California | Carrie Prejean | News | Pageants

Miss California Retains Crown as Alternate is Named 'Ambassador'

Lewis_moakler

Co-executive directors of the Miss California USA pageant Keith Lewis and Shanna Moakler held a news conference today to announce that Carrie Prejean has cut herself off from Miss California pageant activities and isolated herself. They named runner-up Tami Farrell 'Beauty of California ambassador' since only Donald Trump has the power to remove Prejean's crown.

Said Moakler: "She entered the contest under false pretense. Accepting the title comes with the responsibility to represent everyone in her state, not just those who share her opinion."

Reuters reports: "Lewis said Prejean had violated her contract, not for her same-sex marriage views, but for operating independently of pageant organizers. She had also failed to disclose a topless photo shoot before being crowned Miss California. Lewis said pageant officials had been unable to contact Prejean for several days because of the new 'handlers' and attorneys now surrounding her. She also missed several scheduled appearances as Miss California. He said the last straw came 'when she decided she wanted to move forward with media interviews despite the fact that her message was dividing us rather than bringing us back together.'"

Watch a portion of the news conference, at the end of which Lewis tells the National Organization for Marriage that they should be ashamed of themselves, AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. That was EXCELLENT. National Organization for Marriage totally got owned, once again.

    Posted by: Steve K. | May 11, 2009 8:40:34 PM


  2. Mistake: I meant, the National Organization for Maggie.

    Posted by: Steve K. | May 11, 2009 8:41:03 PM


  3. If it was only because of her remarks on the Miss USA broadcast, I would say that she shouldn't lose her crown, however, if she has lied, and is not fulfilling her duties, then she should be dethroned.

    Her job is Miss California, and if she is not doing her job, she should lose it, just like anyone else who fails to fulfill their duties as outlined. If we don't do our job, we would get fired, so should she.

    If Donald Trump lets her retain her title, then he is a hypocrite (from what he promotes on his "Apprentice" show). Second chances are one thing, but she is following her own agenda, and definitely aware of the consequences.

    If he does fire her, it will be blamed on the "gay agenda", not her failures by the far (Christian) right.

    Posted by: CB | May 11, 2009 9:04:42 PM


  4. I bet Maggie Gallagher prejeaned herself when she saw this.

    Posted by: ZnSD | May 11, 2009 9:16:27 PM


  5. Especially a 21 year old beauty queen? Anyone who has the balls to speak their mind on national television and continue on to use their opinion to keep their name in the media should be strong enough to handle 'scrutiny.' Yeah, she's young, but she's not a kid.

    Posted by: Sam | May 11, 2009 9:31:25 PM


  6. I agree with Sam. She could be in her second tour of duty in Afghanistan had she enlisted at 18 instead of choosing to appear in pageants. She is not a child.

    Posted by: Blurgle | May 11, 2009 10:00:00 PM


  7. Wait wait wait! Shanna Moakler is being held up as a representative of Miss USA? And she is making a determination based on the morality of her topless photos??? REALLY? I fully understand that crown-holders cannot join sides of a political argument, regardless of the side so on those grounds, Ms. Prejean justifiably should be de-crowned. But the fact that Shanna Moakler with her drunken, "less than ethical" history is in on the decision making process!?!?! WOW. Hypocricy in action!

    Posted by: BC | May 11, 2009 10:26:53 PM


  8. @CB: I almost don't care anymore if the Xtian right blames us for whatever happens with Prejean. They blame us for everything anyway. If people are gullible enough to believe them (which I don't think they are), then I don't know what we could really do about it anyway.

    Posted by: Bruno | May 11, 2009 10:56:04 PM


  9. @BC: There's nothing at all hypocritical about it. Shanna can go nude, get drunk, do whatever the hell she wants to do and still speak as an employee of the pageant company. That all has nothing to do with the contact between that agency and Ms. Prejean.

    Posted by: Bruno | May 11, 2009 10:57:32 PM


  10. Except BC, Ms Moakler's "drinking" isn't inflaming hatred against minorities. It may be argued that Ms Prejean is indirectly responsible for hate crimes against the homosexual community by "speaking out" in defense of marriage, triggering already unstable individuals to act by "defending" marriage. Ms Prejean seems more concerned in preaching against homosexuality than standing up for "marriage", perhaps she should volunteer in a battered women's shelter or such. I find it amusing that groups/individuals such as NOM are defending marriage by denouncing homosexuality instead of working to actually help those individuals directly harmed by abusive relationships/divorce.

    Posted by: CJ | May 11, 2009 11:02:19 PM


  11. I'm slightly bemused that a beauty pageant is taken quite so seriously.

    Posted by: Midland | May 11, 2009 11:02:24 PM


  12. @BC: Shanna criticized Prejean for not disclosing that the photos were taken when asked, not for taking them in general.

    Posted by: Mark | May 11, 2009 11:06:57 PM


  13. @Midland:
    Normally I wouldn't take it so seriously either. The right wing may claim that the left and gays are personally attacking her, and I can admit that they are right-- but not for what she said during the pageant.

    I take interest (and satisfaction) in seeing NOM and Ms. Prejean being given a well-deserved smack-down because they both actively work to prohibit my rights as a good human-being through the use of misinformation and fear, and for trying to use their own personal religious convictions as a reason to alter laws in a nation that was founded upon the separation of church and state.

    To the far right-wingers: it has been made clear through this situation that the only "activist agenda" present today is your own: NOM for destroying Ms. Prejean's career to further their goals, and Ms. Prejean herself for throwing away her responsibilities and title for personal gain in the media, regardless of who she ran over along the way.

    Posted by: Mark | May 11, 2009 11:23:14 PM


  14. Bruno-so its a do as I say not as I do organization. Ok.

    CJ - again no one would give two shits about her if Perez didn't flip out. We would have said, "What a dumb answer" and then moved on. Remember, her answer was that she believed marriage was between a man and a woman. Obama/Biden said same thing. Now AFTER Perez went nuts, people interviewed her for deeper views. She would have simply faded away, just like every first runner up. So really I blame Perez for any "Hate crimes" you think this woman is responsible for. But I do fully agree with you that an organization by that name (NOM) should be focused on marriage and not on gays.

    Mark - point taken on that account.

    Posted by: BC | May 11, 2009 11:23:38 PM


  15. Lewis and Moakler really had no choice. They had to have someone honor Miss California's obligations now that Miss Carrie has decided to turn her back on an organization that did so much for her.

    I'm not the same Sam who commented earlier, but I agree with him totally.

    Posted by: sam | May 11, 2009 11:31:40 PM


  16. Can they get their tits back from her?

    [Sorry this is my third comment on this slut, all revolving around her tits. Maybe I'm straight after all!]

    Posted by: Ted | May 11, 2009 11:48:17 PM


  17. "Bruno-so its a do as I say not as I do organization. Ok." -CJ

    You still don't get it. Prejean broke her contract. Moakler is not under any contract to not do those things.

    Posted by: DD | May 12, 2009 12:16:16 AM


  18. ZNSD, now that you've said it, we need an official definition of "prejean" - Dan Savage??

    Posted by: Ted | May 12, 2009 12:39:17 AM


  19. I think it's great that Donald Trump gets to make the final decision. Not only do we have to put up with seeing this idiot, but now we get to see Trump and his hair all over the news. Thanks Carrie!

    Posted by: Covert Homo | May 12, 2009 12:44:03 AM


  20. Resident Miss California guy here (I'm with the camp and dish it only on Towleroad)

    A.) Shanna Moakler did all those things (pose nude, amongst other) years, and I mean YEARS *after* she not only finished her reign as a titleholder but crowned the new girl. Being a beauty queen is quite simple...you don't have to be a nun for your whole life. Infact, we just had a former Miss USA get signed with Vivid entertainment (adult porn company)....you just have to be well behaved for ONE year of your life. The year you are Miss (insert obscure state) ...that's it. No nudes. No gangbangs. No crimes or kicking puppies and you win a boat load of prizes and get a gorgeous tiara. If you can't handle that, here's a novel idea, don't sign up for the (bleep) pageant stripping another girl who has had a lifelong dream of being Miss (obscure state here again) away from that.

    B.) One might wonder what the duties of Miss California is. You may not hear it burried between Lindsey Lohan DUIs and Britney Spears meltdowns, but for the most part, a great majority of these Miss Californias do heavy duty work. They partner up with a cause of their choice, last years winner Raquel Beezley, incidently chose Human Rights Campaign as her platform of the year (yes, we all in the Cali org wish she got posed that question) the year before the winner did amazing work with youth based charities....this year we have a young lady who hijacked the system and not only is she dead set on taking herself (reputation) down, she's wanting to drag us into the quick sand with her. She's missed more appearances than I can count. Again, all those appearances may not be making the cover of TMZ's homepage, but they are indeed scheduled and aimed to be attended to, which previosu winners have had absolutely no problem attending. Miss Californias can making anywhere from five to ten various appearances throughout the state any given week. It's been 3 weeks now that Ms. prejean has been M.I.A ...you do the math (on missed appearances thus far)

    C.) They've got a brand to protect, and they're dealing with a little girl who only wants to promote herself while having no issues parading that brand (of theirs)....you can't have your cake, then bomb the bakery. You want to be a divisive voice amongst many? knock yourself out (really) but do so without the Miss California banner that has afforded you nearly $75,000 worth of prizes. She had no issues accepting them, now that they kindly ask her to make an appearance (as these appearances are what is sustaining this program and keeping it alive- they get paid for appearaing at functions) she is nowhere to be seen. That's the most petty way to slap someone in the face.

    Carrie, there's a reason us pageant people have always hurled out "world peace".....it works! and it actually wins you the crown, especially when you like, you know, believe in it!

    Posted by: Bayley | May 12, 2009 4:15:29 AM


  21. The moral: People who live in silicone houses shouldn't act like boobs!

    Posted by: Jack M | May 12, 2009 8:20:47 AM


  22. Bayley's comments above are such a great summary of why she should be fired. But if she is fired today, Donald Trump, who is a real a-hole himself, should make it very clear it is not because of her opinions on marriage equality or her answer at the pageant. It is because she broke her contract multiple times pure and simple. And for those who belittle pageants and/or the ladies in them, you do not know what it is all about so please reread the comments above that explain it!! Carrie has become a true embarrassment to Miss California and anyone else's exploits have no bearing in that and her breach of contract.

    Posted by: Rann | May 12, 2009 9:07:25 AM


  23. "Bruno-so its a do as I say not as I do organization. Ok." -CJ

    You still don't get it. Prejean broke her contract. Moakler is not under any contract to not do those things.

    POSTED BY: DD | MAY 12, 2009 12:16:16 AM

    Um, I never wrote that, I think you misread who was attached to what comment. I agree with you.

    Posted by: CJ | May 12, 2009 9:29:38 AM


  24. @CJ Oops I meant BC. So many damn initials ;)

    Posted by: DD | May 12, 2009 11:10:59 AM


Post a comment







Trending


« «Palm Center: President Can Halt Discharges of Gay Military Personnel« «