" to describe Tweety to a T. It's all about getting the comment or question corporate talking point out. Tweety really doesn't care what the guest says. It's about the corporate framing, and to a lesser extent, Tweety being in the spotlight.

He misses the point so much.

Let's talk about the issues. The AIG bailout, for example.

Is he kidding us? This guy couldn't catch a piece of gum that was stuck under his chair. How much crap has passed right by Chris Matthews (and others) that would cause some of us watching to scream at the TV to correct the bold faced lie they missed (and they miss's them time and time again)

It's funny (almost) to watch Tweety get a clue - I just don't get how more of us in the general public can catch the stuff these guys miss. And my only conclusion is that they don't miss it, it's just too hard to tell a guest that they are lying... or he could even use the word Mis-spoke if lie is too harsh.

You really think Tweety doesn't know the neocons are lying? How stupid would anybody have to be to be that fracking deaf?

With very few exceptions (Olberman, Maddow), today's MSM talking heads are willing tools in support of the political interests of their networks' corporate sponsors.

Why does this sort of thing continue to be news? Chris Matthews is a drooling boy-toy for Frank Gaffney, who is in turn a boy-toy for the next higher up in the corporate hierarchy, until you reach the the High Council of His Corporate Shadow. There you will see transnational corporate giga-demons like Rupert Murdoch, Bill Gates, the Saudi King, etc.

Tweety's skill (and his excuse) is that he describes politics as nothing more than an exciting game, where the playahs make lots of in-your-face moves, and Oh! Did. You. Hear. What. He. Said?

Doesn't matter to Tweety if one side is flat-out lying and the other side is trying to save the country from total collapse. It's all a game, baby, don't you see?

Chris Matthews is paid a lot of money NOT to see. He's paid to frame every debate as he said, she said, where a green cheese moon is on equal footing with rock. Oh boy, controversy!

I see Tweety's face, I turn the channel. Let's all start doing that.

Kind of like the cartoon type scene where I guy is nailing up a cheap painting one afternoon, hits his thumb, but only yells OW! once he's in bed for the night.

There are two types of people who love politics for very different reasons. For people like Matthews the means outweigh the ends, the game, the spectacle of politics is supreme. For serious people who care about improving the country the ends outweigh the means, for example ending fascism permanently is a primary goal, not what Meghan McCain is saying about her ass.

I agree with every word. Chris Matthew, let's face it, is really kind of a dim bulb. He occasionally stumbles onto a correct point of view, but he is a rudderless, center-less, empty person who's core "beliefs" change pretty much daily. and really, his beliefs around things like stem cell research, are straight out of the darkest depths of the wingnut-o-sphere.

Sometimes I think that Matthews just likes to hear himself talk. He spews his stuff and does not listen to the people he has on. Or he does not listen very well. An idea will pop into his head and he goes on autopilot. I'm sure it's a tough job but he constantly misses incredible remarks by the guests on his show. This happens all the time. Like thinking about a tingle going up his leg when Bush is talking or something.

The neocons are responsible for more innocent deaths that Saddam. They are cut from the same cloth.

he didn't seem to be speaking too fast to my ears. But then I was paying attention. Oh, and , if he's such a good guy.....?!?!?!!?........why is he LYING to you?

that Timothy McVay's middle name was Hussein?

That's why Keith uses his laugh at the opening of that segment

People on "send" all the time NEVER hear what others say, they're so busy trying to convince listeners of their authority and point of view. Chris really isn't a very good anchor, simply because he doesn't listen and misses golden opportunities to make his point as a direct response to what his guests say.

I think he fears being led astray by his guests and sticks to some internal script he has going on.

OTOH, what makes Bill Moyers an excellent interviewer is because he DOES listen, he repeats back what his guest has said, adds to it, questions it, agrees or disagrees with it, but it's a "conversation". Tweetie doesn't know how to converse with others.

Unbelievable! Matthews is a good for nothing bum at this point to let two neocons in one week--Fleischer and Gaffney come on and tell bold-faced lies. He's just giving them a forum to spin. NBC is an worthless network. Maybe we should call them Fox jr. (with a couple of aberrations in Olberman and maddow)

was one of these guys also. Now Chris Matthews is no Tim Russert, but Russert ultimately let them off the hook on this exact same b.s. cockamamie story line of how urgent it was for us to go to war. Fine, make Matthews the face of this, but there are plenty of others. And don't forget about that bitch Judith Miller at the New York Times.

--he is incapable of engaging in what my Non-verbal Communication 101 prof calls "active listening." Already admitting he doesn't hear everything, Matthews leaves it at that and is clueless as to the cause of his condition: he is FORMULATING HIS RESPONSE while his guest is in mid-question. He is not interested in hearing anybody out; his reason for being is to rudely pounce, possibly because he's insecure about looking stupid by actually pausing, thinking, then responding. (By glaring contrast, President Obama and Robert Gibbs do not suffer from this condition). My prof doesn't know if this obnoxious "failure to communicate" can be corrected, but he suggests that first you have to give a shit about the other person and treat them with the respect they deserve. Especially if you disagree with them. Otherwise you're little more than Bill O'Reilly.

both war criminals on some level, in my opinion. well, Addington is just a pompous, arrogant dick. and i just want to lump him in with all those other clear villains.

I think there should be a moratorium on that phrase "he's a good guy". These pundits use it for practically everyone on their shows, regardless of their complicity in war crimes or lying in general. It gives notice to the ugly fact that the Washington press corps and politicians are all friends, and all the drivel on the TV is just for Show. Even Paul Begala said George W. Bush was a good guy ("he's a good guy" were his exact words).

For the record, Begala said it on the Crossfire episode where Jon Stewart eviscerated the programme.

Forget about Matthews. He should be cast as a whore every time he speaks. I don't care if, every now and then, he says something that some of you might agree with. This guy simply doesn't care. He just gets off on being there and talking whatever smack he can to get attention. He's to politicians what Joan Rivers was to celebrities at one point. It's the exact same thing. I just have more respect for Joan Rivers in that she at least had no illusions about the fact that she was presenting shallow entertainment.

I stopped watching his show. He doesn't come off the screen as informed or intelligent to me, he just comes off as a doddering narcissist.

Tweety's wings were clipped a long time ago.

He should be reading the articles and comments on Crooks and Liars for actual
NEWS.
Seriously I still think the only message to gain traction at MSNBC is to pick
a specific date for bloggers to post their complaints about Tweety and his show.

Blow their website with comments and someone there may actually decide
to read a few and make some changes.

Wow, you just can't post crap worth here without going after Matthews, even if you have to pull it out of thin air...or somewhere else. Stay objective.