Skip to main content

View Diary: I've finally had it with Andrea Mitchell's MSNBC ad (182 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  She wants to stay on the cocktail party A list (21+ / 0-)

    That's her only motivation.

    The test of whether we're willing to stand up to the thugs that wrote voter suppression laws is this: Are you willing to hold hands with someone that needs hand holding in order to qualify to vote?

    by Richard Cranium on Mon May 07, 2012 at 08:24:59 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  I object to this. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Milou

      And frankly, Richard, you're capable of much more intelligent and substantive comments---I've read and admired them from you many a time.  And I can't BELIEVE you got 21 recs on this.

      I don't say this out of any love for Andrea Mitchell.  But this sort of comment is worthy of everything we don't like on the right.

      Ms. Mitchell has built her career over many long hard years, and I'll tell you, harder years than any man ever put in, simply by virtue of a woman her age trying to get taken seriously in a man's business.  And it's still largely a man's business.

      I also take umbrage at the Kossacks here summing up who she is because of who she is married to.  Could there be any more backwards attitude towards women?  And yet, it's all over this thread!

      It should be humbling to all here how we embarrass ourselves in the very ways we swear we are above.  Think about it, my friends.

      If you want to hate on Ms. Mitchell, at least credit her for being her own person, separate from her husband. She deserves that, for better or worse.  And ANYONE here who chooses to define her by her husband, is simply no better than any knuckle dragger.

      Same goes for accusing her, after her long career, of only being interested in A list cocktail parties.  That's so insulting to any woman's achievements, whether you agree with that woman or not.

      For the record,  I dislike Andrea Mitchell's recent MSNBC ad for all the reasons stated here.  I hold her responsible for those words, and I have no problem asking her to answer to them.

      I have a BIG problem with conflating that disagreement to equating her as a puppet to her husband, and I have a BIG problem assuming that because I disagree with her, it means she only cares about A list cocktail parties.

      Sorry, but to me this is embarrassing sexism from the left.  

      •  Agreed. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        StellaRay

        However we may criticize her work at MSNBC or her Lean Forward ads, she does have a long career of work at NBC News. Who her husband is shouldn't be relevant criticism.

        You care about something, you fight for it. You hit a wall, you push through it.

        by Milou on Tue May 08, 2012 at 07:34:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Exactly. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Milou

          Nor should we feel OK with saying and reccing that all she cares about is "A list cocktail parties." On what evidence can we make this claim?  It's a smear, plain and simple, and should be below our standards.

          We can honestly question Andrea's ad and criticize it on the issue, and not be accused of being petty. We can honestly question Andrea Mitchell's POV and her voice in MANY ways, without dismissing her long career as simply a woman interested in A list cocktail parties.

          Again, this should be below us.

      •  Cripes (0+ / 0-)

        I made a barely coherent comment at 11:30PM yesterday evening because I despise Andrea Mitchell.  I'm not going to apologize for the comment.  Frankly, who she's married to is of no import to me.

        What she does with her esteemed position among the beltway punditocracy is indeed relevant.  I didin't say or even imply that she fucked her way to the top.  What I DID say (and imply) is that she's a fave on the beltway cocktail circuit, and that has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH HER GENDER OR CAREER PATH.  

        I could say the same thing about David Fucking Broder.  And you'd defend him, too?

        The test of whether we're willing to stand up to the thugs that wrote voter suppression laws is this: Are you willing to hold hands with someone that needs hand holding in order to qualify to vote?

        by Richard Cranium on Tue May 08, 2012 at 07:48:02 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  You disappoint me. (0+ / 0-)

          You expect me to understand that you made "a barely coherent comment because you despise Andrea Mitchell."  Fine.  You're allowed to despise Andrea Mitchell, although for my money, I wouldn't waste hate on her.  Hate is far too corrosive to give it that freely.  But that's a whole other enchilada of a conversation.

          You DID NOT say she's a favorite on the beltway cocktail circuit.  You said "all she cares about is A list cocktail parties." Please, at least have the courage to own your words.

          There are many who are favorites on the beltway cocktail circuit.  Some of them who I know you would not demean in this way, because you agree with them.

          Don't try to straw man me with David Broder.  I'm not going to fall for it, and it isn't relevant to the discussion at hand. You know, Richard, you should be happy that 21 people here agree with you.  I don't.

          And again, it's not because I'm here to champion Andrea Mitchell.  But because I don't think you made a substantive argument.  I think you smeared someone unfairly, when there was plenty of reasons and ways to take on Ms Mitchell, fairly.  IMO, you just didn't pick one of them.  And in all fairness, you're not the only one on this thread to do so.

          No need for you to apologize for your opinion.  Stand with it.  And I'll stand with mine.

          I don't.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site