Why Hillary Should Back Off MSNBC Fight

What on earth does Hillary Clinton think she has to gain from going to war against MSNBC?

For the past few days, the New York senator and presidential candidate has been publicly railing against the No. 3 cable news channel. The immediate impetus for Clinton's offensive was an offhand comment by correspondent David Shuster -- he wondered aloud whether the Clinton campaign was guilty of "pimping" out daughter Chelsea to court superdelegates -- but she has also dragged in past transgressions by Chris Matthews and Joe Scarborough.

But to what end? It's normal for campaigns, like athletes, to "work the refs" by protesting bad calls over-energetically. But by continuing to wave her arms and gibber after the other players have moved on, Clinton now risks turning journalists against her for real.

While Clinton believes MSNBC has it in for her, a producer there told me recently that the network's only bias is an institutional one shared by all media outlets. "Obama's new, so he's the story," says the producer. "She's been around for 16 years."

The Clinton campaign's decision to leak a letter of harsh criticism -- after Shuster had already apologized twice, and been suspended from his job -- was seen as a bullying move at MSNBC, where Shuster is well-regarded.

And the backlash hasn't been restricted to MSNBC. Yesterday, Barbara Walters told Clinton to cut Shuster some slack on The View -- a show that has heretofore been sympathetic to her candidacy, and that speaks directly to her core demographic of women.

If that's not enough to cause her to reconsider her actions, perhaps she should consider Fred Thompson's effort to get a fairer shake from Fox News. Remember how much good that did him?

Related: See Rachel Sklar's lengthy but astute take on the whole mess.