We’re Here, We’re Queer and We’re Hypocrites
by Andrew BreitbartThis week’s Washington Times column:
Greetings, from a poolside cabana at a trendy boutique hotel in Santa Monica. Oh, how I love these overpriced overnight stays. The sleek designs. The ambient music. The uniformly attractive and stylishly dressed young staffs. The plush beds with sheets of an absurdly high thread count. Weird faucets and weirder sinks. I bask in the attention to detail. W is my favorite letter. Philippe Starck is a personal hero.
As a realist, I’ve built into my mindset that the majority heterosexual population is less than exclusively responsible for creating this and countless other high-end consumer and artistic experiences. Plus, I have a ton of wonderful gay friends – even ones “married” and with children. If gay activists created “A Day Without a Gay” (as they promoted Dec. 10 of last year), I’d be the first to cry “uncle” – even before Cher. So, accordingly, I make philosophical and political accommodations. I’m – as the MTV generation says – “gay-friendly.”
But lately, color me “gay perturbed.” “Gay-friendly,” a term once manifestly redundant, now seems a glaring contradiction.
The gay political-activist community – in my view, a small minority of left-wing agitators acting on behalf of the whole – has been on a binge of bad public behavior, and I’m not referring to the bare-buttocked-chaps look and inappropriately placed sparklers during “pride” parades.
The Mormon community was recently targeted for its support of Proposition 8, the pro-traditional-marriage initiative in California. Donors to the cause were isolated and even exposed on online maps. Businesses were targeted. People lost their jobs.
The latest high-profile act on behalf of the “community” came from the Miss USA pageant. Perez Hilton, the wildly popular Internet gossip and celebrity hit man, somehow got himself placed as a judge of female beauty at the Donald Trump-sponsored event. Not to be judgmental, but the apprentice behind that hire should be fired. But I digress.
At the point in the pageant when the young lovelies are asked questions by those who pick the winners, the flamboyantly gay man (who by day pries into the private lives of stars and scrawls human DNA-spewing phalli under the faces of those he doesn’t like) asked Miss California, Carrie Prejean, whether she approved of gay marriage.
It was a setup.
You can read the column in full here.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
274 Comments
Excellent! Bravo! Thank you!
I wish that just one leftie would ask Perez Hilton this question
"Why should anyone respect your beliefs if you won't respect theirs?"
Oh wait. That would make too much common sense.
Also that statement actually sounds reasonable and logical.
Why would gays give Obama a pass? Because he's lying about opposing gay marriage and they know it. It's not that big of a mystery really.
From the article:
""Out of all the topics I studied up on, I dreaded that one: I prayed I would not be asked about gay marriage. If I had any other question, I know I would have won," she told Fox News."
Well, there goes any inclination toward sympathy I might've had. Entitled, much, little girl?
"Unless the gay community polices itself better and registers its displeasure against these pitiful and selective acts of political retribution, many tolerant Americans who hold the same beliefs on marriage as Mr. Obama and the Dalai Lama are going to begin to register their displeasure at the voting booth and through consumer boycotts against those who employ or support the thuggish tactics of Perez Hilton and his ilk."
And people wonder why I support the "gay" cause when not gay myself. THAT'S how. When someone starts in on "conform to the behaviors assigned you by the majority," I know who the good guys and bad guys are.
From the article:
""Out of all the topics I studied up on, I dreaded that one: I prayed I would not be asked about gay marriage. If I had any other question, I know I would have won," she told Fox News."
Well, there goes any inclination toward sympathy I might've had. Entitled, much, little girl?
"Unless the gay community polices itself better and registers its displeasure against these pitiful and selective acts of political retribution, many tolerant Americans who hold the same beliefs on marriage as Mr. Obama and the Dalai Lama are going to begin to register their displeasure at the voting booth and through consumer boycotts against those who employ or support the thuggish tactics of Perez Hilton and his ilk."
And people wonder why I support the "gay" cause when not gay myself. THAT'S how. When someone starts in on "conform to the behaviors assigned you by the majority," I know who the good guys and bad guys are.
The judgmental intolerance spewed by jokers like this H8er is remarkable. People have been apologizing as demanded, been embarrassed through re-education and are fed up. Methinks a backlash to the PC intimidation is brewing and this twerp has ignited a fire he cannot control.
I never thought Obama was being genuine when he answered that question in the first place. It's just a politically expedient answer and anyone on the other side of the issue knows it was said with a wink and a nod. What bugs the sh** out of me about this is that Obama can be disingenuous and get away with it. The Left is going to give this guy a pass on pretty much anything as long as they can. It scares me to think how far down the abyss we'll have to go before the MSM or anyone else on the left starts to scratch their head and wonder if they might have elected the wrong guy.
Thank You, Andy! This is exactly what I've been saying for six weeks now, most especially about Iran's extermination of gays. Sounds so much more authoritative coming from you. You're a well-respected MSM media figure. I'm just a right wing extremist. Yes, I'm joking
But let it be known far and wide that I have cc'd all my Iran anti-gay pogrom stuff to Perez Hilton for weeks. Crickets. Again, railing Miss California and playing mum on Iran's fag killers and their Auschwitz-like pogrom for Gays. Just like the rest of Hollywood. Well, at least they're consistent. You know. Like the Three Stooges were. Credit where credit is due.
If we were forcing gays to "conform to the behaviors assigned you by the majority," we would try and force them to be straight. No one is saying they can't be gay. We're only saying gays can't act like a**holes. If being like Perez Hilton or those prop 8 protestors would make me a good guy, I would MUCH rather be a bad guy.
Nice display of tolerance there. So in just a few decades we've gone from not tolerating homosexuality, at least openly, to being required to endorse and promote it lest our open-minded betters consider us a bigot.
Unfortunately, both parties do this, though the Republicans tend to lie to their own voters ("yeah, we'll fix that") and the democrats tend to lie to the voters at large.
As you may recall, I've ranted about this already in the last couple of days — the left has a problem in America in that it's ideas do not sell to the public. To get elected, they need to lie about their actual views and intentions so that voters won't freak out. Then they usually undergo a faked epiphany once they have the advantages of incumbency.
The MSM is complicit because they are fellow travellers.
They'll never scratch their heads and wonder. They're committed now. Their very credibility is on the line, and they know it. If Obama goes down, they go down with him, which is why they will spare no expense to whitewash his record even if it makes Jimmy Carter's look like a walk in the park. Twenty years from now, regardless of the facts, it will be understood in every mainstream media outlet and every other bastion of the Left that Obama's presidency was the best thing that ever happened to America.
You're right that both sides of the aisle are guilty of lying to get into office. Though I think it's fair to say the MSM only points out the hypocrisy on the Right and Lord only knows what it'll take before they're willing to admit Obama has done anything wrong.
Poor Miss USA, whoever she is, overshadowed by the 2nd place runner-up and Perez (I'd argue he's more popular than "wildly popular") Hilton. What question was the winner asked, anyway? Carrie Prejean is far more known in her losing than if she had won. And Perez HIlton, perhaps more know, and definitely far more reviled. (Hey Donald, with this guy as a"celebrity judge," no wonder you're going bankrupt.) Strange world.
Obama: "I'm a Christian"….ya, and I'm the Marquis de Lafayette. If it walks like a Muslim, talks nice to the Muslims and bows to the king Muslim, it's a political chameleon that sat in the church of a raving racist hate monger pretending to be a Christian. If being a member of the "First Church of Monday Night Football" would have pulled votes, this fraud would have been in the first pew to the left. He must be neutered and it must happen asap. Dingle gave us a little ray of light through the thick, black, morass that has been this disaster of an administration. It'll take Dems to be scared and run back to reality, and a p.o.ed constituency to keep a straight jacket on Obama's wildly leftist agenda, the one he hide while he was a candidate. Oh ya, "Perez" is disgrace to everyone born with a pair. Flaming moron.
Not to be too much of a pest, but for someone who's only 22 years old, how bad were the Carter years really. Were they as bad as my Dad says they were. I'm really not sure if he's being serious or if he's just joking. If its the latter then I'm exceedingly happy that I missed those years.
I agree absolutely. The media loves to point out Republican hypocrisy and will always give democrats a pass for similar or worse conduct.
I think they will never admit that Obama has done anything wrong. They only challenge a democrat when they are running against another democrat.
Andrew these guys would walk around a women buried in preparation for stoning to get to a diversity fundraiser.
Screw 'em if they can't take a joke.
Interesting take on Obama's response to gay marriage. My gut tells me the same thing. And yet everything he says and writes is taken at face value.
Dude. No one respects Perez Hilton. Seriously. Not on the left. Not on the right. Not in the gay community. Maybe on VH1 and the other celeb porn outfits. But Perez Hilton is no more a leader of any gay "movement than, I dunno, that "get a brain Morans" photo guy is a leader of the right wing. He's got a blog, he bashes starlets for some reason, his offensive, people hate him, and it drives up traffic. He's got a "sell by" date on him for about 20 minutes from now, after which he can join Morton Downy Jr. and Tiny Tim (ukulele guy) in the dustbin of history.
Seriously, these sort of columns merely extend this morons time in the spotlight. He's as much a leader in gay marriage issues as Michael Jackson, Britney Spears or Rudi Giuliani are leaders for straight marriage.
I wasn't super old yet, but just to give you a taste. . .
1. The economy was in the tank. It was called Stagflation — no growth (stagnation), but high inflation. Think South American banana republic. My parent's home loan was at 18%. At the same time, unemployment was high, GDP was low. But even worse, experts kept telling everyone (credibly) that this horrible state of affairs was the new normal. They even invented something called the Misery Index, which measured how various factors in the economy "felt" to the average American. It's never been higher than during that period.
2. There was not enough gas, so you had gas lines and rationing — you could only buy gas on certain days.
3. The military was a demoralized mess. Under-equipped, full of drug addicts and criminals.
4. Foreign policy was a nightmare. The Iranians held our people hostage. The Russians took over Afghanistan. South America, Africa and most of Asia were firmly Marxist.
5. People actually talked about the Presidency being too big of a job for one man. Carter himself talked about a malaise.
The left in general (not just gays) believe anyone that disagrees with them is not simply wrong, but evil.
Certainly none of us here would feel the need to engage in open, honest debate with Nazis, child molesters or serial killers, we would simply do whatever we needed to do to destroy them.
That's how liberals/progressives/Democrats see ANYONE that disagrees with them, thus they don't need to fight fair, debate honestly or even acknowledge that we have the right to disagree. We must simply be destroyed.
Leftist troll to grossly mischaracterize what I just typed and accuse me of calling liberals "Nazis, child molesters or serial killers" in 3…2…1…
By the way, as much as Miss California thinks she'd have won if she'd gotten another question, the fact that she groups the issue into "gay marriage" and "opposite-marriage" just sets the mind reeling.
"What are your views on hunger."
"I believe that people have a choice to be hungerful or opposite-hungerful.. No opposite-adult should face a place of opposite-food…"
"What do you think is America's greatest challenge in the 21st century?"
"I think we need to learn to make the choice between loving one another, and opposite-loving one another. Too many people are opposite-not-killed because opposite-not-murderers don't opposite-forget how to not opposite-love."
Of course, if she was asked a question about dark matter and theoretical physics, she'd likely be set…
I have a gay brother, I've known many gay people throughout my life, NONE of them were ever as hateful or malicious as this little creep hilton seems to be. He has a real mental disorder, he's never grown up. I visited his website a couple of years ago by accident, read there and immediately left. He's very hateful of those who are more influential then he is. He's like a pouty little kid who didn't get his way so what is he going to do, take his dolls and go home. That way nobody gets to play, that'll show THEM.
Thanks. That makes me very glad that I'm very young. Of course, on the flip side, this means I'll probably be stuck with Obama's mess for the remaining 50 or 60 years of my life.
Isn't an 18% interest rate in loan-shark territory?
Woah, quiet those voices in the head down for a minute. It's getting late, you likely need the sleep.
Great post, Andrew. Perez Hilton did more damage to his cause than good by responding to Miss California so rudely – and he has made more than one gay person ashamed. I dare say that kind of behavior probably puts young, isolated gay people in jeopardy – as it is likely to trigger more hate than goodwill. There are many more gay people who no longer buy bullying as the way to progress than the MSM leads us to believe. Enough is enough already. I know I speak for many LGBT people when I say it's time for the gay community to stop these tired tactics, take stock of how far we have actually come, and do like Obama says – reach across the aisle to fellow Americans in civility and friendship, show them we mean business, show them we are allies not adversaries – and give heterosexual Americans some credit for coming a long way too. They are not as stupid as a lot of us seem to need to believe. We are in a new century with new challenges and threats, and we really cannot afford to play victim anymore. Time to show a little gratitude, brothers and sisters! Thanks for writing this, Andrew. You always nail it.
I suspect part of the reason Obama is given a pass on his position on gay marriage is also for the same reason that black churches in California were for the most part left alone by the angry gay activists.
Attacking traditionally protected minorities creates sort of a political correctness dissonance within the minds of liberals that they can't sort out, so they just ignore this inconvenient truth and pretend what they know is true isn't.
Maybe the way they facilitate this thought is by assuming Obama is lying about his stance on gay marriage for political gain?
I feel your pain, Andrew. I have a lot of gay friends and am fine with gay marriage (I think the Republican party would have done itself a large favor if it had at least campaigned publicly for civil unions rather than stubbornly ignoring the reality that the numbers will continue to shift until gay marriage becomes legal everywhere). At the same time, the hate displayed by that community and their Liberal supporters in the last year has me wondering if I had the choice, how would I vote? To be honest, I've seen so much vitriol and bigotry from those groups, I'm beginning to believe the conspiracy theories that getting gay marriage passed is the first step in an organized attempt to attack Christianity. Sadly, they'll continue to defend Islam (which is vastly more intolerant) because it fits their agenda, sacrificing countless gays and women who are persecuted daily.
I find the whole thing depressing.
I'd be delighted to tell you how bad the Carter years were (as well as the late Nixon years). But Andrew has already covered what I was going to say with the exception that I was one of those with an 18% mortgage, not my parents. And I was trying to raise three kids and maintain a small law practice while being taxed as if I were a bloody millionaire. Life didn't go back to normal until about two years into the Reagan administration. And now the Obamists want to re-create Carter all over again. Now I have three kids and eight grandkids to counsel and convince that this won't go on forever, God willing.
Andrew: Did you get my two e-mails?
"seem to need to believe" ….. Nice , Charles.
These Perez Hilton type of people are the lunatic fringe. Sadly, they are loud, and have the rapturous attention of those would advance the "gay agenda" to elevate them to godhood.
I'm thinking of the X Men movies here – Magneto vs Professor Xavier. Professor Xavier wanted his mutants to be recognized as human beings and respected as such. Magneto would settle for nothing less than mutant domination. The parallels with the whole "gay struggle" isn't lost, especially with the brilliant (and openly gay) Bryan Singer at the helm.
I know I'm completely in Professor Xavier's camp, even if I understand Magneto's malignant need to dominate.
Sadly, the Magneto camp in this struggle is harming the efforts of the Xavier camp.
I can't honestly say I hate anyone. I'm repelled and infuriated by people like Hilton and his supporters for the damage they do to people's lives, simply because those people have different opinions. I think they should look at themselves, and maybe rethink those naked homosexual street orgies in San Francisco. It's looking way too much like the freaks are taking over the movement, which means that those who aren't in the freak camp will be maybe permanently repelled from whatever it is they think they want to accomplish.
As already demonstrated by some of the comments here, the "gay cause," whatever that is, contains a large element of non-gays who feel the need to agitate and upset everyone. Another victims' lobby. What do I support, given my long history of being "gay-friendly?" Pretty much everything except gay marriage, and I'm not exactly ready to commit suicide if that passes in California, either. It's the viciousness I oppose, and the lockstep requirement that we see gay people as a group, which has "a cause" which we must support or be called homophobes, morons and oppressors. Perez Hilton and people like him are human filth, not because they're gay, but because they are obnoxious bullies. And speaking for what used to be a commonly-accepted idea, a gentleman never attacks a lady, however much he may disagree with her. It's called "bad manners," something that Perez Hilton and his friends apparently have in abundance.
On the plus side, the 1970s did produce some great music. And, I will give the 1970s this as well — they were not yet politically correct. So film and television were more for the purposes of entertainment than indoctrination. In many ways (to quote Obi Wan Kenobi) it was a more civilized age. Still, I prefer today the modern era to then.
18% is almost loan-shark territory today, but not back then. I don't know if you have ever heard much about South America at the time, but some of those countries were running 1000% inflation.
She's not being entitled… Perez implied that the contest was based on that answer.
As a bisexual, your reason why I support is my reason why I stand aside. The "gay community" is so much more conformist than you think , Bob. It's an elitist group of New England/West Coast gay men imposing themselves and their lifestyle on the rest of us. If you don't buy these clothes/listen to this music/support these candidates, you are not one of us. And heaven help you if you don't. If you want intolerance, toss the concept of bisexual men into the pot and see what happens.
*MissQuinn*
I hate to admit it, but I actually wanted Carter to win the election in 1976. I was young (and stupid) and I understood Carter to be an honest, decent man. Whereas Ford had pardoned the "evil" Nixon. Little did I know. . .
I have a couple of close friends who are gay. I'd throw myself in front of the train for these guys. They are fun, bright beautiful people who respect others with different opinions from their own. In return they get the same respect. I wish they were my brothers.
I'm with you, Tank – people like Hilton are just plain off the deep end. Pathetic, sad little "LOOK AT ME" narcissist is he. If he thinks he's doing anything to further a cause, he's hopelessly deluded.
Perez Hilton, leader or not, speaks the mind of the gay community when it comes to intolerance of anyone that thinks differently than them.
The G&L community, with their reaction to Prop 8 and now the attack on Miss California, has shown itself to be the least tolerant segment of American society.
I find this sad as I personally approve of gay marriage and have considered their progress on various issues as a good statement of our society. But I am offended by these Gestapo tactics and will vote against any pro gay proposition on the CA ballot.
I dunno Andrew
Why do you assume that Obama or any other democrat really cares at all about "Gay" issues. It's a third rail issue. Bush was first asked about this in 2000 and he stated that we should have civil unions that are the same as a normal marraige in all other respects. The left made an issue that it should be called a marraige. The point is that we are talking semantecs, the civil rights argument is mute by this. Same thing with Prop 8. Civil Unions were there.
The only reason the term marraige is important is to acknowledge what it is. The most advantageous method for producing and rearing children. The best situation for any child is to be raised by his biological mom and biological dad. Sure this isn't always possible but it is the ideal. To me the only reason the leftists pay any attemtion to this issue is its potential to break down the power of the idea of the traditional family.
You know, that's the shame of all this. I have personally known several gay people and they were some of the nicest people I have ever known. But if these tactics continue, I won't vote in favor of it either. No one likes to be strong-armed.
You know, that's the shame of all this. I have personally known several gay people and they were some of the nicest people I have ever known. But if these tactics continue, I won't vote in favor of it either. No one likes to be strong-armed.
I was in middle school at the time, but I recall a general feeling of elation when Reagan was running against Carter. It wasn't just the hostage crisis, it was the endless Cold War that made everything seem stacked against the U.S. at the time. During Reagan's presidential campaign, there was a desire to be proud of being an American that even reached us tweeners at the time.
I remember 18% was the interest rate for a business loan at the time, not some kid with their first credit card. Pretty amazing when you think about it.
I don't know if the left sees it as a way to further break down the traditional family so much as they see it as another group (with a lot of money and influence) that they can add to the plantation.
Keep in mind, the left has chosen a strategy that intentionally segregates people into smaller interest groups so that the left no longer has to make broad appeals to the population at large. Instead, they can collect small groups of fellow travelers and useful idiots and forge them into a governing coalition. I see the segregation of gays from the rest of society as part of that plan, and I see gay marriage as the carrot that they keep hanging out there to pull the group in.
Cheesy Potatoes
It depends. While interest rates were 18% the inflation rate at its height was something like 15%. To put that into perspecitve if a McDonald's burger cost $1 today it would cost $1.15 next year and $1.75 in four years.
While the interest rate was 18% that number was broken down into component parts 15% for the inflation and 3% for the actual interest to be earned.
Also companies changed their inventory to LIFO (LAst in First Out) which costed inventory to the last unit bought to be more in tune with the raising inflation.
As a side note to expound on the Energy Crisis of the late 70's that Andrew mentioned. It was in my opinion due to tax law.
The gas lines were due to something called the Windfall Profits Tax. Congress felt oil should cost $18 a barrel so decided to enact an excise tax of 90% on every dollar above 18 it was sold in the US. To make matters worse the excise tax was not deductible as an expense for taxes making the tax an effective 123% of the profits (Corporate tax rates are 33%). Thus refineries quit selling oil in the US creating the Oil Shortage. Despite the Oil Shortage Polyester, Lava Lamps, Plastic Furniture etc. were the rage. These made from oil byproducts usually outside the US. Phillips 66 even had commercials touting all the wonderful things made from Oil. That is why the term Windfall Profits Tax used by Dem's in Congress today is something you should fear.
John, I think you've been making a great point on this in your articles. It is very telling that Iran escapes criticism for their anti-gay behavior.
I can go you one better than that. Remember, I was still a liberal Democratic activist at the time. I campaigned for the Peanut Man. I'm not sure who would have won if Ford hadn't made that horrible faux pas late in the campaign about Poland not being a captive nation. But not to worry, I voted for Reagan in the next election–a true Reagan Democrat.
I can go you one better than that. Remember, I was still a liberal Democratic activist at the time. I campaigned for the Peanut Man. I'm not sure who would have won if Ford hadn't made that horrible faux pas late in the campaign about Poland not being a captive nation. But not to worry, I voted for Reagan in the next election–a true Reagan Democrat.
I'd like to see people stop over-analyzing this.
Outside of Hollywood and the entertainment industry Perez Hilton Is A Nobody.
I couldn't care less what he has to say about anything or anybody.
And the more this is covered, the more the jerk gets the equivilant of free advertising.
I am curious.
Exactly what is your right to force Ms. Prajean to tell you her viewpoints on any subject let alone gay marraige.
If she does not feel comfortable discussing her beliefs isn't that her business. This is something the left does on any issue. If you have a friend who is a leftist they feel entiltled to force you to share it with them and then openly criticise it if it in disagreement with their own. To the point sometimes of interrogation.
This attitude that MovieBob has shown here is exactly why I will not discuss politics with a democrat. Everything is some kind of interrogation to somehow spin and destroy your beliefs. The minute you start to question them then they go ballistic.
Leftist troll to grossly mischaracterize what I just typed and accuse me of calling liberals "Nazis, child molesters or serial killers" in 3…2…1…
and if you did the problem would be…….oh wait I see, Nevermind
Well in her defence the teleprompter was unavailable………
Had it been available she could have given Obama's answer to the question from the debates word for word and of course the gay community would have applauded her!……………..
So… we should conform to the behaviors assigned to us by the minority of people like Perez Hilton?
It's really not Hilton the person we're all discussing. It's the small minded hate and character assassination he's indicative of.
Just how intelligent of an answer does anyone expect a 20-21 year old to give? I mean can anyone honestly say that THEY could converse about quantum physics or dark matter, black holes, science or anything else on a deeper level then what's for breakfast at that age? Let's be realistic on what we expect in the way of answers from these YOUNG girls.
> "the highly organized gay left has also been deafeningly silent on Islam's anti-modern approach to homosexuality – let alone same-sex unions. The mullahs in Iran somehow get a major pass. [...]
Why the pass, fellas?" <
Psychiatry 101- Defense Mechanism:
Displacement – separation of emotion from its real object and redirection of the intense emotion toward someone or something that is less offensive or threatening in order to avoid dealing directly with what is frightening or threatening."
http://drsanity.blogspot.com/2004/08/psychiatry-1...
In the late 60’s, I volunteered to go to war for my country, (under a Democrat president), and I was harassed, vilified and spit on for my efforts till this day.
In the early 70’s, I marched for women's rights, and the rights of our fellow black citizens, because I believed in their cause of liberty. But, I was still demeaned and thought of as a sexist and bigot because I held conservative values and principles. So, having enough of it, I sold everything I owned at the time, and bought a “one way” ticket to Germany where I lived for 10 years as an ex-patriot abroad, it became so unbearable to me.
In the early 80’s, after returning to the U.S., I worked alone as a free lance photographer here in my town and had many “gay” friends in and out off my successful studio. We never had a problem together. I had, and still have a “live and let live” attitude about what individuals do behind closed doors. But, was still treated openly with distain for my traditional beliefs.
Now for years, almost daily, after all that I worked for to keep the freedoms and liberties of all citizens of race, creed, color or sexual preference alive, I am still being shat upon by these very same people again in word and deed.
There is NO pleasing the left. They have NO gratitude for being in the freest land on earth. They will always want more, and more, and more relentlessly, without a seconds thought on who they damage or destroy. And, still complain that it isn’t enough and grab for more like out of control children.
Being on the left is the worst form of all narcissistic disorders, and I for one have, and will, continue to simply stop playing at their destructive games any longer.
“It’s a new dawn”, Perez, and you and the "Aunties" in our country helped bring it pal.
Not Over.
In the late 60’s, I volunteered to go to war for my country, (under a Democrat president), and I was harassed, vilified and spit on for my efforts till this day.
In the early 70’s, I marched for women's rights, and the rights of our fellow black citizens, because I believed in their cause of liberty. But, I was still demeaned and thought of as a sexist and bigot because I held conservative values and principles. So, having enough of it, I sold everything I owned at the time, and bought a “one way” ticket to Germany where I lived for 10 years as an ex-patriot abroad, it became so unbearable to me.
In the early 80’s, after returning to the U.S., I worked alone as a free lance photographer here in my town and had many “gay” friends in and out off my successful studio. We never had a problem together. I had, and still have a “live and let live” attitude about what individuals do behind closed doors. But, was still treated openly with distain for my traditional beliefs.
Now for years, almost daily, after all that I worked for to keep the freedoms and liberties of all citizens of race, creed, color or sexual preference alive, I am still being shat upon by these very same people again in word and deed.
There is NO pleasing the left. They have NO gratitude for being in the freest land on earth. They will always want more, and more, and more relentlessly, without a seconds thought on who they damage or destroy. And, still complain that it isn’t enough and grab for more like out of control children.
Being on the left is the worst form of all narcissistic disorders, and I for one have, and will, continue to simply stop playing at their destructive games any longer.
“It’s a new dawn”, Perez, and you and the "Aunties" in our country helped bring it pal.
Not Over.
Eh, I voted for Perot in '92. Not as amusing as drug possession nor as damaging as grand theft, it's just something we like to leave in the past since it now looks so stupid. I think it's the nature of the gender, we're only old when we have to look back more than a few years to wonder "What the hell was I thinking?" Women, who never do anything wrong as everything has a good explanation, can't relate.
I agree 100% with your remark about the gay political activist community taking over the whole of the gay community. As a homosexual American who has lived abroad most of my life I have seen first hand exactly where the political activists are coming from. American gays are being played like a violin, and a rather tawdry one at that. I keep thinking gay people will wake up to the reality of the situation but, well, I'm beginning to have my doubts. I've been so appalled by their conduct that several years ago I stopped thinking of and identifying myself as being "gay", I'm simply homosexual now. It's actually quite a relief.
The thing is, I bet if you were to actually hit `em with the truth serum, I severely doubt you'd get a majority of politicians in EITHER party saying they were firmly ideologically opposed to the idea. You'd get a small number of "no, it's sinfuls" from the Republicans, a slightly-larger number of "hell yeahs!" from the Democrats, and MASSIVE caches of "Meh, I could get behind it I guess… hey, can we tack on some pork for my state?" from the remainders of both. It's how they are. Look how little the Democrats actually DO about the environment, or how little the Republicans do about Abortion.
Obama doesn't strike me as someone who has much ACTUAL use for religion (that's one point in his favor, at least) in general aside from political theater – he's telling the truth about never hearing Wright act like a tool: He wasn't paying attention, he was only there so black Chicagoans saw im as a churchgoing man. He's PROBABLY for it – but also probably doesn't care enough to be so publically until it's A.) unavoidable or B.) politically-advantageous.
Welcome home friend.
Not Over.
"Exactly what is your right to force Ms. Prajean to tell you her viewpoints on any subject let alone gay marraige. "
Point of order: NO ONE "forced" the young lady to tell anyone her viewpoints on gay marriage. The question she was asked was whether or not all 50 states should follow the lead of those that legalized it. She gave her answer – a longform "world-peace-y" variation on "leave it to the states" at least according to my Model-to-English Dictionary – then OFFERED her personal viewpoint after the fact.
Miss Quinn,
I know of the people you speak better than you assume I do. They are obnoxious, it's true, and were I "running" such things they wouldn't be the public face of their "movement." HOWEVER, obnoxious or not, I don't see them organizing to pass unjustly discriminatory laws or lobbying to strip people of rights. Just because both sides are flawed doesn't mean one isn't vastly more rotten than the other from where I stand.
"the king Muslim?"
You realize that the King of Saudi Arabia isn't like their POPE, right?
It's a trade off. Plenty of us can speak intelligently at 21 – usually, the very same people you DON'T want to see onstage in a bathing suit. Why do you think they HAVE a Q&A at these things? Because it's FUNNY. That this one decided to play Policy Wonk Barbie on top of it was just icing.
I didn't ask how intelligent someone could SPEAK at 21. I asked how intelligent of an answer can they expect at that age. Big difference in speaking coherently and having knowledge.
Obnoxious? Some of them are downright intolerant of people among their own kind while screaming about intolerance inflicted on them. To me, their hypocrisy is far more rotten than anything else due to the fact that it unwittingly plays into their enemies hands. You point that out to them, they don't give a damn.
You can't strip someone of something they never had. Outside of CA, gay people didn't have the right to civil union. . .so it's kind of a rhetorical bait and switch to say they've been stripped of rights.
Just a peeve that I had to point out.
*MissQuinn*
I call them the GLiB – Gay, Lesbian, intolerant, and Bi – community.
BTW: Whoever thought having a flamer like Perez as a judge of feminine attributes – seriously, WTF? – shouldn't be fired, they should be shot. LOL!
What is so telling about it? Hard-line Islam condemns gays, Iran is hard-line Muslim, they can't criticize Iran without criticizing Islam so they don't. Dirt simple.
What's interesting is the liberals seem so scared by the extremists they don't want to upset the "moderate" government in Iran and make them tilt further. Also there'd be an implied admission that Judaism has advanced beyond killing gays while Islam has not, and they are practically incapable of admitting those people can do anything right.
Well, the Nazis were socialists, "age of consent" laws restrict personal choice, they support abortion and often euthanasia…
Me three.
I would call myself "gay-friendly." Frankly, I don't find it to be any of my business.
As for Prop. 8, I abstained. I understand both sides of the argument and I don't really care. So, I figured I would let all the voters that do care decided the issue (which they did).
But, when I saw the completely unwarranted, unfair and down right ugly reaction by the far left to the passage of Prop 8, I couldn't help but align against them. It wasn't that I suddenly became pro-traditional marriage. Rather, I was (and always am) completely against rewarding anyone who engages in fascist tactics and that is exactly what the militant anti-Prop 8 people did. I am sorry, but I will never forgive a group that loses and free and fair election, then decides to target an unprotected minority (the Mormons) for scorn and wrath. The whole putting addresses of donors on the map just put it over the top.
Then, when I heard that some people were losing their jobs because they were "outed" by the mob, that was the nastiest attempt at suppression of free speech I have seen in my lifetime.
And the worst part was, all these people running around complaining about Prop 8 passing are the same ones running around telling McCain voters "you lost, get over it!"
The whole thing disgusts me.
At that age and in college, they are master regurgitators of knowledge, as those who have crammed for midterms and finals can testify. Actual understanding is very low, as shown by the near-zero retention rates on any knowledge not actively used after college, although if you were smart and kept your books you know where to look things up. I used to know advanced calculus and linear algebra!
The disgusting behavior and hypocrisy displayed by Perez is something that will keep me from supporting gays in any way shape or form. They like to compare their so-called 'struggle' to the struggle blacks went through, which irritates me – they should be more like the black people of the civil rights era and stop it with the histrionics and ridiculous name calling. Carrie Prejean may not be perfect but she's behaved with far more class than anyone else in this situation, including yourself. While Perez wants to call her vile names, she says she loves him and intends to pray for him. She did not insult him.
Of course, Christians are just dumb fascists out to make everyone else miserable, right?
you old cowards don't know anything about gays.
In fairness, since the behavior of Perez keeps you from any support of gays, by following that model, does the behavior of Sharpton, Rev. Wright and/or Farrakhan keep you from any support of blacks? All three are currently parodies and bad imitators of the civil rights era reformers.
Hey pal why don't you and Perez Hilton quit while your behind.
Andrew, I used to live in New Hope, Pennsylvania. It's an artist colony, with a huge gay population. Many New Yorkers have gentlemen farms there. (Redford has one, as do other celebrities, who would rather the world didn't know about.) Many friends own galleries and restaurants, and it seems everyone there has at least painted a landscape or two, and sculpted a bit.
The vast majority, and this is no exaggeration, of the gay community voted for Bush. They are artists, with extremely good taste – some of these bed and breakfasts and galleries are so impeccably designed, restored and furnished, they should and do win awards – they are fully ensconced in the liberal art world in every way, shape and form. These are not blue collar gays, not that there's anything wrong with that, these are the so-called 'beautiful well-off gays' that the gay community loves to show off as the ideal, or used to before hate and anger and protesting was the norm for that community. Yet, these 'ideal' gays are conservative by nature. Not in sexual orientation, of course, but in everything else. Defense, domestic and foreign policy, business and taste.
You are correct in identifying a small but vocal element of the gay population as being responsible for the noise and racket. They are.
I don't know a single gay from that area who supported the idea of a Gay St. Patricks' Day Parade. Most were angry that it was even dreamed up. They said (the Irish ones), 'we're Americans, with Irish descent. What the he&& does sexual orientation have to do with it?'
And they are right.
It's the influence of media, namely MTV, the cable news parody pundits, the Hollywood product and the Television product that force feeds 'gay is cool' messages 24/7. Yes, media, that big bad monster, of which we are apart. It shapes, influences and sways. Anyone who denies it, is not only delirious, but has to explain why they are here, because why else would you be interested in Hollywood, let alone Big Hollywood if it didn't impact your life. It would be like blogging or commenting on dryer lint. It's there, everyone sees it, but it has very little impact on your daily thinking (hopefully). With that said, there are probably lint blogs being formed as we speak.
But seriously, I often think that if media, namely the news, and Hollywood/TV were turned off for a month, our country would right itself (no pun intended) like an overturned kayak.
Moderate in Iran. That's funny, K! Left-leaning moderates in Iran leave Timothy McVeigh in the dust! Moderate Rafsanjani said that all Muslims should nuke Israel given the chance, and even said the deaths of a hundred million Muslims was an acceptable price for annihilating Israel. How moderate is THAT? BTW you can't even qualify as a candidate in Iran unless you pass the regime's ideological muster. What does THAT tell you? Nazi Party member in good standing, maybe? See for yourself.
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&ei=1Gn1SaDhKJH4M...
Yes, anyone who has studied history knows the similarities between American liberals and the socialists known as Nazis.
And that is why "moderate" was in quotes. If they're not actively committing Jihad and personally slaughtering infidel children, then the lefties call them moderates. Of course the liberals have been tilted for so long it throws their views on anything off, they'll claim Obama is a centrist and wonder why all the cameras were angled when they photographed the Tower of Pisa. What, didn't you see when CNN reported it was built on a hillside?
Thank you for this article — I was hoping someone would find the right way to word this situation. I'll see you at the Ramada!
Under politically-correct speech laws Perez Hilton is allowed to attack the White Christian, he could not have said the same if he were speaking to Black Christian.
After my 9/11/2001 conversion from brain-dead liberal to liberty-loving Conservative I met a man who opened my mind to the world of identity politics and how speech codes frame dissent. I started to ask him a question about a young gay acquaintance who was not certain he was gay. I was startled by the man's response to my question just at the moment I said the word gay, he stopped me and said "I'm not gay, I'm a homosexual who is over the Rainbow and wants my life back"
He went on to elaborate what he meant, opening my mind to my wildly misinformed ways of politically correct days.
It's really all about the speech codes, Perez Hilton's hate speech is protected under the law as long as he stays within the politically correct frame.
The under-discussed fact is, however only 33% of America supports 'same-sex union between a man and a woman'; 33% is not a majority. Unfortunately, in order for the Statist to impose something which only 33% of the population supports the Statist will have to impose greater tyranny in order to make 'same-sex union between a man and a woman' law.
Should we continue down the path towards politically correct tyranny eventually by default the word "marriage' will be a criminal act for anyone who is not homosexual.
Charles Beaumont wrote a short story on just this very thing called "The Crooked Man".
It is not a crime to defend the meaning of marriage (the union of yin/yang, egg/sperm, day/night) and that Natural Law which defines the essence of marriage.
Sometimes it does. And when I do support the positions, it's usually the basic position which may be quite reasonable in spite of what they may have to say about it. If anyone sets the civil rights movement back just by their comments or stances, its those three and also those that mindlessly parrot their comments and knee-jerkedly support them. When I see any comments from a David Duke-type, or some Aryan nation type, I'm just as disgusted at those types of comments and opposed to their stances as I would be at the comments of the aforementioned individuals and those like them. And you don't have to stop there – you can throw in feminism, religious / anti religious types, etc. I detest militancy in any form – it stifles and suppresses reason and fairness. I always try to judge people on an individual basis – if they're idiots, that's how I deal with them, no matter what group they pigeonhole themselves into.
I attended Texas Women's University Graduate School in the 1980's..I am male. I watched in disbelief as millions of American women allowed the ultra-liberal left to hijack their cause and alienate men who might be sympathetic to their plight and supportive of equal rights for women. The far left agitators managed to get plenty of air-time thanks to a liberal media bias…it KILLED the feminist movement and divided "professional" women from "domestic, family-oriented" women. Do you remember how condescending some of these alleged leaders of the feminist movement were to other women who preferred to stay home and raise families? The loud, obnoxious whining from this minority allowed them to be drawn as caricatures by opponents of women's rights and it, in turn, painted the entire movement as less than serious….does P. Hilton really represent the views of the majority of gay men or women? I don't know,but if he doesn't, then I agree with this article and I believe he is setting the gay community back just like Gloria Steinem and crowd did for professional women.
Amen, brother!
Four!
That is a very interesting point.
I'll have to consider this further…
I’m a live and let live kinda guy. I do not care what someone does in the privacy of their own homes. But, to take thousands of years of societal foundation and turn it on it’s head because it’s momentarily stylish, is incredibly arrogant, and dumb. As has been stated up-thread I believe gays should have every right short of marriage. Perez Hilton is nothing more than a self important, jealous, misogynist queen, whose name I’d never heard of until a week ago, and I would imagine that was his real point.
Five here.
And I once knew a gay man who privately admitted to me that he was ashamed of being homosexual — not because of any moral conflict, but because "my people are such a__holes."
Miss North Carolina won, I believe, but thanks to Perez's grandstanding nobody gives a f__k about her.
And if you missed out on your history classes, you might want to flip through Jonah Goldberg's book.
"wildly popular"
Pardon me, good sir, I believe you misspelled "inexplicably."
I was in the Army at the time, and having "three hots and a cot" saved me from a lot of the pain over costs, but I had the dubious distinction of having service with some of the most worthless characters ever to wear the uniform.
Carl, (his real first name; if he's still out there, its about time he owned up to this), was in the room next to mine. He was the quintessential epitome of a "head"; when the music went up loud in his room, you knew the towel was under the door and he was lighting up. It got to be so bad, you could almost get a contact high by breathing nearby. It went on forever, I thought, before he was cycled out for academic non-performance. It did take a bit longer for his buddies to be sent away, because Carl was their contact, and their usage went down after he was discharged. He's one of the reasons there is a drug policy in the military nowadays.
That idiot wasted a training slot that could have gone to someone else who was ready to help save lives, (it was a medical training slot). Then I think about all the money that was thrown away so he could stay stoned…
By and large, I think you're right. I agree that this is one of those issues that most politicians view as an issue for the activists (like abortion), and which they personally are pretty indifferent to. I also agree that Obama is probably not religious.
As for Obama's indifference though, I have to make a distinction here. Obama strikes me as an empty suit, created by David Axelrod for the purposes of being sold to the public. I never get the feeling that Obama has any independent opinions or that he really cares about anything.
With that understanding, I don't think Obama cares, but I do think that Axelrod does. However, Axelrod is a very cynical leftist, and I see him caring only because he sees this as an opportunity to create another distinct voting block that he can use to cobble together a governing coalition (see my comments above).
I was an unapologetic womanizer; I thought females were endlessly fascinating, and I dedicated more time to "field research" on them than I did studying. If I had had any sense at the time, I would have put my pay into the bank, knocked out some pre-requirements, and bought a four-year degree, as I had a marvelous ability back then of an almost photographic memory. I would learn things as fast as they put the transparencies on the screen. The FM 8-270 for medical care back then was a full four inches thick. I never even cracked the thing open, just learned from the lecture. What a waste.
Trump thought of it. Who gives a rat's patoot about the pageant? With the Donald, it's all about ratings. I'm sure he knew Hilton would stir it up and now it is all people are talking about. Trump is the PT Barnum of the 21st century.
I can't say that I am in favor of gay "marriage" although I am all in favor of allowing gay civil unions and allowing gay couples to enjoy all the same rights and privileges that married couples enjoy under the law. For me, marriage is a religious sacrament, and the issue of whether or not any two people can be joined in a marriage is decided by the tenants of religion. Therefore, to allow the agency of government to call something "marriage" is to me a violation of the First Amendment. And yes, that means I don't consider a a ceremony from the JoP a "marriage" but a civil union. Conversely, by my own argument, I am fine with a gay couple being married by a religion in a religious ceremony; that's the beauty of religious freedom. Just don't legislate it.
Its not a stretch. He lies about most everything else. Why should this subject be anything different?
You must be logged in to post a comment.