Hillary Hater Chris Matthews Now Laughing Stock
05 January 2008 2:25 pm by Taylor Marsh
Everyone embracing Mr. Obama’s dynamic win in Iowa, what he accomplished, as well as his amazing speech is totally understandable. But Matthews has become the laughing stock from liberal blogs like this one to wingnut blogs (video above from Hot Air) to Fox “News,” where Bill O’Reilly laughed at Matthews on Friday. Via my friend Larry Johnson:
But you would not know that if you happened to listen to the ravings of Chris Matthews. Jesus Christ!! The guy is doing everything but foaming at the mouth and having a full blown gran mal seizure. Bet you didn’t know that what happened tonight in Iowa is the equivalent of the shots fired at Lexington and Concord to torch off America’s War of Independence? Yep. It is so because Matthews said so.
For a grown professional to act this way, especially since we all know Matthews’ motives are grounded in Hillary hatred, is unethical, unprofessional, not to mention unseemly. You don’t have to like Clinton to come to this conclusion. I couldn’t care less about that, but fair media coverage should be expected, because this type of coverage is always converted to another Democrat when the big races come. It’s never okay, no matter the Democratic target. No wonder MSNBC came in dead least on Iowa coverage. They earned it.
It’s the same thing that’s seen in drivel like this at The Corner:
You know what? Deep in my psyche, in the place that kind of misses the toothache I’ve been prodding at with my tongue, I am having a tiny little pang of missing Hillary. Not her, but hating her. Hating Hillary has been such a central political impulse for so long now — 15 years — and I have had to work so hard to keep it up as she became more appealling looking, less shrill, more human — I don’t really know what I will do with that newly freed strand of energy.
Kevin Drum channels my feelings exactly:
As long as we’re laying our cards on the table, this is one of the things that keeps me on Hillary’s side regardless of anything to do with issues or tactics or rhetoric or anything else. I just hate the idea that the fever swamp has been able to turn a perfectly decent liberal woman into such an object of malign loathing. If she loses, then she loses. But by God, I don’t want her to lose because millions of Schiffren’s fellow travelers have carried on a 15-year vendetta of sick-minded smears and hatred. Enough’s enough.
So if you want to know how I became a partisan, it was a slow process, believe
me. But what clinched it was the negative press coverage of Clinton, with virtual silence coming from the blogosphere. As I’ve said before, at the very least we should have worked together to go after Matthews. But what started out
as me being a contrarian to push back and call out the negative press coverage
on Clinton, eventually became something else. That the press also ignores all
facts for the Access Hollywood part of the political story was another issue.
No one was drawing out Mr. Obama’s record. They still aren’t, though there is some hint they’re stirring.
The real story of this primary so far, which no one has covered, is why Obama’s
opponents didn’t make a distinction based on his record starting back last summer. But they didn’t so now they face his real talent, which is anchored in emotion. No substance has been drawn forth from his record, which at this late date puts every single candidate trying to catch him in the worst possible position. When you have all the emotion packed into the personality of the politician, especially someone like Obama who also has charm and charisma, the challenge gets tougher.
As I’ve
said many times before and no doubt you’re boring of hearing it, emotional connection
to candidates wins elections. The second Obama’s opponents saw the connection
he was creating with his crowds, which was unmistakable because I witnessed it myself, they should have realized
the threat coming their way and begun to dissect the substance, which is sorely lacking. It seems no one respected Mr. Obama as much as I
did, because the moment I saw him in action on the stump, as opposed to his pitiful performances at policy forums, I started contrasting his performance with
his record. The two simply don’t match up, which means that in a general
election, once emotion meets media scrutiny, Mr. Hope will be put through it, something that should have happened long before now.
On another note, via Mark Halperin, with
video:
“Thank you New Hampshire, for welcoming me into your homes and hearts.”
“And when you vote, I hope you will ask one question: who is ready
to be president on day one?”“To fix the economy, to end the war, to give health care to all.”
“The goals are big and the stakes are huge.”
“We’re not just changing presidents, we’re changing our
country.”“I hope you’ll vote for me. And if you stand with me, I will
stand up for you every day as president.”“And I’ll be ready to start on day one.”
This is
very subtle contrast, which is terrific. The real story here is that Clinton is absolutely shifting strategy, again subtly, which is the important thing to see. She’s dropped the stump speech for questions, as well as gotten much more conversational with crowds, also letting down her guard. As for winning New Hampshire, it will be very, very difficult in only a few days after Iowa, with Obama clearly surging. One caveat is tonight’s debate. If something goes wrong for one of the candidates anything can happy. Nevada could stop him too. Rory Reid’s got the best opeation around, so my money is still on him. Again, it’s all the way to Super Tuesday. What to watch for is the signs Clinton is changing tactics and being more transparent on the trail.
The other thing to watch is if the traditional media start picking up on the Who’s vetting Obama? story, figuring out the answer is nobody and that it’s actually their job. That’s why your emails and letters to MSNBC and beyond are so important: MSNBC Viewer Services and Hardball.
