Megyn Kelly, Queen of Narcissism, Gets a Pass

Posted on August 11, 2015 by Robert Ringer Comments (78)

Font:

Megyn Kelly is razor sharp, impeccably prepared, relentless, tough, verbally skilled, and, to boot, a pretty good looker. She’s also an egomaniacal smart-aleck who seems intent on following Glenn Beck down the path to mediocre celebrity status.

When Kelly is on her game and acts like a broadcast professional, there’s no one better. She’s at her best when she’s going after radical–left liars like Baltimore prosecutor Marilyn Mosby, Planned Parenthood’s criminal elite, and just about everyone who perpetuated the “Hands up, don’t shoot” lie.

But she’s at her absolute worst when her cranial inflammatory condition — Beckitis — flares up and “I,” “me,” “my” come rolling off her tongue in nonstop fashion. Well … come to think of it … she’s at her very worst when she’s interviewing her “hunk” of a house-husband and artificially boosting one of his novels into a New York Times bestseller. I think George and Ira Gershwin had him in mind when they wrote “Nice work if you can get it.”

Borrowing from her ex-husband’s comments about his marriage to Kelly, her current spouse appears to be the wife she’s always wanted. As her ex (Dr. Dan Kendall) put it, “We both needed someone to cook and clean.”

But let’s not get personal here. I have no dog in this fight — I’ve never even met Donald Trump — but starting what is supposed to be a serious debate about serious issues by asking a flagrantly loaded question aimed at one participant — under the dishonest guise of its being for all the participants — is a perfect example of why people dislike the media almost as much as they do politicians.

But for me, Kelly’s loaded question was almost secondary. I was already annoyed by her giddy, self-absorbed blather long before the candidates came out of their bunkers to do battle.

I felt like I wanted one of her colleagues to grab her by the arm and tell her to calm down and act like she’s been in the end zone before. When she showed a video of what she was doing just before the debate (It sounded like a bunch of childish gibberish, so I didn’t really even understand what she was talking about.), it was clear that she was going to seize her moment in the spotlight to focus on her main love: Megyn Kelly.

It reminded me of her appearance on Jimmy Kimmel’s show some time ago when she made a complete ass of herself — giddy off the charts — talking about her experiences at the White House Christmas party and how awkward she felt meeting the Obamas. (No, I don’t watch Jimmy Kimmel, but — as you would guess — she actually played the video on her show. It’s fortunate for her ego that the universe is expanding.)

But back to the debate. After Trump told her, “You’re not doing a very good job,” Kelly looked like an embarrassed little girl who had been slapped on the wrist, immediately frowned and looked down, and remained stone silent for a few glorious moments. With all her smarts, I found myself wondering why she would think she could get away with taking a swipe at the toughest street fighter on the planet.

In any event, whatever else one might think of Donald Trump, he was right on when he told Kelly that she wasn’t doing a very good job — because she wasn’t. As to the blood comments, that whole brouhaha is so stupid that it’s not worth discussing.

Now, let me answer my own question as to why Kelly thought she could get away with taking a swipe at Donald Trump: It’s because she has the ultimate Teflon shield around her — Brit Hume and his wife, Bill O’Reilly, and, most important of all, Roger Ailes. Ailes quickly went on the record by saying that Kelly “is a brilliant journalist and I support her 100 percent.

Big mistake, Roger. It’s like rewarding a spoiled, pampered child. So it was no surprise when Kelly began her Monday broadcast by saying, “You may have heard there was a dustup involving yours truly and presidential contender Donald Trump.”

She then self-righteously said that she had decided not to respond to Trump’s remarks (even though she was responding to them as she spoke!), adding that he has declined to apologize and “I certainly will not apologize for doing good journalism.” Talk about a self-serving comment — her journalism was terrible!

It was analogous to Lois Lerner’s proclaiming to Congress that she had done nothing wrong, then taking the Fifth Amendment. It’s a cute trick, and both she and Kelly got away with it.

Plain and simple, Kelly’s problem is that she violates — with impunity — a cardinal rule of television broadcasting: Never make yourself part of the story — and certainly not the story. From the time she showed those pre-debate clips about herself until The Donald smacked her down, it felt like she was screaming at viewers, “Look at me! Look at me! Aren’t I great?” She may be pretty, but she’s pretty nauseating as well.

While the powers that be at Fox can coddle and protect Kelly from losing her job, they can’t force the public to continue to watch her. I’ve been around long enough to know that the one ironclad rule of life is that things change, so the Queen of Narcissism would do well to look over her shoulder.

As always, Fox has a bevy of talented beauties in the pipeline. It’s kind of like Ohio State football, where if your Heisman Trophy candidate quarterback goes down, you just pull another one off the bench who’s just as good or better.

It really is true that every twenty-four hours the world turns over and somebody else is on top. It’s surprising that her mentor, Brit Hume, who became a legend by playing things straight down the journalistic middle (never injecting himself into the story), would not take the time to explain the rules to her.

With all this in mind, my conclusion is that the big winner is Kelly’s ex, Dr. Dan Kendall. Every time she goes on another self-worshiping rant, you’ve got to believe he’s thinking, “But for the grace of God …”

Robert Ringer

+Robert Ringer is an American icon whose unique insights into life have helped millions of readers worldwide. He is also the author of two New York Times #1 bestselling books, both of which have been listed by The New York Times among the 15 best-selling motivational books of all time.

78 responses to “Megyn Kelly, Queen of Narcissism, Gets a Pass”

  1. Aaron says:

    Well said. You articulated what my gut was trying to tell me. I characterized it as "playground bully" journalism.

    • Teri says:

      All night I kept wondering which side FOX was on. They kept bashing them like it was an R and D debate.
      But then again, I am sure their ratings are higher if a liberal is in office. What do you have to talk about for 24 hours if your own guy wins?

    • Deborah Kelting says:

      Fox is now partly owned by the liberal left…They at best want a "go along to get along" stand for nothing R that will be a "yes" man like much of the current R party. They cannot go too left because they will lose what makes them the number one cable station. But they certainly do not want a Conservative that will challenge the left agenda. Just saying

      • Kenpowoman says:

        Fox is partly owned by a Saudi prince, which explains why their coverage of Islam and Muslims virtually disappeared when that deal was finalized.

      • Barbara Cutrell says:

        Bull's eye article by Ringer and a bull's eye comment, Deborah. Couldn't agree with you more. They have lost me as a staunch viewer. I watch HGTV rather than Kelly and Fox- they at least offer an entertaining and informative program.

  2. Marte says:

    I don't watch TV often enough to have witnessed the previous episodes you speak of nor to know anything about her husbands past and present – and I didn't watch what I think of as the "pre-game" show, but I was thoroughly disgusted with her performance during the debate.

    I have admired her toughness when interviewing some nasty people, but her performance during the debate reduced my admiration for her by about 97%.

    However, she can't take ALL the blame for that poorly run debate. There were two other people sitting there who could have/should have done something.

    Donald Trump wasn't the only candidate who was treated poorly that night.

  3. Rocketman says:

    I think that it's very telling that all the left wing media people praised her and FOX after the debate was over. If the likes of MSNBC praise the job you did then you have screwed up badly.

  4. Ric Aragon says:

    My thoughts exactly. Megyn Kelly's giddy-as-a-shoolgirl demeanor in the beginning made her look like a dingbat, and anything she may have said after that was impossible to take seriously. Her question to Trump was indeed self-serving, as was the self-righteous look of contempt on her face as she asked it. Brit Hume needs to pull her aside and remind her what real journalism is. And Megyn… lose the venus flytrap eyelashes.

  5. Bob says:

    I don't get this hatred for Kelly and her choice of questions. She obviously sees Trump as a name caller – I don't want my president to be a name caller – and she called him on it. They also called out Bush for his common core past. What is wrong with investigating someone's manner of operating? She doesn't want to see her president running around dismissing people by name calling. Good for her. Is that what you want of your president? And I'm not suggesting that this was the best use of debate time either. I just don't get the big hoopla.

    • Jim Hallett says:

      She was the hired "attack dog" to discredit Trump, which obviously is the agenda of all the lamestream media and inbred politician types. They would prefer a face-off next November between the Clinton and Bush crime families. As a Ron Paul/Murray Rothbard libertarian, I am no fan of Donald Trump as a presidential contender, but do view him as one of the rare entertaining folks, amid all the lies, platitudes and do-nothing promises of most of the others. Megyn Kelly's attacks on Trump were not given to the other candidates, and yet post-"debate" polls revealed Trump as the clear winner . .. so the agenda of Fox and others failed!

      • Kenpowman says:

        Pretty sure the whole debate team was given their marching orders by Murdoch sr., whom we should never forget has said he'd support Hillary for president.

    • Ron says:

      If you're a dumb assed dog Bob then someone needs to tell the king that he's not wearing any clothes. Kudos to anyone with courage enough to speak the truth. Some people really do need a wake up call. As far as your use of "name caller" … everyone name calls. Gays, Blacks, Honkies, Lesbians, Transgenders, Caitlins, Progressives, Libs, Tea Partiers, … the list goes on and on. Get over it!

    • Robert Ringer RJR says:

      For me, Trump was a side issue. The real issue is Megyn Kelly's narcissistic, giddy, schoolgirl behavior. When she leaves all that at home, she's great. It's hard to understand why a media genius like Roger Ailes doesn't explain that to her. I don't want to completely stop watching her, because there's not much to watch on Fox anymore as it creeps further and further to the left.

      • Scott theczech says:

        Ever since Wilson [the presidency of] character assassination, esp. by the "progressive" left, has [d]evolved into an art form. If you run for high office in this country, expect things to get ugly, very ugly.

        Since the left-right continuum has all shifted left over the years, there is a void created on the right of that continuum; Democrats are now collectivists, Republicans are now left of center – quasi democrats – and there is no political yet organized such that it can effectively represent the true conservatives of this country, or about 25% of voting adults.

    • Ellis Baxter says:

      I do not think it is hatred, I think it is a total failure of class … policy would be nice. Trump had the floor for over 11 minutes, Bush over 8, the rest under 7 and two under 6 ! Fair and Balanced?

    • Richard Lee Van Der says:

      Yes, but… anything to disapprove of Rosie types is good!

    • Tk Wellington says:

      Bob her point was not about name calling, but pushing women back to being barefoot and pregnant….she feels Donald may tamper with equal rights for women……that was my take….and I also no longer wish to lister to her on Fox News either…..

  6. Brad Tobin says:

    Well said

  7. Wendy says:

    You nailed Megyn Kelly's performance perfectly. I had been losing respect for her for a while now as I have been noticing her narcissistic attitude becoming more prevalent but she completely lost it after that debate. That question about Trump's behavior towards women was nothing more than a liberal stunt. Like him or not, Trump is Trump. From my observation he treats everyone from both genders the same. He's consistent on that. He'll trash men the same as women and Kelly knows that. I think that is what set everyone on fire because it was an unfair attack. They all definitely seemed determined to destroy Trump. I did not care how he did in the debate but Fox definitely went down in my book by lowering their standard with a personal agenda.

    But, as you indicated, her whole performance was pathetic and her focus on her self was frustrating. It was supposed to be a night about the candidates, not the moderators.

    I agree with Rocketman, you know you screwed up badly when the left wing media praised the job you did. The 5pm debate was an excellent example of what the 9pm debate should have been. The moderators outclassed all three of the 9pm moderators on every level.

    • Patti says:

      he three got a phone call 10 hours before the debate, telling all three to take Trump down, also the candidates had gotten the news to take Trump down, it seemed the three listened and the only one that listened to his direction was the short one that Trump asked him if he was having a good day!!

    • Kenpowoman says:

      I nearly lost it when she turned to the cameras toward the end of the debate and said with a simper, "And coming up next…. God!" Claiming all the candidates would get that question, but of course, they didn't. That comment alone was enough to make me stop watching her program.

  8. RealitySeeker says:

    lol….. Trump has got you off of the sidelines and back in the game?

    This has got to be the most entertaining, most down and dirty, presidential campaign since Andrew Jackson ran for office. Trump has awoken the pussified, go-along-to-get-alongs of the world to the delicious taste of red meat. And do you know what? The vegetarian cows and fat pigs who vote the party line are turning into carnivores. The GOP doesn't want that. No! They want fat cows, pigs and chickens, not meat loving coydogs. Fox News is owned by elites who want viewers to hang on every word of their Barbie assassin doll, Megyn Kelly. Yes, Fox news attempted to bring down Donald Trump. I wonder what the bounty on Donald's scalp was?

    First the GOP insiders tried to bring down Trump with charges of racism. Then they tried to get him by using John McCain as a means to accuse Trump of hating veterans. Then they tried to smear Trump by accusing him of raping his ex-wife. Then they sent another women to assassinate Trump. She had Chris Wallace and Bret Baier at her side. Megyn Kelly's sole purpose in the first debate was to gotcha Trump.

    The hit failed. That snake, Roger Ailes, is going to have to better than Megyan, if he really wants to bring down the best, in-your-face, dirty duelist who has run for president in a long, long time.

    When Thomas Jefferson ran for office he called John Adams a "hideous hermaphroditical character, which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman." Adams' men shot back by calling Vice President Jefferson "a mean-spirited, low-lived fellow, the son of a half-breed Indian squaw, sired by a Virginia mulatto father."………..

    ……..lol…. it must have been fun, back then, to watch the Founders go head to head.

    History repeats. And Americans are saying bye-bye to Reagan's 11th Commandment and hello to Donald Trump's rules, i.e., there are no rules. Get ready for anything. because if the GOP can't bring Trump down, then the elites might have to do to Trump what the political machine did to JFK in 1963.

    • oscarwildeweenr says:

      Scalp? Is there one under there? What IS that, anyway? Looks like a coypu crawled up there &’s trying to hybridize with his cranium. Or maybe he’s the reincarnation of the whig party?

      Whatever THAT is the certain thing is he, & his, recurring skit-fashion, want to trump you up, trump & pump some “insurance”. Whose buying? If I was still selling, I’d want that mailing list.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6erU9Z3bUc4

      • RealitySeeker says:

        "Are you not entertained? Are you not entertained?"

        This political slugfest is almost as good as having a season ticket to the Coliseum. Did you check out what these two chicks had to say about Megyn? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DP6S3KE2DaI

        I swear to God, everyday I wake up and I feel like Private Joe Bowers in the movie, "Idiocracy". You just can't make this shit up.

        My all-time favorite reporter once said: "A good politician is quite as unthinkable as an honest burglar". ~ H. L. Mencken

        Today I can add that a good Fox News reporter "is quite as unthinkable as an honest burglar".

        In fact, you could wrap up all of the shit- suckers on Fox and still not have half as good a reporter as Mencken— including that lightweight, dishonest, ringmaster, Roger Ailes.

        • oscarwildeweenr says:

          you know ol' oscar, like 'ol onan, entertains hisownself, dontcha' cher?

          unlike maximus – dat's a datsan, right? – i beat my…plowshare into a sword, split the seams that bind, breathed deep (the gathering gloom), & split out for the territories & even fresher breathin'.

          throwin' that edge up into the cheap seats, why that's just wasteful – even if it is dramatic & in the script & all.

          menck was a mensch. also good with edged words.

          • Reality Seeker says:

            'Trump told Sean Hannity in a weekend phone call that he was “never doing Fox again,” appeared on four non-Fox public-affairs shows on Sunday, and did interviews with Today and Morning Joe on Monday, Ailes raised the white flag and picked up the phone on Monday morning. “Roger wanted a friendly relationship,” the source explained.

            Ailes offered Trump the chance to do a special on Kelly’s prime-time show to clear the air — an offer Trump flatly refused. “Donald was sufficiently pissed off that there was no way that was happening,” a person familiar with the call told me. According to the source, Trump’s ire was especially stoked after Howard Stern called to tell him about a 2010 interview in which Kelly joked about her breasts and her husband’s penis. Ailes offered other shows, and Trump agreed to appear on Fox and Friends and Hannity, two venues that have been loyal boosters of his candidacy."
            http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/08/fox-

            Anybody who knows the inside baseball story about the players of Fox, knows FAUX News isn't anything like the ingenuous public is led to believe. Trumps got them by the short hairs, because Fox and Fools miscalculated Trump's stage presence. The truth is that many of the Fox family are more sordid than Trump.

        • Richard Lee Van Der says:

          Mencken was the best!

  9. Rick says:

    The "machine" fears Trump because he has his own ammunition (money) and therefore will have no "leash". Despite their efforts, every "mistake"'he makes, helps him surge. He is speaking directly and has Command Presence. He has also greatly increased interest in this Presidential Race.

  10. Stephan F says:

    A top notch analysis Robert. To simplify things a bit — yet not to ignore or take away from her individual peculiarities & abnormalities — the M.K. problem is really just a microcosm of the entire fox news network. She is as intellectually dishonest as the rest of that army of neocons at FNC who are as biased, prejudicial & slanted as any liberal media you’ll find on the tube today. They have, in fact, brought the propagandizing to the masses to a whole new level. Their outrageous claim of being “fair and balanced” and “We report, you decide”, is so utterly contemptible it should be considered pure Orwellian Doublespeak by anyone one with an IQ over 50.

  11. oscarwildeweenr says:

    Me-gyn’s anodyne…is it so different from k kardashian’s well-televised behynd?

    There’s no business like show business…i coulda’ been an actor, but I wound up here….

    I prefer to watch method-ists whose method is, effectively, temporary, just to the final scene’s cut/wrap. Perma-method-ists are like tundra – you see the forest, forrest gump, of absolutely no trees, just lots of ‘special’ effects
    .
    Oscar weens skipping the not even eponymous awards shows is time not wasted, too.

  12. ◄Dave► says:

    Very well said, Robert. I wholeheartedly concur. The comparison to Beck's trajectory is rather poignant. I once admired them both and now can hardly stomach Beck. I used to find Kelly's giddy child-like enthusiasm and wit disarming if not charming. That's over.

    I had not heard of her ex's remarks. LOL! Thanks for sharing. :)

    BTW, my only interest in Trump is my hope that once the GOP manages to kill his efforts to reform them, he runs as an independent and uses his fame and fortune to finally do what Perot failed to do – break up the Incumbrepublocrat Duopoly, and open up our political processes to legitimate third party participation. ◄Dave►

    • aajj says:

      I just can't understand why Ms. Kelly needs to have "giddy child-like enthusiasm and wit". Sounds like a cheerleader instead of a professional journalist. Also, what does her ex-husband have to do with this? Who cares what he thinks? If she were a he, would anyone expect giddy child-like enthusiasm and wit? Would anyone be asking his ex spouse anything? So he wasn't happy with her as a wife? So what?

      I think she asked a very appropriate question as Donald Trump has a history of making disparaging remarks about women ( a very very large segment of this country's population).

      She is expected to be the quiet little woman instead of a professional journalist.

      She is fantastic, smart and fearless. Those are the qualities of a good journalist.

  13. joe murphy says:

    It isn't often that I find my own thoughts mirrored by someone else's, but yours are almost word-for-word what I said to my wife at the time. I was astonished at the Queen's gleeful trap-setting of Trump, and delighted at her astonished behavior when he threw it right back at her.

    I hate the way she never allows her guests to finish a sentence. Talk about narcissism. She and Bill O'reilly should have a contest. They are both horrible interviewers. The show is always about themselves. Guests are merely something to bounce their pearls of wisdom against.

    I've been wondering lately about Fox news. I'm sensing a shift to the "go along to get along" way of thinking of politics, with perhaps a bit of "skull and bones" old boy network included.

    Maybe I missed it, but I don't recall a word asked about what would be done about our out of control central banking system or how to pay off our debt and have a balanced budget; or what to do about the insane investment world.

    I'd like to hear someone mention trying to reduce the size of the federal government to the size our founders meant it to be; merely the individual states' coalition for national defense.

    Wouldn't it be a good thing to be able to move across a state line if you didn't like the laws of your state? It's a hell of a lot easier than moving to a different country!

    • cara.nome says:

      WE THOUGHT BILL OREILLY WAS GREAT, STOPPED WATCHING HIM A LONG TIME AGO WHEN HE STARTED THE LOOK-AT-ME, POPOUS ASS – BRAGGING STUFF. WE GOT TO WHERE IT WASN'T WORTH IT EVEN THOUGH SOMETIMES HE HAD SOMETHING TO SAY.

      AND IT INFURIATED MY HUSBAND THAT BILL WOULDN'T LET ANYONE ELSE FINISH WHAT THEY WERE SAYING AFTER INVITING THEM ON THE PROGRAM.

      ON THE OTHER HAND, SAW THROUGH MEG RIGHT OFF THE BAT, WONDERED WHY HE KEPT HER ON, GUESS YOU CAN FIGURE THAT ONE OUT FOR YOURSELF.

      DID YOU GET THAT AFTER TRUMP HANDED IT RIGHT BACK AT HER, THE CAMERA DID NOT SHOW HER FACE?

  14. oscarwildeweenr says:

    FOX news…what is there to wonder about, chicken-coopers? is "manson family" wonder worthy, too?

    danger swiss family in outer space will robinsons! lol…..

  15. Kevin says:

    I thought it was a great way to start the debate with tough questions. It is best to get those type of issues flushed out. It gave all the wannabe's a chance to stand up to the eventual questions so everyone can see what they are made of. Those questions should have been on everyone's mind if they are serious watchers of the process.

  16. I'm just glad people are paying attention…for a moment at least. Maybe this whole thing is made up (probably). Meanwhile, Hillary is sharpening her guillotine.

    • Richard Lee Van Der says:

      What kind of mind takes Hillary seriously?

    • Jean says:

      Hillary will need to first use that guillotine on Bernie Sanders. He's the current front-running Democrat . Sanders is sweeping the floor with Ms. Clinton, who should find herself in an orange jumpsuit if the truth of her e-mail scandals is pursued. More than one intel professional has stated that if she had Top Secret info on her home servers, it had been stolen from secure servers. By whom and for what purpose is what every Hillary supporter should be asking. Of course, it's much easier to follow the Kardashians and mindlessly vote "D" in 2016.

  17. Keith Sims says:

    I threw up in my mouth a little when I heard the phrase, "…doing good journalism." Her eloquence is astonishing.

  18. Liz says:

    Trump is a silly excuse for a presidential candidate. So what if he got a silly excuse for a debate question from Kelly? The entire episode and the serious analysis put to it by all of us is just silly.

  19. Bunzie says:

    Fox News is a Ailes/OReilly manipulation of the first order.Throw a bone to the right then to the left, add egomaniacal blowhearts like Kelley/OReilly, cheerleaders like Hannity, absolute intellectual non-entities like Jerry and Juan, condescending bores like Wallace and you wonder why the ascent of Fox coincides with the descent of the Right. There are virtually no conservative intellectuals invited to Fox one because they wont put up with the drown-out ,talk-over ethos of Fox and two because there's nobody on staff that can stay on their level. Sound bites over knowledge as the Union continues to disintegrate. Pathetic performance on debate night.Count the liberal contributers any given week. Fair and balanced isn't when the meaningful voices of the right are minimal OReilly rules Ailes' roost and the shunned aside John Stossel is the only Foxie to call him a blowheart to his face on national television.

  20. CARA NOME says:

    THAT "THING" WITH CHRISTIE AND RAND PAUL WAS FOR SURE MADE UP.

  21. Roger Roger says:

    Take a bow, Robert.. I had already emailed to my list, essentially all of your comments before I just read your post.. Have I learned and put into practice what I first read in WTI back in the mid-70s or what? Another 40 years of practice and I'll probably be ready to go out on my own. With gratitude.

  22. Mike Combe says:

    Awesome Robert !

    I just love this line…."I found myself wondering why she would think she could get away with taking a swipe at the toughest street fighter on the planet."

  23. abdent78 says:

    Unfortunately, she thinks Bill O'Reilly is the person to emulate. I liked her until she became more … "out there"

  24. Scott theczech says:

    Watching all these inflated egos going at it is akin to the Macy's Day Parade with all those big balloon characters, Yikes!
    You gotta feel sorry for Brett Baier though, who I consider a very good journalist; he's between a rock and hard place because the machine has to continue bringing in the revenue. As long as the public laps this stuff up, then so-called journalists like Kelly will continue the circus. I wouldn't expect Ailes to put a leash on it any time soon as advertising revenues have never been better for this organization.

  25. Simon says:

    Well before we get horribly critical, be warned, any of us can become very self absorbed or a narcissist. No one is completely free of that danger. I did not watch most of the debate, but felt like the after debate shows on Fox were a bit annoying and self indulgent. Megan Kelly is one of the best out there in my opinion. She seems to ask the questions that I would have hoped others would have asked, but don't. She needs to get a grip and remember her humble roots. I hope she does and I wish her the best. We need hardcore no nonsense people out there.

    • msmith says:

      Really? With all the issues we're facing right now, Rosie O'Donnell is the the question you were hoping someone would ask? Really?

  26. Robby Bonter says:

    The Glenn Beck "mediocre celebrity" analogy is unfair. This woman is charismatic, gorgeous, and unlike Beck, who panders and demagogues to his audience with his transparent mocking condescension of them to "pray for this and that," as though Glenn Beck starts every day in concert with a spiritual connection with The Almighty.

    Megyn, by contrast, is strong, direct, and spontaneous enough to be honest and mistake prone, as that type is. She could never be a phony-baloney like a Glenn Beck, who needs a "chuckles radio" sidekick to help him carry a program from start to finish. Megyn can carry the mail on her own without a lackey on board to prop her up.

    My dilemma is that I like both Megyn and Donald Trump, in this confrontation, but happily, for different reasons.

  27. Jon Mayer says:

    Debate? That was a debate? What was debated, I ask?
    One thing is for sure, the outsiders (Trump, Carson, and Fiorina) shown like jewels. The rest paled as mere graduates of Civics 101 – 901 who became drab gray bureaucrats who never accomplish much more than creating a new gov't program. AKA eternal life. (That's a Reagan inside joke, kids.)
    I like the businessman. No nonsense. "Get it done!"
    If not, Ben and Carly would be unbeatable.
    Or Ted and Carly.
    The real question is: When is New Hampshire going to close their Primary to registered Republicans ONLY?

  28. Richard Lee Van Der says:

    I take it you don't like/respect MK… Really as dingy as the muddle-minded Glen Beck? He has an excuse: part of his brain was burned because of abuse of alcohol. Probably. Kelly is "beautiful"? Not to my eye. All the beauty parlors in America cannot make a silk purse out of a sow's ear! But, they try. The result in the ordinary-looking string of Fox-type women. Some others in the line have been since taught "how to dress"… the old "make-over" routine. But, by contrast to CNN women, I guess Fox-women are, relatively, "beautiful". Sometmes beauty is in the brain, like Greta! How some others in the world must wag their collective heads RE contemporary America. But, I know when and where it all started. My own mother proclaimed that she was NOT going to be "dowdy", then got herself "educated" by the Ladies' magazines of the day, Ladies Home Journal, Redbook, et al. But, better than looking like a woman of the 30s and 40s! "What fools these mortals be!" Puck. Remember that in the "funny paper"?

  29. Rip Read says:

    Most EXCELLENT Mr. Ringer…as always, crystal clear, well observed and a totally astute take on the M. Kelly story of the day.

    As a nearly 40 year “follower” of your teachings and observations of this life, and how to move through it, I am always amazed by your clarity…and strive to glean the lessons presented therein.

    I, for one, am grateful that you are still here and making your voice heard.

  30. Phil says:

    I read somewhere a while back that Murdoch's kids are poised to take control of FOX at some point in the future and that they are more liberal than their father. Cannot recall the details, and for all I know they are already exercising influence in the organization. In any event, thank God for the internet and the growing number of alternatives to cable TV news.

  31. aajj says:

    I think if Megyn Kelly were a man, Mr. Ringer would have had no comment about the ex-spouse, her marriage or her good looks. She behaves as a journalist and her marriage, looks and lack of humility have no bearing on how she does her job. If she were a man, no one would have a problem with her concerns about Mr. Trump's apparent disrespect for a very large segment of the world's population (female). If she were a man, no one would care about what her ex spouse had to say. No one would care that she was a "looker". Apparently, she is not the submissive, unassuming, scared little woman everyone wants all women to be. I think she is terrific!!!

    • Jean says:

      I would like to know specifically to whom Trump referred as a "disgusting pig" or a "dog" as was alleged. Trump has also aimed his verbal flamethrowing at males; why was that not addressed? Apparently for a swath of the voting population, it's perfectly fine to insult men, but not to insult women who have put themselves into the line of fire? As a woman, I don't feel insulted when Donald Trump refers to Rosie O'Donnell as a disgusting pig. Frankly, I agree with the assessment! She earned the appellation, and that judgment seems to have been held by many (think Barbara Walters, Whoopie Goldberg and the other hostettes on The View). And if the opinion of women is of utmost importance to you, would you be offended if Ms. Kelly asked Hillary Clinton how she could possibly run as a women's advocate while continuing to stand by a known rapist and the most noteworthy example of sexual harassment alive?

      BTW, don't think for a minute that male television news readers get a pass – if you remember the first Gulf War, there was an NBC correspondent who achieved fame as the Scud Stud (last name of Kent, can't remember his first.) He was famous not for his journalistic ability, but for being "a looker." That's equality for ya'!

  32. Dan Griffing says:

    In 1979 when Megyn Kelly was only 9 years old, Robert Ringer wrote a feel-good, somewhat narcissistic but rather shallow libertarian tome: "Restoring the American Dream". I remember this because it was from the early days of Libertarian Politics and I still have the book. So I'm wondering, cui bono? Why would Ringer carry water for the decidedly non-libertarian, non-conservative Donald Trump.

    I carefully watched the prime time GOP debate twice. and read the transcripts.

    There is absolutely nothing in Megyn Kelly's performance that could rightly be characterized as "Kelly’s loaded question", or as "with taking a swipe at the toughest street fighter on the planet." All of the questions were carefully crafted to ask each candidate the difficult questions so that no one could claim that the Fox News debate was a "puff-ball" event that went easy on any of the candidates.

    Kelly asked Trump one question and a follow-up exchange about Trump's public history of disparaging women in the most vulgar and demeaning terms, and whether Clinton would use that to feed the Democratic narrative about the GOP's war on women. There was nothing unfair, irrelevant, or inappropriate about this line of questioning. Trump's after-debate response was to personally attack Megyn Kelly which basically proved the point that she was making about the nasty, irrational way that Trump handled people in general and women in particular when they said something that Trump didn't like. In referring to Kelly, Trump said: "You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her — wherever".

    We certainly don't need a man of this kind of nasty, bullying temperament leading the country. Obama is bad enough with the combination of his ideological fanaticism, coupled with his thin-skinned demonization of opposing views. Trump might even be worse with his dishonest, brown-shirt thuggishness that answers any challenge with out-of-control anger. We could have a deranged personality not seen since the Austrian paper-hanger who took over Germany at the helm of American nuclear weapons.
    I also find it highly unprofessional for Ringer to publish a story in which he drags in conversations of Kelly's ex-husband on what went wrong with the marriage. Gossipy details about Kelly's personal life have nothing to do with the issue of proper debate questions. If he's not too over-the-hill to realize this, he should be ashamed of the smear he did of Megyn Kelly.

    • Robert Ringer RJR says:

      I think you need to reread the article. It had very little to do with Trump, but everything to do with Megyn Kelly's night-after-night egomaniacal, childish behavior. Trump was really irrelevant.

      This paragraph pretty well summed up my point:

      "Plain and simple, Kelly’s problem is that she violates — with impunity — a cardinal rule of television broadcasting: Never make yourself part of the story — and certainly not the story. From the time she showed those pre-debate clips about herself until The Donald smacked her down, it felt like she was screaming at viewers, 'Look at me! Look at me! Aren’t I great?' She may be pretty, but she’s pretty nauseating as well."

      As I said, I think she's great – but her uncontrollable ego and giddiness are destroying that greatness.

    • Phil says:

      I hold a Ph.D. and a J.D., with enough "higher" education to drive any sane person crazy. Let me tell you something, Dan. That book of Mr. Ringer's, Restoring the American Dream, has been about as spot-on accurate in predicting coming social and economic trends than anything I was exposed to in the hallowed halls of universities in this country. The man has been uncanny in predicting the future. There is more learned political economy in that one book than what you will find in 99% of what you will find on library shelves. So put that in your peace pipe and smoke it ; )

    • No Megyn is all about good journalism. In her Howard Stern interview she said she'd F Bill O'Reilly, marry Hannity (because he is likely the one with the most money and kill Glen Beck. The author of this article got it right.

  33. You nailed it! I'm laughing because it's like you read my mind and put my thoughts on paper for me. The punchline to your story is great. You need to write for Breitbart.

  34. Thank you for telling it like it is in this article. I feel exactly the same way about her, but when I comment on how nauseating her demeanor is I get accused of being jealous. Jealous? Like I aspire to be a back-stabbing, self-serving dick tease. No, thank you!

  35. Vera says:

    Every dog on earth likely descended from a species knows as the Tomarctus – a creature that roamed the earth over 15 million years ago: dog facts.

  36. Sima Hockley says:

    It’s a pity you don’t have a donate button! I’d certainly donate to this superb blog! I guess for now i’ll settle for book-marking and adding your RSS feed to my Google account. I look forward to new updates and will talk about this blog with my Facebook group. Chat soon!

  37. randycena says:

    In order to give your personal kitchen a vintage fashioned look you could consider changing your sink to have an apron entry sink. It is a powerful way to remodel your personal kitchen inside an unusual method. <a href="http://www.oldfashiongospel.org” target=”_blank”>www.oldfashiongospel.org

  38. randycena says:

    This isn’t unusual to find out a specific decor in your house item specified as “mission/arts in addition to crafts. ” This leads to the misconception both of these designs tend to be one as well as the same, though this isn't true. <a href="http://www.jewelryresearch.org” target=”_blank”>www.jewelryresearch.org

  39. randycena says:

    Shearling overcoats and jackets are produced from sheepskin pelts. They’re luxuriously mild, warm in addition to stylish. The real lamb pelts help make the versatile garments together with amazing breathability in addition to insulation. <a href="http://www.playinyourclothes.org” target=”_blank”>www.playinyourclothes.org

  40. randycena says:

    Any kind of school, school or even college understudy who's acquiring the graduate degree will have to present an investigation paper, frequently alluded to being an exploration document, proposal or even exposition, towards the division and also the school, with regard to assessment. Editing is essential. <a href="http://www.clothingmodel.org” target=”_blank”>www.clothingmodel.org

  41. dguy901 says:

    This is MK!
    http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/megyn-kelly-howar

    I no longer watch Fox when she is on, I will; watch CNN before her. Strikes me as a woman who was molested by a family member as an adolescent and was never offered or sought counseling.

  42. Eruza says:

    I'm envious. Seems like every time I come back to your website you have a new interesting thing for me to read. How do you stay so motivated? Do you research all of these posts before posting?

Leave a Reply