Tag Archives: chris-matthews

After MSNBC Mocks Angle for Expecting Fox Info Plugs, Ed Schultz Boasts How He’ll Boost Dems

Last Wednesday, Chris Matthews wildly attacked Fox for acting like “stooges” for Republican candidates like Sharron Angle to come on and promote their candidacies. It turns out that on the very same day on his national radio show, Ed Schultz was talking up how excited he was for “stooge” work for the Democrats on MSNBC:   I’m excited about the fact that now that I’ve been at MSNBC for over a year now, year and a half, this is the first election cycle that I get to go through with a TV show. I’ll show those son of a guns over at Fox how to promote candidates. I’ll do a great job doing that! [Michigan gubernatorial candidate] Virg Bernero will be on the tube tonight, a winner yesterday. Next up will be next Wednesday after the Tuesday primary in Colorado where Andrew Romanoff is going to defeat Mr. Bennet, the appointed senator, who was late to the table on helping Americans on health care reform. But Schultz attacked Angle in his “Psycho Talk” segment on his MSNBC show for expecting Fox to do what he was boasting he’d do for the Democrats: Wow. Now, you know it‘s bad when Fox News is calling the newest Tea Party queen naive. Hey, Sharron, I‘ll tell you how your wish can come true. Move to China. Their media censorship means that the press would only ask questions that you want to answer. Or better yet, maybe you can check out Iran. If journalists there don‘t report the news the way you want, well, they can get arrested. You‘d like that, wouldn‘t you? Here in America though, we have this thing called freedom of the press. It‘s kind of in the Constitution. You can ask your Tea Party buddies for a copy. They will have one for you. Republican leaders better hope Sharron Angle goes right back into hiding, because a wannabe public servant saying that she wants to control the press is “Psycho Talk.”

See the rest here:
After MSNBC Mocks Angle for Expecting Fox Info Plugs, Ed Schultz Boasts How He’ll Boost Dems

Chris Matthews Wrongly Predicts Bill O’Reilly Will do the Right Thing on the Shirley Sherrod Firing | Video Cafe

What a shame! Chris Matthews was on your side yesterday and you blew it Bill-o. added by: kennymotown

Matthews to Tea Party: Tear Down Those Racist Signs and Then I’ll Believe You!

Chris Matthews, on Monday’s Hardball, actually reported on two different Tea Party organizations condemning Mark Williams, of Tea Party Express, for penning a racially charged satire, however Matthews wasn’t impressed, as he questioned the sincerity of the Tea Party movement’s commitment to fighting discrimination, and demanded that they do more to remove “racist signs at the next Tea Party rally.” After reciting some of Williams’ “fictional letter” the Hardball host then noted that both the National Tea Party Federation and the Tea Party Nation chastised Williams, but Matthews wasn’t buying it as he commanded tea partiers at the next rally to “Reach over, grab the [racist] sign and tear it out of the guy’s hands, then I’ll believe you.” The following was aired during the Sideshow segment of the July 19 edition of Hardball: CHRIS MATTHEWS: Next the Tea Party reaches its tipping point. It started when Tea Party Express leader Mark Williams wrote a fictional letter in defense of slavery to President Abraham Lincoln. Quote, these are his words, quote: “We coloreds have taken a vote and decided that we don’t cotton to the whole emancipation thing. Freedom means having to work for real, think for ourselves and take consequences along with the rewards. That is just far too much of us to ask of us colored people.” Well that’s, Williams called that satire, the leaders of the National Tea Party Federation called it trouble. Yesterday they expelled Williams. The sentiment continued today. The Tea Party Nation, the group that hosted the big party convention down in Nashville has just put out a statement saying they have quote, “zero tolerance, a zero tolerance policy against racism and they will ban any members who show themselves to be racist.” Okay I’m gonna wait to see just one of those Tea Party people pull down one of those racist signs at the next Tea Party rally. I’m just waiting. Reach over, grab the sign and tear it out of the guy’s hands, then I’ll believe you.

See the original post here:
Matthews to Tea Party: Tear Down Those Racist Signs and Then I’ll Believe You!

Confused Matthews: How Can South Carolina GOPers Vote for a Indian-American But Not Support a Black President?

Chris Matthews, on Wednesday’s Hardball, invited on recently defeated Republican Representative Bob Inglis to slam Matthews’ favorite targets, namely the Tea Party, Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin and after he got the requisite criticisms out of the South Carolina congressman of those entities asked him if he could explain how primary voters from his own party could nominate an Indian-American like Nikki Haley, even though they’ve “got a problem with a black president?” Matthews, clearly not grasping the concept that perhaps voters in South Carolina could cast their ballot based out of purely ideological and not racial motives, asked Inglis the following question: How do you figure your state out? It’s pretty conservative obviously. It’s Strom Thurmond country in many ways and, and it has people like DeMint pretty far over and then people like Lindsey Graham who are sort of regular conservatives. But then you nominated, your party has nominated an Indian-American woman, Nikki Haley. Obviously an attractive candidate, she knows how to present herself obviously, but what’s that about? Is that just an interesting little aspect? It’s okay to be Indian-American but we’ve got a problem with this black president? What’s that about? Before Matthews ended his show on that stumper of a question, he egged on the soon to be former Representative Inglis to attack the Tea Party, Limbaugh and Palin, as seen in the following exchanges that were aired on the July 14 Hardball: CHRIS MATTHEWS: Well, the Tea Party has racked up big wins already in 2010. They scared Senator Arlen Specter out of the Republican primary and watched him lose as a Democrat. Former Alabama Democratic Congressman Parker Griffith did the exact opposite. He jumped into the Republican primary and lost down there. Tea Partiers ousted Senator Bob Bennett at the Republican state convention out in Utah. They ran Governor Charlie Crist right out of the Republican Senate primary in Florida. And the latest victim of the Tea Party is South Carolina congressman Bob Inglis who lost a Republican runoff just last month after getting hammered in town halls for voting for TARP and knocking down false rumors about death panels. He joins us right now. Congressman Inglis, I want to make sure everybody knows you’re not a RINO. You’ve got an 85 percent conservative record, you’ve got a five percent liberal record. You’re a conservative, right? REP. BOB INGLIS: Right, I think it’s actually 93 percent ACU rating. Yeah, yeah. MATTHEWS: Well I looked, I looked at it a couple years ago. So you’re up to date at ninety, ninety-what? INGLIS: Ninety-three percent. MATTHEWS: So you’re not conservative enough for South Carolina. INGLIS: I needed that extra seven. MATTHEWS: Oh my God! Well you told the Associated Press, quote, “I think we have a lot of leaders that are following those television and talk radio personalities and not leading us.” We’ve had a little contest here, as you know, waiting for somebody. Well, you’re a lame duck now but maybe you count. But we’ve been waiting for somebody to say “I’m not really a ditto head. I don’t really follow Rush Limbaugh’s thinking. He’s not my leader.” Are you ready to be the first? INGLIS: Well I’ll tell ya- MATTHEWS: Or are you still gonna hold back? INGLIS: I don’t, I don’t follow Rush Limbaugh’s lead. You know, when, when I found out I didn’t? I was in six years and I was out of Congress for six years and I was listening to him one day and he’s making fun of people in cars who get high fuel efficiency and I thought, you know, Rush, that’s it. I turned the radio off. MATTHEWS: Yeah. INGLIS: Because it didn’t fit with my dad who’s 87 years old. He’s my idea of conservative. He used to tell us, “Now, we gonna let off the gas at the Tarvers’ and you coast to our driveway,” because he’s a conservative. MATTHEWS: Well what happened to Teddy Roosevelt? Wasn’t he a great conservative in the Republican Party? INGLIS: Yeah, absolutely. MATTHEWS: A conservationist. INGLIS: Yeah and so my, yeah and so my thought was, you know, listen, conservatism is saving resources, and, and what Rush was further making fun of is people driving electric cars with regenerative braking. I’m thinking, if I make the investment to get up the hill with my gas, why wouldn’t I want to generate electricity coming down the hill? I’m a conservative. MATTHEWS: Rush, by the way, says a lot of things. He makes fun of anybody who tries to deal with conservation issues, which are traditionally conservative issues. He makes fun of all kinds of things. … MATTHEWS: You, you sir, strike me, as I hate to use the word, as someone who’s well-educated. I know you went to UVA Law School. Is that hurting you? Is – no I’m dead serious about this. Do you get hurt in the Republican Party now for having had a fine education? Do people think, look askance at you and say, “Oh he’s an egghead, he’s got a good degree from UVA” Is that a problem now, it’s better to be a yahoo? Well I mean to be really uneducated like Palin, to really be proud of the fact you don’t know anything? INGLIS: There, there is a sense out there that ignorance is strength. But you know ignorance really is not strength. MATTHEWS: Where did that come from? Where did that come from? INGLIS: And here’s my view. I’m ignorant of a lot of things. There are a lot of things I need to know but if I choose to remain ignorant of those things, that’s when, that’s quite a different matter. So I have a sense of how much I don’t know and I need to find out a lot of information. I think that’s what education gives you is a sense of how much you don’t know and let’s go find it out. MATTHEWS: Well, what do you make of Palin’s – without getting — she seems like, I guess a nice person as a human being but the question is, is she selling herself as someone – she calls it common sense. But I think what she’s really selling is “I don’t read books. I don’t read newspapers, Katie Couric. I don’t read magazines. I don’t need information. I have common conservative sense.” What does that mean? To say you know things without having read it or learned anything? What do people know naturally? … MATTHEWS: Well, that fear that led people like Rick Perry of Texas to talk about secession, those old scare terms about race. I mean race is always an issue in America but to go back and rip that scab off? What’s that about? Why are people doing that? Is it their fear, fear of change or is it just anger or what? INGLIS: Yeah well, I think that we, what we’re finding out here that in 2010 we have not fought the final fight against the scent of racism and won. We’re still in it. We’re still dealing with that problem. We always will be, but we need to extend grace to one another and have some honesty about it, understand that we are different, but let’s find a way to extend grace and get through it, and that’s – rather than womp up those fears and drive with misinformation reactions against people because of their party or their ethnicity. That’s a real problem and it- MATTHEWS: How do you figure your state out? It’s pretty conservative obviously. It’s Strom Thurmond country in many ways and, and it has people like DeMint pretty far over and then people like Lindsey Graham who are sort of regular conservatives. But then you nominated, your party has nominated an Indian-American woman, Nikki Haley. Obviously an attractive candidate, she knows how to present herself obviously, but what’s that about? Is that just an interesting little aspect? It’s okay to be Indian-American but we’ve got a problem with this black president? What’s that about?

Read the original here:
Confused Matthews: How Can South Carolina GOPers Vote for a Indian-American But Not Support a Black President?

Matthews to Democrat: What Percentage of Republicans Would You Put In the ‘Nut Bag?’

Chris Matthews, on Monday’s Hardball, brought on his own personal congressman, Maryland Democrat Chris Van Hollen, to review how his party was going to distinguish themselves from the GOP in the midterms with Matthews asking the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee head if they were focusing on all the “crazy” Republicans, or in other words “nut collecting.” Matthews then, after playing a clip of Barack Obama singling out Republicans Joe Barton, John Boehner and Roy Blunt, also reminded Van Hollen the President missed another “crazy” person with “B” name as he proclaimed: “If you’re going out looking for nuts, it would seem like you’d put [Michele Bachmann] in your basket.” Matthews even tried to pin down Van Hollen by demanding: “What percentage of the Republican Party would you put in the nut bag right now?” The following exchange was aired on the July 12 edition of Hardball: CHRIS MATTHEWS: Okay let’s take a look. Here’s the President. He’s got a new tack out there, by the way. For a long time, after a year and a half in office, he never mentioned the opponent. He was like a Chicago pol. There is no Republican Party. Now he’s starting to name names. He’s advertising your opposition. Just like you advertised the Republicans and what they would do if they got in. Here he is advertising what the Republicans, he’s using names like Boehner, these curse words. Boehner! What’s the other guy’s name? REP. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN: Boehner and Barton? MATTHEWS: Barton! Boehner, Barton and Blunt, Blunt. He’s got em, all these B’s. Let’s take a look – BP of course – here he is in Missouri. Let’s listen. (Begin clip) BARACK OBAMA: You may have read the top Republican on the House Energy committee, Mr. Barton publicly apologizing to BP…Does anybody here think BP should get an apology? Mr. Barton did. He called this a tragedy. This, this, this fund that we have set up to compensate fishermen and small business owners throughout the Gulf. That’s not the tragedy. The tragedy is, is if they didn’t get compensated. So this is the leadership that we’ve gotten from Barton and Boehner and Blunt. Sometimes I wonder if, if that no button is just stuck in, in, in, in Congress. (End clip) MATTHEWS: Well, there you heard it. Barton and Boehner and Blunt. I love the names. Here he is, let’s take a look. Here he is Gibbs, the spokesman for the President, on Sunday underlying that this is, what you just heard is going to be the spiel from now until Election Day this November. Let’s listen. (Begin clip) ROBERT GIBBS: Joe Barton started his congressional testimony of the CEO of BP by apologizing not to the people in the Gulf, but to the CEO. I think that’s a perfect window, not into what people are thinking but the way they would govern. Joe Barton, John Boehner, those are the types of things you’ll hear a lot, I think both from the President and I think local candidates about what you’d get if the Republicans were to gain control. (End clip) MATTHEWS: You guys are out there nut collecting, aren’t you? I mean you, you, the Democrats have, we’ve had a tough economy in this country, everybody’s had a hard time. A lot of people have, maybe not the oil companies. So you’re going around looking for nuts. Like, you know, Barton is crazy enough to side with BP in the worst catastrophe. Another one, Bachman. You haven’t gotten the other “B” here. If you’re going out looking for nuts, it would seem like you’d put her in your basket. You haven’t gotten to her yet. She wants to investigate you guys for anti-American activities. VAN HOLLEN: Well look what’s surprising Chris is not what they claim to do- MATTHEWS: You love these nuts don’t you? VAN HOLLEN: Well, they have told us what they’re gonna do. They have forecast exactly what they’re gonna do. Joe Barton has always been on the side of the big oil companies and he said it publicly. They’ve been on the side of the big insurance companies in fighting health care reform- MATTHEWS: Who’s the guy that yelled out in the State of Union, “You lie?” VAN HOLLEN: That was Joe, that was Joe Wilson. MATTHEWS: Where do they get these guys from? VAN HOLLEN: But, but that’s the point. See people need to focus on the fact that if you were to hand over control over to the House, these are the guys who are gonna be running the policy and there the same guys that created the problems. MATTHEWS: What percentage of the Republican Party, right now, as it has changed in our life. You’re a bit younger than me, has moved to the right. What percentage of the Republican Party would you put in the nut bag right now? The party that, not just conservatives, but people that are just really crazy out there, even beyond the tea partiers? VAN HOLLEN: Let me, let me just say- MATTHEWS: You don’t want to give me a percentage. VAN HOLLEN: No, no but the out of the mainstream caucus- MATTHEWS: Okay. VAN HOLLEN: -of the Republican Party in the House is the largest caucus in the House by far. Which is why you had these situations where you have these right wing- MATTHEWS: Do they talk like this on the floor? Do you actually hear them talking among themselves, talking like this? “Isn’t BP great?” VAN HOLLEN: Well usually, no usually they’re a little more circumspect. Which is why it’s, you know, something when, when Joe Barton gets out and publicly makes these statements. MATTHEWS: Okay, okay. VAN HOLLEN: But it’s important that people understand what these guys really do. MATTHEWS: Okay you know usually when you vote, a regular person votes with their gut. They walk in there, they vote with their money too but mainly they’re gonna go “I don’t like the way things are going.” They go in and vote against incumbents. That’s called a referendum. Now you guys are trying to change that gut instinct to “No don’t go in there and vote with your gut” because that will screw your party. “Go in there and go, now which party is the worst? Let’s make sure I don’t have the worst party at least. So the Democrats have not exactly been a great success yet but the Republicans are far worse.” Right? How do you get people to change the question from “Yes or no? Do I like things the way they are or not like the way things are?” to “Let me think Democrats versus Republicans?” How do you get people to think like that? Because clearly you’re trying to get them to think like that, Gibbs is trying to do it. And the President is trying to get us to think like that? Choice not referendum. How do you change it like that? VAN HOLLEN: Well because people, at the end of the day, have a choice between two candidates? Right? And so it’s not- MATTHEWS: But they don’t think like that, usually. They usually go yes or no? VAN HOLLEN: No what we’ve said, though is it’s not just about us. It’s us versus them. What differences do you have between the parties on these issues that are critical to Americans? And if we can get people to focus on the fact that, you know, John Boehner describes the situation- MATTHEWS: So this the frying pan into the fire kind of thing? VAN HOLLEN: Well, this is, this is let’s have a real debate on the issues. MATTHEWS: I think it’s great. VAN HOLLEN: And what’s interesting is what they’ve told us they’re gonna do- MATTHEWS: I think it’s great you’re finally advertising your opponents. Because [guys] like Boehner, and Mitch McConnell and Eric Cantor and Jon Kyl have been getting a free ride in this country for months now. They just sit back like Burgers on Main Street, waiting for you guys to blow it. Then they get all the votes. VAN HOLLEN: Well they get to sit on the sidelines. They get to whine, they get to carp. And now we’re saying put up, let’s see what you guys are saying you’re gonna do. MATTHEWS: You have an interesting choice that you’re making for the American voters if they choose to make a choice, and not just go “nyah.” Anyway, thank you Chris Van Hollen, who happens to be my congressman.

Visit link:
Matthews to Democrat: What Percentage of Republicans Would You Put In the ‘Nut Bag?’

Tax Cut All-Star — CNBC’s Trish Regan: Calls It ‘Inherently Un-American’ to Penalize Prosperity

Throughout the last half-century, time and time again, a means to stimulate an ailing economy has occurred through tax cuts. Former Presidents John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush have proven economic relief is most effective through tax cuts – not government spending.  Still that method has detractors. However, CNBC “The Call” co-anchor Trish Regan, with a panel decidedly against her, made the case for tax cuts. On NBC’s July 11 broadcast of “The Chris Matthews Show,” Regan explained how tax cuts encourage businesses to help reverse the trend of high unemployment and that businessmen are worried about the end of the Bush tax cuts. “They absolutely are,” Regan said. “They’re concerned about it and this is one of the issues when it comes to hiring. They’re hesitant right now when it comes to bringing more employees on board because one, you’re not seeing final demand because consumers aren’t spending that much, and number two, they’re dealing with the tax consequences of having more people in their companies. So that’s definitely an issue.” Matthews followed up Regan’s response with a question to Chicago Tribune columnist Clarence Page. He asked would if “Democratic progressives” would be open to the idea of tax cuts, if it meant rescuing the economy and solidifying President Barack Obama’s chances for re-election in 2012. “Well, only if it hit those at the bottom,” Page said. “You should expand the earned income tax credit or give some kind of a job incentive. But I disagree that he ought to call off, well continue the Bush tax cut. That’s not going to win Democrat support.” However, as the Congressional Budget Office shows , upper-income taxpayers pay more than their fair share of taxes, over six times as much in terms of a percentage of household income overall. And Regan as explained, penalization through taxation is “inherently un-American” because it discourages aspiration. “Isn’t there something kind of inherently un-American about the more money you make, the more money we’re going to take from you?” Regan said. “I mean, even if you’re not making $250,000 a year as a couple, you may aspire to make that. The government’s going to take more.” Probably at this point, Matthews may have been wondering how someone with these views wound up booked on his shows. Regan’s remarks drew laughter and protest from “The Chris Matthews Show” panel. Nonetheless, Time magazine’s Joe Klein offered up his pro-taxation view – suggesting all conservatives want to abolish the income tax, which he deemed as “radical.” “It’s called the progressive income tax for a reason,” Klein said. “Now conservatives want to abolish the income tax. That is so radical.” But Regan fought back, explaining taxation discourages productivity which is essential to economic growth. “What I’m saying is, you don’t want to necessarily discourage productivity,” she said. “You want the country to grow and there are ways to do that through tax cuts whether it be through individuals or to businesses.” Klein attempted to use former President Bill Clinton’s 1993 tax hike as evidence higher taxes don’t necessarily discourage economic growth. And although there is significant evidence to dispute Klein’s point , Regan explained the economy was in a different place then as it is now. “He did it at a time when the economy was growing,” she said. “We’re in a very different situation right now.” Take away: Good thing Regan is anchoring a CNBC show and Klein is writing a column for a magazine with a dwindling circulation.

View post:
Tax Cut All-Star — CNBC’s Trish Regan: Calls It ‘Inherently Un-American’ to Penalize Prosperity

Time’s Joe Klein Cheap Shots Palin: ‘She Doesn’t Know Anything’; Earns Creepy Chris Matthews Cackle

There’s something very tortuous about watching some of the talking heads assembled on NBC’s “The Chris Matthews Show,” especially when they try to dissect former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin like she is some alien life form. On the July 11 broadcast of his weekend show, Matthews and his panel analyzed Palin’s “Mama Grizzlies” ad spot and attempted to determine what Palin’s end goal was with the ad. And Time magazine’s Joe Klein attributed credit to Palin’s charismatic ability.   “The most important thing about Sarah Palin is that she’s a great stand-up politician,” Klein said. “I mean, when you hear her talk – this is not a woman who has sat in a room with a political consultant telling her how to pronounce words. It’s just her voice.” “There’s something in the inflection which is provocative,” Matthews replied. But then came the eventual expected cheap shot from Klein. Klein had once said Sarah Palin and Fox News host Glenn Beck should be tried for sedition on that same program and he didn’t disguise his disdain for Palin on this episode either. “But I think that’s balanced against the fact that she doesn’t know anything ,” Klein said. “And that’s a big problem.” Klein’s comments earned the trademark Matthews “ha!” However, CNBC’s Trish Regan advised her co-panelists not to underestimate the power of Palin when it comes to the women vote. “Experience does matter, but let’s not forget that if women are motivated, they can make a difference at the voting booth,” Regan said. “Look at 2008 – 10 million more women voted than men.” That wasn’t good enough for Matthews or Klein. They were already looking toward the Iowa caucus in January 2012, where the demographics are a little different. “You got to Iowa, one woman, evangelical Christian against four guys,” Matthews said. “I still think the shape of the field is important, right Joe?” “Right, especially in Iowa,” Klein replied.

Go here to read the rest:
Time’s Joe Klein Cheap Shots Palin: ‘She Doesn’t Know Anything’; Earns Creepy Chris Matthews Cackle

Chris Matthews Calls George W. Bush and Sarah Palin ‘Know-Nothings’

Chris Matthews on Friday called George W. Bush and Sarah Palin know-nothings.  Chatting with California gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown on “Hardball,” the MSNBC host also called the Republican candidate for governor in that state Meg Whitman a know-nothing. “What is it in the American psyche or character that says, if you don`t know anything, you`re somehow an average person or average guy and you have horse sense?” asked Matthews. “What is it about people that keep picking people like George W. Bush to be president? And you see these people like Sarah Palin out there with fans.”  It seems in Matthews’ view, governing Texas, Alaska, or running one of America’s leading Internet companies requires zero intellectual capacity (video follows with transcript and commentary, h/t Weekly Political Review via Twitter’s @ndgc12dx): CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Former California governor Jerry Brown is currently the state`s attorney general. Governor Brown, it`s great to have you on. I just want to ask you, do you think the last seven years have been good for California with Schwarzenegger? Here`s a business guy and movie star, a business guy, who said, I can take business sense, like Meg Whitman, and make government work. It hasn`t — well, has it worked? I`ll leave it as an open question. Has he been a net plus or a net negative? JERRY BROWN (D-CA), ATTORNEY GENERAL, FMR. GOV., CANDIDATE FOR GOV.: Well, certainly in terms of the budget, blowing up the boxes, reorganizing government, it hasn`t. Now, Arnold Schwarzenegger has pioneered the environment and climate change legislation that is really path-breaking, so I give him full credit for that. But in terms of the crisis we`re in now, the idea that not knowing anything, not even caring enough to vote for 28 years, gives you the equipment, the skill, to wrestle those 120 legislators to the ground, get them on your team and deal with this deepening crisis — I doubt that. And if these surveys are any indication, Ms. Whitman has hit a wall for the last — probably since March, not moved forward. And I think we`re in a very strong position to win the confidence of the people and get down to brass tacks here of solving the problem.  MATTHEWS: What is it in the American psyche or character that says, if you don`t know anything, you`re somehow an average person or average guy and you have horse sense? What is it about people that keep picking people like George W. Bush to be president? And you see these people like Sarah Palin out there with fans. Why would anybody like somebody who the campaign manager for John McCain said, “She doesn`t know anything?” Why is not knowing anything — why does the know-nothing candidate, like Meg Whitman, a person who doesn`t have any government experience, have the appeal to be even with you in the polls? The know — the person that doesn`t know anything about government! How disgusting. It’s one thing to make such comments about a former President and a former governor, but to similarly disparage the Republican gubernatorial candidate while interviewing her Democrat opponent demonstrates absolutely NO journalistic impartiality by Matthew. Maybe he should just endorse Brown so that his few viewers would fully understand why he’s so hostile to Whitman. Come to think of it, that could be the next step in MSNBC’s activism. Stay tuned. 

Read the original post:
Chris Matthews Calls George W. Bush and Sarah Palin ‘Know-Nothings’

Governor ‘Moonbeam’ Employs ‘Tea Bagger’ Insult on MSNBC’s ‘Hardball’

If former California Gov. Jerry Brown , now once again a candidate for governor of California really wants to be sort of a unifier as he says, he might want to watch how he refers to some of his constituents. On MSNBC’s July 9 “Hardball,” Brown was interviewed by host Chris Matthews and was asked how he could make all the unions in California work together in a political way. (h/t @HayleyMcConnell ) “How do you deal with the kick-butt unions out there?” Matthews said. “They’re really tough. You have the correction officers, you got the police, you got the teachers, the nurses. These are tough, strong well-funded units that are politically cohesive. They took down Gov. [Arnold] Schwarzenegger when he tried to take them down. How do you make them work? How do you get them to serve the public and make reasonable compensation?” Brown wanted to make it clear that they were “all Californians first.” He defended the unions but took a shot at the Tea Party movement by using the “tea bagger” reference, which is a favorite of MSNBC personalities . “First of all you treat them with respect,” Brown replied. “You lay out your agenda, and you get everybody understanding we’re Californians first. We’re not Democrat or Republican or a member of this group or that group. And don’t just say unions are a powerful force. Hey, you know Wall Street destroyed $11 trillion worth of wealth. That’s powerful. No union could do that. Then there’s the tea baggers and the Chamber of Commerce. The key to democracy is leadership what can forge the common purpose. That’s what I feel my entire life has prepared me to take what I learn, work with the diversion conflicting factions and get this common pathway to the future. Seizing the assets of California, which after all is still the eighth wealthiest political entity in the world.”

See the original post:
Governor ‘Moonbeam’ Employs ‘Tea Bagger’ Insult on MSNBC’s ‘Hardball’

Dobbs Calls MSNBC’s Ratigan ‘Insane and Inane’

In a July 9 post on www.loudobbs.com , Dobbs let fly bashing the staff at his one-time competitor for “two gems that can’t be ignored.” “MSNBC guest anchor Cenk Uygur filled in for the equally insane and inane Dylan Ratigan and pushed the crazy idea that President Obama is a conservative,” he wrote. The video of the segment is all there because Dobbs embedded it from the Media Research Center. Dobbs, who still has a talk radio show, then went on to criticize Uygur’s twisted logic that, Uygur’s words Obama “seems to have bought into the Republican talking point on deficits.” Then he went on criticize “the old-standby, Mr. Tingle Up His Leg Chris Matthews” for saying there are only two camps in the nation – “those who want things to improve and those who want to see the country, and therefore the president, fail.” Dobbs summed it up with a good question: “How can anyone watch this nonsense?” Dobbs, you may recall, was pushed out by CNN for his own opinionated statements that ran counter to lefty orthodoxy on immigration especially.

See the article here:
Dobbs Calls MSNBC’s Ratigan ‘Insane and Inane’