Video: Shuster flips out over Miss California
posted at 4:40 pm on May 12, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
In fairness, this isn’t anything you wouldn’t hear from Shep on a day when he’s feeling extra pissy. Count on Shuster to miss the point, though: The reason this story is hot isn’t because the public hangs on the every word of “superficial” pageant contestants, it’s because the left’s campaign to humiliate Prejean for an exceedingly gentle statement of opposition to gay marriage is a flashpoint in the conflict between political correctness and Christian belief. What makes her an almost uniquely sympathetic figure in the public debate is that she’s not a polished pol or pundit advancing an agenda. She was asked a simple question about her opinion, gave a simple answer, and has been vilified in the nastiest ways for it ever since — including by people appearing in this clip. Which is to say, it’s because she’s nothing more than a pageant contestant that makes it easy to root for her and makes the story compelling. Even if, like me, you disagree with her on the issue.
Watch ’til the very end or else you’ll miss intellectual giant David Shuster suggesting that people who participate in pageants have nothing useful to say to anyone, ever. There’s a whiff of ostentatious feminism about that — i.e. no one who’d participate in something so superficial and retrograde deserves to be taken seriously — but insofar as it conclusively presumes something about the intelligence of an individual woman based on one aspect of her life, it’s anything but. Click the image to watch.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
Yes, but are his boobs fake?
lorien1973 on May 12, 2009 at 5:12 PM
ddrintn on May 12, 2009 at 5:12 PM
you beat me to it
youngO on May 12, 2009 at 5:13 PM
“Accepted her fame” how? By continuing to breathe? By not going into hiding?
It’s about brownshirt tactics, not about the issue of gay marriage.
ddrintn on May 12, 2009 at 5:13 PM
It was a beauty pageant and she was specifically asked the question by a beauty pageant judge. So how was she supposed to shut up about it?
AUINSC on May 12, 2009 at 5:13 PM
I’m vilified all the time ’round here because of my opinions. What’s your point?
JetBoy on May 12, 2009 at 5:12 PM
Does that make it right?
youngO on May 12, 2009 at 5:13 PM
Or a more factual one would be that it’s her religion and her theology, not yours and you really have no business telling her what she can and cannot believe.
She hasn’t spoken out against women in bikinis, and considering most women enhance their image in some way or another, the breast implant issue has always seemed stupid to me.
Esthier on May 12, 2009 at 5:14 PM
I agree with Carrie on her answer but it’s not a violation of free speech to have what you say questioned or criticized by others. If they come and arrest you or the govt. takes you off the air{fairness doctrine}that would be a violation of your freedom of speech. You don’t have the right for everyone to agree with you although I do. Actually I find Carrie very agreeable.
evensteven on May 12, 2009 at 5:15 PM
“Breast implants + walking around naked = please shut up about others’ lifestyle. What’s so extreme about that? Seriously.
radiofreevillage on May 12, 2009 at 5:08 PM”
Yeah…the speaker of the house has implants. Big ones. I guess THAT’S okay.
LtE126 on May 12, 2009 at 5:15 PM
Any time someone is threatened with removal from a job, because of a particular belief – whether you agree with it or not – you should feel sorry for them. And the culture.
There’s nothing worse what is happening to this chick. For what? Saying something that she believes in. It’s pathetic.
That said. More boob and lingerie pics. That’s all I really want.
lorien1973 on May 12, 2009 at 5:15 PM
Although Fox News has Lauren Green and Gretchen Carlson, both former Miss Americas, neither of whom lack brains…
Steve Z on May 12, 2009 at 5:15 PM
Is Shuster gay or does he just play one on TV?
Joe Caps on May 12, 2009 at 5:16 PM
I’m standing before you half-naked. This is an issue best discussed in a different setting.
radiofreevillage on May 12, 2009 at 5:16 PM
It is what it is.
JetBoy on May 12, 2009 at 5:16 PM
You guys check out Miss California USA Organization PSA “I Believe” featuring a bunch of former beauty queens just released?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ay7GaRETDNg
Very obvious knocked to Prejean.
BJ on May 12, 2009 at 5:17 PM
The ONLY reason we are still talking about it…
…is because your fellow gay-marriage supporters can’t let it go.
First it was the boob job.
Then it was the “semi-nude” picture.
Then it was her parent’s divorce records.
Then it was her “contractual” issues.
Then it was photos that weren’t supposed to be made public along with photoshopped pictures.
And, of course, all along calling for her head on a silver platter.
J/B, we’ve gone back and forth on this and I still can’t believe that you don’t understand the first rule of holes (stop digging).
Miss Prejean would have faded away into obscurity even AFTER the Perez Hilton comments IF places like TMZ had left her alone.
Remember, she’s NOT a symbol of traditional marriage…
…she’s a symbol of the left’s hatred, viciousness and vindictiveness against ANYONE who dares have a differing opinion than them.
And Shuster here is just another prime example of that.
But as I said before, as a gay marriage opponent, I certainly hope and encourage the left to continue their attacks on Miss Prejean.
If they’re not careful, they’ll set their cause back so much that my great grandchildren won’t have to worry about the gay marriage issue.
Religious_Zealot on May 12, 2009 at 5:18 PM
Not her call. The pageant allowed the question and she gave her answer.
KittyLowrey on May 12, 2009 at 5:18 PM
Really? How about sending us your photo, real name, and your home address. Then you might get a more accurate feeling of what she’s going through.
It’s easy to hide behind screen IDs, isn’t it?
Gregor on May 12, 2009 at 5:18 PM
Did you feel sorry for The Dixie Chicks?
SnarkVader on May 12, 2009 at 5:19 PM
Actually, she was wearing a full gown then, something most of us would consider fully dressed.
Oh, come on. You don’t really believe that. I’ve never seen you defend others who attack you just for your beliefs, and there is nothing appropriate about those attacks.
Esthier on May 12, 2009 at 5:20 PM
Of course, I will tell her what to believe. She has the right not to listen, and I can’t force my views on her. But I can say whatever I want. Freedom of speech means that you cannot be prosecuted by the government for your thoughts and speeches. It doesn’t guarantee you the freedom from peer pressure.
radiofreevillage on May 12, 2009 at 5:21 PM
Whatever.
AUINSC on May 12, 2009 at 5:21 PM
Not yet.
The reason I asked is that I like the comparison between her stance on marriage and Obama’s.
SnarkVader on May 12, 2009 at 5:21 PM
It is what it is.
JetBoy on May 12, 2009 at 5:16 PM
If you can’t beat ‘em join em? I honestly never seen you get villified here. Maybe just get you to think and not feel your way through ideas (no i’m not talking about your preferences). But I never hear the left attacking Obama or any other liberal the way they’ve attacked a beauty contestant. It should show you how low your friends on the left are. I would suggest you shouldn’t join em. If you believe in gay marriage, all power to you fight for it. But don’t call us bigoted because we don’t agree with you. To me the only bigots are among the militant left
youngO on May 12, 2009 at 5:21 PM
How was their job threatened? People just chose to go to their concerts or not go. It’s not a very good analogy.
I don’t agree with her position, btw. I’m just making the point that seems to be lost on people.
A better analogy is: Your boss says you should be fired because you voted for McCain, he voted for Obama.
Would that be legal in the normal world? Nope.
lorien1973 on May 12, 2009 at 5:21 PM
OK, she have her answer. We will tell her what we think about her answer.
radiofreevillage on May 12, 2009 at 5:22 PM
A great nation springs from a great people. We have become a silly, petty and childish nation. How do we survive that?
ronsfi on May 12, 2009 at 5:22 PM
Who is this twag and why is he on MSLGBTV?
daesleeper on May 12, 2009 at 5:22 PM
radiofreevillage on May 12, 2009 at 5:21 PM
How about you wasted more of your time peer pressuring your president? And shame him from denying his friends in the gay community? Instead of vilifying a beauty chick
youngO on May 12, 2009 at 5:22 PM
How were they threatened for job removal? They pissed off their fans (even directly insulting them, calling them rednecks), so their fans decided to boycott them. That’s capitalism.
If Carrie was more like Kathy Griffin, specifically appealing to gays for her audience, and then she made this comment, losing sales… of whatever she’d be selling, then this story would be analogous.
Esthier on May 12, 2009 at 5:23 PM
daesleeper on May 12, 2009 at 5:23 PM
They’re adults who also got to speak their minds and chose to do it on foreign soil. People choosing not to be fans anymore after the DCs made a point of insulting their fans is also theirown choice.
Prejean did not insult anyone and took care to state her opinion was not meant to offend. She did not choose to raise the issue, unlike the DCs. That a mission to destroy her was then launched is not the same as radio stations not playing DC songs or fans choosing not to buy their product.
KittyLowrey on May 12, 2009 at 5:23 PM
Thinking about her answer is one thing, people threatening to remove her from her job is quite another.
lorien1973 on May 12, 2009 at 5:24 PM
I’m pretty outspoken, whether or not I’m in the majority, or the minority, thought on an issue. Not quite “hiding”. Gimme a link, and I’ll happily send you a photo and where to reach me. Plaster it all over. “what she’s going through”…please, poor thing!
Then be the big man and let it go from your side. This “well, they started it” stuff is very childish.
JetBoy on May 12, 2009 at 5:24 PM
Don’t forget,that the Lefty goons have gone after her personal life,and spilled dirty laundry of her parents!!
So there was,and still is, an ongoing Search and Destroy
Missions against Miss Perjean!
And its not just her,the Liberal personal attack machine,
has a track record,and it never stops!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Exibit”A”,
Miss California
Joe the Plumber
SarahCuda
and etc in infinity!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
canopfor on May 12, 2009 at 5:25 PM
Glad to see the gay nazis were shut down.Good for trump no matter what his reasons.
sonofdy on May 12, 2009 at 5:25 PM
Their music was banned from country radio. The FBI had to provide protection at their shows because of death threats.
SnarkVader on May 12, 2009 at 5:25 PM
radiofreevillage on May 12, 2009 at 5:26 PM
And if that’s what was happening here, it would be completely appropriate.
Going into her parents’ divorce records, publishing photos that were never meant to be published and insulting her personally, that’s what people are objecting to.
Also, you are more than welcome to tell her what you think she should believe, but you have no right to tell her what she cannot believe. There’s a difference. Just because you believe Christian women shouldn’t wear bikinis, that doesn’t mean you’re correct or that all Christians share your opinion.
Esthier on May 12, 2009 at 5:26 PM
Its not just them. I had the same thing happen to me over on youtube.
Thats why I had to remove my account there.
sonofdy on May 12, 2009 at 5:26 PM
Yes, and that included the “judge” calling her a b and a c. We’re entitled to say what we think of that.
And the charge was made this morning that some of the photos that were released to the media were photo-shopped and some were photos taken during a shoot that were not intentional or ever meant for release. Those, if true, certainly go beyond merely telling her what they think of her stance and go in the “try to destroy her because she doesn’t believe as we say she should” column.
KittyLowrey on May 12, 2009 at 5:27 PM
And the same thing is being done by the gay nazis.
sonofdy on May 12, 2009 at 5:27 PM
No, but neither did they almost lose their jobs.
The Dixie Chicks are a product for mass consumption – they sell records, t-shirts and concert tickets.
It is the right of every consumer to decide whether or not they want to purchase a product. This decision can be based on stupid things that the makers of the product say and do.
However, Miss Prejean is not a product, you do not “purchase” what Miss California does.
Now, I understand that traditional beauty queens do a lot of PR stuff. Thus, if there is a dearth of companies that want to USE Miss Prejean, that would be perfectly fine.
But people want more than that, they want her to lose her job.
Religious_Zealot on May 12, 2009 at 5:27 PM
To be clear, I thought her answer was fine and I think Perez Hilton is a repulsive pig.
SnarkVader on May 12, 2009 at 5:28 PM
…and they just keep on diggin’. Even old dogs learn eventually, but lefties…. so predictable.
littleguy on May 12, 2009 at 5:28 PM
Country stations are not required to air songs. They can choose to or not. Airing of songs is free publicity to the artists. That is what one would call capitalism.
Removal of employment, by your employer, because of a political belief is wrong. It’s sad that this simple concept needs to be explained.
lorien1973 on May 12, 2009 at 5:28 PM
When is Shuster going to get all hot and bothered about Nancy tolerating torture?
Upstater85 on May 12, 2009 at 5:28 PM
We did. It was damn good.
Religious and conservative people didn’t abandon the public square just because a jackass became President and a douchebag became a beauty pageant judge.
Threaten her job and pursuit of her happiness? Aint gonna happen. Blowbacks a bitch.
JiangxiDad on May 12, 2009 at 5:28 PM
You sure do think that “gay nazi” thing is clever, don’t you?
SnarkVader on May 12, 2009 at 5:29 PM
Wow.
So you think it’s okay for employers to fire employees due to political beliefs? Try that in real life and see how fast you end up in court with a wrongful termination suit.
lorien1973 on May 12, 2009 at 5:29 PM
After her naughty pictures come out and he’s done vomiting!
littleguy on May 12, 2009 at 5:30 PM
It was ‘BANNED”? Really. And who issued this fictional ban? Nobody.
KittyLowrey on May 12, 2009 at 5:30 PM
Honestly what angers me about this is the predictable and all too typical lefty smear tactics designed to squelch free speech. Leftists like Hilton along with his like-minded getaway drivers in the media are no different from the radical students who jump up on stage and shout slogans at Conservative speakers on campus. They don’t want a debate. They want to shut us up. They are the same forces behind the “fairness” doctrine. All they do is demand conformity and when they don’t get that they go into full destruction mode.
Do yourself a favor. Go back to the original Prejean post here on hotair documenting the answer she gave at the pagent. What you will notice is that we all predicted how the left was going to treat this. We predicted they would act like the little fascists they are and go after her guns-a-blazin’. They would not take any interest in the actual debate. Their goal would be to destroy her, strip her of her crown and, if possible, conduct a public hanging in downtown San Fransico. Why? Because she gave the wrong answer. She gave an answer that ran contrary to the leftist agenda.
And no, Jetboy, you are not “vilified” around here because of your opinions. People argue with you when they disagree and people back you up when they agree with you. When a moron occasionally makes a snide comment about your sexual preference many people defend you against those stupid attacks. Nobody tries to destroy you. Nobody tries to dig up your past and spread it around the internet in an attempt to ruin your life. They argue with you within the normal perameters of a debate. Big difference.
Zetterson on May 12, 2009 at 5:30 PM
Really, Jet? You think you’d be fine if reporters went through your past, just looking for something to humiliate you with? Any semi nude photos you never meant to be shown? Any nights with questionable judgment? And what about your parents? Do you want the most private aspects of their lives published to discredit you?
Esthier on May 12, 2009 at 5:30 PM
1) How is the fact that radio stations refused to play their music (which was their right to do) the same thing as wanting to have Miss Prejean fired from her job?
2) The death threats were WAY over the top and most everyone on the right condemned the death threats.
Religious_Zealot on May 12, 2009 at 5:31 PM
I’m villified…..
Jetboy on May 12,2009 at 5:12PM.
Jetboy:
I read and like your posts,I don’t think your being villified,keep your powder dry!:)
canopfor on May 12, 2009 at 5:31 PM
Look, I know you respect her answer…
But I would like to think this is a little different. As far as I know, Prejean wasn’t trying to appeal to the Gay Marriage Alliance… The Dixie Chicks were trying to sell their records to those back-woods hick consumers of theirs… The Dixie Chicks have more in common with Murtha than they do with Prejean.
Upstater85 on May 12, 2009 at 5:31 PM
Of course it’s wrong. No one is saying it isn’t.
SnarkVader on May 12, 2009 at 5:31 PM
I objected to that too, including on this site.
Read back to the beginning of this thread though. I began by asking AP if anybody anywhere made an argument critical of her and yet appropriate in tone. His response was that it was inherently an impossible thing to do.
I think it is very easy to do.
radiofreevillage on May 12, 2009 at 5:31 PM
Clear Channel and it wasn’t fictional.
SnarkVader on May 12, 2009 at 5:32 PM
Jetboy:
I read and like your posts,I don’t think your being villified,keep your powder dry!:)
canopfor on May 12, 2009 at 5:31 PM
Well said.
youngO on May 12, 2009 at 5:32 PM
I hadn’t followed the story very closely, just the initial q&a with judge vulgar outburst then hearing occasional references to the photo(s). I had NOT heard about her parents records being dragged into it. Sounds like a typical tactic from that quarter so can’t be surprised but still disgusted.
KittyLowrey on May 12, 2009 at 5:32 PM
Some people are. In this very thread; people are saying it is.
lorien1973 on May 12, 2009 at 5:33 PM
This is a bit off-topic, but as a woman I’ll be glad when my fellow women stop taking the opinions of homosexual men on how we dress or what we should weigh or what our relationships should be like or whatever. I’m really sick of this fixation that some heterosexual women have on their (male) gay friends as if those guys are somehow great confidantes for women. I have male gay friends. Nice guys, but I’d never rely on one of them as a confidante for anything of substance. They have a completely different frame of reference and priorities. These women would be better off working on developing healthy relationships with their boyfriends and husbands.
The ridiculousness of this whole situation, which stems from having Perez Hilton involved in the pageant as a judge in the first place (and the pageant’s desire to cater to the political beliefs of what was described on our local L.A. news yesterday as their “core” audience – what percent is the male gay population, again?), is so irritating. I don’t see how any of this is advancing the status of women. I wish women would reject “businesses” (fashion, beauty mags, pageants) that operate in this way.
Y-not on May 12, 2009 at 5:33 PM
Of course, you don’t really believe it. How about when the employer is the Catholic Church, and the employee is pro-choice?
radiofreevillage on May 12, 2009 at 5:33 PM
Don’t hold your breath
Zetterson on May 12, 2009 at 5:33 PM
Attempting to out douche olberman and coming close.
The left is not about equality for women but using the concept of equality for women to gain power.
jukin on May 12, 2009 at 5:33 PM
Well, aren’t they trying to release some of her naughty torture pics?
Upstater85 on May 12, 2009 at 5:34 PM
The people who wanted Prejean fired wanted to end her career, yes? The people who wanted the Chicks off the radio wanted the same thing. Neither one was right.
SnarkVader on May 12, 2009 at 5:34 PM
I’d go even further and say that this prying into her personal life (divorce records, etal) in an attempt to destroy the person because of the belief is wrong too.
Nudey photos she’s done. I’m -more- than cool with seeing those.
But prying into her life for a political belief? If you can’t discuss the merits (or lack thereof) of her position, then the person with the contrary point either finds it indefensible or doesn’t really believe in his own position.
lorien1973 on May 12, 2009 at 5:34 PM
As I said. It’s wrong. Don’t play that game with me. It doesn’t work.
lorien1973 on May 12, 2009 at 5:35 PM
Channels with them were free to play the DCs if they chose and some in fact did. I’m afraid fictional is indeed what your claim is.
KittyLowrey on May 12, 2009 at 5:35 PM
I’m sorry, I should have specified that I wasn’t saying it is. Hyperbole is my enemy. =)
How can anyone think it’s ok to fire someone for their political beliefs?
SnarkVader on May 12, 2009 at 5:36 PM
Also Jetboy, another thing that bothers me is that a usually reasonable person such as yourself cannot see this for what it is.
Zetterson on May 12, 2009 at 5:37 PM
And yet no one is doing it. Going into her personal life isn’t arguing against her.
And that’s actually what you were trying to say would be a decent response, that she’s not entitled to her opinion because of her personal life, which is no one’s business but hers.
I’m with AP. There’s nothing to argue about. It’s her opinion, not her argument for keeping marriage between a man and a woman.
Esthier on May 12, 2009 at 5:37 PM
Ah… but that’s like assuming the only reason the Dixie Chicks were persecuted was because people wanted to ruin their careers… Is the New York Times being persecuted by the right… just because they aren’t doing so well and many righties would just rather have them fail? No, the NYTs is insulting the intelligence of many of its readers.
Upstater85 on May 12, 2009 at 5:37 PM
But again, they had no legal right or requirement to play ANY music.
They choose which music to be played based on what they think will bring in more listeners and make them more advertising money.
The DC weren’t martyred, they committed Seppuku. They attacked and vilified their own fans – the people that gave their money to the DC.
Miss Prejean didn’t attack anyone. In fact, if she hadn’t been asked the question we wouldn’t know WHERE she stands on the issue.
The DC CREATED their situation by making anti-American statements abroad.
The DC are still employed (and won an emmy or something, didn’t they?) and their employment was never, ever in question.
We can’t say the same for Miss Prejean.
Religious_Zealot on May 12, 2009 at 5:37 PM
Huh?
radiofreevillage on May 12, 2009 at 5:37 PM
Nope, sorry. Look into the hearing held in Congress re: Clear Channel.
SnarkVader on May 12, 2009 at 5:38 PM
I don’t know of any examples where this has happened. Can you provide some specific examples?
The cases I’ve heard of are when the employee acts in a way that is inconsistent with the policies/procedures of the employer, not just that they believe something different.
I guess the question is whether or not donating $50 to the Proposition 8 advocacy fund is an action that would be overt enough or public enough to be legally covered under someone’s work contract. I very much doubt it.
Y-not on May 12, 2009 at 5:38 PM
That’s directly related to ability to do the job. A Peta employee would be sacked for going hunting too.
That’s not at all the same.
Esthier on May 12, 2009 at 5:38 PM
No.
They didn’t want the DC career to end.
They just didn’t want their radio to support them.
Religious_Zealot on May 12, 2009 at 5:39 PM
if the Pageant Contestant’s don’t matter, then what about the lifeless HomoNazi Judges?
SDarchitect on May 12, 2009 at 5:40 PM
SnarkVader on May 12, 2009 at 5:34 PM
Radio airplay is a popularity contest. The DCs criticizing Boooosh in front of a European audience was viewed as an unpatriotic act by the country fans in America who listened to them on radio and bought their CDs. They try to portray a intellectual superiority to country fans. This resulted in boycotts and country fans abandoning them. They then became darlings of the Northeastern Liberal Elite for a while. Ms. Prejean stated her beliefs in a beauty pageant and became a focal point for attacks from gays and liberals while maintaining the support of the majority of Americans.
Big difference.
kingsjester on May 12, 2009 at 5:41 PM
And the NYT sucks.
SnarkVader on May 12, 2009 at 5:41 PM
It’s sad that you don’t see the problem here, though.
lorien1973 on May 12, 2009 at 5:41 PM
Bravo. Well put.
TheBigOldDog on May 12, 2009 at 5:41 PM
Further, if people don’t want to buy Prejean pics or whatever simply because they don’t agree with her, I don’t think anyone here is saying that is somehow WRONG.
Upstater85 on May 12, 2009 at 5:41 PM
Yeah, but why do they suck?
Upstater85 on May 12, 2009 at 5:42 PM
Er, I don’t need to look into what I’m already aware of. I follow news as it happens, you see.
KittyLowrey on May 12, 2009 at 5:42 PM
And radio play is essential for any successful artist.
SnarkVader on May 12, 2009 at 5:42 PM
I disagree. They didn’t want them on the radio because they didn’t want to listen to them. So radios listened to consumer demand. That’s capitalism.
I really fail to see the problem in that case. Consumers were simply using their own free speech in response to the Dixie Chicks using theirs.
Except for the death threats. Those crossed the line and should never be tolerated.
Esthier on May 12, 2009 at 5:43 PM
OK. And I think that going into personal life is perfectly legitimate in arguments revolving around morals. She has no problem going into other people’s personal lives by claiming their “lifestyle” is inferior. I don’t see what makes her immune from criticism of her own.
Sure, some care is required, and it seems to be there’s what I would call for lack of a better term a “justifiable defense”. But her entire personal life out of bounds? Sorry. Let her lead by example first.
radiofreevillage on May 12, 2009 at 5:43 PM
Dixie Chicks thought it was patriotic to speak out against
Bush,they were wrong,and pissed off the their fans,
and then cried about it!
The Dixie Chicks brought it on them selves,and played it
up on every lefty talk show that would have them!
They were the toast of the Lefty talkers,
please,the Lefty’s manufactured them as ‘VICTIMS,for their
own political purpose’s of course!!!
canopfor on May 12, 2009 at 5:44 PM
Because other than a few exceptions, it’s a left wing echo chamber. And that’s coming from someone who’s been called a piece of liberal trash. =)
SnarkVader on May 12, 2009 at 5:44 PM
Yep yep
Upstater85 on May 12, 2009 at 5:44 PM
Shuster seems more the Janine Garofalo type.
IKIDYOUNOT on May 12, 2009 at 5:44 PM
I really don’t, unless we’re talking about a position where the employee’s opinion is irrelevant, like a janitor or secretary. But to even be a member of a church, you are saying you agree with its fundamental teachings. Being pro-choice goes directly against that.
Esthier on May 12, 2009 at 5:45 PM
What? Catholic Church would employ a bishop who think gay is fine, so long as the bishop doesn’t engage in homosexual sex?
radiofreevillage on May 12, 2009 at 5:45 PM
Chinese whores?…….how about a few “Media Whores!”
try again later on May 12, 2009 at 5:45 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »