Shamelessness.
"Chris Matthews had barely finished praising his colleagues at the 10th anniversary party for his 'Hardball' show Thursday night in Washington, D.C. when his remarks turned political and pointed, even suggesting that the Bush administration had 'finally been caught in their criminality.'
In front of an audience that included such notables as Alan Greenspan, Rep. Patrick Kennedy and Sen. Ted Kennedy, Matthews began his remarks by declaring that he wanted to 'make some news' and he certainly didn't disappoint. After praising the drafters of the First Amendment for allowing him to make a living, he outlined what he said was the fundamental difference between the Bush and Clinton administrations.
The Clinton camp, he said, never put pressure on his bosses to silence him."
Gee, I wonder why, Chris.
"Hardball" my foot when it comes to the Democrats.
The hysterical charges that the Bush Administration has been "vindictive" towards its critics ("The Most Vindictive Administration In History," of course) is as trumped up as the "LIAR" charge (based on "The Sixteen Words" of the SOTU regarding yellow cake from Niger that were true), and is likewise a projection meant to deflect from the well-publicized record of the Clinton's own vindictiveness (and lies).
Bush critics have gotten away with saying things that would've--at the very least--gotten them an IRS audit if directed at the Clintons when they were in power.
In front of an audience that included such notables as Alan Greenspan, Rep. Patrick Kennedy and Sen. Ted Kennedy, Matthews began his remarks by declaring that he wanted to 'make some news' and he certainly didn't disappoint. After praising the drafters of the First Amendment for allowing him to make a living, he outlined what he said was the fundamental difference between the Bush and Clinton administrations.
The Clinton camp, he said, never put pressure on his bosses to silence him."
Gee, I wonder why, Chris.
"Hardball" my foot when it comes to the Democrats.
The hysterical charges that the Bush Administration has been "vindictive" towards its critics ("The Most Vindictive Administration In History," of course) is as trumped up as the "LIAR" charge (based on "The Sixteen Words" of the SOTU regarding yellow cake from Niger that were true), and is likewise a projection meant to deflect from the well-publicized record of the Clinton's own vindictiveness (and lies).
Bush critics have gotten away with saying things that would've--at the very least--gotten them an IRS audit if directed at the Clintons when they were in power.
posted by John | 4:54 PM
10 Comments:
It all depends on what the definition of "pressure" is.
OK, OK, Alan Greenspan gets a pass for being nothing less that a....well...some people said the Antichrist, but if that had been true we would have at least been required to obtain UPCs on our hand or forehead.
As for the Kennedys the only notable things they've done are drink everyone else under the table before getting behind of the wheels of their automobiles and causing severe harm up to and including killing people. But I digress.
Chris Mathews loves to talk about how the 1st Amendment gives him the right to say whatever pops into his head be it ruining someone's reputation or perpetuating lies.
Poor Joe Wilson and Valerie Plame have certainly been smeared by the Bush White House. (Sarcasm intended) Joe Wilson, otherwise known as a proven liar by a senate sub-committee that even the liberal press can't ignore it and even Mathews, liberal,partisan, blowhard that he is can't seem to understand that even though he has free speech, he doesn't have speech without consequences. The consequences being that his ratings are pitiful.
I myself, being the casualty of a Subdural Hematoma still have enough sense to know right from wrong. I have not been brainwashed or indoctrinated in the least. Doing right and telling the truth are not signs of these processes. But, one of the signs of a head injury is a personality change. My change was that everything bad about me became worse, particularly my temper.
Which leads me to my last point:
I can name several people that I would like to happen upon in life.
1. Matt Lauer
2. Kieth Olberman
3. Chris Mathews
4. Al Gore (professional victim and global warming lie perpetuater)
I probably missed someone, oh yeah Brian Williams, I would give him a history lesson about our founding fathers not being terrorists that would leave him traumatized to the point that he would have to have therapy to say my name. Any of these so-called journalists and "politician" would know the definition of violence when I finished with them. That's harsh you say? I am the one with the problem and I need to mellow out. Let me explain something: If any of these men/boys would have been bold enough to spout there anti-American rhetoric during WWII they would have systematically been lined up and shot trial not withstanding.
One final point and my rant will end. Why did Matt Lauer get a buzzcut? I mean, that's reserved for real men. People who have bigger fish to fry than foo-fooing their do in the morning. This boy does no work. The hardest thing he does all day is opening the door at the front of the NBC building. His attempt to trap George Bush into saying something about the legality of Gitmo and the so-called torture that occurs there that he could pin him in a corner on was lame. Bush said again again that it was his job to protect the American people which is the crux of what the War on Terror is about. Lauer acts as if he wants to love on the jihadis. Maybe have a tryst with one of them. God help us should we violate their rights, whatever that means. Let another terrorist attack occur in this country on Bush's watch and Lauer will be the fist estrogen laced person to cry foul. Nuff said.
I think Lauer's buzzcut had something to do with balding.
Yes, the buzz cut likely has to do with age...
There are three ways of dealing with progressive baldness:
1- the comb-over
2- the natural look (as is)
3- the buzz cut
I would take 3 over the other options.
I used to watch Matt regularly, until I realized his bias was glaring.
I will begin posting on my blog again shortly. My absence has been the result of the development of seizures . Halloween night last year at approximately 10:00 PM I began having a series of four seizures, the last being in the ambulance on the way to the hospital. I came close to biting my tongue in two. The old wives' tale about swallowing your tongue is just not so, as it is physically impossible to swallow your tongue. It is, however, possible to happen upon Neurologists who, for a lack of better words, suck. My head injury occurred July 7th, 1995. My seizures happened October 31st, 2006. A full 11 years after the fact. After much study I found this not to be impossible, though unusual. Most seizures begin sometime shortly after head injuries occur. I feel much better now, do not take anticonvulsants of any sort because the good in them does not outweight the bad. If you want to see what I've done in between bouts with the sickness caused by the meds check me out at this hole in the wall. It's good to be back and ready for a battle in'08!
John R., My brother in law recently started having seizures. Those are scary.
How soon we begin to forget the Clintoons.
I had a little fun...Clintoon
The Clinton's are banking on Americans' short-term memory.
The problem is that many people still do not think that he did anything wrong. I have a good friend who thinks the Clintons are the best thing that ever happened.
[shakes head]
Post a Comment
<< Home