Chris Matthews Shows It Wouldn't Matter How Palin Answered Couric's Reading Question
For well over two years, the liberal media have made fun of how Sarah Palin answered Katie Couric's ridiculous question concerning what she reads.
On Thursday, Chris Matthews, along with MSNBC political analyst Richard Wolffe, made it clear that no matter how the former Alaska governor answered that question, she was going to be ridiculed (video follows with transcript and commentary):
CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Here she is telling Barbara Walters what she reads, a dangerous area. Let’s listen.
(LAUGHTER)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SARAH PALIN (R), FORMER ALASKA GOVERNOR: I read a lot of C.S. Lewis when I want some divine inspiration. I read Newsmax and "Wall Street Journal." I read all of our local papers, of course, in Alaska, because that’s where my heart is. I read anything and everything that I can get my hands on, as I have since I was a little girl.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
MATTHEWS: I just love Barbara Walter’s face, that discerning look: I have seen you people come and go. What is this number all about?
I could just see her looking at this candidate.
Your thoughts?
NEWTON-SMALL: Well, I mean, if you read "America By Heart," I think this book is actually a giant sort of tribute to Katie Couric. And, essentially, it’s like, here, Katie. You asked what I read. Here is a giant list of everything that I have read. And it’s just excerpts of every single thing that she’s read in the last two years.
MATTHEWS: But Newsmax. Explain Newsmax, why she would say something like that. That’s a digest of conservative to right-wing thinking. You don’t have to read. They just tell you the little items you’re supposed to know.
NEWTON-SMALL: I mean, that’s her base. That’s exactly her base, is Newsmax, people who read Newsmax, people who watch Newsmax.
MATTHEWS: Well, why would you say that’s among your reading every day?
Your thoughts about that? Why would you say something like that? It’s like I’m getting ingested. I don’t read.
WOLFFE: It’s not reading it for the news in Newsmax, is it?
(CROSSTALK)
MATTHEWS: Just looking for one-liners.
WOLFFE: All "The Chronicles of Narnia."
(LAUGHTER)
WOLFFE: Look, divine inspiration from a series of kids books? I don’t think C.S. Lewis would really want Newsmax in --
(CROSSTALK)
MATTHEWS: But I wouldn’t put down C.S. Lewis.
WOLFFE: No, I’m not putting him down.
MATTHEWS: Right.
WOLFFE: But divine inspiration? There are things she could have said for divine inspiration. Choosing C.S. Lewis is an interesting one.
And Newsmax, yes, it is playing to the base, but this isn’t a source - - look, she could have spent the last two years boning up on policy and showing she was serious to answer the Katie Couric question or to deal with the 40-odd percent of Republicans who think she’s not qualified to be president.
This is not doing it, is it?
Pretty clear there is absolutely NO answer to this question that would satisfy the likes of Matthews and Wolffe.
As Alex Pappas at The Daily Caller noted shortly after this aired, "[T]he acclaimed British academic and creator of childrens’ books [C.S. Lewis] was also a noted writer of works on Christianity."
These included "Mere Christianity," "The Problem of Pain," and "Miracles."
Readers are advised this ignorant display occurred on "Hardball," a program that according to the host is "absolutely nonpartisan."
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Illiterate liberal
Submitted by Moonstone716 on Thu, 12/09/2010 - 9:54pm.
Richard Wolffe is broadcasting his ignorance. To him, C.S. Lewis is just a writer of children's books, and he knows that because some have been made into movies.
Of course, no one who watches Hardball would know any more than he does.
just out of curiosity
Submitted by djwolf12 on Thu, 12/09/2010 - 11:17pm.
When Wolffe was a young cub, in school during attendence, did the schoolmaster say: Wolffe, Dick?
Palin's Reading List
Submitted by The Grooter on Thu, 12/09/2010 - 9:59pm.
Palin really could have satisfied Ba-Ba and Tingle by stating that her reading list included:
1. Daily NYT, after first bowing down to the paper on the porch.
2. Das Kapital.
3. Mao's Little Red Book.
4. Anything by Mia Angelu
5. Plato's Republic (the original Communist Manifesto)
6. Dreams of My Father (Once a week)
7. Closing each day with anothe romp through the NYT.
You forgot the BIGGIES
Submitted by Galvanic on Thu, 12/09/2010 - 10:08pm.
While England Slept
Profiles in Courage
both ghost written for John F. Kennedy.
And.....
Submitted by TempusFugit on Thu, 12/09/2010 - 11:18pm.
...Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals
~Holy cow, Matthews is ignorant
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Thu, 12/09/2010 - 10:03pm.
Let's see, off the top of my head:
Mere Christianity
Surprised by Joy
The Problem of Pain
A Grief Observed
The Great Divorce
The Screwtape Letters
The Four Loves
Miracles
Oh, and Reflections on the Psalms
C.S. Lewis
Submitted by TempusFugit on Thu, 12/09/2010 - 11:17pm.
Anybody who knows anything about Lewis knows that Narnia was the most trivial thing he wrote. He wrote EXTENSIVELY about Christianity, as the above examples show. And Palin doesn't even mention Narnia, so I assumed that she was referring to his non-fiction works. BTW he also dabbled in science fiction, such as That Hideous Strength and Out of the Silent Planet
Be careful
Submitted by HockeyKid on Thu, 12/09/2010 - 11:28pm.
how you trivialize Narnia. That series contains a great wealth of thought regarding the nature of Christian existence.
NONE of Lewis' literary work is without a great deal of merit, nor cause for reflection.
Oh, and you forgot Perelandra, the other book in the Perelandra Trilogy.
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
You're right
Submitted by TempusFugit on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 12:29am.
Poor choice of words. I meant to say "lightweight" or something similar. I certainly wasn't dissing Narnia: I love the series and it's profound. But it was aimed at children, and is on a much lower intellectual level than his non-fiction work
CS Lewis wrote more than Chronicles of Narnia
Submitted by Okieflyover on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 2:00am.
Do you people not know that?
~And Perelandra
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 11:45am.
I just listed all his "inspirational" works I could think of.
My personal favorite is his autobiography, "Surprised by Joy". I got myself a nice copy of it for my 29th b-day.
I wish she had said, I read
Submitted by RefudiateObama2012 on Thu, 12/09/2010 - 10:30pm.
I wish she had said, I read some op-eds from the NYTimes and The WaPo, but I don't subscribe to them. If they want to send them to me, I've always got some fish to wrap.
Couric wanted an answer that would make Palin look bad
Submitted by nkviking75 on Thu, 12/09/2010 - 10:53pm.
Couric's question was intended to elicit an answer that could be used to prove that Palin was (1) a dolt; (2) a right-wing extremist; (3) a religious nut; (4) all of the above. I'm sure Palin's mind was racing trying to avoid the trap, but unfortunately she couldn't. If Katie were forced to answer the same question, no doubt the list she'd give would make her look bad as well.
“Always love your country — but never trust your government!" -- Bob Novak (1931-2009)
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
Listen to
Submitted by NDanielson on Thu, 12/09/2010 - 11:12pm.
Newton-Small (call Kathy Griffith, there's a misnomer there) talk about "excerts" in place of the word excerpts. Liberals are such hypocrite clowns. Trying to sound smart while talking sh!t about someone who outclasses them by leaps and bounds. All their slams based on some canard or another, as well. Idiots.
I am losing my mind if I keep talking
Submitted by djwolf12 on Thu, 12/09/2010 - 11:10pm.
about Chris Matthews. This is a guy who blasts republicans that didn't serve in Vietnam (while Chris deferred his service during the war and opted to become a Peace Corpseman) and spends an entire segment on his show today about something of true relevence to 2010 issues: WATERGATE!!!! What a joke. This network needs to change its name to MSWTF?
If Sarah happens to be the
Submitted by MidAmerica on Thu, 12/09/2010 - 11:17pm.
If Sarah happens to be the next Republican nominee it won't matter what she reads. The next election is a referemdum on obama and right now he's looking pretty vulnerable.
Matthews and Wolffe: quite the pair
Submitted by HockeyKid on Thu, 12/09/2010 - 11:21pm.
Matthews seems to realize that Wolffe's about to make them both look like complete jackasses; he at least warns off the attack. Wolffe, on the other hand, is totally oblivious to the fact that he is looking down his nose at Clive Staples Lewis, Oxford Don, veteran of the trenches of World War I and the man credited with maintaining, through his radio broadcasts, Britain's spiritual compass during World War II.
Wolffe's puny mind can't even apprehend the vastness of its own ignorance.
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
Another Liberal Doublespeak!
Submitted by gopcongress on Thu, 12/09/2010 - 11:24pm.
"You don’t have to read. They just tell you the little items you’re supposed to know."
Can anyone please explain to me how this works? Anyone?
"The news and truth are not the same thing." -Walter Lippmann (1889-1974) FOLLOW ME ON TWITTER
Aren't these same news
Submitted by MidAmerica on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 12:08am.
Aren't these same news outlets that accuse Palin of being poorly read and informed the same news outlets that have been pushing the fraudulent Global Warming scam?
I would say that anyone who did not read or listen to the MSM is probably better informed than the people who are constantly being duped by politically biased news sources. These are the same people who sent children to bed crying because the polar bears and the penguins were dying. So not only is the MSM full of lies they also will stoop to using childrens fears to advance a political cause. .....shameless
Everything about Richard
Submitted by shannon76 on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 12:09am.
Everything about Richard Wolffe offends me. Since it's the end of the year I'm going to go ahead and pull this card: I wish we could deport his scrawny, faux-intellectual, Obama jock sniffing, ass back to England.
Mere Christianity looks at
Submitted by tfindian on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 12:09am.
Mere Christianity looks at the reality of God in such a way that is absolutely brilliant, and yet written in such a common sense approach......... a dummy like me can read it. It will give anybody that reads it, divine inspiration. The thing that kills me is how the libs are always bragging/talking about everybodys intelligence....and judging who's smart and dumb. And yet C.S. Lewis is one of the smartest writers of the 20th Century. Jeesh.
The lib talking heads are
Submitted by Richard B. on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 12:13am.
The lib talking heads are really becoming boring. Why anyone tunes them in is incomparehensible. Mathews is totally tuned out of reality.
Run the stats on Newsbusters/MSNBC articles...
Submitted by Slyrr on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 12:26am.
Can someone do the stats on this? We need a run-down of how many Newsbusters articles are centered around reports from, on or about MSNBC, it's reporters and their guests.
Seriously - what would Newsbusters talk about if MSNBC didn't exist? Sure there's plenty of other liberal bias, but everybody knows that MSNBC wins the prize for 'most flagrantly liberal/partisan/socialist network in the history of planet Earth and beyond'.
They're not even a news organization - why waste breath on them? The wiki documents showed that Obama and the Demorats used the 'stimulus' racketeering scheme as a front to buy out MSNBC through GE. MSNBC is bought and paid for, totally owned by Democrats, and everyone knows it.
Posting articles saying 'MSNBC is biased for Democrats' is like posting articles saying 'sun will rise tomorrow' or 'earth spins on its axis once every 24 hours', or 'breathing found useful in preventing death'.
It's just not news anymore. We all know they stink and can't be trusted. End of story - move on.
While I acknowledge that it's
Submitted by Chris Norman on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 12:36am.
While I acknowledge that it's informative to know what liberals are saying on the unfiltered medium that is MSNBC, I agree that using them as a source of liberal bias in the media is like shooting fish in a barrel. I maintain that the slightly more subtle liberal bias (it used to be a lot more subtle) on the other networks, the newspapers, magazines (excluding Time and Newsweek) and in entertainment is much more insidious and dangerous.
You miss the point
Submitted by art341 on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 5:46am.
It's that MSNBC is one of the funniest idiot shows ever collected into one place. No more searching around for idiots of different sorts, there they are all neatly collected in one spot. Sort of one stop shopping.
Think about it, have any of you ever seen anything funnier than Ed Schultz? Anything nastier than Keith Olberman? Anything dopier than Chris Matthews? Anything more vacuous than Rachel Maddow? Anything more idiotic than Lawrence O'Donnell? (Who, tonight appologized to the oh so gentlemanly Alan Grayson for embarrassing him by showing him to be the uninformed dolt he really is.)
See, it's all in one place. Just crack open a brewski, settle down and four hours later your ribs are screaming in pain and you haven't even stressed the batteres in your remote. Really, what could be more convenient?
Seminaries and theological
Submitted by Darasen on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 12:33am.
Seminaries and theological programs require reading C.S. Lewis. These lefties are once again showing their absolute ignorance.
How Rich
Submitted by donabernathy on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 1:40am.
-
Come to think of it... that pretty much sums up MSMBC the bend over...ummm lean forward network.
-
roflmaoCS Lewis wrote more than Chronicles of Narnia
Submitted by Okieflyover on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 1:57am.
These guys prove the adage more and more every day:
"It is better to remain silent and be thought the fool than to speak and remove all doubt."
More tolerant liberals
Submitted by Okieflyover on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 2:04am.
I love how tolerant liberals say they are but they are so quick to bash others.
When is the last time Matthews added value to any conversation?
Tingles: "What is this number [Palin] all about?"
Submitted by SickofLibs on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 9:38am.
Didn't that go out with 23 skidoo?
What a misogynist this creep is.
Matthews and Co. are the dolts
Submitted by crusain on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 11:44am.
The great James Burnham (in his book Suicide of the West) described how left-liberals inform themselves: each morning they are a blank slate until they consult their oracle the New York Times. At once they are fitted with all their opinions and more importantly their self satisfaction.
Leftists don't "read" as a means of enlightening themselves, they absorb fashionable, acceptable views and they pose with them.
Don't forget that Lewis was a Professor of Literature. His studies of Medieval and Renaissance literature are premier works of scholarship.
News papers
Submitted by touche on Fri, 12/10/2010 - 12:38pm.
We anyone starts asking about what you read and base intellegence on which papers you read, they are already lost..
I just refer to the quote "If you don't read newspapers you are uninformed, if you do read newspapers you are misinformed" one of my favorite quote by him.
And nothing makes that quote more accurate than the NY Times. So Katie, you are so misinformed as usual.