| By John Amato on movies  Tim sent in this video. The Conservatives that supported Mel as their hero after the very controversial "Passion of the Christ," movie are really falling apart trying to defend him while making believe they aren’t. The apologists usually move past his anti-Semitic remarks and accept his apology at face value–then change the subject to–why isn’t anyone talking about anti-Christian sentiments. A typical smoke screen that they are so very good at, but hey–he did apologize–right? Or was it his PR staff? Meanwhile, Joe has a problem with a few other pundits in this clip.
Video-WMP Video-QT transcript: SCARBOROUGH: As they say in tennis, game, set, match. Our experiment proved Mel Gibson‘s alibi was a load of trash, but judging from the howling from conservative circles who still support Mr. Gibson, apparently our experiment was too effective. This clip was taken from a transcript of FOX News Channel‘s John Gibson‘s radio show.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Joe Scarborough involved in a cheap stunt last night. Now, I asked Judge Napolitano about this who has presided over countless drunk driving cases. He says you can‘t drink .12 in an hour. You can‘t get there. This just can‘t get any dumber, can it? Talk about empty calories. (END VIDEO CLIP) SCARBOROUGH: FOX News‘s John Gibson can talk about empty calories all he wants, but if I were him, I‘d be more concerned with empty heads. Now, Gibson seems to be suggesting that a judge would be more of an expert in administrating a breathalyzer exam than a law enforcement officer who actually administers breathalyzer exams. We brought one in of those officers to conduct the experiment, and he did it straight up. But Gibson called us all frauds because we attacked his buddy, Mel Gibson. I wonder if John‘s really comfortable calling a law enforcement officer a liar. And even if he is comfortable calling a law enforcement officer a liar, is John Gibson really suggesting that a New Jersey judge like Judge Napolitano is comfortable calling a New Jersey police officer a liar? I know Judge Napolitano, and I‘m pretty damn sure he‘d never call me a liar, and I certainly know he‘d never call a New Jersey police officer a liar who had involved himself in a dishonest stunt. But that‘s what John Gibson said he did. But Gibson‘s rant was mild compared to the seething rage that still seems to be running through the veins of future FOX News host Laura Ingraham, who has had a hard-on for this network since she was unceremoniously dumped years ago. Now, Laura Ingraham says she likes me, but judging from her embittered attacks, that‘s news to me. I guess she‘s just one more example of this take-no-prisoners, hate first, ask questions later mentality that has rotted the minds of liberals and conservatives alike. Judge for yourself the words of Laura Ingraham read, not by Ms. Ingraham, but by an amazing celebrity impersonator. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We must inform you of how low a network can go. If I was Joe Scarborough‘s producer looking at his ratings, I‘d be drinking, too. This is embarrassing. How can you go on the air with this and expect to get ratings? Hello? (END VIDEO CLIP) SCARBOROUGH: Now, if I were Laura Ingraham, I would be careful about judging others‘ ratings at MSNBC. Ms. Ingraham‘s stint at this network was an be abject failure that ended in her firing that was followed by a decade of ill will. Hey, I‘m very careful not to judge others. I‘m very careful not to cast the first stone. So I don‘t know what personal anger issues Ms. Ingraham has. I would suggest a course in anger management. And I don‘t know why she continues to hold this asinine, longstanding, childish grudge against MSNBC. But she needs to get a grip. She needs to have a drink. And in the immortal words of John Riggins, you need to loosen up, Laura, baby. Now, listen, I‘ve always tried to avoid getting into phony fights with politicians and other talk show hosts to pump up my ratings. I think my parents raised me to be better than that. What I‘ve relied on instead has been telling you the truth when it comes to Republicans, telling you the truth when it comes to Democrats, telling you the truth when it comes to conservatives, to liberals, to Christians, to Jews, and to Muslims. I‘m proud to say I think that‘s what separates me from the overwhelming majority of talk show hosts who read talking points on other networks. In this case, I turned from being one of Mel Gibson‘s biggest supporters to being one of his biggest critics. Why? Because it was the intellectually honest thing to do to say I was wrong. And our experiment we delivered Tuesday night was devastating to Mel Gibson‘s argument. That‘s why Laura Ingraham and John Gibson, the apologists for the deliverer of those anti-Semitic smears, are now attacking me, attacking the staff of my show, and attacking law enforcement officers. It‘s a shame. They owe us all an apology. And if they were man and woman to admit that, like me, sometimes they make mistakes, that‘s what they‘d do. But in this political environment, it doesn‘t seem like intellectual honesty is in great form. Meanwhile, the battle lines in Hollywood over Gibson, whether you‘re for him or against him, continue to grow. Today, some of Mel‘s closest friends came out to support the embattled star, including pal Jodi Foster, who told the “L.A. Times,” quote, “Is he an anti-Semite? Absolutely not. But it‘s no secret that he‘s always fought a terrible battle about alcoholism.” | 
No comments:
Post a Comment