“Good for you! You go, girl!”

Teresa Heinz Kerry Tells Pittsburgh Reporter To “Shove It”

I’m sure you’ve heard all about it. Teresa Heinz Kerry, shortly after giving a speech urging a return to civility in American politics, told a reporter from a conservative newspaper to “shove it”:

“We need to turn back some of the creeping, un-Pennsylvanian and sometimes un-American traits that are coming into some of our politics,” she told her fellow Pennsylvanians at a Sunday night reception at the Massachusetts Statehouse.

Minutes later, Colin McNickle, the editorial page editor of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, questioned her on exactly what she meant by the term “un-American,” according to a tape of the encounter recorded by WTAE Channel 4 Action News.

Heinz Kerry said “I didn’t say that” several times to McNickle. She then turned to confer with Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell and others. When she faced McNickle again a short time later, he continued to question her, and she replied, “You said something I didn’t say. Now shove it.”

According to the video clip on the site, Hillary Clinton approves.

I think a lot of Americans are going to say, ‘Good for you! You go girl!’ And that certainly is how I feel about it.

Now, if I had said last week that a prominent figure in the Kerry campaign would tell a reporter to “shove it” and that Hillary Clinton would publicly support the move, you would have said I was a Right-Wing loon. I might have been, and I might still be. But I would have been right.

Please explain to me how this is just a bunch of hot air stirred up by Republicans.

UPDATE: The NY Times isn’t even sure that she said “un-American”. That makes them and Teresa.


  1. It is alot of hot air because the reporter asked her what she meant by un-American ‘Activities’ which she she didn’t say. They were trying to twist her words in a McCarthy way.

  2. Yes, I’ve heard that line of reasoning. Not very convincing. Mrs. Kerry’s reaction was warranted and worthy of praise from Hillary Clinton because the reporter said ‘activities’? Give me a break. If that’s the case, why didn’t she just correct him? If that’s the case, why didn’t she reply when he asked her what she DID say? If that’s the case, why didn’t Clinton say anything about it when she endorsed Mrs. Kerry’s remarks? No matter the reason, why did she act so uncivil minutes after giving a speech where she asked for more civility? Did she mean everyone but her? Sounds like a load of after-the-fact BS to me. I doubt you’d be seeing things the same way if someone in the Bush camp said the same thing and the same reason was given.

  3. So did the reporter accuse her of saying ‘un-American’ or ‘un-American activities’? I the latter, or if you don’t know, then you should stop referring to her ‘flat denials in the face of obvious truth’ as you did in your follow-up post.

  4. Atticus: I do know. He asked (not accused) her what she meant when she said un-American activities. She said she didn’t say that, which would have been fair enough. He then asked her what she meant. She said she didn’t say that, which didn’t answer the question. He then asked her what she said. She said she didn’t say that. He asked again what she said. She asked why he put those words in her mouth. He said she said something about ‘un-American…[gestured as if searching for a word]…activity’. She said she did not say that. She said ‘I did not say ‘activity’ or ‘un-American’. Those are your words’. The reporter used the word ‘activity’ instead of ‘traits’. Never mind that it appears clear in the video that he’s searching for the right word, because I’ll grant that maybe he’s searching for the right word to trap her. The problem is that she flatly denied saying ‘un-American’ at all, she refused to discuss it at all, she refused to acknowledge the line of questioning at all, and she then told him to ‘shove it’ based upon the organization that employed him. Do not forget the context of the encounter. It was minutes after she claimed to want more civility in politics. If she had simply engaged the discussion for thirty seconds, she could have easily cleared up any misunderstanding that the reporter may have had. If the reporter or newspaper misrepresented her when it published the story, she would have a leg to stand on when denying it. Instead she makes herself look bad in the eyes of many. Some folks don’t think she did anything wrong. Hillary Clinton is one of them, apparently. Fair enough. I just don’t have much personal respect for Mrs. Kerry’s actions, and I question the reasoning of those who are defending them. Watch the video. Read a transcript. Flat denial. Obvious truth.