Does this Fit to a "T"?

Have you seen the latest fashion statements from Abercrombie & Fitch? That’s not a metaphor. A&F has a fresh line of slogan T-shirts for girls that are eliciting nervous chuckles from some and have hatched a “girl-cott” for the store by a group in Allegheny County, PA.

What could possibly be wrong with a t-shirt slogan?

Would you want your teenaged—or college-aged daughter prancing around in a t-shirt that sports this phrase across the chest: “Who Needs a Brain when you Have These?” Another one says, “I Had a Nightmare I was a Brunette,” and then there’s the T that reads “Available for Parties” across the front.

Yeah, great packaging.

Abercrombie is no stranger to criticism. There was the 2003 catalog with photos of topless women and bottomless men which provoked so much ire that the company pulled the publication. Remember last year's U.S. Olympic gymnastics team failing to win a gold medal? Right on cue, A&F sold T-shirts with the phrase "L is for loser" next to a picture of a gymnast on the rings. Those shirts were pulled from the racks after USA Gymnastics called for a boycott.

I think I'd have seen the Olympic Wrestling Team over for a little attitude adjustment at A&F.

While Abercrombie backed down then, it’s not now. Their defense: "Our clothing appeals to a wide variety of customers. These particular T-shirts have been very popular among adult women to whom they are marketed." In other words, if A&F prints them, girls will buy them.

The irony is this: with the controversy comes attention—media attention—and that’s what it’s all about for Abercrombie & Fitch. Controversial marketing. Packaging. Image: Concepts with personal applications that should be more fully developed before trying on such slogan shirts.

Young girls wishing to be trendy with an A&F slogan shirt that’s somewhat demeaning to the fairer sex might be initiating a trend they cannot reverse.

Second Opinions

We went to another doctor for a second opinion on my prostate cancer.
He said I've got it, and I dress funny.
Second opinion--what else did I expect?
So now it's a matter of choosing who, where, and when.
We already know why...and, excruciatingly, how.

I guess cancer patients always live in a semi-state of denial--hoping against hope.
Always looking for another opinion.
Me--I'm just looking for a date and a time to carve this stuff out of my belly so I can get on with the business of loving my family and living my life.

It's not so bad, really.
A friend of mine was just told this week that his cancer is terminal.
Sometimes, second opinions are worse than we expect.

"Do as I say, Not as I Do"

Politicians screaming for windfall taxes on oil companies' "windfall" profits make me see red.

Exxon-Mobil earned over $10-billion in profits last quarter, Shell racked-up $9-billion, BP made $6.4-billion, and Conoco-Phillps was a comparative slacker, earning only $3.8-billion in profits.

Would that I were as sluggish.

Congress wants to tax the oil companies on profits for any oil above $40/barrel. Here are two important pieces of information that you're not hearing much about--and which grandstanding senators are ignoring:

• The profit margin by big oil companies is less than 10%
• Senator-investors' profits on their stocks were up 12%

Once again, we have the Pot calling the Kettle a cookware-American.

The New Yorker published a piece of research by Georgia State professor Alan Ziobrowski surveying the stock transactions of senators between 1993 and 1998, revealing their ability to beat the markets by 12%. Most fund managers feel good about a 2% spread.

When's that investigation beginning?

For that matter--big banks enjoyed a 20% profit margin this last time around. How come no one is looking at their books? Oh yeah, they just did...and sent some guys to jail as I recall...and still made a 20% return.

Don't recall anyone in Congress advocating a bail-out of the oil industry when a barrel of oil cost $10/barrel, do you? We've got milk subsidies, sugar subsidies, lumber tarrifs, garment tarrifs, and nothing but red tape and double speak from Washington when oil companies want to build new refineries.

The government will sustain a failing railroad operator for decades (Amtrak) but has not the political backbone to employ a little common sense in analyzing what it costs to produce a gallon of gasoline. When you extrapolate the benefits to society, the economy, and national security from enabling Big Oil to expand capacity and build new refineries, it's a no-brainer.

Which should be a slam-dunk, since that seems to be what we've sent to Capitol Hill.