Comments on: L.A. Times James Rainey, in Column About Miss California: There Is Far Too Much Discussion of Miss California

By: Patterico's Pontifications » Patterico’s Los Angeles Dog Trainer Year in Review 2009

Fri, 01 Jan 2010 18:34:56 +0000

[...] sanctimoniously proclaimed that there had been too much coverage of Miss California — in a column about Miss California. Complete with a picture of Miss [...]

By: Cassy

Cassy — Tue, 12 May 2009 20:24:26 +0000

“UPDATE: Speaking of Miss California and journalism, there is a raging journalistic debate regarding whether she can claim to be a Christian while posing for pictures like the one below the fold. Feel free to weigh in on this Important Journalistic Question.”

How much debate was there when she was standing on a stage for millions to gawk at wearing 3 ounces of fabric in what they claim was a bathing suit, that didn’t quite cover her fake boobs? Seriously. She showed a lot more during the pageant than she is showing in that black dress or nightie.

By: Cam Winston

Cam Winston — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 16:58:06 +0000

Lighten up. I was doing that as a transparent excuse to post the picture.

Duly noted, but I think that you haven’t made your case well enough and separate post with several more pictures are necessary before I can accept your premise, kind sir.

By: Michael Ejercito

Michael Ejercito — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 04:42:31 +0000

I’m not giving a pass to Miss Califoria because, yes, as a matter of fact, what’s she’s doing (intentionally provoking lustful thoughts and/or actions) is sinful.

But then without provoking lustful thoughts, how could they get husbands?

By: Michael Ejercito

Michael Ejercito — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 04:39:27 +0000

There would not be a controversy if Perez Hilton had not decided to emulate Fred Phelps’s level of civility.

By: lu-ee

lu-ee — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 03:11:07 +0000

Mr. Rostrom, is it possible to get the exact date of the Time magazine you read about the excommunication. I just did a search in Time magazines online archives and could not find the article you alluded to. went all the way back to 1923. Thanks.

lu-ee

By: Rich Rostrom

Rich Rostrom — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 02:24:49 +0000

“… [can she] claim to be a Christian while posing for pictures like [this] one…”

A few days ago, I happened to be looking through some TIME magazines from 1940. I noticed (in passing) a squib about a beauty-pageant constestant threatened with excommunication by a Catholic archbishop for appearing in the swimsuit competition.

So… not that long ago, this sort of thing was a real issue.

By: carlitos

carlitos — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 01:34:09 +0000

I’m guessing that they didn’t teach “sense of humor” at subsunk’s Sunday school today.

By: Subsunk

Subsunk — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 01:31:16 +0000

whether she can claim to be a Christian while posing for pictures like the one below

Duh. Is this a trick question? Where’s the pornography?

Doesn’t the Bible look favorably on a woman’s attempts to find a husband, impressing him with her looks, and proving her love by bearing his children?

Of course, she is still Christian posed that way. Only stupid folks could think otherwise. Or the Taliban! This is all a kerfluffle generated by what Godless liberals “believe” Christians think. They wouldn’t know a Christian thought or action even if smitten by thunderbolts from heaven.

What kind of idiotic question is that?

Subsunk

By: SteveG

SteveG — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 00:37:06 +0000

#17 seems a little self congratulatory…. I’m wondering how I sock puppetted myself without knowing it.