erik lundegaard

Pundit Shaming: Laura Ingraham

I came across this the other day. I think I started on YouTube with Louis CK and somehow wound up with Christopher Hitchens (R.I.P.) in 2008 defending then-candidate Barack Obama against Laura Ingraham on FOX-News. Here's the exchange that pricked up my ears:

Hitchens: The losers in this are not me, it's the types. They're campaigning for someone who says if necessary he'll go straight across the border into Pakistan to root these guys out. And McCain has attacked Obama, saying, “How can you be so militant?”
Ingraham: That's bravado. That's campaign bravado, though.

The “bravado” she's talking about is Obama's militant stance toward Pakistan, which she favors, rather than McCain's objection to said stance. Later, when Hitchens says Obama is evolving toward his position, Ingraham interrupts again:

He's in a campaign. That's a big bet, though, is it not? That's a big bet on the War on Terror you're making.

A bet that paid off. Then she goes on to defend Sarah Palin. Fun!

The above starts at 2:00:

Any correction from Ms. Ingraham after the killing of Osama bin Laden? Any mea culpa? A sense of humility somewhere? Someone alert the pundit-shaming tumblr, which should be the busiest site on the Web.

Tags: , , , ,
Posted at 07:32 AM on Sun. Nov 25, 2012 in category Politics  


Strontium-Perfused Dillweed Caplets wrote:

Laura Ingraham might be the only person I've ever heard successfully talk over C. Hitchens.

Comment posted on Sun. Nov 25, 2012 at 01:02 PM

Erik wrote:

True. To her disadvantage. He had everything right and she had everything wrong. In this clip anyway.

Comment posted on Mon. Nov 26, 2012 at 10:04 AM
« Face Front, Dark Knight!   |   Home   |   Hollywood B.O.: 'Twilight' Stumbles, 'Lincoln' Surges »
 RSS    Facebook

Twitter: @ErikLundegaard