Chris Matthews Brings Highly Caffeinated Liberalism to Morning Joe

Photo of Tim Graham.
  • Bookmark and Share

Chris Matthews showed up on the Morning Joe set on Monday morning, and he quickly established a pro-Obama hard line. On Iran, he claimed "We are not the good guys. We did not liberate Iran. They liberated themselves from our people." Life under the ayatollahs is "liberation"?

Matthews also insisted that a new New York Times poll showed the American people are instinctively socialistic on health care: "So there is a socialistic sense to it, like Social Security in a positive sense. Nobody wants anybody at the door at the hospital to be kept out when they are sick or dying. There is a social responsibility here that seems to fit like running museums, running zoos. There are certain things we expect government to do."

On Iran, Matthews was pleased that John McCain and Barack Obama were debating how explicitly the U.S. government should sympathize with the pro-democracy protesters, but he clearly came down for Obama and against rotten American policy going back to the arrival of the Shah of Iran in 1953:

There is such a thing as a good honest American debate where both sides have a piece of the truth. Clearly we have a terrible record in the history of modern Iran, we tried to screw up their democracy back in the early 50s, and we pulled off a coup, that put back the peacock throne, we are supposed to be believers in democracy and we put a monarchy in there, we backed Saddam Hussein in his horrific war against Iran, we don’t have a lot of good street cred over there, so we’ve got to work from that, we are not the good guys. We did not liberate Iran. They liberated themselves from our people.

It's not easy to figure out the right message. If we get involved in that country's politics, they will resent us. And at the same time, we have to be Americans and say we believe in clean elections. But I go back to our elections 2000, 2004, God help us. Thank God people we have a constitution in this country, and people believe in stable government, because imagine what the streets would have looked in this country if we were all Iranians.

On health care, Matthews felt that while the Americans don’t want the government making their cars, they do want the government in control of life-and-death medicine.

WILLIE GEIST: The New York Times has a new poll out. Do you favor a public health insurance plan? Seventy-two percent favor it according to this poll. Chris Matthews are you surprised by these numbers?

CHRIS MATTHEWS: You know it’s interesting, the public has this instinctive prejudice. They don't want government making cars, for sure, and by the way god help GM, because the minute we put that "made in Washington" stamp on those cars, nobody is buying any of those babies, it’s just not going to happen. Whereas health care, it's one of those things like Social Security. It is somewhere out there, it's not a marketplace thing. You don't want to bid for the best doctor. You know, I’ll pay you ten bucks to come to my house tomorrow, I will give you fifteen. You don't quite want to make it market-oriented. So there is a socialistic sense to it, like Social Security in a positive sense. Nobody wants anybody at the door at the hospital to be kept out when they are sick or dying.

There is a social responsibility here that seems to fit like running museums, running zoos, there are certain things that government is expected to do. The problem is, and Pat Moynihan, our joint hero on this side of the table, figured out was, government always gets the job to do things that are not efficient or rewarding in the marketplace. Medicine will never be a big winner financially. I think the public knows we need public health.

Matthews was very direct in predicting if Obama fails to pass a bill to nationalize health care, he is a failure and a weakling: "If Barack Obama doesn't get a health plan through this year, he will be a loser, and he will fail. If you fail in American politics, you get weaker the next time out. He must win this fight or he will be unable to win future fights. That's why it's important for his administration to get some bill through. Therefore, this is a partisan fight in the end. Republicans want him to go down in defeat."

Matthews expressed the common liberal frustration that socialist health care is at least 50 years too late in arriving:

CHRIS MATTHEWS: Well unless you set a deadline you don’t get the job done. We got a deadline it's called October. I have been through this since Harry Truman’s day. We have been talking about this, and nobody gets it done because nobody sets a deadline. This President has done it, and it's October, and he will sign that bill. It will happen.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: You are just talking about universal health care, right.

CHRIS MATTHEWS: I am talking about the people that I work with that don't have health care.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: Yeah, you are just talking about universal health care. Okay. And then what? Then we are $2 trillion closer to being bankrupt.

CHRIS MATTHEWS: Supply and demand. We will have a lot more kids getting into medical school, and a lot more practitioners that will be doing the job. That's what we need to do, we need to expand our goals.

Chris Matthews has a bunch of co-workers without health insurance? What kind of liberal operation is MSNBC running if it has uninsured employees?

[Transcripts by Sam Theodosopoulos]

—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I love liberal economics...

CHRIS MATTHEWS: Supply and demand. We will have a lot more kids getting
into medical school, and a lot more practitioners that will be doing
the job
. That's what we need to do, we need to expand our goals.

Can someone explain to me how government mandates and caps on doctor salaries is an INCENTIVE for students to pursue a medical career?  After all, if they're allowed to make too much money, as determined by Big Brother Barack, they'll simply be demonized by his lapdog national media like Wall Street and insurance executives.

Good point.  Don't forget,

Good point.  Don't forget, the government already controls how much doctors get paid for treating Medicare patients.  And the result of that has been doctors declining to accept Medicare. This is likely to result in fewer, not more,  people going to medical school.

What makes Matthews sure we will have more doctors?  What will make them want to spend a couple hunderd thousand on a medical education that it will take them 20 years to recoup?  Oh, I forgot, they will be inspired by Michelle Obama who says don't worry about making money; go into the helping professions. 

I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows.  -Bart Simpson

 

...go into the helping

...go into the helping professions.

Which is of course easy for somone to say after they've made their pile.

Right....she said she and

Right....she said she and Barack had sooooo many bills until he wrote two books.  If those she's talking to don't have another way to get rich while they're in the "helping" professions...well, too bad.

I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows.  -Bart Simpson

 

Motherbelt - You hit on one

Motherbelt - You hit on one of the really annoying aspects of the way in which they made their pile - these two have been sheparded from one position to another, in addition to him having 2 books written for him.

One little piece of this mosaic that gets spackled over is her job as a "diversity coordinator" at the University of Chicago Hospitals. 

You don't have to be Jessica Fletcher to figure that her myriad failures within Chicago City Hall led her exasperated rabbis to create a job for her where she couldn't do too much harm (to them anyway, the community at large is another story).

Her city job, of course came only after she failed to get sufficient billables at Sidley Austin - an international law firm so huge, that as a black female ivy league grad, she should have been able to fly under the radar and hide her incompetence for 20 years.

 

"What makes Matthews sure

"What makes Matthews sure we will have more doctors?"

Maybe he assumes we're going the way of the old Soviet Union, where your career was chosen for you by the government, lol.

"Can someone explain to me

"Can someone explain to me how government mandates and caps on doctor
salaries is an INCENTIVE for students to pursue a medical career?"

It isn't. But you don't have to take my word for it, just look at those countries that already practice socialized medicine. They have chronic shortages of health care professionals because there is little incentive to enter the industry, and many that do leave to practice in a less socialized system....kinda like ours now. As a result, they are forced to import emplyers from foreign countries....you know, like those Muslim doctors in England that were planning to carry out terrorist attacks there.

That's why Matthew should stop pretending like he knows what he's talking about when it comes to economics. Just because you've heard the words "supply and demand" doesn't mean you understand them, or have a clue about economics. And being a liberal, it's pretty safe to assume Chris is virtually clueless when it comes to economics......ESPECIALLY when it comes to supply and demand, as virtually every liberal socialist dream ignores it.

 

Matthews views...

If we had run our society the way Chrissy Matthews wishes. There would also not be a Berlin Wall seperating East-from-West either. The difference being that the entire world would have would have fallen under the heel of the despots.

__________________________ 

Long Live...THE REPUBLIC !

Yes lets talk about

Yes lets talk about socialist health care....

On avg. Canada waits nine hours to be waited on in the Emergency Room....You think it was a long wait here now nine hours is the AVG.

24 hour waits to be admitted to a hosiptal.......

An avg. of seven WEEKS to recieve thearpy  for cancer patients and 40% of Britains cancer patients don't get any treatment......

I've heard this number many

I've heard this number many times, but is there any truth to it? Are there sources?

Bal,

Heres one. How about this one? Or this one

Ask and ye shall receive. 

"This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008

What Bal?

No "thank you"? 

"This
liberal would be all about socialize -- uh, uh, would be about
basically taking over and the government running all of your companies."-Maxine Waters 2008

Bal, you're smarter than

Bal, you're smarter than that.

Bal

Here's a source for you. I live in Canada have NEVER seen the types of numbers that have been reported by the media. And  believe me, I've been in an emergeny room more that once. I have pins in my left ankle, left femur, right elbow and right shoulder.

I've told this story once before but here I go again. My daughter had her tonsillis up out and a few days later she was bleeding from the throat and vomiting up blood. On the way to emergency she fainted in my arms. It took about one minute to get her admitted.

Sometimes I wonder if the people that report these statistics have ever actually been to Canada...Sigh

So you are trying to convince us then?

So you are saying we need to trash our health care industry and socialise it because you were able to be seen in an emergency room for a true emergency in Canada? 

Sincerely,

a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.

No, I'm not foolish enough

No, I'm not foolish enough to believe I could convince you folks of anything. I was just talking to Bal..good night.

Ok mandrake do you have any

Ok mandrake do you have any stats?

No I don't have any stats.

No I don't have any stats. As most here know, statistics and media can lie. I'm a primitive man and only trust what my 5 senses tell me.

Now I could go over to the emergency room at Toronto East General Hospital and observe whats going on. But that seems like a waste of time since I've been there so many times I already know.

Besides, I also know from my 3 years here that I'm not going to change anyones mind..but it is fun :)

Matthews on health care

If I was "lucky" enough to be a beneficiary of that oh so fine system of government run health care in Canada, where the motto is "Try not to die while waiting several months for those crucial medical tests", I'd have to say one thing and one thing only: Matthews is a hoser.   

 

"I think you'd better call John, 'cause it don't look they're here to deliver...the mail". -NY 

Hey SVH ... love the Powderfinger tagline

 Hey SVH ... love the Powderfinger tagline

 

_______ Him and the Unicorn he rode in on

America - the big bad boogeyman with the big bad CIA.

Oh do shut up Matthews

LIE - we tried to screw up their democracy back in the early 50s 

  Excuse me? Screw up the democracy? The Prime Minister of Iran nationalised the oil industry. This is an act of a Democracy? (Well, outside of Pres. Obama and the banks, auto companies, etc) That is the act of socialists.

Subsequent negotiations with the AIOC were unsuccessful, partly because General Ali Razmara, who became prime minister in June 1950, failed to persuade the oil company of the strength of nationalist feeling in the country and in the Majlis. When the AIOC finally offered fifty-fifty profit-sharing in February 1951, sentiment for nationalization of the oil industry had become widespread. Razmara advised against nationalization on technical grounds and was assassinated in March 1951 by Khalil Tahmasebi, a member of the militant Fadayan-e Islam. On March 15, the Majlis voted to nationalize the oil industry. In April the shah yielded to Majlis pressure and demonstrations in the streets by naming Mosaddeq prime minister. *

  Anyone else remember the events of the 50's? The war in Korea against Communists. The Ruskies developing the bomb. The Chicoms took over Tibet. Alger Hiss was spying for the Ruskies. The domino theory. The Vietcong take over North Vietnam. The Warsaw pact. Sputnik. The Ruskies test an ICBM. NORAD. Uncle Fidel taking over Cuba.

  Communism was on the march and we were rightly worried that we would have another Soviet satellite in Iran.

 Damn straight we tossed out some socialists and helped a friendly face stay in power. We should be proud of it. Not whining like Chrissyboy. 

Sincerely,

a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.

PS: That oil industry? Iranians did not build it. Great Britain did. And they got no reimbursement when it was nationalised. Much like the shareholders of American Banks, American Auto Companies, and (coming - cap & trade) American Energy Infrastructure.

* http://www.iranchamber.com/history/oil_nationalization/oil_nationalization.php

"a friendly face stay in

"a friendly face stay in power."

A friendly face with bloody hands. What is it worth?

"That oil industry? Iranians did not build it. Great Britain did. And they got no reimbursement when it was nationalised."

I think the profits they made without sharing it with the Iranian people was enough of a reimbursement.

What brand of stupid were you born with?

  Did you choose to ignore everything I wrote or did your stupid get in the way of comprehending it?

I think the profits they made without sharing it with the Iranian people was enough of a reimbursement

That runs directly counter to the post you responded to, idiot.

A sentence taken directly from the post JWF made just above the idiots post: When the AIOC finally offered fifty-fifty profit-sharing in February 1951 

  They were always paying taxes you idiot. They were always paying royalties you idiot. All oil companies pay royalties to all governments you idiot.

  Take your socialist propaganda over to www.IloveSocialism.com where it belongs. 

Sincerely,

a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.

Since when do taxes or

Since when do taxes or royalties automatically benefit the people?

And what do you think the share was before the offer made? Actually this proofs more or less my point.

More information here.

 

I am not your googlemonkey socialist.

  Your own link answers your question. And what do you think the share was before the offer made?

1933 agreement

The terms of the new agreement provided for a new 60-year concession. The Agreement reduced the area under APOC control to 100,000 square miles, required annual payments in lieu of Iranian income tax, as well as guaranteeing a minimum annual payment of £750,000 to the Iranian government.

   You must be sorely torqued at your own government that receives royalties from oil companies that don't automatically benefit the people.

  Looks like there is no pleasing you at all socialist. Idiot socialists don't even read the links they share.

Sincerely,

a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.

"These provisions, while

"These provisions, while appearing favourable, are widely agreed to have
represented a squandered opportunity for the Iranian government. The
agreement extended the life of the D'Arcy concession by an additional
32 years, negligently allowed APOC to select the best 100,000 square
miles, the minimum guaranteed royalty was far too modest, and in a fit
of carelessness the company's operations were exempted from import or
customs duties. Finally, Iran surrendered its right to annul the
agreement, and settled on a complex and tediously elaborate arbitration
process to settle any disagreements that would arise."

The AIOC was pulling a fast one on the Iranian government. They didn't pay their fair share. What else do you need. 

Anyway this whole thread started about the missing "reimbursement" you were whining about. I still say they made enough profit to make that look preposterous. 

Phew, I thought you objected to me calling you a socialist.

  Poor Iranians in 1953, they did not read the fine print on a contract.

  I can see how that justifies taking our embassy personnel captive for 444 days, killing 250 marines in Beiruit, killing our airmen in Riyadh, and killing Jewish people in Argentina.

Why yes, I can clearly see it now that the socialist has pointed it out.

 Say, I got screwed on my mortgage contract. I was supposed to have a dry basement but it gets really damp when it rains. When can I commence to da killin?

Sincerely,

a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.

I called Matthews a liar. Now I am going to call you one.

 Anyway this whole thread started about the missing "reimbursement" you were whining about.

 I said nothing about reimbursements. Liar. My original post concerned Matthews statement that we tried to screw up a democracy. I said no, we tried to screw up socialists. I quoted from an article on Iran to show that they were attempting to nationalise the oil industry, a socialist move.

 Show me where I whined about reimbursements, liar. The first mention of the word was in your reply.

Sincerely,

a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.

So i log into my favorite

So i log into my favorite MMORPG and there's some guy talking trash about the US re:our history with Iran over a wide chat channel. It wasn't really the place to discuss this sort of thing, but i discussed with him several topics related, including whether or not Iran was buliding an A-Bomb (he didn't think so)  He mentioned the work the US did in installing the Shah in the 50's, getting rid of what he described as a "democratic goverment". I knew that we had done so, but i didn't know why...I shot from the hip "if truman saw that they had democratically elected some communists, he was right to run them out on a rail." The guy i was talking with got quiet after that; i guess i got lucky :-P

And what the hell is this?

Matthews: But I go back to our elections 2000, 2004, God help us. Thank God people we have a constitution in this country, and people believe in stable government, because imagine what the streets would have looked in this country if we were all Iranians.

What the hell is he saying here?  Liberals/Democrats/Idiots would have poured into the streets were it not for a belief in stabel government? Seriously?

Are liberals like him that insane? They hated/hate President Bush that much they would have hit the streets were it not for the Constitution?

 Why does no one question idiotic statements like this?

Sincerely,

a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.

But I go back to our

But I go back to our elections 2000, 2004, God help us. Thank God people we have a constitution in this country, and people believe in stable government...

This thinking is so convoluted, where do you start?  Nearly every country has a constitution.  The Soviets had the right to freedom of speech in their "constitution."  Wrap your brain around that.  You could fill an entire semister on just that alone.

Listening to Tingles Matthews talk politics/economics is like listening to a village elder who just figured out how to strike flint and iron go on about particle physics.  You get the feeling he's trying sound smart, but he's just kind of flailing around hoping no one throws the B.S. flag.

 

Liberals really felt that Bush's 2000 victory was fraudulent.

When the Supreme Court finally put an end to the endless Florida mess it was one ruling the Liberals thought was purely political.

All the real purely political rulings for their side they heralded as 'fair' and right on.

Matthews is not stupid.  He is like the trivia guy in the Sport's Bar down the street who knows a lot of numbers and facts to back up his opinion, but is generally wrong about the outcomes because he can't see the base human element in the game.  To Matthews, politics are a sporting event.

He's terribly childish in his presentation to the world when it comes to what he believes.  The only positive thing about him is that he does expose the Liberal disfunctional brain when it comes to history, context, facts of human suffering and defense of Obama's lack of substance.

But I digress.

I stopped watching Matthews and Morning Joe a long time ago when I realized that intellectual integrity was a null set among the group.

ACA 

...

Quoted from: 'Acaiguana notes from the Underground' (Soon to be at theaters near you)

Holy Smokes.

A. Where the hell have you been?

B. Please don't go away again.

  I joined the Navy in 1981 and spent the next 17 years overseas. Things seemed kind of normal when I got back in 1998. But something snapped in 2000 and then liberals went absolutely bonkers in 2003 with the invasion of Iraq.

  Liberals absolutely mystify me. The 2nd Iraq war was the first war I was on the outside looking in. Congress authorised it in Oct 2002, President Bush waited 5 months and then gave Saddam 36 hours to bug out. Then we went in. Why the level of visceral hatred on the left for something that made absolute sense to me?

  I will to my dying day not understand the liberal mind. Hence, my bewilderment at Matthews statement. Thank you sir. 

Sincerely,

a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.

Hi JWF - ACA

Bo Diddly, Bo Diddly .. where'ya been?

'Round the world, and I'm goin' again.

:-)

The Liberal Mind is probably the most simplistic mind to understand that walks among us.  Remember, "They walk among Us"?

If you spend time watching children develop, one thing you will notice is that they are always amazed or disdainful of anything new in their lives.  They ask questions and dote on the answers.

They also learn.

For Liberals, this learning stops at about the age of 13 for the women and about 15 for men.

It is simply a case of arrested development.  Most people eventually grow up; but some are living on the cusp of the center Bell Curve.  That is to say, double-digit IQ.

Now, there is an interesting syndrome about some people south of 100 IQ.  They become obsessed with the idea of intelligence.  Consequently they absorb and mimic and practice speech patterns that are to them, indicators of what they perceive as being smart.

Never mind the disconnect between logic, facts and context in what they say; it sounds smart to them

Feel good about yourself.  You are not one of them.

ACA 

...

Quoted from: 'Acaiguana notes from the Underground' (Soon to be at theaters near you)

I like that discription

I like that discription Aca...

I always thought it was RDD, which I determined was the problem with liberals. As an example a dog, does not have an advanced intelligence ability and is mostly controlled by emotions. Similarly, liberals controlled by emotion are handicapped by a lack of ability to reason. It is the ability to reason that seperates man from dog, hence the RDD, reason deficit disorder. Hopefully drugs will be developed to improve their lives.

 However I fear it is like horses, you can bring them to water, but....

So as frustrating as the poor liberal are...it is like getting mad at your dog, I mean they are just liberals..what do you expect..

what an idiot

"Feel the Tingle'" Matthews has opened his mouth yet again and removed all doubt. Even the party loyalists in congress are bailing from this massive attempt to socialize the health care industry. He needs to go.

Matthews

is nothing more than a butt-kisser.  Maybe he'd like to get a job in the Obama administration.  That would make sense.  He might even land a job replacing Bo.

The NYT poll that Matthews

The NYT poll that Matthews and Geist love so messaged the methodology as to make it a big lie, not really a poll: http://fishwrangler....

If governments museums are so great why is a trip to the Getty better for your kids than a trip to any government run museum in California?

Matthews-again

jessieH      WE, the PEOPLE, didn't do anything to Iran, the govt. did. WE would love to see a free world, with no dictators. But in reality, WE have dictators all over the place in washington. WE have no voice in congress or the senate. WE have a govt. that controls the MSM. WE have a govt. throwing the Constitution out the window. WE have a govt. getting rid of company CEOs. WE have a govt. doing almost the same thing as the Iranian govt. Matthews works for the MSM. His words are meaningless. How many Czars does Iran have?