Marsden to Duke kids: Get over it, “silver spooners”
posted at 4:24 pm on April 14, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
First she drops the ball on Imus, now this. Tough week for Rachel. The charitable explanation is that she simply doesn’t know the facts well enough to grasp the extent of the injustice committed here. Read this piece, the first in a series by the News & Observer, to see what a filthy weasel Nifong was from the beginning. And read this too.
In Rachel’s defense, there are some aspects of the case about which even the Duke kids won’t show the appropriate indignation. I wonder why.
The ratings have been healthy thus far so Fox is giving Gut and crew a shot in primetime tonight at 9 p.m. Smart move. It’s the only show I watch every day, mostly for the wit and banter but partly for the increasingly nasty exchanges among the cast. I’ve tacked a little example of that onto this clip. Enjoy.
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: 1 2 Next »
I like Rachel although she does seem to have a checkered past.
She’s kind off an “Ann Coulter” in training.
JayHaw Phrenzie on April 14, 2007 at 4:27 PM
I think her point is dead on.
In the overall grand scheme of things what is more significant? The fact that every country in the world is facing jihad at some stage, or someone was false indicted. or soemone made a black joke.
I agree with her 100%. We’re over if we dont get serious fast.
VinceP1974 on April 14, 2007 at 4:30 PM
I wonder if she or anyone else saying “get over it” was on the end of serious allegations like this would feel the same way.
EnochCain on April 14, 2007 at 4:32 PM
She is “cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs” like that guy in the clip said.
However, she’ll probably be on Red Eye all the time now because of it.
And we’ll be subjected to these clips on Hot Air, just like the Rosie clips.
asc85 on April 14, 2007 at 4:34 PM
What do you mean, “subjected”? Don’t like the Red Eye clips? Don’t read the post. Simple as that.
Allahpundit on April 14, 2007 at 4:35 PM
Thanks for the warning. Fortunately, National Geographic is running a hippopotamus documentary at 9 p.m.
RedWinged Blackbird on April 14, 2007 at 4:37 PM
I love Red Eye, and I like Rachel. She does put her foot in it a bit and can be annoying, but that’s part of her charm. She’s not the reason I watch the show, however.
It’s ALL about Levy.
violet on April 14, 2007 at 4:40 PM
So who is this Rachel chick anyway? She’s… well… I don’t know…. lame? I mean, I’ve barely watched the show and when she made the comment about how “it’s not illegal to tell a bad joke” even I was going “yeah, honey, you’re proof of that one!”
I must be missing something. I don’t get this show… occasionally they say something funny but whenever I’ve watched it I’m just left thinking “huh?” … it’s like they are trying to hard to be, what do the kids say nowadays? “hip”… or “rad”… or “kewl”…. or something….
I do think that Levy is amusing, though. And Gutfeld has his moments….
… and I need to cut it out with the “…”, I’m starting to get on my own nerves. I think I’ve used up my quota of periods for the month with this post alone.
dead-duck on April 14, 2007 at 4:46 PM
Conservative Version of the VIEW.
That’s why you like it. It seems so familiar, I guess.
Rachel is the Rosie and the others….. are that,.. udders.
Kini on April 14, 2007 at 4:52 PM
The Rachel chick needs to get a clue! Shut up or something. Silver spooners? These young men will have this stigma hanging over there heads for the rest of thier lives. When they go to get a job, etc… If it were my son wrongly accused of a crime like rape. I would be out there ruining Nifong, the so called victim, and the black panther lawyer.
ChrisIansNana on April 14, 2007 at 4:59 PM
Too bad Michelle isn’t in NYC five days a week. If she replaced Rachel on RedEye, their ratings would skyrocket.
However, that crazy schedule would seriously impede the production of new Vent episodes so forget that idea.
ScottMcC on April 14, 2007 at 5:04 PM
Ms. Marsden seems a bit…off, maybe?
billy on April 14, 2007 at 5:05 PM
They tape at 9 p.m., I think. Awful.
Allahpundit on April 14, 2007 at 5:06 PM
While I’m delighted that the false charges have finally withered away, I’m even happier that we’ve now got more opportunity to argue for crushing the islamist menace. No more incessant “Duke Duke DUKE DUKEDUKEDUKE” on the tube! It’s time to recapture the attention of the easily-distracted.
As for Rachel Marsden … I suppose she’s tolerable, though she’s got skeletons in her closet that resonate when the topic is “false charges of sexual assault.” I’m betting that’s partly why she can’t bring herself to be too sympathetic to the innocent Duke lacrosse players. Give her time. Maybe she’ll get better as an on-camera personality.
If nothing else, she’s pretty easy on the eyes. Here’s to nice legs and low camera angles!
OhioCoastie on April 14, 2007 at 5:09 PM
Yeah, and talk about IMUS IMUS IMUS!!
dead-duck on April 14, 2007 at 5:13 PM
Touchy.
Wade on April 14, 2007 at 5:15 PM
You watch this show every night Allah? Do you ever sleep? The show is on at 2 AM here on the east coast. I only ever watch it when the dogs wake me up and I have to go down and let them out…
Babs on April 14, 2007 at 5:17 PM
I tape it and watch it the next night at around 11.
Allahpundit on April 14, 2007 at 5:18 PM
Marsden’s behavior here is consistent with some of those stroies floating around elsewhere on the ‘net, as OhioCoastie suggests.
Karl on April 14, 2007 at 5:24 PM
Just in case you all don’t know, the word faggot is a term for a bundle of sticks. When you are working in your yard this time of year, picking up twigs that have fallen from the trees and bundling them, you are creating “faggots” of twigs or branches… This term was morphed into a single cigarette, like a “fag”, one of a bundle of twigs or sticks. According to my dictionary, the word faggot is also used as a term for a public school boy that is subservient to others. Maybe that is how it ended up being a pejorative for homosexuals, who knows?
Babs on April 14, 2007 at 5:33 PM
Then that’s a no-go for Michelle as a regular for RedEye. I’m surprised FNC never did anything with It’s Out There… I guess that KP cyberpunk handprint ID shot in the intro was just too darn much for the Fox brass to take.
ScottMcC on April 14, 2007 at 5:44 PM
Thanks for clarifying.
Was there a question or reference to f….t that I missed above?
I am confused as to what motivated your post. :)
JayHaw Phrenzie on April 14, 2007 at 5:47 PM
Gotta watch AP’s video to the end in order to understand.
ScottMcC on April 14, 2007 at 5:49 PM
I didn’t watch the video. I watched it live last night. (West Coaster).
I missed the part about F…..s although I cracked up when Rachel tried to pass off Nappy Headed as a reference to a Diaper.
For some reason I had short term memory loss after the show ended.
JayHaw Phrenzie on April 14, 2007 at 6:00 PM
I hope you are just using “tape it” as shorthand. Don’t you use a DVR? I have one TiVo recording Fox 24/7 and I don’t even post on a blog. :P
JayHaw Phrenzie on April 14, 2007 at 6:01 PM
“Tape it”? What is this “tape” you speak of?
Blast! JayHaw beat me to it already:
RightWinged on April 14, 2007 at 6:23 PM
I love Red Eye. I record it and watch it in the morning instead of FOX and Friends.
The animosity centered around Rachel is starting to get cringe worthy, though.
frankj on April 14, 2007 at 6:32 PM
By the way Rachel has gotten more and more obnoxious by the day. In the first few episodes, I thought she was just uncomfortable on camera and that the guys just liked teasing their female friend, and I could actually see it taking its toll on her and genuinely felt bad for her, especially because she’s the only “conservative” there.
But she’s increasingly gotten on my nerves, partly because of the stupid jokes, and partly because her conservative image is failing as she takes anti-life positions and other far left positions that don’t seem to fit. And she seems less comfortable by the day, and they rip on her and it tumbles out of control to the point where I’d rather watch one of these New Black Panther or Nation of Islam idiots on a long winded rant than listen to Rachel nervously try to make an incoherent point with the jokes tacked on that couldn’t be less funny.
Gutty, if you’re reading this, PLEASE GET HER OFF THE SHOW! I’m sorry Rachel if you’re reading this, but I like the show, and would like to see it succeed, but you’re dragging it down. The “nappy is a british term for diaper” thing the other day was the straw that broke the camel’s back. Look, you’re on a TV show and this story was ALL over the news, you can’t be that stupid and remain in the position you’re in.
On a positive note, Angela McGlowen is smokin’ hot. I would recommend her as a replacement, but she’s not particularly “funny”, she’s just a smart conservative who would actually be able to make points that were understandable and didn’t always require the use of the word “Manitoba”.
But again Gutfeld, honestly, Rachel needs to go… are you waiting out a pilot contract she’s under or something? I don’t know who could replace her, because Malkin and MKH are in DC, but I’m sure there’s someone out there.
RightWinged on April 14, 2007 at 6:36 PM
I like Rachel. She sets up Bill’s best lines. And some of Levy’s.
Alex K on April 14, 2007 at 7:07 PM
Your problem with Rachel is that she’s too far left?
Allahpundit on April 14, 2007 at 7:08 PM
I’m not real keen on Rachael, some days I think she’s mostly there as cannon fodder for Levy and Schulz. Sometimes she’s OK, but she tends to just give talking points like Fleming, and she puts her foot in her mouth like Coulter on a more regular basis.
Bad Candy on April 14, 2007 at 7:14 PM
Your problem with Rachel is that she’s too far left?
Allahpundit on April 14, 2007 at 7:08 PM
Yeah, wait…what? I’m with Allah, huh?
Bad Candy on April 14, 2007 at 7:16 PM
No, that’s only part of it… because she’s supposed to be this “conservative”, yet she rarely actually makes the same arguments we would, and I’ve noticed her taking weird Dem positions a handful of times… and it more annoying because she, well I’m not going to say she’s stupid, but she certainly comes off that way.
But again, that’s only a very small part of it… she’s supposed to be the “conservative” on the show, but I don’t think she represents us well, partly in lack of wit and smarts, and partly on positions.
But as I said, my main problem is with the jokes and the general feeling of “she’s not ready for primetime” you come away with after every show… (Another clip you might want to add AP is the showstopper “you guys are just being hard on me because I won’t go skateboarding with you after the show”)
Again, I’m not even saying she’s “too far left”, I just think she’s a basketcase and while claiming to be a conservative, is extreme right in some of her positions, while DNC policy left on other issues, and she can’t seem to explain or defend any of them.
RightWinged on April 14, 2007 at 7:38 PM
I don’t care for the show too much, for reasons I won’t get into here, but I did see one with Janice Dean that will live in my memory forever. She did a thing with her tongue that was, well, just wow! What a hottie!
jaleach on April 14, 2007 at 7:42 PM
You’re 100% right AP. After I made that post, I thought I came on a bit too strong. My apologies.
asc85 on April 14, 2007 at 7:51 PM
I’m sure I heard her deride the 2nd Amendment.
Stephen M on April 14, 2007 at 8:20 PM
asc85 on April 14, 2007 at 7:51 PM
Not all red eye posts would necessary have this dummy in the clip, so how would you know unless you read the post or watched the clip. You owe no one an apology.
I agree with AP on most things but promoting Rosie by continually posting her rants only perpetuates her rants. But then I am only a commentator and AP runs the board so it is his call. Telling anyone if you don’t like it don’t read it sounds rather childish to me and does not lead to discourse but discourages it. But again his call.
Wade on April 14, 2007 at 8:21 PM
Wade on April 14, 2007 at 8:24 PM
You did. About a week ago, she openly mocked the 2nd Amendment and the whole concept of defending yourself against an armed criminal. That’s the point where I was done with her.
ReubenJCogburn on April 14, 2007 at 8:29 PM
I don’t know who that guy to her right is, but he does that annoying thing where he repeats the end of every single sentence. Every single sentence.
“Hold on to the silence. Hold on to the silence.”
“Bring it back to Clinton. Bring it back to Clinton.”
PaisleyCow on April 14, 2007 at 8:35 PM
Wade on April 14, 2007 at 8:21 PM
Do Not Click On Rosie…
She will go away, I guarantee you!
Babs on April 14, 2007 at 8:44 PM
Thanks for your comments Wade.
However, I guess I’m thinking of examples in my life where I’m volunteering to do something for a group of people, and then instead of people being thankful that I’m doing it for them, they complain to me about the job I’m doing! So I think this is kind of analogous (sp?). AP, Bryan, Ian take the time to post interesting stories and make this website the great one that it is, and I’m sure it’s frustrating when people like me criticize some of their choices.
asc85 on April 14, 2007 at 8:44 PM
DOn’t see the show, but this was lame. The Rachel-person had it tangled up. The Rutgers Women’s Basketball team should not have had a press conference about Imus. The correct response for them should have been, “Imus, who? Party on, Champs!” But it gave Rutgers publicity. The college stood behind their players, who of course hadn’t done a thing wrong, in fact did a lot right by winning the championship.
The 3 Duke players were facing PRISON. Years of it. For group of crimes that they didn’t commit. (don’t forget the kidnapping charge – a head scratcher – living room to bathroom? That charge alone would send them to prison if convicted.) Their coach is out of a job, their entire team sat out a season – over thirty guys idle, for what purpose? Their professors tainted the university atmosphere with guilty before proven innocent. Duke’s president hardly showed leadership, but appeasement. There are compelling reasons for allowing these three men to speak publically, one of which is because they needed to – they’ve been legally constrained since they were charged. Wouldn’t anyone else under these circumstances want to speak to the public?
What’s this talk about conservative? The small examples of Rachel seem to display “Liberal Left.”
naliaka on April 14, 2007 at 8:46 PM
I’m volunteering to do something for a group of people, and then instead of people being thankful that I’m doing it for them, they complain to me about the job I’m doing!
Hey asc85, sounds like you live in my community… I got wise to these jokers years ago! Wanna swap stories?
Babs on April 14, 2007 at 8:53 PM
I watch it live every night (East Coaster).
Connie on April 14, 2007 at 8:58 PM
Frankly, it should embarrass us all that this woman, Rachel Marsden, who has extensively stalked three men (and pled guilty to doing so with at least one of them) and ruined their lives (one was originally fired from his job) is labeled as a “conservative.” Since she did the same thing as the Duke stripper–in falsely accusing a man of rape and ruining his life–she has no business commenting on this story . . . let alone having a job with FOX News.
They should be ashamed. As should we all that her behavior was rewarded as such. For the record, when she still had a radio show, I appeared on it once or twice, and I liked her and thought she was very nice. But that was before I was made aware of her extremely disturbing history, to which many people later repeatedly alerted me. This Salon article has the full story on her past, and I recommend everyone read the full four pages. You will be disgusted. Here’s just a tidbit about the Canadian Crystal Gail Mangum:
So, does Crystal Gail Mangum get a job at FOX News Channel now, too?
Debbie Schlussel on April 14, 2007 at 8:58 PM
Rutgers loss the championship to Tennessee
Capitalist Infidel on April 14, 2007 at 9:00 PM
Ellis? ugh.
Connie on April 14, 2007 at 9:01 PM
I watch it live every night (East Coaster).
Connie on April 14, 2007 at 8:58 PM
Hey Connie, you’re a wierdo.
Babs on April 14, 2007 at 9:01 PM
Please do not compare Rachel Marsden to Ann Coulter. AC is brilliant and funny and makes salient points about our Orwellian P.C. culture, while RM is just a clueless embarrassment.
If you want to make the “We’re too weak to fight the war on terror analogy”, throw it at the wusses like Edwards who won’t debate on Fox News but wants to be our Commander in Chief.
It is outrageous to conclude that because someone is not poor and underprivileged that the prospect of spending a good part of one’s life in jail is no biggie – not to mention what they have already lost. Remember what happened to Patti Hearst? The girl gets kidnapped by Leftists terrorist types and ends up going to jail as a result – all because she was a rich girl.
The Duke Lacrosse players certainly deserved a press conference far more than Rachel deserves a spot on a Fox show. And did I mention that she’s not funny?
Buy Danish on April 14, 2007 at 9:07 PM
Allegedly….
Connie on April 14, 2007 at 9:11 PM
Babs on April 14, 2007 at 8:53 PM
You mean you think we live near each other? Or just “philosophically” near each other?
You probably have more interesting stories than me. I have no patience with these kinds of people.
asc85 on April 14, 2007 at 9:14 PM
You did. About a week ago, she openly mocked the 2nd Amendment and the whole concept of defending yourself against an armed criminal. That’s the point where I was done with her.
ReubenJCogburn on April 14, 2007 at 8:29 PM
Rachel the Canadian says.
We don’t have the “right to bear arms” woven into the political and social fabric of our society. We don’t believe that it’s every man for himself, at any cost. Instead, we believe that we’re all in this society together, and the fewer guns that are out there on the street in the hands of people who believe it’s their God-given right to use them, the better.
There’s a lot in there which does not sound conservative. At least not in the US. Not sure about this Canadia place though wherever that is.
Stephen M on April 14, 2007 at 9:38 PM
It’s spelled “touché.”
Jim Treacher on April 14, 2007 at 9:45 PM
Oh snap. I’m stealing that, Treacher.
Alex K on April 14, 2007 at 9:52 PM
Easy question, Allah: when do you sleep, dude?
Do I agree with you all the time? No. Are you pencilneck geek sometimes? Sure. Are you going to Hell? Oh, yeah. I think. Assuming there is one. And I’ll probably, too, so what do I care?
But, seriously, if they actually pay you for this gig, you need a raise. Are you listening, Michelle? Allahpundit gets more than his share of the criticism (add me to the guilty list) … and not enough of the credit.
This is – bar none – the best blog on the net. AP is the reason. I’d deny it, but it’s plainly true. He needs a raise, a bonus, or Jessica Alba’s cell number. Stat.
Professor Blather on April 14, 2007 at 10:45 PM
Well, THAT was an eye-opener.
Thanks for the heads up. Explains the odd and flat quality of the repartee.
naliaka on April 14, 2007 at 10:54 PM
Wow. I have to admit that this story is very disturbing. I’d like to hear her side of the story. If all of these allegations are true, it’s a real shame. I hate it when conservatives turn out to be freaks.
Thanks for the heads up, Debbie.
violet on April 14, 2007 at 11:20 PM
I have a somewhat related question to all this: Rachel is clearly a conservative voice on the show, and the show is supposedly “conservative.” I have watched it probably 10-15 times total, but is it just me or does Andrew Levy refute her points daily and seemingly defend liberal positions? How can this guy be called a conservative when all I’ve seen him do is make jokes about George Bush, go after Rachel, and defend guys like Al Sharpton? And why is a show ostensibly conservative ironically so unbelievably PC? Bringing on the media whore Amaechi, and basically agreeing to all his points, did it for me.
Patriot33 on April 14, 2007 at 11:30 PM
I haven’t seen this, I guess I’m long gone asleep by then, bt I LOVE IT! It has all the barbs and biting (almost like the blogospere.) I do think they they need a better conservative woman who can throw it right back at them.
I’m always avaiable….;-)
Rightwingsparkle on April 14, 2007 at 11:50 PM
I don’t remember anybody calling him a conservative. He’s never referred to himself as such, that’s for sure.
Jim Treacher on April 15, 2007 at 12:09 AM
P.S. Amaechi was a great guest. I don’t know that he’s anymore of a media whore than any other guest who’s been on the show to promote something, and besides, he was witty and pleasant. But I would say that, since I’m totally gay.
Jim Treacher on April 15, 2007 at 12:13 AM
Regardless of whatever, Geraldo does not make a good lead in for Red Eye. I have to remember to switch back to FOX after his show is over.
Connie on April 15, 2007 at 12:51 AM
It seems incredible that this Rachel-woman is being compared to Ann Coulter. They are light years apart. It’s incredible anyone is claiming Rachel is conservative, for she sure don’t talk like one. She’s just fast with the snitty comments, Maureen Dowd comes to mind, not Coulter. That’s not conservative. Why are conservatives being smeared by being falsely associated with this woman, especially with her background? One guy is whining that everything is a plot to blame Clinton. Yeh, that’s a conservative position. Anyone else on that show? Bunch of Libs, as usual. A shoutfest doesn’t promote discussion or information sharing – just quickie glib talk and attempts at snappy sound bits.
naliaka on April 15, 2007 at 1:00 AM
Could you tell that to News Hounds and the like?
Jim Treacher on April 15, 2007 at 1:44 AM
Ah, you are correct, that was one of the other times I heard her taking the liberal position… again folks, I’m not accusing her of being “too left”, just too dumb and clearly has a few screws loose. I wasn’t going to mention her stalking history, but Debbie and others let the cat out of the bag, so there it is. Anyway, she’s anti-gun and anti-life, and anti-coherent thoughts and anti-funny jokes… She may call herself a “conservative”, but I think she’s just a nut. She may take the right position from time to time, and her appearances in the past on O’Reilly via satellite from Canada gave us hope for that country, but she’s far from anyone that real conservatives would want having their back. Unless by “having your back” in your world means “having her send hair and fingernail clippings and possibly throwing on a diaper before attempting to kidnap your real girlfriend”.
Also, as I explained earlier, Rachel needs to be dismissed… but in the meantime she can make herself look a little better, first by reviewing her lame jokes before she says them, but more importantly, rolling with the teasing. Tonight Greg told Bill that he was an offensive person, Bill said “we’re not talking about looks Greg…..” and went on to say his part. Rachel doesn’t understand self-deprecating humor I guess, because whenever they tease her she gets all pissy and tries to defend why she brought it all back to Canada again, etc. She needs to just roll with it instead of being defensive… next time Bill or Greg says “so it all comes back to Canada” or something along those lines she should just shrug her shoulders and say “hey, that’s how I roll” or something stupid like that. Her defensive whining takes away from the style of the show every time, and only fuels Levy to make it even worse for her, which in turn causes her to say something stupid again, etc. etc.
The show isn’t conservative, it’s probably more libertarian. In fact I believe Levy specifically told me in a thread a few weeks back that he is a libertarian… maybe it was librarian… I don’t know, I just remember he was under the impression that I called him a conservative and objected to that. Gutfeld is probably not “far right”, but more or less your “war on terror” conservative. Rachel is supposed to be a conservative, but we’ve established that the only thing being conserved are good jokes and coherent thoughts. That said, I don’t know of a single show on Fox that is supposed to be a “conservative show”, not sure where you got that idea. I don’t agree with stuff like the Amaechi thing, etc. but it’s not called Kool Aid… Eye. It’s RedEye. It’s like the Weather Channel, but without the Irritable Bowel Syndrome. (Regular viewers of the show will understand what I’m doing there)
Rachel asked me to thank you for being the first person to accuse her of being “fast” with “snitty” comments.
Why do I care so much? Because this is one of my favorite shows (gave it a chance and it grew on me after a few episodes), and I can see Rachel singlehandedly sinking the ship in time.
RightWinged on April 15, 2007 at 2:51 AM
Poor Rachel Marsden? ARE YOU KIDDING? She hates men and I’ll tell you why. Its good.
First of all she was arrested and found guilty and served probation for harassing an old boy friend who did not want anything to do with her. Rachel is a TOTAL crazy nut and idiot.
It cost the Duke players probably close to a million or more to defend themselves, and where do they go to get their good name back?
Here is the start of the sentencing document from THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA, 2004/10/12 (Criminal Division):
Michael Morgan v. Rachel Marsden
“The accused, Rachel Marsden, and the complainant, Michael Morgan, met in 2001. Morgan was a talk show host at Vancouver radio station CFUN and Marsden had previously auditioned for shows on CFUN. Marsden is 29 years old while Morgan is 54.”
25 years difference? Some one has daddy issues. She sent harassing emails and all kind of weird stuff to spark the relation up.
aug 2001, met
may 2002 “culminated the relation physically”
july 2002 Morgan was minimizing his contact with Marsden
oct 2003 Marsden starting harassment
jan 2003 arrested, detectives sized Marsden’s computer
She was arrested, sentenced to probation and evaluated for “counseling”. The judge wrote: “Does the public need to be protected from Ms. Marsden?”
Clearly SHE hates the young, rich, educated Duke men. SHE HAS MEN ISSUES. Figures with Fox news, they already have convicted felons on regularly, what’s another stalker.
gmcjetpilot on April 15, 2007 at 2:57 AM
It’s all true and worse. Read the Salon article (READ ALL FOUR PAGES), which includes her BS “side of the story.” The woman is disgusting, disgraceful, a liar, a stalker (she pled guilty to this), and a false rape accuser. Like I said, Rachel Marsden is the Canadian, White Crystal Gail Mangum (the Duke false rape accuser).
Frankly, I think it’s incredible that certain people were all up in arms over what Ann Coulter uttering the other f-word allegedly means for conservatives, but don’t give a damn that a false rape accuser, stalker, and all-around liar is employed by FOX News representin’ as a “conservative.”
And, by the way, aside from being WAY smarter and an actual, real conservative, Ann has thus not been accused of stalking three men, nor has she pled guilty to it for one of the men, nor has she falsely accused a man of rape and ruined his life before he was ultimately vindicated. Rachel reminds me more of Glenn Close in “Fatal Attraction.” And her history bears it out.
Watch for Hollywood to make the movie about the “conservative” FOX News commentator, who in her other life is a serial stalker. That will be a thriller I won’t be entitled to complain about in my movie reviews.
Debbie Schlussel on April 15, 2007 at 2:58 AM
Thanks for clearing this up. I guess I just assumed he was conservative because, um, conservatives on this site were raving about him for weeks before I caught my first episode of this show. My bad.
Thanks for the insight. Which again makes me wonder, exactly why is this show being promoted so constantly on this blog? Is Allah Pundit tight with these guys or something? And I didn’t just assume it was conservative because it was on FNC, but I had heard Gutfeld in a couple interviews (about policy and such) and the posts on this site gave me that impression as well. But obviously I was wrong…which again I ask, why do you guys love this show so much? Sex sells I guess (is that 60% of the show?).
And yeah, obviously this Rachel Marsden has been exposed. She has lost any and all respect I had for her. The times I’ve watched I didn’t think she was funny, nor very effective at articulating conservatism, but I gave her a pass. But now with all this coming out, she does not deserve that forum and she will do more harm than good. Get a real conservative on there, and a funny one.
Patriot33 on April 15, 2007 at 4:00 AM
I completely agree with you on that. I had no idea that this woman had this history. One of her employers said that her history is of no consequence to the present, but something like three instances of false rape allegations and a guilty plea of stalking is something I find relevant. Even if (big hypothetical “if”, btw) those three instances of “rape” and “stalking” could be explained away as love gone bad, the allegations against the Patricia O’Hagan were downright creepy.
The Left can say what it wants about Ann, but they can’t accuse her of this kind of thing. As far as Marsden is concerned, this isn’t a case of “any publicity is good publicity.” I’d think that this would be a liability for Fox. I’m no lawyer, but… *shudder*
Again, Debbie, thanks for that article. Completely floored me.
violet on April 15, 2007 at 4:00 AM
Just as an aside, I love Levy’s segments on the show. I like a little libertarianism thrown into the mix. ‘Tis the voice of sanity.
And Gutfeld… He’s freakin’ awesome.
violet on April 15, 2007 at 4:05 AM
I don’t know if it’s amusing or informative or worthwile at all, but it is slightly karmic for a woman with a history of creepy stalking and abuse of men to be verbally harangued by a couple of guys.
Though I think she’s never going to catch up on her karmic balance at this rate, the way she keeps up the stupid act and the claims to be something she isn’t act.
Though the whole “conservative” thing reminds me of “New York Republicans,” i.e. Democrats with a basic grasp of economics.
Merovign on April 15, 2007 at 4:20 AM
Yes, because having to agree with someone 100% of the time is the mark of an intelligent person, right? AP and Bryan are both probably more “conservative” than I am, yet out of all the sites out there that don’t feature naked chicks or the NY Mets (or preferably both), Hot Air is one of my favorites.
Speaking only for myself, for the 800th time, I’m a self-described wackjob libertarian, and I’ve never in my life claimed to be a conservative. So fucking what? Gutfeld DOES describe himself as a conservative – does this mean we shouldn’t be on the same show? Do you seriously only watch shows, or read books, magazines, or blogs, that only reinforce everything you already believe? If so, I feel sorry for you.
You’re goddamn right I’ll give Bush a shot when I think he’s screwed up – I believe I have that right as an American, and more specifically when it comes to certain issues, as a veteran. His prosecution of the Iraq war – which I support – is in my mind quite frankly indefensible, as is his administration’s incompetence when it comes to the treatment of veterans.
Doesn’t mean I hate him, or suffer from BDS, cuz neither is true. But I don’t think sticking your head in the sand makes you a patriot.
Oh, by the way, I’ll give you $100,000 if you can name one time I “defended” Al Sharpton, or even said a single thing about him that wasn’t totally negative.
Oh, Rightwinged, I have never claimed to be a librarian, though I do arrange my books alphabetically by author on my shelves. But I think that’s only because I’m down with OCD…
Levy on April 15, 2007 at 4:52 AM
I remember Levy bringing up Sharpton’s anti-Semitism in his half time report. This show is not conservative, per say, but anti-pc and fun. Give it a rest with all the nit-picking. This is not an immigration post, for Pete’s sake.
Stormy70 on April 15, 2007 at 9:14 AM
Not to be confused with the spelling police
Wade on April 15, 2007 at 10:09 AM
Or the HTTP police.
Sorry, just washed my hands and can not do anything with them.
Wade on April 15, 2007 at 10:12 AM
Well, um, you can like somebody even if you don’t agree 100% with their politics. I can, anyway.
It’s all part of some shadowy conspiracy, probably.
I apologize for hurting your feelings.
Jim Treacher on April 15, 2007 at 11:13 AM
Rachel adds nothing to the show, and I’m pretty sure she’s going to say something that gets the show cancelled some day. In the NYT article about Red Eye, she’s portrayed as the odd “man” out who keeps to herself. Maybe she should keep to herself on a different TV show. Just sayin’.
Of course, if I’m believing the way the NYT protrays something, maybe I should just shut up.
Enrique on April 15, 2007 at 12:20 PM
Agree. I’m very conservative, so there are certain aspects of the show that offend my “delicate sensibilities,” but I get to laugh for an hour (sometimes even at myself) and it keeps me from running for the “Head On” after an hour of Geraldo.
Connie on April 15, 2007 at 12:35 PM
Or in Beatles terms for AP, Rachel is the Pete Best to Gutfeld/Levy/Schulz’s Paul/John/George.
I’m not worried about Rachel doing any damage to conservatism as movement or anything that extreme. Bottom line is that RedEye is the only show I consistently watch on cable (on any of the 8,071,446 channels available) and like many, I recognized its greatness from Day One. Every show gets tweaked as the show progresses and RedEye–a show that’s only a few months old–is no different.
Eventually they’ll find a Ringo and world domination will follow. I wonder who that Ringo would be? Amy Hayes? Emma Caulfield? Or an unknown?
Yeah, Amechi was a good guest. So was Musto and… Hey, I just realized this makes Treacher their Brian Epstein.
Oh, you were kidding? Okay. Never mind about the Brian Epstein thing. You can be George Martin.
ScottMcC on April 15, 2007 at 1:24 PM
Andrew Levy posts here on Hot Air? He’s good. I said I didn’t really care for the show all that much for various reasons, but I do enjoy Levy. Whether he’s a conservative, libertarian, or liberal makes little difference to me. His deadpan delivery and wacky insights leaves me wishing he ran the show (or had his own show). Another positive was the Janice Dean tongue thing (which involved Levy, actually). And Gutfeld’s mother. Unfortunately, you have to sit through a lot of nonsense to get to Levy and Gutfeld’s Mom.
jaleach on April 15, 2007 at 1:31 PM
Very simply, she doesn’t have any money. It won’t do the Duke guys any good to show any anger concerning Crystal Gail Mangum publically because they want to keep victim status for themselves. Let me add this is a smart legal strategy and I in no way condemn them for this. It was Nifong’s responsibility to protect them from a false accusation and that will be the narrative going into the civil phase of this fiasco.
Bill C on April 15, 2007 at 1:52 PM
I knew it!
Seriously though, I’m probably one of the most far right people around here, but also one of the biggest fans of the show… folks need to give it a chance and understand that they’re not watching Hannity’s America.
By the way Levy, why did Greg start taping a lot of the pre-commercial break teases? We used to hear the lunatic and the perv and whoever is on third base laughing at his teases, but now it’s very clear that most, as well as the opening voice-over are taped, or the others’ mics are cut.
RightWinged on April 15, 2007 at 2:10 PM
Settle down. I didn’t know, and that’s why I asked the question. I didn’t think I ever said one has to be lock step 100% conservative or else (you see this lack of independent thinking more on the left, not the right), and as a conservative there are numerous things I disagree with the administration. But generally when Bush is criticized from the right, it’s on specific policy and not whether or not he reads the newspaper (which btw I think he does, and he is the news anyway so why read your critics). Look, I hadn’t seen the show enough to know exactly what was up. It’s not really my cup of tea, but I can see why people would like it. Good luck with the show.
Patriot33 on April 15, 2007 at 2:16 PM
That’s the problem. Watch it in the evening after a couple of beers/glasses of wine/shots and it will be a different experience. The show is too cacophonous to be enjoyed while your senses are still waking up.
Some notes on Redeye.
-Rachel has set herself up as a foil due to her lack of comedic timing and her prickliness when her opinions are scrutinized. I enjoy the dynamic and she definitely will stay on the show until she is decides to leave. Who wants to watch a show in which everyone is always agreeing?
-Her past probably will prevent her from advancing much beyond her current position. Men naturally avoid crazy women like snakes avoid Rickki-tiki-tavi. Frankly, she has to decide whether staying on the show is good or bad for her career. Increasing she is the butt of the joke and I get the feeling that this is not something anyone planned. IOW, I don’t see them walking off the set and laughing it off while sharing drinks. If they are then they really have us fooled. Good for them.
-The show has really improved and the only complaints I have is not enough Levy, Greg shouldn’t talk over his mother, and one guest on set and two in studio is too much.
Keep up the good work and let Rachel be Rachel.
Bill C on April 15, 2007 at 2:55 PM
A compliment for me in the Hot Air comments section? I’m stunned.
Thanks, though, dude. Much appreciated. I’ll take Alba’s cell number.
Allahpundit on April 15, 2007 at 3:02 PM
The thing I can stand least about Rachel Marsden is that she often stretches to turn any subject out there into a conservatives vs. liberals distinction. Did that quite a few times with the Anna Nicole Smith stories that kept popping up, even though I’m sure liberals are as tired fo the whole affair at this point as we are. Levy’s sarcastically given her kudos several times for the way she’s managed to contort herself to use a story as an instructive illustration of liberal absurdity.
Mark V. on April 15, 2007 at 3:07 PM
WTF RACHEL?!?!?!
Defector01 on April 15, 2007 at 3:11 PM
Yeah, that’s enough of that… You suck AP. I’m going to write Michelle to get you fired! (or whatever it is the AP haters do)
Oh man! That reminds me, and I hope Levy comes back to this thread to answer this for me… What the hell was Mrs. Gutfeld talking about last night? She kept going off topic and talking about some new game she’s inventing or something.. sounded like she may have had a few cocktails in her before you guys called her last night. It was hilarious as always, but I am genuinely curious what she was talking about.. it almost sounded like a plug. Of course it was much less annoying than how every time Dick Morris is on H&C or O’Reilly they have to spend the first 10 seconds saying “check out dickmorris.com to read his columns free”, etc. He obviously has something in his contract and it’s pretty f-ing obnoxious. Anyway, to quote Greg’s mom “Say hi to all your little friends”.
RightWinged on April 15, 2007 at 3:12 PM
Awww! Can’t I be Billy Preston?
Everybody’s talking about some Janice Dean tongue thing…? I really need to start watching the show.
Jim Treacher on April 15, 2007 at 3:20 PM
Yeah, I wanted to know what the game was too. Greg cut her off. No fair!
Connie on April 15, 2007 at 3:27 PM
I think Mrs. G had tipped a few before Gut dialed her up.
Allahpundit on April 15, 2007 at 3:28 PM
Levy, what a pleasure to see you in the hizzouse. Brother, you do oblique deadpan like you invented it. Hifreakinglarious stuff. Kudos.
So, um…do you have that Janice Dean clip by chance?
Pablo on April 15, 2007 at 3:46 PM
This isn’t the one you’re looking for, but not bad… I find a handful of other Fox News Foxes to be substantially hotter, but Dean, when free flowin’, seems the most….. accessible
http://youtube.com/watch?v=8XcEgfm8eNM
RightWinged on April 15, 2007 at 3:53 PM
Here ya go.
Jim Treacher on April 15, 2007 at 3:57 PM
I have no idea whether she thinks she’s coming off as erudite or not, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I beheld attitude, not intellect. I also detected an underlying unpleasantness. I had never seen this woman before, nor did I know anything about her so I had no preconceived concepts whatsoever about her. Then, I read Laura’s post up there, which appeared after my post. So, I find that my instincts were right. As far as political commentary/satire goes on that show: Plenty of people try to copy what they think Ann Coulter is doing, but fall flat, for they don’t realize how much background is behind each carefully chosen “throw away” comment she makes. Likewise, Rush Limbaugh’s use of something like “feminazi” is not a simple name-calling, but a complex political comment bundled into one compound word. Some people have a talent for this, most don’t. You can guess who I think don’t got it.
If you like the show, good for you. You don’t have to defend your choice. If we all did the same things, the world would shut down. I am at the point in my life that I want more meat in a debate, not just trading quips, so RedEye in it’s current manifestation doesn’t appeal to me at all. Unfortunately, most of TV these days is some variation of that same, empty format, so I don’t watch TV.
So, guess I have nothing more to say, ever ever on this subject. (Until AP puts up some other perplexing clip).
naliaka on April 15, 2007 at 4:30 PM
I think you missed my point nalaika. I can’t stand Marsden, and she gets more obnoxious by the day, I was responding to your specific comment here..
By saying that you’re the first person to accuse Marsden of being fast with snitty comments. Her comments may be snitty, sometimes, but fast she is not… which you’ll notice many of us are complaining about. Aside from her checkered past, inability to take a joke and roll with the punches, she is NOT fast at all, and it’s a drag on the show. That’s all I was saying, it was just another jab at her when I said she asked me to thank you for calling her fast, nothing else.
RightWinged on April 15, 2007 at 4:39 PM
Well, see I did have something else to say, which is: this is probably EXACTLY what’s going to happen.
naliaka on April 15, 2007 at 4:39 PM
RightWinged on April 15, 2007 at 4:39 PM
Sorry, I reread and see your gist. :) Still, gave me an excuse to whack her again. ;P
naliaka on April 15, 2007 at 4:41 PM
I can’t really explain what Mrs. G was talking about cuz I’m not sure myself. I think it had something to do with the “DC Madam,” but I could be wrong. I do know it wasn’t a plug for anything.
RightWinged – Greg started taping the teases and “cold open” a couple weeks ago, I think, as part of our surely-doomed-to-fail efforts to be more professional. (Much like how I now use the teleprompter during my “tomorrow’s stories” segment.) He and Bill generally write them, since I’m usually far too busy carefully crafting my ad libs.
Patriot – I’m down-settled. Sorry if I was pissy – it was your statement that I’d defended the likes of Al Sharpton that kinda set me off. Though I WOULD find him extremely amusing if he didn’t bizarrely have the power he does…
Levy on April 15, 2007 at 4:42 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »