Pimp My Riot: In Defense of David Shuster
As you must know by now, MSNBC's David Shuster has revealed himself to be the Anti-Christ by suggesting on-air that Chelsea Clinton's role in her mother's campaign smacks of opportunism on the part of Camp Clinton; his exact words were that the once-and-possibly-future First Daughter was being "pimped out" by Mom and Dad. Since most folks assumed Shuster wasn't alluding to the MTV brand of pimping out, which I imagine would've involved jacking Chelsea up on 24" rims, the wave of thoroughly bullshit outrage in response to his admittedly ill-advised comment began pushing across the land almost immediately. Over the past few days, Shuster's been excoriated in the press and the blogging media, suspended by NBC, and targeted for as public a shaming as possible by Hillary Clinton herself.
Most of those now engaging in the obligatory and all-too-gratifying pile-on claim Shuster's offense to be two-fold: He insulted the child of a particular presidential contender for behavior most politicians' kids engage in -- the cynical would say that all candidates pimp their children in one manner or another -- while cavalierly flaunting the depth of anti-Clinton group-think that supposedly permeates MSNBC.
Hillary, though, has taken the argument one step further.
Her campaign is insinuating that Shuster's comment is a slight against all women, more proof that MSNBC -- the special-needs child of the NBC News family -- is essentially one big frat house. They cite a 12-month period that's seen the dismissal of Don Imus for making a crude but, let's face it, somewhat innocuous joke about the Rutgers womens' basketball team, an on-air mea culpa from Chris Matthews -- not to mention his inability to talk to Erin Burnett without little hearts dancing over his head -- and now Shuster's indiscretion.
In other words, the Clinton camp seems to be recasting this in exactly the kind of terms that are likely to motivate women voters; the fact that the Clintons are so adept at this sort of misdirection is precisely the reason their critics consider them little more than political profiteers who will say or do anything to make points at the polls.
This is why it's become second nature to question their motives, no matter how genuine or innocent those motives might seem at first glance. While there's no doubt that Chelsea Clinton simply wants to see her mother elected president, the campaign's own "handling" of her makes Chelsea look like just another weapon in the Clinton arsenal, and Hillary's indignation reek of calculated insincerity.
Understand something, I'm certainly not claiming that what David Shuster said wasn't incredibly stupid and somewhat unfair, nor am I saying that Hillary Clinton wouldn't make a decent president. However, it's not as if a journalist's decision to question the motivations of the Clintons is happening in a vacuum; the press has seen the Hillary and Bill PR machine in action for quite some time now, and maybe for that reason is apt to regard the Clintons' actions with slightly more suspicion than it otherwise might. I'll be the first one to say that this is unfortunate.
Did David Shuster deserve to be disciplined?
Yes, but not for the reason his detractors might think and not by the one charged with doling out the punishment.
Shuster raised a relevant point in an unquestionably crass and injudicious manner, and there's no doubt that he wouldn't challenge, say, Michelle Obama, in the same way -- lest he risk having Al Sharpton amass a torch-wielding mob at NBC's front door before the opening credits of the 5 O'clock news even hit the air. Now though, a different group is demanding satisfaction for what it feels is a personal slight, and, for starters, it wants that one ineffectual gesture aggrieved parties invariably want in times like this: a public apology. I'll never understand why an obviously insincere show of genuflection acts as some kind of panacea to the perpetually pissed-off, but a good rule of thumb is this: If someone's apology has to be demanded, he or she probably doesn't really mean it. When you look at it like this, suspending Shuster is probably justified since he knows exactly what he said and meant every word of it -- making any apology an act of ass-kissing theater. Still, factor in the comical twist that Shuster's official reprimand is being self-righteously administered by NBC News President Steve Capus -- the same man who turned ethical somersaults on national television last year to justify his network's shameful decision to air the manifesto of Virginia Tech gunman Seung-Hui Cho -- and you have to wonder what's really wrong over there at 30 Rock.
Maybe Shuster got off easy.
He gets to spend some time away from the Clintons and the peacock for awhile.
Follow Chez Pazienza on Twitter: www.twitter.com/chezpazienza
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Well, come on. This is the same Chelsea Clinton when asked by the 9 year old reporter from Scholastic Magazine if her dad would be a good first spouse in the White House replied quite haughtily that she "didn't talk to reporters, even cute little ones like you". That was when Hillary was a contender. Once Hillary fell in the loser category who pops up to lobby the sorority sisters and other elites but Miss Chelsea. Schuster may have put it inelegantly, but that's exactly what the Clintons had done with her.
1) the race is far from over. Clinton's hardly "fallen in the loser category" as you put it. She might lose in the end, but this is just as premature as the inevitability argument made by the Clintons before anyone had voted.
2) its not a matter of being haughty or snobby that kept Chelsea from giving the little kid an interview, its that she wants some modicum of privacy. She's got a policy of not talking to any press, its hardly like she said she wouldnt speak with the child because she thought "Oh, she's just a kid, who cares what she thinks and no one will read this anyway." That would've been 'haughty', as you put it. Thats far from the case.
3) "Lobby the sorority sisters"? What the hell are you even talking about here? First, were either clinton even in a sorority? And if so, what has that got to do with anything? Thats just a bizarre statement.
this whole 'pimping' non-issue has gotten absurd. for god's sake people, it's slang. yeah, it was a catty comment, but not worthy of all the hand-wringing histrionics. i'm sick of the clinton campaign trying to drum up support by playing the victim card. it's so disingenuous to suggest the hillary or chelsea, rich, privileged, ivy-league/stanford educated elites are somehow the victims of "sexism." you want to find real sexism? how about poor, single mothers who were thrown off the welfare rolls by hubby bill clinton's so-called "welfare reform?"
Well said. The fact that Hillary went to Yale Law and Chelsea went to Stanford clearly shows that they've never been the victims of sexism.
Just like the fact that Obama went to Columbia and Harvard shows that he has never had to deal with racism. And Romney, as a Harvard Law and Harvard Business grad has never had to deal with people thinking less of him for his religious beliefs.
Clearly you've got a great insight into the effects of prejudice.
Well said. The fact that Hillary went to Yale Law and Chelsea went to Stanford clearly shows that they've never been the victims of sexism.
Just like the fact that Obama went to Columbia and Harvard shows that he has never had to deal with racism. And Romney, as a Harvard Law and Harvard Business grad has never had to deal with people thinking less of him for his religious beliefs.
Clearly you've got a great insight into the effects of prejudice.
David's comment simply shows the arrogance with which the media has coopted this election. Chelsea is doing what all of the family members of each candidate are doing; supporting their family. To suggest that the Clintons are somehow guilty of something unsavory is buying into the whole media Clinton gestalt that blasts them at every step of the way. In fact this is what you have chosen to do with this article as well; turn it into another Hilary bashing. Don't try and tell me that the word pimp has some other less unsavory connotation that is pure nonsense. Reporters use words are their instruments so David Shuster knew very well what he was doing especially in this overtop Hilary bashing environment. He thought well everyone is doing it lets take it another step because everyone loves to hate Hilary.
Listen if you want to hate Bill Clinton because of Monica that's one thing but what Hilary did with that affair will forever remain none of your business even if you want to be a busy body about it.
Judge Hilary and not the Clintons because then what you have become is worse than what you describe which is a scapegoating journalist that only knows how to sling around the phrases of hate. Shame on you for continuing this.
The root of this particular incident is in the fact that Shuster allowed himself to be put in a position to opine instead of report. No one gives a damn about anyone else's opnion unless he or she is paid for it. And no one will notice it until you say something stupid as in the case of Shuster.
This whole donneybrook has shot way pasr rediculous to somewhere is CHENEYSPAC
How about Huababy sayin that the 10 Commandments are better that "the law"?
Remember when Romney said that the reason none of his five sons are in the military is that by working for Mitt's election, they are doing a mighty service for our country. Well, now that Mitt's been eliminated, I don't see any of the five enlisting. Yet the kept media are silent about that but pick on Chelsea instead. And that includes "Riverhouse". One more thing: Speaking of "rich" and "privileged" How come there is never any mention of Harvard-educated Obama coming from a Ph.D. father and a mother and grandparents much richer than the Rodhams ever were. He is no guy who worked himself out of the ghetto like the great Charlie Rangel.
But then isn't the media being biased asking Romney why his sons aren't in the miliary but not Chelsea? Me thinks everyone doth protest too much - and how did Obama get in here? So you're saying because he's black he can only come from the ghetto? I don't get it -- and how exactly was HIllary helping the poor when she was a partner in a law firm for ten years (included in her 35 years of experience) -- you folks are giving Democrats a bad name with these ridiculous discussions . . . Shuster made a mistake, Hillary is trying to capitalize on it which kind of answers Shuster's questions -- and Chelsea is not a child - she's an adult who works at a hedge fund where I guarantee you people say worse words that pimp -- and Shuster didn't direct the word at Hillary or Chelsea - just used it as a verb -
That's not something "unthinkable," since you thought of it. Really, really stupid, but not unthinkable.
I like Mr. Schuster. But his remark was inappropriate at best. Maybe David watches too much MTV and thinks that was normal language. In my times it usually came up on a police blotter. I could just hear the black community scream if this type of remark was made about the Obamas.
When we consider this pimp/whore allusion tossed into the media by Schuster as "nothing" compared to the other hideous things the Republicans have slung at the Clintons, it's time for people to face the facts of the sociopathology operating tacitly within the fabric of our society, and for all thinking and decent people to cease remaining silent and thereby complicit.
This very sick Clinton Hate that was invented by the Neocons and needs to stop immediately with each of us. When we see it, we need to slam the shit back to sender with a little note, "here, soulless weasel, here's some of your brains you left behind." If we don't begin to defend Hillary Clinton here, we're perpetuating woman hatred world wide. The hate stops with us. She certainly does not deserve any of it. It's part of a sick perspective of women that needs to be understood and healed because it is pathological and reaches into every aspect of our society to the detriment of us all.
These vicious creeps that create it and put it out there actually are sadists that get their kicks from cruelty. Need some proof about how sick it is? Read the source of this kind of thinking from Neocon rag Weekly Standard, here:
http://www
Want to read an intelligent article about this subject of the sociopathology of Hillary Hate? Go here:
http://www
Want to read a speech Hillary Rodham Clinton gave at the U.N.'s 4th World Conference on Women's Plenary Session? go here:
http://www
GO HILLARY!!!!
I don't care what generation you refer to, or
what dicitionary you use, pimp equals prositution/public woman.
For those you who believe the 27 year old young
woman is being used by her parents, then let
me flip to Obama, why does he continue to use
the 27 year olds for his campaign, does he not
use them too! On the one hand everybody says
this campaign is amazing, all the young people
are coming out in droves. And then you have the media people making such demeaning remarks
about Chelsea, who happens to a female.
While the blacks came down on Don Imus like a ton of bricks within 20 minutes, where are the
white men, why don't they come down with their
hammers on David?
Sexism and racism is not good for this Country.
I am glad you see Hillary attempting on this
very day to rid our media, our insitutions of
sexism. Shows me she can stand up for what is
right, she will fight the very cord of what is
wrong with America. She'll fight not just for her daughter, but your daughter, my daughter too. So rightfully so.
These posts are ridiculous - nobody called Chelsea anything - he just implied she was being "pimped" out -- pimps are actually men so in a way isn't it progress that a woman would be considered a pimp? Seriously I hate sexist racist talk too but this is pretty minor. As for Hillary standing up for all women, I think there are a few in Bill and Hillary's past that would beg to differ on that assertion. . .
You said pimps are actually men. I'm a man and I consider that an insult. Pimps are the lowest form of life on the face of the earth.
They are worst than the lowest bottom dwellers in the most polluted body of water in the world.
Well, if you want to be really technical, if you've been pimped out, you're a prostitute
I fairly certain that after the 15 seconds of outrage Shuster's comment generated in the hearts of the Clintons ... the first words out of their mouths on the matter was ...
"How can we use this?"
"...there'
Exactly, so there's your outrage.
The thing about it that is smothered in the PC-Oh-my-God consternation is the perception that "Billary" are political whores. The logical extension to that with Chelsea calling SUPER-DELEGATES and NOT exclusively, Mr & Mrs Main ST America, reinforces the perception that B & H would use any political extortion to bring pressure on people to bend to their liking-even pimping out their daughter.
David Shuster may as well have been Socrates being given the cup of Hemlock for asking too many questions, that as back then and as today-people don't want to engage the truth.
Bucco
http://gro
What David Shuster needs is to take a long sabat from Chriss Mathews, in fact all those so called TV journalist
Chez, you have no right to take the position of an expert on an issue that is about women. It wasn't just the Clinton campaign - women all over the country wrote to MSNBC to fire Shuster and wrote to Clinton to fight back hard. I know because I and many friends were among them. Clinton is 100% right in standing up for women. WE want her to.
Hillary is standing up for ALL WOMEN, not just Chelsea. This is the way she'll continue to stand up for the MAJORITY of Americans who have been ignored, maligned and mistreated way too long.
Women can take a stand and (finally) vote for their own best interest by electing Hillary Clinton president - OUR PRESIDENT (and writing MSNBC at msnbc.comsnbc.com to fire Shuster). This isn't a minor issue. It's the epicenter of the matter for women - the point you're missing. Firing Shuster will prove, as firing Imus did, that the public has a voice, that women have power and we're taking it.
David Shuster reminded me of why the only TRUE CHANGE in politics will happen when a Democratic woman is president. Thanks so much to Hillary Clinton for understanding how insulted and hurt many women feel by Shuster, MSNBC and other out of touch commentators. It's time for a government that represents the majority of Americans - women.
Sorry but no female legacy running for hubby's job speaks to me. I made my way w/o a man. No thanks.
I am a feminist who fought the real battles of feminism, thank you. Chelsea Clinton is 27 years old and she's "off limits" and doesn't have to speak to the press like she's a nine year old? That's feminism? Give me a break. Again, the Clintons can only be brave when they are personally attacked. I'll be very surprised if she uses this amount of passion against John McCain or for a progressive position that isn't politically popular but morally right. I was bothered by the the fact that Chelsea was off limits months ago -- I could not understand it. It was an outrageous comment by Shuster to be sure -- there would be none of this outrage if Tucker had said it, and he says offensive things every day of the week. Does Hillary show outrage at the comments on Fox? Never. How nice to bring a network to its knees in defense of your daughter. That's real feminism, isn't it? Let her speak for herself. What are the Clintons afraid of?
HIllary most likely will get traction for this, like the tears before New Hampshire. When it comes to real leadership, she loses and loses big. When we have a warmongering woman president (if she even can beat McCain), I hope all you feminists are happy.
So, just to make sure I completely understand your point here, this scenario would be just fine with you......
"Welcome to Tucker. I'm Brian Williams and will be filling in tonight. Most of you know me as a serious journalist on NBCs Nightly News. But during the next hour I will be playing the role of commentator/pundit.
Today, Nancy Pelosi once again has confirmed impeachment is off the table, what a HO!"
In our first round table discussion we'll talk about Barney Frank. He "came out" in support of getting rid of Bush's tax cuts for the wealthiest americans. How GAY is that! Rachel Maddow, you're a lezbo, what do you think about this?"
sorry, I posted this on the wrond thread. It was supposed to go on the Cenk thread.
What in the heck are some people using for BRAINS? Leave Chelsea alone - she has every right to speak for her Mother, those who critize do NOT have much to talk about, get on with what is important. Chelsea seems to be a very fine young lady and I think the Clintons have done a great job raising her, it would be good if all young people had her insight. Nothing was said when Al Gores' daughter spoke for him, Bushs' daughter and wife all spoke for him. Some the announcers on TV talk nothing but B.S. and this man who said this about Chelsea is one of them. Go Hillary, Go Chelsea.
Al Gore's daughters spoke. They took questions. They put themselves on the line. Chelsea hides in the shadows but wants to be able to cajole superdelegates into voting for her mother. If she's going to take that active a role, then she can answer questions of reporters. She can live a feminist life instead of having feminism used as a tool for votes.
Thank God Shuster is safe from the Clinton claws -- the Clintons are tacky and tabloid people, One wonders if any of them have a soul-but that is another debate. People need to keep moving forward, this is 2008 - it is time for the feminist to realize THEY WON a long time ago--it is apparent some of them haven't taken advantage of that fact==so they think they need YET another representative, Billary Clinton! Listen to the young who are educated, who keep learning and improving on the past. What was 'pimping' in the old days (I am 66 years old) encompasses much more now. Chelsea Clinton is seen by much of the population as imprisoned in her parents obsessions with THEIR power and control. Shuster is the first to call it what it is and afterall it is his job to stir the pot (I think they call it perspective). So long as he is suspended, we will see him again. Ass kissing is soooo passe. Shows us a true picture of Clinton and how many lives they crapped on. They are disgusting.
Right on! A voice of reason emerges at last. I can breathe again.
I for one found it more despicable when John Edwards would trot out his little children for an obligatory campaign appearance than when adult Chelsea works on behalf of her mother.
I'm an Obama supporter, myself.
Not at all sure how this blog is supposed to be "in defense" of David Shuster. It's more of a slap against Hillary for pointing out obvious sexism.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
