Posted on 03/24/2006 2:21:53 PM PST by mcvey
thank you
I think Chrisy Matthews..I think somebody on speed...and therefore untrustworthy not to mention boring.
Yes, that's the same source I have. I actually taped it and checked it against their transcript and it is verbatim. I have never seen Matthews go quite this far overboard.
McVey
No, Chris. You are the only one who heard it. There is a reason for that.
Between the drooling, spitting and burp-suppression... he manages to bash Bush for a good 15 minutes a night.
Why bother with him, anymore?
Yep...no argument from me.
Early AM surfing to check on if the world is still out there.
Matthews said, "So you really can't count on the administration to tell you what is going on. That is just the fact. You've got to check it out. "
Check it out with who, Matthews? The MSM???? Yep! Matthews wants us to believe only the MSM knows the truth, our only source for the truth because Bush and Cheney lie.
Matthews went back to the old canard about Bush not letting the American people see the caskets as they arrive. A bettter interviewer than Imus would have countered with, "Bush knows democrats would use casket photos as political weapons." A better interviewer than Imus would have reminded people the MSM has done no personal interest stories on soldiers, no stories on the daily heroics of our soldiers, no mention of medals awarded, and no coverage of the amazing stories of our doctors and medics saving civilian lives.
Matthews was "over the top" in his wild accusations about Bush in order to try and salvage the MSM's legitimacy. Matthews wouldn't have been so reckless with his accusations if Brit Hume, not Imus, had been interviewing him. Hume wouldn't have let him get away with the slander. But Imus did expose Matthews in a way no responsiible journalist would have been able to do. When Imus rightly exposed Matthews as a partisan democrat, a Hillary supporter, Matthews actually denied it. Matthews tried to make it look as if he might vote for a McCain or Hagel, he even intimated he liked Biden running, and he predicted John Edwards might have a chance against Hillary. Matthews can go on and on about Bush lying, but Imus managed to show us just what a real liar sounds like.
This really is typical Matthews, he's all about scoring points to win false arguments. He uses cheap imagery tricks and word games, distorts the truth until it's not even part of the discussion, so he can pretend he won the debate.
in this instance Matthews goes for Bush's jugular. Matthews has always said Bush's finest moment was on the rubble heap in New York City, with the bullhorn, threatening our enemies. It doesn't surprise me at all that now Matthews would try to tarnish that triumphant moment for Bush, twist it into some kind of indictment that Bush lied to us about extracting payback.
I heard the Matthews and the Begala segments while driving to work, so I was a bit distracted, but, Matthews really opened up. It does highlight, once again, the effective technique Imus uses to interview someone. Basically, he just lets 'em go. Something Matthews should learn to do on his own show.
What I thought was interesting was the Begala segment. I know Imus always says, "I love that guy," but I got the distinct impression that Begala was stepping on Imus' style and it will be an equally long time before he is on again. Imus just has him on to keep Begala's type of fans, imo. It's funny but I can take Matthews (most of the time) and Carville, but Begala is just a smarmy twit.
Thanks for the ping.
Great reply!
Thanks, mcvey. I really do think that Chrissy listens only to those little voices in his head.
Maybe someone should tell chrissy that Darryl Worley did not collaborate with Bush on that song. In fact maybe they can also tell him to STFU!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.