Skip to comments.Chris Matthews: Is challenging Obama unconstitutional?
Posted on 10/18/2012 1:34:53 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
On MSNBCs Hardball Wednesday evening, Chris Matthews discussed the theatrics of the presidential debate with James Lipton, longtime host of Inside the Actors Studio. Lipton offered some unremarkable observations he called Mitt Romney the boss who tells lame jokes and waits for everybody to laugh or else but what made the segment remarkable was Matthews reaction to a portion of the debate in which Romney in essence silenced President Obama, telling him he would have a chance to speak later.
Matthews played a video clip of the exchange, in which Romney accused Obama of cutting the number of oil and gas permits awarded on federal lands:
ROMNEY: How much did you cut them by?
OBAMA: Im happy to answer the question.
ROMNEY: All right. And it is I dont think anyone really believes that youre a person whos going to be pushing for oil and gas and coal. [Gestures.] Youll get your chance in a moment. Im still speaking.
ROMNEY: And the answer is I dont believe people think that`s the case because
ROMNEY: that wasnt the question.
ROMNEY: That was a statement.
After the clip ended, Matthews seemed appalled. I dont think [Romney] understands the Constitution of the United States, Matthews said. Hes the president of the United States. You dont say, Youll get your chance.......
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Matthews has early onset dementia. All the signs are there and it is no joking matter.
He’ll be 67 in December so maybe it’s just dementia.
What a moron he is.
We know that the left always treated GWB with such respect.
“Liberalism isnt doing so well lately. In fact Id go so far as to say that liberalism is becoming downright pathological. The disease is progressive (in more ways than one). Precursors were visible as far back as 1964, and again in the 1980s. Yet this latest uspsurege has been building since 2000, and has never yet spread so widely or threateningly across the body politic.
The chief symptom of liberal distress is an intense form of denial. Liberals now actually deny that conservatives exist. There are, of course, strange, cartoon-like images that liberals call conservative, yet these bear little resemblence to complex conservative human beings with thoughts capable of posing a reasoned challenge to liberal convictions. In psychiatic terms, liberals have split off an all-bad version of conservatism in an effort to defend against the intolerable reality of actual threats to the liberal point of view. I dont think this denial has quite reached the level of psychosis. Perhaps we could call it high-functioning borderline instead. At any rate, we are now clearly in the realm of pathology.
The problem is visible in the 2012 presidential and vice-presidential debates. If we treat President Obama and the three debate moderators as manifestations of a troubled liberal mind, the progress of the debates makes perfect sense. It is an exercise in the gradual breakdown of denial, accompanied by increasingly frantic efforts to shore that denial up.
The first debate reflected a relatively stable form of denial. It had been going on for years, after all. President Obama and Jim Lehrer simply assumed that no conservative opponent existed. There was thus no need to prepare, no real need to show up, and no need for the moderator to impose time limits or interrupt the conservative with questions. Its easy enough to crush a stick figure.
Once Romney broke through this first form of denial, more active and less stable attempts at denial were required to hold reality at bay. .........................”
Sorry, Mr. Kurtz, but it's been a one-way ratchet to socialist hell over the past 80 years.
Bush's medicare drug coverage; No Child Left Behind; Obamacare; rise of the Apparatchik class and crony capitalist "investments" in green energy scams in exchange for campaign money; bankrupting of the US to pay for more liberal voters; EPA assaults on private property rights; violations of centuries of contract law to pay off unions.
Are there any serious conservative wins in the past 80 years? What have we actually conserved?
Matthews must be getting the very best of dementia treatment because he has suffering from the ailment for at least twenty years and hes still alive and making stupid comments like this.
I often have to wonder if there is some one off camera on the set with a drool cup and a fresh pair of depends that rushes in between segments to deal with his needs.
Okay Mr. Matthews lets clean you up real quick and you can have a cookie. Heres your sippy cup.
Romney was very smart to address Obama that way. It helps break the spell and diminish respect for Obama. It throws Obama a bit who is never talked to that way except by his hulking wife.
isn’t there a speeding bus out there somewhere with Matthew’s name on it ?
HOW did Obama KNOW that Crowley had the ROSE GARDEN TRANSCRIPT??? Because he GAVE it to her!!! CHEATERS!
You beat me to it. I think it would be best for Chris to retire. He’s really embarassing himself now. He is 69 years old I believe.
Oh please. Why print this looney tune crap.
These posts always remind me of why I never watch Matthews. Why does anyone even listen to that windbag?
When can we go back to the pre-2000 rule and start capitalizing President again?
Matthews is the public face of the Left’s private thoughts and inner-circle conversations.
Matthews forgets that the First Amendment hasn’t been abolished by Obama yet. What a biased leftist idiot.
We need new legislation introduced which will restrict and prevent the type of presidential abuses of power we have seen in this last presidency. I suggest we call them the NObama Protocols...: )
...”Matthews forgets that the First Amendment hasnt been abolished by Obama yet. What a biased leftist idiot”...
What people like Matthews do not understand is that, under a dictatorship, like he promotes, he would be the first to go..Even the dictator would see through and loathe him.
Here are some of the Chris Matthews/Obama base.
Chrissy and his ilk thought challenging Bush was constitutional ... patriotic even.
What’s good for the goose ........
You're having a DEBATE with the President of the United States...
You are THE candidate selected by the opposition party to run for election against this President...
This President has agreed to debate you in a format you both agreed upon...
And you CAN'T challenge him. Because he's the President?
Is that it, Matthews? Do you realize how moronic that line of thinking is, Chris? EVEN coming from you.
Matthews is upset because the Republicans have the gall to run a candidate against Fearless Leader, the Great Spreader, the Grand Redistributionist, The Most Wonderful Hero of All Time, and Champion of All That Is Good And Just. The utter nerve of Pubbies to run a candidate and not simply let Obama run unopposed as all great heroes should be allowed. Like when after Wellstone died in the plane crash, some of his supporters said the Pubbie running for his seat should champion Wellstone’s political philosophy...which was as left-wing as Obama’s.
If we didn’t talk about Chris Matthews on FR, he’d have virtually no fan club because most of the brain dead consumers of lamestream MEdia are like, Chris who?
Think of the difficulty Matthews faces each day. His daily goal is to say the most bizarre thing he ever said. He hasn't yet found it, but, somewhere, there has to be a limit.
You don't say that out of respect for the office if not the man. But if disrespect to the president is unconstitutional then the media and the Democrats spent most of 2000 to 2008 violating the Constitution on a daily basis.
But then again Chrissie always was an idiot.
“Romney was very smart to address Obama that way. It helps break the spell and diminish respect for Obama. It throws Obama a bit who is never talked to that way except by his hulking wife.”
Yep. Being spoken to dismissively also tweaks his Narcissistic Personality Disorder. If the polls show Romney still leading on Monday, Clinton’s Bellhop will be under enormous pressure to hit a walk-off grand slam in the final debate. One problem: as we’ve seen in the first two debates, he isn’t capable of that.
Every time Romney challenges him face to face in any way he lets a little more gas out of the Obama myth and O’s support among independents shrinks.
That fat pantload Roland Martin made the same assertion yesyerday on CNN—(first time I’ve watched CNN in God knows how long—I lasted 3 min. but that was the topic when I was tuned in.
These are people that have no respect for anything—ESPECIALLY the Constitution or anything good about America—people whose brethren railroaded Nixon, slandered and vilified Reagan and the Bushes, etc etc and they worry about respect for this horrible person they all tingled and drooled over like girls at a Justin Bieber concert in 2008. Yeah right.
Where else did he learn that famous attitude of pissiness toward the Republicans in the Obamacare meeting after being anointed? or the phrase "all wee wee'd up"? The Wookie, that's right.
That thread was pulled by the Mod. What did you do?
You're being too kind...
Progressives think they’re the most brilliant people on the face of the earth while they confuse brilliance with an easy propensity to lie and to be deceitful.
They consider Christianity to be a dangerous religion responsible for untold murders yet they deny the millions upon millions of deaths associated with the socialism they love to embrace and deny at the same time.
They will consider dogs in the womb of a bitch to be dogs yet they consider a human in a woman’s womb to be “a non-viable tissue mass” as they declare sex to be recreation rather than procreation.
They consider veterans, as a group, among others, to be more of a terrorist threat than militant Muslim jihadists who never miss an opportunity to murder and torture in the name of their religion.
They have never defined the term “rich” yet they never miss an opportunity to villify “rich” people.
Is there a pattern there?
They hold hard-working, God-fearing, family loving Americans in utter contempt, which makes it alright to lie to them.
The media and pundits marveled openly about Bill Clinton’s ability to sway opinion with lies — they envied his ease and skill.
I recall a school teacher telling her students the same thing.
This thought is mainstream leftist thinking for when they achieve absolute power.
That comment is very telling of what their objective is.
All I can think of off the top of my head is the defeat of the ERA and the DC statehood amendments. Reagan's legacy was to some extent negated by GHWB and Sandra Day O'Connor. GWB seemed clueless and confused, a caricature still used on him. As Eisenhower once said of Nixon, "give me a week, and maybe I can think" of some conservative victory.
York is wrong on this one. When a sitting president agrees to a debate, he agrees to share the stage with an equal. Each deserves the same deference. The president is not allowed special rules not allowed for the other. The challenger is entitled to respond to the president in the same manner the president responds to him.
This is one problem with a president accepting the invitation to a debate. He elevates the challenger to the status of an equal.
This election, Romney elevates Obama by appearing on the same stage with him....
Hockey fans will see that Obama is the Eric Lindros of politics. Romney is Ed Jovanovski...
Can you imagine if Romney would have called Obama and Crowley out on that? It would have been possible that the whole debate would have blown up in Obama's face.
Of course it is Tingles.
What you're upset over is BLASPHEMY of your god-King!
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.