Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper
RECENT POSTS
- Who Really Wears the Pants in Russia?
- Malia Obama – Budding Fashionista?
- The Very Latest on the US-Russian Summit
- President Obama Seeks to Build Up Medvedev Over Putin
- President Obama's Proverbial Reset Button
- The Latest from the US-Russian Summit
- Kenya Dig It? President Obama Talks Africa, Chastises Politics in Late Father's Homeland
- US-Russian Arms Negotiators "Under the Gun," Might Temporarily Bypass Senate Ratification for Treaty
- Asked What He Doesn’t Like About Himself, President Obama Cites His Golf Game
- Today's Q's For O's White House
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Feminist Organization: Bring Me the Head of MSNBC
February 08, 2008 4:17 PM
Now the powerful Democratic feminist women's group EMILY's List, which works to elect Democratic women who support abortion rights, is stepping into the MSNBC brouhaha.
Circulating the Youtube clip of MSNBC's David Shuster making the offending comment, Ellen Malcolm -- the president of EMILY's List and a top adviser to Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY -- has written to NBC Senior VP Phil Griffin, saying that "For months, women and men from all over the country have been telling me about their anger at MSNBC’s treatment of women, especially Senator Hillary Clinton. Now, just yesterday, David Shuster talked about 'pimping out Chelsea.' That is completely reprehensible.
"I'm sending this letter today to let you know that the misogynistic pattern in the reporting by your network must come to an end. I know I speak for millions across this country when I demand that you take immediate steps and publicly tell us what you will do to eliminate this sexist and demeaning culture that has become so pervasive in your network."
Malcolm says that MSNBC's "journalists have repeatedly, and in now the most odious fashion, crossed the line with personal, sexist and demeaning attacks. The half hearted apology by Mr. Shuster this morning fails to even acknowledge the insulting nature of his comments."
And then, a threat: "If you refuse to take action, women across the country, viewers, sponsors, and consumers can only assume your implicit endorsement of this type of sexist commentary on women and repugnant treatment of our children."
What do you make of all this? I am woman hear me roar in numbers too big to ignore? A political stunt to drum up the women's vote the day before some key caucuses? Appropriate? Over-the-top? Share your thoughts below.
- jpt
February 8, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (137)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
I'm glad to see a woman doing the pimping. In the usual context "pimping" is men taking advantage of women and keeping them in economic bondage. I see it as a statement of power and influence. Use that power for what you believe in Chelsea!
Posted by: Zoomer | Feb 12, 2008 10:44:18 AM
I do not know if this request is possible, but let's try anyway. I am an Independent Conservative. If Clinton wins the nomination, I will vote for McCain. If Obama wins, I'll vote for Obama. Without the clintonion pontification, how many other Independents, Conservatives, and indeed Republicans think the same way?
Posted by: joes | Feb 11, 2008 6:02:04 PM
So Hillary is upset, that people said Chelsey is being "pimped", but the Clinton campaign was quick at "Pimping" this opportunity to distract people from the real issue- that Hillary is loosing support all across the country.
Posted by: Jaime | Feb 11, 2008 5:14:24 PM
Remember, had the anchor said "Michelle Obama is being 'pimped out' by the campaign.." this would be horrible and racist. So why shouldn't be sexist? Whats good for the goose is good for the gander.
By the way I'm a obama supporter, and I think MSNBC's coverage is biased, as well as other media outlets. You always have to take them with a grain of salt.
Posted by: The message matters more than the person | Feb 11, 2008 11:23:10 AM
Boycott NBC?
Yeah, that's hilarious. NBC is owned by GE. The only way to boycott GE is to stop paying your taxes at which point you will be placed in a correctional facility and stripped of all your middle-class female priviledges and perks not to mention your most fundamental human rights. Go ahead, boycott GE. I double dog dare you!
Posted by: philo | Feb 11, 2008 10:23:33 AM
As a feminist, I know, see and believe that comments are constantly made with blatant sexism...BUT I despise more the complete overreaction to each and everything said. When the Clinton team used the term "blonde bimbos" and there I was actively working on Bill's campaign, I thought it a bad choice. But, I still woke up each day and did not suffer for it. This is in fact all one big ploy geared to generate "fem" sympathy and I hope it is ineffective. Women have fought too hard to get caught up in ultra sensitivty. Heck,my age 80 father watchs "Pimp my Car" and thought the Schuster comment was using pop culture vernacular...
Posted by: Molly | Feb 10, 2008 4:35:51 PM
I too have been thoroughly disgusted by the commentary of the men a MSNBC. Objective? I don't think so.
The crux of the matter is no one is being objective here.
Anyone watched the last Bill Maher show? While speaking about the Democratic candidates, he referred to Obama, correctly, as an African American, and to Hillary Clinton as
a "vaginal" American. When someone on his panel (no doubt motivated by the Robin Morgan article that has been making the rounds lately) said that it would be easier for an African American to win the Presidency than a woman, which indicated that sexism was more prevalent in this country than racism, Bill Maher replied: "Yes, unless she (the female candidate) were hot."
So it comes down to this? Either you are hot, or you are connected to a powerful man and you ride in his coattails!
If that isn't sexism and, yes, misogyny, tell me what is?
Hillary is accused of a lot of things, not least of which is that she stuck with Bill. If she hadn't stuck with him, she would now be accused of breaking a marriage.
As for using Bill to get to the Senate and now to the possibility of becoming the first woman president in the US, so anyway, what's wrong with that! Do we really believe that women still in 2008 are respected and valued enough to get somewhere on their own? What about the many glass ceilings in business and politics as well? I would use anything I could to get to a position that would actually give me the power to do something good for this troubled country.
I will proudly vote for Hillary when my state's primary comes around, and for certain in the national elections.
Charoula
Posted by: Charoula Dontopoulos | Feb 10, 2008 12:18:56 PM
I will certainly continue to watch both Fox and MSNBC. For all the rest, I suggest you watch CNN (Clinton News Network).
Posted by: joes | Feb 10, 2008 9:26:48 AM
Inresponse to grik: We can add color to language, but there is also such thing as propriety. That comment was way out of line.
Posted by: Ria | Feb 10, 2008 5:26:46 AM
Pimping
Just what is wrong with colorful language? David Schuster's point was valid. Political discussion is all about opinions and lively discussion.
Are we supposed to run around with our mouths stuffed with cotton so that only dull gray inoffensive remarks creep out?
Posted by: grik | Feb 10, 2008 2:28:55 AM
Why isn't Chelsea in uniform; supporting her Mon's war? I do think that the word has changed to not be as offensive as it once was, but it is not acceptable and the reporter should be dismissed.
Posted by: Jake | Feb 10, 2008 2:24:00 AM
Just want to know why women supporting Hilary think they are supporting feminism. First of all Hilary endorsed a cheating husband. As a woman, I feel like if my husband cheated on me, I would kick him out of my life for good. I appreciate how much Hilary has done and where she has reached today but I believe more than half of her success comes from her husband, Bill Clinton. To me that is not a great example of feminism. Should I go and find a guy to marry so I can ride on his coat tail too to show my feminist side?
Posted by: Curious | Feb 10, 2008 1:00:48 AM
Claire said:
"A study by the Center for Media and Public Affairs has concluded that the media in general is biased against Hillary. Are reporters and men feeling threatened by the idea of a woman as President?"
Well, that's certainly a very simplistic analysis. I know it might take some thought to realize that the poor relationship between the media and the Clintons might have more to do with their highly secretive and unforthcoming nature, which they take to a degree that is quite unusual for public officials. But hey - Nixon felt unfairly treated by the press too. Maybe something in his feminine nature made them feel threatened by Tricky Dick.
Cheryl said:
"I think anyone who states its because its Hillary has their head in the sand. Look how they have treated the Speaker of the House! There is a undercurrtent of sexism in this country and it is really showing in this campaign."
As someone who knows men who think nothing nearly as critical of Pelosi as they do of Clinton, I can tell you that you're wrong. Although you're entitled to grab the thesis that makes you feel the coziest and most empowered.
Jennifer said:
"It seems that everyone has to walk on eggs when it comes to dealing with Hillary Clinton these days. Perhaps she should stay focused on her campaign, rather than the comments made by David Schuster. Is Chelsea being pimped out? Hell yeah. Supporting political family members does not mean ringing up big time celebrities. An election is bare knuckled process and I'm surprised that the experienced Clinton is reacting this way."
I agree 100%. Well, nearly 100%. More like 98%. The difference is that my sense of surprise is reserved for the People who are surprised that Clinton is reacting this way. It's actually more descript to say that, rather than "reacting", she's "acting" this way. She's just very good at sniffing out whatever innocuous, meaningless item she can best pounce on to deflect herself back into the role of the victim. It's that killer Clinton instinct for sniffing out and wallowing in the gutter of American politics, while the electorate scratches their heads and asks "How did we end up here?"
Vote for Obama if you are done with all this B.S. We Independents will have no trouble voting for McCain if you don't.
Posted by: Zarathustra | Feb 9, 2008 11:26:08 PM
"If this same treatment were extended to Michelle Obama and her daughters, heads would have already rolled, and Jackson and Sharpton would be leading the charge, understandably."
Bonnie, if and when Obama's daughters reach the age of 28, work for a hedge fund, call up superdelegates for votes and then ask to be out of the scrutiny of the press, then we can have that hypothetical conversation. And BTW, Obama was over-reacting to call for Imus' resignation. He just got a different job that pays as much further away from the limelight - after settling w/CBS for breaching their contract with him to explore the bounds of our hypersensitive society.
There are a lot of other remarks in this "thread" that suggest that they grew up in families where women couldn't/didn't speak their minds and that they would like to project that sort of cultural baggage onto others. And as for Hillary as the most experienced Chief of Staff that an educated voter could choose, I would like to see their idea of how you would successfully lead a company without any sense of vision, transparency or ethical considerations. But the authoritarian president as C.E.O. meme is what's been getting us into too much trouble lately anyway. It's ok to take away some of the more democratic lessons that American businesses have learned lately, but it might be a good idea to junk the paper-pushing and disciplinarian obsessions. This generation has computers now, and ideas that go beyond valuing mere competence in constructing policy. Someday, after all our other jobs are outsourced, you'll understand the value of creativity also.
Posted by: Zarathustra | Feb 9, 2008 11:14:45 PM
I absolutely agree that it's time to boycott NBC. There is nothing impartial about the reporting of Chris Matthews, Shuster and others on air. Journalists are supposed to remain neutral and simply report information, whereas some of these anchors sound like they are paid staff for Sen Obama's campaign. At the first opportunity they attack Sen Clinton, but when Sen Obama acts inapropriately or shows weakness, they chose to ignore it. I've stopped watching the NBC station and web site and am not going to until they recognize that they are way out of line and need to clean up their act!
Posted by: Karen Mulder | Feb 9, 2008 10:43:30 PM
If NBC/MSNBC can take action against long-standing Imus regarding "over-the-top" insults to a predominantly African-American girls' basketball team, then the SAME network can take the SAME action against Shuster, Matthews and Russert for their denegrating pattern of remarks and coverage of Sen. Hillary Clinton and the "over-the-top" comment about Chelsea being "pimped out". I would say Chelsea Clinton, daughter of a former president and former First Child, and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, a former First Lady and candidate for the Presidency of the United States of America should warrant no less than the Rutgers Girls' Basketball Team. In fact, I recall Hillary Clinton's website defending the girls' basketball team and agreeing with NBC's decision. I am too, calling for a boycott of NBC/MSNBC. If Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson can be outraged and take to the streets, so can we (as Sharpton and Jackson should now if they were as "inclusive" as they claim to be). If this same treatment were extended to Michelle Obama and her daughters, heads would have already rolled, and Jackson and Sharpton would be leading the charge, understandably. We demand action to be taken NOW. As far as I'm concerned, my television remote will never see the likes of any NBC or MSNBC show or personality again. Although I will seriously miss Pat Buchanan and Tom Brokaw, I guess I'll just keep buying their books. Join this "Norma Rae" and BOYCOTT NBC/MSNBC!
Posted by: Bonnie | Feb 9, 2008 10:31:01 PM
Steve, your idea that the "comment was largely harmless" just validates what is going on in this country. Far too many men feel it is quite okay to castigate and make fair game of any and all women and simply pass it off as a joke or "oh well." Dont know if you are married or have a girl friend, (I doubt it with that kind of attitude) but how exactly would you feel if someone kept making derogatory remarks about her and then capped it off with the pimping remark? C'mon man, grow up! This isnt 1950's anymore where women were chattel and men could say, or do, anything without repercussion. I would just love! to hear some of your good old boy beer conversations...
Posted by: lee | Feb 9, 2008 9:54:12 PM
It seems that everyone has to walk on eggs when it comes to dealing with Hillary Clinton these days. Perhaps she should stay focused on her campaign, rather than the comments made by David Schuster. Is Chelsea being pimped out? Hell yeah. Supporting political family members does not mean ringing up big time celebrities. An election is bare knuckled process and I'm surprised that the experienced Clinton is reacting this way.
Posted by: Jennifer | Feb 9, 2008 8:23:52 PM
I have never understood the problem people have with Senator Clinton, (which is the way the news media should address her since they give this respect to men who serve beside her), but it seems to also harbor with the news media and its not just NBC. I have seen it on all the big networks and please don't even mention the local news people because their comments are even worse.
I think anyone who states its because its Hillary has their head in the sand. Look how they have treated the Speaker of the House! There is a undercurrtent of sexism in this country and it is really showing in this campaign.
I remember when the news media was all over Bill Clinton when he was running for president the first time and then they went after Senator Clinton when she made her "cookie" comment and I want to know where are the attacks on Obama or why don't the press ask his wife about baking cookees Is they that clean of questions in his past? NO yet nothing is said and thrown at either one of them. Why aren't men calling Obama a chicken for not wanting to debate Hillary? Because he will show once again how bad he looks when she is able to show her thoughts to his retoric.
I think this campaign for the Democratic ticket shows that there are such undercurrent seperatism that hopefully one day the media will remember the greats before them who reported the truth not their opinion.
This country is in trouble and I think the first thing we need to accept is that we no longer are the greatest country in the world and if people would like to know why perhaps they should ask why are they accepting everything instead of questioning everything..
Posted by: Cheryl | Feb 9, 2008 7:28:32 PM
Boy, now I understand why Hillary and Bill don't like the press after seeing Shuster talk about Chelsea being pimped out. This should be offensive to anyone with a sense of decency as it is degrading and an insult to all women. McCain's mother has been speaking ouf for her son John. Is she being pimped out? What about the children of the other candidates, including Obama's daughters who have appeared on stage with him and in ads. Are they being pimped out too? However, as usual, Hillary is being singled out for these sexist comments by the chauvinists at MSNBC who are pretending to be objective reporters. Dave Shuster should be fired just like Don Imus was fired for his remarks about the female Rutgers basketball team.
A study by the Center for Media and Public Affairs has concluded that the media in general is biased against Hillary. Are reporters and men feeling threatened by the idea of a woman as President?
It is time for a woman to be President to change the way our country thinks about and values women.
Posted by: Claire | Feb 9, 2008 7:25:17 PM
Post a comment

