Oy, aye, aye! Awwwkward.

Perez's question was inappropriate. Perez's video slamming Prejean like he did was inappropriate. The press attacking her in the specific manner they did was inappropriate...Larry King's (and I don't care for the man) question didn't seem inappropriate in the least - she just didn't want to answer it. Manipulative. What did she expect?! She's on there to sell her book, quid pro quo Carrie, he wasn't being rude and he didn't have to invite you on HIS show to plug your (no doubt) turd of a book.

I was originally willing to defend her on basis of freedom of speech with an understanding that by giving an honest answer a judge didn't like she should accept the loss and go away and people can respectfully disagree with her.

But she brought this entire thing on herself by thinking she was so oober important that writing a book of her story was in order. It's not like she landed a plane in the middle of the freakin' Hudson River! (Reminds me of another certain self-important someone who wrote two books about himself before actually accomplishing anything of substance in life).

Carrie's 15 minutes of fame are up. She should have quit while she was ahead.

Carrie Prejean settled because she was claiming religious discrimination and the Miss California pageant people confronted this "fine upstanding Christian girl who's so offended by the thought of gay marriage" with a porno film she made.

Yeah, the Almighty is offended by gay marriage but completely cool with amateur solo sex tapes. What a hypocrite.

Apparently, we're not allowed to post links at all on this blog now. I posted a single link and it was kicked into the spam folder.

All right. No more links. Carrie Prejean settled because she was claiming religious discrimination for her answer regarding gay marriage. In response, the Miss California people produced a solo amateur porn flick this fine upstanding Christian woman starred in.

Confronted by her own hypocrisy, she settled out of for getting her expenses paid and she got nothing for herself.

Feebie, just now read your post. Nicely done.

Let me edit my last sentence. Frustrated by having my first post, with a single link, being kicked to the spam folder. I should have said, "Confronted by her own hypocrisy, she settled for getting her expenses paid, while getting nothing for herself."

I can't believe she faulted Larry for a caller's question on a live show. She wants pre-screened callers to ask only nicey-nice questions, she can go appear on Oxycontin Fatass's show.

When will she lose that smug self-satisfied look. She preaches about God and walks around passing moral judgment as she shakes her fake boobies and whitened teeth. Her sex tape produced in front of her "Christian" mommy was what caused her to fold during mediation and that is the question she is avoiding. It must be nice to soak up all of God's forgiveness while you deem the rest of the world inappropriate! She makes me want to become a lesbian and marry a farm animal.

She should have named her book, "A Sale of Two Titties."

Feebie, your last sentence says it all.

"Yeah, the Almighty is offended by gay marriage but completely cool with amateur solo sex tapes. What a hypocrite."

Your example does not really show she is a hypocrite. She was against gay marriage. If she went on to secretly give money to those causes or vote in favor of gay marriage while continuing to speak out against it on the conservative circuit THAT would make her a hypocrite. Context.

But she is too opportunistic for me to go to any great lengths to defend her beyond the original incident.

"Yeah, the Almighty is offended by gay marriage but completely cool with amateur solo sex tapes. What a hypocrite."

Your example does not really show she is a hypocrite.

But Ms. Prejean is hypocritical. She throws the bible at an issue saying, "Jesus wouldn't like this" and then goes on to videotape sexual acts and pose naked. The rules and obligations of fundamentalist Christianity only apply (in her mind) when they help support her condemnation of others. At least Jimmy Swaggart had the decency to admit that he'd sinned.

The really sad thing here is that she doesn't seem to understand why people despise her so much. She won't convince anyone to quit supporting gay marriage or even of what soap to buy, but she seems baffled after displays like that why the average person doesn't support her.

-Julie

"She throws the bible at an issue saying, "Jesus wouldn't like this" and then goes on to videotape sexual acts and pose naked."

Julie, these are not the same things, as Patrick explained. I am not saying she is not a hypocrite in her OWN life, she just isn't a hypocrite in the sense that she made a sex tape and then doesnt support gay marriage. That alone doesn't make her the hypocrite. Its a non-sequitur.

According to her religion, Jesus also doesn't like people who judge "Judge not, lest ye be judged". She got up on her moral high horse and went way overboard considering this video by anointing herself the Christian Icon on morality.

Her original answer wasn't hypocritical (even taking into consideration her past). That was her honest OPINION.

What is hypocritical, is how she is dealing with this set of circumstances in her OWN life and that of her Christian moral code. That is independent of anything with respects to gay marriage.

Just to underscore what Julie said, Carrie Prejean is a hypocrite because she was suing based on "religious discrimination," claiming her Christian views were a basis for her firing. Being such a sweet wholesome Christian girl, one wonders why she's making pornos for her boyfriend. Granted, it was intended for one person at the time, but she also let it slip that she was only seventeen at the time. When it was pointed out that other seventeen-year-old girls became registered sex offenders for doing what she did, she was only too happy to drop her suit. And that would explain why she didn't want to say why she settled.

"Well, because if I pressed my suit, they'd turn me into the authorities and I'd have to spend the rest of life registering my residence with the police, not being allowed to live within 500 feet of a school, bus stop, park, daycare center, church and anywhere else children congregate. To say nothing of having my house routinely vandalized by my paranoid neighbors who found my name and address on a registered sex offender website."

She was hoping she'd get to go on Larry King Live and let the audience stare at her book cover for an hour.

Patrick, I've been agreeing with you lately (which is weird, but whatever) but you don't have to be a perfect person to be able to argue you suffered religious discrimination.

However, I believe while her being fired DID have some discriminatory undertones to it the fact that she showed such little humility to the point of self-aggrandizement is where she is is hypocritical considering her tape.

She to me looks pretty self obsessed and opportunistic. If she was really such a courageous young woman she would have stood by her honest opinion and her answer, and accepted her loss OR gone about this lawsuit of hers very quietly or NOT AT ALL. But she doesn't appear to have filed suit or written the book for any other reason than to get money, publicity and pity.

In that sense, she IS a hypocritical Christian (but really, who isn't hypocritical in one way or another). It's just not about her argument against gay marriage. It's been almost every action and choice she has made since her original answer.

Personally, I can't stand her.

But I also think her having to face charges of being a sex offender for making a tape of herself is 100% absurd. THAT is nuts. Those laws need to change!

In all likelihood, I was exaggerating what would have happened to her had she been convicted. There are varying levels of sex offenders, including those who can basically live wherever they want, but still have to appear on a website that everyone can see, and still have to make sure the police know what they're doing. Apart from that, there are no restrictions.

I do agree that a seventeen year old sending nude pictures to her boyfriend hardly merits the stigma of becoming a sex offender, but it even takes less than that, sometimes. I know a guy who was basically railroaded into his sex offender status because a 13-year-old boy was pressured into testifying against him. Even though no physical evidence of the things the child alleged was found, this guy was convicted, sentenced and has had to shell out hundreds of thousands of dollars over the years, just to keep his status as terrible as it is.

What I object to is the fact that this can be some kind of bargaining chip. If someone breaks the law, you shouldn't agree to keep it to yourself as a means of blackmailing someone. Either turn them in if you think they should be, or not, if you think that the charges brought against them would be outrageous. None of this, "If you don't drop your suit, I'll turn you in to the authorities and you'll be charged and convicted as a sex offender, but if you drop the lawsuit, I'll keep it to myself."

If you support the sex offender laws as they would apply to Carrie Prejean, then turn her in. If you're against them, don't. I'd support someone for acting on their conscience, regardless. But it's terribly unethical to use it for extortion.

One thing's for sure. Carrie Prejean's boyfriend when she was seventeen is total scum, if he's the one responsible for that video getting out.

I didn't watch this particular Larry King show...never do in fact, but I'm somewhat familiar with the format. While I admire the way she (CP) stood up for her beliefs during the original pageant and answered the question how she did, and I believe she was unfairly treated afterwards, I too agree that her 15 minutes are up. If you don't want to be put on the spot and answer uncomfortable questions, don't go on the show. You have to know that's what's going to occur.

I concur with Patrick (whaddayaknow!) with the statement on CP's ex boyfriend's release of the video, if indeed it was him. Obviously someone else wants in on this circus ride...

I disagree that she was unfairly treated afterwards by the Pageant folks. It's true, she may have lost the crown thanks to her statement, but after she lost, I think the Pageant people were pretty mellow.

IIRC, the real reason they fired her is that she stopped showing up to her contractual public appearances. When they first fired her, and she cried foul, they published on the Internet a few email exchanges, in which they remind her of her contractual obligation to show up for public appearances. Her replies were basically statements that read like "I'm bigger than this Pageant thing now, and I'm only going to do the appearances that I feel like doing." That's not doing your job. If I only come into work on days I feel like working, I'm damn sure gonna get fired.

If I have time, I'll hunt the link.

Now, I do believe the media treated her unfairly afterwards, but that's a horse of a different color.

Link to the emails; she comes off very hostile.

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2009/06/10/transcript-e-mails-carrie-prejean-keith-lewis/

Patrick - you sound rather hateful on Miss Prejean. Do you hate Christians?

So has the sex tape went public? Where can I find a copy?

Crusader writes: Patrick - you sound rather hateful on Miss Prejean. Do you hate Christians?

No. I am a Christian, actually. I just don't like hypocrites and I also don't like whiners who claim they are persecuted and attempt to capitalize on it.

So, she was rejected for her stance on gay marriage. She can get over it. That hardly amounts to persecution. She lost a beauty pageant; she wasn't sent to a death camp.

Yes, Perez Hilton -- hyped nonentity that he is -- asked what I considered a stupid question, and even more stupidly, he penalized her for her answer. The mature thing to do would have been to ask her something else, or if he must ask that question, rate her based on how well she presents her views and how well she supports her opinions, but just because you don't happen to like her opinions, that's not a reason slam her so hard that her loss is assured. That's petty, vindictive and spiteful.

Perez Hilton gets to beat down someone for daring to oppose gay marriage. Gee, how impressive. Pretty ironic, considering that gay marriage proponents are the ones preaching tolerance all the time. I'm sure Perez Hilton truly feels validated now, the jerk.

You have all spent far more energy discussing her than she deserves. Just use what I call the Coulter defense - ignore her and maybe she'll go away.

Careful Mike- she was a minor at the time the tape was made. If you were to find it on the net and view it, you could find yourself in serious legal troubles.

The question Perez Hilton asked her was unfair. To even ask such a politically-loaded question at a beauty pageant was ridiculous (almost as ridiculous as having Hilton be a judge).

To lose the Miss USA crown for answering the question honestly was an travesty.

The Miss California pageant reacted badly at that point. A pageant official, a former Miss California herself, resigned in protest at the MC pageant not immediately stripping Prejean of her crown. The official stated that Prejean was out of touch with most Californians (the same most Californians who had just voted down gay marriage in a plebiscite).

The Miss California pageant claims Prejean skipped pageant events to attend political events with herself as the star and so, grateful for a legitimate reason to unload her, the pageant stripped her of her crown. She says otherwise.

Once Hilton asked the question, Prejean was dead meat. If she had said she was in favor of gay marriage, the pageant would have worried about middle America not embracing her as Miss USA. When she answered in opposition to gay marriage, the pageant had to worry about losing celebrity support and the attendant glamour.

What I can't figure out is whether Prejean lacks self-awareness or if she cynically decided, once she heard Hilton's question, to milk a bad situation for all it was worth. After all, there's a lot less fame and fortune in being a Miss USA runner up than there is in being the injured party in the war against political correctness.

How much more fame? Name the winner of the pageant.

"Careful Mike- she was a minor at the time the tape was made. If you were to find it on the net and view it, you could find yourself in serious legal troubles."

Not according to TMZ who talked to her boyfriend and obtained a copy of the tape. According to her ex-boyfriend she contacted him asking him to say that she was underage when she made the tape so she could sue to prevent it from being released. Apparently she was 20 years old when the tape was made. Of course there is nothing wrong with erring on the side of caution.

Sign me up BAYYYYBEEE!

cornerdemon says "I think the Pageant people were pretty mellow"

What? Are you living on this planet? The pagenat people went bolistic! See Conan's post. He is right on target with his description of the pageant people's reaction.

Conan writes: What I can't figure out is whether Prejean lacks self-awareness or if she cynically decided, once she heard Hilton's question, to milk a bad situation for all it was worth. After all, there's a lot less fame and fortune in being a Miss USA runner up than there is in being the injured party in the war against political correctness.

I truly doubt that Prejean is anywhere near sufficiently calculating to decide to make hay the instant "she heard Hilton's question."

It might have occurred to her to do this after she lost the title, but "once she heard it"? Truly doubtful.

You've painted yourself into narrowing it down to two possibilities, so your only option left is to see her as lacking self-awareness. Personally, I think she answered the question truthfully and reasonably expected (incorrectly) that she be judged on her poise and eloquence in answering the question.

Then once she got dumped by MC, she decided she was the victim of religious persecution (which she may have been) and was going to play the victim card. Unfortunately for her, apparently her former boyfriend decided to hop on the train of scandal, which ended her plans of making a professional victim of herself right there.

Now, with her new book, she's trying again to capitalize with her victim status. Quite frankly, I doubt it will work, but her repeated attempts may have the cumulative effect of earning her the notoriety and celebrity she wants.

Actually Conan, I think you may have a few facts wrong. The other finalists were also asked politically loaded questions as well (for example, the winner, Kristen Dalton of North Carolina, was asked whether or not she supported the government bailout of private companies and why; Miss Arizona, who placed third, was asked about universal health care). In interviews you can find on youtube, Ms. Dalton stated that she was prepared to answer a question about gay marriage; Miss Arizona stated that she wished she had received the question about gay marriage instead of the one she received. Although I agree with you that asking political questions at beauty pageants is ridiculous (and giving the contestants only 30 seconds to respond just as ridiculous), Ms. Prejean and the other contestants knew that political questions would be asked - and if a person doesn't want to be asked political question while wearing an evening gown, she shouldn't have participated in the pageant in the first place.

Ms. Prejean DID NOT LOSE the Miss USA crown because she answered honestly. Miss North Carolina beat her (and came in first) in both the swimsuit and the evening gown competitions, the scores of which were flashed on the tv screen after each contestant appeared. Miss North Carolina also managed to, in my opinion at least, answer her political question in a more eloquent and savvier manner. Carrie Prejean's answer rambled, contained a falsehood which contradicted a fact in the judge's statement (i.e., we don't live in a land where you can chose same sex marriage - the judge just informed you that Vermont became the 4th state to legalize it), and she used the phrase "opposite marriage" to refer to traditional, heterosexual marriage (a term not in anyone's lexicon at the time). Just because she did several public interviews after Miss USA pageant and stated that she lost because of her answer doesn't make it true -- to me, her statements were a reflection of her poor sportsmanship, her lack of honesty (as she certainly could have investigated the scores of the swimsuit and evening gown competitions which were readily available) and her desire for her 15 minutes.

I don't think the Miss California pageant necessarily acted badly after Ms. Prejean's performance at the Miss USA contest. Although it's always mentioned that a beauty contest winner represents her state or country, it is a fallacy; the citizens of California did not vote for her (a private panel of judges did in a beauty contest) and she did not sign a contract with the state of California (she signed what is essentially an employment agreement with the for-profit, private organization that runs the Miss California USA pageant (hereinafter referred to as the "Contract")).

The pageant official to whom you are referring is Shanna Moakler, who was not a former Miss California - she was a former Miss New York and Miss USA. She resigned from her position as co-director of the Miss California organization over a month after the pageant. She stated that she resigned because Ms. Prejean had violated the Contract in several respects and was given a pass (i.e., allowed to keep her crown by Donald Trump) and that she was upset that Ms. Prejean failed to take responsibility for any of her Contract violations; such violations included: (i) posing semi-nude; (ii) making appearances not authorized by her employer; and (iii) aligning herself with organizations (such as NOM) without the pageant's consent. Ms. Moakler further expanded that it would make her job more difficult in the future in terms of holding other Miss California's accountable for their contractual responsibilities because Ms. Prejean was given a pass. I don't recall Ms. Moakler ever stating that Prejean was out of touch with most Californians; she did state that Prejean was entitled to her opinion and she expressed that she disagreed with it - I can guarantee that nowhere in the Contract did it obligate Ms. Moakler or any other employee of the pageant to agree with Ms. Prejean or campaign for her opinions.

The reality is that the beauty pageant business is generally gay-friendly. Many of the sponsors and supporters of the Miss California pageant are gay. The fact that Ms. Prejean apparently had no qualms about accepting prizes and assistance from so many gay people while withholding from them her opinion on gay marriage (at least prior to the Miss USA pageant) could be considered another testament to her character. Ms. Prejean's statements and actions (including recording robo-calls on behalf of NOM to the citizens of Maine to encourage them to overturn gay marriage) probably alienated those sponsors and threatened the health of the organization. Her employer was certainly within its right (especially as set forth in the Contract) to ask Ms. Prejean to keep quiet about the issue of gay marriage (or to focus on the "no offense" part of her answer) after the Miss USA pageant.

While I agree that her opposition to gay marriage played a part in her termination, it is undeniable that she committed many breaches of her Contract, which justified her firing -- she was far from having clean hands. A list of her Contract violations would include (i)failing to disclose that she had posed nude (in addition to previously disclosed semi-nude photos, she just recently confessed to filming herself masturbating), (ii) entering into a book deal without the pageant's express written consent (her attorney sent emails to pageant officials saying that Ms. Prejean had entered into a book deal despite that fact that the parties had not reached or executed an amendment to her Contract permitting her to do so) and (iii) failing to be cooperative (as illustrated by a slew of nasty, petulant emails to a pageant official, as disclosed by Fox News and later confirmed to be accurate by her own attorney). I think it is highly logical and ethical for an employer to fire an employee who(i) was engaging in behavior that was hurting its business and (ii) was committing multiple violations of her employment contract. Don't you think so? I don't think that's behaving badly at all.

In addition, the pageant officials did not say that she skipped events -- although it was disclosed in the tabloids that she failed to make a previous appearance on Larry King Live because she was hung over. They stated that she failed to make herself available for "tens and tens of" appearances.

Prejean was not dead meat when the question was asked. She could have responded (and still not have lied about her opinion) by saying, for example: "My home state of California just voted on this very important issue. Before I went into voting booth, I considered many factors in making my decision -- my upbringing, my faith and, of course, my heart. I am grateful that I was allowed to cast a vote and have my voice be heard. I think the citizens of the other states should have the opportunity to have their voices heard as well and cast votes on the issue the way I did. Thank you." Of course, the answer assumes that she (who so deeply cares about traditional marriage) actually bothered to vote in order to make such a statement true. But I'm giving an example of how she could have answered the question in a more diplomatic fashion that would not require her to lie about her beliefs or alienate members of the judging panel.

You could very well be right about both your choices. She may be lacking self awareness, as well as cynically taking advantage of the situation. I myself equate her with Christian charlatans such as Jim Bakker and Peter Popoff - she's just someone using religion (and letting herself be used) to make a buck and get attention.

Hope my post helped provide you with facts to inform your opinion.

Over at HuffPo, it says that Prejean said that she left the show because she was apparently told that she wouldn't have to take calls from viewers.

If that's the case, I wonder what Prejean thought she was going to do on Larry King. Let us stare at her book cover for an hour?

The other finalists were also asked politically loaded questions as well (for example, the winner, Kristen Dalton of North Carolina, was asked whether or not she supported the government bailout of private companies and why; Miss Arizona, who placed third, was asked about universal health care).

You're not seriously suggesting that questions on corporate bailouts and universal healthcare carry the same emotional and political baggage that a question on gay marriage carries?

Carrie Prejean's answer rambled....

Yes it did. And I hope she lost points with the judges for that.

The pageant official to whom you are referring is Shanna Moakler, who was not a former Miss California - she was a former Miss New York and Miss USA.

I knew she was a former Miss Somewhere.

I don't recall Ms. Moakler ever stating that Prejean was out of touch with most Californians....

I do recall her...or someone else high in the MC organization...saying that.

She stated that she resigned because Ms. Prejean had violated the Contract in several respects and was given a pass....

Moakler is worried that Prejean posed for risque photos? Pot, meet kettle.

Although, in fairness, Moakler's photos were a few years after her pageant days and were not in any violation of a pageant contract.

Moakler also appeared in an advertisement supporting the overturning of Prop 8 shortly after the Miss USA pageant and the controversial question. As a co-director of the MC pageant, was she required to obtain permission to appear in that ad? If so, did she?

According to Wikipedia, Moakler said in an interview that, overall, she enjoyed her reign, but complained about having to live with a pageant chaperone who made sure she dressed appropriately at all times. So, it sounds like Prejean's not the only one who struggled with pageant restrictions.

...it is undeniable that she committed many breaches of her Contract, which justified her firing....

Agreed.

Although Prejean says she did not violate her contract, I seem to recall she appeared at in front of an organization opposing gay marriage almost immediately after the Miss USA pageant. I hardly think the Miss California pageant would have approved such a controversial appearance so quickly on the heels of the Miss USA contretemps.

Prejean was not dead meat when the question was asked.

Yes, she was. Any other candidate would have been as well, even the one who said she was prepared to answer it and would have preferred it to her actual question.

Middle America, the America for whom the pageant keeps Miss USA wholesome, would not have fully embraced a pro-gay-marriage Miss USA. Lefty America would have roared about the hypocrisy of a woman who claims to support traditional values yet who sells herself as a slab of meat in a beauty contest.

She could have responded....

Your hypothetical reply was a good one, but do you really think Perez Hilton would have been satisfied with a reply that did not actually answer the question?

I myself equate her with Christian charlatans such as Jim Bakker and Peter Popoff - she's just someone using religion (and letting herself be used) to make a buck and get attention.

That falls under my cynically taking advantage of the situation option.

Hope my post helped provide you with facts to inform your opinion.

Your post was enlightening.

But, I still think Prejean's a preening self-righteous bimbo whose fifteen minutes of fame are up and I wish she'd go away.

I finally got to watch the video and am at a loss to understand why she abruptly stopped doing the show. I don't think Larry's first question was out of line, but when she objected to answering it, he dropped it and moved on.

Larry's not noted as a tough questioner, but Prejean acted like a hothouse flower wilting under the unrelenting pressure of an intense grilling. From what little I've heard or read of beauty pageant politics and infighting, no one that delicate can rise to the top. It's gotta be an act...and it's getting old.

I wonder what Prejean thought she was going to do on Larry King. Let us stare at her book cover for an hour?

I'm sure she would have flipped her hair once or twice to break up the monotony.

Conan writes: "You're not seriously suggesting that questions on corporate bailouts and universal healthcare carry the same emotional and political baggage that a question on gay marriage carries?"

Why not?

Conan writes: "I'm sure she would have flipped her hair once or twice to break up the monotony."

How thoughtful! She should have won Miss U.S.A. (Thanks, Conan. You actually got me to laugh out loud.)

Hi Conan, thank you for reading my post. As you can tell I've followed this idiotic controversy closely and was admittedly getting a few things off my chest.

I would agree that the question about same sex marriage carried more emotional baggage. But, as I stated before, the winner subsequently stated that she had been prepared to answer that question and Miss Arizona, the third place finisher, said she wished that she had received that question. These contestants knew that they would be asked political questions; given that Ms. Prejean hailed from California where the issue of same sex marriage was a very hot button issue on the ballot, she (perhaps out of all of the contestants) should have been prepared to answer that question in an eloquent and politically savvy manner. In my opinion, she did not. Coupled with the fact that she did not win the other 2 portions of the competition, I do not see the big deal that she did not win the crown.

Regarding Shanna Moakler, yes she did pose nude - and yes, she did so while she was not under any contract prohibiting her from doing so. She also never lied to anyone about posing nude. As I stated previously, Ms. Moakler was not necessarily particularly upset about Ms. Prejean's nude photos - she was upset about her numerous contract violations (including making appearances without pageant consent) and her failure to take responsibility for them. During the press conference with Donald Trump (after Trump let her keep her crown), Ms. Prejean pulled out the victim card; not once did she say anything along the lines of "I would also like to apologize to the pageant for not being 100% true to my contract. I promise to do my best to do so during the remainder of my reign." I can completely empathize with Ms. Moakler - I would also be very upset if an employee violated a contract with me and failed to take any responsibility for it whatsoever. Letting Ms. Prejean get away her contract violations could very well make Ms. Moakler's job of enforcing the same contract with other pageant winners very difficult - as the message they would receive is "Well Carrie got away with it, so can I".

Ms. Moakler's position as co-director of the MC pageant was an unpaid one, as she has stated. Keeping that in mind (employment contracts are 2-way streets, the employer typically agrees to provide compensation and perks and the employee agrees to do the job), I highly doubt that she signed a contract with the pageant that required her to obtain any kind of permission in order to appear in any kind of political advertisement. If there was such a contract, then the MC pageant would have been in its rights to terminate her employment for breach of contract (and, it would also have been within its rights to ignore the breach if it elected to do so). The MC pageant would also be correct in "firing" Ms. Moakler if it felt that she was doing anything to hurt its business - such as alienating its sponsors with her statements and behavior.

Again, I don't think anyone who got that question in the pageant was dead meat. Granted, I do think that if she gave a more diplomatic response (such as the one I tried to give in my hypothetical), it might not have fully impressed Perez Hilton, who was clearly using his question to further the cause of gay rights (but I do think that Perez Hilton probably would not have subsequently called her names and drew penises on her photo with such a diplomatic response). He was only one judge of many - and besides, she was not the frontrunner as I've explained and most likely would not have won anyway.

You have to remember that the question asked at the pageant does not obligate the contestant to take up the issue raised as her platform. Such an action would be highly unusual. For example, Miss North Carolina, after the contest, did not start campaigning against the corporate bailouts - and, from the interviews that I've seen with her, no interviewer has even bothered to ask her further about the issue. If Ms. Prejean had given a more diplomatic answer (such as the one I tried to provide), I don't think she would have come under such heavy criticism from either the left of right wing - sure, there would have been some people who criticized her for not affirmatively taking a stand one way or the other on the issues - but I think, for the most part, not many people would have cared.

I am certainly aware that Ms. Prejean was asked about same sex marriage in interviews after the pageant. Instead of placing focus on the "no offense" part of her answer and redirecting focus to her platform of the Special Olympics (which is what the MC pageant suggested she do), she chose to go against her employer's wishes and made further public statements about a very emotional and divisive issue. In this country, when you make public statements about a subject, you are making yourself a public figure about that subject which opens you to criticism from the public. She elected to ignore the advice of her employer (and, perhaps naively, elected to follow the advice of Maggie Gallagher and Charles LiMandri of NOM and her pastor, Miles McPherson). She is the one who made public statements about same sex marriage, traditional marriage, her faith and her upbringing - thereby inviting further public scrutiny of her about those topics.

Tami Farrell, the runner up in the MC pageant who took over after Ms. Prejean's firing, handled interviewer questions to her about same sex marriage in a savvier way and, as far as I know, hasn't been vilified by anyone on the left or the right. Admittedly, she probably was following the advice of officials at the MC pageant when she responded something to the effect that "It's kind of silly to be looking to a beauty queen for answers on this subject."

As to her behavior on Larry King, cynically, I think that she (i) was again trying to generate even more scandal in order to get free publicity for her book and (ii) trying to further the theme of the big bad liberal media picking on sweet, innocent conservative women. If indeed her reaction was genuine and not pre-planned, I think it provides further evidence that the judges at the Miss USA pageant (including Perez Hilton) were correct in not selecting her to be Miss USA as she showed a lack of tact and decorum.

Personally, I think she just learned the meaning of the word "inappropriate," and was dying to try it out.

What terrifies me about Prejean is that she is 22.

Twenty two. I thought she was a well-preserved thirty something. Lay off the fake bake already. Her decolletage is going to look like a leather handbag in another year or two.

Personally, whether or not she 'should' have won is immaterial-if those tapes had ever made it out (and they would have at some point, I'm sure) she would have had to give up the crown anyway. As it was, because they existed (and were out of her control, and therefore had the potential to become public), she was already in violation of the rules. They already danced around it with the 'topless' photos she had taken when she was underage for a photo shoot, this just clinched it.

At least she got to keep the fake titties.

She is a non-issue, to me. But, as far as Larry King, this guy is scum, far bigger scum than she is. I thought it was kinda' neat that the third or fourth time he asked again after she told him she was not allowed to talk about the settlement that she took off her mike. We need more people to treat scummy 'journalists' like that.

Great Information, thanks for the useful Article. Also check these nice anal bitches blog. Doppelanal Arschfick