This is just plain nuts. If Perez Hilton represents the gay community, they've got a long, hard road ahead of them if they're trying to gain acceptance and overall support. Make no mistake about it, Perez Hilton-whom most people previously knew next to nothing about-has with this sorry episode attempted to make himself a household name, parlaying the controversy he created at the Miss USA Beauty Pageant into some kind of aim for personal recognition and influence with the gay community. But to what overall effect?
The really strange thing is, I agree with him about gay marriage, or at least what he said on the second video, which he posted on his website shortly after the Miss USA debacle-the states should decided. I would add the caveat that the state legislatures should decide, not the state judiciaries. At the same time, as a rule of thumb, its best to keep in mind that, if you don't want to know a person's honest opinion on any given subject-don't ask. Failing that, if you don't get the answer you want, don't act like a fucking asshole about it.
Miss USA contestant Miss California-Carrie Prejean-she did not give the answer Perez Hilton wanted or expected to hear. Though it might well have cost her the crown, she gave her honest opinion, however incoherently it might have seemed at times. For one, all American's don't have the right to choose gay marriage. She obviously meant they have the right to their opinion on the subject-which they do, whether the likes of Perez Hilton likes it or not-but her mangled answer in the midst of an otherwise flawless run for the Miss USA title is testament that questions like this are better avoided, for obvious reasons.
In his follow-up response on his web-site, Perez Hilton showed what a self-absorbed numbskull he really is. Earth to Perez Hilton-most of the American people are smart enough to distinguish cheers from boos. Such obvious propaganda calls into question the veracity of his entire body of work as a celebrity gossip-monger on his self-named pseudonymous web-site, which he boastfully describes as the "most hated web-site in Hollywood".
The bottom line here as I see it-Perez Hilton did not get pissed off because Miss California does not believe in gay marriage. He is merely jolted that, having manipulatively posed a question which he felt she would be obliged to answer in a way pleasing to him, she had the temerity to give her actual opinion despite the obvious fact that it was not what he, a judge of the pageant, wanted to hear.
In other words, Carrie Prejean showed him for the fucking fool he obviously is, for all the world to see. He followed up by proving to all of us just what a fucking prick he is, in no uncertain terms.
This is a man who suggests that people should vote for Matthew Lambert as the next American Idol, not because he's the best, but just because he's openly gay. Why Donald Trump would want to have somebody like that as a judge of this contest is beyond my comprehension.
Hilton ended his video rant by saying it was time for a "cocktail".
No. I guess I'd better not.
12 comments:
Just what is it you Fear about gays being able to Legally Marry..Every time you post on a topic dealing with this its Like well i dont support this, and its up to the states..NO uts not and it shouldnt be.. 2 people who love each other regardless of there genitalia should be able to marry. Its not a religious issue, its not a issue of government controlling sexual behaviour. Uts about Individual rights, which in America to many are being lost.And you complain that they flaunt there lifestyle..SIMPLE dont watch shows with gay themes and characters, dont read articles dealing wuth gay issues. No one has a gun to youre head
Shadowhawk-
Did you watch the videos, especially the one of Hilton? Listen to that little bitch going on. What gives him the right to call Carrie Prejean a stupid bitch or refer to her as having half a brain? That's the whole point to the post.
You have your right to the opinion you just expressed, I have the right to mine, and Carrie Prejean, and anybody else, has the right to theirs. If Perez doesn't want to hear an opinion that doesn't agree with his, he shouldn't be asking fucking questions like that.
Again, what he's really ticked off about is that she ruined his chance to turn the Miss USA pageant into a propaganda tool for gay marriage, and perhaps even more importantly made him look foolish in the process. Well, tough fucking shit, dem's da breaks.
So.. Her answer could be construed as Propoganda as well. You claim to be all about following the constitution and such. But it looks like its only if it serves youre right Wing agenda..
And i quote
ALL MEN ARE EQUAL AND ENDOWED WITH CERTAIN INALIENABLE RIGHTS.
That includes gay people. minoritys, majoritys, pagan, christian jew..Man, woman Child.. EVERYBODY
Who the fuck are YOU to dare to even think of denying someone there rights as set by our forefathers. And dont give me this bullshit it infringes on youre rights.. What people do in there homes, out of youre sight DOES NOT FUCKING CONCERN YOU..
ASSHOLE
And Perez Hilton DOES NOT rep ALL gay people.. One bad apple wont ruin it for all the other decent , caring gay americans.. He is an idiot.. the vast majority of gays are NOT..
Again, that's your opinion, mine is quite different. Nothing wrong with that, but then again, the issue which is the point of the post is not about the validity of one opinion over another. The point of the post is that Perez Hilton is a little bitch who shouldn't ask questions if there's a chance he might not like the answer.
And, again, if he does ask the question and he gets an answer he doesn't like, then he shouldn't act like a little fucking five-star prick about it.
No, what she said could not be construed as propaganda. What she said can be construed as nothing more nor less than answering the question honestly, which, as a contestant, she was obliged to do.
Which, yes, she could have lied and so played into Perez's little propaganda game, but she didn't. So Perez just fucked up didn't he? She told the truth as she saw it. I'm sure she'll do just fine in life.
Bottom line-nobody is obliged to agree with Perez Hilton, or gay marriage, or any other issue any one person or group thinks they should agree with them about.
That's called life. That's called fucking reality. It's also, by the way, called Freedom of Speech. Get fucking used to it.
He lost me at "dumb bitch".
Part of getting the crown is the contestant's poise and Miss CA kinda flubbed the answer with a false start, "in my country", and she didn't really answer the question.
Woulda been cool if she had called the judge a dumb bitch but that's a luxury he has that she didn't.
I can see this guy poking caged rats with sticks.
Why is bitchiness considered an admirable attribute ?
Yeah, that was really my whole point. I don't care that he asked the question at a beauty pageant, and I really don't care that he doesn't particularly like people that don't support gay marriage. It's the two things together that are mutually incompatible.
In a World where gay people are routinely executed in Iran and Afghanistan, and horribly persecuted in the rest of the Muslim world, arguing about gay marriage in United States is totally obscene.
Perez Hilton is about Perez Hilton. Making a general statement about gays from his rants, is ridiculous.
Sonia: Gay marriage is a legit issue, even if it's less urgent than gay rights in Iran etc.
There isn't a reason for gays not to win democratic rights under capitalism except for its decadence.
OT: Indian police say they have no evidence the father of Slumdog Child tried to sell her.
Ren-
How many gay leaders have disavowed Perez Hilton's antics? How about just gays in general?
This post isn't about gay marriage. It's not even about whether Carrie Prejean should or should not have won the competition and may have lost due to her response.
Frankly, I didn't think she gave a good answer, and I don't have a problem so much that she lost, even if she lost in part due to that answer. To be clear, that assessment isn't based on whether her answer was right or wrong, just the way she phrased it, as Quim noted.
Be that as it may, this post is about the need for respect for the right of free expression. It is telling that people like Perez Hilton and many others on the left spend a great deal of time bitching and moaning about their rights, yet when the shoe is on the other foot they don't seem so enamored of the right of free expression, or any other rights for that matter.
Sonia-
You make a good point. How much time has Perez Hilton devoted to the rights of gays in Iran to just live without fear of persecution. How many other gay advocates have devoted any time to it in comparison to complaining about the lack of a right they've never had anywhere in all of human history.
They've spent centuries in the closet due mainly to religious oppression, which I don't condone, but at the same time, it seems to me that once they came out of the closet, they found widespread support in addition to the expected opposition from the religious right. They've got political clout, they've got at least some degree of acceptance, and no one wants to deprive them of their basic human rights-at least not openly.
They've got it pretty good here and in the west. I'm not saying they have no reason to complain, but by the same token, they've got a lot to be grateful for as well.
Still, they want to piss on anybody that offends their sensitivities and rant like little bitches when somebody expresses a view that doesn't suit them, and they have plenty of "friends" on the left who patronize them and encourage them to do so. Then, when somebody calls them on it, they get even more pissed and rant about that too. Oh well, I don't know what to say, I'm just me, I don't particularly owe anybody anything.
The amusing thing here is I would probably vote for gay marriage if it came up for a vote on the ballot in Kentucky or anywhere else I might live at any given time. I'm just not going to vote for a political party that will appoint judges who will impose it by judicial fiat, especially on the national level. Mainly though, that is the least of the reason I would vote against such a party. If gays don't understand that, fuck them.
You're all over the place.
You made a big jump from a specific to a general point that is not sensible.
Perez is a publicity seeker.
No, I'm not all over the place. This is a free speech post, not an anti-gay marriage post. The point is Carrie Prejean, or any other person who is against gay marriage, has as much right to their views as Perez Hilton or anybody else with a pro gay marriage point of view, has to theirs.
If I was all over the place, I would bring the pro-abortion crowd into the mix as yet another example of leftists who disrespect those who disagree with their opinions to the extent that both them and the pro-gay rights crowd have a lock on the Democratic Party. Even organizations and individuals that agree with Democrats and leftists as pertaining to all other issues are often viciously attacked, for no other reason than they disagree with the pro gay rights and pro-abortion crowd.
Take for example the Roman Catholic Church. You would be hard pressed to find an organization more liberal and more in tune with the Democratic Party and many leftists policy positions, yet they are viciously attacked by liberal Democrats and leftists. Why? Of course, because they disagree with abortion and gay marriage.
Or take individuals such as Joe Liebermann, who was also viciously attacked, even though aside from the Iraq War, Israel, and national defense issues, he is in lockstep with practically every facet of the Democratic Party's policy positions. Oh, of course he's against gay marriage, but he is for civil unions.
What's the point to all this? The point is that the Democratic Party-and by extension, the vast majority of leftists-have turned into a caricature of a monolithic group where dissent is not allowed, at least not on certain issues, the most obvious being abortion, gay rights, and the fucking Iraq War. Of course there are others, but these seem to be the most strident.
I suppose its natural that, when you are dealing with a group of people that so viciously eat their own, they would encounter outside dissent with such utter insane blood lust.
Perez Hilton is nothing special or vastly different. He is more than anything a perfect representation of the Democratic Party, and the left in general.
To bring all that up, of course, would only seem to be going all over the place, making wild leaps, and not in keeping with the original point and spirit of the post. It's actually though all too pertinent.
Post a Comment