The Politico's Roger Simon wasted no time on Hardball in smearing Rep. Alan Grayson after the Florida rep. went on the offensive against republicans over health care

"like a guy on crack who's always searching for a bigger high"

It's one of the first times that Alan has ever gotten any national exposure before so how does he even make a case that Grayson is a media hound? Matthews at least thought what he said was true about the republicans just say no stance on health care reform, but James Warren also attacked him as has most of the Villagers. They sure don't like uppity liberals, but if you're a nut job conservative you can say anything at all on TV, in Congress or on radio.

And the money keeps coming in for Rep. Grayson.

I think the blogosphere appreciates a liberal with guts.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (100)

PLAYS: (134)

Even after admitting that Tom Ridge's revelations that he felt the terrorist threat level was being used for political purposes was pretty stunning, Matthews and his guests go on to just diminish this as politics as usual and some kind of running joke they were all in on. Too bad the media didn't treat it as such when it was occurring instead of doing their part to help scare the crap out of gullible Americans who didn't see right through this stuff. And this is not politics as usual. It's criminal. But our media treats the criminal as politics as usual, so sadly their reaction isn't surprising.

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (62)

PLAYS: (110)

Immediately following the press conference given by Sergeant James Crowley, Chris Matthews and his guests started raving about what a great job he did and how he might have a future in politics if he wanted one.

Matthews: We're back with Roger Simon and Mark Whitaker after that, I have to say remarkable press conference Roger because I have watched politicians for about forty years now. He's better than most of them.

Simon: Is this guy suave or what? We had a cordial and productive discussion. It's like a head of state. He was good.

Matthews: Well he answered a lot of questions. No apologies. He said they're going to look forward. They're going to have a meaningful discussion later, not over a beer, but a serious get together. Mark your thoughts.

Whitaker: No apologies and probably no law suit from the body language. He says they're going to meet again. My guess is that Skip Gates loves to do documentaries.

Matthews: And he will be a player?

Whitaker: I wouldn't be surprised that they're going to be players in a documentary. And I think we've seen that a star is born. I think this guy could have a future in politics, the media. We'll see.

Matthews: Look out Deval Patrick in the next election, the governor up there. We'll be right back. I have to tell you I, well I feel like we're watching a.. Britain's Got Talent here. Right back with Mark Whitaker and Roger Simon and more of the politics fix. We've got our Susan Boyle here.

Now, for anyone who's been watching him for as long as I have, this is another obvious man-crush remark by Matthews along the same lines as his "furrowing up his leg" statement about Obama, or the "Aqua Velva" remark about Grandpa Fred. Tweety just can't help himself. But it seems he's got the Freepers up in arms for comparing Crowley to Susan Boyle.

As creepy as it is to watch Matthews with no filter as usual and just letting the first thing to come into his brain pour out of his mouth, and expressing another of his man crushes on the air, I really don't think he was trying to insult Crowley.

DOWNLOAD (49)

PLAY (70)

Chris Matthews is apparently perplexed as to why President might want to bypass the national press corps with his online town hall meeting today.

Matthews: Well what's the President up to? Is he doing what he does well? Is he simply sticking to his strengths or is he trying to bypass what he sees as a problem area, meaning the national press corps?

....

Well being from the Politico you must be very proud Roger because you were the only news organization that writes as part of its work that got called on at the press conference the other night. He skipped the New York Times, the Washington Post, the LA Times, the Wall Street Journal. He didn't call on any of those people but he called on you guys.

First of all, The Politico is a "news organization"?? Wow. They look more like a Matt Drudge gossip rag to me. Says a lot about what Matthews' idea of "news" is.

I can't imagine why the President wouldn't want to be calling on the likes of Chuck Todd or Ed Henry. Matthews also apparently thinks that only "real" reporters ask tough questions. Yeah, "real reporters" like the fellow Villagers he names.

I've got a list of people I consider actual journalists and none of the people Matthews named are on it. The people he named are more worried about raising their own profiles with who they have access to than anything that could pass for journalism. Frankly, I hope the President continues to irk the likes of Matthews and talk directly to the public as often as possible.

After eight years of Bush refusing to talk before anything but hand-picked audiences who had to sign loyalty pledges before they'd let anyone near him or our military, which he loved to use as props, this entire debate on how President Obama is managing his audience from Matthews and the rest of the press is pretty rich.

  By almost any accounting, the past few days have been calamitous for John McCain. But not according to Roger Simon of the Politico. While McCain's transparently cynical ploy to play hero in the Wall Street bailout drama was widely derided as a stunt, Simon on Thursday insisted "it isn't as dumb or as desperate as it looks." Then as polls revealed American voters saw Barack Obama as the clear winner of Friday's generally even debate, Simon instead announced "the Mac is back."

Simon's hagiographic treatment of McCain didn't start this week. After the Republican convention earlier this month, Simon regurgitated the talking points emanating from McCain Central:

John McCain is a maverick who has now done what mavericks almost never do: win. And now he must lead a party while maintaining his independence from it.

It's a dilemma, but McCain attempted to resolve it by facing it head on. "I don't work for a party," he said. "I don't work for a special interest. I don't work for myself. I work for you."

Then as the economic crisis threatened to undermine the Republican's campaign, Simon praised McCain for "shooting craps" in trying to appropriate the Wall Street meltdown for his own political purposes:

John McCain is now shooting craps with his presidential campaign. It is high risk. But all he needs is a little luck to pull off his current gamble.

McCain has suspended his campaign to work on a solution for the nation's financial meltdown, and he has threatened to pull out of the first presidential debate scheduled for Friday unless Congress takes action by then.

McCain has been attacked from all sides for doing this, but it isn't as dumb or as desperate as it looks.

Then came Friday's debate.

Continue reading »

Download | play    Download | play   (h/t Heather)

Actually, it's hard to think of anything that the talking heads inside the Beltway Bubble think would hurt John McCain's chances.  But this is so slippery and the terminology so vague that it's troublesome to see the potential to sway a lot of low information voters.   With the news that we are considering drawing down forces in Iraq, beginning in September (reg. req'd), Roger Simon of The Politico, who never met a Republican for whom he wouldn't apologize, insists that this "October Surprise" will help John McCain.

SIMON: Yeah. It may be an October surprise in July. I think anything that signals that the war in Iraq is generally winding down would be good news for John McCain. He has always said that he wants to leave Iraq, too, but he wants to leave it with victory and honor. And if a drawdown of troops is seen to be militarily justified because we're winning, because the surge is working, and not political trickery because Republicans need it for the fall elections, then that is likely to be effective. 

So how many caveats did you count?  There's a lot of stars that have to line up just so to make that work, but let's focus on the purposeful vagueness and empty rhetoric. 

McCain has ALWAYS said that he wants to leave Iraq? Does anyone ever explain how you can leave an occupation (remember, we "won" the war back in 2003) with "victory"?  Is there any honor to that? 

'The surge is working' meme is working my last nerve as well.  Yes, violence is down within Baghdad (where the majority of those escalation-designated troops were sent), but outside of that area, in Kirkuk, Diyala, Mosul and Fallujah?  Not so much. And is it considered a "win" when we're talking about 4.5 million Iraqi refugees?

What happens if the "drawdown" (which is Beltway speak for returning to pre-surge levels) is NOT militarily justified but politically justified?  Is it still a "drawdown" if we're simply moving them to Afghanistan where violence and attacks has jumped lately?  Will it still help McCain when the number of troop deaths in Afghanistan increase even more, like today's attack in Kabul?

Transcripts below the fold

Continue reading »