MSNBC Sucks - So Do Some Feminists

[frerottenextelway]

David Shuster of MSNBC was suspended today for saying the Clintons had ''pimped out'' their daughter when they had her placing calls to super delegates on their behalf. Shuster said this on the ''Tucker'' show yesterday, and MSNBC was served with a threat from some in Clinton campaign that they would boycot the upcoming debate from Ohio on MSNBC if action wasn't taken.

First off, ''pimped out'' isn't a deregatory term. It's a generational term that's gone from somewhat offensive a full decade ago, to semi-flattering today. Second off, this came on a pundit show, not straight reporting. A pundit show is where you're supposed to give controversial straight-talk opinions, not straight unbiased reporting.

Don't get me wrong, Shuster is a complete stooge, one of my least liked reporters, but this is a joke.

Also, there's clearly a conflict within MSNBC, where some anchors (Mathews, Scarboro, Tucker) are pulling for Obama, but the higher-ups (including Abrams) are clearly behind Hillary (ie., an hour long fluff piece biography on Hillary's life aired in prime time yesterday).

[Taco John]

In fairness, Schuster sucks too.

[frerottenextelway]

Originally Posted by Taco John

In fairness, Schuster sucks too.

In fairness, I said that.

[TexanBob]

My best laugh was when someone pointed out that Schuster also got the phrase wrong. The Clintons might be accused of "pimping" their daughter (although candidate's children have been a staple of recent presidential campaigning), "pimping out" their daughter would mean fixing her up with big rims, a loud stereo system and a fancy paint job.

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by frerottenextelway

David Shuster of MSNBC was suspended today for saying the Clintons had ''pimped out'' their daughter when they had her placing calls to super delegates on their behalf. Shuster said this on the ''Tucker'' show yesterday, and MSNBC was served with a threat from some in Clinton campaign that they would boycot the upcoming debate from Ohio on MSNBC if action wasn't taken.

First off, ''pimped out'' isn't a deregatory term. It's a generational term that's gone from somewhat offensive a full decade ago, to semi-flattering today. Second off, this came on a pundit show, not straight reporting. A pundit show is where you're supposed to give controversial straight-talk opinions, not straight unbiased reporting.

Don't get me wrong, Shuster is a complete stooge, one of my least liked reporters, but this is a joke.

Also, there's clearly a conflict within MSNBC, where some anchors (Mathews, Scarboro, Tucker) are pulling for Obama, but the higher-ups (including Abrams) are clearly behind Hillary (ie., an hour long fluff piece biography on Hillary's life aired in prime time yesterday).

It's understandable for a parent to be offended with that particular terminology used in reference to their daughter. In the context that was used, it certainly appears to have been intended to demean.

[Bronco Bob]

Keith Olbermann made a big apology to the Clintons on behalf of NBC today on Countdown.

[Bronco Bob]

Here is the clip. Judge for yourself.

[frerottenextelway]

Originally Posted by Blueflame

It's understandable for a parent to be offended with that particular terminology used in reference to their daughter. In the context that was used, it certainly appears to have been intended to demean.

With all due respect Blue, to peeps above 35 it may come across demeaning, to most below 35 I don't think it's negative at all, certainly not demaining in the traditional sense of the word pimp.

Me and my wife (Clinton gal, yay) watched him host Tucker last night, and I told her today that Shuster was suspended for that. She's like, 'I didn't even know he was insulting her'.

I don't know, that's at least my opinion.

[frerottenextelway]

Originally Posted by TexanBob

My best laugh was when someone pointed out that Schuster also got the phrase wrong. The Clintons might be accused of "pimping" their daughter (although candidate's children have been a staple of recent presidential campaigning), "pimping out" their daughter would mean fixing her up with big rims, a loud stereo system and a fancy paint job.

Nah, the phrase is right.

[enjolras]

To me it's very similiar to the Kelly Tillman "lynching" episode a few weeks ago. A word that has very strong meaning to some, but something VERY different for others.

It seems like everyone is way to damn sensitive these days.

[Bronco Bob]

Originally Posted by enjolras

To me it's very similiar to the Kelly Tillman "lynching" episode a few weeks ago. A word that has very strong meaning to some, but something VERY different for others.

It seems like everyone is way to damn sensitive these days.

I dunno, saying they ought to lynch Tiger Woods in a back alley does
sound way out of bounds to me. These people are professionals.
They are paid to talk. They ought to think about what they are saying.

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by frerottenextelway

With all due respect Blue, to peeps above 35 it may come across demeaning, to most below 35 I don't think it's negative at all, certainly not demaining in the traditional sense of the word pimp.

Me and my wife (Clinton gal, yay) watched him host Tucker last night, and I told her today that Shuster was suspended for that. She's like, 'I didn't even know he was insulting her'.

I don't know, that's at least my opinion.

The context (in the clip BroncoBob posted above) certainly wasn't positive. The person who said it seemed to want to suggest that Chelsea's public appearances in support of her mother were not of her own volition, but rather that she was being coerced into making them. It's not unusual in today's political arena to see children campaigning for their parents and in most cases, that is not questioned; it's expected. Michelle Obama is currently in Washington state campaigning for her husband... don't you think it would be offensive to almost everyone if any political commentator suggested he was "pimping" her? I can assure you, it would spark controversy.

At any rate, it would definitely offend me if anyone used the word "pimp" and my daughter's name in the same sentence... unless they were talking about customizing her automobile.

[frerottenextelway]

Originally Posted by Blueflame

The context (in the clip BroncoBob posted above) certainly wasn't positive. The person who said it seemed to want to suggest that Chelsea's public appearances in support of her mother were not of her own volition, but rather that she was being coerced into making them. It's not unusual in today's political arena to see children campaigning for their parents and in most cases, that is not questioned; it's expected. Michelle Obama is currently in Washington state campaigning for her husband... don't you think it would be offensive to almost everyone if any political commentator suggested he was "pimping" her? I can assure you, it would spark controversy.

At any rate, it would definitely offend me if anyone used the word "pimp" and my daughter's name in the same sentence... unless they were talking about customizing her automobile.

"Doesn't it seem like Chelsea is being used by her parents to promote their campaign?"

Is that offensive or negative? Because at least to me, and I think my generation, that's 100% synonymous with what he said.

Now, I understand from your generation (please don't take offense at that ), it comes across as ''aren't they treating their daughter like a prostitute'', but that's just isn't what it means anymore. It doesn't mean anything like that.

[frerottenextelway]

Originally Posted by Bronco Bob

I dunno, saying they ought to lynch Tiger Woods in a back alley does
sound way out of bounds to me. These people are professionals.
They are paid to talk. They ought to think about what they are saying.

Plus the guy used the word gang. Clearly he's implicating that Tiger is a hoodlum. Fwiw, Tiger had no problem with either of them.

Love (Tiger).

[frerottenextelway]

Originally Posted by enjolras

To me it's very similiar to the Kelly Tillman "lynching" episode a few weeks ago. A word that has very strong meaning to some, but something VERY different for others.

It seems like everyone is way to damn sensitive these days.

Btw, that's a great analogy. I was trying to think of one, but couldn't. ESPN is a bunch of dooshes for suspending her over that too, she was clearly not only not insulting Tiger, but attempting to compliment him on his dominance.

[Bronco Bob]

Originally Posted by frerottenextelway

"Doesn't it seem like Chelsea is being used by her parents to promote their campaign?"

Is that offensive or negative? Because at least to me, and I think my generation, that's 100% synonymous with what he said.

Now, I understand from your generation (please don't take offense at that ), it comes across as ''aren't they treating their daughter like a prostitute'', but that's just isn't what it means anymore. It doesn't mean anything like that.

When Barack and Michelle bring their kids up on stage, are their children
being used to promote Obama's campaign? How come no one at
MSNBC questions that? At least Chelsea is an adult and can make
her own decisions on where she goes.

[frerottenextelway]

Originally Posted by Bronco Bob

When Barack and Michelle bring their kids up on stage, are their children
being used to promote Obama's campaign? How come no one at
MSNBC questions that? At least Chelsea is an adult and can make
her own decisions on where she goes.

1.) Have they even brought their kids on stage?

2.) What's offensive, the point, or the wording - because he got suspended for the wording not the point behind it.

[Bronco Bob]

Originally Posted by frerottenextelway

1.) Have they even brought their kids on stage?

Yes.

2.) What's offensive, the point, or the wording - because he got suspended for the wording not the point behind it.

Both. Why even go there in the first place. Other than MSNBC's
continued attempt to derail the Clinton campaign. Did MSNBC
complain about Romney's sons? Did the fact that some of
Giuliani's children were against him get much mention?
Do any of the other candidates even have children?

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by frerottenextelway

"Doesn't it seem like Chelsea is being used by her parents to promote their campaign?"

Is that offensive or negative? Because at least to me, and I think my generation, that's 100% synonymous with what he said.

Now, I understand from your generation (please don't take offense at that ), it comes across as ''aren't they treating their daughter like a prostitute'', but that's just isn't what it means anymore. It doesn't mean anything like that.

The hypothetical re-statement would still suggest that Chelsea does not want to support her mother's campaign... that she's being forced to do it. Other candidates' offspring customarily campaign for them (Bush's twins, Kerry's daughters, Romney's sons, just to name a few) and no such remark is made; it's accepted at face value and expected. As it should be with Chelsea. The comment suggests that the parents may be objectifying their daughter and just seeing her as "an asset to be used" regardless of her own wishes. And what kind of daughter wouldn't want to (would have to be forced to) support her mother's campaign? The listener could easily conclude that he's hinting that Hillary's political ambitions left her lacking as a parent... that even her own daughter doesn't really want to campaign for her. Yeah, it was negative.

[frerottenextelway]

Originally Posted by Blueflame

The hypothetical re-statement would still suggest that Chelsea does not want to support her mother's campaign... that she's being forced to do it. Other candidates' offspring customarily campaign for them (Bush's twins, Kerry's daughters, Romney's sons, just to name a few) and no such remark is made; it's accepted at face value and expected. As it should be with Chelsea. The comment suggests that the parents may be objectifying their daughter and just seeing her as "an asset to be used" regardless of her own wishes. And what kind of daughter wouldn't want to (would have to be forced to) support her mother's campaign? The listener could easily conclude that he's hinting that Hillary's political ambitions left her lacking as a parent... that even her own daughter doesn't really want to campaign for her. Yeah, it was negative.

It's not really a hypothetical restatement, more of a rewording it in traditional words to put it in what I view, proper context for you. The point is, there's a big difference between disagreeing with an opinion on an opinion show, and finding a comment vulgar. You seem to be arguing that his point is wrong. Thing is, he didn't get suspended for having a wrong opinion. He got suspended for being vulgar. My point is that it wasn't vulgar, not that he was right. I mean, like I said, I don't really like the guy because I rarely agree with him, but the comment wasn't vulgar.

[frerottenextelway]

Originally Posted by Bronco Bob

Yes.

Both. Why even go there in the first place. Other than MSNBC's
continued attempt to derail the Clinton campaign. Did MSNBC
complain about Romney's sons? Did the fact that some of
Giuliani's children were against him get much mention?
Do any of the other candidates even have children?

MSNBC ran an entire hour fluff piece on Hillary growing up as a tough girl in a men's world last night, in prime time. They made the decision not go to live news coverage of the shootings to show this. Like I said, some anchors are in Obama's corner, but the higher-ups clearly aren't. The notion that there's a conspiarcy at NBC to bring down Hillary is absurd.

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by frerottenextelway

It's not really a hypothetical restatement, more of a rewording it in traditional words to put it in what I view, proper context for you. The point is, there's a big difference between disagreeing with an opinion on an opinion show, and finding a comment vulgar. You seem to be arguing that his point is wrong. Thing is, he didn't get suspended for having a wrong opinion. He got suspended for being vulgar. My point is that it wasn't vulgar, not that he was right. I mean, like I said, I don't really like the guy because I rarely agree with him, but the comment wasn't vulgar.

In which case, he should have worded the remark more wisely. However, it would still be offensive if the only candidate (of many whose offspring have been active in their campaigns) who is accused of "pimping" her daughter happens to be female. If he's successful in questioning her parenting skills (without coming right out and saying it; just the hint that she might have been too politically ambitious to be a good mother can be equally effective), it might erode her support even among female voters. It was a low blow.

[Blueflame]

Originally Posted by frerottenextelway

MSNBC ran an entire hour fluff piece on Hillary growing up as a tough girl in a men's world last night, in prime time. They made the decision not go to live news coverage of the shootings to show this. Like I said, some anchors are in Obama's corner, but the higher-ups clearly aren't. The notion that there's a conspiarcy at NBC to bring down Hillary is absurd.

The individual who made the remark clearly isn't pro-Hillary.

Just as a side note.... for the record, I already voted in the primary... and it was a candidate other than Hillary who received my vote.

[TheDave]

just another example of the bizarre overly PC world we live in...

Kinda reminds me of that South Park episode where they took out everything that offended anyone from their Christmas celebration... they were left with an aluminum pole...

very festivas of them...

[Bronco Bob]

Originally Posted by frerottenextelway

MSNBC ran an entire hour fluff piece on Hillary growing up as a tough girl in a men's world last night, in prime time. They made the decision not go to live news coverage of the shootings to show this. Like I said, some anchors are in Obama's corner, but the higher-ups clearly aren't. The notion that there's a conspiarcy at NBC to bring down Hillary is absurd.

Did you ever stop to consider that because of people like Madman Matthews
and his hour long sexist rants against Hillary these past several months
and the more recent pilings on by Russet and Olbermann that MSNBC is
starting to take a lot of heat from the women out in the country and
the higher ups are now starting to do a little back peddling before
they lose all their female audience? That the Hillary piece was just
throwing the women of this country a bone.