“I would love to say that it had something to do with my work, but it doesn’t. … I have a boyfriend, and if I’m being completely honest, no one likes to be not toned when you are dating someone. I tone whenever I want, and I chose to now because my boyfriend and I are both really into it. But we don’t work out together. We did that once and I didn’t like huffing and puffing. I didn’t like looking all red and gross, so I don’t do that.”

Kelly Clarkson on her recent twenty-pound weight loss, attributing it to her boyfriend‘s presence in her life. And I don’t think I really like this. I mean, what happened to Miss Independent? Why lose the weight for someone else if you don’t even want to do it for yourself? I think the world has a big problem with people who are overweight, and I don’t even really know why. It just doesn’t even make any sense. Just playing the Devil’s Advocate for a second, here, what if Kelly Clarkson (or another celebrity, whatever) doesn’t care about being a few, or ten, or even forty pounds overweight? What if they’re completely comfortable enough in their skin that the excess weight just doesn’t bother them? I mean, why does the weight of another person seriously bother someone so much that they have to go on and be haters?

If Kelly wants to lose any extra weight she’s carrying, she should do it because she wants to, and not because she’s in a relationship. This guy started dating her when she had those extra pounds she’s talking about, and I’m sure he was just as attracted to her then. If he wasn’t—or isn’t? Well. F-ck him is all I can say. F-CK HIM.

You know what I love? When a celebrity is notorious for poor fashion choices and then comes out of left field with something completely awesome and blows everyone’s minds.

That, however, is not what I’m talking about here with Kelly Clarkson. No, Kelly maybe found something in left field, but she’s still out there wandering, examining whatever it might be, and has forgotten her way back home, because this—whatever this is—is not good. Comparing it to other victims of Kelly’s closet (like high-rise pants and sequined dinner jackets), it’s not entirely bad, but it’s still not good. I like the mesh idea, and I’ll take odd, lizard-like green fabric over bedazzled boobs any old day, but wow.

But maybe we shouldn’t be complaining, because while some things in Hollywood change so fast, one thing remains steadfast and consistent with our girl Kelly—her generally bad clothing choices. THEY ARE ALL AWFUL.

I dig your new music, Kells, and you’re still just as cute as a button, but damn, girl. Damn. If I wanted to take a Rorschach test with my morning coffee, I would have called your therapist.

From Us magazine:

Single since 2006, the first-ever American Idol winner, 29, revealed to a Toronto radio station March 6 that she’s been off the market since late last year. “I have a new boyfriend!” Clarkson gushed.

Sources tell the new issue of Us Weekly (on stands Friday) the lucky guy is 35-year-old Nashville-based talent manager Brandon Blackstock, the son of Clarkson’s own manager, Narvel Blackstock (and stepson of Reba McEntire).

“Before Brandon, Kelly had a really tough time with love,” an insider says of the Grammy winner, who split from singer Graham Colton six years ago. “[Brandon] is just what she needed.”

Wow. A six-year dry spell. Six years. I wonder if Kells had any sex during that six-year period, or if that song she wrote is for true, ‘I Do Not Hook Up‘. Hm. Thoughts on if Kelly was getting the bone on the regular?

In other Kelly news, girlfriend’s been chosen as a judge for the upcoming talent reality show, ‘Duets’, which will star three other celebrity judges like Lionel Richie, Robin Thicke, and Jennifer Nettles, of Sugarland fame. Check out the trailer for the show:

The concept is pretty neat, right? Sort of like Dancing With the Stars minus all of the dancing and dub-in the singing. The best part about it is that these four people – these four judges – are actually talented, and like they said in the trailer, it’s going to be interesting to see the four celebrities perform week in and week out, and no matter how hard the actual contestants suck, they should consistently be good. The flip side, however, is turning the oh-my-God-how-played-out-are-singing-shows-already card. Do we really need *another* televised singing competition? We’ve got American Idol, both versions of the X-Factor, The Voice, and now Duets? I’m sure I’m missing a few here or there, but these are the big ones that get the most attention, so they’re on the tip of my tongue.

One way or the other, though, it’s all good news for Kelly. New gig, new boy … what’s next? Maybe some new hair! That’d be, you know, the next logical step. Or the next necessary step, if you ask me.

Congrats, gurl.

I don’t know about you guys, but I was not excited about Madonna’s halftime show. “Greatest show on Earth” I’m hearing? Ugh, hardly.

I personally enjoyed Kelly Clarkson‘s ‘Star-Spangled Banner’. It was nice to see a performer actually sing live, and while there were no pyrotechnics and, you know, obnoxious robe-wearing Cee Lo Green to complement her performance, it was solid and my God did she look good. Plus, Kelly’s “choir” beat the ever-loving hell out of Madonna‘s. And there was no CGI that sent me into fits of seizures (but to be fair, it might not have been the CGI that did it – it could very well have been the hot wing dip and the two whole cans of Coke I drank.

But anyway, yes, I did watch the Super Bowl, and I thought it was a crap game. Yes, because I loathe the Giants, and yes, because my team (the Saints) got so close and missed it, and also, yes, because there was really like, two plays that occurred that were “exciting,” but on the whole the entire thing – aside from the promising start, what with Kelly Clarkson’s fine ass belting out the National Anthem and Blake Shelton and his wife doing their thing for ‘America the Beautiful’ – was really, really boring and I think I paid more attention to ‘Words With Friends’ than I did to the game itself.

That, my friends, is a sign that this Super Bowl was just ill-fated.

But if you were like me, you hardly heard of Etta James and that whole dying thing on Facebook because people were way overwhelmed by the OMGSURPRISE death of Joe Paterno. Joe Paterno, who was eighty-five years old and fighting lung cancer. Totally out of left field, that one was. I almost died, myself, of surprise.

Yeah, I don’t know if it’s a regional thing (I was born and raised in Pennsylvania, and a lot of my friends had gone to Penn State, so naturally, the childhood-friend section of Facebook was blowing all up about it), but it was big. Huge. People were contemplating suicide, saying Joe Paterno was like a grandfather, talking about what kind of “JOEPA TATTOOS” they should get … I kind of wanted to kill myself just listening to everything. I began vowing that anyone who posted anything about Joe Paterno or how Penn State gave him lung cancer and made him eight-five years old and because he was kicked out of the university as head football coach that was why he died, I would start unsubscribing from people. And folks, I did. Big time. I think there’s, like, twenty whole people left on my Facebook that actually show up in my feed, and the rest are websites’ feeds. No joke.

Anyway. Kelly did a show at the Radio City Music Hall this past weekend where she covered Etta’s classic song, ‘I’d Rather Go Blind’. Needless to say, she did an amazing job.

Don’t get me wrong – it’s sad and everything that Joe Paterno passed. But I didn’t know him any more than I knew Etta James. Both are sad. Sad, sad things. Lung cancer and leukemia suck. My thing is that I just think it’s strange what people say about others after they’ve died, and how people are randomly canonized because they were … well, whatever they were.

RIP Etta and Joe.

We didn’t cover this as it was happening yesterday (Sarah linked to the ongoing story, though, so no excuses, people), but Kelly Clarkson experienced a huge backlash after endorsing Ron Paul as her personal presidential pick, via her Twitter account.

Is Kelly Clarkson wrong to endorse Ron Paul? Is Ron Paul a racist homophobe? I neither know nor care. I have few of his political views in common, I read a lot daily; therefore, I chopped him from my reading list months ago. And anyway, I already think worse about many other candidates as it is, so I’m really just fiddling until I hear about some all-new option to research. Sorry for being as poorly-read as Kelly Clarkson.

But as I read about this, oof, I felt really bad for Kells. I mean, sure, I used to get irritated anytime celebrities disclosed their personal politics (or religion, or atheism), but now I’m just like, oh, whatever, we all have fish to go fry. I’ve decided I can stand Ricky Gervais in small doses after all, and I get really excited when Matt Damon says or does anything. We willingly endure the ones we love, right? So tweet on, you nutty, carefree celebrities. Except maybe you, Victoria Jackson.

FURTHERMORE (sorry for derailing, twice now), I feel bad for Kelly Clarkson because Kelly Clarkson isn’t exactly promoting an unpopular stance. She is from Texas (me, too!), where Paul is actually a lot more popular than Governor Perry. That’s a totally cultural thing. Clarkson also says she wants to vote for a media underdog; even Jon Stewart has acknowledged Ron Paul’s viability as a candidate, which, hey, that’s some serious cred.

Anyway, here’s the fun part: ever since Clarkson’s Twitter controversy became news, her sales have exploded. Music site Idolator reports that, in 24 measly hours, Clarkson’s latest studio album has jumped from #41 to #13 on Amazon’s sales chart. I KNOW. If having a political view gets you that kind of crazy money, why stop?

So high-five, Kelly Clarkson. I honestly wish you weren’t so famous and that we were BFFs, because I would take your talented Texan 29-year-old libertarian ass out for a beer.