NOM's new ad

The BBQ Pit
1

I don’t have the time or inclination to give it a real pitting but I’ll open it here since that’s where it’ll end up and I may want to cuss.

The National Organization for Marriage (NOM), [soon to join with the Biblical Literacy Association to form NOMBLA) has released a new ad to follow their ‘Gathering Storm’ sensation. This one features a celebrity. Of sorts. (On a scale of 1 to 10 with 10 being Tom Cruise and the baby who was cradled by a gorilla being 1, she’d rank perhaps 3, somewhere between the guy from the “it looks like it looks like a mini a mini mall” commercial and Sanjaya.) It’s Carrie Prejean, the Miss [del]America[/del]USA contestant who answered that she believed marriage was between a man and a woman and subsequently [del]had her face ripped off by Perez Hilton, a lesbian biker gang, and a gay chimp[/del] didn’t become Miss [del]America[/del]USA.

The ad goes a little sumpin’ like this.

I didn’t chime in on the Prejean/Perez thing when it was happening mainly because I didn’t care one way or the other. Now I’ll just say that it would be hard for me to choose between which was more stupid: her answer, or the event organizers choosing Perez Hilton as one of the judges.

I’ll also add here that I can’t stand Perez Hilton. He’s a mean spirited talentless wannabe who never will be more than he is, which is a bitchy crude snarker. I’ve only been to his website a couple of times but it was ridiculously crude and mean spirited; he does such cute things as as draw cum dribbling from the mouths of male celebrities who have gay rumors (almost redundant qualification) which told me as much as I needed to know about his integrity. He’s exactly the kind I’d the kind of K-List dignitary I’d choose to give some class to my F-List beauty pageant.

OTOH, while I couldn’t care less what Carrie Prejean thinks about gay marriage one way or the other, I thought her answer deserved to prevent her winning the contest (whether it did or not I’ve no idea) because it was so stupidly formed. First off it started with the same “Isn’t America just dreamy?” rehearsed non-answer intro she’d have no doubt used to field a question about global warming or the mortgage crisis or malaria in Africa or whether she’d rather do porn with Archie or Jughead, and then the “no offense but” part was either incredibly stupid (because of the controversy it began and the fact it didn’t answer the question and the fact it pissed off a judge and the fact it was sure to make her instantly unpopular with millions of people) or Machiavellian brilliant (because of the instant celebrity it got her), and judging from the fact she’s a beauty pageant contestant who started the question off with a fake smile and a “Isn’t America just dreamy?” rehearsed non answer intro I’m going with the non Machiavellian answer.

Well anyway, Perez did what Perez does and makes a bitchy crude followup. I somehow missed the CSPAN when Perez was confirmed Secretary of Gays but apparently he was since li’l Miss Prejean is now a martyr who’s being picked on in that way that 5% of Americans who are gay have of beating up on the 80% who are Christian (not sure which side the gay Christians take- I suppose they just abstain courteously from the beating up process) and it’s apparently Perez’s influence what done it compared to the ad.

My favorite part though is the comment “when a ‘pro-marriage’ group expresses concerns about how same sex marriage will impact religious groups they’re called liars and bigots”. Interesting thing is that the pro-marriage group happens to be the same one doing this commercial- what are the chances?! And they happened to be using misinformation and gross exaggerations for religious and ideologically motivated reasons, that’s different from lying and bigotry.

and

Okayyyy.

I’m sure there are gay marriage activists who aren’t interested in debating it, and they didn’t say “all gay marriage activists”, so technically that is true. That would mean it is equally true in saying “Catholic priests are pedophiles who prey on the young and then hide behind the church”, because after all some are, or “Christian evangelicals are violent hypocrites who scream out against gays and abortions yet beat their wives and rape their own daughters” because I’m sure you can find some precedents somewhere.

So I suppose the question for today is this:

Are the people behind the NOM(BLA) ads really that fucking stupid or are they just trying to reach people who are that fucking stupid? What do you think caller?

2

Re: the dumbass answer, do you know exactly what question she was asked? I haven’t seen it included with the clips of her answer.

3

The original.

4

The latter, but it’s not like that’s much different from political adverts in general. They serve to inflame those who agree, not change the minds of those who disagree. The ad isn’t for us - it’s for the people who generally think likewise but aren’t motivated to do anything about it.

5

They edited the part where she stumbled. “In my country” something, something…

She is hot, no denying. People who are that hot can take advantage of living a charmed life. There is no need to hold opinions, positions that mess with the lives of others. I don’t mind Perez’s soapbox rant later either. Even if he is a tool, he is right. Absolutely right. Despite that fact that she is extremely hot, if I was a judge, I would have voter her off as well.

6

NOMBLA, no shit? Am I the only one that thinks the resemblance of this acronym to NAMBLA will open them up to all kinds of hilarious ridicule?

7

I was wondering about that…

8

Someone’s getting whooshed… either **Riga’ **and **Bruce **by Sampiro or me by reality (again).

9

Ah, since Googling “Biblical Literacy Association” only turns up a single hit that has nothing to do with the NOM, I’d venture to guess it’s me. Well played, Sampiro.

10

We’re not *all *like that, you know.

11

Only the gay Christian New Yorkers.

(Sorry – can’t resist the sly 1776 reference. Carry on.)

12

I’m always ‘abstaining courteously’ IRL on things on which I have no opinion, but no one ever catches the reference.

The anti-same-sex-marriage movement has become a parody of itself. This gives me great hope.

13

Bruce was just noting that we can. People like you and I don’t, because we have so many, many other options, due to our brilliance and sparkling personalities. The idea of skating on our hotness just doesn’t occur.

14

If you want to see her speak for longer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsG3U_lAmEw&feature=related

She isn’t incredibly articulate, but I’ve heard worse.

15

Oh, I know, I know! I was just twittering with George, and he says thats the only reason he even made those Ocean’s movies. I mean, they treat you like you’re just a piece of utterly *fabulous *meat!

16

Have you ever been present at a meeting of the Gay Christian New York legislature? They speak very fast and very loud, and nobody listens to anybody else, with the result that nothing ever gets done.

(I’m glad I wasn’t the only one who’s mind immediately went to 1776 upon reading that.)

17

Can I watch with the sound turned all the way off? 'Cause that would keep the stupid down to manageable levels.

18

Really? With the fake tits, the fake hair color, the fake caps on her teeth, the fake eyelashes and more makeup than Lenin’s corpse, I find her scary-repulsive.

19

Yes, she has that “manufactured in a way that is the standard entertainment industry take on what they think hetero males find attractive” look. And that creepy, creepy, vacant rictus of a smile …

But then, that’s what MOST beauty contestants at the level have looked like for years.

20

I’d do her, just to prove I am not gay (or something like that.)