Well, not quite true: never blog too angry. A little anger can help. Too much, though, and you end up wanting to pound on the wall; this pleases a certain demographic, and you may define ‘pleases’ any way that you like. So, now that I’ve calmed down – some – about Obama crony David Axelrod crassly equating Carrie Prejean with a dog:
…I’ll say this: after an event like the above I’d be embarrassed about me being on the same side of the same-sex marriage debate as Axelrod, except that there’s actually no evidence whatsoever that I am (I already know that I’m well to the left of his boss on this issue). As it is, I’d much prefer to have Carrie Prejean as my spokesperson than the people that have decided to publicly attack her; unlike them, she’s shown no indication that she personally hates her opponents.
I really should stop being surprised at this sort of thing, though. It’s not like it’s going to stop for the next 3.5 years.
Speaking as somebody who is actually for same-sex marriage: has my side mucked things up enough, or do we want to really go for the gusto and alienate still more people? She’s not getting tossed, her detractors are not going to get a social conservative crusade declared against her (mostly because the social conservatives that they think that they were aiming at don’t actually, you know, exist), and now we get to be reminded that the current President is prepared to do anything for same-sex marriage except actually stand up for it. Let’s quit while we’re behind, OK?
PS: Do you know what would help? Going out and working to pass actual SSM legislation such as Maine’s (via Slublog). That doesn’t bother people like judicial fiat or ‘shut up, he explained’ does. Strange but true.
… (basic concept here) but this is an interesting question that The Patriot Room suggests: what’s the current excuse for yelling at Ms. California, but not Ms. Rhode Island? Note: ‘excuse.’ I know the actual reason already: Ms. California disagrees with SSM supporters, while Ms. Rhode Island (presumably) doesn’t.
I’m at a loss, here. If it’s aimed at social conservatives, surely the people doing learned last year that directing demoralization attacks at the caricature of ‘Christianists’ that lives mostly in your head only annoys the people that you’re caricaturing; if it’s aimed at the general populace, you’d think that it’d be explained why it’s contradictory to be both against same-sex marriageand being fine with being photographed in your knickers; and if it’s aimed at the Online Left, I don’t see what the point is. She’s a good-looking woman with unacceptable ideas, so they hate her already, in that Special Time kind of way.
Or maybe I’m being too dismissive of that last possibility. After all, now they have something a bit more tangiblewith which to indulge their fetish…
He’s responding to Hilton’s attempt to sanitize away his bad behavior towards Carrie PreJean via the use of bogus copyright infringement claims against a YouTube video that featured his comments. Patterico’s response? he’s rehosted the video on his own channel and is now daring Hilton to come after him, too: he’s even ready to contemplate a lawsuit.
Speaking as a supporter of same-sex marriage, my response is: good. Perez Hilton hurts the SSM cause every time he opens his mouth. I couldn’t find a worse public spokesman for this debate if I tried for a week. More to the point, he’s guilty of precisely the same kind of bigotry that he accused Ms. PreJean of having, and I’d like him to go back doing… whatever it is that he does. If he really wants to help, he needs to SHUT UP and APOLOGIZE.