June 18th, 2015 • iizthatiiz
“The Washington Post hates hates hates it that I have a blog that people pay attention to!” – Bristol Palin
Bristol Palin wrote a column last week calling out Miley Cyrus’ for her intolerant views.
Is it just me or does it seem more than a little fake that someone claiming to be accepting of everyone and everything would spew such judgment towards her own parents and their deeply held religious beliefs?
She wants everyone else to let her be “free to be Miley,” but seems unwilling to offer the same respect to her parents and those who wish to live out their Christian faith.
Oh, Miley. Thanks for giving us the best example of what “tolerance” looks like in Hollywood: it looks a lot like contempt. (Patheos)
The article went a bit viral, garnering over 100,000 shares within the first few days. That didn’t sit too well with some of the folks over at the Washington Post, where they published a whiny article bemoaning the fact that Bristol has such a wide audience.
In the pre-Internet days, Palin would have needed to be a guest on a talk show or the subject of an interview for her anti-Miley message to reach anyone. (Washington Post)
WaPo’s little rant didn’t go unnoticed by Bristol. Having already pushed back against the self-indulgent pop diva, Palin wrote a follow-up column yesterday, this time placing the Washington Post in her cross-hairs.
[ WaPo ] … apparently thinks it’s absolutely absurd that so many publications are talking about the so-called “Bristol versus Miley” thing that [ they ] just had to add join in with [ their ] feelings about the “Bristol versus Miley” thing?
Here’s the real truth. The Washington Post is lamenting that there are no gatekeepers anymore. With the advents of social media and blogs — even the icky “ultra Christians ones” like this Patheos one! — newspapers are no longer the arbiters of the cultural conversation.
Deal with it, Washington Post! (Patheos)