I am not a big fan of gossip columns, but at least Page Six and TMZ are not vicious (and TMZ actually does it stuff with a sense of humor). Perez Hilton is a little vicious monster with zero talent. I do not get why he even has a career.

“Lavandeira”? Seriously? Perfect! Just perfect.

Did the Seinfeld people ever actually produce and market “The Man-zier”? That flabby little dirt bag could certainly use one.

Here’s a better question:

Assume that Cryus is actually going commando in the photo. Does that mean that the government is going to go on a witch hunt finding all the people that viewed the image and arresting them for possession and distribution of child pornography?

Furthermore, will this be another crisis that the Obama administration will used to either shut down the internet or make everyone violate their Fourth Amendment rights by having to spy on themselves and fork over traffic logs to the government, all the while selling the idea as “protecting the children”? And let’s not even get started on how Cryus has already been exploited as a child. Despicable!

@Cindy He’s probably an illegal too.

I find Perez Hilton to be a morally repugnant, disgusting individual.

I am an anti-authoritarian, but there are a few rare instances where I wish we as a society could drop the hammer on scum like Hilton.

At minimum, banish him from America.

/rant.

Well, Count, we CAN drop the hammer on him – without all that nasty authoritarianism. ABC is leading the way by dropping the economic hammer, with I’m sure quite a few to follow, including the all important “hits” that lead to groups like ABC to advertise there. And the government is contemplating dropping the child porn criminal charges hammer. That the latter is leading to the former is, I’m sure, mere coincidence.

So with all those three, as a society we are “dropping the hammer”.

Ain’t a free society grand?

“Here’s a better question:
Assume that Cryus is actually going commando in the photo. Does that mean that the government is going to go on a witch hunt finding all the people that viewed the image and arresting them for possession and distribution of child pornography?”

Here’s a better question:

Why does America produce so many flaccid-pricked losers whose life’s worthless fulfillment is to jack-off their flaccid pricks to internet kiddie porn?

Not only does porn make guy lousy at sex, it makes them pathetically desperate wankers wanking their Viagra onto an empty screen.

And NO, I don’t want government to ban the flaccid porn for loser pricks because this way the flaccid pricks won’t be pro-creating .

The creepy little fag, who couldn’t even come up with an original psudo-name for himself, has crossed way over the proverbial line on this one. The government MUST prosecute this case, or it opens the door to every pervert like him to repeat this repugnant action.

I’m going to be teaching our youth group at church in a week. The topic: feminism. This whole disgusting and wretched debacle is part of its poisoned fruit. Hilton obviously cares less about the impact such a story would have on our young girls. And sadly, young girls like Miley Cyrus don’t care that their irresponsibility is broadcast to millions of young people, who probably are just laughing and thinking it’s no big deal.

I would love to see Hilton’s site erased over this but I doubt it will happen. Good for ABC for at least having some modicum of morals.

It’s been too long since some good ol’ fashioned Google bombing. Some celebrities need to get naked, Stacy needs the traffic!

There’s no way prosecution of Hilton on “child porn” charges would ever hold up. Here’s the definition:

(8) “child pornography” means any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where —

(A) the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;

(B) such visual depiction is a digital image, computer image, or computer-generated image that is, or is indistinguishable from, that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or

(C) such visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct.

Getting out of a car isn’t “sexually explicit conduct.”

If a judge was too stupid or camera-happy to laugh the charge out of court, a jury would.

Not all conduct which some find offensive is illegal. Getting out of a car isn’t illegal. Neither is taking a picture of someone getting out of a car, and posting that picture on the Internet. Get over it.