Prominent Washington journalists took pains to defend Ms. Sanders
Honestly, what a spectacle.
Prominent Washington journalists, meanwhile, took pains to defend Ms. Sanders — earning their own opprobrium from some liberals who asked why reporters were sticking up for an administration that routinely impugns their work.
Not just “liberals.” It’s not a purely left-right issue – as we’ve all pointed out a million times. Trump is a terrible human being, who does bad things to people right out in the open where we can see, all day every day. I don’t think so ill of Republicans as a whole that I think they all insult and belittle anyone who disagrees with them, but Trump does do that. Michelle Wolf is a fluffy bunny compared to Trump.
Andrea Mitchell, the NBC News correspondent, tweeted that an “apology is owed” to the press secretary. Her network colleague Mika Brzezinski wrote that “watching a wife and mother be humiliated on national television for her looks is deplorable.”
Several reporters who cover the White House approached Ms. Sanders in the Hilton ballroom to express sympathy in the immediate aftermath of Ms. Wolf’s monologue. Later, at a windswept after party hosted by NBC News, Ms. Sanders appeared in good spirits as reporters swarmed her. (She even took time to chastise one journalist for asking a question at a news conference that she disliked.)
And Maggie Haberman spoke from a very great height.
Ma’am, if you want to scroll through 3 years of Jake’s tweets or mine, you’ll find plenty about Trump’s language. Have a good Sunday. https://t.co/HkJ7gTlbV3
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) April 29, 2018
What a spectacle.
I think these press quislings are just desperate to avoid facing the hardest truth Michelle Wolf dished out:
“You guys are obsessed with Trump. Did you use to date him? Because you pretend like you hate him, but I think you love him. I think what no one in this room wants to admit is that Trump has helped all of you. He couldn’t sell steaks or vodka or water or college or ties or Eric. But he has helped you. He’s helped you sell your papers and your books and your TV. You helped create this monster, and now you’re profiting off of him. And if you’re going to profit off of Trump, you should at least give him some money, because he doesn’t have any.”
As far as I am concerned, at least, Michelle Wolf hit every every one of her uniformly loathsome targets dead center. They have nobody to blame but themselves for being such big fat targets.
Why is no one upset because she made a tasteless joke about Mitch McConnell’s neck? He has the saggy skin many elderly men have, but apparently it was far more egregious to comment on Sarah Sanders’ eye makeup.
I guess it’s cute to be impertinent towards an elderly statesman, but we have to be respectful to someone’s daughter who talks to the press—and the American public—like they have just said a naughty word in Sunday school. Her contempt and disdain for the truth are far more disrespectful than anything Wolf said.
Her Sarah Sanders material didn’t come off (well, to me) as making fun of her looks.
Also, I seem to remember Sarah Sanders’s boss making an intemperate remark or two about women’s looks. Some of those women might even have been mothers!
I always thought that WHCD was for grown-ups, an in-group jolly where it was almost certain that someone or several would get a thorough ribbing.
Why are they so fixated on the make-up bit? There is another way of reading this – if only Sarah Huckabee Sanders’ press-secretarying were as good as her make-up is then we would not be in this goddam mess.
Several other well-crafted barbs were launched at that dinner but they are trying to distract attention with trivia.
Another thing about this “humiliated for her looks” bullshit–Andrea Mitchell and the rest of them are journalists. They make their living using words.
And they can’t see that that joke was about lies rather than eyes? They can’t parse a fucking joke?
Infuriating.