Carrie Prejean has made herself worser by publicly supporting her incorrect view of LGBT rights. With her serving as a GOP recruiter to get young people to vote for that political party, she won't achieve much because a lot of young people support the very important right of same-sex marriage. The subtitle on the front cover of that magazine is wrong because same-sex marriage is inevitable for the greatness of LGBT equality.

Beauty Queens, even disgraced ones, aren't known for their brains! She needs to climb down off the cross, we need the wood! She was removed because she was too busy to perform her duties as Miss California! She was busy promoting herself.

Okay, I almost put this disclosure at the bottom, but I figured I would give fair warning ahead of time. This comment begins with Prejean and ends on not so much Prejean, but it somewhat ties together. Hopefully you can see the conclusion that I came to - yes a lot of it is a rant, but mostly not about Prejean.

After thinking about this since this article was posted, could anyone imagine if she was on "our side?" My criticism never stemmed from her views on marriage equality, my criticism was stemmed in her inability to speak the English language in a coherent manner when under pressure. I mean seriously, when she gave her answer at the Miss USA pageant she made Dubya seem like a frickin' genious.

My other thought is in regards to the "big tent" theory. We see what happens when you adopt the "big tent" philosophy: the good, the bad, and the ugly. Although I don't blame him entirely, Rahm Emmanuel created a mess for the Democratic Party (hence my returning to being an independent) by recruiting Blue Dog Representatives and Blue Dogesque Senators. So the Party are trying to accomodate everyone and anyone while they sell out the progressives who USED to make up the majority within the party. That majority has now dwindled for which the party has now become filled to the brim with "moderates" (aka Democrats in Name Only - also referred to as DINOs.)

Seriously, look at what is happening on the health care front. People overwhelmingly voted to Democrats into office to only cut off their noses to spite their face. Last session of Congress, Republicans had 49 seats in the Senate, they lost 9 (including Specter's switch.) Democrats have 60 - a super-majority - and they are accomodating the Republicans. They are allowing the Republicans frame the debate as if the Republicans had won a super-majority.

Sorry went off on a tangent, but my point is, what is the use in having a big tent if you are going to have people stiffling progress at every turn? This same scenario holds less true for the Republicans as they follow more in lock-step behind each other as if they were in the North Korean Army. The Democrats? Not so much. When the Republicans were in power, it only took 51 votes in the Senate to pass ANY legislation, but when the Democrats are in power, all of the sudden it takes 60? WTF? Excuse that acronym, but that is exactly how I feel at this point.

I know that it would never happen, but I think this is the strongest argument to turn our Congress into a system of proportional representation. It would force our legislators to actually form REAL coalitions within their caucuses. And if people were willing to work within the caucus they agreed to work with, there is recourse, kick them out. This would allow TRUE third party candidates to have a say in our government. The Prejean's, the NOMs, and even the Cindy Sheehan's would have a realistic opportunity to make their voices heard in Congress.

Well, judging from that cover, Im willing to bet that its mostly the male youth theyre looking to recruit as I doubt very seriously that any self respecting young lady would be attracted to any party by a woman who looks more like she should be doing a play boy model shoot instead of champining the conservative cause...