Hillary Clinton
Related: About this forumHas anyone noticed what a hater Andrea Mitchell is?
She doesn't come off as an objective journalist when it comes to Hillary. She comes off as someone who has some sort of personal problem. It's almost like one of those women who hates other women, if you know what I mean? I can't be the only one who has noticed it.
shenmue
(38,537 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)It's almost as though she and Maureen Dowd have way too much in common.
I often wondered if they were mad at Bill for whatever reason, and taking it out on her!
Cha
(305,406 posts)Maybe Dems rub her the wrong way?
BooScout
(10,407 posts)She should have been removed as a reporter on her beat years ago because of her blatant bias. I rue the day that network news programs came under the jurisdiction of the entertainment divisions....it totally ruined any kind of objective reporting.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)BlueMTexpat
(15,496 posts)with me years ago. I have absolutely NO respect for her whatsoever. She is the typical "Queen Bee" and goes after other successful and accomplished women like a Harpy.
Here is one example:
In October 2003, on the Capitol Report, Mitchell made a statement which Libby's defense construed to mean it was widely known among journalists that Joe Wilson's wife was in the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), a position she later clarified by answering the question of how widely known it was in Washington that Joe Wilson's wife worked for the CIA: "It was widely known amongst those of us who cover the intelligence community and who were actively engaged in trying to track down who among the foreign service community was the envoy to Niger. But frankly I wasn't aware of her actual role at the CIA and the fact that she had a covert role involving weapons of mass destruction, not until Bob Novak wrote it."
Eta link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrea_Mitchell
She is a walking, talking, lightweight Op-Ed masquerading as a serious journalist and has carried RW GOPer water so often that she might was well be a Fox News anchor.
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)so she takes an aggressive approach to all things Clinton. She thinks by doing this she will get the big scoop.
It is a combination of the personal dislike and professional aggrandizement.
NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)Andrea Mitchell is a walking, talking hatefest, a passive-aggressive tool who loves to take down accomplished women and men. It may be envy, or just showing off.
beachbum bob
(10,437 posts)what you expect? fair and balance?....lol
Fla Dem
(25,685 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)At least it seems so to me. My wife used to work at MSNBC and she would tell me tales of shit Andrea said in private about the Bush administration. It was not flattering at all.
ladym55
(2,577 posts)She is patronizing to all ideas and people remotely related to the Democratic Party, but is especially venomous when it comes to the Clintons. I categorize her as one of the Beltway insider haters. They like their own power and suck up to Republican power brokers in DC.
Her regular meme when I have seen her lately is how "unpopular" Hillary is, no matter how many supporters she has or how far ahead she was in primary voters. It's a tired statement not supported by things like numbers. (Why is really basic math so hard for so many people?)
Although she is an independent entity, I always keep in mind that she is married to Ayn Rand's acolyte Alan Greenspan, so that too, helps explain her.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)I could see it plain as day just listening to her. That shows how awful she is. Can't believe someone so biased would be allowed to pretend she's a journalist
LAS14
(14,682 posts)She and Maureen Dowd must be best buddies.
Jamaal510
(10,893 posts)are hosts who leave me frustrated and baffled about how they still have jobs. MSNBC got rid of people like MHP and Karen Finney who actually had good shows, but the aforementioned 3 still have theirs. I can't imagine any of them having high ratings.
splat
(2,326 posts)Joseph Pulitzer said that. Journalists are supposed to turn a hairy eyeball on everything.
But to expect any of the pros to be cheerleaders for your side or else you call them a "hater" isn't going to get us, or Hillary, anywhere good.
We're better than that.
realmirage
(2,117 posts)When a person never has anything good to say about a person, and looks for the negative in every situation that deals with that person, it's called hating.
splat
(2,326 posts)But when they do it to everybody, no, it's not called hating. It's casting a jaundiced eye, being a skeptic, thinking all politicians are suspect. Get a nuance!
realmirage
(2,117 posts)Last reply to you
Walk away
(9,494 posts)own non-accomplishments from her past career. She never was much and she never will be. No wonder she hates other women.
splat
(2,326 posts)I don't believe you.