Added: 2 years ago
From: NewsPoliticsAmerica
Views: 56,636
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (99)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • The boyfriend should have kept a master copy and then use it by uploading it to somewhere like RedTube; Porn of YouTube, as a final..."Fuck you and your career."

  • @Sargotha Providing that such a situation arises to which it is justified to do so.

  • What a shameless hypocrite!!! Hiding behind god and all this crap on values when she is the biggest whore on TV at the moment, snooky prays to her for guidance every morning.

  • I bet the boyfriend was offered money or saw an opportunity to make some. What a complete arsehole.

  • just her sex tape whatever justify gay marriage? she was dating a guy then,it was with her guy

  • the ex boyfriend that disgusting rat!!! he sold the tape for 15 minutes of fame!!! Poor Carrie, her reputation complete destroyed = (

  • She says "it's just ME."

    She means her, seven dildos and 8 butt-plugs LOL

  • Look at 0:59, you can see that it's filmed in an optical illusion to make the guest look TINY compared tot he host. It looks like Gandalf talking to Bilbo Baggins.

    Bill O'Reilly does the samething-- unless he has someone who he wants to kiss their ass, then he changes everything so they're the same size.

  • What a fucking asshole. 

  • What is hypocritical that her boyfriend sent in pictures of her but asked to be blurred out. Guys are pieces of shit.

  • @Misssfortune

    Oh please, what about the "blue dot over the face" double-standard like in the William Kennedy Smith trial?

    Or the bitch in the Duke University rape-trial (Crystal Gale Mangum) who had her name and face hidden, while the guys got branded as rapists by name and face?

    This is NOTHING in comparison to that.

  • Just another case of 'i fucked up, but its everyone else's fault, and im the victim of a media witch hunt' ....conservatives are sooooo predictable

  • Comment removed

  • @rjrichme

    You mean they're HYPOCRITES. Like with Dr. Laura's nude pics and Limbaugh's rampant drug-use.

  • She wants him to say she was 17 so Fox News can turn the negativity concerning their message about equal rights to "LEBERAL MEDIA !!!!ATTACKING!!!! CHILDPORN VICTIM!!!!111". So basically if you attack her or their position on gay marriage you support child porn.

    To the guy who released the videoes, you truly are an American Hero.

  • @kolar

    Not only that, by California law they'd have to return the tape(s) to her.

    That's what Jenna Jameson did: i.e. she lied about her age and made porn with a porn-company; then when it got released, she revealed that she was 17 in the tapes, and they had to give them all to her. Then she SOLD the tapes-- the fucking lying BITCH.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • This pathetic little weasel released this for one reason and one reason only; she obviously dumped him. And rightly so.

  • Her ex-boyfriend sounds like a lame ass FUCKWAD for ratting her out like that. Listen to his shrill, whiney, prepubescent sounding voice. How come so many hot girls hook up with needle-dick tattletails?

  • @higingbotham

    how am i ignorant?? ignorant about what?? this hoe-bags lies and cover ups cause you just know the whole story don't you?? shut the fuck up!!

    note- she draws emphasis on "i was 17" as if that's her reason to be forgiven by the public, at that age we all know beyond better and instead of making fucking excuses because she got caught, she should have just admitted the truth, she wasn't fucking underage she was an ADULT. she's a venomous skank all around.

  • "i was a 17 year old" OH THAT MAKES IT ALRIGHT! because you know, you were 17! all forgiven in the eyes of the lord! I'm sure he just turned the other cheek while you fornicated yourself For public distribution. But those gay's tho! yah girl good call good call, good thing you have the best moral compass!!!.......hypocrite.

  • @wetdream09

    No you ignorant fuck...she wants him to say she was 17 so it can never be released, considering it would be child porn.

  • What a shit show!!! It seems Christians are always lil party hounds. It is a nice easy way to just kind of reset the slate. It has all become so white trash these days. Bush the big Christian invading and killing and his daughters falling down drunk in mini skirts in the street while other young women and men their age are actually giving their lives, Palin's daughter having baby out of wedlock then the baby daddy does playgirl shoot and now running for mayor of their town.  It is amazing!

  • @iamcoreyh Do not generalise Christians, you son of a bitch.

  • Damn ,, she can take the whole hand inside of her , wow

    Nice sex tape ;)

  • WHAT A GREAT CHRISTAIN!

  • hahaha her ex-boyfriend is very stupid if he thought she did the video by herself

    It is clear that someone else was carrying the camera.

    How did he not notice that?

  • I only wish she could have used a cross to masturbate. Maybe she should have thrown in a few lucifer's in the screaming.

  • why doesn't she go the paris hilton route and get it released so we can all celebrate her sexiness?

  • I have to say her ex is really a asshole,  he is cheap

  • everybody makes mistakes,

    but i still agree with carrie.

  • I do belive in sluts, I do belive in slut,

    i do i do i do i do i do

  • They misspelled basically...

  • she just a nasty tramp

  • did her boyfriend release this tape?

  • He sold it to avid video but they need her to sign a release which she wont do

  • Thank you carrie's ex-boyfriend you deserve a gold medal hope you make a lot of money for thoses tapes

  • Carrie Prejean....yet another crazy brain-washed drone that doesn't actually know the meaning or practice of "having values."

  • I hate Carrie Prejean. I really, really do.

  • Shady as hell. She's trying to pass it off as underage photos. Sick bitch!

  • this guy is the lucky bastard !!

  • So, this hypocrite retard made 8 sex tapes of herself masturbating like crazy! Waaoo! She got to take the offer of this porn company; thus, many other people will see how hard and rough she works on her clit, and that she is able to take that vibrating big black dildo in her ugly cunt!

  • Her x is a fucking ass rat bitch!

  • I don't have anything against sluts per se.

    But if a slut goes on Fox acting morally superior to others & goes and speaks at several Family Values groups about how she's being attacked for her high moral values, & then it surfaces that she may have made over 20 pornographic tapes & dozens of pornographic pictures - then whatever attacks come her way - she deserves.

  • Even with all the sex tapes she is still morally superior to a liberal terrorist such as yourself! What she did in private is none of your freaking business. What homosexuals do in private is none of your business. What Christians do in Church is none of your business. Islamic Muslims taking over the United States of America should be your business, but you're to busy looking for Carrie Prejean sex tapes! So who's the freaking hypocrite?

  • I love that Prejean is promoting Christian values. I wonder if she realizes that the Bible says she should be stoned to death?

  • Comment removed

  • Being an independent and Atheist, I could care less what Carrie believes.

    My concern is how far MSNBC and other reputable media have slandered or make fun of anyone who disagree with their political agenda.

    This tends to follow the same logic Joseph Goebbels used. Look up "GOEBBELS' PRINCIPLES OF PROPAGANDA".

  • Which part of this story was slander?

  • No slander on this video, just typical msnbc negative put down. Reread my comment.

    I notice it is usually Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow or David Shuster who follow Goebbels Propaganda.

    You apparently have watched MSNBC so much or drink their Kool Aid to give the 'righteous' liberal thinking emotion that you have become numb to their brainwashing.

    Good luck with that.

  • Just thought I'd check since you used mentioned slander and everything here seemed to be factually accurate. With regard to this particular story I should point out that all manner of print, internet, and cable news media outlets have covered it, so with that regard msnbc is hardly alone. Msnbc has given it just as much critical coverage as fox has given it negative.

  • Furthermore, comparing Rachel Maddow to Joseph Goebbles (who managed the propaganda for the Nazi party) is hyperbolic in the extreme and taking a position critical of Prejean hardly means I'm 'brainwashed', but it's an easy way to dismiss points of view different than your own.

  • I find it interesting your defense of MSNBC, unless you are employed by them or the DNC.

    As you probably know most of their stories are not for news reporting but ratings for their agenda. By over accenting the negative of some "5 min of fame" woman, does nothing for as news story unless you want to be a tabloid. Yes Fox does the same.

    I dismiss nothing but point out the ignorance of people listening to one media's propaganda story because it stimulates their endorphins and their ideology.

  • Also I use Goebbles because that is the closest example of Maddow (and Hannity) who only report negative stories for people without their ideology and positive for ones who agree.

    Look up the 19 points of "GOEBBELS' PRINCIPLES OF PROPAGANDA" and as you listen to Maddow reporting about a Republican who disagrees with Obama, see which principle she is using.

    She is good at it.

    Olbermann does it to but his is out of hate.

  • There are many professionals who have written about effective campaigning and advertising. I'm not sure why you chose to make a comparison to one that helped a party to kill millions of people. Also for the record I have no affiliation to either msnbc nor the DNC - I can't hold this position unless I'm paid for it?

    You've made it clear that you have gone back on your claim of slander. Perhaps you could explain, with specifics, what you did take issue with as far as the analysis?

  • Interesting, you are trying to put be on trial ("explain with specifics") because I disagree with MSNBC's anit-Conservative tabloid reporting.

    I will explain what is obnoxious about this video. Prejean is of no major significance in the world of things. Yet she is a brainwashed Christian that made a anit-gay statement and now is promoted to a national news story. Why- because her boyfriend has pictures.

    So why would MSNBC give a negative story on her? I know why but maybe you can explain?

  • If you're claiming that this wasn't newsworthy consider what we're discussing a woman who made a very public statement of intolerance on national television related to one of the largest civil rights struggles currently in progress in this country. Furthermore, she went on to become the spokesperson for the nation's largest anti-gay organization and wrote a book about it. There is certainly an argument that her hypocrisy in the wake of all that makes her newsworthy.

  • Than the MSNBC purpose for this story was to stimulate endorphins of the people against Prejean's ideology.

    I believe most people could care less whether someone is for or against gay life style. Usually it is people raised in a strict religions - like some Christians or some Islam.

    However, I must move on.

  • So I did a little homework and I think I understand you better having looked at some of your other posts. I think it's pretty foul of you to say things like Maddow thinking having her period is torture when she spoke on waterboarding. That was sexist and uncalled for. I also take issue with your stereotyping of gay men as weak or effeminate when they werve bravely - requiring pink camo, throwing grenades underhand, and some of the offensive sexual comments I won't repeat.

  • I believe you meant this for someone else....

    "So I did a little homework and I think I understand you better having looked at some of your other posts. I think it's pretty foul of you to...etc'

    I was not the one who said what you are indicating. LOL requiring pink camo and throwing grenades underhand...?????.

  • The sexist quotation with regard to Miss Maddow was yours upon double checking; however, I did take the wrong quote from a user who posed on a video you also had. I apologize for that mix up - though it's sad you find that to be funny.

    Perhaps I should just cut to the essence of the video and ask what your position is on marriage equality. I think it's clear what I believe.

  • Sorry to disappoint you but I care less about life styles as long as they to not interfere with the way I live. Since I do not hold to any religious dogma, I see marriage as nothing more than someones made up Law of the land.

    As to the sexist remark - after spending 2 years in Vietnam war, being PC is not a top priority. After seeing real torture, I was upset with a media commentator telling me waterboarding was torture, as if she would know.

  • Stating that marriage is a union of a man and a woman is intolerant? Are dictionaries intolerant because words have meaning? If you want to call a circle a square should the language be changed so you are not offended?

  • it would say that a sexchange of one would mean divorce, and change of both would be legal again, and so on and what this logic furthermore implied.

  • That is not my position. Allow me to clarify. I think that Miss Prejean is entitled to believe whatever she wishes as an individual and if she personally feels that for her marriage is defined that way that's her right - though I disagree. However, what I do feel is intolerant is to discriminate against gay and lesbian Americans in the public sphere with our laws. This is what she was and is supporting.

  • Laws against same sex marriage are not discriminatory, they simply describe marriage as an opposite sex union. Gays and lesbians can marry (a member of the opposite sex) it is their own behavior and choice that prevents it. What the gay activists want is a change in the meaning of marriage as traditionally understood. This is what people oppose. It is not bigotry or discrimination.

  • I could create a parallel argument pointing out that African Americans were once allowed (just like all other Americans) to marry others with their ethnic background. Was that equality? I don't think many today would think so, though a majority once did.

    The question then becomes why specifically it is you don't think civil (not religious) marriages should not be offered to couples who happen to be of the same sex. Which benefits and protections included in marriage are objectionable to you?

  • Majorities can be wrong. The ban on interracial marriages in the past were discriminatory, but those unions were real marriage (opposite sex unions).

    Marriage produces offspring in a stable environment which benefits society. Laws have given special status to marriage for this reason. People caring for each other in a familial way should be encouraged. I am not opposed to giving same sex unions some kind of legal recognition. I just object to redefining marriage to do it.

  • Firstly, population has been sharply inclining over the last two hundred years. Secondly, many couples of the same sex take in the great many children we already have that are in desperate need of homes. Thirdly, it is legal for both the elderly and the infertile to marry.

    I'm trying to understand what it is you object to in civil marriage law for same sex couples. Again I'll ask for an example of a specific benefit or protection that should not be granted.

  • 666, its a bit too late for that, We have 10 % gay marriage in America and 2 states getting gay marriage by Xmas.

  • This avalanche is only beginning. We'll be hearing about the tape where she's taking black cocks in the butt before summer.

    After that, she should do an album.

  • I know, I mean how dare they show some person to be a hypocrite of the nth degree.

    It's just a funny story that further shows the hypocrisy of the right-wing Christians in America. This isn't about appropriation of views, this is about the old GOP motto.

    "Do what I say, not what I do."

  • ROFL she's so inappropriate. Her theme song so needs to be The Divinyls "I Touch Myself"

  • One would think that after being exposed as a hypocrite, and having made such a fool of herself in the process, that she would tune down the 'holier than thou' attitude and slink away from the spotlight. However, I suppose she'll try to sell her book at any cost - even if it's the last shred of her already tattered dignity.

  • This is the problem with taking and spending an advance. She kinda has no choice. Her publisher would have just sued her if she had money but we know she'd broke.

  • so THAT'S what carrie prejean looks like when she's masturbating.

  • Another Family values hypocrite. Is it any wonder she identifies with Sarah Palin as her hero?

  • Carrie CreamJeans has a hand model career in her future. Rubbing one out for Jebuss-- typical Evangelical hypocrite. Can't wait for the video with her and a latex fist.

     Conservatives have the intellect of a bucket of dead fish.

  • I wouldn't go that far. At least a bucket of dead fish know that Palin is a fucking moron.

  • If you take the word of the Palins Cosmic Team-- the highest paid individuals on the campaign staff. Sarah smelled like a bucket of dead fish-- apparently she has odor issues.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more