Laura Ingraham makes surprising concession on drones

[dancjm]

I saw that segment and it just felt to me like she really meant what she was saying.

Maybe she has woken up, it's one thing for her to say she StandsWithRand, but calling out the perpetual warfare state is a pretty epic step in the right direction I would say

 

[itshappening]

She's been really positive towards Rand for ages now. She's also one of the few 'conservatives' who gave decent Ron Paul interviews (Cavuto is another).

Cavuto is just awesome full stop. He's been interviewing Ron on that show since day one and was the only one at fox doing it when there was a virtual black out in the early days

 

[itshappening]

The line from the party water carriers always changes as the letter behind the POTUS does.

I think somethings different though considering how much a disaster Bush was and continues to be re-evaluated I think it's going to be harder for them to be apologists in the future. I think (hope) they will have learned their lesson

 

[supermario21]

Also, Ingraham was lashing out at the WSJ for repping the War Party drum beating. It was Republican v Republican.

 

[phesoge]

Also, Ingraham was lashing out at the WSJ for repping the War Party drum beating. It was Republican v Republican.

I wish I could have hugged the woman when she called out the wall street journal for their support for perpetual war.

 

[anaconda]

in a Fox panel talking about the filibuster. The whole panel is good but Laura says something interesting around the 6:20 mark.

WALLACE: "Were you raising these same objections [about the war on terror and drones] when Bush was president?"

INGRAM: "Absolutely not, and I should have been. I should have been raising those questions."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi..._sunday_panel_why_shouldnt_the_president.html

I recall her absolutely swooning over George W. Bush. Maybe she's coming around. Time will tell. Maybe not unlike the Glen Beck situation. It sure is nice to hear people like her expressing opinions that support both constitutional principles and the politicians like Rand that are their strongest advocates in Washington, D.C.

 

[torchbearer]

IIRC, wasn't there a "flower bomb" for her for her positive interview of Ron Paul a long time ago?

it was one of our first projects.
i think brian hand delivered them to her at a book signing in houston.

 

[anaconda]

I like Laura Ingraham, but probably only because she's hot.

She also has a wonderful radio voice. It may be worth noting that her show was canceled recently in favor of Michael Savage. I think maybe she's only doing podcasts. So it may be that her new constitutional principles is a marketing decision aimed at this growing liberty market segment. But hopefully she's sincere and it grows on her. It would be nice to have her fully on board with the NEW GOP.

 

[supermario21]

I think Laura is even better than Beck. I think Beck is still a huge Israel hawk.

PS. Her show on TRN went to Andrea Tantaros but she just switched brands, she still has her show at the same time I think.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

She also has a wonderful radio voice. It may be worth noting that her show was canceled recently in favor of Michael Savage. I think maybe she's only doing podcasts. So it may be that her new constitutional principles is a marketing decision. But hopefully she's sincere and it grows on her. It would be nice to have her fully on board with the NEW GOP.

Her voice is okay...but her personality irritates me. Her show still airs in the Phoenix market, so it's probably on in other markets too.

 

[anaconda]

I think Laura is even better than Beck. I think Beck is still a huge Israel hawk.

PS. Her show on TRN went to Andrea Tantaros but she just switched brands, she still has her show at the same time I think.

Here in the S.F. Bay Area, her show on KSFO 560 A.M. was cancelled and Michael Savage took her time slot. I believe as of Jan. 1st.

 

[Cowlesy]

Question for the house: Do people feel a need to actually "trust" any of these talking heads? We always talk about back-stabbing, etc, but I have never once felt inclined to give any of them my "trust." Mostly because they've never asked for it. Like a lot of media outlets, I'll like and support when they agree with me, and ignore them when they argue against my interests. But "trust" never comes into play.

If you put on an enjoyable program, I'll tune in and try and support your advertisers. If the program is just stuff I disagree with, I just tune to something else and ignore your advertisers.

*shrug*

 

[anaconda]

Wow. Great segment. I am similarly impressed with Ingraham here. And very cool for her to come clean on G.W. Bush, who she used to swoon over.

 

[georgiaboy]

good on Laura for this. Her points rang very true, and she appeared to really be expressing heartfelt convictions, even to the point of admitting past error. Having her so clearly outnumbered on the panel is lame.

I hope Rand gives her some exclusive interview time.

ETA - Can the Thread Title be updated to correct the spelling of her name? She deserves the respect.

 

[Feelgood]

I hadn't been listening to her before, but during the filibuster and after, she was great supporting Rand. And she said this on air - "the neoconservative view is really hurting the GOP". That's good. We need all the allies we can get - Laura Ingraham, Glenn Beck...

I did like the little dig at the end of how Bush never killed an American! Zing!!!

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Question for the house: Do people feel a need to actually "trust" any of these talking heads? We always talk about back-stabbing, etc, but I have never once felt inclined to give any of them my "trust." Mostly because they've never asked for it. Like a lot of media outlets, I'll like and support when they agree with me, and ignore them when they argue against my interests. But "trust" never comes into play.

If you put on an enjoyable program, I'll tune in and try and support your advertisers. If the program is just stuff I disagree with, I just tune to something else and ignore your advertisers.

*shrug*

Nah, I don't even listen to them on purpose. I only hear about this kind of stuff when it's pasted here or if I hear it as background music at a store or someone's house. And Faux News is a a popular channel for the TV watchers at my gym and a default channels at many stores.

 

[supermario21]

I sympathize with Laura because she was essentially 1 v 2/3 on the argument, including a conservative WSJ editor. She certainly wasn't towing the party line. Also, listen to some of her past interviews with the Pauls and Pat Buchanan. She has been for less war at least for a little while.

 

[rbohlig]

Does anybody know who that woman on the far left was? She was absolutely terrible. I couldn't tell if she was a Bill Kristol type republican or a spokesperson of some sort for the Obama administration....kind of funny to think about.

 

[fr33]

For what it's worth during the primaries I heard her say multiple times that she was troubled by the NDAA and assassinating citizens. She was pretty rough on Romney after he had the nomination even.

 

[supermario21]

Does anybody know who that woman on the far left was? She was absolutely terrible. I couldn't tell if she was a Bill Kristol type republican or a spokesperson of some sort for the Obama administration....kind of funny to think about.

Kimberly Strassel of the WSJ, so yes, a neocon.