Andrew Breitbart: Mall Cop

Cow Towing to Other Countries

Archive for the ‘Bitches and Hos These Days’ Category

Movin My Hips Like Yeah

with one comment

In one of the more double-take inducing headlines Big Hollywood has published in a while, Brian Cherry asks the question most vital to a politically polarized nation facing an economic recession and two foreign wars:

Remember the Maines: Is Miley Cyrus the Next Leftist Trojan Horse Into Country Music?

This is a freakin koan if I’ve ever seen one.  How does one answer this question? “No”?  “Yes”?  Neither reply seems to make much sense.  The best answer I can come up with is “Are your parents cousins or something?” but I always shy away from answering a question with a question.

Now, I’m so old that I can remember way back to May of 2009, when Big Hollywood editor-in-chief John Nolte was trying to rally good Christian soldiers around the banner of Ms. Montana:

Miley’s a target-rich environment for celebrity enforcers because she’s openly opposed to the spread of Gomorrah and therefore a threat who must be marginalized through ridicule at every opportunity.

What, pray tell, could Miley have possibly done in the last 11 months to have gone from conservative Christianity’s last bulwark against Hollywood excess to diabolical leftist sleeper agent?

Liberals failed miserably when they tried to take over the talk radio industry with Air America.  It reminded me a lot of the time that Pearl Jam took on Ticketmaster, which in turn reminded me a lot of a bowl of jell-o taking on a herd of wildebeests.  The left can’t compete in the Christian market.  Let’s face it, the folks who declare Robert Mapplethorpe “art” simply have no credibility in that particular market.  With that said, Country is a family friendly format they still think they have a chance of corrupting, and Miley Cyrus may be their perky little Trojan horse into that industry.

You mean a pop star might have a manufactured persona?  This is worse than I thought.  Pray for Toby Keith, my friends.  But wait, what actual evidence is there that Cyrus might be insincere in her publicly stated Christian beliefs?

A good example of her more questionable behavior is that she was involved in a scandal that included some pictures she took of herself with her camera phone.  Her actions bordered on sexting, and she was involved with this before she was old enough to bug her dad for the keys to the pickup.  The photos were pictures of her in her underwear, wetting herself down in a shower wearing only a white t-shirt, and lounging in the arms of boy in what appeared to be a sort of early teen afterglow.  Of course she apologized, but apparently didn’t learn anything from the incidents.  Soon after she, and her parents, allowed her to be photographed for Vanity Fair magazine in a manner that would suggest her core audience was a rampaging pack of pedophiles.  Once again, she apologized.

When that whole Vanity Fair thing went down, I just assumed it was an entirely media-generated controversy designed to sell copies of US Weekly and get Perez Hilton and TMZ page views whenever some perv googles “Miley Cyrus sexy” for the rest of eternity, and that no sentient human being could actually be offended by those photos.  Thanks for sorting me out Brian Cherry!

You know, if Cherry really thinks that all it takes to negate the conservative movement’s cultural influence and threaten its institutions is a teenage girl’s bare shoulder, he might want to consider betting on a different horse.

But the fact that Miley Cyrus is human female with a human female body that sometimes gets photographed isn’t his only evidence against her.  Behold:

While Miley is portrayed as type who can be found in Church on any given Sunday morning, she is even moving away from the official religion of the entire industry, and experimenting with Buddhism.  When talking about her religious beliefs, Miley put herself out of step with the core country audience when she made this statement:

“The one thing I’m really strong about regarding my religious beliefs is that you should know a little bit about everything before you define your own beliefs. I think all religions have a good practice in them. Liam and I have been reading about Buddhism lately and it’s all about hope and love. To me, faith is about having a clean slate and a clean start.”

Expressing a desire to be religiously literate apparently puts one “out of step with the core country audience.”  I went to Catholic school.  We were assigned books about Buddhism.  Buddhism is a major world religion, and if you’re a person who takes religion seriously, you should probably be educated about it.

As for the “I think all religions have a good practice in them,” well, that’s no different than what the Catholic Church teaches, at least.  And most mainline Protestant denominations generally articulate the same line that non-Christian religions are imperfect expressions of humankind’s relationship with God.  Cyrus isn’t saying anything here that most Christian ministers wouldn’t also say.

What Miley has that others don’t though, is a father who can get her through the Nashville gauntlet and into the club without paying any real dues.  While it is nearly inevitable that she will one day take advantage of a country music plan B, the problem is that she could be a corrupting, left-leaning, influence on an industry that so many liberal elites want to see taken out of the “red state” column.

It should be obvious to anyone that country music is hardly the sole purview of strict conservative values, but I won’t belabor a point that’s been well-documented elsewhere. What funniest to me is that Brian Cherry is actually worried about the political implications of Miley Cyrus.

Written by dieblucasdie

April 23, 2010 at 7:39 pm

XOXO, Blucas

leave a comment »

Billy’s Hallowell’s latest piece on Big Hollywood is notable for 1) the sheer level of outrage he’s able to reach over freakin’ Gossip Girl and 2) word-choice so bizarre I can only assume that what ended up on BH’s website is Hallowell’s original post run through MS Word’s thesaurus.

Threesomes are Hollywood’s latest obsession.  Within weeks of the release of Britney Spears’ asinine “Ballad” about engaging in a menagerie, CW leaked details about a threesome they were planning on the hit show Gossip Girl.  In what could easily be confused as part of a massive Hollywood-led campaign in support of teen pregnancy and a wide array of sexually transmitted diseases, CW decided that exploiting filth for a heavy cash flow was more important that exercising common sense and decency.  Surprise!

Ah, the menagerie.  That place in TVland where the most elusive of creatures is kept:  the teenage Hollywood starlet lipstick lesbian.  In Gossip Girl’s menagerie, she frolics alongside a poor starving Brooklyn playwright who lives with his post-grunge one-hit-wonder father, and an industrialist heir who tried to rape a 14 year-old in the pilot, but is sensitive now.

Oh, wait, I don’t think that’s what he meant by “menagerie.”

I’m pretty sure that if you “easily confuse” three separate, on-screen kisses (which is what was shown on Gossip Girl) for “a massive Hollywood-led campaign in support of teen pregnancy and a wide array of sexually transmitted diseases,” you are probably too easily confused to turn on your television anyhow.  Also, the previous episode featured a plotline where paparazzi published a picture of Duff’s character (a Hollywood starlet) taking free condoms from the student health center.  I know Hallowell probably believes that condoms are murder, but still.

The only thing more grotesque than CW’s exploitation of a threesome for ratings is the media’s coverage of the menage a trois.  In a recent article, Michael Ausiello (Entertainment Weekly) was ecstatic over the impending sex scene – so excited that he taunted readers with his foreknowledgetelling them, “Though my Gossip mole has asked that I not ID the threesome (on the grounds that it would ruin a major upcoming storyline, or some such nonsense), I can confirm that the kinky tryst will involve one of the following combos…”  Ausiello then proceeds to list possible character combos.

Then – no joke – readers (many of whom were not at all phased by the show’s indecency) began commenting about who they thought would be involved!  Insanity.

Insanity!  Get this you guys: fans of a television show actually speculated on an upcoming major plotline.  On the internet!  I’m pretty sure that was one of the Seven Seals.

What does Hallowell expect that comment thread to look like?  Resounding condemnation of the CW or the show?  Er… actually that comment thread does contain a lot of that.

Gossip Girl is so lame and desperate for ratings.(**rollseyes**)

There’s six replies to this post agreeing with it, and more similar posts downthread.  But mostly I bring it up because a random Entertainment Weekly website commentator who uses expressions like “(**rollseyes**) had a much more sane, measured response than Hallowell.

Are these really the values our society has adopted as “the norm”?  In 2006, alone, teen pregnancy increased significantly in 26 states.  Liberals would blame this on “abstinence-only education,” while I’d blame a sizable portion of it on a society that continues to exploit sex for financial gain.  Can we really expect people, young and old alike, to respect or even understand sex when threesomes and other unrealistic sexual messaging invade our lives at every corner?  Let’s get real.

Dude, it’s not like this was pterodactyl porn or something.  I’ve no doubt that drunken, ill-advised threesomes are a more common occurence than many things depicted on television.  For instance, here’s a plot description from an episode of Big Hollywood‘s beloved NCIS:

NCIS is targeted to investigate a series of murders by a serial killer who posts videos of the crimes on the internet. The first two victims have scrolls with links to websites of videos of their murders along with cryptic pictures spliced in. After a third video is posted, a live stream from inside NCIS, a suspect is brought in but dies in Interrogation. Video of the death ends up on the web linking the crimes to a female singer. NCIS storms a garage but Gibbs realizes that it was a setup for them to kill the singer and a man who she appears to have captive at gunpoint is the real killer. Gibbs is given a Civil Service Award but is a no-show and Tony stands in to accept the award on his behalf.

Also, the (3%) rise in teen pregnancy is mainly due to increased fertility and (oh noes I’m a LIBERAL) abstinence only education.  I mean, it should be pretty obvious that whether someone has access to a condom and knows how to use it or not will have a greater effect on whether or not she gets pregnant than if she saw three people kiss instead of two on TV.

The entire premise of using a threesome to drive ratings came full circle when E! Online reported CW’s reward for exploiting sexual incongruence for the sake of the almighty dollar.

The first time I read this, I nearly did a spit take at “sexual incongruence.”  Is that, like, when you’re trying to do it standing up and your genitals don’t match up right?  Or would Gossip Girl have been in the clear if D and V and a certain Hollywood starlet had added a fourth?

And what a disappointment Hilary Duff is.  Joining the cast of one of television’s most trash-ridden shows appears to be a half-witted attempt to shed the “good girl” image she’s yielded over the years.

Aw shit, Hilary Duff.  Billy Hallowell’s not mad, he just disappointed in you.  I hope you’re duly chastened.  He liked you fine when you were a precocious preteen sensation, but now you’re 22 and you kissed another girl on-screen.  You just gave a couple hundred pregnant 12 year-olds the clap, Hilary Duff.  I hope you’re proud of yourself.

Written by dieblucasdie

November 18, 2009 at 8:44 pm

Stay Classy, James Hudnall

with 5 comments

GET IT? SHE’S LIKE THE WICKED WITCH OF THE WEST BECAUSE SHE HAS MINIONS THAT CLEAN UP MESSES.

WAIT THAT DOESN’T MAKE ANY SENSE.

OK, I MEAN, SHE’S LIKE THE WICKED WITCH OF THE WEST BECAUSE SHE’S A WOMAN PARTICIPATING IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE.

NEXT WEEK I’M THINKING OF HAVING HER BE A SHREW, BATTON CAN DRAW SOME SWEET WHISKERS.

OR MAYBE I’LL MAKE SOME MENSTRUATION  JOKES.  WOMEN WHO ARE DEMOCRATS ARE ALWAYS ACTING LIKE THEY ARE ON THEIR PERIODS.

Written by dieblucasdie

November 15, 2009 at 11:26 pm

Scare Quote Watch, Day 223

leave a comment »

Since screwing his fellow conservatives over by wresting Roger L. Simon’s money from them (I know that’s two in a row, but I never get sick of linking to that one!), Alfonso Rachel has actually been very judicious with his use of air-scare-quotes, though you can tell in this clip that he’s just dying to use them during his TOTALLY FAIR paraphrasing of an abortion-rights advocate.

I must say though, Rachel gets points for honesty, with his admission that the only actual basis for his opposition to abortion rights is religious in nature.  His argument for outlawing abortion rests on his claim that America has been, since its founding, a religious nation (Rachel alternates between describing it as “Judeo-Christian” and just straight-up “Christian”).  So yay theocracy!  I guess?

Since I am too tired to re-hash the history of the establishment clause and early establishment clause jurisprudence (I mean, it’s 2009.  The least you can do is read the Wikipedia article about something before you start running your mouth, dude), I’ll take a different angle.

I’d be interested to hear Rachel’s thoughts on the broader implications of this argument.  We’re a Christian nation!  The founders were Christian!  Should divorce be illegal?  What should the prison sentence be for adultery?  How often should people like Rachel be forced to re-read the various bits in Matthew condemning the hypocrisy of the Pharisees?  Discuss!

I Have to Go to DAGOBAH?

with one comment

Conservative commentators have been quick to spin yesterday’s bizarre Palin press conference/resignation as a political masterstroke, but I’m happy to say that our own little corner of the internet has already submitted the masterpiece of the craziness-is-genius genre.

Not to go an analogy too far, but Sarah Palin seems to be taking a page from the Hollywood playbook of George Lucas.

Apparently Kurt Schlichter views “taking a page from the Hollywood playbook of George Lucas” as a good thing.  Though I guess if it’s code for “selling a massive pile of shit for a gazillion dollars” he might be on to something.

She has just completed her own introductory trilogy, and it was an astonishing success.

First, she was a fantastically successful conservative governor lurking beneath the mainstream media’s radar.  Next, she was a vice-presidential candidate who, even though she lost, still did more to electrify the base than the headliner.  Third, she has now drawn the curtain on her post-election career as a sitting governor, a period that saw her deftly turn the tables on mainstream haters like David Letterman.

So the three examples of her “astonishing success” are 1) serving, then resigning, as governor of Alaska, 2) losing a nationwide election, and 3) getting into a sissy slapfight with freaking David Letterman.  Schlichter’s willingness to view these things as signs of a successful politician points to the thing I’ve never understood about the SARAH PALIN PHENOMENON.  I completely understand the draw of a fresh face, especially one who better represents the Republican base than the Yalies who’ve run the party for so long.  But like… when someone flames out as spectacularly as Palin did, you look for someone else.  I mean, you didn’t meet many Deaniacs in 2005.

Thankfully, Schlichter has the answer to this riddle:

Again, a “Star Wars” analogy:  Remember when Darth Vader faced off with Obi-Wan Kenobi?  “If you strike me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine?”  She’s now immune from bogus legal claims and her book will not only raise her profile but set up her family financially for life.  Now Sarah is unbound, freed from the need to be up in Juneau and able to network, fundraise and even (maybe) campaign without limitation.  And the modern media environment will let her do these things without even a nod to the mainstream media (Do you think Katie Couric will ever get to ask Sarah another question?  Ha!)

Lefties, if you were responsible for her doing this, you just unleashed your strongest opponent and made her immune from your strongest attacks all at once. Ouch. It must hurt to know a woman you pride yourself on seeing as a drooling Neanderthal nitwit so thoroughly out-maneuvered you. You do see it, right?

Palin fanatics like Palin because she pisses off liberals.  That’s pretty much the only reason at this point!  They like to frame the lulz from the left as fear, but please, conservatives, I’m telling you this in all seriousness:  There is not a potential 2012 Republican candidate I fear less than Sarah Palin.  Please, meesah!  Nominate her!

Written by dieblucasdie

July 4, 2009 at 4:57 pm

What If I’m… The Bad Guy?

with 3 comments

teamjacobbase.jpg

Can someone associated with Big Hollywood tell me what Male-Gigolo-in-Chief John Nolte’s recent absence/hiatus was about?  Immediately prior to that, he was writing reviews so even-handed and straightforward that I couldn’t have covered them here if I wanted to.  Since he’s been back, he’s been acting a bit crazy, frothing at the mouth over Night at the Museum‘s pernicious liberalism, obsessing over that shitty Goode Family show, and, of course, lauding Miley Cyrus’ bapitism-by-fire.  Did he get, like, sent to a re-education camp?  Did he start smoking whatever (clearly good shit) Breitbart smokes?

One of y’all is probably going to tell me he had a kid or a death in the family and I’m going to feel like a jackass.

Anyway, I bring this up because Deuce continues his descent into madness this evening, repping hard for the Twilight series:

“Twilight” is all about the self-restraint of both appetite and passion. Also playing an important thematic role is the importance of self-sacrifice, loyalty and family. It’s awfully hard not to like a film aimed at teens that’s so unapologetically earnest and well-intended. In this cinematic age of nihilism, moral relativism and hyper-sexualization of young girls, ”Twilight” should be hailed as the work of iconoclasts.

In fairness, Nolte claims not to be familiar with the source material, but dude.  That series is probably the most prurient thing I’ve ever read that doesn’t have actual sex in it.  It’s especially funny that Nolte would hold it up as a good portrayal of innocent/wholesome/traditional female sexuality, since in this case the male is the gatekeeper, and the middle two books are pretty much entirely about Bella trying to trick Edward into boning her.

And while the books do espouse a submissive female role, it’s not the traditional Patriarchy-approved one.  It’s a weird, idiosyncratic one, that is more Mormonism-meets-Gor than Ladies Home Journal.  It’s basically a 2,000-page study in the sexual hangups of one, Stephenie Meyer, and anyone who tries to make it larger than that does so at his peril.

Written by dieblucasdie

June 2, 2009 at 2:00 am

Teaching John Romano About Primary Sources, Part 2

leave a comment »

I’m just going to keep doing this until Romano starts implementing basic intellectual rigor into his posts.  So I might be at this a long time.  

In part one, our hero took a DHS report to task for using “immigrants” instead of “illegal immigrants,” when in fact that report used the latter phrase a solid half-dozen times, and the former once, clearly for brevity’s sake, in a footnote.  From this it was clear that, not only had John Romano not read the report he was bitching about, but that he hadn’t even bothered to click over to the second page of the Washington Times pearl-clutcher he was using as a source.

Today, he’s picked up Jeffrey Jena’s habit of concluding his post by asking what he thinks is a devasting rhetorical question that turns out to be easily answerable with 5 seconds of googling.

I want clarification as to why she [Sonia Sotomayor] feels that being a Latina woman makes her inherently wiser than a “white male.”

Don’t you?

Romano is referring to Sotomayor’s now-infamous remark from a 2001 lecture:

I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.

Romano wants clarification!  Happy to be of service!  That is one sentence from a 4,000-word speech Sotomayor gave in 2001, specifically about her Latina identity.  You can read it in its entirety here.  Here is the very next sentence:

Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see.  My hope is that I will take the good from my experiences and extrapolate them further into areas with which I am unfamiliar. I simply do not know exactly what that difference will be in my judging. But I accept there will be some based on my gender and my Latina heritage.

Of course, Romano would know this already if he actually read the things he complains about, instead of just getting all red-in-the-face about random pull quotes he heard while listening to Morning Joe through the door while he was a taking a dump, or however he gets his news.  

In case 4,000 words isn’t enough clarification for Romano, though, there’s always the FUCKING CONFIRMATION HEARINGS.  That is what they are for, dude.

What’s funny to me about this whole shitstorm over an 8 year-old pull-quote, though, is that  just a few days ago, Limbaugh, Gingrich, Big Hollywood, etc, were all complaining that the media was only discussing Sotomayor’s race and not her record.  Then they did their research, realized that her record is actually quite moderate, (especially when you consider that she’s replacing Souter) and decided to make their opposition to her appointment all about race.  

Let’s be real here.  Conservative opposition to Sotomayor’s appointment is about three things: 1) Abortion, 2) Tribal opposition that would greet any Obama nominee, and 3) Abortion.  Let’s have a discussion about those things instead of manufactured controversy!  That would be awesome!  

I am seriously going to laugh my ass off if conservatives end up blocking the appointment of a politically moderate Hispanic woman, only to have Obama end up appointing some white dude who is the dirtiest of hippies.  

Written by dieblucasdie

May 29, 2009 at 5:32 pm