« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell *had* 32 teeth.

"Lawrence, we can end this interview right now if you don?t want me to finish my point."

By: Moe Lane (Diary)  |  May 6th, 2011 at 09:30 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

I know this, because I just watched him crawl on the floor trying to retrieve them after he tried to push around former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

This one’s going around. Newsbusters, @adambaldwin, the Daily Caller – take your pick. Particularly enjoyable was the part where she called O’Donnell a liar:

RICE: You have just made a false statement. You said that we couldn’t assemble a coalition. How many countries fought in the coalition in Iraq?

O’DONNELL: Actually fought and had casualties? Actually fought?

RICE: Yeah, how many.

O’DONNELL: Maybe half a dozen actually fought.

RICE: I see. So the Georgians who went there and the Japanese who went there and others –

O’DONNELL: Actually had soldiers firing weapons on the ground?

RICE: This was not part of the coalition. The people who — the British and the Australians and the Poles and all of those — the Canadians, all of those who were ultimately in Iraq, these were not part of the coalition?

O’DONNELL: Yes, they were.

RICE: Yeah. So your statement was just false.

Couple that with all the times where Rice backhanded O’Donnell for not letting her finish and the result is almost twelve minutes of entertaining awesome. Next time… send your A-Team, ye Lefties.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

Tags: , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • Deskpilot

    than WWE. This was truly a smackdown for the ages.
    O’Donnell’s next Google seach should be for an orthodondtist, or maybe he needs to go shopping:

    http://www.modells.com/largeImage/index.jsp?LargeImageURL=http%3A//MOD.imageg.net/graphics/product_images/p5483698dt.jpg

  • bk
  • Aaron Gardner
  • powertothepeople

    as anyone with a bit of honesty would have to say he walked away with his tail tucked and looking like a fool.

  • msctex

    O’Donnell should have known better, but the fact he didn’t only proves how far gone so many of these people are.

    Jonah Goldberg used the most purely frightening Obama quote I have yet to come across the other day, and it was, “I actually believe my own BS.” It was probably meant as a joke, but this is a chief prerequisite for Progressivism, right up there with abdication of the notion of Cause and Effect. O’Donnell went into this verbal TKO fully expecting his arguments to be effective, thinking there was no way nor reason he would be made to appear a fool.

    More’s the pity.

  • rcatheart

    Ok, I absolutely never watch MSNBC, for any reason. Is this what all their “journalists” are like? Is this supposed to be “news” or “opinion”? What is this guy’s show normally like? Is it more of an OReilly-type program, or “hard news”?

    Regardless, way to go, Condi! I can’t believe MSNBC is even putting this up on the internet – it makes their guy look crazy, rude, and so possessed of his own agenda that he can’t even have a normal conversation.

    Wouldn’t your mom be embarrassed if you were behaving like that? Or if you were working for an organization encouraged its employees to behave like that?

  • banzaibob

    Why can’t we have intellectuals such as Ms. Rice running the country instead of clowns like Obama. Most of the time we get people who want the office and they can’t even find their way out of a wet paper bag. I wish we could draft her to at least be the VP pick.

  • ceili_dancer

    A curbstomping of the first degree. The real sad part of the aftermath of the interview is the lefties will think that O’Donnell won that debate because he was a rectal cavity to Secretary Rice and “He showed them”. I think Secretary Rice should make a necklace of his teeth like I see some of the gator hunters do.

  • johnt

    The measured tones, cadence, the stone face, just like a semi-normal person, [a liberal who doesn't drool] might look. It’s hopeless, they’re all nuts, they differ only by degree and the medicines they take. Does anybody remember the part that says, “and the nations that support them”? Or the Salman Park training center in Iraq, or the $thousands Saddam gave to families of terrorists, and on and so on?
    Low I Q freaks, that is, media liberals, really do think that incessant interruption is clever, that their intelligence is above zoo level. Why not, they don’t want answers. Unless it’s Joe Biden or the O.

  • Justin Spagnolo (standardcandle)

    Clearly MSNBC editors thought that Lawrence did well enough to air the tape…

    And frankly, I’m a little jealous… I wish I could get paid to make to make an ass out of myself in front of 300,000 viewers every night… but alas, my self dignity won’t allow it.

    To be fair to Lawrence though, I don’t think their A-Team would have made a difference. Its the substance of their lies that make them look foolish.

  • Flagstaff

    “…it makes their guy look crazy, rude, and so possessed of his own agenda that he can?t even have a normal conversation.”

    He is what he is.

  • etpietro

    ….you mean someone on the left who is in Condoleeza Rice’s intellectual weight class, I’m sorry but there simply isn’t anyone.

    Certainly not in the lefty media anyway.

    There is nothing more satisfying than watching Condy take someone down with her superior smarts, encyclopedic knowledge of the facts and, best of all, her calm, and placid demeanor.

    And yet, behind that very pleasant smile, is a ferocious tiger just saying, “Oh, my God, I am going to smack you down so hard and love every second of it.”

    This SO made my day.

  • etpietro

    “Condi” of course, not “Condy.”

    Sorry, Dr. Rice.

  • victrola

    There’s nothing more refreshing than an intelligent, articulate conservative that can absolutely smack down liberal nonsense.

    These are the type of Republicans we need to promote, not ones that are one-trick ponies that can only spout off bumper sticker slogans.

  • bk

    cut @Lawrence O’Donnell slack for his crazed racism with Condi Rice. He works at MSNBC, & so had probably never seen a black person.

  • rcatheart

    I don’t understand how “these types of people” (random liberals on the street and in the media, etc…) honestly think they know *more* than the people they are interviewing. Like he’s going to confront her with these “facts” and she’ll be totally taken by surprise and have to admit that either she’s stupid or she’s been lying the whole time?

    Newsflash, dude: the woman was Secretary of State and National Security Director. There is no possible way that she is dumber or more ignorant about the issues than you. She “knows stuff” that you can’t possibly even imagine in your wildest dreams. She “knows stuff” that she will take to her grave. You’re *really* not going to win here.

  • aesthete

    Lawrence O’Donnell was the heady mix of blustering bully and confident fool that he always is.

    That said, I don’t agree with the premises of either. Does it matter that we did or did not have a coalition? What about UN resolutions — are they even worth the paper they’re printed on? What of Arab democracy? How is that vital to national security or our interests in any way that is not wishful in nature? Condi clearly had the better argument — but only if you already accept as a given that the US should be the UN’s muscle, that humanitarian war is acceptable, and that international coalitions and support are important. Interestingly, and unfortunately, lost in the tangle was what Iraq actually meant for the security and interests of the US, or a definition of our interests in the Middle East. It is unfortunate that our debate isn’t adult enough to address and challenge the unstated assumption that the US’ interests are those of the UN or the rest of the world.

  • alwaysfiredup

    She belongs in the next Republican administration, in whatever capacity she chooses.

  • effinayright

    What would have done? What standard would adopt for US action internationally?

    And as for the “unstated assumption that US interests are those of the UN and the rest of the world”, who ever said that was the test? Are you not aware that O’Donnell himself was arguing that the US acted when its interests were threatened, and that Rice was arguing that NOT ONLY were US interests threatened, but those of other UN member nations?

    It seems your post is just one strawman after another.

  • effinayright

    Sigh…that should be “US interests were NOT threatened”.

  • aesthete

    We’re basing our policy (or at least, its rationales) on what the UN Security Council tells us is good for us. No one on that table was concerned with whether or not Iraq was in America’s best interests — Lawrence just attacked Condi on anything he could, and Condi cited UN Resolutions regarding Iraq. Who cares if other UN member nations’ interests were threatened? Our actions *should* be self-interested, not based on whether other nations’ interests are at stake. There was no discussion of what our interests in the ME are or should be, and how invading Iraq secured those interests. That is a discussion we are sorely in need of, not yet another discussion where we get to brag about how pro-UN Bush was.

    A move towards rational foreign policy would begin with the realization that our foreign policy should favor *us*, not the interests, liberty or democratization of other nations and international bodies. Insofar as any of those things favor us, that’s great, but oftentimes they do not and we need to deal with that.

  • ciscoguy