Friday, November 13, 2009

Answer the Question!


People really need some sort of a timer to determine exactly when their 15 minutes of fame are actually up. When you go over your fifteen minutes, you're not just flirting with disaster, you're courting it and fixin' to marry it. Case in point today would be Carrie Prejean.

Ms. Prejean (pronounced along the same lines as if she were a mustard in one of those commercials, "Pardon me? Do you have any Grey Prejean?") was the Miss California contestant who was "competing" in the Miss USA Pageant. I say "competing" because is it really a "competition" to walk around in high heels and a swim suit. Enjoyable to watch? Sure. Tricky as hell? I'd imagine so. But competitive? Not so much, it wouldn't seem. Anyway, she was the one who was given the question by the loathsome Perez Hilton about whether or not gay marriage should be legal in the country. (It's a ridiculous question because a) marriage is regulated at a state, not a federal, level, and b) who gives a crap what Miss California thinks about it in the first place?) Miss California famously replied with something to the effect of how she supports "opposite marriage", but not gay marriage.

While gay marriage advocates tried to vilify her for that response, they conveniently overlooked the fact that President Barry is also a fan of opposite marriage, as is Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton and 36 of the 50 states in the union. But through said vilification she decided to take the road known as that of the Better Than Thou. That would have been fine if she actually had half of a brain in her head. Sadly, but not shockingly, that was not the case.

If she had realized the limits of the 15 minutes of fame, she might not have found herself in the position that she's in. Hell, if she had realized the power of money, the Internet and Donald Trump, she might not have found herself in the position that she's in. Here's the scoop: She sued the Miss California USA folks because she claimed that they fired and that constituted libel, slander and religious discrimination. They claimed that they fired her because she wouldn't do the gigs that they set up for her to do. Meanwhile, during all of this "she said-pageant people said" bickering, she played the little martyred Christian girl card and tried to trump it with the pure as the driven snow card. Whoops! Too many cards!



Mind you, Donald Trump owns the Miss USA pageant. (That's different from Miss America, for all of you pageant newbies. They're both ridiculous and exploit the dumb and beautiful, but what the hell? It's two or three hours of blondes and boobs once a year. I can live with it. I'd rather have them doing that than living in the Middle East and wearing the beekeeper's uniform.) Thus, he owns the Miss California Pageant. Somehow. (I don't get how that works exactly. I mean, if you own Oscar Mayer, it's not like you own all of the hot dog stands out there. Mmm....hot dogs.) If you're essentially going to sue Donald Trump, you'd better make damn sure your closet is skeleton free...something the former Miss California forgot to do.

Turns out that she had sent several cell phone videos of just herself to a guy who she claimed was "her boyfriend" and whom she claimed she "cared about very much". She also claimed that she was 17 at the time that she did said videos (which, by the way, at the time she was only claiming there was ONE and that it was "the biggest mistake of her life". One which, apparently, she repeated another 14-19 times as the boyfriend claims that he has at least between 15 and 20 videos of her, um, pleasuring herself.) OK, so that revelation rears it's ugly head (or maybe not so ugly, she's kinda hot) and what do you think happens to the lawsuit? Miraculously settled, that is correct!

Now, the only way that I can figure that the masturbatory cell phone sex videos (how hot) would have been detrimental to her lawsuit would be if she was claiming that that Miss California USA Pageant had painted her as something less than wholesome when, in reality, she already was something less than wholesome. (Not that less than wholesome is bad! But she was claiming that not only that it was horrific, that she, inexplicably, needed a lot of money for it.) Naturally, the terms of the settlement are confidential, but that doesn't stop a former Miss California USA from going on the talk show circuit and trying to not talk about the reason why she settled.

The problem the former Miss CA USA seems to be having is that she has spent most of her life in high heels and a swim suit and is used to just flashing her ample bosom at folks and having them drool and give her what she wants. She's not used to having to defend herself. She claims that her idol is Sarah Palin. I get that. They both have the moral aspect of their lives going on. The problem is that neither one of them has figured out how to channel that aspect without coming across as sanctimonious or, in the case of Carrie Prejean, a complete idiot.

Carrie Prejean went on Larry King (Barely A) Live the other night and seemed to think that the interview would not include questions that she COULD answer but didn't WANT to. According to the huffy folks over there at The Huffington Post, Larry King actually asked a viable and reasonable question, that being: "Why settle since you had a fight to carry on?" She responded by saying something about how the settlement was confidential and she couldn't discuss it. Larry King responded that he understood that, that he wasn't asking about the settlement and that he was asking for her reasoning as to why she settled. She refused to answer and instead fed him this line: "Larry, it's completely confidential and you're being inappropriate." Um, what now?


Inappropriate?! No, what's inappropriate, you little twit, is going around pretending to be something that you're not. Don't get me wrong. You can absolutely be an outspoken Christian with extremely high moral standards and have had a past that was less than stellar. That's fine. In fact, since the majority of us do have less than stellar pasts (good Lord, do we ever) I appreciate those that demonstrate a much cleaner path once they've dusted off the filth from the previous path. But don't act like you've never been down and dirty. (We've all zigged when we should have zagged at one point or another in our lives. That doesn't make us bad people now. OK, it does make some people absolutely hideous. But most of us? Not so much. Besides, admit it, the zagging felt great!)

But Ms. Prejean acts so offended that Larry King would ask her a perfectly legitimate question that is so not out of the bounds of the confidentiality agreement. At one point, completely bewildered by her claiming confidentiality as why she won't discuss why she settled and dropped her fight against what she claimed was religious discrimination, asks "So, the agreement discusses the motive behind why each party agreed?" (That translates loosely into: You just don't want to say that you had to settle because you didn't want your myriad of solitary sex videos to come out at a trial.")

Somewhere around this line of questioning is when she threatens to walk out of the interview. She is clearly talking to someone who is not in the camera's line of sight and they seem to be encouraging her to act as if she is going to walk out. Instead, she takes off her mike and then just sits there as if there's nothing wrong. Meanwhile, back at Camp King, he has taken a phone call from a viewer who has asked her what her advice is for gay people who do want to get married. Larry King repeatedly asks her if she can hear him and at one point he says, "Can you hear me?" and she responds, "No, Larry. I cannot hear you." Um...what? I...I think you can! By the very virtue that you just answered him, I'm pretty sure you can hear him! It's nothing short of hilarious and the entire exchange is in the video below. Behold!



She's done, isn't she? I mean, she has some book coming out (maybe it's already out, I have no idea, nor do I have any interest in looking it up at the moment) which may or may not sell. Regardless, I highly doubt that her book signings (because don't they always do book signings) are going to involve throngs of followers. It's OK for regular people to lie (for some reason), but when you're putting your own self up on a pedestal and then it comes out that you've lied and/or misrepresented yourself, that's just not OK with people. The public has a short fuse for hypocrisy. (They also have a short memory for it as well, but that's another story.) All I know is that she can't go away quick enough. She's made herself look like an idiot and she's wasted everyone's time with her self-pleasing act (pun totally intended). All I can hope for now is that the ex-boyfriend who likely sold the videos which she willingly gave him got a sizeable amount for them. That seems fair at this point, doesn't it?

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

No comments: