Video: Michelle bids Kofi a fond adieu on O’Reilly
posted at 9:32 pm on December 11, 2006 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Talk about getting a pitch in your wheelhouse. Plus mini-banter about Congressman-for-life William Jefferson and the empty suit known as Barack Obama, whose name the boss invoked without genuflecting. Tsk.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Fair well, ta, ta, adu-adu-adu! So long good bye so nice to see you go! Koffi, you are a rotten piece of humanity that I hope and pray gets thrown on the garbage heap of humanity at the day of judgement. You are a small minded little crook that had no business in the business you were in. May the Lord have mercy on your pathetic soul.
NEMETI IN SYRACUSE on December 11, 2006 at 9:41 PM
Heh O’Reilly’s “Obama!” was pretty funny.
Dash on December 11, 2006 at 9:42 PM
That was a more humorous segment. I couldn’t agree more with Michelle’s point: good riddance Kofi. Just an aside, I’ve noticed more and more that Bill is doing segments I’ve seen first on this site. Is he getting his story ideas from Hot Air? Certainly someone on his staff is reading this blog.
thedecider on December 11, 2006 at 9:45 PM
I watched the segment live, great job again ladies. It is so refreshing listening to articulate, enthusiastic commentary on current events. So many of the talking heads are simply not up to the job; KP and Michelle in particular are on top of the their game. Well done. Bravo!
As for Kofi, watch the door doesn’t hit you on the way out. And William “Cold Cash” Jefferson, well, his day is yet to come. But it is coming.
Zorro on December 11, 2006 at 9:45 PM
I wonder if “Cold Cash” Jefferson will be able to use some of that N’Orleans juju to keep the investigations at bay until after the ‘08 elections.
eeyore on December 11, 2006 at 10:06 PM
I like how Kirsten said Kofi wasn’t gonna get up there and tell everyone how much of a miserable failure he’s been.
That’s true; he’s not going to admit it… but it would have been nice.
- Is Kofi even aware of the situation in Africa? -
Opinionnation on December 11, 2006 at 10:08 PM
Kofi is going to help Jefferson with the oil for food program in New Orleans like he did at the UN. Got to keep up his image ………LOL………..NONE
bones47 on December 11, 2006 at 10:14 PM
Kirsten has a tough job saying something nice about the folks who haven’t really done too much nice in their campaigns and lives. She says Kofi isn’t a good leader but he isn’t a deliberate screw up (true). Obama would do very well if he hired her to tender his message. And Wm Jefferson will be sanctioned and investigated for his bribery and corruption before the term is over. He’ll be gone.
Michelle and Kirsten are the best and both are much more careful about saying what they know to be true rather than what they “think” might be true. Too bad the AP can’t work the same (or at least look that good).
Well done, ladies. Permanently a fan of both of you.
Subsunk
Subsunk on December 11, 2006 at 10:16 PM
I think we are missing the real story here: O’Reilly is pounding Kristen every week.
That lucky SOB!
SnakeintheGrass on December 11, 2006 at 10:16 PM
The panel discussion on Hume’s show had a lot of talk about Obama as an “unorthodox candidate”. As I recall the discussion was set off when video had Obama describing himself as – “an unorthodox candidate”. Barnes scoffed at this calling Obama a run-of-the-mill liberal. Chatter ensued but Barnes won the point. And I walked away thinking, “Is unorthodox the new black?”
Stephen M on December 11, 2006 at 10:21 PM
i guess that GregH / honora / Constantine & other liberals here on this blog are now in mourning, the same way they were in mourning when they lost their best friend Zarqawi
Starblazer on December 11, 2006 at 10:22 PM
Kofi, the UN, utter failures.
They lived off the US funded welfare state, that is, from the US keeping the UN afloat, while the UN members had nothing better to do, like kill Muslim Jihadi terrorists, stop communists, stop genocide, etc., but to bash the US and President Bush.
Hasta la vista, Kofi!
Anyahosayao, Kofi.
Sayonara, Kofi.
Bonasera, Kofi.
Joi Gee, Kofi.
Zai Jian, Kofi.
Namaste, Kofi.
Namaskar, Kofi.
Do vidtzanya, Kofi.
Das vidanya, Kofi.
Arrevederci, Kofi.
Aloha oi, Kofi.
Don’t let the door knob hit ya’ where the horse shoulda’ bit ya’.
Can the US get a few billion of their membership funds back, please? After all, you and other UN operatives, spent a lot of time working and speaking against us.
William
William2006 on December 11, 2006 at 10:44 PM
I noticed that too, Snake. She should stick with me. I don’t pound and tell.
mikeyboss on December 11, 2006 at 10:45 PM
Surprisingly, CNN’s Jeff Greenfield compared Obama to Ahmadinejad.
Rick on December 11, 2006 at 10:48 PM
I like how Kirsten couldn’t even keep a straight face when attempting to defend Jefferson’s corruption. It’s like she knew it was impossible and anything she said in his defense was going to sound ridiculous.
Bye bye, Kofi. Next in line for the job – Bill Clinton?
wiserbud on December 11, 2006 at 10:49 PM
Sorry, for some reason the link didn’t work. Try this , and go to the video section on the bottom left titled “CNN’s Jeff Greenfield on Obama’s image”
Rick on December 11, 2006 at 10:53 PM
Truman was spinning in his grave.
Couldn’t he have spoken at the Carter Library?
reaganaut on December 11, 2006 at 11:04 PM
So, Allah–without getting into unnecessary details–is KP no longer one of the gang?
DaveS on December 11, 2006 at 11:30 PM
lol, did anyone notice where Michelle said “good grief does he have some gall“. You know she wanted to say “balls” again, but didn’t want to be bleeped. If you’re reading this, am I right Michelle, is that what you were thinking? Was that a censored shoutout to the HotAir folks? By the way, “good grief”? What are you, Charlie Brown? j/k.
RightWinged on December 11, 2006 at 11:43 PM
Good Lord, has this dolt no shame? Kofi Annan is the most ineffectual UN Secretary/General in its short and downward-spiraling history. Annan, with his ineptitude and his blindness or inattention to massive corruption, makes Boutros-Boutros Golly! seem like a geo-political genius, which he most assuredly was not.
For this numbskull to come to our country and to use his farewell address to bash and preach to the United States is incredulous, and very telling about the man and the organization he attemped to lead (allegedly.)
It is high time for the United States to Just Say No, to quit funding this travesty on such a massive scale only to have kettle-headed dimwits like Annan turn around and practically slap us in the face. Enough is enough.
hillbillyjim on December 12, 2006 at 12:05 AM
Barak Hussein Obama. Not trying to be too paraniod here, but come on. For president? Sorry, but at this point in time, just the name disqualifies him.
R D on December 12, 2006 at 12:16 AM
You know hillbillyjim, you often bill yourself as a slack-jawed innocent but you make very clever posts nonetheless. The U.N. has its usefullness as a debating society. Although we would prefer the U.N. to have more teeth, we often recoil at the thought of a one-world-government, or a United States at the beck-and-call of other nations. When we ridicule the U.N. (and believe me when I state I’ve done my fair share of that) we should also ask ourselves what we really expect from this combination of world representatives. What do we want the U.N. to accomplish in the world, and what are we willing to give up or supply to this organization for that to happen? If the answer is nothing and the U.N. is dissolved, then where do we turn for debate? Where does the U.S. – or our allies – address grievances? Certainly the U.N. has shown itself bloated and corrupt. Certainly it is in dire need of an overhaul, but in the longer term, are we ready to give it up? Are we really ready to say we do not want a world-forum in which to address our position on world issues?
thedecider on December 12, 2006 at 12:20 AM
(Psst…Dave. Ixnay on the PeeKay…)
Jaibones on December 12, 2006 at 12:23 AM
thedecider, you raise a very good point. In IMHO, if we could get rid of the corruption and recognize it as a debate society, it should stay. Oh yeah, I didn’t mean stay in the US. Move it to France, where men are pussies and the frogs are scared.
R D on December 12, 2006 at 12:31 AM
You see how easy it is Kofi when you have no accomplishments to talk about, just bash the U.S. It’s OK, we can handle it.
And in other news:
U.S. Military air-drops relief supplies for 160,000 displaced Kenyan flood victims. Efforts are also underway to reach about 100,000 Somali refugees in three camps cut-off by severe flooding in north eastern Kenya with a US military plane making the first of fifteen air-drops of relief supplies.
See how irrelevant your leadership was in this world Kofi?
BDU-33 on December 12, 2006 at 12:36 AM
R D on December 12, 2006 at 12:31 AM
I understand the feeling, but I think its better staying in the U.S. France is becoming an Islamic society. In fact, much of Europe is being overtaken by Islamists (hence the term “Eurabia”). The U.S. still provides the best (and most neutral) environment for a productive debating society. The U.N. would not survive in Europe. I think the delegates know that even though it is not publicly acknowledged and the likes of Kofi Anan can spew his anti-American rhetoric in the comfortable confines of our borders. To me, it’s the price we pay for being the world’s oldest democracy and wealthiest superpower. We really are a shining example to the world without.
thedecider on December 12, 2006 at 12:49 AM
America has freed more people in 230 than the rest of the world combined.
You’re an idiot, Kofi; slink off into the darkness.
Black Adam on December 12, 2006 at 1:05 AM
I understand the feeling, but I think its better staying in the U.S. France is becoming an Islamic society. In fact, much of Europe is being overtaken by Islamists (hence the term “Eurabia”). The U.S. still provides the best (and most neutral) environment for a productive debating society. The U.N. would not survive in Europe. I think the delegates know that even though it is not publicly acknowledged and the likes of Kofi Anan can spew his anti-American rhetoric in the comfortable confines of our borders. To me, it’s the price we pay for being the world’s oldest democracy and wealthiest superpower. We really are a shining example to the world without.
thedecider on December 12, 2006 at 12:49 AM
Once again, I must bow to your superior knowledge. Thinking things through, and not having a knee-jerk reaction is the wiser thing to do. ;-)
R D on December 12, 2006 at 1:17 AM
Damn…. forgot the quote tag.
R D on December 12, 2006 at 1:18 AM
This is a nice idea, except for the fact that recently, the General Assembly has become a forum for one U.S. basher after another, and one meaningless resolution after another. This is far from a debating society. It is more a “let’s see what we can do to stick a needle in the tiger’s eye today” congregation.
The current international situations regarding Iran and North Korea illustrate just how ineffective the Security Council has become. Of course, our use of the Security Council “veto” is also another in a long litany of U.S. “abuses” expounded upon by member states in the assembly.
I agree that there is some usefulness to the United Nations, and I don’t think abolishing it would be productive. However, I think that we should reduce our monetary contribution until some of OUR grievances are addressed.
hillbillyjim on December 12, 2006 at 2:40 AM
I disagree with the idea to keep the United Nations headquartered here in the United States of America.
Why?
Because it is a corrupt club, rife with communists, Islamic republics, dictators, etc., all praising the bad guys and trashing the good.
One of the main acts performed by the UN these days is to attack Israel and the United States, and to cower against nefarious, violent, okay, I’ll say it, evil regimes.
The diplomats are in need of a little lesson.
Somalia, Iran, Palestinian areas, Nigeria, these are a few good ideas for the location for the United Nations headquarters.
I wonder how long it will last, and if the member countries, and their diplomats, will beg and plead to move back to the United States of America, and will promise to be good boys and girls and to play nice.
Once they see the contrast between the United States of America and another, less inviting host country, perhaps they will become “Enlightened” and grow a pair!
Next US ambassador to the United Nations? Not Chuck Norris. He is too nice, too good.
He might have been a successful Tang soo do and ju jitsu martial artist, and movie and television actor, but he is not a mean man, he is very nice, almost too soft.
Hmmm. Who to send?
Okay, here area few suggestions:
Shaun Hannity.
Larry Elder.
Walter Williams.
Laura Ingram.
Ann Coulter.
David Horowitz.
Michael Medved.
Ward Connerly.
Star Parker.
Thomas Sowell.
That is just an initial list, but some on the list appear to be more stead fast, decisive, and strong willed, as well as keenly astute and aware, exceptionally intelligent, and loyal to the United States of America, their fellow citizens, and possess a deep moral and ethical foundation.
William
William2006 on December 12, 2006 at 4:19 AM
Jump the fence, Kirsten!!!
Halley on December 12, 2006 at 5:50 AM
Okay, I see Michelle, I see Kirstin, I see MK, but I dinna see Bethany anywhere. :o(
Last we heard she was sick with a cold or a flu. She didn’t eat at Taco Bell, did she? I miss her.
Coronagold on December 12, 2006 at 7:00 AM
And this guy thinks he can lecture us? Feh. My favorite lunacy from this loser is when he went to visit the tsunami destruction and wondered where all the people were.
And he was in charge of the UN.
CrimsonFisted on December 12, 2006 at 8:09 AM
For crying out loud Kofi Azzhat used to be a hotdog salesman Macalester College in Saint Paul! My dad remembers this.
Guess the twit never rose much beyond his former sales job.
Timber Wolf on December 12, 2006 at 8:33 AM
Michelle, you could read the dictionary and look fabulous!
Wait…you already did that, because you feed O’Reilly his lunch every time you’re on.
Cute AND smart. Aren’t we lucky to have you?
seejanemom on December 12, 2006 at 8:58 AM
Slightly off topic, but, New Orleans could be certified as the most corrupt city in America.
I was told by a very reliable source that $1000 will buy you a deputization and a badge. Drunk driving never becomes an issue after that.
That being said, William Jefferson is a par player.
natesnake on December 12, 2006 at 9:49 AM
It’s hard to argue that on big issues like Darfur, Iraq, etc. the U.N. has been pretty much useless. Peacekeeping and security are definitely not the institution’s strong point as it is nearly impossible to get 190+ countries all with different interests not only to agree to do something, but also to come up with the resources and manpower to actually pull it off.
To write the U.N. off as completely worthless though is naive and shortsighted. The U.N. does many things effectively that no one ever hears about because they are boring, obscure, and relatively easy to agree on because they are in the best interest of most of the world. Maritime law, shipping disputes, trade law, civil aviation procedures…these are all controlled by the U.N. They are never in the news and why should they be? But without the U.N. they wouldn’t exsist and the world wouldn’t run nearly as smoothly.
JaHerer22 on December 12, 2006 at 9:58 AM
I agree, those are all very usefull to the world. But the common theme for these aspects is money. Their complicancy in the Oil for Food scandal says it all.
As you noted, the aspects that involve the wellfair of the oppressed, raped, murdered, etc., they are generally useless. Not deeming what happened in Darfur as “geneocide” is criminal.
Lets call a spade a spade, and say the the WTO could absorb the trade aspects. That would leave the UN a beaurocratic albotross that should be abandonned on an ice berg.
If the UN would start to care about the welfare of world’s citizens, I would start to care about the UN.
natesnake on December 12, 2006 at 10:11 AM
The sooner Kofi leaves, the sooner we don’t have to listen to his particular brand of BS any more. And as far as relocating the UN headquarters, how about Easter Island? I don’t think they could do quite as much damage out there in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.
MarineDad on December 12, 2006 at 10:34 AM
JaHerer said:
The U.N. does many things effectively that no one ever hears about because they are boring, obscure, and relatively easy to agree on because they are in the best interest of most of the world. Maritime law, shipping disputes, trade law, civil aviation procedures…these are all controlled by the U.N.
This may be true, but the UN(useful) fails miserably when it comes to handling situations that call for a pair of
ballsMalkinsBigOrangeAxe on December 12, 2006 at 11:43 AM
JaHerer22 on December 12, 2006 at 9:58 AM
These are just a few you left out: Rwanda, Kosovo,Uganda’s and Sri Lanka’s child soldiers, Somalia, women being mutilated, abused, slaved around the world, children as sex objects in Thailand, Russia and elsewhere, Burma, savage tortures and killings in certain cultures of the world, while preaching ‘human rights’ and what not to the West and conveniently practicing ‘multi-culti’ and PC for these thugs.
I agree with you that the mundane and boring items are never mentioned. You and yours don’t give the same brake to the U.S. for not being able to solve the nearly unsolvable over night or nag, nag, nag for trying.
Can’t have it both ways.
The U.N. is an utter failure on 98% of the issues it was meant to address. Still, so long as the U.S. pays the most and is still in it, it must remain here.
Entelechy on December 12, 2006 at 12:35 PM
If you say so. The U.N. is inept at most everything. Maritime law is often carried out in international courts, nothing to do with the U.N. Anything else you listed could be set up as an international commission, devoid of any politcs. They allow the torture of people, slavery of people, genocide of people, they steal from the people (even Kofi kids got in on the take). Ask the Israeli’s how much interest the U.N. has in keeping their country safe. I will trade maritime law disputes for a couple of million lives anyday, or a few billion dollars of corrupt money.
It is naive to think a corrupt, bureaucratic world organization led by socialists, marxists, and communists solves more problems than it creates.
right2bright on December 12, 2006 at 12:42 PM
Not quite correct. These things are controlled by international treaty.
The UN claims jurisdiction … but their claims carry little weight.
Every nation on the planet ignores UN dictates whenever it is in their interest to do so. Treaties between nations carry far more weight than UN dictate … break a treaty, and other nations may retaliate. Ignore the UN, and absolutely nothing happens.
Kristopher on December 12, 2006 at 12:53 PM
Admiralty law, the proper term for what Jeher22 referred to as maritime law, was instituted during the reign of Richard the Lionheart in England by his mother, Eleanor of Guyenne.
Between 1897 and 1974, the Comite Maritime International, a private organization of international maritime lawyers, was considered the legal body of record for determining maritime trade and safety conventions. However, United States admiralty law issues are handled by federal courts, not international bodies, and certainly NEVER the UN.
In 1958, the International Maritime Organization was established by the UN, but it is a stand-alone body, not an agency of the UN, and received little formal recognition before 1974, and has managed only to introduce sub-agencies, commissions, and beaurocracies, not viable laws.
Just saying.
Freelancer on December 12, 2006 at 1:36 PM
Ah, the dreaded sound level plague.
These vids are always about a quarter the volume of the Vents.
I think the person who invents an automatic sound level normalizer for PCs will become famous, if not necessarily rich.
You have to crank it up for one vid, then the next blows your head off.
Merovign on December 12, 2006 at 10:57 PM
Comment pages: