TheWrap.com:

Not many bold faced names expressed any outrage, which is not that surprising as Hollywood is a liberal town, after all. That was left to folks on the other end of the political aisle, such as presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich who took to Twitter to decry the decision….

Here’s a look at some of the best responses to the news.

Olivia Wilde
Woohoo!! Die Prop 8 Die!!!! 9th Circuit just ruled you unconstitutional. Next step Supreme Court!

Seth MacFarlane
Prop 8 architects: Every civil rights battle is eventually won by the oppressed party. Save your hundred mil and buy some Bud platinum.

Jesse Tyler Ferguson (“Modern Family”)
Historic! #Prop8 is unconstitutional. @AFER & I won’t stop until ALL Americans are #free2marry. Sign> bit.ly/pledge8 & RT

Perez Hilton
#Prop8 struck down AGAIN!!!! perez.ly/zrVPi5 Equal rights for all!!!!

The Wrap:

Hilton has inked a deal Celebra Children’s Books (a Penguin Young Readers Group imprint) for “The Boy with Pink Hair.”

Sarah Palin isn’t the only celebrity queen According to the publisher, Hilton’s foray into kids’ books is “a defining story about how believing in yourself and following your aspirations can not only bring out the best in you, but also in those around you.”

And: “With fun, colorful and endearing characters, Perez reminds readers that by simply accepting our differences we can find the things that unite us all.”

“The Boy with Pink Hair” is slated for launch in September with an initial print run of 75,000.

Hilton’s last book — 2009’s “True Bloggywood Stories: The Glamorous Life of Beating, Cheating, and Overdosing” (pictured) – old-sold Carrie Prejean on Amazon.com.

Perez Hilton the Intolerant lecturing your children on “accepting our differences.” What’s next, Barack Obama lecturing us on why it’s wrong to wage a war of choice in a Middle Eastern, oil producing country that’s no threat to us? Oh, wait…

I like The Wrap but this sort of catty reporting and spin is beneath them. To drag Sarah Palin into it is cheap as is the closing shot at Carrie Prejean. Prejean’s only sin was that she had a set of moral standards. Hilton’s salvation (in the eyes of Hollywood, at least) is that he has no moral standards and therefore can never be qualified as a hypocrite. He can call Will.i.am a “faggot” and practice all kinds of hostile misogyny … but just so long as he’s no hypocrite, that makes him superior to Prejean in the eyes of morally illiterate. As far as The Wrap’s spin, how many books did Hilton really sell? Enough to justify a shot at a children’s book?

We all know what’s going on here. Outlets like Penguin aren’t in the business of making money as much as they are to undermine the culture, and the place that starts is with your children and the stripping away of their innocence as soon as humanly possible. How many “progressive” schools and libraries will make this gateway drug into Perez Hilton’s sick celebrity culture a part of their inventory? Parents can’t control everything their kids see, read and watch 24/7.

You can’t blame Hilton. He is what he is, and of course he wants to spread his noxious depravity to your kids. That’s what evil does.

But Penguin aiding and abetting him … that’s something entirely different.

“In the name of Christ,” says Rice, she can no longer, “belong to this quarrelsome, hostile, disputatious, and deservedly infamous group.”

Rice went on to say, “I refuse to be anti-gay. I refuse to be anti-feminist. I refuse to be anti-artificial birth control. I refuse to be anti-Democrat. I refuse to be anti-secular humanism. I refuse to be anti-science. I refuse to be anti-life.”

That her very statement itself is quarrelsome and hostile, that her list of refusals is patently disputatious, and that she herself is infamous for promoting a dark and cynical view of humanity in her early vampire novels, places these remarks so far past irony that they border wanton hypocrisy.

They bring to mind a parable about logs and eyes that one assumes Ms. Rice, “in the name of Christ,” has likely heard.

Of course, Progressive Christians like Kirsten Powers, and Christianity-haters like Perez Hilton – two groups almost universally aligned on every issue – were quick to defend and praise Ms. Rice.  According to Jonathan Merritt, author of Green Like God – Unlocking the Divine Plan for our Planet, Anne Rice feels that “Christianity has been hijacked.”

The hijackers, one presumes, are the quarrelsome, hostile, disputatious, infamous, anti-gay, anti-feminist, anti-birth control, anti-Democrat, anti-secular humanism, anti-science, anti-life religious folk that Ms. Rice takes issue with in her own statements, but of course, those people are not new to the church.  If anything, the church (in this case the Catholic Church) has only gotten more progressive in the decades since Ms. Rice originally walked away from her faith, or even in the decade since she returned.

But Progressive Christians like Mr. Merritt always feel the need to defend a person hostile to Christianity with inane clichés, regardless of context, because it affords them a place, if barely, at the cool kids’ table.

Of course, most people in America have had a bad experience at some point or another with Christianity or Christians.

As science has proven (or maybe I just made it up) half of all people are jerks, and the other half are jerks half of the time.  Add to that the fact that the vast majority of all American at least claim to be Christians, and it’s just simple math that people will have been rubbed the wrong way by one of them.

And of course the very reality of the fact that Christianity believes something, ensures it will run afoul of free people with independent beliefs from time to time.

Any ideology is divisive, regardless of how well meaning its adherents, because it defines a set of views exclusive from all others.  Even those whose ideology is decidedly inclusive are exclusive of those whose ideologies are not inclusive, as expressed so aptly in this – the best video in the history of the world:

—–

But the main reason Progressive Christians and Christ-haters are so often aligned is not because of their individual bad experiences with Christians.  They have as many or more bad experiences with each other because that’s the company they keep.

The main reason Christianity gets a bad rap is that Christianity gets a bad rap.

I’ll elucidate.

Christianity takes the blame in the culture because shapers of the culture are so openly hostile to Christianity.

Most people in the average day encounter Christians – probably a lot of them – and most of their experiences are at a minimum innocuous, and maybe even good.  They don’t know that the people they deal with are Christians, because so far, Christians don’t have to where patches on their clothes and hunker in ghettos in this country.

But when they turn on their televisions, or listen to the radio, the Christians are clearly defined, not as the good-natured majority, but as the fanatical minority.

They wear uniforms – drab clothing on the men, head scarves and no make-up for the women – and are always the characters abusing their children, hiding horrifying sexual secrets, or covering up theft and murder in the name of God.

This is a storytelling technique known in the arts as – FICTION.   But since it is the only view of Christianity ever portrayed in the arts, people over time begin to identify with it.

They begin to re-imagine their own personal bad experiences with believers, which represent the exception in almost every case to their own broader personal interactions with Christians, as the norm.

They begin noticing people who look like the Christians on TV – strange, hateful people – who certainly exist at the outer edge of the church, but don’t represent a majority of believers, and allowing their very existence to validate the falsely premised view of the glowing box in their subconscious.

Then they have the leftist narcissists like Anne Rice confirm the whole idea and suddenly the reality that almost everyone they meet is a Christian, and therefore Christianity is the very definition of normal, is lost.

But in truth, it is the culture shapers themselves who are the minority.

Anne Rice, Dick Wolf, Rosie O’Donnell, and all of the actors and writers and musicians that so malign Christians are part of a tiny sliver of people who live at the peak of human decadence.  They are utterly insulated from dissenting opinions.

They hate the church because it does not embrace their own self-gratifying lifestyles.  It is the only place left where they encounter a no.  So they rebel against it like the frightened children that they are and try to both destroy it and gain its love.

That this group of ego-driven bigots has so much influence over the perceptions of millions of people they openly despise is the real story, not whether or not one of them goes to mass.

There are problems with Christianity as an institution (however loosely threaded), make no mistake.  Like any family, it has difficult personalities, internal disagreements, and projects its own sometimes-embarrassing idiosyncrasies.  It is not above reproach.  My own list of criticisms for the state of the church is long and detailed, but this view of Christianity as the home of intolerance and selfishness just doesn’t fit the facts.

That place is progressivism, a church Ms. Rice still approves of, and that still approves of her.

It is hard to find a media personality more widely despised than Perez Hilton.  From Will.i.am to Demi Moore, celebs across the spectrum think Hilton is a pimple on the butt of Hollywood.  And they’re basically correct. 

As of Sunday, he’s not just an annoyance – he’s a child pornographer.  On that fateful day, Hilton, whose standards of good taste include using Photoshop to paint semen on the faces of stars and starlets and helpfully labeling body parts like “ass” and “boobs”, hit a new low.  He linked via his Twitter account to a picture of rising Madonna wannabe Miley Cyrus climbing out of a car in a short skirt and no underwear.  In the picture, which has been removed, Cyrus’ genitals are allegedly clearly visible.  

According to Salon.com, Jeffrey Douglas, a criminal defense attorney in Los Angeles, said that Hilton had subjected himself to “extraordinary and intense” liability and that it was “suicidal for him to do this.”  Douglas continued, “We’re not talking about a misdemeanor.  You don’t have to know what the definition of the law is; all you have to do is knowingly distribute the photograph.”  

Douglas is exactly right.  Under 18 USC §2252, any person who:

“…knowingly transports or ships using any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce or in or affecting or foreign commerce by any means including by computer … any visual depiction, if – (A) the producing of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and (B) such visual depiction is of such conduct.” 

This sounds like the child would have to be engaged in sexual activity, so a nude shot wouldn’t do the trick, but that’s not correct – under 18 USC §2256…

“…‘minor’ means any person under the age of eighteen years,” and “‘sexually explicit conduct’ means actual or simulated … lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person.” 

So upskirt shots of Miley Cyrus count as child porn, and Hilton absolutely distributed one of them.  What’s Hilton’s penalty?  Under 18 USC §2251, “Any individual who violates, or attempts or conspires to violate, this section shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 15 years nor more than thirty years.” 

Hilton also violated California state law.  Under California Penal Code §311.2(b):

“Every person who knowingly sends or causes to be sent, or brings or causes to be brought, into this state for sale or distribution, or in this state possesses, prepares, publishes, produces, develops, duplicates, or prints any representation of information, data, or image … any obscene matter, knowing that the matter depicts a person under the age of 18 years personally engaging in or personally simulating sexual conduct, as defined in Section 311.4, is guilty of a felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or six years, or by a fine not exceeding one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000), in the absence of a finding that the defendant would be incapable of paying that fine, or by both that fine and imprisonment.”  What is “sexual conduct” under §311.4?  It includes “exhibition of the genitals or pubic or rectal area for the purpose of sexual stimulation of the viewer.” 

That would be what Hilton just distributed. 

So let’s total this up.  Hilton is facing a maximum fine of $100,000 under California law, more under federal law, as well as a maximum of 36 years in prison and a minimum of 17 years in prison. 

The fact is that Hilton has come close to crossing this line before.  Last year, Hilton posted pictures of Tallulah Willis, the 15-year-old daughter of Bruce Willis and Demi Moore, wearing revealing a revealing top.  Hilton called her a “slut.”  Then Hilton posted a picture of Tallulah’s shorts riding up, and labeled it “ASS.”  

So there’s a pattern here.  While Hilton may not be printing these pictures out and tacking them to his walls for his own sexual pleasure, he’s making the photos widely available to those who do.  And that violates federal and state law. 

The only question is: is there a DA gutsy enough to take Hilton on?

***UPDATE: Perez Hilton disputes the photo was of a nude Miley Cyrus. To reflect the dispute, this post’s headline has been edited. 

International Business Times:

Celebrity blogger Perez Hilton could possibly be investigated under child pornography laws after he posted a semi-naked photo of Miley Cyrus on his Twitter page.

The question itself  is nearly incomprehensible but Miss Oklahoma, Morgan Woolard, handles it with grace, aplomb, and intelligence.  Naturally, she didn’t win.

Funny how it’s always a question coming from the political left, challenging a position supported by the political right.  Why don’t we ever see:  ”Good Evening Miss Vermont.  Late-term abortion is a serious issue in our country.  Could you please tell us your opinion on extinguishing nascent human life when a baby is only weeks away from being born?” or “Miss Illinois, do you believe President Obama when he says that he never heard Rev. Jeremiah Wright say any controversial statements over the twenty years he attended his church?”.

Of course, I don’t want ANY politics injected into events like this.  It’s a beauty pageant for crying out loud.  We all know why we’re watching.  If we’re going to ask questions at all, can’t we just keep it in the realm of “What is your position on world peace?” and skip to the swimsuit competition?

So when Andrew Breitbart asked me if I’d interview Carrie about her new book, Still Standing, out November 9 from Regnery, I chuckled and thought: The liberal faithful will think this is perfect: One “fanatical homophobe” interviewing another. 

Except that they would be wrong.

In case you’ve been living under a rock this year, Carrie Prejean is the former Miss California who became an accidental lightning rod in the spring. At a glitzy pageant held April 19 at the Planet Hollywood Resort and Casino in Las Vegas, Carrie appeared poised to be crowned Miss USA. But during the final segment of the contest, a Q&A with pageant judges, Carrie drew as her questioner the gay gossip aficionado, Perez Hilton. 

Ignoring the longstanding pageant tradition of steering clear of politically charged questions, Hilton launched this salvo: “Vermont recently became the fourth state to legalize same-sex marriage. Do you think every state should follow suit? Why or why not?” 

Keeping her mega-watt smile picture-perfect, Carrie revealed no outward hint of concern. But inside, she writes in Still Standing, “it was as though I could feel time slowing down; as if silence was screaming in my ears…I had to break that silence with my answer – and I had to do it now…” 

“Well, I think it’s great that Americans are able to choose one or the other…” Carrie answered. “And you know what, in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman…” 

And with that, a 22-year-old lifelong athlete who works with developmentally disabled children became the global poster-child for virulent “homophobia.” Within 24 hours, a histrionic Hilton had called her a “dumb bitch,” then corrected himself, saying he wished he’d called her a “c**t.” Immediately, pundits and bloggers who use typically their media platforms to decry “hate” napalmed Carrie with every hateful invective from “bigot” to “Nazi.” One British politician even issued a televised death threat. 

I know a little about what that’s like. In late September, HarperCollins announced that it had bumped up the publication date for Sarah Palin’s memoir, Going Rogue: An American Life, to November 17. As Sarah’s collaborative writer, I suddenly became a target (the left having running out of original ways to insult the former Alaska governor herself.) 

Andrew Sullivan, who blogs at The Atlantic’s website, read my arguments in favor of traditional marriage, and summarily crowned me a “fanatical homophobe.” Others, to use Perez Hilton’s term, followed suit. 

Had Sullivan bothered to reach out for a reasoned dialogue, I might’ve shared with him that my sister Lori, an articulate, politically active lesbian on the progressive left, has had with me some pretty productive discussions on gay marriage. That for me, it’s about more than “the Bible tells me so”; it’s about the collision of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. 

I might’ve shared with Sullivan that the maid of honor at my wedding was my best friend, CM, and her longtime lesbian partner. Sure CM looked a little athletic schlepping down the aisle in her 1980’s tea-length, peach satin dress with dyed-to-match pumps. But then neither one of us walks like Carrie Prejean. 

…Who, incidentally, learned her sexy pageant walk from a gay man. 

Let’s face it ladies, nobody can work a pair of pumps like the right gay man. And it was an openly gay man named Jim (whom Carrie describes in Stilling Standing as “wonderful”) who transformed her from lanky athlete to slinky siren, and taught her not to lope across the pageant stage like a giraffe. And it was also a gay man, Keith Lewis, who courted Carrie to compete for Miss California, then Miss USA – a man Carrie thought at the time had her best interests at heart. 

See, the irony is that people like Carrie and I can be confidantes and even best friends with the gays and lesbians in our lives. We can be in mentoring relationships, like Carrie and Jim. We can collaborate on ideas, as I did with “Anlir,” a gay commenter whose ideas I often adopted when I managed World Magazine’s evangelical-focused blog. We can even be accepting of our family members’ sexuality. 

But if we dare to differ on the issue of gay marriage, then the truth about our actual relationships with gays and lesbians is ignored, liberals’ clairvoyant “insight” into our hearts and minds is substituted as fact, and our protestations are filed mockingly under the “some of my best friends” defense. 

If, on the institution of marriage, we say publicly that we believe the same thing as voters in 31 states – in every state, in fact, where gay marriage has been put on the ballot – then we become targets who must be defamed and destroyed. 

Sadly, snap judgment and name-calling would once have been uncharacteristic for Andrew Sullivan. My good friend Anita Palmer, former managing editor of Eternity, an evangelical monthly, told me she was a huge fan of Sullivan’s laser-like reasoning back when he wrote for The New Republic. 

“He was acerbic, but brilliantly logical, almost irrefutable in that succinct, British way that was just a joy to read,” Anita told me at Starbucks the other day. Her tone was wistful; she missed that Andrew Sullivan, she said. 

Carrie and I both long for the Sullivan of old – and for more people like my sister Lori – who would be willing to chuck name-calling and personal destruction in favor of reasoned, civil debate. 

*****

Lynn Vincent:  Okay, let’s just get the “sex tape” elephant out of the room. When I read about this I thought, “You know what, this isn’t really a ‘sex tape’ as we’ve come to think of sex tapes when they break in the media.”  What are your thoughts on that? 

Carrie Prejean:  Well, there is a video that is out there, and I’m not proud of it and I was very immature at the time. People can call it whatever they want to call it. But it’s definitely not a sex tape. But it’s still the worst mistake I’ve ever made. 

LV:  So I was thinking about this and I thought, “Okay, she was probably with her boyfriend and they were, you know, together and he was filming her…”

CP:  Well, let’s just get that thing taken care of. There was no one else in the room with me. I was by myself. It was for a boyfriend at the time, who I trusted and we were dating at the time. So, I think that definitely needs to get cleared up. 

LV:  So you made the tape and you shared it with this boyfriend. 

CP:  Well at the time, I guess I thought I was being a good girlfriend. 

LV:  I think in the flap copy of your book and in other places, it talks about you being a role model for young Christian women, so there will be people who say that you’re a hypocrite. What’s your response to that? 

CP:  Well, it’s definitely not something that I’m proud of, like I said. And, you know I still think that I am a role model. I think that we’re all sinners – we all make mistakes. The only perfect person is God, and I know that He forgives me….I’m forgiven for the things that I’ve done and how many of us want to share the most horrible mistake that you’ve ever made with complete strangers? Even talking about this right now with you is extremely uncomfortable. And, you know, we all make mistakes, we all do things we’re not proud of. But what matters most is who we are now and who I am now is someone that is a strong, strong person and I’m still standing. The bottom line is who I am today, and that’s a strong woman who defended traditional marriage, and that’s the only reason why we’re really even discussing this right now. 

LV:  Right. And so, in terms of a role model, I think you could say that some of the lessons we teach as role models arise from mistakes we’ve made. That’s how we get our experience. 

CP:  Right. And I think that now I can definitely teach younger girls, don’t ever do something [sexually inappropriate], even when you’re in love and you think that he’s Mr. Right and you “know” nothing will come out, because everything that you do – all the choices that you make – will affect you in the long run. Did I think when I was seventeen that…when I was twenty-two years old and in the spotlight, that the choices that I made then would come out now? No. But, that’s why young women need to learn from this. They need to really think about what they’re doing and make the right decisions and don’t ever do something that you wouldn’t want your pastor, your mother, your father, or your friends to see. Nothing is private anymore in this world, unfortunately. 

LV:  How did you feel about your opponents in this lawsuit presenting you with material that you recorded when you were a minor, in order to secure a favorable outcome for themselves in this lawsuit? 

CP:  Well, I’m not really going to be discussing anything that happened in mediation because I signed a legal agreement. It seems as if I’m the only one sticking to that agreement, and I will continue to obey that agreement. So anything that was discussed I’m not able to talk about right now. 

LV:  Well, let’s move onto your book. I was sitting in Starbucks in Del Mar enjoying it the other morning and, at the beginning, you take us right into that moment Perez Hilton asked you the question about gay marriage at the Miss USA pageant in Las Vegas. Take us to that moment. What were you thinking then? What were you feeling? 

CP:  Well, I just remember being so excited, and that I felt so proud and honored to be representing the state of California. I’d worked hard for this job and I was ready to become Miss USA. I was very confident with public speaking and being able to handle questions under pressure, and I just remember after hearing the question that I couldn’t believe that it was even being asked in a pageant. But I knew that I had to deal with it…but when I began to answer the question I felt as though so much of the hard work and dedication…that I had put into this pageant was just – it was gone…There was no way I was going to win Miss USA if I gave the answer that I gave. And it was worth it to me. It was worth it to be honest and tell the truth rather than to back down to just win Miss USA for the year…I think that was a test. It was a test and we’re all tested at some point in our lives and, you know, I think that I did pass the test. 

LV:  And, you know it was interesting last Tuesday the state of Maine became the 31st state to vote “No” on gay marriage. This time the vote was a bit different in that the state actually repealed a law allowing gay marriage. And this was in a state where voters are widely considered to be moderates and independents. So if you support traditional marriage, and people in Maine support traditional marriage, and people in the thirty other states where this issue has been put on the ballot support gay marriage, why do you think you were so viciously attacked? 

CP:  Well, for one, I think it’s because I was in a pageant…the type of setting where there’s media and there’s the entertainment industry. And I’m a pageant girl – I’m not supposed to have an opinion and I’m not supposed to be intelligent and I’m not supposed to stand up for what I believe. I’m supposed to back down to win this tiara. And when I didn’t do that, I think people were shocked. And when I continued to defend the stand I took, people became frustrated. They knew that they were not able to take me down. They knew I was going to stand by what I said and I wasn’t going to take back what I said – that it was just an honest answer. There was nothing controversial about it. And it is mind-boggling to me that we’re still even talking about this seven months later. It’s not even a controversial issue. The President of the United States agrees with me. Sarah Palin agrees with me. The majority of people in the United States and my state agree with me — that marriage is a union between a man and a woman. 

LV:  One of the things that has been personally dismaying to me is that I have had and do have great relationships with gays and lesbians. But instead of being able to sit down and have a civil discussion about the issues, about gay marriage, about domestic partnerships, about civil unions, with people who feel differently than you and I do, that it always goes into attack mode. It always goes into name-calling. So my question is, if you had a chance to sit down to coffee with some of your critics personally and it was you and them at Starbucks just talking about this issue, what would you say? 

CP:  Well, I want everybody to know that this is not a personal attack. It’s not me hating anyone. I don’t hate anyone. It was just that I was asked a question at a pageant and I had to give an honest answer. I had to be true to myself and I had to be true to the way I was raised. So I would just let them know that this is not a hateful thing against anyone. It’s just a personal opinion, and we are all entitled to our personal opinions. And we should have the right to express our personal opinions. Since when are we not able to give our own opinion when we’re asked? 

LV:  So you’re saying, you should be able to give an answer other than “world peace?” 

CP:  Exactly. You should be able to give an honest answer and not be attacked, not be called every name in the book, not be fired, and not have every single one of your boyfriends being called from your past to see if they’ll give up some dirt. 

LV:  Over the past seven months, is there anything that you would do differently if you had a chance to do it again? 

CP:  No, I really don’t have any regrets. I think that I’ve had a great support team. I’ve had people that I’ve surrounded myself with who are positive, people who give me great advice, who stand with me. You know, I’m not alone in this. My detractors would love to hear me say that I feel alone and I feel sad and I feel miserable. But you know what? I don’t. This was such a learning experience for me and I’m glad I learned these lessons at such a young age. But I’m happy now to just move on with my life. I hope that mothers and daughters and conservatives read my book and feel empowered to express their own personal beliefs and opinions… I hope that I was able to be used in a positive way to give other people encouragement. 

LV:  In your book you write about an old sports trick where you – as a basketball player, for example – you visualize sinking the shot. You said that when you were competing in the Miss USA pageant, you visualized the things you would do to win the competition. 

CP:  Yes. 

LV:  What are you visualizing going forward in your life? 

CP: Well, I always have told myself, ‘you draw the line then you live above it.’ Hopefully other young women can learn from [my experience], not only with the stance that I took in standing up for what you believe, but also that if you do have an opinion, don’t be afraid. Don’t be afraid to say it and stand by it. And if people try and attack you, then so be it. Let them, let them attack you. Let them dig up things from your past. And if you’re faced with a controversy like this [tape], then admit to it. The truth will set you free. 

LV:  Now in Stilling Standing, you dish quite a bit on Keith Lewis and Shanna Moakler [both of the Miss California organization.]…You’re pretty tough on them. What will be your response to people who say you used your book to settle scores? 

CP:  The purpose of writing my book was for me to tell my side. I think that was really important. I think the media definitely got a twisted version of what really happened. So it was important for me to set the record straight. As far as Keith Lewis and Shanna Moakler, I wish them well. This was just my chance to tell my side of the story and to clear some things up. 

LV: I want to touch on the issue of your faith since it’s obviously the defining thread that runs through your life. I was interested to read in your book that at the state level, at the Miss California pageant, the judges actually praised you for talking about your faith. And then you move on to Miss USA and you have your handlers, like Moakler, telling you, “Don’t talk about God! Don’t talk about God!” What was that like for you? 

CP:  That was difficult. It was very difficult. I was dealing with people who didn’t think the same way that I did. So from the very beginning it was a challenge, but I learned to deal with it. 

LV:  One of the things that really struck me in your book was when you describe Keith Lewis really putting his hands on you and sort of sizing you up and touching your body all over to see if he thought that you were in good enough visual shape to compete. It sort of reminded me of – I don’t know – someone sizing up livestock that they were going to buy. Was that humiliating for you? 

CP:  Yes. And I think that was when I really realized the business that I was in and the industry that I was in. And it was shocking to me but, you know, I had to deal with it because I had won the [Miss California] pageant and so I just thought, “Okay, this is just what they do.” Looking back, I think this was their way of telling me, “Okay, you’re ours now and we’re going to mold you and shape you to be who we want you to be. And you will listen to us.” 

LV:  I would imagine that it was a moment where you began kind of thinking, “Oh my goodness, what have I gotten myself into?” 

CP:  Right. Exactly. And that’s what I did think. 

LV:  One of the things that I noticed early in the book was where you talked about one of your early mentors counseling you to just be yourself in these pageants, Carrie. Just be yourself. And certainly you did that when Perez Hilton asked you that question. And yet on some other things, earlier in your pageant career, you sort of allowed yourself to be carried away from that early advice. You know, as though the pageant machine was sort of driving you forward. Can you talk a little bit about how you get caught up in that kind of thing and carried along? 

CP:  In my book you’ll see that I was tested twice.  The first time was when they had asked me not to talk about God anymore and [I didn’t]. It made me feel really uncomfortable… I felt this guilt inside of me knowing that I had not stood up when I could have. I could have said, “No, that’s not right,” or “I don’t agree with you.” But instead I just kind of played it off and ignored the situation. So, I definitely learned from that. 

LV:  So in, I think in a very human way, in those particular situations you were…kind of going along to get along. 

CP:  Right. My main focus was winning Miss USA. I mean, that was my main goal. I’ve always been very competitive and I was just kind of going along with this and saying to myself, “I guess this is just what you’re supposed to be doing.” But there comes a point when you have to draw the line and you have to really be who you are and not let anyone else change you. 

LV:  Young girls are going to continue to look up to you as a role model. What’s your best advice for young girls who want to follow in your footsteps and become a strong woman who stands up for what she believes in? 

CP:  That wherever you get your courage from – mine comes from my faith, my family, my supporters – always have the courage not to be intimidated. Don’t ever feel like you have to be silent for standing up for what you believe in. And that’s what’s so great about this book, Still Standing, is that people will see that I am still standing after what anybody can throw at me. They can throw whatever they want at me. They can call up my old boyfriends and ask them if they have dirt on me. They can come up with pictures of me and attack me, attack my family. That’s fine, they can do all of that, but I am still standing. And I think it infuriates some people that I am. But my advice to young women would be to just be you. Just be who you are and stand up for what you believe.

Regnery Announces Plans to Publish De-Throned Miss California Carrie Prejean

WASHINGTON, D.C. -Regnery Publishing announced today it has signed a publishing contract with former Miss California Carrie Prejean. Her new book, Still Standing, will be released in November 2009. 

Prejean attracted national attention when she answered a question at the Miss USA Pageant defending traditional marriage.  The unprecedented personal attacks that ensued eventually culminated in Prejean being stripped of her Miss California crown. But the 22-year-old won the respect of millions for modeling something other than evening gowns and swimsuits – the courage of standing up for her convictions. 

Now she will tell her side of the story, answering such questions as what happened behind the scenes at the pageant, why she answered the Perez Hilton question as she did, what really led to her losing the Miss California crown, and how she has been forced to battle the left’s double-standard on free speech and the bias against conservatives – particularly conservative women – who stand up for their beliefs. 

Prejean is represented by Lee Hough with Alive Communications, Inc.

But that’s nothing compared to the kid glove treatment Hilton gets in the accompanying text.

For the uninitiated, Hilton runs one of the most popular tabloid sites on the Web, and his most recent claim to fame was grossly insulting Miss California, Carrie Prejean, after she dared to oppose gay marriage during the recent Miss USA pageant.

EW’s profile touches on some of Hilton’s more outlandish behavior and notes the disdain he inspires in some PR circles. It also recounts his recent skirmish with the manager of the Black Eyed Peas which left him bruised and beaten (Hilton called group singer will.i.am the “F” word which inspired the altercation).

Hilton claims the Black Eyed Peas incident “matured” him. So a follow-up question on the Prejean matter seems more than appropriate – unless the magazine didn’t think such a mea culpa was even necessary.

The magazine doesn’t bother. Nor does it bother to ask Hilton his thoughts on President Barack Obama’s position on gay marriage (Obama’s against it). Would Hilton, now a gay rights figure to some, call the president the same names he labeled Prejean? Why or why not?

That might make for an illuminating discussion, but EW would rather pump up Hilton, excuse his excesses and use his hateful site as a way to sell magazines.

Fortunately, the liberal seasoning that flavors Hollywood’s narcissistic lunacy has yet to permeate mainstream American society. While the ideologues that control Hollywood (not to mention the media and university classrooms) make it seem as though ultra-leftism trumped conservatism in a battle lost long ago, a surprising new poll shows that the plurality of Americans still see themselves as politically conservative.

According to research from Gallup, when asked how they would classify their political views, 40% of Americans call themselves conservative. This compares to a mere 21% who claim to be politically liberal. An additional 35% – the second largest ideological subset – are self-proclaimed moderates.

In a nation comprised of such a diverse set of ideologies – not to mention the presence of a clear right-minded majority – one wonders why Hollywood banishes projects that promote family values or right-minded ideals, for that matter. This lack of diversity is a symptom of a greater problem: A one-mindedness and intolerance that permeates the industry at every level.

Hollywood types are so removed from the mainstream American sentiment that they refuse to fathom the possibility that opposing ideals exist. Just look at what occurred in the aftermath of this year’s Miss USA Pageant.

The now infamous Carrie Prejean was asked a politically-charged question by none other than gossip blogger and perpetual-big-baby Perez Hilton. When Hilton didn’t like Prejean’s answer (that she does not, indeed, support gay marriage) he went nuclear. Within hours, he released a video rant, calling Prejean a “stupid b*tch” among other sentiments. Then, he took to his blog, insulting her intelligence and continuing to fuel a controversy that did little to help either side of the gay marriage debate.

This is the same Perez Hilton who recently called Black Eyed Peas member Will.i.am a “faggot.” Aside from the hypocrisy present in this infuriating example (imagine what would have happened if some foolish conservative used that language), it can safely be stated that Hilton symbolizes all that is wrong with Hollywood (assuming you consider an obnoxious blogger with fuchsia hair a member of the Hollywood elite).

Somehow, it’s not okay for Carrie Prejean to answer a question with honesty, but it is okay for Hilton to use a word that many people in his own community would find extremely damaging. Of course, this is only one anecdotal example.  But, rest assured: There are plenty more.  Let’s not forget Janeane Garofalo’s opinion of the Tea Party protesters.  Here’s what the gem had to say:

It’s not about bashing Democrats, it’s not about taxes, they have no idea what the Boston tea party was about, they don’t know their history at all. This is about hating a black man in the White House. This is racism straight up. That is nothing but a bunch of tea-bagging rednecks. And there is no way around that.

Someone get Garofalo a newspaper. Stat. Tea Party protesters are railing against unprecedented government spending that will surely endanger America’s future. If she took a moment to put down the granola and adjust her bifocals, maybe she’d understand that being against the president, for most, has nothing to do with his race and everything to do with his idiotic fiscal policy.

And then there’s Cher, who recently said:

…I just don’t understand how anyone would want to be a Republican. I just can’t figure it. I don’t understand.  If you’re poor, if you’re any kind of minority – gay, black, Latino, anything…If you’re not a rich, born-again Christian, I don’t get it.

Last but not least comes Madonna (who just screams “family values”). During the 2008 campaign, she used a photo montage during one of her performances to compare John McCain to Hitler. In Madonna’s world, she’s the hero, while McCain – a man who suffered years of brutal torture for his nation’s sanctity – is the villain. Go figure.

Why can’t people like Hilton, Garofalo, Cher and Madonna simply be good liberals and accept – as their self-professed doctrine would ask them to – that Americans have unique perspectives and life experiences? Surely, they don’t have to agree with we “rednecks,” but shouldn’t they, at the least, have the common decency to respect ideological diversity?

The answer is, yes. The reality is, until they experience what it means to be an everyday, hardworking American, it’ll never happen.