NY Sun editor: Rutgers team must "feel pretty terrible" about Corzine crash
During the 10 a.m. ET hour of the April 20 edition of MSNBC Live, New York Sun national and foreign editor Nicholas Wapshott told host Chris Jansing that he "should think" that members of the Rutgers University women's basketball team "feel pretty terrible about what's happened to [New Jersey] Governor [Jon] Corzine [D], who was racing to attend a totally unnecessary meeting of reconciliation where these women are paraded as inadequate." Wapshott was referring to an April 12 meeting between Don Imus and the basketball team held at the New Jersey governor's mansion following Imus' April 4 comments, in which he referred to the team as "nappy-headed hos." According to an April 13 Reuters article, Corzine was on his way to the meeting when the vehicle in which he was riding "swerved to avoid another car and crashed through a guard rail."
Wapshott made his comments during a discussion with Jansing about Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's (D-NY) planned attendance at a Rutgers forum on women and political leadership. She is also scheduled to meet with the women's basketball team and its coach, C. Vivian Stringer. During the segment, Wapshott also claimed that Imus' "drive-by insult" was "blown out of all proportion by the coach who had them all paraded as victims on television. That's not good for them."
Wapshott concluded by advocating that Clinton "advise" the team members: "Grow up. Be mature. If somebody says something horrible to them -- to you, just shrug and move on because that's the way in life you're going to have to get on with it, and don't choose your five minutes of fame as they've done." Jansing responded: "Now, I have to say, I think in the appearances that they have made and the interviews I've seen, they've been extremely mature and thoughtful."
Earlier in the segment Jansing had asked Wapshott: "Does [Clinton's] campaign seek political advantage in this whole Imus controversy?" Wapshott replied: "I think so," later adding that Clinton is "jumping on the bandwagon" by meeting with the Rutgers team. Jansing did not host any other guests during the segment.
From the 10 a.m. ET hour of the April 20 edition of MSNBC Live:
JANSING: Nicholas Wapshott is the national and foreign editor with The New York Sun -- good morning.
WAPSHOTT: Good morning.
JANSING: Hillary is scheduled to meet with the women's basketball coach, Vivian Stringer, among other things. It should be interesting, given that Hillary was herself in the past the target of some of Imus' jokes or rants, if you prefer. The Senator also sent an email to thousands of supporters urging them to send messages of encouragement to the team. Does her campaign seek political advantage in this whole Imus controversy?
WAPSHOTT: I think so. One of the interesting things to have emerged from The Washington Post poll that came out yesterday was that, actually, Hillary Clinton is much more popular among African-Americans and women than she -- than Barack Obama. And I think that she's going to shore up that lead that she has in this very important section of the community, particularly in this race with Barack Obama.
JANSING: And not only is she making this appearance but, yesterday, her husband, the former president, met with Al Sharpton, of course who was on the forefront of asking for Imus to resign. She herself is going over there to talk to him later today. How important would her campaign see an endorsement from Al Sharpton as being?
WAPSHOTT: Well, I mean, Al Sharpton is sort of a mixed blessing because he's -- himself has said a number of things, including anti-Semitic remarks, which I'm sure that he regrets. So, Al Sharpton is not the stature of leader that one might hope among the African-American community -- on the other hand, he's significant. And, of course, all of this has to do with the fact that Bill Clinton is such a popular person among all African-Americans and therefore Hillary is trying to, as she will in all fronts, try to take advantage of Bill's popularity and hope that it reflects on her, which, so far, it seems to be working.
JANSING: We should also say that, at Rutgers, today, Senator Clinton is at a forum on women and political leadership and, in fact, she was invited long before the controversy broke out, but does she maybe have to be a little bit careful about what she says today? How open could she be to charges of opportunism?
WAPSHOTT: There's no doubt she's jumping on the bandwagon. Although the invitation was long-standing, that she took up on Monday and as you say it was delayed. But I would -- you know what I hope that she does say to them is that these are good African-American women and some that are not African-American, but what she should be saying to them is: "Don't have yourself painted as victims."
So, you had a drive-by insult from Don Imus. It was blown out of all proportion by the coach who had them all paraded as victims on television. That's not good for them. That's made their situation worse and the relationship, too, when it then went on to the Governor's mansion. I should think that they feel pretty terrible about what's happened to Governor Corzine, who was racing to attend a totally unnecessary meeting of reconciliation where these women are paraded as inadequate.
The best answer I think is to advise them: Grow up. Be mature. If somebody says something horrible to them -- to you, just shrug and move on because that's the way in life you're going to have to get on with it, and don't choose your five minutes of fame as they've done.
JANSING: Now, I have to say, I think in the appearances that they have made and the interviews I've seen, they've been extremely mature and thoughtful. Nicholas Wapshott, thanks so much, appreciate your time.
MMfA should change its name to "Azzhole Exposers"
This NY Sun guy qualifies for sure, as does Imus and many others who aren't "misinforming" as much as they're just being jerks.
You took the words out of my head.... It's bad enough to be called names on national airwaves, and now these swarmy, smug tools are telling them to 'just get over it', 'don't worry about a thing'... they are complete fools
Well, this one took longer than I thought it would. I guess the Troglodytes got distracted with their efforts to blame Liberalism for the Va. Tech shootings.
I wonder, was this governor in the habit of not wearing a seatbelt while hurtling down the highway at 90 mph?
Yes, and exactly what FIRE was he rushing to put out? The fire of racism?
It was a MEETING. A meeting.
There was no need for him, or anyone not rushing to an emergency, to be booking down the highway at 90 mph.
Still, Rutgers isn't to blame. A lack of common sense is the culprit.
Call ahead. "Hey, I'm running a little late. Hand out coffee and doughnuts. Bye."
And drive the speed limit. And wear a seat belt.
Randy
to be fair, he was not driving. it looks like a cowboy cop feeling he could do anything he wanted.
Then tell the nut behind the wheel to slow down.
I think governor of NJ has that power, yes?
Randy
The VT massacre against innocent students put much of what we face in harsh pespective......and the entire flap over Imus' "injurious" remarks seem a little silly now, in comparison.
Come on, Tommy, you thought it was silly then.
Come on Val, please show me where I said Imus' comments were "silly"?
Come on Tommy, I was responding to how you just said "the entire flap" was silly. Not the comments.
Val, What I said, in case you missed it a few posts above - is by comparison to the VT shootings, the Imus flap, which blanketed the media for days, now appears very silly and irrelevant.
If you disagree, then fine.
And what I said is that you thought it was silly long before thirty kids got killed, and that I thought you were being disingenuous.
Please enlighten me and tell me what exactly I thought was silly?
If issue 2 is more grave than issue 1, it doesn't mean that issue 1 is "silly".
Tommy, really, please study logic. You are grossly deficient in this area.
If issue 2 is the mass slaughter of 32 innocent college kids, and issue 1 is comment by a talk show host - then any reasonable person would tend to view issue 1 as silly, by comparison.
If you disagree, so be it.
Tommy.... IF one thing IS 'more important' than A SECOND thing, it DOES NOT follow that the SECOND THING is 'silly'... If one person has a broken leg and ANOTHER person has terminal cancer, you do not say the person with the broken leg is 'silly' by comparison- they ARE BOTH serious in VARYING DEGREES...
Mr. L.,
Not a very good comparison at all. If I had a broken leg, I would find it a little difficult to whine to a terminally ill cancer patient about how serious my affliction was........but then I am not a liberal :)
For I would view my temporary inconvenience as a "little silly" compared to what the cancer patient is enduring.
Thanks for making my point.
They're both things that have to be dealt with, though. The point is you're not going to pass up going to the hospital with a broken leg because someone might have a more serious concern, making your broken leg look "silly". That's why it doesn't make sense to make the comparison in the first place.
Nobody's making your point, including you.
Perhaps this makes more sense to your intrusive argumentativeness.....by comparison, arguing with you and your alter ego is "silly" when comparing discussions to a reasonable, intellectually challenging and intelligent poster.
Actually, no comparison is even necessary.
Tommy, I thought you were against personal attacks. I'm making a perfectly fair and sensible point, and for some reason you feel compelled to not only bring up this baseless "alter ego" BS again (and again...and again...) but to insult my intelligence and reasonability when you can't reply to the point I'm making.
How am I not being "reasonable" here, please?
I'll try once. These are two situations that are analogous in this way, in my opinion. There were two situations involving college students facing adversity - one held press conferences and spoke of "being scarred for life" based on a stupid comment, undeserved admittedly, from a talk show host. The other faced bullets, a crazed gunman and death from a wacked out fellow student. Both situations were heavily covered in the media. Now, I would assume if you asked the Rutger's girls how their "scarred lives" compared with the lost lives of the VT students, they would probably say their concerns were ultimately "silly", BY COMPARISON.
My point went more to the oversaturation media coverage of the Imus situation than anything else - and how we seize on these "silly" controversies and how they come to be very pale and unimportant when put up against a real tragedy. That was all I was saying.
You can agree or disagree, it's all good.
I do think the "scarred for life" comment is an obvious exaggeration. If that's what you were talking about specifically without actually specifying it, then yes I would hope that she would agree with that. As far as comparing the two things in general, there's no need to do that as they both deserved attention in their own different ways. That's something you've practically agreed to already, by admitting that Imus should have been held accountable for what he said. It was stll a genuine controversy, even if the effects were exaggerated.
Now, don't you feel better about that post than your previous one?
Brab,
I may have been unclear earlier, but my point went more to the media attention given to both events and how they covered the aftermath of the Imus controversy almost ad nauseum. Each situation is vastly different, but in my opinion one warranted brief coverage yet was blown way out of proportion, while the other deserved it's treatment and forced us to examine what is really important, and what is ultimately not, in our lives.
The problem that I had was that you made it very clear last week that you thought the Imus flap was blown out of proportion. Fine, your opinion, you're welcome to it. This week, though, with thirty-plus kids and teachers dead, you used the tragedy to underscore your point about Imus.
And I just thought that was cheap, and beneath you.
Val,
You say I used the tragedy, I would disagree. I made a simple point highlighting why I thought the tragedy was reality hitting us square in the face, while the Imus flap was largely a media driven story.
I have explained it fully.
You were definitely unclear, and specifying the extent of the media coverage makes it much more understandable, thank you. Without that, neither Mr.L nor anyone else was going to make the case you seemed to be presenting.
Forgive me, but it's hard to be seen as "intelligent", "intellectually challenging" or "reasonable" when you make personal attacks and baseless accusations instead of making the effort to make yourself understood. I think it's pretty obvious that I make that effort, even if you don't agree with me. I don't think there are many (if any) episodes where you can genuinely accuse me of being "unreasonable", in any case.
I take intellectual honesty especially seriously, in case you hadn't noticed. To have more than one name on here would be a very dishonest act, in my opinion. I tried it once, about two years ago for a couple of weeks, just to blow off some steam. But I didn't sock-puppet or gang up on people using it, which is your accusation here.
So please, if you have a substantive point to make, just make it. If you think I'm being hypocritical or inconsistent, say why. But don't spout some knee-jerk defensive crap about "alter egos" and insults about my reasonability and intelligence. I know you're capable of being reasonable some of the time, so I don't know if it's a self-control issue or what. But if you can control it, I would ask you to do so, and stop accusing me of being someone else, and accusing other people of being me.
Is that fair?
No you are a conservative as your total lack of basic comprehension and irony demonstrates. The analogy is perfect and since YOU whine more than any ten posters here the irony SHOULD have caused you to stroke out except being a con you are immune to it
Exactly so. Well said.
So lemme get this straight: we shouldn't be holding Imus accountable for his offensive remarks because of a shooting? Heck, there are many days in Iraq where more people are murdered than at VT. Maybe everything is silly in comparison. Let's just pretend the right-wing misinformers don't own the airwaves, it's the least silly thing to do.
Once again, show me where I said Imus should not be held accountable?
If holding Imus accountable was the right thing to do, then who cares about comparing it to VT?
Apparently you do not, and that is perfectly fine.
Wapshitt needs a seat belt around his brain to keep for saying crap like this.
Funny but they hand out probation like candy on this site.
Wapshott. Great, another brainless wizard I've never heard of.
Apparently the favorite con punching bags are on vacation, or just behaving themselves? If all else fails, reach down to the bottom of the barrel and scrape up some obscure rightwinger who sticks his foot in his mouth.......gotta feed the beast.
Well if no-name Schlussel can generate 111 posts on yesterdays thread, this clown can probably make triple digits. Hell, I've already contributed 3.
C'mon...you know we must feed our addiction.
We all have our addictions, for sure. For some it's conservative nutjobs, for others it's liberal hysteria.......I'd rather have ice cream, but it's too fattening.
He's the editor of the New York Sun and he's appearing on MSNBC. Just because you've never heard of him doesn't mean he's "obscure."
Well, Brab........err, Clams is back.
Right, Celia.
Oh, you mean me and Celia down by the schoolyard?
And right on cue.......
;)
I've been here all day. It's supposed to prove something that I commented on your lying?
By the way it's "Me and Julio down by the schoolyard".
Absolutely correct. Celia is breaking my heart. She's shaking my confidence daily.
At least the writer is the same.
Hmm I thought that was "you're shaking my coffee and straining". Or maybe "you're shaking my coffin and staying."
Just kidding, I've been a Simon and Garfunkel fan for ages, I just found that page entertaining.
And you're still responding with empty nonsense and false accusations instead of actually addressing what I wrote.
Did I say I never heard of him? Are you making stuff up again? (surprise)
And you're still baselessly accusing me of making stuff up, even though you've never provided one shred of evidence that shows that I've ever made anything up. You're the one spouting made-up accusations about me and Brab being the same person. Hypocrisy be thy name.
Back on point, you accused MMFA of digging "down to the bottom of the barrel and scrap[ing] up some obscure rightwinger," so it's only natural to assume that you'd never heard of Wapshott. It's also not much of a stretch to assume that you didn't bother to read the article, because if you did then you would have known that Wapshott is an editor of a major New York newspaper and that he was appearing as a guest on a prominent cable news program. No digging or scraping necessary when his words are being broadcast to millions on MSNBC Live.
Ok this guy Wapshott is a jerk. No doubt about it. But so is Corzine.
Would somebody please explain to me WHY Corzine needed to be a part of the Imus-Rutgers BB team meeting in the first place?
The answer is ...he didn't.
This bozo was looking to stick his nose in this for a POLITICAL photo-op.
So he's got his driver speeding there, he's not wearing his seatbelt, and ends up in an auto accident. What a maroon. All I can say is I'm thankful he didn't end up hurting anybody but himself in this ridiculous political play where his presence wasn't even necessary.
Geez Jeter, you get up on the wrong side of the bed or what? You never know, this meeting was about the biggest news story of the day, all the cable channels had live coverage outside the governors mansion waiting for "breaking developments". The governor was probably just trying to outrun the paparazzi or something.
"...don't choose your five minutes of fame as they've done."
What a moron. This line really ticks me off.
These women did not CHOOSE these five minutes. They had these five minutes dropped on them like an avil.
Judging by their response to the hornets nest that ensued, I think they would have much preferred their "five minutes" to be their achievement on the basketball court.
I am sure everyone feels terrible about Corzine. He is seriously hurt.
I suppose the Rutgers team called up the governor and told him not to use his seatbelt on the way over.
These people are just beyond belief.
Another thread ruined by fighting with a troll. And Tommy is a troll. He never seems to be concerned about the stupid, idiotic, lying things his righty pundits say. He just changes the subject or wastes everyone's time. Why anyone engages him is beyond me.
The Rutgers team has nothing to do with Imus' stupid comments/firing or Corzine's car accident. Imus was cruisin' for his bruisin' for years.
Amen, JJ.