My Interview With S E Cupp

I had the pleasure recently of interviewing the stunningly brilliant and equally gorgeous republican brunette, S E Cupp. Her book is “Why you’re wrong about the right.”

http://red-secupp.blogspot.com/

She is not Jewish, which I shall lament for decades to come.

As with other interviews, I would first like to describe the fictional interview that did not take place. For those who would rather read the Jayson Blair Times than a real newspaper, I shall present a fictional interview, with how I would take her answers out of context to my benefit.

Below is the fictional interview.

Eric: Don’t you think we should tell everybody the truth that we are happily married with 2 children?

SE: We have never met, and this interview is not off to a good start.

Eric: Sheesh, it’s not like I asked you about your underclothing.

SE: I have mace and pepper spray, and am not sure which one I should use first.

Eric: I’m sorry. I guess flipping you over my shoulder and taking a nibble would be out of the question?

SE: You are either a liberal, an imbecile, a predator, or all of the above.

Eric: So in other words I have no shot?

SE: Truer words have never been spoken. I will make sure everybody knows.

I shall now present the fictional interview in the way a liberal news media outlet such as the Jayson Blair Times would.

Eric: Don’t you think we should tell everybody the truth that we are happily married with 2 children?

SE: Truer words have never been spoken. I will make sure everybody knows.

With that, in the spirit of conservatism and republicanism, I now present the completely unedited, g-rated, actual interview with S E Cupp.

1) What is the S E Cupp story, and what do you want to communicate most either through your book, television appearances, or other forums?

1. SEC: “I think I’m still writing the S.E. Cupp story…at least I hope I am at only 29! But as far as the first few chapters go, I’m just the hard-working daughter of two hard-working parents who taught me to prize authenticity above superficiality. I think that’s what draws me to conservative politics. My writing is devoted mostly to culture criticism — sure I focus on politics quite a bit, but not so much Congressional appointments and policy (though I do that from time to time). Mostly I write about the cultural implications of political moments…whether it’s gun control, a president-elect who seems sheepish on Israel, the NASCAR voting block, or so-called “women’s isues.” I write about religion, sports, politics, popular culture…really very little is off my radar. I don’t usually write about the Dow, for example. Although once I did write a column about consumer greed.”

2) What political issues are you most passionate about?

2. SEC: “I like to write about politics as it appeals to a certain American value — whether it’s self-sustainability, independence, common sense, fiscal responsibility, community, decency — but not in a saccharine or pollyanna way, but in a way that gets to the root of what makes us all human. So when I write about gun issues, for example, it’s not just to lobby for greater gun rights, but to explore the reasons we want and need self-protection and self-reliance to begin with. When I wrote about Sarah Palin it wasn’t just to convince people to vote for John McCain, but to explore the reasons we should want a Sarah Palin in a position of power. If it doesn’t have greater cultural implications, I’m really not interested in it.”

3) Who are your top 3 American political heroes of all time, and who are your top 3 political heroes on the world stage?

3. SEC: “I love Lincoln, Goldwater and Reagan, unsurprisingly. But I also loved Decatur (I’m recently kind of obsessed with the Barbary Wars.) I’m very protective of George W. Bush and Tony Blair still, and am eager to see how history writes their legacies. Condi is certainly a woman to admire, and I’m starting to really like Uribe.”

4) What have we gotten right and wrong with foreign policy?

4. SEC: “Going to Iraq was absolutely the right thing to do, though we could have waged a better public relations campaign. Patriot Act initiatives were also necessary, and I’ll be very disappointed when Obama loosens, changes or does away with that program. If you can call Bush’s work on AIDS foreign policy, I’d generously commend him there. Aiding Israel is always the right thing to do, and brokering relations with Colombia has been one of Bush’s greatest achievements. I’m very disappointed, however, in the way we’ve handled China, whose human rights abuses are astounding. I’m also saddened that we haven’t been able to affect the turmoil in Zimbabwe and Darfur to better degrees.”

5) What are your thoughts regarding the last 8 years with regards to domestic policy?

5. SEC: “Bush has dealt with social issues very well, and gets little credit for it. Whether it was taking caution in stem cell research (while still generously funding research), or erring on the side of life in the Terri Schaivo case, or letting the marriage debate happen around him (and not injecting presidential politics into an already crowded discussion), he’s been a good moderator, and a defender of American values. And of course, it goes without saying that he’s kept the country safe for 8 years. No small feat. But on the other hand, he has overspent. Considerably.”

6) In retrospect, what are your thoughts regarding the 2008 Elections?

6. SEC: “The elections were an exciting time. There was unprecedented coverage and unprecedented activity. I’m not bitter at all about Obama’s election — McCain wasn’t a formidable candidate, as much as I respect him. But I am bitter about the treatment of Sarah Palin. If we can’t agree that a mother of five (with one child in Iraq and one child who is disabled), a former city council woman and mayor, the first female governor of Alaska and the youngest, who worked her way up from nothing, without the help of a trust fund or family name, who put herself through school and fought tremendous obstacles, should be a person to admire, then I’m not sure who is. I understand policy disagreements, but this woman represents just the kind of leader we should be promoting and telling our kids they should want to be like. I was sickened that the far left and even worse, some elements on the right, put her in the position to have to explain her religion, apologize for her state school education, defend her family, and justify her decisions. What an embarrassing moment for us.”

7) What do you think have been the most positive achievements of the Bush Presidency, and what has left you most disappointed? If you were writing the history book or the biography of the Bush Presidency, what would be its core theme? If you had 5 minutes to interview President Bush or Vice President Cheney, what would you ask them?

7. SEC: “I’d want to know how president Bush has so successfully been able to ignore the popularity contest and focus on his convictions. His commitment in the face of tremendous opposition has been remarkable, but I imagine it occurred with a cost. I’d want to know what that was. As for Cheney, I’d want to know where he was hunting next.”

8.) You, S E Cupp, are President on January 20th, 2009. What are the first three things you do? What is your hundred day plan?

8. SEC: “There’s no way I could answer these questions. I’d make a horrible president, not because I’m unqualified (though I am) but because what I want in a president are not the attributes I currently possess.”

9) What are the main positive and negative contributions to society that the blogosphere has brought us? What can be done, if anything, to as the song says, accentuate the positive and eliminate the negative?

9. SEC: “The blogosphere, like YouTube and reality television, have made it seem like anyone can be famous. Anyone can be an investigative journalist. Anyone can break news, and bring down a governor. That’s good and bad. The great blogs are the ones that still adhere to traditional journalistic ethics and values. The dangerous blogs are the ones that pretend those very ethics are out of fashion, or no longer relevant. As for blogs not trying to be news vehicles, continue forth…if your thoughts are interesting enough, the page views will follow.”

10) What do you want people to know most about S E Cupp the person? What do you want most out of this world? What do you want people to remember about you 100 years from now?

10. SEC: “I can’t really control what people think of SE Cupp. My opinions are out there, and I stand by them. For now. I’m not so much worried about what people think of me…I’m more interested in prompting self-reflection in others.”

I would like to thank S E Cupp for her genial nature, intelligent outlook, and overall delightful disposition. The future of conservatism requires young blood to carry the conservative torch. S E Cupp is well positioned to be an articulate and effective spokesperson for what will advance conservatism, and improve our overall culture. Conservatives and society at large will benefit from this.

I wish S E Cupp well always, and am glad she is speaking out.

eric

12 Responses to “My Interview With S E Cupp”

  1. Shooter Says:

    She sounds like a really admirable woman. (This is me trying not to be condescending). You dig up good interviews, Eric. So here’s another good conservative author to read and support. Independent thought…perhaps even thought indeed…is being stamped out in this country. Keep up the good work. Let’s do away with bumper sticker political philosophy.

    Also, it appears my problems with posting have gone away…

    Jay

  2. Jersey McJones Says:

    Why do so many Republicans always hold up Lincoln as a political idol? Why do they still call themselves the “Party of Lincoln”? I’ll never understand this. I once met the historian Eric Foner and joked with him, “Do you think today’s Republicans get the inrony of calling themselves “The Party of Lincoln” or do you think they’re really just clueless?” We laughed. Do you guys have any idea who Lincoln was, what he stood for, and what he did? You guys have no idea how ignorant you sound when you bring him up. I think of that infamous Chris Mathews interview with conservative pundit Kevin James when Mathews literally buried that idiot alive on national TV for repeating that ignorant, inspid, sleazy “Chamberlaine” reference in regards to the mythical “terrorist appeasement” of the Left. James didn’t have a clue in tyhe world what he was talking about – he just repeated a cheap GOP sound-byte like Pavlov’s Dog hearing a bell.

    Lincoln, my @$$.

    JMJ

  3. Micky 2 Says:

    Lincoln was great regardless of what party you belong to, so why cant we revel him as a hero ?
    Whats ironic about standing with the party that elected a man who ended slavery and won the war ?

    Just like you whine everytime we mention Reagan as a hero why should we care since you obviously dont get it ?

    Ignorant, insipid, sleazy, BLA BLA BLA , just cuz ya cant face the truth.

    Carter did it, Hillary did it, Obama has done it, they’ve all appeased our enemies.
    Hell, theres thousands of you on the streets protesting right now appeasing Hamas and Iran.
    So go ahead and cry insipid, sleazy whatever.
    You’re obviously just wrong.

  4. Jersey McJones Says:

    LOL! You don’t have a clue where Lincoln stood poltiically, do you? If you think today’s Republican party is anything like the “Party of Lincoln” then you truly just don’t have a clue about your own country’s history.

    JMJ

  5. Micky 2 Says:

    There you go again, playing your little schoolboy games.

    I never said anything about where Lincoln stood, did I ?
    And I never said that the todays party anyway resembles what the party was like in Lincolns days any more than the dem party is what it was or has remained true to Jeffersonian like priciples 200 years ago.
    I know enough to know that Lincioln himself was a slave owner but he did inadvertantly free the slaves due the distaste he had for secession which is still admirable, and so anyone should look up to him as a hero, thats all I was saying.

    Just like you have a clue about how the left appeases our enemies ?
    First thing on the chopping block is to close Gitmo and you dont appease our enemies ?
    You can study history till your butt falls of but if you go and interpret it to your needs then its not history any more than science is subjective to global warming when its financed by politics.

    This is not so much about who knows what or more about history which is all you arrogantly ever fall back on when you dont have a decent argument.
    You right away go into the “I myself as a student of history ” mode and start with your snotty holier than thou attitude because you picked up a book once in your life. Hurrah.
    This is about you letting people envy who they want for whatever reason they want.
    Why does it bug you so much when we see Lincoln and Reagan as heros to the point that you feel you need to belittle and smear people ?

    I dont see why you worship Carter.
    But I understand it.

  6. Jersey McJones Says:

    Oh, give it a rest. The “left” doesn’t “appease” terrorists. That’s just nonsense. And if anything, “Gitmo” just creates more terrorists and makes us look bad to everyone else. Gitmo makes us look like arrogant lawless morons who don;t even trust our own justice system. It’s stupid.

    As for “global warming,” there’s a lot more money being poured into disproving it than proving it. Whether the warnings are right or wrong, we stand to lose pretty much nothing, if the nay-sayers are wrong, we stand to lose everything. Cons should avoid gambling. They don’t understand how to play odds.

    It bothers me when people hold Regan up as some great American hero simply because he was not. He accomplished pretty much nothing of of any merit. He made America and the world a worse place.

    Lincoln, on the other hand, held together the union, in part directly and in part indirectly ended slavery, kept the South free for the future so that now we don’t have some Third World cess pool for a southern neighbor that calls itself the CSA, and on and on and on. You should read about him. He was a great man. And he stood for just about everything you guys stand against today.

    As for Carter – LOL! Nice try!

    JMJ

  7. Stix Says:

    Who is the Jersey McJones. Does he even have a clue what he is talking about???? What is giving into the wills of our enemies. elling them that we lost so they can fight harder to get us out. Who was it that told the countries secrets that gave the enemy the heads up of how we are traking them?? who is it that caled our own soldiers Nazis???? And compared GITMO to Gulags??? Who is it that wants to give our enemies a court of law??? Who wanted us Iraq to Al Queda and Iran??? If that is not appeasement then I do not know what is.

    Oh well I was here to tell eric he was tagged
    http://stixblog.com/2009/01/13/damn-i-have-been-tagged/

  8. Micky 2 Says:

    JMJ;
    “Oh, give it a rest. The “left” doesn’t “appease” terrorists. That’s just nonsense.”

    Yea, yea, yea, so you say, but thats all you got is, “I say so”
    The facts are in bub and you lose.

    Jersy, out of a hundred detainees set free from Gitmo 61 have returned to their groups and resumed their fight.
    So stop trying to change the laws of basic math by saying “it makes more of them”
    Thats about as smart as the girl I knew that broke all my long linguini in half before putting them in the water. I asked her why she broke them in half and she said”Dont you get more that way”?
    Show me proof that it creates more of them.
    You guys keep repeating that idiotic line especially over Hamas and yet theres nothing to support that idiocy.

    Creates more of them. Retarded.
    So, if thats the case then letting them go would create less of them ??

    And whats this crap that we stand to lose nothing on GW if were wrong ?
    How about billions of dollars wasted on measures that do nothing but limit the freedoms we stand to lose also ?
    Play the odds ?
    Thats not the question.
    Its when to walk away from the table, thats the question.
    Theres not more money being spent to disprove it.
    Thats a big fat stinking lie, so whats new?
    As a matter of fact when you look around its only more obvious that the amount being put into BSing the people with campaigns, BS our kids in school, commercials, documentaries, government funded studies, worldwide international campaigns, alternative energy studies, etcetera makes it abundantly clear that more is being put into proving it than disproving it.
    I’ve read about Lincoln more than you think, but i’m not out to see what little obscure info you or I have thats never been heard before.
    Yoy made my point for me there sonny boy.
    By mentioning what he did you only reinforce my assertion that evertone should herald him as their hero.
    The rest of your crap is just bias predictable opinion.
    For every bad thing you say about Reagan, I could say 10 good things.

    Try nothing.
    I dont see what was so great about a president who takes the cake when comes to the worst president ever.
    But I do understand why those of a warped value system would worship him.
    Its no different than watchung Dumb and Dumber. They each thought the other was great.

  9. Micky 2 Says:

    By the way.
    Whats the deal with Obama and him thinking hes Lincoln reincarnated ?
    Is he trying to convince everyone hes Lincoln ?
    First he announced his candidacy on the steps of the state house in Springfield just like Lincoln did.
    The theme of his inauguration is going to be a “new birth of freedom” he says it was inspired by Lincolns speechs.
    Hes actually also gonna be sworn in using Lincolns bible.
    And then theres this ridiculous narcissistic 3 day train ride hes taking thats the exact same route from Philly to Washington that Lincoln took.
    Even all of Lincolns favorite foods are on the menu that day.
    What a shmuck if he thinks hes anything like Lincoln.
    Lincoln represented railroads and banks before he was nominated.
    What did Obama do ? He represented ACORN and was a community organizer
    Lincoln was all about the constitution and hammered away on it during his candidacy while Obama never mentioned it once during his campaign.
    Not that I noticed.
    This was all brought up in a program yesterday, thought it was pretty interesting how the left is trying to claim that they are the party of Lincoln when theres no doubt the right comes alot closer.
    As anyone knows, especially Jersey should know that the democrats adhered more to Jeffersons political views than they did Lincoln.

    Oh well, it doesnt matter.
    Lincoln was a man who kept his word and did what he said he was going to do.
    Obamas already taken more than half his campaign promises off the table or completely away.

    SUCKERS

  10. Jersey McJones Says:

    I’m not getting further into this one. It’s getting screwy.

    JMJ

  11. rob6364 Says:

    Lincoln WAS NOT a slave owner… his wife’s family were slave owners, but he was never. And yes, the GOP has changed a bit in the past 150 years… so what is your point… that SE Cupp can’t like Lincoln because she was born in the 20th century? You liberals never make any sense.

  12. Right-wing rising star Says:

    [...] Nick Hornby, and he’s publicly called her “charming.” In an interview with a besotted blogger, she said, “I like to write about politics as it appeals to a certain American value — [...]

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.


Fatal error: Class 'WP_actions' not found in /home/content/p3nexnas03/55/2057155/html/wp-content/themes/default/comments.php on line 107