Another Perspective
Carrie On the Tradition
Queen Esther would be proud of Miss Prejean.
The pageantry of politics is often annoying, but lately we have become more exercised over the politics of pageantry. Beneath the gaudy tiara of Miss California USA a great deal of activity has been going on, as Carrie Prejean has shown herself to have a mind of her own. She also is prepared to distribute pieces of her mind in directions lately deemed unfashionable.
In truth, the Bible got the beauty pageant advice correct, along with everything else. The only such event covered in Scripture took place in Persia about 2400 years ago, with a real queenship offered as first prize. Mordechai, the wise Jewish refugee, told his niece, Esther, one thing. “Esther did not tell her nationality and her birthplace, because Mordechai instructed her not to tell.” Esther added a little wrinkle of her own: she was the only girl who did not try to tell the king’s beautician how she should be made up, instead graciously bowing to the expert.
She won the contest, not least because she could not be typecast. The deep-seated cultural prejudices were put aside. So much so, the Talmud relates, that “each nationality saw in her similarities to their appearance.” By not trying to be a particular style, and falling back on her natural beauty, she became a canvas upon which each segment of the international population could project their own subjectivity.
Today’s contestants in these polemics of pulchritude have learned this lesson well. Ask them any question at all upon matters profound or superficial and you will receive in reply a polished gem of saccharinity. The answer will be lovely and vapid, offending no one and defending nothing. They never give a wrong response because they have been trained to get it trite.
The same was true of Carrie Prejean as she made her way to the top by wading in her bathing suit through the shallow end of the gene pool. Yet when she was challenged by an impertinent questioner to opine whether marriage is a concept which can be applied to same-sex couplings, she showed off a very pretty backbone. “My belief is that marriage is only between a man and a woman.” Her refusal to shill for the latest fad of the left has led to her shrill denunciation. She was nearly guillotined by the mob, her crown saved only by the intervention of Donald Trump, the pomp-adoring guy with the pompadour. Trump, for reasons best not explored here, actually runs the Miss USA festivities.
Like Queen Esther before her, Carrie knew to abandon her anonymity when a great principle of civilization was being negotiated. This was no time for a miss to con with geniality. At such a moment, the show may no longer go on, and truth must be acknowledged as the fairest of them all.
Beyond applauding Carrie and her steadfastness, I think an important point should be made. Asking a woman in a beauty contest to testify against the sacrament of marriage between a man and a woman is an intrinsically absurd proposition. If her presence in such an event has any point, it is to highlight the gift of womanhood, to proclaim to men that God has prepared for them a perfect partner. To ask a woman engaged in celebrating her femininity to declare that it is fine if a man chooses to refuse this gift is a negation of what she is trying to communicate.
George Gilder magnificently laid out in these pages some two decades ago the case for marriage between man and woman versus sexual activity outside this structure. He showed that every bit of dignity stripped from marriage in our culture is taken from the stature of our women. The less a man has to commit of himself to gain female companionship, the weaker the foundation of respected womanhood in our society. Women have a stake in marriage, a significant stake: matrimony is their patrimony. The idea of marriage between men, marriage without reproduction, marriage without appreciation for otherness, leaves women undermined.
So Carrie Prejean is right not only in terms of the Biblical logic she cited, she is right in the internal logic of the pageant. Her crown is not there to proclaim her as an object of beauty, a diamond, a peacock, a sunset or a butterfly. (I was horrified on a TWA flight back in 1988 to hear Mel Gibson tell Michele Pfeiffer in Tequila Sunrise she was “the most beautiful thing” he had ever laid eyes on.) It is to proclaim her as a human being, one with a special role that bridges past and future. She and only she can meet the man to summon together a new soul to build the world of tomorrow.
(Dedicated to Jen, Julie and Chris of Continental Airlines who treated my family so royally upon our return from Cleveland to Miami.)
About the Author
Jay D. Homnick, commentator and humorist, is a frequent contributor to The American Spectator. He also writes for Human Events. Here he speaks at the Rally for Religious Freedom in Miami on June 8, 2012.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (115) | Leave a comment
Related Articles
More Articles by Jay D. Homnick
More Articles From Another Perspective
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/05/15/carrie-on-the-tradition
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Ailes: A Voice for the Silent Majority
- Obama’s Drone War
- Inside the Gates of Eden
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
David Mathews | 5.15.09 @ 7:13AM
* "So Carrie Prejean is right not only in terms of the Biblical logic she cited, she is right in the internal logic of the pageant. "
The internal logic of the pageant is the exploitation of women as the toys and property of men ... an idea well respresented in the Old Testament and also by Esher.
Carrie Prejean is such a morally upstanding Christian that she posed for plenty of nude pictures. This is the same type of hypocritcal self-righteous morality as exhibited by Rush Limbaugh, condemning minorities for drug addiction while thoroughly addicted to drugs.
It is also the same sort of hypocritical morality as exhibited by Ted Haggard. He was fully engaged in a homosexual relationship while condemning the same.
Conservatives need to make peace with tolerance because it would greatly improve the lives all those closeted conservatives who repress their own personality simply to avoid the self-righteous hypocritical condemnation of their fellow conservatives.
Miss California| 5.15.09 @ 7:35AM
Put your coffee down before you check out Davey's latest kitty-kat photo (scroll down once ther, it's worth it)
http://media.photobucket.com/image/lion tamer/Jtingley1/191b8a8d.jpg
Miss Utah| 5.15.09 @ 7:46AM
HI DAVEY!
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_orkXxp0bhEA/R1wWCgPnAwI/AAAAAAAADHo/gQUhA47a1Ks/s400/071209-miss-utah-soldiers-magazine.jpg
After the photoshoot , my friends and I campaigned for-and donated to- Prop 8 in California. We even sent a check in your name, you big, bad beached manatee!
David Mathews | 5.15.09 @ 7:48AM
Miss California's got a photograph that would certainly please Rush Limbaugh, Ted Haggard, Larry Craig and the rest of the closeted Republicans.
Conservatives are just as homosexual as everyone esle. Conservatives differ from everyone else, though, in their decision to repress and hate their own self as they are forced into the closet by their self righteous bigoted fellow conservatives.
Rush Limbaugh would never have needed oxycontin if he wasn't forced to stay in the closet.
David Mathews | 5.15.09 @ 7:50AM
Hello Miss Utah,
* "After the photoshoot , my friends and I campaigned for-and donated to- Prop 8 in California. We even sent a check in your name, you big, bad beached manatee! "
Too bad you are on the losing side of this argument, though. Conservatives are like slavery advocates after the Civil War.
You lost. You are now a politically irrelevant extremist minority.
The KKK never recovered that which the South lost, you know ... !
Goddess of the Doorgunner| 5.15.09 @ 7:55AM
Who needs political relevance?
http://obamabidenwatchdog.com/images/missusa.jpg
jerryofva| 5.15.09 @ 8:10AM
Dave Mathews is the perfect archtype for the Progressive male. He is driven by suppressed rage against the harpies who have stripped him of his masculinity. At every opportunity he takes out this rage against a woman targeted by the Fascist extremists who rule progessiveland. Over the last year this hate has been focused on Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin and now Carrie PreJean.
I do have way out of this jealousy and hatred for Mathews. He can style himself a woman and crossdress. If he allows me to assist him I will gladly hook him up with a very nice Dominatrix who will assist him in his transition to womanhood.
Paul D| 5.15.09 @ 8:22AM
Is it too much to ask for that Donald Trump has learned his lesson and won't hire Celebutards to judge the contest next year?
ds80| 5.15.09 @ 8:23AM
Hey Davie Matthews, our good little schoolboy: please dial up your Lexapro - your misogynist heterophobia is showing.
It must be awful living every day with such rage as you have. But that would explain the Lexapro.
Doorgunner| 5.15.09 @ 8:58AM
Aww, it looks like Davey's gone again. And his mommy thinks he's looking at porn every time she catches him beating his dummy at the keyboard.
Mike| 5.15.09 @ 10:18AM
Mr. Homnick's attempt to spruce up the image of Miss California by equating her to Esther was an amusing read.
One sentence in the article captured my attention: "Like Queen Esther before her, Carrie knew to abandon her anonymity when a great principle of civilization was being negotiated." Two observations about this great principle of civilization. First, I have yet to understand how two gays marrying would in any way affect my marriage. Their marriage would have no bearing on my relationship with my wife or on my beliefs about marriage. I hold many beliefs that are not shared by all people. I understand and accept this fact. This is what it means to live in a pluralistic society. If you think living in a pluralistic society is challenging, you might want to give some thought to what it would be like to live under Taliban rule. Second, if gays are allowed to marry, I doubt heterosexuals, the majority in our society, would be inclined to abandon their sexual preference to marry someone of the same gender or, as Rick Santorum suggested, a dog.
There seems to be a tendency to view gay marriage as a zero sum issue. If the gays prevail, heterosexuals necessarily lose. In order not to lose, heterosexuals must marshal to crush the gays. What a childish mindset.
Old Texican| 5.15.09 @ 10:55AM
Ladies,
I suspect Carrie just might have "won more friends and influence" than the actual Pageant national winner.
That is certainly as it should be. Courage and honesty are still respected by most Americans
jerryofva| 5.15.09 @ 10:59AM
I just can't fathom why anybody is really taking this stuff this seriously. It's a beauty queen after all. What is so disturbing is how hateful progressive submissive men have become. Carrie PreJean is a mirror which exposes the intolerant nature of modern progressive thought is.
And Mikey, I offer you the same assistance that I did to Dave Mathews.
Ed| 5.15.09 @ 11:01AM
We all owe a big debt of gratitude to David Mathews, Troll of the Realm. Does he have a real job? Does he live in a squalid artist's garret? Or, like the Phantom of The Opera, does he live in a subterranean Batcave?
The whole web wonders.
Doorgunner| 5.15.09 @ 11:34AM
Gee, Mike, your hitting the buzzwords and obeying the rules, aren't you? Let's parse, shall we?
Please, read the constitution. There's no mention of a "pluralistic society." And there are rights enumerated, but none regarding marriage. Why? My guess is that the founders of my country didn't have a lot of tolerance for moral equivalency, which is the reality of liberal 'pluralism', and they recognized marriage as primarily a religious concern, not an instrument of social engineering or a tax classification.
Indeed, the constitution may be construed as a quantification of universal values; it is more a refutation, than endorsement, of "pluralism". You confuse pluralism with tolerance; I suspect because it sounds 'erudite'. Read Isaiah Berlin on pluralism and negative and positive freedoms afforded by societies. You'll sound a little bit less like you're making it up as you go along.
As to marriage, personally I don't think there should be any government involvement at all. Civil, domestic partnerships as part of a tax code and statuatorily regulated benefits distribution- fine. Let's leave marriage out of it; the constitution does. Chuck and Larry can go get "married" in The Church of Horny Splendor for all I care.
Now, what is "zero sum" here is the equation by which Alinskyites construct their arguments. Either the opponent submits or he is the enemy... to be ridiculed, isolated, marginilized and ultimately eliminated. Well, Sparky, good luck with that. Some of like being pushed- you'll know us by our smile.
drt| 5.15.09 @ 12:05PM
It's not the Daves who scare me--they're just gnats you can swat away with an indifferent flick of the hand. It's the "useful idiot" Mikes of the world who are the real problem. They think they know the truth, and they fool many with their smooth talk and specious arguments. But wittingly or not, they serve the interests of those whose aim is to destroy the biblical foundations of this country.
Tom Paine| 5.15.09 @ 12:22PM
Folks,
Ms. Prejean was a contestant in a beauty pageant.
Social conservatives at least should see her as yet another symptom of our crass popular culture. Why you would embrace her as some kind of symbol of righteousness is baffling to me.
Now, I hold no ill feelings towards this young woman. I hope at some point an adult explains to her how much more she could get out of life doing and making things and thinking less about her looks.
In between breast implants and facial surgery, she seems to have embraced a moral opinion shared by the majority of Americans. Why does that make her special?
She seems like a female Joe the Plumber -- i.e., just another empty symbol.
gary| 5.15.09 @ 12:47PM
Gotta agree with Tom Paine on this one. I was on Miss Prejean's side at the beginning of this controversy for expressing her views, but the way conservatives are treating her is absurd. Also, gotta agree w/Dave M- many of you do sound like slavery advocates after the Civil War. Because you don't just "defend marriage" you also feel it necessary to denigrate gay Americans.
jerryofva| 5.15.09 @ 12:48PM
Oh no, a snarky Tom Paine has weighed in with "the Truth" undoubtedly discovered through the use of the dialectic.
Tom, it wasn't the social conservatives who turned Carrie PreJean into a cause celebre. It was you Progressive Fascists who did over a position on marriage that she shares with the President of the United States. (And yes, my fellow conservatives, President Obama really does hold those anti-gay marriage views, as do many in the African American community. )
Progressive men need a liberation movement so they can free themselves from the domination of the hairy-legged set and thereby shed their hate for women.
gary| 5.15.09 @ 12:50PM
Gotta agree with Tom Paine on this one. I was on Miss Prejean's side at the beginning of this controversy for speaking her mind, but the way social conservatives are treating her is absurd and kind of appalling. Also gotta agree with Dave M- many of you do often sound like slavery advocates after the Civil War. You don't just defend marriage, you also find it necessary to denigrate gay Americans.
gary| 5.15.09 @ 12:58PM
Gotta agree with Tom Paine on this one. I was on Miss Prejean's side at the beginning of this controversy for speaking her mind, but the way social conservatives are treating her is absurd and kind of appalling. Also gotta agree with Dave M- many of you do often sound like slavery advocates after the Civil War. You don't just defend marriage, you also find it necessary to denigrate gay Americans.
gary| 5.15.09 @ 12:58PM
Gotta agree with Tom Paine on this one. I was on Miss Prejean's side at the beginning of this controversy for speaking her mind, but the way social conservatives are treating her is absurd and kind of appalling. Also gotta agree with Dave M- many of you do often sound like slavery advocates after the Civil War. You don't just defend marriage, you also find it necessary to denigrate gay Americans.
Rob| 5.15.09 @ 1:02PM
To Mike (and those who arrogantly assume that because they think gay marriage will not affect them, therefore it will not affect our society),
You may not be the "marginal case". There are sufficient lessons from history that can teach us about the effect of unintended consequences. The following article explains them as well as any I have come across.
http://www.janegalt.net/blog/archives/005244.html
Doorgunner| 5.15.09 @ 1:13PM
THANKS, TOM PAINE!
Mr. Obama was a contestant in a beauty pageant.
The Liberal Left at least should see him as yet another symptom of our crass popular culture. Why you would embrace him as some kind of symbol of righteousness is baffling to me.
Now, I hold no ill feelings towards this naive man. I hope at some point an adult explains to him how much more he could get out of life doing and making things and thinking less about his posturing.
In between broken promises and outright subterfuge, he at least seems to have embraced a moral opinion shared by the majority of Americans. Does that make him special?
He seems like a Joe the Plumber for Marxists-- i.e., just another empty symbol.
PolishKnight| 5.15.09 @ 1:24PM
There is one thing to be said for Rush Limbaugh's light hypocrisy, David: It was private and in the closet, so to speak. On the other hand, you parade around your hypocrisy as a badge of honor including your hypocrisy about hypocrisy. You bash racism as the worst thing (besides hypocrisy) and express this distaste by bashing white males because of their race. You claim to care about the working man, but you toss him under the bus for illegal immigrants for partisan political reasons. The list goes on and on.
Rush's hypocrisy was, at worst, that he condemned drug users for their socially destructive lifestyle when he had a personal problem. Rush never said he was perfect, but you like to think you are by only looking at the shortcomings of your opponents. Look in the mirror sometime.
Tom Paine| 5.15.09 @ 2:24PM
jerryofva --
I assure you I have no hairy women in my life, and do not crave liberation from women in general. Such a desire I know would be futile.
How you see mild criticism of this absurd celebrity as an example of fascism is a mystery to me, but it does do us the service of showing in general how little you understand the word "fascism," which you constantly throw around.
Old Texican| 5.15.09 @ 2:45PM
Rush has a really bad back. So do I. the 24/7 pain truly does just grind you down.
A lot of people with chronic screaming pain trip up and wake up one morning addicted.
The remarkable thing is that he never faltered with his day to day shows.
Purely brilliant work day after day.
Hypocrit? .....nah just human.
jim rice| 5.15.09 @ 2:53PM
@doorgunner re:
"As to marriage, personally I don't think there should be any government involvement at all. Civil, domestic partnerships as part of a tax code and statuatorily regulated benefits distribution- fine. Let's leave marriage out of it; the constitution does. Chuck and Larry can go get "married" in The Church of Horny Splendor for all I care."
Excellent.
Glad someone could get away from thinking of different ways to call David Matthews "gay" and believing it was funny.
This whole thing with Prejean and Hilton is just stupid. Both of them are irrelevant morons and it's sad that wee're giving them the attention they're craving for doing nothing. Prejean likes "opposite marriage." So what? She's an idiot who can't speak, but she has a right to her opinion. Besides she also said that it's great that "Americans can choose."
Hilton? He's just a complete waste of space.
The whole Biblical parallel the author attempted to draw is also just sad. We're supposed to believe that it's ok to betray yourself in order to get what you want? Thanks, Bible! This was an inane letter.
Doorgunner| 5.15.09 @ 2:58PM
Tom, you silly little man. One more time, mouth the words if you need to:
"It was us, the superior left, that turned this right-wing breeder into a celebrity. Who would thought a simple little plan to mock those ignorant rednecks could've gone so wrong!"
Geez, you'd think a little girl from Kansas through a bucket of water on you yammerin' twats.
Doorgunner| 5.15.09 @ 2:59PM
threw.
Dang it, I was laughin' at my own stuff again.
jerryofva| 5.15.09 @ 3:00PM
Tom Paine:
You are so predictable. You fell for the bait which makes you dummer then Dave Mathews. You should have concentrated on my point that it is people like you who turned a molehill into a mountain over Carrie PreJean.
The entire controversy is just a misuse of Alinsky-ism on trivial matter. Besides Rules for Radicals is really a handbook of bullying and all it takes to take down a bully is ressistance. She fought back and you lost.
And Tom, you just don't want to get back into the Fascist argument. You couldn't come up with a defintion that was independent of the Stalinist version. Fascism is merely Socialism under local conditions. Mussolini's argument with Lenin boiled down to whether socialism was national or international. Hu Jintao has settled that argument in Mussolini's favor.
Progressivism, Socialism, Communism or whatever you want to call it today is merely a subspecies of Fascism.
Tom Paine| 5.15.09 @ 3:11PM
jerryofva --
You're right to say I "don't want to get back into the Fascist argument," but it's not because I'm a Stalinist, and it's not because I somehow fear your debating abilities. Your posts are incoherent, vague gibberish. It is not very interesting to argue with incoherent, vague gibberish.
As to your assumptions about "people like" me, all I can say is that you know nothing about me.
I have observed the same trick being used with the Prejean affair as was used with Sarah Palin: basically both rush to the cameras to weep and complain about "vicious attacks" when few are made, and everyone is supposed to accept whatever they say, no matter how foolish or simple, as gospel simply because they are allegedly the victims of media "attacks." It's clever, but in the end not very interesting or significant.
Doorgunner --
Your posts make even less sense than jerry's. I don't know what to tell you. I hope your aim is better when you're at your post than they are in your posts.
jerryofva| 5.15.09 @ 3:28PM
Tom Paine:
I know everything about you at least as an archtype. I have encounter you in many guises over the past 40 years or so. You are all the same. Humorless and unable to argue anything outside of indoctrinated talking points. When faced with ressitance you first attempt to denigrate your opponent and when that fails you resort to bluster and then finally run away like a little girl.
Now to the topic at hand. Perez Hilton levied a vicious personal attack on Carrie PreJean that was taken up by the usual suspect in the MSM and echoed and magnified by so-called Progressives like you. Now that she has won the publicity battle you decide it was a trivial matter. Why you even came here to comment on such a trivial matter is beyond my understanding. You must have been ignored by the girls and picked on by the boys when you were in grade school.
Tom Paine| 5.15.09 @ 3:35PM
jerryofva --
You're assumptions are inaccurate, your reasoning is discombobulated, your suspicions are foolish, your rhetorical flourishes are lame, your diction is impoverished, your accusations are empty, your facts are cherry-picked, your argument is against a straw man, your thinking is disorganized and weak, and your larger point isn't worth making.
jim rice| 5.15.09 @ 3:37PM
what battle did she win? She's still just an idiot with nice tits and an opinion that no one in their right mind cares about.
Doorgunner| 5.15.09 @ 3:40PM
Tom,
Look at you, flailing away in a conservative echo chamber (yes, we know it). Does this somehow make you a hero in the mirror? Do you think you're some kind of warrior for the cause; that your somehow scattering opposition forces? Dance, little man, dance. We'll keep throwing you crumbs; it's the compassionate consevative thing to do.
Really, do you even have someone to repeat your little bon mots to? I'm sure you have some wonderful little fantasy life. Please, regale us.
Doorgunner| 5.15.09 @ 3:43PM
Woops.
Hold that thought, Tommy and Jimmy.
Gotta go spend your tax dollars on some stimulus.
Thanks.
jerryofva| 5.15.09 @ 3:59PM
Jim Rice:
When Donald Trump comes out and tells everybody that Ms. PreJean's views are the same as the President's and gives his full support to her then she has won.
Tom seems to have gotten offare
jerryofva| 5.15.09 @ 4:00PM
...off his meds.
jim rice| 5.15.09 @ 4:04PM
Won what?
So she has an opinion like everyone else, so what?
She's still inarticulate and came off sounding like a moron.
She still has naked photos of herself running around the internet.
She's just another bimbo that has gotten WAY too much attention for doing absolutely nothing. If she had been able to formulate a reasonable sentence and actually answer the question, it wouldn't have been so easy to pick up on this and make fun of her. The idea she was trying to get across was fine... admirable even. "Americans can choose." Her inability to use words made her come off looking stupid, and making fun of stupid people is fun... as everyone on this site seems to think.
I'm going to google "carrie prejean tit" now so I can look at it and not have to hear her speak.
jerryofva| 5.15.09 @ 4:30PM
Jim Rice:
She won by exposing people like you, Tom Paine and Perez Hilton as small minded, mean spirited people who cannot bare the thought of someone having a different set of ideas. Just think, if Perez Hilton had kept his mouth shut nobody would have heard of her. Hateful people like you turned her into a celebrity.
Daisy| 5.15.09 @ 4:48PM
It's sickening to read the liberal nutjob posts on this thread. These weak, whiny men are threatened by a beautiful blond 22 year old woman who just voiced her opinion. I don't like to use the P word--but lib-loser boys--it certainly applies to you.
MT| 5.15.09 @ 4:51PM
Jim Rice, TP/Jeremiah, Dave Mathews, Mike and Gary have acorns for balls. Fascist liberal community organizers all.
Sheila| 5.15.09 @ 5:01PM
The best thing about Carrie Prejean is that she's going to marry a (lucky) REAL MAN and together they will have strong, healthy sons to help lead our country. We already have too many weak estrogen soaked liberal shemales here--we need more real men! Go Carrie!!
Michael L. Hauschild| 5.15.09 @ 5:10PM
Well, you know what Ron White says, "If you have seen one breast you want to see them all. (Except Dave's of course.)
Tom Paine| 5.15.09 @ 5:29PM
jerryofva --
"I know everything about you at least as an archetype."
Surely even you must see how stupid a thing to say this is.
Tom Paine| 5.15.09 @ 5:31PM
What is the difference between Prejean and Paris Hilton?
I still don't get it. So Prejean gave a press conference. So what?
I'll grant you this: she's on the same level intellectually as Sarah Palin, who I understand is running to her defense.
But I still don't get why any of this is interesting or important to you people.
Tom Paine| 5.15.09 @ 5:36PM
Daisy --
What makes you think that someone who disagrees with this woman is "threatened" by her?
At what point do you decide you have to explain what you mean when you make these accusations?
I personally don't care what she thinks about anyting, and no, I won't be voting for her for vice president anytime soon. But that doesn't mean I'm "threatened" by her.
Get a grip.
jerryofva| 5.15.09 @ 5:47PM
It doesn't sound stupid at all because with every one of your posts you confirms to everybody here how archtypically "Progressive" you are.
and oh your os so snarky reference to Sarah Palin show everybody how infantile you are. Anybody with half a brain can see that Sarah Palin is better qualified to be President then Obama is. The only skill that he has shown is that of Michael Corleone.
Tom Paine| 5.15.09 @ 5:52PM
Obama is Hitler, Stalin, Heidegger, Mussolini, George Sorel, and now ... Michael Corleone?
Wow, jerry. You've got a mind like a steel trap. Nothing gets past you, does it? Penetrating historical analysis.
Daisy| 5.15.09 @ 6:01PM
TP/Jeremiah--bet your 'grip' is weak, too, just like Perez Hilton's. Truth hurts, limp (and I mean limp!) wristed weenie. lol
Violette| 5.15.09 @ 6:06PM
Mr. Hauschild, perhaps you would like to feast your hungry eyes on the beauteous breast-mounds of TP/Jeremiah. That little liberal looker sports quite a rack I've heard.
Michael L. Hauschild| 5.15.09 @ 6:35PM
Violette and Daisy,
I am afraid I must pass. That is a road too well traveled, even though TP/Jeremiah will claim to have been violated only twice. (The first was the NFL, the second being the Chinese army.)
jim rice| 5.15.09 @ 6:55PM
@jerry: How can I be more clear? I don't give a shit what she thinks. Sure, it's nice that she believes that there should be a choice, that's not the point.
She's an idiot. There was a direct question, and she couldn't answer it. And the answer she did give came off as unsure and moronic.
And she lied to the pageant committee.
And yeah, maybe if Hilton had just kept his trap shut we wouldn't be having yet another moron in the national spotlight. But everyone already knows that guy is worthless.
They both suck and aren't worth the addition of anyone who doesn't have a dick in their hand. And it has nothing to do with the fact that her family likes, "opposite marriage."
Tom Paine| 5.15.09 @ 7:03PM
Michael L. Hauschild --
I think we all know what it means when a man engages is locker-room humor intended to show how macho his is. As to your fantasies about homosexual gang-rape, all I can say is you've got problems, sir. I'm sure Ted Haggard made the same kind of jokes to his closeted born again friends.
Nick| 5.15.09 @ 7:18PM
Jerryofva,
"Hairy-legged set"!!
Classic!
Do you mind if I use it?
Violette| 5.15.09 @ 10:14PM
Hauschild, you are funny!! Made me laugh out loud. Sorry I got you in trouble with that little sweet thing, boytoy TP/Jeremiah.
Tom Paine| 5.15.09 @ 11:04PM
Yeah ... Another brilliant thread of thought-provoking debate and exuberant exchanges of ideas.
Thanks all of you for giving me so much to think about.
Let's see ... there were the fag jokes, and ..... some more fag jokes ... and some jokes about unshaved women .... and then some more fag jokes. And then someone called me a Nazi, naturally.
What an intellectual powerhouse!
Tom Paine| 5.15.09 @ 11:07PM
It's like a MENSA meeting for people whose mothers drank Southern Comfort continually while pregnant with them. Have any of you ever thought of becoming college professors? Because you have so much to offer in the way of critical thinking and new ideas.
Baby Doll| 5.15.09 @ 11:49PM
I'd gladly take my Southern Comfort drinking mom over the coke whore who whelped you. Buzz off wussy.
Tom Paine| 5.16.09 @ 2:33AM
Baby Doll --
You are a stupid little cunt, aren't you?
Big J| 5.16.09 @ 11:48AM
Wow, looks like I missed one heck-of-a back 'n forth!
Rob, excellent link. The writer was spot on.
Tom Paine, as usual your points are useless to anyone who has an ounce of sense. I'll give you credit where credit is due however: you stay on your imaginary liberal go-round, not quite able to grasp the brass ring.
I don't mind reading your liberal nonsense, but when you knowingly offend a member of our armed services, you go over the top. You are a cackling idiot. Why not go over the the Kos or Huffpo with the blithering Dave Mathews? You would be much more welcome, and I am sure the rest of us would be eternally grateful. Jim Rice and others notwithstanding.
Be gone, fool.
T Paine's Mom Is A Crack Whore| 5.16.09 @ 4:29PM
Wow, what's up with foulmouth TP/Jeremiah? Truth hurts, huh P**** boy? Guess your mommy really is a crackwhore--explains your retardation.
Tom Paine| 5.16.09 @ 4:51PM
At times Am. Spec. attracts interesting posts and has pretty good articles.
Overall, however, it is a gathering place on the web for completely ignorant assholes.
Many of you are willing to demand decency and civility of people who criticize you. Not one of you demands the same of those who share your political views.
When that ape Vadum writes pieces condemning Democrats as "fascists" (for which he deserves to be beaten), or Hillyer does the same, none of you have the decency to offer the slightest question if such rhetoric is appropriate.
When posters write unambiguously racist or otherwise hateful posts -- usually about Obama or his wife -- none of you has integrity to criticize them.
Some of you seem like nice folks; one or two of you actually knows something about politics and history; but honestly, none of you strike me as courageous, at least in terms of how you behave here.
Dave Mathews| 5.16.09 @ 5:28PM
Go to hell, liberal bitch, TP/Jeremiah. No one has invited you to post here--and no one likes you. Go back to your democrat whores, you arrogant ass.
Alte Chaver| 5.16.09 @ 6:08PM
Yankel,
Who ya fooling. A TWA flight back in 88?. Trying to infer that otherwise CH"V you would never have seen a movie?. And who made you put on the headphones? Un fun vant bist du azoy familiar with the beauty pageant? I think its time you looked in the mirror and got to know JDH as well as you know eveyhting else you write about
Mary| 5.16.09 @ 7:52PM
Jeremiah,
We've been through this.
You called a whole threadful of people racists and facists long before you ever started posting as TP. You intimated that I was too stupid or too venal to know I was a Nazi. And I spoke my peace and really don't hold it against you. I really don't. I like to read some of your stuff. Only reason I'm bringing it up is to remind you; you're in no position to judge anyone.
Remember that; and if you think this place is overall a pack of losers, what does that say about you that you're here so much of the time?
Vadum is not an ape, anymore than you are. And that goes double for Mr. Hillyer.
Why can you dish it out but not take it?
You were treated poorly on this thread, but you're calling people cunts and you recently called an author a cunt for no reason. It was your thread entry. When has Vadum or Hillyer ever sunk that low? When?
You don't even really argue much anymore. You think it's enough to tell Mr. Hillyer he understands nothing about history. Who do you think you are? He's probably a lot better educated than you are. He writes, he's helped run campaigns. You read his his entries and bloviate in a combox like the rest of us.
You probably don't even contribute any money to Amspec. Some of us do. And if I'm right on this score you're just coming in and taking on dump on a neighbor's rug.
One thing I'll give you; during the Bush years anyone who disagreed with the WOT was branded a traitor. And that's nonsense. If that's the source of your angst try to get over it because neither side is immune to demonization of the other side.
If your type of drop by is replicated and multiplied civil war is coming.
If you think yourself so much smarter than so many here go find your peace with people you size up as higher caliber and leave us to our own company.
Obama Drules| 5.16.09 @ 8:41PM
Jeremiah is a liberal; that's why he's eternally pissed off. That's just how those fools roll. Tedious liberals are so predictable, they never disappoint.
Michael| 5.16.09 @ 10:03PM
Heterosexual only marriage is an ancient venerated institution with the power of every world religion behind it. Let us not allow it to pass away like other great institutions humanity once depended on for advancement that are now extinct but were also backed by every major religion. Slavery. (supported by Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox -Jewish and Christian - Islam, Hinduism, Taoism...) Pogroms against members of minority religions (supported by above list). And here in the USA... segregated schools and toilets (suported by our most populous denomination (if you count just the 'true' WHITE Americans of course) the illustrious The Southern Baptists.
Don't misunderstand me please. I believe in Jesus Christ as God Almighty. He is the savior of all mankind and the image of the invisible God. It just seems to me that his more just world advances in spite of his church not because of it. Yes I know that there were Christian groups opposing all of these things, but they did so in opposition to the dominate "Christian" institutions and were severly persecuted by the mainstream (read "90% of Americans agree...") church. Thank God for groups like the Quakers and Anabaptists. One day Soulforce will be counted among the number of courageous Christians who dared to say that the majority of Christians were serving tradition not Christ.
BTW The way Prejean was treated was terrible. No argument. David Duke was shown more respect when he ran for governor of LA. Not every person who thinks that this is an issue of social justice thinks its okay to treat the opposition so shabily; so lets avoid that straw man and stick to the issue shall we.
Wise One| 5.16.09 @ 10:33PM
Christians abolished slavery, not atheists. Christians are trying to abolish abortion, too--not atheists. Sorry, dude--Christ would NEVER support anal sex, regardless of your desires.
Bob| 5.16.09 @ 10:39PM
You don't care about marriage, you care about acceptance by society at large; and you are willing to use government coercion to get your way. The militant gays among you are itching for a fight; be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.
Sappho| 5.16.09 @ 11:53PM
"Asking a woman in a beauty contest to testify against the sacrament of marriage between a man and a woman is an intrinsically absurd proposition. If her presence in such an event has any point, it is to highlight the gift of womanhood, to proclaim to men that God has prepared for them a perfect partner. "
Or to women???
Breathe through your nose, you can do it!
Any point| 5.16.09 @ 11:55PM
Yeah, and dude, you'll never get a piece of that, even if you think god tells you its ok.
American Hero| 5.16.09 @ 11:59PM
"Sorry, dude--Christ would NEVER support anal sex, regardless of your desires. "
He told me it was good. Don't lie to the people.
JHarp| 5.17.09 @ 12:28AM
Hero's mom thought she'd dropped a huge turd in the toilet, but it was actually him. No wonder the sh!thead likes it up the @ss.
Stinkers| 5.17.09 @ 12:30AM
Hey, homos; your @sshole is an EXIT, not an ENTRANCE!!
Michael| 5.17.09 @ 3:31AM
I just want to repost this to illustrate the power of an effective argument with no hatred or animosity present in the original post.
Stinkers| 5.17.09 @ 12:30AM
Hey, homos; your @sshole is an EXIT, not an ENTRANCE!!
Michael| 5.17.09 @ 3:35AM
Wise One, please actually read my post -- ALL THE WAY THROUGH! I acknowledged that Christians abolished slavery. I am a Christian. I know that a 3 paragraph essay is a lot to ask, but please try.
Michael| 5.17.09 @ 3:38AM
JHarp,
I'm not shure who you are responding to, but can we please lose the toilet insults? Whatever side you are on it certainly doesn't help your cause.
Michael| 5.17.09 @ 3:39AM
TYPO
I do know how to spell "SURE". I was a bit careless. I appolojazz :)
Michael| 5.17.09 @ 3:53AM
Wise One,
I forgot to respond to the anal sex presumption.
Four points
1. You have no idea whether I am even homosexual
2. Straight people engage in anal sex too
3. Many gay people do not engage in anal sex because they find it abhorrent and self violating
4. Thomas Aquinas and most of the other ancient church fathers thought the passage in Romans was referring to women who accepted anal sex from men. They did not think it was a condemnation of two women loving each other.
Please try to read the Bible as though it were written to Christians living in the ancient (and thankfully extinct) Roman empire instead of ignoring history and thinking it was written yesterday in yesterdays context.
And for a little extra intellectual fun I will go on the record: I personally think anal sex is an abhorrent act. I do my best to dissuade my straight and gay friends from engaging in it. I believe it violates the commandment of love your neighbor. Same sex attraction does not violate this commandment; it just makes your stomach turn.
Nick| 5.17.09 @ 6:11AM
Michael,
I have two requests.
Refering to point four, could you cite the books, chapters, and paragraphs/verses of Saint Thomas and the other Church Fathers that back up your absurd assertion. Or do you know their thoughts through intuition?
Also cite the Roman Catholic Church documents that SUPPORTED slavery.
Michael L. Hauschild| 5.17.09 @ 6:58AM
Michael,
I am a little curious about this evangelical approach to dissuade consenting adults from “boarding the caboose.” How does a person respond to the inquiry, “Do you engage in anal sex?” Do most of the respondents simply reply, “No thanks” or do a large percentage of them simply summon law enforcement personnel? Does part of your Crusade entail enforcement, some sort of Voyager Wing with ladders to peep in bedroom windows or installing hidden cameras? When you do get someone to respond in the affirmative do you try to get them to go “cold turkey” or do the perverts simply think you are simply suggesting an enhancement, nechrophilic bestiality?
Who knows, maybe this Butt Police thing could catch on, call your congressman (I suggest Barney) and get a bill passed so this could be taught in the schools. You could call it “No Child’s Behind,” you know, with rallies and contract pledges.
Keep me posted.
Murphy| 5.17.09 @ 1:45PM
Well. I've found it.
This is the stupidest thread I've ever read on the internet, and that's saying something.
Most of you need some kind of therapy.
Michael Hauschild --
You are an idiot.
I can only assume some people are deliberately posting scurrilous or completely stupid stuff in an attempt to make conservatives look bad.
The alternative explanations would be unfortunate if true.
MT| 5.17.09 @ 1:56PM
HA ha ha. You liberals get your panties in a pinch when the TRUTH is spoken. No hostility or hatred in a truthful assertion--anatomy is anatomy.
Michael| 5.17.09 @ 1:56PM
Nick,
Give me some time to do the research. I have read it, but its been a while. It is in there. Aquinas is interpreting the passage and lesbianism never comes up. Anal sex does. As for slavery don't you Catholics consider Paul a Catholic. He gave instructions for how it was to be practiced. I'd call that a ringing endorsement.
Mr. Hauschild,
What a vivid imagination you have. Actually I have a lot of friends that talk quite openly about their sex lives (sometimes a bit too openly for my taste) and when they do I admonish away from ANY activity I think God would disaprove of
Daisy| 5.17.09 @ 2:05PM
Anal sex is an abomination regardless of the gender of the participants. It's just wrong, and way nasty. Hauschild--you're hilarious. 'Boarding the caboose', just damn! Even though Murphy is ashamed to admit it, I know he/she's laughing inside. C'mon, squirrely liberal, admit it--the truth will set you free.
Murphy| 5.17.09 @ 2:45PM
Daisy, I'm sorry to disappoint you. I think only a really stupid person with no intellectual life and no sense of decency could find any of the posts above amusing. You people sound deranged to me. For all your sanctimonious moralizing about homosexuality, you clearly don't have a very good character. Perhaps you should examine your own shortcomings a little.
Michael L. Hauschild| 5.17.09 @ 3:20PM
Daisy,
It just occurred to me in order to maintain the “Proof of Purity” for Michael’s Butt Police (and for assurance that no “backsliding” has occurred among his converts) we need to establish an NDR (National Dingleberry Repository). Since funding is short and typically the applicants are all tightasses (how is that for an oxymoron) his basement will be used as a storage facility until TARP funding is secured. Applicants please send Michael your Dingleberries to insure no duality of DNA exists in your sample. For those of you unfamiliar with the sample collection process please request an MRTK (Mike’s Rim Trim Kit).
One last thing, now that Mike has a “Sphincter Squad” in place we need to seriously consider an appropriate punishment to assure “rectal remorse.” Interment in the Br’er Rabbit Penitentiary has proven counter productive, and since the “hotbed” of this activity seems to center in Nancy Pelosi’s district, the obvious alternative to imprisonment is waterboarding. Simply upgrade a page from Nathaniel Hawthorn’s work and instead of the Scarlet Letter, “enhance” these buggers and then brand them with the “Lavender Two Letters” (SS, sodden sodemites).
The Word| 5.17.09 @ 3:24PM
Hauschild --
You're a fucking idiot.
Daisy| 5.17.09 @ 6:57PM
Word, you may be correct that we are idiots on this thread--but we are damn funny idiots!! Loosen up, tight-ass--it's good for you to laugh at yourself. You liberals are such a bore because you have no sense of humor. Yawn.
Daisy| 5.17.09 @ 7:02PM
Mr. Hauschild, as a rule, I'm not particularly fond of backside humor (it's so unsexy), but I must say your last post was a tour de force.
Nick| 5.17.09 @ 7:02PM
Michael,
Saint Paul gives instructions on how someone, if one happens to be a slave, should act as a Christian. How is that an endorsement?
Everyone is called to convert and repent. Criminals in prison can be devout disciples of Christ, that is not however an endorsement of going to prison.
Nick| 5.17.09 @ 7:03PM
Michael,
Saint Paul gives instructions on how someone, if one happens to be a slave, should act as a Christian. How is that an endorsement?
Everyone is called to convert and repent. Criminals in prison can be devout disciples of Christ, that is not however an endorsement of going to prison.
Nick| 5.17.09 @ 8:41PM
Michael,
I left out that Saint Paul also gives instructions on how masters are to treat their slaves in a Christain way. Some consider this an endorsement. The Roman Catholic Church does not.
The Gospel of Jesus Christ is for everyone, no matter what state of life one finds themselves. From the Emperor of Rome down to the lowliest of slaves, even the vilest criminal is called to follow Christ.
Saint Paul's concern is to convert hearts, through the Holy Spirit, to Jesus Christ. Slavery was legal and there were different forms. There were slaves caught in war and there were those that sold themselves or their children into slavery. As long as you didn't exploit your slave and treated him with love and charity, you were not violating Christ's teachings. This is not an endorsement of the institution. This is living in the world, not of the world.
In Saint Paul's letter to Philemon, he has the slave Onesimus return to his master, as the law requires. But he posits to Philemon, "15) Perhaps this is why he was parted from you for a while,that you might have him back for ever, 16) no longer as a slave but more than a slave, as a beloved brother..."
Saint Paul wants him to treat his slave as a BROTHER! This was radical in the extreme at the time. He also doesn't want Philemon to punish Onesimus, even though it is his legal right.
You should follow your own advice about reading the Scriptures in the context of the times, Michael.
Michael L. Hauschild| 5.18.09 @ 6:00AM
“Carrie Prejean Blog”
Profane Comments: $0.00
Thomas Aquinas debate
about girl on girl action: $0.02
Mel Brooks (my hero) humor: $5.00
Amusing Daisy: Priceless
wbheff| 5.18.09 @ 12:43PM
I don't understand why so many politicians are pandering to the perverts when it comes to the oxymoron, "same-sex marriage." Homosexuals are a minuscule proportion of the population, they are not some significant voting block to which politicians must kowtow to win office. Homosexual behaviour is evil, always has been and always will be. Marriage is the union of a man and a woman, despite some perversions of it by some people. The fact that one of the Roman Emperors "married" his horse doesn't change what marriage is, nor do the fact that some have promoted polygamy.
Marriage and the family are the bedrock of our free, civilised and decent society. The homosexual fanatics who would destroy that are few in number, yet way too many politicians are, as I said earlier, pandering to them, and I cannot understand why. I am not a conspiracy theorist, yet there must be some reason behind this that is not apparent. There is no "civil rights" issue here, again, irrespective of what this highly vocal minuscule minority would have us believe. So, for the third time, why the proposed preferential treatment for perverts?
jim rice| 5.18.09 @ 4:22PM
b/c marriage is a bs religious construct. If you Christians want it, then take it, and never ever let the government sanction it again. It's just a word. A ridiculously stupid word. Everyone deserves the legal rights and protections afforded by this thing called "marriage."
Pingback| 5.18.09 @ 5:31PM
Steynian 356 « Free Canuckistan! links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Smitty| 5.18.09 @ 5:51PM
Jim Rice--please off yourself, you worthless dirtbag. Your posts are depressing. If marriage is just a 'word', then why do you say everyone deserves the legal rights and protections it affords ? What an idiot you are.
Daisy| 5.18.09 @ 5:54PM
Awwww, Mr. Hauschild--that's so nice, thank you. Thanks again for the laughs, too. I still crack up when I re-read them. Daisy ;)
Pingback| 5.19.09 @ 11:27AM
Steynian 356 | acorn 8 links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Captain| 8.16.09 @ 11:58AM
I can think of nothing more depressing than the "gays" who indulge in this disgusting perversion.Shitstabbing describes their activity adequately,or is this another example of "zero sum" argumentation?