Romney won, Rudy lost. That's Chris Matthews' take on the GOP presidential debate he moderated on MSNBC last night. Matthews made his views clear during his appearance on this morning's "Today." Meredith Vieira, who interviewed Matthews at 7:09 EDT, seemed to share her colleague's assessment.TODAY CO-HOST MEREDITH VIEIRA: Winners and losers in your assessment?
MSNBC HOST CHRIS MATTHEWS: Oh, come on. Well, let me just say I thought that just factually, Giuliani stood out on the issue of abortion rights, clearly. At one point I asked if they would be happy, if it would be a good day for America, if the courts struck down Roe v. Wade, the court decision back in '73 that gave a woman the right to an abortion, and he said 'that would be OK,' Very tentative. And then later on he reasserted his position that he is for abortion rights. So I think that separated him on a big issue.VIEIRA: Yeah, but Chris, he also said it would be OK if a strict constructionist judge upheld Roe v. Wade. It sounded like he was talking out of both sides of his mouth there.
View video here
.Story Continues Below Ad ↓
In fairness to Giuliani, as a matter of constitutional principle he was not necessarily being inconsistent. He has made it clear that he could imagine a strict constructionist judge deciding that Roe should be upheld as a matter of stare decisis -- respect for established precedent. Unless one takes an entirely results-oriented approach to court decisions, something judicial conservatives pride themselves on not doing, Rudy's responses can be squared. Vieira tacitly embraced a more populist approach: if you're for abortion rights you should uphold Roe, and vice versa. It doesn't necessarily work that way. And that is true in both directions. For example, pro-choice constitutional scholar Alan Dershowitz has acknowledged that Roe was wrongly decided and should be overturned.OK, back to the Meredith-Matthews banter.
MATTHEWS: He [Rudy] had some difficulty last night.And later . . .
VIEIRA: Let me ask you about Mitt Romney. Because he comes in here, he's one of those candidates that everbody talks about but he's not doing particularly well in the polls, yet a lot of people felt last night he looked and sounded the most presidential of the group. What do you think about that?As Meredith began to close the segment down, Matthews interjected, clearly wanting to give his bottom-line conclusion.
MATTHEWS: I think he'll go up on the polls. Because I think a lot of people, maybe two or three million people, saw him last night, the political people, they'll talk him up, it'll get around, we're talking about it right now. I think Mitt Romney will move into the top three very clearly now. I think.
MATTHEWS: So it's probably a lucky night for Romney, altogether.My two cents say Matthews was on the mark. As much as I would generally want to resist superficial impressions, it's unquestionable that Romney looked the most comfortable and presidential. And on a night when all were seeking to be seen as the successor to the man in whose library they stood, by his sunniness and good nature Mitt seemed most fit for the mantle.
ASIDE: If Rudy didn't help himself, neither did McCain in my opinion. He looked tired and confused at times. And his "gates of hell" line, while popular in the hall, struck me as canned and forced.
Contact Mark at mark@gunhill.net
—Mark Finkelstein is a NewsBusters contributing editor and host of Right Angle. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
More Liberal BS
May 4, 2007 - 07:39 ET by JimboThere is so much obvious bias here that I am not going to attempt to point it all out. There is an interesting point that I will mention, however. Since Rudy is at the front of the pack, at the moment indicating a potential final run between him and Hillary, Mathews chooses to single out Rudy as “struggling” to start the process of eroding Rudy’s support and to gain support for Chris’ “Clinton return to the White House” dream.
By the way – isn’t Chris Matthews asking questions at the GOP debate akin to Bill O’Reilly asking questions at the Democratic debate? What’s up with that?
Jimbo says - "There is a fine line between freedom of speech and treason"
Chris Matthews hosting a Repu
May 4, 2007 - 08:10 ET by jonathanandersonChris Matthews hosting a Republican debate ... well, that in itself makes it a LIBERAL debate ... the questions will come from a LIBERAL perspective holding LIBERAL bias and will generally seek to establish the LIBERAL point-of-view.
too early
May 4, 2007 - 07:40 ET by the mad poleI didn't watch. It's may 2007!!!!! Besides, I already made a choice, GO BLUE. :)
Lucky??
May 4, 2007 - 07:45 ET by Jimbo“So it’s probably a lucky night for Romney, altogether”
Even in declaring what he perceives to be the winner, he can’t bring himself to give a shred of credit to a conservative. “Lucky”?? That infers that Romney was incapable of coming out on top as a result of his own merit. It’s like he won, because the others lost. Mathews is completely blinded by hatred of the right.
Jimbo says - "There is a fine line between freedom of speech and treason"
I also thought that was a ver
May 4, 2007 - 08:28 ET by Hero SquadI also thought that was a very curious choice of words. It probably even pains him to declare a Republican a winner in a Republican debate.
*****
"Was it a millionaire who said 'Imagine no possessions?'" - Elvis Costello
Coming from Matthews it could
May 4, 2007 - 08:33 ET by Gat New YorkComing from Matthews it could also be the kiss of death from Romney. The last thing any of those candidates needs is any kind of endorsement from Matthews or the rest of his band of communists.
Chris Matthews hosting a Repu
May 4, 2007 - 08:41 ET by jonathanandersonChris Matthews hosting a Republican debate ... well, that in itself makes it a LIBERAL debate ... the questions will come from a LIBERAL perspective holding LIBERAL bias and will generally seek to establish the LIBERAL point-of-view.
Proverbs 28:4
They that forsake the law praise the wicked: but such as keep the law contend with them.
An endorsement by Matthews is usually a mark of corruption ... and criticism a mark of integrity.
How is it that the republican
May 4, 2007 - 09:20 ET by Airforce_5_OHow is it that the republican are not afraid to go on a liberal network and debate but our liberal buddies can’t go on Fox?
What do you guys think?
Reduce the U.S. Carbon Footprint. Send Rosie to Iran. Airforce_5_O 04/04/2007
Because liberals are snivel
May 4, 2007 - 09:32 ET by MightyMouthBecause liberals are sniveling little snot nosed crybabies? Just taking a wild guess here.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
'Cause they're fraidy scared.
May 4, 2007 - 09:52 ET by dahliatravers'Cause they're fraidy scared.
Because they think show is mo
May 4, 2007 - 10:20 ET by ThisnThatBecause they think show is more important than substance, and they set out to try to prove it every single day of their miserable lives?
Most likely
May 4, 2007 - 10:33 ET by AgnosticThe Dems can dictate what they are willing to do most likely becuase they know that the media will not only support their actions but the media will also supress any contradictory opinions.
This should be a general elec
May 4, 2007 - 10:41 ET by Gat New YorkThis should be a general election issue. Republicans were not afraid to follow through with last night’s debate with a host that carries the Democratic Party liberal water and on a station that does the same. Democrats were too afraid to do the same on Fox. I fully expect that whoever is the Democratic candidate will have to have answer for that and why anyone should think that they have enough courage to confront other more compelling challenges in the world than a fear of appearing on Fox News.
Good-moning GNY,They won't an
May 4, 2007 - 10:48 ET by bigtimerGood-moning GNY,
They won't answer for it because I do not think they will confronted about it...I hope I am wrong.
Matthews and Politico, let alone msnbc should be ashamed...
Fox would never be so classless as to do anything close to what these pathetic obviously biased leftists critters did last night, I do not care who the moderator would be.
BT - I found it interesting t
May 4, 2007 - 10:54 ET by Gat New YorkBT - I found it interesting that NBC used Brian Williams as the Democrat moderator and they used one of their clowns Chris Matthews for the GOP.
Fox is a serious news organization. Also, Fox's audience is much larger than MSNBC, CNBC, and CNN combined.
And I do hope their cowardice is an issue.
To me it comes back to the ha
May 4, 2007 - 11:18 ET by Airforce_5_OTo me it comes back to the hard questions. Where the Dems are running from a debate knowing they will not be asked the standard softball questions (as we witnessed the other night).
The Republicans are not afraid of the hard questions and will travel into enemy waters.
Reduce the U.S. Carbon Footprint. Send Rosie to Iran. Airforce_5_O 04/04/2007
Behind enemy lines
May 4, 2007 - 10:00 ET by jcrueAt least the GOP candidates were not afraid of appearing on enemy turf unlike the DNC/Fox fiasco.
How can you face down terrorists when you are afraid of a news network?
I find it funny, there is mor
May 4, 2007 - 10:14 ET by Casey97I find it funny, there is more diversity of opinion on social issues from the republican line up opposed to the democrat group. It seems to be a Democrat presidential nominee, pro-life need not apply.
GOP the party of DIVERSITY.
With Rudy as a Republican nominee, at least have someone that wears a dress on occasion. Who do the Democrats have? Certainly not Hillary! Since her husband seldom wears pants, she must wear the pants in that family. It appears she has taken this literally and wears pant-suits only.
/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-/*-
With Democrat revisionist history and liberals guaranteeing the future (global warming, nuclear destruction, etc.) only the future is certain; the past is always changing.
Matthews
May 4, 2007 - 10:21 ET by iveseenitallLet's see. Rudy's in the lead going in. Matthews is the "host". After the debate Matthews goes after Rudy on his abortion answers and proclaims someone else to be the "winner". Sniff, sniff---something stinks here.(although Romney was pretty impressive, IMO).
NEVER,NEVER trust a liberal
They are scared of Rudy.
May 4, 2007 - 10:32 ET by florida_chadThey are scared of Rudy.
Good morning fc...You think t
May 4, 2007 - 11:11 ET by bigtimerGood morning fc...
You think they are scared of Rudy...just wait to see how they act when Thompson jumps in.
LOL!
And his "gates of hell&q
May 4, 2007 - 10:15 ET by bigtimerAnd his "gates of hell" line, while popular in the hall, struck me as canned and forced.
Struck me that way too, let alone he sounded nervous to me in the beginning to the middle, you could here it in his voice, I have listened to him for years and years and never heard him sound that way whatsoever.(the spin by the talking heads afterwards about this was amusing to me, he was fired up, yeah right, maybe, but he is done IMO.)
Matthews and Politico were absolutely horrendous, they ought to be embarrassed this morning...
I forgot, leftist don't know what that means...as they pat each other on the back.
BT - this was a warm up but y
May 4, 2007 - 10:45 ET by Gat New YorkBT - this was a warm up but you should expect some of those lines to become part of the general campaign.
The overriding issue will be the war against terror (not global warming or whatever) next year and Democrats do not have a serious answer that identifies what this war is and how to fight it other than playing Where’s Waldo in the mountains of Pakistan. They also have no serious answer on dealing with the Middle East while the GOP candidates voiced articulate and compelling answers on the subject.
I agree with all your points
May 4, 2007 - 10:58 ET by bigtimerI agree with all your points GNY...
That is exactly why Shrillary is doing what she is doing now with Byrd trying to undo her vote....funny as heck to anyone with a brain, she is cute by half.
She keeps hurting herself...dontcha' just love desperation?!
The dem's will have to have answers when the rubber meets the road...I can't wait.
I do hope the repub's refuse to have anything to do with msnbc and Politico again.
BT - Mark Levin commented bes
May 4, 2007 - 11:14 ET by Gat New YorkBT - Mark Levin commented best on MSNBC's performance:
http://levin.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZmQ0Mjk2YjBjNDRkNzdhMjk3ZDQ2OGI5MmUxNTY5YWE=
The GOP did what they needed to do and made a fool out of Matthews who is too self-absorbed to realize it.
GNY...I love Levin, always ha
May 4, 2007 - 11:28 ET by bigtimerGNY...
I love Levin, always have...and agree with all his summary.
Funny, if you could put together all my posts together from the beginning of the debate last night on open thread to Matthews thread he put up later, up until now, I basically said the same thing with the exception of his last paragraph, which I total agree with and is a given...lol!
Thanks for that link and Levin blog site....it is a keeper for me.
Many of his questions weren't
May 4, 2007 - 22:33 ET by dahliatraversMany of his questions weren't intended to elicit a candidate's substantive views but to play gotcha and embarrass. He also ran the debate as he runs his low-rated TV show — hyper-paced questioning in which the candidates didn't have an opportunity to explain their positions in a way that might be useful to the audience. - Marc Levin
Excellent.
MSNBC scheduling dept got the wrong message and sent talent to staff a visit to The View rather than a Pres debate.
According to the "Rate
May 5, 2007 - 17:12 ET by WhichWingAccording to the "Rate the Candidates" poll on MSNBC's site, Ron Paul had the best night, followed by Romney and Giuliani. So I would say that the biggest inaccuracy in their conversation is leaving Paul out of it altogether.
what is the sample group who
May 5, 2007 - 18:15 ET bywhat is the sample group who would go to msnbc to vote? i would think less conservatives than liberals, which is not the group which will vote in the rep primary
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Misterbill's scorecard
May 5, 2007 - 17:20 ET by misterbillMisterbill's scorecard-- I did not watch the debates--multiple reasons, but Matthews and KOB are the key reasons. Very important to me is that it is way too early in the game to give a hoot. I will vote for the best person for the job. Neither of my two favorite candidates weren't there.
I am tempted to change parties so I can vote against the wicked (b) witch -hellary. But that's a Dem trick, so I won't. I will vote for either Fred or Newt, whoever of the two winds up on the ticket. Newt is America's smartest, Fred is America's wisest. There is no one else , IMHO , in the same league as either of them.If neither runs, I will do a write-in. It won't be the first time.
PS - They should put me on the ticket--
May 5, 2007 - 17:27 ET by misterbillPS - They should put me on the ticket-- I would make a different kind of VP. I would address the Congress the way the Brit Parliament does with pithy, cutting comments to the talking heads. Such as "Mr Murtha--do you happen to have brought your spine with you today??" or "Ms Pelosi, did you hit every branch in the ugly tree on the way down." or "I heard what you said, I just need a while because I can't believe it!"
I don't know about the rest
May 5, 2007 - 18:59 ET by WhichWingI don't know about the rest of you, but I would love to see our Congress conducted the same way as the British Parliament. Once a week the president, or VP, addresses them directly. I find it very entertaining. And it's better than taking shots at each other in the press.
Newt lost me
May 5, 2007 - 17:34 ET by RJNewt lost me in his phony GW "debate" with Kerry. He's capitulated to the AGW crowd, and that's one of my make or break issues. There's just too much riding on it....destruction of our economy, UN carbon taxes that will lead to other taxes, a giant step toward socialism, etc.