Chris Matthews: Gingrich Nomination Would Cause ‘Embarrassment and Sadness for Our Republic’
MSNBC's Chris Matthews on Tuesday issued an absolutely disgraceful commentary concerning Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich.
In Hardball's final segment, the host attacked the former House Speaker saying, "Ever since he arrived on the national scene, politics has been nastier, more feral, too often uglier," and concluded, "Gingrich being nominated by a major political party for the American presidency promises a grotesquery to make even the most hard-nosed of us avert our glance in embarrassment and sadness for our republic" (video follows with transcript and commentary):
CHRIS MATTHEWS: Let me finish tonight with this. There is nothing I can say about the state of this country's political health as telling as the fact that Barney Frank is leaving and Newt Gingrich is thriving. Barney has brains, wit, and a conscience, and a pretty good sense of proportion. He can argue his case but still see the other guy’s, especially if it’s a good argument. Gingrich is still mad he was made by Bill Clinton to enter Air Force One from the rear.
Barney calls Newt the thinnest-skinned character assassin he ever met. It’s a serious charge that hits home to those of us who remember how Newt came to power in the House was over the bodies of Democratic leaders he’d charged with corruption over a Democratic Party he accused of treason. It’s how Gingrich gets what he wants.
Now he wants the Republican nomination for president, and he has a chance to get it. Republican conservatives have a basic goal for the coming year: win the White House. That means running Obama outta there. Newt would be the man to do the job. He could be. He would go into debates with the President wielding whatever broken beer bottle his mind can manage to grasp whether on the way into the ring or already there. Where Romney will enter with a Sunday punch, something on the order of, “With all due respect, Mr. President, you had your chance,” then dramatic, well-rehearsed pause, “and you blew it.” In other words, a line Obama will be ready to parry most likely with his own well-rehearsed retort.
But Newt in the ring could be more dangerous, harder to defend against, harder to predict. Newt would unleash whatever charge will force his rival, President Obama, on defense. Character assassin is Barney Frank’s tag for him, but it’s wise to consider it. Newt will say what works to hurt Obama even if the weapon kicks back at him. He’ll take a great deal of scar tissue to land all the more of it on the President.
One thing I know about Newt Gingrich: ever since he arrived on the national scene, politics has been nastier, more feral, too often uglier. There’s something about this figure that darkens the atmosphere, lessens the spirit.
The haters of liberal democracy will cheer his every assault, his every rise in the polls, his every advance toward Tampa where the scene of him, Newt Gingrich, being nominated by a major political party for the American presidency promises a grotesquery to make even the most hard-nosed of us avert our glance in embarrassment and sadness for our republic.
And this is what is considered journalism on MSNBC today.
Regardless of the media's love affair with Barney Frank, he has been one of the most polarizing figures in politics for decades.
To put him on some pedestal as a paragon of statesmanship while casting Gingrich as a demonic figure "that darkens the atmosphere, lessens the spirit" is the height of gall.
As for the former Speaker supposedly being mad about the 1995 incident with Clinton and Air Force One, Gingrich is on record for saying that House Republican victories in the following five elections perfectly demonstrated who the real winner was in that scrum.
But underlying all the hatred is the truth: Matthews knows Gingrich would wipe the floor with Obama if they ever squared off in a debate.
This is the second evening in a row he's intimated this, and that fact is really at the heart of all this unhinged vitriol.
Gingrich and his supporters better get used to it, for if he stays atop the polls and starts winning some primaries and caucuses, the invective from Obama-loving media members like Matthews will only get more poisonous.
Happy Holidays.
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
..."a grotesquery to make
Submitted by tcm14 on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 7:56pm.
..."a grotesquery to make even the most hard-nosed of us avert our glance in embarrassment and sadness for our republic."
That's funny, Chris, this is exactly the reaction most people have to YOUR SHOW!
This whining by Matthews is the best endorsement for Newt I have yet to see. "Haters of liberal democracy" indeed; nice smear he threw in there.
grotesquery?
Submitted by Hog_Flambe on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 11:24pm.
Which is it Chris... democracy or republic?
There is a difference....
TCM... Newt ain't what you wish/think/hope he is.
:-D
The grotesquery was
Submitted by Emrys on Wed, 11/30/2011 - 11:45am.
the Clinton administration, with it's semen-stained Oval Office, fake tears for the camera at Brown's death, etc. etc. That certainly made "the most hard-nosed of us avert our glance in embarrassment and sadness for our republic."
I still think the original
Submitted by tcm14 on Wed, 11/30/2011 - 3:16pm.
I still think the original Clinton campaign was the most biased media I have ever seen, even moreso than for the Chosen One. But maybe it just seems more egregious to me because it was the first time I really noticed the huge bias in the media.
Grotesquery
Submitted by ProudAmerican58 on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 7:57pm.
As in "Hardball w/ Chris Matthews." Oh, Chrissy, how you make it sooo easy...
As for Newt, he's already got my vote!
As usual, Chrissie is wrong again*
Submitted by cajun2 on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 7:57pm.
Only the LSM will be embarrassed and sad that a liberal is not POTUS.
All the more reason to vote for Newt G_________. What a joy it will be to see Chrissie in tears, no tingles.
Gingrich Nomination Would
Submitted by Clericus on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 7:57pm.
Gingrich Nomination Would Cause ‘Embarrassment and Sadness for Our Republic’. Nobody would be as big an embarrassment as Obama, with the possible exception of Chris Matthews.
Chris... we get it...
Submitted by dlwoltmann on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 7:59pm.
You hate the man. The more you devote every night to bashing him, the more popular he gets. You need to face facts. You and your Obama worshipers have damaged your credibility as journalists beyond repair. To the point, that everything you spout will be ignored. You and your ilk have created a stronger, more determined conservative movement. So in that aspect.. I say thank you.
and Bodini added ...
Submitted by Bodini on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 8:04pm.
"Ever since he arrived on the national scene, the media has been nastier, more feral, too often uglier," and concluded, "Matthews being hired by the Marxist Media Outlet (MSNBC) for the American public consumption promises a grotesquery to make even the most tolerant of us avert our glance in embarrassment and sadness for our republic's media outlets' gross misrepresentation of journalism and their total lack of integrity and ultra-liberal bias when reporting the news"
Politicians
Submitted by TRH on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 8:06pm.
Many politicians have gone through tough times only to come back strong. Look at Nixon. After losing to Kennedy he came back and defeated Humphrey and destroyed McGovern. Newt had some rough moments but he also had some good ones. Let us figure this out for ourselves Crissy. Noone is listening to you nor watching you.
Embarrassment and Sadness for Our Republic?
Submitted by iamsaved on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 8:08pm.
Obama has set the bar so low that this country's expectations can't go anywhere but up.
'Embarrassment and Sadness?'
Submitted by ChrisNH on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 8:10pm.
Uh, Chris...aren't we kinda like at 'Embarrassment and Sadness' NOW?
Matthews speaks with such authority and eloquent familiarity...
Submitted by stage9 on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 8:22pm.
...on the subject of nastiness, ferity, ugliness and embarrassment. I can think of no better words with which to describe his weekly presence on MSpiNBC than those.
"If God is dead, somebody is going to have to take his place. It will be megalomania or erotomania, the drive for power or the drive for pleasure, the clenched fist or the phallus, Hitler or Hugh Hefner." — Malcolm Muggeridge
Who's he talking about?
Submitted by Dave81 on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 8:33pm.
"...ever since he arrived on the national scene, politics has been nastier, more feral, too often uglier."
I'm confused, is he talking about Gingrich, or Obama? And who do we have to thank for the nasty, feral, ugliness in recent years? *cough*main stream media*cough*
Gingrich
Submitted by Curly on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 8:34pm.
"Embarrassment and sadness currently occupy the role of POTUS and FLOTUS!
The true embarrassment
Submitted by Unsane on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 8:47pm.
What is embarrassing and and shameful to the republic, as far as I am concerned, is the shallow rationale for voting in His Majesty The Shahinshah. We are ALL paying for that mistake by the easily fooled.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)
The Newtered RINO will lose to Obama in the G.E. if nominated
Submitted by Dave. on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 8:58pm.
...as it sadly now appears the closest thing we had to a Ronald Reagan, and IMHO probably the only one in the pack that had any real chance of beating the Dear Ruler (as well as then actually turning this country around), is about to exit the race.
That's when the 'sadness for our republic' would begin in earnest, as our days remaining as a republic would be numbered.
And it would not be a very large number, at that.
If you think what the MSM did to McCain the minute he won the republican nomination back in'08 was bad, that was nothing compared to what they have in store for Newt should he win it.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Per my response below...
Submitted by ProudAmerican58 on Wed, 11/30/2011 - 1:04am.
NO! This is still AMERICA! While we sometimes make mistakes, ala Obama, we don't give up that easily.
poisoning the water
Submitted by Kuso Jiji on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 9:24pm.
fat, dumb and drunk is no way to go through life mr. mattews. you need to look in the mirror and see how you have poisoned the political landscape with your stupid and irresponsible comments.
Jiji
Submitted by 26CX on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 9:30pm.
You're anticipating a level of self-awareness in Matthews that isn't, and will never be, there.
Don't give the flapping vaginal lips . . .
Submitted by ConservaSerb on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 10:22pm.
That much credit. Only about 9000 people really care what Tingles says, and 3000 of them are flagellating themselves at any one time.
A wise & frugal government, which shall leave men free 2 regulate their own pursuits of industry & improvement, & shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government. T. Jefferson
unlike
Submitted by wizardjr on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 9:48pm.
the embarassment Chrissy causes every night
Wanna see what a bar fight really looks like Chrissy?
Submitted by ThisnThat on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 10:00pm.
How about Newt Gingrich - Presidential candidate, and ....
Sarah Palin, VP nominee? I can guarantee that if Sarah said, "Newt, we can win Michigan. Let me take a crack at it", that Newt wouldn't stop her like McCain did.
__________
“Didn't win the Medal of Honor? Didn't even serve? Then lie about it. We'll support you." — 9th Circuit Court
I'd prefer Palin-West .. . .
Submitted by ConservaSerb on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 10:21pm.
But I'll take Gingrich/Palin . . . with West as Secretary of State.
A wise & frugal government, which shall leave men free 2 regulate their own pursuits of industry & improvement, & shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government. T. Jefferson
Jughead Matthews
Submitted by Kleenex on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 10:12pm.
Matthews thinks if he's sad then everybody is, the sign of a narcissist.
Matthews you F-ing moron!
Submitted by Bill Brasky on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 10:17pm.
If you knew what an embarrassment to the country was, you wouldn't be sucking Obama's micro-penis.
He'd have to fight through . . .
Submitted by ConservaSerb on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 10:20pm.
Kal Penn and Reggie Love.
A wise & frugal government, which shall leave men free 2 regulate their own pursuits of industry & improvement, & shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government. T. Jefferson
Bill Brasky*
Submitted by cajun2 on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 10:22pm.
Your post is as disgusting an offensive as anything Chris Mathews has ever said. Lower yourself to his standards makes you look even worse, a hypocrite.
Mathews
Submitted by Kleenex on Wed, 11/30/2011 - 6:43am.
Mathews "claims" to be an impartial journalist, which you seem to believe him.
Yeah, Tingles
Submitted by ConservaSerb on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 10:19pm.
Electing a Marxist Muslim Moron sure has made the rest of the world love us more, hasn't it?
A wise & frugal government, which shall leave men free 2 regulate their own pursuits of industry & improvement, & shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government. T. Jefferson
One thing I know about Newt
Submitted by HypocriteHater on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 11:01pm.
One thing I know about Newt Gingrich: ever since he arrived on the national scene, politics has been nastier, more feral, too often uglier.
What Chrissie fails to mention is the Democrats' contribution to the nasty, feral, ugly politics after the GOP took control of the House after 40 years in 94 and Newt became the Speaker. They weren't too happy about losing their majority status, to say the least. But in Chrissie's mind, it was all Newt's fault that the dems were so bitter.
→ Gotta be true if Chris said it
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Tue, 11/29/2011 - 11:12pm.
After all, when Bill Moyers, at the behest of Lyndon Johnson, tried to paint Goldwater as a homosexual, that wasn't at all nasty.
NO!
Submitted by ProudAmerican58 on Wed, 11/30/2011 - 12:56am.
This is still AMERICA! While we make sometimes make mistakes, ala Obama, we don't give up that easily.
Gingrich nomination would cause "embarrassment and sadness"
Submitted by no tingly legs on Wed, 11/30/2011 - 9:00am.
but when we had a rapist/adulterer/groper/perjurer in the Oval Office, no problem.
Right Tingles?
Tingles is right. It would be
Submitted by east tennessee john on Wed, 11/30/2011 - 12:29pm.
Tingles is right. It would be the end of liberal democracy, thankfully. Has he borrowed Barney's kneepads to suck up even more tothe man who can't distinguish between England and Great Britian, the great internationalist? Also, why hasn't msnbc, anywhere, discussed Reckless Endangerment and the level of participation of demoncrats in the 2008 collaspe? Until some demoncrat refutes that historical narrative, writtrn by a NYT financial editor, all they are is lying sobs.
Whoa!
Submitted by Richirth on Wed, 11/30/2011 - 2:33pm.
I actually agree with something Mathews says. "There is nothing I can say about the state of this country's political health as telling as the fact that Barney Frank is leaving and Newt Gingrich is thriving."
Except I see this as common sense breaking out.
NEWT
Submitted by ROSIE RIGHT on Wed, 11/30/2011 - 2:40pm.
is HOPE AND CHANGE I believe in. All the sharks will be out and circling now that this Barracuda has made his presence known..Newt will be the one to give as good as he gets in this fight with the big-eared string bean and his shadow dudes out to destroy this great country. Gingrich knows his way around politically and shares this conservative's views. Don't fall for the weaker candidates who'll go down for the count against Nobama's well-funded and secretive machine, it's going to take mano a mano to get at Nobama past his blah-blah telepromptings. Nobama is Nobody but vapor inside and Newt will bring that out into the light and show him for the Nothing that he really is!
I guess Chrissy missed the
Submitted by eaglewingz08 on Wed, 11/30/2011 - 3:43pm.
I guess Chrissy missed the feral vile democraps vicious attacks on Bork and Thomas which were prior to Gingrich. I guess he missed all the vile attacks on Nixon and Reagan by democraps too. I guess he missed all the democrap vile attacks on W after Gingrich had left Congress. Either Chrissy is a pathological liar or he is absolutely clueless and unfit to host any show on tv.
The State Approved Press
Submitted by BenDoubleCrossed on Thu, 12/01/2011 - 10:58pm.
The hush-hush of politics is controlling a segment of people without those people recognizing they are being managed.
In 1789 The Constitution and Bill of Rights are established as the law of the land.
For 97 years it was understood that 1st Amendment freedoms of speech, press and assembly were the sole rights of flesh and blood citizens. Corporations had no rights. Newspapers had the right to print because they employed people and not the other way around.
"The 20th century has been characterized by three developments of great political importance: the growth of democracy; the growth of corporate power; and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy." -Alex Carey, Australian social scientist who pioneered the investigation of corporate propaganda (see Taking the Risk Out Of Democracy, Univ of New South Wales, 1995)
In 1886 footnotes to the Santa Clara Railroad case, written by a Supreme Court Clerk who was previously a railroad executive, became the basis for corporations claiming the same rights as flesh and blood people.
Following reports of serious financial abuses in the 1972 Presidential campaign, Congress amended the FECA in 1974 to set limits on contributions by individuals, political parties and PACs. But politicians exempted the commercial press, because the 1st Amendment prohibits abridging their freedom of speech and the press.
2 USC 431 (9) (B) (i) The term "expenditure" does not include any news story, commentary, or editorial distributed through the facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, unless such facilities are owned or controlled by any political party, political committee, or candidate;
But we cannot rely on the commercial press to be unbiased and provide the information we need to remain free. Both Republicans and Democrats agree the press is biased and only differ on which networks and newspapers are the culprits:
A newspaper must at all times antagonize the selfish interests of that very class which furnishes the larger part of a newspaper's income... The press in this country is dominated by the wealthy few...that it cannot be depended upon to give the great mass of the people that correct information concerning political, economical and social subjects which it is necessary that the mass of people Shall have in order that they vote...in the best way to protect themselves from the brutal force and chicanery of the ruling and employing classes. (E.W. Scripps).
In my opinion the idea of media being objective was a marketing ploy to sell newspapers:
"It was not until the 1920s that you really get the notion of professional journalists, the way we think about them today," says Michael Delli Carpini, dean of the Annenberg School of Communication at the University of Pennsylvania. "A lot of different schools of journalism started, codes of ethics were developed, the whole notion of the journalist as objective came into play .... of standing outside the story, telling both sides, of being factual rather than opinionated."
If the United States Supreme Court defined freedom of religion using the same logic that campaign laws use to define a free press only the church or synagogue "as an institution" would enjoy freedom of religion, not its parishioners!
"Section 431(9)(B)(i) makes a distinction where there is no real difference: the media is extremely powerful by any measure, a "special interest" by any definition, and heavily engaged in the "issue advocacy" and "independent expenditure" realms of political persuasion that most editorial boards find so objectionable when anyone other than a media outlet engages in it. To illustrate the absurdity of this special exemption the media enjoys, I frequently cite as an example the fact that if the RNC bought NBC from GE the FEC would regulate the evening news and, under the McCain-Feingold "reform" bill, Tom Brokaw could not mention a candidate 60 days before an election. This is patently absurd." – Senator McConnell
The press exemption divides participation in America’s political process into two categories: The regulated majority, every living U.S. Citizen, candidate for office, political party and political organization and the unregulated commercial media.
To restore equal protection under law, the “press exemption”, 2 USC 431 (9) (B) (i), should be modified to read: “The term expenditure does not include any news story, commentary, or editorial distributed by any candidate, political party, citizen, citizens group, corporation, broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication.”
Every man is equally entitled to protection by law; but when the laws undertake to add... artificial distinctio¬ns, to grant titles, gratuities¬, and exclusive privileges¬, to make the rich richer and the potent more powerful, the humble members of society--t¬he farmers, mechanics, and laborers--¬who have neither the time nor the means of securing like favors to themselves¬, have a right to complain of the injustice of their government¬. President Andrew Jackson.
The 1st Amendment does not guarantee our freedoms but it does prohibit Congress from writing laws that would abridge them. The 1st Amendment was added to the Constitution because some State representatives to the Constitutional Convention feared the power of an over reaching Central Government. State Constitutions are where protections of our freedoms of speech, press and assembly are found. The 14th Amendment attempts to extend Federal protection to the Bill of Rights and in this instance is misconstrued. Only Congress can violate the 1st Amendment and the Federal Campaign Act and the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act violate the prohibitions of the 1st Amendment. Federal Campaign laws abridge freedoms of speech, press by limiting how much money individual citizens and citizens groups can donate to their candidates and issues, and they abridge freedom of assembly by declaring it a crime for candidates, political parties and grass roots organizations to coordinate their advertising campaigns.
The solution to limiting corporate influence and restoring flesh and blood citizen’s control of politics is not limiting how much individuals and grass roots organizations can spend communicating. There is no Constitutional basis for making political coordination a crime? Does a candidate for office have the responsibility or authority to tell a citizen or citizens group they cannot simultaneously put out campaign materials from the candidate and a grass roots organization that supports the candidate? Where in the Constitution does participating in politics require a candidate or citizen to give up 1st Amendment freedoms of assembly and association?
UNITED STATES v. ASSOCIATED PRESS - Decided June 18, 1945
It would be strange indeed however if the grave concern for freedom of the press which prompted adoption of the First Amendment should be read as a command that the government was without power to protect that freedom. That Amendment rests on the assumption that the widest possible dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources is essential to the welfare of the public, that a free press is a condition of a free society. Surely a command that the government itself shall not impede the free flow of ideas does not afford non-governmental combinations a refuge if they impose restraints upon that constitutionally guaranteed freedom. Freedom to publish means freedom for all and not for some. Freedom to publish is guaranteed by the Constitution, but freedom to combine to keep others from publishing is not. Freedom of the press from governmental interference under the First Amendment does not sanction repression of that freedom by private interests.
But corporate media can be part of the solution if they walk their talk:
The commercial press is the most well-known promoter of campaign reforms to get money out of politics. Among reasons given is the need to level the playing field for challengers.
Since the only thing campaigns produce is information for public distribution and the cost of distribution is the origin of much of the need for money in politics, why don't the commercial media offer to publish and broadcast candidate and issue ads for free?
Not likely: there is speculation Obama may raise a billion dollars and Republicans 750 million. Campaign season is Christmas for media corporations.
Anti-corporate rant from a sleeper poster
Submitted by Unsane on Tue, 12/06/2011 - 1:22pm.
Why do you hate corporations so much? Do you understand what they consist of?
Besides, getting rid of corporations is EASY. It usually just involves money.
To get rid of bad government, you need another currency: blood. And most of the time, you need LOTS of it.
"CONSUMED DEMOCRACY RETURNS A SOCIALIST REGIME" - Slayer, "Fictional Reality", from Divine Intervention (1994)