Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

merrily

(45,251 posts)
44. This may come as a shock to you, but you are not a mind reader. I told you my
Mon Apr 11, 2016, 06:24 PM
Apr 2016

intent several times and not once did I say the intent was to demean her. It's a disclosure that, ethically, she and her network should be making EVERY time she is on air talking politics.

As far as all DUers knowing, I have several times seen people posting who did NOT know she is Alan Greenspan's wife, so you are mistaken about that as well. And more people read DU than post here. Even those who know may not have it at the forefront of their minds every time something is posted about her where it is relevant.

Obviously, this is some kind of huge issue for you, given you equate being called by your husband's name with calling me a name nasty enough to get you a hide,* but that does not mean Andrea Mitchell feels the same way as you do. That is merely your assumption.That someone uses the same professional name throughout their career does not necessarily mean they would be offended being called by their husband's last name while they are still married to each other. I do not accept that I am being rude to her simply because you don't want your husband's name used for you.

Also, I'd love to know how I am being rude to someone who does not know I exist, let alone which name I am using for her. If she complains to me about which name I am calling her, I will consider her complaints, including whether or not I've been rude to her. If I have, though, it's not even in the same universe as her unethical behavior in failing to disclose.

Similarly, if I call you by your husband's last name, I'll give your comments about that great consideration. However, your outrage and name calling of me over my calling someone who will never see my posts by her husband's last name when you don't know her or know if she actually would mind is starting to seem way over the top.

*Reply 9

Recommendations

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

Kickin' for the truth! Faux pas Apr 2016 #1
Thanks! merrily Apr 2016 #5
After the election... Else You Are Mad Apr 2016 #2
What you said...New 'FOX-2 Channel' coming soon! appalachiablue Apr 2016 #3
I'm not sure. This stuff is too important to the PTB. Murdoch didn't start Fox News merrily Apr 2016 #4
Good point. nt Else You Are Mad Apr 2016 #6
i tend to the young turks..i rarely watch any msm... restorefreedom Apr 2016 #7
I think at this point it might be interesting Ichingcarpenter Apr 2016 #8
New York can break hillary SoLeftIAmRight Apr 2016 #9
Who the hell is Mrs. Greenspan? SheilaT Apr 2016 #10
This goes to her vast conflict of interest, which NBC allows merrily Apr 2016 #11
+1! dorkzilla Apr 2016 #12
I agree! merrily Apr 2016 #19
No, you can't because I SheilaT Apr 2016 #13
Again, I read here. Mrs. Mitchell does not. I disagree that her behavior and that of NBC does not merrily Apr 2016 #14
Then it's okay if SheilaT Apr 2016 #15
Oops. I didn't mean Mrs. Mitchell. I meant Mrs. Greenspan. Thanks for correcting me. merrily Apr 2016 #16
There is no Mrs. Greenspan, SheilaT Apr 2016 #17
More rude, ad hom nonsense from you to me. merrily Apr 2016 #18
I did not alert, but I received a copy of the jury results. merrily Apr 2016 #42
Juror number 7 got it right. SheilaT Apr 2016 #45
No, Juror 7 and you are both wrong. merrily Apr 2016 #46
It's not about what her name is.... sense Apr 2016 #30
No, it's not innocuous. SheilaT Apr 2016 #32
This may come as a shock to you, but you are not a mind reader. I told you my merrily Apr 2016 #44
Thank you for getting it. Her husband's actions during the Clinton administration were merrily Apr 2016 #43
Sometimes it's a good idea to make the connection between husband and wife Art_from_Ark Apr 2016 #47
Tamron Hall went after Jeff Weaver today at the TOP of her lungs. It was disgusting. jillan Apr 2016 #20
I am sure her treatment was a lot more biased and louder than it should have been, but merrily Apr 2016 #21
This was scolding. I really wish Bernie & his entire campaign would boycott jillan Apr 2016 #22
Fox and MSNBC want similar things and those things do not included economic justice. merrily Apr 2016 #23
Did you think you would ever make a statement where you put msnbc in the same category as Fox? jillan Apr 2016 #24
Yes, I did. MSNBC was once all Republican all day, from Imus in the Morning, through merrily Apr 2016 #25
And they dumped Phil Donahue for being against the war. nt morningglory Apr 2016 #27
I have heard that, but it happened before my own MSNBC days. merrily Apr 2016 #29
She's another paid shrill for Hillary Riding Coattails Politicalboi Apr 2016 #26
This message was self-deleted by its author Mike Nelson Apr 2016 #28
Speaking of hit jobs, your post is "cute." merrily Apr 2016 #31
Apology... Mike Nelson Apr 2016 #33
That's very stand up of you. Thank you. merrily Apr 2016 #37
Did you piss in someone's cornflakes today, Merrily? dorkzilla Apr 2016 #34
I guess I must have. One day I'm the meadowlark of happiness merrily Apr 2016 #36
I usually drink Gertrude Jekyll and Snide for breakfast dorkzilla Apr 2016 #39
zomg. I am so stealing "Jekyll and Snide," you clever minx, you. merrily Apr 2016 #40
I bequeath it to you, dear friend. Go and Snide in peace. dorkzilla Apr 2016 #41
of course. she is mrs wall street. pansypoo53219 Apr 2016 #35
Shhhh. We're not supposed to know that she is not an unbiased journalist. merrily Apr 2016 #38
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Bernie Sanders»Mrs. Greenspan just devot...»Reply #44