First, Matthews has to admit he has a problem

Hillary Clinton is ahead in the polls, Bill Clinton is the most popular political figure in the country, and Gallup reports today that Americans overwhelmingly believe the former president would be a helpful asset if his wife wins the presidency.

And yet there’s Chris Matthews, with his unhealthy fixation.

MSNBC host Chris Matthews is obsessed with Bill Clinton’s sex life. Over the last four weeks, Matthews has incessantly raised baseless speculation that President Clinton may have an extramarital affair or engage in inappropriate behavior that would impact Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY).

He has called Clinton’s sex life the “800-pound gorilla stalking behind” Hillary Clinton, and suggested it would sink her presidential campaign. Earlier this month, Matthews asked about Bill Clinton’s “personal behavior” 10 separate times in a single interview.

Look, I realize that Ken Starr, impeachment, and the late ’90s were probably great fun for the political media, and guys like Matthews probably saw a nice bump in the ratings. But if media professionals care anything about our discourse at all, they’re really going to have to get a life.

Last summer, the NYT ran a 2,000-word, front-page dissection of Bill and Hillary Clinton’s marriage that contained no news at all, exploring exactly how many weekends the couple spends together in a typical month. Shortly thereafter, the WaPo’s David Broder stated his concerns that reporters didn’t quiz Hillary about her personal relationship with her husband after a speech on energy policy. A few months later, the WaPo questioned whether Bill will be the “biggest issue” in Hillary’s campaign.

I feel like news outlets need to undergo some kind of 12-step program now, before the campaign season really picks up.

And if the media’s response is, “We have no choice; sex sells,” then I have a suggestion.

Take a moment to consider Republicans’ infidelity.

Lurking just over the horizon are liabilities for three Republicans who have topped several national, independent polls for the GOP’s favorite 2008 nominee: Sen. John McCain (affair, divorce), former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (affair, divorce, affair, divorce), and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani (divorce, affair, nasty divorce). Together, they form the most maritally challenged crop of presidential hopefuls in American political history…. Now, just a few years after infidelity was considered a dealbreaker for a presidential candidate, the party that presents itself as the arbiter of virtue may field an unprecedented two-timing trifecta.

McCain was still married and living with his wife in 1979 while, according to The New York Times’ Nicholas Kristof, “aggressively courting a 25-year-old woman who was as beautiful as she was rich.” McCain divorced his wife, who had raised their three children while he was imprisoned in Vietnam, then launched his political career with his new wife’s family money. In 2000, McCain managed to deflect media questioning about his first marriage with a deft admission of responsibility for its failure. It’s possible that the age of the offense and McCain’s charmed relationship with the press will pull him through again, but Giuliani and Gingrich may face a more difficult challenge. Both conducted well-documented affairs in the last decade–while still in public office.

Giuliani informed his second wife, Donna Hanover, of his intention to seek a separation in a 2000 press conference. The announcement was precipitated by a tabloid frenzy after Giuliani marched with his then-mistress, Judith Nathan, in New York’s St. Patrick’s Day parade, an acknowledgement of infidelity so audacious that Daily News columnist Jim Dwyer compared it with “groping in the window at Macy’s.” In the acrid divorce proceedings that followed, Hanover accused Giuliani of serial adultery, alleging that Nathan was just the latest in a string of mistresses, following an affair the mayor had had with his former communications director.

But the most notorious of them all is undoubtedly Gingrich, who ran for Congress in 1978 on the slogan, “Let Our Family Represent Your Family.” (He was reportedly cheating on his first wife at the time). In 1995, an alleged mistress from that period, Anne Manning, told Vanity Fair’s Gail Sheehy: “We had oral sex. He prefers that modus operandi because then he can say, ‘I never slept with her.'” Gingrich obtained his first divorce in 1981, after forcing his wife, who had helped put him through graduate school, to haggle over the terms while in the hospital, as she recovered from uterine cancer surgery. In 1999, he was disgraced again, having been caught in an affair with a 33-year-old congressional aide while spearheading the impeachment proceedings against President Clinton.

We all know about Bill Clinton’s issues from a decade ago, but Bill Clinton isn’t going to be on the ballot. If the media is drooling with prurient interest in the candidates who’ve committed adultery, there are several to choose from.

IF Bill Clinton has removed his trousers around ANYBODY other than Hillary since the day Hillary decided to run for Senate you can bet your sweet patootie that the Rovians know about it, have proof and probably pictures. When will we find out? About a month after Hillary is nominated. Then the election will be between a Republican and Clinton’s Dick.

I don’t like it but that’s the way it is. You can talk about Rudi & McCain’s faults all you want but it’s not going to change reality.

Are you reasonably sure that Bill has been chaste?

  • Mathews seems rather jealous of all Bill’s action. Sounds like Chris has an itch he needs scratched.

    Seriously, at this point, who cares who Bill knows in a biblical way?

  • “the election will be between a Republican and Clinton’s Dick.” – Cynic

    The 2004 election was the year of the Swiftboat, 2008 could be the year of the SwiftDick. Watching Think Progresses’ mashup video of Matthews, he really is trying to mine this issue awfully hard. The Republican Party must be paying him a lot, or he needs to go to Sex Obsessives Anonymous in a really bad way

  • This is because Hillary’s a woman and we know that womenfolk get all upset and irrational if they don’t get enough attention from hubby. We don’t want Madame President to go into a sulk because Bill forgot her birthday, do we? She might start WWIII!

    Or at least, that’s the only “reason” I can see for bullshit obsession over how much time the Clinton’s spend together.

    And given the choice between voting for a ReThuglican (two legged mutant dick) and Clinton’s dick…I’ll take choice #2.

  • There would be a big reaction if Bill got caught again. And their history keeps Hillary from making an issue of the adultery of the Rep candidates. Hopefully Mitt will hit hard on the sexcapades of his opponents as he goes down to defeat in the primaries. Then in steps Jeb to be the articulate, clean candidate.

    I refuse to believe Mitt is known by many people as the slick dancing Mitt. That’s way too stupid to catch on.

  • News of a Bush divorce is all over the supermarke tabloids. Why hasn’t this been picked up by Fox and those other liberal media outlets?

  • It is also very odd that the wife is the one who these attacks/innuendos are meant to hurt.

    Let’s say Bill gets busted, does that really hurt Hillary or make her a victim of an unscrupulous husband. It sucks they are doing it, but I really don’t see it hurting her.

  • Bill’s behavior isn’t what’s going to sink Hillary, it’s hers, and not her private behavior. While I think these early national polls are ridiculous, I did find it interesting that in the Zogby poll this week 54% of the people who said they preferred her also said they’d be willing to switch their vote to someone else. Her inability to admit mistakes and to characterize any criticism as “the politics of personal destruction” even if they concern policy have striking similarities to the ways Dubya behaves. She’s Dubya with a brain and in women’s clothing. The Democrats can’t let her buy the nomination because 2008 is too important (and should be fairly easy for them to win) unless she is the standard bearer. Then we are in trouble. She can’t win the general election.

  • The Democrats can’t let her buy the nomination because 2008 is too important (and should be fairly easy for them to win) unless she is the standard bearer. Then we are in trouble. She can’t win the general election.

    Sadly, I think this is spot on. Unless of course the GOP nominates Brownback. I think Kucinich could beat Brownback in a general election.

  • Are you reasonably sure that Bill has been chaste? –Comment by Cynic

    That question is so unthinkably lame that it deserves no response. I am not sure and I don’t care. I am stunned that anyone in this forum would stoop to the such a low level. There are a few things I don’t like about Hillary, starting with her support for this stupid war, but Bill Clinton’s behavior gets her a pass in my mind.

    If Hillary Clinton decides to forgive her husband and overlook his clay feet, then it is her business and only her business. His popularity never went under 60% during the so called Impeachment/witch hunt. If she is over it, then why should anyone here spend one minute talking about it. When we stoop to such levels, we are only helping the other side.

  • KCinDC,
    Read the article and what an asshole! He can’t get past sex (whether it be the sex of the person or the act itself.) Mathews really needs to spend a week at the Bunny Ranch or a lobotomy. I’d vote for lobotomy.

    As for Hillary, Hillary is Hillary’s greatest weakness. I agree with Edward and Edo.

  • For all those Republicans fixated on MARRIAGE……..Please note there is NOT a single divorce between ANY of the Democratic Candidates for President.

    The same cannot be said for the major Republican candidates..including McCain,Guiliani, and eventually Gingrich. Romney the supposed Mormon “polygamist” is the only one to be married once…go figure…..

  • A reason behind Chris Matthews’ anti-Clinton bias is that he lobbied hard, yet, unsuccessfully for the Press Secretary job in the Clinton administration.

  • JoeCHI, can you cite your source? Your explanation would certainly explain his strange obsession with the Clintons.

    As for those claiming Hillary will never win a general election, never say never. If the status quo continues, a blender could win against the Republicans.

  • On the flip side, Matthews treats Guiliani as a God in human form. You should have heard him gush over Rudy on Imus a few weeks ago. Apparently Guiliani single-handedly de-odorized the NYC subway system, according to Tweety.

    He doesn’t even hide it any more.

  • GRACIOUS ~
    On a personal level I agree with you but, in the world of electoral reality exposure of a Bill Clinton peccedillo after Hillary has the nomination will most certainly elect a Republican President. all of your feelings and attitudes are valid but they don’t apply.

    I Repeat: Are you reasonably sure that Bill has been chaste?

  • Dear Cynic:
    I think you are engaging in a fallacious argument. Your belief that a Clinton peccadillo would elect a Republican President is a non sequitur. I use as my proof, not my feelings and attitudes, but the public opinion polls during the Clinton impeachment. The American people were never in favor of that debacle and I believe the American people are smart enough to look through the BS if it happens again.

  • Who care about Bill?
    If you are willing to talk that much about Bill and what he did then why in the world would any of you even THINK of a McCain, Newt, or Gulianni???

    Hillary voted for the war like so many other democrats… THEY WERE LIED TO BY A PRESIDENT IN SUCH A MANNER UNBELIEVABLE…

    … his lie has cost way too many lives for him to not face impeachment while America was ready to impeach a president over a personal matter.
    Yes I disagreed with what Bill did, but if America really stood for all it talks up it shows our value is only face deep.

    I hear people asking the Democratic Congress if they have the balls, bu the real question is does AMERICA have the balls to do the right thing and impeach this man??? The answer is no because we are more concerned about face and don’t realize this dude is making us looking ugly as I don’t know what.

    If you don’t believe me…. write your congressman and demand impeachment. If you do you’ll get it. If you don’t you won’t and whatever happens after this America needs to look at itself when questioned what role you played in when those names are announced of our fallen soldiers and for what? Lets be honest. For what? The capture of Saddam? Woopie! How about taking those 20K more troops and storm Pakistan and capture Bin instead of waiting for someone else to do it for us.

    Peace!

    NOTE: Nice features to defeat spam and nice suggestion to not lose you post after all this typing.

  • Comments are closed.