Paris Hilton Responds to John McCain "Celebrity" Ad

This will very likely be the only time I post a video from Paris Hilton. At least it is an MSNBC clip from Countdown with Keith Olbermann. And by the way, Ms. Hilton, that was hot.

McCain's "The One" Targeting Left Behind Readers?

As noted here in several posts, John McCain has had a series of back-to-back attack ads, all attempting to portray Barack Obama in a negative light. In large part, they are all based on Obama's perceived image (or at least that which the right wishes to portray). Like the PUMA Hillary Clinton supporters, they are projecting the way that Obama is talked about in the press, and the behavior of some of his more ardent supporters onto Obama himself.

They are doing so with a lot of distortions, out-of-context quotes, and sometimes outright lies. But that isn't the point of this post. I'm more interested in what McCain hopes to illicit from these ads. In the recent Paris Hilton/Britney spears ad (seriously), bloggers and cable news speculated that the intent was to portray Obama as an empty, airy celebrity. Famous for being famous and nothing more. And a hint of race-baiting with two hot white chicks and a black man.

But what about the new ad, "The One?" This ad--stealing Rush Limbaugh's current theme--casts Obama as a self-proclaimed messiah. His supporters are his adoring flock, and Obama will deliver us. Is the ad trying to paint Obama as conceited and self-important now? Or is there a more insidious aim, as with the race-baiting?

Then I got to thinking about the fabled Republican base. Family values. God, guns and (no) gays. The Heartland. Left Behind readers! In that apocolyptic Christian fiction series of books, a charismatic, self-proclaimed messiah captures world adulation. On his charisma (and help from the Devil), he changes the world--and ushers in the rapture and the tribulation! Is this what McCain is getting at? Is he trying to portray Barack Obama as the Anti-Christ?

Just wonderin'! Here's the ad again. Make up your own mind.




Turns out, I wasn't the only one wondering. From Daily Kos: McCain's Left Behind Attack

John McCain "Proud" of Britney Spears/Paris Hilton Ad

Yesterday, I posted a couple of pieces on the ludicrous (heh) John McCain attack ad, featuring Paris Hilton and Britney Spears alongside Barack Obama. The ad is nonsense, and could even be seen as subliminally racist, without having to pull your tinfoil hat down very hard.

Surprisingly, when asked about it, John McCain says he's proud of it. Really?



[Excerpt]

McCain: 'We're Proud of That Commercial'

ABC News' David Wright reports: Who knew Paris and Britney would ever be a campaign issue???

The McCain campaign's decision to feature the women in a 30-second spot accusing rival Sen. Barack Obama of being a shallow celebrity has consumed the campaign debate today. . .

Read more (with video) at: ABC News

More on the McCain Obama/Paris/Britney Ad

Photo from source, AOL News

Because I was too stunned to write much about it. . .

[Excerpt]

McCain Math: Paris + Britney = Obama

In one of the more puzzling uses of celebrity in a campaign ad that we can recall, John McCain is trying to cut down Barack Obama's rock star-like popularity by likening the Democratic presidential candidate to Paris Hilton and Britney Spears. . .

Read more at: AOL News

New McCain Ad: Barack = Paris + Britney?

Sometimes, you just don't know what to say. In his latest attack ad (in a long string), John McCain is likening Barack Obama to. . .celebutards Paris Hilton and Britney Spears. Yeah, I know, I don't get it either.

This is a stunningly bad ad.

Kathy Griffin on Celebutard Paris Hilton (Straight to Hell)

The Other Half and I are off for the evening to see Kathy Griffin at the Mandalay Bay. She's a personal favorite, even when she's nattering on about celebrities I know nothing about. For instance, in this clip, she rips Paris Hilton--a celebutard that I have tried desperately to avoid learning anything about. And Kathy makes it hilarious. See what all the fuss is about. . .

Wildfires in California, Worst Ever?

Photo from source, News.AOL.com

I don't mind when a big story takes over the news, if the story is legitimate. This one counts. But how long will it be before the primary focus becomes something like, "Fire Brings Brad Pitt Back to Jennifer Aniston, Both to Rebuild Burned House," or "Paris Hilton's Dog Singed, the Inside Story!"

[Excerpt]

Wildfires Force at Least 250,000 to Flee

SAN DIEGO (Oct. 22) --Wildfires fanned by fierce desert winds consumed huge swaths of bone-dry Southern California on Monday, burning dozens of buildings and threatening hundreds more from Malibu to San Diego, including a jail, a hospital and nursing homes.

Read more here: News.AOL.com

The Media's New Shiny Thing: O.J. Simpson

Photo from DougHenning.com

You know the drill. A celebrity or politician does something outrageous or stupid. A girl goes missing in Aruba. A talentless heiress ODs, and leaves a baby behind. . .

A 24/7 news obsession is born, and almost nothing else gets reported. And now we're treated to reruns--O.J. Simpson, again. Like the Jon Benet story, this one grew new legs this week.

Now, I know I'm guilty of some of this too. I wrote a story about O.J. earlier, a couple on the Britney train wreck performance, a Paris Hilton story. And of course, Larry Craig. But hey, that stuff's funny, I don't care who you are. It's easy to get sucked in (ahem, sorry).

But I'd like to think we're capable of focusing on more than one thing at a time. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration just loves distractions like this. It's the perfect opportunity to do some more nefarious things while nobody is looking. Whether they can be as good at that post-Rove, I have no idea. Just be looking at what the left hand is doing while the right one is dangling sparkly things before your eyes.

The News Has Been Cancelled!

That is the clarion call of Randi Rhodes of Air America Radio. And boy, is she ever right. If there isn't a Paris Hilton, Anna Nicole or "missing white woman" story captivating the media, they'll find some other sparkly thing to attract the viewers. Let me give you an example.

We went out to breakfast, ran errands, and then did housework for the first half of the day, so I had no idea what was going on in the world this Sunday. So, I sat down in my office, and turned on the TV. And here what was on:

• CNN: "In the Money" with a very fluffy piece about cell phones with cameras



• FOX "News": Ollie North's "War Stories"



• CNN Headline News: Big fat alligator with trainer. Whaa?



• MSNBC: Crime documentary, "MSNBC Reports"

I just want the news! I tried the various web sites for the above mentioned networks, and while you can find news there, it is usually buried in the "boring" columns, away from the flashy pictures of Paris Hilton, and that missing Ohio lady (which is a sad story, but come on, a LOCAL one). I went over to the BBC, and there was some actual news:

Guantanamo closure 'not soon'
Nader mulling White House run
Extend Afghan tour, Canada told
'Drug baron' caught in Colombia
US Senate seeks fuel efficiency
House overturns abortion aid ban
N Korea 'ready to shut reactor'
"Amistad" retraces slave route
Blackstone float raises $4.13bn
New Orleans 'still a flood risk'
'Al-Qaeda gunmen' killed in Iraq

To be fair, this was also in one of their "boring" no pictures columns, but it is a far more newsworthy list than you'll find on any of the US News sites I looked at today. Oh, just checked out FOX "News" one more time. . .an interview with Carly Simon. "What advice would you have about keeping it real?" I'm not kidding, she was just asked that question seconds ago. My advice: REPORT THE FLIPPING NEWS!!!

We'll Always Have Paris

Which came first, idiocy in the news media, or in the populace? That chicken and egg question has come up many times in my social circle, and we never really resolve it. There seems to be a weekly distraction that bumps virtually every valid news story off the air, on all the news channels. Is the news media inherently ridiculous, or is the public stupid, and really just love this stuff?

Our latest news-hole (no pun intended), is every action or inaction made or not made by Paris Hilton. She is only the latest in a very long series of these news-suckers (again, no pun intended). We've had Chandra Levy (not her fault, of course), O. J. Simpson, Britney Spears, Robert Blake, Natalee Halloway, Jon Benet, and of course the budding romance between Natalee's Mom and Jon Benet's Dad. How sweet! If they adopt Anna Nicole's baby, it will be a tabloid trifecta!

It does seem with the latest one-two-three punch of Anna Nicole's death, Britney's breakdown, and Paris goes to jail, that we are really scraping the bottom of the barrel. Excepting Britney's very limited vocal talent, these women are basically famous for being famous. This used to be a role inhabited by Zsa Zsa Gabor or Charo. And hey, at least they had those wacky accents! How did this group of "celebutards" (thanks, Stephanie Miller!) become more important than actual world and national affairs?

News of Joint Chiefs Chairman Peter Pace's resignation was cut off to bring us the essential footage of Paris leaving her house, and getting in her car to go to court. On MSNBC, you could actually hear someone screaming in the background on the set, either in urgency or disgust, I'm not sure which.

The news media has always been attracted to bright sparkly objects. But you'd think with three 24-hour news channels, you'd get more news. Paradoxically, we get less. The news media seems completely unable to focus on ANY important news anymore. The Anna Nicoles and Parises somehow manage to eclipse virtually everything else, except during those perfect storms when more than one celebutard does something off the wall. Has anyone noticed that MSNBC and FOX "news" actually interrupt their programs every hour or so--for news breaks? It's kind of like when MTV interrupts programming to show us some music.

I remember when the tabloids first crossed over to television. There was a horde of programs like Hard Copy, Inside Edition and A Current Affair (hosted by, surprise, Bill O'Reilly). These shows were somewhere between Entertainment Tonight and The Jerry Springer Show. But nobody confused them with NEWS. And yet somehow, all of the news networks decide to shovel this shizz at us, and then claim it's what we want. It is? Am I the only person who leaps for the remote whenever there is a Paris story on?

There has to be a market for REAL NEWS. If MSNBC really wants to set itself apart, and finally get out of third place, maybe Dan Abrams should give the whole network a make over. Save celeb gossip and news for short stinger segments at the end of the program (like Keith Olbermann's Countdown often does). If it's a huge story, like Linday Lohan cut off her leg because she likes the pirate look--mention it, give the details, and move on. Focus on the big stuff that happened in the world. If you must have commentary shows, comment on important stuff, not "Rosie Vs. the Donald" garbage. I'll bet MSNBC would catapult to first, and it would set such an example. I can't believe I'm the only one sick of all the tripe.