Video: The Coulter-Lauer fight this morning
posted at 10:55 am on January 7, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Ann Coulter returned to the Today show to talk about her new book, but only after Matt Lauer insisted on trying to blame Coulter for the controversy arising from Today’s cancellation of Coulter earlier in the week. She got her slot on this morning’s show after Drudge red-sirened a report from sources at NBC that Coulter had been banned for life, which NBC eventually denied and had to prove false by bringing Coulter back as soon as possible. Coulter rips NBC and Lauer for blaming her for the controversy:
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
It actually never lets up, and it actually gets even more delicious when Lauer challenges Coulter on the lessons of the election. Lauer asks Coulter if she didn’t get the sense that people want to focus on the issues rather than what divides us — as if the issues and the potential solutions aren’t what divide us. Coulter rips the media in return, noting that Obama rarely got challenged on issues, instead getting softball questions on his feelings while “Sarah Palin had to memorize the last seven kings of Swaziland”. Obama certainly never had to explain the Bush Doctrine on national television.
Coulter’s new book, Guilty: Liberal “Victims” and Their Assault on America, is now out in bookstores and on Amazon. I just got a copy yesterday, and I’ll be perusing it — and maybe we’ll see if Ann Coulter would like to talk more about the book than NBC’s vacillation on featuring her on a TEMS show soon.
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: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »
I don’t like others instructing me on what I may, or may not, call them. I use my own judgement as to what I consider to be decent and acceptable.
With respect to blacks, I have lived through most of the “forced” changes in label and grew quite disgusted with the whole enterprise. It became clear to me that blacks didn’t really care what they were called (as evidenced by the labels they – in large percentages – have used for others in very public settings) but were only interested in playing little control games, trying to see how they could force white people to change their language on a moment’s notice. At some point, about 15 or 20 years ago, I just got sick of the whole situation. Personally, I’m a “sticks and stones” person who thinks that anyone who concentrates on names and labels is weak.
Now, the case with “Oriental” is totally different. Here, I don’t even know why that label went out of style, and can’t remember exactly when it happened, but the replacement has been nothing short of incorrect and often forces highly inaccurate statements, out of the political correctness.
Of course, if someone forces me to use some specific label in normal discussions with them, when I think that my language is acceptable then I just stop speaking with that person. For blacks, I have always used the term “black”, but you know that that is looked at as unacceptable by many – when it suits their purposes – and at that point I just give up and move on.
Respect has two sides. One cannot force someone to go through 5 incarnations of “the appropriate” label and then complain about someone using a wrong label. I’m not speaking to you, on this point, but with the general “one”.
However, with the United Negro College Fund and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People being the largest and most well-known black organizations, I think it’s extremely unfair to use these terms publicly and then require others to not use them. Like I said, I don’t use those labels, but I don’t fault anyone who does. They’re just words, after all.
progressoverpeace on January 7, 2009 at 4:36 PM
“over the line”?
Did Lauer ever suggest that Whoopi Goldberg went over the when she wondered whether she had to worry about the return of slavery were McCain elected?
People want a different attitude- now?
Bite me, Lauer.
drjohn on January 7, 2009 at 4:36 PM
Cindy-You’re missing the point. I’m not the only Black person who thinks the terms offensive and when people on the right throw it around it makes us look bad. I’m not saying you offended me and shouldn’t use the term, I’m saying Black folk are pointing to your use of the term aftert the Chip dust up and saying “See, they are racists” so how can we then dump on Coulter?
Look. Do I think you guys are racists? I didn’t (until this conversation). But we looked at best completely tone deaf when the song dust up happened. At worse for years to come this incident will be used to “prove” Conservatives are bigots. With that in mind what is it that Coulter has done worse than has gone on here that we need to claim she’s making us look bad?
Rob Taylor on January 7, 2009 at 4:37 PM
Progressoverpeace-I do in fact care what I’m called and it isn’t a “control game.” Why can’t I expect you to respect my wishes? because you “refuse to be instructed” on what you’ll say?
Is that better than what Coulter says in her books? More mature? More conducive to debate? Of course not. And that’s my point.
Rob Taylor on January 7, 2009 at 4:40 PM
“Sarah Palin had to memorize the last seven kings of Swaziland.”
I may not be a Coulter fan, but that’s a great line.
Gina on January 7, 2009 at 4:42 PM
If all those terms disappeared tomorrow we would still be called racists and homophobes, nothing is going to change that. I will not be cowered into thinking about every word I might use. You, yourself, have said that since this thread you didn’t think we were racists but you are the one who has been instructing on the current correct term. Who the heck uses the term Negro anymore. Maybe I missed a thread that brought all this up while I was out of town but race is seldom discussed here. I am sorry that your feelings were hurt but life happens.
Cindy Munford on January 7, 2009 at 4:46 PM
Cindy-My feelings aren’t hurt. I’m just pointing out the hypocrisy of people who make the right look bad (not you as an individual) saying someone much milder is making the right look bad.
Rob Taylor on January 7, 2009 at 4:50 PM
The United Negro College Fund, ever heard of it?
omnipotent on January 7, 2009 at 4:54 PM
Well, you first have to make a distinction between your personal linguistic desires and those of larger swaths of society. In the large, it is nothing but a control game, and a petty one. There is no question in my mind about that, at all.
In any event, I generally use the label “black”, so we are luckily in sync on this, Rob. And I do refuse to be instructed on my language. You should, too. Like I said before, we used to be “Sticks and Stones” people (I still am), but we have come to a point where children are taught that names hurt them more than sticks and stones. That is a weak position that leads to nothing good.
progressoverpeace on January 7, 2009 at 4:54 PM
LOL! Rhetorical obviously. Thanks for the laugh though.
Cindy Munford on January 7, 2009 at 4:57 PM
+100
CAll me anything but late for dinner.
Cindy Munford on January 7, 2009 at 5:00 PM
But we know what you really mean…
The Race Card on January 7, 2009 at 5:00 PM
My bad. (hangs head in shame)
omnipotent on January 7, 2009 at 5:01 PM
To be honest, someone like Coulter–an abrasive, bomb-throwing, rabble-rouser is often needed. All too often, the “Conservative voice” comes across as apologetic, defensive, and deferential. You need someone who’s going to say “I’m going to finish my sentence.”
In many ways, she’s a lot like Samuel Adams. I wouldn’t want her running a government, but she sure can stir things and people up–and sometimes that’s what you need–and that’s what conservatives need now.
Matt Helm on January 7, 2009 at 5:03 PM
Heh. I haven’t heard that in years. It used to be one of my grandfather’s favorite lines.
progressoverpeace on January 7, 2009 at 5:07 PM
I can’t get this video to work. Go to Huff poo and Daily kos, see how the Black Republicans are treated… My husband is a BR and he is vilified…
reshas1 on January 7, 2009 at 5:07 PM
It was funny, don’t hang your head. Let’s face it although Allah talks about nuance all the time, a lot of times it’s hard to convey in text. I am just not as talented as Allah and Ed at doing it.
Cindy Munford on January 7, 2009 at 5:08 PM
Right on!
We’ve got enough Newts (Bill Kristols, etc.), we need more firebrands like Ann to stir the pot of truth, once in a while.
omnipotent on January 7, 2009 at 5:10 PM
What Lauer, and all other liberals, mean when they say that is “if you’ll just do what we want, we’ll quit whining”.
clearbluesky on January 7, 2009 at 5:11 PM
Exactly, a valued tool in the box.
Cindy Munford on January 7, 2009 at 5:12 PM
It’s not what you’re called, it’s what you answer to.
Jim Treacher on January 7, 2009 at 5:12 PM
I am clueless, what would I be looking for if I went into enemy territory? I still think computers are magic so I don’t alway get it.
Cindy Munford on January 7, 2009 at 5:15 PM
I may have missed it so I’ll just have to ask…
Which offends you more. The song parody of the LA Times using the term, ‘Magic Negro”, or the LA Times for using it?
DannoJyd on January 7, 2009 at 5:15 PM
Me too. I bought “High Crimes and Misdemeanors” and thought it informative if not overly dry. Then years later I was in the Borders bookstore in Westwood and picked up started flipping through her newly released second book, “Slander.” In that quiet bookstore I started crying laughing. I couldn’t help it. It’s truly a pleasure to read something that is “laugh out loud” funny. Someone asked me, “what are you reading?” I couldn’t speak. I just showed her the cover. And this lady in uber-liberal Los Angeles said, “I’ve got to check that one out.”
That’s the power of Ann.
ramrocks on January 7, 2009 at 5:18 PM
In other words it’s not a control game. It’s a demand for obedience.
Once a racist was someone who believed that people of other races are inferior. Now a racist is a Republican and/or someone who doesn’t do or say what someone of certain select groups instruct them to. It’s creeping thought control.
snaggletoothie on January 7, 2009 at 5:18 PM
Her books are filled with lines like that. That’s why they’re great reads. I recommend her. Even if you don’t like the way she sounds on television, you’ll find her writing funny. If you found that line funny, you’ll enjoy the book. Trust me.
ramrocks on January 7, 2009 at 5:20 PM
I don’t think conservatives come off as too apologetic, rather just too disjointed on what the conservative message is. The rift between evangelicals and the rest leaves us sounding confused and inconsistent.
The Race Card on January 7, 2009 at 5:21 PM
Ann Coulter is never disjointed in what her conservative message is.
thomasaur on January 7, 2009 at 5:23 PM
That’s a fair point. The problem is, that unlike the Left, the most important element of American conservatism is the principle of the rational individual and our rights being based on that principle instead of rights being based on the collective identity which is the core of modern liberalism. Because of this, American conservatism does often come across as disjointed as compared to the unified message put out by the liberal machine.
But, by the same token, all too often, the conservative “spokespeople” put up on the tube–with notable exceptions such as Coulter and our own MM (Michelle Malkin, of course, not to be confused with Marilyn Monroe :) ) do all too often come across as defensive or apologetic. We need to come out with confidence and say, “This is who we are and this is what we stand for.”
Matt Helm on January 7, 2009 at 5:25 PM
Cindy, I go to check out the enemy.. It is amazing, they are living in dream land.
reshas1 on January 7, 2009 at 5:29 PM
Any comment that laments the fact that we are divided on the issues is the most vacuous crap anybody can spew. It ain’t the issues that divide us, it’s the solutions that divide us. We all want the deficits reduced, less terrorism, less crime, and so on. To some the answers are more taxes, negotiate with terrorists, more gun control, or just plain more control. We will never be unified. The Japanese united us in 1941, and if Muslim terrorists failed to unite us in 2001, we never will be unified.
Pelayo on January 7, 2009 at 5:40 PM
Ann Coulter is not your typical conservative. She is confident and sure of her message. She’s also sure of herself. That comes of as cocky and it’s a bit much for wussies like Matt Lauer, but I think she’s a net plus for conservative ideology.
Incidentally, she is really good on radio. Al Rantel (KABC) would interview her weekly on his show. She gives good air.
The Race Card on January 7, 2009 at 5:44 PM
DannoJyd-I’m offended at the song, the article is making a point about Whites liberals. But like I said I don’t care about the song, just a bunch of people pretending Ann Coulter is worse than them when they go to extraordinary lengths to irritate Black folk.
That’s what all this Negro stuff is, a bunch of people who want to be passive aggressive with Black folk because they feel put upon by hearing the words blacks or African American. It’s not even the term itself, it’s the smirking desire of the users to use a term they know will bother somebody. It’s like someone calling a woman a broad. In a Bogie movie not so exciting, when someone ays it to some woman, kinda douchey.
Rob Taylor on January 7, 2009 at 5:46 PM
Well stated. The other thing libs have going for them is the overwhelming sense that righteousness is on their side. Our culture confirms this for them in every way.
Being liberal is better than being white.
The Race Card on January 7, 2009 at 5:46 PM
Conservative is the new black! Too bad more blacks aren’t new conservatives.
The Race Card on January 7, 2009 at 5:51 PM
Well white and liberal must be like a lottery win. I agree with Race Card, Matt makes a great point.
Cindy Munford on January 7, 2009 at 5:51 PM
Or the more colloquial “homebitch.”
The Race Card on January 7, 2009 at 5:53 PM
Sweet, now I can let my Brutha-in-law know he is doubly blessed. : )
thomasaur on January 7, 2009 at 5:56 PM
Sic’em…. I LOVE it!
CynicalOptimist on January 7, 2009 at 6:06 PM
The only thing offensive about the song is the coonish voice rendition of Al Sharpton. The LA Times article was not offensive in referencing the “magic negro” archetype. Rather their offense was the furtherance of the idea that Barack is somehow less-than-authentic as a black man because he’s not a rapper, athlete or a reverend.
The other thing offensive was the author quasi-justifying his commentary by pointing out his mixed race. People can comment and opine about race without being a member of the race about which they speak.
The Race Card on January 7, 2009 at 6:07 PM
Bravo Ann. My head would explode if I had that conversation with putz Lauer. He’s such an arrogant man.
Mojave Mark on January 7, 2009 at 6:24 PM
COULTER IS AWESOME!
SHE GOT LAUER TO ADMIT HE’S A LIB!
(HE SAID NEAR THE END, “ACCORDING TO YOU, I’M WRONG ABOUT JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING!”)
reliapundit on January 7, 2009 at 6:28 PM
Brian Maloney posted about this at Radio Equalizer.
You should read the mental rantings of one Jared…
And then there’s this…
YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!
More proof that liberalism IS HAS BEEN AND ALWAYS WILL BE FOR FOREVER AND A DAY A MENTAL DISORDER!
BobAnthony on January 7, 2009 at 6:28 PM
Maybe, the reason that we are not united is because of 50 plus years of liberal control of our public schools.
Johan Klaus on January 7, 2009 at 6:30 PM
Let me tell you about Lauer, he went to Greenwich High School here in the People’s Republic of CT-Stan. SO I GUESS THAT’S SUPPOSED TO MAKE HIM BIG MAN ON CAMPUS! I WENT TO GHS, GRADUATED IN 1992, AND WHERE AM I?! WORKING FOR AN AU PAIR AGENCY STUFFING ENVELOPES, FILING, DATA ENTRY!
And for Lauer to fall to a woman like Ann, PROVES HE’S A GIRLIE MAN! Then again I agree with a lot of what Ann says and does. Anyone who doesn’t HATES AMERICA! YOU HATE AMERICA? WELL I HATE YOU!
BobAnthony on January 7, 2009 at 6:34 PM
I like that better
thomasaur on January 7, 2009 at 6:36 PM
Johan Klaus
BINGO !
I see so many of the younger people here posting lefty swill because they haven’t had a chance to out grow their ‘education.’
snaggletoothie on January 7, 2009 at 6:37 PM
Maybe you should call Vince McMahon for a job….
AprilOrit on January 7, 2009 at 6:43 PM
Well, for starters..she’s blonde, skinny and successful!!
She’s also on TV….and stuff….
BigWyo on January 7, 2009 at 7:03 PM
Hmmm, I answered that question already.
AprilOrit on January 7, 2009 at 7:11 PM
Just wondering…
Why is G. Gordon Liddy or J. Edgar Hoover proper, but
B. Hussein Obama is improper.
whyme on January 7, 2009 at 7:15 PM
I stand corrected.
Johan Klaus on January 7, 2009 at 7:16 PM
And we have a winner.
Johan Klaus on January 7, 2009 at 7:19 PM
Doesn’t everyone love a girl-fight! It is a shame Lauer doesnt’ look as good in a dress as Ann.
Laura in Maryland on January 7, 2009 at 7:20 PM
i think the M. Tool Lauer, sharted his pants a little. way to go Coulter, buying your book right now.
custer on January 7, 2009 at 7:21 PM
+10
Totally agree with you.
ramrocks on January 7, 2009 at 7:23 PM
progressoverpeace on January 7, 2009 at 4:54 PM
+100
CAll me anything but late for dinner.
Cindy Munford on January 7, 2009 at 5:00 PM
Agree with you Cindy; best comment of this tread.
Ann Coulter does not have an ounce of “political correctness” in her soul; thank God! Lauer is pure radical Liberal throughout his soul. NBC sucks, and Lauer sucks even worse. Political correctness has made pussies out of way to many Americans. Rock on Ann Coulter; I’ll enjoy reading your book very soon.
Keemo on January 7, 2009 at 7:27 PM
Problem is, they’re programmed to respond by rote. Critical analysis, critical thought, individuality, and logical argumentation are very dangerous to the Leftist world view. Remember, you’re really dealing with a group that comes closest to the Puritans or to the Crusaders in ideological zeal and commitment and also in how they perceive the world. If you oppose them, you’re automatically evil and must be silenced for the good of the all. You can also see this in the Leftist assertions based on Authority as seen in the marginalization of anyone questioning the dogma of global warming or questioning the agenda of The One. This is essentially a return to the medieval outlook of the Scholastics in the 14th century.
Modern liberalism is the obscurantist movement of the 21st century and it, along with fundamentalist Islam, has the potential of leading us into a new and much longer Dark Ages.
Matt Helm on January 7, 2009 at 7:28 PM
Yeah, I know. I just answered it truthfully..
BigWyo on January 7, 2009 at 7:32 PM
what a wretched woman. she needs to get a boyfriend or if she has one get some strange so she won’t be so uptight and get rid of some of that hostility!
Noneya on January 7, 2009 at 7:37 PM
Noneya on January 7, 2009 at 7:37 PM
Nothing different than any post you make here. Look in the mirror wretched woman.
Keemo on January 7, 2009 at 7:44 PM
who said I’m a woman?
Noneya on January 7, 2009 at 7:46 PM
I was being kind…
Keemo on January 7, 2009 at 7:47 PM
I’m fascinated by the idea that we constantly have to be constrained by ‘other’s wishes’ yet they do not have to be constrained by ours.
In other words, how come no one is tolerant of my intolerance since we should all be tolerant of each other?
TinMan13 on January 7, 2009 at 7:48 PM
Ann is always a clean up batter. She hits it out of the park every time.
SouthernGent on January 7, 2009 at 7:51 PM
then save your niceties….
Noneya on January 7, 2009 at 7:52 PM
No, no, no. You are being unfair to the Scholastic movement, which paved the way for the Renaissance.
ramrocks on January 7, 2009 at 7:54 PM
Why do you find it necessary to hide your gender? You’re very open about your sexual orientation.
ramrocks on January 7, 2009 at 7:56 PM
Well, they do have surgical procedures that can help you out with that you know.
BigWyo on January 7, 2009 at 7:57 PM
You’re right–and in the early period of the movement they were very creative and really did make an important contribution, but by the 14th century, they’d become ossified and a hindrance to intellectual thought and development–very much like modern liberalism is now.
Matt Helm on January 7, 2009 at 7:58 PM
How true. The ultimate excuse – as in,”I may be a middle-aged white man but at least I’m liberal.”
Rod on January 7, 2009 at 8:01 PM
That’s rich, have you read any of your posts?
Cindy Munford on January 7, 2009 at 8:08 PM
I practically never watch major network TV anymore, so frequently when I see a clip like this one, it’s the first time I’ve ever seen one of the major newscasters for an extended period of time. I’ve never watched Matt Lauer for more than a few seconds before. My God, the man is completely unlikeable, disingenuous, snotty, infantile, and malicious. Do they actually pay him to dismiss his guests out of hand?
Ms. Coulter handled him pretty well, I’d say. However, I was really waiting to hear her answer Lauer’s question concerning whether she insisted on “B. Hussein Obama” because it pleased the extremists in her own party with “No, Matt, I do it because it irritates you so reliably.”
philwynk on January 7, 2009 at 8:10 PM
Hmmm, I answered that question already.
AprilOrit on January 7, 2009 at 7:11 PM
Yeah, I know. I just answered it truthfully..
BigWyo on January 7, 2009 at 7:32 PM
Well OK – if that makes you feel important.
Wyoming is a long way from Park Avenue, you might want to chip away some of your brazen assumptions….
AprilOrit on January 7, 2009 at 8:11 PM
then save your niceties….
Noneya on January 7, 2009 at 7:52 PM
Come here to play, sometimes ya get a little roughed-up. Just once, I’d like to see you actually have something of value to add to the conservation. Typical Liberal, throw as much hatred as you can at the screen, hoping to spread some of your misery with as many people as possible.
And all we give you back is some good ol’ fashioned right wing love… :)
Keemo on January 7, 2009 at 8:12 PM
I have to add this: I’ve been reading Coulter’s books since about 2002, and one thing I have never heard, in any venue, is a liberal attempt to rebut some point she’s made. Lauer came closest by unbelievably suggesting that mainstream media sources have done plenty to support the nuclear family, but, of course, he has no factual information with which to back up a lie of that magnitude. Mostly, they just do what Lauer did — read some factual statement and then ask, “How can you say something so outrageous?”
I know, I know, liberals don’t process facts, but I have to wonder why it never occurs to any of them that if her statements are so very outrageous, they should be easy to refute.
philwynk on January 7, 2009 at 8:13 PM
After ragging on her myself, I have to say that she did write something the other day that was pretty good. Darn I wish I could remember where it was. That’s what I like about good old HotAir, you can lay somebody out on one subject and join hands on another. Anyway, I’ll try to find it, she was spot on.
Cindy Munford on January 7, 2009 at 8:17 PM
Do you have the slightest idea how many times I’ve heard lefties say vicious things like this?
For that matter, do you have the slightest idea on how many people liberals resort to vicious insults as their first recourse? From where I sit — and I’ve been engaging liberals in public discourse for about 25 years — it’s one of the most predictable characteristics about the left, that they will begin by insulting.
Don’t you realize that you’d gain a lot more ground if you could actually demonstrate that some significant point she made was wrong? Why not give it a try sometime, instead of displaying your true inner self by snarling and spitting?
philwynk on January 7, 2009 at 8:18 PM
Umm…Wow..Did you get an ‘A’ on your geography test last week or am I missing something here??
BigWyo on January 7, 2009 at 8:19 PM
During the Olympics last summer we here in the USA were cheering the “TEAM USA” and the coverage was great until the MSM stated calling some of the wonderful athletes afro american athletes (not American athletes) and they’ll look you in the face and de nigh that they did. It’s going to be a wonderful four years.
mixplix on January 7, 2009 at 8:23 PM
Matt Lauer…turd….walked into a frickin buzzsaw.
wildweasel on January 7, 2009 at 8:25 PM
While I was home for Christmas the person in charge of the remote stumbled onto a television program I am completely ignorant of. I believe it is call Gossip Girls? In the total of two minutes that I saw, I am not sure there could be enough documentaries about the nuclear family to undo the message sent. There was so much sexual romping around by supposed high school students that I forgot to laugh at the boy was wearing a blazer and an ASCOT. He pretty much convinced me that it wasn’t a look the average fourteen year old could pull off.
Cindy Munford on January 7, 2009 at 8:26 PM
I am a New Yorker – this town revolves around looks 24/7 unfortunately. If we aren’t already good looking we pay to play – to the plastic surgeon.
You’ve never seen me or anyone here for that matter.
You shouldn’t assume so much on an anon board.
AprilOrit on January 7, 2009 at 8:26 PM
(Sorry, I was busy working today.)
Umm…is a “phobe” someone who is “phobic” or fears someone or something? I certainly don’t fear Ann Coulter; indeed, I find her writing to be witty, well sourced and informative. You should read her work on McCarthy.
As for my insult of Lauer, you will note the paragraph break between thoughts, as my praise for Coulter and my insult of the fairy Lauer were separate thoughts. I find him to be offensively arrogant, but cartoonishly effeminate. He is a bald celebrity gossip columnist, with neither the intellect nor the wit to compete with Coulter on level ground.
I did not bother to address any of his actual comments, as most of them came while his interviewee was talking. Admittedly, she does talk at length.
Jaibones on January 7, 2009 at 8:34 PM
Ah…a feminist, eh?
Jaibones on January 7, 2009 at 8:35 PM
Hey, folks – let’s stick to the most important fact: Ann is HOT! And of course, Michele is an absolute knockout in her own right. Sorry if that sounds sexist – I can’t help it – I admire their minds, too!
OneVision on January 7, 2009 at 8:40 PM
Got to love the left…they’re their own worst enema…
Matt Helm on January 7, 2009 at 8:44 PM
I really wish Ann ( and Rush ) would acknowledge what a disaster President George W. Bush was. There is absolutely no upside to defending him. Republicans should have been calling for his resignation two years ago at the latest.
Yes, it’s true that we haven’t been massively attacked since 9/11, and it’s true that the reason we haven’t been attacked is because they fear Bush’s response ( they could attack, if they wanted to ), but they feel the same way towards Putin and we don’t need a President Putin.
Buddahpundit on January 7, 2009 at 8:52 PM
The worse that Rush will say is that W is not a movement conservative, not interested in promoting conservatism. I think it is hard to to criticize a sitting president of your own party. Especially when that president has been nothing but nice to you and acknowledged your power by using your show to get word to the people. Whenever W needed to get something tough through to the people he would call the show or have Mr. Cheney call. The last call was for the bail out and I felt Rush was very very uncomfortable. Walked the tight rope of disapproval and deference to the office of the Vice President. It was painful to hear.
Cindy Munford on January 7, 2009 at 9:15 PM
Hmpf. Brown shoes with a black suit.
Can’t liberals get anything right!?!?!
IrishEi on January 7, 2009 at 9:25 PM
Go be fat somewhere else….
BigWyo on January 7, 2009 at 10:03 PM
Hmm…not sure if that’s TMI…or NotEnuffI.
soundingboard on January 7, 2009 at 10:23 PM
The sickening incident in Fort Lauderdale today seemed to me to be a good example of the point Ann makes in her book about this faux victimhood constantly played by the left. Also exemplifies what previous commenters have been saying about the left’s control of our public educational system and its influence on these young idiots.
surrounded on January 7, 2009 at 10:36 PM
You better!
Or she’ll rip your lungs out.
soundingboard on January 7, 2009 at 10:53 PM
That is exactly right, and Rush knows that Bush diminishes, and I’d say purposely subverts, the fabric of American exceptionalism. That is why it irks me when those two, Ann and Limbaugh, defend Bush. I think it’s just painful for them to admit because liberals have attacked Bush with so many strawmen that you get into the habit of defending Bush on everything.
Buddahpundit on January 7, 2009 at 10:57 PM
Best part of the interview is when Laur proves her book title. Guilty!
at about 7:55, He says to Anne ” according to you I’m always wrong about most things”
Wow! what a dope!
katy on January 7, 2009 at 11:46 PM
Badum…tisssshhhhhh. I’ll be here all week!
Jaibones on January 8, 2009 at 12:02 AM
Lauer actually proves Ann’s points just by attempting to argue with her. Amazing!
And…did he call me paranoid?
long_cat on January 8, 2009 at 12:47 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »