2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumChris Matthews..Pitiful!
Watching Chris Matthews this afternoon, spending 1st segment tearing into Iraq War supporters..
I mean is this guy so fucking dumb, that he is in a complete state of self denial on his role....
I knew he really sucked during the buildup discussions but had very few definitive facts of what he actually said and did........ Until I came across this!
Thank you Media Matters..
http://mediamatters.org/research/2005/12/23/chris-matthews-2005s-misinformer-of-the-year/134530
CAG
(1,820 posts)wasn't he a cheerleader for Cheney's war back then??
busterbrown
(8,515 posts)Man Alive.....He stunk to high hell!!
cpwm17
(3,829 posts)I remember it well. He was just about the only person in the media that spoke out against the war before it started.
He does have a bad habit of saying positive things about some unsavory people.
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)Kingofalldems
(38,496 posts)Both were salivating. Liddy was screaming about how big Bush's package was and how women wanted him.
global1
(25,285 posts)flamingdem
(39,332 posts)oh yeah baby
sometimes I wonder if he's just attempting to confuse repukes
busterbrown
(8,515 posts)flamingdem
(39,332 posts)Tweety is confused. He used to vote Republican!
busterbrown
(8,515 posts)I think Man of War was the Sire....
flamingdem
(39,332 posts)(they seem to know him well )
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)although he's not a bad guy
Sky Masterson
(5,240 posts)While searching the news headlines today, I noticed an article on MSNBC's website titled, "How the Bush administration sold the Iraq War", which goes on to quote and criticize various lies from Bush officials regarding Iraq's nonexistent weapons of mass destruction program.
What's interesting here is not the criticism of Bush officials (which is appropriate), but that the article, perhaps unsurprisingly, never once mentions the news networks which helped the Bush administration sell the war to the public. Maybe that's because one of those networks was MSNBC:
* "MSNBC cancels Donahue, its top-rated show and a rare oasis of war skepticism in the mainstream media. An internal NBC report surfaces that describes him as "a difficult public face for NBC in a time of war." The report worries that his show could become "a home for the liberal antiwar agenda at the same time that our competitors are waving the flag at every opportunity.""
* "MSNBC's Hardball host Chris Matthews asks of World Bank/IMF protests in Washington DC: "Those people out in the streets, do they hate America?"
Conservative pundit Cliff May responds: "Yes, I'm afraid a lot of them do. They hate America. They align themselves with Saddam Hussein. They align themselves with terrorists all over the world." Hardball correspondent David Shuster later adds that "anti-Americanism is in the air.""
* "MSNBC's Dan Abrams indignantly defends the Bush administration against critics who suggest the White House isn't telling the truth about the rationale for war:
"Well anyone making these allegations better be willing to defend exactly what they're saying. They're saying this administration is at the least morally corrupt, lying to the American public and the world about their motives and willing to have Americans die for that lie, and at worst, that they're actually abhorrent criminals. That's absurd.""
* "MSNBC's Chris Matthews goes further: "We're proud of our president. Americans love having a guy as president, a guy who has a little swagger, who's physical, who's not a complicated guy like Clinton or even like Dukakis or Mondale, all those guys, McGovern. They want a guy who's president. Women like a guy who's president. Check it out. The women like this war. I think we like having a hero as our president. It's simple. We're not like the Brits.""
Although MSNBC was only one of the big three "news" networks involved with selling the war to the public (FOX and CNN being the other two), it's nonetheless quite remarkable that this organization has the audacity to blame anyone else for its own raging nationalist fervor and unrepentant journalistic failures during the the leadup to the needless and bloody Iraq War.
ancianita
(36,159 posts)cpwm17
(3,829 posts)Last edited Wed Mar 20, 2013, 11:53 PM - Edit history (1)
I see that false claim made all of the time. His habit of making weird comments about some war perpetrators sometimes leaves an impression that he did support the war.
Matthews was one of the few anti-Iraq War members of the media. He was outspoken. I assume he had enough clout so he could get away with his anti-war stance.
ancianita
(36,159 posts)I watched MSNBC during those years and I remember his view of the runup to the war differently from you. I also see him as a master hedger whose opinions fail to lead citizens' thinking whenever this country's in the midst of sorting out the signal from the noise.
Mika
(17,751 posts)http://www.fair.org/blog/2012/05/04/matthews-remembers-mission-accomplished-some-of-it/
MATTHEWS: Do you think this role, and I want to talk politically the president deserves everything he's doing tonight in terms of his leadership. He won the war. He was an effective commander. Everybody recognizes that, I believe, except a few critics.
Joe Bacon
(5,165 posts)And he NEVER apologized for that. Which is why I refuse to watch Tweety.
jinx1
(45 posts)I have been really disappointed lately by his show anyway...was never sure he belonged on MSNBC. Not because he has differing views but because he seems a little SLOW for them...or as a friend of mine often says...not so smart.
cally
(21,597 posts)One of the few in the media at the time who did not. He was a cheerleader for *, though, and I rarely watch him because of that.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)true Dem and a true historian.
Bet you can attribute X amount of Obama votes directly to him.
busterbrown
(8,515 posts)He in my opinion is partly responsible for the deaths of American kids and Hundreds of thousands
of Iraqi civilians... That aint falling off the wagon!!!
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)was against it and then got scared into it by Cheney telling him the night before the vote that he was passing on secret info that they KNEW for a fact Saddam had developed suitcase nukes.
The only senators to vote against it:
21 of 50 Democratic senators voted against the resolution: Sens. Akaka (D-HI), Bingaman (D-NM), Boxer (D-CA), Byrd (D-WV), Conrad (D-ND), Corzine (D-NJ), Dayton (D-MN), Durbin (D-IL), Feingold (D-WI), Graham (D-FL), Inouye (D-HI), Kennedy (D-MA), Leahy (D-VT), Levin (D-MI), Mikulski (D-MD), Murray (D-WA), Reed (D-RI), Sarbanes (D-MD), Stabenow (D-MI), Wellstone (D-MN), and Wyden (D-OR).
1 (2%) of 49 Republican senators voted against the resolution: Sen. Chafee (R-RI).
The only Independent senator voted against the resolution: Sen. Jeffords (I-VT)
My point is only the people who had an automatic deep and powerful anti-war commitment and/or mistrust of Bush voted against it.
Many trusting souls believed what Bush/Cheney were peddling. Why wouldn't you....who in their right mind would believe that they would be so evil as to misguide the country and put our young people in jeopardy?
But, all these people who voted for it or reported on the lies (like Chris) have a black mark on them that they have to live with. But, time passes and you have to move on. There was no stronger (typically less partisan) advocate for Obama than Chris. And I will always be convinced that he helped Obama get reelected.
busterbrown
(8,515 posts)be curious enough to explore the contradictory information which was being written by writers such as Robert Scheer, Molly Ivans, Paul Krugman etc. Amy Goodman everyday, Air America everyday.. U.N.
Inspectors who were speaking out etc.. The fact is that telling a father or mother whos kid died or got mutilated in that war, that they will have a black mark on them that they will have to live with, does little
to comfort their pain... And the millions of Iraqis who were terrorized by our country???
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)they didn't find WMDs that Bush wasn't like thrown in prison. For me, every single person who voted for the resolution is diminished in my eyes especially since it was so absolutely clear to me the whole thing was bullshit. That's what I meant about a black mark. For those who actually supported it - they will have to live with the fact that they abetted B&C and all have blood on their hands forever.
But...there's nothing you can do about that now. So few Dems voted against it. We can't just shun most of our Democrat leaders forever, can we? I guess your answer to that is "yes". I was like that too - but have mellowed.
Perhaps there is a book out there I haven't read, but I think it would be interesting to read an insider expose on how the democrats reached their conclusions to go along. How they interacted with each other. I wonder if Bill thinking Saddam had to go influenced Hillary and how much she influenced others. On the Cheney documentary, they said that a lot of dems went along because they were seeking reelection and after 9-11, the mood was "kill all the bastards." I had also forgotten that they pushed the resolution as just granting the prez authority should he need it...believing him that he wouldn't exercise this option unless he was absolutely certain we were in danger. Think that was what Hillary thought (and got bamboozled).
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)in the lead-up to the War. I think he did, but there's nothing in that article indicating that. It's just a list of criticisms of Matthews making statements about particular people, etc., after we were in teh war. And while some of those criticisms are valid, some are references to statements taken out of context.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)He needs to be liked and feels insecure paddling against the current. Those are terrible character traits for a serious journalist.
However, Chris Matthews is a natural born apologist and propagandist; he wins the Anti-Edward R. Murrow Prize for boot licking commentary.
blogslut
(38,019 posts)Wrong or right, he doesn't care. As long as he's the center of attention, all is well in Tweetyland.