Small rant: It is Andrea MITCHELL, DUers.

[elleng]

Last edited Wed Sep 5, 2012, 08:46 PM - Edit history (1)

She is a working woman, and has decided to retain her own name. DU, at least, should respect that.

End rant.

[KamaAina]

1. Well, we know that

but some feel it's important to point out that this journalist* is married to the Randroid ex-Fed chair.

[Whisp]

4. it is important, that is not a well known fact

by people that don't read political forums and know their pundits.

I've educated a few and it's always a --- 000000000000H... reallllly?

[elleng]

11. I'm offended that some think pointing out any such thing is important.

I'm an attorney, a Democrat, married an attorney, a Republican, and would be horrified, as a WOMAN, if anyone suggested those facts would be in any way relevant to my points of view, either professional or political.

[KamaAina]

16. Well, you may be onto something there

do repukes ever refer to "Mary Carville"?

[elleng]

21. Right. Thanks, KamaAina.

NEVER seen a suggestion that those 2 influence eachother in their professional lives, tho we do wonder how the marriage can succeed. Props to them that it appears to have done so.

[WinkyDink]

37. Her husband is NOT just ANY Republican, FGS.

[elleng]

43. SO WHAT?

[Jim Lane]

58. A journalist who covers government is not equivalent to a lawyer.

I've never called her "Andrea Greenspan", but it is relevant to point out from time to time that, while she covers government, she's married to a former government official who played a major role in generating some of the policies and events she's covering. It's information that raises a reasonable question of whether the personal relationship might influence her views. How would she feel about reporting a fact that makes her husband and his acolytes look bad?

Some viewers would see a connection. They're entitled to have the information so that they can make their own assessments.

The analogy to your situation would be if you were an attorney who served on a disciplinary committee that evaluated complaints charging attorneys with professional misconduct. If your spouse were brought up on charges, then, yes, it certainly would be relevant to your point of view. You could not be expected to be objective. You would have to disclose the relationship and recuse yourself.

[Jazzgirl]

2. Fuck Andrea Mitchell.

N/T

[GodlessBiker]

3. +1

[PCIntern]

13. You first...nt

[Cali_Democrat]

19. eeewwwww

Sloppy seconds after Alan Greenspan?

[AnnieBW]

45. He probably needs Viagra anyway

Oh, shit. Now I have to bleach my brain...

[DontTreadOnMe]

20. and fuck you Andrea Greenspan too

nt

[zbdent]

25. Not with Ann Coulter's

d*ck ...

[Ms. Toad]

69. Please delete this comment.

Using a gender identity as an insult is really hurtful to transgender friends of mine. One in particular has had to sit through similar cracks about Ann Coulter at work, where she is not yet out, with everyone responding with big yucks to the same secret she has been hiding for 50 years - and is currently hiding from them. She is a woman (currently) with a penis. It is devastating to hear her co-workers laughing at her (by proxy), and she wonders how she will be treated when she transitions within the next couple of months. Will they make the same cracks about her behind her back? To her face?

And it is devastating to your fellow transgender DU members to hear their lives being used as an insult or a derogatory joke.

I hope that helps you understand why such comments really do hurt people I am sure you are not aiming at, and I hope you will remove it.

[Vanje]

78. Please delete this comment

Implying that someone is transgender is an offensive insult. It insults transgender and gay men and women far more than it insults . Ann Coulter is one nasty piece of work, but lets not call her 'fag' or 'trannie'.

[madinmaryland]

5. I think people just want to tag her with the failed policies of her husband that

she still supports.

[elleng]

7. We know she 'still supports' policies

how, exactly?

[Cleita]

8. That isn't it at all. Her reports are transparently biased and

many of us are picking up on it.

[gateley]

6. I'm with you, elleng. She's not all bad, by any means, and shouldn't be discounted

(or disparaged) solely on her questionable choice of partner. If you hate her, hate her because of your differences of opinion, not just because of her husband.

[Cleita]

9. And that's exactly why we don't like her.

It isn't her husband. It's the bias in her reports.

[gateley]

31. That's perfectly valid, but she goes by Mitchell and calling her Greenspan seems childish.

[Dragonfli]

40. Her views themselves are "Greenspanian" should we pretend her views are otherwise?

Why give her cover to continue to COVER FOR, AND COVER UP the Greenspan legacy?
If you just want some women to cover for the Repugs, pick one of the blue dog women that do the same.

She married the man, and also agrees with the views, you wold have us pretend she does not and did not? Why?

[gateley]

49. Right. I'd have you pretend she doesn't have those views.

That's exactly what I meant.

Trash her for her views, for sharing Greenspan's views, but calling her Andrea Greenspan when she goes by Mitchell is as childish as pronouncing Boehner's name as boner.

[Dragonfli]

50. Then you understand that the "Greenspan" honorific is descriptive

But if you can't grok that I will hence forth use Andrea Greenspanian liar (the full honorific) when referring to this entitled lying hack that lies blatantly for a husband she would like us to believe she is not married too.

What I don't get, why do you respect a lying entitled hack so much?

If you are looking for a strong hard working woman in journalism, there are many, she is simply not among them, so why pretend so hard?

If you are looking for a woman journalist to respect and admire, just tune in to Current TV, or MSNBC, there are actual journalists that have earned respect on both of those channels.

Andrea is nothing more than an entitled elitist, LIAR, not someone worthy of respect, she did not earn her place.

[gateley]

52. I don't recall saying I respected her, liked her, or agree with her.

Again, you're drawing your own conclusions (erroneous) from what I'm saying.

Greenspanian is okay, though. .

The woman's name is Mitchell. Even people I dislike have the right to choose their own name.

[elleng]

47. Thanks, gate.

'Childish' covers it.

[Logical]

10. You are missing the whole point!!! It isn't that people give a shit about her last name....

It is who she is married to that makes her biased! Get it now?

[elleng]

12. Highly offensive suggestion.

As I've stated elsewhere, I'm an attorney, and a Democrat, and married an attorney, a Republican, and as a WOMAN I would be horrified if anyone suggested my professional or polirical points of view were in any way related to those facts.

[Logical]

15. Wow, yes shocking thinking someones spouse influences their opinion. I guess you think.....

Clarence Thomas's wife has no impact on his decisions?

[Dragonfli]

41. I think we are supposed to pretend Clarence's wife isn't married to him, just like with Andrea.

They are strong women that MUST BE RESPECTED (even if/when they are fascist)

[spanone]

14. if i were married to mr greenspan, i'd change both of my names

[niyad]

17. easier not to be married to that jerk in the first place.

[valerief]

18. Thank you for your concern. She still sucks. nt

[Warren Stupidity]

22. She is an asshat and her connection to Greenspan ought to be disqualifying

to any assertion that she is a journalist and not a corrupt hack. This is not an issue of sexism on du.

[tjdee]

23. Is Tweety still ok though?

Cause he's a professional etc. etc.

I mean look. The reason it is done is to highlight the connection to her husband's politics, not to disrespect her choice to retain her name.

She's not the only one with a nickname.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

24. Working?

Respect the name but laugh at her crap performance.

[elleng]

28. Not a chance.

She works hard.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

33. You should have completed your sentence

Last edited Fri Sep 7, 2012, 07:45 PM - Edit history (1)

At the 6:50 mark.

Wow, look at her stumble over calling fact "opinion."

She works hard at carrying the water for the GOP.


So I gave you two days for a reply and nothing? Kind of hard to argue what she is doing in the video.

[Dragonfli]

42. Much harder than blue collar folk I am sure

Jesus is this elite underground all of the sudden?

[elleng]

46. No, this is Democratic Underground

and I am a feminist.
She and Rachel and Lawrence work hard in their own ways, as do 'blue collar folk.'

'Jesus' has nothing to do with it.

[Dragonfli]

48. I think her "work" is pathetically easy, not worth minimium wage and yet she earns in one year

What an actual hard working woman makes in ten (or more likely twenty five).

Tough work there,. I can see all the callouses, I wish you would respect blue collar woman that do REAL WORK one-tenth as much,
But you likely have never worked on anything requiring sweat yourself so I doubt you can identify with real working woman.

Your soul is much poorer for not knowing the difference and not knowing the women you should be supporting over her, rather than supporting that entitled idiot over real women.

[HiPointDem]

67. all of a sudden?

[Zoeisright]

26. I'll call her whatever the hell I want.

Because she's a disgusting traitor. To her gender and to this country.

[elleng]

27. Of course you will,

and I'll disagree.

[Stinky The Clown]

29. I dare say not one person who posts on DU and refers to her as Mrs. Greenspan is even . . . . .

. . . . . thinking about the point you make. It is to point out her unflagging support of the 1% and the fact that she is a part of it.

There is, I suggest, not one whit of sexism in the use of that name for that particular woman.

[niyad]

30. small rant--the title should read "It's Andrea MITCHELL" not "Its Andrea MITCHELL"

it helps to know when to use apostrophes and when not. . .

[elleng]

35. Indeed. 'It is Andrea MITCHELL.'

[tabasco]

32. Fuck that piece of shit media whore.

'nuff said.

[TeamPooka]

34. Insulting Ms. Greenspan is the whole point of the nickname.

I'll be respectful to her when she earns some.

[Coexist]

36. does that mean I can't refer to Wolf Blitzer as "Leslie" anymore either?

[WinkyDink]

38. Yeah, well, TS, Eliot. I'll knock her and the man she rode in with.

[upi402]

39. media traitor

please pay attention

[rustydog]

44. R E S P E C T it should be a two-way street

Thank you for the small rant!

[elleng]

64. Thanks, rustydog.

[Ikonoklast]

51. She is a paid propagandist.

Her 'work' is trying to overthrow Democracy and install an Oligarchy.

Mrs. Greenspan doesn't care about a no one like you.

She is Leni Riefenstahl without the vision or talent.

[rufus dog]

53. As one of the main offenders, I understand your rant.

And when I use her husband's name in the title, I admit I cringe. My intent is not a shot at all women, but it is a shot at her, and her transparent act on MSNBC.

To you I offer a compromise, can she be referred to as Andrea (Greenspan) Mitchell? If that is still offensive I will refrain and use her name without any qualification or slur.

[elleng]

54. Thanks for the offer, rufus.

[rufus dog]

55. thank you for your post.

can I use Andrea (Greenspan) Mitchell?

[elleng]

56. Sure.

's up to you, rufus.

[rufus dog]

57. Good one!

You make me deal with the trepidation.

On my side Greenspan has been officially retired.

Damn Lawyers!

Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan,

o.k. I am done.

wait not yet.... Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan, Andrea Greenspan,

O.K. DONE!

[elleng]

61. TROUBLE, rufus!

Oh, was this meant for me??? I'M a lawyer!

And she's NEVER been called Andrea Greenspan, its NOT HER NAME, like mine has never been Ellen BlahBlahBlah, NEVER used that name!

[rufus dog]

76. The Dog is trying

See below

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021292839

[elleng]

77. Really good, and I appreciate it/you.

I thought she did well, at convention, too; don't watch her show usually, due to the hour its on, but neither have I had questions or problems with her reporting in the past. Haven't mentioned THAT little factoid until now, in this reply to you, dear dog!

Thanks!

[mykpart]

59. Regardless of her feelings about an issue

or to whom she's married, her reporting should be judged solely on its content. Just because you have a point of view doesn't necessarily mean it has to show in your reporting. That's part of being a professional.

[elleng]

62. Right, in fact, one's point of view should NOT show in reporting,

different from being an 'analyst' or whatever else they call themselves, like Matthews.

If they do let it show, they should step aside and say something like: This is my opinion/point of view, NOT a report of the occurrence.

[pewpface]

60. A. Greenspan

yes, hide behind your faux cloak of feminist authority while shaming people for having the audacity to point out andrea's not-so-unimportant relationship to one of the biggest fraudsters in american history. we only call her andrea greenspan because we're bigots. gotcha.

[elleng]

63. Are you, pewpface, calling the 40 or so DUers who have responded here bigots?

I am not doing so.
I have no 'feminist authority,' I simply recognize the facts and life of working women, and have done so for more than 40 years.

She is indeed married to a fraudster. Andrea Greenspan is NOT HER NAME.

[Duppers]

65. You miss the point

when DUers call this corporate journalist Mrs. Greenspan.

She is biased, nonobjective, and downright unfair when reporting on Democrats.

[HiPointDem]

66. "journalist" my ass. she's a paid propagandist. i give her no respect.

[HiPointDem]

68. i think it's funny how charges of 'sexism' 'racism' etc. so quickly follow slams on the 1%ers who

own this country and the political process.

i think it's funny how legitimate movements for human rights are turned into defenses for privilege and weapons against ordinary people.

[swayne]

70. "ANDREA GREENSPAN" is a DERISIVE TERM, just like "MARY CARVILLE" would be

However to her "credit" I don't think Mary Mataline ever really has to worry about that.

[progressivebydesign]

71. Ah the Democratic Party.. land of thin skins and endless umbrage.

We have bigger things to handle right now than the use of someone's husband's name. Frankly, I used my maiden name for business but like MOST professional women, we are ALSO Mrs... whatever, socially.

Of all the things to get bent over.. this?? It is important to know who she is aligned with because she's a "journalist," who has a bias, that matches her husband's ideology. I'll never apologize for calling her that.

[HappyMe]

72. With all of the things going on

in the world today, THIS is what you're on about?

When I was married, I didn't change my name. When people called me Mrs. K, I never ripped anyone a new one. Nor did I correct them.

[elleng]

74. Nor did I.

A SMALL rant, to which a surprising number responded.

[Vinnie From Indy]

73. Selective outrage

The pomposity with which this admonition is delivered is quite funny to me. If I were not so lazy, it would be great fun to review the posts of the OP to find any mention of any nickname of anyone. Has the OP ever referred to Chris Mattews as "Tweety" or Bill Clinton as the "Big Dog" or "Billary". Also, is it not equally as offensive to the OP to read posts where ony a first or last name is used to refer to a politician, journalist or celebrity. Would this also fail the OP's acceptable language matrix?

What is offensive to me is the OP's repeated assertion that Andrea Mitchell works hard. How would the OP know anything about that. Is Mitchell's appearing on screen when she supposed to sufficient to call her work hard? I happen to know hundreds of women that work brutal hours for only a fraction of what Mitchell undoubtedly gets paid. Also, how hard is it to read the GOP talking points and then repeat them on camera?

I plan on referring to Andrea Mitchell as Stinky McCrankypants from now on. Cheers!

[elleng]

75. Don't understand 'pomposity' I guess, Indy.

ostentation: lack of elegance as a consequence of being pompous and puffed up with vanity.

From THIS, you get that? 'Small rant: It is Andrea MITCHELL, DUers.
She is a working woman, and has decided to retain her own name. DU, at least, should respect that.'

In NO WAY is this OP intended to refer to 'nicknames.' It refers to a woman using her name, and others referring to her mistakenly with the name of her husband, which name she has never used.

Obviously you can refer to her however you would like.