keeps dragging around its heavy burden of anti-Black prejudice, and that attitude is detrimental to both the Western and Black worlds.

Lucien BONNET

Author of the Book entitled
"Bill A Ri And There Was Light !" in
http://www.contact-canadahaiti.ca

LINKS (JANUARY 12, 2008)
UBC astronomer makes first map of dark matter
CTV.ca - 11 Jan 2008
For the first time, a team of UBC scientists have mapped the elusive "dark matter" in a supercluster of stars in the night sky.
New map lets scientists 'see' dark matter CBC News
Astronomers get best look yet at dark matter surrounding galaxies The Canadian Press
Ars Technica - Kazinform - InTheNews.co.uk - Daily Mail
all 26 news articles »