Dan Abrams IS NOT "a passionate Hillary supporter." Why is it that Obama people always say that about anyone who is "passionate" about giving evenhanded coverage to the candidates. If Obama doesn't get preferential treatment from everybody, all the time, then whoever it is must be "a Hillary supporter."
Abrams has said I don't know how many times he's NEUTRAL in this - he just sees the BLATANT media bias against Hillary Clinton - which isn't difficult to do - and he feels obligated to talk about it, since nobody else will.
Of course, it's possible that by now Abrams may have jumped into the Clinton camp - but he didn't start out there. I know the slanted media coverage is what caused me to take a new look at Clinton and eventually brought me over to her side.
I turned my TV to MSNBC today - for about one minute - swear to God, ONE minute in the hour prior to Shuster's on-air apology. I saw Tweety sitting with 'BamaBot Eugene Robinson and all I heard Tweety say was "The Clinton machine is just like Tammany Hall." Robinson's head bobbled. And this was in the hour just prior to Shuster's on-air apology.
Of course, I hit the remote and got rid of the *sshole immediately. But it was obvious, even in the face of what happened, that the Clinton-bashing goes on - the Clinton-hate is unrepentent. And while Tweety MAY (certainly not guaranteed) step back for a short time from the blatant misogyny, he (and the rest of MSNBC) ARE NOT going to step back from their ridiculously biased characterizations of the Clintons. They're not going to stop trying to make everything the Clintons do and say look somehow nefarious and darkly "suspicious." Eyebrows will be raised, insinuations made. Snide remarks will fly around the studio. EVERY. SINGLE. DAY.
And they're not about to start voicing any - ANY - criticism of Barack Obama about anything he says or does. I mean, honestly - have you ever heard even the tiniest critique of Obama from MSNBC? I've never, ever heard one negative syllable - certainly no accusation - and absolutely no suspicion.
So sure, they may cut back on the blatant sexist crap for a while, but they're just changing tactics, buying time - their long-term agenda is still in place - the poisonous coverage of Hillary and all the Clintons will go on until they've accomplished their mission of destroying Hillary's candidacy.
Today was a good day for women, though - a good day for Hillary - and a good day for holding them accountable. But it ain't over - not by a long shot...
An MSNBC production source says that it was only after the Hillary campaign threatened to boycott future debates that Shuster was informed of his suspension.
Will Shuster's suspension be enough to get Hillary to recommit to the debate? Her campaign is refusing to answer questions about whether she'll appear, or what they're asking for in the talks. This suggests that they want to leave the network twisting in the wind on the debate question, perhaps to "work the refs," send a signal to MSNBC and other news outlets about what they will and won't tolerate.
So, Shuster wasn't suspended UNTIL Hillary's team said they might not debate on NBC. Typical corporate media.
And, her campaign seems to be holding out, forcing NBC to be fair (what a concept!) - and whatever other stuff they want.
I read earlier today that Obama has declined to participate in the Washington, DC, Maryland and Virginia ABC7/POLITICO Candidate Forum - but that they're going ahead with it anyway, Clinton only, I guess.
That probably p*ssed him off - that they'd do it without him - so now it's tit for tat, so to speak.
I wonder, though, if Hillary pulled out of the MSNBC debate - because of what MSNBC did and not, like Obama, because she just didn't feel like participating - if MSNBC would still go through with it, leaving her out.
I would think NBC would cancel in that case - since it would expose their true agenda too clearly. But, ya never know...
Yeah - I read that too - I think it was Taylor Marsh who said Shuster dug in his heels and originally refused to apologize.
Oh - just found some of it - here's part of what she said on her blog:
"That any professional journalist 'stood his ground' after the comments Shuster made illustrates that he obviously didn't think anyone at the network cared if he smeared Chelsea Clinton or Hillary. The arrogance of this behavior by Shuster obviously comes from the atmosphere at MSNBC. Fish always rot from the head."
So, the big kahuna, NBC, had to step in and fix the giant mess Shuster made. After all, if Clinton actually bowed out of the debate because of this, it would not only cost NBC money, it would be such a HUGE embarrassment for the network.
This is really a shame, though. David Shuster was such a good reporter on the Libby case and others. Arrogance and NBC's top-down policy to "select" the candidate (like when Jack Welch set network policy to get George W. Bush elected) did Shuster in - with our help, of course.
Not enough, of course, but a start - and MSNBC is DEFINITELY feeling the heat.
We've got to keep it up or they'll just revert to their old, bad behavior - after all, they're not going to alter their misogynistic, anti-Clinton agenda because a bunch of us "uppity women" object - temporarily, yes - but, as we all know, this Shuster incident happened AFTER Tweety gave his so-called apology. After that, MSNBC's anti-Hillary campaign just picked right back up where it had left off - rolling right along, unabated, until this new "isolated incident."
By next week they'll be firing it up again. Count on it...
I wrote a "Shuster needs to be fired" e-mail to them earlier this morning - plus another one saying "goodbye" to KO - that one makes me sad, but had to be done.
And then I wrote a third one - this time to Dan Abrams thanking him for his expose of the biased pro-Obama - anti-Clinton media coverage but criticizing his exemption of MSNBC, the worst offender in terms of bias and blatant sexism. Not that it'll make any difference, after all, it's his employer.