Chris Matthews’ mini mea culpa

Chris Matthews’ record of creepy, on-air misogyny is not exactly new, but it reached new depths last week with his small-minded dismissal of Hillary Clinton. After years of anti-woman rhetoric, this one seemed to cross the line.

Thankfully, Matthews seemed to get the message. Or, at a minimum, his bosses seemed to get the message, and told Matthews to apologize.

For 10 days, the “Hardball” host had doggedly insisted he was just reciting a bit of history when he said on the air that “the reason she’s a U.S. senator, the reason she’s a candidate for president, the reason she may be a front-runner is her husband messed around.”

But protests against those and other remarks by Matthews reached a peak yesterday when the presidents of such groups as the National Organization for Women, Feminist Majority and National Women’s Political Caucus sent a joint letter of complaint to NBC News President Steve Capus.

On last night’s program, Matthews defended the substance of his remarks that Clinton’s political career in New York was launched because of public sympathy stemming from her husband’s much-investigated affair with Monica Lewinsky. But, he said, “was it fair to imply that Hillary’s whole career depended on being a victim of an unfaithful husband? No. And that’s what it sounded like I was saying.”

Noting that it would be just as unfair to attribute John McCain’s political success to having been shot down in the Vietnam War, Matthews said: “Saying Senator Clinton got where she’s got simply because her husband did what he did to her is just as callous, and I can see now, came across just as nasty — worse yet, just as dismissive.” He said he would be “clearer,” “smarter” and more respectful in discussing women.

It’s worth watching:

The comments were certainly welcome, but are they enough?

Kim Gandy, NOW’s president, said last night that “Chris Matthews is a repeat offender when it comes to sexist attitudes toward women politicians. . . . I wasn’t really looking for an apology. I was looking for a behavior change, and for him to treat female politicians the same way as male politicians.”

In the joint letter, also signed by author Gloria Steinem, the women cited other examples in which Matthews referred to Clinton as a “stripteaser” and called her “witchy.” When Nancy Pelosi was in line to become House speaker, the letter noted, Matthews asked a guest if Pelosi was “going to castrate Steny Hoyer” if the Maryland congressman was elected majority leader.

About 30 people affiliated with the National Women’s Political Caucus picketed NBC’s Nebraska Avenue NW bureau yesterday afternoon as a protest against Matthews’s remarks.

“This is a victory for all women. We are pleased that Chris Matthews has shown remorse,” the caucus said in a statement last night.

I am, too, but at the risk of sounding overly demanding, I found his contrition underwhelming. For one thing, Matthews didn’t apologize willingly — he insisted for nearly two weeks that his comments were perfectly appropriate, and only backpedaled when the network started feeling the heat.

For another, Matthews’ apology made it sound as if his misogyny problem was limited to one anti-Clinton diatribe. It’s not; his problem extends to other women, and has for quite a while.

What I’d hoped to hear is a sense that Matthews realizes that he’s been disrespectful to women, and that he’s finally ready to change his attitude. Instead, we heard one statement of contrition about one incident.

Matthews has a pattern of behavior. I got the sense that last night’s mea culpa was, as far as he’s concerned, the end of the controversy. In reality, it should be just the initial step.

I was looking for a behavior change, and for him to treat female politicians the same way as male politicians.”

God help us if Chris starts talking about what he thinks the women may smell like. One English Leather reference was more than enough

  • I am not impressed or convinced. Matthews has problems with all strong, intelligent women, not just Clinton.

  • There is a long history in the abnormal psych literature having to do with Irish Catholic males who “make it” through upward mobility. Priests are a pretty standard example (and not only the pedophiles). So is Chris Matthews. Women, to such men, tend to be either virgins or whores.

  • I don’t think the remarks are enough.

    He claims Clinton’s political career was launched based on her husband’s infidelity. But how does he know this? No one else seems to think so.

    That he’s still claiming it shows that he’s venturing out to try to paint ther as something she’s not- the total background of his misogyny proves it.

    It’s not impossible that he wasn’t just being a jerk, but it’s “beyond a reasonable doubt” that he was, to my mind.

  • Ed Stephan sounds like he must not know many Irish Catholics. I’m sure all the people out there who do know what I mean.

    Ed Stephan’s comment is just as bad as Chris Matthews’.

  • Matthews is still being dismissive (and any man also calling him out on his misogyny). His apology is essentially “I now understand there are a lot of stupid people – especially stupid girls – who aren’t nearly smart enough to ‘get me’ so I promise in the future to use small words & dumb it down in case those dumb grirls are forced to watch my show because they can’t figure out how to use the remote.”

  • Provide some cites to your alleged abnormal psych literature, and provide a quote from it about your “virgins or whores” statement, and the dates of the studies, if there are any studies, before you go making stuff up.

  • It will be interesting to see how he acts during the next primaries. I was so disgusted by his last appearance I turned it off and got live updates online. I used to watch him but for the last year or so I found him so appalling that he’s so far off my radar if it wasn’t for Countdown, I wouldn’t turn on MSNBC. If I want humor mixed into my politics (which I assume he is shooting for with all of his too bizarre comments), I’ll stick with Stewart and Colbert. Matthews might think he’s funny but he’s neither witty or interesting. He’s pathetic.

    It was so stand up of him to make this almost apology for one statement. What about all the others? Please. Spare me your almost contrition. Try acting like a man who doesn’t hate women, objectify them, etc. Matthews belongs with Focus on the Family, not a news show.

    As for Pelosi, I wish someone would give her a set of balls (and a spine and a table).

  • I quit paying for cable TV a few years ago, and went without that medium until this year, relying on the Internets and the radio. Chris Matthews was the final straw, in addition to the outrageous cost of cable; screaming at Tweety got to me. Why do I let idiots drive me crazy, was my question.

    He’s worse now, but I care less. Somewhere, someone said it well, and I’ll paraphrase: what seems to be important now are the opinions of reporters and talking heads, not the opinions of the public. Matthews has some real problems in his psyche, and I think he’s running out of ways to avoid the gorilla in the room, so the repressed stuff in his head comes out under pressure. I don’t know if he bad-mouths liberal and conservative women equally – anyone hear of him slamming Laura Bush? – but I do know that his attitudes about women are archaic and disrespectful and embarrassing, as they come across on camera. Nancy Pelosi, Hillary, women reporters…Matthews comes across as a little boy, a construction worker, or a shat-for-brains horn dog depending on the stimuli. And at times we men all do that, but just not on camera, and not on a supposed news show.

    No, his apology falls short even if he tried. His behavior will not change until he gets counseling, so either he will and things will improve, or he won’t and the viewers will either have to put up with it in order to see what his guests have to say, or he will be let go. Either way, I don’t care anymore. I used to have to put up with him in order to see the interviews. Now, I get better interviews from Jon Stewart. And soon, we might see Rachel Maddow doing interviews. She’s good.

  • He’d be okay if he had put it this way:

    …the reason she’s a U.S. senator, the reason she’s a candidate for president, the reason she may be a front-runner is because her husband was once president.

    I have absolutely no problem with that statement.
    It is completely truthful.
    In fact, it is no different, or less accurate, than this statement:

    …the reason Bush is president, the reason he became a front-runner in 1999 was because his daddy was once president.

    You can’t have one of those statements without having the other.
    Unfortunately Matthews didn’t put it that way.

    But I’m not getting my panties up in bunch about Tweety.
    He is an entertainer. He is paid to alternately roil up the left and right.
    Everybody has been pissed at him at one time or another.
    Everybody has been gleeful with him at one time or another.
    Apparently… he does his job quite well.

  • Whether Chris Matthews only apologizes for the one incident or his ongoing behavior, he has to know that everyone is watching him now. He clearly was pressured into this apology, and probably realizes picket lines and nasty messages to his bosses will ensue yet again if he says similar things. So whether or not he was able to be forthright in apologizing for a pattern of behavior, it seems obvious that if nothing else, he read some of those complaints – he knows people are pissed at him for more than this one comment.

  • Of course the apology was insufficient and underwhelming, but it does look like Matthews got a talking-to by his bosses. It seems that his network is actually taking a bit of responsibility for some of the garbage that their chosen gasbag is spewing.

    Perhaps CNN will wring some apologies out of Glenn Beck.

    Perhaps Fox Propaganda will get Bill O to do some apologizin’. (Now I’m just being silly.)

    In any case, let’s hope that this is the start of a trend. But don’t count on it.

  • Muck Fathews. The man is simply one of those in the media who represents all that is wrong with the media. Apology or not, this empty suit has got to go.

  • This is like watching a skunk trying to smell better. Give it a bath, douse it in perfume, do whatever you want, the odor will remain. And it’s just a matter of time before it stinks up the place yet again. I give him six weeks and he’ll pull some other gem out of his stink hole and let it fly. The man lives to be controversial, and in his world that means being offensive to people.

    It’s not a bug it’s a feature.

  • ” He said he would be “clearer,” “smarter” and more respectful in discussing women….

    Meaning that he will be less obvious while continuing to do what he’s always done.

    (MS)NBC owes all of us an apology for Matthews, Russert, and Carlson. Matthews is merely the most egregious example of the lameness. There are better people out there, some of whom appear on MSNBC as commentators or fill-in hosts. Why their employer doesn’t replace this confederacy of dunces with is beyond me.

  • Honestly, I couldn’t even make it to the “apology” part of the video clip. There was too much self-serving intro about how tough and fair-minded and out to protect the American people he is. Anything that congratulatory it’s an apology in my opinion.

  • “This is like watching a skunk trying to smell better. Give it a bath, douse it in perfume, do whatever you want, the odor will remain.”

    Maybe we should stop refering to him as ‘Tweety’ and start calling him ‘Pepe le pew’…

  • Okay, he starts off by saying that he loves being “hard-hitting” and loves saying things that are provocative, and thinks being careful in what he says is just no fun at all. I read that as “I will say anything for ratings, and the truth is for sissies.”

    He reminds us that he has a good heart and means well, so we should never think he actually means to hurt the people he slams. Right. This is a variation of the conditional apology: “if” someone was hurt or offended, “then” he’s sorry.

    While his remarks were less than adequate in addressing the specifics of his ongoing smears against Clinton, they were useless in addressing the pattern of his treatment of women. I would not look for measurable changes in his behavior because he hasn’t been threatened with a consequence that would force him to do it.

  • If you’re a registered user at Media Matters, as I am, you would have gotten an email from them enumerating Chris Matthews’ outrageous and offensive remarks during MSNBC’s New Hampshire primary coverage and providing MSNBC email addresses to lodge a complaint. Since I had actually watched some of that coverage and turned it off when I couldn’t stand another minute of Matthews’ ignorant braying, I had already sent MSNBC a scathing email about him when the Media Matters email arrived in my in-box. There isn’t a doubt in my mind that Tweety’s half-hearted apology was mandated by his bosses not because they disagree with his remarks but because they got a crapload of complaints. I was dead serious when I told MSNBC that they had lost me as a viewer unless or until they remove Matthews from their coverage team (though I ended by saying I would give them one more chance in the hopes that I would see Keith Olbermann haul off and punch Matthews in the mouth just to shut him up).

  • Did anyone else notice that he went on for FIVE MINUTES with this? Any normal person could have done it in 20 seconds, but that’s Tweety.

  • These guys (Tweety, Beck etc.) aren’t going to change. As long as they are on they will keep doing the same thing.

    It’s a bit like the local radio shock jocks, who are paid to be misogynistic assholes. From time to time they’ll piss off enough people to get themselves fired, at which point they either go to another market or just take a sabbatical until memories fade. But they keep getting rehired because they are just doing what they’re supposed to.

    If Keith Olbermann really runs CNBC, maybe he fire Tweety. (As if.)

  • That was an apology? It sounded like he was saying “I was 90% right but with live TV and not having a script I went a little over the line”. So, you know, it’s the format’s fault rather than anything Matthews himself did wrong. I heard a whiny “can’t you all understand how difficult my job is” type of defense rather than anything remotely apologetic. Chris Matthews isn’t going to change one bit, hopefully he will quit his job and run for office because I don’t think MSNBC is ever going to fire him.

  • Could we just have an Olbermann network, and throw the rest of it into a big hole in the ground? The very idea of Matthews, Russert, and the other panderbear broadcast oafs, spending eternity rotting in a landfill, makes the sun seem to shine a little brighter….

  • Matthews. That old queen. But in his case it’s not just a matter of simple misogyny meets man-love. Clinton bashing is what really launched his show back in the 90s and it seems to remain his spiritual center. So there’s probably a Pavlovian response there to the very mention of the name. Matthews also regards cynicism, particularly his own, as a virtue.

    So yeah. I’m sure he was being completely sincere. :-b

  • Should the general election be McCain vs Clinton, it will be fun to watch Mr. Mathews try to hide his loathing of Hillary Clinton and his man-crush for John McCain “the guy he’d love to have a beer with, again”.)

    In all likelyhood he won’t, and Hardball will be about as impartial as the average Sean Hannity show.

  • There are two questions here: 1) whether Chris Matthews’s mea culpa is “enough” to constitute a genuine, personal apology and 2) whether it is “enough” to justify continuing to have him on the air as a political analyst.
    Regarding the first question: I am cynical about whether his apology reflects any deep understanding of why he makes the comments about women that he does, but I am willing to have an only-time-will-tell attitude to see whether he ceases to make all sorts of misogyny comments and whether his comments as a whole reflect an equal treatment of men and women in the public eye.
    But I am more interested in the latter question. Regardless of whether his apology is sincere and leads to a lasting change in the nature of his comments, I think it does nothing to justify keeping Chris Matthews on the air as a political analyst. His misogyny has its own roots, perhaps in terms of his ethnic/religious background, but it also is part and parcel of his shallow commentary that makes sweeping statements merely on the basis of his own personal perceptions. In addition to all the misogyny, and perhaps the flip side of it, he repeatedly fawns over the masculinity he perceives in certain men, such as Bush’s “swagger” and being “physical” that he celebrated years ago, or last June’s obsession with the “sex appeal” and “smell” of Fred Thompson.
    It is bad enough that mainstream media is so focused on the popularity of politicians and not on their actions and truthfulness, and on issues that matter. But Matthews (and others, to be fair) further degrade political commentary by evaluating personality pretty much solely on the basis of unexamined personal perceptions. Matthews should share a TV studio and air time with someone like Joan Rivers. He should not be presented as a political commentator, not matter how much his misogyny and male-hero worship cease.

  • You should have seen the folks on Morning Joe defend Tweety – Scarborough, Buchanan, Brezinski’s embarassment of a daughter and even David Schuster went on a joint diatribe against Media Matters… it was unbelieveable, not a single opposing point of view.

    I really had hopes that Morning Joe would be canned, and replaced by Rachel Maddow – unfortunately MSNBC is content to put these mindless nuts permanently on our public airwaves…

  • Well, the truth is, if McCain hadn’t been shot down and become a Famous POW – rather than becoming the discharged failed officer he was destined to be otherwise 0 he wouldn’t have had a career. And it took being the son and grandson of Admirals for him to be a Famous POW.

    I just wish someone would go on Hardball, grab that midget by his tie and give him one really good punch to the cheek, the kind that alters his looks permanently, then leaves him in a crying heap in front of the cameras.

  • On January 18th, 2008 at 9:07 am, Swan said:
    Ed Stephan sounds like he must not know many Irish Catholics. I’m sure all the people out there who do know what I mean.

    Ed Stephan’s comment is just as bad as Chris Matthews’.

    Actually, I can think of ten Irish Catholic males just in my own acquaintance who fit Ed’s bill perfectly. As again, this is some Irish Catholic Males, not the Irish Catholic males.

  • Provide some cites to your alleged abnormal psych literature, and provide a quote from it about your “virgins or whores” statement, and the dates of the studies, if there are any studies, before you go making stuff up.

    Give it a rest, Swan, you’re proving Ed’s point. As is usual with you, you are off in “too much is not enough” land.

  • his self-protecting little speech is NOT adequate to offset years of demeaning, dismissive and totally unfair treatment of female guests and subjects of conversation. He is more than slightly rude and unfair to everyone except his crushes, but he definitely has a misogyny problem – I await actual change in behavior. I agree he was forced to “apologize” by his bosses-I, too, have written several scathing e-mails about his outrageous and unprofessional demanor.

  • The National Organization for Women, Feminist Majority and National Women’s Political Caucus are all living fossils proving the death of feminism and the stench of feminazi brain death pervades throughout!

    Camille Paglia is right when she condemns these gaggles of crones who defend a president for conduct unbecoming a pipe-fitter. Childless crone Steinem & the other over-the-hill types simply make themselves look silly. Clinton Inc is largely composed of “identity politics” retardos like the groups above.

    Go Obama!

  • Swan–
    Coming from an Irish Catholic family (maternal), Ed’s comments were correct when it comes to quite a few of the guys on that side of the family.

    Not all of them, but many of them.

    As far as Matthews goes, what makes anyone think he’ll ever change? No amount of letters, no sternly written emails, and nothing short of advertisers jumping ship will ever change any of these clowns — Matthews, Beck, et al.

    They made it being the slimy asscicles they are, so where’s their motivation to do anything different?

  • you go, daveinboca! be seen and heard everywhere, and make sure you announce you are an Obama supporter to everyone who can hear or read you! woo hoo!

    (but could you give me a list so i can correllate HRC’s increases in poll numbers?)

  • I’ve been retired for nearly a decade. I have very little professional literature here at home, and I’m certainly not going up to campus for the particular purpose of satisfying Swan’s snide demand. If he’s really interested, he can do his own research.

    The specific article I was thinking of when I wrote my comment was (I think) in an early issue of the American Journal of Sociology. It was by a woman psychologist (again, if memory serves). The title I do recall: “Bowery Man on the Couch”. Her thesis was that the Bowery Irish and Italians differed in terms of psycho-sexual development due historical factors in their pre-America backgrounds.

    The Irish adaptation to poverty and mostly unemployed fathers was to keep the sons at home unmarried far beyond the norm. They provided day laboring income for their mothers and still-at-home sisters. They also spent evenings in the taverns drinking with other men in the same situation. Because they had little or no contact with mature women beyond their mothers, all women they encountered fell into the categories virgin or whore.

    In contrast, she said, Italian fathers were definitely heads of their families. As soon as the sons were old enough their fathers fought with them to maintain dominance. His job was to drive them out of the house as earlier as could be. Because of this pattern, Italians viewed women (including their mothers) more realistically, as grown women who could and should be wooed.

    This was obviously early 20th century stuff and peculiar to a special class.

  • All this stuff about Irish Catholics is the biggest load of horseshit I have ever heard in my life. Would it be tolerated to talk this way about black males, I doubt it and I certainly wouldn’t. For the record I am an Irish Catholic male and I know many Irish Catholic males and I don’t know one who fits the stereotype planted here. In fact the only one I know off is Bill O’Leilly who plays an Irish Catholic on TV.

  • Matthews is a jerk! He calls his show “Hardball” but depending who he’s interviewing, most of his questions fall in the “softball” category. He babbles on and interrupts people constantly. I don’t understand why MSNBC keeps him on.

  • Since when does personal anecdote (“I have known…”) constitute reasoned argument or even a statement of relevant fact? As I have belabored above, I’m merely reporting the results of studies done long, long ago. The condition of the nation’s Irish having altered greatly throughout the 20th century, I have no reason to believe they still describe today’s reality.

    For the record, I’m 5/8 Irish, ex-Catholic and a former Franciscan seminarian. And I don’t think that’s relevant either.

  • Matthews interrupts and is dismissive with almost all of his female guests; yet, he allows people like Buchanan to drone on and on and interrupt others on the panel. Did anyone see Matthews’ Plame interview? He invited her on to give “her side of the story,” and then did not let the woman speak, insisting on telling her story in his own way. He is long past his expiration date.

  • zeitgeist, @36

    daveinboca is Obama supporter, like I am Queen Sheba, the ruler of Saudi Arabia. In his past postings, he’s always been against everything even vaguely liberal or progressive. This time, he took the opportunity to unload on a bunch of feminist organizations and cloaked his vomit with Obama mantle.

    On Matthews: in addition to all the groups mentioned in CB’s original posting, Emily’s List ought to be mentioned as well. They’ve had a sort-of campaign for us to write both Matthews and MSNBC expressing disgust at his misogyny.

  • Not much of an apology in my opinion. He’s basically saying “I’m sorry if you misunderstood what I was saying. I get it. I’ll be more precise and—oh, OK—more respectful going forward. And hey, I have a good heart.”

    Gee, Chris, I guess it’s our bad, then.

    And as many others have already pointed out, Matthews was specifically backing away from a single bad comment he made about Hillary. There was nothing about the years of other creepiness he’s served up to us.

    I cannot wait until the MSNBC staffers who know the details start landing other gigs. That’s when we’ll start getting the details around the ‘apology’ published. Get set for: “Chris was genuinely suprised and perplexed….He muttered about ‘those bitches’ during his closed-door session with senior management….He turned the color of a tropical sunset when Olbermann’s name was mentioned…”

    Should make for a good read.

  • Unfortunately, as a product of Catholic education, I totally relate to the misogyny spewed by Matthews. We were both taught this attitude;the difference is, as a female, at the age of 9, I just KNEW it was all crap, that no god could be so hateful to more than half of the human race. This diatribe was no apology; it was an excuse forced out by his employers who know bad publicity when they see it. Chris, grow up! People are People, regardless of their chromosome makeup. Just because of 2 X chromosomes, rather than our brains residing in our pants, we are capable of recognizing crap when we hear it.

  • The problem with some of the comments is that they too are just as sexist. Sen. Clinton is not a senator because her husband cheated OR because he was president. She might well have come to this sooner if she hadn’t devoted time to her husband’s career. She was named one of the 100 most influential women of her generation after graduating from school, worked for the Watergate committee, and helped Jimmy Carter with the legal services corp which helped poor people. So might have been Senator Rodham instead of Senator Obama from Illinois running for the Democratic nomination is 2008.

  • If Matthews were an Olbermann-clone getting in trouble for making a defametory comment about a conservative, I’m sure that the Salon crew would be defending him for speaking an unpopular truth, but still a truth.

    Fact is, Hillary Clinton’s public opinion ratings were horrendous from day one of her husband’s presidency up until Monica-gate. Only her victimhood from that scandal brought her public opinion ratings up to the point where she would have been considered even remotely electable to the Senate. Chris Matthews (who grew up in the suburbs of Philly, not in some “Angela’s Ashes”-style Irish-American ghetto) simply spoke the truth: without her husband’s affair, she would have never gotten into the Senate.

    And really, as a voter playing the role of Presidential hiring manager, if you were to pose the question: “Hillary, there are 100 people in the Senate. Why are you the 1 of those 100 most deserving of a promotion to President?”, she would have no good response. The equally underqualified Obama would have no good answer either. Hillary (and Obama, too) isn’t a legislation-producing machine like Ted Kennedy, doesn’t head any committees like Joe Biden, and doesn’t have a reputation of forging bi-partisan consensus and legislation like Kennedy or John McCain.

    So yeah, what has Hillary done to earn this promotion, besides taking credit for every positive thing that her husband accomplished? The victim role got her into the Senate, and delivered New Hampshire to her this year.

    Not a good role model for my young daughters.

  • Shallow men naturally create more splash when deep watered.
    Matthews regularly chirps at his own quips, allows bullies to shout over other guests, rarely penetrates beyond the surface jargon of invited propagandists and little furthers much intellectual revelation.
    His woeful lacks in ability far overshadow any gender bigotry. But he’s smallminded enough to stoop to that as well. Luckily, his skill dearth limits credibility, if not discrimination.
    Maybe someone could put some clips of his misconduct together and empanel a grand dame jury to redress the wrongfulness.
    -I’d watch.
    -otto

  • I refuse to watch MSNBC anymore, they have a miserable track record for hiring misogynist men from Imus to Joe Scarborough to this creepy Matthews to now that slimey Schuster who has been suspended—-WHY has Matthews not been suspended?? What he said about a respected woman of the Senate was just as horrible and mean-spririted and nasty IMO as what Imus said about those Rutgers college ball team! If any man in a normal office was as creepy and leering and disrespectful of woman as Matthews has proven himself to be time after time after time, that guy would be fired and that company would be in court being sued by said women!
    I can’t imagine how Ms Clinton must feel to see every night on the TV a dozen balding, very unattractive, women hating men are just tearing her every move, every word, every hairstyle, every pantsuit apart, for several years now! How have they influenced the electorate by doing that? I don’t want her to be Prez, but I can’t see just being nasty day after day after day for YEARS at a time against one person–what has she done that is so bad that the rest of Congress hasn’t done!! She has been living a life worse than Britany Spears with some of these commentators for the past 5+ years, enough already, start picking on some crooked RINO’s, trust me, they are there too!
    Frankly, I think that all of us who find this behavior intolerable any longer should make a point to watch MSNBC and then take down advertisers and write them saying you will no longer purchase any of their products–that is the only way they learn to really put their foot down to this uncalled for misogyny, until sponsors started pulling out, Imus was just suspended too, when it hits MSNBC’s pocket books, these throwbacks will be fired and on the street!

  • CHRIS MATTHEWS SHOULD RETIRE, HE IS OLD HAT…..

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2Om-c9IMjw

    http://www.hillaryclinton.com/video/131.aspx

    http://www.hillaryclinton.com/video/121.aspx

    http://www.hillaryclinton.com/video/132.aspx

    ONE VOTER TO ANOTHER

    HILLARY CLINTON AND EVERY WOMANS DREAM:

    There is much more here than what the average eye sees. It is one woman who has the power and the proved smarts to run the most valuable country in the world THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

    You men out there you have daughters that dream, go to school study hard, with dreams of one day maybe become the President of the United States. If it where your sons, you would be exhilarated, or a major league baseball player for your son. Well, mothers dream too, they dream for their sons and THEIR DAUGHTERS.

    Hillary has reached that plateau for all Mothers and Daughters to dream
    that they too, can make our country better, stronger, and protect it with all their hearts and minds and souls…

    Why cant women share in the dreams. Slowly they are in baseball, basketball, car races, they have proved they have what it takes. Now
    let them show you what they can do……they will make you proud.

  • Comments are closed.