The Nation: Does MSNBC Stand for "Most Sexist Nasty Boys Club"?

[RamboLiberal]

The Nation magazine has had its disagreements with Hillary Clinton. But our criticism has always been about her position on the issues--her vote on the Iraq war. Her decision to keep Mark Penn, chief honcho at a PR firm which has done work for union busters and Blackwater, as her uber-strategist. But what appalls me are the media's misogynist attacks on Hillary Clinton who, even if you disagree with her on the issues, has to be treated respectfully as a smart, disciplined, enormously hardworking woman, Senator and Presidential candidate.

That's why MSNBC's Chris Matthews' vitriolic comments about Clinton have been reprehensible. For years, Hardball's host has suffered from what I'd call "Clinton derangement syndrome." (Full disclosure: I've been doing Hardball since the days of the Clinton impeachment scandals and have challenged Matthews' when he lobs his ad hominem attacks on Bill and Hillary.) His sexist attack on Hillary Clinton reached a new misogynist high (or low) last month when he commented that "the reason she's a US Senator, the reason she's a candidate for president, the reason she may be a front-runner is her husband messed around." Those demeaning and stupid words caused a firestorm. The delicious irony is that the backlash against Matthews has certainly increased support for her among women.

Now we have another MSNBC sexist moment. The other day, correspondent David Shuster--who plays a fairly prominent role in the cable channel's election coverage--stated: "Chelsea's sort of being pimped out in some sort of weird way." (He says he was referring to the fact that she was making calls to convention superdelegates but not talking to the press.) Shuster --who's half-heartedly apologized and been suspended--at first tried to defend himself. It took MSNBC's top exec, Phil Griffin, to issue a real apology to the Clinton campaign.

Misogynyistic language aimed at the first women Presidential candidate's daughter? Pretty low stuff. Hillary Clinton is now reconsidering whether she will participate in an MSNBC debate scheduled for February 26th. I think she should participate. And when she does, it's her moment to speak out, in anger and in sorrow, at those snarky sexist men at MSNBC, and others in our media (think of the right wing ranterslike Limbaugh and Savage) who traffic in misognynist and demeaning commentary on women and their children.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20080209/cm_thenation/45282799

Good idea - be fun to watch her smackdown Tweety and company on MSNBC and I bet Obama would agree and might put in his own digs at the racist crap - he could smackdown people like Limbaugh for his Barack the Magic Negro and for Halfrican American, etc.

[robbedvoter]

1. Surprisingly good from the Nation.

[Alamom]

2. Yes it is. It's hard to dispute or spin the truth. rec.

[Iceburg]

3. MSM: Mysogynist Stream Media /nt

[Stinky The Clown]

4. MSNBC: Misogyny Should Not Be Condoned

[Triana]

5. SO -- all the folks on DU who have told us DU women...

...that this stuff is "all in our head" were -

WRONG!

Seems SOMEONE ELSE noticed it too. So we're not just being "too sensitive" and "hysterical" and "imagining things".

Pfffft!

[TheWraith]

10. Sorry, but The Nation is imagining it too.

This "article" basically accuses the entire network of being biased because Schuster used an inappropriate euphamism, and because Matthews suggested that Hillary's post-First Lady political career exists because of the national prominance she gained during Bill's sex scandal. Whether you agree with his assessment or not (and I don't, particularly), it's pretty hard to read sexism into that unless you want to.

[frazzled]

6. Good on The Nation

They've never been very kind to the Clintons themselves (in fact, I remember canceling my subscription when they kept printing those Clinton-Mena articles back in the early 90s). But for the most part, it's been on policy issues, not personal ones. I don't know whether sexism is driving the anti-Hillaryism at MSNBC or whether anti-Hilliaryism is driving its sexism. Either way, it's wrong--just as it was wrong to use race in this discussion.

As a woman, I agree this old boys club sniggering has to end. I warned everybody in 2006 that it would be harder for a woman to be elected than even a black man--based on the fact that, although the Dems swept the mid-term elections, only 20% of the Dem women candidates won their elections while 80% of the Dem men candidates won theirs.

Ladies (and gentlemen), whether you are for Clinton or Obama (and I voted for the latter) you have to register your dismay at the sexism being displayed on MSNBC.

[tridim]

7. "Most sexist" if you completely ignore Faux.

I think Tweety is very sexist, but I'd never defend him. The rest of the network, not so much.

[Freida5]

8. I am pleasanttly surprised. May have to read the Nation again (once primary is over)

[question everything]

9. Add the Newsweek guys - Fineman and Alter

who often appear on MSNBC and, at least Alter, openly swoon over Obama in his print column, while whining at being "a stepchild" of the boomer generation.

[donkeyotay]

11. CNBC is even worse.

I watched Larry Kudlow going off on Clinton ending with calls for her to "get life," supposedly because she is too stupid to understand capitalism. What outraged Larry? The idea that Clinton called for a moratorium on interest rates on mortgages. Amusingly, the Treasury came out later the same day, IIRC, calling for a 5 year freeze. Presumably this did not make Paulson too stupid to appear in public.

Previously , Larry and his all male panel had dismissed the ignorant Hillary for not understanding markets while praising Obama. According to them, Obama understands capitalism because he said that freezing rates would keep banks from providing loans to poor people - presumably believing in the Free Market's invisible hand. They all but embraced him as one of them - one of the guys. What happens when the free ride stops and Obama has to either reveal himself to be like-minded with the Larrys of the world or reveal himself to actually be a liberal. I doubt that he's that different from Clinton in his policies, but he's not taking the same fire for it.