Strengthening Constitutional Self-Government

No Left Turns

Connie, We Hardly Knew Ye

Way back in January, I noted the dreadful debut of "Weekend with Connie and Maury," the new MSNBC show with Connie Chung and hubby Maury Povich. The attempts at humor were several orders of magnitude below the worst yucks on "The Daily Show." Now the show has mercifully been cancelled, but not before Connie Chung offered this musical number in farewell. To borrow the great quip from the late Randall Jarrell, you have to see it, not to believe it.

As you watch, recall that Connie was once paired with Dan Rather as the co-anchor of the nation’s supposedly premier network news broadcast. On second thought, it is now obvious that she was the idea co-anchor for nutjob Dan.

Hat tip: JPod at The Corner.

Discussions - 12 Comments

What an unbelievable display of ... I’m not sure how to characterize it. I doubt she was serious. That had to be done at least tongue in cheek, and maybe more than a little sarcasm. What I can’t figure is this -- who (or what) was she hoping to reach with that? Perhaps nobody? Or maybe that was the "joke" -- nobody is watching anyway, so I might as well do something beyond foolish?

I heard a version of it on Laura Ingram this morning. In that version, coyotes sang back up. I would recommend to anyone who listens to it without the coyotes, that you add your own coyote sounds.

Erg . . . What prompted you to watch that show, if you don’t mind me asking? I mean, anything with Connie Chung just doesn’t seem like it would be very appealing . . .

As horrific as that was (ugh), I detect some bitterness in her "song." I can’t quite pin it down, but I think this was a way of salvaging her pride by mocking the whole process of cable TV...as odd as that sounds.

She had to have lost a bet to someone. Not what you would want on your highlight film at the end of a career.

Dan Rather is at least a little nuts, but that imbroglio about the forged document doesn’t refute the whole report. The document was one piece of evidence among scores of other unanswered allegations. To ignore the rest would be like letting Clinton off because Kenneth Star had a typo in his notes.

The document was one piece of evidence among scores of other unanswered allegations. To ignore the rest would be like letting Clinton off because Kenneth Star had a typo in his notes.

First point, allegations aren’t evidence. There is no evidence whatsoever that Bush shirked his responsibilities.

Second point, your simile comparing Bush and Clinton is asinine. Bush was not accused of anything legally "actionable." Moreover, comparing See-BS’s shameless trumpeting of stupid forgeries to a few typos is grossly inappropriate.

You have to give Connie this much: this is the most anyone (saving Laura Ingraham) has had to say about her since her infamous questioning of Newt Gingrich’s mother.

First point, allegations aren’t evidence. There is no evidence whatsoever that Bush shirked his responsibilities.

No evidence execpt the conspicuous absense on his name on duty rosters, and the rememberances of currently un-discredited witnesses. I suppose if they push the point, the discrediting will start.


Second point, your simile comparing Bush and Clinton is asinine. Bush was not accused of anything legally "actionable." Moreover, comparing See-BS’s shameless trumpeting of stupid forgeries to a few typos is grossly inappropriate.

I’m going to assume you know if desertion of National Guard Duties is legal, so no argument. I think the funny misspelling of your enemies names is inappropriate, though. It stifles civilized debate.

Those "allegations" were answered satisfactorily during the election...I guess you missed it. If you cruise around the ’Net you’ll find why he did what he did (basically, his jet was being discontinued...he was released from service).

Don’t make baseless accusations and lame (and inappropriate) comparisons if you want "civilized debate." And why is defaming Bush OK with you but slamming CBS inappropriate? Looks like you have some double standards.

Dain, if you could point me to a couple of sites, I’d be grateful. It’s entirely possible I missed something.

Look, it’s the 21st century - defaming EVERYONE is okay! And please don’t misunderstand, I only took issue with your name-calling CBS. You have every right to slam ’em.

There isn’t just one source (that I know of), but here’s a guy who knows, having served with Bush at the time, and who subsequently became a high-ranking officer in the Air National Guard.

What Bush did was very typical at the time...no shenanigans, just SOP. Many people forget the John Kerry also joined the reserves...he just got called up, which could have happened to Bush as well. When you get right down to it, not many young men actually wanted to go to Vietnam. I actually think that Bush was more willing to expose himself to danger than most, but it’s disgusting for people who elected Bill Clinton TWICE to insist that such service is somehow essential.

And I’m saying this not as a Bush worshipper, but as a matter of fairness. I’m a little upset with ol’ George these days, but not because of something he did when he was young.

Leave a Comment

* denotes a required field
 

No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://nlt.ashbrook.org/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/8638