Miss California Controversy (from Rumours)

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by jwd

But yet California, what most people would classify as a liberal state and heavily Democrat, has itself denied gay marriage rights, both by the vote of the people and its' Supreme Court. ???

California is an anomaly. Here is the history in relevant part.

On September 2, 2005, the California Senate approved the bill 21-15 and on September 6, the California State Assembly followed suit with a vote of 41-35, making California's legislature the first in the nation to approve a same-sex marriage bill without court pressure.

The next day, September 7, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger indicated he would veto the bill, citing Proposition 22, which had passed with the approval a majority of voters five years earlier.

Like the statutes amended by AB 849, Prop 22 prohibited the state from recognizing same-sex marriages, but as an initiative statute, it was not affected by AB 849.

The legislature avoided physically delivering the bill to the governor for over two weeks, during which time advocacy groups urged Schwarzenegger to change his mind. Ultimately, the bill was delivered on September 23 and vetoed on September 29, 2005. Schwarzenegger stated he believed that same-sex marriage should be settled by the courts (rank hypocrisy for the R party whose words he was parroting) or another vote by the people via a statewide initiative or referendum. He argued that the legislature's bill simply complicated the issue, as the constitutionality of Proposition 22 had not yet been determined, and its ultimate disposition would render AB 849 either unconstitutional (being in conflict with a valid voter initiative) or redundant (being guaranteed by the California Constitution itself, as construed by the courts).

Shortly after the newly elected Assembly was sworn in, Leno resubmitted a similar bill on December 4, 2006. AB 43 was passed by the legislature in early September 2007, giving the governor until October 14, 2007, to either sign or veto the bill. Schwarzenegger had stated months before that he would veto AB 43 on the grounds that the issue at hand had already been voted on by California by way of Proposition 22. The governor followed through on his statement and on October 12, 2007, he vetoed AB 43. Schwarzenegger wrote in his veto statement that to solve the issue of gender-neutral marriage, the California Supreme Court needed to finish its rule on the challenge which had been made to Proposition 22.

Proposition 8 (2008)

Months before the state supreme court's ruling, groups who opposed same-sex marriage began circulating initiative petitions. One petition, #07-0068 (titled the "California Marriage Protection Act" by its proponents; titled the "Limit on Marriage" amendment for the ballot by the California Attorney General), having gathered an estimated 764,063 valid signatures, qualified for the November 4, 2008 ballot, as Proposition 8. The measure would add § 7.5 to Article I of the California Constitution mirroring the now-unenforceable Family Code § 308.5. It would attempt to supersede that part of the Supreme Court's holding that authorized the granting of marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Twelve other proposed amendments since 2004 had failed to qualify to be on the ballot. The ability of the voters to remove a fundamental constitutional right by initiative amendment has been called into question, and lawsuits were filed on those grounds asking for the removal of Proposition 8 from the ballot. That lawsuit was dismissed on July 16, 2008.

On the day after the election, the results remained uncertified. With 100% of precincts reporting, the vote was 52.47% in favor of Proposition 8 and 47.53% opposed, with a difference of about 504,000 votes; as many as 3 million absentee and provisional ballots remain to be counted. The organizers of the "No on Prop 8" campaign conceded defeat on Thursday, November 6, issuing a statement saying, "Tuesday’s vote was deeply disappointing to all who believe in equal treatment under the law."

On Wednesday, November 5, 2008, three lawsuits were filed, challenging the validity of Proposition 8 on the grounds that revoking the right of same-sex couples to marry was a constitutional "revision" rather than an "amendment", and therefore required the prior approval of 2/3 of each house of the California State Legislature. Plaintiffs in the various suits included same-sex couples who had married or planned to marry, and the cities of San Francisco and Los Angeles, and the county of Santa Clara. The California Supreme Court heard several challenges to Proposition 8 and on May 26, 2009 upheld the proposition, but did not overturn previous same-sex marriages because while it acknowledged its earlier decision that held marriage was an absolute right, it followed its precedent of not finding a 2/3 vote was required to change the California Const. Note - the two decisions are rather inconsistent.

(most of that comes from wiki)

In the end, The Arnold had changed his mind as have the numbers of Californians who oppose it when contrasted with the 2000 vote. So, the numbers have gone down. Also, had the far religious right not lied in ubiquitous commercials about the effect of gay marriage, saying things like public schools were going to be required to teach children about gay sex, etc. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/willia..._b_207811.html) -- Finally, if even a small number of black people would get over the homophobia and stop being hypocritical about allowing others the same exact rights they fought for -- and the Hispanics would stop blindly following the Catholic Church -- the next voter initiative will likely pass, esp. when you consider more older people will die and, therefore,m not be able to vote. The younger people are for gay marriage.

Note - the people should never be able to vote of what group gets rights to the exclusion of other groups in the minority. The minority always loses. if the nation could have voted on equal protection for blacks or women's suffrage, those would never have passed the popular vote That is exactly why America is not a democracy - it is a Republic that employees a representative democracy.
__________________________________________________

Having said all that, the tide is changing for gay rights and it is way overdue. Sadly, Christianity has been hijacked in the process.

[David]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

California is an anomaly. Here is the history in relevant part.

(snip enormous precis)

I can't read all that, strand! That's waaaaay too much. Summarize please in a paragraph or so. Trim verbiage.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by David

I can't read all that, strand! That's waaaaay too much. Summarize please in a paragraph or so. Trim verbiage.

Despite its earlier finding that marriage was an "absolute right," the California Supreme Court did not have the balls to overturn the popular vote.

[LukeA]

Originally Posted by jwd

But yet California, what most people would classify as a liberal state and heavily Democrat

Not sure what gives you that idea. Once you get out of San Francisco and Los Angeles, the state leans Republican- and its not just the rural areas, either. Orange County and San Diego are decidedly Republican. The state is regularly governed by a Republican. California Republicans tend to be more the fiscally conservative type, rather than the socially conservative (ex. the South), but there are a whole lot of Mormons who enthusiastically backed Prop 8.

When you factor in the widely speculated belief that the historically large black turnout helped sway Prop 8, its not all that hard to believe that Prop 8 passed this past November. The next time it goes up to the voters (hopefully sometime next year), I think a Prop 8 overturn is in the cards.

[BombaySapphire3]

Originally Posted by LukeA

Not sure what gives you that idea. Once you get out of San Francisco and Los Angeles, the state leans Republican- and its not just the rural areas, either. Orange County and San Diego are decidedly Republican. The state is regularly governed by a Republican. California Republicans tend to be more the fiscally conservative type, rather than the socially conservative (ex. the South), but there are a whole lot of Mormons who enthusiastically backed Prop 8.

When you factor in the widely speculated belief that the historically large black turnout helped sway Prop 8, its not all that hard to believe that Prop 8 passed this past November. The next time it goes up to the voters (hopefully sometime next year), I think a Prop 8 overturn is in the cards.

San Diego county (where I grew up incidently) is very slowly trending Democrat..it needs to be noted for the first time ever as far as I know, a Democratic President won this county and Obama came within less than 3 % of winning in the notoriously conservative OC.( This would be almost tantamount to a Repulican President taking half the vote in San Francisco county)The inland counties ..particularly the ones populated by the decendants of the Okies still trend heavily repub..but for the most part they are sparsely populated compared to the megalopolises of SF and LA.Sacramento, now the largest inland city in Ca broke very slightly for Obama in 2008.I also think that some African Americans may have voter's remorse now that they realize that their political bedfellows on 8 are the not so long ago racist Mormons .So in light of all this I concur that a revote on 8 will likely have a different result.

[gldstwmn]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/06/1...ned/index.html

Miss California USA Prejean dethroned

LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) -- Carrie Prejean has been dethroned as Miss California USA for "contract violations," including missing scheduled pageant events, according to a state pageant official.


Donald Trump poses with Carrie Prejean in May. Prejean was removed as Miss California USA on Wednesday.

Prejean, 22, retained her title last month despite a controversy over topless photos, missed appearances and her statements against same-sex marriage.

Miss USA pageant owner Donald Trump decided to fire Prejean a month after he gave her a second chance.

"Carrie is a beautiful young woman, and I wish her well as she pursues her other interests," Trump said.

Runner-up Tami Farrell, who was Miss Malibu, will immediately assume the Miss California USA title, state pageant Executive Director Keith Lewis said.

"This was a decision based solely on contract violations, including Ms. Prejean's unwillingness to make appearances on behalf of the Miss California USA organization," he said. Watch the new Miss California talk about the developments »

Lewis told CNN's Larry King on Wednesday that it wasn't one thing Prejean did, but "many, many, many things."

"She came to us and said, 'I'm not interested in your input; I'll make my own decision what I'm going to do,' " Lewis said. "You know, when you have a contract, when you're working for someone, you have a responsibility to follow through on what that requirement is."

Trump brought Prejean and Lewis together in New York for a meeting last month, after which he announced that communications between the beauty queen and pageant officials had been repaired.

"I told Carrie she needed to get back to work and honor her contract with the Miss California USA organization, and I gave her the opportunity to do so," Trump said. "Unfortunately, it just doesn't look like it is going to happen, and I offered Keith my full support in making this decision."

Charles Limandri, Prejean's lawyer, said she learned about the decision Wednesday morning in a phone call from Trump's office.

"This is all kind of a big shock," Limandri said. "We've been working with Mr. Trump's office. She's been doing all the speaking engagements she's been asked to do. It is not true that she has not been cooperating."

No one from the pageant organization ever warned Prejean she was not doing what they wanted, he said.

"Something is going on," he said. "Truth is not being told. I don't understand where this is coming from, or why."

"For people to say that she breached her contract, that she is not doing speaking engagements is false," he said. "She did one last Sunday in Las Vegas and it went really well."

Prejean stepped into controversy at the Miss USA pageant in April when she declared her opposition to same-sex marriage in a response to a question asked during the national pageant by Perez Hilton, a pageant judge. Prejean finished as first runner-up, but it was not clear if her answer cost her the crown.

During a radio interview Wednesday with Billy Bush, who also was host of the pageant, Prejean said it was that controversy that led to her losing her title, not contract issues.

"It's just because of my answer, I think," Prejean told Bush. "None of this would be happening right now if I just said yeah, gays should get married, you're right Perez Hilton."

Wednesday night on Larry King, Bush asked the new Miss California USA the question that sparked controversy for Prejean. Bush asked Tami Farrell whether in light of several states allowing gay marriage she thought other states should do the same.

"I think it's a personal decision and a civil rights issue," Farrell said. "It's something we should let each state decide."

In addition to Prejean's gay marriage answer, controversy boiled to a new level in early May when seminude photos of Prejean appeared on gossip Web sites.

Miss California USA officials -- some of them outspoken advocates of same-sex marriage -- suggested the photos breached the contract Prejean signed with the pageant. These officials also complained they couldn't reach Prejean and she had missed important pageant events.

The controversy seemed over when Trump declared the pictures not to be too racy and Prejean promised to do better in communicating with the state pageant.

Hilton, the judge who asked the same-sex question during the pageant, cheered Prejean's firing.

"Better late than never," Hilton said.


Shanna Moakler, a former Miss USA who resigned as co-executive director of the California pageant when Trump did not dismiss Prejean last month, welcomed Wednesday's decision.

"First and foremost, my faith has been restored in the Miss Universe organization and with Donald Trump," Moakler said. "I believed eventually what I intimately knew would come to fruition."

[MacMan]

I read this last night... didn't investigate it at all... But I thought this girl who was just fired was initially the runner up because of her answer to the gay rights thing that perezhilton asked. I thought she lost because of that. If that's the case, how did she become miss california - only to loose it?

[carrie721]

Originally Posted by jwd

Come on Carrie, you can do better than that. That's not backlash! That's questioning Obama's intentions at best.

LOL. what were you expecting me to cite? homos having a perez hiltonesque screaming fit? i've already said i find that kind of BS ridiculous. i haven't seen anything of the sort re: obama, and if i had, i wouldn't want anything to do with it. but considering the vast support obama had from many in the homo population after the election due to his strong pro-homo campaign rhetoric, it is profound to see these same people expressing any amount of cynicism and suspicion.

Originally Posted by MacMan

I read this last night... didn't investigate it at all... But I thought this girl who was just fired was initially the runner up because of her answer to the gay rights thing that perezhilton asked. I thought she lost because of that. If that's the case, how did she become miss california - only to loose it?

she won miss california. the title she lost out on was miss USA. miss california is employed under the auspices of the miss USA organization, which may be where the confusion is coming from. now she is being stripped of her miss california crown due to breach of contract.

[strandinthewind]

And, because most of the straight guys in the country want to stick it in her, they are going to take her side regardless of the legality. Notably, most straight guys could give a rat's a$$ - so other than the brief stirring int he loins upon looking at her, they will then be off to the next hot looking babe. Such is life.

In the end, if she breached her contract, which those emails seem to show, then they were justified in firing her. Would they have done so if she had not given the gay marriage answer - probably not. But, it was her answer to that that caused her to make all the unauthorized appearances, etc. that lead to her dismissal for breach of contract. If any of us had an employee who did that, we'd fire them too and regardless of their position on marriage

In the end, this chick is being advised by huge power players. There will be a book deal or some other money grab in the near future. She is merely the pretty pawn.

[sparky]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

In the end, if she breached her contract, which those emails seem to show, then they were justified in firing her. Would they have done so if she had not given the gay marriage answer - probably not.

Correct. She answered the question in a way that drew in the focus.

In the end, this chick is being advised by huge power players.

Or not so huge, or so smart, as the case may be. They are using her for their ends. And if her "power players" were truly intelligent, they could have parlayed her celebrity into a lifelong career.

Not happening.

She'll be a footnote.

[jwd]

Getting back to the REAL ISSUES......

Originally Posted by carrie721

what were you expecting me to cite? homos having a perez hiltonesque screaming fit? but considering the vast support obama had from many in the homo population after the election due to his strong pro-homo campaign rhetoric, it is profound to see these same people expressing any amount of cynicism and suspicion.

Well, maybe this would cause some of the homos to scream a little more like Perez, and more rightly so.

"When Barack Obama sought the presidency, he pledged to reverse the "Don't ask, don't tell" policy preventing gays and lesbians from serving openly in the U.S. military. Yet on Monday, the Supreme Court rejected a gay Ohio soldier's challenge to the law — with the legal backing of none other than the Obama Administration."


http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...903545,00.html

[carrie721]

Originally Posted by jwd

Getting back to the REAL ISSUES......



Well, maybe this would cause some of the homos to scream a little more like Perez, and more rightly so.

that is the last thing anybody needs.

"When Barack Obama sought the presidency, he pledged to reverse the "Don't ask, don't tell" policy preventing gays and lesbians from serving openly in the U.S. military. Yet on Monday, the Supreme Court rejected a gay Ohio soldier's challenge to the law — with the legal backing of none other than the Obama Administration."


http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...903545,00.html

that decision was actually not the crushing blow it initially seemed to be. this site explains it better than i could.

http://lawdork.wordpress.com/2009/06...whats-it-mean/

however, this? this is a big ****ing deal:

http://www.americablog.com/2009/06/o...ends-doma.html

obama is a backpedalling clintonian jackass. i was never nuts about him, but that **** still stings.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by sparky

. . .
Or not so huge, or so smart, as the case may be. They are using her for their ends. And if her "power players" were truly intelligent, they could have parlayed her celebrity into a lifelong career.

Not happening.

She'll be a footnote.

Let me clarify. What I meant was that there is huge money in this issue and she, for the moment, was a hot (looking and socially) person to present it. So, the huge power players used her and she went along willingly because she will get some kind of book deal or make $$$ off of speaking engagements for a limited time off of this. So, she is getting something out of it though she is merely a pawn or footnote. I do not think there was ever any concept by the power players of her getting a career out of this. They are all about the cheapest bang for the buck off of which they will make millions in ad rev., fundraising, etc.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by jwd

Getting back to the REAL ISSUES......

I think her answer to the question and the subsequent reactions is the real issue in this thread. Obama's timing regarding this issue is ancillary to that But, it is still relevant. I think Obama has been in office for five or so months and this is a complicated issue that he cannot afford to lose in a poorly planned and ill timed effort - most politicos agree with that and any lawyer worth 1/2 their salt will tell you that denial of cert can happen for any reason and facts of the case determine whether to pursue the case to the Court. So, while I am not and never was a huge Obama supporter, I am willing to give him a reasonable amount of time, which certainly is longer than his first five months

Interestingly, like the blacks, the gays really have nowhere to go and the D's know that. It is not like the gays are going to flock to the R party because the media portrays Obama as dragging his heels Moreover, the gays are not going to vote for the R candidate out of spite. Rather, they wisely see that although the D's may not be perfect on this issue, the least the D's usually do in some nonaction as opposed to the R's who openly pursue anti-gay law.

[strandinthewind]

At least she is not so dumb that she can remember a canned answer fed to her

As predicted, this sow cannot possibly admit that she violated her contract and that it is all the bad gays demonizing the innocent Christian girl

In the end, this c*nt is all about the hypocrisy and is just out to get a dime.

commentary supplied in red

Ex-Miss California USA: Pageant director never supported me

(CNN) -- Former Miss California USA Carrie Prejean wants to set the record straight.

Prejean garnered widespread criticism when she declared her opposition to same-sex marriage in a response to a question posed to her during the Miss USA pageant.

Prejean was allowed to keep her Miss California USA crown in May, despite a controversy over topless photos and missed appearances. However, state pageant Executive Director Keith Lewis took her crown on Wednesday, saying it was a business decision based solely on "contract violations."

Prejean offered her side of the story when she spoke with CNN's Larry King on Friday. She also discussed whether she would sue to reclaim her title and her future plans. The following is an edited version of the interview.

Larry King: You've had a couple of days now, Carrie, to think it all over and it's sunk in. What are your feelings today?

Carrie Prejean: I'm definitely a little bit surprised just by the way that I found out about this. You know, I was called by the media to inform me that I was fired. yea right - like she didn't at the least see it coming - rather, I submit she planned on it to get her name back up in the lights, where it is now and where it was not at the beginning of the week

King: Are you saying the pageant didn't call you?

Prejean: No. I haven't received any phone calls. In fact, my lawyer found out from the media, as well, before we received any contact. I still have not, to this day, received any contact from Mr. Lewis. Bullshiitte and she knows it

King: Now, since they were so supportive of you at the time and after the Trump announcement, what do you make of the fact that they didn't call you?

Prejean: Well, I think Mr. Trump was definitely in the middle. And I think that, you know, he has only heard one side. Because Donald Trump is such a bad business man

Ultimately, at the end of the day, you have to think about, Are you going to release Mr. Keith Lewis or are you going to release Carrie Prejean? I think that they had to release the beauty queen at the end of the day.

King: How do you respond to (charges from Lewis)?

Prejean: Well, Larry, all I can tell you was this basically comes down to the answer that I gave the night of the pageant. As you can see, Mr. Lewis does not agree with the stance that I took. I think he's very angry. I think he's hurt. He said in a previous statement that he's deeply saddened and hurt that -- what Carrie Prejean believes in -- a marriage is between a man and a woman. Politics and religion have no play in the Miss California family.

My question is, then why was the question asked at the pageant in the first place? If politics has no role in the pageant, why was I given this question? Puuuhhhlease, political questions of some sort have been asked for years and she clearly has multiple mock runs with potential questions. Millions of $$$ went into preparing her for this competition. She did not just show up and walk on that stage. her a$$ hurts from producing this shiittee she is trying to sell us in the role of the helpless victim.

It was a hidden personal agenda that judge No. 8 asked, and I think that they were not ready for my answer that I gave.

King: Let's say they were upset by your remarks. They didn't like your answer. Why didn't they just tell Donald Trump », we're unhappy and let's pick the runner-up or whatever?

Prejean: He absolutely did. I mean Keith Lewis held a press conference in Los Angeles and didn't invite me to the press conference and, you know, awarded the first runner up as the new ambassador of California. That is just undermining me and undermining his own titleholder from day one. VideoWatch how e-mails between Prejean, Lewis may have contributed to firing »

As far as the other appearances, I've had some inappropriate appearances that Keith Lewis has asked me to do. And I'm sure you're aware of them already -- one of them being Playboy; another one being a reality show which is being filmed in Costa Rica. So had I said yes to these, I mean, I would have been out of the country.

Again, Playboy, I couldn't believe. I was completely shocked that he would even pass this along to me. Another one was a gay movie premiere that he wanted me to attend incognito. He actually said he wanted me to wear a hat and go in disguise and attend this movie premiere promoting gay marriage and then come out with a statement the next day saying that Carrie Prejean attended a gay movie premiere.

It just doesn't seem right, Larry, does it? Let's see the proof of that - surely she has emails as she did on the other shiitte?

King: Are you now sorry you even entered. Or, in retrospect, has this been a boom for you publicity-wise?

Prejean: You know, this isn't something that I signed up for, Larry. I simply entered in a pageant, the Miss California USA contest, and I gave an answer that a lot of people weren't expecting.

The bottom line, I took a stand, and I think I am now being punished for the answer that I gave. This isn't about contracts. This isn't about me missing out on appearances.

If you want to ask Keith Lewis any appearances that I have made prior to the Miss California U.S. pageant, I will guarantee you, Larry, he will not even -- he can't even tell you an appearance that he -- he scheduled for me.

This isn't about appearances. This isn't about a breach of contract. This is about Keith Lewis not agreeing with the stance that I took on saving traditional marriage. And from day one, he wanted me out.

King: Well, are you going to sue, Carrie?

Prejean: That's -- you know, that's something that is not something that I want to -- I want to do. I think that what's going on is wrong. And I think that there is definitely some information that is missing. And I know that sooner or later, the truth will come out and people will recognize here who's right and who's wrong.

King: What are your lawyers telling you to do or advising you to do?

Prejean: You know, that's up to my lawyers to determine whether or not they think that there will be a lawsuit involved. But that's not up to me, at this point.

King: What are you going to do right now, career-wise?

Prejean: Well, first of all, I want to thank the millions of viewers. I know you have so many viewers on your show, Larry. Thank you so much for your support. Thank you to all the Californians who have supported me, who backed me, who sent me thousands of letters and e-mails. I just want to thank you so much for your prayers, for your support. While they are beating off to your nude pics

And I know that when God is for you, no one can be against you. So thank you. Because posing nude, getting breast implants, and preaching hate is exactly what the Bible teaches us to do? Maybe she should release a doctor's statement that her hymen is still intact and she is, like a good Christian should do, waiting until marriage.


King: Can you tell us what you're going to do, though?

Prejean: I'm not sure. Definitely some -- a lot of offers -- opportunities have come my way, a lot of offers.

I'm just really excited. I feel relieved. I feel just so blessed and so honored to have represented the state of California. And I'm ready to move on with my life and just be where God leads me. Back to the nude photos maybe for a few extra George W.'s we'll, god willing, get a beaver shot

http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/06/1...ean/index.html