Disgusting Olbermann and the boys club- say whatever the hell they want about Clinton.  This is disgusting-

Well I'd say it was a very poor choice of metaphor.  But it is in no way meant to suggest that someone take her out physically.  

The faux outrage is tiresome.

Between the comment of 'pimping Chelsea out' and this pretty obvious metaphor a superdelegate being 'strong' enough to convince Hillary to back down.

If anything, Keith is complimenting Hillary on her strength -- or stubbornness -- by saying that there's very few people who have the stature to do this. Her husband would be one, but unfortunately he's a little biased.

It's context, and it's a little silly to argue anything else other than what the interview was about.

Seriously, a second diary about an simple turn of phrase. And yes, its just a well accepted metaphor that is not seen as racist or a call for violence.

I saw the segment last night. If Edwards were the one (he was my guy) they were talking about I wouldn't be offended.

Your outrage not only makes you appear to be so partisan  you are divorced from reality, it causes any other legitimate complaint you make seem less true.

Again, before you cry wolf, make sure its not a poodle.

"Yeah, somebody who can take her into a room and only he comes out."

How about he take her into the room - I think we all know who'd come out, and it wouldn't be Keith.

He sent an "apology" to Rachael Sklar at Huff POst but couldn't resist his nasty nature and complained that she was just trying to be mean to him rather than genuinely critical of his statement.

"BaWhaaaaaaa.  People are being mean to me.  BaWhaaaaaaa."

KO.  Worst. Person. In. The. World.

Women do get more phone calls than men so maybe that's all he meant.  She got a call and stayed behind to chat awhile.

But in reality I think it's time for us to get beyond this MSNBC bull and start talking about boycotting GE.  The momma company lets the kids go wild until people involve them directly.

I think it's time.

Can the fringe posters please coordinate a little better.  Did we really need three diaries posted about the same topic within a space of 20 min?

The media is angry that it's power was insufficient to give Obama a win in Pennsylvania.

To millions of women, that is an outrageous comment.  To every women who has ever been physically abused, that is an outrageous comment.  To every women who has ever been threaten by a man, that is an outrageous comment.  

I remember having a boss take me into his office and LOCK THE DOOR (I was 7 months pregnant) and tell me that I had just made a grievous error in a client presentation.  His hands were tightly gripping the edge of his desk as he spoke.  I ask what I had done and he told me that when he had said "yes" (about a presentation slide) he had really meant no...but that I had told the client "yes".  Other than wondering the the f*ck he was talking about I was scared - really scared.  The client was looking for me and he knocked on the office door and when he heard the lock being unlocked and came in he was very concerned about what had been going on.  My husband and my bosses' boss were not happy campers when I reported this idiot to them.  And this was in 1977.

So don't ever threaten to take a women into a room and only have the man come back out.

Olberman should be fired IMHO.

Name me on instance where this phrase has been taken a serious threat when used in this context. Are you all so pathetically partisan that reason has totally escaped your grasp? If you have a blow up over this non-event, when a real threat comes out know one will believe you. You are becoming the stereotype of the fanatical supporter, overly sensitive to any perceived threat that reason no longer functions as a check on your thought processes.

Seriously, this is one dumb-ass diary.

And Keith will be happy.

Olbermann is being and continues to be paid a great deal of money for speaking the way he does - however vile. That means that MSNBC not only condones, but even encourages it. And there must be financial benefits behind MSNBC clear bias and support for Obama candidacy. Quality journalism is definitely no longer a virtue in the age of so-called "hope" and "change", among many other essential things we really need.

BRAVO!

Think that is too far? A real stretch? Just a tad bit hysterical?

Replace Hillary Clinton with Barack Obama in that formulation and you tell me what that means. If someone said this about Barack Obama, it would mean that this man be lynched to remove him from a path to power. Period. Full stop. No equivocations.

There would be an outcry from EVERY Democrat, even those of us who do much care for Obama as a candidate, condemning those words, because that is what we are called upon to do when confronted with evil.

Diary spam should be a bannable offense. there is already a diary covering this on the rec list. Please delete this diary.

Certainly not the words I would have chosen, but if anyone is really drinking the Kool-Aid deeply enough to think that this is a call for physical violence, they're beyond help. You folks should be more outraged, I'd suggest, at the open floating of a smoky-backroom deal to end her candidacy.

Which, of course, is what he was talking about, not some physical scenario. Am I wrong in assuming everyone here understands that at some level, or is this just too convenient for a common-outrage community-building exercise?

Sounds like it's time for KO to go back to calling basketball games--always seemed like he tried too hard to be the "cool kid" on his news network when most of us already knew all he was is a 2nd class sports reporter...

2 or 3 month vacation before he pops a blood vessel in his head, or his head simply explodes. If Hillary does well in Indiana, he may need a defibrillator on hand. This Edward R. Murrow wannabe has gone beserk with his Clinton-hating B.S. "Hey Keith! Our Democratic primary has more than one candidate. Ever hear of journalistic integrity?" Good night, and good luck....

If this is the "new issue" you have hit rock bottom and are digging.  You are making a racial issue out of this?  Why don't you all just get on top of your roofs and scream "AMERICA ARE YOU CRAZY, HE'S A BLACK GUY."  B/c that is really why Clinton(s) and supporters keep talking race.  Obama has tried to make this non-racial and you guys want to remind everyone about how we truly feel about black men in America.  Your sick.  This is why, as a joke, Jon Stewart, asked Obama "Will you enslave the white race?"  B/c that is the "fear" Pennians are trying to instill.  Damn you!

Ok, so if two people go into a room and only one comes out - what happens to the other person?  Seriously.  Maybe he wasn't inciting a call to violence against Hillary but the implication that the second person doesn't come out is blatently hostile, at best.

Reactions from prominent women bloggers:

From Rachel Sklar of Huffington Post -- Keith Olbermann's Idea For Beating Hillary: Literally Beating Hillary

Excerpt:

What does that mean? Really, it can only mean one thing: Beating the crap out of Hillary Clinton, to the point where she is physically incapable of of getting up and walking out. At minimum. We know this. We know this because we have all seen movies where people are invited into private places to have "discussions" and the unruly party is, um, dealt with accordingly. It's an unmistakably violent image.
Do I really think Olbermann thinks Hillary Clinton should really be violently beaten to the point of physical incapacitation, or worse? No, though some have taken that statement to its logical conclusion. But it is an unmistakably violent image -- and that point seems to be undisputed by those who have written about it so far (Google "Olbermann" and "take her into a room" and you'll see results like "Keith Olbermann Advocates Violence Against Hillary" "Olbermann: Misogyny 101" "Calls To End Race Turn Violent""Olbermann: How To Snuff Out Hillary Clinton"). Even Fineman seemed taken aback by the statement - there is a distinct pause after, and it's an eternity in TV time. He's not facing the camera but you can tell that the statement was jarring. (Even so he agreed, saying, "Yes, yes exactly.")

There really seems to be only one interpretation here, and the only point of debate is on whether it's okay or not. I'm going to cut that one short: It's not. To the fellow (male) journo I wrote to about this yesterday, who waved it off as just some colorful film-noir imagery, I say: can you IMAGINE if someone had said that about Obama? That he should be taken somewhere and dealt with, so that he wouldn't come back? Can you imagine if some right-winger had talked about getting Obama out of the race "the old-fashioned way?" If that last one makes you cringe, it should, because it evokes a history of violence against black people in this country that is raw and real. Well, frankly, the same goes for women -- many of whom have been taken somewhere private, and never returned.

I can already hear the outcry of those who can't believe I'd equate the gender card with the race card. Well, too bad. They're both issues, they're both factors, and in the first presidential campaign where both a woman and an African-American have a real shot at the nomination, they're both all too germane. Each of the candidates is a complex person whose appeal or lack thereof can be endlessly parsed and attributed to all sorts of factors. But sexism is one of them, and part of the problem is that too many of such comments are waved away as being just jokes or not a big deal or geez, take a chill pill. Well sure, I'd be happy to -- as soon as I can no longer find articles like this one, which cites the example of "a politically progressive man who made a series of legitimate complaints about Clinton's policies before adding that when he hears the senator's voice, he's overcome by an urge to punch her in the face."

To my mind, this is much worse than Pimp-Gate, which entailed an off-color implication resulting from David Shuster's misguided attempt to sound cool, and even worse than Chris Matthews saying that Clinton had gotten where she was because her husband had "messed around." If David Shuster can be suspended for likening Chelsea Clinton to a prostitute, then what happens when Keith Olbermann implies that the only way to stop Hillary Clinton is to inflict some sort of physical harm on her? Like I said above, I don't think that Olbermann meant it literally, but that's not the point. Words matter, and so do the images they evoke. This can't be ignored.

A reader of her blog post made the following comment:  "As an Obama supporter, sometimes Mr. Olbermann and his veiled/not-so veiled misogyny has me reconsidering my vote."

I personally have heard many of my women friends told me that the misogyny against Senator Clinton is so hurtful that they have developed an intense fear of Obama and his supporters.  I'm sure this type of fear is partially responsible for the poor support Obama is getting from women voters.

She humiliated KO when she was on his show.  She answered his 'hard' questions with clarity and humor, and he was left speechless. He can rant about her for hours, as long as she isn't there.  But he was plenty able to threaten her behind her back, what a brave man? In so doing he called for violence, and he probably doesn't even know what he did that was wrong. He thinks she deserves to be killed?  That is far over the top, and he is so admired by his male viewers, that he's asked for her to be assassinated, and someone may decide to obey him.  The sexism on MSNBC is dangerous, and Keith must be fired.  He isn't responsible enough to have a bully pulpit.    

If Olbermann went into a room with Hillary I am pretty sure SHE would be the one coming out!

With his ridiculous hit job on Clinton on NAFTAGATE. That was one of the most disgusting pieces of "journalismL" I have ever seen. He reported an unsubstantiated allegation as fact and offered no rebuttal. He just had Howard Fineman to perpetuate his smear, which was exposed as factually wrong a few days later.

I think Olbermann is around the bend these days.

... recced by the same HillaryIs44 mob.  Musta got the same e-mail notice that TexasDarlin' got.

Besides the major lie about Olberman making violent threats (total bullshit) Randi Rhodes was not fired.  Her contract, negotiated at a time when AAR couldn't pay their number-one talent what she was worth, so they had to give her pretty much anything else she wanted, actually prohibited AAR from firing her, and the new suits there didn't like that.  They took her off the air because she wouldn't change her contract, using a two-week old comedy performance as an excuse.  

After the public outcry against her suspension, and the enormous drop in podcast subscriptions, the suits ended up begging her to stay, even offered her more money to stay, but they required her first to apologize, so they could save some face.  She refused to apologize;  and as soon as the date specified in her contract arrived that allowed her to quit AAR, she quit, and took herself and her fans to NovaM radio.  

Most of the stations that used to carry her still do, via the new syndicator, and her show is better than it has been in years -- she's having fun again, back in her home in Florida, freed of the AAR idiot suits.