What's the latest on Tweety's ratings? Methinks he's struggling to keep his head above water.

Tweety von Spittle is pathetic. I don't was "Hard"ball anymore.

I have a question: If Cheney resigned his position with Halliburton in 2000, then why was he continously paid 150K through December of 2005?

Jeannie See @ 5:

I have a question: If Cheney resigned his position with Halliburton in 2000, then why was he continously paid 150K through December of 2005?

It's called a golden parachute. Don't YOU have one?

What the hell? Is he off his meds or something? That was stupid and bizarre.

Is it just me, or does Chris Matthews seem to get a wild hair up his rear every so often, in an mentally unballanced sort of way.

2. Contact MSNBC
MESSAGE: I demand an apology from MSNBC and Chris Matthews for lying, misleading and pandering to fascists.

Kerri Forrest, Senior Producer, Hardball
202-824-6767

Steve Capus, Pres. NBC News
212-664-3228
steve.capus@nbc.com

Bill Wolff, VP Program.
201-583-5008
bill.wolff@msnbc.com

Jeremy Gaines, VP Comm.
Tel. 201-583-5000
Fax 201-583-5977
jeremy.gaines@msnbc.com

John Boxley
Programming Producer
Tel. 818-840-4763
Fax 818-840-4275
john.boxley@nbcuni.com

She did good, and people need to realize that it was the low end of the sentencing from a Bush appointed Republican that set the sentence of 30 month for Libby, and that Bush Sr said under an interview that outing a secret agent is the most insidious crime that anyone could commit.

Bush has said first that anyone caught involve outing a undercover agent would be fired, and that he promise to order an investigation of this. (no investigation was ever order by Bush)
Bush then said anyone indicted would be fired from the administration (Libby serve well past his indictment)
Bush made a plea to the judges for lighter sentence and was turn down before commuting Libby. (slap to the jury that found Libby for obstruction of justice)

It is leading to the conclusion that one of 3 people Cheney, Bush, or Rove could have outed the agent and that Karl Rove just got his security clearance pass once again for renewal.

When you think about how the seriousness of the crime being totally ignore by the administration and the Katrina disaster of locking down the victim in an area with no medication, water and food for several days in a sweltering heat like the one we just experience this week, makes you wonder where is the outrage?

If a disaster or the global warming of huge proportion happens, its going to be a systematic slaughter for survival for this administration. I still cant get over how this president endanger so many in so many ways. He is not inept as the PNAC guideline shows that he is hitting every mark in succeeding those plans.

Is Chris Matthews bi-polar?

I mean he took such a strong stand on how Bush commuting Scooters sentence is wrong and then he sounds like he swings toally the other way by hounding Melanie Sloan .

Really Chris should see his doctor, maybe he needs meds or to have the dosage increased.

tweety is not bipolar, nor is he inconsistent....

he has been spouting the "clinton did it too" line, since day one

and someone needs to get into tweety's face and ask him this.....what underlying crime was clinton trying to hide? how does a bj destroy the constitution and the rule of law?

Jailed conscientious objector hits out against Libby clemency
Submitted by Canada IFP on Thu, 2007-07-05 19:26.

A veteran who spent 14 months in prison for filing a conscientious objector application against redeployment to Iraq has spoken out against the commutation of Scooter Libby's sentence by President Bush.

"I was imprisoned for 14 months after trying to apply for conscientious objector status after seeing the reality of the Iraq war," Kevin Benderman, who had to serve his sentence at a prison 3,000 miles from home, said.

Kevin Benderman had served as an army mechanic for 10 years when he developed moral and religious objections to the war in Iraq, after serving there in 2003, and refused to deploy there again. After seeing scenes of devastation in Iraq, and through his readings of both the Bible and the Qu’ran, Kevin Benderman filed an application for conscientious objector status on 28 December 2004.

He was then sentenced to 15 months' imprisonment at a court martial.

Matthews is a flake.
Sloan is hot.
Cable infotainment sucks.

Tweety is so used to covering his rethug. buddies asses on a daily basis.

The best way for you US folks to ensure this doesn't happen again, is to simply remove the power of pardon from your president. After all, you are not ruled by a King, are you?

Not Playing The Follow My Rationality Game

This man, Chris Matthews, is a shit disturber. For a living, he tries to insight others, by using their own comments to contradict themselves in front of his cameras. When the guess appears to not be willing to play "his" game, he will then play his 'hardball' confrontation role.

From the very start, Melanie Sloan refuse to play his game. These chicken shit host dislike it when their guess don't dummy up for them. Matthews has one goal, and that is, to make others look stupid under his arrogance. Tucker Carlson is the same way, but Matthews has a following that is employed throughout the day on MSNBC. Their confrontation style amounts to insulting and disrespecting their guess. There is no resimilance of quality associated with their right-wing talking points style of reporting. It follows: The use of a hypothetical or unrelated comparisons that make sense under the hypothetical frame work provided by, in this case Matthews.

I am really hoping I don't have to call this the best we have in America. It has got to get better then this. So far. it is what I see over and over, day after day, and regardless of what is most important, you always get an act with Matthews.

What I would give for a left-wing, true in balance and fairness, program. Every true Liberal does not want the same kind of programming the right has flooded the airways with. They want a true reflection of the views in a fair way with careful consideration to ratio of guess and any other dynamic that would make the process one sided.

Joseph

No seriously, Tweety has obviously spewed the party line and been drinking at the kool-aide bar from day one, but then he has these passionate spots like yesterday where he calls them on their BS for wanting Clinton brought up on perjury, then saying it is OK to let Libby off. Strange to say the least.

When someone releases the medications that he takes, a few good physicians can tell us what the likely repercussions are. I remember having seen radical shifts in his demeanor as he is talking to someone. He doesn't appear intelligent very often, so it seems likely he has a handler that is well versed in making him jump through hoops with the earpiece. It is almost as though he is being shocked as he is being told what to say.

I normally don't watch Mr. Spittle because I do believe that he is an idiot - at the very least he is bi-polar and not being monitored with meds but it was on last night and when I heard this moron badgering Melanie Sloan I wanted to throw a brick thru my TV. What is wrong with MSNBC - the only show worth watching on that whole damn network is Olberman.
Anyone who doesn't believe that Scooter was promised no jail time if he took the fall is also an idiot. Bush & Cheney & Scooter and others are all guilty of conspiring to out a NOC agent for the CIA which is treason by any definition. Why there has been NO accountability for this and other crimes & misdemeanors is a question every voter needs to ask before the next election and demand that impeachment proceedings start immediately. I'm sick of what passes for media in this damn country and sick of what passes for representation of the people in this country. It's time to wake up and realize we've been sold out to the highest corporate bidders by both parties and that a democratic republic demands participation by it's citizens and when our government no longer works for us we demand new government. The revolution is long overdue folks.

It's just theater. Matthews probably feels the sting when the media is charged with rolling over for the Bushies so he's compensating by acting like a rabid pit bull with people he thinks will be easy and not do a Cheney by telling him to do that which is physically impossible.

Can I have that two+ minutes back? Please.

poppy @ 36:

Matthews has a pattern. Every once in awhile he has to play "Hardball." He almost always does it with female guests. Note that he did not tolerate her speculating about what others might have been thinking, but he let similar speculation by his male guess go without challenge.

And before you point out that he is deferential to Ann Coulter, keep in mind that I accuse Matthews of bulling females.

I accuse Coulter of BULLING females.

Who the hell watches these people anymore? They are no longer relavant. The country has pretty much abandoned the extreme right. What do they represent? 20% of the people, the same number that supports Bush. The louder they bitch the more irrelavant they know they have become.........

quit watching these fucking shows. other than olberman, boycott these assholes. the best way to get their attention is to ignore them.

Disgraceful! Melanie made it clear she wasn't going to answer the question and he hounded on and on and on... I mean it's OK to ask twice, even to point out a guests unwillingness to answer the question but dear god he hounded her no less than 9 times AND about something completely irrelevant...

(p.s. love the spell check feature!)

What really burns me is if these freaks like Tweety want to make comparisons then use a comparison that is relevant. A Clinton comparison makes absolutely no sense but a Bush Sr. comparison does. Poppy pardoned Iran-Contra criminals, some before they were to go to trial to save his own ass. Must run in the family - guess that's why their known as the Bush Crime Family. And baby bush, the little weed of the family commuted the Libby sentence to save his and Cheney's treasonous asses.

I saw both the Hardball segment, and the earlier Tucker one (being a real glutton for intellectual punishment). The way in which Frum and Sloane handled themselves was
sickening. When is the DNC gonna use some of that money I send them to actually
get talking heads that can do what most of us can: predict what talking points the Repugs will use and how to counter them. It's easy. Just have the facts. And don't get all flustered like Sloane when asked how she felt about the Clinton impeachment. There's an answer, Melanie! And please, if you're gonna claim there was a conspiracy to "get" Wilson (which there was), don't give Christie an opening by saying Armitage
was probably part of it (much less evident). I'm really getting tired of Dem talking heads coming off so ill-prepared. The Repugs never say anything that they haven't been saying for at least the previous 24-36 hours. As for Matthews.....

DiSinfotainment.

Did he mention who Mark Rich's lawyer was
Ding ding --- why it was Scooter!

Small world.

I see Matthews is still promoting the lie that Clinton lied under oath and committed perjury as a premise for his comparisons to the Libby case.

Clinton DIDN'T lie under oath or commit perjury in his Paula Jones grand jury testimony.

The definition of "sexual relations" for the purposes of Jones' lawyers effort to discover a pattern of sexual harrassment in the workplace committed by Clinton was clearly drawn and agreed upon by both sides and the judge before the questioning began.

Clinton answered all the questions truthfully, both legally and technically.

In fact, the full details of the Clinton/Lewinsky relationship UNDERMINED the case Jones' lawyers were trying to make against Clinton because it ran so contrary to the pattern they were trying to show; Lewinsky was the aggressor, there was no quid pro quo offered or implied, no promotions or demotions were given based on the relationship.

Tweety is such a jerk.
Matthews should get all worked up when asking soft ball questions to man Coulter?

Love Melanie Sloane... you go girl.

If the president said that he would come in, in his first time and "supposedly" clean up the way things were done under the Clinton administration then why is what Clinton did so relevant? I thought it was the Bush administration that was going to do a better job of keeping things above board. It seems to me that the only card they have is to blame Clinton for the blunders they themselves made and said would clean up. Two wrongs don't make it right so where is the relevance of the "for Libby freedom" argument? There is none. Either you clean it up right or you continue the line of no credibility in government.

Same crap. No Tweety's not Bi-polar. Love that nickname by the way.

And no, he's not protecting the GOP to help the GOP.

He's trying to help himself by increasing his ratings using Matthews-logic to court the right and the left. Whenever you see his Hillary trashing or GOP Pundits controlling his show it's just Matthews way of balancing out the 1 to 2 days worth of honest discussion and truth telling. The logic really isnt' logic that's why it's Matthews-logic. To reach the level of Rush-logic, which is 1 rank above O'Reilly and 10 above Beck, there can be no truth telling or honest discussion; that would bump you down to Novak-logic, which is telling bent truths mixed with GOP smears, and washed down with a half pint of Dem blood from a straw inside your coffin located under Rove's house.

Seriously, the reason why Matthews goes from being a hard nosed fact getter to patty-caking mean girl is because it's totally self serving. The guy is way too selfish to be a total all the time hack. That requires giving up your dignity and showing up a parties with your shovel. Matthews can't stand being called a hack like when he exploded in a cussing fit on Imus's show last year. No, he wants to be ratings King in order to 1 up Tim Russert, his rival in Washington Elitist Assholery.

So Matthews-logic is to be 1 part Tucker and 1 part Keith Olbermann, press both sides really hard even if it means pressing one side on important issues grounded in relevant facts and the otherside with trival crap more important to the facilitation of GOP slime machine than the public discourse. You know...MSNBC balance in post-donahue world. The pre Donahue world you have 2 Conservatives for every Liberal and you allow gang rapes. But we're in the Post-Donahue world where you simply allow the conservative to lie and allege democrats eat our children and then you get tough on democrats when they actually pull off a coherent counterattack, such as ignoring gop attacks and talking about relevant issues. Can't have that in the post-Donahue world - either dems serve as a pawn (P--sy) or incrediabilty stupid untrustworthy guest, but not both...that would be cruel.

So when I see Matthews go off on democrats for some lame reason I don't see a hack carrying water for his party. I see a snob trying to out do his snob buddies by trampeling the truth to bolster his status, which you'd think he'd be scorned for, but instead you know he's high fiving his buddies at parties letting out a big F--k yeah, the same way they wished they could have done in highschool after an atomic wedgie.

So he's not a hack. He's a douche. A douche tempted by the darkside of cablenews - the get paid and made famous quick without any qualification for being on air other than the ability to prosecute democrats and coddle conservatives side of the force.

On a side note: Tweeky's trek over to the darkside has it's perks. As more and more media types venture over to the darkside the void left behind becomes larger and larger which is now filled by Countdown with Kieth Olbermann. So no matter what Matthews loses.

Just because previous President's may have done the wrong thing doesn't make what George Bush did right. I don't know why people keep arguing that two wrongs make a right in cases like this. By arguing that two wrongs make a right you are basically saying all you have to do to make things right is to do another wrong. It seems me that's going in the wrong direction.

I don't know what is wrong with Matthews. Sometimes his brain just plain doesn't track. Could he be drinking again?

Carmikl @ 63:

Just because previous President's may have done the wrong thing doesn't make what George Bush did right. I don't know why people keep arguing that two wrongs make a right in cases like this. By arguing that two wrongs make a right you are basically saying all you have to do to make things right is to do another wrong. It seems me that's going in the wrong direction.

Maybe we could beat back the arguments about Clinton by citing all the wrongs Bush 41 comitted and then we could get into Reagan's problems and then, and then, and then.... We could really be circling the drain if we kept going thru history for comparisons and defenses of current crimes.

63 Carmikl

But one could build a case for Custom and Usage and precedent.

boosh probably think he's precedent.

Peter Feldstein @ 66:

Maybe I'm wrong, but wasn't Chris Matthews more intelligent than he appears to be now? Is there something wrong with him that needs fixing?

Pathetic!

See what happens when you drink the Kool-Aid.

xargaw @ 65:

I don't know what is wrong with Matthews. Sometimes his brain just plain doesn't track. Could he be drinking again?

Drinking again? As if he'd stopped? I think the day he isn't

# 32 Nicole Belle Says: Joseph, you make excellent points, but you’re preaching to a choir here. Might I suggest you give MSNBC that feedback?

Your point was taken literately. I let them have a piece of my mind. Actually, I always do. That is my problem. I never feel heard because they never respond. One of my attractions to C&L is, on occasion, you are acknowledged and supported for what you think. Thank you for your comments.

Joseph

Comments sent by e-mail to a network or an advertiser aren't as effective as old fashioned communication by regular mail or phone. E-mails become statistics compiled by summer interns and then lost in the in-box of the assistant manager trainee in cubicle 14639a.

Matthews' role is to challenge his guests and ask "hardball" questions. He's not supposed to be on one side or the other, nor is his world view supposed to be consistent. His show is based around the idea that he will ask his guests questions they don't want to answer. The way to "win" is to answer his questions and support your point of view with specific quotes, statistics, documents and other references, not to just keep ignoring his points. That just makes you look weak, no matter how ridiculous you think his questions are.

Rather than criticize Matthews' use of GOP talking points to attack positions you all agree with, you should instead be pleased that these points are all he can find to use. It looks as though he can challenge Republicans by simply referring to reality. To challenge Democrats, he has to adopt GOP positions, with all of their inherent logical fallacies.

It's Me @ 55:

Clinton DIDN'T lie under oath or commit perjury in his Paula Jones grand jury testimony.

The definition of "sexual relations" for the purposes of Jones' lawyers effort to discover a pattern of sexual harrassment in the workplace committed by Clinton was clearly drawn and agreed upon by both sides and the judge before the questioning began.

Clinton answered all the questions truthfully, both legally and technically.

My recollection is that President Clinton got in trouble by answering questions the way a smart lawyer would. Since "sexual relations" was a defined term in the questions he was asked, he was free to deny having had "sexual relations" with Monica Lewinski if his activities did not meet the definition. In other words, if getting blown was not part of the definition of "sexual relations", then he was not committing perjury when he claimed he did not have such relations with Ms. Lewinski.

What did him far more damage, I think, was that his testimony was taped (and could therefore be watched by non-lawyers). Given the Supreme Court's ruling that pursuing a lawsuit against a sitting President would not distract him from the business of government, I am not sure how much success he would have had opposing the taping of his testimony. However, I am not sure that he even tried to oppose this part of the process.

What the hell is with him lately? Does Tweety think that being rude is real journalism? Lordy...

Though I have to admit, it was a bit of a mystery to me why Melanie, who is usually sharp as a tack, stumbled at first. I suppose it was because of the ambush compounded with dumbfounding rudeness. That would make anyone pause, I suppose.

Re: Bob Roberts @ 81:

You're exactly right about the defiinition of "sexual relations" as clearly and freely agreed upon by all parties (Clinton's lawyers, Jones' lawyers and the judge) prior to the questioning before the grand jury. It was utterly logical and proper for the definiton of terms to be narrowed and EXCLUDE precisely the kind of consual, non quid pro quo, non harrassment sexual relationship that Clinton had with Lewinsky. In Jones' search for a pattern of sexual harrassment, such a relationship would not support her claim NOR was it the business of anyone on the grand jury to hear about it.

I'm not sure about your other point regarding whether Clinton could have or could not have blocked the taping of his testimony because I really don't know the historic details myself, but you are also correct that the taped testimony can easily be spun by interested parties to non lawyers all over the world as it IS being spun all the time all over the airwaves this very day.

The other aspect of the case that has continued to damage Clinton and give free reign to all the Clinton-haters to spin, spin, spin the "he lied under oath" LIE is Starr's inappropriate and unethical leak of the information about the stains on Monica's blue dress. As inappropriate and unethical as it was for the grand jury to hear that much about the (to Jones' case) immaterial relationship between Clinton and Lewinsky, it was even MORE inappropriate and unethical for Starr to leak that information to the general public.

The consequence of that information being given to everyone on Earth (for which Starr should have lost his law licence) is that it gives every Clinton-hating liar the ammunition he/she needs to spin their favoirite lie about Clinton having sex with Lewinsky and "lying" about it to the grand jury in the Paula Jones case.

Snore. Snark.

Clinton committed perjury over a blowjob!

Scotter did it to protect the VP and Prez who committed treason by leaking the name of a CIA agent.

I think there is a small difference.

Dr. Acula @ 3:

Tweety von Spittle

LMAO!