Matthews: My Job Is To Make Obama Presidency a Success
By Mark Finkelstein
November 6, 2008 - 09:35 ET
Just in time for the new James Bond movie, Chris Matthews has earned himself a new moniker: Odd Job. Matthews says he sees his job as a journalist as doing everything he can to make the Obama presidency a success.
Appearing on "Morning Joe" today, Matthews was reluctant to criticize Rahm Emanuel's kabuki dance over accepting Obama's offer to be chief of staff.
The "Hardball" host (and presumptive candidate for U.S. Senate from PA) was equally unwilling to see the Emanuel episode as evidence of a lack of planning and discipline in the nascent Obama administration. Matthews eventually explained why.[H/t multiple NB readers.]
CHRIS MATTHEWS: Yeah, well, you know what? I want to do everything I can to make this thing work, this new presidency work, and I think that --
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Is that your job? You just talked about being a journalist!
MATTHEWS: Yeah, it is my job. My job is to help this country.
Matthews wasn't done with his odd new job description . . . An incredulous Scarborough kept pressing, astonished at such a complete 180 from Matthews's repeated insistence during the Bush presidency that he had to hold the government accountable.
SCARBOROUGH: Your job is the make this presidency work?
MATTHEWS: To make this work successfully. This country needs a successful presidency.
Matthews will hardly be alone in that sentiment. Once Obama assumes office, the "speaking truth to power" line we've heard so often during the past eight years will be a thing of the past.
The least they could do is change 'hardball' to dodgeball.
“The lamps are going out all over America; we shall not see them lit again in our lifetime”
Morons of America, Unite! You have nothing to lose but your country.
-B.H.Obama
The new Central Command analysis, conducted by dozens of experts from across the government, focuses in particular on likely hot spots for the next administration, including Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran, according to three U.S. officials familiar with the review.
How about we just try getting behind the guy in charge this time. See what happens. It worked for FDR. And we know how much the other way fails with - in recent history - LBJ, Nixon, Clinton, and Bush. Let's quit showing our enemies how willing we our to eat our own.
The new Central Command analysis, conducted by dozens of experts from across the government, focuses in particular on likely hot spots for the next administration, including Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran, according to three U.S. officials familiar with the review.
How about we just try getting behind the guy in charge this time. See what happens. It worked for FDR. And we know how much the other way fails with - in recent history - LBJ, Nixon, Clinton, and Bush. Let's quit showing our enemies how willing we our to eat our own.
So objective journalism=lack of patriotism-once a leftist is in office?
Good job. You're definatly ahead of the curve.
Pravda...I mean MSNBC should be using that line by monday.
“The lamps are going out all over America; we shall not see them lit again in our lifetime”
Morons of America, Unite! You have nothing to lose but your country.
-B.H.Obama
I'm just saying if they're going to prop this guy no matter what he does, and it helps in the fronts of Iraq and Afghanistan. I think taking care of business there is more important, than whining about why they didn't do this when Bush was in command. They didn't, too bad, it sucks, I was right, blah blah blah
All of that is immaterial as long as we have troops in the field - just get the fucking job done.
Capiche ?
We can still nip at his heels about domestics issues ....
Maybe
Oh and you're assuming what we've been listening to the past eight years was "truth to power". It wasn't.
In all honesty this Matthew's Cat is going to be in spin mode as Obama finds he has to equivocate on a lot of campaign rhetoric. Already, allowng the Bush tax cuts to expire, is getting close to being off the table because the adverse impact it will have on the country. I will be glad if he doesn't allow them to expire. He will be doing the right thing in my mind, and in your mind.
So I say, let's say "Yay Obama". Rather than "Bwahahahahah he flip flopped".
When it comes to the war. Engage in the same selective reporting they did - to the negative - for the past eight years. But this time, try the positive angle. It might work. If it works, I'll be all like "Yay, Obama, good job, won the war, brought the boys back home, we're all singing in the streets and living in prosperity".
I'd much rather be that way, than the be the way it's been the past eight years. Further, I need to replace the outright disgust I'm feeling right now over this bullshit with some level headed, objective, perspective place within the context of history.
We're losing the initiative in Afghanistan. Shit might get pretty tight.
The new Central Command analysis, conducted by dozens of experts from across the government, focuses in particular on likely hot spots for the next administration, including Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran, according to three U.S. officials familiar with the review.
How about we just try getting behind the guy in charge this time. See what happens. It worked for FDR. And we know how much the other way fails with - in recent history - LBJ, Nixon, Clinton, and Bush. Let's quit showing our enemies how willing we our to eat our own.
I'm with you to a point Tom. I definitely refuse to get on board with the "he's just a regular politician, he's not a change agent" meme that is now the mantra of the right wing world. Sorry honks, but hiring Emmanuel is not sufficient evidence of anything other than a desire to succeed in moving his legislative agenda past Reid and Pelosi.
But I hope to God that the collective "we" that put Obama in power compels him to live up to the spirit of his rhetoric and to serve the national interest. A world where a President is free of criticism is not a world I choose to live in. And Matthews shows himself to be no better than Dennis Miller when he says crap like "I want to do everything I can to make this thing work, this new presidency work."
BTW: If Obama is truly telling the progressives to fuck off, I think he'll find that Olbermann is more than willing to go after him on policy issues. Olbermann's audience runs far to the left of Matthews'.
"Once upon a time, dinosaurs didn't have families. They lived in the woods and ate their children. It was a golden age."
—Earl Sinclair
"I do have respect for authority even though I throw jelly dicks at them.
Terry in Crapchester wrote:Funny that the righties weren't complaining about his mancrush on Bush all these years . . .
Tweety is an idiot. Anyone who takes him seriously in any capacity whatsoever ought to have their head examined.
I had almost forgotten about Matthews' Irie Gazos moment with the bulge in Chimpy's flight suit. That was back when we were going to be greeted as liberators. You might wonder why Matthews refuses to understand the role of the 4th Estate. But I don't. He's a classic starfucker.
"Once upon a time, dinosaurs didn't have families. They lived in the woods and ate their children. It was a golden age."
—Earl Sinclair
"I do have respect for authority even though I throw jelly dicks at them.
Mace wrote:Matthews and Olbermann are no more journalists than Limbaugh or Hannity. Who the fuck cares what they have to say about anything?
Mace
In reality, you are correct. But on MSPravda, they are looked at as and treated like journalists. Fox News didn't have Hannity or O'Reilly covering the conventions or election returns. Guess who did the job for MSPravda? And BTW, if ANYONE, journalist, commentator or teleprompter tech at FoxNews ever suggested it was his job to support GWB, do you think we would ever have heard the end of it?
“The lamps are going out all over America; we shall not see them lit again in our lifetime”
Morons of America, Unite! You have nothing to lose but your country.
-B.H.Obama
Mace wrote:Matthews and Olbermann are no more journalists than Limbaugh or Hannity. Who the fuck cares what they have to say about anything?
Mace
Exactly. BTW, that's one ugly fucking avatar you've got there.
Well thank you very much, Goobs, but I think it's lookin' a LOT prettier since about 6:00 tonight. :) BTW, you don't have to keep it until the 19th. Feel free to lose it at any time.
Mace
A bet's a bet. Just so long as that front-running little pussy theJON doesn't see me wearing it.
Tom In VA wrote:Already, allowng the Bush tax cuts to expire, is getting close to being off the table because the adverse impact it will have on the country. I will be glad if he doesn't allow them to expire. He will be doing the right thing in my mind, and in your mind.
So I say, let's say "Yay Obama". Rather than "Bwahahahahah he flip flopped".
How would he be flip flopping if he doesn't allow the tax cuts to expire? BSmack has already showed us that he has promised that anyone under $250K in income will not pay a penny more in taxes.
He has to make them permanent or he is a liar.
Moving Sale wrote:I really are a fucking POS.
Softball Bat wrote:
I am the dumbest motherfucker ever to post on the board.
Tom In VA wrote:Already, allowng the Bush tax cuts to expire, is getting close to being off the table because the adverse impact it will have on the country. I will be glad if he doesn't allow them to expire. He will be doing the right thing in my mind, and in your mind.
So I say, let's say "Yay Obama". Rather than "Bwahahahahah he flip flopped".
How would he be flip flopping if he doesn't allow the tax cuts to expire? BSmack has already showed us that he has promised that anyone under $250K in income will not pay a penny more in taxes.
He has to make them permanent or he is a liar.
A good portion of the Bush tax cuts benefit people who make over $250K. He could abolish those and still keep his promise.
War Wagon wrote:The first time I click on one of your youtube links will be the first time.
Sure, but if he raises taxes on them, where does he expect job creation to come from?
I have made the assumption that you are a business owner yourself. Will you add positions and keep spending if you have less money to spend? I have already cut back on staff at my office via not hiring replacements for two who have left. That does mean that I have to put in more hours, but such is the case in these uncertain times. It also means that we spend less on things around the office. IE we used to bring in lunch every Friday. Not anymore.
Further, you and I both know that with the current tax system in place there are plenty of incentives to reduce what I pay myself in income. If taxes go up that is all the more reason to get creative with income.
Moving Sale wrote:I really are a fucking POS.
Softball Bat wrote:
I am the dumbest motherfucker ever to post on the board.
Left Seater wrote:Sure, but if he raises taxes on them, where does he expect job creation to come from?
I have made the assumption that you are a business owner yourself. Will you add positions and keep spending if you have less money to spend? I have already cut back on staff at my office via not hiring replacements for two who have left. That does mean that I have to put in more hours, but such is the case in these uncertain times. It also means that we spend less on things around the office. IE we used to bring in lunch every Friday. Not anymore.
I am. But at the current time, I'm my only employee. Not enough money to spend hiring another person. And taxes are only one part of the equation.
To be honest, if I were to hire someone, the most cost-effective thing to do would be to have my wife quit her job and work for me. In that case, all it would cost me would be her take-home pay (which isn't that much) plus the cost of health insurance which her current employer picks up. I doubt I could hire a competent secretary for less. Yes, there are drawbacks to doing it that way, but from strictly a financial standpoint, that would be the cheapest.
War Wagon wrote:The first time I click on one of your youtube links will be the first time.
Terry in Crapchester wrote:
I am. But at the current time, I'm my only employee. Not enough money to spend hiring another person. And taxes are only one part of the equation.
To be honest, if I were to hire someone, the most cost-effective thing to do would be to have my wife quit her job and work for me. In that case, all it would cost me would be her take-home pay (which isn't that much) plus the cost of health insurance which her current employer picks up. I doubt I could hire a competent secretary for less. Yes, there are drawbacks to doing it that way, but from strictly a financial standpoint, that would be the cheapest.
Exactly my point. After I got my business up and running I didn't do the day to day hands on, rather managed the direction. Now I am doing more of the day to day work. If taxes go up, I will be doing more and more, and that means there will be less and less money for others. So sure, taxes are only part of it, but they are a big part. Raise taxes on those who create the jobs and watch job creation fall.
Moving Sale wrote:I really are a fucking POS.
Softball Bat wrote:
I am the dumbest motherfucker ever to post on the board.
Left Seater wrote:How would he be flip flopping if he doesn't allow the tax cuts to expire?
Because he said he would let them expire. But this is a case where I can't see anyone complaining (legitimately, anyway) if he goes back on what he promised, as long as he follows through with his middle-class cuts. I'm guessing the (misguided) rationale for allowing the Bush cuts to expire is to pay for the middle class cuts. But if he can be convinced that increasing taxes on the upper 5% would result in less revenue rather than more, and everyone benefits from them, there shouldn't be any bitching. But there still will be.
BSmack wrote:They actually start at 250,000. Obama has made it clear that anybody making under 250k will not see a tax increase. For him to violate that pledge would be like Bush 41 turning his back on his "No new taxes" pledge. Maybe I'm naive, but I don't expect Obama to commit political suicide anytime soon.
Smackie Chan wrote:
Because he said he would let them expire. But this is a case where I can't see anyone complaining (legitimately, anyway) if he goes back on what he promised, as long as he follows through with his middle-class cuts. I'm guessing the (misguided) rationale for allowing the Bush cuts to expire is to pay for the middle class cuts.
Can't have both be correct. BSmack is all over the part where he said those making under $250K will not see a tax increase. If the Bush cuts expire, that is a tax increase.
Further, why let the Bush tax cuts expire, only to go back and then cut them again?
Moving Sale wrote:I really are a fucking POS.
Softball Bat wrote:
I am the dumbest motherfucker ever to post on the board.
BSmack wrote:They actually start at 250,000. Obama has made it clear that anybody making under 250k will not see a tax increase. For him to violate that pledge would be like Bush 41 turning his back on his "No new taxes" pledge. Maybe I'm naive, but I don't expect Obama to commit political suicide anytime soon.
Smackie Chan wrote:
Because he said he would let them expire. But this is a case where I can't see anyone complaining (legitimately, anyway) if he goes back on what he promised, as long as he follows through with his middle-class cuts. I'm guessing the (misguided) rationale for allowing the Bush cuts to expire is to pay for the middle class cuts.
Can't have both be correct. BSmack is all over the part where he said those making under $250K will not see a tax increase. If the Bush cuts expire, that is a tax increase.
Further, why let the Bush tax cuts expire, only to go back and then cut them again?
Like I said earlier, I don't think the Bush tax cuts have to be an all-or-nothing deal. Obama can keep that portion of the Bush tax cuts which benefit those earning under $250K, and repeal the rest.
That having been said, it would appear that Obama is proposing additional tax cuts, not just those on the Bush package, for those making <$250K/year.
War Wagon wrote:The first time I click on one of your youtube links will be the first time.
to dodgeball.
