Ex-Miss California loooooves herself... on video.

[almaty 19]

Hey, I'm a liberal and I still think masturbating is awesome.

same here...

[SMR 368]

She's a hypocrite in the eyes of the left (not really - but they will portray her that way) because those with morals fail and it makes them hypocrites, but since the left is amoral they can run gay brothels from their homes and still be re-elected over and over again.

Everyone on this planet has done something when they were 17 that they regret. Well, except the libs. They were just "expressing themselves". And therefore, they were justified.

Wrong kid, but nice try.

It she had not gone around parading herself as a moral paragon of all things pure and Christian, this would not be an issue. She fvcked herself up by promoting one thing and doing something else. it's like condemning gay marriage and then being caught soliciting a gay male on a bathroom stall...

Well, first off, she didn't parade around and she didn't say anything about all things pure and Christian. She made a statement about gay marriage. She was asked a question and answered with her personal opinion while emphasizing that it was a personal opinion. If anyone was parading anything, it was Perez Hilton when he asked the question.

Second, it's not like condemning gay marriage and then getting caught in a bathroom stall with a gay male (which also wouldn't necessarily be hypocritical since she could support homosexuality between consenting adults but be against legally recognizing this relationship). She condemned homosexuality, not masturbation. If she had condemned masturbation, that would be hypocritical. If you can't recognize the difference between masturbation and homosexuality, you have an issue.

Len, your argument is like saying that someone is a hypocrite if he says he doesn't think chickens should be raised in poor conditions and then gets caught doing insider trading. It's unrelated. By your logic, expressing an opinion would always be hypocritical because everyone has done something that might be considered wrong.

She has made several appearances on behalf of defense of marriage groups. She tried the "I was only 17" defense when the pictures surfaced and now with the video. Both have been invalidated. She didn't lose her Miss California title because of her response in the pageant, she lost it because she breached her contract, plain and simple.

I don't think she's a role model, nor should she, or any pageant figure for that matter. But in reality, they are. That is why they have morals clauses in their contracts, that is why as a winner they make so many public appearances.

This posts reeks of irrelevance because you're a shaky lib.

This post reeks of irrelevance because it's trying to draw a moral equivalence between masturbation and homosexuality. I think you will find few people that think they are equivalent (other than those who think there is nothing wrong with either).

Nobody here is arguing that she shouldn't have lost her title since she violated the contract. But that has nothing to do with hypocrisy. My main objection to this thread is that she is baselessly being called a hypocrite.

About privacy: my understanding is that she took the video and then gave it to her boyfriend. If that is the case, he can argue that he was given rights to the video. Unless it has that screen at the beginning that it's only for private home viewing and all other rights are reserved, it's hard to assert that those rights weren't given with the video when she gave it to him.

If he took the video without her consent or took it from her without her consent, she is protected by the law and he is in a tough legal situation.

Maybe that's what you read into it (RE: homosexuality and masturbation). Lord knows what the distribution is of masturbatory behavior and political leaning among all individuals, right?

AS for the hypocrisy claims... it doesn't take too many neurons to connect that if you put yourself in the spotlight, you better not have any brown stains for the light to catch.

I tried and actually couldn't understand what you were trying to say with the first paragraph of your response.

Putting yourself into the spotlight and having brown stains may make you stupid, but it doesn't make you a hypocrite in this case.

[HAL 9000 96]

She's a hypocrite in the eyes of the left (not really - but they will portray her that way) because those with morals fail and it makes them hypocrites, but since the left is amoral they can run gay brothels from their homes and still be re-elected over and over again.

Everyone on this planet has done something when they were 17 that they regret. Well, except the libs. They were just "expressing themselves". And therefore, they were justified.

Wrong kid, but nice try.

It she had not gone around parading herself as a moral paragon of all things pure and Christian, this would not be an issue. She fvcked herself up by promoting one thing and doing something else. it's like condemning gay marriage and then being caught soliciting a gay male on a bathroom stall...

Well, first off, she didn't parade around and she didn't say anything about all things pure and Christian. She made a statement about gay marriage. She was asked a question and answered with her personal opinion while emphasizing that it was a personal opinion. If anyone was parading anything, it was Perez Hilton when he asked the question.

Second, it's not like condemning gay marriage and then getting caught in a bathroom stall with a gay male (which also wouldn't necessarily be hypocritical since she could support homosexuality between consenting adults but be against legally recognizing this relationship). She condemned homosexuality, not masturbation. If she had condemned masturbation, that would be hypocritical. If you can't recognize the difference between masturbation and homosexuality, you have an issue.

Len, your argument is like saying that someone is a hypocrite if he says he doesn't think chickens should be raised in poor conditions and then gets caught doing insider trading. It's unrelated. By your logic, expressing an opinion would always be hypocritical because everyone has done something that might be considered wrong.

She has made several appearances on behalf of defense of marriage groups. She tried the "I was only 17" defense when the pictures surfaced and now with the video. Both have been invalidated. She didn't lose her Miss California title because of her response in the pageant, she lost it because she breached her contract, plain and simple.

I don't think she's a role model, nor should she, or any pageant figure for that matter. But in reality, they are. That is why they have morals clauses in their contracts, that is why as a winner they make so many public appearances.

This posts reeks of irrelevance because you're a shaky lib.

This post reeks of irrelevance because it's trying to draw a moral equivalence between masturbation and homosexuality. I think you will find few people that think they are equivalent (other than those who think there is nothing wrong with either).

Nobody here is arguing that she shouldn't have lost her title since she violated the contract. But that has nothing to do with hypocrisy. My main objection to this thread is that she is baselessly being called a hypocrite.

About privacy: my understanding is that she took the video and then gave it to her boyfriend. If that is the case, he can argue that he was given rights to the video. Unless it has that screen at the beginning that it's only for private home viewing and all other rights are reserved, it's hard to assert that those rights weren't given with the video when she gave it to him.

If he took the video without her consent or took it from her without her consent, she is protected by the law and he is in a tough legal situation.

Maybe that's what you read into it (RE: homosexuality and masturbation). Lord knows what the distribution is of masturbatory behavior and political leaning among all individuals, right?

AS for the hypocrisy claims... it doesn't take too many neurons to connect that if you put yourself in the spotlight, you better not have any brown stains for the light to catch.

I tried and actually couldn't understand what you were trying to say with the first paragraph of your response.

Putting yourself into the spotlight and having brown stains may make you stupid, but it doesn't make you a hypocrite in this case.

They certainly do make you out to be a hypocrite when your claim to fame is morally based and you engage in what can be easily construed as amoral behavior.

Too bad you didn't understand the rest- but the italicized 'you' implies one thing that is quite obvious. The second sentence dabbles in the unknown association between politics (including the religious/moral base of certain political bases) and behaviors performed by such folks.

[Danno 1,228]

She's a hypocrite in the eyes of the left (not really - but they will portray her that way) because those with morals fail and it makes them hypocrites, but since the left is amoral they can run gay brothels from their homes and still be re-elected over and over again.

Everyone on this planet has done something when they were 17 that they regret. Well, except the libs. They were just "expressing themselves". And therefore, they were justified.

Wrong kid, but nice try.

It she had not gone around parading herself as a moral paragon of all things pure and Christian, this would not be an issue. She fvcked herself up by promoting one thing and doing something else. it's like condemning gay marriage and then being caught soliciting a gay male on a bathroom stall...

Well, first off, she didn't parade around and she didn't say anything about all things pure and Christian. She made a statement about gay marriage. She was asked a question and answered with her personal opinion while emphasizing that it was a personal opinion. If anyone was parading anything, it was Perez Hilton when he asked the question.

Second, it's not like condemning gay marriage and then getting caught in a bathroom stall with a gay male (which also wouldn't necessarily be hypocritical since she could support homosexuality between consenting adults but be against legally recognizing this relationship). She condemned homosexuality, not masturbation. If she had condemned masturbation, that would be hypocritical. If you can't recognize the difference between masturbation and homosexuality, you have an issue.

Len, your argument is like saying that someone is a hypocrite if he says he doesn't think chickens should be raised in poor conditions and then gets caught doing insider trading. It's unrelated. By your logic, expressing an opinion would always be hypocritical because everyone has done something that might be considered wrong.

She has made several appearances on behalf of defense of marriage groups. She tried the "I was only 17" defense when the pictures surfaced and now with the video. Both have been invalidated. She didn't lose her Miss California title because of her response in the pageant, she lost it because she breached her contract, plain and simple.

I don't think she's a role model, nor should she, or any pageant figure for that matter. But in reality, they are. That is why they have morals clauses in their contracts, that is why as a winner they make so many public appearances.

This posts reeks of irrelevance because you're a shaky lib.

This post reeks of irrelevance because it's trying to draw a moral equivalence between masturbation and homosexuality. I think you will find few people that think they are equivalent (other than those who think there is nothing wrong with either).

Nobody here is arguing that she shouldn't have lost her title since she violated the contract. But that has nothing to do with hypocrisy. My main objection to this thread is that she is baselessly being called a hypocrite.

About privacy: my understanding is that she took the video and then gave it to her boyfriend. If that is the case, he can argue that he was given rights to the video. Unless it has that screen at the beginning that it's only for private home viewing and all other rights are reserved, it's hard to assert that those rights weren't given with the video when she gave it to him.

If he took the video without her consent or took it from her without her consent, she is protected by the law and he is in a tough legal situation.

Maybe that's what you read into it (RE: homosexuality and masturbation). Lord knows what the distribution is of masturbatory behavior and political leaning among all individuals, right?

AS for the hypocrisy claims... it doesn't take too many neurons to connect that if you put yourself in the spotlight, you better not have any brown stains for the light to catch.

I tried and actually couldn't understand what you were trying to say with the first paragraph of your response.

Putting yourself into the spotlight and having brown stains may make you stupid, but it doesn't make you a hypocrite in this case.

They certainly do make you out to be a hypocrite when your claim to fame is morally based and you engage in what can be easily construed as amoral behavior.

Too bad you didn't understand the rest- but the italicized 'you' implies one thing that is quite obvious. The second sentence dabbles in the unknown association between politics (including the religious/moral base of certain political bases) and behaviors performed by such folks.

So if you voiced any opinion which is based on your moral convictions, you are an automatic Hypocrite if you have at anytime in your past been a part of amoral immoraL or downright shameful behavior?

Sorry dude, you are striking out with this logic.

[HAL 9000 96]

I can see Dannologic ® is back- or was it just taking a subtle break in your decreased postings as of late?

(No, poor Danno... that is definitely not what I am saying- but you'll still read Orange when others write Apple).

[Danno 1,228]

I can see Dannologic ® is back- or was it just taking a subtle break in your decreased postings as of late?

(No, poor Danno... that is definitely not what I am saying- but you'll still read Orange when others write Apple).

Sorry about my lack of activity of late, business has been heavy (thanks Obamer) .... but I will try to keep up here as best I can.

Speaking of Apple, I just bought a new imac, it is so sweet.

HAppy "Thanks" Hal.