Matthews thanks Scarborough, Shuster for support
SUMMARY: Hardball host Chris Matthews thanked fellow MSNBC personalities Joe Scarborough and David Shuster on-air for their support in the wake of the firestorm sparked by Matthews' January 9 comments attributing Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's political successes to her husband's "mess[ing] around." Scarborough said that it was "outrageous that Chris Matthews ha[d] to apologize"; Shuster stated, "Nobody ... has contributed more in a positive way to our political discourse than Chris Matthews."
During the January 18 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, host Chris Matthews said to fellow MSNBC host Joe Scarborough, "Joe, thanks for the wonderful words this morning on Morning Joe. I watch you all the time, I watched you with particular attention and joy this morning, sir. Thank you." On the January 18 edition of Morning Joe, Scarborough said that it was "outrageous that Chris Matthews ha[d] to apologize" for his January 9 comment that "the reason" Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) is "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."
After thanking Scarborough, Matthews went on to note that he will act as Scarborough's "happy substitute" on Morning Joe "next Tuesday for three hours."
Matthews also extended thanks to MSNBC correspondent David Shuster, stating, "[T]hanks for what you said on that Morning Joe this morning. You are my pal." While discussing Matthews on Morning Joe that same day, Shuster asserted: "Nobody is more gracious and has a bigger heart, and has contributed more in a positive way to our political discourse than Chris Matthews."
From the January 18 edition of MSNBC's Harbdall with Chris Matthews:
MATTHEWS: Joe, thanks for the wonderful words this morning on Morning Joe. I watch you all the time, I watched you with particular attention and joy this morning, sir. Thank you. We'll work again and I will be your sub -- your happy substitute next Tuesday for three hours. I'll see if I've got three hours of talk in me. I think I do.
ANDREA MITCHELL (NBC chief foreign affairs correspondent): I think you do.
MATTHEWS: I think I do. Anyway, thank you, Joe Scarborough of Morning Joe.
JOE SCARBOROUGH (host, MSNBC's Morning Joe): I think you could do it. I'm proud to have you there. Thank you.
[...]
MATTHEWS: OK. Couldn't resist to bring back "macaca" for one more appearance. Shuster, thanks for your nice words this morning --
DAVID SHUSTER (MSNBC correspondent): We were going to play the audio there, Chris, but I knew you'd get mad.
MATTHEWS: No, that's all right. Thanks for what you said on that Morning Joe this morning. You are my pal. Joining me now, Kevin Corke, who also has been out on the campaign trail.
If Matthews supposedly "apologized" for his comments, then what is he thanking them for? For their rebuttals to his apology?
What a phony apology then!
Funny how every fascist with low ratings is still on the air.
It's good to not watch because that removes their influence over political discourse, but it won't change anything about the media itself.
I urge everybody to take Matthews off your DVR/TIVO and let MSNBC know you are doing this. Hurt him where it hurts ... his ratings. Let's get rid of this Fascist ... once and for all.
Wow...the irony is simply wasted on this nutball. Anyone have a clue bat?
Wolf give it a rest.
Circle up the wagons!
Wolf the sentiment is appreciated, its getting a bit robotic though.
This whole Matthews thing is bizarre and creepy. You guys are simply bat s-h-i-t crazy.
Chicken 'n Waffles is the one who deserves derision for his serial stalking of women, not Mattherws for simply expressing his views.
I must ask, possibly in vain (choke), for clarification, from the person using the title of my favorite weekly.
What do those little bars between the letters mean, emphisis? structural support? protection from communical deseases? a horizon or flatlining? Concerned idiots want to know.
While bat shit doesn't have the gravitous of bird shit. It does have its charms and a worthy history you ignerunt nugie you.
Would it wound your male ego if I said I was not satisfied? :-0)
I answered over there, btw.
So two of Matthews colleagues voiced their support for Matthews. And Keith Olbermann never gives his colleagues a WPITHW award.
Mmmm....
Must just be an MSNBC thing ;-)
Give Rachel Maddow her own show
Juliajayne, I second that!
These guys are all so giddy in pleasuring each other that they are blinded to their risk to STDs. All this butt-kissing has me reaching for the Lysterine.
This is a ridiculous thread, and meaningless to boot. So, Matthews admits his hyperbole and exagerrations got away from him, apologizes, his colleagues compliment him for addressing it at all, and MMFA highlights it as if it's, what?, disingenuous? Uncalled for? Too much? Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
There is no pleasing some people, apparently.
The point, Tommy, is that people are defending Matthews and saying he had no need to apologize, and Matthews THANKS them!
That means Matthews' apology is meaningless.
Media Matters' recent obsession with Chris Matthews is disturbing. No mention of his fine journalism [including sharp jabs at right-wing extremists] has been included in your coverage of his alleged "problem with women." And David Shuster is one of the harder-hitting reporters out there, and hardly hides his Democratic leanings.
What has gotten into you guys? Where is your sense of balance and fairness and completeness in this coverage. You've just about lost me, and I am a long-time fan. You should concentrate on the real enemies of good/fair journalism, not talented if imprudent people like Matthews. [It's also disturbing that you've published only one of my posts on here. I'm on your side, guys. Just not this time. But that should be irrelevant anyway. Are you censoring the dialogue here?]