On Paula Abdul's art career and bottled water for dogs

Attending a Sunday fundraiser for pet rescue centers – where Ellen DeGeneres, shockingly enough, was nowhere in sight – Your Mayor was greeted by sundry objects that made his brain hurt.

Despite Ellen’s absence, other celebrities contributed to the fundraising, even if their contributions didn’t actually raise any funds.

To wit: A silent auction offered “paintings” featuring the handprints of celebrities alongside the pawprints of their pets. Paula Abdul was among those who contributed a canvas, with the prints of one of the diminutive yappy dogs who had appeared on her reality show “Hey Paula” gracing her “artwork.”

At the silent auction’s conclusion, Abdul’s work had received no bids. Even though Abdul appears on the most popular show on Television (not “Hey Paula,” eejit; “American Idol”). Even though its initial bidding price had been slashed in half. Even though other similar offerings from celebrities such as Drew Barrymore and Jessica Alba did, in fact, move. Even though one imagines that the residual chemicals that might be found on Abdul’s mitts and planted on the canvas via direct contact with her hands might appeal to those with certain proclivities. (Perhaps crazy pill aficionados don’t attend fundraisers for pet rescue organizations.)

I considered bidding on Abdul’s efforts for kitsch value, but then reconsidered: This was crap, so I wouldn’t put it on my wall, and I couldn’t think of any of my friends who would do so, even ironically, either. So why bother?

Ah, but more oddities were forthcoming at the event. Did you know that dogs have their own bottled water? Neither did I, but let me introduce you to VitaPaw®, “a daily dose of goodness for your best friend.” (Just what the world needs, more disposable plastic bottles.)

“VitaPaw is refreshing water, infused with vitamins for all day hydration,” a bottle of the fluid reads (yes, water indeed provides all-day hydration, so can’t trip them up there).

It adds, “Even the most discriminating pet will enjoy this fresh alternative to tap water.” Which doesn’t quite scan: If this was terrific stuff, wouldn’t “the most discriminating pet” absolutely love this? Wouldn’t “even” “a mammal with no taste whatsoever” “enjoy this fresh alternative to tap water?”

Oh, and then there’s this warning on the bottle: “Not intended for human consumption.”

No doubt because it might inspire them to leave their scent all around their neighborhood.

If animals find this more desirable than tap water, but if it’s not worthy of humans, does its alleged popularity amongst the fur-bearing set have something to do with the fact that some pets like to drink out of the toilet?