« Carville: If Hillary Loses Either Texas Or Ohio, "This Thing Is Done" | Home | Hillary Camp: No One Is Winning This Race Without Super-Delegates »
Despite "Pimp" Remark, Shuster To Return To MSNBC
In the wake of the news that Hillary will debate on NBC later this month, an MSNBC spokesperson confirms that Shuster won't be fired and will return to the network.
My take: As dumb and crude as Shuster's remark was, in the end this mainly was all about Chris Matthews.
Advertisement
Good. It was a stupid comment, twisted for political purposes and blown way, way out of proportion. Let's move on.
February 13, 2008 3:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
It was mainly all about Hillary trying to deflect attention away from her losing streak while trying to rally women to save her sinking ship.
February 13, 2008 3:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good. Suspension was more than enough. Now Matthew is someone who should be taken off the air.
February 13, 2008 4:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good, enough already.
February 13, 2008 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg,
Does Matthews know about this? ha he ever talked to you about it? Your reporting? Between you, Somerby and Media Matters has he ever tried to defend himself? Besides that lame on air "apology" a couple weeks ago.
February 13, 2008 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Another Good from me. My guess is his first day back will be sometime around, oh, Feb 27.
February 13, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
No it was about Hillary wanting more campaign air time. If she didn't want to risk putting Chelsea into the pig pen, she shouldn't have asked her or let her do so.
The word Pimp or Pimping is used all over the internet as a political term. It's a shame MSNBC didn't stand up to Hillary.
February 13, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
At the risk of being square, that doesn't make it right. That said, I'll echo the "good" sentiment, and that this was overblown.
February 13, 2008 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. The word choice was stupid for a journalist of shuster's caliber. The term is used more and more today in everyday conversation by people. I personally don't like the word and never use it, but I don't go nuts when someone uses it. Let's just move on.
February 13, 2008 5:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have to say I was flabbergasted that Shuster let slipped like that. It was a horrible lapse in judgement for a person who I consider to be one of the actually decent MSM political reporters instead of a stenographer like so many of his colleagues. I think he genuinely did not understand that his choice of words would be considered offensive. But he did own up to it and apologize.
Unfortunately it also means that the point he was trying to make, a fairly good one for that matter, is forever untouchable.
February 13, 2008 6:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
It was a rare moment of honesty where a pundit actually calls something for what it is. And it's no surprise that such moments come in street talk because that's the only place these people are allowed to be real. The MSM are all such a bunch of hedged and calculated phonies.
The reason blogs and talk radio are popular is primarily because they're actually somewhat direct about what they really think.
Talk Radio, right or left, has never been afraid to be direct. It's no surprise the first hosts to find large audiences were also those most unafraid to be brazenly direct and even crude, having had the advantage of not being able to help it.
Hopefully some day the "smart people" in the corporate media will get the backbone to say what they really think. But as long as they're still paid big bucks to do voice over for flashy graphics, don't bet on it.
For that matter, don't bet on blogs keeping the fire in the belly. As they build larger audiences and get larger budgets, they'll almost invariably start hedging want they say, quashing their own individuality, and moving towards the MSM in playing it safe with red/blue partisan politics and tired pundit clinches, and limiting themselves to "proper discourse."
February 14, 2008 5:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
This gets to the crux of the problem—it is acceptable "on the street" to refer to women as b****es and hos, and to "pimp" things out. Misogyny is not acceptable, whether it's "on the street" or on the air any more than racism is.
February 14, 2008 8:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Does anyone know why Clinton decided to go ahead with the MSNBC debate? If Clinton had outright just said "Chris Matthews is acting unacceptably and we'd prefer to work with a network that we know can treat us fairly" I think that would have been well within her rights.
February 13, 2008 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Does MSNBC have any credibility left?
It's too bad Hillary didn't stick to her guns. He was out of line.
February 13, 2008 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Shuster was not out of line. Hillary is simply a cry-baby who by being offended by this comment showed just how out of touch she is with the younger generation.
Pimped out, pimping out, pimp, are no longer offensive words. I hope Shuster gets to be part of the debate panel! Or Matthews. Or Olberman.
The reason Clinton will now debate is because she calculates that it is in her political interest to do so, just like the Iraq War Vote, Iran Vote, running for NY Senate, etc.
The American people owe Hillary Clinton nothing. She can go on and on about how we need her, but people are starting to understand that we need her about as much as a war in Iran.
February 13, 2008 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama and Judgment...Why did he vote for the 2005 Energy Bill when neither McCain or Hillary did?
http://www.greenpieceblog.com/2008/02/obama-and-2005-energy-bill.html
February 13, 2008 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's the senator from Illinois--13.9 million acres of corn.
There's your answer, crumbrye.
February 13, 2008 5:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
We can create jobs through clean energy manufacturing. Why should I vote for someone who talks about environmental reform one day and votes for dirty technologies the next, just because its politically convenient?
February 13, 2008 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Shuster's point was a fair one, although his choice of words was pretty indefensible. That said, if someone is actively campaigning on behalf of someone else, that person is fair game for criticism. So why can't Chelsea defend herself?
I can't wait to see what non-controversy controversy Clinton will stir up next. The reality that her campaign is all sound and fury but precious little substance is really starting to set in. She didn't expect to be facing a candidate with broad personal appeal who hit back on substantive issues. And it shows.
February 13, 2008 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
A sixth or seventh on the good. Poor choice of words, relatively stupid comment to make anyway, blown out of proportion for political gain, punished for network gain, and Chris Matthews is a sexist boob and should be sent to cable access.
February 13, 2008 5:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I expect that when MSNBC (or any other network) turns on Obama if he does get the nomination, you'll all be saying what a crybaby Obama is.
Right?
February 13, 2008 5:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary's not a crybaby. It's good strategy. The media is pretty terrible to her, and it's smart to put them on notice, and I think Chris Matthews has singlehandedly gotten her some votes with his boobery.
February 13, 2008 5:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I certainly agree with that. (One of many reasons I don't have TV.)
February 13, 2008 6:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Personally, I think it is because NOT to go on with the debate would give Obama an out not to do another debate which he already agreed to. If she tried to reschedule a new one, that would give him a reason to call it off. CNN's doing one on 21st, and although I'm sure Fox would be glad to take MSNBC's place and moderate the debate, Obama's scared of real questions and would not agree to a forum where there might be tough questions.
February 13, 2008 6:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
What do you base this on?
Obama's scared of real questions and would not agree to a forum where there might be tough questions
Give an example, and cite it please. Obama has been in on more forums that I got a chance to even watch.
February 13, 2008 6:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
It wasn't a strategy boys. We women are just sick and tired of all the sexist and misogynist crap that comes off MSNBC. Aren't you? Or didn't you hear all the puerile comments over the past 6 months? Are you "progressives"?
February 13, 2008 10:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wasabi, I was one who said it was a strategy and i am a woman. I'm a bit younger so I'm familiar with the word "pimping" in the way it was used and don't find it offensive really, though ill-thought out and, really, an inane comment in the first place as Greg and Josh have said. But it appears the sexism of the media--possibly particularly Matthews--got Hillary some votes in NH so it makes sense she would pounce on this comment. I mean, it's politics--everything is a strategy, right? that doesn't excuse some of the comments about Clinton. But I don't think the Clinton campaign makes a move without thinking about politics. And that's not a criticism.
February 14, 2008 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
My take on the whole affair was that it was a poor choice of words for broadcast TV due to PC censors. But otherwise, in a casual conversation, I think "pimping" was a pretty appropriate description for what the Hillary campaign is doing with family. Their Soprano's routine isn't all that far off the mark.
Bill and the family proxies make the hits and do the dirty work, Chelsey works the phones for the soft sell becasue it's taboo to say anythign about her as the daughter even though she's clearly a political operative now, meanwhile Hillary sheds crocodile tears and laments how tough politics can be.
This whole episode was Clinton playing the victim card again to work the MSM refs, which really makes me sick that:
1) our media is so lousy that such attacks stick becasue there is almost no journalistic credibility left in the MSM.
2) this is the environment the Clintons have helped create and thrive in. It's a vicious spiral as more and more people are sickened by the phoniness and cynicism, which lowers interest and turnout, which makes the MSM even fluffier, which turns off more people, and so on.
February 14, 2008 4:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Good call. The language was atrocious. After reading this morning's papers about Clintons's plan to steal the nomination, if need be, in the
future Schuster should simply sya:
"The Clintons will do anything, from using their daughter in an overtly political way while refusing to let the press talk to her to manipulating the DNC, to take back the office.
Momma knows best what we need even if we don't want it."
God, I know I will suck it up but pulling that lever for her is gonna be hard.
February 14, 2008 9:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Jeez -- these comments. Of course the Clintons have their adult daughter campaign for Hillary. And every presidential candidate with adult children does the same thing. I guess some of you people were simply offended when Gore's daughter Katrina campaigned for him. And I'm sure you pointed out how ruthless John Kerry was when he had his kids and Teresa Heinz's kids campaign for him. Unless David Shuster had gone on air calling Romney a pimp for "using" his sons, or Bush a pimp for "using" his daughters, I'm not sure what "legitimate" point he was making. And as for the argument that using the term "pimped out" is okay because it's street slang, give it a rest. The term "bitch" is now used commonly as slang. I hear young people of all races use the term "nigga." Many young people describe bad things as "gay." Would it be okay for Shuster to call Hillary or Michelle Obama a bitch? How about referring to Barak as nigga? Or maybe he can call Obama a punk -- I mean MTV has a show called Punked, right? Maybe Shuster can refer to Obama's energy plan as gay. I agree that Shuster's suspension was enough of a penalty, and I'm sure lessons have been learned. But the justifications of his conduct found on this board are frankly, sickening. And I am a man and an Obama supporter.
February 14, 2008 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jane Hamsher in Firedoglake says that "pimping" has evolved to lose its sexual conotation and that she itself now uses it without any thought of that former meaning.In fact used it as the headline for a recent post.
Interestingly that appeared in a post criticizing Obama's sexist language in a statement about Hillary which included the word "claws".
She also says that she knows Shuster and that he has no woman problem.
Personally I agree with those who say it was a stupid remark. And I agree with those who
feel HRC's campaign exploited it. And I think that was normal(even tho I support Obama).It aint beanbag.
February 14, 2008 5:32 PM | Reply | Permalink