Media critic Rachel Sklar writes today about a discussion between Keith Olbermann, on his MSNBC Countdown show Wednesday night, and his compliant minion Howard Fineman of Newsweek:
Fineman said that, all the delegate math aside, ultimately it was going to take “some adults somewhere in the Democratic party to step in and stop this thing, like a referee in a fight that could go on for thirty rounds. Those are the super, super, super delegates who are going to have to decide this.”
Said Olbermann: “Right. Somebody who can take her into a room and only he comes out.” [...]
[SUSAN's NOTE: Take notice of his use of the pronoun "he".]
What does that mean? Really, it can only mean one thing: Beating the crap out of Hillary Clinton, to the point where she is physically incapable of of getting up and walking out. At minimum. We know this. We know this because we have all seen movies where people are invited into private places to have “discussions” and the unruly party is, um, dealt with accordingly. It’s an unmistakably violent image.
Do I really think Olbermann thinks Hillary Clinton should really be violently beaten to the point of physical incapacitation, or worse? No, though some have taken that statement to its logical conclusion. But it is an unmistakably violent image …
FURTHER NOTE the subtitle running as the two MEN talk about how to dispose of Hillary Clinton: “Campaign & Suffering“:
The full transcript is here.
Here is more insight from Ms. Sklar — and she links to Melissa of Shakesville, a guest blogger here at No Quarter who is tracking the sexism directed against Hillary Clinton —
Hillary Sexism Watch: Part Eighty-Three [Shakespeare's Sister]:
To my mind, this is much worse than Pimp-Gate, which entailed an off-color implication resulting from David Shuster‘s misguided attempt to sound cool, and even worse than Chris Matthews saying that Clinton had gotten where she was because her husband had “messed around.” If David Shuster can be suspended for likening Chelsea Clinton to a prostitute, then what happens when Keith Olbermann implies that the only way to stop Hillary Clinton is to inflict some sort of physical harm on her? Like I said above, I don’t think that Olbermann meant it literally, but that’s not the point. Words matter, and so do the images they evoke. This can’t be ignored.
Update: And it wasn’t — an MSNBC spokesperson sent over an apology from Olbermann, which I have reprinted in full:
It is a metaphor. I apologize: the generic “he” gender could imply something untoward. It should’ve been “only the other comes out – from a political point of view.” You could’ve called for reaction first if your main motive had merely been criticism.
It is true, I did not contact MSNBC for comment – I was reacting specifically to the on-air commentary by their top-rated anchor, as seen by me and about 950,000 other people. To be fair, Olbermann regularly does the same in his “Worst Persons” segment, which often calls out on-air personalities for their remarks. I do, however, appreciate the alacrity of Olbermann’s and MSNBC’s response.
The full clip is here:
Keith, what are we talking about here exactly? [The Confluence]
Hillary Sexism Watch: Part Eighty-Three [Shakespeare's Sister]