Chris Matthews’ cheese has done slid off his cracker

No, seriously:

The problem is there are people in this country, maybe ten percent, I don’t know what the number, maybe twenty percent on a bad day, who want this president to have an asterisk next to his name in the history books, that he really wasn’t president. … They want to be able to say, well, he didn’t really have that batting average; he really wasn’t the first African American president; he really didn’t do health care; he really didn’t kill bin Laden. There’s an asterisk, and they have been fighting for that, the people like Donald Trump, since day one. They can’t stand the idea that he’s president, and a piece of it is racism. Not that somebody in one racial group doesn’t like somebody in another racial group, so what? It’s the sense that the white race must rule, that’s what racism is, and they can’t stand the idea that a man who’s not white is president. That is real, that sense of racial superiority and rule is in the hearts of some people in this country. Not all conservatives, not even all right-wingers, but it always comes through with this birther crap and these other references and somehow trying to erase ObamaCare, erase his record in history, and a big part of it is bought into by people like John Boehner, who’s not a bad guy, but he knows the only way he can talk to the hard right is talk their language.

Chris Matthews is to mental health what Lindsay Lohan is to sobriety.


About Myiq2xu

I was born and raised in a different country - America. I don't know what this place is.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

91 Responses to Chris Matthews’ cheese has done slid off his cracker

  1. votermom says:

    From the last thread

  2. votermom says:

    Susan Rice to be National Security Adviser?

    • DeniseVB says:

      Well, Susan is a good little foot soldier since she believes everything you tell her, repeats it and now rewarded. It’s how Tony Soprano promoted his capos.

      • swanspirit says:

        Obama and friends really think they will “weather this storm” and get back to business as usual , and just keep on doing what they do best , lie cheat and steal . They are complete political animals and are still seeking to turn this onto Republicans .

    • piper says:

      I have never seen another administration full of incompetent people who would have trouble getting and keeping a job in the private sector like this one. Fiction writers, failed lawyers, tax cheats, cooks, bombers, slum lords and other ass lickers.

  3. votermom says:

    twitter over capacity for me

  4. Somebody says:

    This is a short summary of laws potentially broken and possible punishments for those involved in the IRS scandal. I don’t know anything about rightside but this article is pretty bare bones and factual quoting statutes

    • Somebody says:

      By the way I noticed one of those laws had to do with two or more people conspiring to take away constitutional rights…….Um I think somebody needs to investigate the Senate, just saying!

    • votermom says:

      IRS also denied pro-life groups tax-exempt status

      “In one case, the IRS withheld approval of an application for tax exempt status for Coalition for Life of Iowa. In a phone call to Coalition for Life of Iowa leaders on June 6, 2009, the IRS agent ‘Ms. Richards’ told the group to send a letter to the IRS with the entire board’s signatures stating that, under perjury of the law, they do not picket/protest or organize groups to picket or protest outside of Planned Parenthood,” the Thomas More Society announced today. “Once the IRS received this letter, their application would be approved.”

      • Somebody says:

        Holy crap

      • votermom says:

        • lyn says:

          What’s creepy is that many who are commenting on the IRS article in the NYT support what the IRS did, because these groups were conservative. The vile progs are fascist bigots.

        • piper says:

          Can you imagine all the screaming and tantruming they would do if this were happening to them (vile progs)?

      • Horrible. I’m reading a great book by Harvey Silverglate, Three Felonies a Day — it’s about how federal criminal laws have become so vague and overreaching that average, law-abiding citizens probably break 3 of them a day just going about their lives. Very chilling.

  5. votermom says:

    This is actually a cool article
    A fascinating map of the world’s most and least racially tolerant countries

  6. Erin says:

    This kind of projection for the motives of those who don’t agree that Obama is all that and a bag of chips used to piss me off, now it just makes me laugh. What a sad little world Tweety lives in. He makes decisions on who to vote for based on the ethnicity of the candidate and just cant image that there are people out there that don’t think the same way as he does.

    • Mary says:

      All true. But what Chrissie engages in, is actually hate speech. He should be shunned.

  7. yttik says:

    I’m curious, how come terrorists aren’t labeled racist? Seriously, they want to kill and maim people because of their ethnicity, their religion, their culture. Terrorists really are hardcore racists. That’s who we should be concerned about.

    In the US, I’d say the number of hardcore racist is somewhere around less than 1%. Another couple of percent are simple bigots. Then there’s this huge group, say about 15-20% that are like Matthews. They don’t want equality, they want to nurture feelings of persecution so they can declare their personal self righteousness and nobility to the whole world. This is the most insidious group when it comes to racism, because their method of operation requires them to focus on differences, to never let black people forget that somebody might hate them because of their skin color. They are so addicted to feeling pity, that they don’t even care if they rob people of their power.

    • votermom says:

      I’m tweeting that.

    • Erin says:

      Not sure racist is the right word. The terrroist type you are referring to are prejudice against other religious and ethnic groups, many of whom are the same race as they are. They aren’t targetting people because they are white/black/asian, they are doing it because of politics and religion. I would call that a bigot, not a racist for the same reasons you differeniated racists/bigots in the US in your comment.

      • If you superimpose a map of Muslim countries over the map of intolerance that votermom posted there is almost 100% overlap of muslims and racism. Seems to me there must be a correlation between fierce religious intolerance and racism.

        • Somebody says:

          Huh? Murphy, muslims are tolerant…’s the religion of peace for goodness sakes!

          Are you suggesting that they are less tolerant than we are constantly being told??? I am shocked, shocked I tell you.

        • votermom says:

          Actually, in those countries even the non-muslims are suspicious of “people of another race.”
          That’s kind of a natural reaction to seeing that “other race” blow up & behead people you know.

      • yttik says:

        Well, the reason I differentiate racists and bigots is because racism requires some power behind it. People sitting on their back porch shooting off their mouth are simple bigots. They really don’t have the power to oppress anybody. Racism is systematic and institutionalized.

        Prejudice against other religions, ethnic groups, and cultures, backed up by believing you have the right to kill them, is pretty darn racist if you ask me.

        • Erin says:

          I differentiated based on the clasical definitions in webster’s dictionary. As I understand muslim terrorist motivations, they fit more under bigot than racist definitions below. I dont see their actions motived by their race, as by their religous and politcal world view. Defintions are fluid and I can understand why you can see a kind of racism in some of the terrorits groups. Heaven knows there are a lot of them and their motivations are varried.

          Definition of RACISM
          1: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

          Definition of BIGOT
          a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

        • using the dictionary definition of racism, I would argue that pretty much NO ONE in the USA is a racist. Seriously. The percentage of Americans who believe that “racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race” is so small as to be statistically insignificant.

          In which case, the civil rights movement can just shut itself down and Chris Matthew’s mouth should be permanently duct-taped closed. Which makes no sense (well, the duct tape maybe) of course, so a more complex definition of racism is needed.

          Yttik’s definition is more useful as a social tool for increasing tolerance among people and ensuring that those with power (the govmt, big corps, institutions) are held to a very high standard of fairness — forget outright racism, we don’t want our government and institutions to even be biased for lords sake.

          Which is why we’re the greatest country in the history of the world.


  8. Anthony says:

    Doesn’t that ass-kissing, leg-tingling psycho know that pulling the race card just doesn’t work anymore? This jackass has cried “wolf” so many times that even the wolves are yawning.

  9. votermom says:

    Fox Cincy: IRS employees say “we were just doing what the boss said”

    • yttik says:

      Of course they were. There’s really is no such thing as a rogue IRS agent. There are no “rogues” in a bureaucracy. There is paperwork, rules, red tape, and orders from above. The system hardly allows room for common sense, so it certainly doesn’t allow room for people to act independently.

      • votermom says:

        The Fox report flashed a Tea Party express rally where Sarah Palin was speaking, which reminded me that in 2011 everyone was expecting her to run and the Tea Party would have been her machine if she had.
        Another motive for the targeting.

  10. DeniseVB says:

    Gay Patriot made a good observation about Obama releasing an opponent’s divorce records that you could pretty expect that behavior to continue.

    Also love this (someone posted this downstairs), Gutfeld’s riff on the media’s “Elvis Syndrome” ….

    Noticed that the House of Reps cloak room was bugged too, Holder’s got to GO!!! He won’t approve a special prosecuter? Wonder why?

    As the Obama sh*t keeps hitting the fan, the I-word certainly is a possibility now that all these “scandals” together are pretty damning. Standing alone, not so much…..

    Oh, and those Benghazi emails, any hints as to where Obama was that night?

  11. yttik says:

    The NT Times has actually written an editorial critical of the President. I just about fell over.

    • Somebody says:

      I believe at least at this point we only know that the phone records were retrieved from the phone company. Some of those records led back to the cloak room. I don’t think we have any evidence that there was any actual wiretapping involved at least not at this point.

      However and this is tinfoil hat territory at this point. Doesn’t the Patriot Act give the justice department a pass on wiretapping for a short period of time like 48 hours or something? Sort of like a preview fishing expedition and then they have to go to FISA court? I think that’s part of the Patriot Act, all under the auspices of national security of course.

      Think about it, it makes sense to cast such a wide net because then you could legitimately under the auspices of national security have a little listen on a LOT of phone lines. That could be a handy tool during an election, assuming of course any of the information was shared which of course would be illegal and I’m sure nobody would fracture any laws. It would explain why there was such a delay in telling the AP.

      I know that’s kind of out there but you guys always say it would be irresponsible not to speculate.

      • an update to the article at the link confirms that Nunes meant that DOJ had seized phone records from the capitol press pool office (which we already know), NOT that there was evidence of DOJ tapping phone lines in the cloak room. I hope politicians arent being “confused on purpose” about the difference between seizing a phone record and listening in or recording an actual phone conversation.

        • Somebody says:

          That’s my understanding too it’s just phone records. At this point there is no evidence of actual wiretapping.

          Congressional members need to be careful in making accusations like that too.

  12. votermom says:

    Jon Stewart gets in some perfunctory digs at Carney & Obama, then makes it all about reminding the audience how odious Republicans are.

  13. DeniseVB says:

    Down memory lane, did the IRS give Harry Reid Romney’s tax records?

    • Mary says:

      Quite possible.

    • from the link: ““He didn’t pay taxes for 10 years! Now, do I know that that’s true? Well, I’m not certain,” Reid told the liberal news outlet. “But obviously he can’t release those tax returns. How would it look?”

      what a weasel.

  14. Matthews is a total dipshit of course, but there is actually something quite dangerous about his demagoguery: there is a sliver of truth in what he’s saying, and half-truths are a dangerous weapon. I’ve been reading the conservative blogs and news sites last few days because they have been leading with the scandal news as it’s breaking (hot air, powerline, malkin etc). I find the writers at these sites are good — funny, opinionated, and pretty responsible writers/journalists. The comments are a different story, unsurprisingly. The majority of commenters are perfectly reasonable partisans with whom one may or may not agree, but there are a significant percentage (10%?) of commenters who post pretty unabashedly racist comments. My “racist filter” is fine meshed — references to Barky, or Hussein, or the kenyan get caught in it, so I think 10% is a pretty liberal estimate. But that’s 10% of powerline commenters, for lords sake, not the general public.

    In any event, of COURSE there are a tiny minority in the tea party and republican party who are white supremacists or who live in sincere fear about the demise of the white race. Yeah, so what? There are a tiny minority in the Netroots and Democratic party who are true-blue marxists and anarchists, who sincerely agitate for overthrowing the US govmt (dirty little secret: there are also true-blue racists in the democratic party and labor movement too, I know some of them even).

    Matthews KNOWS this. He knows there are lunatic fringes, as well as not so fringey members who have offensive views, in all groups. Using the existence of a tiny few odious members to not only smear the entire group but to friggin justify the State’s criminal intrusion into their operations, denying their Constitutional rights, and just generally intimidating and silencing them is despicable.

    I hate over-the-top comparisons (no, asshole, the tea party is NOT the Taliban, not even close you freak, and no obama is NOT Hitler), but Matthews is fucking dangerously irresponsible — his outrageous commentary can’t be brushed off — the Rwandan genocide was sparked by a media personality spouting off hateful lies on the radio, and what Matthews is saying here, along with Bond and his Taliban remark, is truly dangerous.

    • votermom says:

      There were senators, and even Biden, iirc, calling the tea party terrorists.

    • yttik says:

      People, Americans anyway, tend to rebel. So when you are constantly accusing them of racism, there is a small percentage who will take that as a challenge. So all these accusations of racism become a self fulfilling prophecy.

    • Erin says:

      Do you have any idea how that percentage comes out on the liberal blogs? Contrary to what my fellow liberals may think they are not free of bigotry or racist stereotyping either when they make comments.

  15. votermom says:

  16. votermom says:

    Tipsville . . .

    Sneed is told that Attorney General Eric “Fast and Furious” Holder’s days are numbered.

    Sneed hears President Barack Obama, who is this/close to Holder, has set his sights on Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick as a possible replacement “when the heat dies down on the latest hot-button scandals to hit the U.S. Justice Department,” said a top White House source.

    Last year, Holder became a hot button over a congressional probe of the sale of government guns to drug cartels.

    This time it’s the double whammy of an IRS scandal and the U.S. Justice Department’s seizure of Associated Press reporters’ phone records — which has caused a media uproar.

    “The president will wait until the heat dies down — and a little time has passed beyond that — before he does anything to Holder because Holder is a close pal, and that’s a big deal in the White House,” said a top Dem source. “Holder is also a close buddy of Obama’s senior adviser Valerie Jarrett,” the source said. “Obama knows a change has to be made, but he wants Holder to leave with his reputation intact.”

    ◆ Cool under fire: Patrick, who hails from Chicago and will not run again for governor next year, got high marks for the way he handled the Boston Marathon bombing and its aftermath.

    ◆ Translation: ”The president will chose either Patrick, who has been a great governor, or Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano, although Patrick is in the lead,” the source added. “Obama would have to replace Napolitano, but Patrick would be available.”

  17. votermom says:

  18. fif says:

    This is the fail safe. Tweety can use this to dismiss any criticism, any blatant evidence, any incompetence. I will never understand why this guy has a job that gives him a platform to spout his idiocy.

  19. votermom says:

    3223 RTs on this so far

    • DeniseVB says:

      The Fair Tax would eliminate the IRS. I think they have other great ideas too, but then the corrupt politicians (both parties) wouldn’t be able to use them as their personal ATM machine.

      I remember Glenn Beck supporting the Fair Tax folks but reminded us that we should also tithe 10% of our income to local charities that directly help our communities.

  20. Fox commentator Eric Bolling wonders if it was “just a coincidence” that he was audited by the IRS last year after being a very vocal opponent of obama during the re-election campaign.

    • DeniseVB says:

      Oh, you don’t want to piss off Bolling. 😉 Didn’t he want to donate to keep the WH tours open for the kids who already planned trips to DC? I think the admin refused him.

  21. votermom says:

  22. Constance says:

    Wow, I was just watching the local morning news (King 5 news, NBC) for the traffic report and they had a blurb saying. “The white house has released X number of emails regarding Benghazi which show that the CIA is responsible for the Benghazi talking points and that the CIA did not know if terrorists were involved in the attack when they developed the talking points.” So the white house mouth piece is still actively spreading shit and lies regarding Benghazi! What are they covering up.

    • Mary says:

      Not only do the new emails show that CIA DID know it was terrorists from the git-go, but they also show that the FBI agreed with them, and had no argument with the original talking points from the CIA.
      It was clearly the WH and State that pushed the alterations.

  23. HELENK says:

    in the Benghazi E-mail dump, nothing about the teleconference. That is a important piece of the puzzzle

  24. Lulu says:

    The excuse that the IRS was being deluged with applications by Tea Party and other objectionable and fraudulent filings for non profit status is a lie. The excuse that they had to come up with screening criteria on the fly due to the deluge is a lie.

    • Mary says:

      Sheesh. Might be easier if we make a list of what ISN’T a lie, from this administration.

    • excellent link — thank you. I sure hope congressional staffers are reading blogs like this — there is so much info being disclosed and revealed on the tubes that is relevant to their inquiries.

  25. myiq2xu says:

    I’m gonna live-blog the WH presser. Not sure how long I can endure Obama’s bullshit.

  26. HELENK says:

    comcast (owner of msnbc) confronted at shareholder meeting about their fact checking and how do they protect themselves from libel lawsuits

  27. votermom says:

  28. HELENK says:

    this could make a big difference in lawsuits against the government. If you win the government lawbreaker will have to pay your legal fees

Comments are closed.