This is getting ridiculous. On Wednesday night’s Countdown, Keith Olbermann and Howard Fineman, discussing Hillary Clinton’s continued presence in the Democratic nominating contest, conducted the following exchange:
Fineman: What this is going to require…is some adults somewhere in the Democratic party to step in and stop this thing, like a referee in a fight that could go on for thirty rounds. That’s what’s going on. Those are the super, super, super delegates who are going to have to really decide this.
Olbermann: Right. Somebody who can take her into a room and only he comes out.
You can watch the exchange here:
There’s been an outcry (though not, tellingly, in the mainstream press) against Olbermann’s comments, most of it crying sexism. Which could be right, to be sure—but I’m not completely convinced. (You could certainly build a case for sexism based on the many other inappropriate things Keith Olbermann has said about Hillary Clinton; in this instance, however, the Olbermannian impropriety seems rooted in its wink-wink suggestion of violence, rather than the fact that that suggestion was directed at a woman.)
Regardless. There’s really no getting around the core problem here: that a prominent newsman suggested, on national television, that a candidate for the presidency of the United States should be beaten up (or worse). Even being generous and leaving aside the sexism/violence stuff…it was a stupid thing for Olbermann to say. Not “stupid” as in “inappropriate”—although it’s that, too—but “stupid” as in “intellectually vapid” and “insipid” and “a waste of everyone’s time.” There’s so much that the press, reporters and commentators alike, could be talking about right now when it comes to the campaign—and when it comes to everything else that’s going on in the world. Instead, here’s one of the most powerful men in the media, a man who can boast an audience of nearly a million viewers each night, vocally amusing himself at the image of the Democratic superdelegates “deciding” the nomination by beating up the second-place candidate. It’s frustrating. It’s insulting. It’s baffling.
Olbermann uses Edward R. Murrow’s famous words—“Good night, and good luck”—as a sign-off in his own Countdown broadcast. That never made sense to me; why call attention to greatness when you yourself are so far from it? But today, the day that would have been Murrow’s 100th birthday, the comparison seems especially ironic. And especially sad.
Update: Per a wonderfully thoughtful piece from Salon’s Joan Walsh: looks like Olbermann has apologized—sort of—for the remark.
“It is a metaphor. I apologize: the generic ‘he’ gender could imply something untoward,” Olbermann said, in a statement MSNBC spokesperson Alana Russo forwarded me a few minutes ago. “It should’ve been ‘only the other comes out — from a political point of view.’”

I heard this and did not for one second think it implied actual violence. It was metaphoric. Keith can be over the top, yes. However, he is one of the few in any media that is not echoing the Clintons' spin that she can win and has the most votes. I am really upset with how they are conducting their campaign and I am a white female boomer.I am really upset with the fact that no one is pointing out how outrageous her reaction to a 9.2 point win in PA is except John Stewart and Stephen Colbert (besides Keith). In my opinion there has been sexism in the sense that a man could NOT have gotten away with any of Hillary's stunts.NOT ANY.
Posted by JDS
on Fri 25 Apr 2008 at 06:02 PM
This article suggests someone looking for something that doesn't exist. As the other post indicates Olbermann's comments are entirely appropriate based on HRC's tactics and behavior. His recent remark had obviously more than one interpretation. Do we always have to look for a sneaky motive whenever a "suspicious" comment is made. That's what we have become, partially because of the vile and criminal administration we have had for almost eight years. Our abilities to accept things at face value is gone; not always appropriately.
Posted by Skeptic
on Fri 25 Apr 2008 at 07:23 PM
I really wish that these CJR blogs would spend a little less time analyzing the kinds of things that talking heads say to fill up their 24-hour-7-days-a-week newshole. Stories like this that focus on an unscripted comment seem especially nonconstructive.
The points are valid and clear (even if somewhat unconvincing). Perhaps it would be more constructive to look at something that Olbermann said in a scripted portion of his show to make a point about how bad he is. Of course what he said was "a waste everyone's time." That's precisely why people watch Olbermann's show and others like it -- to waste time.
Posted by From where I sit
on Fri 25 Apr 2008 at 11:45 PM
Thank you JDS for pointing that out. And I disagree with "from where I sit" that K.O. is a waste of time. I think Keith's plea to HRC to shackle G. Ferraro was brilliant. And he was the only one brave enough to say it the way he said it. To me that was 6 months worth of any perceived wasted viewing time. And that is just one example.
Posted by keithalso
on Sat 26 Apr 2008 at 02:18 PM