Although MSNBC representatives make disgracefully offensive comments about President George W. Bush on a daily basis, it appears there is something the network won't tolerate: over-the-top remarks about Chelsea Clinton.
Such appears to be the case as MSNBC correspondent David Shuster has apparently been suspended for comments he made about the former first daughter on Thursday's "Tucker."
*****Update at end of post: Hillary's front-group, Media Matters, is absolutely thrilled by this announcement.
As reported by TVNewser (h/t NBer ricklail):
Shuster, who apologized this morning on MSNBC and will again this evening, has been suspended from appearing on all NBC News broadcasts, other than to make his apology. He has also extended an apology to the Clinton family. NBC News takes these matters seriously, and offers our sincere regrets to the Clintons for the remarks.
For those that missed NewsBuster Mark Finkelstein's post on this issue, a video and transcript of Shuster's remarks are available here.
Update 18:51 | Matthew Sheffield. Shuster's suspension just wasn't good enough for the Clinton campaign who are now threatening to boycott MSNBC during presidential debates:
A distasteful comment about Chelsea Clinton by an MSNBC anchor Thursday could imperil Hillary Rodham Clinton's participation in future presidential debates on the network, a Clinton spokesman said.
In a conference call with reporters, Clinton communications director Howard Wolfson Friday excoriated MSNBC's David Shuster for suggesting the Clinton campaign had "pimped out" 27-year old Chelsea by having her place phone calls to Democratic Party superdelegates on her mother's behalf. Wolfson called the comment "beneath contempt" and disgusting.
"I, at this point, can't envision a scenario where we would continue to engage in debates on that network," he added.
Clinton and Barack Obama are scheduled to participate in an MSNBC debate Feb. 26 from Ohio, which holds its primary March 4. The Clinton campaign has pushed hard for as many debates as possible with Obama, but Wolfson said the Feb. 26 debate could be jeopardized.
*****Update II: Hillary's front-group, Media Matters, is just thrilled about this announcement. What a shock! Those that can stand the astounding hypocrisy should go here and here.
Maybe even more sickening, NBC actually sent a statement to these shills apologizing for Shuster's statements.
Imagine that.
Can you remember NBC ever sending an apology to President Bush for any of the disgusting comments made by Shuster, Olbermann, or any of the other so-called journalists employed by this abomination?
Regardless, readers are warned to have a trash receptacle, tissues, and breath mints handy before clicking on any of the above links, for this is truly nauseating detritus.
*****Update III: What's the likelihood the Clintons are using this issue to evoke sympathy and slow down Obama's momentum?
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Seems the Clinton phone book is vast!
February 8, 2008 - 18:53 ET by drillanwrGeez ... Hope they gave old Dave there fair warning so he could "lube up" before "taking" that one ...
Any chance of Olbermann getting "time out" for ANY remarks he's made about CiC GWBush ... ummm ... er ... yeah, I thought not.
What's that now ... 2 MSDNC apologies FOR the Clinton cause so far?
When you men get home and face an anti-war protestor, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend because she knows she’s dating a pussy… ~ Attributed to General Tommy Franks
Let that be a lesson to you:
February 8, 2008 - 18:51 ET by ironchefofmunchiesYou can call Republicans anything you want. You can insult all Christians in any manner imaginable.
BUT MESS WITH THE CLINTONS, AND YOU WILL PAY!
PS- Chelsea is still fugly. Yeah, I said it. Because it's true.
They kept her under
February 9, 2008 - 10:06 ET by Cape Conservativelock and key all during the White House - off limits to all press. Now that she might do some good, bring her out to try to fool the people into thinking her mother is actually a warm human 'bean'- My My My
Broom Hilda's fingerprints are all over this.
February 8, 2008 - 18:52 ET by R D HelmI am guessing she swooped in and threatened to turn them all into toads over at MSNBC.
Of course, in Kiethie's case, that would have meant a step up in the food chain. :-)
None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. -J.W. von Goethe
Bush women
February 8, 2008 - 18:58 ET by iveseenitallThey kept their filthy mouths off the Bush girls too. So it seems logical that they should stay away from the Clinton girl. Besides, Shuster is a total ass. I think he is another headache to NBC and they're probably glad he is off the air for at least a while.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
Chelsea is working IN it
February 8, 2008 - 22:01 ET by GForceI would think that since Chelsea is working "it" for her mother that she is fair game. I'm sure her daily "activities" are paid for by the campagne. Is she's on the payroll? Or just taking a little break from her 6 figure hedge fund job?
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it"-Aristotle
Does this mean they're
February 8, 2008 - 18:55 ET by rbosqueDoes this mean they're going to fire all those others for demonizing the President???
It might mean most will be out of a job! Oh well.
Now....
February 8, 2008 - 18:57 ET by BarkerShuster needs to go kiss the ring of Huggy Bear.
MediaMatters/Soros/Billary..
February 8, 2008 - 18:57 ET by bigtimerMediaMatters/Soros/Billary....
Scored again!
Exactly! I just dropped in
February 8, 2008 - 20:13 ET by mostlymoderateExactly! I just dropped in over at the MM site and they are really proud of this little accomplishment. They are disturbingly "smug" and conceited over their.
mm... What is funny is
February 8, 2008 - 20:21 ET by bigtimermm...
What is funny is they are eating their own in the long run when it is all said and done.
Doesn't get better than this...
This is just ridiculous.
February 8, 2008 - 19:02 ET by RickTaLifeThis is just ridiculous. Really makes me sick. :-x Sorry, nothing particularly enlightening about my posting here, just wanted my displeasure to be known. 1,000's of "over-the-top" comments about our president, vice president, members of congress, etc, not to mention all the personal attacks on family members of folks like Rudy Guiliani, and not 1 word from management...but 1 comment, which to be honest doesn't seem like it's too over-the-top to me, about a clinton and the guy gets suspended!? Bull.
rick... I could not
February 8, 2008 - 19:12 ET by bigtimerrick...
I could not agree more with you...I despise Shuster/have posted as such for years now here I think, but what he said was true...
Olbermann has had despicable communistic rants that are so outrageous that even Matthews couldn't come close to topping them if he even tried.
Media Matters and all involved at work for sure, but I want to know who is making these decisions at the top too...
Matthews had to apologize not that long ago to Billary if memory serves me correctly.
I just heard Schuster's apology too...again on msnbc at the top of Tuckers show with Nora subbing.
Btw...has anybody heard that Hill was lying about running out of money, she just increased her fund-raising by this ploy...just curious.
Precisely. I hope this
February 8, 2008 - 19:24 ET by RickTaLifePrecisely.
I hope this gets wider coverage than just the blogosphere...at least O'reilly covering it would be nice....maybe on a Bernie and Jane day. :-) Actually, I'd like him to cover it with Miller.
Regardless though, even if it's a lost cause, I pray that Shuster sees what happened here and a learns a lesson about his own network's biases and outrages. lol, and the left talks about our administration "controlling the media." I think this is a prime piece of evidence showing who really has such a power, and how that power would be used in her own administration, should she win (and it looks more and more likely that we'll be dealing with at least 4 years of her).
Ah well, I'm off to happier things.
RTL... Have a good one!
February 8, 2008 - 19:30 ET by bigtimerRTL...
Have a good one!
But why is Shuster
February 8, 2008 - 19:04 ET by mlongBut why is Shuster being punished for saying that about Chelsea when other MSNBC host have said similar or worst things about Republican/Conservative women?….KO,Chrissy Mathews
and others have attacked Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin with many
tasteless remarks..as a someone said at Olbermann Watch…
“Chelsea got a taste of what non-Democrat females have gotten at the
hands of MSNBC hosts. It certainly wasn’t out of bounds for MSNBC hosts
to compare disgraced Sen Vitter’s wife’s tv appearance to a hooker.”
No one can make the excuse that Chelsea is off limits…she’s not a kid any
more She’s an active member of her Mothers election team and fair
game..now not to be called a Hooker of course..but you can’t have a
double standard that you can make crude remarks about
Republican/Conservative Women but not Liberal/Dem Women.
MSNBC has had the chickens coming home to roost on this and I really hope
O’Reilly and others start pointing out the double standards of the
network and it’s on-air talent…when it comes to who they’ll
punish(Imus,Shuster) and who they won’t(KO.Chrissy)when they make
racist and sexist comments.
But on a side note you just got love the irony after all the fuss over the
phony FOX boycott because their a biased “Right wing” network (even
though most of the Dems candidates still appeared on their shows)that
the biased Left wing network MSNBC will be the one that is really
boycotted by the Dems top candidate. LOL!!!!
"I want my Mommy!!!!"
Hillary Clinton'08
MSM is code for double-standard
February 8, 2008 - 21:51 ET by needle"but you can’t have a double standard that you can make crude remarks about Republican/Conservative Women but not Liberal/Dem Women."
What do you mean “you can’t…”?
MSM is code for double-standard, hypocrisy, and bias, which is precisely what this web site is dedicated to expose. In fact it seems as if the MSM "can't" help themselves.
Impunitas semper ad deteriora invitat.
In stark contrast, these
February 8, 2008 - 19:04 ET by NL207In stark contrast, these same editors think it only right and proper that the media discuss allegations of alcohol abuse by the Bush twins.
Shuster could have said
February 8, 2008 - 19:06 ET by JerShuster could have said everything that he did about Chelsea, and if he had not used the term "pimped out", there would have been no problem.
If Shuster had used the same phrase with respect to George Bush's daughters, he would have suffered similar punishment.
Jer
Think So?
February 8, 2008 - 19:29 ET by Del DolemonteYou've obviously been out of town the past few months-Jenna Bush's press treatment last summer when she announced her engagement was greeted by the media with gems like this:
"Jenna Bush Pregnant - Jenna Bush, one of President and Laura Bush's twin daughters, has become impregnated and engaged to long-time boyfriend Henry Hager.
The pregnancy speculation began when these shocking photos of a muumuu-clad Jenna and puppet star "Elmo" appeared two months ago. No date or place has been set for the wedding."
http://www.postchron...
At the same time came this absolutely deranged column by a major newspaper columnist in the San Francisco Bay Area about Jenna:
http://www.sfgate.co...
excerpt:
"I got her trained just right. She brings me a steady supply of cold Bud Lights while I chill on the La-Z-Boy watching the Nationals game on the plasma. Here's a funny: After any home run, I'll down whatever's left of my beer and suck in a big mouthful of air and then belch her name really, really slowly and blow it right in her face. "Oh my God that is so gross!" she squeals, and then totally cracks up and makes that funny snorting noise and goes to get us both another beer. Man, I love being married. Her hair smells like kitty litter and nachos and bad domestic wiretapping law...."
Out of town? Sadly, no.
February 8, 2008 - 20:00 ET by JerOut of town? Sadly, no. I've been right here the whole time. It's just that the "Tittle-Tattle Blue" and "SFGate" websites aren't on my daily "must read" list.
You'll have to do better than that, Del.
Jer
No he doesn't
February 8, 2008 - 20:25 ET by RiharIf presidential kids are off limits then they are off limits. If it's ok to trash them then it's ok to trash them. Whether you read that silliness or not, it's out there.
Was it OK to print the picture of Kerry's daughter in a flimsy dress without a bra? I don't think so. I might think Kerry's daughter is foolish for wearing that thing where she knew she'd get her picture taken but I still think publishing it was wrong.
Chelsea Clinton however is taking an active political role. Daughters of Bush, Kerry, and Gore never did that to my knowledge. If you're not in the fray then I think it should be "hands off". If you get down in the muck with the political crowd however, get ready to catch some mud in the face from time to time.
Let's be even handed, even if the press is not.
When a liberal speaks, the truth is busy elsewhere.
Rihar...I'm in general
February 8, 2008 - 20:39 ET by JerRihar...I'm in general agreement with everything you say in your post, and criticism of Chelsea's politicking shouldn't be off limits. But I also believe Shuster's "pimping out" phrase crossed the line.
Jer
Out of Town?
February 8, 2008 - 21:51 ET by Del DolemonteStandard Saul Alinsky tactics-attack the messenger, because the message can't be refuted.
SFGate is the web reproduction of the SF Chron, a major newspaper. Or as Cluck Trent would say, a great metropolitan newspaper. In other words, a major media outlet.
Morford's diatribe againts Ms. Bush got much wider circulation than the pitiful numbers MSNBC gets. But he got a pass?
Del, who attacked which
February 8, 2008 - 21:59 ET by JerDel, who attacked which messenger and how?
Jer
why Jer
February 8, 2008 - 22:04 ET bywho attacked the messenger? that would be you, Jer. And how?, well read the thread Jer it's pretty obvious.
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
botg...I've read the
February 8, 2008 - 22:16 ET by Jerbotg...I've read the thread. If it is that obvious to you, then please describe how I attacked the messenger.
Jer
Sointantly Jer
February 8, 2008 - 22:22 ET byright here Del posted a reasoned argument complete with links. You could have responded to the post or the links but what did you do????
I don't read those (messenger1) and Del (messenger2) needs to do better than to link to places i don't read.
The substance was ignored by you and the messengers poo-pooed.
Obvious enough?
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
botg...Apparently I
February 8, 2008 - 23:46 ET by Jerbotg...Apparently I was out of town when the bar which determines a "personal attack" against someone at NB was lowered to about one centimeter off the ground.
I stated what was clearly an opinion that Shuster would have suffered similar sanctions from MSNBC if Bush's daughters had been the object of his "pimped out" phrase instead of Chelsea Clinton.
Del responded with the somewhat dismissive observation that I must have been "out of town" for months and missed the media mistreatment of Jenna Bush. His evidence consisted of links to a couple of obscure websites containing admittedly unflattering remarks about the President's daughter--sites, by the way which I wouldn't be visiting if I were "in town" or "out of town".
I certainly didn't agree with the unflattering remarks, and I may have even suspended the authors if they were employed by me. But, Del's evidence wasn't sufficient to cause me to change my opinion about Shuster and MSNBC. So, I told him he would have to do better than that.
Do you honestly believe that constituted a personal attack?
Jer
Jer
February 8, 2008 - 23:52 ET byhow does "attack the messenger" = "personal attacks"?
you poo-pooed the links, the sites, and Del
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
botg... how does "attack
February 9, 2008 - 00:33 ET by Jerbotg...
how does "attack the messenger" = "personal attacks"?
Answer: attack = the singular of attacks
messenger = a person or thing which delivers a message; as opposed to the message per se
I asked Del what he meant; you answered that it was obvious, and subsequently identified Del as messenger2. Del is a person. Thus, according to you, I had made a personal attack on Del.
you poo-pooed the links, the sites, and Del
Wrong. I poo-pooed the links and poo-pooed the sites, but I didn't poo-poo Del personally.
Jer
grasping at straws
February 9, 2008 - 00:41 ET bygrasping at straws
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
...and you're reduced to
February 9, 2008 - 00:50 ET by Jer...and you're reduced to irrelevant cliches.
[But don't take it personally] <wink>
Jer
not even sure its worth that
February 9, 2008 - 00:59 ET bynot even sure its worth that much
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Uh, I Didn't
February 9, 2008 - 12:10 ET by Del DolemonteI posted a disgusting piece about Jenna Bush from a major San Francisco newspaper. You dismissed it. Game, set and match.
By the way, how come other MSDNC hosts get to call Bush "Hitler"?
Sorry Del...but the
February 9, 2008 - 18:17 ET by JerSorry Del...but the rules of tennis which I've played by for the past 40 years don't allow you to take a couple of serves, walk off the court, and then come back the next day and claim "game, set, and match". [Not to say it wasn't enjoyable volleying with Botg instead].
It would have been better if you had linked the article from The San Francisco Chronicle instead of SFGate.com and Tittle-Tattle Blue. But if you bothered to read my other posts, you should have noted that I agreed the remarks about Jenna were inappropriate and that I may have suspended the columnist if he were my employee. But the examples were not sufficiently compelling or analogous to cause a change in my basic opinion about how MSNBC would have responded if Schuster had used "pimped out" type language with respect to the Bush daughters.
Help me out, though. Did Rush suffer any repercussions back in the 90's after he compared a young teenaged Chelsea to a "dog"?
I'm willing to waive the default, but you're still behind in the score. Your serve.
Jer
Nice Try!
February 9, 2008 - 21:52 ET by Del DolemonteThe Chron columnist in question's articles appear in both the print edition of the Chron as well as the sfgate internet version. And since the Chron is the second largest newspaper in circulation on the West Coast, that's a lot of readers.
And exactly how do you propose that I post a link to a page of newsprint? Can't be done. That's why the Chron has their "sfgate" electronic version.
As you apparently do not know, many newspapers print exactly the same thing in their print editions as they do online, but online it's called by another name. A prime example of this is the NY Times-owned Boston Globe, which publishes its print articles under the nom de plume "Boston.com". Likewise with the Chron and sfgate.
As for the evil Rush Limbaugh insulting Chelsea, that happened some 15 years ago. Besides, Limbaugh later personally apologized to Hillary for his insult when he ran into her by chance at a public function in New York several years ago, actually seeking her out when he heard she was there.
She accepted his apology.
Del...thanks for
February 9, 2008 - 22:44 ET by JerDel...thanks for response. I have a couple of points in reply--including partial concession--but my computer keeps shutting down with Application Error message and I'm losing posts. Let me try again later when I can comment more fully.
Jer
Bull _ _ _ _
February 8, 2008 - 19:44 ET by Founding_FatherYou can finish the rest of my subject by yourself......
Let's see...Bull_ _ _ _
February 8, 2008 - 19:55 ET by JerLet's see...Bull_ _ _ _ Hmmm...I've got it! Bulletin...Right?
Look, it's just my opinion, and unless and until I'm convinced it's baseless, I think I'll stick with it.
Jer
Jer -
February 8, 2008 - 20:32 ET by drillanwr<pssst!> Buy a vowel! ( ... i! Buy an i! ... )
When you men get home and face an anti-war protestor, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend because she knows she’s dating a pussy… ~ Attributed to General Tommy Franks
Shuster
February 8, 2008 - 19:07 ET by billbOf all things to get upset about?????? He could have called her Hitler, murderer,liar, killer, but those comments are reserved for President George Bush. What he really means is that the Clintons are in fact "pimping" to get elected.This is common for the Clintons. It reminds me of the outrage toward the murderer of Polly Klass. No one got really outraged until he gave the camera the "finger." The original heighnous crime didn't seem to upset the press as much!
Chelsea's Mom (Has Got It Going On)
February 8, 2008 - 19:11 ET by third eyeChelsea cant you see? Your just not the girl for me. I know it might be wrong but Im in love with Chelsea's mom.
Well who would of thought Shuster's tighty-whiteys would be flying high on a flag pole in HillaryLand this evening. Not me, thats for sure.
If Chelsea had been...
February 8, 2008 - 19:18 ET by goldenthroatIf little Miss Clinton had been a Republican, there wouldn't have been a second opinion about this comment. Maybe she IS being "pimped out" by Slick Willy and Shmillary! When Shmillary is fighting for her political life right now and with Osama Bama nipping at her heels, the Clintons will resort to just about any tactics to gain an advantage.
Hillary Jr. is just one of those tactics.
"Yeah! That's the ticket!" - Tommy Flanagan
gt.... ROFL! Billary
February 8, 2008 - 19:24 ET by bigtimergt....
ROFL!
Billary Jr. ....oops I mean Hillary Jr.
I love it!
bama?
February 8, 2008 - 19:47 ET by Founding_FatherGT - please, for all that's pure, don't connect Hussein Obama with Bama... That just hurts this Alabamian to the core.....
BALONEY
February 8, 2008 - 19:12 ET by Der AlteYeah, he's sorry for doing it to a democrat's offspring. Wonder if he would have suffered the same fate if he said it against the Bush twins? I hate it what bad things happen to "good" people!
Paging Mr. Shuster
February 8, 2008 - 19:29 ET by Lame CherryFor those who think NBC is in the Obama bank, let this be a lesson in reality.
Apparently Shuster's other reprehensible comments against Conservatives are ok.........just noting Hillary is using her Chelsea as a high grade tease political whore is too much.
Shuster did this awhile back........Hillary must have run a poll to see if she made a stink it would give her sympathy for when she gets beat, so she can keep her senate job until she retires.
Strange Hillary can call a raped nurse a "bimbo" and a woman attacked by Bill in the White House whose husband just died a "bimbo", but her using her sperm donated daughter a whore which she is...........is just too much.
Shuster should issue the above as an apology and tell NBC to suck it.
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
Geez, after David Shyster
February 8, 2008 - 19:45 ET by fitzfongGeez, after David Shyster debased himself in furtherance of the Joe Wilson/Valerie Plame/Patrick Fitzgerald/Chuckie Schumer/Henry Waxman Escort Service, you'd think he'd be the last one accusing anyone of being a prostitute.
Make
Sure
Never to
Bash the
Clintons
fitz... That post was
February 8, 2008 - 19:50 ET by bigtimerfitz...
That post was perfect.
bigtimer... 2 for 2 with
February 8, 2008 - 19:52 ET by fitzfongbigtimer...
2 for 2 with you today. I'm honored. :-)
fitz... I'm the lucky
February 8, 2008 - 19:57 ET by bigtimerfitz...
I'm the lucky recipient when it comes to your posts.
'Nuff said.
Apparently
February 8, 2008 - 19:55 ET by drillanwrMSDNC ain't burning that Clinton Bridge just yet ... You know, juuust in case BHO can't seem to pull this out for `08. Why, who would they (MSDNC) be stuck campaigning for? McCain??!!??
BTW -
Some of us have recalled Chrissy's Clinton groveling of just a couple weeks ago.
Let's NOT forget the Clinton shot across the bow (threat) of a certain magazine that was to publish, I believe, a non-flattering article about Billy Jeff ...
If ANYONE is deluding themselves that IF, by Satan, Hillary makes it into the Oval Office that she and her machine WON'T control the MSM ... well, I got some carbon credits to sell ya ... dirt cheap.
When you men get home and face an anti-war protestor, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend because she knows she’s dating a pussy… ~ Attributed to General Tommy Franks
drill...
February 8, 2008 - 20:30 ET by JerI take it you disagree with Bill O'Reilly's repeated assertions that the MSM is clearly rooting for Obama over Hillary.
Jer
Jer
February 8, 2008 - 20:37 ET by drillanwrOh, not at all ... Just that
1) HRC and BHO are pretty close in the polls and deligate count(s)
2) and I feel 99.999% certain SHE would NEVER allow him to beat her out for the ticket (you can imagine any Clinton scenario you want there ...)
so
3) MSDNC must be able to lift the Hillary `08 banner ... should "conditions" for the general election warrent them to ... eh, hmm.
When you men get home and face an anti-war protestor, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend because she knows she’s dating a pussy… ~ Attributed to General Tommy Franks
Good riddance to Shuster
February 8, 2008 - 19:55 ET by Captain RepusI am amazed by the goings-on at MSDNC ever since Russert got 'Hillaried' for daring to ask an un-scripted question during an earlier debate. From that day the entire snuff-squad at MSDNC has been on a slam campaign against her thighness and a fluff campaign on behalf of Barrak Hussein. Now they are finding out what many others, especially Bill's sex victims, have undergone from the Clinton machine; if you cherish your life and/or livelyhood you never, I repeat never turn against either one of these scumbags.
The family members of
February 8, 2008 - 20:19 ET by mostlymoderateThe family members of political candidates should not be ridiculed. However, once you start campaigning for your parents you open the door to criticism. Don't get me wrong, I despise Shuster; however, in this particular situation I think Medi@matters went overboard (<<I use @ so they don't get the publicity...vile scum they are)
Sort of like Edwards "take
February 8, 2008 - 20:24 ET by Captain RepusSort of like Edwards "take Dick Cheney's daughter, she is a queer you know ...." - the Clintons didn't seem to find anything wrong with that
Hillary Clinton will be the
February 8, 2008 - 20:32 ET by mostlymoderateHillary Clinton will be the Hugo Chavez of this country. Period.
...
February 8, 2008 - 20:22 ET by dervishThe only question is, do the Clintons have this much juice at all the networks, or just NBC?
I believe the winner of this year's election has just been announced.
Double Standard?
February 8, 2008 - 20:27 ET by BourbeauDenigrate the President - no problem.
"Nappy haired ho's" - You're Fired!!!
"Pimped her daughter Chelsea" - We're sorry, we're sorry, please forgive us.
The hypocrisy astounds me.
February 8, 2008 - 20:44 ET by mostlymoderateThe hypocrisy astounds me. The same reason Olbermann can say anything he wants but O'Reilly can't. The same reason Christianity can be ridiculed but Islam cannot. The same reason we are supposed to feel sorry for Heath Ledger as a victim of drugs but at the same time mock and humiliate Rush Limbaugh for his struggle with drugs. Are you getting this???
BINGO!!!
February 9, 2008 - 00:24 ET by danybhoymostlymoderate,
You hit it on the sweet spot. It's all about hypocrisy, the double standard. It's about a nasty combo of Political Correctness & Corruption of the MSM.
It's not getting any better, for the most part. Yea, the ratings at MSNBC suck, & Air America is barely alive after going through bankrupcy court, & the newspapers are losing readers & circulation. But they are still out there screwing things up, being biased, & lying(directly or by omission). These corrupt media operations need to be put out of buisiness, the sooner the better.
The best way to do that is let them know of your anger with them & tell their sponsers you are done with them untill things change. No organized boycotts, just do it yourself, mention it to others, & sometimes things change. I don't do GE products anymore, just an example.
"Some of us are wise, some of us are otherwise" Mark Levin
That's a little simplistic.
February 9, 2008 - 00:27 ET by balboaThat's a little simplistic. Olbermann / O'Reilly, sure. The rest? Eh...
How long will Chelsea
February 8, 2008 - 20:33 ET by MidAmericaHow long will Chelsea get to be 'their little girl'? She's 27 after all, almost 28. My daughter was that age just a few years ago and as a manager she has been subject to a fair amount of verbal abuse and none of those people have apologized to me. Evidently Chelsea gets the same gender advantage as her mother, 'you can't hit the girl'.
Besides look at the abuse that has been heaped upon the son of George H. W. Bush. The elder Bush is due a whole lot of apologies.
As far as I'm concerned
February 8, 2008 - 20:49 ET by drillanwrAs far as I'm concerned being said to be "Pimped Out" for you mother's political ambitions might not be quite as bad as having your (private) grown daughter's name (in essence outted for one's own bloody political points/purpose) tossed out (by the opposition) in a presidential and Veep debate(s) as an "assumed" known lesbian to make some lame (non)-point regarding gay marriage that just laid there on both debate floors like some unidentifiable and embarrassing (for the self-centered purveyor of such information) road kill.
When you men get home and face an anti-war protestor, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend because she knows she’s dating a pussy… ~ Attributed to General Tommy Franks
In the OT when this came
February 8, 2008 - 21:00 ET by motherbeltIn the OT when this came up, I said fair enough, Imus got fired. Shuster got off easy. Here, people are pointing out the hypocrisy, which has made me think.
I agree, there is a lot of hypocrisy. but it reminds me of blacks who say white guys get off easier for coke than black guys do for crack. What's the solution...ease up on black drug convictions, or quit letting the white guys off with just probation?
In this crossing the line thing, maybe the solution is not to go easy on Shuster, but to be more vigilant about ALL language that crosses the barriers of good taste. Maybe not with firings, but developing an atmosphere in which that kind of trashtalk from pundits is simply not accpetable.
In the open thread I also said this:
This is what happens when supposed adults adopt the language of the
"streets" in an attempt to look cool. And it's also the result of this
kind of vulgar talk becoming too accpetable, which results in it being
used in situations that should have more decorum.
This AM Mika Brzezsinski asked Shuster this if he was going to CPAC
to hang out with "his peeps." Another one who wants to look "young and
cool" and show that she knows the jargon. While certainly not on the
same level as Shuster's vulgar and distasteful comment, it shows a
similar mindset: the desire to use the jargon of the young, and of the
streets, to show that they're part of the culture. Ditto Imus.... imitating thug talk.
If adults would just talk like the adults they're supposed to be, this wouldn't be a problem.
And I still believe that.
Hear,
February 8, 2008 - 21:03 ET by dervishhear. We can dream.
mb -
February 8, 2008 - 21:22 ET by drillanwr... to be more vigilant about ALL language that crosses the barriers of good taste. Maybe not with firings, but developing an atmosphere in which that kind of trashtalk from pundits is simply not accpetable.
WHAT!?!? You actually want the MSM to think before it opens its mouth? Have you any idea what this will do, physically and mentally, to Chris Matthews?? Have you?!?
Next you'll be wanting them to actually investigate and research the stories before airing them ... Perhaps even covering them from every angle, and not speculate?
Geez, mb! [sarc button, as always, on auto-pilot]
When you men get home and face an anti-war protestor, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend because she knows she’s dating a pussy… ~ Attributed to General Tommy Franks
I'm sorry drill....
February 8, 2008 - 21:32 ET by motherbeltI got carried away.....I see now what a slippery slope it is.
Well ... okay, I guess, mb -
February 8, 2008 - 21:43 ET by drillanwrI'm just looking out for poor Chris Matthews, you know ... And the mess on the MSDNC studio/set should his head implode if he has to think before he opens his mush-mouth.
When you men get home and face an anti-war protestor, look him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend because she knows she’s dating a pussy… ~ Attributed to General Tommy Franks
Professionalism within the Media
February 8, 2008 - 22:02 ET by needleWhoa! You are calling for professionalism within the Media! (You may as well ask men in the general public to wear a coat and tie when they go out to dinner.) This ultimately could put NewsBusters out of business!
I agree with ‘dervish’ though; it is certainly worth dreaming about.
Impunitas semper ad deteriora invitat.
I don't recall anyone ever
February 8, 2008 - 21:06 ET by DCC1I don't recall anyone ever getting suspended for the not so nice things they say about the Bush twins or Cheney's daughter, oh yeah thats right their parents have a R after their name.
And so what, as far as I can tell Shuster is right, they pimp her out to get more votes, and if she is going to be a part of the campain than she has to give up her privacy, and take it like everyone else.
Well, my point, DCC1, is
February 8, 2008 - 21:27 ET by motherbeltI don't recall anyone ever getting suspended.....
Well, my point, DCC1, is that maybe they should have. Shuster shouldn't get off easy because they did. It's too late to go back and punish them now, but because of that, should everyone from here on out get a free pass to trash policitians' families? Do we just do away with standards altogether because they have been lax in the past?
And in the end, it all comes back to Network execs demanding better behavior from their broadcasters. What's wrong with having a meeting and saying "No more. You're newscasters, journalists, not insult comics. From now on, act like adults. Talk like adults with a modicum of education, not street thugs."
It's really that simple.
The problem is that their
February 8, 2008 - 23:25 ET by DCC1The problem is that their motivation is not to clean up the broadcast room, it's to defend the Clintons. It would be nice if they could grow up yes, but thats not whats going on here. If you don't believe me, just toon in to Olbermann tonight for proof, I bet he makes comments at least as outragous as this if not more, and he will NOT get in any trouble whatsoever, if anything they give him a raise.
This isn't fairness, it's just politics as usual as they pertain to the Clintons.
Suspended?!
February 8, 2008 - 22:11 ET by needle“I don't recall anyone ever getting suspended…”
Suspended?! Are you serious? They probably got endless high-fives and “hoorays!” from their associates, not to mention those creeps over @ Medi@matters.
Impunitas semper ad deteriora invitat.
Similar comments made by
February 8, 2008 - 21:26 ET by GregESimilar comments made by conservatives and conservative-leaning people get those people in big trouble, just as this one got Schuster in trouble.
I will say that NONE of those things should get anyone in trouble. I don't care if someone is liberal, conservative, or whatever, and I don't care who it's directed it. NONE of this should get someone in any trouble, because what's been said is NOTHING. Yes, I know there's a double standard, absolutely, and that the media is moronic when it comes that double standard. That's not context here but I want to make that clear anyway. Do I find it interesting that he says NOTHING against the Clintons and is strung up for it? Yes, very much so. But overall, the continuance of making people "pay" for saying things that are only big because someone pumps it all up to actually be big, is stupid and dangerous to freedom of thought.
I can't sit here and say he got what he deserved, because he didn't. And I don't care if he's liberal or not, I will defend his saying it whether I agree with it or not, because it wasn't anything at all.
As the saying goes, I may not agree with what you say, but I will absolutely defend your right to say it. Whack Leftists can't utter such words.
There's a big difference
February 8, 2008 - 21:46 ET by motherbeltThere's a big difference between being free to express opinions and being allowed to insult others in a vulgar way. There have to be some standards.
You do know the meaning of "pimping someone"?? And you think that's perfectly OK to say that that is what someone is doing to their daughter?
Oh, I see. It doesn't matter because it's just a phrase, and it doesn't mean sex, etc. right? Well then, how about there;s a place for street language, and a TV news show isn't it?
Or are you advocating no standards, anywhere? Then why have a dress code? Why shouldn't they be allowed to do their broadcasts in sweats? If shorts and sandals are good enough for the beach, why not a newscast?
The phrase vs the contextual meaning
February 8, 2008 - 22:24 ET by GregE"Or are you advocating no standards, anywhere?"
No, not at all. And I was thinking that I might be opening it for someone to jump in and take it to some further level, far beyond my context, as an example. And that's what you've done. No, that's not what I mean at all.
"There's a big difference between being free to express opinions and
being allowed to insult others in a vulgar way. There have to be some
standards.
You do know the meaning of "pimping someone"??"
Instead of disagreeing on the phrase itself, I think we're disagreeing on the contextual meaning of the phrase. I'll tell you what I view the phrase as, in his context. It's obviously not the same as yours but that's ok. Here's my view in THIS context of Schuster's....
"Pimping out her daughter," to me, the moment I heard it, in this context, meant Hillary letting her daughter be the person to step out and say things as a surrogate for Hillary. Say things that Hillary herself would not be able to say said but wouldn't have to say herself because saying it herself wouldn't work as well or be as "becoming" of a her as candidate. Same as when Bill was doing it. He could say what Hillary was thinking, yet if Hillary was questioned about it in any negative way, she'd simply say "that was Bill, not me," though having Bill do it would get the words out there for all to hear and she could stand back and not actually be the presenter of those possible controversial words.
That's how I heard Schuster's comment the very moment I heard it. I heard it as an analogy used in the context of campaigning, analogous to letting someone else work for her and she reap the benefit of it without having to do it herself........nothing to do with vulgarity, a sexual nature, or anything of the sort.
I see your point, greg.
February 8, 2008 - 23:27 ET by motherbeltI see your point, greg. And I know it didn't imply sex. To me it's more a matter of propriety, bringing street language into a situation where is doesn't belong.
Don Imus, if he were speaking in his normal manner, would never have said those women were whores, but because he was talking "street," that's how he described them. Shuster would never say that the Clintons were offering their daughter for sex, but he saw no problem in using that street phrase to describe what he saw as their exploitation of her.
I also get ticked off with journalists saying this one or that one "Has the cojones" to do so something, when they would never use the English vulgarity. How many other vulgarities are OK to toss around willy-nilly if we translate them?
I think we have beat this into the ground....LOL
Have a great weekend.
CRUDE BUT TRUE
February 8, 2008 - 21:52 ET by docbBeneath contempt...that is the clinton campaign..They have used every trick in the book to maligan others but when someone speaks TRUTH to power THEY ARE OUTRAGED!!!!..HIS LANGUAGE was crude but it was none the less TRUE. They[hc/bc] need the youth vote and so she is being used -just like her grandmother.
She is out of donors and this will help with the women who have chosen to stay with a serial philanderer because they have no chioce...Hillery had a choice and she chose AMBITION OVER HER child.
Poor Shuster
February 8, 2008 - 22:03 ET by DelsaHe should start looking for another job. If it was not good enough to say, "I am heartly sorry for having offended the all powerfull Clintons" sixty five thousand times on his knees, then the suspension will turn into a termination.
I don't like shuster but i feel sorry for him. Now maybe he will understand the speech thing is NOT free. Can't even be stupid!
Shuester and Al'Qaeda
February 8, 2008 - 22:37 ET by dronetekTo be honest, I don’t think this merited dismissal when
compared to the other stupid things he has said. On the other hand, I'm getting
sick of his "fight Al'qaeda where they are in Pakistan" rhetoric as of late.
HE needs to get his head of his ass and spend a few hours looking at the AQ in Iraq propaganda
videos coming out daily. I'd like him to check out one of their latest, showing
3 men burned alive and children beheading a man.
SHUESTER, educate yourself:
**WARNING: GRAPHIC**
http://video.google....
Schuster hasn't gotten the word.
February 8, 2008 - 22:53 ET by pbthinkerHad he said the same thing about McCain's children he would have been fine, you just can't say that about any Democrat.
I'm saying it's wrong either way, but Schuster could have gotten away, with the same phrasing, had it been about a Republican. Yes, my dear, there are different standards.
Democrats: Stuck on Stupid since 2000.
I don't know who to root
February 8, 2008 - 22:56 ET by contraryI don't know who to root for here. Shuster is a poor excuse for a journalist, yet media matters is a abhorent special interest group. Maybe they will eat each other.
"Republicans always get a huge pass on the racist issue. Huck is just another example. Provided they don't start up with the N word, they seem able to pander directly to the racist vote."
-- Chuck Davis, intellectual heavyweight, bigot
Trifecta
February 8, 2008 - 23:02 ET by CaringwhiteguySo far the Clintons have knee-capped Tim Russert, Chris Matthews and David Shuster. And Hillary has participated without shedding a single tear. Someone better warn these guys to stay away from Ft. Marcy Park.
GregE is close
February 8, 2008 - 23:18 ET by soosanSomedays I look at the postings and I just shake my head. What are you thinking? This isn't about Shuster, this isn't about how the media slurs the right and usually ignores things from the left, (it's a little about the 1st ammendment), this is about a political strategy team that has to grab anything it can to help its candidate. Look at it from their view - the campaign has stalled, the husband has lost his golden touch, the record is of no use, etc. What do you do to refocus the voters on the campaign? You accept a gift when it is given. So some schmuck reporter uses a silly phrase. You act offended, you claim that your child has been wronged, you do exactly what the Clintons are doing - you act victimized. lib 101.
On the same page with
February 9, 2008 - 01:23 ET by maggieqpublicOn the same page with you.
My ten cents worth of speculation….
There has been a good deal of cheerleading lately at MSNBC – for Obama. Shuster makes a tasteless remark about Chelsea. Hillary/Media Matters jump on the opportunity presented by Shuster….. mother Clinton appeals to her female voters by expressing her hurt and outrage (MSNBC is bad, bad, bad). Poor Hillary. Poor Chelsea. Hillary now has justification to cut off contact with the pro-Obama cable channel. She will add appearances on Fox News. Conservative Fox News will treat her well, because the conservatives at Fox News want Hillary rather than Obama to meet the Republican in the general election. MSNBC tones down the Obama cheerleading because they want access to the Clinton campaign.
I think you summed things
February 9, 2008 - 01:28 ET by JerI think you summed things up very well.
Jer
soosan
February 9, 2008 - 02:03 ET by Noel Sheppardsoosan,
Hence, Update III. :-) ns
Well, well, well, HRC going
February 9, 2008 - 10:03 ET by motherbeltWell, well, well, HRC going for the "sympathy vote" again. What a surprise.
Obama should point out that she's using a woman's tactic of tears (on a couple of occcasions) and pouting to get attention.
And he shouldn't be a sissy and have his wife do it.
Update: Noel, I went toMM and read the piece you referenced... ...I can't believe I agreed with MM on this that they said:
"Instead of constantly searching for the right response to these outbursts, MSNBC should be searching for ways to foster an environment where they don't happen in the first place.
Except I was talking about a general air of manners in the newsroom (i.e. using standard English, not "street" language) and they are only concerned about "sexist" remarks. And no, I hadn't read that before I made my remark here.
Some of the examples were valid, but these?????:
"Is it ironic that this self-avowed feminist went to New Hampshire, showed some emotion, and that seemed to be a real help to her with women voters?"
"It takes a lot of guts for a rich, privileged white lady who is one of the most powerful people in the world to claim that she is a victim of gender discrimination."
MSNBC's Carlson suggested (to Eleanor Smeal) that women may be "so sensible, they don't want to get involved in something as stupid as politics"
All I can say to MM is "get a grip."
I still say...
February 9, 2008 - 01:13 ET by The Detroit PopulistThe man was telling the truth.
Shillary knows no bounds.
Including pimping her daughter.
Tell the truth and you will be punished.
February 9, 2008 - 02:33 ET by SlicksterThis clown is already groveling, "Hey Hillary, that's one ugly kid you got, who is the father, looks like she has some Kennedy in her".
February 9, 2008 - 09:13 ET by ghotifunNoel:
Taken at face value, this story is just another example of the hypocrisy in the current media. I agree that tasteless comments don't help the political discussion/debate is dispensing issues to the public for them to peruse and then decide. The line of "reasoning" that Shuster was getting at could and should have been phrased more intelligently and carefully and the point would have been made. Instead, as motherbelt has said, he chose to "street-talk" his comment and now the comment has become more of an issue than Chelsea stumping for her mother. Again, "dumbing down" of the English language becomes the norm. I still shudder at the thought of "ebonics"!
I have to agree that the point you querry in "update III" is the first thing I thought of. It is classic Clintonista! Their political machine couldn't wait to "exploit" Shuster's remarks for their own gain. Agian, the liberal media gets caught making an ill-thought comment and "suffers" for it. Well my reaction to (Mitt Romney's) David Shuster's comment is that's the kind of poorly thought out comment that led him to (drop out) be suspended...(thanks to B Hussein Obama for the line)
E.T. Phone Home!
February 9, 2008 - 09:44 ET by StCroix64Is Chelsea Clinton and alien? She has ET hands...take a look at how long her fingers are.
http://d.yimg.com/us...
http://www.freewebs....
soulless exploitation
February 9, 2008 - 11:53 ET by CatherwoodRest assured that Hillary does care one whit about Chelsea being referred to as 'pimped out'. Words like those don't even phase her. This is all about media attention. Now that the Ice Queen is the underdog, she will use any means possible to draw the medias's attention to her. this was just one of those events which the soulless one will milk for all it's worth.
Shuster is a repulsive
February 9, 2008 - 16:29 ET by daveinbocaShuster is a repulsive degenerate who lies and says nasty things about Republicans all the time without retribution.
Good to see this p.o.s. get payback.
A Definite Double Standard
February 9, 2008 - 16:40 ET by Del DolemonteBob Parks checks in with numerous examples of Bush-twin-bashing here, mainly done by the major network late night hosts.
"Now, 27-year-old Chelsea can go out, campaign as a stealth partisan operative, as since she was a First Daughter, everyone has to be nice and not comment about her at all. I ask, why should this rule apply today?
I have three words for those hyper-sensitive Chelsea protectors: The Bush Twins."
http://outsidethewir...