On the March 21 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, host Chris Matthews aired a video clip of former President Bill Clinton at an event earlier that day in Charlotte, North Carolina, where Clinton said of a possible match-up between Sens. Hillary Clinton and John McCain: “I think it'd be a great thing if we had an election year where you had two people who loved this country and were devoted to the interest of this country and people could actually ask themselves, who's right on these issues, instead of all this other stuff that always seems to intrude itself on our politics.” After airing the clip, Matthews asserted: “There's only one way to read that. He's saying that if you pick these two people you get two people who love their country. If you don't, you don't get two people who love their country.” Matthews added: “You get this other guy [Sen. Barack] Obama who has all this other stuff, as if that other stuff is Obama's problem.” But others have in fact offered an explanation of Clinton's comments that differs from Matthews', demonstrating that, contrary to his claim, there is more than one way “to read that.” Indeed, Bill Clinton's spokesman, Matt McKenna, said of the comments: “Actually, as is indicated by the quote itself, President Clinton was talking about the need to talk about issues, rather than falsely questioning any candidate's patriotism. He was lamenting that these kind of distractions 'always seems to intrude' on political campaigns. This is consistent with his criticism of the 'politics of personal destruction,' which dates back 16 years.”

Sen. Clinton's campaign posted McKenna's statement on its “Fact Hub” page in an entry headlined, “Fact Check: What Bill Clinton Said In Charlotte.” Bill Clinton's response was also noted in The New York Times' political blog The Caucus.

Matthews also addressed Bill Clinton's comments later in the show. After re-airing the video clip of Bill Clinton, Matthews said: “You know, when he waves that finger at him -- I remember him waving that finger before. 'I did not have' -- you know, when he starts to wave that finger, I begin to wonder, what is he talking about? There's only two patriots running in this race and the other guy has all of these problems as if it's his fault?” The Chicago Tribune's Jill Zuckman disagreed with this interpretation, stating: “I don't believe that he's trying to suggest that Senator Obama is not a patriot. I think what he's saying is Senator Clinton and Senator McCain like each other and they have policy disagreements.” Matthews responded: “You have two people that love the country and don't have all this other stuff. What's all of this 'other stuff,' and why single these two out as the patriots?” Zuckman replied: “I think what he's saying is if these two are in a general election together, it will be a great race. It will be an uplifting race where people can feel proud of their country.”

In addition to Zuckman, Steve Benen stated on his blog, The Carpetbagger Report:

There's just nothing striking about the comments. He said Clinton and McCain are patriotic Americans who can face off in a campaign about issues. It wasn't a shot at Obama; it wasn't about Obama at all. I suppose one, if they were really anxious to parse the words and raise a fuss, could make a variety of inferences, but there's really no rational need to do so. At face value, his comments were harmless.

Also, in a post on National Review Online's blog The Corner, Kathleen Parker, a syndicated columnist with the Washington Post Writers Group, wrote that she “was present” when Clinton made the remarks. She added, “In no way did I interpret Clinton's remarks as questioning Obama's patriotism. Clinton was making the case for his wife's electability against McCain, who last time I checked is the presumptive Republican nominee and her challenger should she win the Democratic nomination.” From Parker's blog post:

In no way did I interpret Clinton's remarks as questioning Obama's patriotism. Clinton was making the case for his wife's electability against McCain, who last time I checked is the presumptive Republican nominee and her challenger should she win the Democratic nomination. He may have intentionally bypassed Obama in his leap to match Hillary against McCain, but he didn't say anything that could be construed as questioning Obama's patriotism. The sequence went as follows: He noted that Hillary polls ahead of McCain in Ohio and Florida and also that McCain leads “Hillary's opponent” (I quit typing here and don't recall exactly which states he mentioned in that part of his comment.) His point, obviously, was that Hillary should be the nominee and, in that case, she and McCain would face each other in the final contest.

From the March 21 edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews:

MATTHEWS: But, Mike Allen, like a cartoon character, Mike -- I want to ask you about -- you know the cartoons we grew up watching of the cartoon character that runs off the cliff and doesn't look down and keeps running, in fact, stays there in free space, as if there isn't a cliff they've just gone over. Hillary and Bill Clinton -- I want you to look at this. If this isn't a case of that, I don't know what is. This is Bill Clinton today talking about the situation in this race in this somewhat unearthly way.

BILL CLINTON [video clip]: John McCain is an honorable man, and as all of you know, he has paid the highest price you can pay for the United States short of giving your life. And he and Hillary are friends. They like and respect each other. They have big disagreements on foreign policy and economic policy. They have taken reluctant Republican senators all over the world to prove that global warming is real but there is a way to deal with it that grows the economy and doesn't shrink it. And we now have a bipartisan majority in the Senate to do something about this.

That's the kind of leadership this country needs. And I think it'd be a great thing if we had an election where you had two people who love this country and were devoted to the interests of the country, and people could actually ask themselves, who's right on these issues, instead of all this other stuff that always seems to intrude itself on our politics.

MATTHEWS: There's only one way to read that. He's saying that if you pick these two people, you get two people that love their country. If you don't, you don't get two people that love your country. You get this other guy, Obama, who has all this other stuff, as if that other stuff is Obama's problem. He's getting pretty tough here, isn't he, in these last efforts to hold onto reality or something like a Clinton reality, Mike?

MIKE ALLEN (Politico chief political writer): Well, of course, Chris. And the Clintons, in fact, really believe that he would be a weak candidate in the general election. They, of course, for their own personal reasons, but they also fear, in a campaign like this, you have to believe this, that they would be much stronger candidates.

Now, Chris, as you suggested in your question, there's two reasons that the press hasn't -- has sort of been suspending reality here a little bit or holding off on a verdict in this campaign. And that is, first of all, because we've been wrong so many times, burned so many times. Why should this be the first time in this cycle that what we expect to happen will happen?

But second, as you referenced, it's the Clintons. People think that somehow, some way, they're going to find a way to get out of this. And this has to be very emotional time for them. This was such a personal affront today for Bill Richardson, who had two appointments from President Clinton, to go ahead and endorse their opponent.

[...]

MATTHEWS: Here's her husband, former President Clinton, what he had to say, some tough words today. I think he's still in a fighting mood.

BILL CLINTON [video clip]: John McCain is an honorable man, and as all of you know, he has paid the highest price you can pay for the United States short of giving your life. And he and Hillary are friends. They like and respect each other. They have big disagreements on foreign policy and economic policy. They have taken reluctant Republican senators all over the world to prove that global warming is real but there is a way to deal with it that grows the economy and doesn't shrink it. And we now have a bipartisan majority in the Senate to do something about this.

That's the kind of leadership this country needs. And I think it'd be a great thing if we had an election where you had two people who love this country and were devoted to the interests of the country, and people could actually ask themselves, who's right on these issues, instead of all this other stuff that always seems to intrude itself on our politics.

MATTHEWS: You know, when he waves that finger at him -- I remember him waving that finger before. “I did not have” -- you know, when he starts to wave that finger, I begin to wonder, what is he talking about? There's only two patriots running in this race and the other guy has all of these problems as if it's his fault?

ADAM CLYMER (author and former New York Times reporter): Well, when he waves his finger, reach for your wallet.

[laughter]

MATTHEWS: Jill?

ZUCKMAN: I don't believe that he's trying to suggest that Senator Obama is not a patriot. I think what he's saying is Senator Clinton and Senator McCain like each other and they have policy disagreements.

MATTHEWS: You have two people that love the country and don't have all this other stuff. What's all of this “other stuff,” and why single these two out as the patriots?

ZUCKMAN: I think what he's saying is if these two are in a general election together, it will be a great race. It will be an uplifting race where people can feel proud of their country.

MATTHEWS: That's a unique selling point?

ZUCKMAN: Look, Senator McCain talks about it a lot.

MATTHEWS: A unique selling point, so they're paired off more or less politically.

ZUCKMAN: Exactly.