NBC's Shuster: No Regrets

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only.

Well, David Shuster has no regrets:

From the beginning of his suspension, MSNBC executives "were perfectly fair and upfront, from the top on down," Shuster says. "I have no bitterness, no regrets."
Sort of:
Well, maybe one. File it under "Lesson Learned." "I have the responsibility to make my point precisely and aggressively, without using coarse language. Clearly, it was inappropriate for a lot of viewers. I made a horrible mistake by allowing people to be distracted by some words rather than focus on the story."

What story David? That Chelsea Clinton was campaigning for her mother? That was the story?

It seemed inevitable after being defended by the likes of A-List blogs like Talking Points Memo that Shuster would not learn any lessons. Shuster defended Chris Matthews for his sexist remarks and took a sexist approach to his coverage of the Clinton campaign. And was defended for it.

Of course the Clinton campaign was right that a temporary suspension was not enough. And I am not talking about Shuster. That was plenty for him. It seems that no one at NBC will address its pattern of sexism and misogyny.

< Yes, The DLC 'Supports' Obama | Saturday Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    It is disgusting that elements our media uses (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by my opinion on Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 01:33:58 PM EST
    sexism, racism, fear and hate as tools to achieve their objectives. You are right this isn't just about Shuster. It is a much larger problem of how the media manipulates it's consumers.

    Look, you can't expect gasbags (none / 0) (#1)
    by MarkL on Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 01:22:49 PM EST
    like that to have much humanity. If Shuster is going to watch his language in the future, that's the best we can expect of him.

    upcoming debate on msnbc (none / 0) (#2)
    by NJDem on Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 01:29:19 PM EST
    So, I think it's either going to be ridiculously pro-Obama, as their coverage has been, OR, in an effort to make up for the coverage and blatant sexism, they will go out of their way to be fair to HRC.  Either way, I don't expect it to be balanced.

    Sorry if this is an inappropriate way to make a request, but is there any way to get a thread later about the "State of the Black Union" event currently on C-Span, and HRC's speech that should air around 5:30 EST?  Thanks in advance! :)

    Open Thread just up (none / 0) (#4)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 01:38:55 PM EST
    of course he has no regrets (none / 0) (#5)
    by Kathy on Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 01:42:18 PM EST
    he has become a champion to a great deal of the left blogosphere.

    Sacrificial lamb really: (none / 0) (#6)
    by oculus on Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 01:45:03 PM EST
    "Tensions were clearly building. I was at the wrong place at the right time, or the right place at the wrong time. I don't know which."

    David Shuster

    Question for Jeralyn (none / 0) (#8)
    by Saul on Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 01:47:28 PM EST
    Jeralyn, on a previous post you stated that in 2004 all the major papers in Texas with the exception of the city of Corpus Christi endorsed Bush not Kerry. Are you  saying they did not have two columns that showed Dem Party This Guy and Republican Party This guy and they had only a republican choice?  If that is true then that does not show very good judgment on their part since it is not like they did not know how unpopular Bush was since this was his second term.

    Ot (none / 0) (#9)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 01:52:11 PM EST
    Post this in the Open Thread.

    Saw it---thanks BTD (none / 0) (#10)
    by NJDem on Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 01:53:58 PM EST

    I think that ... (none / 0) (#11)
    by chemoelectric on Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 02:33:56 PM EST
    ... the opinions expressed by BTD in this posting are copasetic.

    Interestingly "to pander" and "to pimp" have the same literal meaning, yet there is no tabu against using the word "to pander". To me, the word "to pimp" was a minor point in this affair; the major point, for me, was the suggestion that there was anything at all odd about Chelsea Clinton calling superdelegates on behalf of her mother. I suppose what that is about is an extremely disrespectful view of a woman, who will be turning 28 years old in a few days, as some kind of childlike pawn or slave.

    I hate that. Chelsea Clinton is, in fact, more than old enough to be a Congresswoman, and is closing in on the age for eligibility to the Senate. She could be campaigning for herself, if she chose, and there is nothing noteworthy about her calling superdelegates.

    "Pander" and "pimp" may have (none / 0) (#12)
    by jawbone on Sat Feb 23, 2008 at 04:45:45 PM EST
    similar meaning in slang and street language, but they do not, most definitely do not, have the same meaning in general usage.  While shout cable may be pretty informal, it is not yet that informal.  

    Try to imagine a NYTimes headline, say, "McCain Pandered to Communications Companies" to "McCain Pimped out his Senate Office to Communications Companies." The connotation is very difference, in my view. Both a on the negative side, the the second almost suggests a quid pro quo on illegal proportions, not just ethically.

    Shuster may be very hip, but he also works in a slightly more formal medium than, say, a freeewheeling blog or the street.


    Shuster and Clinton Rules (none / 0) (#13)
    by cal1942 on Sun Feb 24, 2008 at 12:38:49 AM EST
    Crude references aside the fact that Shuster would assault the fact that the child of a Presidential candidate is on the campaign trail is a near perfect illustration of the Clinton Rules.

    It wasn't just the language it was questioning what for any other candidate would be considered normal operating procedure.  I wonder what Shuster or anyone other media figure would have said if Chelsea Clinton weren't out campaigning for her mother.  Would they have raised questions about her absence on the campaign trail?

    How dare those Clintons to actually deign to breathe the air.