While I had my issues with WALL-E, I wouldn't have considered leftist brain-washing to be one of them (although, I suppose some might argue that I'm so far gone I wouldn't notice it in the first place). It seems, however, that some of the more conservative members of the audience did pick up on it and are visibly upset.

Think Progress (admittedly, it was voted "Best Liberal Blog" in 2006) has a round-up of some of the commentary coming out about the movie from the right side of the theatre. "From the first moment of the film," wrote Shannen Coffin, former general counsel to Vice President Cheney, "my kids were bombarded with leftist propaganda about the evils of mankind."

Another writer described the movie as "a 90-minute lecture on the dangers of over consumption, big corporations, and the destruction of the environment." He goes on to explain that he will be doing his part to save the world by "by boycotting any and all WALL-E merchandise" and calling for others to "join my crusade."

I'm sure that these reviewers do not speak for all conservatives, representing, instead, an extreme, but it is still amusing that they are getting so upset over a movie that they aren't being forced to see. I could get similarly incensed about the VeggieTales series -- or just not watch them.

I've never been much of a fan of reality TV. Putting ordinary people (who are always prettier or meaner or whinier than anyone person I've ever met) in weird circumstances to show what happens just isn't entertaining to me. I've got kids, I deal with weird circumstances ALL DAY LONG!

Apparently, I'm not the only one who isn't crazy about at least one reality TV show. The Washington D.C. based nonprofit group Zero to Three is upset with the new NBC television series "Baby Borrowers". The group's spokesperson told Page Six, "We're concerned about the fact that these babies are being separated from their parents and placed with strangers. On the first episode, the babies were separated for about 12 hours and were clearly in distress. Typically they will cry and cling and search for their parents, which they were doing. They should be with someone they've had the opportunity to get to know."

I'm all for educating teens on child care getting rid of the notion that parenting is one big ball of baby powdery fun, but there ARE better ways than dumping a baby off with complete strangers for a television show. Working at a childcare center, volunteering at a church nursery or preschool, or even babysitting are all good ways to get a small idea of what life as a parent is like.

There is no way I'd ever, ever, ever have agreed to let my babies be on a television show like this, even with a nanny stationed nearby in case she's needed. What exactly is going on with our society that makes babies fair game for a reality series, anyway?

A lot of people love Pixar. The amazing animation studio, with incredible artists like John Lasseter and Pete Docter, has a knack for infusing life and soul into normally inanimate objects. With hits like the Toy Story movies, Monsters, Inc, Finding Nemo, Cars, and now WALL-E (which I got to see last week), the company has much to be proud of.

So are you one of their fans? Have you seen all nine of their full-length films? Can you name them all? (They are: Toy Story (1995), A Bug's Life (1998), Toy Story 2 (1999), Monsters, Inc (2001), Finding Nemo (2003), The Incredibles (2004), Cars (2006), Ratatouille (2007), and WALL-E (2008).)

Well, if you fancy yourself to be as big a fan as I am, you might want to try your hand at this Pixar-related quiz over at Moviefone. I got nine out of fourteen correct (I missed a few actors and cultural references) -- how will you do?

There are few childhood characters that have stood the test of time as well as those on Sesame Street. Kermit Love, creator of one fhe most famous of those characters -- Big Bird -- passed away last week at the age of 91. Though Love's career spanned decades, he's known worldwide for his contribution to the children's show and for his work on Sesame Street's most beloved characters.

Big Bird, as you know, is a towering 8-foot, 6-year-old bird, whose head and neck are controlled from inside the costume by levers. Mr. Love was protective of his creation, according to a NYT article, and the costume got its own seat when they traveled by plane. Because he wanted Big Bird to seem natural and more real to small children, he designed the costume so that stray feathers would fall off during shooting.

Carroll Spinney, who plays both Big Bird and Oscar the Grouch on Sesame Street talks about his old friend Kermit Love on NPR. In a CNN article, Spinney said of Love, "He looked very much like Santa Claus but was a little bit more like the Grinch."

The hype has been building for months, ever since word first got out last fall about Pixar's new film WALL-E. It's the story of WALL-E (Waste Allocation Load Lifter -- Earth-Class), a determined robot who falls for a sleek new robot named EVE who shows up one fateful day. WALLL-E ends up chasing her across the galaxy and saving the world in the process.

As a fan of quality animation and a total Pixar groupie, I have been looking forward to seeing this film for quite a while. With all the trailers, adverts, and WALL-E's face plastered all over the streetcars here, my kids have been eagerly awaiting its release as well. They squeal with joy whenever they see him, and my older son has been reminding me that the movie was coming out June 27 practically non-stop.

So, does the movie live up to the hype? Is it as good as we have come to expect from Pixar, the studio that brought us such modern classics as Toy Story, Monsters, Inc., and one of the best children's movies ever, Cars? Well, since June 27 just happened to be my daughter's birthday, I took my son Jared (six years old) and daughter Sara (turned four that day) to find out.

If you've ever seen television or been the recipient of junk mail, you are probably familiar with the lingerie chain Victoria's Secret. In addition to selling teddies and thongs, they sell apparel aimed at the college set. Their brand, Pink, has licenses with many colleges to sell hoodies, t-shirts, tote bags and that sort of thing.

Now, one college campus seeks to remove such gear. University of Minnesota has decided to remove themselves from the 33 other colleges who sell gear through the Pink Collegiate line. At this time, Victoria's Secret is still offering the merchandise. Instead of dealing with the colleges directly, VS made a deal with the Collegiate Licensing Bureau.

Although the site I sourced has an opinion on this, University of Minnesota hasn't explicitly said it feels the ads are too racy. The school was concerned about their reputation however. A representative quoted stated the school did not feel it was in their best interests to have Gopher gear sold through the apparel giant.

Pic by Sweet~Vanilla.

Actress and Blue Lagoon star Brooke Shields knows a thing or two about the paparazzi. Having been a child star and a young person in the constant eye of the media storm , Brooke has taken it upon herself to teach her children how to handle the media.

Brooke's daughter, Rowan, who is five, knows what to do when the paparazzi strikes. Says Rowan, when asked by her mom what to do when the media strikes, "Well, I look straight ahead and I don't look them in the eye." Shields is sorry her daughter even knows what the word 'paparazzi' means.

Shields says that teaching her children to ignore the press is a healthier way of handling them. The actress knows the paparazzi will be there no matter what she does, so better to ignore them than give them what they want, I guess. Shields is also mom to daughter Grier Hammond, two.

As a person, you know that some people never learn. You see and hear this fact every day. As a parent, you will, at some point, no doubt be forced to share this delightful bit of information with your children, even as you try to teach them to be people who do learn from their mistakes and shortcomings. Sometimes it's tough to do when those people who never learn continue to be on the receiving end of everything but karma.

As we all know by now, Don Imus, the controversial radio disc jockey, is in the news again for making what are being construed as racist remarks. Recently Imus commented on the numerous (six!) arrests of football star Andrew Jones, who is African American. During the broadcast Imus asked what color Jones was. When he received the response, he stated, "Well, that explains it. Now we know."

Imus has since come forward claiming his comments were meant to be sarcastic. The people aren't buying it though, and neither is Andrew Jones, who said he has problems with African Americans and that he will be praying for Imus. I don't necessarily think Imus has a problem with a certain set of people (maybe he does, maybe he doesn't), but I do think he doesn't know when to let well enough alone. He doesn't know when to keep his mouth shut. Imus, however, doesn't get paid to do that. He gets paid to bring attention to his program, any way he knows how. And making controversial remarks is his trademark.

Today, my seven year old and I spent the afternoon in the bookstore. While I was heartened to see many little kids enjoying books, I couldn't help but notice that there weren't many older kids browsing the aisles. After reading about this study, I think I know where those kids were: at home in front of some sort of digital entertainment.

The Tween & Teen Lifestyle Report is a bi-yearly look at what kids ages 8 to 17 are doing with their free time. No surprise, the trend away from reading and toward surfing the Internet, watching television and playing video games continues. The study, conducted by Youth Trends, a research and marketing firm, shows that only 65% of teens (ages 14 to 17) read a magazine for fun last month compared to 65% a year ago. Magazine reading among tweens (ages 8 to 13) showed a similar decline with 48% reporting reading a magazine in the last month compared to 52% percent a year ago.

Skipping magazine reading might not seem like such a bad thing (aren't they all beauty tips and celebrities anyway?), but the report shows that kids are using that time to watch more television and play around online. The report doesn't reveal just what the kids are watching on the tube, but you can be pretty sure it isn't educational. Online, they are spending the majority of their time sending and receiving emails, instant messaging and playing games.

I love to read and rarely does a day go by that I don't indulge that love. It's a habit I developed as a child (way before the Internet and cable television) and one that I still enjoy immensely. My seven year old, if left to her own devices, would rather watch an episode of Hannah Montana for the fourth time than read a book. But when I turn the television off and put a book in her hand, she quickly remembers that she loves to read. I give her books not just to get her away from the screen, but because I hope to make reading a habit that she will enjoy for the rest of her life, too.

When I think of the hottest trends in hip teen clothing, I usually think of that store in the mall that has the half naked mannequins lounging around out front. What I don't think of is JCPenney. But apparently, that's exactly the direction that the national chain is trying to head in. Just take a look at their latest teen-centric ad:



JCPenney's has jumped onto the "sex sells" bandwagon, trying to update their image to attract a younger crowd. But here's what I'm wondering: The commercial clearly pokes fun at the trusting mom who sits upstairs reading her magazine while the kids "go downstairs to watch TV." At the same time, it's sending a message to teen customers that today is the day to have sex with your boyfriend, right under your mom's nose.

The thing is, that mom in the commercial likely makes up the majority of JCPenney's customer base. How are moms who are loyal to this classic and formerly pretty wholesome brand going to feel about this commercial that encourages their teens to break parental rules and engage in risky behavior? Betrayed? Angry? Suddenly not so spendy?

It seems like a big risk to take to me. What do you think about JCPenney's new commercial?

Edited to add: As it turns out, everyone, JCPenney did not authorize this ad. (Let's let out a collective whew.) There's a lot of finger pointing going on right now; JCPenney is blaming its ad company Saatchi & Saatchi, who in turn is blaming the production company Epoch films.

According to Gawker, the commercial won an award at the Cannes Lions Awards this past weekend. Penney's chief marketing officer has been quoted as saying, "It's obviously inappropriate and nothing we would ever condone."

"She went straight from Disney princess to High School Musical," complains one mom in an article titled "Parents fret as as tots love 'High School Musical."

As Disney shows such as Hannah Montana and High School Musical (HSM) predictably make their way down the marketing food chain, there is growing concern among parents that adolescent themes like boyfriends and break-ups are now being digested by two and three-year olds. Today, it's not unusual for a four year-old to have a High School Musical birthday party or to proclaim Sharpay, HSM's superficial, Jimmy Choo wearing mean girl to be her "favorite character." So long Cinderella.

I have sounded off on this disturbing trend often in my blogs and I stand by my position that the sexualization of childhood via entertainment, toys, and clothes is one of the most insidious forces facing young kids -- especially young girls.

It's not easy to safeguard childhood given the corporate marketing onslaught and the fact that so many kids are steeped in what now passes for "kid culture."

So what's a mom to do? My strategy is to stick to my guns. If I can postpone a premature adolescence by even a couple of years, it will be worth it. I set age-appropriate boundaries and explain them in a way that my children can understand and explain to their peers if questioned about it.

Of course, they want to know why their friends can watch these shows when they can't. I simply tell them that all families have different rules. This won't be the first time where ours differs from those of other families. In our home, I explain, kids watch and play with kid stuff because being a kid is FUN and there is no need to rush it. I assure them that there will be plenty of time for tween and teen things in the future. So far, this explanation has been satisfactory. I used a similar tact with the Bratz Dolls: "I want you to play with a doll that looks like you. This doll looks kind of mean and wears so much make-up. She doesn't look very fun."

This year our 8 year-old daughter attended a party where High School Musical was shown. She informed the girls that she isn't allowed to watch "teenager movies" and an animated G-rated film was played instead. She also left the room when the conversation turned to things she recognized that we would not like her to be part of. I didn't expect that to happen, but it did and I was proud of her. It happened to be the day before Mother's Day and I told her it was the best present she could have ever given me.

This weekend, she attended Girl Scout camp by herself for the first time. Initially, I had flashbacks of all those "camp" movies where the bad girls talk the other girls into compromising dares and rites of initiation involving boys. Luckily, camp came on the heels of her very commendable (and courageous) conduct at the birthday party. I let her go.

As the bus drove off, I thought to myself, "First Girl Scouts, then college." It goes so fast. That's precisely why she should be a little girl as long as she can.

The name "Chanel" is synonymous with elegance, simplicity, and wealth. After all, it was Coco Chanel who introduced the world to the little black dress, a wardrobe staple no woman's closet should be without. And her Chanel No. 5 has stood the test of time (aided no doubt by Marilyn Monroe's statement that it was the only thing she wore to bed) remains one of best known perfumes in the world even today, eighty-seven years after its creation.

And because anything adorned with those intertwined C's can take many years to afford (as even on Ebay, Chanel suits are out of the price range of most people) Chanel shoppers tend to be women, not teenage girls.

However, that didn't stop Chanel from choosing 18-year-old Emma Watson, the actress who plays Hermione in the Harry Potter series, to be the next face of Chanel. The dewy-faced teenager has signed a two year contract with the fashion house said to be worth $6 million, which is almost criminal considering she'll also be given Chanel clothing to wear at functions.

I'm still several decades away from being able to afford Chanel and while I understand they may be trying to appeal to a younger generation, it seems strange to have someone not even old enough to vote or drink represent the brand.

Barack Obama is upset because the Republicans and the media have cast aspersions on his wife's character, questioning her patriotism and calling her his "baby mama". He told one network that "I've said publicly before, and I'll say it again - I think families are off limits." He's also upset that his opponent, John McCain, hasn't spoken out against dragging wives through the mud.

John McCain, however, countered saying that not only has he spoken out against the practice, it's Obama that has not taken a stand. McCain spokesman Joe Pounder, referring to calls for Cindy McCain to release her taxes and questions about her husband's campaign use of her company's private jet, said that "Obama's silence speaks volumes, and it's unfortunate that he would single out others for a standard he himself has failed to live up to."

If you ask me, it seems that personal attacks calling someone unpatriotic are not quite the same as asking for transparency in campaign financing, although I will admit I'm not sure why Mrs. McCain's taxes are relevant. Still, in general, I would say that wives and families should be off-limits during an election -- we're not voting for Michelle Obama or Cindy McCain, after all.

So what do you think? Are families fair game or should they be left alone? Are they relevant to a candidate's qualifications for elected office or are they indicative of the candidate's character?

The applause over the first black presidential candidate in the history of the United States had barely died down when FOX News made the bizarre decision to use the subtitle "Obama's baby mama" as the subtitle to footage of the candidate's wife aired during a segment discussing conservative attacks on Michelle Obama.

While it's true that Michelle Obama is the mama to Barack's babies, "baby mama" is a Jamaican Creole slang term for a woman who is not married to her child's father. The term has been used frequently in hip hop songs and the vernacular of people trying to be hip.

My kids have -- and frequently play with -- a large plastic strawberry filled with Strawberry Shortcake characters that were mine when I was a kid. They love the way the dolls smell, the interchangeable hats, and the little rubber shoes that don't constantly fall off (unlike their more modern dolls).

But according to American Greetings Properties, the company who owns Strawberry and her friends, my kids are an anomaly. Modern kids can't relate to the old SS and friends, they say, and either can a whole string of other 1980s characters. So they're all getting makeovers to attract a new generation of fans, while still trying to hook parents with the nostalgia factor. Care Bears are slimming down, TMNT are getting more muscular (but less aggressive), even Mickey Mouse is in the process of getting a new look.

I really don't have a problem with companies remaking favorite brands to make them more modern. When Strawberry was remade a few years ago, she was brought into the 21st century, but she was still clearly a kid. This most recent makeover gives Strawberry a cell phone (goodbye, Custard the cat!), long flowing hair, and those vapid, Bratz-like eyes that are oh-so-popular with manufacturers today.

What do you think about the makeover -- Strawberry Shortcake gone wild or perfect for today's little girls?