With embedded video below the fold
On MSNBC's "Morning Joe," back on Monday, Erin Burnett let loose with her real feelings and laid it on the line right on the air, calling President Bush a "monkey" during a business news piece about the Nicolas Sarkozy visit to China.
During the news piece, Burnett said that she couldn't see how anyone couldn't have a "man-crush on that man," in an apparent allusion to French President Sarkozy. The video on the screen at the time was a shot of Presidents Bush and Sarkozy walking side-by-side, with Germany's Chancellor Angela Merkel just behind them. After her "man-crush" comment, Burnett made quick to say that she didn't mean "the monkey" and that she meant "the other one."
This caused Joe Scarborough and his co-hosts to wonder what the heck she was talking about? "The monkey? Who's the monkey? What's she talking about?" Scarborough asked.
After the crew kept asking her who the "monkey" was, Burnett then compounded her gaffe by acting as if she thought they were talking about Chancellor Merkel. "Why would you be talking about Angela Merkel like that? I don't understand," she bumbled in a failed attempt at humor.
Scarborough was nearly indignant at that one saying, "Now she's attacking Merkel, she's our ally in a time of war."
Naturally, they all treated it as a big joke, but it really was a reveling episode, telling us all how Burnett feels about America's allies and our own president.
Jeez, not much bias there, eh?
Transcript:
ERIN BURNETT: While Nicolas Sarkozy is in China, which of course is trying to become a financial capital of the world, and in honor of his visit the Chinese have announced $30 billion dollars of deals... there he is, I mean who could not have a man-crush on that man?
(Scarborough laughs)
BURNETT: I'm not talking about the monkey either, I'm talking about the other one. (laughs)
JOE SCARBOROUGH, host: The monkey? Who's the monkey? What's she talking about?
BURNETT: (giggling) Monkey in the middle. Alright... (more giggling)
SCARBOROUGH: I... I don't know... what's she talking about, Willy?
BURNETT: (laughing again)
SCARBOROUGH: You know, I think, I think she still has jet lag.
WILLIE GEIST, co-host: I don't know. That's my president, I don't know who she's talking about.
SCARBOROUGH: I know she's not talking about him!
BURNETT: Why would you be talking about Angela Merkel like that? I don't understand, alright, um...
SCARBOROUGH: Now she's attacking Merkel, she's our ally in a time of war.
BURNETT: (more laughter)
SCARBOROUGH: Now, listen, my dear, let me tell you something. When I'm jet-lagged I just take Ambien, some Tylenol PM and I sleep it off. OK?
BURNETT: It was my stop in Riyadh, it just made me insane. (still laughing)
(h/t Mary Martinelli)
Comments Policy
The MSNBC Affliction
November 30, 2007 - 11:36 ET by drillanwrJeez ... Sounds as if Erin's been dipping into David Gregory's "travel bag" (recall the on air drunken interview with Imus one morning several months back).
Trying so hard to make the President look like a complete idiot usually ends up with the critic looking like just that ...
BTW
Isn't this the MSNBC babe Limbaugh's got the semi-hots for?
She didnt mean to say
November 30, 2007 - 11:35 ET by sunandsteelShe didnt mean to say monkey, she meant to say Chimpy McHitler.
What doesn’t kill you, only makes you pissed off. -Children of Bodom
Isn't she
November 30, 2007 - 11:38 ET by Matthew Sheffieldthe reporter who Rush Limbaugh has praised in the past?
That would be the very same
November 30, 2007 - 11:40 ET by Warner Todd HustonThat would be the very same reporter, yes.
Matthew and WTH-
November 30, 2007 - 11:43 ET by drillanwrRush admits to being "right" only 98% of the time (I think the figure is correct ...)
Rush admits to being
December 1, 2007 - 09:19 ET by NewsbusterbrownRush admits to being "right" only 98% of the time (I think the figure is correct ...)
Well, she does sound like she's on the conservative side economically.
I thought I heard him call
November 30, 2007 - 11:45 ET by taterI thought I heard him call her a "street walker" in the past.
Do you realize how much it costs to run for office? More than any honest man could afford. -Montgomery Burns
Another example of a cute
November 30, 2007 - 11:40 ET by Free ThinkerAnother example of a cute newreader letting us all know why she is only a cute newsreader. What a lack of intellect and class.
THE ONLY MONKEY SHE NEEDS TO
November 30, 2007 - 11:55 ET by TOETHE ONLY MONKEY SHE NEEDS TO THINK ABOUT IS HERS. WHICH IS ABOUT TO BE SPANKED !
}}---> Bad Monkey
November 30, 2007 - 12:01 ET by Cool ArrowWhack whack!
OH OH!!!!! Pick me, pick
November 30, 2007 - 12:15 ET by Airforce_5_OOH OH!!!!! Pick me, pick me.... I'll do it!!!!!!!!!!!
The only thing you should feel when shooting insurgents is the rifle recoil.
Airforce
November 30, 2007 - 13:45 ET by fosstenThank you for the Monty Python and the Holy Grail reminder:
Dingo: You must spank her well, and after you are done with her, you may deal with her as you like... and then... spank me.
All: And me. And me too. And me.
Dingo: Yes. Yes, you must give us all a good spanking.
Dingo: And after the spanking, the oral sex.
Galahad: Well, I could stay a bit longer...
Roger the Shrubber, are you listening?...NI!
Forget 911, I dial 10MM.
AF Fossten
November 30, 2007 - 21:15 ET byhear hear
GoHunter08
Dear MSNBC
November 30, 2007 - 12:05 ET by c5thenHow mature and professional of your reporter Erin Burnett to refer to The President of the US as a "monkey" while reading a story about France and China's financial talks.
Do you have any on-air conduct standards or is it left to be like the cafeteeria at a high school?
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic. Let's get it back! Fred08.com
You're right..it's just
November 30, 2007 - 12:44 ET by motherbeltYou're right..it's just amazing. What kind of moron just "naturally" segues from financial talk into first commenting that it's natural to have a "man-crush" (didn't anyone wonder who was the man with the man-crush?) on Sarkozy, and calling her own President a monkey?
No class. All A$$
Do they have any standards of conduct?
Apparently it's an ability to insult the President in any context.
mb-
November 30, 2007 - 12:44 ET by drillanwrWell, Sark IS a soon to be divorced bachelor. Could be she's looking for the "inside track" with him.
Did she give the phone hand-sign to the ear "Call me" signal after her remarks? <pfheh>
Another pretty face worth
November 30, 2007 - 12:14 ET by bobthemanAnother pretty face worth tuning out. Maybe it's just me, but these anchor bimbos turn out to be a real disappointment once you know who they really are. Sort of like taking out the hottest chick in high school and only realizing after the date, it wasn't worth the cost of dinner and movie.
http://politicsofdes...
The next check she is
November 30, 2007 - 12:29 ET by Right2thePointThe next check she is collecting should be from the unemployment office.
Right
November 30, 2007 - 12:34 ET by BlondeThis is far more loathesome than the Imus thing.
But you know, it was just a scathing on-air insult of the President of the United States. So, no biggie.
The twit is probably reading this blog and laughing it off.
Disgusting how low we've sunk in regards to what we'll put up with on the idiot box.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
And disgusting how low the
November 30, 2007 - 12:42 ET by rimskyAnd disgusting how low the MSM has sunk in this, sort of, unspoken competition to see who can deal the lowest blow to the President!
It's not that they've
November 30, 2007 - 12:59 ET by mattmIt's not that they've 'sunk', they're just becoming less capable of hiding or smoothing-over their bias.
It could be a symptom of BDS or just the natural result of the degrading of the journalism schools in the past 2 or 3 decades, or a combination of these and other factors...
".. to see who can deal the
November 30, 2007 - 21:22 ET by Jerry".. to see who can deal the lowest blow to the President!"
It's only fair. Bimbo reporterettes deal low blows to Bush. Bimbo interns dealt low blows to Clinton.
When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).
Bad Jerry!
November 30, 2007 - 21:27 ET by BlondeThat one deserved a beverage alert.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
3 Little Monkeys?
November 30, 2007 - 12:32 ET by acumenIf Burnett said this on the air in the US, what did she say with the cameras off when she was abroad?
Could the moonbats please remind me why the "world" supposedly hates America again? (sarc on) I'm sure it couldn't possibly be based on idiots like Burnett jetsetting around spewing this kind of derisive language (sarc off).
(More sarc) Maybe Burnett was just caught up in the new spirit of bipartisanship and civility the dems promised us in '06 (more sarc off).
Or perhaps Burnett is swallowing the Ambien with Kool-Aid.
Lighten up, people!
November 30, 2007 - 12:41 ET by RJFirst, Erin Burnett isn't a "news anchor" she has a daily cameo from the stock exchange.
Second, her segment is always jokey, with a lot of friendly back and forth jabs and name-calling.
I disagree
November 30, 2007 - 12:52 ET by motherbeltRJ, I often agree with you, but we part ways here. The fact that she isn't a news anchor certainly doesn't mean she is free to toss a gratutious insult to the President into one of her financial commentaries.
And it was gratuitous. She was clearly talking about Sarkozy with her "man-crush" comment (it came immediately following his name) but she had to toss the extra in.
Shameful.
No problem, MB, but I STILL think y'all need to lighten up
November 30, 2007 - 13:00 ET by RJ...you and I see it differently on this. Just understand that the entire segment is always riddled with that stuff.
For example, the use of the "mancrush" concept has been a running gag...and so has the jokey name calling of various world leaders. She and Joe also take shots at each other. I think they have a good sense of humor going between them.
Even if you think it went over the line, it's pretty minor when you look at the overall context of the segment.
Just understand that the
November 30, 2007 - 13:27 ET by rimskyJust understand that the entire segment is always riddled with that stuff.
Just because it's always riddled with that stuff, doesn't make "that stuff" acceptable. It's just like a lie that is perpetuated and eventually becomes accepted as truth. These, as someone said, 'gratuitous' comments are becoming the norm with these pretty newsreaders who don't know any more than anyone else! But because they are ON AIR, and PRETTY, their words carry weight with a large portion of the viewing public. It's the popular thing to do. Like in High School when the popular clique rags on the nerds.
Lets Understand Something
November 30, 2007 - 13:50 ET by BourbeauThere's too much of this denigrating humor tossed about recklessly by people like Erin Burnett. Here's a sobering thought. If by chance, that were President Obama and she made that comment, I suggest her ass would have been fired immediately (I'm sure we all recall the Don Imus episode). So for my money, if the mocking is not suitable for a man of color, it's damn sure not suitable for the President of the United States. Erin Burnett owes the MSNBC audience an apology for her stupidity; not because her program is always riddled with that stuff, but because she's an overpaid on-air personality who needs to have her wings clipped.
Wow. And I thought the PCers were overly sensitive
November 30, 2007 - 14:43 ET by RJHave youse guys been attending PC classes behind our backs?
BTW, you've overlooked that a RINO and a lib, Scarborough and Geist, immediately let her know she was being inappropriate. I guess it wasn't enough of a smackdown, though.
Maybe a public flogging will satisfy you? :^)
BTW, you've overlooked that
November 30, 2007 - 16:28 ET by motherbeltBTW, you've overlooked that a RINO and a lib, Scarborough and Geist, immediately let her know she was being inappropriate.
RJ, I, for one, didn't overlook anything. I didn't know that; I told you, I don't watch "Morning Joe." Nowhere in the story or the transcript here is anything about Joe or Willie telling her she's being inappropriate. But if they did, I'm glad.
I don't expect a flogging, and even if more than a dozen people were watching MSNBC and heard her, it was about Bush, so I doubt the media will raise a cacophony of calls for her to apologize.
If Joe or Willie did tell her it was inappropriate, I hope she listens and knocks it off.
"flogging" was a joke, MB
November 30, 2007 - 16:43 ET by RJ...which is what the story deserves...no offense, but I just can't take this as seriously "offensive" :^)
I don't think it is the
November 30, 2007 - 17:16 ET by stratmanI don't think it is the responsibility of her fellow TV personalities to admonish Burnett. It is the duty of her boss(es), and the buck ultimately ends with the network heads.
Treating this cavalierly is giving tacit approval to more and possibly increasingly provacative outbursts from others historically presented as above the fray of base opinion and partisanship.
Huntley and Brinkley are (slightly) rolling in their graves over this abuse of trust and position. I doubt Cronkite would be as classless as Burnett were he still front and center on TV. Dan Rather is another story.
Then again, maybe her hyperactive and hyperbolic buddy Jim Cramer has rubbed off on Burnett... in a bad way. (Example)
Killing them with kindness isn't working. Time to get scrappy with the Donkeys.
Fer goodness sake, people! Huntley? Brinkley? Cronkite?
November 30, 2007 - 17:30 ET by RJThe woman does a short daily monetary segment from the stock market.
Honestly, and no offense, but I'm getting some pretty good chuckles from the over-reaction. :^)
I meant I didn't expect it
November 30, 2007 - 18:25 ET by motherbeltI meant I didn't expect it to become an "Imus Moment" which was how I perceived it from you.
I guess it just troubles me that so many in the media think nothing of making insulting remarks about the President on the airways, and consider it no big deal. I guess I really don't even mind if YOU don't consider it a big deal, but I think they should. They are professionals, after all. Throwing around gratuitous insults about the President shouldn't be part of their "chatter."
Even with Clinton, the jokes told about him were of the "wink-wink" variety, commenting on his interest in ladies. With Bush, they have taken on a venomous tone, which I don't think is appropriate to inject into a news or financial report. If she had made a joke about him being short, or short legs trying to keep up with Sarkozy, that would have been one thing. But the "monkey" thing has become a particularly hateful stab (I wouldn't even call it a "jab") at the President from his enemies; I don't think Burnett should have gone there.
And I think we have beaten this into the ground....I'm done with it. LOL
I understand, motherbelt
November 30, 2007 - 18:39 ET by RJIf a major figure had said it as an out-of-the-blue gratuituous comment, I'm certain I'd be testy about it, too. But as you see above. posters are comparing her to Huntly, Brinkly, and Cronkite.
That's why I tried to explain it in context. Yeah, she shouldn't have said it, but in the fast-paced, joking patter their segment has developed, I just can't get upset about it.
In fact, I'd bet that President Bush himself would have laughed if he had seen a few of their segments and then his name came up in the way it did.
RJ: I was not comparing
December 1, 2007 - 00:04 ET by stratmanRJ:
I was not comparing Burnett to Brinkley, Huntley or Conkrite. She hardly rates mention in the same sentence with them. I believe none of these TV newscasters would have approved of such a gratuitous belittlement of a president, hence the rolling in their graves over the further diminishment of their beloved profession.
Burnett is more than a free cable access Wayne's World chatterbox. Her rhetoric cheapens her profession and undermines her authority as financial analyst/reporter.
I have no issue with you disagreeing with my point of view... as long as you accurately reflect that in your argument. Unlike a discussion of historical fact, this was an ethics and morals discussion where opinions will vary.
I do agree with you that in the grand scheme of things, Burnett's comments barely register on the meter. Good on her if she apologized (as other's have indicated on this forum).
Killing them with kindness isn't working. Time to get scrappy with the Donkeys.
Well, stratman, just as mb and I agreed,
December 1, 2007 - 00:15 ET by RJ...you and I will have to disagree, too. :^)
It looked to me like you were making the comparison. Sorry if that's not what you intended.
I'll just repeat my point, with which you will also disagree: it's a lot of hubub about not very much, and I absolutely believe even President Bush would have laughed at it.
delete
November 30, 2007 - 14:55 ET by motherbeltdouble post
For example, the use of the
November 30, 2007 - 14:53 ET by motherbeltFor example, the use of the "mancrush" concept has been a running
gag...and so has the jokey name calling of various world leaders. She
and Joe also take shots at each other. I think they have a good sense
of humor going between them.
I didn't know they take shots at each other routinely; I don't watch "Morning Joe." But taking shots back and forth with a co-worker is one thing, insulting others as part of the repartee is out of bounds, IMO. I wasn't even offended by the "mancrush" comment...was she implying that Joe had one on Sarkozy? I don't care. But everyone who's ever seen any politcal show or website knows the "monkey" insult with President Bush, and Burnett shouldn't have gone down that road.
Do you think there will be a call for her to apologize?
I think we will have to agree to disagree on this one. In a friendly way, of course ;-)
Then Burnett should keep
November 30, 2007 - 12:51 ET by ConservativeRexThen Burnett should keep the jokes for when she is plying her trade in a house near Las Vegas.
Why should we have to put up with lightweights like that anyway?
And there's your answer why psmsnbc ratings are in the toilet.
Offhandly calling Bush a
November 30, 2007 - 12:57 ET by lotrOffhandly calling Bush a "monkey" is unprofessional at best and offensive at worst. Case in point: If Burnett had offhandly referred to Hillary Clinton as "that nappy headed ho", we already know the "lighten up, people" appeal would not hold water.
CNBC-not MSNBC
November 30, 2007 - 14:32 ET by CaringwhiteguyRJ
You are correct. Ms. Burnett does not anchor on MSNBC. She anchors on CNBC, and does a daily "cross-over" to MSNBC in order to plug CNBC.
Anchors aweigh
December 1, 2007 - 09:27 ET by nkviking75According to her bio on the CNBC website, Erin Burnett is indeed a news anchor. She may not be the anchor on that segment, but she is an anchor.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
Just how frivolous and
November 30, 2007 - 13:20 ET by fitzfongJust how frivolous and infantile have the media become since the 1990s? Ever since slick bubba and his wife of convenience were in charge, you've had news presenters quoting their bratty children (stand up, Couric) when interrogating the Secretary of State, MTV college bimbos asking the President what kind of underwear he was wearing (and the creep answering!) and countless "reporters" straight from the casting couch dropping one-liners from godawful shows like Friends into their "news analysis". And that's even before getting into the blatant partisan backgrounds of "objective journalists" (Stephy, Russert, Chrissy Matthews), the pretty boy nepotism that goes into hiring intellectual lightweights as news presenters and analysts ("Bubbles" Brzezinski, Anderson Cooper Vanderbilt, Chrissy Cuomo, etc.), the brain dead DNC/DailyKos parrots (Olberdouche, David Shyster) and the outright cowards (Wolf Blitzer, for starters). Erin Burnett falls into the Friends quote category. The lack of honesty and talent in the media is precisely why it's such a joke now.
Wrong Is Wrong
November 30, 2007 - 14:10 ET by stratmanWhat a partisan moron. No wonder Chris Matthews drools over Burnett.
This was an innappropriate on-air comment. I may not be a Bill Clinton fan but I would not go on-air and call him "Leg Humper" even though he has groped, squeezed and humped a variety of women since marrying Hilary. It would be disrespectful to the office of the president and to our nation.
As I recall, sportscaster Howard Cosell was fired for calling someone a "little monkey" while calling a football play. Those that knew Cosell did not think he was making a racial epithet, but he was fired none the less. Should his estate now be given back wages because "monkey" is OK to say now?
I think it would be a hard sell to alledge that Burnett was not using "monkey" as an overt reference to the Left's moniker for Bush: Chimpy McHitler. Burnett is a financial reporter/analyst, a position that infers a level of intelligence that should be able to discern blatent partisanship, offensive rhetoric and the ability to keep that type of bile out of on-air dialogue. Maybe her psychological need to be noticed and liked, or the Left's recent emboldened behaviours, culminated in her innappropriate comment. It certainly should be approached as a type of Rorschach test into the psyche and or political leanings of Burnett. This does not burnish her stature or trustworthiness as financial reporter/analyst.
To those who contrive that this was just playful banter, if Hilary Clinton were to become president, would it be acceptable to refer to her as a "bitch" on-air in a similar situation? Some things are never appropriate no matter how others care to spin.
Killing them with kindness isn't working. Time to get scrappy with the Donkeys.
You know, stratman, you made
November 30, 2007 - 14:35 ET by motherbeltYou know, stratman, you make a good point. Why is is OK to call a white man a monkey, but not a black man?
I agree with poster "lotr" that:
Offhandly calling Bush a "monkey" is unprofessional at best and offensive at worst.
Just the fact that it's "unprofessional" should be enough. Burnett needs to realize that she is a financial commentator, not a stand-up comic. Not only this instance, but maybe the fact that her segment is usually "riddled" with that kind of stuff is inappropriate in general.
It was very
November 30, 2007 - 15:19 ET by stratmanIt was very unprofessional. Burnett handled the leering Matthews segment with some dignity. Now she stoops low in deriding the president with a DKos type insult that can not be viewed as anything but pejorative. As if our enemies need any more propagada fuel.
As to the apologetists' comments that this particular TV segment is known for its jocularity, I refer to most every mother's customary adage (at least when I grew up): If your friend jumped off a cliff would you follow?
Maybe this segment should be held on a cliff in the future.
Killing them with kindness isn't working. Time to get scrappy with the Donkeys.
Post Tramatic Drool
November 30, 2007 - 18:37 ET by well99I think she is still suffering from PTD from Chrissy and needs help.Come a little closer..closer .
You've got that
November 30, 2007 - 21:32 ET by motherbeltYou've got that backwards...it should be PDT -"Post-drool trauma."
Or maybe PDSD Post-Drool Stress Disorder
This is true
November 30, 2007 - 22:12 ET by well99Either way it is scary.Many suffer from life long stupidity.That could explain MSNBC.
Classic!
November 30, 2007 - 14:17 ET by Bighead227Another classic example of our left-wing media casually insulting (sophomoronically sic) our Commander-in-Chief and our allies in a time of war. What a scumbag. The best part is how unaware she is, she has no clue she is even doing anything wrong. And she has no worry of any possible repercussions because she knows her fellow lefties will never cover it. Besides, this is how we talk in the newsroom...no bias though.
In truth, she's probably
November 30, 2007 - 14:29 ET by fitzfongIn truth, she's probably secure in the fact that she has a few freebies in her pocket. It would take a hell of a lot more for the network to sack her as she has an airtight sexual harassment case against the network and Chris Matthews for that on-camera drooling session a couple of months ago.
tit for tat (hmm maybe that doesn't work, anyway)
November 30, 2007 - 15:07 ET by Andante...can you imagine the outrage if someone at FOX had called Hillary or Pelosi a monkey?
So correct Andante
November 30, 2007 - 16:57 ET by exLibThis is the point I was going to make.
Sure, we can act like the good natured Convservative, Free-Speech advocates we are. But in this case especially, we must demand a single-standard for on-air, or public conduct.
Conservatives continually lose ground politicaly because the media listens to the squeaky wheel, ie; the loud-mouthed-lefties. So our speech gets curtailed daily while theirs goes relatively unchallenged.
A few years ago some reporter on Fox said "we" when speaking to a GOP strategist or congressman and the need for a plan. The left jumped all over that as "proof" that Fox news was a shill for the right.
This woman needs to get canned IMMEDIATLY, at the very least to send a message to the left that they must hold themselves to the same standard they hold the right to.
Qualifications
November 30, 2007 - 15:13 ET by CJK51Reading the transcript and seeing the picture, I'm left to ponder how the lovely Ms. Burnett got her big time network gig. It must be her obviously unbiased, objective ability to read the news and not editoralize, right? :-)
Actually I have always
November 30, 2007 - 16:12 ET by buddycActually I have always thought that Bush is a nice looking man who is in great physical shape.
I can't understand why they (people like Erin) have to resort to personal insults. Bush has done many good things. He has done some things that some disagree with. I might be reasonable for liberals to disagree with some of his positions. Some of his actions are out and out winners. Most, if not all, of what he has done were supported by liberals initially.
I can't think of anything he has done that would support such nasty and personal attacks.
Everyday you see more and more evidence that liberal views are bankrupt of any intellectual support. The general views that Republicans are shallow and non intellectual and liberals are deep thinking intellectuals are clearly out of date.
Howard Cossell
November 30, 2007 - 16:58 ET by exLibThat's all i have to say. Anybody remember him and how he got fired.
Here was a guy who had done more in the world of sports broadcasting to further race relations at a time when it really was a problem.
Any Comment?
November 30, 2007 - 17:08 ET by keckkwHas CNBC or Erin Burnett issued any comment or apology yet?
Aplogize????
November 30, 2007 - 17:25 ET by BourbeauTo my knowledge, neither CNBC or Ms. Burnett have apologized, nor should we expect them to. Too much of this creap get's aired over MSNBC and CNBC without any broadcast standars; they all see themselves as on-air commedians, and anything goes. I can appreciate how the standards of old TV have not transferred to cable, but allowing people like Burnett to get away with those kinds of comments is unacceptable. Again, and I remind you only of what transpired with Don Imus; the use of the term monkey in reference to a black would have caused an eruption of outrage. To say it on-air in reference to the President of the United States is should cause similar outrage and the strongest rebuke of Ms. Burnett.
FYI
November 30, 2007 - 19:31 ET by third eyeI saw CNBC Money Honey #4, aka Erin Burnett, apolgize on Hardball tonight actually. And Id just like to say that Im not mad at her, just disappointed...
Surprisingly, just today an
November 30, 2007 - 21:38 ET by Warner Todd HustonSurprisingly, just today an apology was issues. by Burnett, not the station.
An apology from Erin Burnett isn't so surprising, Warner.
November 30, 2007 - 21:42 ET by RJI've been trying to tell you guys that, from the way she conducts herself and the way the segment typically rolls, it wasn't meant in the same nasty way as we've seen from other media people.
RJ
November 30, 2007 - 21:54 ET by BlondeYou may be right about Erin Burnett. I've been watching Morning Joe for a few weeks (her segment comes on as I'm about out the door).
I'm glad she apologized, though. It was a horribly inappropriate thing to say.
And several posters here have made the very cogent point that if one were to substitute Obama, Hillary, or Pelosi.....the LSM would be shouting at the top of their lungs.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Inappropriate is true, Blonde
November 30, 2007 - 22:05 ET by RJBut I was so sure she would apologize I searched today to see if she had a blog. Couldn't find it if she does. :^)
I'd have posted the apology
November 30, 2007 - 22:13 ET by Warner Todd HustonI'd have posted the apology here, but I have been locked out of this thread and no longer have the ability to edit it.
So Warner
November 30, 2007 - 22:14 ET by BlondeYou got "locked out"?
What did you do, spill Matt's beer or something?
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Well...
November 30, 2007 - 22:36 ET by Warner Todd Huston... I made a spelling error when I originally posted the piece and an NB associate (like my Walmart speak?) with higher status than I made the correction. But, I cannot edit his stuff because he is higher than I am. So, then I got locked out after he edited the thread.
I spelled President Bush without capitalizing the "p" in president! And I had an "h" in Nicolas Sarkozy's name.
I bee'd a baaaad boy.
I know you would Warner
November 30, 2007 - 22:16 ET by RJ.....must have been frustrating :^)
yes...
November 30, 2007 - 22:37 ET by Warner Todd Huston... I have already emailed the folks hoping they would add the apology video.
I didn't see it, RJ
November 30, 2007 - 22:13 ET by BlondeBecause I don't watch Hardball (gee, imagine that). But apparently that's where she did apologize, per Warner and another poster here, whom I believe.
Monday's segment should be interesting on MJ. We know they peruse NB's.....they mention us occasionally.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Yeah, Blonde
November 30, 2007 - 22:17 ET by RJI had already planned to watch or tape it to see if this thread gets mentioned.
Blonde
November 30, 2007 - 22:22 ET by MrShyYeah, Joe gives NB props a lot, doesn't he?
Who makes the most mentions? Is it him? (BOR and Malkin have too, oui?)
Notice I'm sprinkling in some French as an ode to the Nutty Prof... (and was he really banned??)
"MY end justifies THAT mean." - Shakespeare (not really)
The Prof got banned already?
November 30, 2007 - 22:25 ET by BlondeWow, have to hunt down a post of his to see.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Maybe I'm wrong.... deep
November 30, 2007 - 22:27 ET by MrShyMaybe I'm wrong.... deep down, I think we'd all be a bit sad if that were to happen.
"MY end justifies THAT mean." - Shakespeare (not really)
Shy
November 30, 2007 - 22:34 ET byprofff is still here
GoHunter08
Wow
November 30, 2007 - 23:19 ET by well99I would say I missed his propaganda and always posting a link to realliesonclimate.org but I dont.
Blonde.....PT banned....?
November 30, 2007 - 22:33 ET by JayTeeHeck, the dude probably got corporal tunnel syndrome from Typing all day/nite.
PT isn't ...uh...isn't insulting, he is just voluminously wrong on several subjects at one time.
Besides, what's happening to PT on this site is probably considered "torture" by the left.
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
The "Perfesser's" priofile is still up
November 30, 2007 - 22:37 ET by RJIf he were banned or given a time out it would read "access denied"
A time out, RJ?
November 30, 2007 - 22:39 ET by BlondeThat's so funny, on so many different levels, when discussing a liberal.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Apparently not
November 30, 2007 - 22:37 ET by BlondeUnfortunately, being galactically uninformed and pathetic at making (or understanding) a point is not sufficient grounds for banning, here.
However, if annoying counted, well....you know.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive