Tag Archives: chris-matthews

Matthews: Businesses Sitting on Trillions of Dollars to ‘Screw’ Economy and Obama

Chris Matthews thinks American businesses are refusing to spend money in order to intentionally harm the economy as part of a long-term plot to “screw” President Obama. Such political paranoia was actually uttered on Monday’s “Hardball” as the host chatted with Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post and Charles Mahtesian of Politico. Readers are strongly advised to prepare themselves for the kind of conspiracy theory normally reserved for the likes of Michael Moore, Oliver Stone, and members of the far-left who actually believe George W. Bush and Dick Cheney had a hand in the 9/11 attacks (video follows with partial transcript and commentary):  CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: You know, a great question, Charles, that wasn’t on my list to ask but I’m going to ask you because you seem like a sophisticated guy of many parts. You think business can sit on those billions and trillions of dollars for two more years after they screw Obama this time? Are they going to keep sitting on their money so they don’t invest and help the economy for two long years to get Mr. Excitement Mitt Romney elected president? Will they do that to the country? Yeah, Chris, business owners and corporate executives across the fruited plain are intentionally undermining their companies and their personal fortunes in order to impact an election that is 25 months away. Certainly, they’re not keeping stockpiles of cash out of fear of: rising taxes, increased healthcare costs, the creation of carbon emissions targets, a double-dip recession, or the next regulatory shoe to drop from the current administration. No. They’re just remaining uncharacteristically liquid to harm the man that gives you a thrill up your leg.  Now that we’ve settled that Mr. Matthews, could I interest you in some waterfront property in southern Florida? 

Originally posted here:
Matthews: Businesses Sitting on Trillions of Dollars to ‘Screw’ Economy and Obama

Matthews-Mitchell Admit: Military Doesn’t Trust Obama’s Political Advisers

Of all the revelations in Bob Woodwards’s new book , this could be the most devastating . . . On this evening’s Hardball, Chris Matthews and Andrea Mitchell admited that the military people in the Obama administration don’t trust Pres. Obama’s political advisers. That raises grave concerns for America’s security.  In purely political terms, consider the implications given that among Americans, by far the most trusted institution is . . . the military. View video here . ANDREA MITCHELL: This is a new president who had no relationship with the military. And what does come through loud and clear from this book is the distrust and the long knives that were out between the civilian side, the political aides, the former campaign aides, and the military brass . . . National Security Adviser Jim Jones is very clear that he feels ostracized, that he didn’t have access to the president on the president’s first European trip. He had to go to the president and complain. CHRIS MATTHEWS: Well is it true they don’t like each other?  Just bottom line here: is it true the military guys don’t trust the White House political people and the other way around?  Your thoughts first, Andrea, on that one. MITCHELL: I think that is true.  And I think in particular that Jim Jones, a Marine general, retired Marine general, feels very much at odds with some of the civilians on the national security team and is about to leave. I think that’s the next big announcement we’re going to have from the White House, is the shake-up on the foreign policy/national security team that mirrors what’s happened so far on the economic team.

See original here:
Matthews-Mitchell Admit: Military Doesn’t Trust Obama’s Political Advisers

Matthews Scolds Obama: ‘Stop Saying Cutting Taxes Is Giving People Money – It’s Their Money!’

A truly shocking thing happened on Monday’s “Hardball”: Chris Matthews, the man who once proudly boasted about getting a thrill up his leg when Barack Obama speaks, actually scolded the President on national television. Maybe even more surprising, the MSNBCer told the object of his affection, “Stop saying that giving people tax cuts is giving people money. It`s their money!” The unashamed liberal host continued, “A tax cut is when the government doesn`t take our money. It`s an important distinction” (video follows with transcript and commentary): CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: I have one small tweak to make to what the president said today — he should stop saying that giving people tax cuts is giving people money. It`s their money! A tax cut is when the government doesn`t take our money. It`s an important distinction. He talked today, for example, about people getting a check from the government in the form of a tax cut. That`s not the way it works. If tax rates are kept lower, it`s a matter of the check going to the government being smaller. Again, it`s an important distinction. Wouldn’t it be nice if others on the Left along with their media minions understood this basic principle? After all, the way Democrats and press members have been talking about extending the Bush tax cuts lately, it’s as if we all work for the government and any money it deigns to give us we should be thankful for. That an unapologetic liberal like Matthews not only gets this but is also willing to say it on national television makes you wonder why all so-called journalists don’t agree. Errr – maybe not.

Follow this link:
Matthews Scolds Obama: ‘Stop Saying Cutting Taxes Is Giving People Money – It’s Their Money!’

NBC News Prez Whines That Fox News Is ‘Trying to Brand Us’ As Liberals Because of the Radical MSNBC Lineup

Washington Post media reporter Howard Kurtz wrote this howler today in a story on how MSNBC’s leftishness rubs off on the mothership: “No one is suggesting Brian Williams’s newscast had suddenly become biased.” That’s right. Brian’s show has been biased for a long time . But there’s more comedy in how NBC News chief Steve Capus tries to suggest it’s unfair to see NBC as liberal because of the ever-increasing left-wing shrillness quotient of MSNBC in prime time:  Capus concedes that MSNBC’s lefty lineup at night–Ed Schultz, Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow and, as of next week, Lawrence O’Donnell–raises questions about NBC. But cable is “narrowcasting,” he says, and “I think the audience gets it, pure and simple.” Fox News, he adds, is “trying to brand us” as a liberal broadcast network because of MSNBC. “It’s a classic political tactic — they don’t like Keith Olbermann, they’re going to come after us. It’s annoying.” NBC News has operated with a left-wing tilt going back to at least Huntley/Brinkley in the sixties, but now they have a new way of pretending to be straight news: Don’t we look calm and sedate next to Olbermann?  Kurtz was also told that MSNBC was a complete programming mess for 11 years, but adding radical-left talk show host after radical-left talk show host has suddenly made the network “serious,” after all these years:  Fox still dominates the cable news race, but MSNBC now regularly beats CNN in prime time, and Joe Scarborough’s “Morning Joe” has become the most talked-about breakfast show . Capus attributes the turnaround to the channel branding itself “the place for politics,” giving it a long-sought focus after so many short-lived programs with the likes of Alan Keyes, Phil Donahue and John Hockenberry. For its first 11 years, “MSNBC didn’t have its act together,” Zucker says. “Only in the last three years has MSNBC emerged as a serious network. Kurtz is buying the company spin on this one. Fox & Friends crushes Morning Joe in the morning (often by a gap of about 1 million to 400,000). Kurtz doesn’t even note that CNN Headline News has boasted that its Morning Express with Robin Meade has beat Scarborough in the coveted 25-54 demographic for many months . Perhaps Kurtz is being charitable to NBC so he doesn’t look too much like a CNN employee. Kurtz is certainly correct that Fox News enjoys taunting NBC and MSNBC (if he doesn’t mention that NBC and MSNBC often shoot back):  Fox Executive Vice President Brian Lewis responds that “NBC, and especially MSNBC, is not even a blip on our radar screen. We don’t care what they do. Capus must be confusing us with CNN” as a close competitor. (Fox host Bill O’Reilly, for his part, regularly describes NBC as a left-wing network, at one point slamming “Capus and his character assassins.”)

View original post here:
NBC News Prez Whines That Fox News Is ‘Trying to Brand Us’ As Liberals Because of the Radical MSNBC Lineup

Marc Ambinder Fulfills Own Prediction, Provides Messaging Assistance to Dems: ‘Go After Palin!’

I didn’t know about what follows when I posted last night (at NewsBusters ; at BizzyBlog ) on Atlantic politics editor and CBS Campaign 2010 “Chief Political Consultant” Marc Ambinder’s September 15 prediction that “The media is going to help the Democratic Party’s national messaging.” Though drop-dead obvious, I still found it interesting that someone in Ambinder’s position would admit it. It turns out that only two days after Ambinder put forth his prediction, he proactively made it come true. Despite the inquisitive title of his September 17 post (“Will the White House Play the Palin Card?”), Ambinder clearly believes that going after Sarah Palin should be part of the White House’s and Democrats’ strategy during the next seven weeks. It’s enough to make you wonder if he has already written his CBS election post-mortems. Behold Ambinder’s cluelessness: … when Tea Partiers are in “elect someone like Christine O’Donnell mode,” Democrats sense an opportunity. Simply put, the crazier the Tea Party seems, the more Democrats can link the Republican agenda to its source of energy, which in turn fires up rank-and-file Democrats. There is, in fact … someone whose very name provokes disgust among Democrats, someone whose name identification is 100 percent and whose ubiquity is extremely useful. That person is Sarah Palin. All that’s required is for the President to utter her name a couple of times. The Fox-Rush-Redstate nexus would explode. Palin would bask in the attention and respond. And respond. And respond. … Elevate Sarah Palin? How much higher can she go? Everyone knows her. Some of Obama’s advisers have argued in the past that the attention paid to Palin by Americans in the last stages of the 2008 campaign is one reason why Obama was able to win so cleanly. Palin and the Tea Party movement are not the same thing. The movement, evolving out of movement conservatism, is principally about government and the economy. Palin revels in the culture wars. But when that part of the Tea Party that does care about social issues becomes the story, linking the two in the public’s mind is easier. Anyone who thinks that Palin hurt John McCain’s campaign wasn’t watching the same election as everyone else. McCain was suffering from intense conservative disinterest until he picked Palin. When he did, she energized the sensible, conservative base of the party as no one ever has. The fact that McCain’s people then seemingly did all they could to water her down in the ensuing weeks is primarily McCain’s fault, not hers. Despite that, residual affection for Palin is what prevented McCain’s 7-point loss from going into double digits, and, for better or worse, arguably salvaged his ability to continue on as a U.S. Senator. Despite well over a year of exposure to it, Ambinder betrays a total misunderstanding of the Tea Party movement. Fiscal issues are currently very important, but if he thinks there’s a big divide within the movement on social issues, he’s got another thing coming. The overriding issue is, to steal from Mark Levin, liberty versus tyranny. There is probably no better example of how all of the supposedly divide-creating issues (fiscal, social, constitutional) tie together under the liberty vs. tyranny banner than Palin’s completely accurate, totally courageous assertion that statist health care will inexorably lead to “death panels” — and that they are designed into legislation this Congress has already passed and this President has already signed. So let me get this straight: During the next seven weeks, Marc Ambinder will be CBS’s “Chief Political Consultant” on Campaign 2010. He’s part of a team that will, in the network’s own words , provide “reports and political analysis (that) will be prominently featured across all CBS News broadcasts and platforms on the run-up to election night 2010 on Nov. 2.” At the same time, Ambinder has not only clearly chosen sides, but is actively providing “messaging” advice to which he hopes Team Obama and the Democrats pay heed. Assuming he continues to do this, Ambinder’s contributions to CBS’s “reports and political analysis” will then necessarily involve evaluating first, whether the home team followed his advice, and second, whether following or not following his advice was successful. Of course, you’ll never hear Ambinder tell his audience that “This is (or isnt’) what I suggested.” No-no-no. CBS will present its “Chief Political Consultant” as an impartial, disinterested observer. What horse manure. And they wonder why their ratings continue to drop. Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com .

See more here:
Marc Ambinder Fulfills Own Prediction, Provides Messaging Assistance to Dems: ‘Go After Palin!’

MRC’s Notable Quotables: Watch Out, GOP — It’s 1964 All Over Again!

Just posted this morning over at MRC.org, our latest edition of Notable Quotables , a bi-weekly compilation of the latest outrageous, sometimes humorous, quotes in the liberal media. Topics this week include: CBS’s Bob Schieffer absurdly suggesting Republicans could face a landslide defeat this year, “very much like 1964,” while Katie Couric frets (again) how “moderate Republicans are becoming an endangered species.” Also in this issue, NBC’s Meredith Vieira declares that the Bush tax cuts “didn’t succeed, so what’s so good about them,” while CBS’s Harry Smith lobbies for “a second stimulus” or even “something like a new WPA.” Oh, and Chris Matthews gets another “thrill” from hearing Obama speak — this time, it’s “all over me.” Video of that confession, plus three other clips after the jump. [Click here to view/download the three-page, fully-formatted, full-color PDF ] Now the quotes from recent weeks, as featured in the September 20 Notable Quotables : Watch Out, Republicans: This Is 1964 All Over Again “It is very much like 1964. In 1960, Republicans lost narrowly with an establishment candidate, Richard Nixon. They got to 1964, they threw out all the establishment candidates, they threw out their party leaders and they nominated Barry Goldwater who — fine man — but he was far to the right of most of the people in his party, and they lost in a landslide. And that’s why you have establishment Republicans worried about what’s going to happen now in November.” — CBS’s Bob Schieffer on the September 15 Evening News . Liberal Media-Speak for “Congratulations, You’ve Won” “You are going to have to answer some questions. We saw that the Republican Party chairman in Jon Karl’s piece there, he went on to say that you’re ‘not a viable candidate,’ that you ‘cannot be elected dog catcher in Delaware.’ He went on to say that you’re either a liar or mentally unhinged.” — ABC’s George Stephanopoulos to Senate primary winner Christine O’Donnell on Good Morning America , Sept. 15. “Tea Party nutbag/Senate nominee from Del. was on CNN w/me in ’96. Forget her ignorant nonsense until I saw this.” — Former CNN anchor Miles O’Brien in a September 15 Twitter posting, referring readers to an anti-O’Donnell article posted on the left-wing Talking Points Memo blog site. Correspondent Nancy Cordes: “Polls show O’Donnell’s ultraconservative social views-” Old clip of Christine O’Donnell: “Lust in your heart is committing adultery.” Cordes: “-make her a decided underdog in this blue-leaning state.” — CBS Evening News , September 15. “She needs to watch some porn and get some tips, is what she needs.” — Host Joy Behar on CNN’s Headline News Joy Behar Show , September 15. Are Republicans “Miscalculating At Their Own Peril”? “You’ve got Delaware, you’ve got Kentucky, you’ve got Alaska, you’ve got Utah, one after another after another. Are all of these Tea Party victories good for the Republican Party?…Even Karl Rove came out and said last night this is — that’s not going to help us get the seat in the long run….I wonder if you’re making a miscalculation at your own peril at, you know, this perceived enthusiasm gap, these people are literally changing the face of a party.” — CBS Early Show co-host Harry Smith to GOP consultant Dan Bartlett, Sept. 15. Katie Frets: Are “Moderate Republicans…an Endangered Species”? “The party crashers. Big primary victories by fringe candidates open a rift in the GOP….Does this mean moderate Republicans are becoming an endangered species?” — Anchor Katie Couric on the CBS Evening News , September 16. Flashback : “[Senator Arlen] Specter’s a Republican who favors abortion rights, is against a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, and is a vocal supporter of embryonic stem cell research. [to Specter] Do you feel like an endangered species these days?” — Couric to then-Republican Senator Arlen Specter on NBC’s Today , May 13, 2005. “What’s So Good About” Bush’s Failed Tax Cuts? “One of the key issues also heading into the midterm elections, is this expiration of the tax cuts, Bush’s tax cuts….These tax cuts have been in existence for quite a while, these Bush tax cuts. If they were designed to stimulate the economy and to create jobs, they didn’t succeed. So what’s so good about them?” — Co-host Meredith Vieira to GOP Representatives Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan and Kevin McCarthy on NBC’s Today , September 14. In the five years after the full tax cut package was passed in 2003, the economy added more than 8.3 million new jobs. Sawyer: Not Raising Tax Rates = “Tax Cut” “Good evening. It will be the big battle to the finish line in November, and this is the question: How big a tax cut will you get next year?” — ABC’s Diane Sawyer opening World News , September 8, talking about the debate over whether to maintain current tax rates or let them rise to Clinton-era levels. Was $862 Billion Stimulus “Big Enough?” How About “a New WPA?” “Gretchen Morgenson, I want to go back to the stimulus….People complain about the size of government, they’re complaining about the deficit, they’re complaining about TARP and who knows what all else. As we’re standing here looking at it right now, just if you can step away, was the stimulus big enough?” “There are plenty of economists out there, Mark Zandi, who say what’s really needed is is a second stimulus.” “Laura Tyson, what about a more significant stimulus, beyond the things, these, you know, a block here, a block here, a block here, but another say couple hundred billion dollars, what about, say, something like a new WPA?” — Fill-in host Harry Smith interviewing a panel of economists on CBS’s Face the Nation , September 5. Applauding Obama’s Four-Star Attorney General Correspondent Rita Braver: “Ignoring political pressure is Holder’s constant message as he talks to Justice Department lawyers in places like Mobile, Alabama….When he took office last February, [cheering crowd] he got a hero’s welcome. It was in part, he believes, a reaction to cronyism and questionable policies advocated in the Bush-era Justice Department….[to Holder] Because you’re the first African American Attorney General, do you put any extra pressure on yourself?” Attorney General Eric Holder: “Yeah, I certainly feel that. I feel there’s a certain responsibility I have….” — CBS’s Sunday Morning , September 12. George’s “Tough Questions” for President Obama “Now, in his first post-summer interview, President Obama takes on George Stephanopoulos and the tough questions.” — ABC promo aired during the September 8 Nightline , touting Stephanopoulos’ interview with Obama. vs . “I wonder what this must feel like from behind your desk. You’re President of the United States. You have to deal with the fallout. And he’s a pastor who’s got 30 followers in his church. Does it make you feel helpless or angry?” — ABC’s George Stephanopoulos asking President Obama about the Florida pastor who threatened to burn Korans, in an interview segment shown on Good Morning America , September 9. The GOP = “The Party of Hate” “Tonight, we start with the party of hate. The Republican Party in this country has been running on hate and division for the last 50 years….What black person, gay guy or girl, immigrant or Muslim American in their right mind would vote for the Republican Party? They might as well hang a sign around their neck saying, ‘I hate myself.'” — Fill-in host Cenk Uygur on MSNBC’s The Ed Show, August 26. Is America’s Islamophobia Suppressing Muslims’ Freedom? “The plans to build an Islamic center close to Ground Zero have whipped up anti-Muslim sentiment….Not since 9/11 has the country seen such anti-Muslim fervor….[to Feisal Abdul Rauf] In the latest poll that ABC’s conducted, only 37 percent of those who were asked expressed a positive feeling about Islam. Do you think that Muslims, people such as yourself, others here, can actually have a place to practice their religion freely, to live freely as Americans, given that figure?” — Host Christiane Amanpour interviewing the imam organizing the Ground Zero mosque on ABC’s This Week , September 12. Columnist Mimics Jennings’ 1994 Tirade Slamming Voters’ “Temper Tantrum” “According to polls, Americans are in a mood to hold their breath until they turn blue. Voters appear to be so fed up with the Democrats that they’re ready to toss them out in favor of the Republicans — for whom, according to those same polls, the nation has even greater contempt. This isn’t an ‘electoral wave,’ it’s a temper tantrum….The American people are acting like a bunch of spoiled brats.” — Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson, September 3. Flashback : “Imagine a nation full of uncontrolled two-year-old rage. The voters had a temper tantrum last week….Parenting and governing don’t have to be dirty words: the nation can’t be run by an angry two-year-old.” — ABC’s Peter Jennings in a November 14, 1994 radio commentary after the GOP congressional victories that year. “Well-Meaning” Hostage Taker “May” Have Gone Too Far “He’s an activist, may be very well-meaning, but he’s now put himself in a situation where he, the police officers and his hostages’ lives are endangered….He’s a bit of an activist, a guy who truly believes, seemingly, in his heart that he needs to do all he can to save the planet. Most watching this would argue he may have taken it way too far on this day….” — CNN’s Rick Sanchez during live coverage of the Sept. 1 stand-off at the Discovery Channel. The hostage-taker claimed human beings were “parasites” and demanded the network shows programs talking about “ways to disassemble civilization.” Incoming CNN Host Will Fit Right In “I’d love to do President Obama. I like what he’s done for the reputation of America abroad, which I’m not sure many Americans fully understand.” — British journalist Piers Morgan, who has been hired to replace Larry King as host of CNN’s 9pm ET hour starting in January, on the September 9 CBS Early Show talking about people he would like to interview. Now, Chris Admits to Thrills “All Over” Clip of Barack Obama from 2008: “My family gave me love. They give me an education. And most of all, they gave me hope. Hope, hope that in America, no dream is beyond our grasp if we reach for it, and fight for it, and work for it.” MSNBC’s Chris Matthews: “I get the same thrill up my leg, all over me, every time I hear those words. I’m sorry, ladies and gentlemen, that’s me. He’s talking about my country and nobody does it better. Can President Obama stir us again and help his party keep power this November?” — Setting up a segment on MSNBC’s Hardball , September 7.

Mark Levin: Christine O’Donnell is ‘Smart to Bypass’ Sunday Talk Shows

Conservative radio host Mark Levin thinks Delaware Republican senatorial nominee Christine O’Donnell is “smart to bypass” the Sunday talk shows she was scheduled to appear on this week. As the Associated Press reported Saturday, O’Donnell canceled her appearances on CBS’s “Face the Nation” and FNC’s “Fox News Sunday”: Campaign spokeswoman Diana Banister cited scheduling conflicts and said O’Donnell needed to return to Delaware for commitments to church events and afternoon picnic with Republicans in a key county where she has solid backing.  Sunday morning, Levin told his Facebook followers this was a good decision: Christine O’Donnell is smart to bypass these shows and the O’Donnell-hating media. All they’ll do is try to rip her with cherry-picked clips and the rest. They’ll use Rove, Krauthammer, Weekly Standard, National Review, Powerline, Castle, etc., quotes against her. She owes them nothing. Her goal is to get elected. Now that she’s raised nearly $2 million, she can tell the voters who she is and what she believes, rather than subjecting herself to the frenzy and bias of the media which clearly seek her personal destruction.  As the media are in a full-court press to dig up dirt on Tuesday’s surprise winner, it seems a metaphysical certitude they’ll attack her no matter what she does. With this in mind, was this a good decision on O’Donnell’s part, or are political candidates better served to face the press regardless of their biases? 

Here is the original post:
Mark Levin: Christine O’Donnell is ‘Smart to Bypass’ Sunday Talk Shows

Matthews Jokes About Obama Bringing Gun to Knife Fight When Dealing with GOP

On Sunday’s syndicated Chris Matthews Show, as the group discussed how a budget fight between a Republican Congress and President Obama might play out politically, host Matthews joked about the Chicago saying about bringing a gun to a knife fight and putting people in the morgue as a metaphor for how Obama might deal with Republicans politically – a saying President Obama also has a history of using : CLARENCE PAGE, CHICAGO TRIBUNE: But Obama knows how to play confrontation politics the Chicago way, and this is the kind of thing that, this is where the rubber meets the road. MATTHEWS: You mean like Jimmy the Cop, “They come at you with a knife, you go at them with a gun”? PAGE: You’ve got it. And remember- MATTHEWS: “They put you in the hospital, you put them in the morgue”? Is that what we’re talking here? Notably, some MSNBC liberals like Keith Olbermann have a history of accusing Republicans of inciting violence by using metaphors, and just a few weeks ago, Cenk Uygur of the Young Turks filled in on MSNBC’s The Ed Show and went to lengths to accuse Republicans of inciting violence with metaphorical rhetoric, all while ignoring Obama’s own similar history. Below is a transcript of the relevant portion of the Sunday, September 19, syndicated Chris Matthews Show: CHRIS MATTHEWS: Clarence, does he have Bill Clinton’s finesse and plainness like Clinton did? The minute it got to the tough- CLARENCE PAGE, CHICAGO TRIBUNE: Nobody’s got Bill Clinton’s finesse, but- MATTHEWS: He was good at that stuff. He was good when it got to Newt. PAGE: But Obama knows how to play confrontation politics the Chicago way, and this is the kind of thing that, this is where the rubber meets the road. MATTHEWS: You mean like Jimmy the Cop, “They come at you with a knife, you go at them with a gun”? PAGE: You’ve got it. And remember- MATTHEWS: “They put you in the hospital, you put them in the morgue”? Is that what we’re talking here? PAGE: Just look at Clinton versus Gingrich. They faced each other down, and who got blamed for the shutdown? It was Gingrich and the Republicans.

Link:
Matthews Jokes About Obama Bringing Gun to Knife Fight When Dealing with GOP

Matthews Admits: Maybe I Was Smart Not to Run For Office This Year

Well you have to give Chris Matthews credit for admitting the obvious. On Monday’s Hardball, as he overlooked the bad environment for Democrats this midterm season, Matthews appeared grateful he didn’t make his much rumored run for Pennsylvania’s Senate seat, as he asked one of his guests: “Do you think it could be the year where guys…like me were smart not to make the run?” [ audio available here ] The admission came during a segment in which Matthews, the Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza and local radio talk show host, Dan Gaffney of WGMD, were breaking down the prospects for Christine O’Donnell to upset Republican Mike Castle and go on to win the general election for the Deleware Senate seat with Gaffney explaining that it was a distinct possibility since there is “a lot of anti-establishment, anti-incumbent sentiment” in that state, calling that race “a crap-shoot.” This caused Matthews to wonder, if in fact, that attitude extended to Pennsylvania as he asked Gaffney the following question: Let me go to Gaffney, a fellow Irishman, while I’ve got you on the show, I’ve got to ask you this. Do you think it could be the year where guys like Beau Biden and guys like me were smart not to make the run? I’m looking at this situation. You cannot predict this year! It is a crap-shoot! And they’re so anti-establishment out there, that they recognize your name and they say, “I knew that name three months ago.” They don’t like you. Isn’t that true? The following exchanges were aired on the September 13 edition of Hardball: CHRIS MATTHEWS: Welcome back to Hardball. The Republican primary in Delaware, the little state of Delaware, tomorrow could have big implications for the Republicans nationwide and their ability to take over the U.S. Senate, which is possible. Republican Mike Castle is fending off a tough challenge from Tea Party candidate Christine O’Donnell and polls show she’s in the race of his life, actually that’s a close, too close to call. … MATTHEWS: Joining me is Delaware radio talk show host Dan Gaffney and WashingtonPost.com managing editor Chris Cillizza. Dan, give me a sense do the voters of Delaware know how important this vote is tomorrow. That this could affect the, I guess you could call it the outside chance of the Republicans grabbing the Senate as well as the House, come November. DAN GAFFNEY: Yeah, I think many of them do, but some of my talk radio callers don’t care. They are more interested in winning the actual battle than the war and there’s such a wind of anti-Castle, you know there’s a wind of anti-Castle wind in the air and even when presented the fact that Castle has a better chance of beating the Democrats, many people don’t care. They want to vote him out any way. MATTHEWS: Boy that sounds like the Democratic left sometimes. That sounds like November Doesn’t Count. I grew up with it, it’s called NDC. Cillizza, you’re, you’re shaking your head positively. The one thing about a polarized electorate is it doesn’t care about practical electoral consequences. CHRIS CILLIZZA, WASHINGTON POST: Yep. MATTHEWS: By the way, I want to give a salute, if not a positive salute, a reality check to the far right. Bob Bennett was knocked off, the guy that beat him, Lee is going to win the general. Crist, Crist has been bumped out of his party but Rubio could well win that. He’s ahead in the polls down there. Specter was knocked out of his party, but Toomey is well ahead by about seven points in PA. And who am I missing? Murkowski. Well I gotta bet, what’s his name up there, Joe Miller is gonna win that, or if he gets in that thing clean, one on one. So you could argue that the Tea Parties have had a pretty good record of positioning themselves to win generals. Maybe not in Nevada, but other places. CILLIZZA: Chris, first of all, isn’t it amazing that we’re talking about Delaware? You’ve got the New Hampshire Senate race, you’ve got New York, you’ve got Wisconsin, we’re talking about Delaware. This is a state we never thought we would be talking about. Number two, that states you just listed: Alaska, Utah, those kind of states. The one thing that’s different, this is Delaware. This is a Democratic state. Mike Castle’s been elected for more than 40 years. He’s been the governor of the state. He’s been the at-large representative. This is not a state where whoever winds up being the Republican nominee, Utah, Alaska, has a big leg up in winning. Not sure if they’re gonna win, but that’s a big leg up. MATTHEWS: Okay let me give you, let me give you, let me give you some history, young fellow. Joe Biden, back in 1972, bumped out a guy who had won the House seat, and let’s go in here Dan, you’re the expert, had been a House member, a Senate member, for x many terms, and a governor, just like this guy Mike Castle. Joe Biden, at the age of 29, knocked him out of the seat and held it for what? 40 years. So isn’t it possible that Christine O’Donnell could be a senator for life. We don’t know. GAFFNEY: Well let me tell you, what my original opinion was that if she wins the primary tomorrow, we would say “Hello, Senator Coons.” That was my original opinion. MATTHEWS: Right. GAFFNEY: But now I’m starting to think that if she pulls it off tomorrow, if, that’s a big “if”, she could do anything. If she can beat Mike Castle in this state, she can do anything. MATTHEWS: What’s your state like these days? Is it as unhappy as the rest of the country and could it say, you know what if she isn’t quite prepared or maybe this other fellow Coons has more executive experience, the usual logic way we make decisions may not be in play this year, there’s so much anger. GAFFNEY: No it’s very emotional Chris. MATTHEWS: Yeah. GAFFNEY: It’s very emotional. There’s a lot of anti-establishment, anti-incumbent sentiment. The Tea Party movement is strong. There is a strong sentiment, especially in the southern part of the state. There are only three counties, the two lower counties, much more conservative, much more likely to go to Christine O’Donnell. The upper county, Newscastle, is urban, it’s the city of Wilmington. Much more likely to go toward Mike Castle. However, will he win enough in Newcastle to take the whole state? It’s a crap-shoot. All of my political pundit friends are saying the same thing to me, “I don’t know.” MATTHEWS: Well Let’s talk about the country. Chris go back, let’s pull back and look at the whole country. CILLIZZA: Sure. MATTHEWS: People watching now from California want to know this. It’s possible with Boxer in play, with Patty Murray in play, with Harry Reid in play, with Russ Feingold in play- CILLIZZA: Yep. MATTHEWS: That the Democrats could lose the Senate. It’s very possible, on a bad night, a what do you call it, a wave night, well you’re the expert, right? Delaware matters. CILLIZZA: Look I would say Delaware, you used the word in the intro Chris – shoe-in. And I thought to myself, that’s exactly right. We considered this like, I met Chris Coons, I like Chris Coons, I didn’t think Chris Coons was gonna beat Mike Castle. I agree that Christine O’Donnell, you never know what’s going to happen if she wins, but she’s not as strong a candidate as Mike Castle in the general election. Doesn’t mean she can’t win, but she’s not as strong a candidate. So if you take Delaware and move it into the “We don’t know” category. Now you’re looking at rather than winning two out of the three of Wisconsin, Washington and California, now you’re talking about winning all three. Is it possible? Yes it’s absolutely possible. MATTHEWS: Ha! I love it! CILLIZZA: Polling, polling in all three suggests it could happen, but it seems odd to me. I think Wisconsin, in order, I think Wisconsin, California, Washington, even the most sort of optimistic Republican strategists I talk to say, “Look we’d love to win two out of three of them that would make a great night.” But two out of three and losing Delaware that means they’re probably not in the majority. MATTHEWS: Okay there’s others than. I think you’re so smart. Let me go to Gaffney, a fellow Irishman, while I’ve got you on the show, I’ve got to ask you this. Do you think it could be the year where guys like Beau Biden and guys like me were smart not to make the run? I’m looking at this situation. You cannot predict this year! It is a crap-shoot! And they’re so anti-establishment out there, that they recognize your name and they say, “I knew that name three months ago.” They don’t like you. Isn’t that true? GAFFNEY: Well I think Beau Biden, yeah it is true. Beau Biden should have gotten in this year. I mean he, he probably is… MATTHEWS: Could he have beaten either of these candidates? Could have beaten Castle or beaten O’Donnell? GAFFNEY: Yes, I think he could have. Not that I would’ve supported him but I think he could. Yes. MATTHEWS: Really? GAFFNEY: Beau Biden? Absolutely.

Read more here:
Matthews Admits: Maybe I Was Smart Not to Run For Office This Year

Chris Matthews and Howard Fineman Have Mutual Obamagasm on Hardball

Chris Matthews and Howard Fineman on Friday had a mutual Obamagasm while cameras rolled on MSNBC’s “Hardball.” As the adorable couple chatted about the Koran burning scandal, and of course blamed the entire controversy on Republicans such as House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Oh.), former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, and former Alaska governor Sarah Palin, the Newsweek columnist unashamedly started the love-fest. “Well, sitting there in the press conference today with President Obama, you could almost hear sort of the classical music in the background,” cooed Fineman. “It was a stately thing, and a mature discussion.” “I get you,” echoed Matthews. “This is an Oxford don, he’s so well-turned, he comes in there elegantly, presenting himself elegantly, presenting himself on a very high-level tone.” One imagines both of these so-called journalists needed a cigarette and a shower during the break (video follows with transcript and commentary): HOWARD FINEMAN, NEWSWEEK: Well, sitting there in the press conference today with President Obama, you could almost hear sort of the classical music in the background. You know, I don’t mean to be facetious… CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: No, I get you… FINEMAN: But, you know what I mean. It was a stately thing, and a mature discussion, you could agree or disagree, let’s all be reasonable about this… MATTHEWS: This is an Oxford don, he’s so well turned… FINEMAN: Yeah! MATTHEWS: …he comes in there elegantly, presenting himself elegantly, presenting himself on a very high-level tone… FINEMAN: And he gave a very… MATTHEWS: …against this menagerie… FINEMAN: Yeah! MATTHEWS: …that’s biting at his heals. FINEMAN: That’s why I’m saying, those people that you cited, Boehner and Gingrich and Palin, are not playing the same ballgame that Barack Obama is. MATTHEWS: I shouldn’t them the Three Stooges, they’re a lot smarter than that. I think they know it. They’re not stooges. FINEMAN: Sure they know what they’re doing. MATTHEWS: Stooges are the people that buy their act. Honestly, do you think anyone  at MSNBC is the slightest bit embarrassed to see male journalists gushing and fawning over the president this way? Or do the folks running this pathetic “news” outlet share such sentiments and therefore think men behaving like teenage girls is appropriate? 

See the rest here:
Chris Matthews and Howard Fineman Have Mutual Obamagasm on Hardball