this whole farce has resulted in the best publicity that competition ever could've wished for.

and how many times d'ya reckon these ladies fluffed their lines? they were probably filming solidly for the past week.

hehehe, i admit i haven't followed this 'controversy' very much...

but when i saw the tags and descriptions, i just had to see if my immediate suspicion was true

it was... brook lee (miss hawaii > miss usa > miss universe) appears in the psa

the background of that suspicion is that i went to school with brook and once caught her making out... with the butch catcher for the girls' softball team

yeah, big deal - so what... but my inkling that she'd be in this video spot was, well, spot on

I believe I can fly
I believe I can touch the sky
I believe it every night and day
Even while having sex with a gay

I stay close to the ground
I keep hiding my angry frown
I keep making this high pitched sound
Every time I do a reach around

I believe I can fly
(... ad nauseum)

I'm not really all that big on the whole "belief" thing, but oh well, they can have their fun.

M'eh - this is all a manufactured issue. Total baloney. What amuses me is the anger, the fury, the frothing at the mouth, the total loss of all common sense, decency, and civility on the GAY side of the debate. Prejean didn't say anything that a bazillion other people (including Barak Obama) have said. But because she said it they have a coniption fit.

Methinks the man-ladies doth protest too much. If the mere voicing of a simple statement of belief threatens them so much, then they must be REALLY insecure about themselves.

She broke the rules. She is actively participating in divisive political promotions.

This fuss would still happen even if the Miss California (et al) pageant wasn't popular, but since it is popular it gets a little more attention from outsiders like us.

It has very little to do with the "gay marriage" issue, though that aspect is also fueling outside interest.

*commercial

Adding video to channels (Commercial) - requested by looris.

Broke the rules by answering the question posed to her? :eyeroll: Whatever...

I personally think the whole thing is a publicity stunt. Trump is a sleaze who trolls for publicity. Notice every year the MAP now has some sort of 'crisis' that puts it in the news? Last year it was the drunk chick. This year its the gay marriage thing. Coincidence? Haw haw. Trumps probably does all this on purpose to pull in attention to a contest that hardly anyone bothers watching any more.

There is no way in hades that a conservative pro-life hetero candidate just 'happened' to be asked such a loaded question by a gay-advocate blogger judge. If anything, you'd have to blame the JUDGE for asking a politically charged question - not Prejean for answering it.

Winstonfield - are you retarded? Probably not - probably just offensively ignorant. Answering the question had very little to do with this - she broke the rules by appearing in other contexts as a spokesperson for other causes (preserving the sanctity of marriage) when she's actually a trainee for the position of spokesperson for California. She fucked her employer over, and broke the rules.

Furthermore, there has been no major lack of civility aimed her way because of what she said - what people have expressed angry disagreement with is the entire orchestrated, heavily (semi-secretly) funded Mormon PR campaign behind proposition 8 and NoM, which coincide neatly with Prejean's statements but more importantly with the numerous other activities she has undertaken 'in support of marriage.' Stop pretending that this is about her answer to a question - it's a number of activities, some of which are coincidental, some of which have been clearly proven to have been orchestrated, and none of which have been carried out by Donald Trump.

I'm not offended by gay people marrying, but I'm deeply offended by truly ignorant people rolling their eyes and pretending that their shallow, fact-less worldview contributes some sort of superior insight.

I believe in having sex with each of these women.

Answering the question had very little to do with this

Her answer to the question set off the firestorm. There were calls for her removal or 'voluntary surrender' from the very hour. If this had "little" to do with her answer, then why were they trying to get rid of her at that point?

Furthermore, there has been no major lack of civility aimed her way because of what she said

She was lambasted in insulting and demeaning terms within a few minutes of her comments.

I'm not offended by gay people marrying, but I'm deeply offended by truly ignorant people rolling their eyes and pretending that their shallow, fact-less worldview contributes some sort of superior insight.

In short, you're offended by people who factually, calmly, and accurately dissemble the bigotry of group you favor.

Winstonfield Pennypacker; Standing up for bigots, racists, and war-mongers since 1999.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
Methinks the man-ladies doth protest too much.

Yeeeeeeep.