No argument there from me. I think how she chose to say what she said was stupid and ham-handed. I understand the point she was making, though, and she is not wrong. She just chose a particularly brain-dead way to go about getting it across.
The real question for us, though, is this: Is her lack of facility with idealogical expression worth all this energy being expended on taking offense (see Axhandle's earlier post)? Is it worth contributing to an ever-growing structure of right-wing PC and thought policing? My answer is no and I will now proceed to move along as if the woman never existed. The rest of you are welcome to stew in righteous (and completely ineffectual) indignation.
When Pepsico gets snowed with emails from outraged converts to the rival brand or private brands, that is scarcely in vain. They do count these things, even though they reply now with Ms. Annoying's non-apologetic apology. Phone calls and letters would be even better, and hand written letters the most effective.
You just don't come off like a JUVENILE Rat political pontificator to an America which is mostly a Red Zone, and get away with it scot free. Not if you want to be considered an integral and loyal part of Americana any more. What could she POSSIBLY have been alluding to except the supposed snub of America to world sensibilities by its jumping on Saddam LIKE THE UN ITSELF SAID SHOULD HAPPEN?