Meghan McCain Is Totes Jealous Of Carrie Prejean
There’s one major issue that sets Meghan McCain apart from other Republicans — she’s in favor of legalizing gay marriage. I admire McCain for going against her party — and many in the Democratic Party as well — on this issue, but I loathe that she manages to make her pro-gay marriage stance all about her. Case in point: today’s completely non-sensical Daily Beast column, in which McCain somehow manages to argue that she, as a pro-gay marriage Republican, gets more s**t from her party than pro-sex tape/anti-gay marriage Carrie Prejean. “If you’re a Republican, is it better to be in favor of gay marriage or to make a sex tape? That is the question.” Ugh, really? McCain’s big point centers around Prejean’s appearance on Sean Hannity’s show, in which Hannity asked Prejean if she was in love with her boyfriend at the time that she made him the naughty vid. That, McCain says, should not matter.
“I’m sorry, why would being in love matter when it comes to filming yourself in a sexual context? … Making a sex tape is never acceptable. I don’t care how in love you are with your boyfriend … These tapes and photographs can ruin your career and your credibility, but it’s the laissez faire attitude toward them that I find so upsetting.”
But “if you make a sex tape, you’re a dumb ho” isn’t even McCain’s main point. She goes on to say that, apparently, you’re less of a dumb ho if you’re a Republican who made a sex tape whilst opposing gay marriage. In short, she’s jealous that she, Meghan “John’s Daughter” McCain, gets less love from her party than that dumb ho Carrie Prejean. Wah!
“I find it even more disturbing that as long as you oppose gay marriage, filming yourself having sex is taken more lightly. It seems that as long as you are against gay marriage, any scandal in your life can be overlooked or overcome. When you are in favor of it, however—and I have been very vocal about my support—that position defines you. Sometimes I wonder if I were against marriage equality, whether it would make it easier for some Republicans to accept my place within this party.”
But, Meghan, don’t you want your position on gay marriage to define you? Isn’t that why it’s one of your main talking points in your column and on your Twitter? Your position on gay marriage is what makes you special and sets you apart from a lot of people in your party — why are you complaining about that?
Is Carrie Prejean going to get less flack from conservatives about her sex tape(s) because she is so adamantly pro gay marriage? Look, one sex tape may have been excusable, but with seven others waiting in the wings, conservatives are gonna have a hard time supporting Prejean because her credibility and reputation have been sullied, and defending her will take too much effort. So congrats, Meghan. I’m pretty sure Prejean will be thrown out with the trash in 3, 2, 1 …
But I’m still confused as to what McCain actually wants. For Carrie Prejean to be slut-shamed by the party so that Republicans can prove that they’re not hypocritical? For the Republican party as a whole to embrace her — McCain — even though one of the issues she is most vocal about is one in which they are diametrically opposed? This is politics, Meghan, not an episode of “Sex and the City.” No one actually cares about each other.
Here’s the thing Meghan needs to be reminded of, again — not everything is about her. Carrie Prejean has been a darling of the Republican Party for a few months now because she was vocal about her opposition to gay marriage, and she drew a lot of media attention to that point of view. They’ve been using her and she’s been using them — hence her big, fat book deal. Now that her reputation has been sullied, they’ll drop her like a hot potato. They’ll find someone new to speak out about gay marriage or they’ll focus on a different social issue — like, say, abortion. Meghan McCain shares her party’s stance on choice — i.e., she’s against it. So why not pursue the warm, loving embrace that she so desperately wants by making that the issue that defines her? [Daily Beast]