Give ’em hell, Teresa

So Drudge has started another of his infamous firestorms over Teresa Heinz Kerry telling a reporter to “shove it.” Learn the facts, and you’ll see that Teresa was being kind.

The “reporter” in question was Colin McNickle, the editorial page editor of the Scaife-owned Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. If you want to know why Mrs. Kerry might have a beef with Mr. McNickle, you can read part of the answer here: the Tribune-Review editorial page has been on a disgusting and dishonest jihad against the Heinz Endowments for nearly a year. He’s lucky that a fleeting tonguelashing is all he got.

Let’s hope people learn the full story before jumping to conclusions of Teresa being out of control.

The Discussion: 11 Comments

Oh, you know they won’t. That’s not the kind of world we live in. Go Teresa!

July 26, 2004 @ 12:21 pm | Comment

Sure, someone writes something you don’t like, you single them out after your speech on civility and assault them.

July 26, 2004 @ 6:08 pm | Comment

Perhaps it’s time for Howard Stern to bring back a Stuttering John figure and have him go after Republicans for embarrassing interviews. Of course it wouldn’t work at a Bush event. History has shown that Secret Service and Bush security would escort any reporter of McNickle’s lack of stature out of the area forceably.

July 26, 2004 @ 6:13 pm | Comment

Tom, you’re exactly right.

July 26, 2004 @ 6:17 pm | Comment

No Boo, the reporter kept trying to ask her a loaded question based on a false premise, i.e., that she specifically referrd to “un-American activities,” which she never did. She repeatedly tried to correct the reporter. And there is deep history here — the reporter works for a Scaife-owned paper that has been trying for many months to make Heinz look bad. She was responding to an ongoin witch hunt.

Personally, I wish she had been a bit more genteel, but under these circumstances I think she’s going to emerge unscathed, and she may well come out ahead in the eyes of many Americans.

July 26, 2004 @ 6:17 pm | Comment

History has shown that the more delicate phrase, “Go Fuck Yourself” has wonderful results.

July 26, 2004 @ 6:36 pm | Comment

I don’t think anyone’s really upset about this, I just think the timing was amusing.

July 26, 2004 @ 7:26 pm | Comment

The only thing interesting about this is story is that it’s a litmus test for dishonest partisanship. Richard wanted Chaney’s head for an intemperate response to unfair allegations yet defends Heinz-Kerry. Others defended Chaney and condemn Heinz-Kerry.

July 27, 2004 @ 2:51 am | Comment


I do believe there is an implicit anatomical difference between “shove it” and “fuck you”; however, I believe that both are protected free-speech. However, by nature and raising, I’m a cussin’ man who tries not to hold such outbursts against the user. Even a weasly polecat breed of one.

To my knowledge a curse word can do little if any actual harm to anyone. On the other hand, lies can do a lot; the paper the reporter in this incident works for has been writing flat-out lies about the Heinz Endowments under the guise of “opinion.”

But, what the hell, I think it is all “colorful” and makes for lively politics–the swearing and cursing, not the lying.

July 27, 2004 @ 7:31 am | Comment

Conrad, you’re missing an essential difference: Theresa’s opponent was being annoying, and, well, just doesn’t have much status. So “shove it” (as in shove it up your ass) is kinder than….

Cheney, whose opponent was being a pompous prick (but he has status), and he’s a heartbeat from the presidency! So, uh, the difference is, uh. well……

Oh, nevermind.

July 27, 2004 @ 8:08 am | Comment

I agree with Boo – it was the timing rather than the invective. I had no problem with Chaney’s F-bomb or even W referring to a reporter as an asshole. So what? Its nice to see the false front drop on occassion and get to see a little of the real person.

July 27, 2004 @ 8:07 pm | Comment

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.