Clinton Campaign Not Looking for Shuster to Be Fired, After All

[RamboLiberal]

Source: ABC News

After some conversations with folks at the Clinton campaign, I can offer some clarity -- maybe -- on what they're asking NBC/MSNBC to do.

And despite Clinton's letter, saying David Martin Shuster's apology and suspension was not sufficient, Clinton's goal is not for NBC to fire Shuster, he and his fans will be happy to hear. Until Thursday, the Clinton campaign had no issues with Shuster, I'm told.

The campaign says it has more to do with what it sees as a sexist, locker room, on-air atmosphere at MSNBC.

Clinton supporters ask: what other network has had, within the space of one year, because of comments widely seen as boorish and inappropriate, a firing (Imus), an on-air apology (Chris Matthews) and a suspension (Shuster)?

Clinton, who has been on the receiving end in two of those incidents, is taking a stand for MSNBC to clean up its act. Or, so Camp Clinton says.



Read more: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/02/clinton-campa-1.html

---

Glad they're not asking for him to be fired. IMHO especially since Tweety is the more egregious offender and you know no way in hell short of being photographed actually fellating one of the "manly" Repukes would he be fired.

I'm glad Hillary is smacking them back - other Dems need to do the same. We've taken enough crap for a very long time from too many of these pundits on MSNBC and CNN - for Faux there is no hope but Dems should publicly smack them as well - it could have some effect perhaps at least in exposing it!

One remedy I think MSNBC should take is to fire Tucker since his ratings are in the toilet and he's proven to be a complete failure in the lineup and hire Rachel Maddow - like Keith she is nothing but a class act who can intelligently discuss politics and is not another RW bootlicker. Can't the idiots at the networks figure out the Repuke and conservative movement is dying and quit trying to grab a share of Faux audience. We're hungry out here for intelligent and fair political talk and not the constant smarmy sniping against the Clintons and other Democrats and for more appearances by Democrats and not always running to the Repubs.

[LaurenG]

1. I'm very happy to hear this. Bringing attention to the issue is perfect

Giving him a second chance is generous. I agree with this way of handling the situation.

[Cooley Hurd]

2. Glad to hear it! Shuster's one of the best in the business...

MSNBC needs to curb its perceived sexism.

[roguevalley]

66. I would find it hard to stomach clinton if this happened. we're supposed

to be so damned christian. remember forgiveness and redemption?

[thepurpose]

3. Its not just Tweety. Joe Scarbourgh cheer leads this kind of crap and the make up of the guest

on all of these shows are inside the beltway people and white male. Nothing wrong with having white male guests, but when you have the same people on over and over again with the same opinions nothing changes and they get to cozy with the hosts. I don't know if I am saying this correctly, but I find it odd that there are absolutely no black, female, hispanic or any other ethnic group for that matter, on air hosts qualified to host a program on MSNBC.

[RamboLiberal]

8. They need to fire Tucker for crappy ratings

and equally crappy show. Rachel Maddow has more than proven she needs her own show. And I'm so sick of seeing Pat Buchanan all the time on every damn show even Keith's.

[thepurpose]

10. I watch Joe a couple times last week and every guest he had coming up when they showed who was to

come was white and male. There may have been one white female. I really hate to be having to talk about this in racial terms, but when you have on a national program only guests of priviledge and almost solely from one race coming on and telling everyone that real americans think Gilliana for example is considered America's Mayor and that Romney's family is the type of all american family real America wants to see in the white house I think some perspective is completely missing. Then having everyone sit around a tear Hillary apart when she has support from latinos, blacks and asians as well as whites with no comment from these other group is really unseemly.

[goclark]

71. Exactly right! It is unseemly

No reason to even have a color tv because it is "White TV" 24/7

[mithnanthy]

9. MSNBC has one young lady...

named Tamara,(?) who is being featured more often. She's an African American female who is bright,beautiful and shows great promise in her career, and I like her presentation. I'm sorry I can't recall her last name, right now. ugh!

[thepurpose]

11. She has been on as much lately because Mika has not been out a lot.

I saw her often on the First Look really early news update and she filled in for Mika.

[Kahuna]

4. I just fired off an email to MSNBC in support of David Shuster.

It would be dreadful if he were to lose his job or status because of this incident.

[tulsakatz]

20. I wrote one on Friday!!

He's one of the best journalists they have....or for that matter, one of the best ones of any network, imho!!

I wanted them to know he will be sincerely missed by me and I'm sure many others too!

[ursi]

43. I did too ...his slip up doesn't even compare to anything Ann Coulter has done to John Edwards

[splat]

39. That was never in question; headline at TPM jumped to conclusion

That poster could only think of one narrow meaning to "not sufficient." Addressing a hostile climate was too subtle for him.

[JTFrog]

5. In other words, since the victim card didn't get her a sweep....

No use someone losing their job.

[Tuttle]

21. That's the sort of reply I'd expect to hear on Tweety's show

The overly cynical analysis of Hillary is SO close to the goring of Al, it makes me sick!

I am probably more for Obama than HRC (after Edwards is no longer a contender) but when I see the motives of the Bushies used as a template to be painted on our candidates, I feel the need to speak up.

And furthermore, the commercial for HRC made by Robert Kennedy Jr has spoken volumes to me and (I wish) all the other Keyboard Kommandos who login here. If she were the candidate, I would certainly vote for her, without holding my nose. It would be a vote FOR her, and not against any other candidate.

Meanwhile, others can continue to vote for the white rich guy, if they wish to.

Tut-tut

[Clovis Sangrail]

6. bullshit issue

saying you are going to "pimp out" your son, daughter, sister, father, etc. to describe getting them to go do something for you has become a common expression.
If you don't think it has you need to broaden your social circles.
It may not be an idiom you use, but trying to control if somebody else uses it?

This falls into the "inflicting morality on others" category.

[thepurpose]

12. Really. I have never used that term about my kids and never would.

The comment was inappropriate for a national news program host to use. What do you think would have happen to David if he had use that term while discussing the Bush's girls? You think the GOP wouldn't have let it go? Things need to change in the media and if this incident changes things than great. I am not hopeful it will. Beside this is about a lot more comments coming out MSNBC than just this one and this one reporter. Just like Imus comment was part of a larger pattern of crap coming out of his mouth there are many hosts that sprew worst things all day long against the Clintons and they will start in on Obama if he is on the ticket also.

[Clovis Sangrail]

15. like I said...

you need to broaden your social circles.
I *do use that idiom, and I've heard it used by a LOT of others.
... and I'm not talking about kids.

Regarding the Bush girls, I think it *has been used.
(I know I've used it)
I very definitely recall conversations in 2004 about Mary Cheney being pimped out.
I can't verify any of them made it beyond blogs, but I think they did.
(without Lexis Nexis at my finger tips my search abilities are limited)

Regarding this being a pattern... if there are "many hosts that sprew worst things all day long against the Clintons" people should go after *them.
I hate "guilt by association"

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bettyellen]

24. i have a wicked sense of humour- but your idea of broad horizons- or what's okay

on a news show- those are dumb. both dumb and posts.

[Clovis Sangrail]

27. well... first off you misquoted me

I said "broaden your social circles" NOT "broaden your horizons"

Second, calling Tucker a news show is like saying Rush or Boortz do news shows.

Where I live the only thing on the radio is conservative talk radio and sports.
I listen to the radio on my drive to work (for traffic and entertainment), and every day I hear hosts on pulbic shows spewing insanely vile crap.
Not "we don't like Hillary" but she's "an ugly witch" or "a loathsome troll of a human" or other such drivel.

I might not like it, but it's their show... and it's NOT news.

Third, what is acceptable to show or discuss on the news has changed and will continue to change.
If you don't believe me some of the more amusing examples are noted http://www.cnn.com/2007/LIVING/wayoflife/07/31/censorship/">here
Those changes were driven by what society considered acceptable.

[bettyellen]

28. well Shuster is SUPPOSED TO BE a journalist- not one of the gang- bangers in your circle.

which is why you have totally missed the point.
and i seriously feel sorry for the local enviornment, all the hate spewing you're exposed to...
i'd have to get the fuck out of there, but that's me. I don;t put up with, or make excused for sexist, or racist bullshit.

[thepurpose]

31. Maybe David should start dressing the part too. So he is more convincing talking about pimps and

hoes in a acceptable way.

[Clovis Sangrail]

32. yeah.. the environment sucks

but it's where my wife's career has taken her so I'm here for a couple years.

FYI: there are no gang-bangers in my circle.
That was sort of my point about "broadening social circles".

But thanks for ASS<->U-ming.

;)

[bettyellen]

37. well my enviornment is fabulous- the only people talking about pimping and hos are

dumbass kids - you hope they'll grow out of it. pretending to be gang bangers. watching too much MTV.
we new yorkers don;t put up woth all that hate speech. no reason we should.

[Clovis Sangrail]

40. I've heard the "pimping out" idiom

from people ranging from 20 year old students to 50 year old phd's.
As for what you New Yorkers put up with... o.o

you must live in upstate, because the last time I was in NYC the common vernacular was anything but prissy.

[bettyellen]

42. you confuse not allowing yourself to be degraded with being a pris, LOL. i am so sorry for your

mindset. to me that's a pathetic leap to make. commanding respect doesn;t mean there's a pole up your ass, so sorry for you to equate the two. maybe you're living where you belong. here in the big city, we don;t play that shit.
women get respected because the majority here know better than the asses you listen to on the radio. those that can't, get kicked to the curb.

[Clovis Sangrail]

45. do you realize how pompous you sound?

"maybe you're living where you belong. here in the big city"

way to be inclusive.
:applause:


btw: your ASS<->U-mptions are showing again.
I grew up in LA and spent the next 20 years in the Bay Area... and my feelings on NY are much like yours about where I currently am:
"Why they fuck would anybody willingly stay there?"

:rofl:

[bettyellen]

46. you equated being treated well with being a pris- that's fucking sad, stockholm syndrome sad

we in the big liberal city never had to love or enable our abusers. fuck pompous, that's just knowing i am lucky to live among the more fucking evolved than the bigoted losers you admittedly live amongst.
you wouldn;t get it, and i feel sorry for you for that. truly.
so never mind.

[Clovis Sangrail]

51. I didn't make that equation.. YOU DID

I realize it must be tough for somebody from a land as cool and hip as the inside of your ASS, but REREAD the thread.

The only time I mentioned prissy was here:
the last time I was in NYC the common vernacular was anything but prissy

YOU are the only one who made statements about equating "being treated well" and "being a pris"

You're so over the line you don't even see it. This has NOTHING to do with how somebody treats somebody.
You can't seem to seperate your interpretation from somebody else's intentions.

Unfortunately, that sort of attitude is why the left is so fractured... and will remain so.

Good job on the ASS<->U-mptions though.
Keep it up.. the rest of us can spot you easier that way.
;)

[bettyellen]

54. it is about journalists being appropriate vs the irresponsible asswipes who have lowered your

standards.
it has everything with being trreated with rerspect. not your thing, obviously.
go be down with your bigoted folk and ho slang. have fun with it. and yeah, i will continue to feel sorry for you.

[Clovis Sangrail]

65. deal

and I'll continue to piss in the cheerios of holier-than-though self-righteous asswipes

:toast:

[LanternWaste]

89. I suppose that's one unique and particular

"and I'll continue to piss in the cheerios of holier-than-though self-righteous asswipes"

I suppose that's both a unique and a particular way for a person to advertise both their civility and their dignity. I would've have assumed that unique to progressivism is a tolerance for lifestyles of others-- whether hedonistic or stoic, civil or rude. And though it may be true that it is a unique factor amongst the progressive community, I think we can agree it's certainly not common among the progressive community.

[Clovis Sangrail]

90. :)

The dirty secret of the progressive community is that we *all have boundaries beyond which we're not tolerant.
I refuse to tolerate politicians who support unjust wars.. others refuse to tolerate fundamentalists trying to shove religion down their throats...
and there are others who refuse to tolerate those who don't toe what they consider to be the "progressive" line.

:toast:

[Clovis Sangrail]

47. oh yeah...

you do realize you just supported the notion that women who accept it should be "kicked to the curb"

women get respected because the majority here know better than the asses you listen to on the radio. those that can't, get kicked to the curb.


transation: "screw those women who've been sold into slavery.. they deserve to be kicked to the curb!!!"
That's a pretty shitty was to treat people.
:rofl:

[bettyellen]

49. no. the people who do not respect women get sidelined, where you are they get radio shows

big fucking cultural difference.
as i said, we don;t put up with that shit where i am from, and we're not willing to go back to that 50s mindset. even if it plays okay in your sad ass neck of the woods.
save yourself. move!

[Clovis Sangrail]

56. I'd move if I could

but you obviously didn't my earlier post where I stated why I was here.

And *you might not put up with "that shit" in your neck of the woods, but obviously a LOT of people are OK with NOT respecting women.
Or did prostitution go away in NY?
Last time I was there streetwalker heroin addicts were plentiful if you know where to look.

Was it Duluth or NY that was the big port of entry for illegal slave girls in the US...
... hmmm... I'm thinking NY.

moral upstanding place that is it

:rofl:

[LanternWaste]

88. You appear to be confusing "civility" with "prissy".

You appear to be confusing "civility" with "prissy". There isw indeed a precise and relevant difference...

[Clovis Sangrail]

22. those words very well MAY become acceptable

in the MSM.
I don't watch TV very much, but I'm pretty sure 'bitch' already DOES pass censors on the MSM.
All of those other words can be found on various popular shows (ie: Sopranos)

Morality and accepted discourse are both malleable and they do change.

20 years ago the idea of having an openly gay lead character in a television show was preposterous.
30 years ago the idea of showing a man's ass on television was insane.
40 years ago TV shows still depicted married couples as sleeping in separate beds.

Things change.

[thepurpose]

26. Um, the discussion is about Lucile Ball and Tony Soprano? Okay I see where you are coming from.

[bettyellen]

30. wher she lives hate speech rules instead of jouralism, so major cities should sink to that level too

or at least i think that's what the little *@$*^&$## was trying to say.

[Clovis Sangrail]

33. no... I'm saying Tucker isn't a news show

and if you think it is, then Rush and Boortz are also news shows.
If you go along with that you shoot yourself in the foot by legitimizing them.

thanks for calling me a "*@$*^&$##" though

oh... btw, among the ASS<->U-mptions you've gotten wrong... I'm not female. ;)

[bettyellen]

38. shuster is supposed to be a journalist- even doing an editorial where working women are called hos

is fucked up. so yeah, they should be called on the carpet for it. evolution of speech my ass, it's degrading, any any woman who puts up with it is complicit in her own degredation. i'm sure it happens alot in that lovely hate filled place you're from. that however means they have a lot of work to do, a lot of eveolving.
we're not bringing down our standards of behaviour and journalistic practices to match hatesville, in the stix. fuck that.

[Clovis Sangrail]

67. so now shuster called her a ho?

you say "evolution of speech my ass" but you seem OK with helping his speech "evolve".
:eyes:

[orleans]

70. obviously. and i'm sure your wife loves it when you tell your friends

how you pimped her out



and as far as this expression becoming "mainstream"--yeah, right. the N word really became mainstream/acceptable too, didn't it?

[Clovis Sangrail]

73. errr... I think she's used the expression about me more

than I've used it about her.

;)

[druidity33]

84. seen the TV show "Pimp My Ride"?

It was on MTV i think. It's appalling but true. The term has become relatively common in certain areas. It is not nearly as offensive to me personally as some of the vitriol spewing out of Coulter, O'Reilly, Matthews, Brooks, Limbaugh, et al.

Would folk have had the same reaction if Shuster had said the Clintons are using their daughter to further their campaign goals in a sneery sort of way? Or is it solely the implication that he was calling Chelsea a whore? Because, honestly, i do not at all believe that is what his intention was.


:shrug:

[hlthe2b]

14. Line in the sand time.... Women are no longer going to put up

with this type of misogyny within the MSM. You will stand up when your ox is being gored, but cry "inflicting morality on others" when women are being treated in such a demeaning and sexist manner.. That says a lot about you, Clovis. None of it good.

[Clovis Sangrail]

18. where were you in 2004?

Were you outraged at similar treatment of Mary Cheney?
Did you rise up in anger when the National Enquirer painted the Bush twins as drunken party girls looking for a good time?
What about all the Coulter comments?
It's hard to swing a dead cat without hitting some anti-Coulter quasi-sexist comment.... do you rally behind her whenever these comments are made?

If you don't/didn't... can the self righteous crap.

[hlthe2b]

19. Ahh another visitor from the other side....

Subtle, Clovis (NOT)

But, NO, I don't tolerate this type of sexist misogynistic and despicable language at all, regardless of target.

[Clovis Sangrail]

25. lol

You're pretty funny... you think you've got me pegged based on a few lines in a thread but you're far off the mark.
That's OK, though... I'm pretty sure I've got you pegged too. ;)

I'll be looking to see you defending Michelle Malkin's rights in the future.

When I have time I'll browse through the archives and see if you've made a peep about "sexist misogynistic" language when it was aimed at someone you dislike(?).

[hlthe2b]

29. Yeah, right...

:eyes:

I don't defend RW cretins. But I will stand up to misogynists who disparage ALL women.

[Clovis Sangrail]

34. 0.o

so if somebody makes what you consider a sexist comment about somebody you like it's disparaging all women
but it it's somebody you don't like them it's OK because they're RW cretins?

yeah... I think that peg was right. ;)

[hlthe2b]

35. Yup.. but the peg was about you and your roots...

glad you finally fessed up...;)

[Clovis Sangrail]

36. of course

I'm a baby eating, cattle raping, mysoginist sucker of corporate cocks.

and YOU caught me out

:rofl:

[hlthe2b]

41. and.. what clinches it...

you can't spell! :rofl:

[Clovis Sangrail]

53. ooooo

yr rAYEt!
typ0s pint oVt rw'ers.

:rofl:

[Occulus]

52. I'd like to point out that yours is a typical RW argument

used to "prove" that "the left" is hypocritical and thus "bigoted liars".

I'd also like to point out that, despite reading DU daily for quite a long time now, today is the first time I've ever seen your username in a post.

Stop using RW arguments (that's what that is, and I think you know it).

[Clovis Sangrail]

63. bite me

Look at post count and join date.
I've been around this place as long or longer than you, and I'm pretty sure I've actually been on threads with you before.

[Hekate]

55. Well you certainly managed to lower the discourse here singlehandedly. The point isn't whether...

...popular gangsta rappers have potty mouths.

The point is whether we want public discourse on the airwaves to descend to that level or not, and the point is whether we believe it is acceptable to refer to women as "nappy headed ho's" when they are star athletes or refer to their parents "pimping them out" when they are political daughters working on a campaign.

Misogyny is alive and well and as putrid as ever.

Hekate

[Clovis Sangrail]

64. I fail to see how 'nappy headed hos' is similar

there is no other meaning for that ... not that I know of.
Saying somebody is whoring out their kid or pimping out their husband or wife DOES have a meaning beyond the sexual connotation.

I think it's pretty funny that everybody assumes only gang-bangers or gangsta rappers use that sort of language.
Why do you think that is?
I don't know any gang-bangers nor do I listen to rap... and I've heard a number of people use that idiom.
Myself included.

It seems pretty clear that the meaning wasn't "having her daughter illegally sell sexual acts and give her a cut of the money".
Railing against somebody just for using it because of how *you choose to interpret it rather than how it was meant is "inflicting morality".

[orleans]

68. are you fucking kidding? a common expression that is used in

regards to your children or parents?

where the hell did you grow up?

[Clovis Sangrail]

72. LA

and I'm not kidding.

I'm not saying I walk around calling my siblings 'ho's' (I can't recall ever using that word) but I do frequently refer to somebody A getting somebody B to go do something beneficial for somebody A as "whoring them out" or "pimping them out".
I've said, to my father, that my mother pimped out us kids to get things done for her.
My sister has said it about the magazine companies that get her kids to go door to door selling subscriptions.

I'm very serious when I say it is not unheard of.
It may not be a phrase that I hear every day, but it's something I hear or say maybe once a month.

on edit:
edited for clarity

[GalleryGod]

76. Out of Touch Eltists like Maggie Williams and others...You think Scarborough & Mika

will take this lying-down? Ha!
I hope they bury "BILLARY" with WIT,withering WIT ! The Clintons can't stand it!
HOW do I know..Carl Bernstein told me so.

[LanternWaste]

86. Or possibly hang out with the under twenty-five crowd

"If you don't think it has you need to broaden your social circles."
Or possibly hang out with the under twenty-five crowd... :eyes:

Do you believe that on air personalities should be able to use any contemporary idiom? If not, is there a list of idioms you believe should not be used-- and what precisely is that list based on?

Fundamentally, idioms are to be avoided by both print and broadcast journalists until part of the mainstream-- and whether you're aware of it or not, "pimping out" is certainly not in the mainstream yet. And as he is a major journalist who's broadcasts are seen worldwide, it is incumbent upon to him to allow his language to be the most accessible-- even for those whom English is not the first language.


Bad form? Certainly. Rude? Even more still. Mainstream? No.

[Clovis Sangrail]

7. dupe.. delete

[Dogmudgeon]

13. I have an idea -- let's ask Jesse Jackson about it!

:evilgrin:

--p!

[navarth]

44. ummm..getting back to David Shuster....

I think he's great and I hope he doesn't pay too dearly for his inappropriate comment.

[GalleryGod]

77. It only RAISES his profile ! Ha! HRC-WJC,Inc. picked on HIM!

Maybe MIKA should interview THIS woman this WEEK?
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:


Look familiar Mr. President? Super Bowl Party,Mr. President? Divorce filing, Mr. President?

[kristopher]

48. WASHINGTON, KANSAS, LOUISIANA - all massive losses

Obama cleaned Hillary's clock.

She thanks you for talking about non-issues such as misspoken but true statement of a reporter instead of her humiliating loss; she really really thanks you.

If she becomes president, will she use terror alerts for distraction when there isn't a convenient journalist flay?

[bettyellen]

50. you agree they were whoring out their daughter?

good to know. :hi:

[kristopher]

58. First let me correct my mistake

Obama cleaned up in Washington, Nebraska, and Louisiana; not Washington, Kansas and Louisiana.

Second. No I didn't say that. His emails make clear that was dissing the Clintons and their attempt to restrict access to their daughter. He wasn't calling her a whore etc etc etc. But you've already heard all of that.
I understand the anger but I think it is misplaced. You are salivate like Pavlov's dog whenever Clinton pushes these emotion buttons. I won't argue about it because it is a discussion about values and perceptions.
I think Hillary has too many similarities to the Bush crew. She thinks like them and she makes political decisions like them, she relates to the press as they do and she attempts to manipulate the electorate with the same tactics they use.
The only difference - and it is a huge difference - is that she does this in pursuit of goals that are more closely aligned with what I believe to be "right" while I think Bush's goals are very "wrong".

Yet a large part of my problem with Bush goes beyond the goals and center on the means; together with the philosophy that the ends justify the means. I believe she is a mirror imge of Bush in that area. She voted to start the war because to NOT vote to start the war would have hurt her political ambitions. She voted to label the standing army of a sovereign nation as a "terrorist group" because she thought that would hurt her political ambitions. The votes she has cast have not shown a person who sees a route to a better circumstance for this country, but rather a person who is adept at obtaining power within the existing circumstances.

I don't know that Obama is better; but he at least offers me the possibility that he is. He hasn't disproved himself to me as she has.

Let me add one more thing. One the point of race and gender. If one of our candidates does win, there is the belief that it will be a meaningful breakthrough for either women or blacks. Personally, I think we need that breakthrough on the racial front more than we need it on the women's rights front. Of the two problem areas, the racial one is causing much greater damage to our social structure than the other.

[bettyellen]

59. i stopped reading when you compared me to a dog. you're so not worth my time.

[Clovis Sangrail]

69. what a rational response

are you sure you don't have some extra dung to fling?
;)

[NoodleyAppendage]

61. BINGO. Right on the mark and many around here took the bait.

Clinton narcosis has rendered many on DU stupid to the political machine that runs her show. Mark Penn makes Rove look like a walk in the park.

[Hekate]

57. Schuster just needed a hard smack for further coarsening news commentary. So do Tweety, Tucker, Joe

Another poster defends this kind of talk as common, then mocks others for not liking that characterization. As Hamlet sarcastically said to the Queen, "Aye, Madam, 'tis common."

The point isn't whether popular gangsta rappers have potty mouths.

The point is whether we want public discourse on the airwaves to descend to that level or not, and the point is whether we believe it is acceptable to refer to women as "nappy headed ho's" when they are star athletes or refer to their parents "pimping them out" when they are political daughters working on a campaign.

Misogyny is alive and well and as putrid as ever. Tell it like it is, Hillary!

Hekate

[GalleryGod]

78. Sorry, NONE of you have the Dem Credentials of Chris Matthews

Who also spent 2 years in the Peace Corps:patriot: and ran against a corrupt Democratic Congressman, Joshua Eilberg, in the Dem Primary of '74. (Later went to JAIL in Abscam) More cajones than most of you here,sad to say.

As for "Morning Joe" ! Simply the BEST!
NAME a better show!?:rofl: :donut:


M.Bolger & CJ Matthews, April,2007; After 6 lectures in two consecutive days.
Photo by Gallerygod :loveya:


Willie- "Where ya' goin' ?"
Mika- " I'm late for GG's class, I'm lecturing and he's buying me lunch in the caf!"

[SoCalDem]

80. Since corporate media has morphed into a banter & kaffeeklatsch mentality

they GUARANTEED that this sort of thing would happen..and it did and it does and it will..

They were looking for ways to make the audience feel like they were part of the "conversation"..like they were at the table with the on-air "talent"..

CNN even circulated a memo a while back ENCOURAGING the prompter-readers to USE "street language" and slang...to draw in the young'uns..

the so-called "news venues" don't DO news.. they do SHOWS..where the hosts & host-ettes ARE the show...their personalities & their double-entendre patter is the biggest part of their "shows"..if news accidentally gets imparted in the process, that's just an oversight..

If they were serious about showing us the news, we would see "real-looking" news-people sitting at desks, just telling us what happened.. they would not be yukking it up, chatting each other up, and overtly flirting and playfully dissing each other..

They WANT the shock-radio material, but they also want it SEEN...and yet they pretend it's "news"..

[NoodleyAppendage]

60. How is Clinton different from Shrub? Both have pressured the media to suit their aims.

Clinton is such a f'ing crybaby. Why should she have ANY SAY SO in which journalists are hired and fired? That sort of behavior is what I would expect from the fascist Repukes, but one of our own? Well...then maybe that means she's not one of our own?

J

[wisteria]

62. Clinton is taking this way to far. I am a woman and I find nothing sexist

about the show in the morning. It sometimes very blunt and opinionated, but sexist? No way, just because a negative comments are directed towards the Clinton clan does not make the comments sexist.

Personally, I like Shuster and it makes me angry that Clinton had him thrown off the show. Much worse comments were said about the Clinton's and Chelsea in the past and they didn't accuse networks and people of sexism and feign outrage. This sound like the trick the Cheney's pulled on Kerry in 2004 after Senator Kerry mentioned that Mary Chaney was gay and behaving like it was something awful to say.

[orleans]

74. let's swap some links here.

"Much worse comments were said about the Clinton's and Chelsea in the past and they didn't accuse networks and people of sexism and feign outrage."

LINK?

what msnbc show in the morning are you talking about? scarborough's show?

here's a link as to how non-sexist he is:

"It's about an MSNBC host saying things like this: "I've been trying to call Alessandra Stanley with The New York Times for some time just to have lunch with her, and she thinks it's because I'm trying to influence her -- that's not the case at all, it's because, I was surprised, I saw a picture of her and I thought she was kinda hot!"

http://mediamatters.org/items/200801180010?f=s_search

"It's about things like a male MSNBC host describing a woman running for president as "shrill" (and "very shrill") and asking, "hat about her housekeeping skills?" Those were Joe Scarborough, too.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200801180010?f=s_search

"On January 23, an (all-male) Morning Joe panel laughed along as Mike Barnicle compared Hillary Clinton to "everyone's first wife standing outside a probate court."

"Then on January 30, Joe Scarborough told co-host Mika Brzezinski, "Mika, don't make me backhand you."
http://mediamatters.org/items/200802080011?f=h_top

or are you talking about tuckers show?
"And then there's MSNBC host Tucker Carlson, who has described Hillary Clinton as "whining" and suggested the reason there are so few women in Congress is that "most women are so sensible, they don't want to get involved in something as stupid as politics" and said of Clinton, "hen she comes on television, I involuntarily cross my legs," and described her as "castrating, overbearing, and scary." (MSNBC can't say they didn't know what they were getting when they hired Carlson; before joining the cable channel, he said women "want to be spanked vigorously every once in a while" and told Elle magazine that Clinton is his "guilty fantasy," explaining: "Every time I see her I think I could, you know, help. ... She seems tense.")
http://mediamatters.org/items/200802080011?f=h_top

EMILY's List president Ellen Malcolm has described Matthews' comments as "sexual harassment brought to you by MSNBC."
http://mediamatters.org/items/200801180010?f=s_search

or are we talking about tweety?
"And Matthews has made countless other comments about Hillary Clinton that he completely ignored last night. He has called her a "She devil" and "witchy" and said that men who support her are "castratos in the eunuch chorus" and compared her to a "strip-teaser" and questioned whether she is a "convincing mom" and said she speaks in a "scolding manner" and described her laugh as a "cackle" and suggested that "being surrounded by women" might "make a case against" Clinton being "commander in chief" and called her an "uppity" woman and described her as "anti-male" and obsessed about her "ambition" while ignoring that of the (all male) Republicans running for president.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200801180010?f=s_search

"his suggestion that Nancy Pelosi would "castrate" Steny Hoyer and that she would have difficulty disagreeing with President Bush without "screaming" and "without becoming grating." Or his suggestion that the Des Moines Register endorsed Hillary Clinton because the paper's "female editors and publisher" succumbed to "lobbying" by Bill Clinton.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200801180010?f=s_search

or maybe you'd like to see shuster impersonate the women on the view?
http://mediamatters.org/static/video/morningjoe-20080111.wmv

could you please explain to me how, when men start talking about women in this manner, it is not sexist?


sexist: "a man with a chauvinistic belief in the inferiority of women"
"showing contempt for the other sex"
"discriminatory on the basis of sex (usually said of men's attitude toward women) "
sexism: "Discrimination based on gender, especially discrimination against women.
"Attitudes, conditions, or behaviors that promote stereotyping of social roles based on gender. "
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sexist

what is YOUR defination of sexist?

i like to use examples that would make a situation personal or put it in someones own backyard: if these men made these comments in reference to your daughter you'd be okay with that? or in reference to your mom? that would be okay with you? or if they were laughing, making fun of and talking about your shrill voice, how you can't disagree without screaming, or become grating, that you're too uppity, you're going to castrate someone, you're a she-devil, your laugh sounds like a cackle, you're like a strip-teaser and your friends are castratos in the eunuch chorus, you are castrating, overbearing, and scary, that you are a guilty fantasy to some guy because everytime he sees you he wants to, you know, help...because you seem so tense, that you and your mother and your daughter want to be spanked vigorously every once in a while, and you're like everyone's first wife standing outside a probate court even though you're kinda hot--but what about your housekeeping skills?

anyone talking about you in that way wouldn't bother you? phase you? you'd find that acceptable dialogue in regards to your daughter or your mother?

no?

well--no wonder! it's sexist! and in spite of shuster's reporting that we all appreciate--he needs to keep his bullshit in check when he's on the air. as should the rest of the boys in the club at msnbc

btw--i am also a woman. and i find it offensive as hell.

[Clovis Sangrail]

79. you do make some points

but you wander off into the weeds just as much.

Cracks about "housekeeping skills" or "everyone's first wife" are unacceptable and say more about the clowns who make them than the person to whom they are referring.
However, crying "sexist" because somebody says "don't make me backhand you" or uses the word shrill is asinine.

When Tucker, Chris, Joe, or whoever makes a crack that they should be called on... do so.
All political talking heads generally suck (a sexist term) and you can expect their opinions to be generally worthless.
They aren't concerned about "news" so much as money.. which comes from ratings... which comes from controversy.
Which is why they say the things they do.

If you want to see this behavior taken to the extreme look at Mann Coulter (more sexist provocation) or Michelle Malkin.
If you expect these people to be worth a fuck (more sexist terminology) you're living in a fantasy world.
Elevating them to the status of "news" only legitimizes them, rather than pointing them out as the crap flinging monkeys they are.
(I think that last one could be considered racist if you've never actually seen a monkey fling poo)

[orleans]

81. when was the last time you heard on tv anyone say pat buchanan

sounded "shrill?"

he fucking sounds shrill to me all the goddamn time i hear him talk but i have NEVER heard anyone remark on his "shrill" voice. i'm guessing it's because, in part, he's a male. when guys say a woman is shrill it sounds acceptable to a lot of people--it plays into the stereotype that women are shrill or tend to sound shrill at times--as if men never do or are incapable of it.

same with the backhand remark. that conjures up images of domestic violence and the majority of domestic violence, (from what i learned in a domestic violence class at college), was mainly violence directed toward women.

how in the world is it acceptable for some guy to tell a woman not to "make him" backhand her?

isn't that a popular excuse of males who beat up women? that it was the woman's fault? that she "made" him do it?

so scarborough tells mika not to make him backhand her.
sorry--that's unacceptable talk on stations (cable or public) that should have a certain level of professionalism to them.

as for coulter or malkin--i'm not even going there. i find them both disgusting and disgraceful. i vaguely remember hearing the two of them denigrate women as well--which helped to form my extremely negative opinion about them. (that and the fact of their political leanings)

[Clovis Sangrail]

85. different worlds I suppose

I've used the phrase "don't make me backhand you" or "if you do that again I'll backhand you" quite a lot in my life... and very rarely with women.
In my mind the phrase derives not from violence against women, but of parents against children.

It's not something I'd think is acceptable to say to somebody I don't have that sort of relationship with, but I don't consider is sexist.

Some things really depend on context.

I personally find Coulter and Malkin to be shrill harpies (dual sexist remarks) that portray women, and humanity in general, a very bad light.
I don't find my description of them to be 'sexist' because I'm very obviously NOT denigrating women in general.

Maybe I consider "sexist" and terms that identify a person's sex as separate things.

[GalleryGod]

75. Want a Fight Sen. Clinton ? She'll EAT you ALIVE and not even BURP!

MIKA !!!

[JerseygirlCT]

82. I agree with your last paragraph particularly

Tucker adds absolutely nothing. Maddow is good, sharp, on point, interesting. Seems a no-brainer to me.

[MasonJar]

83. David Schuster has always previously seemed sensible to me. If

his apology was indeed honest and not just job saving, then he should be forgiven. I do NOT agree in any way that such a phrase is now common usage to the point that is should not be inappropriate and unwarranted in any scenario, especially in a daughter campaigning for her mother. In fact the statement was a slur and there is no way around it, as Obama himself declared. I feel confident that Obama was being honest and not just spouting the necessary jargon. I am astonished that such a seasoned reporter would be so sexist; I am also appalled that anyone at DU would sanction such a statement just because he/she supports Obama. No gentleman and no lady would appreciate their own daughter being called a pimp; I have two daughters and I can speak personally on this matter. My son, who is unfortunately a PUG, would be disgusted to have such a reference implied against his sisters.

[Mezzo]

87. I hope and pray this is true...

it was inappropriate, but certainly not something to be fired over. I've said this before, Schuster got yelled at by Joe Scarborough earlier that day. Maybe he was off his game.

[fascisthunter]

91. Yo, I'm Pimpin' Me Serious Some Laughs...