August 19, 2004

chris matthews has completely lost it

Politics reminds me very much of the measles. The measles donít hurt much if you will take a little saffron [herbal] tea or something else to keep them on the surface. But if they once set in on you, they turn your hide yellow and sometimes make you cross-eyed. So do not let politics set in on you. --Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Heber J. Grant, 17: Being Loyal Citizens, From the Life of Heber J. Grant, p. 159 (or so)

is there any better example of one who has let politics "set in on him" in this sickening way than chris matthews? when the swift boat veterans came out with their stories intending to expose john kerry as a liar, matthews completely lost it. first, he got john o'neill, the principal author of the book unfit for command, to come on the show. matthews spoke the whole time. did i say 'speak'? i mean yelled. he yelled at o'neill, who apparently was unfit to answer a question in matthews' eyes.

chris matthews, seen here conducting an interview while drunk (as usual)

then tonight he gave the same treatment to michelle malkin. i'll admit, i only watched about 2 minutes of the interview, but that's all i could take. even my girlfriend asked me to change the channel. "this is giving me a headache" she said.

matthews would ask malkin a question and interrupt her before she could answer. that was his interview style! call it the "angry father who suspects his son is using heroin" interview style. it's the one in which ONLY THE INTERVIEWER speaks.

i switched back to msnbc later (i guess i didn't learn my lesson the first time?) and keith olbermann and his buddy-buddy guest were talking about how michelle malkin "made a fool of herself on this network about an hour ago." but the msnbc crew will just have to excuse ms. malkin--and mr. o'neill, for that matter--they were just invited on to the show so chris matthews could ground them and take away their phone privileges.

why doesn't john kerry respond to the veterans charges against him? if he would release his military records and show that these men are lying, the controversy would be over right quick. imagine yourself in this situation (running for president with potentially damning claims made against you). would you respond decisively with facts to refute the liars? or would you call them names? john kerry chose the latter.

read michelle malkin's own account of the event at her blog. she has a link to the transcript, and the msnbc blog where olbermann continues (i really think he is one of those people who just likes to hear himself talk). she also provides matthews' telephone number.

Posted by travis at August 19, 2004 11:29 PM | TrackBack

The MSNBC folks are understandably a bit agitated. Their network is going under as we speak.

Posted by: doug at August 21, 2004 10:16 AM

Perhaps they can use the opportunity of Kerry's concession speech to announce the shuttering of their own doors. It'd be fitting, since they are essentially a 23-hour-per-day propaganda machine for Kerry's campaign. (The 24th hour is Joe Scarborough's show, their fig leaf for "unbiased" journalism.

Posted by: John at August 22, 2004 03:39 PM
Post a comment

Remember personal info?