Chris Matthews Sticks Foot In Mouth Again

[red states rule]

Where is the PC Police? Motor Mouth Chris Matthews makes a sexist remark to Elizabeth Edwards, and at the same time, insults every women on the planet and there is total silence from the left

Oh, Chris is a big Bush hating lib. That explains it

But it is nice to see how liberal men REALLY feel about women





Chris Matthews Makes Sexist Remarks to John and Elizabeth Edwards
Posted by Noel Sheppard on December 13, 2006 - 11:26.
One of the more interesting double standards in the media and politics is how folks on the left are allowed to make sexist remarks – or, in the case of a former president, exhibit obviously sexist behavior – with total impunity. Yet, the same actions by someone on the right will be met with so much scorn as to threaten the individual’s career.

A fine example of this occurred on Tuesday’s “Hardball” when host Chris Matthews made some extraordinarily sexist comments to former Senator John Edwards and his wife Elizabeth. So as not to offend anyone, the partial transcript of this exchange follows in the “Read More” section. Furthermore, the must-see video is available here:

ELIZABETH EDWARDS: There are not that many politicians who are actually very good at jokes. John spoke one time and I said I wouldn`t even go because it was -- he was supposed to be funny and I didn`t think he could carry it off.

CROWD: (LAUGHTER)

MATTHEWS: I love it. You`re great. Behind every great man, there`s a woman trying to kill him.

CROWD: (LAUGHTER)

E. EDWARDS: He has great characteristics.

MATTHEWS: What is it? Does she do this? Does she bust your balls like this when you come home? When you get (INAUDIBLE), does she do that?

CROWD: (APPLAUSE)

E. EDWARDS: My children are watching this.

CROWD: (LAUGHTER)

MATTHEWS: What`s this with the equal marriages? Why do people marry their equals? It used to be different? What happened to the Stepford wives, the good old days? What happened?

CROWD: (BOOING)

MATTHEWS: Oh, how P.C. How -- why don`t you hiss? Oh, thank you. Finally, the freaking hiss. I needed it. It was the hiss. I needed that.

E. EDWARDS: You know have to know how smart his wife is in order to...

MATTHEWS: Let me ask you this. This is...

Now, just imagine if Sean Hannity or Bill O’Reilly said this to a Democrat Senator and his wife. How quickly would the National Organization of Women and the ACLU be filing lawsuits against Fox News

http://newsbusters.org/node/9631

 

[manu1959]

Where is the PC Police? Motor Mouth Chris Matthews makes a sexist remark to Elizabeth Edwards, and at the same time, insults every women on the planet and there is total silence from the left

Oh, Chris is a big Bush hating lib. That explains it

But it is nice to see how liberal men REALLY feel about women

Chris Matthews Makes Sexist Remarks to John and Elizabeth Edwards
Posted by Noel Sheppard on December 13, 2006 - 11:26.
One of the more interesting double standards in the media and politics is how folks on the left are allowed to make sexist remarks – or, in the case of a former president, exhibit obviously sexist behavior – with total impunity. Yet, the same actions by someone on the right will be met with so much scorn as to threaten the individual’s career.

A fine example of this occurred on Tuesday’s “Hardball” when host Chris Matthews made some extraordinarily sexist comments to former Senator John Edwards and his wife Elizabeth. So as not to offend anyone, the partial transcript of this exchange follows in the “Read More” section. Furthermore, the must-see video is available here:

ELIZABETH EDWARDS: There are not that many politicians who are actually very good at jokes. John spoke one time and I said I wouldn`t even go because it was -- he was supposed to be funny and I didn`t think he could carry it off.

CROWD: (LAUGHTER)

MATTHEWS: I love it. You`re great. Behind every great man, there`s a woman trying to kill him.

CROWD: (LAUGHTER)

E. EDWARDS: He has great characteristics.

MATTHEWS: What is it? Does she do this? Does she bust your balls like this when you come home? When you get (INAUDIBLE), does she do that?

CROWD: (APPLAUSE)

E. EDWARDS: My children are watching this.

CROWD: (LAUGHTER)

MATTHEWS: What`s this with the equal marriages? Why do people marry their equals? It used to be different? What happened to the Stepford wives, the good old days? What happened?

CROWD: (BOOING)

MATTHEWS: Oh, how P.C. How -- why don`t you hiss? Oh, thank you. Finally, the freaking hiss. I needed it. It was the hiss. I needed that.

E. EDWARDS: You know have to know how smart his wife is in order to...

MATTHEWS: Let me ask you this. This is...

Now, just imagine if Sean Hannity or Bill O’Reilly said this to a Democrat Senator and his wife. How quickly would the National Organization of Women and the ACLU be filing lawsuits against Fox News

http://newsbusters.org/node/9631

i saw that show....john edwards just leaned back and let his wife politley rip chris.....as for why the left does not tear into people like chris......it would not be pc to rip into the retarded

 

[red states rule]

I work next to lib and he always tells me Chris is a conservative. I do get a kick out of libs like him

 

[manu1959]

I work next to lib and he always tells me Chris is a conservative. I do get a kick out of libs like him

chris is a conservative compared the th san francisco bay area crowd that i have to deal with....

 

[red states rule]

I must respectfully disagree with you. Chris fits in perectly with those nuts



Chris Matthews to John Edwards: Are You Scared By Bush's 'Messianic Nuttiness?'
Posted by Geoffrey Dickens on December 13, 2006 - 16:02.
After a prolonged absence for health reasons Chris Matthews returned to the airwaves last night and as if making up for lost time quickly returned to bashing Bush over Iraq. As part of Hardball's College Tour, Matthews brought former Senator and Vice Presidential candidate John Edwards to the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill to join in the bashing and within the first few minutes of the show asked Edwards if Bush going to Iraq "was a daddy thing," and if he thought it was "scary" that "a President of the United States of limited ability," was able to create a "firestorm of almost messianic nuttiness."

Then a little later on Matthews asked Edwards "why do you think we're still hated around the world?" and worried that 9/11 had "screwed up our value system about humility in the world."

The following exchanges occured on the December 12 Hardball, as Matthews, as part of an ongoing college tour, brought Edwards to the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill.

Chris Matthews: "What's the lesson over there? Did we, did we, I know you've been very direct about this saying it, you, among, among a lot of senators in both parties supported this war, it was a mistake..."

John Edwards: "I said I was wrong. I said I was wrong."

Matthews: "You said something very interesting in that article. In the lead, you said there was a political agenda here. It wasn't just WMD. What was that? What was the President up to here with going to war in Iraq?"

Edwards: "It's impossible for me to know. I think he had an agenda against Saddam Hussein from the moment he stepped into office."

Matthews: "Was it a daddy thing?"

Edwards: "Could be. I think, I can`t get inside his mind, but it`s possible."

Matthews: "He never told us that."

Edwards: "No, of course he didn't tell us. No, he said this was all about the war on terrorism, central to the war on terrorism. He took a place that was not central to the war on terrorism and turned it, made it central to the war on terrorism."

Matthews: "You're a student of American life. You`re very in active in politics, very successful. Do you think that it`s scary that a president of the United States of limited ability was able to take this country and create a firestorm of almost messianic nuttiness about the fact of the French are no good, we`re going to have freedom fries. The Dixie Chicks are no good. He created a national attitude of you have to be for me, or you`re bad. Did that scare you a little?"

Edwards: "I think, I think the lesson is there`s a depth, a maturity, an experience, the ability to exercise good judgment that`s required of the President of the United States that ought to be on the forefront of any decision that a voter makes in 2008."

In the next segment Matthews continued to pitch his hardly, hardballs to Edwards:

Matthews: "And why do you think we're still hated around the world?"

Edwards: "Why do I think America's still hated?"

Matthews: "Yeah. We are."

Edwards: "Because I think that over the last six years, the Bush administration has shown a fundamental misunderstanding of what it takes to lead. I think to lead you have to have more than power. You need power."

Matthews: "Right."

Edwards: "You need to be strong militarily, economically, et cetera. But I think you also have to show that you have the moral authority to lead. Countries have to naturally want to come to you. In order for that to be true, you have to sometimes act in things that are outside your own strategic self-interest, things like the genocide in Sudan."

Matthews: "When President Bush ran for office, he said something that grabbed me. He said, 'I think we need to be a little more humble in our foreign policy. Do you think 9/11, as horrible as it was, screwed up our value system about humility in the world, whether we're the boss of the world?"

Edwards, to a round of applause from the UNC students: "No I think George Bush screwed up our value system."


http://newsbusters.org/node/9642

 

[manu1959]

I must respectfully disagree with you. Chris fits in perectly with those nuts



Chris Matthews to John Edwards: Are You Scared By Bush's 'Messianic Nuttiness?'
Posted by Geoffrey Dickens on December 13, 2006 - 16:02.
After a prolonged absence for health reasons Chris Matthews returned to the airwaves last night and as if making up for lost time quickly returned to bashing Bush over Iraq. As part of Hardball's College Tour, Matthews brought former Senator and Vice Presidential candidate John Edwards to the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill to join in the bashing and within the first few minutes of the show asked Edwards if Bush going to Iraq "was a daddy thing," and if he thought it was "scary" that "a President of the United States of limited ability," was able to create a "firestorm of almost messianic nuttiness."

Then a little later on Matthews asked Edwards "why do you think we're still hated around the world?" and worried that 9/11 had "screwed up our value system about humility in the world."

The following exchanges occured on the December 12 Hardball, as Matthews, as part of an ongoing college tour, brought Edwards to the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill.

Chris Matthews: "What's the lesson over there? Did we, did we, I know you've been very direct about this saying it, you, among, among a lot of senators in both parties supported this war, it was a mistake..."

John Edwards: "I said I was wrong. I said I was wrong."

Matthews: "You said something very interesting in that article. In the lead, you said there was a political agenda here. It wasn't just WMD. What was that? What was the President up to here with going to war in Iraq?"

Edwards: "It's impossible for me to know. I think he had an agenda against Saddam Hussein from the moment he stepped into office."

Matthews: "Was it a daddy thing?"

Edwards: "Could be. I think, I can`t get inside his mind, but it`s possible."

Matthews: "He never told us that."

Edwards: "No, of course he didn't tell us. No, he said this was all about the war on terrorism, central to the war on terrorism. He took a place that was not central to the war on terrorism and turned it, made it central to the war on terrorism."

Matthews: "You're a student of American life. You`re very in active in politics, very successful. Do you think that it`s scary that a president of the United States of limited ability was able to take this country and create a firestorm of almost messianic nuttiness about the fact of the French are no good, we`re going to have freedom fries. The Dixie Chicks are no good. He created a national attitude of you have to be for me, or you`re bad. Did that scare you a little?"

Edwards: "I think, I think the lesson is there`s a depth, a maturity, an experience, the ability to exercise good judgment that`s required of the President of the United States that ought to be on the forefront of any decision that a voter makes in 2008."

In the next segment Matthews continued to pitch his hardly, hardballs to Edwards:

Matthews: "And why do you think we're still hated around the world?"

Edwards: "Why do I think America's still hated?"

Matthews: "Yeah. We are."

Edwards: "Because I think that over the last six years, the Bush administration has shown a fundamental misunderstanding of what it takes to lead. I think to lead you have to have more than power. You need power."

Matthews: "Right."

Edwards: "You need to be strong militarily, economically, et cetera. But I think you also have to show that you have the moral authority to lead. Countries have to naturally want to come to you. In order for that to be true, you have to sometimes act in things that are outside your own strategic self-interest, things like the genocide in Sudan."

Matthews: "When President Bush ran for office, he said something that grabbed me. He said, 'I think we need to be a little more humble in our foreign policy. Do you think 9/11, as horrible as it was, screwed up our value system about humility in the world, whether we're the boss of the world?"

Edwards, to a round of applause from the UNC students: "No I think George Bush screwed up our value system."


http://newsbusters.org/node/9642

i watched this.....all i could think was so prior to 9/11 america was loved around the world and only when bush took office 9 months earlier did we become hated....

osb did not declare war on us prior to that
no one tried to blow up the wtc prior to that
the cole was not bombed prior to that
american soldiers were not dragged through the streets of somalia prior to that
two us embassies were not attacked prior to that

thank god all that was a dream and as soon as the guilt trip duo gets elected we will all wake up and america will be loved once again

 

[red states rule]

From another frequebt guset of the "conservative" Chris Matthews............



ABC's Barbara Walters: Frank Rich Book that Rips Bush White House 'Fascinating'
Posted by Megan McCormack on December 13, 2006 - 17:07.
Liberal New York Times columnist Frank Rich was among friends during his appearance on Wednesday’s edition of The View. While co-hosts Elisabeth Hasselbeck and Rosie O’Donnell were nowhere to be found during the segment, Joy Behar and Barbara Walters allowed Rich to promote his book, which Walters herself said "tears the Bush White House apart." While Walters did pose one challenge to the writer’s assertion that the Iraq war cannot be won, most of the questions directed to the columnist would not be considered so tough.

Walters began the interview with the Times columnist with this glowing introduction:

Barbara Walters: "Every Sunday, millions of people turn to New York Times columnist Frank Rich to hear his views on everything from politics to pop culture. That's how important his opinions are. Not everybody loves his opinions, and in his new book, The Greatest Story Ever Sold, he absolutely tears the Bush White House apart. This is a book that is such fascinating reading."

Walters first asked Rich about his most recent column, in which he argued that the war in Iraq was already lost:

Walters: "So last week, in your column, you said it's not about winning this war, we've already lost it and we should get out, right?"


Rich: "Yeah. I think that, you know, we have a situation where it's getting worse by the day, in terms of the violence, the dangers for American troops that are bravely fighting over there. And we might as well figure out how we're going to cut our losses and get out in the best possible way, cause it's not going to get better. It’s sort of a fantasy to think it will."

Walters followed up with the one "tough" question Rich would face for the remainder of the interview:

Walters: "But there are people, including the President, you know, that still talk about winning and that say that if we get out now, it will be such chaos in the Middle East and we will never be respected again and the worst thing we can do is get out."

Rich: "We have no good choices. I think it’s going to be chaos whether we stay or go. I think the reason to think about some sort of timetable for getting out now is we can still be in control of it and manage it. It's getting worse by the day and at a certain point, the events on the ground in Iraq could take it away from us, the right to make decisions."

Joy Behar then chimed in and asked Rich why the administration went into Iraq in the first place.

Joy Behar: "Why do you think we went in there in the first place?...What is your read on why they did that?"

Rich: "I think, you know, the war against the Taliban, against the people who attacked us like al-Qaeda on 9/11, was winding down. We knocked out the Taliban in Afghanistan in the fall of, of ‘01. And I think the feeling was this was an easy add on, be a cake walk. We could take out this thug, which Saddam Hussein is, and be home by Christmas, and that was the plan."

Behar then wanted to know if the administration had been "lying" when it argued that there had been a connection between Iraq and the terrorist attacks of September 11th. Rich responded by comparing the "selling" of the Iraq war to the way makeup and cereal are sold:

Behar: "We know now know that he didn't really have anything to do with 9/11, so were they misinformed or were they lying?"

Rich: "Well, the whole point of my book is it seems that they basically trumped up two stories. One was, as the President himself has now said this year, that somehow there was a connection between Iraq and 9/11, and there was none. And, and the other was the weapons of mass destruction were poised to send mushroom clouds to American cities."

Behar: "Yes."

Rich: "My point in the book is to show, really, in a very straightforward way, how they rolled this out. They sold it the way they might sell Cheerios, you know, or cosmetics. And just by pounding it over and over again in our heads til we–the country was in a state of hysteria and thought this war was essential."

Walters then asked Rich if there was "still a story that’s being sold" to the American people:

Walters: "Are we still doing that? Is there still a story that’s being sold?"

Rich: "Well, I think that they've lost control of the story, because what’s happened in the past few months is that we see on television what's going on in Iraq, and they can't control it. That's the whole problem. And so now they really seem to be losing control of it. Their memos leaking, you know, Rumsfeld–Rumsfeld memo just before he was fired was leaked, and, and, you know, they don’t really have control anymore."

Behar then asked Rich whether the federal government's response to Hurricane Katrina demonstrated to Americans that President Bush was "out of control" and "incompetent."

Joy Behar: "Don't you think the tipping point was Katrina, when the United States, the American people saw that this, that this President was out of control and incompetent in many ways?"

Rich: "I think when Katrina happened, and that’s why I ended the book there, cause I thought that was sort of the third act, the final curtain of the story. When people saw federal officials saying everything was hunky dory in New Orleans and yet it wasn’t, and people were screaming for help at the Superdome, people understood that was also what happened in Iraq. We kept being told mission was accomplished, everything was great, and it wasn’t. I think people put two and two together and that's when his poll ratings started to collapse."

The focus of the discussion then turned toward Mel Gibson and a comment he made directed at Rich, saying, "I want his intestines on a stick and to kill his dog." Frank explained that Gibson was upset over his criticism of Passion of the Christ, which, as Clay Waters reported here at TimesWatch in March 2004, Frank described as a "joy ride for sadomasochists." Behar and Rich went on to discuss what they see as Gibson’s seeming penchant for violence and poked fun at his July 2006 drunken rant:

Behar: "...I want to read you a quote from Mel Gibson–"

Walters: "About Frank?"

Behar: "About Frank. He said, ‘I want his intestines on a stick and to kill his dog.’ Why doesn't he like you?"


Frank: "And the horrible thing is, I don't even have a dog. I guess–"

Behar: "He'll buy one for you and then kill it."

Frank: "I think that's a new movie, Apocalypto, I think there’s a lot of killing in that. I was very critical of Passion of the Christ. I felt it was not a movie that was fair to basically the Jews of that period. And he took great exception, and I guess in his less than sober period, because it was a year or two ago, right–"

Walters: "Now you see why they all love Frank, right?"

Rich: "He, he made that remark to the New Yorker and–so I can never get a dog."

Behar: "It's part of his, his lexicon, violence, you know. The Apocalypto is, is violent. The Passion of the Christ, poor Jesus, what they did to him in that film. And then I want his intestines on a stick? I mean?"

Rich: "Well, it, it’s a good description of his kind of film making. I mean, if you want to see intestines on a stick, go see a Mel Gibson film..."

The segment then turned into a discussion of the country’s fascination with party girl celebrities like Paris Hilton and Britney Spears. Rich argued that such "escapist entertainment" was a good distraction for the nation, because thinking about Iraq too much would cause us to "take a gun to our heads":

Rich: "You know, 9/11 was a huge shock, this war has gone poorly in Iraq, so people want some escapist entertainment and it's much more fun, I guess, to think about Nicole Ritchie and Paris Hilton than to think about the troops that were killed that day."


Behar: "So–yeah, it’s easier to think of crotch shots of Britney than to think about Iraq, frankly. It is. It’s a nice distraction."

Rich: "It is, and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that. If we were thinking every minute about this war, we’d take a gun to our heads, you know."

http://newsbusters.org/node/9646

 

[William Joyce]

Chris Matthews is alright by me. The fact that someone bashes Bush or doesn't think the war is a good idea isn't proof they're "liberal"... plenty of harder-core conservatives think the war was a terrible idea and Bush a moron.

Matthews is just an old-fashioned Democrat, I think. Democrats 50 years ago were patriotic, hard-working and knew a man's place and a woman's place. Today, not even Republicans do.

 

[jillian]

i saw that show....john edwards just leaned back and let his wife politley rip chris.....as for why the left does not tear into people like chris......it would not be pc to rip into the retarded

It was a truly beautiful thing. She was every bit the southern lady and oh so nicely eviscerated him. Heh!

 

[red states rule]

It was a truly beautiful thing. She was every bit the southern lady and oh so nicely eviscerated him. Heh!

I have no doubt Pretty Boy Edwards wears the pants in his family

As soon as Liz tells him what pair to put on (the only pair Pretty Boy has no doubt)

 

[jillian]

I have no doubt Pretty Boy Edwards wears the pants in his family

As soon as Liz tells him what pair to put on (the only pair Pretty Boy has no doubt)

I know you're young and don't have that kind of life experience, but why do you assume that just because a woman can handle herself that her husband is somehow weaker? You have so much to learn.... seriously.

And, believe it or not, I'm not saying that to insult you. But someday you'll find out. Oh yeah... and I work with some incredibly powerful men, and to a one, they'll tell you the most important words to learn in a marriage are "yes, dear".

 

[red states rule]

I know you're young and don't have that kind of life experience, but why do you assume that just because a woman can handle herself that her husband is somehow weaker? You have so much to learn.... seriously.

What I am saying is Pretty Boy did not say a word to defend his wife

The NOW gang is totally silent on Motor Mouth Matthews commenting how he prefers the Stepford Wifes

Where are all the feminists at? Oh, Chris is one of their own. Pass given

 

[jillian]

What I am saying is Pretty Boy did not say a word to defend his wife

He didn't have to. She defended herself. One, it was much more effective for her to do it than for him; and Two, he'd have diminished her if he did.

The NOW gang is totally silent on Motor Mouth Matthews commenting how he prefers the Stepford Wifes

I don't think Matthews is a major issue in life.

Where are all the feminists at? Oh, Chris is one of their own. Pass given

Do they comment on every stupid thing O'Reilly or Hannity says? If you can show me they do, and somehow the only time the "feminists" didn't say something was this time, then maybe that has some cred. Until then, it's just another rant about how the poor right is beleagered.

What do you think a feminist is? I think it's someone who thinks women should have choices.... be it to stay at home and raise a family or pursue a place in the workforce.

 

[Annie]

He didn't have to. She defended herself. One, it was much more effective for her to do it than for him; and Two, he'd have diminished her if he did.



I don't think Matthews is a major issue in life.



Do they comment on every stupid thing O'Reilly or Hannity says? If you can show me they do, and somehow the only time the "feminists" didn't say something was this time, then maybe that has some cred. Until then, it's just another rant about how the poor right is beleagered.

What do you think a feminist is? I think it's someone who thinks women should have choices.... be it to stay at home and raise a family or pursue a place in the workforce.

Not reading the 'left' that often, albeit the NY Times and WaPo being regular, I've seen plenty that slams O'Reilly, Hannity, and many others. On the other hand, every instance? No. So your point is? That it's ok for any of them to say the kind of stuff Matthews said?

 

[red states rule]

Not reading the 'left' that often, albeit the NY Times and WaPo being regular, I've seen plenty that slams O'Reilly, Hannity, and many others. On the other hand, every instance? No. So your point is? That it's ok for any of them to say the kind of stuff Matthews said?

I wonder how Jilly and the liberal media would have reacted if a REPUBLICAN had made the same comment to Edwards and his wife

 

[Annie]

I wonder how Jilly and the liberal media would have reacted if a REPUBLICAN had made the same comment to Edwards and his wife

We'll never know, they are way too careful. I do believe Savage if off the television airwaves?

 

[red states rule]

We'll never know, they are way too careful. I do believe Savage if off the television airwaves?

Savage ia an ass. I cannot listen to him

We both have a very good idea how libs would react if Karl Rove said he prefers women who are like the Stepford Wives

Jilly would still be screaming and foaming at the mouth

 

[Annie]

Savage ia an ass. I cannot listen to him

We both have a very good idea how libs would react if Karl Rove said he prefers women who are like the Stepford Wives

Jilly would still be screaming and foaming at the mouth

Well you are more reasonable and moderate than myself. But I agree that if anyone right of Marx said what Matthews did the libs would be off the wall.

 

[red states rule]

Well you are more reasonable and moderate than myself. But I agree that if anyone right of Marx said what Matthews did the libs would be off the wall.

To libs like Jilly, Keith Liberalmen is a fair and objective journalist.

Like Chris, his rating are in the toilet not because their shows stink, but because of a vast right wing conspiracy who only allows conservatives to succeed in the market place