Audio: Axelrod dumps on Miss California
posted at 8:54 pm on May 16, 2009 by Allahpundit
Yeah, I know I wrote about this yesterday but you need to hear the audience reaction to see how right Omri Ceren was. Again: There’s no joke here. There’s no wit or irony or play on words or anything remotely clever. Unless he’s calling her a dog, and he surely isn’t, the extent of the “punchline” is simply invoking Carrie Prejean in a context that’s meant to be belittling, even though it’s not quite clear how. And yet the audience practically shrieks with glee. To the extent this is any type of humor at all, it’s a sort of in-joke without the joke: The left’s been enjoying a Two Minutes Hate on her for the past few weeks and now suddenly here’s the senior advisor to the president joining in. The laughter, I think, is simply a reflex of surprise and approbation upon discovering that a figure as exalted as Axelrod would stoop to their level of douchebaggery. All things considered, she’d make a great opening joke for The One’s next speech — except, of course, for the fact that he holds the same position on gay marriage that she does.
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 »
Yep, yep and +10
hawkdriver on May 16, 2009 at 11:40 PM
I have to sign off, but if you all want to see Robert Gibbs squirm like Nancy Pelosi, this press briefing where he defends Obama’s flip flops is a fun read.
Buy Danish on May 16, 2009 at 11:45 PM
Sorry for the late reply…
Hehe, well, I was thinking we would be more than fair to the left.
OK, how about Kristen Powers?
Upstater85 on May 16, 2009 at 11:45 PM
We weren’t born to walk on water
We weren’t born to sack and slaughter
But on our souls, we weren’t born
To stoop while an innocent woman is trampled under
And when the final duel is near
We’ll lift our spears and fly
Piercing into the sky and higher
Then we sill see who will thrive
Yes, Axelrod, Perez and their ilk will cower while we will survive
If we wait for the darkest hour
Till we spring alive
Then with claws of righteous fire, we will devour them like a falcon in the dive
PercyB on May 16, 2009 at 11:47 PM
I know that you aren’t defending Carrie because of her looks. I may not agree with you on everything, but you do seem to be a man of decency and honor, and I respect your devotion to our country.
I admit enjoying the vicarious pleasure of teasing younger men about their, how shall I say, * passion * for hot babes. And I apologize for not yet being able to give up this particular vice. I’m still trying to recover from the last time I borrowed Rear Window from the library many moons ago. That kiss!
Loxodonta on May 16, 2009 at 11:49 PM
I wish his one issue was something like Individual Liberty or Small Government…
Upstater85 on May 16, 2009 at 11:49 PM
Thank you Kensington.
Loxodonta on May 16, 2009 at 11:51 PM
Okay. I can say without hesitation that I wouldn’t want to see her called a dog by anyone from either party (and she’s a political commentator, who is arguably more fair game than a pageant contestant). And if you think about it, people are waaaaaay harder on Meghan McCain around here than they are on KP.
capitalist piglet on May 16, 2009 at 11:52 PM
So anyone think someone tomorrow will slam this ugly behavior? Is Cheney on any of the morning shows?
Upstater85 on May 16, 2009 at 11:52 PM
No offense taken whatsoever.
hawkdriver on May 16, 2009 at 11:54 PM
It would be nice to see Mary Cheney stand up for Free Speech.
thomasaur on May 16, 2009 at 11:55 PM
Hahaha… Meghan McCain. I’m trying to imagine comparing her to KP. Sorry, it’s just really a funny image in my head.
Yeah, but the point is, whether it is JG or KP, it isn’t right for a President or anyone from his team to be using demeaning language in an attempt to silence any opposition.
Can anyone imagine where the Soviet Union would be today if Reagan had referred to them as a bunch of dogs? Yes, it’s not fair to hold Obama to Reagan standards, but still…
Upstater85 on May 16, 2009 at 11:56 PM
That it would. Especially since I don’t believe she’s in the Topless Women Demographic…
Upstater85 on May 16, 2009 at 11:56 PM
At what point do we realize that this “Two Minutes Hate” has been going on for a wee bit longer than 2 minutes?
It was going on even before the anti-Prop 8 riots and shows no sign of even slowing down, much less stopping.
They seem even more infuriated when those who oppose them stand up for themselves (Prop 8, Miss California).
It’s time we stop kidding ourselves about the gay rights movement.
They’re not looking for equality…
…they’re looking for SUPERIORITY.
And anyone who dares oppose them will be destroyed.
Religious_Zealot on May 16, 2009 at 11:57 PM
I know what the point is. I agree with it. ; )
The White House has no business attacking private citizens. The fact that this one doesn’t seem to realize that, or doesn’t care, ought to be alarming to people. It telegraphs a disrepect for the American people.
capitalist piglet on May 16, 2009 at 11:58 PM
Thank you sir, and thank you for your service. You can add me (and the small Episcopal church that I’m a member of) to the list of people praying for you, and for the success of your missions.
massrighty on May 16, 2009 at 11:59 PM
And this is why the notion of Gay marriage as something of equality is absolutely absurd. They would move to have the government force people to recognize this marriage AND the special benefits that come along with the special gay marriage.
Upstater85 on May 17, 2009 at 12:00 AM
I sure hope the right gets their act together and starts articulating exactly what you just said. If this is how Obama is going to operate, I definitely hope he fails. And just so Wanda understands me clearly, Obama failing is the only way America can succeed.
Upstater85 on May 17, 2009 at 12:01 AM
It would certainly seem that this President and his administration are shaping up to combine the worst traits and characteristics of all the previous ones combined, and it’s only been 4 months.
MB4 on May 17, 2009 at 12:05 AM
This should make Obama happy. He can finally legitimately claim to be part of the Kennedy Clan.
It’s hard to imagine how someones family could be so horrible that they’d actually want to be a Kennedy.
Upstater85 on May 17, 2009 at 12:13 AM
Fireworks.
Loxodonta on May 17, 2009 at 12:18 AM
That is the EXACT same audience reaction that Obama got when he mentioned Hillary by name, paused, then slipped her the ghetto middle finger and it’s also the same EXACT audience response he got when he said “You can put lipstick on a pig…it’s still a pig” in reference to Sarah Palin.
But Obama never meant any of that stuff, just like Axlefraud didn’t just call Carrie Prejean a dog.
If you want to see the woman haters and have a good laugh, look at this:
http://s699.photobucket.com/albums/vv353/OxyCon/He-ManWomanHatersClub.jpg
OxyCon on May 17, 2009 at 1:15 AM
I wonder what Carrie’s father is thinking right now…
I say, “Bring back duels!” If Axelrod ever has to defend those remarks on a duel against Carrie’s father… I tell you, he WILL lose.
newton on May 17, 2009 at 1:25 AM
Anyone who doesn’t see this by now is willingly ignorant. This is a movement that is so full of hatred that it is trying to destroy society as well as itself.
There is no love, no advancement in morality, enlightenment for society or goal of equality in this bitter movement.
Skidd on May 17, 2009 at 1:58 AM
I wonder what Carrie’s father is thinking right now…
I say, “Bring back duels!” If Axelrod ever has to defend those remarks on a duel against Carrie’s father… I tell you, he WILL lose.
newton
At the very least a fist to that doughy face.
SKYFOX on May 17, 2009 at 4:42 AM
+10
sarahpalinfan99 on May 17, 2009 at 5:02 AM
+100
Amen to that brother! Exactly what I’ve been wondering.
Where is the GOP on Carrie Prejean?! Only Sarah Palin had the b@!!$ to issue a statement supporting Carrie. Sarah took a lot of heat for that statement by the way.
sarahpalinfan99 on May 17, 2009 at 5:10 AM
I think they’re making noise to get more time to handle the Botox-gate.
the_nile on May 17, 2009 at 5:38 AM
Religious Zealot, you really are a piece of work. You twist my words, and flat-out LIE about what I’ve said. You must be reading the leftist playbook, since you are well-versed in their tactics.
I disagree with you on one issue…gay marriage…and you feel it necessary to label me a “one issue voter” (based on what?) and you, among a few others, label me as “not conservative”, or my favorite…a “lefty troll”.
All because I’m pro-gay marriage.
You and your ilk are a cancer on the Republican party, and the conservative movement. You seem determined to destroy it.
Peace. At this juncture, it’s pointless for me to reply to you any further. I’ve tried and tried, but you seem to have your own little agenda. Have fun.
JetBoy on May 17, 2009 at 7:34 AM
Can anyone put together a montage of this stuff.
davod on May 17, 2009 at 7:35 AM
No matter how hard they try, the left cannot progress enough to develop class. I guess the men on men and women on women are the new black.
afotia on May 17, 2009 at 7:39 AM
How to defeat the Alinsky rule of political ridicule: http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/defeating_political_ridicule.html
onlineanalyst on May 17, 2009 at 8:06 AM
I’ll share some crazy religious concepts, for fun or maybe more, whatever.
I was reading Aquinas on good and evil, and of course he saw that everything God made is good, and that evil is a failure to exercise or live up to the good. Failure is a deficit, not a substance in the world that can be understood as the sidekick of good.
So anyway, he’s talking about how the good is something you can know, it has a form. Like when some guy rescues a girl in a swimming pool, you grasp the meaning of the act, it makes sense to you in the big scheme of things, it’s like a work of good art.
But evil has an air about it that 1) is very ugly and 2) makes no sense. I think of evil along the line of being something gratuitously wretched. Again, it’s a deprivation of what would otherwise be good if the creep would have just left things alone. Evil doesn’t make sense, it has no rhyme or reason and was never called for in the greater scheme of things; mostly, it is the opposite of good art: it’s hideous to look at.
There’s something to this view. If you liked the movie The Dark Knight, that was sort of the point: the Joker was a hideous man whose actions were purely gratuitous, they had no intrinsic meaning, they were filth for filth’s sake. I think of the wrenching news stories you sometimes read about where some creeps invade a home and rob the people in it, and just for the hell of it, they rape the woman and destroy her life. Pure evil.
Which brings us back to the Democrat Party.
These little bursts of gratuitous cruelty are a sign of something really dark.
Hope I’m not being too preachy, just trying to be descriptive, and to express my growing concern at the kinds of people who consider our President their friend or kindred soul.
jeff_from_mpls on May 17, 2009 at 8:40 AM
Exactly. More Rules for Radicals. It’s their default reaction. They LIVE by Saul Alinsky tactics.
marklmail on May 17, 2009 at 8:43 AM
Unfortunately there are many people like that on this website.
I know what you believe in, and you really are the furthest thing from a liberal.
To label you as such is very dishonest.
Unfortunately there are many people who will just reflexively label another conservative a “liberraaaal” if they don’t tote said person’s line on every single issue.
blatantblue on May 17, 2009 at 8:58 AM
Repubs are pussys. They don’t have the balls to fight. Simply put, when the Carrie Prejean implants jokes started I would have went right to the “well, the speaker of the house Nancy Pelosi has breast implants and has had many, many facelifts…why isn’t the speaker of the house Nancy Pelosi who has breast implants and many many facelifts defending her” route.
No balls.
They have way more stuff to ridicule than we do. And the Chimp in Chief is more thin skinned than anyone.
We’d have him in a straightjacket.
LtE126 on May 17, 2009 at 9:01 AM
I don’t know why you would think Axelrod would be above this type of sexism. He encouraged Obama to use that tactic throughout the campaign.
AnninCA on May 17, 2009 at 9:24 AM
Sleazy. Since when is it okay for government officials and bureaucrats to lash out against private individuals? Guess it’s part of the new fascism.
Also, suppose instead of Axelrod calling her a dog, it had been Don Imus?
petefrt on May 17, 2009 at 9:30 AM
White House mulls naming new dog “Miss CA”, Obama & family laugh.
Axelrod is NOT the one to hang the scarlet letter on Miss CA.
Obsession of perverts: rape, pillage and burn.
This presidency represents barbarians.
maverick muse on May 17, 2009 at 9:35 AM
Apologies if this has been brought up already…
James Watt was forced to resign for far less of an insult.
Skywise on May 17, 2009 at 9:38 AM
I don’t want to imply that David Axelrod is ugly, but he looks like the product of a badly botched abortion.
bw222 on May 17, 2009 at 9:41 AM
Why is it that the Liberals who claim to be the most tolerant of all of us are actually the least tolerant among us?
kingsjester on May 17, 2009 at 9:44 AM
That is the question of our age.
Thoughtful reflection tells you that tolerance cannot be the actual goal.
Something else is the goal.
But that’s where things get hazy, and maybe it’s best for us to just leave those thoughts unthought.
jeff_from_mpls on May 17, 2009 at 9:54 AM
In a most congenial manner with all due respect to EVERYONE, Ms. Prejean ONLY stated her own view when asked a question that required an answer.
Whereas, Ms. McCain preaches to everyone what they ought to think and be and do in her avid attempt to direct an entire national party.
Who’s the big crybaby swearing at the White House when she doesn’t get her way? Ms. McCain.
NO COMPARISON, image, content, presentation, purpose. NONE.
maverick muse on May 17, 2009 at 9:54 AM
You may be a member of the Republican Party, but you’re definitely not part of the conservative movement.
bw222 on May 17, 2009 at 9:55 AM
Where are the denunciations from Barney FranK? Isn’t he the moral pilot for the leftists?
Is it true all the little leftist girls (how do they miss out being aborted?) want to look like Jeanine Garafaloa?
Does the Jeanaeane Garafaloa Barbey come with a paper bag cover up?
seven on May 17, 2009 at 10:10 AM
Why not, O’ Arbiter of Conservatism?
blatantblue on May 17, 2009 at 10:11 AM
Since Carrie Prejean is a member of the privileged white supremacist class, it wouldn’t have mattered. If the joke was about, say, Vanessa Williams, the Justice Brothers and Barack Obama would be demanding he be fired and would refuse to accept any apologies.
Buy Danish on May 17, 2009 at 10:12 AM
Speaking of dogs..I wonder what the rest of the litter looked like and what made Mrs.Axelrod pick him over the other canine?
rich801 on May 17, 2009 at 10:13 AM
Yeah really… I could easily call you a subversive liberal only here to sow discontent and break up conservatives.
Skywise on May 17, 2009 at 10:14 AM
How would you know? Some of you automatically label someone based on a certain position on just one issue. Much like Prejean has been labeled by the left based on her position on one issue, not to mention her elevation to sainthood by many righties…based on her opinion on one issue.
JetBoy on May 17, 2009 at 10:32 AM
JetBoy, I’m confused and disappointed by your responses to the ongoing attacks against Carrie Prejean. I confess that I was very angry with you at first, and again apologize for my initial response. But I remain very disappointed with you and what I can only interpret as you hypocrisy about this issue.
I know there are ignorant and hateful people who abuse and discriminate against homosexuals. Many of us here, including me, have defended homosexuals from mistreatment many, many times.
I’m not sure I know all the posters here who are bigoted against homosexuals, but I’m certain they are using Perez Hilton’s attack to promote their bigotry. I’m also uncertain whether you appreciate just how much damage has been done to your cause, not by such anti-homosexual bigots, but by the ugliness shown by the likes of Hilton, those who rationalize such attacks and dismiss Ms. Prejean’s defenders, and those who remain silent about all of this. Many of us are not questioning our support for homosexuals being free from harassment. I am not. However we are questioning our support for all or some aspects of homosexual political causes as a result of the most vocal homosexual activists.
Yes, JetBoy, I know Carrie Prejean is a beauty pageant contestant, she is not a Rhodes scholar, and she has not led an unblemished life. Yet, when asked a politically charged question by Mr. Hilton, she gave a simple, honest answer in a way she hoped would not offend anyone. But, your allies not only disagree with her answer, Perez Hilton viciously slurred her for it. In response to the his slurs, the invasions of her and her family’s privacy, and other ongoing attacks, Carrie Prejean has not responded with a single slur against homosexuals, nor attacked anyone. Instead, she has responded graciously and with forgiveness. This is the inner beauty to which I referred in this post, that caused you to gag in this post. I don’t understand why you leap upon Ms. Prejean’s superficial role as a beauty pageant contestant, but fail to see the inner qualities she has demonstrated since these attacks began.
Life is not a beauty pageant. We each have to make judgments. Which qualities are more important to consider, the outer or the inner?
Loxodonta on May 17, 2009 at 10:34 AM
Obviously, JetBoy is not conservative on at least one social issue. But I don’t know what JetBoy’s views are on fiscal or national security issues. If he is conservative on those issues, that would qualify him under Reagan’s rules. And that’s good enough for me.
And I feel the same way for those who oppose JetBoy’s views about Gay Marriage and these attacks on Carrie Prejean.
Conservatism regarding fiscal and defense matters is what should unite us. I want to be allow for disagreement about the social issues, and hope it can be done amicably. Although I confess that it has been difficult for me to maintain my composure given some of the respsonses to the attacks on Carrie.
Loxodonta on May 17, 2009 at 10:56 AM
He qualifies
blatantblue on May 17, 2009 at 11:05 AM
It’s just sexism. I am no longer a Democrat after seeing the rampant sexism in the primary. I see it on the other side, too. The mistreatment of Palin by her own party is sexism.
There will be plenty of other examples coming up, because this is a wave. The treatment of Miss CA by the administration reveals that everyone knows it is perfectly OK to trash women.
Pelosi will get trashed, too, btw. She actually earned this one, but there will be more than a few sexist remarks made without fear of reprisal.
AnninCA on May 17, 2009 at 11:06 AM
Thanks. I’d hoped so. Of course, that makes this disagreement even more painful for me. But life is not easy and I was never promised it would be.
I hope you are doing well.
Loxodonta on May 17, 2009 at 11:12 AM
I’m not sure you can place all the mistreatment of Palin by the Republican party as a sexist issue. Yeah she was attacked and some of it was sexist but the great majority was nothing more than what a failed candidate normally got.
Bush got far worse treatment for being a redneck country boy… would you consider that racist?
Skywise on May 17, 2009 at 11:13 AM
Disagreement and honest debate is the food for intellectual growth.
Really, do you want to be an mono-ideology party where everybone must think identically like… oh say… North Korea… China… Russia… the Democratic Party?
Skywise on May 17, 2009 at 11:16 AM
If this is what passes for entertainment among liberals, it’s hard to imagine why Air America isn’t doing better.
Alalazoo on May 17, 2009 at 11:22 AM
Your journey away from Democrats must have been a painful one. I sympathize with you for that. It happened to me too, but for different reasons and decades ago.
Yes, it is sexism from the Democrats. But it’s a strange type. It’s elite intellectual snob, extreme left-wing ideological, and political expediency sexism. On the one hand, Michelle Obama, and other liberal women towing the party line, are held up as icons of the new liberated woman. Then, on the other hand, misogynistic language is used to disparage all less educated women; all women who hold conservative views; and all women, including liberals, who pose a political threat or even may tarnish The One’s shine.
It reeks of hypocrisy.
Loxodonta on May 17, 2009 at 11:26 AM
McCain hasn’t gotten the same treatment, Sky.
AnninCA on May 17, 2009 at 11:30 AM
Lox..I think they eat their own. Hillary was a very solid liberal. Didn’t matter.
That’s why I identify it as sexism.
Maybe it’s the toothpaste theory. There’s a set amount of seething anger that must be directed somewhere. It just happens to be toward women who are obviously alpha types right now.
Backlash? It’s now affected liberal groups, such as NARAL, etc.
But I still see the same treatment of Palin by many of the GOP men. We’ll see if they catch themselves.
BTW, apparently, Bohmer has conceded that Cheney is actually helping. I think there’s a wake-up happening since Pelosi dug herself in so deep. It’s finally dawning on some just what Cheney is doing and why.
AnninCA on May 17, 2009 at 11:34 AM
As a Reaganite and a supporter of liberty and free speech, of course I don’t want such uniformity in the Party or our country. I expect differences and value them as opportunities for learning. But I do find closed-mindedness, especially when linked with passionate advocacy, very frustrating. And hypocrisy always gets me steaming.
Yet, I know I make mistakes, and often don’t see them until others point them out. And I know that it is difficult for me to see my own hypocrisy.
Therefore, please feel free to point out my faults, anytime. Go ahead, make an old man cry, you heartless beast!
Loxodonta on May 17, 2009 at 11:37 AM
I agree with you Lox that there is an odd elitism going on mixed in with the sexism.
What’s interesting to me is that elitism is, by definition, exclusive. Therefore, the people supporting this would never be a part of the “club.” *haha
Why they would admire that is beyond me. It’s sure not the type of liberal thinking I grew up on.
AnninCA on May 17, 2009 at 11:40 AM
How am I a hypocrite, Lox?
JetBoy on May 17, 2009 at 11:42 AM
I was not able to follow last year’s campaigns until just before the general election, so I had no horse in that race, and still have no horse in the race for 2012.
I’ve read through a few of the Palin and other potential candidate threads here, and have seen such heated, over the top, advocacy and attacks. So much so that I have avoided posting in them and haven’t even read most of them. I know I have to bite that bullet eventually, and will keep your observations in mind when I do. Thanks.
Loxodonta on May 17, 2009 at 11:42 AM
The Obama administration is just having their cake getting a nice big taste bite of it as well. Forgive me if I am being redundant, I haven’t read through them all.
He can claim to be against gay marriage and believe in the sanctity of one man and one woman. All the while people that are supposed to represent him and his views, attack those that hold that same view essentially making gay Americans happy.
He’s playing both sides of the fence, and as such should have a new name, one suggestion…Our Lord in Savior, King Flip Flop.
TampaBayBull on May 17, 2009 at 11:50 AM
True. But I still don’t think that’s because of sexist reasons. McCain gambled on a wild card candidate who made a poor public showing. Michelle Obama has made far more gaffes but nobody attacks her. Hillary Clinton COMPLETELY AND TOTALLY botched her first trip to Russia and nobody attacks her.
At some point you have to say that a political attack or a political grudge is just that.
Skywise on May 17, 2009 at 11:53 AM
Miss Cal is a dog. Palin is a pig. Where’s the outrage from the feminists? Oh, that’s right, they only support LIBERAL women.
marklmail on May 17, 2009 at 11:56 AM
No no… you misunderstand, I’m not attacking you. I thought you were coming from a standpoint of “we shouldn’t fight and all be in agreement” mode and wanted to interject that we really are a big tent party.
Skywise on May 17, 2009 at 11:57 AM
On this issue, and this issue alone, as near as I can tell, I believe you have been hypocritical based on posts from you that:
– Treat Ms. Prejean as if she were to blame for the ongoing attacks because of her defense of herself and attempts to live her life and advance her career, as if she should go into hiding;
– Ignore, miminalize, or rationalized away the attacks against Carrie, while complaining about the reactions of her defenders;
– Claim the attacks would cease if they were ignored by her defenders;
– Make uncomplimentary statements about Ms. Prejean, without at least recognizing that she has not acted toward her attackers in the same ugly manner in which they have acted toward her.
Now, I confess that I am making an assumption about you here, but I cannot believe you would hold the same views if the victim were a homosexual expressing his simply worded support for Gay Marriage, and his attackers were conservatives and defenders were Gay Marriage proponents.
If this is not the case, then I apologize for saying you are hypocritical on this issue. However, I still believe the arguments you have made are not helpful to your cause. And even greater concern to me is that such arguments promote submission to an extremely intolerant and verbally abusive culture.
And good morning to you.
Loxodonta on May 17, 2009 at 12:03 PM
Axelrod is an exceptional human being–as greasy pimps go. Did we expect anything more from this PR hump?
RandyChandler on May 17, 2009 at 12:06 PM
I’d comment on this, but I have to feed my new black lab puppy, Barak.
Little Boomer on May 17, 2009 at 12:07 PM
No, that would be racist.
Little Boomer on May 17, 2009 at 12:08 PM
Communication can be difficult to understand, especially on a blog’s posting board. And in any case, I understand so few things.
Oh Lord, Thy sea is so great and my boat is so small.
I do believe in open and honest debate, and don’t want to avoid debate so that we merely appear to get along. I try to have such debates here myself. Although they can get tedious and I greatly enjoy the good natured humor.
So, I do hope you understood that I took no offense at all at your post, and in my final words was responding in humor.
Loxodonta on May 17, 2009 at 12:16 PM
First off, I’ve never said you weren’t a conservative.
I wonder sometimes, especially in the MANNER that you advocate your position on gay marriage…
…but I’ve never stated that you WEREN’T a conservative.
I don’t think that one issue means you can’t be a Republican or conservative on other issues (there are a couple of issues I’m kind of liberal on).
But this one issue does to you what religion does to Hitchens…
…you completely come apart when you discuss it.
I have no problem discussing any other issue with you…
…but when you start trying to morally equivocate the vicious attacks on Miss Prejean with those defending her for voicing her opinion…
…well, then I have nothing more to say to you on this matter. Obviously this issue causes your moral compass to spin.
Religious_Zealot on May 17, 2009 at 12:23 PM
Allow me to “catch and move further down the field the ball that you have thrown”.
Let’s switch roles here between Carrie Prejean and Perez Hilton. Let us say that men had pageants. It is actually not that much of a stretch because men actually do have “pageants” – think body-building. Let us say that Perez Hilton was a contestant in one of these body-building “pageants”, an expanded one to include some of the addons that women’s pageants have, like where the contestants actually talk rather than just strut and pose. I know it’s a stretch but maybe Perez Hilton had been lifting weights 10 hours a day, 7 days a week for years. Let us say that Carrie Prejean was one of the judges. Why she would reasonably be selected as a judge, I don’t know, but it would be a lot less strange than a gay man being selected to be a judge at women’s pageant.
Now, let us say that judge Carrie Prejean goes off on her own personal agenda and asks Perez Hilton the politically charged question of what he thinks about gay marriage. Perez Hilton then gives a simple, honest answer in a way he hoped would not offend anyone. He probably has at least some idea that it is not the answer that Judge Prejean, with her agenda, wants to hear, but he wants to be honest and not lie to/schmooze the judge/judges. He basically says that he favors it but does not at all criticize those who are against it.
Then Carrie Prejean throws a hizzy fit and marks Perez Hilton with a big F for the whole pageant and proceeds, along with her followers, after the pageant is over, to viciously slur Perez Hilton for it. In response to her slurs, the invasions of his and his family’s privacy, and other ongoing attacks, Perez Hilton does not responded with a single slur against straights, nor does he attack anyone. Instead, he responds graciously and with forgiveness.
For just a couple of so many examples, would David Axelrod have piled on and talked about naming the White House dog Perez with big laughs from the press or would Bill Maher have piled on and gone on the attack against Perez Hilton? What would people have thought if they did?
Anyone who does not get the moral of this “story”, I can’t help you, I don’t think anyone can.
MB4 on May 17, 2009 at 12:23 PM
Thanks. That was very well done.
Loxodonta on May 17, 2009 at 12:36 PM
Yes I’m sure worried about a dumb blond with fake breasts and a history of sleazy photos weighing in on matters her little pea brain overloads on. All she is to you goopers is someone you can rally around because your party is in a death spiral. The msm media gave her her 15 minutes of fame, but now, like Joe the Plumber, you think you can use her to appeal to your neanderthal base. No need to worry goopers, the neanderthal demographic you have all wrapped up. So parade her around your little propaganda network Fox, work up some fake outrage, like you always do, and then when you see she has worn out her propaganda value, forget about her. Something the country did about a week ago.
athensboy on May 17, 2009 at 12:40 PM
Finally.
hawkdriver on May 17, 2009 at 12:43 PM
I’d comment on this, but I have to feed my new black lab puppy,
BarakMichelle.Little Boomer on May 17, 2009 at 12:07 PM
*
The most muscular arms on the planet can’t save that mut.
marklmail on May 17, 2009 at 12:45 PM
athensboy, the point is how she’s being vilified simply for having a different opinion than the left press.
They are the ones giving her the 15 minutes, plus more.
AnninCA on May 17, 2009 at 12:50 PM
Another sane voice of the gay movement. You’re welcome here my friend. We’ve given up defending the traditional people of our party who defend traditional values. We fully intend to sell these suckas down the river for party harmony.
hawkdriver on May 17, 2009 at 12:50 PM
Unsat. Take that stuff over to DU of KOS.
hawkdriver on May 17, 2009 at 12:53 PM
…or KOS…
hawkdriver on May 17, 2009 at 12:55 PM
Your hatred will completely consume you.
MB4 on May 17, 2009 at 12:58 PM
Old Axlerod is just panting, if there is a dog in this at all, for the chance to get on all fours and lick her toes.
Sad for an old, very ugly man to posture this way, but it does say volumes about him and his audience.
Hate=Hunmor.
Class shows. And he ain’t got any.
Harry Schell on May 17, 2009 at 1:07 PM
“Finally” what?
JetBoy on May 17, 2009 at 1:11 PM
Another snoozer, you need some new material.
Hatred and bigotry wholly owned by the American left and the democrat party.
daesleeper on May 17, 2009 at 1:16 PM
Axleclod is nothing but a contemptuous little cockroach turd who is wallowing in his fast fleeting moment of power. He will be reduce to ashes when the time comes and good people won’t even remember he was around to take up space and breath air that they needed.
wepeople on May 17, 2009 at 1:19 PM
Who’s this we? Please don’t be bitter and give up the whole ship. The Republican Party will always be dominated by people of faith who are traditional on social issues. That doesn’t mean we have to kick out atheists or homosexuals or people having different opinions about abortion or a long list of other social issues. It just means we need to have our arguments, then take a vote, and the winner wins until the next time to advocate our views and vote, with no seething and backstabbing.
It’s sort of like being married and focusing on the most important things that unite us that make the family work, not having our fights in front of the children, and doing our best not to lose our temper with one another.
Okay, dear?
Loxodonta on May 17, 2009 at 1:34 PM
I was responding to a question regarding objectivity by conservatives, not comparing Meghan McCain to Carrie Prejean.
capitalist piglet on May 17, 2009 at 2:04 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »