Matthews on Bill Clinton: "[T]hings always change when he inserts himself"
On the February 5 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, discussing the 2008 Democratic presidential race, Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson asserted: "The tenor of the race did change when [former President] Bill Clinton inserted himself in the race." Host Chris Matthews responded: "By the way, things always change when he inserts himself." Later in the program, Matthews stated: "Eugene Robinson, thanks for that nice line about the injection by Bill Clinton. ... [I]t's your line, not mine." Robinson responded: "Oh, no, no, no ... no, no, no."
From the February 5 edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews:
MATTHEWS: Is this Obama's spirit rising? Is this the great feeling of, "Let's have an African-American, a young guy with an interesting background who can talk" -- and that's rare in politics today, somebody who can talk --
ROBINSON: Yeah.
MATTHEWS: -- or is it Clinton fatigue? This sitcom's just gone on too long. We're tired of hearing what Bill's doing: Bill can't talk this week; he can talk; he's in the doghouse this week; he's not in the doghouse -- are we just tired of the sitcom?
ROBINSON: Well, but, you know --
MATTHEWS: You know that's an issue.
ROBINSON: The tenor of the race did change when Bill Clinton inserted himself in the race. When it was [Sen.] Hillary [Rodham Clinton (D-NY)] versus [Sen.] Barack [Obama (D-IL)], it was one kind of race. When it was Barack versus Hillary --
MATTHEWS: Things tend to change when --
ROBINSON: -- and Bill --
MATTHEWS: By the way, things always change when he inserts himself.
ROBINSON: Well -- ooh, ooh, ooh.
BUCHANAN: I think if I've got --
ROBINSON: Moving right along.
BUCHANAN: I think -- look. There's -- nobody can deny that Obama has a tremendous movement. It's larger than Reagan's in '76.
MATTHEWS: Right.
[...]
MATTHEWS: Everybody's going to be here all night. We'll be staying alive on pizza and cookies all night tonight. Eugene Robinson, thanks for that nice line about the injection by Bill Clinton. And --
ROBINSON: You're very welcome.
MATTHEWS: -- it's your line, not mine.
DEE DEE MYERS [former Clinton press secretary]: Hnh-hnh. Hnh-hnh.
MATTHEWS: Anyway, Dee Dee Myers --
ROBINSON: Oh, no, no, no. I'm claiming --
MATTHEWS: -- it's your line.
ROBINSON: -- no, no, no.
MATTHEWS: -- Washington Post columnist. Dee Dee Myers, thank you. Pat Buchanan. Do not go anywhere tonight. Our live prime-time coverage of Super Duper Tuesday starts in just a minute.
What's wrong with what this? For crying out loud, is this not true? And does anyone not think that Bill was instructed to be more low key after his South Carolina/Jesse Jackson comments? He stepped back, Hillary stepped up, and people focused on her and not them - this helped her, in my opinion.
Things always change when former Presidents insert themselves, especially Bill Clinton. To be so ultra sensitive around here when any little off the cuff comment is spoken about the Clintons smacks of such panicking, it's quite interesting.
TOMMY,
While I understand what it is that you are saying, I wonder though if this thread was meant to show the mis-information of CM and much of the rest of the media that seem to be making the claim that anythig that Clinton does/did is somehow more important to report on than that of the last several years of near total silence of the Bush regimes lies, injections, or out right garbage and illegal occupation of Iraq.....
Yes, Bush is an outgoing prez and this should be about Hillary and Barack because it is a presidential race and yes Bill should just disappear until after Nov 4th but MMFA is, like a few other threads they have created has clearly outlined, as hyperbol, the words of Clinton in recent days and the near silence about Bush....
It is unbecoming of a media to be so careless and immature and I tend to believe that this is MMFA's point?
HOW STUPID DO THEY THINK WE ARE?
"HOW STUPID DO THEY THINK WE ARE?"
A lawyer once told me that he would never ask a question he did not know the answer to.
"Because Bill's sexual mishaps are "funny" and did not get thousands of US troops and count[l]ess innocent people killed."
Well, not the thousands of US troops part, anyway.
However, for your memory- Clinton did award Halliburton a no-bid contract in Yugoslavia, commit felonies while in office, bombed Chinese embassy, imposed a regime change in Serbia and bombed Christian Serbs on behalf of Muslim Albanian terrorists. All good things, right?
I agree.
Is there a gibberish translator in the house?
Meta-Matthews. Matthews unending discussion of the "sitcom" IS the "sitcom".
Yeah, you’d think a guy so steeped in nostalgia would want to bring back the sitcom. Instead we’re stuck with fairy tales masked as Reality Shows. Welcome to the 21st century!:)
I don't know if Matthews meant anything sexual when he said it, but Robinson certainly took it that way:
ROBINSON: Well -- ooh, ooh, ooh.
As for Bill inserting himself, seems to me Elizabeth Edwards was a great deal more vocal than he was early on, & UNTIL he said "fairy-tale" & Donna Brazille had a cow, he had been no more visible than the other candidates spouses. Then everything either he or Hillary said suddenly came under scrutiny & of course the media jumped aboard full throttle.
But now they are blaming Bill. Ha! Too funny.
Michelle Obama also gets her digs in and I think many would be surprised by the tone of many of her speeches and comments...but of course that doesn't get any media attention...the Obama camp apparently operates with immunity from all critisim and scrutiny. My husband heard me complaining about Michelle Obama for some time but didn't Know what I was making a fuss about till he finally sat down and watched some of her comments...he was pretty shocked by her tone and was surprised that no one in the media is covering this. As you said, Elizabeth Edwards also was very vocal too and all I ever heard was praise for her by the media. It is one set of rules for the Clintons and a seperate set for everyone else. it is surprising she is still doing as well as she is with the raging media bias against her.
Dear Mr. Biedlingmaier,
For the sake of accuracy, please change the title of this item to:
"Dick Makes Dick Joke"
It'd be a perfect fit.
This um, joke, wouldn't make the cut on Jay Leno. Or maybe it would have----in 1998.
Could we have some serious political analysis, Matthews? Leave the humor to the professionals.
About as much "truth" as saying that some cons are usually on the receiving end of the "insertion".
(I'm going to hell for that).
Maybe the thrust of Matthews point was that when Bill inserts himself into the political intercourse, things get blown out of proportion, and there's often an indelible stain on the fabric of our nation.
Oh yeah, weiner.
Can I get a job at MSNBC?
Yeah Tommy, you, me, & most reasonable folks understand that BUT we'll be told what he did with his sexual organ in private is none of our business.
Just figured I'd remind you of that before one of them comes along to give you the lecture ;-)
Ah there's Dave. What no lecture Dave?
Tommy you're just wrong LOL!
"In Dave's case, the rightwing forced Clinton towards his obsession."
For the record here, that is not at all in any way whatsoever what I said above.
Adding: here's what I said above:
The main focus of the anti-Clinton, conservative agenda has been, and continues to be, about the right-wing's obsession with Bill Clinton's sexual organ. Matthews' comment may as well have come from Rush Limbaugh.
Nowhere in that do I say the right forced Clinton into anything.
Right, thanks.
The claim is that I blamed the right for Bill's fooling around. Again here, I clearly didn't and don't.
Recapping here again, so it's very clear, this is the claim that was made:
"In Dave's case, the rightwing forced Clinton towards his obsession."
And again, for the record here, that is not at all in any way whatsoever what I said.
Let's recap.
Clinton definitely liked the ladies.
Kennedy liked the ladies, too. Apparently, Newt Gingrich has spend most of his life pursuing ladies not his wife. In politics, there is no shortage whatsoever of men AND women with active libidos. IKE had his girl on the side.
What has changed is TWO things: FIRST, Clinton ushered in an era of MEDIA coverage which decided that every detail of every private moment of CERTAIN political figures mattered enormously and needed to be extensively investigated, reported, and exposed. This is NEW to America, and also helped fulfill ANOTHER new development: a 24/7 NEWS appetite, voracious for ratings, and desperate for scandal to forward its goal: to please conservative ownership.
SECOND, The GOP decided that having an affair should rise to the level of "high crimes and misdemeanors" and should be grounds for impeachment and removal of a sitting president.
In NEITHER case did the American Public AGREE with the Rightwing. The Republican's "morality" and "outrage" was completely driven by partisan political attempts to destroy an opponent of the other party. The American Public, wisely, decided they didn't care to KNOW all the details of such an affair, continued to find Bill Clinton enormously popular, and also wondered at the HYPOCRICY and DOUBLE STANDARD that the GOP was applying, since so very many GOPers fall far short of any "moral" standards.
Thus, the "OBSESSION" with Bill Clinton's private live was ENTIRELY held by (1) desperate partisan smearmongers of the GOP, and (2) desperate partisan smearmongers of the MEDIA.
The American People didn't care THEN, and they don't care NOW.
"The GOP decided that having an affair should rise to the level of "high crimes and misdemeanors" and should be grounds for impeachment and removal of a sitting president."
Wow! Do you really believe that? The "American people" didn't care anything about Clinton's many, many episodes of cheating on his wife. What the American people did care about was that a sitting President would LIE under oath. Perhaps that simple little fact got in the way of your memory of the events.
The American people expect a liberal President to be sexually immoral. Name one who isn't. But, at least he can do what the 'evil conservatives' do when they fall short of expectations-- admit to it. But, noooo Bill lied and lied and lied...UNDER OATH. That is what he was impeached for.
Is Eugene Robinson a right-winger? Boy I bet he'd be a tad surprised to hear that!
I don't even think Matthews was thinking about Bill's sexual organ when he said "inserted"...it was Eugene, if not a leftie then damn close, who had his mind in the gutter.
Face it Dave, Bill Clinton as good as a President as he was will forever have the adventures of his sexual organ as part of his legacy.
"the obsession by the right. "
Exactly. That is what it is.
There are other matters that are far, far more important to people in this world than this. If they'd spent half as much time fretting over any number of other issues as they did -and still do- over Bill's genitals, we'd all be better off.
I think it's very clear what Matthews meant by his joke, in both the transcript and the video.
Also note that I don't say Clinton's behavior past or present ought to be off-limits. But there's a discernible difference between discussion and obsession--obsession that is way out of proportion to how it affects real people. It's obsession almost to the point of exclusion of real issues. Trouble is, certain right-wingers see political pot-shot points in obsessing relentlessly over Bill's genitals, and they can't stop.
Dave you seem to believe the right-wing remains obsessed. They certainly were at one time, but seriously how often does the Right obsess about it lately? Furthermore it was never ONLY the Right.
Dave you wrote: But I think the rest of the world has long ago moved forward
Obviously Robinson & Matthews have not. Robinson is not a right-winger. And Matthews is not a right-winger, he's just a boob. But here they are joking about Bill Clinton. PLEASE take note the only one on the panel not snickering about this is right-winger Pat Buchanan.
If you perceive a lull (I don't), just wait. If Hillary is the nominee, it would be naive to predict that every single member of right-wing punditry and talk radio won't become obsessed with Bill's genitals yet again.
The obsession, it goes without saying, had no place else to go except downwards after the ridiculous fixation of the late 90s-a fixation driven by the right wing (but not shared by the majority of the public).
Once again, I didn't assert Matthews or Robinson were right-wingers. I said that the joke was the same you'd hear from Rush Limbaugh.
I also never said that no one on the left was concerned about or preoccupied with Bill's sexuality. But it's very clear that the vast majority of the obsession obviously came, and still comes, from the right-wing. And they will see it as a tool to use against Hillary should she be the nominee.
"I also never said that no one on the left was concerned"
"was" should be "wasn't".
It's a tool to use against hillary? If he'd used his tool against hillary in the first place...
Bill has bill and bill alone to blame for any unwanted attention he receives. hillary will. ofcourse, be hurt by the re-dredging of his muck but I'm sure she knew it was ...coming?
Also, no one said that Bill Clinton isn't responsible for his behavior and subsequent attention. But there's a very discernible difference between attention and the right-wing's obsession--an obsession which you obviously share in.
then why does one of the biggest right wing sites, world net daily, feature kathleen willey all the time? here's her "warning" from a week ago. and what is her claim to fame other than her charges she was molested? and i can offer a dozen other sites, newsbusters for one, that featured her recent book.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59919
I don't even think Matthews was thinking about Bill's sexual organ when he said "inserted"...it was Eugene, if not a leftie then damn close, who had his mind in the gutter.
Robinson: The tenor of the race did change when [former President] Bill Clinton inserted himself in the race.
Matthews: By the way, things always change when he inserts himself.
Matthews: Eugene Robinson, thanks for that nice line about the injection by Bill Clinton.Matthews: By the way, things always change when he inserts himself.
Yeah so? That could have meant anything, it was Robinson who snickered, then Matthews seem to catch on to the innuendo I don't believe he even realized he made.
I watched the video again for a second time.
Robinson, it seems very clear and obvious to me, did not mean "inserted" in the way that Matthews subsequently and most obviously and deliberately did.
"Comparing larry Craig to the U.S. president?"
Bingo. There really is no comparison between the right-wingers' multi-million dollar, obsessive investigation of Bill Clinton's genitals, versus the Free Pass they've given to their in-denial buddy Larry Craig. Thanks.
Matthews purposefully dumbs down political discourse.
A joke (I guess) where the word "inject" is supposed to maybe have a sexual connotation?
I don't know, humor isn't what it used to be I guess. Groucho Marx is dead, so isn't Lenny Bruce and Richard Prior (I think). By the time I'd have realized that the word "inject" had also a sexual connotation (maybe), is about the same time I'd realize it isn't even funny, and humor isn't what it used to be.
Never mind that.
The moment I read the transcript, I thought that chris maybe put his foot in his mouth (as he often does)...
Like every other racist idiot in the "media" presently, they just can't invoke Sen. Obama without invoking his race or color or whatever you'd call it (and maybe he's not of a different race or color anyway, I can't be sure now that I think of it, because I don't have a color television, but prefer a Black&White one)
I think maybe he did catch himself almost saying something racist (which happens eventually to those who keep invoking race in their observations of the world).
He says the Senator is "an African-American, a young guy with an interesting background who can talk..."
And then catches himself, and injects quickly "...and that's rare in politics today, somebody who can talk"
(WHEW! The idiot thinks to himself: "I almost made the African-American guy out to be a surprise, for how articulate he is... Nice Save Me, for quickly injecting politics into it, as being the context in which my observation was meant to be taken" WHEW!)
I don't know... maybe I'm just imagining that chris nearly said a racist thing there, or something that could be interpreted as such.
He sure did inject quickly, like a rabbit, that thing about politics being the context within which he was speaking.
Whatever the case, it remains true: People who incessantly observe the race of others, almost always eventually say something that can be interpreted as racist.
It's best not to see the world in such Black and White terms... unless that's the kind of television you prefer, and then you just can't help it.
(WHEW! The idiot thinks to himself:...
Yeah, we've got him on his toes - he second guessed himself in a similar way the day before when talking about the authenticity of McCain watching the Super Bowl in public.
That's also what I thought, that MMFA has the guy jumpy flinching herky-jerky self-conscious about what he's saying and who's monitoring it... GOOD.
I see MMFA has a special part of it's web-site devoted to chris exclusively, the "matthews monitor" or something like that... GOOD.
I actually wish MMFA would divide it's pages up like that for a lot of things: A special section exclusively for Foxnews... a special section exclusively for radio hacks... sectioned off from broadcasting, a part of the web-site devoted exclusively to newspapers and print.
I've long thought MMFA should divide what they publish in a manner like that I just described, with the main all-important most distinguishable division being between what is BROADCAST on the PUBLIC AIRWAVES, and what is not (which is mostly a division of newspapers and print on one side, and FCC License holders on the other).
It's the difference between a First Amendment Right to misinform the American People, and what is not a Right at all but a Privilege, a Privileged and Licensed use of a Public Resource, Public Property, the PUBLIC AIRWAVES...
...to misinform the American People on.
That's the main didvision I'd like to see here on MMFA: Stuff done by way of an FCC License, versus stuff done by way of newspapers print and whatever other First Amendment Right manner there is of misinforming People.
It's a matter of Legal Jurisdiction is what it is.
See, now this is an actual kind of pointless item. Nobody invented a whole new figure of speech here, they just used cheap innuendo for a joke.
Not misinformation, but if one had a thesis that the "pundits" on tv are all frutrated stand up comedian wannabes obsessed with showing the world how clever and cool they are, this item would be great evidence.
The thing is, the silly joke makes the actual and valid point of the argument vanish. Bill Clinton does have a great deal of influence and his presence in the media spotlight does a lot to change the situation. Too bad that point is missed amongst the "huh, huh you made a Clinton sex joke" banter.
As for "Clinton fatigue," it's no different from "Britney fatigue." Another case of the media endlessly going on about something while at the same time complaining about the media going on about something.
Patient: Hey doc, it hurts when I move my arm like this.
Dr: So stop moving your arm like that.
SAVE DEMOCRACY, VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT!!
Give me a good o'le soap opera, porno, whatever in the White House, so long as we get the prestige of a Clinton foriegn policy, the surplusses in the budget, the value of the dollar, the strength of a all volunteer armed forces, Social Security repaid with surplusses, Medicare shored up with recending the Bush tax cuts, ........ how much time do we have???
I say if they have to we'll recruit the interns just for Bill whom knows what he likes, a Secret Service detail that keep it from Hillary, and reserve the rights to the re-broadcast any surveillance tapes.
Happy Thoughts;
Dan Grady
Matthews is sexist and racist. I couldn't believe my ears when he said that comment, "let's have an African-American, a young guy with an interesting background who CAN TALK." What was that supposed to mean??? that the other African Americans CAN'T talk? I couldn't believe that I heard that right!! The inflection was on CAN TALK. Why nobody called him on it was beyond me. He and Joe Scarborough need a course in EEOC or else just retire.
I couldn't believe it! I only saw that much of Chris Matthews the other day and that's what I got. It was appalling! He's really indefensible and unexplainable! Is it that he is not able to contain his personality (shudder) or is he trying to win a ratings game with 'The Soup'? (You know ADHD children are often 'inappropriate') It would have been every bit as disgusting if it referred to McCain or anyone! He's really disturbing at this point. Hard to imagine his wife and children are educated people and they haven't left him out of humiliation.
As pathetic, are the pundits who sit their day after day while he rambles or rages inappropriately, then dutifully smile, offering no objection...but hey...it keeps a lot of feckless hacks employed and entertained so why not.
Mathews is a walking, talking bag of misinformation.
Tommy - are you naieve or stupid? One of the two - take your pick.
I just want to know what is this pass everyone keeps saying Obama is getting from the media? What did his wife say that was so offensive? And how can anyone say a man who's been linked to everyone from Farrakhan to Saddam "Hussein" has been given a pass by the media, when the media is the one saying some of these things?
As for the thread, it was a joke. Maybe tasteless, but I found it funny. Matthews is the school yard bully who's been outed to the principal, so instead of tormenting the kid he wants to (Hillary Clinton), he's gonna go after the closest thing to her to get some vindication for his scrutiny from the media lately.
"We're tired of hearing what Bill's doing: Bill can't talk this week; he can talk; he's in the doghouse this week; he's not in the doghouse -- are we just tired of the sitcom?"
This from a man who clearly cannot,will not shut the hell up about the Clintons.Just for the record Chris?Bill Clinton is 10 times the man you could ever hope to be.You mental midget.