"So I'll continue doing my job without fear or favor."
Said Megyn Kelly, on her show last night, taking the least time possible to kick Donald Trump to the side. Watch the clip, because her good humor and style shine.
For some reason — and for the first time — she reminded me of Katharine Hepburn. Maybe it's a new pattern of contouring makeup, but I think it's more likely the psychological boost.
August 11, 2015
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
86 comments:
It's an act.
It does appear to be a good job with the makeup. You can hardly tell that she is bleeding from anywhere.
Of course, they only show her from the waist up.
For obvious reasons.
Hepburn wouldn't have spiked the football like this.
This hagiography for Murdoch's minions is a little too much. They were already well compensated for their hit job.
Good comparison. Kelly is the new Hepburn.
But what does that make Tromp?
Here's the brains we're dealing with at Fox.
Can anybody tell them apart. They're generic brainless.
Literally, generic. They identify a genre. "As you can see, I'm telling you news."
The law of genre is that a genre announces itself as a genre using something outside the genre.
Look, I like Mygyn Kylly, but I didn't think this question was ever really about Trump. It was about showing how gutsy Mygyn could look while questioning him, in hopes of creating some news. I would give her some slack if she questioned whether he has the temperament for president given his frequent bombastic insults directed at "people," as opposed to just "women." Mygyn asking about "women's issues" is cliche, opportunistic, boring, and therefore not good journalism.
Sharc, that's a flaccid argument.
In these debates, we cannot expect journalism or intelligence on policy issues.
We can and should look for insight into candidates' philosophies and character.
Kelly poked Trump, and he squealed a pig. Good job, Kelly.
*like a pig
What's interesting about Kelly is that she is usually pretty good on the issues, but every once in awhile . . .
Trump shouldn't apologize. It does no good anyway and he also referred to Wallace with blood coming out. It wasn't a period reference.
"In these debates, we cannot expect journalism"
You set the bar too low. I expected journalism from Mygyn, and she left me flaccid.
A former gf said that dogs always knew when she was having her period. Don't yell at them, I suggested.
The fact that Trump couldn't adequately address and handle Kelly's question about his past comments towards women shows he is not cut out for President. Look at how Romney was criticized for his "binders full of women", which had no intentionally negative connotations. Now imagine a debate against Hillary with Trump's comments brought up.
@rhhardin, well, yes I think I'll have a go at your challenge. It seems to me that Harris Faulkner looks a bit different from Megan Kelly, and either Jackie Guttfield is a year or two older than Kelly or she needs a better makeup person. The notion that these women are brainless tells me more about you than it does about them.
@Althouse, did you not have enough coffee this morning? Megan Kelly looks nothing like Katherine Hepburn. Or even Audrey. Hepburn was fond of playing feisty, independent middle-aged women and Kelly is a feisty, (apparently) independent 45 year old woman, so perhaps you are confused by the roles Hepburn liked to play.
@Sharc, Megan Kelly was perfectly reasonable in asking the question she did of Trump. If he is the nominee his past comments about women will be an obvious line of attack for the Dumbocrats. His inability to handle that question suggests that either he was poorly prepped for the debate or that he didn't take the debate very seriously. If the latter then he's not much of a candidate (and his vehement efforts to shift the blame to Kelly suggests that this is the case). But if it was the former, then his inability to translate his business acumen and wealth into a strong campaign organization is troubling, to say the least. We can't tell much from the Roger Stone firing, since sacking staff is an obvious gambit either way.
I'm very troubled by yesterday's Althouse post suggesting that she fell hook line and sinker for the notion that when Trump said "blood coming out of her ... wherever" he was speaking of Kelly's vagina. You used to be more thoughtful, ma'am, and I rather miss your "cruel neutrality." Or what passes for neutrality among the faculty of the University of Wisconsin.
For some reason — and for the first time — she reminded me of Katharine Hepburn.
Gonna need taller boots.
I too miss the cruel neutrality.
"So I'll continue doing my job without fear or favor."-pure BS. Wait an see when her ratings drop how this "fearless" women reacts.
"I am women hear me roar" is tiring and as the accumulated data shows is on average a failure - Candice who.
'Watch the clip, because her good humor and style shines." - full Sontag. As Bloom states, the closing of the American mind.
A moderator is not a journalist. And should not be a journalist to boot.
This whole episode demonstrates what low esteem we have for journalists or "quasi-journalists"
still, if she associates "seeing somebody on her knees" exclusively with giving head, that is very telling about her career. Haha*
* I would 'lol', but I've read today in WashPost, that only old people 'lol'
Bob Ellison: "We can and should look for insight into candidates' philosophies and character."
OK, and exactly what new have we found out about Trump thanks to this exchange?
Blogger Bob Ellison said...
Sharc, that's a flaccid argument.
In these debates, we cannot expect journalism or intelligence on policy issues.
We can and should look for insight into candidates' philosophies and character.
Kelly poked Trump, and he squealed a pig. Good job, Kelly.
It sounds to me like she inserted herself into the debate. If so, then she failed as a moderator. People tuned in to hear the candidates, not to see the moderators poke them. A good moderator should only ask questions impartially and see that each candidate gets equal exposure.
Blogger Unknown said...
A moderator is not a journalist. And should not be a journalist to boot.
Agreed, but then who should replace them? Academics? Historians?
I pretty much stopped watching Fox News a few years ago. The only program I felt was worth watching was Kelly.
After the "debate" I have no interest in watching her show anymore. I'm not a Trump fan, nor am I mad at Kelly for her performance at the debate.
I just have a sour taste in my mouth after the debate, and am tuning out. From what I'm seeing, many feel the same way.
Roger Ailes knows his star is going to take a ratings hit, that's why he tried to make peace with Trump yesterday.
Whatever-
Sick of the entire clown show.
Long after we've forgotten who Donald Trump is, we will still be listening to, and trusting, Megyn Kelly.
The smart money said that Trump was going to lose his battle with Murdoch. Ailes has apologized, Trump was back on the FOX this morning and his lead in the polls has increased. Murdoch, who has had his own problems with his public pronouncements, lost this round to Trump.
Any GOP nominee who can't take questioning from a Fox anchor is going to be savaged in the general election.
What's all this about Trump being a fighter? This fighter seems to whine and complain a lot. This is your fighter?
still, if she associates "seeing somebody on her knees" exclusively with giving head, that is very telling about her career.
It's giving head with ISIS too.
"OK, and exactly what new have we found out about Trump thanks to this exchange?"
Nothing new. He responded as one would expect. But it may new for people who haven't listened to Trump before.
"Can anybody tell them apart. They're generic brainless."
Catherine Herridge and Lauren Green stand out amongst the generic.
will not apologize
It's worth reviewing what an apology is, sociologisst Erving Goffman :
A further illustration of the difference between ritual concerns and substantive ones comes from occasions of accident in which the carelessness of one individual is seen as causing injury or death to another. Here there may be no way at all to compensate the offended, and no punishment may be prescribed. All that the offend[er] can do is say he is sorry. And this expression itself may be relatively little open to gradation. The fact - at least in our society - is that a very limited set of ritual enactments are available for contrite offenders. Whether one runs over another's sentence, time, dog, or body, one is more or less reduced to saying some variant of ``I'm sorry.'' The variation in degree of anguish expressed by the apologizer seems a poor reflection of the variation in loss possible to the offended. In any case, while the original infraction may be quite substantive in its consequence, the remedial work, however vociferous, is in these cases still largely expressive. And there is a logic to this. After an offense has occurred, the job of the offender is to show that it was not a fair expression of his attitude, or, when it evidently was, to show that he has changed his attitude to the rule that was violated. In the latter case, his job is to show that whatever happened before, he now has a right relationship - a pious attitude - to the rule in question, and this is a matter of indicating a relationship, not compensating a loss
_Relations in Public_ ``Remedial Interchanges'' p.117-118
Are you confusing Katharine Hepburn with Rosie Russell?
And the Megyn Kelly Show is a TV show, not a newshour.
Igv is correct. Catherine Herridge and Lauren Green are actual reporters, and both do a superb job. They do not inject themselves into their reporting. Among the other women on Fox, who mainly are relied on for commentary, there are certainly many lawyers, or law degrees, whether presently active as such or not.
Bloody Kell.
tds says: OK, and exactly what new have we found out about Trump thanks to this exchange?
Remember, not everyone in the US is as up to date on politics/people running as most of the folks here. This is potentially new information for some folks and maybe some people learned something new. I thought education was a good thing.
She got clobbered and had to walk back a little but still defiant. Alas, peasants don't have your intellect and are not as smart as you are, (hmm, you voted for Obama). They have their pitchforks and torches and they are for Trump.
Kelly is a good actress which is one reason her show is quite good.
But to think that the first real question in the first debate among ten Republican candidates, each of whom will only get to speak for a few minutes, should be about Rosie O'Donnell, no. Kelly made a fool of herself, and revealed herself to be part of the Feminist side of Republican, Inc. and first and foremost, a TV star. It was an unserious and ... as, the Donald would say ... stupid question.
The role chosen by Kelley is king of the paintball warriors sliming the target she is assigned to slime.
But she had better understand that some targets shoot back.Trump will shoot back straighter and with even more firepower that Murdoch and Rove can arrange for the Bush Campaign.
Until now I have admired Kelley's aggressive attacks on enemies of the people. But she clearly does not care for fairness at all. She only cares about winning against weak opponents.
An example is. The series of attacks on the Prosecutor in Baltimore. They have been over the top cheap shots obviously taken to enamour her to Fox News viewers, but with no care for the truth at all.
Trump is correct about Kelley being overrated. She cannot even slime a bombastic clown like Trump and get away with it.
I would say Megyn's [note her name is ME...GYN foreshadowing perhaps her feminist transformation? I kid a little] last question about God was the worst of the debate. It was sarcastic and phrased as if by a smart ass. That sealed it for me - I felt her questions, attitude and act that night were all about making a bigger name for herself. So I was off her bandwagon by the end of the debate and well before the pissing match erupted on Twitter.
"A former gf said that dogs always knew when she was having her period."
I can tell you who knows when a women is having her period. Bears know and follow them. There have been several bear attacks that were later explained as instances of the bear following a menstruating women.
I though Kelly acted like a giddy schoolgirl at the beginning of that "debate" and I turned it off to watch an interesting program on Discovery ID about a cop killing in El Segundo that was solved after 45 years,
ARM kind of sounds like she did.
"So I'll continue doing my job without fear or favor."
Said the overrated and silly Megyn Kelly.
@tradguy, go back and read my comment at 7:18. Are you laboring under the delusion that if Trump is the Republican nominee the Dumbocrats would abstain from attacking him based on his past comments about women? Althouse and other women might give Planned Parenthood a pass for a joke about buying Lamborghinis based on sales of baby parts, but no way she or any other woman is going to give Trump a pass based on telling a contestant on The Celebrity Apprentice it would be a ‘pretty picture’ to see her on her knees. Kelly was doing the Republicans a favor in exposing Trump's vulnerability and his inability to respond.
And BTW the comments about Baltimore's DA are perfectly within bounds. After that worthless SOB Gansler, it behooves Maryland's prosecutors to limit their grandstanding. Apparently Marilyn Mosby didn't get the memo. Or thinks the differences between her and Gansler with respect to race and gender give her immunity.
"Murdoch’s message to blunt Trump’s rise in the polls came loud and clear over his social media and publishing outlets, and the Fox News debate moderators tried to destroy his candidacy in a single night by unleashing an all-out character assassination to discredit him.
“This wasn’t a debate, at least not like most of those I’ve seen. This was an inquisition.”—Frank Bruni, journalist, New York Times
Throughout the night, Fox News moderators, Bret Baier, Chris Wallace, and Megyn Kelly, deluged Trump with cheap shots and sophomoric “gotcha” questions, while pitting the candidates and the audience against him.
It was an obvious planned hit to destroy Trump’s candidacy, a failed bread-and-circus show that left viewers with nothing substantive but a foul taste in their mouths. Cyberspace erupted with “disappointing, disgusting, embarrassing, appalling, shocking, and shameful.”"
http://canadafreepress.com/article/74409...
If only InTrade was still in business!
Look, I like Mygyn Kylly, but I didn't think this question was ever really about Trump. It was about showing how gutsy Mygyn could look while questioning him, in hopes of creating some news.
I like Megan Kelly too but agree with this 100%. And I didn't like her saying "I certainly will not apologize for doing good journalism." That's not for you to say, sport.
(besides which it's second-rate writing. "Doing journalism"? Really Megan?)
"Trump’s candidacy should also serve as a cautionary tale about just what happens when you try to brand even the smallest indiscretions as evidence that someone is of the Devil’s party. To illustrate this, ask yourself this question: what label can the Left (or the Right, for that matter) apply to Trump that hasn’t already been so devalued by overuse?
That he’s a racist? So is anyone who criticizes President Obama’s golf swing these days.
That he’s a sexist? So is anyone who defends due-process rights.
That he’s a phony? What politician isn’t?
That he’s a fascist? So were the last two presidents, depending on which books you read.
That he’s a crypto-Nazi? Yeah, because Lyndon Larouche hasn’t beaten that one to death at all.
See the problem? Even if all of these labels were true of Trump, they’ve all been used to cry “wolf” so many times that now no one thinks they mean anything anymore. Short of openly waving a Nazi flag, eating black babies, or sexually assaulting someone on live television, there’s little Trump could do to actually give these labels the power to scare people. So instead of dismissing him with labels, people actually have to engage with his arguments, such as they are, and even if he’s proven to be gloriously, hilariously wrong, the fact of having to engage with him still lends him some degree of legitimacy."
http://thefederalist.com/.../10/donald-trump-was-inevitable/
The moderators thought the debate was about them. They chewed up over 30 minutes of the debate with their embarrassing attempts to light fires.
The emphasis should have been on "what's wrong with America, and how would you fix it...."
Not gotcha questions, designed to create heat, not light.
Pathetic. Especially from Megyn. She seems to be turning into Nancy Grace right before our eyes.
Sad.
Big Mike...the voters will understand Trump's wit and humor easily. He can get them to listen to him easily because they sense that he is a loyal man. Why fear the NYT and the Nets in the age of the Internet communications? Drudge uber alles.
The Church Lady's Puritan shaming culture is a paper tiger today. Authenticity wins now. Trump has proven that in one month.
I think the worse thing is she was validating the war on women meme.
One of the weird things about watching MLS on TV is the camera work where from time to time you can see the blonde TV journalist chick (who kind of looks like Ms Kelly) just standing there on the sidelines, looking bored out of her mind, waiting around for her time to stand in front of the camera with her microphone.
Ah yes, it appears that Kelly is being thrown under the bus for the Trump loving misogynists.
Poor delicate flower Kelly. Of course, she did play "F**k, Marry, or Kill" with Howard Stern live on the air, as well as describing her husbands pet name for her boobs...
http://www.fitsnews.com/2015/08/09/megyn-kelly-one-classy-broad/
So, there's that...
The Trum'kinheads are crowing because 50,000 of them signed a petition out of an audience of 24 million. Landslide Donald!
"The fact that Trump couldn't adequately address and handle Kelly's question about his past comments towards women shows he is not cut out for President."
Also, the fact the Trump did adequately address and handle Kelly's... means he is the only serious candidate in the race on either side.
Hence the polls.
Remember, America isn't you or what you think it is. It is an Obama nation now, and Trump is the only person whining now in order to win instead of little bitch boy whining after it's all over that he didn't win.
"Let me eat my waffles guys" is effeminate whining, not subversively attacking the media as Trump's whining comments are doing.
Either way, I need more concern from y'all. Dance.
"But if it was the former, then his inability to translate his business acumen and wealth into a strong campaign organization is troubling, to say the least."
True, because a strongly organized campaign would be in 2nd or 3rd or 4th in the polls. Not winning, that's for sure. That's what weak whiners like Trump do with meak campaign organization.
"either he was poorly prepped for the debate or that he didn't take the debate very seriously"
Or he was a clown running a clown show.
"the voters will understand Trump's wit and humor easily. He can get them to listen to him easily because they sense that he is a loyal man."
A great example of Trumpian wit. Thanks.
Trump is indeed loyal, to his hair, his money, and his fame.
And to the Clintons, of course.
Katherine Hepburn famously destroyed Spencer Tracy's marriage. So she has that going for her, which is nice.
Hepburn was an actress, a celebrity. Kelly is a news reader, a celebrity.
Neither one should be the focus of any attention when discussions of politics are underway.
Had Kelly done for Trump, or Jeb, or Cruz, what Crowley did for Obama against Romney, would you still think she was Hepburnesque, or not?
“I would … note that an awful lot of Republicans, including other Republican candidates, have gone out of their way to smack Donald Trump with a stick. Now I think that’s just foolish,” he said.
Asked why, Cruz paused and then replied, “Donald Trump had a rally in Phoenix, Ariz. [to which] between 10 and 20 thousand people came out. When you attack and vilify the people at that rally as crazies, it does nothing to help Republicans win in 2016. I’d like every single person at that rally to show up and vote in 2016, knock on doors with energy and passion, and turn this country around. If Washington politicians show contempt and condescension to those [voters,] that is a path to losing at the ballot box.”
And when asked whether he wants those voters to eventually support him, he replied, “It is my hope to earn the support of the supporters for every other candidate in 2016.”
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/ted-cruz-foolish-for-gop-to-criticize-trump-121241.html#ixzz3iWFat8Kb
GEORGE All I want is someone as intelligent as you, but a little less tense and argumentative. A sort of Katharine Hepburn figure.
LUCY You don't deserve Katharine Hepburn.
GEORGE Audrey Hepburn.
LUCY Also too good. Just stay away from the Hepburns.
Two Week's Notice (2002) Sandra Bullock and Hugh Grant
A lot of people sure think they have all these folks figured out.
A lot of people are wrong.
Trumps candidacy centers around his personality just as Kelly's show centers around her personality. She has a stronger personality than he does. Maybe she should run for president, too.
I like Megan. She is smart and seems to think about things, or has the greatest staff in the world.
On the other hand, I think of her sleeveless dresses the way The Althouse thinks of men in shorts.
Regards -- Cliff
Megyn Kelly and Donald Trump are the best things that ever happened to each other.
24 million viewers -- 'Splain me who was the loser, again?
Unknown said...
A moderator is not a journalist. And should not be a journalist to boot.
Given their actual role, perhaps they should be called instigators rather than moderators.
Still no apparent push-back on Kelly's foundational use of "War on women". Either the Donald missed an opportunity to address that or he didn't take the bait.
Sidenote: Having finally watched it, some of the candidates had really shitty hair/makeup prep for this sort of thing.
Of course, Kelly had it troweled on perfectly...could use those lashes as windshield wipers.
Well if Megan Kelly is Katherine Hepburn, it's safe to say that The Donald is no Spencer Tracy.
I'm probably as conservative as any of you supposed "Reich Wingers" who comment on this blog. If you want to criticize Megan Kelly for posing a tough or even snarky question to The Donald, I have two words for you "Monica Crowley".
It's a tough world out there, and it's time for everybody to put their big boy (or big girl) pants on. If by some miracle Trump wins the Republican nomination, he's going to get hosed, indeed well and truly hosed, by 95% of the media folks in this country. Megan's mousy little nibble at The Donald's ankles will be nothing compared to the Great White Shark bites coming from the likes of the clowns at the New York Times. I frankly can't name an anchor at ABC. NBC, or CBS, but they'll be feeding on The Donald's political carcass like a pack of hyenas. Meantime Hillary will be getting a pass.
So toughen up boys and girls; it's a long way to November 2016
Skeptical Voter, I think you mean Candy Crowley.
"@Althouse, did you not have enough coffee this morning? Megan Kelly looks nothing like Katherine Hepburn."
The smile/mouth is similar. The eyes are different. (Hepburn's turn upward, Kelly's downward) It's not a stretch to say they look somewhat alike, especially with the newer Kelly makeup.
Skeptical, I tend to agree with you, but Trump isn't playing by their rules. Who knows how that translates with the general election voter, but it seems to make little difference to the primary voters.
Megyn Kelly is not Kate Hepburn. Hepburn was a raging socialist.
My favorite scene in the The Aviator is the realization that Howard Hughes, while rich, is not Connecticut Northeastern Liberal rich. He's a man, that despite his incredible flaws, who works for a living — with his "airplane guff."
"They’re selling postcards of the hanging
They’re painting the passports brown
The beauty parlor is filled with sailors
The circus is in town"
Has anybody noticed that there are more serious issues about than pumping Nielsen ratings?
Crosspost:
Oh look, a squirrel! We now know much more about the propriety of alluding to certain lady biologics than we do about the candidates' positions on war and peace and other trivia. The FOX News moderators were shining examples of journalism at its golden best. Oops, wrong idiom. I meant to say bright yellow.
In a country of 300 million souls there are 93 million adults who do not have jobs and what are the serious questions these moderators asked? Trump also didn't do himself any favors either. He could have simply asked Kelly the same question about the 93 million and asked her to stop wasting the viewers time with stupid gotcha questions and ask real informative questions. Had he done so, the whole "debate" might have actually turned into something resembling a real debate and not a CNN/MSNBC/ABC/CBS/NBC farce. Indeed he would have risen in stature and embarrassed the "moderators" who most likely would at that point ignored Ailes and the producers and attempt to salvage themselves by asking some real substantive questions. But no. Fox blew it. Kelly is good looking but he is ever going to take her seriously again? And Chris Wallace shows the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
Ann, take a chill and take a Trump free rest of the day off. Otherwise he might turn your head into a hotel and condo development.
"If you want to criticize Megan Kelly for posing a tough or even snarky question to The Donald, I have two words for you "Monica Crowley".
Analogy fail.
Monica Crowley didn't pose "...a tough or even snarky question...". She actively intervened to help Obama with his lie about calling Benghazi "terrorism", and she belatedly admitted some time later that she was wrong (while unbelievably faulting Romney for not standing his ground against her.) Not to mention that she oh-so conveniently, in her small sheaf of notes, just somehow happened to have instant access to the partial quote from Obama's statement which, taken, out of context, appeared to support his lie.
This is hardly equivalent to a supposed "fair and balanced" "journalist" from Fox News attempting to take out Trump with gotcha question which brought the "War on Wymmyn" lie back from the dead for Hillary.
And I can't stand Trump.
geokstr, I think you mean Candy Crowley.
I'll be here all week. Try the veal!
She shouldn't apologize to Trump.
She should apologize to her audience for asking such stupid questions.
St. Megyn will leave the apologizing to Roger Ailes, which is as it should be.
King Roger crawling on his kneepads all the way to Canossa to beg forgiveness from Pope Donald is the early contender for Funniest Spectacle of the 2016 election cycle.
MK: "When did you stop beating your wife?" Defense attorney: Objection, leading the witness. Judge: Sustained.
Speaking as a former political operative who acted as an audience plant to ask opposing candidates revealing questions, I can't believe the amateurish conduct of Megan Kelly. You try to bring the other candidate down without showing your hand. If you are in the business of bringing down candidates, which I most definitely did and with great success, you don't want to leave your own blood on the floor, so to speak, when you bring him down. You want the opposing candidate to think you are his best friend before you reach behind his back and cut off his suspenders.
But then, the question arises, why did Megan Kelly think her job was to bring down Trump? I think the explanation will come when she gets hired at MSNBC. Somebody at Fox is going to pay for turning the greatest night in cable television history into a debacle.
I actually thought it was iffy Gotcha journalism, at least the question about how he referred to women. She's good otherwise.
Also, back in the 1930's, the studios heads did not have kind words for Katherine Hepburn: box office poison.
Cubanbob said:
"Trump also didn't do himself any favors either. He could have simply asked Kelly the same question about the 93 million and asked her to stop wasting the viewers time with stupid gotcha questions and ask real informative questions."
Sure..but he did on at least one occasion suggest that the country has no time for political correctness etc., real problems to address...though he's slim on specifics.
I also found the extended explanation of third party defection and Trump's response amusing. Trump repeatedly saying "I fully understand" as they prattled on setting up question.
By the way..questions these mods put forth are likely not their own...just came out of their mouths. There clearly was some major decisions going on beforehand determining who would be asked what as well.
In Woman of the Year, Hepburn played a powerful newswoman based on Dorothy Thompson and Clare Booth Luce, maybe Kelley is channeling them with her clipped delivery but it's a stretch.
Gee, it's tough figuring out what's going on here.
Much ink has been spilled and pixels destroyed following Megyn Kelly's question to Donald Trump about his reference to women.
Here is a similar question to Hillary. I doubt if Megyn Kelly or any other reporter would dare ask it.
Mrs. Clinton, you and several people on your staff ruthlessly destroyed the credibility of the women who came forward and stated that they had been sexually assaulted by your husband while he was governor of Arkansas and later President. Women like Gennifer Flowers, Mandy Grunwald, Juanita Broaddrick, Kathleen Willey and Paula Jones. Not to mention Monica Lewinsky. They were called Bimbo Eruptions by Betsy Wright.
You and others in your husband’s administration smeared their reputation as trailer trash, liars and stalkers. Is that how the Clinton family cares about women’s rights and dignity? How do you handle the charge that you, your husband and the people around you have conducted a war on women?
Commentators like Kelly can't help themselves. Given a choice between asking a policy question, which might help the viewers, and a gotcha question, which will inflate their reputation, they'll always go gotcha. It's in their blood, no matter where the blood comes from, their eyes or their whatever.
The Donald is saying if you dare to ask that question I will hit you with what, paraphrasing a Latin term, you could call an ad femina derogatory response meant to threaten the recipient of the comment, their identity puts them in an out group. It isn't a modern attitude. Maureen Dowd isn't disturbed because she'd like to see the Republicans clasp the asp tightly to themselves.
84 Comments on Ms Kelly while the country is going to hell.
Stay focused my friends.
BTW, Moneyrunner nails the hypocrisy here.
Why do I suspect that Prof A would go ballistic (gotta watch my metaphors or whatever here :-)) if a male reporter asked Moneyrunner's question of Hilary?
OOPS make that "Hillary"
Post a Comment