During late night coverage of Friday's presidential debate between Senators Barack Obama and John McCain, “Hardball” host Chris Matthews attacked the Republican for showing both “contempt” and an “inferiority complex” towards his Democratic opponent. The MSNBC host asked liberal Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson, “What do you make of what I take as contempt? And I’m not sure contempt is an admirable trait when you’re up against an opponent who has every right to be there against you, in fact has equal footing.”
Before Robinson could answer, Matthews revised the question, asking if this indicated some sort of “inferiority complex” on McCain’s part: “He never looked at his opponent. What is that about? Is that an inferiority complex? Is that embarrassment? Is that guilt? Or is it contempt? What is it? It’s something.” Robinson eagerly agreed, asserting that “this is part of John McCain’s style that he, he has to make an opponent into an enemy” and adding that the GOP candidate “almost has to demonize the enemy in order to get into that, that, that fighting stance.”
About five minutes later, Matthews returned to the topic. He interviewed Mississippi Congressman Chip Pickering and complained, “Congressman, it may be a small point to some, but anyone who has ever engaged in debating knows that you must address your opponent. If you’re an attorney, a prosecutor, you must point to the defendant. You must do it. You can’t ignore them physically. John McCain did not look at his opponent tonight. How do you explain that?” Pickering responded by claiming McCain simply was focusing on the questions and the substance. Fixating on the subject, Matthews followed up and fretted, “Every time a question came up, they were told to talk to each other, have a debate between each other. Why couldn’t John McCain do that? Why did he choose not to do that?”
A transcript of the exchanges, which occurred around 12:20am on September 27, follows:
CHRIS MATTHEWS: Let me ask Gene, why, before I lose you tonight: What do you make of what I take as contempt? And I’m not sure contempt is an admirable trait when you’re up against an opponent who has every right to be there against you, in fact has equal footing. He won the nomination of the other party, to treat your opponent with such contempt that not once throughout the evening do you give him the courtesy of looking at him? He was supposed to, as part of the format of this debate, five minutes with each exchange, to exchange a discussion with his opponent, to share thoughts, to challenge the opponent. He never looked at his opponent. What is that about? Is that an inferiority complex? Is that embarrassment? Is that guilt? Or is it contempt? What is it? It’s something.
EUGENE ROBINSON (Washington Post): Well, you know, look- It’s up to- Only John McCain knows whether it’s genuine contempt. Here’s my theory, is that, is that this is part of John McCain’s style that he, he has to make an opponent into an enemy, you know, in his mind, to kind of, you know, to kind of get up for this. He personalizes conflict as we all know and tends to put himself at the center of it. And, and, you know, it’s a window into his style. He almost has to demonize the enemy in order to get into that, that, that fighting stance.
MATTHEWS: Yeah.
ROBINSON: You know, I think it came right through the screen. It looked like contempt and anger and that usually does not play well in these debates.
12:25am
MATTHEWS TO CONGRESSMAN CHIP PICKERING: Congressman, it may be a small point to some, but anyone who has ever engaged in debating knows that you must address your opponent. If you’re an attorney, a prosecutor, you must point to the defendant. You must do it. You can’t ignore them physically. John McCain did not look at his opponent tonight. How do you explain that?
…
MATTHEWS TO CONGRESSMAN CHIP PICKERING: Well, what do you make about the format? The format was supposed to be five minutes on each topic. Every time a question came up, they were told to talk to each other, have a debate between each other. Why couldn’t John McCain do that? Why did he choose not to do that?
—Scott Whitlock is a news analyst for the Media Research Center.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Matthews was right: McCain acted like a first class jerk
September 27, 2008 - 01:47 ET by lelectraAnd frankly Obama missed a few golden opportunites to annihilate him, in my opinion, but maybe his strategy was to simply let the American people see who McCain really was: an obnoxious lying immature jerk.
His eye rolling, smirking, sneering, and screwed up faces were not only completely disrespectful of Obama's position, but his humanity as well. He wouldn't even look at the guy. Wholly inappropriate behavior. He reminded me of a fresh, spoiled eight year old. This is statesmen behavior?
Actually, it reminded me of his comrade, another irreverent jokester called GW. These guys display their deep seated sense of entitlement and white privilege merely by being the snarky brats they are.
It reminds me of the folks who never look at the help. McCain thinks he's better than Obama. He couldn't be more wrong.
Good grief, you have got it
September 27, 2008 - 02:11 ET by general companyGood grief, you have got it to bad to debate here, i We generaly like to start from the middle. GooooNiiii : ]
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
But...
September 27, 2008 - 02:30 ET by Army BratObama is so contemptible ...whaddya spect?
Happy Trails...
I come to this sight
September 27, 2008 - 09:47 ET by docbto see what the right wing nuts are screaming about and this is proof positive that people will skew to what they need to support their beliefs.. Truth is never an issue..just scream lies loud enough and surely someone will believe you!!!NOT..
Thought the debate was lukewarm at best from both candidates...Found Mccain to be angry and condescending , unable to engage with Obama and holding a measure of distain with his inability to make eye contact...Leaders must engage or they look childish...look at Bush and Mcain's just following his lead.
Obama is cool to icy but answered thoughtfully and countered tit for tat... He certainly has the demeanor to be president but am not sure the bigots will get past his bi-racial appearance!!!
I certainly do not want a Pres that is dumber than me , as in McSame...but we may get him...unless people vote their values and not their prejudices....
Blind person
September 27, 2008 - 11:26 ET by Jerry MackIt is obvious that you also brought your prejudice against blind people.
YAT
September 27, 2008 - 17:32 ET by lotr(Yet Another Troll):
(1) Try practicing what you preach.
(2) Sorry, but I disagree with your biased assessment of the debate. In truth, it was a exhibition in substance over style. Obama, while he certainly has style, had very little in the way of substance. While I agree that eye contact and more direct engagement by McCain would've helped his TV persona (which is indeed important for electability), the reality is any phony actor can get up there a "look good." McCain clearly demonstrated that he has a clue about foreign politics. Obama, to his credit, handled himself well and appeared "presidential," there was a lot of fluff with little real content.
I guess you're a fan of
September 27, 2008 - 05:12 ET by motherbeltI guess you're a fan of Obama's cocky teenager attitude, then.
Race baiting
September 27, 2008 - 06:52 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsAnd frankly Obama missed a few golden opportunites to annihilate him
Well, you got that right. Simply more proof that guys like Obama need Affirmative Action to get anywhere. He should have a couple of helpers with him in the next debate, it's only fair.
D
P.S. Loved your snide racist remark too!
Keep the ILLEGALS out, join NumbersUSA to send free faxes to your reps.
One man's contempt is
September 27, 2008 - 06:53 ET by kgOne man's contempt is another man's "snappy".
"Forget change, I want improvement!"
Well
September 27, 2008 - 07:02 ET by well99I have no doubt your a expert on obnoxious lying immature jerks.Are you the Obama Girl?Your love or lust for him is blinding you to the facts.Here is your sign.
http://www.clipartguide.com/_pages/0041-0701-2312-4924.html
"Obama Girl". Apparently
September 27, 2008 - 08:48 ET by Jerry"Obama Girl". Apparently she was only doing a paid gig.
http://www.youtube.c...
When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).
last night's snapshot polls
September 27, 2008 - 13:37 ET by wdhorningBoth CNN and Fox had "punch in" polling. Here were the numbers about midnight:
: CNN FoxNews TOTALS
McCain 30317 73800 104117
Obama 73250 15300 88550
These results show a few things:
1) for the total of all Democrats and Republicans and Independents, more voted for McCain where the vote ratio was 44% for Obama, but 56% percent for McCain.
2) CNN has a viewership that is mostly Democrats, that is a ratio of 3:1 over Republicans, yet Obama only got 7:3 ratio which, when a common denominator is used, yields 7:3 ratio out of 9:3 proving that many Democrats switched sides, at least when looking at debate performance. (A tie ratio would have been 9:3, but Obama only got 7:3).
3) FoxNews viewship is mostly Republicans, and that ratio is about 7:5 over Democrats according to recent viewer's survey. In this case McCain got a ratio of 3:1 and when the common denominator is changed for comparison we see that with a viewership of 7:5 McCain got a vote of confidence of 15:5 which exceeds a tie of 7:5 by 2 to 1
4) There was of course some independent voters in the mix, so the ratios are not perfect, but still close
5) Finally, the FoxNews poll also shows a much larger percentage of Democrats watch FoxNews than the percentage of Republicans that watch CNN. Could it be that FoxNews presents both sides more fairly that CNN?
Ans: I watched the interviews after the debate and very strong arguments were allowed to be made by spokespersons from both McCain and Obama camps on FoxNews. I have watched CNN on occasion in the past, just to compare, and sure enough, CNN lets a Republicn who is a "numb nuts" speak on behalf of McCain/Palin, but picks the brightest Democrat to speak for Obama/Biden.
7) I believe it was 6 times Obama had to say something like, "Sen McCain is absolutely right", while McCain only agreed with Obama ever so slightly on a few key points (like doing something about the financial crisis). It seems McCain articulated much better, which was not just debating skills alone, but he has more knowledge in the background of all issues.
8) This simple survey shows that all the MSM commentators are clearly in the Obama camp, because they all said Obama won the debates, but the combined Democrat-Republican survey I just did proves them to be biased at bias can get.
9) I watched a discussion afterwards, where Juan Williams could NOT look anyone in the face when he said Obama won the debate and also while explaining why, showing Mr Williams, in truth, did not believe what he was saying. He finally did look the moderator in the face for those things that were simple statements of fact, however, proving he was embarassed when he lacked confidence in his support of Obama, but OK when what he said was just a statement of fact. All the other commentators looked the moderator in the face, because they all provided more balanced comments that were fairly truthful, including those comments favoring Obama. No one looked down or away when providing favorable comments for McCain.
Leave it to "man-crush"
September 27, 2008 - 08:13 ET by lotrLeave it to "man-crush" Matthews to spin the "body language" in favor of his "leg thrill." I noticed this body language myself (I even complained to my wife about it), but I had a completely different take. Remember, McCain did not want to be there -- he asked that Obama "join him" in working through the "Wall Street bail out." Obama merely "call him out" in response. Also, something "unpleasant" apparently went down behind close doors on Thursday. To me, the body language of McCain was one of someone being disgusted with someone else -- McCain couldn't look at him because he indeed have righteous contempt for him.
Barry's an @ss
September 27, 2008 - 08:23 ET by GForceI was just waiting for Senator McCain to call Obama
"Barry".
Obama continuously called Senator McCain "John",
which was completely disrespectful.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it"-Aristotle
old man McSame
September 27, 2008 - 09:53 ET by docbcould not even make eye contact...He seemed on the verge of a meltdown...seething and condescending...wonder if it was because his stunt did not work in DC? He blinked and was called out on it across the board...Made me laugh out loud...
McCain Should Have
September 27, 2008 - 09:15 ET by BlueCat57McCain should have stuck to his guns and not gone to the debate. He should have reminded the American public that the Democrat congress had not passed legislation to deal with the financial "crisis" and that apparently it needed the Republicans' help to make a decision. That he has been elected by the people of Arizona to represent them in Congress and that right now his job was to take care of Arizonians just as he will take care of Americans when he is President. He could remind the people of Illinois that their representative, Obama, has not been doing his job. But, alas, McCain is too old-school polite to do that. Fortunately I'm not.
From the We Are Illinois.org Web Site:
PRESS RELEASE: Does Obama even care?
1/16/2008
With five-year presidential campaign taking its toll, does Obama even remember which state he was elected to represent…does he care?
History holds true – another no-show job for Chicago Democrat
For Immediate Release - Jan. 16, 2008 CHICAGO
That's like reading Marx to become an entrepreneur.
Ice skating in Hell
September 27, 2008 - 10:59 ET by Indiana JoeNever thought I'd say this, but I noticed it too. McCain would not look at Obama. In television, perception is going to trump substance every time. And the perception of any real "undecided" voter would be, I think, "Why won't he meet Obama's eyes?"
Now, I could say that in a "debate" format like this one, the questions are asked by the moderator, so answers should be addressed to the moderator. That strikes me as proper technique. And I could say that Obama constantly looking at McCain while answering Lehrer's questions was unnecessarily confrontational, and seemed like more of a personal attack.
But the perception is all that's going to matter here. No one watched to find out what the candidates' positions are, those have been explored ad infinitum. It was a show, these things always are, and I thought McCain came across as shifty and nervous. Obama came across as confident and in control. I should point out that I only watched about an hour of it, it was a real snooze, IMO.
People who are really informed and interested in the issues were watching to cheer their candidate on. The undecideds, though, the ones both sides need to win... they're not talking about what was said, they're talking about what they thought of the performance.
And on that basis, this helps Obama more than it helps McCain. It sucks, but it's what I think.
"... smells like... victory." - Robert Duvall
IJ
September 27, 2008 - 17:59 ET by lotrI agree with you, and I certainly noticed it, and lamented the same things you are. However, regardless, I came away from the debate (I watched all of it) reassured that McCain ought to be the obvious choice. I mean, come on, one does not get as far as McCain in politics by not making eye contact. His body language last night betrayed a certain disgust he was harboring against Obama -- given the recent political dirty pool of Obama, is it difficult to empathize with him?