Clinton Campaign Not Looking for Shuster to Be Fired, After All

[boston bean]

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/02/clinton-campa-1.html

February 09, 2008 9:07 PM

After some conversations with folks at the Clinton campaign, I can offer some clarity -- maybe -- on what they're asking NBC/MSNBC to do.

And despite Clinton's letter, saying David Martin Shuster's apology and suspension was not sufficient, Clinton's goal is not for NBC to fire Shuster, he and his fans will be happy to hear. Until Thursday, the Clinton campaign had no issues with Shuster, I'm told.

The campaign says it has more to do with what it sees as a sexist, locker room, on-air atmosphere at MSNBC.

Clinton supporters ask: what other network has had, within the space of one year, because of comments widely seen as boorish and inappropriate, a firing (Imus), an on-air apology (Chris Matthews) and a suspension (Shuster)?

[robbedvoter]

1. Thank you for the truth. it'll get buried here - but it's nice to see it.

[neutron]

7. Shuster is not the Jerk - MATTHEWS should be canned

[high density]

2. Then why did she write such a cryptic letter in the first place?

IMO this is an example of her campaign floating yet another test balloon with this wishy washy lawyer talk and then popping the balloon when the winds seem to carry it in a direction that the campaign doesn't want it to go.

[11cents]

"Cryptic" - not really.

It said that suspending Shuster was not enough and that the network needed to examine the atmosphere that was leading to such incidents. I was surprised that Josh Marshall headlined this as a demand that Shuster be fired -- that was an extrapolation and should have been framed as such.

[chimpymustgo]

69. Thank you. The letter was NOT cryptic. SOME people chose to misinterpret it. Whining again.

And just plain making sh*t up.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

76. Agreed, and it's been happening all along.

"SOME people chose to misinterpret it. Whining again. And just plain making sh*t up."

[rodeodance]

14. NO where in that letter did she say fire. But there were some on DU that Assummed she

did and spread the lie around!

[high density]

23. Clinton is insulting us

That letter was very carefully crafted to have the meaning that it did. I refuse to believe otherwise. She can explain it away all she wants, but what she wrote remains there for all to see.

[BlackVelvet04]

35. You believe what you want because that's what you want....

nowhere did she call for a firing.

[rodeodance]

44. NO> she is NOT--Many made ASSumptions-passed them off as lies on many threads!

[high density]

46. It's all on her if she can't write in a more upfront manner

She's more naive than I thought if she figured nobody would read between the lines of that letter.

[rodeodance]

93. and some people have Major Reading Comprehension Problems and make ASSumptions!

[creeksneakers2]

65. " I refuse to believe otherwise"

That's a powerful statement.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

77. perfect screen name

[spotbird]

109. "no temporary suspension or half-hearted apology is sufficient."

Can be recharacterized, but it speaks loudly as to the author's wishes.

This fits a familiar pattern.

[emilyg]

20. Cryptic is all in your mind.

[high density]

27. Clinton's the one making it cryptic

She wrote a letter in which anybody that can read and comprehend the English language could infer from that she wants David Shuster fired. Perhaps she should write more plainly and honestly in the future, but she's a politician so I guess that's probably not likely to happen.

[rodeodance]

96. and some people have Major Reading Comprehension Problems and make ASSumptions!

[KittyWampus]

62. I agree with you about the intent with the wording. Clintons are OLD PRO's. I'm almost impressed

[Tom Rinaldo]

79. That letter was written before Shuster gave a real apology

Her letter was written after Shuster tried to get away with giving a classic non apology apology in the morning, before he gave his second apology in the evening.

And she wrote it after at first flatly refused to apologize in an email exchange with Hillary's campaign on Thursday night. When he made his, as he said "housecleaning" comment the next morning rather than give a full apology, she must have been really pissed. That morning Shuster claimed he just used a slang term but that he understands some people might not have heard it the way he intended and if that was the case and it offended anyone THEN he apologized to those people (without apologizing directly to the people who were the pimp and the whore in his slang analogy).

THAT was a half-hearted apology. It was not sufficient. Hillary was right. I read the apology that Shuster gave in the evening and that one reads like a real apology. This letter came before the real apology but after the half hearted one.

[K Gardner]

3. It evidently wasn't just DU that interpreted the letter that way. Thanks for the clarification !

[madfloridian]

5. It's at TPM and everywhere else.

This is cover your ass stuff.

[rodeodance]

43. But so so many posted VILE slimes about Hillary today. Wonder if they will 'claridy'

their posts??

[madfloridian]

4. How nice she doesn't want him fired? Didn't she just ruin his career?

?

[neutron]

11. She Stood Up to MSM. IT'S ABOUT TIME !!! Kudos to Hillary!

[joshcryer]

12. Nope.

[11cents]

18. Oh Jesus.

She shouldn't have said a word when he said that she was treating her daughter like a whore? She shouldn't say anything about months and years of misogynistic slime at MSNBC? God DAMN it, can't you see that pushing back on stuff like this is good for ALL Democrats, and will benefit Obama if he's the nominee? GOD DAMN IT.

I keep telling myself not to come here, not to come here ....

But oh, that bitch Hillary, "ruining" David Shuster's career (as if), just because he said she was pimping her daughter. I mean, the nerve of a politician asking for some accountability from the media that's served us so very well.

[rodeodance]

31. this was his 2nd offence of this nature--msnbc did it to him--not Hillary

[comradebillyboy]

66. didn't he step on his own dick by making

such a stupid and unprofessional comment about pimping her daughter? C. Clinton has no obligation to speak to Schuster or anyone else. And, as has been pointed out quite frequently, no other candidate's relative or supporter has been compared to a whore for helping their father, mother or friend's campaign. Is Obama pimping Caroline Kennedy or Teddy or Ophra or his own wife?

It may be a hip term if you are 16 but for a "professional journalist" on a major network its stupid and unprofessional and demonstrates a serious bias in his perspective.

Notice that Kieth Oldberman had to make an adequate apology on behalf of MSNBC since Schuster didn't seem to think his comments were the least bit out of line and made two non apologies of the "if you are too fucking stupid to see it my way...I am sorry you are so fucking stupid" sort.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

78. SHE ruined his career?? He's the idiot who spewed ...

then insisted he did nothing wrong ... and then gave an obvious non-apology. If you're going to put the gun in your mouth, and keep pulling the trigger ... sooner or later it's going to go off.

[MonkeyFunk]

95. No

he'll have a career.

Any damage done to it was self-inflicted.

[rodeodance]

99. Schuster did it all by himself (no, not ruin but not good for him)

[Life Long Dem]

6. It was just another stunt of Hillary's.

[madfloridian]

10. And stick a fork in Shuster....

he's done anyway now. It's too little too late now, Hillary.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[madfloridian]

19. Define Obama crud, please. I think that is awful. What is "Obama crud"

?

[JeffR]

25. "Obama crud" = the ravings of a lunatic

Far as I can tell.

[rodeodance]

Its a level down from a smarty pants Obamacrybaby!

[11cents]

22. Poor, poor David Shuster

Some BITCH of a politician forced the heroic corporate media that we all love so much not to call women whores.

(And Shuster isn't through, ferfuckssake. This barely ruffled his hair.)

[bettyellen]

52. maybe his wife will have to whore for him the whole two weeks he;s suspended.

[rodeodance]

8. I know one particular thread that has been leading the "Clinton wants him fired"--whonder if he/she

will check in heer?

[robbedvoter]

13. I'll link that one here - for people to wise up to the truth:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4504857&mesg_id=4504857

[joshcryer]

17. Why am I not surprised by the responses to that thread.

[rodeodance]

28. Here you go.

Forum Name General Discussion: Primaries
Topic subject Hillary To NBC: Fire David Shuster
Topic URL http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4507134#4507134
4507134, Hillary To NBC: Fire David Shuster
Posted by ProSense on Sat Feb-09-08 05:57 PM

Hillary To NBC: Fire David Shuster
By Greg Sargent - February 9, 2008, 5:35PM

This has been elsewhere today already, but here's a quick update on Shuster-gate: Today Hillary turned up the heat on MSNBC over the Chelsea "pimp" comment, sending a letter to NBC News president Steve Capus in which she made it clear that his suspension just won't suffice...

Dear Mr. Capus,

Thank you for your call yesterday. I wanted to send you this note to convey the depth of my feeling about David Shuster’s comments.

I know that I am a public figure and that my daughter is playing a public role in my campaign. I am accustomed to criticism, certainly from MSNBC. I know that it goes with the territory.

However, I became Chelsea’s mother long before I ran for any office and I will always be a mom first and a public official second.

Nothing justifies the kind of debasing language that David Shuster used and no temporary suspension or half-hearted apology is sufficient.

I would urge you to look at the pattern of behavior on your network that seems to repeatedly lead to this sort of degrading language.

There’s a lot at stake for our country in this election. Surely, you can do your jobs as journalists and commentators and still keep the discourse civil and appropriate.

Sincerely,

Hillary Rodham Clinton

Hard to miss the line, "no temporary suspension or half-hearted apology is sufficient." She wants him fired.


Shuster apologized, twice, and Chelsea is 27 years old. Why hasn't Hillary demanded that Chris Matthews be fired? Contrast Shuster's comment to what the Clintons' buddy said when Chelsea was a teenager: John McCain's mean, sexist, homophobic joke about Chelsea.

[11cents]

30. Her letter said that MSNBC's problems are systemic

That it's not just Shuster.

That's what she should be saying.

[rodeodance]

36. I totally agree, She never asked for Schuster to be fired like some LOUDLY claimed her on DU

[joshcryer]

9. I always said she'd take the high road, unlike some idiots here.

[rodeodance]

29. yes. ~yes she can, yes we can~

[chascarrillo]

15. You mean MSNBC actually acts accountable for their actions?

Where's CNN's apology for Glenn Beck's comments? Lou Dobbs's comments?

Where's FOX's apology for... well... every goddamn person on that network?

I think it does speak - to some degree - to MSNBC's greater commitment to good journalistic practices. They're not perfect, mind you - there certainly is a locker room atmosphere to a great part of their programming, and Clinton is right to speak against it, but at least they've taken some small steps in correcting fuckups when they happen.

[jkshaw]

21. It might be that MSNBC

is locked into the "We try harder" mantra. Was it Avis car rentals that used that years ago? They lean on "liveliness." Perhaps they'll do some backpedalling. I hope it doesn't dull down Keith Olbermann, though.

[AZBlue]

24. This article is self-contradictory and smells fishy.

Clinton's letter, saying David Martin Shuster's apology and suspension was not sufficient

If she didn't want him fired, but suspension wasn't sufficient, then what more did she want? Public flogging? Caning? Forty lashes with a wet noodle? They'll have to explain that in a lot more detail before I'll even begin to believe it.

She's just going back on what she said because she's gotten bad press from it.

[bettyellen]

32. your post is fishy

the answer is in the next paragraph... and you ignore it.
bullshit.

[high density]

33. Clinton's the one writing the letters and then trying to adjust the meaning of them later on.

She's the one you should be calling the bullshit on.

[rodeodance]

38. I have seen your post and you have lots of reading comprehension problems.

[high density]

51. Evidently I seem to have comprehended TOO MUCH from the letter

with about a thousand other people as well.

[bettyellen]

40. um. no. the letters adress problems i have seen on msnbc they do no ask for anyone to be fired.

no matter how many post this bullshit.
jeese, i totally regret voting for obama now. i'm embarrassed because his supporters are full of shit about this.

[high density]

48. Why are you bringing Obama into this?

It's not his problem.

[bettyellen]

53. it should be, if he has respect for women. maybe he's okay with his daughters being called whores..

his supporters seem to think it's all good!

[high density]

58. You're outraged for the sake of being outraged

The timeline here doesn't involve Obama at all. I'm going to assume he's against his daughters being called whores by default. He doesn't need to explain anything in regards to this silly spat between the Clinton campaign and MSNBC.

[bettyellen]

59. actually, no. i voted for obama but as an unapologetic feminist, i am fucking disgusted

that anyone on obama's side can excuse this shit. it should not be a partisan issue, but here it is..
i am repulsed by the bias against women. barack should say he's disgusted too. this is not how the news should be reported in the 21st century. i am turning off msnbc. (okay, maybe just olberman- but fuck the rest. ) i will not support this shit, sorry for the women in your life if you make excuses for it.

[high density]

61. Stop putting David Shuster's words in the mouths of Obama supporters

I'm not going to let you have the last word with total bullcrap assertions that anybody is "supporting" this stuff or "making excuses for it." Nobody supports it. Everybody thinks it was a horrible comment to make. That said, some of us are not going to call for David Shuster to face a firing squad because he said one stupid comment.

This thread is about Clinton's letter that, not surprisingly, was supposedly widely misinterpreted because she wrote in such a vague manner.

[bettyellen]

63. look at this board- it is swarming with Obama avatars making light of this

they made it a partisan issue.
and firing squad? oh please. that letter was clear about systemic sexism. and only obama people claim they don;t see it, only obama people edit that shit out to mislead people here.

like i said, it's embarrassing to barack now. i hope he has betetr sense than his little worker bees claim ing faux outrage, etc etc.

[rodeodance]

98. Whining again?

[AZBlue]

55. I gave up.

She's completely illogical, sorry to say.

[bettyellen]

60. you gave up because Hillary's letter was crystal clear and you were called on it.

read it all over this thread, and go crawl under a rock.

[susankh4]

70. Oh really?

Then why did Obama, your man, agree with her?

Has he lost it too?

[bettyellen]

85. where did he say that?

?

[rodeodance]

100. Do some reseach before you spout off nonsense

[bettyellen]

102. did Obama actually weigh in on this? I did Google and came up with nothing...

or did you mean to reply to someone else?

[rodeodance]

106. yes, he did. It was posted yesterday. sorry but I do not have it. Obama supporters

not eager to broadcast his comment.


i do not know which side you are on--that last comment was my dig.

[bettyellen]

107. darn, i searched for it.

i'm sick of people exagerrating hil's reaction.
what's more ids that i think she is in a no win situation here. whatever her reaction would be, many would fault her.
i think she took the high road and is gettingtotally roasted (and lied about) for it.
i think a man could have had a completely overblown reaction, and would be lauded for it. men are allowed to be assholes if they are protecting womenfolk. so yeah,, i'm ten kinds of dissapointed here.

[susankh4]

112. Here is what I can find right now:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23071790/

It quotes his campaign representative:

"Bill Burton, a spokesman for Obama, called Shuster's comments "deplorable" and said they had no place in the political process."

I know I also saw a comment by Obama himself.... but it seems to be missing from Yahoo now. I'll keep trying to track it.

[susankh4]

111. This is all I can find right now

It quotes his campaign representative:

"Bill Burton, a spokesman for Obama, called Shuster's comments "deplorable" and said they had no place in the political process."

I know I also saw a comment by Obama himself.... but it seems to be missing from Yahoo now. I'll keep trying to track it.

[susankh4]

71. Actually.... Obama brought himself in...

He came to the Clinton's defense on this.

As well he should have.

[bettyellen]

74. Link? I have not seen anyone make this claim- it's not on Google- and it's Baraks supporters

making light of it, allover this place.
I'd love to see the quote, if you have it.

[rodeodance]

97. it is tendency of some OBAMAbabies to post slime--and lots have about this issue

[bettyellen]

103. and my point is to dismiss bigotry as a partisan issue is short sighted and immature

very dissapointed in Obama supporters.

[rodeodance]

104. yes. thank you.

[AZBlue]

34. Did you forget the sarcasm or rofl tag?

You can not possibly be serious.

I asked what it was that she wanted to see happen and the answer is - as you state, "in the next paragraph": The campaign says it has more to do with what it sees as a sexist, locker room, on-air atmosphere at MSNBC.

:wtf:

Where in those words does it explain what she wanted to see happen? I'm seeing quite a bit of desperate illogical posts by HRC supporters here the last couple of days - it's actually quite alarming.

[bettyellen]

37. so... you think they can't do anything to fix the rampant sexist atmosphere?

or that they shouldn't.
is it okay to say Michelle and the kid are walking the stretts, whoring it up for big daddy?
would you like to see that on TV, because you guys are validating it, and it's bullshit.

[AZBlue]

42. Wait - let's finish the first discussion before you change topics.

Or do you do that because you couldn't prove your point, so you're just going to move onto a new one, hoping I'll forget what we were talking about?? You still have not answered my original question.

[bettyellen]

49. i wasn't being sarcastic- her letter expresses a problem with rampant sexism

and suggests it's a widespread problem at msnbc- so they should look at station policy. like they should have some guidelines, such as not using totally sexist perjoratives. i.e. suggesting women working the streets (that was the image they showed of chelsea) are whoring.
no where did you get that this is just about schuster. or firing. that was not in the letter. you jumped to a conclusion.

[AZBlue]

54. You're stating the letter had nothing to do with Schuster?

OK, I see. Good luck with that. I won't be responding again - I only deal in reality and facts. Bye bye.

Oh - and you STILL haven't answered the question. But, no matter now.

[bettyellen]

56. nothing to do with firing schuster... and i did answer. just not the way you want me to.

because you don;t see what you don;t want. isaid it's about MORE than SCUSTER- can't you FUCKING READ???
i answred you, but you ignored the question about obama. am i supposed to believe...he'd be fine w/ being described as pimping out michelle and whoring his little girls. yeah... i'm sure.
and you're mom, i bet she walked the sreets, metaphorically for you, right? no big deal at all. lol. i bet.
you like the sexism, you got it.

[Luminous Animal]

57. She wants EXACTLY this...

"I would urge you to look at the pattern of behavior on your network that seems to repeatedly lead to this sort of degrading language.

There’s a lot at stake for our country in this election. Surely, you can do your jobs as journalists and commentators and still keep the discourse civil and appropriate."


She doesn't need to go back on anything because she was precise in her first letter. It is the idiot pundits who are leading us away from this clarity.

[Orangepeel]

26. I think MSNBC deserves some credit. It's the only network that took action

CNN sponsors Glen Beck on Headline News, for crying out loud. Fox is full of talking heads saying boorish things. Even if MSNBC doesn't do enough, it is to MSNBC's credit that they ever do anything. None of the other networks do.

[HughMoran]

39. So there was an ASSumption made

haha - that never happens here :rofl:

[rodeodance]

41. THANK YOU--

[rodeodance]

45. RECCOMEND -FOR THE TRUTH

[CreekDog]

47. Unless you are paying attention to what they said

Oopsy, looks like what they said wasn't what they meant. They meant something different, or mean something different now.

[DiamondJay]

50. you know why? Its because she is not Hillary Sharpton

who tries to get everyone fired for saying something he doesn't like. just like he tried to ruin Imus' career

[kerry-is-my-prez]

64. There was another instance where Olbermann apologized for his "fill-in's comments.

Someone who filled in for him made a sexist comment and he apologized for it when he got back.

Anybody remember what it was?

He was also angry about the Shuster comment.

[RamboLiberal]

72. Allison Stewart made a comment on Wendy Vitter's leopard print dress

Keith apologized for it when he got back.

[chieftain]

67. How does this clarify the letter sent by the Clinton campaign?

Asking for more that a temporary suspension seems to be asking for the termination of the commentator who is most likely to tell the truth about what is happening in DC today. Oh, he should be punished for his reprehensible remark. And Hillary's people are right to point out the biased, inane anti Hillary bilge that spills so easily from the lips of Chris, Fat Timmy and GOP Joe. But fire David Shuster. That is downright stupid. Make him apologize yet again. Suspend him if you must. But silence the most truthful commentator in America, what are you thinking of?

[bettyellen]

75. perhaps he should acknowledge his mistake this time- instead of implying people were

mistaken to be offended, that was the most useless, unrepentant aplogy i have ever witnessed.
the man needs guidleines- a policy, and he needs to know it will be enforced.
that station needs to shape the fuck up. it's hostile towards women.

[chieftain]

80. I couldn't agree with you more about the hostility toward women

that abounds on MSNBC. It is not limited to Hillary. Mathews and GOP Joe are just plain nasty to their female colleagues and guests. It is almost grade school of the 1950's level. You can picture Chris and Joe in a tree house pulling up the rope so no girls can get in.
That said, I don't see how the Tapper article clarifies the Clinton letter which rules out temporary suspension and apologies as satisfactory punishment for Shuster. It seems to me that the logical inference is that the Clinton Campaign was demanding that David be fired. Saying that they had no problem with him before the remark hardly qualifies as a definitive statement that he should keep his job.
Shuster should be sanctioned for his tasteless, hurtful and inappropriate statement. But I hope we don't lose his voice entirely, especially if Scarborough continues his blatantly partisan screed and Chris gets more hyper and out-of-control every day.

[bettyellen]

81. it seemed clear to me, that MSNBC isn't doing enough because the pattern persists

isn;t that more logical than assuming she is crying for someone's head- especially since she isn;t.
she widened the discussion to the pattern- her detractors want to make this some sort of isolated incident wher ee she is after shuster and it just isn;t so. - hil says it's the opposite, it's the station.
there's a pattern- what's the logical way to correct this pattern? scapegoating and a slap on the wrist? we all know that's not working.
in my mind it's kind of <petty> <hysterical> <shrill> to assume anyone is asking for someone to be fired. and it's a lie.

[chieftain]

82. I reject the notion that I or TPM is petty, hysterical or shrill

in this matter. We simply made the mistake of taking the Clinton Campaign at their word when they said a temporary suspension was not punishment enough.There has yet to be a clarification of how that statement is anything other than a demand that David be fired. Your calling it a lie and mis-judging my assumptions hardly explains what Clinton <said>, <meant> or <meant to have us think she meant>

[bettyellen]

83. you jumped to a conclusion- not took them at their word.

i believe that she said the suspension wasn't enough- not that it wasn't enough punishment. LOL. see the leap you're making there?
doesn;t anyone want to see how this is an opportunity for MSNBC to grow up and stop acting like a bunch of frat boys? it's only an opportunity if they do more than a slap on the wrist. but that's just me, being solution oriented. too boring for y'all, right? more fun to imagine shrill calls for beheading.

[chieftain]

88. I agree with you on the need for MSNBC to grow up.

And if Clinton called for the firing of Mathews and Scarborough for their lack of journalistic integrity and their patent bias against her, I would applaud and sign a petition to that effect. I disagree with you that so many of us jumped to an incorrect conclusion as to the meaning of her statement. And I still maintain in as non-shrill, non-hysterical and non-petty way as possible that the Tapper article has not clarified the matter. If she or her campaign has issued an unequivocal statement that they have not demanded that David be fired please link me to it.

[bettyellen]

89. lol, how would they prove a negative? saying " it's not enough" leaves the discussion wide open

as to what MSNBC can do to do better in the future. that's a pretty grown up way of coping. and totally unlike what she is accused of.

it's amazing to see how badly people want this to be a call to fire him. i guess if your the sort who "wants to believe" .. you'll see what is not there. Me? i'm sort of more reality baesed, you know?
MSNBC has some work to do, I hope that message stops getting muddied up by all the partisan BSers. That would be a shame.

[chieftain]

90. Relying on questioning peoples' motives to

further your arguments is not particularly conducive to reaching agreement.A simple statement saying that we are not asking for David to be fired would suffice but clearly that is not forthcoming.

[bettyellen]

91. she shouldn;t have to prove a negative. people should actually quote her perhaps instead of

jumping to wild conclusions. seriously. i don;t think a clarification was needed, but they gave one- you want more? that's just ridiculous.
if this was man's daughter being called a whore (and that ain;t nearly the strecth you're making,lol) you'd all be calling for him to be fired. you'd be applauding the outrage, because men are supposed to react that way. another time where hillary can;t win.
nuff said. nothing she said would be okay with some people. that's become obvious.

[robbedvoter]

68. And that other thread decrying Clinton squishing puny GE- MSNBC - still going

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4509372&mesg_id=4509372
adding here to demonstrate the bad faith on this board - even from people who should know better

[robbedvoter]

73. And they keep feeling sorry for poor GE, thinking of the Nixon era - when journalists were

investigating, rather than propagandizing...
If the Clintons were so able to control the media - how does one explain what happened during Bill's presidency?
Nixon times are over - or else W wouldn't be sitting pretty in the White House and giving speeched to CPAC how he was right on war.

[robbedvoter]

84. Adding here every disinformation post that gets in the other threads

as long as they keep going
Kick to emphasize the FACT that "The Clintons" are NOT American Royalty.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4506567&mesg_id=4510857

[ProSense]

86. This is damage control!

Not Fired?

02.09.08
By Josh Marshall

A number of readers have written in to question, or much more than question, our latest headline on the Clinton/Shuster story -- namely that Hillary Clinton is demanding that Shuster be fired.

First of all, some have criticized Greg Sargent's reporting. But let me make this crystal clear. I personally signed off on the post and I wrote the front page headline myself.

Some have said that Clinton's letter to NBC wasn't written clearly or that she was saying that suspensions and apologies were not enough, that what was needed was a broader reevaluation on the network's part of its attitude to women and Hillary Clinton in particular.

Simply read the key passage ...

Nothing justifies the kind of debasing language that David Shuster used and no temporary suspension or half-hearted apology is sufficient.

I would urge you to look at the pattern of behavior on your network that seems to repeatedly lead to this sort of degrading language.

Some readers seem to believe that Clinton is saying that it's not about suspensions or apologies. It's about MSNBC's need to reevaluate its pattern of behavior.

But there's a fatal flaw with this strained interpretation. Look at the actual words. If that's the case, why does she qualify 'suspension' with the adjective 'temporary'? That tells the tale right there. The alternative to a temporary suspension is a permanent one, which is clear English we call 'firing'.

I give the Clinton campaign the respect of knowing that they're no slouches with the written word. And the words in this letter were clearly chosen with great care. The point of that passage was that merely suspending Shuster was insufficient -- that he needs to be fired. That's what they meant. And I have little doubt that Shuster and the MSNBC execs understood the meaning the moment they read it. I think it would be wrong to shy away from making that clear.

[rodeodance]

101. Some people have major Reading comprehension problems--You one of them?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

87. Facts Matter. Thanks For Supplying Them In The Face Of Knee Jerk Slanderers.

[rodeodance]

94. yes, good point

[rodeodance]

92. Keep this kicked--as some many have not yet gotten the memo--or are in denial.

[robbedvoter]

115. True dat!

[Lucinda]

105. ...

[mzmolly]

108. Good to know!

Thanks. :hi:

[Babel_17]

110. Josh needs to take a step back and take a deep breath.

"Nothing justifies the kind of debasing language that David Shuster used and no temporary suspension or half-hearted apology is sufficient.

I would urge you to look at the pattern of behavior on your network that seems to repeatedly lead to this sort of degrading language."

A minor point first: Take away the word "temporary" that Josh sees as being critically important and all you get is the word "suspension". A suspension is something that lasts for an indeterminate time, It Expires When An Issue Has Been Resolved.

The Main Point: Basic reading skills indicate that the emphasis should be on the second sentence, The Only One That Calls For Action.

"I would urge you to look at the pattern of behavior on your network that seems to repeatedly lead to this sort of degrading language."

Seriously Josh, take a step back, trying to react in real time to all the news that pours in is taking a toll.

My points above would be valid even in the absence of the ignored evidence mentioned in the posts above mine. I'm referring to the correspondence between Shuster and Clinton's team and the timing of Clinton's letter to MSNBC, that it was sent after Shuster's first, lame, apology but before his second, marginally better, one.

What's sad is that it is doubtful that there will be any accountability for this poor reporting and commentary. Even if there is it will be poorly reflected in the news cycle. You know, days of slander followed by a brief moment of the actual truth. In other words, the type of treatment that we dem's have been subjected to by the republican biased MSM for the last several years.

But this time it came from people who knew better.

Edit: I want to make the point about the temporary suspension more clear. It seems obvious to me but evidently not to Josh that Clinton was saying that she saw what MSNBC was trying to do with its "temporary suspension".

Shuster wasn't being suspended so that the environment in which his remark occurred could be looked at. He was being temporarily suspended so as to give closure to the issue, it was to be the end of the matter. That is what Clinton objected to.

In fact, she goes on to point her accusatory finger away from Shuster.

"I would urge you to look at the pattern of behavior on your network that seems to repeatedly lead to this sort of degrading language."

That is the rub she is pointing out. Maybe this is why Josh misrepresents Clinton's motives. On one level he senses that the underlying point of this accusation could in some lesser degree be applied to his site. He knows that TPM hasn't been immune to being (understandably perhaps) biased to the fresh face in the campaign to the detriment of Clinton's candidacy.

[robbedvoter]

114. Good points. Thank you.

[Babel_17]

119. I just wish I could have said it better

Fwiw I registered over at TPM so I could sound off in the thread there.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/hillary_to_nbc_fire_david_shus.php

It was reassuring to see that others drew virtually the same conclusions when reading Clinton's response.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/hillary_to_nbc_fire_david_shus.php#comment-2595685

"Greg Sargent says: Hard to miss the line, "no temporary suspension or half-hearted apology is sufficient." She wants him fired.

Wow. Greg and Josh Marshall need a freakin' vacation.

All you have to do to understand what Hillary intends is add the word "Therefore" to begin the next paragraph. The word "Therefore" has been elided, yet it is understood in the context of the sentence. I guess if Hillary's copyeditor had suspected there might be such a gross misread by hysterics, she would have queried it.

My estimation of your ability to be objective plummets daily.

Meanwhile, it demonstrates once again Hillary's awesome power. She may not get elected ultimately, but she is clearly a larger-than-life threat."

[robbedvoter]

113. Looks like the lie thread "pattern" is still up there - I guess this needs visibility

H20Man - I did have respect for you - kinda lost it with that one thread.

[robbedvoter]

116. Need to link this disgusting POS here too - answering here will keep this one up

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4498830&mesg_id=4498830

[yardwork]

117. kick

[robbedvoter]

118. Linking now a good thread for a change in here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4530931&mesg_id=4530931
A Troubling Analogy: Why Do Some Support Nixon Dirty Tricksters Over Democrat Hillary Clinton?


Then, H20 Man closes with the implication that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton somehow has the powers of Nixon---FCC with power to grant favors or squash media empires, Department of Justice which can initiate bogus prosecutions in retaliation and cover up criminal activity, warrantless wiretaps for blackmail purposes against news industry executives and lots of U.S. government money to use as bribes---to use to force MSNBC and the rest of the news media to do her bidding.

This is so hysterically funny---right up there with Hillary was having an affair with Vince Foster so she got her goons from the Arkansas Mafia to rub him out---that I would laugh---if not for the fact that so many people at DU are parroting this nonsense."

[Babel_17]

120. Ok, TalkLeft nails it down

I consider the issue of what Clinton meant to be be closed.

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/2/10/101945/558

Kind of difficult to give a representative snip of what is written. Please view the page.

[robbedvoter]

123. Thank you for this. Who knows? Maybe even H20 will realize he overstepped his bpundaries.

": "Even the awful Jake Tapper concedes that Clinton NEVER wanted Shuster fired. His uncharitable alternative, offered as a POSSIBLITY, not a fact, is that Clinton was trying to capitalize politically on an ugly moment. But even he accepts that Clinton NEVER wanted Shuster fired."

[robbedvoter]

121. One more time, the lie flung:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4537398&mesg_id=4539148

[RoadRage]

122. This Obama supporter agrees.. MSNBC is like a Frat Club... total crap! NT

[robbedvoter]

132. Thank you! Always appreciate it!

[TheDonkey]

124. OH MY GOD HILLARY.... DROP IT!

I saw the conversation in context and to say it was about machismo or a "locker room" atmosphere is complete distortion of what happened. it was him trying to make a "cool" joke and it being completely "un-cool". Lay off the guy, he spent about 2 minutes praising the girl then tries using some slang to get a laugh and Hillary goes wild. MUCH worse things are being said out there and much worse things are happening in this country..... OMG this is ridiculous.

[robbedvoter]

125. Lay off- WHAT???? Did you fucking read the OP or any post on this thread?

Or you want all of us women to stop bothering you and get back into the kitchen?

[rodeodance]

126. The only thing that is ridiculous is you making light of a serious situation!

[robbedvoter]

127. They love MSNBC now. I hope they'll never get to experience that other side

The one Gore, Kerry and Hillary had to endure.

[Babel_17]

128. Give them credit

If it wasn't for MSNBC and others we probably would have had to endure eight years of a guy who DELIBERATELY chose to wear earth toned clothing. The horror. :sarcasm: :)

[robbedvoter]

130. Voting machines did most of the work, but yeah, for W to get votes at all

MSM had to do a lot of heavy lifting.
I am strangely comforted by the thought that, unlike previous primaries, MSM needs to work really hard to pull a switcheroo on us and manipulate our primary. It was much easier in 2004...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4346496

[robbedvoter]

129. Ironically, for an Edwards supporter, MSGOP embodies freedom of speech

here's a thread to help poor "pimp purveyor" out of his suspensuion
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4541644&mesg_id=4541644

[robbedvoter]

131. Adding this new info on Fox snooze Schuster (not as librul as we were lead to believe)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4546793&mesg_id=4546793
David Shuster ain't nuthin' but a worthless piece of Republican filth.

[rodeodance]

133. oh my my --

[robbedvoter]

135. And they call OUR OUTRAGE phony....When did you ever see on DU concern for

Faux types? You know, the policy at FAUX is that EVERYONE - from CEO to cleaning lady - has to be a dedicated GOP-er just to apply for a job there.

[robbedvoter]

134. More DU-ers crying got Faux Schuster - so I need to kick this again

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4509372&mesg_id=4547603

[robbedvoter]

136. And the latest salvo after her interview. What she said WHEN ASKED was

"not my job" = not up to me. Clean your own house!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4550607&mesg_id=4550607

[rodeodance]

137. BRAVO

[robbedvoter]

138. Adding the Rude Pundit "How Much for a Night with Chelsea" helpful contribution

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4551761

[robbedvoter]

139. Another pathetic attempt to rationalize Schuster's comment:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4552098
"
Two of my female friends have used the term "pimping out" in a non-sexual way in emails to me today

[robbedvoter]

140. And a feeling sorry thread now for the free speech pimpin' Schuster

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4561537&mesg_id=4561537
I will of course bookmark this thread and others - for times in the future - when Obama & MSM (assuming he wins) won't be all that cozy as they are now - and maybe the respect of the "free speech' of the media whores may be diminished somewhat...

[rodeodance]

141. thanks you are wonderful

[robbedvoter]

142. "Hillary is still trying to milk/pimp Shuster scandal"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4569217&mesg_id=4569217

Should MSM?GOP voters manage to steal our primary from us, I'll have
the pleasure of reminding them about "SChustering" - and that baston of Freedom of speech MSGOP is...

[robbedvoter]

143. More concern for Schuster's livelihood

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4573281

[robbedvoter]

144. Article from Obama supporter who GETS it - lambasted by other Obama supporters

The David Schuster leson
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4586756&mesg_id=4586756