David Shuster, the television news anchor who suggested on air the other day that the Clinton family had “pimped out” daughter Chelsea in its campaign for Sen. Hillary Clinton’s presidential nomination, has been temporarily suspended from all NBC News broadcasts.
MSNBC announced that it had temporarily suspended anchor Shuster from all NBC news broadcasts — except to offer his on-air apology for what he said about Chelsea Clinton.
Shuster had outraged the Clinton campaign by saying that the campaign had “pimped out” the Clintons’ daughter when they had her place phone calls to party superdelegates on her mother’s behalf. In a conference call with reporters, Clinton communications director Howard Wolfson on Friday excoriated Shuster and called the comment “beneath contempt.”
I saw this as it happened and was struck by its agressiveness. Even saw Shuster apologize later on Morning Joe.
I didn’t think much of it until another commentator said that it sexualized and degraded Chelsea which was uncalled for and I thought that was right.
Then I thought about it. Why have a 23-27 year old woman call up Super Delegates to ask for their votes? Isn’t the very first question they SHOULD ask is “What can you do for me?” I know what her daddy would say.
Those of us over 50 are trying to imagine guys like Walter Cronkite or Roger Mudd slinging that kind of language. There was a time – it now seems brief – when TV news had class.
#2 – It may have had more restraint, but even Cronkite had an agenda. He’s even admitted it.
#2–News?==no. Shuster’s role at least on this program was as a commentator or analyst. Totally different than news.
Just for grins, I’d love to have a transcript of a typical speel Chelsea was supposed to go thru–I’d imagine the giggles as appropriate.
I’m still on the fence regarding whether or not the comment was fair. No evidence there was any pimping, but the word is in the ballpark when stripped (sic) of the sexual connotations.
I dislike all our politicians so much, not hard to label their kids when they are “working for” their parents. Who else “works for” the actual provision of services by someone else?
I thought the original remark was about a Chelsea makeover i.e. getting “pimped out” the way cars do on that MTV show. I didn’t cotton on to the sexual connotation – probably because, if that’s what was meant, it’s definitely out of order.
If MSNBC fires him, Roger Ailes over at Fox News will be quick to make him an offer.
You guys freaking stupid. When came at somebody of nowhere. you come at somebody out of nowhere.
So isn’t kind of creepy the way mitt romney was pimping out his BOYS like that?
“I’m still on the fence regarding whether or not the comment was fair. No evidence there was any pimping, but the word is in the ballpark when stripped (sic) of the sexual connotations.”
What are you smoking?
#6–Pharaoh==I’m not smoking anything–just thinking the same way Shuster does.
And while I assume more women are pimped out than men, yes, if Chelsea was pimped out, then so too were Romney’s boys==except, I think there is the element of going after the old boys club known as super delegates?
It all comes down to the broad vs narrow definition of the word, and what you think of our politicians in general.
Hilliary certainly has whored herself out on her own behalf–I’m think to the hispanic community, and she certainly pimped Bill out for the anti-black minority. In that milleu, Hilliaries outrage is just a bit too precious. Where did that 5 Million come from again?
Thanks for pointing that out! The title is fixed.
She (Bill) will do ANYTHING to win,
I agree that use of a prostitution metaphor isn’t out-of-bounds as a generalization for politicians. As a matter of fact, it’s much too fitting. The problem I see arises when one specific campaign is singled out, and the seemingly respectable daughter of that candidate becomes the implied whore who is pimped out by her folks. Isn’t that a sleazy commentary by anyone’s standards, except maybe in hip-hop/rap lyrics?
I would have to say that referring to her as being pimped was wrong.
Journalism has taken sides on too many issues rather then just reporting news as it occurs. But I guess that’s too boring for Americans.
So we have to create news where their is none.
I’m actually surprised Hillary noticed since she spends most of her time online here anyway: http://tinyurl.com/2n8da
If you discount all of the finger pointing and crawling the average person might notice that the insult was actually directed toward the modus operandi of Ma and Pa Clinton than an insult toward Chelsea.
It seems this whole episode is actually Chelsea being used by yes, you guessed it, Hillary Clinton.
#14–Crimson==thats what I was vaguely thinking, but you crystalized it. Thanks.
MSNBC sucks and this is yet another reason why I would never tune into that now disgusting channel.
I’m not sure why they would even try to compete with GOP-TV (Fox). What MSNBC is doing is actually falling into the no-mans land where they are not watched by anyone.
He looks like he has a stick up his ass. I hope he gets his sorry ass fired.
I hope he doesn’t get fired, he’s a good reporter and made a bad choice when it came to language…but the ironic thing is, what the Clinton campaign did with Chelsea was, indeed, ‘pimping her out’.
There’s a usage of “pimp” that means “shill” as in, “Dvorak is always pimping his blog on podcasts,” which seems appropriate for this case, though backwards.
What I find interesting is this is the second time the Clintons have raised a stink over what an MSNBC anchor has said — they haven’t even done this for Fox.
Apparently its OK to insult Republicans all day long on that channel, but if you get just one toe out of line with the Clinton’s, it’s bend over, grab ankles and say “Thank you mama, may we have another”.
I am not particularly a Hillary supporter but I find myself being very defensive of her.
It seems like she always gets the hard side of a double standard.
The Clintons were CERTAINLY NOT the only candidates whose adult kids campaign for them. Not this election, not any.
Yet the hammer Hillary for her.
Or take the crying thing. Talk radio carped on her for A WEEK for that. But just he week before Mitt Romney cried TWICE and nobody gave a rat’s arse about it.
Or how about the “Hillary will say and do anything to get elected” charge.
I don’t believe for a minute that she is in some special category that way. In reality, she has been MORE consistent and less apologetic in the face of opposition than the other candidates — her Iraq vote being the most prominent example.
#18
It’s one thing to use “pimping” as a sarcastic joke where there is no actual context. Have we come to the point where “journalistic stardards” has become a self-contradiction?
#19
No, I think there would be just as big (if not bigger) outcry, and rightly so, if any newsman said George W. Bush was “pimping out his daughters to win votes”.
Raster is right — they would probably get hammered EVEN MORE if it was aimed at a BW Bush.
It’s a common myth among the Right that the media is harder on them. This is total nonsense, in my opinion.
In this election cycle Hillary is getting hammered for things just as common among the GOP candidates.
If Chelsea were still a kid, I could see the accusation of Bill and Hillary “pimping her out” to suit their political wishes. However, Chelsea is all grown up, and if she wants to support her mom for president, then that’s her choice.
Like Estaban said, Chelsea is no longer a child. She’s a mature woman. Politics is brutal. If the Clinton’s can’t stand the heat, well you know how the rest of that goes.
My question: If I was 25, why would I care what Chelsea Clinton has to say? What has she done? She parties like the Bush twins. Big deal.
Raster and Greg:
Apparently neither of you watch MSNBC, because thats all they do on a daily basis. Bash President Bush
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xPsxhN8yuA
I forgot, how long was he, the host of Countdown, suspended for?
Is this the guy who said Alito was sloppy seconds?
My guess is that this was rigged by the Clinton campaign to pick up sympathy votes, based on my estimation of Bill’s low class before.
Chelsea has been slimed before. Remember McCain’s joke about her… Probably the worst thing I’ve ever read about him. Kids are out of bounds. Period!
#11, Gary,
Isn’t that a sleazy commentary by anyone’s standards, …
No. Shuster’s comment describes Chelsea’s role in the campaign. To most people with some relative perspective and an IQ higher than a warm room, that is easily understood. She wasn’t calling the super delegates to discuss her gr. 11 report card or new Barbie doll.
The word “pimp” has expanded past that of a person that controls prostitutes. As a verb it can also mean to make flashy and attention gathering.
#14, Lord Crimson
It seems this whole episode is actually Chelsea being used by yes, you guessed it, Hillary Clinton.
Exactly !!!
#20, Greg Allan,
I am not particularly a Hillary supporter but I find myself being very defensive of her.
I’m the same. I’ve been defending her even though I didn’t support her for President. After this outburst though, I’m leaning towards another candidate. Playing the “poor me” card does not endear me to any candidate.
#25, Jim W,
I forgot, how long was he, the host of Countdown, suspended for?
He wasn’t.
#26, MikeN,
Is this the guy who said Alito was sloppy seconds?
Who is “this guy” and isn’t Alito sloppy seconds?
***
Yes, yes, that was a sleazy word. But politics is a sleazy game.
prostitute:
n. 2. One who sells one’s abilities, talent, or name for an unworthy purpose.
v.2. To sell (oneself or one’s talent, for example) for an unworthy purpose.
pimp
n. One who finds customers for a prostitute; a procurer.
intr.v. pimped, pimp·ing, pimps
To serve as a procurer of prostitutes.
I think David Shuster’s use of the word is correct. Hillary Clinton and/or her handlers are using Chelsea Clinton to contact and attempt to sway the super delegates.
# 25 Jim W. said, on February 10th, 2008 at 8:15 pm
Raster and Greg:
>> Apparently neither of you watch MSNBC, because thats all they do on a daily basis. Bash President Bush
I’ve watched it enough to know that they legitimately criticize Bush’s policies.
THAT’S NOT BASHING HIM!
The conservatives have been claiming for YEARS that our criticism of Bush’s policies and performance is because “you just hate Bush.”
I don’t like Bush. I don’t hate Bush.
I’m objective enough to know he’s done a HORRIBLE job as president.
This is not bashing. It’s patriotism, actually.
Jim,
I looked at the video link.
Olbermann using the word “pimping” to describe Bush hiding behind the Generals for his failed Iraq policy is strong but legitimate criticism.
Using it to describe the Clinton’s ADULT child campaigning for them is inappropriate. I, personally, don’t even uderstand what is wrong with Chelsea giving some speaches in support of her mother.
Relatives campaigning is done ALL THE TIME BY EVERYBODY.
On the other hand, Bush cherry picking generals to implement his policies and then hiding behind them to avoid blame is worse than any president I can remember in my life time.
I personally wouldn’t use the world “pimping” but a strong word is needed to describe how sleazy Bush is for using the military for his own political gain.
A similarly strong word is needed for how he used and professionally destroyed Colin Powell. It’s just evil to misuse and ruin an honorable man like that.