My buddy Hube over at Colossus of Rhodey notes this double-standard from MSNBC.

As Mike Matthews reported when it happened (as did many other places, but I like to highlight the local blogs that nail it quickly!), MSNBC's David Shuster was suspended indefinitely for saying that Chelsea Clinton was being "pimped out in some weird sort of way" regarding her supposed contacting of "super delegates" on behalf of her mom's campaign. There's news that he actually was close to being fired on the spot for the comment. I think Shuster's comments probably were inappropriate, but that even a suspension is just plain ridiculous. The term "pimped" doesn't exclusively mean what it used to.

But consider: If Shuster can get suspended for that comment, and possibly even fired, what about Keith Olbermann? Olbermann has also apologized for Shuster, by the way ("David has been suspended and remains only for me to apologize without limit to President Clinton and to Ms. Clinton on behalf of MSNBC. We are literally, dreadfully sorry." "Literally, dreadfully sorry"?? Please, someone clean up my vomit! -- Hube); however, he used the very same term regarding President Bush and General David Petraeus back on Sept. 20!

Don't hold your breath. But like Shuster, I don't think Olbermann should even be suspended for his comments, but it surely demonstrates the clear double-standard: Against Republicans and conservatives, feel free to use whatever language you want.

Now we can debate about the issue of whether or not the use of the word "pimping" is appropriate in either case -- but I'm hard pressed to see how it is acceptable to use the term about a career military officer providing truthful information to Congress about a successful military policy while unacceptable to use it about a child acting as surrogate for a candidate, especially when that candidate for years has insisted that the child is not a part of their political life and is off-limits for any comments, much less criticism. After all, remember the outrage over this little SNL gem.

And even after Chelsea became an adult, the Clintons demanded that she be treated as apolitical. Now that Mrs. Clinton is making use of this "apolitical asset, is it not legitimate fodder for comment?

But when you suspend one "professional journalist" over the use of the term while promoting another as your network's biggest draw when he has used the same word (and worse) is rank hypocrisy.

But then again, this incident also illustrates Hillary Clinton's unfitness for office. Her little snit over David Shuster's words tells me that she is going to demand to control press coverage of her and her administration, and punish journalists who speak of her and her administration in ways she dislikes. Heck, that is a bigger threat to a free press than anything done by the Bush Administration, which didn't even prosecute journalist who violated federal law by disclosing classified national security information during time of war!

Posted by: Greg at 09:48 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 500 words, total size 5 kb.