Did you even hear his comment ~ or do you just keep repeating the'line'

not a contest. if he said that (which i am not aware he did) its wrong - isnt this?

That's not sexist.  That's more of a mafia joke.

Learn to take a joke.

Wow. Do we really have to use kid gloves here? No wonder Clinton supporters rail against the media; if you think this is misogyny, good Lord. Let me take you to Free Republic or Little Green Footballs, I'll show you misogyny. Here, lemme surf over to Free Republic, I saw a picture there that would fit.

Hold on... it's here somewhere. Damn. Well, I'll find it, you just wait; then you'll see the difference.

dont watch him.

Exactly.  Unlike Hillary's new BFFs Rush Limbaugh and Richard Mellon Scaife, who are both swell guys.  

um, no.  let try this...  how would you feel if a man said that about your mother, sister, wife, etc?

If Hillary was a man, he would have said "him behind the barn." SO WHAT!

this is not about supporting your candidate!  this is about allowing comments go that are inappropriate and offensive.  but if you want to use this diary as another opportunity to promote your candidate, by all means go ahead - but in this diary i will not do it.

"You can't seriously think he was advocating violence towards women or something. It was a simple metaphor."

Oh. I get it. I guess it was like the voter in North Eastern PA we canvassed who started going on at length about how what should happen next was that someone should put a bullet in that n----r's head when referring to Senator Obama - I suppose only one would come out of that scenario also. We walked away in disgust in the middle of that revolting oratory, saying we didn't want any votes on that basis. I guess that wasn't really racism, and that voter wasn't really advocating violence, it "was a simple metaphor" and we should just get used to it.

Now if newscasters start going on in a similar vein I will expect you Obama supporters to suck it up and not "whine" about it.

Of course the race baiting and other horrible negative attacks against the Clinton campaign that have come out of the Obama campaign don't seem to count in your estimate of the destructiveness of the primary being leveled at Clinton.

I haven't ever seen him say anything mysogynist.  Dude is an equal opportunity preachy, pontificiating blowhard.

a joke?  was he laughing?  were you?

here's a little bit of media history to give you my bent:

"Over at Alternet, Eric Boehlert of Media Matters has a nice summary of the misogyny that has been so willfully directed at the first woman to ever have a real shot at the presidency. Boehlert argues that misogyny has been exceedingly profitable for Matthews.

I'm making a list of the boys who have made it their business to make Hillary Rodham Clinton's historic bid for the presidency especially difficult by tilting the race dramatically in favor of the boy candidate. Boehlert names some of the boys who deserve to be on the list of haters:

[T]he Hardball host has not been alone. This election season, we've seen a cavalcade of white, middle-age men express their deep, personal contempt for the first serious female contender for the White House. Contempt, of course, that has nothing to do with Sen. Hillary Clinton's policies or her beliefs. Instead, it's been an oddly personal disdain dressed up as political analysis.

The way Mike Barnicle on MSNBC said Clinton "look[ed] like everyone's first wife standing outside a probate court." The way Bill Kristol on Fox News said that among the only people supporting Hillary Clinton were white women, and "[w]hite women are a problem, that's, you know -- we all live with that." The way CNN's Jack Cafferty likened Clinton to "a scolding mother, talking down to a child." The way Fox News' Neil Cavuto suggested Clinton was "trying to run away from this tough, kind of bitchy image." The way MSNBC's Tucker Carlson announced that "when [Clinton] comes on television, I involuntarily cross my legs." The way Christopher Hitchens on CNBC described Clinton as being "sort of alternately soppy and bitchy.'"

..[T]he openly sexist comments have produced very few condemnations from within the industry and even less soul-searching from the (mostly male) press corps. In fact, in Matthews' case, the sexist outbursts have helped propel his career. That's how he landed on the cover of the Times magazine.

Why? Because misogyny pays.

Question: If Chris Matthews had been forced to apologize to Sen. Barack Obama for divisive, personal comments the host had made about the candidate, and if the comments had prompted civil rights groups to protest outside the MSNBC studios, do you think Chris Matthews, three months after the fact, would be photographed on the cover of The New York Times Magazine with an uproarious grin on his face?

. . [I]f he says wildly offensive and sexist things on the air, why isn't Matthews shunned instead of toasted? Why would the so-called liberal New York Times lavish so much attention on him?

Simple: The press plays dumb about the misogyny, and the Times magazine article was a perfect example. (The political press hates the word misogyny and considers the idea to be cuckoo. Click here to watch Keith Olbermann jump down Elton John's throat for even daring to utter the word in the context of the Clinton campaign."

http://womenhealth.helevele.com/uncatego rized/misogyny-pays-women-of-america-owe .html

ah - now that smoothmedia has declared it not misogynistic, i have seen the light.  

But, I wish you would try to understand something.  We who support HRC get sick of hearing of how her continued candidacy is an effort to tear apart or destroy the party, retribution, or that she should be taken out back and put out of her misery.  Many, if not most, BO supporters seem to believe this is some completely selfish and reckless crusade on the part of HRC that is opposed by the overwhelming majority of the party.  Trying to strong arm HRC and her supporters to ignore the media double-standards, or inoffensive talk is much more destructive to the party in the long run than HRC's continued fight.

I thought about that briefly, but thought the reference would be too opaque.

"Two men enter!  One man leaves!"

He doesn't think that he, himself, holds a candle to Murrow.  He's very humble on that point.

yes - she my response above.