web
counter
 

Silver Lining: At Least I Know Why This One’s Famous

By Courtney Enlow | Posted Under Think Pieces | Comments (23)



bristol_palin.jpg

News broke yesterday that everyone’s favorite political plaything, and by that I mean “douche we tolerate because people keep forcing us to,” Levi Johnston, has been given his own reality show.

I am of two minds. Let us examine these minds individually.

Mind 1: Honestly, in a world where E! has given reality shows to people because they are a) friends with other questionably famous people, b) sisters with a stripper pole in their living room, c) chicks who pose nude in a magazine rendered irrelevant in this era of internet porn, at least this guy actually did something. Yes, what he did was impregnate, betroth, unbetroth, re-betroth, then re-unbetroth the equally fameseeking daughter of a political candidate, she of similar questionable fame, but at least it was something.

Mind 2: That makes it worse. This present generation of teens and early twenty-somethings has been raised to believe that fame, often without talent or respect from others, is the ultimate goal. This is one thing when it’s those orange trashies from MTV, but this was someone in the inner circle of a woman who very easily could have been the nation’s Vice President. No amount of Tina Fey jokes could have made that less depressing.

Mind 1: Politics is just showbiz with more power. Of course I don’t like it, but that’s our current political climate. If anything, it takes away credibility from an already less-than-credible politician, even in the eyes of her own party. Could be worse.

Mind 2: Doesn’t that send you into a homicidal frenzy? That the political world is now seemingly embracing the idea that they are no better than fucking Snooki?

Mind 1: Of course, but they’re not doing this. He is. And at least it’s just Sarah Palin.

Mind 2: A bigass chunk of the country doesn’t think in terms of “just Sarah Palin.” To this bigass chunk, she’s a perfectly acceptable, even lauded political figure. And she will forever be associated, for better or worse, with this chodemongler.

Mind 1: It’s not like Monica Lewinski or Donna Rice are getting shows here. It’s Levi fucking Johnston. No one gives a shit about him.

Mind 2: But some people do. That’s the problem with the famewhoring do-nothings who keep getting these shows. People may be laughing at them, but they’re paying attention to them. They’re giving them a forum. The premise of this show is that this hockey-playing sperm-farm is running for mayor. Of Wasilla. A position formerly held by his former mother-in-law-to-be. This means this doucheknuckle could conceivably wield power. People have voted worse. Also, you can’t tell me that if the Clinton scandal had happened ten years later, Monica wouldn’t have gotten her own show.

Mind 1: I would have watched it.

Mind 2: Totally.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



Ranking the Ten Most Successful Post-Empire Records Careers for the Film's Cast | The Mysteries of Female Ejaculation Explained | Pajiba Dirty Talk









Comments

Shouldn't that be unrebetroth?

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at August 10, 2010 3:25 PM

Mind 3: If this show causes enough of a stir, couldn't it potentially harm future political aspirations of his unrebetrothed baby mama's mama? Surely,that can only be a good thing.

Mind 4: You're so clever!

Mind 3: No, you are!

Mind 4: /blushes

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at August 10, 2010 3:30 PM

All I can say is, Levi Johnston becoming mayor of Wasilla = END TIMES.

No need to look for Horsemen of the Apocalypse - shit is just done. Game over, America. Thanks for playing. Oh, and that's Mayor Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho to you.

Posted by: MM at August 10, 2010 3:43 PM

But don't you know that if the Clinton/Monica thing had happened today instead of almost 15 years ago, she absolutely would have had her own reality show. She sold her "designs" for bags on HSN for God's sake.

Posted by: PaddyDog at August 10, 2010 3:53 PM

Get out of my HEAD(S)!

Posted by: Paul at August 10, 2010 3:53 PM

Don't worry. When the Zombies come, Levi and his beloved won't be spared.

Posted by: Fredo at August 10, 2010 4:10 PM

Not only would Lewisnki have had her own show, it would have been a dating show. Where it'd be all buffed up guidos on a bus and she'd sit on a throne--or BETTER a replica of the Oval Office and they'd all have to compete for her. Like Tila Tequila but worse.

I love your columns, Courtney. They always make me happy.

Posted by: figgy at August 10, 2010 4:12 PM

figgy makes an excellent point.

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at August 10, 2010 4:32 PM

Monica did get a show. It wasn't a reality show, but it was a show.

Posted by: Chewster at August 10, 2010 4:36 PM

Can someone remind me which one of the Palin clan is retarded? Extensive internet research has yet to find me an answer.

Posted by: schrome at August 10, 2010 4:50 PM

Eh, it doesn't really matter if he gets elected. Wasilla is a small, trashy town. The only reason Palin went from there to Governor is a highly-publicized ethics battle when she was on a powerful state board dealing with oil and the Governor she replaced was corrupt and out-of-touch with Alaskans and reality.

Posted by: Katers at August 10, 2010 4:58 PM

COMPLETELY OFF TOPIC:
...a magazine rendered irrelevant in this era of internet porn...

I do not agree that Playboy is irrelevant because of internet pornography. My first contention to this effect is that I do not view Playboy as pornographic. Pornography to me is any presentation of the sex act, visually, audibly or otherwise. Playboy does not depict the sex act in any way. It displays the female form in all it's majesty, but has never crossed that line since Marilyn first posed all those many decades ago.

The magazine approaches the subject of nudity with respect to both the models and to the reader. Though there was a short period of time in the late 80's and 90's when the models were strongly encouraged (one might even say bullied) into getting breast augmentation surgery, the trend was short lived and is considered a shameful practice today by the higher ups. It represents a short, reprehensible period of the magazine's long history, but not the overall mission. Their continuing goal is to celebrate a realistic, respectful image of the female form.

Pornography has none of these objectives, much less a continuing patronage of the literary world, in-depth and engaging interviews with all different types of social figures, and compelling political commentary.

Certainly, if the belief is that one "knows pornography when they see it," then there is room for the individual's interpretation of what constitutes pornography (there are obviously people who agree with your contention, since the magazine has seen a steady decline in sales over the course of the last decade -- but then again, what magazine hasn't). I would only ask you to weight the differences between this and "bang-bus" before you make your conclusions.

Posted by: superasente at August 10, 2010 8:30 PM

Dammit. I hate agreeing with superasente.

Posted by: Tracer Bullet at August 10, 2010 9:06 PM

Hey, great profile! How long have you been single? No sex for a year??!! wow!! don't think I can make that!! especially when it comes so easy to hook up with some hot models and sexy chicks on ____Sugarmommamatch.----c o m -_____ the place you really should not miss out!! just think about how sensual and beautiful they are!! hwee...

Posted by: ashly at August 10, 2010 9:26 PM

I recently read about Lawrence Fishburne's teenage daughter doing a porn film in order to jumpstart a career through infamy/scandal. Nothing against porn, but at least do it for the right reasons. It's just frickin sad state of affairs.

Posted by: cinekat at August 11, 2010 5:38 AM

What exactly are the right reasons for doing a porno?

Posted by: Wednesday at August 11, 2010 7:09 AM

Oh, gimme a break. "displays the female form in all it's majesty"?

Playboy's "mission" is to deliver naked tits so that guys can get off to them. There's nothing wrong with naked tits, and there's nothing wrong with getting off, but seriously, that's all there is to it.

You can tell yourself whatever you need to to sleep at night, but there's nothing morally superior about beating off to Playboy instead of Hustler -- or Anal Sluts 3.

Posted by: marya at August 12, 2010 8:42 PM

Thanks a million for this, I am greatful for the info

Posted by: Nicki Minaj Pink Friday at November 20, 2010 3:39 PM

Agreed, very well written and can't wait for the second half.

Posted by: Shelia at December 11, 2010 10:14 PM

Took me time to examine most the remarks, but I really liked the article. It proved to be Very valuable to me and I am certain to all the commenters here as well! It is definitely great when a person can not merely be informed, but also amused! I am certain you had fun creating this post.

Posted by: Cream Separator at December 15, 2010 11:17 PM

Joyously prosperous and noodling with demons

Posted by: farmville at January 10, 2011 10:07 PM

Nothing to do make me feel bored everyday. Do you want to help me ?

Posted by: Helene Wascher at January 17, 2011 11:51 PM

I love the way you sound so passionate about what you are writing. Keep up the great work!

Posted by: cursive alphabet at January 20, 2011 5:23 AM