Entertainment | 09/03/2009 10:05 am

Ganging Up on Carrie Prejean – Mr. wOw Is Not Amused

By Mr. wOw

Keith Olbermann, MSNBC’s chief ranter, and Michael Musto, the oft-witty author and Village Voice columnist, had a fine time the other night, skewering Carrie Prejean, the controversial ex-Miss California.

Prejean is suing Miss USA pageant officials for “religious discrimination.” In her suit, she mentions, among other things, being held up to ridicule by Musto and Olbermann in the wake of “The Perez Hilton Incident.” You know: Hilton was a pageant judge (I’ll still never understand that!) and he asked Prejean what she thought of gay marriage. She said, politely, she didn’t believe in it. Perez then posted savagely on his website, calling her a bitch and a “dumb c***.”

After that, relations began to crumble between Prejean and pageant insiders, none of whom were happy with the ugly publicity. And, perhaps, they were unhappy with Miss Prejean’s answer. They said she was a diva, not living up to her commitment to be blonde and vapid and available. She said she was being persecuted for her beliefs. In the end, despite the initial support of Donald Trump, who owns the Miss USA pageant, Carrie was canned. She feels she was just too Christian for her own good. (Unlike Laura Ingraham, Carrie doesn’t feel the need to weld a crucifix to her chest to persuade us of her faith; she lets the light shine through her Maybelline.)

Olbermann and Musto, now named in a lawsuit, went to town on Prejean again – lots of childish schoolyard talk about her implants. Both avoided the fact that it was Perez Hilton – not Prejean – who turned her answer into an incident, and that she had never mentioned gay marriage, pro or con, prior to that fateful query. Do these guys really think it is OK, funny or correct to call a woman what Perez called Prejean just because she has a different opinion?

Of course, as soon as Perez attacked, Carrie was picked up as a martyr by the right wing, and she took to that role enthusiastically. (Hilton gave her a lemon and she turned it into an enormous vat full of intolerant conservative lemonade.)

If everybody had just let Carrie’s opinion, which she is entitled to have, cling to the vine and die, we wouldn’t still be talking about her. She wouldn’t be suing, she wouldn’t be writing a book, she wouldn’t be campaigning for Sarah Palin in 2012. And Mr. Olbermann and Mr. Musto wouldn’t have felt compelled to spend valuable air time “defending” themselves from an ex-beauty queen. It was very nasty viewing, this segment of “Countdown.”

Mr. wOw used to think Mr. Olbermann was the Bill O’Reilly of the left. But no more. In terms of ridiculous, over-dramatic presentation, Keith is vying to compete with that sobbing, paranoid Glenn Beck. It hardly matters that Mr. wOw is ideologically in step with Mr. Olbermann. His performances are increasingly unpalatable. Who cares if Keith is (mostly) correct when one cannot bear listening? Combined with the sputtering whoops, interruptions and high-decibel meanderings of Chris Matthews, MSNBC is down to Rachel Maddow for any watchable liberal discourse. When she’s not trying to be too, too cute, that is.

71 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

i’m amazed people are still talking about this mostly because I didn’t think anyone watched that pageant anymore? If i recall didn’t it do viewership numbers somewhere around the level of an hours worth of Charmin commercials or something? I’m guessing no more than a handful of people could tell you who the last three or even current Miss American’s ARE. So no matter what… Mr. Wow is correct. This girl took lemons and made serious lemonade out of it. Had this not happened she’d be off doing Miss America duties and the only people who’d know her name would be those at the Puyallup Fair where she’s introducing someone on a stage somewhere….

By Chrome Toe on 09/04/2009 9:07 am

e-mail alert

Oh, poor, poor Carrie Prejean persecuted for her opinion. Yes, she’s entitled to her opinion and I’m entitled to mine.

This beach blonde no talent bubbblehead is a joke and the fact that she hooked her star to another infamous bubblehead is just right wing perfection. Keep crying for the camera, after all plastic surgeons gotta eat too. Hope your sugar daddy comes along before the looks fade so you can be "saved" from yourself.

Carrie Prejean

By Tee Zee on 09/04/2009 10:27 am

e-mail alert

You know what Chrome maybe I am wrong on this. Because everyone is focusing her right to voice her opnion as if that is why so many (such as myself) are disgusted by her. Stay with me on this for a second….but picture Condoleeza Rice in Carrie’s shoes on that stage that night. The same question is asked, but answered in a mature, well thought out and articulate manner. The same ideology….that of her being against same sex marraige, but the manner in which the response was made would be accepted as just Ms. Rice’s point of view.

There would definitely have been people up in arms that she is against same sex marraige, but would there be a visceral reaction to Condoleeza herself? I don’t think so. Would Keith Olbermann and Musto have been calling her names and the like? I don’t think so. It has to do with who Prejean is, how she said it, the meaning behind her choice of words and the millions of comments she made after the show. The steady drum beat of Christianity being at the root cause of her not supporting Gays and Lesbians. As I said in another post, but what about the millions of Gays and Lesbians who consider themselves to Christians?

That’s my interpretation of this. President Obama is against same sex marriage and goodness knows he has been bashed for that opinion by people who support it. But who he is and how he voices his opposition is not divisive. He is not coming across as "holier than thou" as Prejean is doing. And that is what separates their stand on the issue.

By Belinda Joy on 09/04/2009 10:38 am

e-mail alert

Well, Belinda, your preception of someone being "holier than thou" is a subjective thing. Your reply may be that you understand that it is, but that’s certainly not the way that you’ve argued the issue as illustrated in your statements to me that "I just don’t get it" and in your attempts to prop up your case with less subjective criteria. Criteria such as the implication that with the Miss USA title comes the responsibility that one either not offend certain segments of the population or that one represent all Americans.

This is an nonsensical "prop" because you are obviously holding a 21-year-old beauty pageant winner to a higher standard than a former academic/senator and current U.S. president and NOW a former academic/advisor/ diplomat/secretary of state, as well. That ‘mental exercise’ is nonsensical too because no politician, let alone pageant winner, could accomplish such a feat or could issue the constant caveats that it would require.

Your argument that Prejean showed intolerance in her continued assertions that her views are based upon her religious beliefs is another attempt to put the wholly subjective on a more objective plane.

Should Prejean have changed her story? She didn’t chose to have this question asked of her in the first place. She didn’t chose to have pageant officials disavow her remarks the next day. She didn’t chose to have them ask her to apologize for her opinion. She didn’t chose to have David Shuster and an E channel reporter say that she made them sick. She didn’t chose to have a pageant official tell the world that she had breast implants a week later.

What she did choose to do was to give a consistent and unwavering answer to persistently asked questions about her stance on same sex marriage.

As to her expression of "my family", Prejean was inferring that this is the Christian doctrine taught in HER home. That statement is not insensitive to Christians who think otherwise, anymore than my Baptist cousins saying that they were reared to believe drinking alcohol is a grave sin , is insensitive to my Presbyterian non-tea-totaler branch of the family.

Again, Prejean never volunteered to publicly state her stance same sex marriage.

I don’t know why anyone would insist that someone issue caveats on their religious beliefs simply because they aren’t held by all and sundry.

I don’t know why things must be politicized to the point of having cultural litmus tests for beauty pageant contestants.

I do know that there was far and away more offensive things said and done to this girl, than could ever be justified by the "intolerance" that is supposedly inherent in her expressions of "my country" or "my family".

I do know that she is being held to a standard not meted out to two people with political and diplomatic skills quite beyond a 21-year-old beauty queen’s pay grade.

I do know this is being done by mature people who ought to know the hell better.

I do know that the basis for it is utterly subjective, utterly biased, and utterly absurd.

BTW— Keith Olbermann has called Dr. Rice a liar and "a pickpocket of the nation’s goodness".

I’ve no hesitation in asserting that were Rice to share anything but a thumbs up view on sex marriage (let alone base a negative one on religious precepts) there’d be a spittle-flecked, inflammatory special comment that would be more appropriately suited for Joe Stalin or Joe Mengele.

I won’t say that in the case of Rice, that he would be doing dirty double entendre with Michael Musto.

Even Keith Olbermann would understand that a difference should be made between Condolezza Rice and Carrie Prejean.

By Cecelia McCormick on 09/04/2009 11:26 pm

e-mail alert

Belinda,

Let’s work with the Condoleeza Rice hypothosis. I submit that had Condi Rice answered the question in a mature, well thought out manner that she would be crucified. The former Secretary of State is widely believed to be gay. The other issue is that blacks, long discriminated against in this country by and large are adamantly opposed to gay marriage. Remember, 70% of blacks who voted in CA opposed Prop 8 which would have legalized gay marriage. Perhaps a better comparison to Barbie is called for?

By Leigh Hart on 09/05/2009 3:16 am

e-mail alert

Of course she is entitled to her opinion, and what Hilton did to her was very wrong. Although my opinion is you cannot classify yourself as a "good Christian" girl if you pose topless. But her lawsuit is completely baseless as she got herself fired. Donald Trump absolutely backed her up and, without hesitation, let her keep her crown after the uproar over her opinion on gay marriage. But she lied about her topless pictures (something that caused Vanessa Williams to lose her crown) and refused to keep any of the appearances she committed to when she became Miss USA. She should not be persecuted for her beliefs, but I don’t think she was. If you’re hired for a job but decide you don’t want to do any of the work that job entails, of course you’re going to be fired. That’s true for everyone in this country, regardless of their political views.

By Carrie Auger on 09/04/2009 11:07 am

e-mail alert

I think it’s high time to get rid of beauty pageants altogether. Maybe once, before women had so many avenues open to real success, they might have served a purpose, but even then - how demeaning to have to strut around and be evaluated like a prizewinning poodle.

But now… what kind of contest is it, anyway, when contestants can have all kinds of surgical "enhancements" to give themselves an unnatural advantage… and what does that say about us that we practially have come to expect women to have such surgery? Why isn’t an all-natural woman with smaller breasts or heavier thighs just as beautiful? And when are we going to recognize women more for what they have accomplished rather than what they look like?

By Lila Kuh on 09/04/2009 11:13 am

e-mail alert

I agree with Mr. Wow that it is childish for these men to bash Carrie Prejean. These men could have logically and respectfully explained the reasons they think her beliefs are wrong. Bashing a person doesn’t change anyone’s mind unless it’s to line up on the side of the one being bashed.

To state that Carrie Prejean should have been fired for not representing ALL of America makes no sense.

We have Pro-Choice and Pro-Life. We have Democrats, Republicans, Independents, and so on. We have Religious and Non-Religious citizens who think Gays and Lesbians should have the right to marry. We have Religious and Non-Religious citizens who think that marriage is between one man and one woman. Some people support the Obama Administration and some people oppose the current Administration. Some Americans think we should not be at war in other countries and other Americans say it’s vital to protect human rights in other nations.

There is no possible way to represent ALL of America with so many opposing views.

If Carrie Prejean was fired for just not doing her job as Miss America, then that’s her own fault. However, if she didn’t perform her job because she felt pressured since her beliefs didn’t line up with those of some people in the Miss America organization, then that is religious discrimination.

Donald Trump did publically support her for stating her own beliefs though. I guess it’s up to the courts to decide what really happened.

By K M on 09/04/2009 1:31 pm

e-mail alert

I find it interesting as we progress into a more informed and hopefully evolving society, discrimination and segregation takes on new faces from past times in our history. judging and typecasting in relation to who is acceptable in our lives, and who is not. I know some "Barbie" dolls who honestly probably would not receive an A list rating on being informed, but have hearts of gold and in the right place. Others, who struggle to remember simple tasks in life, but know how to reach out, and recieve.

Am I a strong woman, you betcha - I will face my demons and kick thier a##S, but will also hold the hands of who might be thought of as being less on other standard quo’s, hug the dying when their voice no longer can express, and thank the universe for all the teachers that come into my life, irregardless. Carrie at 21 at this time is largely the esscence of her teachings in life, 1,5, or 10 years from now she will still be growing and learning. We all have made mistakes, big and small. Let her grow.

By Linda Myers on 09/05/2009 1:31 am

e-mail alert

There is a problem with the argument that Miss USA should represent "us". There is no way for any person to represent "us" about gay marriage, because we are divided on the subject. If Miss California had said "I’m fine with gay marriage" then the other "side" would say that she doesn’t represent "them". No way to win, and I am not convinced that Miss USA’s views make any difference at all. Fast is that I have not watched a beauty pageant in years (except Little Miss Sunshine).

Also, my guess is that she started to give a politically correct statement "we live in a country where you can choose…" and changed her mind and gave her true beliefs "and you know what,… I think I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman…" She made a choice to be true to her beliefs and I can respect that.

By Michele Dahlberg on 09/08/2009 12:22 am