Video: Cavuto pranks Laura Ingraham
posted at 5:44 pm on September 18, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
The Today Show did this to her too but less overtly as a goof than out of what seems to have been simple thoughtlessness.
Hot Air loves itself some Ingraham but this is the stop on the conservative express where the big A gets off.
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 »
I love Cavuto. He has a great sense of humor.
katieanne on September 18, 2007 at 5:48 PM
No…no of course not…Got to love that Neil……
doriangrey on September 18, 2007 at 5:49 PM
“No! No, no.”
HAHAHA!
infidel4life on September 18, 2007 at 5:50 PM
Neil is so busted
William Amos on September 18, 2007 at 5:51 PM
I say — a hot butt is a virtue.
Christoph on September 18, 2007 at 5:52 PM
lol. what Katieanne said.
Spirit of 1776 on September 18, 2007 at 5:54 PM
Care to rephrase that? (eg)
- The Cat
P.S. Or was this calculated?
MirCat on September 18, 2007 at 5:55 PM
Neil has had to deal with some real challenges in life. You have to respect him for that.
Laura may be chasing a problem that is in a technical transition. Pressuring advertisers is the old paradigm. Smart filtering is the new paradigm. With 100+ cable channels and millions of web videos, people are in the process of customizing their own “network”. In her interview with Michelle, I’ve heard her allude to staying as tech savvy as your kids–a real challenge and a good idea.
dedalus on September 18, 2007 at 5:55 PM
Ha, that is great. Neil is funny, I love it.
conservnut on September 18, 2007 at 5:56 PM
Ha ! ! Gotcha
Texyank on September 18, 2007 at 5:56 PM
This is where libertarians diverge from conservatives. In fact, they were never on the same bus to begin with. They were on parallel buses. They may be in lock step on topics like islam and Billary Clinton, but issues like these show that those once parallel buses have different destinations.
jihadwatcher on September 18, 2007 at 5:56 PM
I can’t wait to hear Laura’s RANT about this tomorrow morning on her show.
It’s going to be a zinger. Hu Rraaahhh.
Better start ducking Neil.
Sgt Khe Sahn
1GooDDaDDy on September 18, 2007 at 5:58 PM
?
abinitioadinfinitum on September 18, 2007 at 6:00 PM
Cavuto is the cat’s pajamas.
mikeyboss on September 18, 2007 at 6:02 PM
Brutal. And Neil better hope he’s wearing the right color at the next cocktail party Laura shows up at. What does Cabernet match in his wardrobe, I wonder…?
Jaibones on September 18, 2007 at 6:02 PM
I was watching Neil the other day talking about Brit and Madonna. My kids were watching with me, and he had pics of them kissing up. My kids (14yo son and 11 yo daughter) were shocked, and I had to change the channel. I’m no prude, but am sick and tired of coming across pics like this while watching TV. Especially with my kids.
StephC on September 18, 2007 at 6:05 PM
Oh my God. Your 14-year old son saw Paris Hilton scantily clad? He must be heartbroken.
Christoph on September 18, 2007 at 6:07 PM
That’s pretty funny, assuming they are good friends; it felt like an inside joke.
Wouldn’t make it a habit tho….
Randy
williars on September 18, 2007 at 6:07 PM
Oh, right, sorry, Brit and Madonna kissing. What’s wrong with that? ‘Cause they’re bisexual?
Do you have any idea what percentage of people your children will associate with in the future who are either bisexual or experiment with it?
Especially the females?
I don’t know. I just don’t really care if two people kiss each other.
Christoph on September 18, 2007 at 6:08 PM
Sorry MirCat, I didn’t see your comment, you are to bright and to fast. LOL
abinitioadinfinitum on September 18, 2007 at 6:08 PM
Do something analogous on TV to a leftist commentator and see what happens.
Here’s a hint, mild chuckling and “get over it” won’t be part of the equation.
Merovign on September 18, 2007 at 6:09 PM
Yea, yea, I knew someone was going to be sarcastic.
StephC on September 18, 2007 at 6:10 PM
Amen Brother.
liberrocky on September 18, 2007 at 6:10 PM
The thing is Laura is far sexier than Paris Hilton. And she doesnt have to undress to be that way
William Amos on September 18, 2007 at 6:13 PM
Well, my kids think it’s gross for one thing. And yes, because it shows bisexuality. And I could care less how many people my kids will associate in the future with that will be gay or bi.
StephC on September 18, 2007 at 6:13 PM
You and what Army? Oh…
baldilocks on September 18, 2007 at 6:14 PM
Heh, good job Cavuto.
Bad Candy on September 18, 2007 at 6:14 PM
Honestly, that’s what I like about Cavuto, he doesn’t seem to take things too seriously.
Bad Candy on September 18, 2007 at 6:19 PM
Our culture is going into the gutter and some people just like it that way.
Rose on September 18, 2007 at 6:19 PM
I’m with Laura. Just to clarify. And as the mother of four kids I certainly sympathize with Steph.
Rose on September 18, 2007 at 6:21 PM
you’re right, of course. Ingrahm makes that point in the link to the ‘today’ show video–that the “look away if you don’t like it” defense doesn’t hold water.
Those who want to lose themselves in smut can’t stand anyone suggesting that there be a standard for what we allow in public as a society.
TexasDan on September 18, 2007 at 6:22 PM
Thank you Rose. I know my kids will come across this stuff, but that doesn’t mean I have to like it or approve of it in my own home.
StephC on September 18, 2007 at 6:24 PM
Have a daughter. Then come find me in the dining car.
see-dubya on September 18, 2007 at 6:24 PM
I think you spelled “butt” wrong Allah
BobH on September 18, 2007 at 6:25 PM
The unfortunate thing is that by the time we grown ups see it on TV, it’s old news to the kids.
abinitioadinfinitum on September 18, 2007 at 6:27 PM
The irony–and I hope other men here will back me up on this–is that Laura is so much more attractive than Paris Hilton that in comparison, words fail me.
radjah shelduck on September 18, 2007 at 6:28 PM
Good point.
see-dubya on September 18, 2007 at 6:31 PM
Agreed. The same can be said about “The Boss”.
On-my-soap-box on September 18, 2007 at 6:32 PM
StephC,
You can dissapprove of it, but, as a parent, might it not be better to address a topic like this at home with teenagers rather than allow them to encounter it on their own without your thoughts?
My kids are very young but I find myself spending countless hours with my oldest son helping him to interpret the things that he sees and letting him know that not all of it is right. I’m guessing my values differ from yours in some areas, but I’m glad when I have the time to morally instruct my son as he engages the outside world.
dedalus on September 18, 2007 at 6:35 PM
Let me guess. You were born after 1975 and you have no children of your own.
IrishEi on September 18, 2007 at 6:40 PM
The girls that my sons have liked have been strong Christian girls. They don’t care for the worldly ones. Not even interested. If the kids are raised with strong Christian values and see those values in the home there is a good chance that they will become a part of them. My daughter is too young to date but she is well aware that there are boys you really don’t want to have any thing to do with.
Rose on September 18, 2007 at 6:43 PM
I just don’t want to every have to sit through another commercial for meds for men’s limp penises.
dm60462 on September 18, 2007 at 6:46 PM
Dittos, the kids don’t need to be sensitized to this stuff. Women are not objects.
Valiant on September 18, 2007 at 6:50 PM
[radjah shelduck on September 18, 2007 at 6:28 PM]
Blow-up dolls are more attractive than Paris.Not speaking from experience but blow-up
I’ve heard scuttlebutt that
I presume that … oh, … never mind.
I agree.
Dusty on September 18, 2007 at 6:53 PM
I have a suggestion: Put the preview and submit buttons further apart! :)
Dusty on September 18, 2007 at 6:55 PM
Believe me, I am very open and honest about what my kids see on TV. I am no prude, and we have many, many discussions about these things. I just hate having it thrown in our faces.
StephC on September 18, 2007 at 6:55 PM
Some conservatives need to get a life really. This is no big deal. I didn’t grow up in ths country, and it is stuff like this that makes me, just throw up my hands.
There is nothing wrong with showing hot chicks on TV, even Herpes-infested ones like Paris.
Chudi on September 18, 2007 at 6:57 PM
I’m single forever, bro. Bring on the Paris commercials.
Allahpundit on September 18, 2007 at 6:58 PM
Life’s reality is that this stuff is taking our culture down. If that’s where people want to live, fine, but not everyone wants to be there. That’s what Laura is fighting against. The destruction of our culture.
Rose on September 18, 2007 at 7:00 PM
I take great offense to the endless “Stupid Man” commercials, why doesn’t anyone whine about how they falsely portray all menu as complete morons in every aspect of life?
The most offensive ad I ever watched was for some women’s anti-perspirant that showed a small in stature, helpless man unable to change the tire on his car until a taller-than-the-man woman showed up to do it for him. The whole thing was anti-male on so many levels. Disgusting.
FYI I also think the Paris commercial is disgusting, she isn’t all that attractive and insists on showing how stupid she is by repeatedly opening her mouth at every opportunity (no sexual-innuendo implied).
Neo on September 18, 2007 at 7:00 PM
Hah! Famous last words. They’ll come back to haunt you someday!
IrishEi on September 18, 2007 at 7:03 PM
@dedalus: Steph didn’t say she hasn’t addressed the topic. She simply objects to being subjected to salacious displays on a news segment. I’m a father of two young girls, and even when they get to an age at which I’ve prepared them to deal with this stuff, that doesn’t mean they (or I) will object less to having it slathered on a news segment. It’s corrosive.
Splashman on September 18, 2007 at 7:04 PM
Neil’s in luck. I hear some Blackwater guys are looking for work. It won’t help, but it will make him feel better…until Laura strikes.
ticticboom on September 18, 2007 at 7:10 PM
How in the WORLD did Cavuto manage to keep a straight face during that interview???
C’mon Laura, I love you, but enough with suggesting Hugo Chavez needs “Virtue”. You play all those cheezy songs during your show so I know you cant be THAT stuffy…..
Always Right on September 18, 2007 at 7:10 PM
too funny!
Zorro on September 18, 2007 at 7:11 PM
By choice?
ticticboom on September 18, 2007 at 7:12 PM
It’s really not the Paris commercials or the other (much better) Hardee’s/Carl’s Jr commercial with the girl on the mechanical bull I object to.
What I do object to is a relentless desire to push the “envelope” for the sake of pushing the envelope.
The envelope is there for a reason. And it is already quite pushed and stretched out of shape, thank you. Presumably Hollywood/Mad Ave wanted this freedom for a reason, so do something useful with it.
see-dubya on September 18, 2007 at 7:13 PM
Well, sort of. These things are never fully chosen or not chosen.
Allahpundit on September 18, 2007 at 7:13 PM
hahaha, thanks for the laugh AP. Cavuto is awesome! He’s one dude I’d like to hang with to pick up chicks!
ThackerAgency on September 18, 2007 at 7:13 PM
AP, I feel sorry for you, man. (No, I’m not being snarky.)
And some teenagers need to grow up and be thankful that some portion of the population is trying to hold the line.
Ah, the arrogance and narcissism of childhood.
Splashman on September 18, 2007 at 7:14 PM
The Carl’s Jr. burger in the commercial is meatier and more satisfying than Paris Hilton could ever be. Paris might appeal to me if she padded her bra with burgers. (Carl’s Jr. should have used her for their new “flat buns” campaign.)
Laura Ingraham seems to have some recurring issues about looks and vanity. She is very aware of her own figure and appearance - a condition some feminists might attribute to mysoginy and gender bias. But she also criticizes many people about their physical appearances.
So on the one hand, we should be up in arms about overtly sexual female objectification. But, we should not be offended by physical objectification as long as it is tied to political jousting. Non-sexual objectification is accetable? Dear, that’s called a double standard.
The solution:
When Laura Ingraham goes too far afield, I just stop listening and focus on how hot she is. Problem solved.
The Race Card on September 18, 2007 at 7:14 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pa-dGYjSq5k
William Amos on September 18, 2007 at 7:17 PM
“Please don’t taze me bro”
Sgt. Khe Sahn
1GooDDaDDy on September 18, 2007 at 7:18 PM
Gets off or gets OFF?
Hmmmmm?
drjohn on September 18, 2007 at 7:28 PM
I agree with you guys on this one, it pisses me off that I can’t even watch the news without censoring it when my little ones are around!
4shoes on September 18, 2007 at 7:33 PM
With picture in picture, this clips just looks like a director’s model for how to hear something stimulating and enjoy a fine view simultaneously.
A Jamaican sunset.
A blonde washing a car, and having a nibble.
Andromeda, revolving.
And a cultural debate.
When Cavotuo is on Laura I.’s show, she can have Chippendale guys gyrating in Neil’s split screen.
Goose; gander.
(And don’t forget the Transgandered.)
profitsbeard on September 18, 2007 at 7:33 PM
Splashman,
I can see that from Steph’s last post, and I applaud Steph the discussions she mentions.
I was posting in part as a response to the Britney/Madonna event. You and I would probably agree that one shouldn’t have been too surprised by a Britney/Madonna kiss in 2003, given that two years earlier Britney was dancing in her underwear with a snake to open the show. Ironically, the shock (and higher ratings) this year for the VMA dinosaur was Britney looking very unsexy as her career disappeared. It might make sense to block MTV in one’s cable box, but if you sit down for an evening with MTV it is a different experience than High School Musical.
As for Paris Hilton on Neil Cavuto, do you think a lot of kids watch business news?
dedalus on September 18, 2007 at 7:36 PM
What was wrong w/my post that got it deleted? I simply mentioned your lack of posting about the Dream Act amnesty vote coming up this week? Are you really that hyper-sensitive?
fiona on September 18, 2007 at 7:49 PM
@dedalus: No, I don’t. Steph’s kids apparently were tuning in just enough to notice, however.
You’re certainly entitled to your opinion. Here’s mine: Even if I didn’t have kids and didn’t care about the effect on other people our our culture at large, I still wouldn’t want to watch Paris Hilton or any other skank-for-hire on Cavuto’s show. And yes, I realize I’m in the minority here.
It’s Cavuto’s choice to include the skanks or not. It’s my choice whether to watch his show or not. Who knows — maybe his audience will be larger with skanks. But it won’t include me.
Splashman on September 18, 2007 at 7:58 PM
er, make that “…on our culture at large.”
Splashman on September 18, 2007 at 8:00 PM
Gack. I mean, “…or our culture at large.” Okay, who hit me with the stupid stick?
Splashman on September 18, 2007 at 8:01 PM
Coulda been worse… coulda been B-roll of Bob Torricelli.
Karl on September 18, 2007 at 8:01 PM
HA i love it
ernesto on September 18, 2007 at 8:08 PM
Republicans don’t realize they are not being concervative at all but actually acting like socialists when they think thier opinion should be used to mold or regulate the culture.
Resolute on September 18, 2007 at 8:09 PM
As Neil was looking down chuckling he was also looking for the teleflorists’ phone number, which he called on the next break.
Personally I would rather have the short term scolding from Laura than giving her time to really get pi$$ed.
Speakup on September 18, 2007 at 8:09 PM
NEXT UP: Ingraham (the enforcer) exacts revenge. Cavuto is forced to wear a speedo and wash Laura’s car while Laura hoses him down with a fire hose.
My collie adds:
CyberCipher on September 18, 2007 at 8:12 PM
Now we know it’s just a matter of time.
Dead man walk’n.
Speakup on September 18, 2007 at 8:12 PM
Resolute, you can say that about anyone who is trying to regulate the culture, on either side. Hollywood is acting like socialists when they say that they should be able to do whatever they want no matter what.
Rose on September 18, 2007 at 8:20 PM
I wonder if Laura found it as amusing as Neil did?
csdeven on September 18, 2007 at 8:23 PM
Splashman,
I respect your opion and see your point. The challenge for parents is becoming more complex. When I grew up there were 3 broadcast networks that were under FCC regulation. In today’s world almost everybody with a video camera and an Internet connection is a broadcaster. It makes it impossible to rely on the government or on petitioning advertisers.
Every URL sent to a computer or mobile device can potentially lead a child into some sort of unknown experience. Parents need to stay savvy and give kids the ability to exercise judgment.
dedalus on September 18, 2007 at 8:27 PM
No, I’m hypersensitive about you hijacking a thread for something that’s off-topic. If you have a criticism, e-mail us. It doesn’t belong in the comments.
Allahpundit on September 18, 2007 at 8:27 PM
Splashman, thanks for your understanding of where I am coming from!
I had just turned on the news, and since FOX is the only one I watch, that obviously would be the one I turn to. My kids were in the living room with me, and Neil was on w/ Brit and Madonna. My kids’ reaction to it?? Eww, Gross!!!
I just told them that some people now feel that it’s cool to pretend to be a lesbian (IMHO.)
StephC on September 18, 2007 at 9:18 PM
I think Steyn has a chapter about you in America Alone, AP.
Jaibones on September 18, 2007 at 9:19 PM
Yeah. Well, what can I tell you. When they pass a law forcing me to marry someone I don’t want and reproduce, I’ll do my duty.
Allahpundit on September 18, 2007 at 9:22 PM
While I got a chuckle out of Cavuto’s joke on Laura, he just proved her point. What does it say about our culture when it is “OK” to air that celebrated nitwit strutting her stuff on a Finance-oriented program during a prime time slot on a news network? Laura is right on this one.
Dave Shay on September 18, 2007 at 9:29 PM
Laura in her 40’s is sexier than Paris Hilton is now or ever will be.
Mike Honcho on September 18, 2007 at 9:33 PM
I’m with Allah on this.
(I think we’re on the same page at any rate.)
I agree with conservatives on a lot of issues, and I think Ingraham has a lot of good points to make on issues like Iraq and immigration.
But this Mrs. Lovejoy “Won’t someone please think of the children!!!” style attack on pop culture & the media to “clean up” the airwaves is just entirely silly to me. To me, this sort of thing is really the conservative equivalent of nanny-stating. It’s not as insidious as the type of stuff the left pulls with nanny-stating, but IMO, it’s somewhat of the same cloth. I shouldn’t have my entertainment options limited just for the sake of someone else’s children. I don’t mind seeing an attractive woman - gasp, even suggestively clothed - on TV. I don’t mind a little violence in my movies or TV programming. Dirty language? It’s how real people actually talk, you know.
We live in the internet age, where hardcore pornography is literally never more than two, maybe three mouse clicks away. Trust me, your kids have already seen things that might make you blush..
Vyce on September 18, 2007 at 9:36 PM
Attempting to mold the culture is a thousand gallaxies away from regulating it. Conservatives aren’t trying to ban this stuff just attempting to effect what William Wilberforce called “a change of manners”. If you object to moral guidelines then ignore them, no one’s forcing your hand.
aengus on September 18, 2007 at 9:51 PM
Me neither. But the reason this isn’t the conservative equivalent of nanny-stating is because it isn’t being enforced by the (nanny) state. Maybe you just object to nannys in general.
aengus on September 18, 2007 at 9:55 PM
Aengus,
Didn’t Wilberforce begin the Society for Suppression of Vice, which fined and imprisoned people for such things as distributing the writings of Thomas Paine?
dedalus on September 18, 2007 at 10:12 PM
I agree with Laura as usual, but not for totally the same reason. I am in my mid 30’s and have no kids. In fact I get tired of everything being about kids all of the time. You know, the fact is, sometimes I would like to watch intelligent tv programming without junk being shoved in my face. Now you can say turn the channel, but then what the heck do I watch. The learning channel? Yah, you can never learn enough about tatoos and chopper building. Oh, maybe I can watch the dicovery channel. Redneck truckers is high education you know. The only channel left with intelligent programming is the History channel and sometimes that’s questionable. You can’t turn the channel because there’s nothing on.
gator70 on September 18, 2007 at 10:13 PM
I agree, though some of this is self-correcting. In the past 6-months Paris, Britney, and Lindsay have done a lot to make being a boozed-up-floozy-who-can’t-find-her-panties seem a lot less glamorous than it used to.
dedalus on September 18, 2007 at 10:16 PM
Could happen.
Speakup on September 18, 2007 at 11:12 PM
Actually, they are more likely to outlaw marriage altogether in the interest of fairness since all people aren’t allowed to marry.
Rose on September 18, 2007 at 11:34 PM
Oh, please. “Mold” is a synonym for “influence.” You arguing with me is an attempt to mold my opinion and, by extension, the culture. Nobody’s talking about “regulating,” so stop whining and argue, if you have anything worth arguing.
Splashman on September 18, 2007 at 11:40 PM
I hear the same “turn the channel” argument in online games whenever someone starts spewing profanity over one of the public chat channels. Of course, “turn the channel” is just shorthand for “you prude, just shut up and just disengage from this discussion so I can continue debasing something you value.”
“Turn the channel” might’ve been a valid argument 20 years ago when most of the questionable material on TV was isolated to Mtv and a few pay movie channels after 10PM.
And remember when the “Joe Camel” billboard board ads were such a big controversy? Now I can’t even drive to the airport without passing a billboard advertising one of Kansas City’s fine strip clubs.
I’d write more, but I need to head back to my inbox and delete a few more c1al1s emails.
Dave Shay on September 18, 2007 at 11:55 PM
Rather than do away with marriage, the country will probably eventually expand it to gay couples. It will probably take another 20 years to sort through and in the interim the states will sort out for themselves if when and how they want to address same-sex domestic partnerships.
There seems to be a high correlation between age group and opinion on this issue.
dedalus on September 18, 2007 at 11:55 PM
Awwwww killjoy.
Don’t you want to see Allah get a life, even if a law has to be passed to force the issue?
Speakup on September 19, 2007 at 12:11 AM
How effective is your spam filter? Mine have varied but tend to get about 99% of the junk. My bigger point is that with more choices we have to become more effective at filtering, not just email but TV and Internet too. There is a lot of vulgar junk out there, but so far I have a better experience with my young sons watching TV than my parents did with me. By that I mean there are channels like Sprout, Toon Disney, and Noggin that I can watch for extended periods without seeing an erectile dysfunction ad. The advertisers do cram Christmas gift expectations into my sons, but my parents had to deal with that as well.
dedalus on September 19, 2007 at 12:30 AM
Comment pages: [1] 2 »