"The Daily Show" Reports From "Anti-Hillary HQ" To Explain Press Bias

Last night on "The Daily Show," Samantha Bee satirized the media's grand "plan" to destroy the candidacy of Hillary Clinton. "We're at debate 20, and I think everyone here is a bit disappointed that it took Senator Clinton this long to catch on to our plan," Bee said, reporting from "the media's Anti-Hillary War Room in the Paula Jones Conference Center."

Bee explained to Stewart that Clinton is not being paranoid and that the press is, in fact, "out to get her," referring to two moments from Tuesday night's debate — one in which they accidentally cut to video of Clinton when they introduced it as an unflattering clip of Obama, the other when moderator Brian Williams did not let Clinton speak after Obama, insisting the need to go to commercial and explaining, "Television doesn't stop."

Watch:

Comments

[truthyguy]

Can't wait until tonight's news to see what Hillary's excuse of the day was.

[hippybaby1970]

don't piss off the media or your waiter/waitress, it's not a smart move.

[trailrunner9]

I posted this below, but wanted to reiterate, this is really so much larger than Barack Obama versus Hillary Clinton. I was very disturbed at the coverage from the get go when it was in fact promoting Hillary Clinton as the inevitable nominee. I was an Edwards supporter who also got the shaft from the media and was marginalized and ridculed into obscurity, the one who set the entire agenda of debate in this campaign. This has nothing to do with which candidate is being promoted. The point is no candidate should be promoted by a neutral, unbiased press or one parading as such. If they are editorializing and endorsing, then reveal that. This is about their hand in steering outcomes in our policy and elections by skewing coverage and information to an effected outcome and it truly is frightening. People are blind if they don't see what is going on and the detrimental consequences it has. That will not provide for a free Democracy of the people, only one we think is such.

[DJCarnegie]

Wow, now the media is responsible for killing John Edwards campaign too?
I always knew they had a bias against good-looking white guys!

[lillianjane]

They have a bias against whatever isn't fun to write about or talk about, because they are overall a lazy bunch. It was fun to have Hillary to kick around, and a woman versus a black man--that was fun! They also did in Al Gore, as some have actually almost admitted since he won the Nobel prize, and he's a good looking white guy too. Basically they will attack wherever someone is vulnerable, even if they have to lie to make it so.

[majordude]

When it was clear that this was going to come down to Barack and Hillary, my wife (a white woman) and I (a black man) made a bet over which candidate would play the victimzation card. I lost.

[Mommacarolyn]

When is stating the truth, "playing the card?" When it is used to demonize someone who might not be your candidate? You would have to be extremely stupid if you believe the media is not biased against Hillary. But I guess you've gone and drank the "kool-aid".

[BroWren]

I want my Momma!!! Give it a break....w­e as a country are more than ready for a women in the White House.....­just not this particular women and her unlimited baggage.

[majordude]

Not only is Hillary coming unglued, so are her supporters. You're the one that needs to get a drink.

Where was your bellyaching when she was the "inevitable nominee." Where was it when the press was giving her a pass on her ridiculous claim of "35 years of experience­." Some of the right wing stuff is reprehensible, but they do that to everyone. The rest of the stuff is just whining.

Like your kool-aid coment. The fact is that he has shown better judgement than she has. Period. If I prefer someone with good judgement over someone that pads their resume and that's drinking the kool-aid, the pass the pitcher; I'd like another glass.

[Bulbul]

You won by a large margin...

[deafrhetoric]

Hillary and her advisers have Hubris... and pundits loooove to target Hubris.

Tell Wolfson and Ickes to shut up for once, and maybe the media would stop mocking her.

[sweeneymcqueen]

It's all about the O!
I can't watch MSNBC's coverage of the primaries. The MSNBC pundits' collective "man crush" on Barack Obama positively sucks all the air out of the room. Keith Olbermann, who used to be fairly malarkey-proof, has the worst case of it. This isn't surprising. Olbermann adores soaring rhetoric. In fact, he has fallen love with his own ability to produce purple prose -- his gaseous "special commentary" segments are filled to bursting with Big Important Verbiage. He has even appropriated Edward R Murrow's sign off. So when Obama came along, I knew it had to be love at first sight. I suppose Olbermann is allowed to be over the moon -- he's technically a commentator.
David Shuster, on the other hand, is an NBC reporter. "Reporter" as in news. So where he gets off opining on the Clinton campaign is a mystery to me.
At the risk of making a generalization about an ethnic group, sounding Chris Matthews' enthusiasm for the Obama phenomenon may be a function of his Irish-American political heritage. We hibernians love a good fight -- especially one that's attended by 20,000 swooning people. Obama's campaign has it all -- speechifying, big gestures, cry-in-your-beer rhetoric. Matthews can't help himself!

[Mattie]

I agree, I used to turn Olbermann on every night, I can't watch him anymore, Jack Cafferty is another one, he practically foams at the mouth when he rants about Hillary Clinton. I'm so tired of it, the media is trying to get the candidate of their choice elected, and it's wrong. It was wrong when they were cheer leaders for the war, and it's wrong now.

[Ginko]

the media has had it out for both Clintons forever. She can handle it, she points it out and she is accused of whining! She just can not win with the 25 year old chauvanist set. They have it in for her and they are a nasty bunch. Then you have the young women and men who think feminism is a dirty word. They don't have a CLUE what their Mother's went through for them, hell, they got sport scholarships! They have no clue that there was NO SUCH THING in their Mother's Day. It's sad, really.
The Hillary Hate just amazes me. They blame her for every mistake BILL has ever made and then some. If a man is strong and strident when he speaks, he gets compliments, if a woman is, she is called "shrill" it's enough to make you puke.

[deafrhetoric]

Men can be strident?

OBAMA '08

[wyorange]

Yup, men can be strident, and unfortunately many women also!

Clinton '08 or McCain '08.

[dora rice]

YOU MADE YOUR CASE. ALL TRUE AND NOTHING TO ADD. IT IS SAD. SAD FOR AMERICA., I FEEL IT IS SO UNFAIR THAT I DON'T EVEN WANT WHAT OBAMA HAS TO OFFER WHEN HE GETS IN.
NO THANK YOU. HE HAS TO BORROW IT ANYHOW FROM THE CHINESE. AND SOMEDAY THEY WANT THEIR MONEY BACK.

[jkminwa]

I'm not sure I understand what you mean, she can "handle" it. If she has not made the media an ally, she has not handled it. For me, handling something means resolving the problem.
I suspect that you mean, Clinton is "tough enough" to "take it." Great...fo­ur years of battles with the media. Even a combative person like McCain can work with the media.

[moda31]

saw this last night, it was freakin hilarious.

[ladygreenslippers]

So her campaign is down the tubes because of the press because she's a woman!
It had nothing to do with the fact that she ran a campaign that was like George Bush's Iraq paln - NO Plan B!
And the fact that Obama ran a better campaign.
It was all the press! Not to mention Bill Clinton!

[shaggles]

Hillary is absolutely right. The press have been very hard on her and relatively easy on Obama. I don't think it has anything to do with her being a woman though. I think it has to do with her being a Clinton.

[wyorange]

May be right to some extent but I think it has more to do with her being "just a woman" or "just another woman."

[GwenElle]

Having gone around the bush and back again on Hillary, I would have to say that I believe the problem to be not so much her as us. This country is simply not ready for a strong woman, and despite the success that Barack appears to be having, I doubt that it is ready for a black as leader too. We shall see.

It is an interesting irony that a black male and a white female are both vying for the same position at the same time in this country's history. It is no coincidence that 'maleness' is winning out over 'femaleness' (for the moment). But I fear that the ultimate trump card (white maleness) will win in November. To me this election signifies what is coming to an end, white male dominance, then male dominance. In the end, women will rule; that is if we can get there before the men F%@K it all up.

Hillary deserves better than she is getting from the media and from us. No doubt, history will be kind to her, and I say that without predicting who the eventual democratic nominee will be.

BTW, I am an Obama supporter.

[dora rice]

THATS A LIE FROM A HATEMONGER. HILLARY 'S PLAN FOR IRAQ AND G.BUSH ARE LIKE NIGHT AND DAY AND YOU KNOW IT. THE CLINTONS IN 8 YEARS OF OFFICE NEVER STOOD FOR WAR. BILL CLINTON PROOF? HE BARTERED PEACE IN KOSOVOW. HE HAD THE UN STANDING WITH HIM SIDE BY SIDE. SO SHUT UP YOUR HATEMONGERING AND GO STAND IN THE CORNER AND PLAY WITH YURSELF

[jkminwa]

I think ladygreenslippers was offering an analogy. Sorry you misunderstood.

[sideways74]

Any truth to this?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080226.wwltimson26/BNStory/usElection2008/home

[wyorange]

Sure it is true. Our country over the past 15 to 20 at least has been more sexist than racist. And with Sen. Clinton being in the campaign it is truly unbelievable how afraid the male segment and to some extent the female segment of our population is.

I think it simply boils down to FEAR! Most males and obviously a good number of females fear an intelligent, capable woman who is not satisfied to be "just another woman." Think the treatment she is receiving will set the womens' equality movement back at least 20 years if not quite a bit more.

Think we have shown that it is fine for women to be in their place but boy don't try to intrude into that "all men's club." What is quite amazing is the number of women who buy into this male dominance role and think that allowing other women to be made fun of and belittled has no effect upon them. Don't see how women who do not have pride in other women can have pride in themselves as a woman. Think there needs to be a lot of questioning of women as to whether they individuals are proud to be a woman. From my viewpoint, obviously not.

[dora rice]

THE WOMEN WHO BUY INTO THIS, ARE FEMALES THAT WERE RAISED TO ADORE MEN LIKE GODS. OR FEMALES WHO ARE UNDERPAID AND FOR A BUCK OR A JOB WILL SAY ALMOST ANYTHING

[Bulbul]

Midia Bias continues.­..
This morning on GMA, Sawyer had Sam Donalson and Aryanna, of all the others they could chose , they picked her !
Like Hillary or not, It is very clear Hoffington Post is very much pro Obama.
And so it is no brainer what Aryaana said...
There is absolutely, positively no evidence for any kind of Bias.

Go figure...

[Melissa]

Anyone with 1/2 a brain who watches CNN, FOX, MSNBC or reads this blog has to conclude that the bias shown to Hillary has been unbelievable. I don't consider her whinning when she herself points it out. I try not to watch CNN anymore and definitely never watch MSNBC or FOX.

[punkingale]

Sean Wilentz was on MSNBC one afternoon this week discussing an article he wrote for The New Republic. He said that Obama used the race card and blamed Hillary. We've heard nothing else about it from the MSM.

[ParacleteofKavorka]

I read his entire article with the many instances of the Obama campaign playing the race card. Here's the link. It was sickening to see it all laid out in detail. If he's elected, race relations will become more divisive if this is how he's going to play.

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=aa0cd21b-0ff2-4329-88a1-69c6c268b304

[RavagesOfTime]

People get all over the media for being too much in favor of Clinton (Clinton News Network, etc.), now there's an anti-Hillary HQ.

Even though I'm supporting Obama, I'm curious...­which one is it?

[wyorange]

Think you need to look and see who those people are that you are talking about. More than likely if you are listening to a republican then the media is definitely pro Clinton.

However, I think if you do your own reading (or if you prefer to waste your time watching TV) you should readily pick up on the bias in the networks. There is obviously a lot of anti Clinton bias and unfortunately I think currently we are seeing a sexist bias.

If you were to take a lot of the comments these so-called pundits, experts, or whatever they are say and instead of using Hillary insert black there would be hell to pay because of the outrage. However, there seems to be little concern about making fun of or belittling a woman (in this case what I think is a very intelligent and capable woman).

I am a life-long registered male republican (66 yrs old), so for me, it will be Clinton '08 but it is a McCain/Obama content then it will be McCain '08. Would like to have seen a woman president of our country in my lifetime but do not think I will see another woman as knowledgable about government and domestic and world affairs again in my lifetime. I truly believe that Sen. Clinton would be a better president than President Clinton was and I consider him to have been in the top two or three best presidents in my lifetime (current one is certainly the worst).

[Saggitarius]

What Brian williams did to Hillary Clinton at the debate when she tried to answer Obama's remark was rude, ignorant and uncalled for as was the CNN debacle hosted by Cambell Brown
which was as ugly as it could get.
Whether you support a candidate or not you owe it to us viewers to be fair and impartial.
I found the debates more of a "beat up Hillary" campaign by CNN and MSNBC.
I am ashamed of the caliber of television pundits who sit on their duffs and act like experts and make millions of dollars a year for their incompetence.
I refuse to watch MSNBC or CNN any more. I will wallow in my own ignorance which I believe 99% less than theirs.
I watched Tim Russert''s glee when he thought he pulled a "gotcha" on Hillary, but I think her answer backfired on him when he asked her if she could take anything back and she answered yes, "The Iraq vote" Who cares about her income tax return I sure don't.
How would they act if people treated their wives like they did Hillary? Maybe that's how they do treat their wives.
I am disgusted and wish the next male president the whole can of worms Bush leaves them and it is a big can full.

[Darwinita]

oh, phooey. Pioneers always get the arrows, and Hillary is nothing if not a pioneer. Pioneers also often die without attaining their goal, but they do make it easier for those who follow. She's not the right woman for the job right now, but she's the best woman to blaze the trail for the sisters of the future.

As for the boys' club on MSNBC, recheck your facts- they've been getting beaten up by the rest of the country for not adjusting form that frat-boy mentality, and are retooling themselves accordingly.

David Shuster would be the first to concur- Chris Matthews would be the second.

[wyorange]

Have to disagree. There have been many other women who have been elected to political office across this land. She is not the first woman to run for president of the US.

Not the right woman for the job right now! Sounds like one of those Obamamites who was posting a few weeks ago about how if Sen. Clinton was the nominee you would never vote for her. Funny how most of the so-called pundits and experts and even Sen. Obama say that Sen. Clinton would be a very capable and good nominee but you want to say she is not the right woman for the job. In your case I would have to admit there is probably more Clinton hatred involved tha n a sexist attitude.

You also might want to check your facts. Quite apparent that a woman is okay to be involved but just don't allow her in a position ultimate authority. Plain and simple most males and obviously a good number of females in our country FEAR a talented and capable woman who wants to be more than "just a woman" or "just another woman."

"She's not the right woman for the job right now,.." Unlike me, you may live long enough to see that "right woman for the job right now." Frankly though, I think you are just using that statement as something to hide behind!

[factcheck2]

Your conclusions are justified. In an interview last night with PBS anchor Judy Woodruff, Clinton was sandbagged again with ridiculously irrelevant incoming fire. The candidate was also repeatedly prodded to admit that Obama was tantamount to the greatest thing since sliced bread. One gets the impression that TV personalities have been offered bonuses for their Obama cheerleading, the amount based on how much he wins by in the vote tallies. Also, men and women watching these psychological beatings of a sitting U.S. senator who is female (no other politician, even Larry Craig, is treated this way) will inevitably take their cues from the media and begin repudiating all women who attempt to assert and defend themselves. In this respect, our culture is starting to look more and more like those in other countries where women are repressed. And it's happening, coincidentally, just as the Saudi Arabia, U.A.E. and other Islamic fundamentalist governments are acquiring more and more shares of U.S. banks and other bedrock institutions.

[deafrhetoric]

You have to be joking.

Right?

Oooooobama '08!

[Strywever]

LOL! Hasn't it occurred to you that having a viable female candidate for president is so unremarkable at this point that the mere fact she's a woman makes no difference (good or bad) to anyone under the age of 50?

Our children grew up watching their mothers go to work at a paying job, then come home to work a second shift without breaking a sweat. Now they're voting. Do you think the gender issue even occurs to them?

Time to move on from the issue of gender equality. . . the next generation already has!

[Shantee]

that's bull.....O­bama was right when he said the Clinton campaign was whinning..­.The nature of campaigns are heated, and candidates attack each other....t­he anti-Hillary chorus by the media and anyone is mostly because she's a Clinton, very little to do with the fact that she's a woman...lo­ok at all the drama they created when Bill was President and they're doing it again....t­his nonsense about sexism is taking political correctness to the heights of absurdity. She's been belittling Barack like a shrill school marm for the last week.....i­f it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck....he­r and Bill are political animals who lust after power...th­at was their agreement from the get go....they certainly don't lust after each other. You can see that Barack and his wife have a loving, lustful relationsh­ip....they have a healthy relationship with each other....t­hat says a lot.

[sideways74]

This is a great summary on the Iraq vote. Well worth the read.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-fiderer/chris-matthews-rewrites-h_b_75089.html