Has anyone checked the video to see if Chris Matthews was part of Cindy Sheehan's noisy protest that brought Rahm Emanuel's press conference to a halt the other day at the Capitol? Because Matthews has been on an absolute anti-war rampage. As noted here, in the days preceding Nancy Pelosi's ascension to the speakership he was demanding that she use the power of the purse to cut off funding for the war. Yesterday afternoon he snapped at Matt Lauer when his NBC colleague opined that the Democrats have no choice but to fund the war so long as US troops are in the field.
Matthews continued his campaign on last night's Hardball. Check out these excerpts from his conversation with Dem strategist Hilary Rosen and former Republican representative Susan Molinari:
Demanded Chris of Rosen: "Will the Democrats do what they promised to do in the campaign or will they let the voters down again and not stop this war?"
When Rosen replied that Jack Murtha, who now chairs a committee controlling the funding for the war is "committed to evaluating where we are," Matthews snapped back "words, words, words."
More from Chris:
"They're changing the subject. Every time I talk to these new Democrats about Iraq, they say we're busy raising the minimum wage or stem cell, they're quick to change the topic, even Jim Webb he did it now. It's great, he said what he said. But he said, I ran on other things besides the war. Why is he changing the subject now when he didn't during the campaign?"
"To get elected, is that all they wanted?"
"Do you think it's possible that the Democrats used the war issue to get elected and once they got the power and the perks that they're going to let the war slide a couple of years?"
When Rosen said that Pres. Bush is "going to say something [next week] and the Democrats are going to react," Matthews sardonically observed "this is the iron fist of the Democrat party you're describing? I missed it. When [do] they call for an end of the war, five years, ten years?"
"Do the Democrats have the guts to oppose this war?"
"There are voters that are wondering why we're having the celebration. They wonder why they voted and campaigned and now [the newly-elected Dems are] all congratulating themselves on their new jobs and perks."
"I don't mind playing the role of agent provocateur. I want to see a decision on this, a vote, one way or the other. I want to see these people stand up and say clearly where they stand because we went into this war without a real debate. We had phony intel. A lot of scared Democrats voted for the war not really believing in it. Crossing their fingers, like Hillary Clinton saying 'I didn't really vote for the war. I voted for to authorize the president to have the option to maybe someday go to war if he doesn't get what he wants. This is BS."
Mark was in Iraq in November. Contact him 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
But Chrissie is non-partisan,
January 5, 2007 - 07:21 ET by NewsbusterbrownBut Chrissie is non-partisan, right?
They should change the name of his program to "Screwball" instead.
Poor Chris finally sees that Dem opposition was just pandering
January 5, 2007 - 07:24 ET by blackrain4xmasMan, ever since I saw Chris' jaw drop on election night while talking to Gov Dean....I've had a laugh a day. Seriously, I saved the newsbusters rpt on it in my favorites, and I look at it every day.
http://newsbusters.org/node/8944
Chris Matthews is finally realizing that the opposition to the war was just political pandering to get votes. The Dems he believed were all just voicing their sentiments about seeing violence on tv, and at being out of power. They won't and really can't do anything about the war-technically they can, but politically they can't.
btw, I do my absolute best to remind Chris of this everyday. Surely he doesn't get my emails, but I send him one every single day with a link to the newsbusters rpt above. It shows that the DNC never even started looking at a plan for "A New Direction In Iraq". It was pure pandering. They pimped the idea, he was their ho, and those who voted for Dems got the std.
Enjoy it Chris, you've been had BIGTIME
I invite and encourage any and all to remind Chris Matthews of just how badly he has been pandered/had by lying lawyer politicans.
hardball@mnsbc.com
http://www.floppingaces.net/2007/01/04/they-told-us-that-removing-a-d/
Mark, it is really a surprise to me about the MSM disappointment
January 5, 2007 - 07:27 ET by acaiguanaMark, it is really a surprise to me about the MSM disappointment.
Particularly Matthews. It turns out, he actually believed in the Democrat - well...
BS.
What a maroon. <bugs bunny>
This is really a laugh. I am amazed. I never in a million years thought that the Liberals actually believed anything they were saying and now it turns out that the people who led the charge in the MSM are let down. I assume Olbermann is the same way.
It has been a real education for me to see that Liberals, aside from being Liberals before their country, are themselves so deluded that they believe each other.
This is a thread that needs to be watched while it unfolds. Sheehan, Matthews, Olbermann, Letterman - and the host of ridiculous pompous players over the past 3 plus years.
The very best possible slap in their faces.
:-)
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "Which city is next?"
This is all part of the plan
January 5, 2007 - 11:14 ET by TruthMongerThis is all part of the plan - the MSM puts a little "heat" on the Dems just for show - allowing the Dems to pontificate very intellectually about how they've changed their minds somewhat "now that they're in the leadership" and that they "have access to the intel" about how they'd "really like to get the troops out now" but "GWB has us stuck in there too deep" at the moment and "they're doing all they can" for now...blah...blah...blah...
To which the MSM then replies "Oh, Ok...no problem then...now about this GLOBAL WARMING...!" And soon all is forgotten amongst the great unwashed - unless the damn repubs get back in...then it's FRONT AND CENTER ONCE AGAIN...and on and on it goes...the people WANT US OUT OF THERE NOW....!!!!!
Terrorists are not Muslims, Nazi's were not Christians, etc, etc...
dhris matthews
January 5, 2007 - 07:30 ET by the mad poleWhat I am most upset about is that the msm has whipped the public into such a frenzy with all the distortions that there is a real threat to our President's safety! The dems have created a hot bed of anti-u.s. sentiment and now have to sleep in it.
The safety of our country, our soldiers, our ports our cities...
January 5, 2007 - 07:34 ET by acaiguanaThe safety of our country, our soldiers, our ports our cities...
Well, you get my drift.
If one encourages the enemy into thinking they are winning the hearts and minds of America through their violence and terrorism; the consequences are grim.
Grim, I tell ya, grim.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "Which city is next?"
It's not like they even kept it secret
January 5, 2007 - 08:34 ET by blackrain4xmasThe Dems test out their Presidential themes at Democratic Leadership Council conferences. Dean's Spring/summer DLC themes got the most traction, and so the anti-war movement that was tiny until then exploded in June 02. Just check the polls. People were all of a sudden hugely against action in Iraq, and it was another 3 months before the President even started his runup to war rhetoric with his 91202 address to the UN. After they lost in 04, the DLC pops up and say, gosh, national security issues killed us, the anti-war dance worked with Dems, but not with the general American public.
http://www.ndol.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=253227&kaid=127&subid=173
So they tried to be more centrist, but it didn't work. The press found their resonate tone that would get them higher ratings. People tuned in to hear rumors of lies of scandals more than they did to hear stories of herosim (they turn to History Channel for that kinda thing). Furthering the out of control effort was leaders like Cindy Sheehan who took the ball and ran with it-ran out of control. Need control of Congress? Pander to the base, use the conspiracy-seeking media, and pretend there's "A New Direction In Iraq"
Poor Chris. He was so owned by them, and now he just can't face up to the facts that one doesn't have to like war to support it. They just have to hate the scenario of defeat more than they hate the objective.
And I suppose many would see
January 5, 2007 - 08:29 ET by JimboAnd I suppose many would see this as good, fair and balanced "reporting".
There are so many things that are laughable about this, amny of which have already been mentioned. Add to the list that the MSM says Fox represents biased reporting.
Hey Mr. Matthews, if you want
January 5, 2007 - 08:57 ET by InfomanOhioHey Mr. Matthews, if you want the war to end why don't you get your rear end on a plane, fly to Iraq, and tell our hardworking gals and guys to go home? I'm sure they'll give you the appropriate response...
Gee, the Democrats lied to get elected? And Mr. Matthews is upset at this? I thought it was get elected at any cost just to push out the Republicans. What are you MSM people complaining about?
The truth may be ugly, but it is still the truth.
is he french
January 5, 2007 - 09:15 ET by foolnomorethe puplic were sold this cut an run day an night by crap'ahews, anus'morn'in,,now ! WE the people have to duck an cover since this has only helped the "nut-job's" who want to harm" we the people" more reason to do so . (something from imus this morn( dickhead) -i'am not laughing.
Bless and support All the troops-Liberalism" is" a mental disorder!!!
I don't expect Matthews to be
January 5, 2007 - 09:20 ET by Chris NormanI don't expect Matthews to be impartial - he's a liberal and a commentator - not a reporter. I do expect him not to melt down nightly, spewing forth outrageous bile. It would also be nice if he let people who disagree with him get a word in edgewise before his tsunami of spittle starts...
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
Chris – I agree completely
January 5, 2007 - 09:30 ET by JimboChris – I agree completely on the difference between commentator and reporter. The problem I have is, when you put this kind of filth on MSNBC, it gives the air of reporting, and I truly don’t believe that many people draw the same distinction between commentating and reporting. I’m convinced that this relentless crap is swallowed hook line and sinker by a significant portion of the country as “reporting”.
I know what you're saying, bu
January 5, 2007 - 09:49 ET by Chris NormanI know what you're saying, but I think we have to be careful here. There is a place for opinion shows. I say let the commentator say what he or she wants, as long as it doesn't go out of control - a point Matthews passed long ago. My big objection is when reporters, like David Shuster, tailor their "news reports" to tie into and back up Matthew's opinions.
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
I think we are saying the sam
January 5, 2007 - 10:37 ET by JimboI think we are saying the same thing Chris. I agree that commentators have their place in the world. But I also think the MSN blurs the line between commentators and reporters, as you describe. And I believe it to be calculated and intentional. It's a problem, and yet another tool to advance their agenda.
jimbo/chris
January 5, 2007 - 10:01 ET by foolnomoresadly they are buy'n into this everyday,just look at tax'anuestts an other metro area's hook-line,&sink'n ,,we cannot be vocal enough to out-shout this problem that is before "us"..The sheep'le want to believe in this,an so they will .
Bless and support All the troops-Liberalism" is" a mental disorder!!
Here's a picture of our new S
January 5, 2007 - 09:37 ET by JimboHere's a picture of our new Speaker at a swearing in ceremony using a Koran.
Is it me, or do they all lo
January 5, 2007 - 09:46 ET by MightyMouthIs it me, or do they all look like the Cheshire Cat who got away with something?
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
They did get away with someth
January 5, 2007 - 09:51 ET by JimboThey did get away with something. They successfully injected a fundamentally violent religion into the government of the United States. The MSM has been talking about “historic events” over the past two days. I say this historic event should top the list.
Jimbo,Did anyone check to see
January 5, 2007 - 10:09 ET by Chris NormanJimbo,
Did anyone check to see if Pelosi and Barbara Boxer were also sworn in over a wicca spell book? Because they strike me as being witc.. I'd better be careful here, lest I get turned into a tree or something...
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
Or worse, they will turn you
January 5, 2007 - 10:40 ET by JimboOr worse, they will turn you into a liberal!
Aieeeee! That would be a life
January 5, 2007 - 11:04 ET by Chris NormanAieeeee! That would be a life of torment. Actually, that would explain a lot about what's happening in this country...
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
I'm sorry, I just can't stop laughing at him
January 5, 2007 - 09:52 ET by blackrain4xmas" "Will the Democrats do what they promised to do in the campaign or will they let the voters down again and not stop this war?""
The man doesn't even offer the option that he's been played, but he knows it otherwise he wouldn't have to ask the question.
I can't WAIT until he gets Pelosi, Reid, or Dean on again. There's no way he'll be able to hold his ego back-he'll have to at least ask the question above, and if recent history is an indicator, he's gonna wig out when they try to "finese" him or dance around the issue.
I just hope that he goes a smidge further and asks:
"X number of Americans have died in Iraq since Democrats took power and had the ability to end the war by cutting funds like they did when the ended the Vietnam War...why'd those soldiers die?"
"Which is more important: cutting funding for the war and ending it as successfully as Dems ended the Vietnam War or trying to raise the minimum wage?"
or how about the ultimate:
"C'mon, tell the truth, all this anti-war stuff has just been pandering to get people to vote Democrats into power. You guys never had any real intention of doing anything other than give the President and his neonazicon cabal free reign to wage an imperial war in the Middle East, right?"
Let's go simple:
"Did you lie to me, and if not then what and when are you going to do something to end the war in Iraq?"
Or the one I email froth-mouth-Matthews every morning:
"How's that plan for "A New Direction In Iraq" coming along?"
BWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
Bahahahahahaha, Bahahahaha, w
January 5, 2007 - 10:07 ET by dscottBahahahahahaha, Bahahahaha, what a bunch of suckers to believe a Dem campaign pledge!!!! Rubes!!! Naive!!! Gullible!!!! Bahahahaha. I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell Chris, how much are you willing to pay? The Dems back peddled on how many other issues before even taking office and you're surprised that their new direction didn't include Iraq? You must have been born yesterday.
The 2006 Dem campaign was a pack of lies, just like all slick salespeople do, they told and promised what you wanted to hear, whether the product was what you thought it was or not is besides the point, you bought it and they have your money. Suckers.
“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius
Soooooooo true/soooooooooo pwnd
January 5, 2007 - 10:13 ET by blackrain4xmasImpeachment? nope
end war? nope
"rollback tax cuts"? nope
indict Rove for outing Plame? nope
Man, if they don't get min wage through....they will be 100% out of campaign promises to keep
"A New Direction In Iraq"...how's that plan coming? Formed a committee yet?
Chris Matthews, gullible pawn of the Democratic Party
"A New Direction in Iraq
January 5, 2007 - 10:47 ET by Jimbo"A New Direction in Iraq...... how's that plan coming? Formed a committee yet?"
Nancy is in her office pressing the Easy Button and is thoroughly confused that by the fact that nothing is happening.
Funniest post I've read anywhere all week!
January 5, 2007 - 10:51 ET by blackrain4xmasMan, that's a good one. I can just picture her beating the gavel on an easy button
Wouldn't it be great if someone slipped one up there by her chair one day. What a photo op!
The wonderful irony of this i
January 5, 2007 - 12:36 ET by mattmThe wonderful irony of this is that the Libs in the MSM, who got the Dems elected, are the ones complaining the loudest; Proving the MSM believe they should be running the country.
This is the silver lining in the cloud of the 2006 elections. The Dems have to actually do something, rather than merely criticize Republicans. This makes them vulnerable to being exposed for their vacuous ideology, their corruption, and their incompetence.
Didn't you know that CM is fu
January 5, 2007 - 12:35 ET by sembyDidn't you know that CM is funding Sheehan's anti-war protest; he paid for her trip when she met our pal Hugo!
Do you think that we can ban MSNBC from Newsbusters; I mean all of them are worthless and there are other important stories to report on...and we only giving them free advertising!
You should be thanking Matthews
January 5, 2007 - 15:45 ET by Archibald CoxChris Matthews is doing conservatives a great favor by pressing the Democrats on Iraq. If it turns out that the Dems don't take concrete steps to get the U.S. out of Iraq, after essentially pinning the election on the war issue, isn't that a good thing for the Republicans? I can't see what you're all so upset about.
Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official. - Theodore Roosevelt
Matthews knows the deal...
January 5, 2007 - 16:26 ET by Guy Arthur ThomasMatthews knows the deal, the sometimes silent and sometimes obvious but standard agreement between the MsM and the Democrats: "We slant reports in your favor and your do our bidding on pet morality issues". Apparently Chrissy is unaware that even the greatest Captian can turn a ship only so fast and is so used to have his butt whiped on the first fit he can't understand the lack of immediate acquiesence to his global demands. Idiot!
If you claim to be a conservative, please don't disgrace yourself and conservatism by thinking and arguing like a liberal.