Hillary is Pimping the Pimping Out Remark
by Big Dog on Feb 9, 2008 at 20:54 Political
A great deal has been made about the comment that was made by David Shuster of PMS NBC when he said that it appeared as if the Clinton campaign was sort of pimping out Chelsea. This caused a firestorm among the liberals who are uninformed about the newer meaning of those words. They insist that Shuster was calling Chelsea a whore. I can see how they would make that mistake since the Clintons have been whoring themselves out since they started in public life. Everyone knows that the Clintons are available to the highest bidder. Regardless of what the Clinton whoring class thinks, the reality remains that Shuster meant she [Chelsea] was being used.
The interesting thing is that the Clinton folks say they did not know what the phrase “pimping out” meant which I find interesting because that is all they do. Case in point, Hillary is pimping the attention to this to make PMS NBC look like a bunch of sexist pigs so she can score big with the women, especially the feminists who are always itching for a reason to bash a man. Unfortunately, it was probably a man who had to explain what pimping out meant.
Hillary is certainly pimping out the who issue (using it for those who still don’t know) by sending a letter to PMS NBC. Ti Hillary, it was not enough for her to have received an apology and for Shuster to get suspended. The letter does not exactly make it clear what she wants but it makes very clear that Hillary is pimping this for all it is worth. She states that she found the remarks offensive (even though none of them knew what they meant) and she wants everyone to know she was a mother first. She stated that she is in public life and can take the heat but that it is unfair to attack her daughter who is only helping with a campaign.
For the record, Shuster did not attack the fragile flower known as Chelsea. His statement was about Hillary. He asked if Chelsea was being pimped out [by her mother] in some weird sort of way. That is not an attack on Chelsea, it is a statement about the campaign and what it looks like to him. But the Clintons were never ones to let the facts get in the way of anything.
If I ran PMS NBC I would not have suspended Shuster or made him apologize (same with Chris Matthews for that matter). However, that is a decision made by the company and it is within their rights though it is certain that the decision was not made based upon right or wrong, only on how the company might lose money if “thick skinned” Hillary decided not to participate in debates.
What I would do if I ran the network is tell Hillary Clinton she is free to participate if she wants or to not participate if she does not want to but that the debate will go on with or without her. I would let her know that the network is in charge of how it is run and not a political candidate. Then, if she did not show I would give Barack Obama the debate time to answer questions and allow him as much time as he wanted to attack Clinton. All those attacks would go unanswered and then Hillary would see what hardball really is.
I cannot stand these people. They are such hypocrites. Hillary talks about the appropriateness of words used when she drops F bombs all the time. She and her husband have floated inappropriate word choices throughout this campaign and apologize if they receive backlash. They are using a comment about using someone to their advantage. In other words, she is pimping the pimping out remark.
Educated people who pay attention to our culture know what this phrase meant. I would say however, that the campaign had a legitimate argument if the comment was made about Bill Clinton because when you talk pimp in reference to him it is about sex.
Source:
The Politico
Related:
Political Punch
Tags: debate, Hillary, mommy dearest, msnbc, pimping out
I agree that Hillary Clinton and her camp have blown Shuster’s comments way out of proportion, and are trying to avoid some real issues by spinning this comment, making themselves look like victims, and playing on the ignorance of the general public (or at least anyone over the age of 40 who may have thought he was saying Hillary was a pimp). It may have been a poor decision for Shuster to incorporate slang in his commentary, but this is ridiculous.
He said that Chelsea was “being pimped out”. He also said that “Chelsea’s out there calling up celebrities”. No one would argue the latter statement, but they are trying to downplay possible manipulation on Hillary’s behalf on having Chelsea make those calls (do the Romney kids know anyone from The View?).
This would be a completely different story if Hillary was really trying to pimp out Chelsea.
Oh please!!! David Shuster got what was coming to him and the only people crying are men who feels it is alright to be sexist.
Let me tell you women are pissed at MSNBC and we’re going to get his azz removed for that comment and his forced apology, by going after MSNBC/NBC advertisers….next is Tweety aka Chris Matthews…we haven’t forgotten him either.
So keep on thinking that this is only about Hillary Clinton, it ain’t!!!
David Shuster used the wrong terminology. People get “pimped” things get “pimped out” such as a look, a home, a car. It is an old term that is still offensive, but Shuster was trying to sound hip and got burnt. That’s what he deserves. Educated people, huh? My educated friends don’t use the term because they know where it came from. B
It is not using it that makes one educated, it is understanding the meaning. And Bruh, pimping is a transitive verb that means to use. It can apply to people or items.
The fact is, Hillary is pimping this issue. It is also true the feminist wackos will go after Shuster to avoid the issues.
Wait, Hillary will be crying again before long….
especially after Obama swept the primaries yesterday.
It’s working like a charm! I just love that ajax comment plugin!
[…] [Discuss This Topic with Big Dog] Share Article […]
I just want to say that I am a woman (not a feminazi but a woman) and I am not at all offended by what the man said. I am not unhappy with MSNBC or Shuster. Far worse things have been said and no one got their panties in a bunch.
First of all, he has a right to his opinion like every one else. And I agree with BD, if I were in charge of the station I would tell eveyrone involved that I run it not the candidates and I would not be bullied into silencing someone’s First Amendment right.
Second, I believe he has a point. I believe Hillary is pandering to the young vote which Obama has a clear hold on at this point. Hillary is hoping to put a young female face in there to reach the younger crowd and detract from some of her failings.
If Hillary were really a mother first, she would have refused to let her daughter participate as such and told her that she did not want her involved when things got personal. She did not – she allowed Chelsea to put herself out there and that’s what happens in campaigning. Let’s face it – when you get down to it we are all someone’s child so there are never truly off limits now are they?
I am tired of hearing Hillary come off as a “woman in need.” I don’t believe in any of her opinions but would appreciate a woman candidate acting like a woman and not a damsel in distress. It is time for her to put on her big girl panties and deal with it. This woman wants to run a country and she can’t even take a few off the cuff comments. Not a good sign if you ask me.
It seems that this is exactly what the Clintons have done with the result of their only sexual encounter.
They have dragged this terrified looking young
lady out in public, and now they want to be parents?