01/09/2008
Chris Matthews: Hillary Clinton Rode Tailcoats of Bill's Infidelity
The night before the New Hampshire primary, MSNBC's Chris Matthews was giving Hillary Clinton "a lot of personal credit" for having achieved her political goals, but the morning after her win he spewed out this asinine bit of commentary:
"I think the Hillary appeal has always been about the mix of toughness and sympathy. Let's not forget, and I'll be brutal, the reason she's a US Senator, the reason she's a candidate for President, the reason she may be a front runner, is that her husband messed around...That's how she got to be a Senator from New York. We keep forgetting it. She didn't win it on her merit, she won because everybody felt, 'My God, this woman stood up under humiliation,' right? That's what happened. That's how it happened. In 1998, she went to NY and campaigned for Chuck Schumer as almost like the grieving widow of absurdity, and she did it so well and courageously. But it was about the humilation of Bill Clinton."
Chris Matthews [talking points memo]
Chris Matthews Outdoes Himself [daily kos]
Matthews: Hillary’s succeeding because Bill ‘messed around.’ [think progress]
Posted 1:48 PM EST by Andy Towle in Bill clinton, Chris Matthews, Election 2008, Hillary Clinton, News | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Chris Matthews has just won the douchbag of the year award.
Posted by: sam | Jan 9, 2008 1:59:00 PM
what a load of horseshit, this man really hates women, idiot!
Posted by: the queen | Jan 9, 2008 2:00:33 PM
wow he REALLY doesn't like the Clintons!
Posted by: danw | Jan 9, 2008 2:09:25 PM
I've always likened Hillary to a carpetbagger, and if anyone just read a little past her "I REALLY LOVE NY!" Senatorial election crap, you could see it was all positioning for this run to the Whitehouse. Bill or not, infidelity or not, these components would have been put into play because of the type of politician she is.
I just do not like her. My gut says "No. Bad." When Bill Clinton was President, every week there was another "investigative committee" to try and dig up some crap on him. They turned their guns to her, too (Whitewater, anyone?) when she started to make a path for universal health care. I just do not believe she is savvy enough to survive the barrage of [hidden agenda, right-wing, special council] garbage that will await her. She does not have that "I'm just a good-ole-boy from Hope" air about her, and when the shit rapidly begins hitting the fan (if she wins the nomination, look for stuff to suddenly surface BEFORE the election), that hard New Yawk attitude will bury her. She just does not have it. She is not electable.
My money and hope are behind Obama.
As for these crap-spewing pundits, I just turn off the television if I see a segment will include discussion, interviews, etc... about anyone running for anything. I've got better things to do with my time than invest my energy listening to waffling soundbites.
Posted by: Rad | Jan 9, 2008 2:14:56 PM
Secondly (I had to reload my browser), for as many people who love her, there are as many that absolutely hate her, and unfortunately, that will be yet four more years of a polarized country if she is elected. It will be a reverse of the Gore/Bush run in 2000. We need someone who is outside this hard RED and hard BLUE mentality. Otherwise, the next four years will be wasted by nothing more than political turf wars and just VILE garbage coming out of Washington.
Posted by: Rad | Jan 9, 2008 2:22:16 PM
Hey, didn't Robert Kennedy move to New York just so he could run for the US Senate and then the presidency?
I have my doubts about Hillary Clinton being electable in November, but her rise to US Senator was no less honorable than most of those other millionaire shit holes in Washington. She has performed well in the senate no matter how she got there. And most important of all, her husband's rise to the presidency had as much to do with her efforts as his. She is Big Bill's backbone.
I may not want her to win the Democratic nomination, but I don't feel the need to trash a lady politician who aint done nothin' worse than those US Senators with sinky little ding dongs stickin' between their hairy, muscle-challenged thighs. And she aint no worse than the four Republican bitches either
...ok, ok, all right-- I mean, Republican withces. Don't accuse me of no misogynistic shit.
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Jan 9, 2008 2:34:10 PM
Well, RAD, not much to say to that, except: I will be voting for Hillary in NY and in November; she has my support all the way.
Posted by: Matt | Jan 9, 2008 2:35:10 PM
yah i' sure Obama is clean as a whistle...idiots! regarldless what they think of her, she has shown us , she believes in our country. Obama is the new kid in the block and everyoen wants to be part of his group. HE ISNT JFK or MLK...! as for Hillary , yah she takes alot of crap from men and women...this country is sexist to the core and here she is to prove us right. I HOPE SHE WINS !
Posted by: Bosie | Jan 9, 2008 2:35:55 PM
There is no lower carbon-based life form than Chris Matthews.
Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Jan 9, 2008 2:40:46 PM
I love how people think that there is any scandal left to emerge over this woman-they have thrown everything at her, a lot of it made up, and it has not stuck. She has won two elections handily, gotten respect in the Senate even from Republicans and is running a formidable campaign. We know all the dirt and she has been able to brush it off.
And people that say with a straight face that they hate her so much that they are willing to subject the nation and the world to at least four more years of conservative rule need to see a psychiatrist. Seriously, you have to step outside yourself and see how selfish, irrational,and self-destuctive that sounds. Clinton, Edwards and Obama are all great candidates and any one of them would be better than anything the GOP will spew up. To say that one of them is so awful that Huckabee or Giuliani would be better is sheer madness.
Posted by: Charles | Jan 9, 2008 2:43:43 PM
Chris Matthews and Keith Obermann- the gift that keeps on giving.
Posted by: Tom | Jan 9, 2008 3:04:29 PM
Well, RAD, you sound almost as full of crap as Chris Matthews...The country will be just as polarized under any democratic President because the old right wing is still making their destructive moves...don't blame their targets.
Chris Matthews reminds me of just how easy it is for absolute morons to be on TV...think O'Reilly, etc.
The civil war in this country is driven by the right wing and their need to stick their noses in everyone's personal life, and their ingrained religious belief in 'punishment' for the so-called sinner. As soon as we remove religion from the public forum and from politics, maybe we can get back to being the greatest, most advanced nation in the world.
Posted by: bryan | Jan 9, 2008 3:09:20 PM
I'm sorry, two of the four Republican witches in the Senate are decent ladies and legislators: Senator Snowe and Senator Collins, both from Maine. I got carried away. But then why are they Republicans? I guess their fathers made 'em that way.
Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Jan 9, 2008 3:17:21 PM
There is no time for consensus ....it's pay back time for enduring the fascist regime of the Bush/Chaney years....Chris Matthews is a piuece of shit with a mouth. RickT
Posted by: RickT | Jan 9, 2008 3:29:36 PM
Chris is reaching for a bigger audience by stirring the pot of pure bile the Republicans have been simmering for November. Dumbass! He's becoming more irrelevant with every utterance from his piehole and seeks to steal some thunder from Olbermann and his fellow time-slot anchors at other networks.
Posted by: James | Jan 9, 2008 4:00:09 PM
@ David Ehrenstein: Don't forget that both Bill O'Reilly and Ann Coulter have their wagging wet tongues firmly buried in Chris Matthew's festering hole... so, given that he's sitting on their faces, they're lower life forms than he is. Not much lower, but lower.
Posted by: I before E | Jan 9, 2008 4:04:01 PM
chris matthews is a moron. mr. potato head needs to go. i will be sending an e-mail to the network and to each of his show's sponsors demanding as much. we all should.
remember when this cretin proclaimed bush's "mission accomplished" aircraft carrier, dog-and-pony show as triumphally historic?
what a maroon, what an embezzle!
Posted by: nic | Jan 9, 2008 4:36:23 PM
Apparently the secret is out on CM's low IQ, which he parades before a national audience every night. He's a spaghetti thrower of ideas--seeing what sticks.
Posted by: anon (gmail.com) | Jan 9, 2008 4:42:25 PM
Maybe Clinton is getting a bit of a bump from the sexist statements from people like Chris Matthews and John Edwards (she showed emotion? she's not tough enough! - jerk). I for one have a visceral reaction to people that say things about women candidates that they would never consider saying about men.
I had no desire to see Hillary do well (or poorly, for that matter) until I saw all the crap come out because of a moment of emotion in a heated campaign. Now I'm happy to see her doing well just to see the good ol' boys squirm.
Posted by: Alan | Jan 9, 2008 5:42:52 PM
I don't know why Chris Matthews is so viciously against Hillary's candidacy, but he should learn from his mistakes and realize that women aren't going to watch one of their own railroaded by a fat old white dude in a suit who thinks he knows what he's talking about. New Hampshire proved that.
I don't care if she gave head to everyone in NY to have her position...she's done them well and they should be proud to have her as a Senator for their state.
I do support Hillary's candidacy and she will be receiving my vote and will continue to receive my money to see it happen. She's got balls of steel and while that might threaten the masculinity of the old boys club there in Washington, it makes me as happy as can be.
And for those who find Obama's campaign so exciting and think it is going to be such an exciting break from tradition, I encourage you to read Gloria Steinem's editorial in the NY Times. She has some interesting thoughts on exactly why Hillary's election would be far more groundbreaking.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/08/opinion/08steinem.html?_r=2&scp=1&sq=steinem&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
Posted by: CB | Jan 9, 2008 6:32:20 PM
Chris Matthews is a total jerk who bashes HIllary amost as much as fox news,IVe seen all of the rightwing media ,fox,rush,so called experts pile up on Hillary because the rightwing wants obama because they think hes easy to defeat,period.The rightwing wants to define and destroy obama who they view as an inexperienced muslim they can defeat easily. The truth is they are scared of running against the Clintons because they know the Clintons have a track record of winning. Chris matthews is not part of the rightwing media but he is a Clinton basher from the Bill years, and he thinks backing a black male is much more cool than a woman,hes an offensive jerk.So for all the naive that say Hillary cant win,youre in denial,the every 5 minute attack ads havent started about obama,and when gop is done with him,his numbers will be much lower than hillary,the flip side is tht the public hates the gop now.Vote for HIllary any other choice will result in a gop victory.
Posted by: Chad | Jan 9, 2008 6:47:09 PM
Chris Matthews is a total jerk who bashes HIllary amost as much as fox news,IVe seen all of the rightwing media ,fox,rush,so called experts pile up on Hillary because the rightwing wants obama because they think hes easy to defeat,period.The rightwing wants to define and destroy obama who they view as an inexperienced muslim they can defeat easily. The truth is they are scared of running against the Clintons because they know the Clintons have a track record of winning. Chris matthews is not part of the rightwing media but he is a Clinton basher from the Bill years, and he thinks backing a black male is much more cool than a woman,hes an offensive jerk.So for all the naive that say Hillary cant win,youre in denial,the every 5 minute attack ads havent started about obama,and when gop is done with him,his numbers will be much lower than hillary,the flip side is tht the public hates the gop now.Vote for HIllary any other choice will result in a gop victory.
Posted by: Chad | Jan 9, 2008 6:48:48 PM
CB,
i could not agree more. thanks for the heads-up on steinem's piece.
Posted by: nic | Jan 9, 2008 7:02:21 PM
If you accept Steinem's premise that electing a woman as president would be more groundbreaking than electing an African-American man, then you have to accept that it would also be more difficult. I think Obama's message of hope and reconciliation will be more electable than Hillary's uninspiring message of experience.
Posted by: Seattle | Jan 9, 2008 8:20:13 PM
Chris Matthews has again been publicly humiliated for his ridiculous comments. That is the reason he is still lashing out at Hillary, how pathetic. As for the Clintons, only a fool will count them out. They have come back time and again in spite of the pundits.
Posted by: NIL | Jan 9, 2008 10:30:28 PM