Matthews never demeans Republican women.

Matthews went after Kerry as well. The who would you rather have a beer with comment.

Who had the best ratings on MSNBC ... Donohue and they canceled him because he was asking too many questions about our rush to war.

Then look at CNBC. Kudlow who chastises the communist democrats at every turn. Kernan who is nothing but Repug spin, and on and on.

All owned by GE, they just don't like Dems do they ... ?

I see the common thread as NBC and all it's network arms as being a hit squad for the Republicans.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The good old fashioned boycott with letters to the sponsors.

It's time for organizations to call for boycotts again, past time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

MSNBC has become for the Democrats what Fox News is to the Republicans.

On top of that both Matthews and Russert they have been blatantly pro Obama – ad nauseum. Who is this guy anyway?

There is no objectivity in their analysis; it is all slanted because they obviously sat down together and decided whom they would like to see as President. They are both racists; why else would anyone vote for this unknown? They think they know better than the public; genuine elitists, they have proceeded to bias everything in Obama’s favor. Again I say, who is this guy Obama? Nobody knows, and apparently nobody cares enough to find out.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This ia a well written and unfortunately a very truth article. It is sad to me to see such people as Matthews getting praise from anyone one or organization. The Times(so called liberal msm) is but a shadow of its former self. I totally agree with the comments by mmckinl.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Chris is the classic example of how bad staffing needs are at MSNBC for quality talent. He and Tucker are and were the sad example of people that think they are of Journalism quality. In fact Chris does not need guests as he could talk to himself for the time of his program and he would be pleased with him self. The only good talent MSNBC has is Keith Olbermann, Abrams is trying but just uses the same material that Keith just used on his program just before Abrams came on air. I got it - Hire Senator Lieberman and call his program the Judas Hour.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The only reason Chris Matthews has a job, is because he is a whore. He whores out every ounce of humanity he possibly can. I could find a 6th grader that would ask better questions then this operative.

He is an operative, distraction, and a propagandist. He needs to be off the air. Trash!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Chris Matthews is a cretin and a self-important whore. There is NO humanity in this dipShit. His sole job is to bring on people who might have something intelligent to say then REPEATEDLY interrupt them in half sentence with inane utterances of cretin blather.

His job is to raise his listeners anger to hair-pulling level. I wouldn't waste hocking spittal on this dumb shit. He needs to be taken off the air. Skin-crawling garbage!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WHO is behind the Barack Obama for President
"moo-vement"?

.... GE ..and other corporate elitists.

Are a lot of working class Americans Bitter?
Well, they SHOULD be: Another GE candidate for President (SOLD to the public by the Corporate-Controlled "Mainstream MEDIA)...Ronald Reagan...began the MASSIVE Robbery of the American people that has continued to this day.

About every day the TV Talking heads say: "The Rich are getting richer and everybody else is getting poorer"

...& You'd Think...after nearly 30 years they would FINALLY ASK: (& Answer) WHY?

The answer is simple: Reagan cut the top tax rate down from the 70%'s to the low 30%'s.

Simple: tax the rich a lot less AND they damn sure WILL get a whole lot richer a whole lot faster. There was 2 PARTS to Reaganomics tho. The second part was: "The Two-Tier Wage Structure"

i.e. Pay the Top level "executives" a Whole LOT MORE; Pay everybody else a Whole LOT LESS. (Newspapers & TV in the early 80's had articles & coverage of the "Two-Tier Wage Structure" that CORPORATE America trotted out IN CONCERT with Reagan's election & tax cuts.)

WHEN its CORPORATE POLICY to PAY Everybody else a WHOLE LOT LESS-everybody else is going to get-a whole lot poorer...huh?

a. It was deliberate. b. Its been going on for nearly 30 years.

Next Question: Is Obama likely to fix it?
Answer: Hell No. Because THE SAME PEOPLE are running him for President - The SAME WAY they got Reagan/ Bush1 / Bush2 elected: MEDIA PROPAGANDA.

GE owns MSNBC & NBC. AOL Time Warner owns CNN. Westinghouse owns CBS. (GE is the 2nd largest corporation on the planet). They have interlocking directorships. THEY ARE the Corporate-Controllers of the Corporate-Controlled Media.

MSNBC/NBC have become the CHIEF propaganda mouthpieces of the Obama Pushers (BOPN-Barack Obama Propaganda Networks)-just like FOX has been the the Bush Propaganda Network all these years.

There are no more Journalists, no more NEWS People. They have all become court jesters & clowns doing their bit to please their corporate masters..Top Level..PAID A WHOLE LOT MORE---Media whores.

Here's a glimpse of ONE of the $Billions of TAXPAYER-RIPOFF-Reasons GE wants to "elect" Obama President: GE & Westinghouse are in the business of building nuclear power plants. They are planning to reap $Billions in RISK-FREE Profits by building the lion's share of 29 new nukes.

The Cheney Energy Bill passed in 2005 - made it possible for the nuclear industry to begin planning to build 29 new nuclear power plants (licensing hearings are already scheduled for the first few of them).

No new nuke plants were built for 30 years because the banks wouldn't loan the money - too risky. The Cheney Energy Bill solved that problem by Guaranteeing TAXPAYER PAYBACK of any nuke loans that default (The Congressional Budget Office rated the risk of default at 50% or greater)

Obama voted FOR the Cheney Energy Bill. Clinton voted against. Clinton says her Energy plan does not include nuclear & if they want to be considered they will have to FIRST Make it Cheaper and find a safe way to dispose of the nuke waste.

McCain, this week on the Campaign trail said...we just have to face it we need to start building new, "CLEAN", nuclear power plants. i.e. The Corporate Elitists are running OBAMA AND McCain for President.

("Getting off coal to go to nuclear is like giving up cigarettes to take up smoking crack".)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This article even admits it towards the end, noting that it applies only to "Democratic and liberal women." The media has a soft spot for the right, and a personal thing against Hillary.

Matthews is just an insecure kid with a big mouth. If he thought he could get attention by making crude remarks about 3-headed Eskimos or 3-legged puppies, he would do so, and write a book about it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Chris Matthews is a disgusting piece of garbage long overdue dumping. MSNBC shows the true content of their intregrity as a news source by paying this man with his attitude toward women. But what can we expect from a company that believes Tim Russert, Andrea Mitchell and Keith Olberman are journalist, what a joke, the clown network.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why are CNN and MSNBC trying so hard to be like Fox News? What they do isn't journalism. They are totally dishonest, corrupt and pandering. Sure, they may have the viewers but they don't have any scruples at all. They're the lowest of the low.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

For all of this special annointing he supposedly has received, I wasn't the least bit inclined to read the Times piece. I watch his show fairly regularly, but don't break my neck to see it. It just happens to be on before Countdown. This annoiting must be in circles other than regular viewership, imo. The TV media hyping its own because they are not likely to annoint anyone who brings real news during an election season.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Is it racism when Republicans try and smear Barak Obama, while they cherish Condoleeza Rice?

Not exactly racism, is it? No, it's partisan politics carried out by media prostitutes like Chris Wallace (a male prostitute is still a prostitute) in order to please their Republican owners.

It's normal for people to have an agenda, and to look around for stories that fit that agenda and try and squeeze them into the proper mold - but it's a really rotten journalistic practice. This is all about political smear campaigns which use racism and sexism, or whatever other nasty tactic they can think of.

Chris Wallace is a pretty psychotic individual, like most members of the corporate media - they suck up to their bosses all day long, and spew invective and distortions all night long... no wonder they are psychotic. But really, you have to feel sorry for them... for anyone who says stuff like this in public:

"Lucky though he was, Bill Clinton never had his shot at greatness. He could lower the jobless rate, balance the budget, and console us after the Oklahoma City bomb. But he never got the opportunity George W. Bush was given [on Sept. 11]: the historic chance to lead. - Chris Matthews.

Yes... 9/11 ... a real opportunity to shine, wasn't it? Oh, the joys of militarism!

"C'mon. He'd be embarrassing upstairs at the White House. So I think she'd have a hard time. I think a woman president would have to be very conservative to get elected."

Yes, well maybe you should stump for Ann Colter, Chris - she'd probably be willing to pay you in dominatrix sessions.

Five years from now, 10 years from now, there's going to be a huge Islamic population in the world, they're going to be nationalistic, they're going to be religious, and they're going to be militant.- Chris Matthews

Oh no! Not the Asiatic hordes! What? Oh. Okay. Oh no! Not the Arabic hordes!

I'm not just gonna go after the black Jesse Jackson they all want to make fun of, but I know the wrong people are gonna laugh at that. I don't want to play to that crowd. I don't.- Chris Matthews

Oh, but sometimes you just can't resist, can you?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Matthews is far from being an anomaly in the media. It seems they love to create brainless diversions such as Matthews and his growing cult of misogynistic personality, always whenever the issues become too intense. It's as though a kind of disconnect happens - this presidential campaign involves very serious issues, and instead of focusing on and exploring those issues, we get crap like Matthews and his idiotic bloviations. We get so-called journalists making a big deal out of Obama's preacher and his silliness. We get entire news articles about Hillary's cleavage. Why, oh why, can't the news media act like grownups and give us serious coverage of the issues that are crucial in this presidential campaign? Why the adolescent deviations? And loudmouths like Matthews not only take up air space, they get paid tons of money to do it. I just don't understand. No wonder the world laughs at Americans.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Enough said.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So, Matthews got some undue positive press. He doesn't exactly blow my skirt up either, but it's not because he hates women-folk.

Arrogant, snotty, and condescending are just that, unless words have lost their meaning and "racist" has been superseded by "misogynist" as the new, tres chic label for people you don't really like.

Seriously, find something worthwhile to be offended about.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

With a little rambling, please bare with me and with coffee read to end you might just agree with me.

Reflecting to some of the post debate analysis across the board, just as Obama seems to express the ideal to brush off the questions of his own personal character, Mainstream Media first line Journalist press on in support of ABC’s penetrating want for more grim, and smear in character discussions. The Mainstream first line Journalist Simply brush off public opinion and amplify the so called differences as negative campaigning constantly leaning towards it ideals destruction of the Democratic party will be eminent at the convention. Yes, indeed here we have those first lines Journalist embedded in the Iraq war for over five years reporting confusion to America now looking in the magic crystal ball of politics and see doom and gloom for Democrats.

Isn’t it incredible how deep and proportionate Americas Mainstream Media is clinging to Obama’s Mother and father and relations to racist radicals painting the picture of Reverend Wright as an angry America patriot with video’s widely distributed for years. Or worse, un-American. If Mainstream Media ever went into stuff like that with George Bush, with ties and business relations with the Bin laden family, considered the primer financers of Al Qaeda, and the radical of Islam the Wahabbi, do you really think America would be were it is at today? Probability not. So, Mainstream Media obviously is in close if not complete complicity with the very enemy George Bush has been with for decades. My God the banking method of bungling is pronounced in Bear Stearns and others so absurd with uncertainty beyond what America called the last depression.

The whole imbalance gushes with a Mainstream Media, especially CNBC the money channel connection powered by Allen Greenspan of former Federal Reserve Board Chairman privy to trillion dollars decisions, admittedly saying he saw an accident taking shape ready to happen is extraordinary. All the while as he stands in the storm of legal profiteering and instant funding for the few his wife Andrea Michael with audacity of greed, and a huge bias of opinion shapes political commentary to America on MSNBC with Chris Mathews. Something bitter here which Obama knows and is a coward to bring forward to change. A striking video clip we may never see again was presented by one of the anchor hosts on CNBC money channel by Kudlow, get this he calls Obama Black Power Lite. IMUS got fired for similar stuff or is the media getting bullet proof, or is Obama really a wimp not to call him on that.

What are played out today in open Mainstream Media to America are precious and a wonderful example how the distortion of reality really is. When Colbert had Chris Mathews on his show interviews Mathews, and here declared himself as a possible candidate for the Senate seat to replace Arlen Specter in Congress. The political Knuckle ball’s that have been thrown by Chris Mathews now are wildly apparent and obvious. Chris Mathews is no fan of the Democratic Party. From my perspective Arlen Specter has been portrayed as a political nice guy when in fact Arlen is the Specter, the real political levee for long time profiteering and legislative mangling.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not kidding. This creepy misogynist recently announced his intent to run for Senate with a view to bigger and better things (presidency is my guess).

And I figure any country that would put a halfwitted misogynist like Reagan in office, then follow suit with the Bush Dynasty would reward themselves with a special prize for 2009, McLame, who will set the cause of women, veterans, the poor and people of colour back, oh, two hundred years.

GE has already decided on McLame, Nobama is merely an entertaining side-track for simplistic American minds. Clinton is the real threat, woman or not. (Anyone out there have an objection to the prosperity of the Clinton years, how quickly you are brainwashed to believe they were BAD!)

Slime her at every opportunity and reward the slimers with cover stories.

Sweet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I don't watch any of them. don't want to read about them. bush asskissers all. war greedy mongrel owners of the airwaves. take their fcc licenses away.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Althought Chris may be the star of misogyny, all of the media have engaged in trashing Clinton. Some of this is due to the Clinton name, but much of it seems to be that she is a woman who dares to seek the presidency. How dare she try to invade that male inner circle- President of the United States? Rather than discuss the issues relevant to all of us, the media has focused on the "bitch" versus the black man. I'm always suspicious when the media takes sides. Just look what happened when the media embraced Bush and gave him a free ride.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Being an asshole gets you ahead in this country. Hell...you're REWARDED for being one! You see them on the cover of Forbes or Fortune magazines. Look how Donald Trump has been made a celebrity--young up-and-coming twentysomethings and recent college grads with business degrees WANT to be like him.

Look at the culture in our corporations that reward the middle and upper managers for their ruthlessness. The CEO who cuts/outsources jobs is given a bonus. Look at a typical ad I saw recently for a departmental manager of a major insurance company: "the ideal candidate will possess a management style that aggressively pursues company goals". Sure doesn't sound like they are looking for a nice guy.

As for Mr. Matthews, I am sure he is crying all the way to the bank. If pressed, he would probably tell you: "look babe--if it makes money, you don't make apologies."

I wish the Right would stop yakking about gay marriage, abortion, and whatever they are blaming for "the decline of America". It is the prevalent attitude of "ruthlessness is ok" that really signals the decline of this country.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is misogyny. You can tell because it is
so personal and so venomous.

A great story --thank you for writing it. I
just wish you had written it about three months ago. It might have made some journalists and bloggers a little more self-conscious about where their hatred of Hillary wsa coming from.
(Not picking her as your first choice for the White House is one thing, hating her is another.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I have never heard Matthews or Scarborough call a male guest "dear" or "dearie."

If I had a million dollars, I'd bet all of it that Matthews has Asberger's.

Scarborough is just mean-spirited. Mika needs to grab her self-respect by the collar and let him have it. Once and for all.

The disrespectful treatment by David Gregory of Rachel Maddow is a slap in the face to all thinking people.

Let's turn MSNBC off except Olbermann. He's the only one who gives Maddow a chance to posit views that otherwise would be hard to find on cable.

Chuck Todd: In response to an opinion that the ABC debate wasted voters' time with 50 minutes of tabloid questioning, Todd opined that people always complain when they believe a debate went badly for their candidate. Obviously, he hasn't been following the blog comments which makes him an ignoramus.

It's not entirely about sexism. It's at least as much about protecting corporate interests by blocking a real political discussion as it is about denigrating women.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Chris Matthews is reptilian even by MSNBC standards which is dotted by overgrown rich kids; Dan Abrams is the son of a wealthy Jurist/Attorney, David Gregory is the son of a Broadway Producer, Alex Witt, daughter of a wealthy L.A. surgeon who is obsessed with his "distiguished" genetic pathway; Tucker Carlson's father was a wealthy founder of PBS,
Nora O'Donnell is the wife of wealthy owner of DC's most prominent GOP-favored restuarant/watering hole, Mika Brzezinsky is the daughter of the Brzezinsky, Pat Buchananan sometimes pretends to be the brother of his alter ego, Bay Buchananan( just kidding...but anybody ever seen them together? ).
Chris Matthews is a Pee Wee Herman clone who sounds like him, shares Pee Wee's vapid intellect and has stolen Pee Wee's inane chortle. The suggestion he or O'Donnell could deride another's laugh is ..well..laughable!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I am an Obama supporter but I must agree that Matthews has been ruthlessly belittling Hillary not just this year but for several previous years. It has been shows like his that kept her name in front of us for the past four years as he and other Republican-front TV news talkers (they are not journalists) started nearly every evening's show with her name as the frontrunner. It was as though they had annointed her with holy oil or something. They are the ones who made Hillary seem inevitiable and did not give room for any voice that might express a different choice of thought.

I personally do not like Hillary not because she voted for the war, but because SHE CONTINUES TO SUPPORT IT while lying in our faces and claiming that she wants it to come to an end. She is my State Senator and I have never felt that she did anything for the state but fill a seat. I voted for her first term but I refused to vote for her for her second term. She has voted to support EVERY WAR INITIATIVE that Bush has proposed. She has never stood up to Bush - not one time - so I don't believe she has the guts for the job. She will just do what the corporate lobby tells her to do because AIPAC owns her. But regardless of all that, I resent Matthews, Russert, Nora O'Donnell and the rest of whom they themselves call the "irish Mafia" thinking that they have the right to choose the Democratic candidate FOR us.

During the entire Bush administration, Matthews did not have any Democrats or liberals on his panels or as guests. He had mainly white Republicans fill those roles, He also had no African Americans. He now has several African Americans as guests for each program and has mostly Democratic guests.

So what makes him think that we forget that?

I understand that he is considering running for the Governor's seat in his state of Pennsylvania challenging Rendel (sp?) So that's he's going through all the hullabaloo "hustling" these college debates and trying to turn himself into "hail-fellow-well-met." He is campaigning for himself, the juicy-mouthed a-hole.

Yes, he is misogynst and racist and I resent the way he has thrown Hillary into our faces without asking ALL of us how we felt about it. It is not HIS choice.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hillary Clinton is everything Chris Mathews says, I can't even stand to look at the woman, listen to her, she is a constant nightmare.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm sorry. I just don't see it (the misogyny). This article starts off with references to quotes from persons other than Matthews. When you read what he actually said, he is asking questions for the most part. I think they are within the realm of fair questions. Like: Is McCain too old? Is Obama "black" enough (although the relevance of this latter criterion is questionable - the question can be and has been asked, without the same kind of attack on the media). Within the quotes Matthews says the U.S. may very well be ready for a woman president. That doesn't mean Hillary is the right person. I've been a feminist since I first understood the word (circa 1970 or so) and I just don't see Matthews as a hater of women.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The flamboyant ignorance and extreme bias sloppily-presented as informed and insightful commentary displayed by Alternet on a nearly daily basis is deeply saddening. If the ABC debate was a debacle with a misguided focus on gossipy irrelevancies worthy of yellow journalism, this left-wing hitjob piece on Chris Matthews doesn't stray very far from that current.

After all, if you don't like the messenger, then put out a libelous hitpiece accusing HIM of libelous coverage.

Nothing Chris Matthews has ever said or done could be as demeaning to American women as the damage Hillary Clinton's own campaign has inflicted since the aftermath of the Iowa caucuses.

Here is a politician who has irreparably undermined the the future prospects of liberal women in American politics through her own consistent pattern of unbelievable and unabashed pettiness.

I suppose those among AlterNet's unwavering Clinton supporters, who are so indulgent in their own fantasies of victimhood to explain away Clinton's remarkable descent from front-runner to long-shot, are blind to the fact that her interaction with the media has been of a symbiotic nature, and that that relationship has been a self-destructive one from the moment it became obvious that she wouldn't be *given* the nomination without earning it.

Here is a politician who's been more utterly calculated and whined more consistently than any major Presidential candidate than perhaps Richard Nixon. Here is someone who has coolly and calculatingly used her femininity as a weapon and a shield; Here is someone who has used to fact that she was born a woman as a political tool to abuse and twist every single misogynistic stereotype she and her generation so passionately fought to overcome.

....and yet here's Hillary Clinton relishing tears of self-pity on the eve of the New Hampshire primary, wrapping herself in traditional and misguided perceptions by making womanhood seem synonymous with victimhood.

There was something sickening and depressing about seeing someone who had spent her life so heroically attempting to remold and reshape what it meant to be politically powerful and female, spending eight years rekindling the spirit of Eleanor Roosevelt and going beyond, sitting there feigning tears in front of other women as cameras loomed two feet from her...

It was as if, in that circle of womanhood, in that feminine space, interacting with other woman, and with the cameras intently focused on every microgesture, she decided to show America what SHE wanted to convey about womanhood.

And this politician, who has had such a long and complex relationship with the American media, who regularly touts the fact that she's been "vetted" and that her "baggage has been exposed", someone of such experience, who KNOWS *exactly* how the media will interpret and play every single calculated move she makes, decided to give the media that representation of womanhood.

It was the same representation of womanhood Clinton gave to the media in her completely non-spontaneous and cool remarks about "always getting the first question" and referencing a comedy sketch when snidely suggesting Obama should be offered a pillow. Again calculating that her representation of "woman as victim" would be something the "working class whites" to whom her campaign narrowly speaks would be a representation they're comfortable with.

...because of course, she thinks so little of them that she sincerely believes that the language of politics and femininity is one that she can only represent to them within the context of tired, old stereotypes and relentless victimhood.
She appeals to their broad sense of what a woman is and a woman can be, and shapes her candidacy and hypothetical presidency in terms she thinks they can relate to.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I think partially Matthews and Russert are deflecting attention away from the fact that they fell for the Iraq War Story hook line and sinker and openly promoted it. Their also deflecting attention from their own insecurities in general. By supporting Obama, they get to scratch at Clinton who seems to represent this larger-than-life Vamp who has seductive powers that they dare not give an inch to or she will have them in her eeerie powers & filleted for dinner. Very 50's Noir. They're usually flattered by their guests or everyone understands their parameters. Hillary isn't in that mold, hence she causes them acute discomfort, is known to "shoot lasers with her eyes", (50 ft. woman) etc. Also they so disasterously used their political power to influence the "rush to war" that if Clinton bears collective responsibility for giving Mad George authorization, they bear a much greater burden & by vehemently supporting Obama so strongly they deflect attention from that reality. They become the "cool kids" again. The rebels, when really they were the followers: the bugle-blowers and drum-players when it came to the war. Otherwise, it's just really crazy how often sexualized images come into their analysis of Clinton, as if thier only reference for a woman in power, is "power" in relation to them, as in, a personal realtionship. Sometimes I think men in more "macho" cultures may be less bowled over by strong women. So she becomes their "boogie-woman" (again, 50's Noir, dark looming enlargening shadow on the wall) as opposed to a fascinating and flawed activist/politician, whereas Obama is the beautiful non-threatening poet-warrior man, loved by the penintent and idealistic "men of tommorrow". They love being in that good ligth. Actually they're (Matthews/Russert) just wierd???? I definitely don';t trust them to give Obama props after it goes to the general. Also I think they're rpersonally running against Clinton sometimes, albeit flabbily. What's up with those women in the Polygamist Sect. They're so scary. Now that's the opposite of "wanting power". Powerlessness. Everyone should want power, be ambitious, go for oneself & their community, world. If women were more securely ensconced at any of the networks, there would also be a major story about those "nutcracker"dolls, they sell at airports of Hillary. Talk about "below the belt" politcs. It's so wierd. Anyway. sometimes men just do see women as the "other" if their heterosexual (or not). That's natural to an extent. It would be funny if they gave Gibson's show to Roseanne Barr or Samantha Powers. That would shake it up a little. Re: The View, that's just tripe. Unfortunately, some women are still raised to accomodate, to quickly accept other people's positions as their own, to identify other women as competition for meager resources, suspicious. Anyway, just wanted to say I believe Russerts and Matthews are
possessed by pumpkins.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You know, if we, the womenlet's just fight fire with fire, you know - cut right to it, squeezed the lemon, so to say... and tell the truth about these women-hating men, then the playing field could be leveled.

Granted, these Chris Matthews types, these pasty white men, who are generally chubby and truly unattractive, have scads of money, lots of big cars, and are on t.v.

Truth is, and we all know it, they have penises the size of baby carrots. No woman, young or old, finds them terribly interesting or attractive. We can see them coming a mile away - we can tell you what garbage will spill as soon as the grinning starts. Just look closely and you will see the little fat blond playground bully we all detested in the 3rd grade.

We know it - they know it - and unfortunately, there are a lot of them. They gather together and put women down because, honestly, we don't want them, they are nothing but little fat blond bullies and they are all very silly.

I just change the channel whenever they come on. Most of us do.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I started off this campaign very much pro Obama. The media, particularly, Chris Matthews, probably did more to make me take a second look at Clinton, and I went to different sources to watch both Clinton and Obama and their spouses in action and have come to the conclusion that I dislike them in this order Michelle, Bill, Barack, Hillary. I support her above all the other three, but the thought of any one of the four being on my television set for years makes me sick. McCain makes me sickest of all. I now hope she takes it all the way to the convention and that both sides cannot make a decision and the floor opens up for Edwards, Biden or Richardson. If that does not happen, then the ticket better include both Barack and Hillary or I will cast my votes for the important positons: Senator and House of Representative candidates and leave the top of the ticket empty.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

While Matthews may be a misogynist, this article seeks to nail him on one of the qualities that makes memorable political commentary. Matthews is no longer a journalist, but a professional commentator, reflecting America's palate for editorialized news, rather than "pure journalism."
By the standards indicated in this piece, Mencken was a racist, classist beast as well. The level of interest in this election has been facilitated by Matthews' and the MSNBC rotation, and the Left should be thankful GE has been willing to sponsor such support.
Seeking to scrub their commentary from political coverage would further sanitize this election to the core reality: that there is little difference in either Democratic platform.
Ultimately, this article indicates directly why a Democratic victory is in jeopardy: Matthews is right- to many men, everyone I've spoken with, think Clinton's voice sounds like fingernails on a chalkboard. Everyone I know is sick of looking at the Senator & her husband; we used to admire him, and none of us blamed him for catching some strange back in the day. Now we can't stand them.
Matthews presents a position much in line with that of the Democratic traditional base, whether our more socially enlightened kin like it or not.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

for several weeks to e-mail Countdown. He had Elton John as the "bronze winner" of his Worst Persons list. He said that Elton was full of it when he said that Hillary was behind because of the misogyny here in America. Everytime I've tried to send an e-mail disagreeing with that comment it comes back "Failed". Makes me think that they're blocking e-mails. If that is what is going on they're no better than Faux News. I did get an e-mail through to MSNBC corporate asking why I can't get through to Countdown but, as yet, I've had no response.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

He is definately a sexist even the way he speaks about his wife makes it extremely obvious. He wouldn't dare say anything about Obama because he would be called racist. Better to be called sexist then racist. If it were a real political talk show we would be finding out more about Obama's past and who he really is. We already know who Sen. Clinton is there are no secretes there not even her husbands affair.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No-one has pointed out that the misogyny factor is not confined to Chris Matthews or MSNBC, although if you saw him on Bill Maher last night, you would have seen him laugh off Maher's mention of it. What is becoming increasingly scary to me is the way male supporters of Obama are being emboldened to berate and intimidate women. My daughter, who is a College Democrat on a local campus and who supports Obama but likes Hillary Clinton as well, has been threatened with physical harm for admitting out loud that she thinks Clinton's policies are more detailed than Obama's. I talked to several other women after the secondary Texas Democratic nominating convention a couple of weeks ago who said that Clinton supporters (mostly women) were ganged up on and shouted at, and made to feel afraid for attempting to support Clinton. I saw on the local news where many of them actually left before the balloting because they felt threatened. Many of those who stayed all day said they felt threatened by some of the young male Obama supporters who got up in their faces and yelled at them. These were fellow Democrats!! I really like Obama, and I think he will probably be our next president, but some of his supporters (almost all male) are starting to look like the Republicans beating down the door in the 2000 election in Florida, and I believe it is because they feel free to despise Hillary Clinton for no other reason than that she is female. They can't tell you why they don't like her, many of them will just laugh and say she is a b and leave it at that. It becomes more apparent every day that there has been an enormous gender factor operating in this election cycle, and it far outweighs the race factor that has gotten all the attention. But because people like Chris Matthews and Tim Russert, not to mention others who don't work for NBC, have made so little effort to curtail their own gender bias, Obama's boys feel like they don't have to curtail theirs. On Tim Russert (MSNBC) this afternoon, David Gregory tried to bring up the subject of gender bias, but he was quickly cut off so again the subject was not discussed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Seriously, this kind of political discourse makes me pine for an enlightened monarchy that would shut down this idiotic discourse.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Well, I can't stand Matthews method of interview, ie. ask the guest a question and then interrupt and not allow the answer. However, I am a 68 year old white woman who considers Hilary Clinton bitchy, and snarky, so I guess I agree with all those guys. And, by the way, she is the corporate candidate that has gotten tons of corporate support== witness that they are now tapped out for donations and she can't compete with Obama financially, and he has endless small donations from individual donors. I do support Obama- as our last best hope.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

That any semi intelligent person could possibly expect to find integrity anywhere on the spectrum of corporate media is beyond understanding. Come on people - we all know the corporate media was the main force behind the seating of this fascists government. So where's the merit in arguing the merit of a Chris Matthews?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

He is all wrong! first of all he shouts.. and that is annoying.. then he is very Biased and he should not be making remarks like he does.. I think he has had it and should be off MSNBC... I turn him off I will not listen to the man .... he makes me ill

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why don't you try bad-mouthing Rachel Maddow? Go on, just try it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Once you change your mindset and realize and accept this kind of stuff as entertainment and nothing else, you free yourself from the bonds of expectations. Matthews is just another version of sarcastic humour, he can't be taken seriously. His college tour thing is kind of interesting in that it lets us see the candidates and how they react to some of his drivel. Olbermann remains the master of ironic humour, while Matthews is the fat clown. Hey, he's a great sideshow and nothing else. Don;t go to these types of shows expecting real news or journalism and you won't be disappointed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

he really should be parking an "American" car in his driveway. He could learn something from Fred "drive the pickup truck one block to the campaign event" Thompson.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

He is beyond stupid, but he has a soul mate and his name is Tim Russert - dumb, fat and arrogrant as hell. They're like twins.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

..no flasing leggs, boobs hanging out, fake faces, and more morons calling themselves newspeople...long,long, ago in a far away time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Boehlert's usually good, but I think this is a near-miss. Matthews IS, of course, misogynistic, but the central focus of his obnoxious side is his "mischievous-overgrown-Catholic-city-boy" persona, which subsumes misogyny among many other facets. They show up in spades when Chris talks onscreen with the big wheel in that club, Pat Buchanan (who,to give the devil his due, shows more respect for women than Matthews, maybe because Matthews doesn't have a tough sister Bay).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why do we on the left have to go around dwelling on every potential bigotry in the world? Do we not realize that endlessly calling people racists and sexists and homophobes, etc., etc., loses us support amongst the public?

No one wants to stand around waiting to be the next person accused of being a bigot.

I mean--I'm not a misogynist. But Hillary really is exactly what so many people are accusing her of being.

She really is a wolf in sheep's clothing, beholden to corporate donors while pretending to be grass-roots. She really has profited from Limbaugh's campaign for Republican votes for her and has done nothing to disassociate herself from that madness. She has sent her own hubby out to dirty up the campaign.

She really is campaigning on far past her ability to win, and almost certainly giving McCain a victory in November.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This says it all about America these days. Not much longer to go now, Rome is well alight.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Chris Mathews is just part of the picture. Each day on the David Gregory show, which replaced Tucker's misbegotten program, viewers are given an opportunity to e-mail their concerns or views of a particular story they might be discussing. I take great advantage of that. On one of the first programs, Gregory asked "what would the viewers like to see"? What an opening. My e-mail never got to be read but I like to think they saw it somewhere. I "suggested" that the reporters in Washington get off their collective, lazy butts and do some real reporting, that they stay away from parties where they schmooze with the subjects they are supposed to be covering and he, Gregory in particular, stay off the stage with the likes of a Karl Rove where he made a complete jackass of himself, losing my respect for any credibility he might have had." I further suggested that pandering to John McCain and giving him more passes than they ever thought of giving Obama might be beneficial too. Most importantly of all, I said that regardless what the Pundits liked doing, keeping pots going with their totally unimportant issues as words, long-ago or not so long-ago associations, flag pins made in China, that we are "dying out here," literally and figuratively, and we would really be grateful if they just did their job.

Edward R. Murrow was a giant among the last generation's journalists as in Walter Cronkite and Dan Rather. He has absolutely got to be spinning in his grace at what has become of this once proud, independent, non-partisan profession. We the people are suffering for it, bar none.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

obama has.

clinton has not publicly stated that she is willing to bomb an ally's country without that country's government giving permission.

obama has.

clinton did NOT vote for the recent energy bill putting the cost of nuclear power plant accidents and meltdowns on the shoulders of the american people.

obama did.

yes, it is a concern that her campaign is 'negative.'

charm is nice at a party, and con men can't operate without it. but a presidential election should be decided on policy, not whether a candidate has a pleasant speaking voice.

not that i think it really matters--if the election isn't rigged at the voting machines, as the last two were, there's still not one worthwhile candidate running.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Or, the rest of the mainstream media.

Many of us will never forget their treatment of Ron Paul in the debates, and their deliberate slamming of him during the primaries.

Not to mention, when it was down to McCain, Huckabee, and Paul, they still would not give Paul a mention.

The blackout began right around Iowa, and they made a mistake that will never be forgotten.

Those who don't understand socialism will certainly fall to it. Enjoy the money, privilege, and fun times fellas, because your souls will never sleep.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The only thing I see going on here is that a controversial and divisive female politician is finally experiencing the same intensity of political fire that controversial and divisive male politicians have always put up with. Yes, the insults and caricatures aimed at Hillary Clinton are adapted to her gender, but that does not in and of itself prove misogyny.

For example, what real difference is there between calling a woman a "cunt" and calling a man a "dick"?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

She
1. Will do anything for power, including sell her dignity when her husband humiliated her repeatedly before the world.
2. will say anything for power, including making up stories that make her look brave
3. Will accept help from anybody, including Neo-conservatives, Klan members and many bigots still in the democratic rank any file
The women is motivated by no love for her country, or principles just lust for power.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

pathetic little dick=head? Wonder what his mommy was/is like? Mr Matthews is boringly childish and vapid and dumb as a post to boot.
5 mil a year for nothing but extensive, unending, sexist bs, wow!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You Dems crack me up. Someone who prefers Obama is now called a misogynist or a sexist. Therefore, using that same stupidity, Eric Boehler is a racist, obviously. If he, or any of you were not racists, you would be pro-Obama. Supporting a white candidate over a black candidate proves your guilt as racists.

If you had any brains, you would drop this crap over sexism and racism and focus only on the issues. Problem is, you've focused on pettiness for so long, you've forgotten what matters.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

if you watch what happens you can see it in action. Notice that Don Imus is back. He was forgiven for his sins. That is because they weren't sins. He was doing what his employers and republicans backers wanted. You never see the fire. The smoke is clear to see. It qualifies as a conspiracy because it is done in private and you never get to see the fire.

If a republican talking head supports the current batch of "talking points" that the right wing tax free "think tanks" churn out daily, he is untouchable. If you are trying to kiss the way they want, they will protect you. If a republican politician votes right he might get voted out of office, but "they" will find him a better job. They protect their own. They can afford to. Its a tiny expense out of their wealth.

Tax the poor and transfer the money to the rich. That is the way it works. That is the reason McClellan marched the Union Army around for a year and a half and avoided contact with the confederates. It was making too much money for certain people. You sure wouldn't want it to be over. Lincoln fired McClellan. He didn't get it. He was a dumb country boy. He thought he was supposed to win.

That is why the republican party nominated McClellan to run as the republican candidate for president. Lincoln ran as an independant. How do you think he ended up with a democrat, Andrew Johnson, as a vice-president. Think about it. History is written by the victors. Lincoln was dead. His story never got told.

Republicans have not changed. War is profitable. I suspect that the demise of Richard Nixon was in some way related to the fact that he shut down the Viet Nam War. If he could have kept the war going the big boys would have found a way to cover up for him. They just didn't need him any more so they fed him to the wolves.

Its all something for a real live scholar to crank up and work on.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Problem here is that Matthews and Hillary are like two peas in a pod. So it gets complicated. There's no doubt that Matthews is a total good 'ole boy guy. Problem with Hillary is that she doesn't display any loyalty except to her own brand & that's meant literally. Yesterday, she tossed MoveOn off, tomorrow it might be NOW. Ironic, if she had been a true feminist when Bill humiliated her & she sought a divorce, she most likely would have had the youth vote. So, yes, Matthews is off kilter but Hillary is an obvious target. There is nothing that you can defend either way but to say that most people are tired of it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

standing under the republican umbrella. He is untouchable. SO DON'T PAY ANY ATTENTION. HE IS AN ATOMATON. Ignore him. Rather think why it might be that the republican propagandists might want your mind on this instead of something else. That is the basis of sleight of hand. Don't watch the fast moving hand. Watch the slow moving one. Tricky little fellers aren't they?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Do you really think that the democrats are throwing that much money into the pot? Is this republican money? Have they decided that McCain might just beat Obama? Have they decided that if he were to win he would be easier to snooker into doing what they want?

I voted for John Kennedy. I thought he was going to save the world. If you check his legacy, you will find that it was Lyndon that actually did it. But then Lyndon got an awful lot really wrong.

Ask yourself if you think that the big republicans would be willing to have their big money men play mischief with the democratic primaries. Further, ask yourself if there was republican mischief afoot when Florida and Michigan decided to challenge the DNC? This threw off the balance between Democratic primaries and the superdelegates. Gee whiz how could this have happened?

Ask yourself how dirty politics really might be. Although Harry Truman once commented that he heard people complain about crooked politicians, but in his own experience he had found more crooked bankers than poiticians.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thanks for this expose' of the biased pseudo-journalist MissieChrissie. He makes me want to vomit. No matter since I never watch him, period. (Have in the past, so I have some basis for judgment.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

That's not Bill O'Rillie you're talking about,Mathews has some of those qualities but Bill O has 'em all!! Why anyone would listen to any of those 3 stations still amazes me!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

after hearing all the nasty ass things this fucker said in the national org. for women website, I was like " what a fucking jerk!" then again , so is russert , maybe worse. BUT THE WORST OF ALL HAS TO BE THE FOX NEWSBOY WHOM SAID ABOUT HOW BACK IN LANCASTER COUNTY PA , THEY'D TAKE WOMEN LIKE HILLARY OUT BEHIND THE BARN! PIGS! AND MORE PIGS! at least andrew dice clay[ sexist comedian] is funny and bases his stuff on reality; and yes, the kind of woman whom matthews and company would like all women to act and dress like![ high femme, easily upset, " lady-princess" ]

BUT NOW FOR THE WORST PART! these[ matthews+ russert & co.]are the fuckers that my mom , whom constantly tells me what a liar , blah blah, that hillary is- GETS HER INFORMATION FROM. IN FACT, SHE ALWAYS LIKED THAT MATTHEWS DUDE! she then went on about how she'd be afraid to fly upon any airplane today. ALL THE NEWS THAT'S UNFIT TO CALL NEWS [ " FAIR" AND " BALANCED" NEWS, THAT IS!]

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The crowning moment for me with Chris Mathews was one Saturday morning back last summer. Mathews was waiting with a couple of othe pundits for Hillary's presidential web site to come on line for the first time so they could make comments (i.e., trash it). Mathews read a blurb from the website that said something like, "I will work as hard for veteran's rights as I have for women's rights." (This was during the Walter Reed scandal.) Mathews said he was horrified that she would compare working for our wounded soldiers with working for abortion rights. Hillary never mentioned the word abortion even once, but it was obvious from Mathews' comment that he reduced the fight for women's rights down to only the narrow fight for legal abortions. All of the myriad other areas where women have struggled for almost 50 years were completely ignored -- equal pay, sexual harassment, rape/incest issues, subsidized daycare, and on and on. It was infuriating to hear him repeat this lie, not only several times during that program, but later the next day on another program. He just plain lied about what she had said! It occurred to me that Chris Mathews (as well as Tim Russert and many of the other pundits) is the product of a Catholic parochial school. He was brainwashed very early to think of women as less than males, and it is not surprising that he is blind to everything in the women's movement but the abortion issue. That early conditioning apparently never left him. We need to remember these societal influences when we listen to these people, and take what they say with a grain of salt, or in Mathews' case, not take them seriously at all!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The piece concentrates on "the bitchiness", wihich IS clear, her appearance, presence, and all make it easy to denounce her. Unfortunately it has become the practice for women to shout to be heard, which rarely comes across in a positive way.
The REAL problem, which few above state, is HER stance on virtually all matters of REAL CONCERN. In these, she makes it easy to simply "shorthand it" to BITCH!!! and similar blasts.
If she were on the side of these which benefit the people rather than big money and power, her unfortunate appearances would provide much less ammunition to those the article addresses.
~old74
(that Matthews is totally disgusting is a no-brainer)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

in this article worked for me.

Is anyone else having this problem?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I too have seen commentators, mostly women, including diane sawyer, try to raise the gender bias issue during discussions and have watched them get cut off at the knees, the subject gets changed quickly, people refuse to talk about it, while the attacks and sexist comments continue relentlessly and they keep talking about race. it's appalling, and what you describe as happening to your daughter and others is unbelievable yet wholly believable because the fear and loathing of strong women in this country is deep-seated and powerful. some men will fight hard to keep control and to keep their power, that's what domestic violence is all about, and it's epidemic in this country. I can't forget a comment that obama made early on in the campaign, that he could bring together members from both sides of the aisle because he could "disagree without being disagreeable", sexist code for "we men don't want a tough cold disagreeable bitch in a pantsuit running things, do we?", members of congress wouldn't know how to talk to a woman president, what would the old boy network do? they couldn't flirt with her, they'd prefer an articulate, educated, smooth-talking black man any day, at least they could talk about sports. look at that whole big deal that the media made about the candidates picks for the final four in college basketball. I almost sensed a collective sigh of relief when obama came on the scene, because there was a viable male alternative that the liberal males could flock to. the attacks on hillary have all been about her personality, her "coldness", her not being "likeable", these men don't want a woman running things, it makes them feel weak somehow, insecure. I liked obama too, but that's fading. I don't think that I trust him anymore, for any number of reasons, the sexism being a big one, because, believe me, he knows exactly what he's doing. it's disgusting, what's been going on, and hillary's campaign can't talk about it because that would bring up the "F" word, FEMINISM, and that's a dirty word, a campaign killer, no "real" woman is a feminist, and hillary can't be seen to be one or it's all over for her. so while obama can talk about racism, and accuse hillary's people of being racist, hillary can't accuse anyone of being sexist because the media will call her a feminist.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I've had my fill of derogatory remarks and slanted, one sided news. I now have blocked MSNBC from my cable programming. Period!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Granted I can Not stand Chris - an obsolute Moron, but he is just as full of crap when it comes to Obama. Frankly he has replaced the reprehensible Tucker in who can be the most arrogant and short sighted.
I've cut WAY back on watching MSNBC because I don't think they've been honest and forthcoming with enough things about Hillary and Whats she's Done adn Said- Seems they are trying to get back in her good graces after the Shuster "Pimp Our" comment- Would have been accurate if referring to Hillary, instead of Chelsea.
Misogenistic- Please, the Woman is as Crazy as Nixon, Senile as Reagan, Complicite & compliant as HW and as Much of a meglomaniac as W. She's Cheney's Manchurian Candidate. No one has really nailed her on her recent claims of winning MI- WHICH WAS RIGGED FOR HER!
Nor her insane comments about "obliterating "Iran. She not only has a great deal to answer for as former First lady- she has far more to answer for as a Senator & member of the Armed Services.
I have written MSNBC regarding Chris, Joe, Pat Buchanan. they keep allowing Dems to now be defined by what 'White males' and so calle d'Reagan Democrats' think. there are far more diverse and vast numbers in the Dem Party then they will even discuss- there seems to be a new drive to redefine Dems by these small segments- Just like was done to the republican party when the 'moral Majority' was allowed to dominate the media's attention- taking away the real Base of the Party.
Hillary is NO Dem, she continually proves she is nothing more than a undermining 'Neo Dem'- A Corporationist- the same twisted Group that ruined the Old School Republican party.
I voted for Bill 2x's- supported & defend both through out the '90's - but now I consider her nothing more than a Cheney Protege- Dick in Drag. Just because she has a 'girl package' does not mean we should cut her any slack. 'If she Can't handle the Heat' send her back tot the kitchen! She has alot to answer For!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WHY is MSNBC/NBC PRO-Obama/ Anti-Clinton?

ANSWER: Because Obama is PRO-Nuclear & he voted FOR the Cheney energy Bill; Clinton is NOT Pro-Nuke & Voted AGAINST the Cheney Energy Bill.

GE owns MSNBC/NBC ... & Thanks to the Cheney Energy Bill is planning to reap BILLIONS in proftis (Risk-Free) from building 29 new nukes AND from 30-40 years of Higher Electricity Rates.

Other participants in Cheney's NExt Big MONOPOLY POWER
---ENERGY RIPoff---
Excelon Corp. of ILLINOIS, Westinghouse (Owner of CBS), Entergy (owners of many utilities in the Southern States); 3 consortiums of nuke industry corporations.

McCain voted for the Cheney Energy Bill & has already said on the campaign trail: I have to remember to say ... its absoultely necessary for ...us... to build nuclear power plants.

GE, et al ... Are running Obama AND McCain for President.

If you think nukes are ok... just
GOOGLE: Rocky Flats Denver plutonium, and, Hanford WA nuclear waste.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]