If Rush Limbaugh had been suspended for saying exactly what Shuster said,

[Pale Blue Dot]

we'd all be defending him here, right? RIGHT???

I don't like Hilary. At all. She's my least favorite Democratic candidate. But what Shuster said was ignorant, stupid, and sexist, and he deserves his suspension. You can complain about the double-standard if you want, but two wrongs don't make a right. Shuster was wrong.

[KAZ]

1. Agree 100%

[rodeodance]

2. Rush has his own broadcasting setup--as far as I know--or shares in it.

[Tom Rinaldo]

3. We would be cutting Anne Coulter slack too, right? It's just "slang" n/t

[Patsy Stone]

4. Shuster

essentially called the Clintons pimps. He never called Chelsea a prostitute.

[Pale Blue Dot]

5. ...

You have GOT to be kidding me. What do pimps do? What's the ONLY thing pimps do?

[yardwork]

6. If Rush Limbaugh called Obama a pimp, would you be defending him?

Come on.

[Patsy Stone]

9. I'm not defending him.

I'm saying that the comments I've seen regarding this all seem to think that he made a disparaging remark about Chelsea. He said "They were pimping her out in weird way". "They" being the subject of the sentence.

I never would have said what he said, it was wrong. But to say he explictly called Chelsea a prostitute is not accurate.

And this is not about a candidate. This is about Shuster.

[Pale Blue Dot]

14. Again, what do pimps do?

Charity work?

[Patsy Stone]

18. Pimps pimp

Whether the girls want to be turned out or not. And the fact that he called them pimps is bad enough without the extra extrapolation.

[Tom Rinaldo]

7. He essentially said she was whoring for her parents

even if he put most of the blame on Hillary for pimping her.

[Patsy Stone]

15. "Essentially"

involves interpretation. Explicitly is right there in black and white.

[Pale Blue Dot]

17. Would you split these hairs for Limbaugh? O'Reilly?

If they said the same thing?

[Patsy Stone]

24. Who are you defending here?

Shuster? The Clintons? Chelsea?

I don't agree with the term "pimping out". It was a bad choice of phrase. But, in the world of logic, calling the Clintons pimps is not the same as calling her a whore. I don't agree they are pimps, so I don't agree with Shuster.

[Pale Blue Dot]

27. Would you be defending Rush Limbaugh if he made the same comment and was suspended for it?

If you can answer that question, one way or the other, I'll stop arguing with you.

[Patsy Stone]

29. Yes

Because I would still see it as a dig at the Clintons and not Chelsea. The Clintons could be pimps without the subject of the pimping being Chelsea couldn't they? They could pimp Hillary's campaign in the media, or pimp her ride, right?

[Tom Rinaldo]

21. I was just repeating your own phrasing by using "essentially"

because essentially you were avoiding the reality that Chelsea got called a whore.

[Patsy Stone]

35. No

the Clintons were called pimps. From which a lot of people inferred he purposely Chelsea a whore. I ama defending him because I do not believe he intended to call her a whore. I am not defending his use of the phrase at all.

[NMMNG]

19. One can't be a pimp without prostitutes

:shrug:

[Tom Rinaldo]

25. But then you have no one to "pimp out".

In this case the point was made that Chelsea was "pimped out".

[NMMNG]

30. That's what I'm saying

If you're a pimp you need prostitutes to pimp out. In this case Chelsea was the "prostitute" in question. The whole implication that she was being pimped out was vile and I wrote to the powers that be and told them so.

[Tom Rinaldo]

34. Got it. Thanks n/t

[ProSense]

8. If Hillary had been outraged by the things Limbaugh has said, like insulting our troops, she would

be less of a hypocrite:

Hillary's campaign is upset with David Shuster, but the Clintons are best friends with McCain

Bill Clinton: John McCain and Hillary are 'very close'

McCain and his blogger apparently agree: Chelsea Clinton is "ugly"

[Pale Blue Dot]

11. I told you in my OP that I don't like Clinton.

I challenge you to find one post I've written in which I've been moderately supportive of her. You won't because I haven't.

Do you want to respond to the argument in my OP, or do you want to continue to try to change the subject?

[HughMoran]

10. "two wrongs don't make a right"

You said it!

:applause:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

12. Is David Shuster comparable to Rush Limbaugh?

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

23. Exactly - David Shuster apologized for an assinine comment

It was an outrageous thing to say. Rush Limbaugh has unapologetically been saying outrageous, false, and inflammatory things against everything progressives value throughout his career, whereas David Shuster has generally been one of the better journalists (which still isn't great but better than the other sheep and ChimpFluffers in the media).

[Pale Blue Dot]

26. All of that is true, but it doesn't make what he said any better than if Limbaugh said it.

NO ONE would be coming to Limbaugh's defese if he made the exact comments. NO ONE. It was the wrong thing to say.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

28. No one would be coming to his defense because of who he is

Rush Limbaugh is Rush Limbaugh, with all the years of baggage that entails. I don't see how you don't take that into account. Rush Limbaugh has never apologized in the past. He called Chelsea Clinton a dog face in the past when she was a little girl in the White House and didn't apologize. David Shuster apologized and said one isolated thing. David Shuster can fall back on years of decent journalism for which I think we can allow him one outrageous statement with an apology and not call for his removal from the air waves. I have condemned Shuster's comment and I think his apology is acceptable. What more do people want?

[Orangepeel]

13. but he never is.

For some reason, the only people who are punished for saying offensive things are on MSNBC. So does it make sense to boycott MSNBC, when they seem to be the only media outlet that acts in any way when someone in the stable offends?

[Pale Blue Dot]

16. Where in my OP do I say to boycott MSNBC?

It's true that Shuster was punished whereas Tucker Carlson or Bill O'Reilly wouldn't have been. SO???? That doesn't mean that what Shuster said was OK, or that he shouldn't be suspended.

[Orangepeel]

31. You don't. The Clinton spokesperson did.

Excuse me for extrapolating beyond your post without indicating I was doing so.

[ZinZen]

20. Shuster does not equal Rush

Bad analogy. Rush is rw Oxycontin abusing blowhard. Shuster has been a damn good reporter. Yes his comment about Chelsea is unfortunate but it is being blown out of the stratosphere.

[Pale Blue Dot]

22. Where in my OP do I say they are equal?

Let me clarify: If Rush said EXACTLY what Shuster said, NO ONE on DU would be coming to his defense, and rightfully so. Shuster made a comment that I wouldn't have expected from him. It was tasteless, sexist and stupid, and he deserves the punishment. Rush would too.

[NYCGirl]

32. No, because with Limbaugh, that kind of thing is not a rare exception.

David Shuster, as far as I know, has never said anything like that before. Would they both deserve the same reaction?

[sfam]

33. Limbaugh says junk far worse than this at least 5 times a day...what's...

your point? That Rush will never be suspended?

The good folks on Fox say stuff like this regularly. But they wouldn't suspend someone for anything similar to this.

Yes, Shuster truly needs to apologize both on TV and in person. If the suspension is short, I'm OK with this too - it truly was a horrid comment. But there seems to be this clamoring for firing him - that I just do not get.