Paris Hilton responds to McCain – UPDATED

UPDATE: Some Republicans actually like the “Paris Hilton Plan”

Not sure just what to make of this. I suppose the McCain campaign opened the door for this stuff.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, August 6th, 2008 at 3:49 pm and is filed under Election, Humor, Policraticus, Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

51 Responses to “Paris Hilton responds to McCain – UPDATED”

  1. Katerina says:
    August 6, 2008 at 4:08 pm

    We make nothing out of it. This is a waste of our time.

  2. Morning's Minion says:
    August 6, 2008 at 4:44 pm

    Amazing–she sounds more coherant than McCain on energy policy!

  3. David Nickol says:
    August 6, 2008 at 5:04 pm

    Is this going to break down along party lines? I thought it was hilarious. I think she could whip McCain in a debate, based on his performance at the Sturgis Motorcycle rally.

    I would like to see the outcry from conservative Catholics if Barack Obama volunteered, even playfully, his wife Michelle for a topless (and sometimes bottomless, and more!) bikers’ “beauty pageant”!

  4. blackadderiv says:
    August 6, 2008 at 5:27 pm

    This McCain supporter found the video highly amusing.

  5. SB says:
    August 6, 2008 at 5:39 pm

    We make nothing out of it. This is a waste of our time.

    As has been every other post analyzing campaign ads.

    But this was indeed pretty funny.

  6. Christopher says:
    August 6, 2008 at 5:54 pm

    Brilliant and IMHO, well deserved.

    Nice to see (judging from the McCain campaign’s response) they have a sense of humor.

  7. jonathanjones02 says:
    August 6, 2008 at 6:39 pm

    I hope McCain changes on ANWAR, just as Obama did on the strategic oil reserve. Politicians respond to voters and groups (which are never stationary), and this is all fun to watch. The GOP has no better issue than energy, and it’s a very powerful one.

    Paris did a good job on the response.

  8. Daniel H. Conway says:
    August 6, 2008 at 7:19 pm

    The McCain ad that launched bit of cunning satire used Paris Hilton and Brittany Spears as insulting comparisons to Barack Obama. The McCain team managed to insult three people (one of whom is a largely mentally ill young woman). While Obama is fair game, I thought it was somewhat gratuitous to insult Ms. Hilton and Ms. Spears.

    And Ms. Hilton seems to have a decent sense of humor-taking on the character “Paris Hilton-party girl” and some fun satirical posturing.

    Good delivery, good timing, good fun.

  9. Postmodern Papist says:
    August 6, 2008 at 8:18 pm

    I thought it was hilarious and well crafted. Our hyper-politicized society could use more jesters. Laughter is a powerful tool, especially when aimed at the powerful. I hope to see more of this kind of thing.

  10. Bridget says:
    August 6, 2008 at 8:30 pm

    Why would Vox Nova waste our time showing this Paris Hilton Garbage. Readers, should go to InsideCatholic Blog to read quality stuff.

  11. Mark DeFrancisis says:
    August 6, 2008 at 8:44 pm

    “Readers, should go to InsideCatholic Blog to read quality stuff.”

    Is not the web-morph of Crisis magazine? What a jester you are, Ms. Bridget!!!!

  12. Mark DeFrancisis says:
    August 6, 2008 at 8:48 pm

    Donahue, Hudson and various Scalia offspring?!!!!

    That’s quality stock….

    I wonder how much they are paid by paid to write the propaganda therein?

  13. digbydolben says:
    August 6, 2008 at 8:53 pm

    Paris seems to have more sense than a lot of American politicians. Maybe a ____ should be your President!

    Comment edited by a blog administrator.

  14. Policraticus says:
    August 6, 2008 at 10:03 pm

    Readers, should go to InsideCatholic Blog to read quality stuff.

    Whatever may be the quality of the “stuff” at Inside Catholic, the truth is that, like the liberality taken in U.S. Catholicism after Vatican II, Inside Catholic is a reduction of Catholic identity to political concern. Such reductionism, be it of the liberal or conservative mode, is, indeed, just “stuff.”

  15. Christopher says:
    August 6, 2008 at 10:08 pm

    Pot meet Kettle?

  16. Morning's Minion says:
    August 6, 2008 at 11:23 pm

    “Readers, should go to InsideCatholic Blog to read quality stuff.”

    A choice between Paris Hilton and Deal Hudson? Hmmm…

  17. Mark DeFrancisis says:
    August 7, 2008 at 8:58 am

    “A Few Words in Defense of Our Country .”

    by Randy Newman

    I’d like to say a few words
    In defense of our country
    Whose people aren’t bad nor are they mean
    Now the leaders we have
    While they’re the worst that we’ve had
    Are hardly the worst this poor world has seen

    Let’s turn history’s pages, shall we?

    Take the Caesars for example
    Why within the first few of them
    They were sleeping with their sister
    Stashing little boys in swimming pools
    And burning down the City
    And one of ‘em, one of ‘em
    Appointed his own horse Consul of the Empire
    That’s like vice president or something

    That’s not a very good example, is it?

    But wait, here’s one, the Spanish Inquisition
    They put people in a terrible position
    I don’t even like to think about it

    Well, sometimes I like to think about it

    Just a few words in defense of our country
    Whose time at the top
    Could be coming to an end
    Now we don’t want their love
    And respect at this point is pretty much out of the question
    But in times like these
    We sure could use a friend

    Hitler. Stalin.
    Men who need no introduction

    King Leopold of Belgium. That’s right.
    Everyone thinks he’s so great
    Well he owned The Congo
    He tore it up too
    He took the diamonds, he took the gold
    He took the silver
    Know what he left them with?

    Malaria

    A President once said,
    “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself”
    Now it seems like we’re supposed to be afraid
    It’s patriotic in fact and color coded
    And what are we supposed to be afraid of?
    Why, of being afraid
    That’s what terror means, doesn’t it?
    That’s what it used to mean

    [To the first eight bars of "Columbia The Gem Of The Ocean"]

    You know it pisses me off a little
    That this Supreme Court is gonna outlive me
    A couple of young Italian fellas and a brother on the Court now too
    But I defy you, anywhere in the world
    To find me two Italians as tightass as the two Italians we got

    And as for the brother
    Well, Pluto’s not a planet anymore either

    The end of an empire is messy at best
    And this empire is ending
    Like all the rest
    Like the Spanish Armada adrift on the sea
    We’re adrift in the land of the brave
    And the home of the free

    Goodbye. Goodbye. Goodbye.

  18. Policraticus says:
    August 7, 2008 at 9:05 am

    Pot meet Kettle?

    Are you suggesting that we reduce Catholicism to politics here?

  19. bill bannon says:
    August 7, 2008 at 9:08 am

    Kudos to Paris for putting an end to any chance of a candidate using her again in an ad.
    As it is, the election is turning into a “he said he said” game of sound bite tag. Paris has rendered a service. Unless Mc Cain wants her to point out his age again, he will be silent on her from here on in and hopefully will choose content over tag.

  20. blackadderiv says:
    August 7, 2008 at 9:13 am

    Randy Newman, isn’t he that “short people got no reason to live” guy?

  21. Policraticus says:
    August 7, 2008 at 9:14 am

    I think you’re right, Bill.

  22. Mark DeFrancisis says:
    August 7, 2008 at 9:34 am

    BA,

    Yes. Why did you remnd me, as I am barely 5’9″…

    It just reminded me of reactions to trips to Europe.

  23. Bridget says:
    August 7, 2008 at 11:26 am

    Any Catholic worth his salt realizes what Vox Nova is all about after hanging out here for approximately one minute. Electing OBAMA – the great Infanticide promoter is your main goal! One doesn’t have to read this blog for too long without realizing the staff bloggers are tired liberals from the 60′s who’s messages are falling on deaf ears of faithful Catholics. I’ve never read nastier bloggers than the staff at this blog who l”enjoy” ripping Hudson & Donohue apartand for that matter, any conservative blogger. Where is your Catholic charity. Can’t stand the truth being told by other catholic sites, huh? Yes, Inside Catholic does put out quality articles BASED ON TRUTH, NOT MANIPULATION AND LIES!

  24. Mark DeFrancisis says:
    August 7, 2008 at 11:49 am

    Bridget,

    You are hilarious. As I understand it, all bloggers here, save one, were born post-1970.

  25. phosphorious says:
    August 7, 2008 at 11:51 am

    Is it just me or are Conservatives. . . and not just conservative catholics. . . projecting their own vices on to their opponents?

    After eight years of essentially being in the bag for Bush, of attempting to use the sacraments to support a known torturer. . . . suddenly conservatives are SHOCKED to see politics put before religion.

    Has the church ever been this full of dismal partisan hacks?

  26. Padrevic says:
    August 7, 2008 at 12:09 pm

    I thought the video was hilarious! We need more jesters in our realm. And some Holy fools in our Church. Maybe some need to take a deep breathe and enjoy life. It was a sketch, and a funny one at that. Have a great day all.

    peace to all

  27. Bridget says:
    August 7, 2008 at 12:38 pm

    Henry the 111V “chose” what doctrine he wanted to believe of the Catholic Faith – he was a “cafeteria” catholic like the staff bloggers here and possibly like the bloggers who visit here. Remember, he (Henry the eitht) started a heresy in the church and a new religion, which incidentally, is in deep trouble due to their liberalism. I don’t consider this site an “Authentic Catholic Site”. It’s heretical and any faithful Catholic would well do to keep away from it or you’ll end up believing their “twisted” so called social catholic doctrine beliefs. They are the”hug a tree, kill a baby” crowd.

  28. Mark DeFrancisis says:
    August 7, 2008 at 12:56 pm

    And I guess you are of the “cause 100s of 1000s of innocent Iraqi deaths, while adoring Christ in authentic liturgy” crowd.

    Ms. Bridget, I hope you are young and have a wonderful education ahead of you.

    And if poor “Henry the 111V” would not have had is Church annullment politically delayed…

  29. Bridget says:
    August 7, 2008 at 1:59 pm

    Mr. Mark -

    What about the innocent Iraqi people killed under Saddam? AND what about the “millions” of innocent babies, mind you, not “thousands” killed since Roe/Wade. Every innocent death is a tragedy, even the soldiers who were sent to liberate the country from tyranny. However, these people have had a chance at life, innocent slaughtered babies, have not even taken a breath! You say you’re “for social justice”… where is your fighting spirit for the weakest link in our society, namely our not-yet born babies. There is more violence going on in the wombs of women than all the recent wars combined. Like I said, you pick you’re cause which is to oppose catholic authentic catholic teaching THAT, foremost, ALL LIFE IS SECRET, INCLUDING THOSE IN THE WOMB. Your “social justice” banner is GET OBAMA,ELECTED who will continue promoting the killing theatres of these babies. Your opposition to “any war”, is puzzling are you not familiar to the “just war theory” – that can be left up to an “informed” conscience unlike abortion, which is never negotiable. They DO NOT CARRY THE SAME EQUAL “MORAL VALUE”. As far as my education is concerned, what does it matter to you? Truth does not only belong to the educated. I do recall that the Jesuits, despite their “high intellectual & education” have been the priests called to Rome the most often for their “disobedience” to authentic truth. Again, your site is just a cover to get Obama elected and promote liberalism in the church! You need to get out of the 60′s era of liberalism, which has done so much destruction to the church and family life in general and start truely being a catholic dedicated to TRUTH, ie. CATHOLIC TRUTH, not Vox Nova truth.

  30. Policraticus says:
    August 7, 2008 at 2:01 pm

    I think Bridget’s outburst (communicated by the use of caps lock) is indicative of the sort of breakdown of thinking that marks the essays of Hudson and Donohue. The quick stereotyping and the ensuing elevation of a clearly partisan commentator (Hudson) exhibits a painful intellectual paralysis. Consider these points:

    Electing OBAMA – the great Infanticide promoter is your main goal!

    Given that only two out of twelve contributors have indicated on this blog that they will be supporting Obama, two contibutoris have indicated on this blog that they will be voting for McCain, one contributor has indicated that he will not vote for other, I think this conclusion is the result of supposition and uncharitable reading rather than honest reflection and thought. In fact, if you have read anything I write, I have criticized both Obama and McCain, but have only praised McCain.

    One doesn’t have to read this blog for too long without realizing the staff bloggers are tired liberals from the 60’s who’s messages are falling on deaf ears of faithful Catholics.

    I was born in 1979, really engaged the Catholic faith in 1998, and tend to overemphasize the authority of Pope Benedict XVI, I’d say your reliance on stereotypes is all too evident.

    I’ve never read nastier bloggers than the staff at this blog who l”enjoy” ripping Hudson & Donohue apartand for that matter,

    Some contributors (especially MM and I) do rip apart the messages of Hudson and Dononhue because they are typically intellectually and faithfully meritless. If you want an example of someone “enjoying ripping apart” people, then check out some Donohue clips on YouTube.

    Can’t stand the truth being told by other catholic sites, huh?

    Truth is important to all of us, no matter who states it.

    Yes, Inside Catholic does put out quality articles BASED ON TRUTH, NOT MANIPULATION AND LIES!

    What lies have we told? Could you really believe that a site run by a Republican-affiliated and ideologically strapped conservative is free from manipulation? Please.

    I don’t consider this site an “Authentic Catholic Site”. It’s heretical and any faithful Catholic would well do to keep away from it or you’ll end up believing their “twisted” so called social catholic doctrine beliefs.

    Please point out to us the heresy found at this site and which elements of Catholic social teaching have been twisted.

    They are the”hug a tree, kill a baby” crowd.

    Which contributor fits this description? Can you back up anything you claim?

  31. Mark DeFrancisis says:
    August 7, 2008 at 2:13 pm

    Bridget,

    Let me disabuse you of the false notion that I am a part of Vox Nova. I have nothing formally to do with this site;I always come here most unannounced. Just ask any poster, and he/she will confirm this. :)

    And like you, I am absolutely against abortion and all of its personal and social tragedy. Mind you, hovever, that a Republican president was in power at Roe v. Wade’s passage and has been during 2/3 of the time since then.

    I hope you realize too that only two bloggers here officially haave announced their intention of voting for Obama.

  32. Bridget says:
    August 7, 2008 at 2:32 pm

    Policraticus -

    When you refute statments made against your site you alway write in the language of “politics”, eg. Republican, conservative, etc.- which leads one to view your site as a political blog (rather than a Catholic one) to promote liberalism (Democrat Party agenda.) You attack Hudson, Donoughue, and conservative bloggers for defending the Catholic Church’s teaching. Let’s face it – the PARTY OF LIFE is the Republican Party. If the party of Life was the the Democrats I would definitely give it a 2nd look. But THE PARTY OF DEATH right now is the left wing of the Democratic party of which your site is a strong supporter, You pick and chose from the faith what YOU deem is important according to you beliefs in order to promote your liberalism, not your Catholic faith!

  33. Policraticus says:
    August 7, 2008 at 3:01 pm

    You attack Hudson, Donoughue, and conservative bloggers for defending the Catholic Church’s teaching. Let’s face it – the PARTY OF LIFE is the Republican Party. If the party of Life was the the Democrats I would definitely give it a 2nd look. But THE PARTY OF DEATH right now is the left wing of the Democratic party of which your site is a strong supporter, You pick and chose from the faith what YOU deem is important according to you beliefs in order to promote your liberalism, not your Catholic faith!

    And, behold, you reveal the source of your error. Setting aside your assertion that the Republican Party is the “party of life” (it’s not), you conclude that we must all be Democrats because we oppose “conservative bloggers.” A few points:

    1. Hudson and Donohue are, indeed, “conservative” and they do believe that they are “defending the Catholic Church’s teaching.” What I challenge, and anyone who actually reads the history and teachings of the Church would too, is their aptitude, ability, and knowledge in doing so. I question their understanding of the faith. I have done several posts on Hudson’s many historical and doctrinal errors in his books and articles. I invite you to read through them:

    Deal Hudson and those “liberal” U.S. bishops

    What’s the Deal with Deal?

    2. The problem with your reasoning is two-fold: 1. you seem to think that being a “conservative” and being a faithful Catholic go hand in hand (though do not necessarily); 2. someone who disagrees with Hudson and Donohue is not “defending the Catholic Church’s teaching.” Once more, I ask you to show where I or anyone at this blog has attacked the Church’s teaching (as opposed to defended it).

    3. I am not a Democrat, nor am I going to vote for Obama. This seems to expose the wretched stereotypes you apply and nullify your critique. In fact, I believe I have been the biggest critic of Obama at this blog among the contributors.

    4. This blog is resiliently Catholic at its core. Hence, those who think only in binomials (conservative vs. liberal; Democrat vs. Republican) may have difficulty identifying this. I think you may be confusing us with InsideCatholic, which is political first and only secondarily Catholic. If you strip Hudson’s pieces of their politics, there is nothing left but ruins. No Catholic substance.

  34. Zach says:
    August 7, 2008 at 3:48 pm

    Poli,

    You are not a Democrat, but you have admitted in the past that you prefer democratic socialism to democratic capitalism. This places you decidedly in the camp of Democratic, liberal, (modern American use) thinkers. Why do you avoid admitting this?

  35. Policraticus says:
    August 7, 2008 at 4:17 pm

    You are not a Democrat, but you have admitted in the past that you prefer democratic socialism to democratic capitalism. This places you decidedly in the camp of Democratic, liberal, (modern American use) thinkers. Why do you avoid admitting this?

    I’m not sure I understand the question. Democratic socialism, despite the similar name, rests outside the current American liberal democratic paradigm both historically and ideologically. Perhaps you can clarify what you mean by saying that Democratic socialism is somehow congruent–squarely congruent, for that matter–with American liberalism. Pope Benedict XVI, in his work Europe, likewise considers democratic socialism, which he praises as close to Catholic social teaching, as different in origin and kind form liberal democracy.

  36. Bridget says:
    August 7, 2008 at 4:57 pm

    Vox Nova bloggers are intellectually dishonest. They skirt around issues presented to them and go off on a tangent. I consider it a waste of my time hanging out here. My time is better spent reading sites/articles of real intellectual dept. I’ll leave the Vox Nove people to roll in their drivel.

  37. Henry Karlson says:
    August 7, 2008 at 6:04 pm

    Bridget

    I do think it might be a waste of your time, but it is because you are unwilling to engage people who don’t think like you. Anyway, I wonder if you criticized other blogs, like Mark Shea’s, for posting the video? Or is it only a problem for us?

  38. Bridget says:
    August 7, 2008 at 6:11 pm

    Henry Karlson -

    Your quote”because you are unwilling to engage people who don’t think like you”. Hmm, I read people’s views on this blog and it seems to me they DON’T THINK AT ALL! They’re just brainwashed by Morons like you!

  39. Henry Karlson says:
    August 7, 2008 at 6:18 pm

    Bridget

    Glad to see you continue to read the blog after all. Maybe you will learn something yet. But if you do leave, fine. I don’t think we will be the ones missing out.

  40. Bridget says:
    August 7, 2008 at 6:30 pm

    No of course you won’t miss me, you will continue to roll in your muck and eat it too! Not my game!

  41. Zach says:
    August 7, 2008 at 7:08 pm

    I don’t agree that democratic socialism rests “outside” of the American tradition. It’s very similar to if not identical to the type of government advocated by Democrats and liberals. Why do you think Europe is so in love with Barack Obama?

  42. Zach says:
    August 7, 2008 at 7:10 pm

    If it indeed rests outside the liberal tradition, could you briefly explain to me exactly how that is the case?

  43. Mark DeFrancisis says:
    August 7, 2008 at 9:13 pm

    I don’t know Bridget. That stuff that has been coming out of your mouth herein makes me tink otherwise…

    BTW, Are your parents guarding your internet activity? As a responsible adult, I am worried about you.

  44. Policraticus says:
    August 7, 2008 at 9:26 pm

    Wow, Bridget is still hanging around slinging mud. I wonder if all her talk of our being intellectually dishonest has made her forget that she has failed to back up any of her claims, which seems to me to be a form of intellectual dishonesty.

  45. HA says:
    August 7, 2008 at 9:31 pm

    The…ad…used Paris Hilton and Brittany Spears…(one of whom is a largely mentally ill young woman).

    One of them? Can you be a tad more specific?

  46. Grab the popcorn | The Cranky Conservative says:
    August 7, 2008 at 9:47 pm

    [...] is a point that Zach makes on his blog. There are certain commentators who like to think they argue from an unbiased or non-partisan point of view.* In the attempt to be [...]

  47. Tony says:
    August 7, 2008 at 10:36 pm

    Heck, Paris is probably more qualified to be President than Obama. In a match-off between the two, I’d vote for her.

  48. Mark DeFrancisis says:
    August 8, 2008 at 1:37 am

    Tony,

    Are you sure:

  49. Zach says:
    August 8, 2008 at 8:14 am

    Poli

    Are you going to explain to me how democratic socialism is substantively different from the policies advocated by the Democrats or liberals?

    A quick correction to my post: As far as democratic socialism being outside the liberal tradition, I think that’s probably right. But Democratic policies are well outside the liberal tradition as well. The democratic socialist and the American liberal both accept illiberal, statist policies that reject the idea of limited government and advocate for massive redistribution of wealth at the hands of the demos.

    So, as I said before- why do you not admit that you are in the same camp as these people? Why are you unwilling to admit you are a liberal or progressive in the American sense of the terms?

  50. Policraticus says:
    August 9, 2008 at 9:49 am

    Are you going to explain to me how democratic socialism is substantively different from the policies advocated by the Democrats or liberals?

    Briefly, they are different in origin (geographically and ideologically). While there may be some commonalities in policy choices, social democracy/democratic socialism takes as its starting communal solidarity over and above individual rights, which is a more Anglo-American starting point. The Democratic Party in the U.S., for all its emphasis on social welfare, still begins from individual rights. Thus, I dispute your claim here:

    But Democratic policies are well outside the liberal tradition as well.

    The Democrats and Republicans are surprising aligned in their fundamental principles of individual rights and exchange.

    So, as I said before- why do you not admit that you are in the same camp as these people?

    Because I am not in that camp, plain and simple. I do not work for Democrats, I have never voted for Democrats, and I do not endorse any Democratic candidate locally or nationally.

    Why are you unwilling to admit you are a liberal or progressive in the American sense of the terms?

    I am progressive on many social questions, but insanely “conservative” on moral and foundational issues (e.g., family, morality, promotion of virtue). I would be lost among Democrats if I were to artfully join them.

  51. Zach says:
    August 9, 2008 at 3:08 pm

    Hmm, I don’t know about either of those claims, i.e. that they are different in origin and philosophy. I need a bit more time to think about this and to provide coherent thoughts, but here is my initial knee-jerk rejoinder.

    Most of the policies advocated by Democrats are indeed outside the liberal tradition in that they totally reject the notion of limited, mixed, and Constitutional government. They may begin from rights but that is not where they end up. Democrats are interested in individual rights insofar as those rights are supported by some constituency; they do not assert rights against the government because they believe the government can become too powerful, but because those rights are something people – the community – wants.

    I don’t know what it means to say that social democracy takes as it’s starting point communal solidarity. I don’t think it means much. They are still democrats, they believe in the principles of democracy – one vote per person. In this much, they support the individual rights of the citizens to control their government. They may not have as much of a tradition of rights (Great Britain excepted), but they certainly have incorporated many of the same principles in their post WW2 governments.