Mr. Wow Blog
Carrie Prejean and Satan. Oh, and the Gosselins
2:30 pm | May 15, 2009

Author: Mr. Wow | Category: Culture | Comments: None

In which wOw’s pop-culture warrior helps decode this week in celebrity land.

Editor’s Note: Mr. Wow writes upon occasion for wOw. He is the ultimate Hollywood insider who live-blogged Oscar night for us.

Miss California Carrie Prejean: the gift that keeps on giving. (Thank you, Perez Hilton!)   

Miss Prejean will keep her Miss-California crown, despite all the semi-nude pics that keep surfacing. Donald Trump, who owns the Miss USA pageant, is not offended by breasts, even if Carrie should have told officials that her bosoms popped out at a number of photo sessions. (This was prior to her augmentation, so maybe she just didn’t notice?)

The young blonde who answered Perez Hilton’s question on gay marriage with an “I don’t believe in it,” and got called a “dumb c***” for her honesty, has now become a spokeswoman against gay marriage — a subject upon which she never expressed herself while she ran for Miss USA. But she sure is expressing herself now!

More than that, she is certain that Satan arranged for her to be “tested” on the gay-marriage question. Because Satan has nothing better to do than monitor the Miss USA pageant. Poverty and disease? This can wait while Lucifer checks out America’s beauties.

Well, most of these girls, with their fantastic orange skin tones, do look like they’re halfway to hell already. So Mephistopheles feels comfy. (OK, you caught me. Mr. Wow was trying to get in as many variations on the devil’s nicknames as possible!)

And I love that the conservative cable news stations keep calling on feminists to “defend” Carrie. Uhhh … even feminists in 2009 think the whole idea of beauty pageants to be anti-woman on the most basic level. With the swimsuits even briefer, the strut more suggestive and the bodies not what nature created, I’d hardly expect feminists to jump up for her. Anyway, Carrie’s a big star now, she doesn’t need defending; she needs an agent, a PR person and a financial manager. And smaller earrings. (Actually, if GLAAD had any sense, they would have stepped up to the plate for her, regretful that she is not more open-minded but decrying her being slandered. But that organization seems to have lost its rudder now that the ridiculous “Will and Grace” is not around to shower honors upon.)

Still, we must not despair. Miss California’s unnecessary rise seems to be taking a backseat now to the travails of Jon and Kate Gosselin, the people who have lived off their children for so many years. I am not fond of their show, “Jon and Kate Plus Eight.” They lack charm. Although how charming can people be with eight kids? (Mr. Wow feels he must sample the reality shows; one can only disdain what one knows.) 

I rolled on the floor the other night when a steely-eyed Kate went on “Larry King” to “explain” the rumors surrounding her husband: “We are just normal people … the cameras come in and film us every day.”  Well, I guess these days that is “normal.”    

Now Kate herself is the subject of infidelity gossip. She is shocked, SHOCKED. Well, nobody forced her into a “job” that essentially exploits fecundity. (The dictionary definition of “fecund” is: “producing offspring or vegetation.” Jon and Kate nixed a tomato garden.) And if Jon Gosselin wants be a swinging single again, he might lose some weight and those execrable flip-flops.

Alas — or “hurray” depending on what you like to watch — separation and divorce will not drive these two from the news or TV screens. They’ll end up with separate reality shows as they “find new lives” and fight for custody of those children, undoubtedly confused by years of unnatural camera intrusion.

Now, don’t get me wrong. Mr. Wow has nothing against families. He came from one himself.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <br> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <i> <img alt="" align="" border="" class="" height="" hspace="" longdesc="" vspace="" src="" style="" width=""> <ins datetime="" cite=""> <li> <ol> <p> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <u> <ul>