She-Deviler Media Gang Unrepentant–Boycott MSNBC!

Click above to Boycott MSNBC and NBC!

* Author’s note: Subsequent to publishing this article, I learned that MSNBC News Commentator Tim Russert had passed away suddenly. I send my condolences to his family, and wish him well on his next assignment. —LBNYC

Women and men have been decrying the rampant sexism and misogyny lobbed at Hillary Clinton during the Democratic Primary season — made especially clear after she was left standing in a thinning field of candidates over the last four months. It seems that the better she did, the more the MSM tried to knock her down. During this time, millions of citizens took notice and protested using the power of emails, blogs, phone calls, and remote controls to turn off offensive network news, MSNBC, CNN, late night comedians, Oprah, and The View. They protested with their hands and feet, as they walked into voting booths and pulled the lever “yes” for Hillary Clinton; and as they walked away from the DNC, stopped contributing, and mailed back their membership cards.

Now, in their post-analysis, The Media appears to be just fine with what happened. Although millions of citizens have decried their actions as degrading to women, not to mention a former first lady, current US Senator, and Presidential candidate, their protests have fallen on deaf ears. Actually network high ups see the hullabaloo as excessive, but more than that: it’s the candidate’s fault — she used the coverage to try to create momentum. I would say to them, “right, blame the victim,” BUT Hillary Clinton is nobody’s victim.

In today’s NYT article, Media Charged With Sexism in Clinton Coverage, co-authors Katharine Q. Seelye and Julie Bosman write that most outlets assess their coverage was fair:

. . . many in the news media — with a few exceptions, including Katie Couric, the anchor of the “CBS Evening News” — see little need for reconsidering their coverage or changing their approach going forward. Rather, they say, as the Clinton campaign fell behind, it exploited a few glaring examples of sexist coverage to whip up a backlash and to try to create momentum for Mrs. Clinton.

The Media sees no mistakes in their coverage.

Nicholas Lemann, dean of the Graduate School of Journalism at Columbia University, said: “I have not had a lot of regretful conversations with high-ranking media types and political reporters about how unfair their coverage of the Hillary Clinton campaign was.”

Among journalists, he added, the coverage “does not register as a mistake that must not be allowed to happen again.”

But, never fear, Howard Dean is here. He really gets it now. He’s finally hip to our cause, and I’m sure he’ll handle it.

Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic Party, who says he was slow to pick up on charges of sexism because he is not a regular viewer of cable television, [Good one! I guess he forgot to read all of our emails back in February, March, April, May, and June] is taking up the cause after hearing an outcry from what he described as a cross-section of women, from individual voters to powerful politicians and chief executives.

“The media took a very sexist approach to Senator Clinton’s campaign,” Mr. Dean said in a recent interview.

“It’s pretty appalling,” he said, adding that the issue resonates because Mrs. Clinton “got treated the way a lot of women got treated their whole lives.”

Mr. Dean and others are now calling for a “national discussion” of sexism.

Sure, I’m up for that “national discussion.” Do you think that Sen. Obama will hold those after he does the Town Halls with John McCain?

But really, sexism, schmexism. Give us back our legitimate candidate and our votes! Can you do that? Mmm, I didn’t think so.

Any bets that Florida’s new Obama-selected delegates won’t have full voting privileges restored at the Democratic Convention in Denver? Any one?

USE THE POWER OF YOUR CLICKER AND YOUR WALLET! BOYCOTT SEXIST MEDIA COVERAGE!

Media Sexism Binge Officially Over

June 11, 2001 — Have you noticed? The blatant, rampant MSM misogyny that characterized their coverage of Hillary Clinton’s Presidential Primary Campaign has suddenly disappeared? After praise of her exit speech, followed by a few days of hand-wringing, commentary, and respectful interviews with “Hillary Democrats” about what can be done to woo them, all the nastiness that was slung interminably has gone and dried up. It’s as if none of it ever happened.

Don’t worry. We won’t forget.

We’ll Wait For You (Video)

Thanks to Boowitch 13 for this video.

Hunter Commencement Degraded By Inclusion Of Matthews

HUNTER COMMENCEMENT DEGRADED BY THE INCLUSION OF INVITED SPEAKER CHRIS MATTHEWS

June 1, 2008

Dear Hunter College Community,

As you may know, MSNBC commentator Chris Matthews has been invited to speak at Hunter’s graduation day ceremony on Wednesday, June 4th. Administrative staff at Hunter looked for a speaker who could address political issues in this election year and decided to invite MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann. After agreeing to speak, Olbermann then backed out of his commitment and instead of returning to the drawing board, a Hunter staff member called MSNBC to see who they could send in Olbermann’s place. Matthews was offered and accepted. There was no formal vetting or real consideration given to the selection of this particular graduation speaker.

Mr. Matthews has gained notoriety throughout the country for years of insensitive, sexist comments on his show “Hardball” and his insulting treatment of women—not only, most visibly, Senator Clinton but also his television colleagues who happen to be female. Matthews referred to Clinton as a “she devil,” called her a “strip-teaser” and “witchy.” He has referred to men who support her as “castratos in the eunuch chorus.” He has commented on the physical appearance of women including his CNBC colleague Erin Burnett, calling her “beautiful” and “a knockout” during a discussion of economic news. In an interview with John and Elizabeth Edwards, Matthews asked the former Senator, “Does she bite your balls like this when you go home?” He then went on to ask, “What is this with the equal marriages? Why do people marry their equals? It used to be different. What happened to the Stepford wives? The good old days?” These are but a small sample of Matthews’s on-air sexist comments.

It is, in our view, disgraceful for Hunter College, for all of us who love this institution and most of all for our present and future students who look to Hunter as a bastion of women’s empowerment, to confer this honor on someone whose words in public so contradict the most basic feminist and civic values. Inviting him to be our speaker is asking him to represent Hunter College on this important occasion, and this should never have happened. We are outraged.

We urge President Jennifer Raab to adopt a process in the future that would prevent such mistakes. We hope you’ll join us in this call to improve the process by which the college selects commencement speakers. Write to President Raab to encourage her to establish a more careful, transparent, and democratic process. Her email address is: jennifer.raab@hunter.cuny.edu.

Sincerely,

Students, Adjunct Faculty, Policy Committee of the
Women and Gender Studies Program

How Do They Solve A Problem Like Hillary? (Sing-along)

The MSM, and our elected and unelected Democratic officials are falling all over themselves and pooing in their pants like an episode of South Park, because Hillary Clinton and many of her 18 million supporters are unwilling to line up post haste to ride the Obama Party Unity Pony (PUP). She has a short window. She’s not giving him his night. Boy, that’s something for a party who couldn’t wait to roll out a new endorsement after every Hillary win. Lanny Davis noted that the winner can afford to be generous and shouldn’t be complaining that the loser isn’t saying the right words to surrender on someone else’s timetable.

It reminds me of the Sound of Music, when the nuns sing about their attempts to understand and curb the recalcitrant Maria. They find her both endearing and inscrutable, and their frustration in curbing her makes them call her bad names (for nuns) along the way. Like the MSM and the Democratic Party, they don’t have the slightest idea of who they’re dealing with and what the *&%! to do with her. As you sing along, imagine the all-a twitter-gang falling over themselves trying to grok Hillary.

Let Hillary Hear From You Now!

“What does Hillary want? What does she want?” she asked us last night. She wants to know if and how we will support her.

What do you, one of 18 million who voted for her, want her to do? Write to Hillary! Right now! Tell Senator Clinton how much you appreciate what she has already accomplished, and let her know what you think she should do going forward. Oh, and please add to the collection plate while you’re at it.

And what will you do? Will you continue to support her? Should she take it to the Convention? Should she concede? Should she contest at the Credentials Committee the DNC RBC’s decision to rob her of votes? Should she be VP? (See Lanny Davis’ campaign: http://www.womenforfairpolitics.com.) Should she start a third party? Should she suspend her campaign and reserve her delegates? Should there be a vote on the Convention floor? Should she end her campaign now, this week? Should there be investigations of alleged improprieties reportedly pushed on voters by Obama supporters and operatives at caucuses and polling places? Should the Superdelegates put their endorsements to the side and see what happens between now and the Convention? Should she endorse Obama? Will she wait to see what falls out of Obama’s closet between now and Denver? Is the Electorate College electable?

And just last week, in light of Scott McClelland’s new Bush bashing book, the MSM gave two seconds of regret that they did not do their jobs leading up to the war. Yet again, they have seriously failed in their vetting of Obama, and given a pass to an untested candidate in crucial and dangerous times. In an election year when “we” Dems were a shoe-in to win. McCain, Karl Rove, and Fox News are just beginning to ramp it up, and I can feel the tidal wave of what’s approaching. The Repubs DO NOT WANT TO RUN AGAINST HILLARY. Again, and I’ll keep repeating it, Superdelegates can change their minds anytime up to the Convention.

Hillary has often told the electorate that she didn’t envy our decision as voters. What decisions she must face as she weighs her options within a party whose members have mostly turned their backs on her, refusing to defend her in light of unprecedented sexist, misogynist, race-baiting attacks from all corners. How they have blocked her at every turn, all the while stealing her votes, her thunder, and her record. How we all mourned when Al Gore wimped out in Y2K and didn’t take the strong stand we needed so desperately at the time. But when the Party got an experienced fighter and uniter, they conspired to take her down. And if she stayed and fought for the 18 million of us, would the MSM and Party babies cry out and magnify to the rest of the world, including the villages of Kenya, that “an entitled white woman” has stolen the election that in truth was stolen from her by an “historic black candidate” in a fancy table cloth trick?

I can only imagine the pressure she’s feeling from Pelosi and Reid et al, as their must decide immediately letter circulates through our hollowed halls of government. How many of them no longer exist for me? And yet, what can Hillary do without them in the reality of corporate power schemes? Oh, right, she vowed to investigate corporate power. Hmmm. New politics, my foot.

For all that she has stood up to, I’m fine with her taking her sweet time to weigh her options, considering the position she is in. I’m even finer seeing her make the MSM and Democrats squirm in their seats, crap and all. Hillary Clinton has won the big states, the swing states, and garnered the most popular votes of any US Presidential Primary candidate in history. Hold strong, Hillary! We’ve got your back.

O’Reilly Rants for Hillary (Video)

Video clip from Bill O’Reilly’s May 29, 2008 broadcast on FOX News. He rants about how NBC and MSNBC anointed Obama and gave Hillary the shaft. These actions, O’Reilly said, “are a stain that will never go away.” He’s so right.

I can’t believe I’m agreeing with O’Reilly on anything or rather that he’s agreeing with me. And I can’t believe how good it feels to have someone rant out loud on behalf of Hillary Clinton’s despicable treatment by the MSM in this campaign. Feels really great!

Why Even Have A Convention?

By Jay S. Jacobs, Nassau County, NY, Democratic Chairman, Pledged Hillary Delegate

I finally get it. After more than 33 million votes cast in 51 primaries and caucuses over five months of intense campaigning and media scrutiny, with 3167 delegates having been elected, apparently, no one ever intended for there to be a “nominating” convention. Not the politicians, not the pundits, not the press. Just the people – they thought that they were getting a nominating convention.

I always figured that the nominating convention was to actually nominate the candidate who garnered the most support among Democrats. A bonus would be if that candidate was, as well, able to get elected in the general election. Well, while we can argue about whether or not Hillary or Barack have the most popular votes (depending upon which states you chose to include or exclude), there is no question but that Hillary has garnered more Democratic votes. The exit polling in states with open primaries demonstrates that. But that is not what this contest has ever been about. From the beginning, at least with many in the press and politics, it’s been all about getting rid of Hillary Clinton – any way possible – as quickly as possible. Maximize and emphasize her short comings, minimize her assets and attributes. Overplay her failures, downplay her successes.

The reality has been getting clearer with each passing day but really crystallized with Hillary’s universally criticized reference to Robert Kennedy’s assassination in June of 1968. Hillary was using an example for historical reference, among others, in response to critics who want her to drop out (“this thing has been going on for way too long”). She pointed out that there were many examples of contested races continuing into the summer. The condemnation was loud and swift and, typical for this year’s primary season, equally ridiculous.

Hillary broke the cardinal rule of today’s politics. Even utter a phrase that can be remotely connected to something offensive and, presto, the press finds it offensive (with a little help from your opponent). While Hillary’s reference was merely historical, the anti-Clinton press and Obama campaign became hysterical. How dare she reference such a tragedy? The press and Obama campaign emphasized how offensive this was in light of the legitimate concerns over Obama’s safety, as if referencing an historical fact somehow increases that threat. How crass can they become in trying to run someone out of this race?

For months there has been a constant drum beat to get Hillary out of the race. It started after Iowa. It gets louder and then quieter depending upon the outcome of ongoing contests. When Hillary loses or doesn’t exceed the pundit’s expectations, the calls are deafening. When Hillary wins or exceeds expectations (oops, that has never happened) the “political experts” pipe down for a bit finding clever ways to minimize the success. “It’s too little, too late”, we’re constantly told. “There’s no clear path to victory” for her. “It’s a mathematical improbability.”

After Hillary won Indiana (by too small a margin) and Obama won North Carolina (“convincingly”) Tim Russert and others anointed Obama the “presumptive” nominee. With neither having obtained the requisite majority of total delegates, with hundreds of delegates yet to be elected or having not declared their intentions, with hundreds of other “Super Delegates” having chosen but free to reverse their choice, the pundits are telling the public that it was over. Yet, we had to wait until 1:15 AM for the Mayor of Gary, Indiana to release Lake County’s votes in order to be sure, unlikely, though it was, that those votes would not overturn what looked like a Clinton victory before CNN and others would “declare” Indiana for her. On that remote possibility we had to wait – but on the off chance that the remaining contests and remaining “Super Delegates” would turn smart pundits into not so smart pundits – for that there is a mad rush to end this thing and avoid that uncomfortable inconvenience.

Let’s not overlook Hillary’s 41 point landslide a week later in West Virginia followed the next week by a 36 point “thumping” in Kentucky. Oh, yes, of course, that’s just Appalachia – that shouldn’t really count, after all.

So, I would like to know from the real “deciders” if now is not the right circumstance to take a contest to a convention, under just what scenario is it the right circumstance? When you have two excellent candidates, divided by just a hundred thousand votes or so after 33 million have voted, with 150 delegates between them, more than 3600 having been decided, neither having attained the requisite number to declare a win, isn’t that what a convention is supposed to be for? And, if the answer is “no” than I’d like to hear when the answer would be “yes.”

And, if the answer is that there really isn’t ever a time that we would want to take a contest to a convention, might I suggest that we just dispense with the whole thing and save everybody a lot of time and money. If it’s a coronation we want, why not just plan a huge rally, say, on the waterfront on a hot day in Portand, Oregon. Maybe we can bring in a few rock bands – let’s get Bon Jovi and Springsteen and a couple of local bands to warm up the act. Even better, in keeping with the sophistication and spirit of how it seems we’re conducting our elections these days, why not ask Howard Dean to step aside for that event in favor of Ryan Seacrest?

Posted by permission of the author.

The Media and Misogyny: Kurtz Does His Job

Sunday, May 25, 2008, when people were away, boozin’ n barbequin’ and generally having a good time over Memorial Day weekend, Howard Kurtz was on the job. On his show, Reliable Sources, Kurtz hosted a panel of three women who discussed The Media and Misogyny. The panelists, who were not all Hillary supporters, came to her defense as a woman candidate, and a First Lady, who deserves and has earned respect. The panelists were CNN Correspondent Carol Costello, radio talk show host and Republican Blanquita Cullum, and Washington Post syndicated columnist Marie Coco. They spoke about the sexism that women and women pundits also buy into, which goes largely uncovered by the MSM.

Women voicing for women in concert. Go ladies!