After vowing not to underestimate Clinton, Matthews asserted, "[T]he reason she may be a front-runner is her husband messed around"
SUMMARY: During MSNBC's coverage of the New Hampshire Democratic primary, Hardball host Chris Matthews stated, "I will never underestimate Hillary Clinton again." But Matthews asserted on MSNBC's Morning Joe the next day, "[T]he reason she's a U.S. senator, the reason she's a candidate for president, the reason she may be a front-runner is her husband messed around."
During MSNBC's coverage of the January 8 New Hampshire Democratic primary, Chris Matthews -- host of MSNBC's Hardball -- discussed Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's (D-NY) victory and said, "I've seen her now address large crowds in the last couple of days -- thousands of people -- under tremendous stress when it looked like she was losing this primary campaign, based upon all the polling. And she stood out there for several hours at a time taking every question." Matthews went on to say, "I give her a lot of personal credit. I will never underestimate Hillary Clinton again." But as media critic and blogger Greg Sargent noted, during an appearance on the January 9 edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe, Matthews said of Clinton, "Let's not forget -- and I'll be brutal -- the reason she's a U.S. senator, the reason she's a candidate for president, the reason she may be a front-runner is her husband messed around. That's how she got to be senator from New York. We keep forgetting it. She didn't win there on her merit. She won because everybody felt, 'My God, this woman stood up under humiliation,' right? That's what happened."
During MSNBC's January 8 primary coverage, Air America host Rachel Maddow said, "I will tell you that on the influential -- influential perhaps on the left -- website Talking Points Memo today, you want to know who they're blaming for women voters breaking for Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama? Who they're blaming for this late showing in a big vote for Hillary Clinton? They're blaming Chris Matthews. People are citing specifically Chris not only for his own views, but also for as a symbol of what the mainstream media has done to Hillary Clinton." After Matthews responded, "My influence in American politics looms over the people. I'm overwhelmed myself," Maddow said, "People feel that the media is piling on Hillary Clinton. They're coming to her defense with their votes." Media Matters for America has written numerous items documenting Matthews' attacks on Clinton (recently here, here, and here), and published a study in December examining every evaluative remark Matthews made about Sen. Clinton or former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani during a three-month period. Media Matters found that, notwithstanding his claim that he had been "just as tough on Bill Clinton and Hillary and Rudy and the whole bunch of them," Matthews was particularly friendly to Giuliani and very hostile toward Clinton.
From the January 9 edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe:
MATTHEWS: She's on game now. As I said, I'm not sure she had anything to do with her number last night, except that she was courageous as hell to the end, and her numbers were better than she thought.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI (co-host): Do you think, though -- and Joe's been talking about this, and his mom sent a really interesting email -- that there was a turn maybe at the last minute for some voters, given the really sharp twist in the media in terms of how they went negative?
MATTHEWS: It's not in the polling. I'm just saying it's not in the polling data.
BRZEZINSKI: I know. But, I mean, that's my point. Because people went to the polls throughout the day and maybe changed their mind and maybe were turned off by what they saw, by these nasty headlines.
MATTHEWS: Well, I don't know if they all read The New York Post, but --
BRZEZINSKI: And taking after her for crying.
MATTHEWS: Look, I think that may be true. I think the Hillary appeal has always been somewhat about her mix of toughness and sympathy for her. Let's not forget -- and I'll be brutal -- the reason she's a U.S. senator, the reason she's a candidate for president, the reason she may be a front-runner is her husband messed around. That's how she got to be senator from New York. We keep forgetting it.
She didn't win there on her merit. She won because everybody felt, "My God, this woman stood up under humiliation," right? That's what happened. That's how it happened. In 1998 she went to New York and campaigned for Chuck Schumer as almost like the grieving widow of absurdity, and she did it so well and courageously, but it was about the humiliation of Bill Clinton.
BRZEZINSKI: No, OK, well, you could take it a step back and say that she put Bill Clinton where he is and that he messed around, and then she was humiliated and people felt sorry for her.
MATTHEWS: That is Old Testament stuff.
BRZEZINSKI: Because she does have more than being a victim.
MATTHEWS: I agree.
BRZEZINSKI: She has more to her than being a victim.
MATTHEWS: Why do you hit me? Hit him, don't hit me.
JOE SCARBOROUGH (host): Mika is very upset. Chris, we'll be right back.
MATTHEWS: I'm sticking to my story.
From the 11 p.m. ET hour of MSNBC's January 8 New Hampshire primary coverage:
MATTHEWS: Well, I've seen her now address large crowds in the last couple of days -- thousands of people -- under tremendous stress when it looked like she was losing this primary campaign, based upon all the polling. And she stood out there for several hours at a time taking every question, just like Bill did back in '92 in this same kind of in-the-round arena, exposing herself to just about every kind of question.
And of course, last night, before a hothouse crowd of thousands of people with the cars lined up for the longest time to get into that arena, she stood there and took the heat under what looked to be a difficult time, in terms of the polling again. And I give her a lot of personal credit. I will never underestimate Hillary Clinton again.















And this is as bad as a fellow MSNBCer saying Hillary played the "al -Qeida Card "? I find that hard to believe.
No it is obvious Olbermann gets a free pass from this site and many posters.
Well, who exactly do you think she was talking about if not al Qaeda?
So it is ok to scare Americans? have we not had enough of that for 8 years?
Now I do not think that is what she was doing, but I want your opinion.
SEN. HILLARY CLINTON, (D) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I don‘t think it was by accident that al Qaeda decided to test the new prime minister immediately. You‘re hiring a president to be there when the chips are down.
Obviously she was talking about Al Qaeda. Apparently Olbmermann thinks it's improper for any candidate to mention them at all.
No it's not ok to needlessly scare people which is exactly what Olbermann was saying.
I don't think MMFA necessarily disagrees with this and that's why KO's remarks didn't appear here.
I do not think HRC was engaging in that type of smear , nor was she trying to scare people. That Olbermann comment was unacceptable.
Honestly?
Cause to me it sounds a lot like Cheney in'04...
"It's absolutely essential that eight weeks from today, on Nov. 2, we make the right choice, because if we make the wrong choice then the danger is that we'll get hit again and we'll be hit in a way that will be devastating from the standpoint of the United States,"
They are fairly similar in their implication IMHO.
OLD BEN:
I could've SWORN that Cheney statement was from 2000. It's an undeniably TRUE statement, if that's when he said it. Think about it ...
No doubt. Except that the quote is from a Sept. 2004 AP story.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0907-10.htm
Of course he may have said similar things in 2000 at the Energy Policy meetings. But then, we'll never know.
There's a subtle difference between what HRC said and what Cheney said.
HRC said terrorist attacks have occurred when a government is transitioning and having the right person in charge during that transision is important.
Cheney said the attack occurs because of the choice voters make.
There are plenty of examples of terrorist attacks happening when there's no election or transition government so while HRC may have been technically correct in her limited statement, it wasn't the whole story.
Karl Rove would approve of both statements.
I see what you are saying, except the fact the "government" wasn't transitioning, they just changed leaders. As I understand it "new" Labour is still the government of the day in the UK.
I just lump all such scare mongering together without regard to timing or alleged political reasons - they do it to gain or keep power.
But can you see why he would say it? The al-Qaeda card has been played to DEATH by Bush/Cheney so people are probably going to be leery when they hear the candidates playing it. People are tired of the politics of fear. Sure, what Keith said may have been in poor taste but he was making a valid point IMO.
And I will never underestimate how low Tweety will stoop with his narrow-minded, inane comments. He needs to get fired by CNBC/MSNBC and go do something that he's more qualified to do - like flipping burgers at McDonald's.
Wow, Matthews is ready for the rubber room now! He really is unhinged.
Hey Tweety... I'm calling up St. E's for ya! You better be home tonight cuz the men in the white coats are coming to take you away, ha ha!
OMFG, SOMEONE TELL MATTHEWS TO STFU !!!!
He can't... he's in full meltdown mode now. He's doing a Rush... I say let him continue. May they all self-destruct.
This has got to be one of the most laughble things Matthews has ever said. He really CANNOT be that stupid, right? Or is he?
You're right. I just realized that he's fliiping out because he made a total ass of himself last night and his ego took a big blow. He can't face the possibility that he's not as smart as he thought he was, so he's concocting every possible excuse.
WTG Chris, continue to insult the voters and we'll all change the channel when we see your face..
Like I said in another thread... the media isn't deciding this election. New Hampshire proved that for both sides.
I liked NH before, now I LOVE NH !
(I'm gonna get me a I heart NH bumper sticker.)
Maybe, but we still have a long way to go. There are many more states, many more smears, many more lies, many more surprises in store. Anything is possible.
AND... We still have to deal with the possibility, remote as it may be, that GWB won't go quietly when his time is up. He sounds more ominous now in light of this Iranian speedboat fiasco so we may have to deal with yet another war in the name of 'freedom' soon. What's to stop him from declaring a hold on this election so he can squeeze in a few more tidbits for his 'legacy'?
You win the conspiracy theory of the day award. :-)
Anything is possible, AA. Not saying that it WILL happen... simply saying that anything is possible. Nothing more, nothing less. Don't try and twist it... doesn't work.
And even if it WAS a 'conspiracy theory' - which it isn't - it cannot be any more outrageous than the garbage being spewed by Matthews about Hillary and her reasons for being a Senator and winning in NH.
Thank God, since the media was so instrumental in influencing the 2000 election when they became smitten with a dumb cowboy from Texas.
Is anyone monitoring this guy for mind altering drugs? He’s topping himself with stupid comments nearly day by day. I think you're right, RABBITLUVR - I really do think he’s in some sort of meltdown – what else could explain his stupidity? I’m so fed up I actually emailed MSNBC pleading with them to intervene before he goes over the edge (or has he already?).
Part of the reason for this little tirade [which I saw this morning] & couldn't believe what I was hearing, is poor loser Matthews striking out because his guy Obama didn't win. And part is because Matthews loathes the Clintons.
Chris I've always stuck up for you here, no more pal. You are a joke.
Go Hillary!
Hey Hey, CM is being a spoiled sport but Obama is my man and I can't hold it against him if a crazy TV political pundit prone to developing man crushes has fallen for my guy, GO OBAMA!
Hey Lynn,
My Go Hillary is just my support for her against the idiocy of Matthews. I'm probably not voting for her...though ya never know. I'm giving ALL the candidates a chance to win my vote :-)
Lynn, you have been telling me what a jerk Matthews is for ages, but I've always stuck up for him or given him the benefit of the doubt. I don't know if he's finally gone over the top, or I finally opened my eyes and ears.
The guy isn't just a goof. He's an ass.
He's getting worse. I find it very hard to take him seriously anymore, God I wish they would replace him with Tom Brokaw or something.
Yeah, this was a really bad low-blow. It doesn't change the fact that MMfA exagerrates about him sometime, but Matthews won't get any more defense from me.
I spoke of these comments earlier on another thread. It seems that everyone more or less concurs that Matthews is a consistent blowhard. But the worst part, now that I keep thinking about it, is that apparently nobody at msnbc ever holds his feet to the fire even though he routinely talks out his *ss. It's not like his ratings are that great, or that he's some kind of respected journalist, like Brokaw or something. How the hell does he go unchallenged when he so often makes asinine comments like this?
And even more than going unchallenged, every other msnbc host invites him on their respective shows, treating him like he's some kind of political wizard.
Let's predict what Matthews' next outrageous excuse will be.
"The Clintons" bought votes by allowing all the googling women waiting in line to service Bill?
At this point I figure Tweety is just free associating and has given up all pretense of and attempts at making any sense at all.
Not only did Hillary Clinton help start Media Matters with former conservative David Brock in charge, she bragged about at a Daily Kos convention, stating the following:
"We are certainly better prepared and more focused on, you know, taking our arguments, and making them effective, and disseminating them widely... in a lot of the new progressive infrastructure, institutions that I helped to start and support like Media Matters and Center for American Progress."
And people actually come to Media Matters looking for the truth? Oh pah-leeze. How dumb do you have to be NOT to figure out what’s going on here?