Was it brought up at all on the LK show? Or are you asking why it was brought up in her settlement mediation? If you’re asking the latter, it was relevant beause it represented a breech of contract on her part that she didn’t disclose her porn tapes (actually denied having done any) to the Miss California people.
In the settlement mediation. I guess there’s stipulations and stuff about not having done porn and the like before you enter the pageant.
I’m really not getting the “Larry King shouldn’t have asked her this” stuff. I mean, why even have her on to begin with, really? All she’s famous for is this Miss America crap. And her book is ABOUT her pageant related experiences–she hasn’t done anything else you can ask her about. Her whole shtick seems to be violating the terms of her agreement and then complaining that it’s because people have it in for her (“They made me leave because they hated my gay marriage answer!” or “Larry asked me hard questions”).
So duplicitous double-dealing is honorable as long as it is done for the correct political persuasion?
As I read more and more of your posts, the more I realize that you have pretty much no sense of honor whatsoever. It doesn’t matter what shady tactics are used as long as they support some kind of liberal agenda.
I think that he shouldn’t have had her on the show if he didn’t want to honor those conditions. But, the reality is, if she had a signed contract stating those terms, she has a lawsuit that she can win.
You’re a fuckhead through and through though.
You should set your signature to, “It’s ok to lie to people and break contracts as long as liberal politics are being served.”
There’s no contract here. She was not being financial remunerated for her appearance on the show - it was an opportunity to plug her book. That’s how these things work.
I agree that if there was an agreement in place as she claims, Larry acted inappropriately.
I don’t think it’s all that unreasonable to dishonor an agreement to get your way against someone who has already proved that they themselves will lie with impunity to serve their own ends. Being honorable against people that will happily stab you in the back is a bit like bringing a knife to a gunfight. Kind of well-meaning, but naive.
Not that I believe for a second that such an agreement existed.
“Liberal” has nothing to do with it. Politics have nothing to do with it. I just don’t think ANY guests should be able to dictate conditions about what they can or cannot be asked about. It’s not political for me, I just despise the way the media panders to celebrities.
I had the same issue with Billy Bob Thorton and his country band. “No, I told you I wasn’t taking any questions about my movie career!” Okay, if you want to interview yourself, that’s fine, but you’re dealing with an interviewer.
Hey, if the interview had gone smoothly, everybody woulda forgotten it by now. It’s clearly in Prejean’s interests to make a fuss, it’s not like she’s famous for anything else.
Well, if the celebrity media can be trusted, there are eight videos and 30 nude photos, her book tour has been cancelled, and Vivid Entertainment (porn producer) has a legal copy of one of the videos and are preparing to release it.
Her publisher can’t be very happy.
The religious right doesn’t like to abandon their heroes (unless they catch the gay), but I can’t see how they can continue to prop her up.