Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: Victory dance—-dance, pandas, dance! Previous entry: Of course false confessions were the point

My final post on the Miss California flap - and a smackdown of Roland Martin

I didn’t want to waste any more precious energy on this dustup, but I was curious about what Miss North Carolina’s view on marriage equality was.

Miss North Carolina, Kristen Dalton, who from the POV of Miss California, Carrie Prejean, won her crown only because Prejean drew Perez Hilton’s name out of the fishbowl, weighed in on the marriage equality issue. Fortunately, she didn’t embarrass herself with a boneheaded answer - she actually walked the line quite artfully.

“The beautiful thing about America is that we have the right to choose, we have the right to choose what partner we want to love, commit and spend the rest of our lives with. I think that all couples should be able to be recognized legally, and they should be able to enter into a union. Whether or not it should be defined as marriage, I don’t know, I’ll leave that up to the politicians.”

That was a decent punt, actually and was diplomatic in discussing Miss California’s clumsy, ignorant answer.

Dalton told Al Rocker, “Although I respect her opinion, you know, as Americans, the beauty of America is that we all have a right to our own opinion. I’m proud of [Miss California] for speaking from her heart, and she’s passionate and what she believes in, and she’s proud of herself.”

In related news, on AC360, Mike Signorile was on last night, paired up with CNN’s Roland Martin, , whose column “Commentary: Miss California, thanks for being honest” has to be read to be believed. He defended Prejean’s “answer” as a matter of free speech—and clearly “truth.” That makes no sense; no one prevented Miss California from exercising her First Amendment rights, and it doesn’t protect her statement from ridicule or guarantee her a shiny tiara.

See the exchange below the fold.
Here’s the video and the transcript:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, “THE TODAY SHOW”)

PREJEAN: The way that I answered it, you know, might have been offensive to people, and I said, and no offense to anybody. I did not want to offend anybody.

But I think, with that question specifically, it’s not about being politically correct. For me, it was being biblically correct.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FOREMAN: And fans, like an Alabama legislator who has introduced a resolution praising Prejean, and this viewer, who sent us a CNN I- Report, are standing by her.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KATY BROWN, I-REPORTER: And, Miss California, you are a role model. You are the definition of standing up for your own beliefs and your opinions. And I thank you for that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FOREMAN: Who knew the all-American beauty pageant could get so ugly?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I’m so angry.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

FOREMAN: Tom Foreman, CNN, Washington.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COOPER: So does this really come down to an issue of free speech? Roland Martin blogged about this today on our Web site in support of Miss California’s honesty. We want to hear your thoughts, too. Send us a text message with your question to 94553. Keep in mind the message must start with the letters “AC,” then a space, your name, and question. If you don’t put “AC” first with a space, we are not going to get your text.

Roland Martin joins me now, along with Sirius XM host Michelangelo Signorile.

Roland, why did you write this blog? What are you in support of?

ROLAND MARTIN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, because folks are saying, well, she shouldn’t have said this, she should have given a different answer, she should have played it safe.

My deal is, look, when you ask—if you ask a question, give the answer. And I’m sick and tired of whether its politicians or whether it’s anybody else, where we dance around these issues and give these nice, safe answers as opposed to exactly how he really feels.

Now, there are consequences when it comes to that. When you write a column, people are going to say, “Why did you say it?” You’ve got a radio show? “Why’d you say it?” But you say it, you put yourself out there and you deal with the consequences. I’m tired of the dancing.

COOPER: Michelangelo, do you think she’s being punished because of her beliefs?

MICHELANGELO SIGNORILE, SIRIUS XM HOST: No, I don’t believe it was about the answer that she gave in terms of what she actually—what she believed about marriage. I think it was because she was inarticulate, she was clumsy. She talked about how we have a choice in this country. We don’t. California took away the choice.

So she was wrong, and then she was also this opposite marriage. What did that mean? I think she was inarticulate.

COOPER: Roland, she said we live in a land where you with choose same-sex marriage, which is—actually, it’s not true. Do you buy that, that her answer was technically wrong and therefore, that’s the problem?

MARTIN: Again, for me, I don’t even waste my time on, well, she got second place and she would have won if she answered right. None of us know that. We don’t know how the judges were actually…

COOPER: She certainly believes it.

MARTIN: Right. She believes that. But really how this thing has really just generated so much attention is really because of the answer, her stance, and that is she believes that marriage is between a man and a woman. That’s the real issue, not that she was the runner-up.

COOPER: Do you think most people are criticizing her. You say they’re hypocrites? Why?

MARTIN: I think they’re hypocrites because it’s interesting. People are saying, “How dare she sit here and say that? She—she would have been Miss USA representing America.”

Well, guess what? The president of the United States has the exact same position that she does. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Vice President Joe Biden. I sat through all those debates and watched those Democratic candidates. All of them say I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. But people are saying, “Oh, she’s wrong,” but they say, “Hey, we love Obama.”

SIGNORILE: Let me say the world is changing dramatically. Just in the past few months, we have the governor of New York, an African- American leader. We have the NAACP president, Julian Bond. We have the governor of Massachusetts. We have Reverend Al Sharpton all saying that marriage is a civil rights issue for gays and lesbians.

And we’ve had enormous change. Iowa, Vermont, so it’s changing. I think the president is going to change. And he’s not standing in the way of marriage. And Hillary Clinton has already shifted a lot, too. The terrain is shifting. This is a civil rights issue.

MARTIN: But the CNN poll shows that 65 percent of Americans still say they’re against same-sex marriage.

COOPER: But…

MARTIN: It’s shifting, but the numbers are still there.

SIGNORILE: In 1967, 70 percent of Americans were opposed to interracial marriage, but the world changed. People stood up and led the way. And I think you would have been proud in ‘67 if the judges at the Miss America pageant or Miss USA pageant voted down a contestant because they didn’t believe in interracial marriage. They did the right thing. [

OUCH! Smackdown.

]

MARTIN: My issues not even with the contestant. That’s not my point. My point is she said, “This is my position on it.” And my deal is you should be able to say where you stand on it.

COOPER: We’ve got a question from a viewer, a text question. This is from Lilibelle (ph) from Washington. She asked, “Do you think it was fair to ask the same-sex marriage question to even begin with?”

SIGNORILE: Well, the pageant wanted them to ask questions about social issues, about public affairs issues, about what’s happening in the country.

COOPER: She said she had rehearsed an answer for that. I mean, she had expected it.

SIGNORILE: Right. She picked Perez Hilton, an openly gay man who was a judge.

MARTIN: Well, she picked that out of a jar. So it’s not like, “I’m going to choose him.” She pulled his name out.

COOPER: Do you think it was a valid question?

MARTIN: Was it a valid question? Yes, but frankly for the Miss—Miss USA or Miss California, I don’t think America was sitting at home saying, “I really want to know what the beauty pageant person thinks about various social issues.” I don’t think they’re actually doing that. I don’t look to leadership on public policy issues from a beauty pageant contestant.

COOPER: Michael, you have a radio show on Sirius. People are still talking about this.

SIGNORILE: People are still talking about it, because it was a flash point. I think also because they see that there’s this, now, once again sort of a whipping up on the conservative right to use her and try to claim she was a victim.

She is probably going to have all kinds of offers for jobs. Does anybody know, as you said, the name of the actual winner of the pageant?

COOPER: No.

SIGNORILE: She’s doing fine.

MARTIN: Both sides are whipping this whole thing up. They’re both using it to their advantage.

COOPER: We’ll leave it there. Roland Martin, Michelangelo Signorile, good to have you on. Thank you very much.

Mike blogged about the tussle here.

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Pam Spaulding on 12:41 PM • (26) Comments

Fortunately, she didn’t embarrass herself with a boneheaded answer - she actually walked the line quite artfully.

Holy shit!  She was auditioning for a nationally publicized PR gig and won, then demonstrated her agility in dealing with a hot button issue using tact and grace and moderation?  Clearly they picked the wrong girl.  Shoulda gone with the short tempered whiner that steps on everyone’s toes.

On the flip side, if FOX needs a new dimwitted news model to fill desk space…

Comment #1: Zifnab  on  04/23  at  12:49 PM

He defended Prejean’s “answer” as a matter of free speech—and clearly “truth.”

Not surprising from a CNN pundit: just because someone says it and believes it, then under the terms of the First Amendment it must be the unassailable truth holding the same weight as the opposite contention—even if there are no facts or logic backing it up. The usual MSM “fair-n-balanced” BS. What a toxic media culture this is.

Comment #2: Gracchus.  on  04/23  at  12:54 PM

I see that Martin suffers from the common delusion that free speech means that you can say anything you want and anyone who is upset or offended by what you said has to STFU.

Again, you can say any damn fool thing you want, but you should have no expectation that what you say will be well-received.

Comment #3: Mnemosyne  on  04/23  at  01:11 PM

no one prevented Miss California from exercising her First Amendment rights, and it doesn’t protect her statement from ridicule or guarantee her a shiny tiara.

I have been trying to explain this to idiots for the last couple of days. What is so hard to understand about this?

Comment #4: spence-bob  on  04/23  at  01:16 PM

She was auditioning for a nationally publicized PR gig and won, then demonstrated her agility in dealing with a hot button issue using tact and grace and moderation? 

Clearly, this is why it was in God’s Plan(tm) to bring on the win for her, rather than for Prejean.  Too bad Prejean isn’t Christian Enough(tm) to realize that this was all His Hands(tm).

Never mind that she was probably runner-up for other reasons than her dismal PR tryout.  But all that mathy statistcally stuff with scoring in other pagent areas would be too hard to delve into for hardcore pagent fans and CNN commentators alike.

Comment #5: Ms Kate  on  04/23  at  01:20 PM

Some of these individuals who misinterpret free speech to mean “I can say anything I want to and still get all of the goodies I want with no possible consequences, even if I say the most stupid crap imaginable” really, really ought to go live in a nation where free speech means “If I say anything vaguely anti-government or anti-established-culture I will be stoned, imprisoned, beaten, or perhaps even executed.”

Bah.

Comment #6: tannenburg  on  04/23  at  01:24 PM

She said what she believes and she deserves the flak she’s getting. If you’re going to stand up for your beliefs, than be ready for the criticism you’re liable to get.

What I think this particular pretty, pretty princess doesn’t get is that this isn’t a matter of being politically correct. In some way, Miss USA represents America. Yes, I know, it’s sickening to think about but it’s true. And America is not just pretty, pretty princesses. There are gay people and lots of other non-white, non-Christian people who identify with the discrimination that gay people face and are sick and tired of it. The wprds of someone who alleges to represent America should actually take into account the diversity of America and not just what her parents told her.

Comment #7: DC Fem  on  04/23  at  01:27 PM

“Some of these individuals who misinterpret free speech…”

But they, generally speaking, don’t.  They just pretend to in an attempt to appropriate illegitimate privilege for their own speech.  To wit, most of the people who ‘misinterpret’ free speech in that fashion are the first to turn around and rail about their inability to silence those they dislike using the force of law or state apparatus.

Comment #8: preying mantis  on  04/23  at  01:31 PM

spence-bob, you have to understand that the defining characteristic of conservatives is a lack of empathy.  The idea that the rules apply all around is inconceivable to them.

Comment #9: Punditus Maximus  on  04/23  at  02:02 PM

Okay ... if we have free speech, anybody want to guess what three freely-spoken words will get you immediately ejected from the US Military?

Comment #10: Ms Kate  on  04/23  at  02:31 PM

Another case of whiny xians thinking they’re somehow “oppressed”...
too bad we aren’t tossing them to the lions or crucifying them anymore. Might help give them a sense of perspective.

Comment #11: Danica Lefse Queen  on  04/23  at  02:51 PM

I see that Martin suffers from the common delusion that free speech means that you can say anything you want and anyone who is upset or offended by what you said has to STFU.

Only if you’re conservative. If you’re liberal and you speak your mind, any backlash is justified and appropriate.

Comment #12: Redshift  on  04/23  at  02:59 PM

Signorile’s a very smart guy.  I wish I were even just 1/8 as clever, articulate, and fast on my feet.
He made a number of great points, many of them familiar from the full-equality fights.
But one of his points, one I hadn’t heard of before, suggests that it’s at least possible that Ms Prejean isn’t lacking in smarts at all.  She’s clearly going to have a whole lot more, and better, career options with the wingnut welfare crowd than she ever would have had as Miss Whatever.
I’m not suggesting the whole thing was plotted in advance.  If the pageant was playing it straight (as it were), she couldn’t have known she’d get Hilton as her querior, nor what her question might pertain to.  But, though it doesn’t seem real likely that she was planning something along these lines from the start, it’s at least possible that she saw her opportunity, and took it.

Comment #13: smartalek  on  04/23  at  03:19 PM

She didn’t even come close to answering the question gracefully.  Her answer made it crystal clear that she didn’t know what the fuck she was talking about.  Case in point: her heavy implication that marriage equality is the law of the land and is merely an issue of personal choice.

She proved herself to be only slightly less dumb than Miss Teen South Carolina.

Comment #14: keshmeshi  on  04/23  at  03:21 PM

I can’t see any reason why this is a free speech issue at all.  Prejean said what she wanted, and it was aired on national television.  The station didn’t even edit out her response or censor it, even though it would be within their rights to do so.  What about my freedom of speech to say that I not only disagree with her opinion, but that it was also poorly spoken?  Leave it to a bigot to have their statement aired on nation-wide television during prime time even, and then complain about how their freedom of speech is being suppressed.

Comment #15: bananacat  on  04/23  at  03:37 PM

Yes, she will get to talk her head off for republican and evangelical groups for years to come. But let’s all take a moment to be thankful that she will get no endorsement deals. The orange juice folks learned their lesson about bigoted beauty queens thanks to Anita Bryant so this fool will be a much more marginalized “celebrity” that the rest of us can easily avoid. Does anyone have a cream pie handy?

Comment #16: DC Fem  on  04/23  at  03:52 PM

Hey!

She said “no offense”!!!1111!!1

Even though she knew people would be offended.  What do you mean she should have used tact or diplomacy?  What do you think the words “no offense” mean?

I’ll tell you what they mean.  They mean that the person about to say something offensive is ON BASE and cannot be tagged for any hateful, bigoted thing they say immediately following the phrase “no offense”.  King’s X, dude.  No slambacks.

Comment #17: Caren-Sun-blocking Creator of Animorphic Pancakes  on  04/23  at  03:54 PM

Martie and Emily are playing teeny, tiny violins for poor poor Miss Prejean.

Comment #18: Thlayli  on  04/23  at  04:05 PM

^^^ with Caren above—took the words out of my keyboard.  I wish people would stop assuming that simply saying ‘no offense’ automatically constitutes a free pass, no matter what.  Claiming that you didn’t mean to offend in no way ensures that nobody will be offended, especially if you say something offensive.

On the other hand, it serves as a quick signal not to bother listening to whatever follows, much like its cousins, “I’m not a racist, but. . .” and “I’m all for equality and all, but. . .”

Comment #19: ladybronwyn  on  04/23  at  04:41 PM

Jesus, Roland Martin is quite an idiot.

1st amendment? This is all so idiotic. One of the hypocrisies of these beauty contests is that the women are being judged for something more than their looks. So they invented these little Q&A;sessions.

Now, in her answer, she was factually said “we live in a land” where gay marriage is allowed. Apparently, heterosexual or traditional were words too complicated for her. hence “opposite” marriage. She was not just a bigot. She was dumb.

But all of this is beside the point. The thing is, if you’re a participant in these kind of circus, you agree to submit your answer to the jury’s opinion, and that’s final. He can give a contestant a zero because he didn’t like her voice, her favorite color or whatever. It’s completely discretionary.

Comment #20: Nimed  on  04/23  at  04:45 PM

Caren—Exactly!  The whole “no offense” thing totally drove me crazy, and is generally the first sign that something offensive will follow.  No offense, but you like sh*t today.  No offense, but black people are scary.  No offense, but girls really suck at basketball.

And this whole “But I would have won if I had a different question!” BS drives me up the wall.  So, I hereby shamefully come out as an ex-pageant girl.  Yeah, if they give you a question that you answer poorly, that’s one of the things they take into account.  That’s why they ask the questions!  That’s the friggin point! Maybe she would have won if she had had a different question. If that’s the case, then she also could have won if she’d given a half-way decent, articulate answer.  Example:  “Marriage is an institution that is controlled by the states, so I would be disappointed for the issue of same-sex unions to be taken up by the federal government.  My strong Christian faith means that I am not personally in favor of same-sex marriage, but I am glad to see the question is being taken up by individual states, each deciding on the best way to protect their own citizens.” 
Or something.

Comment #21: roro80  on  04/23  at  04:58 PM

I wish people would stop assuming that simply saying ‘no offense’ automatically constitutes a free pass, no matter what.

Heh, it reminds me of a gag in Aliens, one of my favorite movies.  The smarmy corporate guy (Paul Reiser) goes around saying rude things and “no offense” so when it’s finally revealed that he’s betrayed the whole group, the leader of the group (who he offended earlier) says, “Okay, we kill him.  No offense.”

Comment #22: Mnemosyne  on  04/23  at  05:52 PM

The thing is, if you’re a participant in these kind of circus, you agree to submit your answer to the jury’s opinion, and that’s final. He can give a contestant a zero because he didn’t like her voice, her favorite color or whatever. It’s completely discretionary.

If that’s the case, then she also could have won if she’d given a half-way decent, articulate answer.  Example:  “Marriage is an institution that is controlled by the states, so I would be disappointed for the issue of same-sex unions to be taken up by the federal government.  My strong Christian faith means that I am not personally in favor of same-sex marriage, but I am glad to see the question is being taken up by individual states, each deciding on the best way to protect their own citizens.”

Exactly, both of you. One bets that if she got a question that she wanted to answer with an anecdote about some creepy old men watching her walk around in her bathing suit, she would have quickly come up with a different answer.

Shorter Miss California (and Roland Martin): I am willing to pay the price for my beliefs. And therefore, I should pay no price for my beliefs.

Comment #23: RickMassimo  on  04/23  at  07:06 PM

Shorter Miss California (and Roland Martin): I am willing to pay the price for my beliefs. And therefore, I should pay no price for my beliefs.

Nailed it. You will be quoted. I mean, besides this time.

Comment #24: Nimed  on  04/23  at  07:58 PM

I just got into a little argument with a friend who claimed that the ridicule Miss California is being subjected to is akin to her being raped.

I stopped talking to him right then and there.

Comment #25: UncleMike  on  04/23  at  09:05 PM

BTW, those three words with extreme consequence for the soldier or sailor: I am gay!

Comment #26: Ms Kate  on  04/23  at  11:26 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.