trying to understand your pov

James - don't forget that Shuster was subbing for Tucker Carlson so he was probably prepped by his production staff to come out with a Tuckerism.  Couldn't quite figure out where you stand on this or what you meant when you said he "called it for the pimps."  When dealing with the Clintons I find my fellow progressives sadly lacking in intellectual honesty.  Namely: what's good for goose is good for gander (no double standards) - no cherry-picking one or two ambiguous statement and overlooking preponderance of other evidence, and finally the toughest one: challenge your own assumptions and don't be satisfied with the righteous gut-feelings we all have.

by Gary Markowitz (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 10 comments) on Monday, February 11, 2008 at 12:42:47 PM
 

"Calling It For The Pimps"

I am being intellectually dishonest? I think that "pimp" is in the general vocabulary as meaning "sprucing up, perhaps to the point of being garish or in bad taste," as in the the TV program called "Pimp My Ride."  But, I am calling the Clintons, both of them, also "pimps" in the colloquial perjorative sense of being "promoted/ing for sexual purposes," as in displaying their blossomed daughter to campaign audiences as a focal point, not particularly for "family" imagery, but because Chelsea has "blossomed."

I think that Shuster, who has a very sharp and honest mind, saw that both of these uses of the word were legitimately in play and, with his wits about him, said so.

I do not care for the Clintons, so as far as they carry this bit of color for their own campaign, I will carrying it for the right of Shuster to use general vocabulary terminology in his descriptions, if he thinks it is appropriate. This is so much less important than the daily lies and prevarications from Fox News that I cannot think it worthy of dismissal or even suspension.

JB

by James Brett (80 articles, 95 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 80 comments) on Monday, February 11, 2008 at 1:30:00 PM
 

at least you copped to agreeing that she is being pimped

... in the ugliest terms.  Sad with your impressive resume.  You say quite clearly that the Clintons are literally pimping Chelsea in specifically sexual terms, because she had "blossomed?"  What the hell does that mean, James?  Creepy.  We all know what it means - it means that her body has developed and they are putting their daughter's body on display to be leered at.  I call that a blood libel.

 I apologize, James.  You are being intellectually honest.  The problem with IH is that it brings into focus some rather disturbing thinking masquerading as intelligent political commentary.  Strong words?  No stronger that your statement that the Clintons are cynically putting Chelsea's "blossom(ing)" body on display. 

'Scuse me, I'm going to take a shower, now.

by Gary Markowitz (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 10 comments) on Monday, February 11, 2008 at 2:37:29 PM
 

What the Hell does it mean?

First, Bill Clinton has no discernable morals. He disgraced his office and his family. Do you think that suddenly because he now has fewer constraints on him that he has acquired a moral compass?  Not very likely. Do you also think that William Jefferson Clinton is not the major force in Hillary's campaign? It is the greatest worry of people whose livelihoods are devoted to Democratic politics.

Putting his daughter on stage now that the battle with Obama has been clarified may have many purposes, clearly INCLUDING the vaguely cheesecake-ish effect that is has.  You will, of course, pardon my use of the word "sexual" above, it clearly is a word with which you are uncomfortable.

David Shuster is not an amateur observer. He saw and he spoke. His choice of language could have been better, but he used the vernacular that is deliberately colorful and, as I have said, ambiguous. I give him the slack; you don't.

As for the comment following: unintelligible!

JB

by James Brett (80 articles, 95 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 80 comments) on Monday, February 11, 2008 at 3:29:48 PM
 

Last add. Sad.

Apparently you are titillated by Chelsea Clinton and see her as "cheesecake."  I think this reflects your own "too much information" proclivities.  No one is leering at "blossoming" Chelsea but you, my friend.  I think David Shuster would run from your defense like the plague.  Sometimes it's best to say "maybe I went overboard" rather than get your back up over a silly, indefensible statement.

Cheers. 

by Gary Markowitz (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 10 comments) on Monday, February 11, 2008 at 3:39:09 PM
 

Hoooing for Hillary.

It’s a good thing he didn’t say nappy headed Hoooing for Hillary.  Look what happened Im-a-ass.

by Michael Chavers (42 articles, 0 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 172 comments) on Monday, February 11, 2008 at 3:01:44 PM
 

Progressive Sexism

Gotta love some of the supposed progressive men on this list.

Sexism is alive and well on the left. Why am I not surprised?

by fou (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 88 comments) on Monday, February 11, 2008 at 9:56:38 PM
 

Using Chelsea

"Pimping' is just another word for 'using someone for one's own benefit'. That is the way Shuster used it I believe. The term Pimp or pimping has become pretty common and Shuster is probably the kind of person who uses the word in everyday speech. There is even a TV show called Pimp My Ride. I don't believe Shuster, whom I am not a fan of, was using the term in a sexual manner. Not too many national media people are that crude.

The Clintons are 'using' Chelsea without a doubt. Although she doesn't have much of a role in the campaign other than just stand around on the stage she seems to generate some excitement in their crowds for some reason. The Bush daughters do (did) the same thing. I really don't see much wrong with it except when the Clintons vigorously deny that they are 'pimping' her and go into their usual silly conspiracy mode. 

ABC has an interesting article about Chelsea going to dinner with a 21 year old Super Delegate. That is what I call bad timing considering the amount of noise the Clintons made about the use of the word 'pimping'. Someone in the campaign didn't realize that? Go to Drudge and look for the word "Pimp" to link to the ABC story. Pretty funny.

by Mad Jayhawk (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 211 comments) on Monday, February 11, 2008 at 10:34:03 PM
 

Brett article re Olbermann

Wow. Words fail me at this hideous article by Brett. The one that comes to mind is: YUK TO THE MAX (I'm being polite - restraining myself, that is).

by V. da Vinci (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Tuesday, February 12, 2008 at 1:54:38 PM
 

Get Over It!

It's time to grow up and get over it already! Hillary is out for Shusters blood........she wants vengence. Does this give you an idea of what she might be like as the leader of the "free" world?

by Linda Bailey (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 18 comments) on Monday, February 18, 2008 at 7:04:02 AM