But Miss California is good for my health.
When asked a question about homosexual “marriage” by a homosexual gossip blogger “Perez Hilton,” who, inexplicably, was a judge in the Miss USA pageant, Carrie Prejean provided a “controversial” answer:
“We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite. [Nope, and that's the way it should remain. She meant relationships, which is true.] And you know what, I think in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that’s how I was raised.”
She was a little wobbly, but I’m sure it’s because the question caught her off guard. Despite her nervousness, she said what she believes. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Watch her Today show segment: “[B]iblically correct, not politically correct…I was true to myself.” And she talks about speaking to young people and being able to tell them to stand up for what they believe. On NATIONAL TV, no less. Love you, girl!
“Perez Hilton” has been on almost every network morning show and cable news show. That they gave the hypocrite a platform for his rude, crude, and moronic ramblings is most frustrating. But ratings rule.
This is sort of old news, but I’m blogging it now to reiterate a point. Apologize if you accuse someone of something and find out later you were wrong about the facts. Do not apologize for stating your beliefs and opinions or if someone is “offended” by them. I so admire people who stand by their convictions in the face of ridicule, criticism, and jackassery. This may be vulgar of me to write (let alone say out loud), but over the years I’ve been tempted to offer my backside to people who’ve sent me hate e-mail informing me of how “offended” they are by my views.
God has graciously exercised a restraining hand, tempering the snark and channeling it into more productive and edifying pursuits.
Again, don’t apologize for holding or stating your opinions. You think the other side even thinks about doing the same? Stand firm. Be strong. The truth will out, indeed.
Related posts:
In 2007, I wrote this about Rosanna Pulido, head of the Illinois Chapter of You Don’t Speak for Me, a vocal group of Hispanics opposed to illegal immigration:
“Rosanna Pulido reminds me of me…She’s a woman, a racial ‘minority,’ a member of a so-called ‘disenfranchised,’ preferred, and protected group, [some of whom engage in] a myriad of disingenuous yet highly effective justifications to rely on skin color to get by in life and excuse the acts of badly behaving members of her racial group.”
I started writing for publication in 2002 and blogging in 2003, and I’ve had more than my share of nasty e-mails, 99 percent of which were ad hominem. Fortunately, I was not deterred by the “self-hater,” “race traitor,” “Aunt Jemima,” and “coon” epithets. Being called names made me more determined and more rebellious. Rarely did someone write to me attacking my arguments. When I did receive those e-mails, I read them carefully and learned how to strengthen my own positions.
I don’t blog as much about politics these days not because I’m intimidated. I’m just bored by it. There’s more going on in the world, and I want to write about it. The archives are here for the world to see, and I stand by every post.
Back to Rosanna Pulido. No doubt she’s received similar e-mail. It’s tough being a “voice in the wilderness” and having the guts to call a thing by its name. I can’t stand euphemistic talk or mealy-mouth attitudes or people who’re afraid to tell the truth.
I wanted to let readers know that the pro-enforcement, pro-Second Amendment, pro-life Pulido is running for Congress in Illinois.
Ms. Pulido, thanks for having the courage to speak up for what’s right. And don’t waste time thinking about the haters. They’re gutless.
Update: Michelle Malkin posts e-mail from haters. I’d say it’s typical. The well-reasoned stuff is atypical.
***Scroll down for updates***
By now you’ve probably heard about Andrew Breitbart’s “Big Hollywood” project, which he hopes “will help challenge the status quo in what he believes has been a one-party, left-tilting town.” (Source)
Conservative, moderate, and libertarian folks in Hollywood will offer their commentary on the industry. Big Hollywood probably will look like a right-leaning Huffington Post. Speaking of HuffPo, Breitbart, an editor for The Drudge Report, also helped create Arianna Huffington’s left-leaning site. Hey, business is business!
Right-leaning actors do exist, though they’re not as vocal as their liberal counterparts. Perhaps Big Hollywood will bring more of them out of the closet.
What I’d really like to see, however, is more Christian entertainment in Hollywood. Why, you may ask, would Christians want to be part of an industry that is anti-Christian? I submit that instead of retreating, Christians should be salt and light, even in Hollywood, and smuggle in the Gospel.
Come to think of it, the message doesn’t have to be subtle. Look at Kirk Cameron’s “Fireproof.” The message of Jesus Christ was overt, and that film, with a budget of $500,000, raked in $33.1 million at the box office. (Also see Cinematic Christian soldiers in S.A.)
Is La-La Land any less a mission field than Africa? A heathen is a heathen, whether or not he’s got indoor plumbing and plenty of food and clean water.
I’m working on a related piece for Pajamas Media. In the meantime, check out my recent contributions to Pajamas Media and Townhall. More to come.
Update: A reader sent a link to the Hollywood Prayer Network.
I linked to an article about a Christian film festival. Christian homeschooling blogger Laurie Bluedorn writes: “My kids just got back from the San Antonio Independent Christian Film Festival. Our sons’ web site was one of the sponsors.”
See Christian Filmakers and festival photos here and here.
I’ve never read The Purpose-Driven Life nor am I inclined to now. I don’t like mega-churches or “superstar” pastors.
But I’m pleased Barack Obama chose the socially conservative Rick Warren to do his inaugural invocation, regardless of his motives.
Whatever you think of Warren, make no mistake: he’s a social conservative, my favorite kind. Among other things, he is pro-life and opposes homosexual “marriage.” (I’ve learned in recent years that being socially conservative doesn’t necessarily mean one holds these values.) And that’s good enough for me.
Homosexuals are a tad upset that their brother-in-arms chose someone who calls homosexual behavior by its proper name and shares my opinion about the slippery slope of allowing two men to call themselves married in the traditional sense of the word. People may be offended that I think such a mockery eventually would lead to atrocities like allowing adults to marry children. But look at it this way: I can’t believe in my lifetime, Americans are discussing allowing people of the same sex to marry. Whoever thought that would happen? You honestly don’t think it will lead to other perverted things? You’re either naive, imbecilic, or straight-up lying.
Be offended, curse, laugh, say evil things about me behind my back — whatever you need to do, but I will always oppose homosexual “marriage” and will continue to speak out boldly and publicly against it.
Why did Obama (who said he opposes homosexual “marriage,” by the way) choose a Prop 8-supporting man like Warren, knowing it would anger and confound his leftist base? To “reach out” to social conservatives who voted for John McCain, to skim off a few Republican-voting Christians who dig Warren – I don’t know, and I don’t think it matters that much.
I’m enjoying the fact that Barack Obama is not doing what his supporters expected. For example, blacks, hispanics, and radical leftists aren’t satisfied with his cabinet picks, and some say he’s being too careful, too timid. Careful or timid, he’s still an infanticide-supporting liberal. And that’s bad enough for me.
Happy invocating, Rick!
(Let’s pray that he smuggles in the Gospel.)
***Scroll down for updates***
There are only a few topics I blog about that interest the largest number of readers. Posts about race and Sarah Palin tend to stir things up. Immigration, not so much, surprisingly. Regular readers didn’t like the music blogging, although female readers seemed to like the Hanson posts. And the 64-comment post on synesthesia was a fluke.
That’s the way it is. When a blogger builds a reputation covering certain topics, those are what people expect to read when they come to his/her blog. Today, I have the pleasure of combining music and politics. A couple of months ago, it seems like I was reading a story every day about some rocker “offended” that John McCain played one of his songs during the campaign. Big babies. Clearly, they were not McCain supporters, and clearly, they were raging liberals.
So, when I hear about an artist type – musician, actor, or whatever – supporting McCain, I simply must blog about it.
Aerosmith guitarist Joe Perry, Dave Wedge of the Boston Herald tells us, is a McCain supporter. Lead singer Steve Tyler (he of the generous lips) gets all the attention, even as he approaches senior citizenship. But for a while, I had a crush on Joe Perry.
A “lifelong Republican,” Perry says he decided to go public for McCain after “seeing so many people come out for Obama.” He has his parents to thank for instilling a “work hard” ethic and encouraging him to be positive. Not that it matters in the scheme of things, but I’m glad Perry went on record that he’s a Republican. He’s a rarity among rockers.
Related post:
Update: Maybe Perry’s endorsement will result in more Guitar Hero sales. I’ll bet it won’t hurt. 
I’d really like to know details about Perry’s right leanings. Is he anti-race preferences? Pro-life?
Update II: Reader Ricky W. e-mails to say Aerosmith lead singer Steve Tyler is right-leaning, too. A Christian, also? Listen to him sing “Amazing Grace.”
As much as I try to suppress the enthusiasm, I like hearing about “conservative” celebrities. Hollywood is a liberal bastion. They own it. As far as I’m concerned, they can have it.
Every now and then we hear about an actor or musician who isn’t a left-leaning friend of Streisand. I knew Kelsey Grammer, Chuck Norris, Bruce Willis, Jon Voight, Pat Sajak, Patricia Heaton, Angie Harmon (formerly of “Law and Order”), her husband Jason Sehorn, former cornerback for the New York Giants, and Gary Oldman (Sirius Black!) voted for Republicans. And Stephen Baldwin (brother of Alec) and Kirk Cameron are conservative Christians.
But soap opera veteran Susan “Erica Kane” Lucci of “All My Children” is a Republican? And Dennis “Easy Rider” Hopper? That’s good, because I really like him. (No, not in that way.) And little Ricky Schroder and “The Rock”? (See Celebs Who Lean To The Right)
Before I interviewed the band Hanson last year for a couple of articles, I had a feeling the Oklahoma-bred, homeschooled brothers were conservative.
Confirmed.
Well, we’ll all commiserate with one another on November 5, 2008. I have a feeling Barack Hussein Obama will be America’s 44th president. The status of that prediction will be a big, fat:
Confirmed. 
Listen to this guy, a John McCain-supporting conservative living in California. Sounds like a male me. Parental warning: he says a couple of risque things, but overall, good speech.
Personal note: In California, adjusting. I like it. What I like even more is yet another publishing house editor interested in receiving a book proposal from me. Very nice. Working on it!
Back in this blog’s early days, I used to “live-blog” events like speeches and debates. Haven’t live-blogged in a long time. Why break the streak tonight?
I invite you to “live-comment” tonight’s presidential debate. Discuss the candidate’s answers, appearance, and anything else of relevance. Topics of interest to me: immigration (McCain voted for amnesty, so I don’t know what else I’m expecting from him – very disappointing selection), the war in Iraq and how to deal with global terrorism, and the developing Cold War, Part II.
TV-less? Watch it live at CNN.com beginning at 9 p.m. ET. Live-blogging at MM, and trackbackers probably will do the same. Live-blogging and chatting at Hot Air.
As always, thanks for reading and participating on my blog.
Rest easy, everybody.
Update II (9/27): Unlike Kathleen Parker, whose article I quoted below, I don’t believe Sarah Palin should drop out of the race, as I’ve been falsely accused.
Thread closed. Discuss the presidential debate (and Sarah Palin, if you must) in this thread.
When this election is over, I think I’ll return to digital music tech blogging. Smaller readership, less interest, and fewer commenters (understatement), but less tense and much more fun. Politics makes people…
[click to continue…]
Update: Believers for Barack. I just don’t see it.
————————————————————————————————————
On the morning of November 5, 2008, some of us will be disappointed and others pleased. I voted for the first time at age 25. I pulled the lever for Bill Clinton in 1992 and again in 1996. I escaped leftism and voted for George Bush in 2000 and again in 2004.
When it comes to presidential elections, I’ve always been on the winning side. I’ve never had the dreaded feeling of waking up the day after an election and being bitterly disappointed. I hope the streak continues. 
(Click on the thumbnail to see larger map.)
I know I’ve said and written that it doesn’t matter to me who’s in the White House. Hey, frustration makes say such things. Of course it matters. America won’t fall apart if Barack Obama is elected president.
But it will become less like the place I know and love.
[click to continue…]
Update (9/11): Some readers are under the mistaken impression that I attended the HBCU conference. I didn’t.
The photo below of me and Justice Thomas was taken last October at the Heritage Foundation. Thomas spoke about his experiences and signed copies of his memoir, My Grandfather’s Son.
——————————————————————-
At the recent Annual Conference of the White House Initiative on National Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said it was “not acceptable” that there aren’t more black people in her meetings at the State Department. (Source)
Based on the context of the entire speech, which I read, she wasn’t insinuating “racism” had anything to do with it. It sounded like she was encouraging blacks to become involved in Foreign Service.
There’s nothing wrong with encouraging blacks to consider certain careers, but it sounds too much like pandering to me. If I were giving a speech in front of a black audience (which I hope to do on my book tour), I wouldn’t complain about the paucity of blacks at blog conferences. Who cares?
No matter what the topic, I’d take time to address substantive issues that blacks, not the government, need to fix, like the outrageous levels of illegitimacy and crime among blacks. That is not acceptable. There are more pressing concerns than not seeing other blacks at a conference or in meetings. I wouldn’t waste time, not one second, “lamenting” that there aren’t more people “who look like me.”
[click to continue…]
Based on what I’ve been reading on Memeorandum (my main source for finding out what’s going on in the political blogosphere), leftist journalists and bloggers are nervous about new poll numbers.
John McCain’s up; Barack Obama’s down. I rarely blog about polls, because I have no confidence in them. McCain-Palin is up now (which could be a mere post-convention bounce), but might drop next week. You never know.
Regardless, I’ll bet Obama is kicking himself right now for not being nicer to Hillary Clinton and/or not selecting her to be his running mate. Some say Obama should send her out to “attack” Sarah Palin, you know, woman-to-woman, catfight style. Would she, even if asked? Hillary’s got some leverage right now, that’s for sure. How she uses it remains to be seen.
McCain’s Palin stunt is paying off, at least in the short run, and Obama’s got to work fast and smart to regain his hot and heavy mainstream media love. The media aren’t showing Palin much love, but their energy is being funneled away from the Obamessiah into trying to find or create Palin scandals.
I’ll leave you with this: McCain-Palin just might pull it off. I have problems with both of them, and I’ll blog/write about those issues in the next couple of weeks. But I’ll breathe the proverbial sigh of relief if a Republican is still in the White House by year’s end. President Barack Hussein Obama? Good grief. May it never be…
*Scroll down for Biden-related life-begins-at-conception update*
Here’s some good news for readers who didn’t like my first Palin post: I am one voter with an opinion, and I doubt I will influence anyone. Besides, I planned to vote for John McCain, reluctantly, before he selected Palin, and I still plan to vote for him. In a million years I’d never knowingly vote for an infanticide supporter, and McCain is the only viable option.
Based on right-leaning blog posts and mainstream media stories I’ve read, most Republicans and conservatives are satisfied with McCain’s choice. I’m not, but this election season leaves much to be desired anyway. The Republican party, in its current state, has changed the meaning of conservatism.
Anyway, McCain’s numbers are up, and Palin seems to have energized Republican voters. There are a few people here and there who feel otherwise, though I’m probably the most vocal. But hey, this is only a blog, right?
Now that both hyped-up conventions are over, it’s time to focus on the issues. My opinion of how she raises her children aside, here is what I like about Sarah Palin:
- She is pro-life in the extreme. She believes abortion is wrong even if a woman is raped, just as I do.
- She opposes the use of government funds to kill the unborn.
- She opposes embryonic stem cell research.
- She believes marriage is defined as between only a man and a woman.
- She supports teaching Intelligent Design in government schools.
- She supports the constitutional right to bear arms.
- She believes in a market-based approach to health care.
- She is pro-military and believes in strong national defense.
That’s a good place to start. What do you like about Sarah Palin? Don’t like?
More at Memeorandum.
Update: John Kerry and Joe Biden are both fools. Each believes life begins at conception, but supports a woman’s right to snuff out that life.
Also see Kerry Says He Believes Life Starts at Conception from 2004.
Michelle Malkin gets to the point: “Slick Joe Biden admits: Yes, I’m a cold-blooded murderer.”
Update (7 p.m.): Well said, Dr. Laura.
———————————————
I’ll go against the conservative blogosphere grain and state my confusion over and disappointment in John McCain’s choice of running mate. I think Sarah Palin, a relatively unknown female governor from Alaska, is a bad choice.
I came to this conclusion before I found out Palin has a five-month-old infant (I believe mothers [and fathers, OK?] should raise their children) and a knocked up teenage age daughter (who ought to give up the baby for adoption to an older, married, two-parent family) or that she’s under investigation for ethics violations.
[Commenters are complaining about my using the term "knocked up." I don't remember anyone complaining about how ungracious or unloving the term was when I used it to describe non-conservative unmarried pregnant women, namely, Crystal Mangum, false "Duke lacrosse" rape accuser. Anyway, I'm glad the kids are getting married, but I won't apologize for using the term. Some of you are disagreeing with me for the first time. You have plenty of company! I manage to offend liberals and conservatives, believers and unbelievers. I blog about my views, popular or unpopular. I describe things in politically incorrect ways. I've been deleted from plenty of blogrolls, RSS feed readers, and bookmarks, and I imagine this post will tick off even more readers and bloggers. "Knocked up" is vulgar, I agree, but I use it to make a point.]
[click to continue…]
Update (7/17): Commenter DavidTheMan writes (emphasis added):
“I stumbled on your site from InstaPundit. I must say you hit the nail on the head. I’m a black conservative male and I’m sure you know the looks you get when you talk to other blacks about Democrats…It is pointless for Republicans to try to pander to blacks to get their votes, there is no need for it because they will simply ignore your efforts. Republicans are better off standing strong on their ideals and the conservative principles and letting people come to the party than trying to go to different ethnic groups and cater a specific message to all of them.”
I concur. And about the so-called Southern Strategy, please read Martin Knight’s comment.
—————————————————————————————–
I’m only one black American among millions, and I’m no authority on black people, nor do I speak for black people.
But I can provide insight.
Back in 2004, Republicans were trying to appeal to black voters. Newt Gingrich and the rest wanted to secure at least 25 percent of the “black vote.” Dream on! I poured a bucket of water over their piddling flame. Won’t work, I said. I explained my reasoning in “Why Courting the Black Vote Won’t Work,” which was published in the Washington Times.
Unlike some black conservatives and Republicans I know, I don’t think the party should appeal to voters based on skin color. I criticize white Republicans when they do it, and I’m disappointed when right-leaning blacks encourage them to do it.
[click to continue…]
