jh staff

Archive for the ‘Hillary’ Category

Suspension Coming for Keith Olbermann?

In Culture, Entertainment Business, Hillary, Media, Politics on February 10, 2008 at 10:29 pm

Howard Wolfson, communications director for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, called it “disgusting” and “beneath contempt.”

He characterized it as something that “should never be said on a national news network.”

He also brought up the Chris Matthews apology, the one in which the “Hardball” host said he was sorry for suggesting that Hillary’s political success was due to her spouse having had an affair with an intern.

“At some point,” Wolfson said, “you have to question whether there is a pattern at this particular network.”

What’s the “it” that has Wolfson so exercised?

Well, Wolfson’s remarks were about David Shuster and the comments the fill-in host made about Chelsea Clinton’s campaign role. Shuster used the words “pimped out” in reference to the campaign’s use of Chelsea to recruit Democratic Party super delegates in support of her mother.

Most would agree that the remarks were regrettable, but what about the “pattern” to which Wolfson referred?

The subject network here is none other than MSNBC. But the unnamed perpetrator of the “pattern” is one of its most outspoken and opinionated hosts, Keith Olbermann.

Olbermann is billed on NBC and MSNBC as a journalist. He has called one of his favorite targets, Fox News’ “Factor” host Bill O’Reilly, a “passive-aggressive racist.”

This is the same Olbermann who in narrating an NFL play described a punt return by Roscoe Parrish, a wide receiver who happens to be African-American, as “Roscoe’s Chicken and Waffles at its finest.”

Olbermann also described a supposed conversation between Bill Clinton and Bill Richardson, the New Mexico governor of Hispanic descent, in which Clinton was “asking Richardson for an endorsement and then, ‘would you please pass the guacamole?’”

The “Countdown” host also said that the Bush administration was an example of facism, claiming that it was similar to The Third Reich, and compared Fox News to the Nazis as well.

Meanwhile Shuster profusely apologized to the Clintons and in return was given a suspension.

The suspension was apparently not enough for Hillary. The senator and presidential candidate wrote a letter to president of NBC Steve Capus, which stated that “no temporary suspension or half-hearted apology is sufficient” for the language that Shuster used.

Hillary also asked Capus to “look at the pattern of behavior on your network that seems to repeatedly lead to this sort of degrading language.”

As long as Capus is looking, maybe he ought to take a glance in Olbermann’s direction.

James Hirsen is a media analyst, Trinity Law School professor and teacher of mass media law at Biola University.


‘Party of the Rich’ Dems and Hollywood

In Celebrities, Culture, entertainment, Hillary, Hollywood, News and politics, Politics on November 25, 2007 at 10:00 pm

According to a recent study, there’s a new “party of the rich.” It includes a whole lot of Dems, which means it includes a whole lot of Tinseltowners, too.

“The demographic reality is that the Democratic Party is the new ‘party of the rich,’” Michael Franc recently noted in the Financial Times of London.

Franc, an officer at the Heritage Foundation, conducted a study, which helps explain why wealthy Hollywood is chock-full of die-hard Dems.

Examining the net worth of folks in states and congressional districts, Franc determined that the majority of the nation’s wealthiest congressional districts were represented by Democrats and more than half of the richest households are in the 18 states in which Dems control both Senate seats.

Franc’s study also showed that, contrary to Democrat characterizations, “the vast majority of unabashed conservative House members hail from profoundly middle-class districts.”

While Dem candidates’ eyes must remain firmly fixed on the wealthy, they’re all simultaneously pandering to the working class.

Apparently, the Dem presidential candidates don’t want the same thing to happen to them that happened to Ellen Degeneres

The comedic talk show host recently found herself in the doghouse with striking writers.

The mistake Degeneres made was crossing the picket lines and doing her talk show despite the writers’ strike.

Because of a looming second strike by CBS’s newswriters, John Edwards, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and Bill Richardson have all said they will pull out of a scheduled CBS News presidential debate if CBS’s newswriters join the screen and TV writers in a strike.

The CBS-sponsored debate is supposed to take place in Los Angeles on Dec. 10.

Edwards already posed with picketers in L.A., and his campaign also indicated that he and wife Elizabeth will pass on an upcoming scheduled appearance on ABC’s “The View” because of the writers’ guild strike.

In a released statement, Edwards called on “all of my fellow candidates and their campaigns to do the same.”

The Obama campaign said that if news workers were striking “Barack Obama will not cross the picket line to attend the debate.” Obama’s wife Michelle also cancelled a co-hosting appearance on “The View” because of striking writers.

The Clinton campaign followed suit, noting that “America’s unions are the backbone of America’s middle class, and I [Hillary] will always stand with America’s working men and women in the fight to ensure that they are able to earn a fair wage.”

Richardson jumped on the debate-skipping bandwagon, too. “His actions when it comes to the strike are more important than what he says at the debate,” his spokesperson said.

Left-Wing Pressures Fox News Advertisers

In Entertainment and Media, Hillary, Hollywood, Media, Politics, Television on July 29, 2007 at 10:39 pm

The fringe of the Internet Left has just launched a new campaign against the Fox News Channel.

The DailyKos, MoveOn, Campaign for America’s Future and other way-out lefty sites are asking rabid fans to determine which companies are sponsors on Fox. They then plan to launch a phone calling campaign.

These are the same groups that urged Democrat presidential candidates not to appear at any Fox sponsored debate. The candidates caved in to their demands.

The groups are purportedly trying to convince Home Depot to stop its Fox advertising, the bent-headed thinking being that the company shouldn’t be advertising on a network that in any way questions global warming.

Home Depot has a reputation for promoting environmentally friendly products.

Most of the lib anger has been directed at Fox’s Bill O’Reilly because he has exposed left-wing bloggers for their hate mongering.

MoveOn.org spokesman Adam Green’s wobbly way of cogitating was revealed when he told the Associated Press, “We’re not trying to silence anybody. Rush Limbaugh has a right to be on the air – he admits his point of view. Fox doesn’t.”

Meanwhile on the network TV front, when a popular late-night TV show celebrates an anniversary, who are left-leaning entertainment powers that be going to call to help mark the special day? Dem presidential contender Hillary Clinton, of course.

This is exactly what CBS’ “Late Show with David Letterman” has in store for viewers who tune in on August 30.

New York’s junior senator will be seated in Letterman’s guest chair, getting some free campaign promo and helping Dave observe the 14th anniversary of the show.

It just so happens that the show ranks as one of the most popular late-night programs on the air.

Consequently, it is a coveted venue for national political figures.

Late-night shows like Letterman’s, Jon Stewart’s and Jay Leno’s have become TV spots that politicians seek because of the exposure provided and scope of audience potentially reached.

Letterman is apparently quite fond of both Bill and Hill.

Hillary’s main campaign squeeze and advisor spouse Bill appeared on Letterman’s show on the first anniversary of the 9/11 attacks and was also a guest on a 2005 show to talk about his quadruple bypass.

As for Hillary, the August appearance will be her seventh.

Steven Spielberg Crumbles under Heavy Hillary Lobbying

In Culture, Entertainment and Media, Entertainment Business, Hillary, Hollywood, Movies & Entertainment, News and politics, Politics on June 19, 2007 at 3:16 pm

hillary.jpg Hillary Clinton’s people have been going after Hollywood director Steven Spielberg in a big way.

Ever since the Left Coast showed the love for Barack Obama, the Clinton camp has been in lobbying overdrive.

Last February, Spielberg, David Geffen and their partner Jeffrey Katzenberg co-sponsored an Obama fundraiser that roped in a whopping $1.3 million.

For weeks Clinton staffers have had their sights set on Spielberg, partially because of the director’s fondness for Hillary’s hubby. They were resolute. They had to get an early endorsement to avoid the impression that the entertainment industry had gone gaga for Obama.

They basically nagged the director, repeatedly pleading for him to declare his support for the New York Senator. He may even have received a call from his old bud Bill Clinton.

If Spielberg had endorsed Obama, it would have been viewed as a rejection of Hillary, much like Spielberg’s partner Geffen has publicly affirmed.

In a statement released through Hillary’s campaign, Spielberg said that he had become familiar with the Democratic candidates and that he was convinced “Hillary Clinton is the most qualified candidate to lead us from her first day in the White House.”

The grab for Hollywood cash is of great interest to Democrats who in the 2006 election cycle received 63% of the $23 million donated, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

The media are filled with stories about how Hillary has now won the Tinseltown money battle.

But with Obama backers like George Clooney, Lawrence Bender, Geffen, Katzenberg and Oprah Winfrey, it’s way too early to say where the most Hollywood dough will eventually go.