Audio: Michelle talks Imus with Laura Ingraham
posted at 11:00 am on April 13, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Come for the commentary on race, stay for the non-gratuitous swipes by both ladies at Ana Marie Cox and, um, Snoop fan Ann Coulter. That ought to earn us a few more smart remarks by Drudge.
The NYT and WSJ have worthy pieces on the nuts and bolts of social outrage in l’affaire Imus in case you care, which I really don’t. The Journal’s piece is more interesting because it reads like a drama about how much public pressure needs to be applied to corporate executives before they’ll pretend to be offended.
Exit question one: With Imus gone and Al Franken having taken his six listeners with him on the campaign trail, who will the Democrats baptize as their new favorite radio host? Exit question two: When does Ann start working “foshizzle” into her commentary?
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
So when will RACE BAITER #1 (Jesse Jackson) come out and “apologize” to the DUKE Lacrosse Team for “dissing them” and offering a scholarship to a REAL LIVE ..**ahem**’HO’”?
HHhhMMmm???
seejanemom on April 13, 2007 at 11:05 AM
Don’t hold your breath. Jackson has become an embarrassment, plain and simple. I think what Jackson et al did to the Duke kids was worse than “dissing”, don’t you?
And calling the Duke accuser names, well, what’s the point in that? Enough already.
honora on April 13, 2007 at 11:09 AM
Laura and Michelle are just class acts all the way around.
Rightwingsparkle on April 13, 2007 at 11:15 AM
Thank you, honora, for the fair assessment.
I can ALWAYS appreciate an INTELLECTUALLY HONEST Liberal.
…and yeah, I’ll be blue before he apologizes to anybody for anything. EVAH.
seejanemom on April 13, 2007 at 11:16 AM
Oh, and I was not calling the “accuser” names. I think you were, honora.
She is not an “accuser”, she is a LIAR and a (past convicted) prostitute.
Just “hangin’ with” the vernacular. Deal.
seejanemom on April 13, 2007 at 11:19 AM
Beautiful People left I-man bleeding by side of the road
But the most interesting thing about Imus’ sudden demise is how few of the assorted coatholders, front-runners, bumkissers and drive-by pundits who called in every morning could be bothered to stand up for the I-man in his moment of need.
These liberals may be good company at a cocktail party in Vail, but you wouldn’t want to share a foxhole with them. When the I-man’s phone didn’t ring, he knew it was Joe Lieberman. Or maybe Frank Rich.
Until his idiotic flameout, Don Imus was the nearest thing the liberals ever had to a success story in talk radio. He worshipped John Kerry. He fawned over Maureen Dowd. He cursed the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. After Saddam was executed, Imus joked with a local plagiarist about how Dick Cheney would handle himself on the gallows.
Who knew Imus would walk the Green Mile before Karl Rove?
-snip-
All his new so-called friends ran away and hid on him. Think about that unctuous NBC rumpswab David Gregory. Wednesday night, he went on MSNBC looking like his dog just got run over. But by yesterday morning, Gregory was back on top of his game. He apologized to Jesse Jackson for ever having gone on the Imus show.
But Gregory just did what was expected of him. When the going gets tough, the tough - hey, come back here!
The Beautiful People spent all week stampeding to the microphone to announce, as one female from Time magazine said yesterday, that they won’t be appearing on the Imus Show anymore.
No kidding, honey. Nobody will ever be appearing on the Imus show again, not even Imus.
TheBigOldDog on April 13, 2007 at 11:23 AM
Had to stir the pot, didn’t you?
Rick on April 13, 2007 at 11:32 AM
Liberal radio stations, the most ethically corrupt stations out there. Al Franken and Imus gone. Next will be Al Sharpton’s. Just my prediction. :)
Kokonut on April 13, 2007 at 11:32 AM
Oh my. THAT’S one I’ll be using again. Spot on BigOldDog!
KelliD on April 13, 2007 at 11:34 AM
Of course, what will stop Imus from having his own internet radio show?
Kokonut on April 13, 2007 at 11:36 AM
Ingraham/Malkin ‘08… any takers??
Im in.
Viper1 on April 13, 2007 at 11:37 AM
I don’t think that’s going to happen anytime soon - Sharpton would be shouting racism from the rooftops, and there would be rioting encouraged. If anything, Sharpton and Jackson just showed all of us that they can still flex their muscles and get corporate sponsors to pull their money from “racist” programming.
Rick on April 13, 2007 at 11:38 AM
First, Sharpton and Jackson have not power beyond that which granted to them by the liberal media. If they were ignored, or had their histories repeated in every story about them, they would fade away. Now that they are targeting the MSM, watch for the nature of their coverage to change.
Second, I am confused by the audio. It seems to me one minute it’s bad and scary to silence people, like Imus, then the next moment, it’s ok to silence people Like Snoop. So, I guess, it’s not the silencing but who is being silenced that really counts.
Third, Who has been the leading woman in standing up to the PC culture and enduring scathing criticism by both sides for it? Who has never backed down from it?
TheBigOldDog on April 13, 2007 at 11:38 AM
Not true. Oliphant, Barnacle, Brokaw, Fineman, Begula, Matlin, Crawford, McCain, Carville, Buchanan–all standing with Imus. The actual narrative here is plenty rotten, no need to exaggerate.
honora on April 13, 2007 at 11:45 AM
I’m sure that didn’t go over well with the Clintons.
Rick on April 13, 2007 at 11:54 AM
Links?
TheBigOldDog on April 13, 2007 at 11:57 AM
One of the things I’ve noticed in the country is that the women emerging to power tend to be “giggly”, emoting, and oft time disdaining. Speaking truth to power (or writing it for that matter) doesn’t mean sounding hateful yourself. It is important that we, as women, not emulate the Snoop Dogs and 50cent types. Ann Coulter may not be who we wish her to be, but sounding dismissive of her does a great disservice to our side and women in particular. Ann has her opinion and it is her right to say what she feels/thinks and take responsibility for it. We do not have the right as decent thinking, civil humans to be so disdainful of Ann or anyone for that matter. Can we not be professional, mature and civil regardless of the taunts? I think very highly of Michelle and Laura, but when they begin to sound like females, I cringe. Good, firm and strong emotions are worthy and keep us up to fight the fight. But to use them to diss others is not only poor sportsmanship, it shows a certain lack of maturity. Kinda of like Drudge on 03/19/07….which I missed and thank Hot Air for archiving it. Let’s show ‘em we are grownups folks, there is too much childish, immature behaviour by the tinfoil hatted leftist loons that the difference is vast. My thoughts only!
sharinlite on April 13, 2007 at 11:58 AM
There’s no love lost between Howie Carr and Imus. Carr once sued Imus for making highly inappropriate remarks about Carr’s wife. It goes without saying Carr is having a field day with this controversy.
Slublog on April 13, 2007 at 12:01 PM
Carr and his wife have also done battle with Don Imus. In 1998 Imus, in an attempt to insult Carr, said that Mrs Carr was having an affair with boxer Riddick Bowe. Comments from Imus included a raunchy statement “Bowe stuck his (you know what) up her (you know where)”. Mrs. Carr retained professor Alan Dershowitz as her lawyer. The parties reached an undisclosed settlement. In a 2007 column Carr alleged that Imus’ staments were incited by Mike Barnicle who he alleges told Imus that Carr had said that Imus “would die before his kid got out of high school”. Carr denies ever saying that.[2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howie_Carr
TheBigOldDog on April 13, 2007 at 12:09 PM
Michelle, My Hero! Finally someone stands up to the politcally correct racist who blames everything on the white man. Wow!
Michelle not only has the intelligence, courage, beauty, and ability to effectively articulate her points - she is on the right side.
Michelle certainly has risen to Super Stardom in my book. Go Michelle Go!
omegaram on April 13, 2007 at 12:17 PM
Good link. I’d forgotten Barnicle’s role in this. Figures, given Carr and the Plagiarist’s history.
Slublog on April 13, 2007 at 12:22 PM
Rick, who says about going after Al Sharpton? Just go after the advertisers and their sponsors. Tis all.
Kokonut on April 13, 2007 at 12:29 PM
The more I hear her, the more Laura Ingraham sounds like a pseudo-conservative, and the less I like her.
“…too many gin and juices”? Wow, been hanging out with libs, Ms Malkin? Personal swipes because you can’t refute her argument?
Ann Coulter is the only pundit thus far who ‘gets’ what’s wrong with what Imus said; the targets of his derision were undeserving. Snoop’s “hos” are generic, even fictional. Like telling a dumb-blonde joke vs calling a blonde a “dumb blonde”. Or like telling a joke that begins, “two drunks walk into a bar” vs saying, “…she’s been drinking too many gin an juices”.
It appears that the difference between Malkin and Ingraham, and Coulter is that Coulter is willing to actually do battle and defeat the enemy, whereas Malkin and Ingraham merely want to give them democracy, no matter what the cost.
Looks like there’s a battle brewing between real conservatives and pseudo-conservatives. Ann is obviously in the conservative camp, and the more I read, the more Malkin and Ingraham fall into the pseudo camp.
It’s sad to see someone you once liked fall victim to pseudo-conservatism.
Hiraghm on April 13, 2007 at 12:31 PM
Other than this remark and their criticism of one person, what evidence have you seen of this to back up your claims?
Slublog on April 13, 2007 at 12:36 PM
I’m sure you can find some links, but these are people I saw with my own eyes, mostly on MSNBC coverage.
honora on April 13, 2007 at 12:56 PM
Radar magazine has the list honora and TheBigOldDog seek.
Karl on April 13, 2007 at 1:16 PM
You made the claim.
Did you hear Gregory apologize to Jackson for appearing on the Imus show?
How do you like Ana Marie Cox’s defense of Imus in Time?
Did you hear Imus call Harold Ford Jr a coward for failing to come to his defense?
Oliphant’s a columnist in the Globe. Where’s his article defending his good pal?
What has John Kerry said in the I-Man’s defense?
Cue crickets chirping…
TheBigOldDog on April 13, 2007 at 1:18 PM
Does anyone here know who the sponsors are for Al Sharpton’s radio show ?
DoctorDentons on April 13, 2007 at 1:24 PM
I have a different take on Ann’s comment. She repeated what Snoop Dogg said, right? And since Snoop Dogg said it, it was ok, because he is black and therefore can say things like that, (inimpeachable moral authority, etc) right? Ah, but Ann Coulter just said it, too. And you know, she’s a conservative, ergo racist, so when she says that certain black women are ho’s–well hold on a second. Ah, but she only repeating what Snoop Dogg said, and she said that what he was right so, how wrong can what she said be? Heh, heh. I think she was taking the bogus calculus of PC, and twisting it into a pretzel. You guys are always thinking too frontally. Ali beat Forman with rope-a-dope, remember?
smellthecoffee on April 13, 2007 at 1:41 PM
I suspect that short of being caught with the proverbial dead girl or live boy, Sharpton is immune to a boycott.
rw on April 13, 2007 at 1:43 PM
Imus’ screwup helped expose a bunch of racist left jerks to the light of day.
Way cool, I love it.
Speakup on April 13, 2007 at 1:46 PM
Michelle, you were actually on a suicide mission on that one. People are unpredictable, and to say that to someone in a mall or at McDonalds, who you really don’t know how “wacky” he might be, is very dangerous. But thats just my opinion
mainmann on April 13, 2007 at 2:01 PM
No honey, YOU made the claim:
I pointed out that many of his friends have come to his defense–these are people I heard/saw do so. Do you think I made this up, especially when it can be so readily checked? Please.
honora on April 13, 2007 at 2:04 PM
Someone tell Coulter that Rutgers did not ‘achieve victory.’
digitalintrigue on April 13, 2007 at 2:28 PM
His radio website is sponsored by McDonalds and Walmart. Usually sponsors for the website are for the radio as well.
honora on April 13, 2007 at 2:43 PM
I hear Imus is going to do a guest appearance on the Cappelle Show.
crosspatch on April 13, 2007 at 2:47 PM
I know…I know!
Well put, Dog.
netherman79 on April 13, 2007 at 4:10 PM
While I cheer MM and BP on and am infatuated with LI, I have to admit that Hiraghm is correct. And while there may be a single agenda, there are two distinct tactics or methods. AC’s method is logic and humor and she takes (and gives) great pleasure in documenting the left’s fallacies, myths and ironies.
MM’s method is logic, but to a fault. I think there is a great need for her work (and BP’s and AP’s), but they need to step back now and then to adjust focus, to be able to discriminate. No one has put robes on them, they have taken no vow of neutrality, and whether they like it or not, they are in a battle with a foe that gives no quarter and is guided by no morals. No matter how many times you ask the Moonbats, they will not willingly attack those who attack their enemy so effectively.
Now if MM & Co. will attack AC, they will attack anyone else who does not play ball their way. But why? Why would they do so? I don’t think they can help themselves. I think there is a slight generational difference and I think that they have travelled the path too far now and reached a prominence such that they see AC ripples as threats to their stability.
netherman79 on April 13, 2007 at 4:58 PM
Does AC’s methods diminish MM’s? Their main argument is that it does. But you have ask why. Who are MM’s and HotAir’s biggest fans? Why, it’s us! We also happen to be AC’s biggest fans.
Don’t make us chose! The two methods (in my eyes) are not diametrically opposed. I think MM and gang ascribe to themselves a calling that will never exist. AC operates under no such illusions.
netherman79 on April 13, 2007 at 5:23 PM
Why would anyone on the right be afraid to say speak out against misogyny aftet the Imus incident? Unless your critique of rap music included a bunch of racist slurs, you should be golden. Hate to keep saying the Malkster and Co. is wrong on this one, but they are.
The difference between Imus and Snoop dog (aside from the fact the “ho’s” in rap are fictional characters) is that it is the Black community, and the larger “hip-hop” community, that should be involved in “reforming” rap. That excludes not only Whites who don’t listen to rap (though Whites who are involved in hip-hop should have a voice) but people like Sharpton nad Jackson. Being half-Black I was offended by Imus, and as I said before it’s different to hear Imus make a racist comment and to hear “nigga” from a Black guy, but I don’t buy or sell rap albums and I won’t tell people that do what should and shouldn’t be on those albums.
And netherman’s right, AC isn’t the enemy here.
Rob Taylor on April 13, 2007 at 7:49 PM
Has Cosby weighed in on this?
- The Cat
MirCat on April 13, 2007 at 11:21 PM
You should. You could be next.
Jim Treacher on April 13, 2007 at 11:28 PM