Joan Walsh : You can trust the Gov. and me on this.”

No we can’t; Breitbart had 2 vids up; one was the infamous one and the other was the redemption part.

Dean: ” That’s not what was played on FOX.” Howie, she has said zero about suing FOX, so get on the right page.

Matthews : “I don’t watch Drudge.” Watch him?

Chris, you must call Biden to get the Gov.’s internet number so you can “watch” Drudge.

http://techcrunch.com/2009/02/25/biden-forgets-recoveryorgs-website-number/

The trhee stooges. Matthews, Dean, and Skank!

Chrissy Matthews, a glittering Jewel of Colossal Ignorance……

Chrissy’s ‘internet numbers’ on his Internet Explorer consist of the Huffington Post and Media Matters…

Haha, I just heard Sherrod say that if Vilsack had any blacks working for him, he may have handled it better. You do Shirley, stretch that 15 minutes!!

MichelleF said:
Haha, I just heard Sherrod say that if Vilsack had any blacks working for him, he may have handled it better. You do Shirley, stretch that 15 minutes!!

Send Breitbark the clip!

BAD idea Shirley…
Shirley probably has a contingency lawyer(s) and thinks she has nothing to lose. She will never be more WRONG in her life.

Shirley made RACIST statements to media after the story & her firing.
Shirley was immediately offered an even better job and elevated to ‘folk hero’ status.
Shirley had no monetary losses, except those she will incur by bringing this lawsuit.

She is totally ON TOP of the world right now. She can create her own job. She can earn speaking fees. She is pretty well liked by all — except for those racist comments she made afterward.

Shirley, this lawsuit will make you look like a fool before it’s done, and I’m actually sad about that.
Also, you will be persona non-grata at places that like you plenty at the moment, like the government, the liberal media, the conservative media,

What you thought was one terrible day in your life actuallly was the best day of your life, you just don’t appear to be smart enough to recognize it.

Wow.

And he doesn’t “watch” Drudge??.. hah.

He and Bob Schieffer should hang out.

That’s why she was fired in the first place.She wasn’t part of the academic elite. Notice how much rope they gave Dunn and Jones.Shirley just doesn’t get it. It had little to do with racism.

This is pathetic. It’s HIS JOB. Get the dinosaurs off the air.

Jesus Christ, did you even watch the segment? The discussion concerned Sherrod’s lawsuit against Breitbart. Matthews made the reasonable and correct point that Breitbart did not show a video edited in such a way as to show Sherrod in a false light. The clip Breitbart posted included the “redemption” portion. Walsh and Dean argued that it did not. Matthews showed the clip from Breitbart’s website, proving that it did in fact include the redeption part, and THEN Dean continued to doubt that was what Breitbart showed–actually what Dean did was switch his statement to “…I don’t know…duhhh, that wasn’t what I saw on Fox…duhhhh…” Walsh at least was smart enough to move the goalpost a little. “…they didn’t include all the other stuff…” But the point was made, Breitbart didn’t intentionally show Sherrod in a false light because if he had wanted to present her purely as a racist, he WOULD have edited out the part of how she “saw the light”. And so on.

Arkansas Steve said:
BAD idea Shirley…Shirley probably has a contingency lawyer(s) and thinks she has nothing to lose. She will never be more WRONG in her life. Shirley made RACIST statements to media after the story & her firing.Shirley was immediately offered an even better job and elevated to ‘folk hero’ status.Shirley had no monetary losses, except those she will incur by bringing this lawsuit. She is totally ON TOP of the world right now. She can create her own job. She can earn speaking fees. She is pretty well liked by all — except for those racist comments she made afterward. Shirley, this lawsuit will make you look like a fool before it’s done, and I’m actually sad about that.Also, you will be persona non-grata at places that like you plenty at the moment, like the government, the liberal media, the conservative media, What you thought was one terrible day in your life actuallly was the best day of your life, you just don’t appear to be smart enough to recognize it.

It would be nice, after she loses her case, if she had to pay Breitbart’s legal fees. But it’s always no lose for the left. They can just cry racism and declare moral victory.

I thought the Regime put the “quietess” on Shirley!

They’ll probably offer her a more advanced position to get her to shut-up!

juan said:
I thought the Regime put the “quietess” on Shirley! They’ll probably offer her a more advanced position to get her to shut-up!

They already did, it didn’t work. She didn’t quiet down she got even more outspoken. She’ll be milking this thing for all it’s worth, I mean she IS a progressive social lefty, whaddya expect?

timzank said:
They already did, it didn’t work. She didn’t quiet down she got even more outspoken. She’ll be milking this thing for all it’s worth, I mean she IS a progressive social lefty, whaddya expect?

I say keep the microphone right in front of her face. Maybe she can top hope she can top her belief that Fox News wants to reinstitute slavery.

Does Chris ever watch Mediaite ?

Mediaite, I find it passing strange that you would “edit” a video that was discussing the editing of a video.

You left out the part where Chris really blasted Dean out of his seat.

Here is the rest of the conversation. Talk about editing.

CHRIS MATTHEWS: Well, there you go. “I opened my eyes. I realized it wasn’t about black and white. It was, but it was about other things, about poverty.” So, Joan, that part, that part in there about redemptive revelation was actually in the initial tape.

JOAN WALSH, SALON: Chris, that little snippet was. But it ends with, “I took him to one of his own.” What she goes on to say is one of his own didn’t help him. He came back to her. She wound up helping him. She saved his farm. And then she goes on to tell this story, which is a story that I’ve told and to some extent Governor Dean has told it, too, about the way black and white people in the south were pitted against each other and they were always taught to fight one another when they really had more in common. She goes on to say repeatedly it’s about poverty. It’s about haves versus have-nots.

MATTHEWS: Yeah, but why do you think if this was a complete slime job, why do you think Breitbart kept that in there, Governor? Why did he keep in that part – let me let the Governor in here. Why did he put the redemptive part in here at all?

HOWARD DEAN: That’s not, I did not see that at in the original on the original website or…

Stop the tape. As you can see, Dean first said, “I did not see that in the original on the original website.” This is important because he’s going to change his story:

MATTHEWS: But it is.

DEAN: …or the original Fox…

Let’s take out Matthews’ comment to read the entire statement by Dean: “That’s not, I did not see that in the original on the original website or the original Fox…”

So, Dean at first said that this wasn’t what he saw at the website OR Fox. As the discussion ensued, this changed:

MATTHEWS:…that’s the original website.

DEAN: Well, that’s not what I saw on Fox.

MATTHEWS: Well, what are you saying? We’re not showing the right thing here?

DEAN: I don’t know what you’re showing. But that was not…

MATTHEWS: You’re challenging us now.

DEAN: I’m saying I didn’t see that on…

MATTHEWS: You’re saying we made this up, that we put it in Breitbart’s blog and it wasn’t there?

DEAN: Now you sound like Chris Wallace.

MATTHEWS: I’m asking you.

DEAN: What I said was that’s not what I saw on Fox. I didn’t see that last piece about the redemption shown on Fox.

Actually, that’s not what he said. Just seconds ago Dean said that wasn’t what he saw at the website OR Fox:

MATTHEWS: Go ahead, Joan. The Governor doesn’t believe us now. What do you mean? You’re saying we just put something to (inaudible) Breitbart?

DEAN: Chris, I don’t know what that was. All I know is..

MATTHEWS: You don’t know what that was? I’m telling you it was from the Breitbart blog.

DEAN: That’s not what I saw on Fox.

MATTHEWS: Okay, Joan, will you help me out here? I thought Fox picked up — Fox had further edited the Breitbart blog, I didn’t know that.

WALSH: Truncated…

MATTHEWS: On their website.

WALSH: Chris, you know what happens in TV, and I’m not going to say this part is malicious. Different versions of the shortened clip were shown. And so, I think that sometimes it had the part about I realized it wasn’t about black and white. But the point was why it ended there was it ends with her taking him to one of his own and doesn’t go onto tell this, it’s a long story.

MATTHEWS: I understand it’s not full. And then the question is did Breitbart get the full bite from somebody who gave it to him? [...]

MATTHEWS: Governor, here’s the problem, that is what I remember was in the original. That was the original, and I just showed was the original Breitbart blog.

DEAN: When I saw the story, that wasn’t, the last piece about poor white people wasn’t in it.

MATTHEWS: Yeah, well it was in the one I saw, that’s for sure.

DEAN: And nor, I might add, the most interesting thing about that…

MATTHEWS: That’s why we had the dispute ten minutes ago, because that’s what I saw in the original blog.

DEAN: Okay, but that’s not what I saw on the network. I didn’t see the original blog.

MATTHEWS: Okay, well, that’s what Breitbart put out. That’s what…

DEAN: He may have. He may have.

MATTHEWS: He did.

DEAN: Maybe Fox edited it further.

MATTHEWS: I’m just telling you that’s a fact. I know what came (inaudible). You can see five minutes after you walk off this set you can go check it come back if it’s not true, but that is in fact…

DEAN: I’m not disputing you. I never looked at the Breitbart…

MATTHEWS: That’s what gets murky here. Okay, thank you Howard Dean, thank you Joan Walsh.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/07/29/chris-matthews-and-howard-dean-get-heated-argument-about-sherrod-vide#ixzz0v7OMbA6E

Somewhat off topic, but did anyone else here Ed Shultz refer to Michelle Malkin as “slant-headed” this evening on his show? I thought I heard him call her that right before commercial. But then he came back, and referred to Sean Hannity as “slant-headed” right off the bat. I’ll bet someone whispered in his ear during the commercial how calling an a Filipino woman “slant-headed” might be interpreted as racist. So he when he came back he decided to use it again with reference to Sean Hannity to sort of cover himself.

Does this mean after she sues Breitbart , he has to hire her , like the USDA did ?

Who cares what that “huge round head” Ed Schultz has to say about anyone or anything?
Obviously nobody!! You ever checked his ratings or book sales?? I don’t know how he sees out of those tiny
slits he calls eyes! The fool is a joke…

Thanks for doing Colby’s job, notsofast.

ps, consider me checked.

pss, is this piece part of the comedy you were telling me about in your email. You’re right, you are funny!!

psss, colby perhaps an update is in order.

Who does Dean go to next? This is justice.

I was watching DRUDGE the other day…I love the opening when Drudge trips and falls as he comes in the front door and says hi to Laura…..and then that rascal Eddie Haskel shows up…..wow…we laughed and laughed…

I love watching Drudge…

Though it may be offtopic for the subject, my question does relate to the post.

Last week, I didn’t think much of Jon’s reference to the Benny Hill theme, but now that it has reappeared and a quick search shows that there has also been a relatively recent shout out on SportsGrid… are we to assume that you’re occasionally running YouTubes through the “Benny Hillifier”, GeekoSystem linked at the beginning of the year and it’s only “missing” from above because the embed is a MSNBC clip?

Whoops. I didn’t actually look at the video and just assumed that it was an MSNBC embed, but thanks to the update, I came back to see that my assumption was incorrect. Of course my question about the “Hillifier” remains and I guess that you still can’t use it on a proprietary clip, but I wanted to acknowledge my mistake.

Wonder what the total IQ was in that room , because Dean is a minus 75 .

notsofast said:
Mediaite, I find it passing strange that you would “edit” a video that was discussing the editing of a video.

What? They doctored it? BURN THEM ALL AT THE STAKE!!!

OK, maybe that’s a little over the top. No Playstation until tomorrow.

Does anyone have any idea what inspired Matthews to do his frigging job?

Holy hell. Colby, Joan and Dean are wrong on this. And, you, Colby are wrong, not once, but twice and Matthews is absolutely right. First, Colby, Matthews isn’t saying that Breitbart didn’t edit the approximately hour long tape. He’s saying that Briebart didn’t edit out the redemptive part of the story and he didn’t. Matthews is absolutely right on this point yet you repeatedly say he is wrong. The ORIGINAL clip that he posted at Breitbart included her saying, after she said she hadn’t helped the white farmer as much as she could have, that she realized later that this was wrong and that it isn’t about black and white it’s about rich and poor. Now, in the full speech, she explains more fully this change of heart but the fact that she had realized her original action toward the farmer was wrong was ALWAYS there in the clip that Breitbart aired. I know because I saw it on the first day of the story, on Breitbar’s site. Colby, you completely mischaracterized the basic facts here.

Dean, meanwhile, is only concerned with trashing Fox(despite the fact that numerous journalists have completely debunked the ‘Fox got her fired)-that is the story in this clip-besides the fact that Joan and him apparently didn’t know that the Breitbart clip always included the redemption part. The segment is about Sherrod suing Breitbart and the merits of her case, if any. Instead, idiot Dean wants to make it about how evil Fox. And, you, Colby, want to make it about Matthews being wrong. And he isn’t-you are.

Sean68 said:
Somewhat off topic, but did anyone else here Ed Shultz refer to Michelle Malkin as “slant-headed” this evening on his show? I thought I heard him call her that right before commercial. But then he came back, and referred to Sean Hannity as “slant-headed” right off the bat. I’ll bet someone whispered in his ear during the commercial how calling an a Filipino woman “slant-headed” might be interpreted as racist. So he when he came back he decided to use it again with reference to Sean Hannity to sort of cover himself.

….good observation…. you’re one of only three people that watch this idiot…..even Lefty Liberal Mediaite doesn’t look at this idiot’s show.

….notice how the Left is mischaracterizing Brietbart????

Brietbart NEVER EDITED the Sherrod video….his un-named SOURCE sent him incomplete raw video; all Brietbart did was upload what was sent to him.

Brietbart NEVER EDITED ANY VIDEO, he merely presented on his website what he had.

After the video was viewed by the Left, the NAACP immediately publicly condemned Sherrod….and the NAACP had the entire video all the time. Only after all this happened did Breitbart get the remaining video from his unnamed source.

Brietbart’s hands were COMPLETELY INNOCENT, all he did was show the NAACP audience clap when Sherrod made racist comments about White Farmers and White lawyers …in the process of explaining her mea culpa .

Brietbart is INNOCENT 100%….

Rush sez, “liberals lie”….I would add to that “…all the time…”.

As a white male from the upper middle class, I have long suspected that I am systematically oppressed and the victim of a vast coordinated effort to disrupt my absolute hegemony over this country’s culture, wealth, and power. Thank you and your wonderful blog for confirming these suspicions. Go Packers.
http://acaimaxcleansewarning.com

thealtenbach said:
As a white male from the upper middle class, I have long suspected that I am systematically oppressed and the victim of a vast coordinated effort to disrupt my absolute hegemony over this country’s culture, wealth, and power. Thank you and your wonderful blog for confirming these suspicions. Go Packers.http://acaimaxcleansewarning.com

Renouncing your white-male-upper-middle-class-heterosexual privilege means nothing if you aren’t willing to actually give anything up. Which of your ill-gotten gains are you willing to give up to some impoverished brown-skinned lesbian? It’s easy to talk sarcastically like this. This is stuff-white-people-like gold! You’re a heroic person.