When is MSNBC going to dump Chris Matthews?

He asks a guest a question and then cuts him/her off. He seems incapable of letting anyone finish a sentence. He rarely has an insightful comment. And he rarely has anything worth saying that isn't trivial.

The only thing Matthews should really cut off is Pat Buchanan laughing. It scares little children.

I have no doubt that there are people out there in the same league as Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz. Why doesn't MSNBC try some of them out in Matthew's rerun slot (7:00 - 8:00 EST)?

I'm awaiting a guest who says, "Well, why don't you just shut the fuck up for one minute, and I'll try to answer your insipid question."

but it ain't ever gonna happen...

that has happened.

But it happened within the last couple of weeks.

I'm trying to remember who it was, but not succeeding in remembering.

It's fascinating to watch.

He's a sack of worthless shit who, on days when the wind is blowing in the 'other' direction, doesn't quite smell as bad.

He's a slimy prick.

did I mention that I'm not fond of him?

Yep...I'm always amused at how people have a bi-polar relationship with the dude. While he seems to be wearing his Catholacism on his sleeves these days, he's been pretty much a beltway creature. He lives on the "game" rather than the politics, the personalities rather than specifics and thus he blows with the "Conventional Wisdom". He's a regular at the drinkie-drinkie parties and is tone deaf to what goes on outside his bubble.

I try to not get in a lather about anything anymore. I'm in a existentialist funk which is tied to this economy and inescapable.

I'm going to the gym. For at least a couple of hours I'm content.

I think we're all in our own funks...feeling this recession/depression in our own ways that have been frustrated in the slow pace of any change and/or reform. I attempt to remain optimistic as I know how entrenched the "establishment" is inside the beltway and to make a serious dent in this system takes time and a lot of game playing.

That said...as one whose watched Tweety from his McLaughlin Group days in the late 80s and early 90s, he's wore his emotions on his sleeve. He felt berayed by Clinton and became a harsh critic...then got entangled in the Scooter Libby mess that turned him sour on the previous regime. He still reveres Raygun but Kennedy and Johnson as well...again, he's a creature of the beltway and sees things in black and white...in or out...strong and weak.

Enjoy your time at the gym...I put on headphones, grab a book or find an interesting website and get lost for a while. One can't get too absorbed...especially at a distance and can only affect change in measured ways.

Cheers...

Nothing to love there. I refuse to watch him, no matter what's being covered or who is co-hosting with him.

I've never been one to sit & watch cable news, but I made a point of checking out his man-crush commentary when Chimpy McFlightsuit landed on the USS Abraham Lincoln for his 'MISSION ACCOMPLISHED' photo op. Aside from the occasional zinger he delivers to a wingnut that I hear about on DU, he impresses me as a wishy-washy sycophant who bends whichever way the wind is blowing from one moment to the next.

i dont want a progressive fox. sorry. this is television, and if there wasnt a hardball, there wouldnt have been a countdown. i dont think you understand that you shouldn't waste your time 'imagining' a perfect tv station that fits your politics. there are bigger arguments to fight.

and it wouldn't make MSNBC a "progressive Fox."

Their shows have what Fox never includes: factual information.

I hope they never dump him.

Living in the Central Time Zone, the TV comes on at 4 p.m. each weekday for Hardball, and I usually watch the rerun, too (or at least the second half of it after our local news).

Pat Buchanan is probably my favorite conservative. He usually can get his point across without coming across as abrasive.

I much prefer Chris Matthews to Ed Schultz.

I'm as excited as I need to be over issues. I don't need to watch someone who ramps it up.

Holocaust-denying, racist, homophobic, Nixon-apologist, sexist, hypocritical, lying sack. Whom do you like the least, may I ask?

He's just the least abrasive.

Cripes.

you don't find George Will less abrasive? How about David Brooks? At least these people bring a modicum of decency to their ill-conceived arguments compared with you buddy Pat. They're a lot of things but abrasive? No. Buchanan's belittling and insensitivity to the plight of anyone who's not one of his ilk is obnoxious beyond belief. At least the two I mentioned profess to care about others, even though it's hollow and largely false.

I don't mind Will or Brooks, either. Of course I don't agree with any of them, but none of them make me change the channel when they're on.

heard this argument for years about tweety; he can be good or breathtakingly bad. Seems we're stuck with him.

Seems to me many lefties have impractical expectations of Matthews, given the nature of his show. He has a political variety show and needs to attract lots of major elected officials from both parties. A good progressive like Olbermann or Maddow can't do that. And Tweets can be an able questioner. He nearly sunk Michele Bachmann shortly before the 08 election by eliciting the "unAmerican" remarks from her, and lately he's been good and tough on Republican guests for having little to offer on healthcare. Obviously, I don't like his pro-Stupak Amendment crap and his other "moderate" bilge, but then he's never posed as a lefty. I see the value of his show as being informative on the current political scene and the players on both sides, not chicken soup for my lefty soul, like Rachel and Keith.

Their relationship is like cable news porn. It's creepy to watch.

Matthews is on when I get home, and I can take him for about five, or at most, ten minutes. After that, I just put on some music and make supper.

In truth, those five or ten minutes are probably bad for one's digestion.

My husband and I refuse to watch his show.

even if you don't agree with a person, let them answer your question. i don't really watch him and some of that has to do with his interviewing style.

He's very disrespectful to guests on his show, and to people he interviews. He asks them a question, then he WON'T SHUT THE HELL UP so they can answer the question! He just keeps talking, and talking, and talking. It would seem SOMEONE at MSNBC should be smart enough to tell the guy to shut up, or cut off his mic.

He talks over the answer, so about 75% of the time viewers don't know what the response was. Contrast Matthews with Olbermann or Maddow, who do a very good job of making their point, but also allow the response to be heard. Matthews could take lessons from both, and I especially like Maddow, who does not let the person she's interviewing get away with not answering the question.

Rachel is very, very good doing interviews. (Hint to MSNBC if you're reading: do more with her.)

And I've seen her ask a politician an unanswered question up to three times, without being obnoxious. It doesn't get much better than that.

Friday Rachel had a "political roundtable" that lasted through several segments. She normally doesn't speak to multiple guests simultaneously. It could have been a test for something. But it could have been an instance of adding some variety to Rachel's format.

The world wants to know...

--imm

Don't like it,don't watch it.

He's a holdover of the Irish Catholic mafia of Tim Russert's reign or error at NBC (Mike Barnicle is another)....

A quasi-centrist at best, is true character comes out whenever the topic of abortion rights comes up.

I will grant him his skepticism when confronted with tea-bagging gun-toters and birthers, but REALLY, that is just a demonstration of basic common-sense.

In the end, he's a shill for the powerful and an enemy of women's rights.

I write this a very much lapses Irish Catholic.

He's one of the few "respected" political host on the station inside Washington. He can be an excellent interviewer when he wants to be. He's not afraid to cut a interviewer off and call BS, BS.

...

Chris Matthews is a fantastic journalist and commentator.
His hardball program is unrivaled.

Giving right wing douche bags a forum to lie, often without him correcting them?

I like how he handled Haley Barbour last week. Really rubbed his face in it.

to me although I did watch him every day during the Clinton bashing years, which he was part of, until he soured me to no end. The daily attacks from the likes of Lucienne Goldberg and her fat son Jonah with him only agreeing with them were over the top. Anybody else trying to interject sanity into the discussion were abruptly interrupted and cut off. I used to like his articles before then when he wrote for the San Francisco Chronicle. But, true, I'm no fan. I did watch him last week when he had Bernie Sanders on and he handed the right winger (whose name I don't remember) his ass back. However, every now and then being a true journalist, doesn't make up for all his right wing ass kissing and refusal to make these liars accountable.

Chris MAttews is terrific and I enjoy his show daily and learn something new from it every time I watch it. I sometimes watch the Chris Matthews show on NBC when our local affiliate feels like airing it. It's much more centrist, just like the tv talking heads should be.

Barbour simply wouldn't do it, and Tweety tried every trick in the book.

It was wonderful.

I like Tweety in spite of himself and myself.

I've been known to stay up late past my bedtime to catch him at midnight if I missed the 5 and 7 pm shows. It's not a day if it doesn't have Tweety.

where in fuck do you clowns come from? jesus christ.

for his otherwise annoying traits. He's eccentric, which makes for some good TV.

Can't he fucking shut his god damned trap for just one second while another person is talking - it's infuriating!

Anybody know?

:shrug:

:D

:)

I just spit out my tea!!

:rofl: