General Discussion

Zoeisright

(8,339 posts)

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

Reply to elleng (Original post)

Wed Sep 5, 2012, 08:09 PM

Sep 2012

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

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

78 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Small rant: It is Andrea MITCHELL, DUers. [View all] elleng Sep 2012 OP

Well, we know that KamaAina Sep 2012 #1

it is important, that is not a well known fact Whisp Sep 2012 #4

I'm offended that some think pointing out any such thing is important. elleng Sep 2012 #11

Well, you may be onto something there KamaAina Sep 2012 #16

Right. Thanks, KamaAina. elleng Sep 2012 #21

Her husband is NOT just ANY Republican, FGS. WinkyDink Sep 2012 #37

SO WHAT? elleng Sep 2012 #43

A journalist who covers government is not equivalent to a lawyer. Jim Lane Sep 2012 #58

Fuck Andrea Mitchell. Jazzgirl Sep 2012 #2

+1 GodlessBiker Sep 2012 #3

You first...nt PCIntern Sep 2012 #13

eeewwwww Cali_Democrat Sep 2012 #19

He probably needs Viagra anyway AnnieBW Sep 2012 #45

and fuck you Andrea Greenspan too DontTreadOnMe Sep 2012 #20

Not with Ann Coulter's zbdent Sep 2012 #25

Please delete this comment. Ms. Toad Sep 2012 #69

Please delete this comment Vanje Sep 2012 #78

I think people just want to tag her with the failed policies of her husband that madinmaryland Sep 2012 #5

We know she 'still supports' policies elleng Sep 2012 #7

That isn't it at all. Her reports are transparently biased and Cleita Sep 2012 #8

I'm with you, elleng. She's not all bad, by any means, and shouldn't be discounted gateley Sep 2012 #6

And that's exactly why we don't like her. Cleita Sep 2012 #9

That's perfectly valid, but she goes by Mitchell and calling her Greenspan seems childish. gateley Sep 2012 #31

Her views themselves are "Greenspanian" should we pretend her views are otherwise? Dragonfli Sep 2012 #40

Right. I'd have you pretend she doesn't have those views. gateley Sep 2012 #49

Then you understand that the "Greenspan" honorific is descriptive Dragonfli Sep 2012 #50

I don't recall saying I respected her, liked her, or agree with her. gateley Sep 2012 #52

Thanks, gate. elleng Sep 2012 #47

You are missing the whole point!!! It isn't that people give a shit about her last name.... Logical Sep 2012 #10

Highly offensive suggestion. elleng Sep 2012 #12

Wow, yes shocking thinking someones spouse influences their opinion. I guess you think..... Logical Sep 2012 #15

I think we are supposed to pretend Clarence's wife isn't married to him, just like with Andrea. Dragonfli Sep 2012 #41

if i were married to mr greenspan, i'd change both of my names spanone Sep 2012 #14

easier not to be married to that jerk in the first place. niyad Sep 2012 #17

Thank you for your concern. She still sucks. nt valerief Sep 2012 #18

She is an asshat and her connection to Greenspan ought to be disqualifying Warren Stupidity Sep 2012 #22

Is Tweety still ok though? tjdee Sep 2012 #23

Working? R. Daneel Olivaw Sep 2012 #24

Not a chance. elleng Sep 2012 #28

You should have completed your sentence R. Daneel Olivaw Sep 2012 #33

Much harder than blue collar folk I am sure Dragonfli Sep 2012 #42

No, this is Democratic Underground elleng Sep 2012 #46

I think her "work" is pathetically easy, not worth minimium wage and yet she earns in one year Dragonfli Sep 2012 #48

all of a sudden? HiPointDem Sep 2012 #67

I'll call her whatever the hell I want. Zoeisright Sep 2012 #26

Of course you will, elleng Sep 2012 #27

I dare say not one person who posts on DU and refers to her as Mrs. Greenspan is even . . . . . Stinky The Clown Sep 2012 #29

small rant--the title should read "It's Andrea MITCHELL" not "Its Andrea MITCHELL" niyad Sep 2012 #30

Indeed. 'It is Andrea MITCHELL.' elleng Sep 2012 #35

Fuck that piece of shit media whore. tabasco Sep 2012 #32

Insulting Ms. Greenspan is the whole point of the nickname. TeamPooka Sep 2012 #34

does that mean I can't refer to Wolf Blitzer as "Leslie" anymore either? Coexist Sep 2012 #36

Yeah, well, TS, Eliot. I'll knock her and the man she rode in with. WinkyDink Sep 2012 #38

media traitor upi402 Sep 2012 #39

R E S P E C T it should be a two-way street rustydog Sep 2012 #44

Thanks, rustydog. elleng Sep 2012 #64

She is a paid propagandist. Ikonoklast Sep 2012 #51

As one of the main offenders, I understand your rant. rufus dog Sep 2012 #53

Thanks for the offer, rufus. elleng Sep 2012 #54

thank you for your post. rufus dog Sep 2012 #55

Sure. elleng Sep 2012 #56

Good one! rufus dog Sep 2012 #57

TROUBLE, rufus! elleng Sep 2012 #61

The Dog is trying rufus dog Sep 2012 #76

Really good, and I appreciate it/you. elleng Sep 2012 #77

Regardless of her feelings about an issue mykpart Sep 2012 #59

Right, in fact, one's point of view should NOT show in reporting, elleng Sep 2012 #62

A. Greenspan pewpface Sep 2012 #60

Are you, pewpface, calling the 40 or so DUers who have responded here bigots? elleng Sep 2012 #63

You miss the point Duppers Sep 2012 #65

"journalist" my ass. she's a paid propagandist. i give her no respect. HiPointDem Sep 2012 #66

i think it's funny how charges of 'sexism' 'racism' etc. so quickly follow slams on the 1%ers who HiPointDem Sep 2012 #68

"ANDREA GREENSPAN" is a DERISIVE TERM, just like "MARY CARVILLE" would be swayne Sep 2012 #70

Ah the Democratic Party.. land of thin skins and endless umbrage. progressivebydesign Sep 2012 #71

With all of the things going on HappyMe Sep 2012 #72

Nor did I. elleng Sep 2012 #74

Selective outrage Vinnie From Indy Sep 2012 #73

Don't understand 'pomposity' I guess, Indy. elleng Sep 2012 #75