David Shuster, a pig of a man

David Shuster: "Doesn't it seem like Chelsea is being pimped in some weird sort of way?"

Bill Press: "No. if she didn't want to be there, she wouldn't be there. Give her a break."

What a ??!!&#??!!

And btw, I'd rather watch Faux News than MSNBC.

I'm one of the few that doesn't have a TV, and I grew up without one, so did my wife, so we live in a semi-bubble when it comes to television. But on Tuesday, I was at work, and had the tube on for the coverage. I had it on CNN for about 3 hours, then got bored and flipped to MSNBC. The contrast was shocking. MSNBC, with Chris Matthews, was just terrible. It wasn't just the Obama flacking, but just his presence. He's an ugly boar that shoots from the hip with the most trivial bullshit. I couldn't watch more than 20 minutes, before giving Faux News a shot, I might have lasted 30 minutes there, enough to see a clip of a two conservative bloggers, before I turned it off.

Digby turns her focus on Matthews much better than I ever could; even for those who support Obama, and might want to give Matthews some slack with his anti-Clinton syndrome, you should read this, to learn the narrative that Matthews already has in store in a hypothetical McCain-Obama match-up.

Tags: 2008 election, MSNBC (all tags)

Comments

78 Comments

That says it all, doesn't it?

HRC supporter would rather watch Fox News than MSNBC.

Game.

Set.

Match.

by zonk 2008-02-08 04:26AM | 0 recs
Re: That says it all, doesn't it?

The fact that an Obama supporter is fine with the trashing Clintons get from MSNBC speaks volumes.

by Dave B 2008-02-08 04:42AM | 0 recs
Personally

I think the entire 24 cable news media is a vapid wasteland of CW spoonfeeders.

That doesn't change the fact that Fox is something entirely worse.

I've got ZERO respect for anyone ranking Fox News above anything but... I don't know... syphilis?

by zonk 2008-02-08 04:57AM | 0 recs
Re: Personally

You know exactly how it was meant, but that did not stop you from writing this post.

  Matthews is pathetic in his fawning for Obama and hate for Clinton.  At least the "other side" has no real bias, they don't like either candidate, so they won't shill for one or the other.  It is like looking at coverage from another country - BBC coverage will be mostly in friendly terms, but "better" because they don't show a clear bias.  News casts in countries not friendly to us would be more hostile, but generally not biased for either candidate, thus it still holds value because it is interesting to see the coverage from that vantage point.  Most of MSNBC's coverage is so obviously biased for one candidate that is has completely stopped resembling "news" anymore, has become a 24/7 Obama-mania place.   I rather get "news" than 24/7 fawn, regardless of where it comes from.  

Your "ZERO respect" attack on the owner of this site is not cool at all, is borderline trolling.  

by georgep 2008-02-08 06:18AM | 0 recs
Re: Personally

Well...

Since the objective voice of reason, serene and sincere in all postings, has weighed in...

by zonk 2008-02-08 06:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Personally

At least I don't troll a site I have disdain for just to get my rocks off.  

by georgep 2008-02-08 06:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Personally

Ahh yes... I know you are but what am I.

Nicely played.

by zonk 2008-02-08 06:38AM | 0 recs
Re: Personally

You are actually proving those right who are staying away from dkos because it has become a loud Obama cult/fawn site.  

I guess it makes some feel "big" to tell A-list bloggers  how little respect they command.  All because they don't match your point of view.  With some Obama fans it is some sort of twisted sport.

by georgep 2008-02-08 08:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Personally

Believe it or not -- I have neither the need to curry the favor of NOR attack bloggers... A-List or B-List or C-List... I don't even care to find these magical lists where one apparently classifies them.

But when someone says:


And btw, I'd rather watch Faux News than MSNBC.

You'd better believe I'll call 'em out for it because it's a really stupid statement for a progressive to make.... I don't care if God came down and said it... it's worthless hyperbole.

I'm not defending anything Schuster or Matthews have said or will say -- but using Fox News as a way to somehow make hay of it is silly.

by zonk 2008-02-08 09:01AM | 0 recs
Re: That says it all, doesn't it?

I haven't been watching election coverage on MSNBC recently - been watching CNN.  Less Matthews - more numbers - more sanity

by NYMARJ 2008-02-08 05:09AM | 0 recs
Me Too...

...but even on CNN I have to keep my finger poised over the mute button in case Gloria Borger or Carl Bernstein appear on the screen.

by Alvord 2008-02-08 08:15AM | 0 recs
Can I ask

exactly what is Troll -- much less "hide" worthy about this comment?

Up until apparently the day HRC went back on her commitment to avoid FoxNews debates and now apparently wants them, the universal progressive opinion on FoxNews was that it was a propaganda outlet.

This was certainly a very biting comment... but I fail to see what's troll like about it.... much less "hide-worthy"

by zonk 2008-02-08 07:57AM | 0 recs
Re: Can I ask

I think your cheap attack against Armstrong that he has ZERO respect from you (really? not even 1%, or 5%?) was troll-rate worthy, but, while tempted, I did not bother to rate that comment after all.  Perhaps you should review the entirety of the aggressive commentary you are leaving here before complaining that you have been unjustly rated?  

by georgep 2008-02-08 08:10AM | 0 recs
Re: Can I ask

I actually don't give two shits how I was rated - I was just asking why I was rated that way.

So I guess I have my answer.  Fair enough.  I'm hardly broken up about it.

And FWIW - I don't back off my Fox comments one iota.   It's a sewer, a propaganda arm, a disgrace.  Fox viewers are a more reliable conservative voting bloc than ANY demographic.   Hell - most Fox viewers still think we founds WMDs in Iraq.  

Like I said - but everyone's overlooking - I have no love for any of the silly cable news outlets.  A pox on all of 'em.

But throwing a hissy fit to somehow claim "they're worse than Fox"?

Please... Fox has years and years and years of asshattery.   David Schuster and Chris Matthews make asses of themselves and suddenly their network is worse than Fox?

Yeah.... and Bush is worse than Hitler.

Anyone that loses their perspective to such a ridiculous extent does lose my respect... all of it.

by zonk 2008-02-08 08:41AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

Shuster is a fucking moron.

he used the word "pimped".
 if he had used any other word the statement would be fine, but he used the word pimped.

by Soltare 2008-02-08 04:27AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

Well, I'm an Obama supporter and I HATE Chris Matthews and agree that the statement you cited here is beyond absurd.  

Stupid is stupid, and has nothing to do with candidate preference.  Or at least it shouldn't.

by HSTruman 2008-02-08 04:31AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

Yeah I can't stand that tool.  I don't really know who can.  I support Obama though (mainly because I got sick of being told that Obama supporters are less thoughtful, intelligent, human than Clinton supporters though) so I guess the lumping doesn't really work here.

by kasjogren 2008-02-08 06:12AM | 0 recs
Of course

Hell... Tweety lost me back he was comparing Al Qaeda statements to Michael Moore statements.

He's a hack.

I just find it interesting that a stupid comments by stupid pundits on a stupid (but least stupid amongst stupid) networks in a stupid medium (24 cable news) provokes such outrage.

There probably isn't more than a handful of undecided Democratic voters among the hundreds of thousands that have seen the crap spewed by Tweety and company... and my bet is that the few undecideds who WERE watching probably voted HRC.

So we're left with why Tweety and company get highlighted.

It's simple.  Because victimhood is what plays well for Clinton.  Trace it from New Hampshire through her big fundraising days this week to her overcoming the MA endorsements to you name it.

Experience hasn't played.  Ready to go on Day 1 hasn't played.

Victimhood has played.

Marcia Pappas has gone viral, that's all.  

Please note - I have ZERO love for cable news or any of the idiots that inhabit it.  Hang 'em all - fine by me.  Put this charge atop the list of indictments, also fine by me...

...but let's not think for a minute that Penn, Clinton, and company are cowering in their rooms worried about some pundit on MSNBC or whatever being "mean" to them.  They love it - because they know it's the one theme that seems to resonate.

Victimhood.  It's what's for dinner.

by zonk 2008-02-08 06:45AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

Bah, HRC supporters are glued to CNN so they can listen to the sweet sounds of Wolf Blitzer.

by Soltare 2008-02-08 04:32AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

Matthews has a history of backing losers. He loved Rudy who crashed and burned and now his attachment is to Obama. Digby's right that it change soon to McCain. Obama right now is just a tool for channel his Clinton hatred. If it's Obama vs. McCain, Obama will become the liberal ivy league elitist who working class voters won't show up for. The funny thing is, the polls already show that but he's so blinded by Hillary hatred that he can't see it.

by Ga6thDem 2008-02-08 04:33AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

that's why Obama beats McCain in the GE head to head poll by seven points while hillary ties

by Soltare 2008-02-08 04:56AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

Those polls show a virtual tie. Besides look at the state by state polls. Survey USA has Obama losing  by 30 pts to McCain whereas Clinton only loses byt 10.  10 pts might be able to be over come but I doubt 30 pts would.

by Ga6thDem 2008-02-08 05:21AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

I should qualify that as poll in KY.

by Ga6thDem 2008-02-08 05:31AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

According to Gallup, Hillary beats Obama head to head nationally--right now. This is not to say that we should decide based on that, but that Obama supporters should know very well the malleability of polls. I fear Digby is right. Obama is running on charisma. I love his charisma--but that is precisley what a republican national campaign will be able to destroy. By Novemmber he will look like a onetime community service worker who happened to get elected to the Senate and then got in over his head. He has no record other than autobiography. He has no history of supporting the tradiational elements of the democrat base. I had not thought of him as a limo liberal but I can see how that characterization, or some newer version of it, will define him.  

by thetis 2008-02-08 07:30AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

Is that why he was rated the most liberal senator for 2007.?

are progressive causes the same as liberal or is he too liberal for you?

by hawkjt 2008-02-08 07:50AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

I'm curious. Where do any polls show working-class people won't support Obama in the general election?

He gets plenty of support from that demographic in the primaries. It's just that Hillary seems to get more, at least among Latinos and women, although not from men or African-Americans.

You come across to me as blinded by anti-Obama sentiment that you think only htose that hate Hillary support him. I support Hillary, but simply like Barack more. There are plenty of us who like both, so please don't be so divisive.

by wolff109 2008-02-08 05:00AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

First, off I was talking about the storyline that Matthews will promote if it's Obama vs. McCain.

SUSA has Obama losing by 30 pts to McCain in KY. There's one for you.

by Ga6thDem 2008-02-08 05:33AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

Funny thing that both Dem candidates are running pretty evenly in terms of votes and delegates.  But now that the going gets tough, one camp wants to turn the race into a class war.

by rfahey22 2008-02-08 05:19AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

Just calling them as I see them. And if pointing out some demographic problems is starting a class war then we're in trouble.

by Ga6thDem 2008-02-08 05:25AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

I am starting to get the impression that Clinton supporters (at least here) don't want anything to do with Obama supporters, which would only lead to a result that would make Mondale in 84 look like a close race.

Hopefully it doesn't come down to that to make democrats stop eating their own young...but it probably will.

by kasjogren 2008-02-08 06:14AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

Not surprising.  Character assassination has been the primary tool of a lot of the Clinton supporters on this site so far (and of the Clinton campaign as well).

by NJIndependent 2008-02-08 06:41AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

The supporters of both sides indulge in character assassination. IMO, Obama himself does a little of that when he refers to Hillary's results as "beauty contests" or speaks of "the claws" coming out. That's borderline sexist. Bill in South Carolina obviously upset Obama supporters. Ultimately, the goal needs to be beating McCain. Can somebody explain why Obama will get more indy voters than McCain? Aren't some Obama supporters worried that Republicans are already voting for Obama now so they won't have to vote for him in November?  

by thetis 2008-02-08 07:38AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

Shuster must be reading the blogs, because he "apologized" for his remark on Morning Joe this morning.  He said he wanted to take care of a little "housekeeping", and mentioned that everybody loves Chelsea, and everyone --even Huckabee-- compliments the Clintons for having raised her the way they did.  

He said he used a slang term that he didn't think would be taken the way it was taken, but that he should have known better before using it.  He apologized to the now standard "anyone who was offended".    

by DaTruth 2008-02-08 04:37AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

It's more like Shuster's bosses were reading all the angry email they received.

by Steve M 2008-02-08 04:53AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

It's good that he apologized, but attacking candidates' kids is repugnant, and he should have known better.  Like when the pictures of Jenna Bush stumbling drunk surfaced just ot embarass W.  It was like "News flash, college kid gets drunk".  Oh my God, what is this world coming to?!?  Just leave the kids alone.  W does enough to embarass himself with his own actions.  The same thing applies to Chelsea and the Clintons.  I am an Obama supporter, but Chelsea definitely should be off limits.

by NJIndependent 2008-02-08 04:53AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

Especially since nothing embarrassing was done here - golly

by NYMARJ 2008-02-08 05:13AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man
she's open for attack the moment she becomes a surrogate.
 of course shuster was an idiot for using the term "pimped"
by Soltare 2008-02-08 05:17AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

"open to attack"

That's the problem with the thinking right there...

These are so-called journalists.  They shouldn't be "attacking" anyone, period.  Respectful political analysis does not require vile personal insults and laughing at candidates during speeches, etc.  (they all laughed at Thompson and McCain during speeches in the past)  They think they're just hanging out at a frat house at MSNBC but they're actually in front of a national audience influencing an election...  Scary and sad.

by diplomatic 2008-02-08 05:28AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

that's what analysyst do.

and it's not like cnn is free of it.
 lou dobbs?
 nancy grace?
  Glenn Beck?

those three are batshit insane

by Soltare 2008-02-08 05:59AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

David Shuster's role is sketchy now.  He used to be featured as a straight-up hard news guy who was covering the Scooter Libby trial quite well.  But now they're bringing him in more and more to these pundit panels to do off the cuff analysis and just generally chit chat with the boys...

The real character has been revealed on several ocassions and it has tarnished him in my view.

by diplomatic 2008-02-08 06:20AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

Oh, geez, fun of Obama's children? After all, they appeared in a commercial with him, right? Of course not! I agree with NJ independent, leave the kids out of it.

by Ga6thDem 2008-02-08 05:29AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

don't try that straw man shit with me.

Chelsea is out giving stump speeches on behalf of her mother.
 the moment she does that open season can be declared on her.

baracks kids aren't giving stump speeches are they?
 that would be pretty damn impressive if they were

by Soltare 2008-02-08 05:58AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

"open season" can be declared on her?   PATHETIC.

So, are you going to declare open season on Hillary's mom, too?  She has given stump speeches as well.

by georgep 2008-02-08 06:22AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

Lets declare open season on Michelle Obama - Is Obama pimping his wife?  Lets declare open season on Carolyn Kennedy - Did JFK pimp his daughter?  Lets declare open season on Oprah - Did Obama pimped Oprah? Lets declare open season on Maria Shriver - Did Obama pimped Maria Shriver? And On and on...

by Opandora 2008-02-08 06:42AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

No, but they are on the campaign trail are they not? Why can't we make fun of their hair or their clothes? According to you, Obama putting his kids in a commercial is "pimping them out." I guess it would be okay with you if Limbaugh called them the WH dogs then?

Pretty disgusting comment from you imo.

by Ga6thDem 2008-02-08 10:46AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

I'm so happy MSNBC has made it clear they love Obama and dislike Hillary with much disdain.

The reality is that HRC is the most devisive politician alive and if she is our nominee we will be saying hello to John Mccain in the Whitehouse.

by Djneedle83 2008-02-08 04:48AM | 0 recs
They love McCain more

you may be glad now that they love Obama (what kind of journalists are these?) but you ain't seen nothing yet.  McCain is their longstanding undconditional subject of affection.  If you think they'll pick Obama's side vs McCain in a general election, prepare to feel like HRC supporters feel right now watching that network.

by diplomatic 2008-02-08 04:51AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

Only winner was Clinton you moron..

by Opandora 2008-02-08 06:43AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

David Shuster and the whole pack of Hillary haters are Obama's pimps.

by lowdowndog 2008-02-08 04:49AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

Come on, Jer. Bashing the media is old news. Give me something I don't know.

Besides, I don't hear you bashing anti-Obama fonts. Or anti-GOP pundits. Or CNN for being so vapid. At least be an equal opportunity media basher.

But I agree that the story of whether or not it's okay to attack surrogates (i.e., Chelsea Clinton) is pretty lame. Don't they have issues to cover?

by wolff109 2008-02-08 04:54AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

TV journalism is trash across the board.  Nothing surprising there.

by rfahey22 2008-02-08 04:57AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

Add me to the list of Obama supporters who are disgusted by the sexism in the media in general and MSNBC in particular.  My opinion of Chris Matthews was pretty low before this election and yet he still managed to go lower.

Sexism is bigger than this election.  I don't want Clinton to win, but our political preferences in a democratic primary shouldn't silence the need to attack sexism in our society.

by labor nrrd 2008-02-08 05:20AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

Keep oinking, pigs! It fires up the Hillary donors.

We are going for TEN million in 72 hours, and Schuster's hateful comment only motivates us more! We just might make it!

by cc 2008-02-08 05:23AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

You nailed, Jerome. Pig of a man. Boar. Swine. I used to have respect for David Shuster and his commentary. No more. No matter who you support, this is an insult to woman, mothers, and daughters. What is this sexist, misogynistic crap and utter disrespect of women going on over at this network?

What is wrong with him? What the hell is wrong with MSNBC? They are running one hell of a blatantly biased, negative campaign against the Clintons this election cycle.

I'm going to write to the producers of Tucker and MSNBC and I encourage everyone to do the same. Also, forward this to Media Matters.

What a pig. Deserves to eat mud for this one.

by Mariel 2008-02-08 05:27AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

As an Obama supporter, that was a mean thing for David Schuster to say. Needless to say, just because a media person said a bad thing about Chelsea is not gonna change my vote.

by mecarr 2008-02-08 05:28AM | 0 recs
Re: Jerome is a F^&*(^%H Moron

Jerome:

come on dude.  He has more integrity and non bias than you will ever have.  Let's take for instance your predictions on Super Tuesday, which I saved because it was so freaking loving Hillary it was embarrassing:

Feb 5th Prediction Thread
by Jerome Armstrong, Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 03:29:38 PM EST

Here's my best-guess. I think so many of the states are so close, that its tough to make a 'winner' but here goes:

States

Clinton: CA, NY, NJ, MA, MO, TN, AZ, CT, AL, AR, OK, NM, DE, UT, AK

Obama: IL, GA, MN, CO, KS, ID, ND

I go with Clinton winning 15 and Obama winning 7 states. Where Obama could change the narrative, is with a win in California; that would make it a battle all the way to the convention.

Not that you are letting your feelings/emotions cloud your objectivity.  Just wondering when the transition to shill and hack happened?  Or how much is Mark Penn paying you to spew this shit to everyone.

 

by georgeg1011 2008-02-08 05:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Jerome is a F^&*(^%H Moron

lol.

so has NM been decided yet?

by Soltare 2008-02-08 05:54AM | 0 recs
Was pretty much the CW

The Obama campaign was plannig for the worst - winning only 4 states.   They performed better than they could have imagined.  Deleware was a big surprise.

MO and CT just barely went Obama after Clinton lead in polling.

by dpANDREWS 2008-02-08 05:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Was pretty much the CW

I always think of Wayne's World.

We're...in....Deleware???

by kasjogren 2008-02-08 06:18AM | 0 recs
stop your making me dizzy....

who won...Obama or Clinton.  the rest is just spin...big surprise, nope...and if we want to talk about margin of victories, lets talk about the caucus states and how she absolutely had her A-- handed to her....this weekend will be the same.  She will lost Nebraska, Washington BIG...maybe if she had more money, she could have competed in those states...it is fair to say, that the gains that he made in the last two weeks of the race were substantial.  If there would have been more time, the outcome might have been different.  that is why the Billary should be worried about Texas, and Ohio.  Lose both and its over.

by georgeg1011 2008-02-08 06:20AM | 0 recs
Re: stop your making me dizzy....

I hope the Clintons don't lose this nomination without a good effort.  It seems to me that they haven't been doing anything particularly ingenious or surprising.  Where's the old Clinton magic?  Is this the best they can come up with?  They haven't had a single major endorsement that shocked anybody.  Where is their ace in the hole?  They are really going to go down without much of a fight?  They're letting the media trample them as well.  It's just disappointing and I'd like to think they have something else they're waiting for the right moment to use.

by diplomatic 2008-02-08 06:24AM | 0 recs
Re: Jerome is a F^&*(^%H Moron

Ah, that's one day I've been wrong, other than that, spot on.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-02-08 06:26AM | 0 recs
Re: Jerome is a F^&*(^%H Moron

You've been more accurate than other well known bloggers who shall not be named.  This blog is also more reality-based.  You have shown courage with your independent thinking Jerome.  I really respect how your run this site.

by diplomatic 2008-02-08 06:33AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

I thought of another great reason to vote for HIllary, Rush Limbaugh said he'd raise money for her! Limbaugh, Coulter & Clinton. That's my ticket!

by mecarr 2008-02-08 05:39AM | 0 recs
Shuster should be fired like Imus.

That simple.

by dpANDREWS 2008-02-08 05:53AM | 0 recs
Re: Shuster should be fired like Imus.

I second that sentiment.

by grlpatriot 2008-02-08 06:09AM | 0 recs
I have already emailed MSNBC

by dpANDREWS 2008-02-08 06:11AM | 0 recs
the best decision my husband and I made

was when my first child was a baby. We decided never to have the tv turned on while he was awake.

Our kids have late bedtimes, so we don't turn on the tv until the Daily Show and Colbert.

We don't miss anything.

I recommend this approach to everyone. We wasted too much time watching tv before we had kids.

by desmoinesdem 2008-02-08 05:54AM | 0 recs
Re: the best decision my husband and I made

I respect your approach, but I don't really understand it.  My brothers and I grew up watching television.  Generally I would turn it on after my homework was done, but occasionally I would leave it on as background noise.  I don't think that it had a negative impact whatsoever, and in fact it broadened my understanding of the world around me (my favorite programs were the nightly news and PBS programs such as Mystery, Nova, and Wild America).  Is it an attempt to manage what they are exposed to?  I just don't understand the philosophy.

by rfahey22 2008-02-08 06:28AM | 0 recs
That's pretty vile.

Chelsea is absolutely fair political game, but WTF does that have to do with politics?

by MNPundit 2008-02-08 06:35AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

Keep up your sneering, Matthews, Schuster et al.  All over the country women are seething and writing checks to HRC.  These guys painfully remind us of our classmates, our bosses, our first husband.  And so does Obama.  He's the 22-year-old guy that got hired off the street to manage my local McDonalds over the smart woman who's been there for 10 years.  Her name tag says Betty; his says Mr. Robinson.

http://www.womensmediacenter.com/ex/0201 08.html

by oh puhleeze 2008-02-08 06:45AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

Keep up your sneering, Matthews, Schuster et al.  All over the country women are seething and writing checks to HRC.  These guys painfully remind us of our classmates, our bosses, our first husband.  And so does Obama.  He's the 22-year-old guy that got hired off the street to manage my local McDonalds over the smart woman who's been there for 10 years.  Her name tag says Betty; his says Mr. Robinson.

http://www.womensmediacenter.com/ex/0201 08.html

by oh puhleeze 2008-02-08 06:45AM | 0 recs
Sexual predator?
Maybe, if you define the term sufficiently broadly. But given the connotations of violence and non-consensuality usually associated with this term, I see its use here hardly more appropriate than Shuster's "pimping out" of Chelsea.
by 1arryb 2008-02-08 06:52AM | 0 recs
I'm tempted to send hillary some money now

Schuster has been OK for the most part, though this was a despicable thing to say.  I think the corporate environment at MSNBC is rubbing off on him.  It's especially sad to see KO become another ass-clown for Obama.

Note, I wouldn't give $$ because of Schuster, but I will because of Obama supporters defending that remark.  It ranks along with the assholes condemning Hillary for Bill's sexual sins.  For a campaign about "unity and inclusion" this bunch is the most divisive force I've ever seen in Democratic politics.

Keep pushing guys.  If you win the nomination, you'll probably get my vote in November but nothing more-- no money, no calls,  no showing up at rallies, no trying to sway undecideds..   I'm tempted to turn my JRE passion over to Hillary on a dime now-- meaning money and activism.  

by Rooktoven 2008-02-08 06:56AM | 0 recs
FOX and CNN Better Than MSNBC

We flipped through CNN, MSNBC, and FOX on Super Tuesday.  The contrast between MSNBC and the other networks was embarrassing and shocking.

Olbermann is just as bad as Matthews if not worse.

by BigBoyBlue 2008-02-08 07:11AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

Who was laughing in the background when he said it??? Sounded like Chris Matthews. Disgusting, male PIGS! I just emailed that video to all of my aunts in Ohio, those old gals get the word out and they VOTE

by rossinatl 2008-02-08 08:19AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

It was on the tucker show with shuster sitting in for tucker with bill press and that other older blog writer... did not hear the laughter but I doubt it was from Press who is a huge HRC backer.

Shuster used a horrible choice of language with his comment about Chelsea. As an obama supporter, I think she should be off limits. Sure she is 28, works for a hedge fund, and is stumping and calling superdelegates and the View ladies...that is her perogative..it is her mom.
I think as long as she is stumping for a family member,she is off limits to the press. Unlike Bill, she is not a professional pol. Once she starts doing it for a living..she should be questioned like other pols.

Shuster should apologize for his words.

by hawkjt 2008-02-08 08:39AM | 0 recs
Re: David Shuster, a pig of a man

I'd deck anyone who said that about my daughter, as would my husband.

The fact that a journalist felt free to use it is beyond disgusting.

by WMCB 2008-02-08 10:34AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------