Feb 15, 2008 at 9:32 PM by Political Chase
(Update below)
If there was any doubt before, there isn’t any doubt now. The Straight Talk Express lost all of its wheels and flipped over.
Hammering Senator Barack Obama for a fourth straight day, Senator John McCain said [in Oshkosh, WI] on Friday that he expects Senator Obama to abide by his pledge use (sic) public financing for his general election if Mr. McCain does so as well.
“It was very clear to me that Senator Obama had agreed to having public financing of the general election campaign if I did the same thing,” he said after a town hall meeting here. “I made the commitment to the American people that if I was the nominee of my party, I would go the route of public financing. I expect Senator Obama to keep his word to the American people as well.”
I have a response for Obama: How about this my friend? You take back your vote for torture, your for vote for telecom amnesty, and if you are somehow miraculously elected president, you sign a contract today guaranteeing that you will have all combat troops out of Iraq by no later than January 20, 2010, and prosecute George Bush and Dick Cheney for war crimes, illegal wiretapping, and all other crimes they committed during their administration, then I’ll agree to public financing.
Add ice, stir, and make your own jokes.
Update: See this post for update.
Feb 15, 2008 at 8:53 PM by Political Chase
President Bush held a bicameral fear-mongering strategy session today with Republican leaders. Hint: that’s them below. I hope everyone remembers to say their prayers tonight because no one is going to be alive tomorrow (see update) Sunday morning according to this esteemed group of intellectuals.
 |
| George Bush and Dick Cheney meet with the Bicameral Republican leadership |
So, after meeting with this distinguished group of scholarly gentlemen, President Bush imparted with their new, and highly-polished fear-mongering prophecy (third day in a row).
We also just discussed a serious problem facing our country, and that is the fact that House leaders blocked a good piece of legislation that would give our intelligence community the tools they need to protect America from a terrorist attack.
The American citizens must understand — clearly understand that there still is a threat on the homeland, there’s still an enemy which would like to do us harm, and that we’ve got to give our professionals the tools they need to be able to figure out what the enemy is up to so that we can stop it.
People say, oh, it doesn’t matter if this law hasn’t been renewed — it does matter. It matters for a variety of reasons. It matters because the intelligence officials won’t have tools necessary to get as much information as we possibly can to protect you. And it matters because these telephone companies that work collaboratively with us to protect the American people are afraid they’re going to get sued.
And the American people have got to understand these lawsuits make it harder for us to convince people to help protect you. And so by blocking this good piece of legislation, our professionals tell me that they don’t have all the tools they need to do their job.
Isn’t that uplifting? I just get tingles up and down my spine, and goose bumps all over.
Secobarbitol anyone?
Feb 15, 2008 at 4:19 PM by Political Chase
(Update below)
Chris Matthews made comments this morning about Hillary Clinton’s campaign on Morning Joe that are only going to make relations worse between the Clinton camp and MSNBC.
As you may recall, a major dust-up occurred last week when David Shuster, an MSNBC reporter, said the Clinton campaign was “pimping” Chelsea Clinton out. Hillary Clinton retaliated by expressing outrage publicly and privately to MSNBC executives, which ultimately led to a two-week suspension of Shuster.
Although Shuster bore the burden of MSNBC’s punitive action, the overriding issue according to Clinton and others, has been MSNBC’s – and especially Chris Matthews’ – alleged long-standing pattern of hostile and misogynistic remarks against Hillary.
In what appears to be blatant defiance directed toward his critics in the Clinton camp, Matthews fired back this morning on Morning Joe and said Clinton needs to “get rid of the kneecappers…the press people” who work for her.
MATTHEWS: "What she has to do is get rid of the kneecappers that work for her – these press people whose main job seems to be punishing Obama or going after the press – to building a positive case for her. Look, I just don’t think kneecapping has worked. I think her press relations are lousy. I think if all you do is intimidate and punish, and claim you’ll get even – relentlessly…people, all kinds of politicians, and in all fairness to press…human reaction to intimidation is, “Screw you…Don’t tell me what to say." And that has been their whole policy: “We’re going to win this thing. Get out of the way.” And I think that has been there attitude so long that there’s been a lot of resentment around the country among politicians toward that – and you’re seeing it – every time they get a chance to break for the gate they do. And now John Lewis apparently is breaking.”
Well, it’s pretty clear Matthews has made up his mind. He’s not backing down. Instead, he’s kicking it up a notch. But is Matthews doing the right thing? Did he just dig himself and MSNBC into a deeper hole or did he justifiably stand his “journalistic” ground?
At best, I think Matthews is treading on very thin ice for several reasons.
First, I think Shuster was punished for the sins of many, especially Matthews. Shuster was wrong, but if he deserved sanctions, then historically Matthews and others (e.g., Scarborough, etc.) deserved sanctions as well. But ex post facto punishment just isn’t going to happen. The point of demarcation has to be going forward and Matthews’ comment today is beyond that point of demarcation.
A primary function of the media is to assume the role of adversary. But by far the majority don’t assume that role. They don’t even understand the mere concept of it, much less practice it. Instead, all too many “journalists” merely function as stenographers or even worse, they are enablers. Think Judith Miller.
Matthews chose his words carefully today. No one can accuse him of making sexist remarks, or even inappropriate personal attacks. But his message is clear. He told the Clinton camp “screw you”.
At a certain level I have to agree with him. The media must stop this kowtowing to Very Serious and Powerful Politicians, which the Clintons are indeed a part of and have historically abused the media.
I suppose the issue, to the extent there is one, comes down to timing. One could easily argue that considering recent circumstances and the timing of Matthews’ remarks today, his remarks were probably more ill intended than they were professionally justifiable pushback to the media. What purpose did they serve and what was the gain?
Update: John Aravosis makes it abundantly clear that he thinks Matthews hit the target accurately and appropriately.
Don’t even get me started on how right Chris Matthews is. The man deserves a medal for publicly saying what so many have been saying privately for so long. When her campaign walks around with a self-annointed [sic] crown on their head (and a stick elsewhere) eventually people are going to tell them to take a hike. There’s a reason the media and the blogs aren’t so happy with Hillary. And Matthews nailed it.
