Miss California controversy update

[ADoyle90815]

Miss California officials bypass no-show title holder | L.A. Now | Los Angeles Times

I think the Miss California USA organization is doing the right thing because she did violate her contract, mostly by not disclosing those photos.

[john doe]

I believe there is already a thread aout this.

[talisyn]

Talk about a cop-out! The Miss California people want to appease the outspoken homosexuals and friends crowd, and they want to keep the no gay-marriage crowd. I find that even more pathetic than Mr. Hilton's question that started it all.

[Hemidakota]

Miss California officials bypass no-show title holder | L.A. Now | Los Angeles Times

I think the Miss California USA organization is doing the right thing because she did violate her contract, mostly by not disclosing those photos.

Ugh no...go figure. I would of said the same thing myself. So what is the point here?

[Just_A_Guy]

I've always wondered (but been afraid to ask):

Is "Perez Hilton" really his name? Really???

[Churchmouse]

Donald Trump, owner of Miss USA, said said today she will keep her crown. If Miss USA becomes Miss Universe, Prejean would become Miss USA. Finally some sense to this thing.

[Churchmouse]

Donald Trump, owner of Miss USA, said today Prejean can retain her Miss California title. If Miss USA becomes Miss Universe. Prejean would become Miss USA. Finally some sense to this whole thing.

[Churchmouse]

I've always wondered (but been afraid to ask):

Is "Perez Hilton" really his name? Really???

Mario Armando Lavandeira/Perez Hilton

[Wingnut]

I've always wondered (but been afraid to ask):

Is "Perez Hilton" really his name? Really???

It's pretty easy info to find on Wikipedia.

[Just_A_Guy]

Huh. Maybe I should re-invent my online persona as "Tom Schmooze".

[Faded]

As far as I can conclude, there was not a single photo taken of Miss California that could not be proudly displayed on the magazine cover at the grocery store checkout line. Was she and idiot for having those pictures taken? Yes she was. Is it pornographic? Yes, in my opinion it is. So is a lot of what you see on the covers of those magazines. I think I spotted on the other day that showed a fully nude woman with some cloth item barely covering the "essential" bits.

If you're going to take action against Miss California for those photos, then shouldn't somebody do something about the smut that is being left wide open for the whole word to see? I think we're seeing an example of true hypocrisy here. It's using a double-standard to target and condemn one person for doing something that you didn't like. Miss California would not have ever been in any danger of being stripped of crown if she had not spoken out against Gay Marriage. She would also be Miss USA, and think everyone knows that very well.

Who knew there were still witch-hunts in the 21st Century? All you have to do is exercise your freedom of speech in a way that violates Political Correctness, and they'll find a way to ruin your life.

[Just_A_Guy]

True. From what I've seen (and I haven't gone looking for it; I've just seen what FoxNews--motto: No instinct too base to marketed to--had blaring on its front page), it doesn't look any worse than those pics Hannah Montana did last year.

[Islander]

Miss California officials bypass no-show title holder | L.A. Now | Los Angeles Times

I think the Miss California USA organization is doing the right thing because she did violate her contract, mostly by not disclosing those photos.

The are other Miss USA that had similar pictures disclosed after the fact and they did not lose their crown. This is nothing but a political witch hunt. She stated her opinion on a very polarized subject and it was not politically correct so now "she has to pay for it." If she would have said something like "I don't care" nothing would have happen and she would have moved on with the rest of the Miss beauty pageant viewing public. It is after all a meaningless event but a money making opportunity.

The rest is just the consequences of her past choices.

Edited May 13, 2009 by Islander

[Wingnut]

...it doesn't look any worse than those pics Hannah Montana did last year.

You mean Miley Cyrus?

[Just_A_Guy]

Whatever. :)

[Faded]

Ironic that an event that has woman prancing around in very revealing clothing and bikinis has a moral objection if a participant was photoed "semi-nude." They were semi-nude the entire time they were on stage in a bikini weren't they? Or are they saying that the Miss USA competition gets first dibs?

[Moksha]

Hey, this simply frees this ex-Miss California to spearhead efforts by the National Organization for Marriage or perhaps be a commentator for Fox News.

:)

[Islander]

Hey, this simply frees this ex-Miss California to spearhead efforts by the National Organization for Marriage or perhaps be a commentator for Fox News.

:)

:confused: or...:eek:

[prisonchaplain]

No such luck...she's keeping her title, and Mr. Trump seemed to enjoy her pictures very much.

[bytor2112]

I saw the pics and frankly, she is about as undressed as she was in the swimsuit competition. She gets to keep her crown.

So, I am guessing here, but, if you do something wrong in your past....does that mean that you can't be against g/l marriage?

[HEthePrimate]

I'm just wondering why anyone cares? Either about Ms. Prejean's opinion about gay marriage or her photos. I like Jon Stewart's take on it in the first segment of the May 12 Daily Show.

HEP

[Hemidakota]

I'm just wondering why anyone cares?

Never waste the time in watching anything that Trump is on.