Grandmaster Trump has decided that Carrie Prejean will keep her Miss California crown, just hours after new topless photos emerged (NSFW).
In a tear-filled speech, Prejean claims that she was punished for invoking her freedom of speech. Furthermore, she says her decorated soldier grandfather who served under General Patton in WWII would be severely pissed at everyone who’s been mean to her.
Unfortunately, Prejean is revealing an extremely limited understanding of the First Amendment. Freedom of speech isn’t “I can say any damn thing I want and you all have to like it.”
Being treated nicely by the media is not a First Amendment right. Publishing nude photos she consented to taking is not defamatory. Questioning whether she is in any way qualified to be the new spokesperson for the National Organization for Marriage is not slander.
It seems to me she’s just upset that she’s been discredited, but to borrow words from the tipster who sent us this developing story:
“People who say mean things to you aren’t taking your Constitutional freedoms away. And to claim that WWII veterans actually fought for such an imagined version of the Bill of Rights is really just offensive to what they actually did fight for and preserve. It’s attention whoring, plain and simple. And considering Trump is involved it shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone.”
Well, she’s certainly demonstrated a knack for attention whoring. Expect to see Prejean everywhere from traditional marriage coffee cups to billboards everywhere for the next 15 minutes.
Related posts:
- Carrie Prejean: Naked on the Internet, Of Course There’s been such a firestorm of commenting on Carrie Prejean’s...
- Carrie Prejean Admits to Hannity That Her Sex Tape Exists In the course of promoting her new tell-all memoir, ex-Miss...
- Forget Those Nudie Photos: Carrie Prejean Has a Sex Tape Former Miss California and “opposite marriage” morality advocate Carrie Prejean...
- Hey, Let’s Destroy Carrie Prejean for Agreeing with the President! As you watch the Carrie Prejean brouhaha unfold, you might...
- To Serve and Protect — Just Not If You’re A Celebrity Not gonna lie: I covet the celebrity lifestyle, especially if...
Call me crazy, but my definition of topless means she isn’t actually wearing a top.
Although I understand what you are trying to say, one of your sentences seems to insist that the 1st Amendment is “a Constitutional protection for members of the press.” The way I read it, you are insisting that you insist that it is the only use for it.
Just so the readers of this are perfectly clear…
“The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights that expressly prohibits the United States Congress from making laws “respecting an establishment of religion” or that prohibit the free exercise of religion, INFRINGE THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH, infringe the freedom of the press, limit the right to peaceably assemble, or limit the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”
I’m not arguing that the press doesn’t have a right to dissect this woman but please, don’t try to confuse people as to the actual FULL meaning explaining each person’s rights according to the 1st Amendment.
And I’m no constitutional scholar but I believe I have first amendment rights. Not just the press.
Timm — thanks for the clarification. I think you’re right that I was unclear and I’ve gone back to revise my post.
I don’t know… I only caught a brief snippet of the speech, and she didn’t sound that bad. And she is being “punished” (in a sense) for exercising her first amendment right – in the same way anyone who exercises such a right is punished by society when the expression is unpopular. She had a right to say what she did, and people had a right to respond the way they did (though I think some of the response could have been classified as “unprofessional” – by which I mean, I imagine Perez was being paid to act as a judge and therefore *should* have acted in a more professional manner). She’s upset by the response, as most people would be in that situation, but it’s not like she’s trying to commence any lawsuits against it. I’m not sure there’s a lot of hypocrisy here. But if she said that Perez et al had no right to call her a b**** and whatnot, that would be an appropriate quote to cite here.
She also denied representing NOM.
Hopefully, now that this decision has been made, things will start to blow over, at least until Perez Douchebag wants to be in the headlines again.
“Attention whoring”? Yeah, anybody who enters a beauty contest wants attention, by definition. But I don’t see how defending herself from being pilloried on the national stage is “attention whoring.” She’s not the one digging up her old pictures, her parents’ divorce records, etc.
This whole situation looks very different in light of the fact that Miss Rhode Island posed topless for “Maxim”. And has faced exactly zero opprobrium for it, thus far, because she apparently was not asked for her take on gay marriage.
Because, see, the presumption is that she’s for gay marriage, which means that posing nude isn’t bad. The two things are so inextricably linked that nobody seems to be able to explain why.
“People who say mean things to you aren’t taking your Constitutional freedoms away.”
You can forgive her for thinking otherwise as the cry from the Media and Left the last 8 years has been that their right to speak was being violated by W. So this woman grew up in a age where one of the main talking points was that dissent was being squashed.
And her point about fighting WWII to protect our way of life (our constitution, our rights) from fascism is valid as well. Maybe not the clearest way for her to argue her point but the meaning is clear as to what she meant.
This is nitpicking, nothing else. I am starting to think all this hubbub is just simple envy of a very attractive young woman.
@ Hurricane…….I agree, this is stupid nitpicking. I daresay anyone can have some “dirt” hidden somewhere if people looked hard enough to find it.
And it goes without saying, if you don’t want pics of your naughty or not-so-naughty bits out there, then don’t take any of them in the first place. Even artistic, partial nudity pics can come back and bite you on the butt. How many people have been burned by exes who happen to have pics that they made public? Too many.
The pics were nothing. Paintings of Jesus Christ show the same amount of skin. Show me a real controversy. I want to see Prejean smoking crystal meth or pictures beer bonging a Shlitz while riding driving a school bus…the short one.
Being Christian doesn’t automatically mean you’re perfect. The 16mm grainy film they play of my life after I kick it is going to be freakin’ embarrasing. Point is, I try do to the right thing and not be judgemental when I know I am doing the same shit. It’s difficult, but it doesn’t make the Word less true. Christians could do FAR worse a spokesmodel.
You know who wanted her freedom taken away more than anyone else? Was it the Human Rights Campaign Fund? I checked out their website. They raise money for gay causes and their website had no mention of her. I went to Daily Kos and found that the only mention of her was a poem someone had written in the hate mail section regarding Perez Hilton and his need for cocks. Crooks and Liars mention it only in the respect that folks like Bill O’Reilly are using her as an example of how we must fight to not have our freedom of speech taken away. Think Progress doesn’t seem to mention her at all. From what I can tell, the gay community of activists and the liberal media don’t really care what happens to Carrie Prejean. She’s even said she hasn’t been receiving hate mail, mostly letters of support.
So, who does? It all goes back to Perez Hilton. In his latest ploy to obtain personal power and to make himself appear more important than he actually is, he took on the mantle of gay crusader. He took to his blog, which, in turn, got him invited to talk shows and did as much as he could do to tear Carrie down. He saw this as his big shot at fame. Carrie did what any 21 year old would do when being bullied: she did the best she could figure to do. She went to churches, which she felt would support her in her hour of need.
I have a feeling that Donald Trump and the pageant officials will make sure that Carrie only does pageant approved events from now on. It will be interesting to see what happens to her and Perez. I’d like to see this sink his career. He thinks free speech only applies to him.
Too bad it wasn’t a video of her snorting crack, then it probably just would have been ignored!
Well looky here. Trump even says that her views are the same as Obama’s. What’s that? Are those crickets from our overbloated Mario and other leftwingers? Ohhhhh, it is okay for him but everyone else is insane for thinking that?
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22413.html
Would there be any beauty pageants if one of the requirements was to understand the constitution?
LOL that the gay mafia has made Perez Hilton their figurehead while giving Miss California got the full Sarah Palin treatment.
They’re going to regret that within 3-2-1- whoops, they regret it already!
“I can say any damn thing I want and you all have to like it.”
Um, wait. She was ASKED a question and answered it honestly in her opinion. She shouldn’t be castigated because she didn’t answer sufficiently to you. Otherwise what is the point of asking someone their opinion? If your going to destroy her you are trying to scare and bully people to think only like you.
Am I the only one that thinks she’s just not that pretty?
I’d imagine Perez agrees.
I’m with LN on the other thread – who in tarnation thought that Perez Hilton would be a good judge at a beauty contest?
And Simon, why is the presumption that Miss R.I. is for gay marriage? Because she’s from Rhode Island?
Because it’s the default position, of course. Otherwise, why all the outrage about Prejean?
Re why Obama gets the pass:
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/ravrech/2009/05/12/honestly-obamas-lying/
so sick of hearing about this chick.. and lets remember trump kept that mess tara conner too!
Discredited?
How has she been discredited? Her modeling career really has nothing to do with the fact that she believes marriage to be a union between a man and a woman.
But I’ll tell you who has been discredited. That dumb blonde at Miss Cali USA who thought it would be a great idea to attempt to embarrass Miss Prejean by “revealing” they bought her a boob job. Like we couldn’t tell from the swimsuit competition?
All these Hollyweird liberals who have no issues with plastic surgery and sexual images of women who suddenly feign all this offense at her modeling pictures and her fake boobs have been discredited. While they point their waggy little fingers at her, they come off as hypocrites. You know, like the actual definition of a hypocrite.
Her stance against gay marriage has absolutely nothing to do with her boobs or her career. And you idiots who keep calling her a hypocrite are actually projecting your own hypocrisy on to her, because you really don’t care if a woman poses suggestively or has her boobs altered, but you think people who agree with Miss Prejean do. That also makes you phony. You’re not really outraged at all about her boobs, it’s her opinions that tick you off.
Hell, I’m a Christian and didn’t care at all about gay marriage. I think Christians made a blunder by giving that authority to the government in the first place. If we think it’s a holy institution, why did we let the states make all these laws regarding it in the first place? Because the Mormons scared us with all their wives and children?? I have no idea. At any rate, it is the response to Miss Prejean and Prop 8 (and the hypocrisy of liberals in California who loved how easy it is to change the constitution of California until it bit them in the butt) that has completely turned me off to supporting gay marriage. It’s like giving a cookie to a 2-year old who is throwing a tantrum. Big mistake.
I say don’t give them marriage until they start acting right. Now, go to your room!
“Unfortunately, Prejean is revealing an extremely limited understanding of the First Amendment. Freedom of speech isn’t “I can say any damn thing I want and you all have to like it.””
That’s interesting that you say that, because liberals have been using freedom of speech in that manner for years.
Sorry but I have to support Carrie over that Pez Dispensor of a wanna be celeb. The MSM has been playing the hell out of this and only Fox News has stood beside her against the Gay Left.
“Being treated nicely by the media is not a First Amendment right.”
I have to agree. Being treated nicely by the media (as long as you agree with them) is a First Amenment right. If they disagree with your opionions, prepare to be demonized and destroyed.
As Camille Paglia said today … jokes about killing Pelosi baaaddd and a sign that right wing talk radio is evil. Jokes about killing Limbaugh … mildy unfortunate … Wanda Sykes is usually much funnier.
Bruce, in all seriousness, could you point me in the direction of even ONE instance of Sykes’ talent for being funny? Because all I’ve seen or heard are unconfirmed reports; she has yet to do anything or say anything that even makes me smile. In short, she’s a loudmouthed black woman who thinks that’s all she needs to be, to be famous.
Beige: she was kinda funny on Curb Your Enthusiasm. But that may have more to do with Larry David than her.
Maybe Sykes is only funny with a script written by somebody else.
You know…like Michael Richards. He was hilarious in UHF.
You’ll never convince me in a million years that the whole Perez Hilton ambush wasn’t a setup engineered by Trump himself to drum up publicity for his dismal beauty contest. Perez Hilton, the classic definition of “attention whore” if there ever was one, was on Celebrity Apprentice a few weeks back making the normal fool of himself he always does. And just a few days later he shows up as a judge in this contest and drops this hot button question on one of the contestants, who gives the little camera pimp exactly what he wants.
I smell a great big dead fish in the ice box. It was a setup. Pure and simple.
Just my thoughts.
Michael Richards career is basically over (unless I’ve been living under a rock) due to his tirade, but anyone willing to put money on Sykes career being over after that disgusting so-called joke?
Last night, I pulled out my Larry Elder book from 2002 and re-read the part on Hollywood libs. Especially in light of how conservatives have to watch everything we say in public about Obama, it’s really disturbing how they were able to refer to Bush using all kinds of pejoratives.
I laughed pretty hard when they shoved a cork up her ass in Over the Hedge…
But maybe that was more wishful thinking than comedy.
I don’t necessarily think Sykes is funny.
I was pointing out that Paglia said:
“Sykes (who is usually hilarious) was rushed and inept, embarrassing herself and her hosts. But what Mark Davis did, in irresponsibly broadcasting Feherty’s vile fantasy, was an inflammatory political act that could goad susceptible minds down the dark road toward “Seven Days in May.”
Notice the way Paglia suggest Sykes was just having a bad day, while Feherty is “vile”.
Sorry … Paglia link:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2009/05/13/7_days_in_may/
cry me a river. the martyr complex on this girl is insane. she’s going to ride this gravy train for as far as it’ll take her, i guess.
and she’s not a hypocrite because she opposes same-sex marriage AND has posed nude for pictures. she’s a hypocrite because she advocates for “traditional values” yet doesn’t exhibit them. she is against same-sex marriage because of what the bible has to say about it, but what does the bible have to say about her actions? 1 timothy 2:9-12.
If you don’t want to make her a martyr, stop crucifying her.
Assuming that’s true, it can be said of any contestant in that pageant. It’s just that she was the only one who was asked that question.
your point?
Has been made. This is the part where you try to refute it, if you can.
Yes, the same could very likely be said of other contestants in the pageant. Which would make them hypocrites too.
Why focus on her, then?
what, exactly, is the crux of your argument? that because her opinion was solicited, rather than volunteered, it shouldn’t be subjected to being challenged or criticized?
lots of people have said lots of things about miss prejean since the pageant, some worse than “dumb bitch.” i might ask you, why focus on perez hilton?
That’s exactly it, I’m trying to stifle your free speech. Well done.
Why focus on the guy who started the fire and stoked it for all it’s worth? Oh, no reason. Just entirely random.
i guess using snark, sarcastic comments, and insinuating that i don’t “get” your point is an easy way to get out of having to better articulate your argument or support it with logic.
and talk about stoking it for all its worth! she, more than anyone else, has milked this situation to keep herself in the limelight.
“what, exactly, is the crux of your argument? that because her opinion was solicited, rather than volunteered, it shouldn’t be subjected to being challenged or criticized?”
See – THAT is why she’s got the kind of support she does. Middle America can totally identify with her, I know I can.
Who among us hasn’t been sitting at a nice dinner with friends and family when someone innocently asks a political question and World War III breaks out over the dessert course? It’s become untenable to have an opinion that can be considered even slightly politically incorrect.
A lot of people would ask, “hasn’t politics always been a touchy subject?” Yeah, it has been, but things really have changed in the last decade or so. I’m not old by any stretch of the imagination, I’ve only been able to vote for seven years now, but even I can see how things have changed. Even when I was a kid growing up in California and the libs were getting their extreme hate on for Reagan it was relatively civilized (pre-Iran/Contra at least).
But there is no middle ground anymore – no safe opinions. If you disagree, you’re not only wrong, but you’re a bigot. Frankly, I’m fine with that, because it only backs more people into our corner – but it is a desensitizing influence. Are we really going to toss the stay at home mom down the street who bakes cookies for her daughter’s Girl Scout meets and the Grand Dragon of the KKK in the same pot because they happen to agree on gay marriage?
Hannah – like it or not, she was asked a loaded question and should be granted leeway based on the simple fact her answer was guaranteed to piss off half the people watching either way. I also wouldn’t say she’s milking her 15 minutes of fame, I would say she’s trying to defend herself.
I’ll tell you what – I’ll plaster a few dozen embarrassing photos of you all over the news and the internet, I’ll dispatch an army of pseudo-celebrities onto every talk show they can find to call you a small-minded bigot and laugh about your breast augmentation. Then, when you’re sure it can’t get any worse, I’ll start airing your family’s dirty laundry for the entire world to see.
And all of this because you honestly answered a question I asked you and I didn’t like the answer. Now, are you going to just sit on your couch and take it, or are you going to try to go out and present your side of the story? That’s what I thought.
I guess bringing up the poor, abused Dixie Chicks wouldn’t help?
And frankly, why begrudge her her 15 minutes? I’d much rather see her all over the place than octomom.
Oops, I didn’t mean to compare Carrie Prejean to that clown car womb. Carrie Prejean more than deserves her 15 minutes.
Depends on what it’s supposed to help.
But enough about you.
She dug up her parents’ divorce records. She dug up old pictures of herself. She called herself a “dumb bitch.” Good point.
The Dixie Chicks debacle probably wouldn’t help hannah’s masterful arguments.
By the way, since nobody else has thought to ask the question: Why does a beauty pageant runner-up need to be discredited?
Maybe it would if you expanded a bit.
Sorry guys, you’ve got this one completely wrong. Carrie’s comments were quite correct: she WAS punished for exercising her freedom of speech. Such punishment DOES undermine the First Amendment. (Note that she does not say that it violates it, since that would require an act of Congress.) She does NOT say that “WWII Was Fought To Protect [Her] Opinions”, but that WWII was fought to protect her right to express her opinions without punishment. And she doesn’t claim that all soldiers fought for that reason, but that her grandfather did.
I’m not sure where you guys went wrong on this. Out of all of the liars and hypocrites you could write about, why would you focus on the one person in America famous for being honest?
Err . . . by guys, I mean the Deceiver folks. Not any specific commentors on this thread.
I don’t care what she said, even if I don’t agree with it. I don’t care that she got to keep her crown, because if she had not been allowed to keep it, this would have never died down. However, given her violations of the contract, pictures aside (interviews, blah blah blah), I think she got a free pass because of the controversy. Trump has not been overly consistent in his treatment of naughty beauty queens, so his decision was transparent.
But you know what? Had she given a rousing speech about the right for all human beings to marry, I don’t think this would have turned out that much different. Sure, Perez wouldn’t have been flapping, Shanna wouldn’t have been outraged, but it would have reached a similar end via a slightly different path. Some “opposite marriage” organization or a vocal clan of freaks like the Phelps would have raised a stink and the pictures would have emerged anyway. I think it would have taken a bit longer, though, to be fair. Then for the next five years, the Phelps would be camping outside of competitions and getting attention which makes the more rational and intelligent opponents of gay marriage look bad and would also rouse the obnoxious types that support gay marriage, and in turn, make that side look bad too. Nothing good would have come of it for either side of the debate.
The question does not belong in a silly, human dog show. Simple as that. Who actually won first? Anyone remember?
That’s a good question.
Scott F, your comment made my day. I’d vote for you any day. Ever thought about moving to Massachusetts?
Chronic, I know Michael Phelps is (physically) kind of a freak but that’s no reason to think he’d be camping outside beauty pageants.
If you tell him that there is weed and hookers in it for him, you never know MC Mom.