May I Offer an Opinion on Chris Matthews?

[ylexot]

He still signed the POS that lead to 527's.

True. I wonder if the 527s were an unforseen result or a hoped-for result.

I'd be in favor of removing all policital ads from TV and radio. You can't say anything of substance in 30 seconds, so all you get is attacks and misrepresentations. Instead, let each candidate have a one-hour "show" to say what they want and play them back-to-back. To be fair, have them alternate who goes first each year.

 

[Tonio]

I thnk Ylexot's idea has some merit. I favor either public financing of campaigns with no private contributions, or else requiring TV and radio to donate time to candidates as a condition of their FCC licenses. McCain-Feinggold doesn't do anything to correct the money advantage in elections.

 

[Steve]

I just finished reading the entire Chris Matthews transcript. That guy is off his rocker, for sure. He doesn't let ANYONE get a word in, even those he agrees with. And I love how he demands his guests to make personal statements based on other people's opinions.."I want you to say Kerry shot himself in Vietnam. Say it Michelle (Malkin)."

He should follow those lines up with "Do it. Do it. Do it." like Starsky in the movie.

 

[Penn]

I just finished reading the entire Chris Matthews transcript. That guy is off his rocker, for sure. He doesn't let ANYONE get a word in, even those he agrees with. And I love how he demands his guests to make personal statements based on other people's opinions.."I want you to say Kerry shot himself in Vietnam. Say it Michelle (Malkin)."

He should follow those lines up with "Do it. Do it. Do it." like Starsky in the movie.

I'm thinking if he keeps up this type of (joke) "moderating", he's going to find it hard to get people to come on his show, and give their opinion about a topic.
It's interesting and absorbing to be part of a debate, but it's got to be an exhausting and frustrating feeling afterwards, with his style.

But, maybe that's his goal: only left-wing liberals will want to come on his show. It's one way for the left to attempt to outdo the O'Reilly Factor's ratings and popularity. :shrug:

 

[Larry Gude]

Mathews...

...knows and loves this stuff forward and backward; he is a true political junkie.

What he knows is that the 60's and 70's an awful lot of people said and did things that they'd regret later when it comes to a national political future. He also knows that those same things make some people hero's with a hardcore, influential segment of his party.

He knows Kerry made a calculated gamble in choosing to make Viet Nam such a big deal and, by the way he is hyper ventilating, he may have thought it was a good strategy. These people walk in rarified air, TV types and campaign strategists. They have a few beers. They talk shop.

Kerry's Senate record is problematic through and through, especially the last few years. He has huge gaffs, in his own words, that will be part of campaign commercials so, if military service could establish a bedrock of credibility, hey, it's a good card, play it.

I think it is understood that Kerry is not the only guy to ever job the system for a Purple Heart or Bronze Star. That's why the swifties have let it go until now. But, Kerry overplayed the hand, used some of these guys in adds and rubbed some old wounds.

So, Mathews is seeing this build up to the verge of EXPLODING and ending the race right now. As dumb as Kerry and his crew seem to be, they probably could never imagine, him having been wounded, the fire storm they might stir up.

Vrai might be right; he got lead here by the Clinton vets he hired only to be summarily executed for Hillary.

Mathews and anyone else who knows the real story, that this WILL sink Kerry unless it is stopped right now, are working overtime right now to get this on the back burner and force Bush to help.

Then the RNC convention let's it fade a bit.

It's stall ball right now and every step Kerry makes is inflaming more feelings and making it worse.

 

[Penn]

...knows and loves this stuff forward and backward; he is a true political junkie.

What he knows is that the 60's and 70's an awful lot of people said and did things that they'd regret later when it comes to a national political future. He also knows that those same things make some people hero's with a hardcore, influential segment of his party.


Vrai might be right; he got lead here by the Clinton vets he hired only to be summarily executed for Hillary.

Mathews and anyone else who knows the real story, that this WILL sink Kerry unless it is stopped right now, are working overtime right now to get this on the back burner and force Bush to help.

Then the RNC convention let's it fade a bit.

It's stall ball right now and every step Kerry makes is inflaming more feelings and making it worse.

Yep, I saw the very same arguement in another article from Townhall.com, on 8/20; the author was Neal Boortz, who promoted quite the same idea: he's thinking it has all been an orchestrated setup by friends of Bill and Hillary, right from the beginning.

He thinks Hillary is not ready to run right now, and offering up Kerry for the sacrifice, ie., letting Pres. Bush have 4 more years, is the kind of warped strategy these people are attempting to execute. If Kerry/Edwards win, Hillary can look forward to 8 years of wallowing in her Senate seat. NOT what I think her and Bill and Co., have in mind.

From the article:

"We’re friends, right? So let’s cut to the chase. You know you really didn’t want a 2004 Kerry in the first place. You wanted a Hillary! Just think about those sleek, curvy lines, that flashy grille, the soft upholstery. What’s not to love? Come on and admit it. That’s your real goal. Hillary Clinton in the White House, a liberal nirvana. You panicked, though, and bought the first shiny thing you saw on the showroom floor.

Well, this isn’t the way to go about it, my friend. If your dream version of America is Hillary in the White House, then beating Bush in 2004 is not going to move you closer to your goal. It’s time for you to put the overpowering emotion of hatred aside and try to think a few years ahead. If this 2004 Kerry of yours takes this race you’re probably going to be stuck with him for eight years.

During those eight years they’re going to be polishing up a 2012 Edwards to take his place. All the while your Hillary is going to be collecting rust in the Senate."

I posted the link to the article elsewhere, in another thread about Kerry.
Is this too outlandish for middle America to consider, though?

 

[Larry Gude]

the math...

If Kerry/Edwards win, Hillary can look forward to 8 years of wallowing in her Senate seat.

...is worse than that.

If Kerry wins that guarantees he runs again. That's 8 years before anyone else can get a shot as you said.

He wins again that's 12 because HIS veep will be the guy in 2012.

That guy, Edwards presumably, wins, then you're looking at 16.

Unless he wins again, which is 20 years. If anything, I think it is honest to say that the Clinton aperatus within the party will not quite be putting out the effort they did for Gore. It does not serve their interests. A Bush win does.

I'm trying to look ahead in order to look back at what we're missing.

say Kerry wins. What will we have missed?

In the case of Clinton, it was the effects of Perot and Bush I running a weak campaign along with Clintons tremendous charm and political skill. Kerry has none of that.

It is beyond by reasoning skills to see how anyone who is undecided can be in favor of Kerry/Edwards.

 

[Tonio]

It is beyond by reasoning skills to see how anyone who is undecided can be in favor of Kerry/Edwards.

I can appreciate that. I don't like Bush/Chaney either. A big reason for me is Bush's apparent Messiah complex, and another is his idea that tax relief should focus on capital gains and not on wages. I see this election as the evil of two lessers. I can't remember another election where the Big Two offered such disappointing choices, not even in 2000.

 

[Pete]

I can appreciate that. I don't like Bush/Chaney either. A big reason for me is Bush's apparent Messiah complex, and another is his idea that tax relief should focus on capital gains and not on wages. I see this election as the evil of two lessers. I can't remember another election where the Big Two offered such disappointing choices, not even in 2000.

Where is H. Ross when you need him.

 

[ylexot]

I just saw something that said Chris Matthews will be leading the coverage of the GOP convention for MSNBC

That might be entertaining enough to watch.

 

[Tonio]

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/040820/deering.gif

 

[Larry Gude]

Tonio...

...certainly it is understandable that folks have a problem with Bush and some of his overtly religious moments just as it is understandable that some people like him more because of it.

The thing is, we know what God Bush prays to and we have a fully functioning legislative and judicial branch to protect us all from any God outbreaks, heaven forbid.

The monumental difference between the two, as I see it is; terror.

Clinton stood essentially idle for 8 years through the first tower attack, the embassies, the Cole and the barracks in Saudi. Each time the violence was ratcheted up. The threat is rule and it will not go away. Our world is filled with idle young Muslim males who's onw worlds are in chaos and disaray.

I personally see the failings as being based on what you seem to fear about Bush; religious zealotry. Everything Osama is about is right there in the Koran and in his very literal interpretations. Like it or not, they blame us and they have, frankly, very, very little to lose.

John Kerry is nothing short of impotent on this issue. Our security does not lie with France or Germany. Their security lies with us.

Right now, George Bush is trying to kill them at a rate they cannot sustain.

John Kerry will do what, what? To suggest any sort of compromise is to COMPELTELY miss the problem they have with us; our mere existence as a free, liberal representative republic.

Our left fears Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell and, to some extent, George Bush for the very reasons they should fear radical (though they see themselves as traditional) Islam.

They are the ones who are going to change your life.

 

[Tonio]

Good points, Larry. I believe that ANY religious zealotry is dangerous, whether it's Christian or Muslim or Wicca or what have you, because that zealotry treats all contrary views as evil. Not all religious zealots are terrorists, but zealotry is one factor that allows terrorism to flourish.

The Christian equivalents of Al Qaeda are not Falwell or Roberston but the Timothy McVeighs, the World Church of the Creator and like-minded groups in the Idaho panhandle. Sure, Falwell and Robertson promote hate, but they don't promote terrorism.

One doesn't have to be a Christian zealot to stand firm against terror.

 

[Larry Gude]

Dude...we SO...

...disagree there:

Sure, Falwell and Robertson promote hate,

How can you say that???

You've got the other guys down, McVeigh et al who see violence as the only solution but where you get hate from Falwell is beyond me.

Zealotry in and of itself ain't the issue. I zealously believe in our Constitution as THE way for the world to emulate. That means by definition I do not support forcing it on any other nation.

Bush may zealously believe in his God but you can't see it as the source of wanting to cut taxes and kill terrorists or even reshape the military.

Gay marriage is the only area he has invoked his faith as the de facto rationale.

 

[Tonio]

How can you say that???

Because of the famous "You made this happen" statement after 9/11. I believe it's wrong to tell anyone that God hates him or her. I believe that itself is a hateful statement.

 

[ylexot]

What is interesting is to read the background material to the Constitution. God is mentioned quite a few times. We didn't turn into a theocracy then, we aren't in any danger of turning into one now.

Does religion color one's opinions? Sure, but so do a lot of things.

 

[Larry Gude]

Please elaborate...

Because of the famous "You made this happen"

Seems I missed that one. Who made what happen?

 

[Tonio]

Zealotry in and of itself ain't the issue.

I was talking about religious zealotry, not all zealotry. Otherwise, that would be saying that Redskins fans want to see Texas Stadium burned to the ground and the soil sown with salt so nothing can grow.

 

[Tonio]

Seems I missed that one. Who made what happen?

From September 13, 2001:

Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson...said liberal civil liberties
groups, feminists, homosexuals and abortion rights supporters bear
responsibility for Tuesday's terrorist attacks because their actions
have turned God's anger against America.

"I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the
feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make
that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way --
all of them who have tried to secularize America -- I point the finger
in their face and say, 'You made this happen.'"

"God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to
give us what we deserve," continued Falwell.

 

[Larry Gude]

Tonio...

...in a PC context, that wasn't very nice of them.

If you read what Osama Bin Laden hates about us, his own words, you will see that, almost verbatim, what Falwell says is WHY he, Osama, attacks us; our liberalism.

It is irrational to hate Falwell for this.

As it happens, Falwell is wrong, but Falwell is not seeking to murder anyone either.

If there is a God, he is not on Falwells side and sure as hell is not on Osamas side or God is simply a mean, vicious human being.

In any event, if you don't like Falwell, you should rationally be all for exterminating violent Muslims the world over, cause they wanna kill us all until we convert to Islam which makes Falwell look like Dennis Rodman.