What next? Demonstrating a lack of impulse control reminiscent of, well, Bill Clinton (okay, not as bad as that), MSNBC’s David Shuster opined that the Clinton Campaign “pimped out” Clinton daughter Chelsea for electoral purposes. Clinton attack dog Howard Wolfson consequently called the MSNBC action “disgusting” and warned that the Clinton campaign would refuse to participate in debates on the network.
We should probably give Wolfson special thanks for sparing us more Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann, but in truth both sides fit the “disgusting” epithet. There’s nothing weirder than Chelsea out on the hustings for mama after what her parents put her through over the last few decades. We could call it Borgia Family Values. As I have said before, enough of this American Divine Right of Kings. Sayonara Bushes, Kennedys, Clintons, etc.
All in all, score one for Obama (who scares me more than anyone alas).
Isn’t that a little like asking “what’s worse, rickets or beri beri”?
Charlie, I was thinking it was more like asking, “which is wetter, the Atlantic or the Pacific?”
But then I thought about it a bit, and decided the Clintons are worse. More people listen to them than listen to MSNBC.
The Clintons love to project the perception that they are under attack; vast right wing conspiracy, if not her womanhood and so on, get their ratings up.
So, they jump on this nothing story because they are, ultimately what they perceive all around them…. Victims.
Now another guy has to cover with ash ‘apologize’ for essentially doing his job. The way it’s going, soon an apology will be another way of insulting someone.
If Chelsea is campaigning, making phone calls on her mother’s behalf (not that there is anything wrong with that) she is fair game.
Maybe the Clintons paid him to say it (in which case he’d be pimpin’). Of course, the last thing the Clintons would do is refuse air time, and Hillary can’t afford to not debate Obama. The big question is…who exactly would listen to Chelsea Clinton in the first place?
Roger,
We may have something in the pharmacopoeia for Obamaphobia.
Jamie Irons
All this “correct speech” makes for some very dull reporting and writing, and takes all the fun and creativity out of the political season. It is certainly true that Clinton fatigue (and the same goes for Bush, Gore, Kennedy and all the worn campaign badges of yesterday. Ms Clinton is as boring a speaker as we have seen in many a day: trite and superficial promises to every special interest group. Let us hope she will soon be gone from the Presidential scene and back at her Senate seat. In truth, I suspect that if she is not the Democrat Party candidate, she will not seek reelection and will slide back into corporate law and perhaps Wal Mart again. Mr. Obama is fresh and new and gives a wonderful speec. Mr. McCain is, as he himself stated: “As old as dirt with more scars than Frankenstein.” Yet, I do look forward to a stimulating and delightful series of debates between the elequent but untried Mr. Obama, and the pugnacious and determined Mr. McCain.
PMSNBC versus Clinton Inc? Beer and popcorn time.
I’ll never vote for Hillary. But the use of “pimped out” is disgusting. Reporters should study their thesaurus to memorize a few less offensive terms.
two good wisecracks, Roger (or did you say them?):
–The Democrats are worried becasue they don’t know enough about Obama. And because they know too much abaout the Clintons.
–If you elect a matinee idol as president, what you’ll get will be a musical-comedy administration.
The Clinton Machine: taking their ball and going home, until they run out of networks.
Amen to the end of dynastic political royalty. Hillary’s gang has become so entitled to playing the MSM like a piano that they can literally speak power to truth and purge incorrect reporters and commentators.
Retire Billary, and let Chelsea work for a living. Maybe she’ll reverse the parents’ trend.
Reading comments elsewhere on the interweb make it obvious that the hatred of Obama by the Hill-shills is at least as severe as conservatives regarding McCain. That they can’t unleash their usual dogs of personal destruction is obviously frustrating to them. I’m sure they’re dropping N-bombs in their private conversations as often as Muffer says “ya know” in her non-scripted speaking.
I guess what most troubles me about this is a (presumably) accredited reporter makes an observation about a newsworthy event; the object of the observation makes a threat; and the corporate execs throw their reporter to the wolves.
It smacks of the Mohammad cartoons, the difference being the nature of the threat. In the cartoons, you could argue that the MSM caved because the backlash might have been physical and bloody. In the Clinton case, it appears to be financial ñ and expulsion from the Dem/MSM clique.
As far as I can tell, the observation was couched in offensive language but not libelous. Not long ago a reporter from this same news organization referred to President Bush as a monkey. Her punishment was an on-air apology.
Quite frankly Iím not sure what this means. I think itís a freedom of speech issue, but I canít quite articulate how. Something to do with guarantees of the First Amendment being decided outside of Congress and the Judiciary?
Freedom of speech issue?
The reporter was an employee. As such, his “pimped out” comment was a reflection on his employer. He was free to make the comment, and free to take the consequences. Do you think MSNBC would like to be known as the network that described the daughter of an ex-president and a presidential candidate as “pimped out,” simply for campaigning for her mother?
Recall the Rebecca Aguilar incident in Dallas, where she got suspended from her position as a TV journalist for being nasty to an old man.
I’m tired of everybody screaming for apologies.
If Chelsea performs in public and participates as she does in politics, she’s a fair target. As Harry Truman said, If she can’t stand the heat she should get out of the kitchen, off the stage, away from the cameras, and off the phone.
Chelsea’s a prop the Clintons pull out to visually attest to their family values. Family values like the evening parties with Burkle, the deals and investments from overseas, the pardons, the gifts to furnish their homes, and the girlfriends. Threats and uber-reaction emphasize the Clintons’ desire to force everyone, news media as well as voters, to acknowledge their presence as royalty above the fray of common folk.
This is a genuine battle the “inevitable victors” didn’t expect. Quit howling for special treatment.