Recently, Miss California has been making the rounds as a pro-traditional marriage crusader. She claims she lost the Miss America pageant because of the "heartfelt" answer she gave to a question by blogger Perez Hilton.
She fails to mention that she lost because she hadn't won a single competition to that point, and also that her media whoredom is totally overshadowing the real winner, my home state's Miss North Carolina. Yeah, I'm a bit salty about that. And lets be honest, she didn't bomb her answer because of what she said, she bombed because her answer was poorly-worded and made no friggin' sense.
Nonetheless, this hasn't stopped the usual suspects from recruiting her as a spokewoman for their causes. She's been on the banquet circuit nationwide, crusading against "those folks" the past few weeks.
She was even recruited by evangelical group Focus on the Family to become a national spokeswoman for "opposite sex marriage". I wonder what James Dobson and Co. are saying after this latest nugget.
The directors of the Miss California USA pageant are looking into whether title holder Carrie Prejean violated her contract by working with a national group opposed to same-sex marriage and by posing semi-nude when she was a teenage model.Personally, I think it's a wee bit hypocritical for the pageant officials to act all high and mighty now. Lets not forget, these are the same pageant officials who paid Prejean to Throw Some D's on herself just weeks before the Miss USA pageant, in hopes that the silicon enhancements might "enhance" her chances of winning. And all these pageants feature pretty skimpy swimwear in primetime TV. Bagging this chick because she took some cheesecake photos a few years back is just wrong.
Pageant spokesman Roger Neal said Tuesday it appears Prejean has run afoul of several sections of the 12-page contract that all prospective contestants were required to sign before competing in the November state contest.
The detailed document prohibits the titular Miss California from making personal appearances, giving interviews or making commercials without permission from pageant officials. In the last 10 days, Prejean has made televised appearances at her San Diego church and on behalf of the National Organization for Marriage, a group opposed to same-sex marriage.
The contract also contains a clause asking participants to say whether they have conducted themselves "in accordance with the highest ethical and moral standards." As an example, it asks if they have ever been photographed nude or partially nude.
"As you can see from the contract, she violated multiple items," Neal said in an e-mail to The Associated Press.
A photo of Prejean wearing only pink panties with her back turned to the camera appeared Monday on the gossip blog theDirty.com. She issued a statement early Tuesday saying she posed for the shot when she was a 17-year-old model and objected to its release as an attempt to belittle her religious faith: "I am a Christian, and I am a model. Models pose for pictures, including lingerie and swimwear photos."
[Editor's Note: I'm sure some of you are wondering where I stand on same-sex marriage. Here's where I stand: Nowhere. I honestly couldn't give a crap less. This isn't anywhere on my list of Top 500 Priorities. It's prolly right between #671 (saving CW's The Game from cancellation) and #673 (figuring out whatever happened to Jamario Jamario's career) on my personal "to care" list. That is to say, I don't think about it much. If gay people wanna be married, let em' be married. Given divorce rates in the US, it's not like we heteros are doing such a great job upholding the sanctity of marriage and whatnot.]
On the flipside, Prejean claiming that the release of these photos is some bizarre left-wing conspiracy theory to discredit her is downright comical. As if she was somehow forced at gunpoint to pose topless in nothing but her pantydraws. And no, I'm not posting the photos here.[1] She alleges that she was underaged when the pics were taken, and that putting up the photos only further exploits her. In which parallel universe this woman resides, I have no idea.
Still, I think it also underscores what happens when folks (in this case Conservatives) jump at an opportunity to use a far too willing person to advance their personal agendas. The folks they choose are often far from perfect, and this usually just underscores how trivial your original point was anyway. It also undermines that point, as the folks who organized the Jena Six rallies no doubt discovered.
No, there are no "perfect" spokespersons for any particular cause. Real life happens to real people, and sometimes these folks happen to be quite imperfect, sometimes in ways that directly contradict said clause. Maybe those looking to boost the visibility of their personal agendas should be a bit more vigilant about vetting their mascots, and a bit less anxious to strike while the iron is hot.
Enough of this loserette already. NC Stand Up! We won again!
Question: Do folks sometimes get overeager and choose the wrong spokespersons for their causes? Does a person need to be "perfect" to be a spokesperson for a certain cause?
Pro-Marriage Group and Miss CA Carrie Prejean Make New Ad [OpposingViews]
Calif pageant eyes Prejean for contract violations [AP]
Miss California's breast implants funded by pageant [KRMG]
[1] Or Cassie's "hacked" photos. Does Diddy think we don't know a publicity stunt when we see it?
