fridsty

Go Rachel! I loved that segment!!! Chris Matthew's obsessive hatred of Hilary is creepy. I don't watch his show anymore because of it.

Towards the end of the night Tweety was spinning for some reason "the polls were so wrong" and started blathering some idiocy about the pollsters not being "ethnic" enough, so therefore the respondents lied to be politically correct. If an "Archie Bunker type" had asked the questions, he opined, people might have been more truthful. It was truly breathtaking in its stupidity...and, of course, its lack of self-awareness. Not even being schooled big time by Rachel and Tom Brokaw could penetrate his obliviousness.

The press predicted landslide victory for Obama. And they coincidentally predicted the Iraqies would greet us with flowers too!

I watched MSNBC too, and it was a little weird seeing the extreme mocking of McCain's uninspirational acceptance speech read from a piece of notebook paper.

jp @ 5:

Towards the end of the night Tweety was spinning for some reason "the polls were so wrong" and started blathering some idiocy about the pollsters not being "ethnic" enough, so therefore the respondents lied to be politically correct.

Exactly! Maybe these talking heads got out of the studio and started doing some footwork they wouldn't have to take as biblical truth what some corporate pollster has to say. (and when I say footwork, I don't mean following in O'reilly's footsteps and start pushing campaign workers around)

Maybe it's time for Matthews to take a timeout. I wish someone would ask him why he "obsesses" over Hillary. What makes him act the way he does when her name is mentioned? He needs to explain. Even Hillary or someone on her staff has become aware of what he says about her, as was evident when he questioned her the other day.

Watching Tweety on Morning Scar, both twisting and turning. They are saying that it was racists that were voting against Obama. What jerks, they haven't learned, they are starting the racist card. They should be fired.

I thought the big story coming out of the "MSM" was that Hillary was the presumptive winner, and everybody else need not apply. Now they are just shocked that she won the New Hampshire primary election. It's a BOMBSHELL! Nobody saw it coming!
We learned during the GW Bush administration that these so-called expert talking heads know just about as much as the drunk loud guy at your favorite neighborhood bar. When they guess right, they attribute it to their insight and special knowledge. When they guess wrong, it's a bombshell that took the world by surprise. After getting just about every aspect of the war in Iraq wrong, I am not shocked or surprised that they predicted this primary election wrong.

Mathews is becoming MSNBC's Bill O'Rielly... a "O'Rielly Light".

Maybe it's because Keith Olbermann has had such a meteoric rise in ratings and Tweety can't get over the fact that he's no longer #1 at MSNBC.

Tweety is no match for Rachel Maddow. He's a bloated ego, not even my definition of a grade B tv journalist.

Someone called you out on the Hillary bashing finally, pal, & to your face.
Go Rachel!

Chris Matthews hatred of Hillary Clinton is pathological. Mr. Matthews seriously needs to see a mental health professional regarding his pathological hatred of Mrs. Clinton. I have never seen so much hate for so long as I have witnessed in the case of Matthews continued attacks on Mrs. Clinton.

Matthews has a long-running hatred of the Clinton's since the days he worked under Roger Ailes--now of FOX "News" over at CNBC before he (Matthews) moved over to MSNBC. Just because these people work at major news networks and make big money does not mean they are not deranged and in need of serious psychiatric care. Matthews is pathetic and so too are those who employ him over at MSNBC. If the powers to be cared about Matthews they would see to it that he receive an immediate evaluation by a team of psychiatrists for his unbalanced pathology.

Re: Rachel Maddow. Why does Fox keep featuring folks with psychiatric disorders? Is this a sadistic thing, on the part of Fox management? Do these orders come straight from Murdoch, or is it an Ailes perversion?

Let these tortured souls rest, do not keep holding them up to public ridicule, please, Fox management, in the name of common decency.

lopaloo102 @ 24:

Mr. XXXX @ 23:

but in the end, whoever wins the nom, vote democratic, even if it makes you want to puke

Thinking last night that a Ron Paul indie run might pull enough of these voters away from Hillary (esp. on the war issue) to throw the election to McCain.

VietVet8666 @ 27:

lopaloo102 @ 24:

Mr. XXXX @ 23:

but in the end, whoever wins the nom, vote democratic, even if it makes you want to puke

Thinking last night that a Ron Paul indie run might pull enough of these voters away from Hillary (esp. on the war issue) to throw the election to McCain.

Since all the “official” pre-vote polls have now been exposed as a pile of rancid baloney, let’s try our own informal poll:

On a scale of 1-to-10 (one representing “no trust” and ten representing “totally trust”):

a. How much do you believe what the mainstream media tells you?

b. How much do you believe what your government tells you?

And;

c. How much do you believe the accuracy of paperless Diebold touchscreen vote counting computers?

Add your respective scores for a tally out of 30.

Now ask yourself if you believe anything about last night’s vote.

Think about it...

Leave Tweety ALONEEEEEEE! Leave tweety aloooooooone!
You bastards are always pileing on...and he just gives and gives ..but all you want is more............
leave tweety alone.....

So when Matthew's goes after Bush Liberals love him, when he goes after the Clintons Liberals hate him lol..

The reason Hillary won has nothing to do with Matthew's it's because she showed her caring side when she broke down, that's what people want to see not the negative BS..

Hillary needs to fire her campaign staff and bring in Carvile and Begala now!

...well, it's gettin' very interesting...watch closely folks--James Carville & Paul Begala return to Billary's team today...

I think they start spinning her as even more of a poor victim of CM & MSM...that seems to work for her.

john @ 17:

I thought the big story coming out of the "MSM" was that Hillary was the presumptive winner, and everybody else need not apply. Now they are just shocked that she won the New Hampshire primary election. It's a BOMBSHELL! Nobody saw it coming!
We learned during the GW Bush administration that these so-called expert talking heads know just about as much as the drunk loud guy at your favorite neighborhood bar. When they guess right, they attribute it to their insight and special knowledge. When they guess wrong, it's a bombshell that took the world by surprise. After getting just about every aspect of the war in Iraq wrong, I am not shocked or surprised that they predicted this primary election wrong.

I like that 'drunk loud guy...' Hah, hah, hah.....funny!

Say I thought this site had retired the 'Tweety' moniker in favor of the much more accurate 'Chrissie'. Not only is Matthews dumber than a brick he really should, for his mental health,
come out of the closet. Now, If Maddow mentions that to him. I believe his head will explode. But, hey...

The truth is he really, really wants to have sex with Bush. That's part of the reason for his Hillary Hatin'. She wants Bush's job and Chrissie just can't stand the idea.

You know, for a supposed republican, once again, Buchanan makes a lot of sense and 'Tells it like it is'.

Do you think he'll ever recover from his 'republican' delusion, and become an 'Intelligent Independent', or even, (gulp) a democrat?

Of course, his sister would divorce him.

Swashbuckler @ 36:

Preacher Boob @ 30:

Has any sane person you know ever been asked to participate in a poll?

Actually, yes.

So what did they answer, 'Yes', 'No', or 'Eff You'?

So when Matthew’s goes after Bush Liberals love him, when he goes after the Clintons Liberals hate him lol..

The reason Hillary won has nothing to do with Matthew’s it’s because she showed her caring side when she broke down, that’s what people want to see not the negative BS..

Hillary needs to fire her campaign staff and bring in Carvile and Begala now!

Matthews rarely goes after Bush with the same intensity and seething hatred he has against the Clintons....and Carville and Begala are two has beens who couldn't even argue against the flimsy neocon talking points on that pathetic show CROSSFIRE years ago.

I really enjoyed watching Hardball but I believe Matthews has gone over the top with all his anti-Hillary stuff. Last night, during the returns, he was speculating that the Clinton's would claim "victory" before the votes were all counted just so people could go to bed thinking Hillary had won, even if she hadn't. What's his problem? Chris needs to eat a BIG slice of humble pie over Hillary's win in New Hampshire!

For me, Matthews has lost a lot of credibility as a pundit. His bias puts him in the same league as Sean Hannity.

CHRIS MATTHEWS SHOULD BE FIRED! I WAS WATCHING MSNBC (FOR THE LAST TIME) BOTH DURING THE N.H. RESULTS AND THE MORNING AFTER AND HE COULD NOT HAVE BEEN MORE OBVIOUS THAT HE WAS BOTH DISAPPOINTED AND MAD. THIS MORNING'S COMMENT FROM MATTHEWS THAT "THE ONLY REASON HILLARY WAS ELECTED IN THE NEW YORK SENATE WAS BECAUSE HER HUSBAND WAS A CHEATER." THERE WAS A TIME WHEN ACTUAL REPORTERS AT LEAST MADE AN ATTEMPT NOT TO BE BIAS. MSNBC HAS ALLOWED CHRIS MATTHEWS TO TURN THEIR NEWS INTO ANOTHER FOX NEWS. THIS IDIOT (WHO I USE TO LIKE UNTIL THIS ELECTION) ACTUALLY CALLED NEW HAMPSHIRE VOTERS "LIARS" AND "RACIST". WHY ISN'T THERE OUTRAGE OVER HIS COMMENTS? IMUS WAS A LIGHT WEIGHT AND THIS IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF MSNBC LOSS OF CREDIBILITY.

It's not just Matthews, its much of the blogerati, its Ariana Huffington, etc. Democrats generally like the Clintons so you can beat them fairly but you cant humliate them without provoking a reaction.

We just have a pavlovian urge to defend a Clinton under attack. Learned it long ago.

Billntennessee @ 49:

CHRIS MATTHEWS SHOULD BE FIRED! I WAS WATCHING MSNBC (FOR THE LAST TIME) BOTH DURING THE N.H. RESULTS AND THE MORNING AFTER AND HE COULD NOT HAVE BEEN MORE OBVIOUS THAT HE WAS BOTH DISAPPOINTED AND MAD. THIS MORNING'S COMMENT FROM MATTHEWS THAT "THE ONLY REASON HILLARY WAS ELECTED IN THE NEW YORK SENATE WAS BECAUSE HER HUSBAND WAS A CHEATER." THERE WAS A TIME WHEN ACTUAL REPORTERS AT LEAST MADE AN ATTEMPT NOT TO BE BIAS. MSNBC HAS ALLOWED CHRIS MATTHEWS TO TURN THEIR NEWS INTO ANOTHER FOX NEWS. THIS IDIOT (WHO I USE TO LIKE UNTIL THIS ELECTION) ACTUALLY CALLED NEW HAMPSHIRE VOTERS "LIARS" AND "RACIST". WHY ISN'T THERE OUTRAGE OVER HIS COMMENTS? IMUS WAS A LIGHT WEIGHT AND THIS IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF MSNBC LOSS OF CREDIBILITY.

Chris Matthews keeps bringing up Obama's race, he keeps harping on it again and again.

Preacher Boob @ 41:

You know, for a supposed republican, once again, Buchanan makes a lot of sense and 'Tells it like it is'.

Do you think he'll ever recover from his 'republican' delusion, and become an 'Intelligent Independent', or even, (gulp) a democrat?

Of course, his sister would divorce him.

NOW THAT FRIGGIN CRACKED ME UP!!!!.... his sister... ehehehehheheh but i dont think we are ever in danger of patrick j. buchanan ever becoming a rational, open minded, independent. and yes ... i have agreed with him lately on more than one occaision but really............lest we forget.........

We're going to bring back God and the Bible and drive the gods of secular humanism right out of the public schools of America.
--Pat Buchanan, at an anti-gay rally in Des Moines, Iowa, February 11, 1996

Bet Rachel Maddow never thought she'd agree with Pat Buchanan on something in a million years. The look on her face as Buchanan tore into the MSM was great.

Shawnmeat @ 50:

Paul in Boca @ 22:

VietVet8666 @ 16:

Wondering if last night was pre-game warmup for Diebold.

Absolutely! According to this article, 81% of the New Hampshire voting machines are Diebold--which, by the way, has changed it's name to Premier.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0801/S00057.htm

And what about Iowa?

It's unfortunate that people have been so blinded by the Obama-hype and Clinton-hatred that they were completely unaware of the very real support Hillary Clinton had amongst Americans. Not all of them blog!

The votes were hand counted in Iowa.

Preacher Boob @ 30:

Has any sane person you know ever been asked to participate in a poll?

Tell you what, if someone ever comes up to me and says 'Would you like to participate in a poll?', I'll say 'Hell yeah, give me the skinny end, and I'll jam the other end up your ass'.

That would be an interesting 'pole dance'.

address all of your emails to abrams@msnbc.com dan is the president of the network.... i dont think he wants an OREILLY CLONE on his network anymore than anyone else would...

and TOM BROKAW WAS SPEAKING DIRECTLY TO CHRIS MATTHEWS WHEN HE WAS SAYING THOSE THINGS.......DIDNT CHRIS KNOW?......... I WONDER IF CHRIS COULD HEAR HIM.... WHILE HE HAS HIS HEAD SO FAR IN HIS OWN ASS.

Sure is refreshing to hear Rachel telling it like it is.Not like it's the way Tweety thinks it is.Tweety just likes to hear his own voice.....Egomaniac.

Damn it, I can't remember his name half the time, I automatically call him tweety. Thankyou to Rachel for giving him a little comeuppance.

Mornin Ras......gots to go...work beckons

My God- Democrats are once again doing exactly what Republicans want. If Hillary wins the nomination she will go down the classic Democrats play book of loosing the national election, and will get trounced in January just like Kerry, Dukakis,Mondale.........

She is a wet-dream for the Republicans, and will easily be defeated. The party better wake up and realize real quick Hillary is not Bill.

Thank you for your concern, Motor City Mike.

The power of being a "super star" celebrity is just as corrupting as is the power given to an unchecked and "immune" dictator. There can be no question that "talking heads" are automatically given such "status" and are corrupted thereby to what ever extent their personalities will allow.
The thing that has shown above all the bullshit pettiness of NH is that first Obama started using John Edwards'' stuff, and it put HIM over in Iowa.
At the last ditch in NH, Clinton stole the same thunder, from the same man, and is now shouting that her "epiphany" came upon her unawares so that by some MAGIC"--(very much like that of Obama in Iowa)--SHE suddenly found "HER OWN VOICE", which is the echo of JOHN EDWARDS!
And another POLITICAL FAIRIE TALE is born!
Praiz de Lord and pass us a hole SH%T LOAD OF "MORE OF THE BELTWAY SAME"!
If you really want REAL CHANGE in D.c., support JOHN EDWARDS as much and as often as you can! Forget Tweety and ALL of the "talking heads", the "swiftboaters" the attack ads, and the "hype" which is designed to get fools to follow fools!

35 Ethan Says

Chris Matthews loves the Republicans and he has been singing their praises for years now. Matthews constantly sucks-up to Tom DeLay. Matthews never attacked George W. Bush the way he attacks the Clinton's and Al Gore. Matthews loathed Al Gore and led the cable news rants against Mr. Gore. Matthews has a pathological hatred for Hillary Clinton in the same manner he has a pathological liking of Tom DeLay. Stephanie Miller was correct when she called him (Matthews) a "right-wing tool" on Hardball.

Here are some quotes by Mr. Matthews about his love-love of the Republicans and President Bush:

"I thought in listening to the president, I was listening to one of the great neoconservative minds. We were given a rare opportunity to hear the real philosophy of this administration with regard to the war in Iraq." (August 9, 2007)---Matthews on Bush and promoting the war in Iraq for the administration.

"I like him. Everybody sort of likes the president, except for the real whack-jobs, maybe on the left." (November 28, 2005)
"Sometimes it glimmers with this man, our president, that kind of sunny nobility." (October 25, 2005)---Matthews again, kissing the hearts of the Bush administration. I have yet to ever hear say anything this favorable towards Hillary or Bill Clinton.

"We're proud of our president. Americans love having a guy as president, a guy who has a little swagger, who's physical." (May 1, 2003)--Matthews on President Bush, after the infamous "Mission Accomplished" speech.

"For example, George Allen is a lot like George Bush. He's friendly. He's a jock in a way. He's happy go lucky. He's a good guy to hang out with, kicks back."(May 24, 2006)--Matthews sucking up to U.S. Senator Allen as he often did when the Virginia senator appeared on his Hardball show where he (Matthews) promoted a presidential run for the man he is talking about here.

"They're very adept politically, this White House. And whatever you think of Karl Rove, he is good and he is tough."(October 29, 2004)---Matthews in another typical Republican suck-up pose.

"Tony [Snow] has no regrets, nor do any of us for being his friend. Good guy, he has been, he is, and he will be." (September 4, 2007)---Matthews in another typical Republican suck-up pose. His nose has not got brown yet.

"And as we sign off today, it was the last day on the job for White House press secretary, the very likable, the very good guy, Tony Snow." (September 17, 2007)---Matthews in another typical Republican suck-up pose. His nose has not got brown yet.

"Tom DeLay, you are not in this buisness for the money. You live modestly. You commute back and forth from Washington to Houston, Texas. Why? What drives you every day?" (January 24, 2006)---Matthews in another typical Republican suck-up pose. His nose has not got brown yet. Matthews is working hard on it though.

"We'll be right back with House Majority Leader John Boehner. You can see this man's greatness." (March 6, 2006)---Matthews in another typical Republican suck-up pose. His nose has not got brown yet. Matthews is working hard on it though.

"And Republican Senator Pete Domenici of New Mexico - a good guy, by the way - intends to retire from the Senate when his term ends next year." (October 3, 2007)---Matthews in another typical Republican suck-up pose. His nose has not got brown yet, but, is very close....

"I think you beat a good guy [Jim Talent]. I looked at all the Republican candidates running for election in tough elections. I thought he was probably the best of them." Matthews to Missouri Senator-elect Claire McCaskill, (November 28, 2006)

"Mike DeWine, a good guy." (February 9, 2007)

"Chris Shays, actually a good guy, we'll see how he deals with this thing."(August 28, 2006)

"By the way, if the cover-up works, we're not talking about it, just so you know about it. Don't get completely caught up in this good guy theory of government. It's only the cover-up. If the cover-up works, we never talk about the crime." (January 16, 2007)---Chris Matthews on the "good guys of the Bush administration."

"There's some weird thing about likability. Once you decide you like a guy, no matter how bad he is, you like him." (June 12, 2007)---Chris Matthews regarding George W. Bush.

Abrams is no longer the president of the network. I believe he stepped down months ago.

VietVet8666 @ 16:

Wondering if last night was pre-game warmup for Diebold.

Hmmm, sad to say, but that thought did cross my mind for a second last night.

Bradley effect

T-myers @ 33:

Leave Tweety ALONEEEEEEE! Leave tweety aloooooooone!
You bastards are always pileing on...and he just gives and gives ..but all you want is more............
leave tweety alone.....

lol

uhhhhhhhh no.
nothing tweety says will really influence my "grrl" vote either way.
he's just not that competent a journalist in my estimation for me to take seriously.

LibertyLover @ 81:

VietVet8666 @ 16:

Wondering if last night was pre-game warmup for Diebold.

Hmmm, sad to say, but that thought did cross my mind for a second last night.

Scroll up to post # 31.

.

My view of the anti-Hillary Clinton hatred by Arianna Huffington over at www.huffingtonpost.com:

Arianna Huffington did not like Bill Clinton in the 1990s. I do not expect any honest analysis from her about Hillary Clinton, other than the usual hate and vitriol, foaming at her mouth. She is a fake and phony. Arianna Huffington twists like the wind, and cannot be considered to be a “liberal” or “progressive.”

Huffington likes to provoke and agitate but she stands for nothing. Huffington makes loads of money writing contrarian books in the Bush adminisration while she made the circuit with Al Franken in the 1990s bashing Bill Clinton. I do not trust a word she says about politics and would never buy any of her books. She makes her name on negativity. I have yet to ever hear what Mrs. Huffington “believes” other than that nobody is ever “good enough for her.” Huffington makes me want to vomit.

Although, I do not trust Arianna Huffington at all, huffingtonpost.com is a good blog, admittedly so. But I seldom, if, at all, ever read, anything Arianna Huffington writes.

I am glad the people, and not the likes of Mrs. Huffington, made the decision to vote for Hillary Clinton, last night.

I love you Rachel!

There is only one Democratic candidate that can't win this presidential election and it isn't Hillary. The Repugs control the media and the media is pulling for one Democratic candidate. JMHO, Nuff Said!

I guess terrorists won't kill NH now since they voted for Hillary and not Obama.

Mr. XXXX @ 23:

Chris Matthews hatred of Hillary Clinton is pathological. Mr. Matthews seriously needs to see a mental health professional regarding his pathological hatred of Mrs. Clinton. I have never seen so much hate for so long as I have witnessed in the case of Matthews continued attacks on Mrs. Clinton.

Matthews has a long-running hatred of the Clinton's since the days he worked under Roger Ailes--now of FOX "News" over at CNBC before he (Matthews) moved over to MSNBC. Just because these people work at major news networks and make big money does not mean they are not deranged and in need of serious psychiatric care. Matthews is pathetic and so too are those who employ him over at MSNBC. If the powers to be cared about Matthews they would see to it that he receive an immediate evaluation by a team of psychiatrists for his unbalanced pathology.

We should all thank Stephanie Miller for calling Chris Matthews a "right-wing tool" on his Hardball show. Poor Stephanie Miller took a lot of crap from people on the "left" for speaking the truth on that show. Stephanie told the truth to Matthews for all of us, yet she got harshly attacked on many so-called "liberal" and "progressive" blogs for doing it as she was not supposed to because "she was an invited guest." That was b.s. then and now.

Call Stephanie Miller and thank her for being what you all wished and that is BRAVE!!!! Stephanie was right then and now and has nothing to apologize for. She was correct that night and even more so this morning. Thanks Stephanie Miller!!!

Bottom Line-----HILLARY WON!!!!!!

Deal with it and Grow Up!!!! Stop whining already!!!

lopaloo102 @ 24:

Mr. XXXX @ 23:

Chris Matthews hatred of Hillary Clinton is pathological. Mr. Matthews seriously needs to see a mental health professional regarding his pathological hatred of Mrs. Clinton. I have never seen so much hate for so long as I have witnessed in the case of Matthews continued attacks on Mrs. Clinton.

Matthews has a long-running hatred of the Clinton's since the days he worked under Roger Ailes--now of FOX "News" over at CNBC before he (Matthews) moved over to MSNBC. Just because these people work at major news networks and make big money does not mean they are not deranged and in need of serious psychiatric care. Matthews is pathetic and so too are those who employ him over at MSNBC. If the powers to be cared about Matthews they would see to it that he receive an immediate evaluation by a team of psychiatrists for his unbalanced pathology.

let's reel it in here...

matthews is a human being, and he has his particular likes and dislikes...he's got some funny love of giulianni, and some adolescent disdain for clinton, bfd...

you hate obama with a similarly quirky zeal....

i don't like edwards

that's life

but in the end, whoever wins the nom, vote democratic, even if it makes you want to puke

I love the smell of naivete in the morning.

Matthew's treatment of Hillary isn't just some little human foible easily dismissed. He has taken it to extremes that come across as pathological and obssessive. Given the fact that he has a media megaphone and no fact-checking at all, it is a problem.

The fact that you are treating this so dismissively shows that you really don't get how far beyond reasonable Matthews has gone on his assaults on Hillary. Do some research on all the anti-Hillary actual statements that Matthews has made, because apparently you have missed how truly over the edge he has gone. You can find a lot on the Media Matters site.

It is way beyond normal, it's as if he is a creepy one-man anti-Hillary vendetta, although he isn't a one-man vendetta, he's got lots of company in the Rovian/Mellon Schiafe anti-Hillary camp. The problem is that where the Schiafe-funded Coulter/Malkin/Limbaugh anti-Hillary rhetoric is lessoned by their obvious wing-nuttery, Matthews has been getting by with a semblance of respectability as some sort of expert and he does not deserve that respectability any longer. You don't get to claim journalistic integrity if you do what he has been doing.

And it's as if he can't stop himself - ever know someone who couldn't move on after a bad break-up? Years later every single conversation still goes back to villifying the ex, until you realize the ex wasn't the problem at all, it's the wierdly obssessive person sucking all the energy out of the room in service to the hate? That's how extreme Matthews has gotten. Creepy and wierd.

Oddly enough, Rachel Maddow is the only one I have seen bust him on it and, boy, does he get defensive and pissy when confronted.

We need a You Tube Matthews' anti-Hillary montage, so people like you could get how extreme it really has become.

Word of the Day

From the Urban Dictionary:

1. vajority

The majority of women.

The vajority will vote for Hillary in 2008.

Mr. XXXX @ 99:

Bottom Line-----HILLARY WON!!!!!!

Deal with it and Grow Up!!!! Stop whining already!!!

It's still early.

Hillary won New Hampshire - by a very thin margin.

When Edwards and Richardson step aside, I suspect most of their support will fall to Obama.

Which would be a shame, as I believe the best president would be a president with a vagina.

Marianne @ 103:

I agree that a backlash against the media may have had a role in the results. I am a 40-year-old mother of 2 young children. I have been leaning towards voting for Obama, but I was terribly offended by the coverage of Clinton's defeat in Iowa and of her getting emotional. Huffington Post even had a headline: "Clinton Cried!" I watched the video. She had emotion in her voice and got misty-eyed, but she certainly did not cry. And I would bet that Bill Clinton did the exact same thing many times as president, and it was only regarded as a sign of his humanity. The multiple stories in the newspapers and on TV news shows about the end of Clinton's campaign also irritated me.

Obama's national campaign co-chair (sorry; don't recall his name) was on MSNBC suggesting that Hillary's demonstration of emotion was a sign that she might need to quit the campaign, that she couldn't handle it. That made me so angry that I thought I had decided to vote for Hillary after all. I have since gone back to being undecided.

If I had had to vote yesterday, though, I probably would have voted for Hillary.

I am just glad that media pundits got a chance to look as stupid and biased as they often are.

I am so very tired of their trying to make Howard Dean scream moments to ruin a campaign. Why can't they focus on real issues? Why do they think they need to be king makers?

I was thinking pretty much what you wrote, so thank you. your very intelligent tome would be lost on those assholes, though.

Mr. XXXX @ 102:

Tinfoil Hat @ 31:

Since all the “official” pre-vote polls have now been exposed as a pile of rancid baloney, let’s try our own informal poll:

On a scale of 1-to-10 (one representing “no trust” and ten representing “totally trust”):

a. How much do you believe what the mainstream media tells you?

b. How much do you believe what your government tells you?

And;

c. How much do you believe the accuracy of paperless Diebold touchscreen vote counting computers?

Add your respective scores for a tally out of 30.

Now ask yourself if you believe anything about last night’s vote.

Think about it...

Your sentiments are very fanciful.

I take it you don't have the courage to take the poll. I'm curious - you probably scored 30/30, right?

At this time, despite your "hunches" and unsubstantiated "theories," the Bottom Line—–HILLARY WON!!!!!!

I might have to do a google search to confirm, but I thought the campaign wasn't over. Hillary is the candidate? I thought she won New Hampshire. I know she came 3rd in Iowa. But I was unaware she ran the table and got this thing sewn up. I suppose if I'd scored 30/30 I would know better. Again, I'll have to google the internets to find out.

Prove what you are saying lest, I say: Deal with it and Grow Up!!!! Stop whining already!!!

What's wrong with whining? Whining works. The louder, the better. Whining is one of the Clinton's best weapons, they used it this past week, and they succeeded - last night.

Clytemnestra @ 94:

Ethan @ 35:

So when Matthew's goes after Bush Liberals love him, when he goes after the Clintons Liberals hate him lol..

The reason Hillary won has nothing to do with Matthew's it's because she showed her caring side when she broke down, that's what people want to see not the negative BS..

Hillary needs to fire her campaign staff and bring in Carvile and Begala now!

Really, cuz I thought her "breakdown" contrived. A bunch of people I know believe that too.

Yeah, Bill Kristol is one. Any time you agree with Bill Kristol you really should reevaluate your position.

CoIntelPro @ 107:

the differential between the poll and the ballot is very simple: people lie to pollsters and vote their fears.

Lying is cognitive. Fear is emotional. We agree.

CoIntelPro @ 107:

the differential between the poll and the ballot is very simple: people lie to pollsters and vote their fears.

The evolutionary primacy of the brain's fear circuitry makes it more powerful than the brain's reasoning faculties. The amygdala sprouts a profusion of connections to higher brain regions—neurons that carry one-way traffic from amygdala to neocortex. Few connections run from the cortex to the amygdala, however. That allows the amygdala to override the products of the logical, thoughtful cortex, but not vice versa. So although it is sometimes possible to think yourself out of fear ("I know that dark shape in the alley is just a trash can"), it takes great effort and persistence. Instead, fear tends to overrule reason, as the amygdala hobbles our logic and reasoning circuits. That makes fear "far, far more powerful than reason," says neurobiologist Michael Fanselow of the University of California, Los Angeles. "It evolved as a mechanism to protect us from life-threatening situations, and from an evolutionary standpoint there's nothing more important than that."

http://www.newsweek.com/id/78178

Chris Matthews serves a useful purpose.

Occasionally, it's good to get an opinion from an alternate universe.

Keeps things in perspective, and makes us grateful for what we have.

And damned glad we're not in his Cockamamie Cosmos.

I don't care what they say on the tv "news". I'm not interested in a bunch of obviously biased idiots spinning everything into a personal opinion piece and behaving as if it was the word of gord. I read blogs like C&L and others and don't miss a thing because 99% of main stream "news" isn't.

If I'm interested in infotainment, salacious murders and bullshit, I'll watch the news.

Swashbuckler @ 115:

Kathleen @ 113:

If I follow Rachel Maddow's logic that women have jumped on Hillary's bandwagon due to Matthew's bashing her. Then Edwards is the candidate's bandwagon people should be jumping on. Matthews has been ignoring Edwards for over a year up until recently and as of late has been picking on him in an unfair.

Nope. Ignoring someone is far different from bashing them.

Far worse

This joke of being first to post a coment... and making that comment say 'Frist!'... is way old.

Time to get a new joke.

Tweety on boy-toy Fred Thompson:

"Do you think there’s a sex appeal for this guy, this sort of mature, older man, you know? … Can you smell the English leather on this guy, the Aqua Velva, the sort of mature man’s shaving cream, or whatever, you know, after he shaved? Do you smell that sort of — a little bit of cigar smoke? You know, whatever."

Whatever, indeed. Call him Mister One Percent. Call him "Toast" and stick a fork in him.

Kathleen @ 119:

roooth @ 101:

lopaloo102 @ 24:

Mr. XXXX @ 23:

let's reel it in here...

matthews is a human being, and he has his particular likes and dislikes...he's got some funny love of giulianni, and some adolescent disdain for clinton, bfd...

you hate obama with a similarly quirky zeal....

i don't like edwards

that's life

but in the end, whoever wins the nom, vote democratic, even if it makes you want to puke

I love the smell of naivete in the morning.

Matthew's treatment of Hillary isn't just some little human foible easily dismissed. He has taken it to extremes that come across as pathological and obssessive. Given the fact that he has a media megaphone and no fact-checking at all, it is a problem.

The fact that you are treating this so dismissively shows that you really don't get how far beyond reasonable Matthews has gone on his assaults on Hillary. Do some research on all the anti-Hillary actual statements that Matthews has made, because apparently you have missed how truly over the edge he has gone. You can find a lot on the Media Matters site.

It is way beyond normal, it's as if he is a creepy one-man anti-Hillary vendetta, although he isn't a one-man vendetta, he's got lots of company in the Rovian/Mellon Schiafe anti-Hillary camp. The problem is that where the Schiafe-funded Coulter/Malkin/Limbaugh anti-Hillary rhetoric is lessoned by their obvious wing-nuttery, Matthews has been getting by with a semblance of respectability as some sort of expert and he does not deserve that respectability any longer. You don't get to claim journalistic integrity if you do what he has been doing.

And it's as if he can't stop himself - ever know someone who couldn't move on after a bad break-up? Years later every single conversation still goes back to villifying the ex, until you realize the ex wasn't the problem at all, it's the wierdly obssessive person sucking all the energy out of the room in service to the hate? That's how extreme Matthews has gotten. Creepy and wierd.

Oddly enough, Rachel Maddow is the only one I have seen bust him on it and, boy, does he get defensive and pissy when confronted.

We need a You Tube Matthews' anti-Hillary montage, so people like you could get how extreme it really has become.

If we are focused on Matthews treatment of Hillary. Why not his treatment of Edwards? Ignoring him for over a year, then ignoring his second place win until he was attacked for this and was forced to have Elizabeth Edwards on and then being oh so sarcastic and always pushing Edwards to concede.

If we focus on Matthews treatment of Hillary we need to focus on his treatment of Edwards.

matthews is clearly incapable of being fair and balanced. not even close.

You get no arguement from me there - one is vilified, one is ostracized, all in service of manipulating us, never in service of the good of the country.

America does indeed seek positive change.

MSNBC could get a head start by getting rid of neocon cheerleaders Chris Matthews, Tucker Carlson and Joe Scarborough, and replacing them with ex-employees Phil Donahue, Ron Kuby and Ashleigh Banfield, who were all banished from the network for their righteous skepticism of the Iraq War bamboozlement.

You see
You feel
You know
React
You're waiting
You're waiting
Change

So The Tweety Effect means, what,exactly?

That voters essentially said to themselves, "Aw, the big bad media is being mean to poor Hillary, we're going to make her the nominee because we feel sorry for her"?

Sweet Jesus, if that's the case, then it's a case of open stupidity, and the Dems do deserve to nominate someone as loathsome as Hillary.

And then get beaten, again, in the general election.

Let's stop repeating Chris Matthews's latest excuse----the polls were NOT all wrong.

There were several polls that showed Obama and Hillary in a statistical tie.

Chris Mathews just chose NOT to report on those.

He CHOSE the polls that reinforced what he wanted to be true.

Basically, the Independents Obama was counting on --who voted for him in Iowa----broke for John McCain.

But Matthews ASSumed that those Independents would stay with Obama.

So all the facts were there for Matthews to see. He just let his personal choices INFLUENCE what he reported.

And Andrea Mitchell and Howard Feineman reinforced same.

What on EARTH made Chris Matthews think anyone gave a diggity-dog-damm what Tom Delay thought?

Think about that, folks.

Clevenative @ 100:

Motor City Mike @ 71:

My God- Democrats are once again doing exactly what Republicans want. If Hillary wins the nomination she will go down the classic Democrats play book of loosing the national election, and will get trounced in January just like Kerry, Dukakis,Mondale.........

She is a wet-dream for the Republicans, and will easily be defeated. The party better wake up and realize real quick Hillary is not Bill.

Kerry got "trounced"? Every sentence in your post makes about as much sense as this comment.

I think the Democratic Party would be quite confident of a "trounced" victory themselves this fall, regardless the candidate. Republicans are scared s#itless of anything "Clinton" - and the whole country is fed up with failed Republican politics, so who are you kidding? Tell it like it is.

-Your right, the Democrats finally got a victory this fall, but honestly ask yourself the question: Did they win because on a national scale people like Democrats, or because they (the citizens) wanted change and had no where to to turn to? My thoughts (unfortunately)are with later rather than former. Since the "New Democrat' congress has virtually rolled over and played dead and have done nothing to stop the war in Iraq, I don't think people are all that impressed with the congress at the moment. (They are lower in the polls and Bush, WTF?) They should have pulled the funding for Bush's Iraq folly, if they would have a spine they would have. The Democrats had an opportunity and botched it. They may not be so lucky next time.

As for Kerry loosing to Bush- It was his election to loose. Bush has been the worst American president in US history, it should have not even been a contest, but "W" is still in office isn't he? Yes he got trounced, he should have won by 70%. This is my opinion absolutely pathetic. The Democrats ran a horrible campaign because they are out of touch with how to win national elections. I don't like it, but Republicans are indeed better at this. Never in my life could I have thought people would re-elect this idiot but they did. What does this tell you about the competition? Sadly it tells me we have a big problem with Republicans, and an even bigger problem with how Democrats attempt to win elections.

"Scared sh**less"? They have already written the playbook on how to tear her down and win. Hillary will go down in flames in a national election, she is (whether we like it or not) way too polarizing. This merely has to be exploited, and will be. Remember, there are a lot of Democrats that don't even like her, and a lot of women don't like her as well. That is a REALLY bad sign, especially in the beginning. If she gets the nomination get ready for another 4 years of a Republican in the White House, and the same God-awful looser consultants the Democrats use, year-in and year-out will all point fingers when they yet again come up empty handed with results.

-Tell it like it is? This is humorous. I am a Democrat, but first and foremost I am a realist. So yes, I am "telling it like it is". It might not be what you want to hear, but it is "like it is".

jim @ 46:

Hillary said openly that the first task for Bill after they move in to the White House will be to send him with George W. Bush on an international trip to fix the broken image of the US.

That would shrub's father, George HW Bush.

Jason B @ 135:

Thanks Rachel Maddow for being a woman, like all women, and blaming men while you ran behind Hillary Clinton's skirt. What a shame. Women came out in a big way because they were sure the big bad men were picking on the little ol woman. Hillary played the gender card and Rachel ate it all up. And the worst part is, she turned around and blamed it on the men.

Oh, so you're saying the media blatantly lying about Hillary has nothing to do with it? Maybe THAT'S why people voted for her?

ya know, she used a fake accent to pander to the people in the southern church she was at...when she really only read a passage from a book and used some animation, while she spoke normally before and after the passage?

How is it that people say "ohhhh, no...I'm not misogynist, it's HER" and then turn around and say "she played the gender card."

BS!!!

seele @ 7:

The press predicted landslide victory for Obama. And they coincidentally predicted the Iraqies would greet us with flowers too!

ah no, in that case they were just quoting Darth Cheney :O

Fucking Buchanan, Matthews and Maddow! Nice psy-op there, guys, to explain away how they fucked with the vote. How much did they pay you whores to push that meme?

Women came to her rescue, indeed. Women hate her as much as men do.

The crying at the q&a session is another reason used to explain it away as well. Another meme. Poor Hillary, let's vote for her so we don't hurt her feeling aren't further abused. That horrible cackling didn't work, so try crying, and the women will come to your rescue!

Thank You #134 (Motor City Mike). I believe you are correct, sad to say, but Democrats I really do believe now subconsciously want to lose elections. They will never admit it, but I fear it is true. The proof is how this election is being handled right now. The MSM is calling the shots. We are putting the two most polarizing figures up there, a woman and an African American man as our front runnters, and we expect to win. I think by November of 2008, progressives are going to be so disgusted by all of this they are just going to stay home. And, yes if Hillary is given the nomination, I am not voting for her either. I am no longer going to do what I have done in the past, vote for the lesser of two evils. It hasn't gotten any better in 16 years of using that strategey and I fear it will do even less now. My strategy is to resign myself to this: Democrats don't want to win Presidental elections. End of Subject!

Josh @ 137:

Paul in Boca @ 22:

VietVet8666 @ 16:

Wondering if last night was pre-game warmup for Diebold.

Absolutely! According to this article, 81% of the New Hampshire voting machines are Diebold--which, by the way, has changed it's name to Premier.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0801/S00057.htm

Nonsense. The number of independents undecided going into the race was very high; now we see where their votes went.

Clueless. The point made was Diebold, not undecideds. All the pre-election undecided poll numbers prove is that these machines are as easily manipulated as the electorate.

How can you call yourselves a legitimate democracy when there's no verifiable paper trail on those ballots?

Are Americans so moronic that they can't check a box with a pencil on a slip of paper without having somebody hold their hand?

(The answer, it clearly seems, is affirmative.)

Are Americans so lacking in elementary education that they can't do basic arithmetic and hand-count ballots one-at-a-time?

(Beginning to thnk so.)

You'd think the Florida debacle of 2000 might have awaken some Americans from their brazen stupidity and gullibility. You'd think some Americans might've gotten a clue when it's been proved time-and-again that those paperless Diebold machines can be easily manipulated without any verification.

Nations like Australia, Canada, United Kingdom, Germany, can all conduct legitimate elections by counting paper ballots, and they can do re-counts and still get you the proper verifiable vote count the night of the election.

But oh! the "serious free-thinking" Americans think they can go one better, by bending over and allowing machines do the counting for them without any oversight. Then they have the nerve to tell other nations how to run free elections! National Greatness, Indeed!!

Keep on keeping on believing everything your government and media tells you. Those machines never lie, no-no. You get forcefed bullshit from your corporate overlords, and instead of standing up and saying, hey, hold on a minute, you instead lick your lips calling it chcolate ice-cream, and begging for more.

America gets the democracy she deserves. Sadly for the rest of the world, that means having to deal with fascist war criminals and their delicous ice-cream, err, horseshit..

Josh @ 139:

And buddy, listen...Rachel was not defending or supporting Clinton, she was reporting on what she's seen...

Are you saying that because rachel wasn't completely negative about Hillary like everyone else you hear on tv, she's biased?

Whatever.

Here's the thing - at the end of the day, Rachel Maddow called the media's response to the Clinton Cry "Misogynist." She called Matthews "misogynist." She called people who said anything against Clinton "misogynist."

What really kills me is that, as a black man, if I even hint at a Bradley effect, like one of the anchors on MSNBC did last night, you get shot down with yells of "RACIST! That's RACIST and you're accusing ALL WHITE PEOPLE OF RACISM!" Now, to be fair, I don't believe the Bradley effect was involved, BUT - I find it telling that no one can retort to Maddow's cry of misogyny without being called a misogynist. It's pretty much a perfect play, isn't it?

Maddows said, "Matthews you hate Clinton because you're a misogynist." And in that minute, all rational debate went out the window. Because you can't say, "No, I don't like Clinton because she is a terrible candidate." Why? Because Clinton's SHE. Clinton is now running on being a woman and using misogyny as her card when she's under attack. It's no longer an even race.

To me, it's wholly cruel, because Obama can never point to the color of his skin to hide behind. If he brings it up, the race is over. Clinton constantly refers to her gender as her selling point, and she's still in the race because her gender is 51% of the nation.

Think of it. Another 51/49 vote. There's Clinton for you. That's what this move will head towards.