Other than Palin, who would Obama want to face most? Bachmann or Jeb Bush? Jeb’s only included because then Obama could shamelessly bring up GWB all the time and remind everyone what a bad President he was.

Matthews has gone through some weird transformations over the years. I remember watching him back in the nineties and then he got progressively more manic–his blurbs like “thrill up the leg” and his remark that his job is to see that Obama succeeds (a shameful admission for a ‘journalist’ to utter, an admission of shilling.)

Lately he seems to be less liberal, almost a volte face on some issues. He was beating up on Weiner, wondering aloud if he was suffering a psychiatric disorder and now he’s praising Bachmann–though I would guess he’s pumping her image because he thinks she’s beatable. But who knows?

I also get the feeling he may be angling for a new gig somewhere, perhaps feels that his days at msnbc are numbered. His ratings are pretty low.

Latest New Hampshire poll: Romney 42% Bachmann 10%

Share of Chris Matthew’s day dreams Bachmann 100% Romney 0%

slickerwick said:
Matthews has gone through some weird transformations over the years. I remember watching him back in the nineties and then he got progressively more manic–his blurbs like “thrill up the leg” and his remark that his job is to see that Obama succeeds (a shameful admission for a ‘journalist’ to utter, an admission of shilling.)

Lately he seems to be less liberal, almost a volte face on some issues. He was beating up on Weiner, wondering aloud if he was suffering a psychiatric disorder and now he’s praising Bachmann–though I would guess he’s pumping her image because he thinks she’s beatable. But who knows?

I also get the feeling he may be angling for a new gig somewhere, perhaps feels that his days at msnbc are numbered. His ratings are pretty low.

Say what you will about Matthews, but he is the only MSNBC host who doesn’t take a predictable kneejerk liberal position 100% of the time — maybe only 95% of the time. In contrast, Rachel, Ed and Lawrence are easier to predict than tomorrow morning’s sunrise, and sound like their every opinion has been vetted by George Soros before they’ve opened their mouths. No, I am not suggesting that George Soros actually tells them what to say — rather that he doesn’t need to, since they are so closely aligned with his government-as-Santa-Claus philosophy.

Slickerwick,
The ONLY reason Tingles went after Weiner was because he was hurting the Dems. He admitted that. The man’s a raging lib and that ain’t gonna change.

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
Slickerwick,
The ONLY reason Tingles went after Weiner was because he was hurting the Dems. He admitted that. The man’s a raging lib and that ain’t gonna change.

Well, I’m not denying he comes across as loony (I think I made that clear) and he’s a staunch Obamaphile. But he seems to be morphing in some odd way. I could be wrong about that–not that I care about him one way or the other. I still get the feeling he may be looking for a new gig at some other network; I just get the sense that he’s on the way out.

slickerwick said:
Well, I’m not denying he comes across as loony (I think I made that clear) and he’s a staunch Obamaphile. But he seems to be morphing in some odd way. I could be wrong about that–not that I care about him one way or the other. I still get the feeling he may be looking for a new gig at some other network; I just get the sense that he’s on the way out.

His fascination and excitement with Bachmann is all ratings related. Now that she’s announced she’ll have to give access to all the f*ckstiks, Chrissy included. It will be his sole mission to trip her up.

To put it plainly, he needs a target.

timzank said:
His fascination and excitement with Bachmann is all ratings related. Now that she’s announced she’ll have to give access to all the f*ckstiks, Chrissy included. It will be his sole mission to trip her up.

To put it plainly, he needs a target.

I agree – there is something afoot here that will be evident soon. He had nothing but disdain for her – called her crazy etc. Something smells and I don’t know yet, but I’m sure it will come out soon.

timzank said:
His fascination and excitement with Bachmann is all ratings related. Now that she’s announced she’ll have to give access to all the f*ckstiks, Chrissy included. It will be his sole mission to trip her up.

To put it plainly, he needs a target.

Yeah, and it was hard to tell from that clip whether he was bullsh*tting. Maher and the other guests seemed flummoxed as well. He may be thinking that Romney could win and that Bachmann can’t and so he’s pumping her up. He really mocked her some time ago, calling her a zombie to her face. I remember that. He was an ass, completely unprofessional during that interview.

slickerwick said:
Yeah, and it was hard to tell from that clip whether he was bullsh*tting. Maher and the other guests seemed flummoxed as well. He may be thinking that Romney could win and that Bachmann can’t and so he’s pumping her up. He really mocked her some time ago, calling her a zombie to her face. I remember that. He was an ass, completely unprofessional during that interview.

You could be right. He could think that he will be the “decider” of who the right elects. All I know is that I don’t trust Matthews as far as I can throw him. The guy is not honest and he’s a buffoon. Other than that – he’s fine. lol

He was clearly messing with people.

Chris Matthews has never has been the brightest bulb in the room. Bachman may when Iowa but she will not win New Hampshire.

Resistance Is Futile said:
Chris Matthews has never has been the brightest bulb in the room. Bachman may when Iowa but she will not win New Hampshire.

Talk about the so called ‘NOT the brightest bulb in the room’ …. since ‘when’ does ‘when’ mean ‘win’? (TIC)

“Bachman may when Iowa”.

However, I do agree with you that Chris ‘Tingles & Thrills’ Matthews “has never has been the brightest bulb in the room”.

Oh and Bill Maher is the biggest idiotic, moronic, imbecilic Ignoramus on the planet. The pigheaded comedian wanna-be, is not, has not and never will be funny! Stupid…Yes!!! Funny and smart…No!

Now watch the righties and the RepubliCons go crazy!!

Chris “likes” whoever he thinks will be good for ratings.

Not too hard to figure out.

Wo….

Someone has a crush on the lady with the crazy eyes huh……hehehehe

Careful Chris..I’m pretty sure she knows how to kill with her bare hands…hahahahaha

Kitsune said:
Chris “likes” whoever he thinks will be good for ratings.

Not too hard to figure out.

If that’s the case he’s doing a poor job of it. His ratings are in the toilet.

It just might happen that Michelle Bachmann wins the nomination. That would be unbelievable. It will be either Romney, Huntsman, or Bachmann. I am sure of this.

Chris Matthews has never has been the brightest bulb in the room. Bachman may when Iowa but she will not win New Hampshire.
Matthews is pretty smart. He has spent his life covering politics. If she does not win New Hampshire who does win?

So Bachmann is the new GOP flavor of the month. Chris likes her because he knows it won’t take long for this crazy bitch to say something stupid and he hopes she will do it on his show.

Those limp-wristed pop-up videos of MSNBC groveling for viewers are a reminder that MSNBC is groveling for viewers. I LOVE seeing the rage coming from MSNBC Hacks because it proves that NOTHING is going their way…not politically, not ideologically, and certainly not in terms of viewers. So, the angrier Matthews and his little playmates get, the more I smile.

Tee Hee!

I believe Matthews knows that his endorsement is a kiss of death to a Republican. He speaks out against most everything Bachmann stands for. Why would he praise a Tea Party favorite when he berates the Tea Party all the time? Something isn’t adding up here.

Matthews suffers from poor enthusiasm control.

What is it with he left and the level of smug douche-bag they always have?

tatboy said:
What is it with he left and the level of smug douche-bag they always have?

“the *level* of *smug douche-bag* they *always have*

Another entrant in “America’s Tastiest Word Salad” contest. Apparently t’boi is unaware that the title’s locked up for the next 10 years by a certain half-term ex-gov from a far northern outpost of the wingnut empire.

Chris Matthews Gushes To Bill Maher: “Real” Michele Bachmann Is “My Hero…She’s Going All The Way”

I’ll bet Chris wishes Michele would go all the way…with him…lol

The guy spent a year trashing her, and now is in love with her? He is so unstable.

mediadoubt said:
“the *level* of *smug douche-bag* they *always have* Another entrant in “America’s Tastiest Word Salad” contest. Apparently t’boi is unaware that the title’s locked up for the next 10 years by a certain half-term ex-gov from a far northern outpost of the wingnut empire.

It’s just and “entrant” but I think it has a chance to go all the way. I’ve heard Palin described a lot of ways… but never “smug. That’s a first.

BTW… thanks for proving my point :).

NonElite said:
I believe Matthews knows that his endorsement is a kiss of death to a Republican. He speaks out against most everything Bachmann stands for. Why would he praise a Tea Party favorite when he berates the Tea Party all the time? Something isn’t adding up here.

I will tell you what is up!
It is obvious now that Michelle Bachmann will be a player in one way or
another in the 2012 Election.
Matthews or ANY of those jerks over at MSNBC would realize quite a Ratings
bump for any night they could schedule her as a guest.
I hope she is not that dumb.,
Michelle should tell them all, NOW, well in advance, to kiss her ASS and NEVER
appear on any MSNBC Show!
Any of them would Kill, to have her as a guest, now, but they would be
setting her up for an Ambush!
Matthews

Just my Opinion said:
I will tell you what is up!
It is obvious now that Michelle Bachmann will be a player in one way or
another in the 2012 Election.
Matthews or ANY of those jerks over at MSNBC would realize quite a Ratings
bump for any night they could schedule her as a guest.
I hope she is not that dumb.,
Michelle should tell them all, NOW, well in advance, to kiss her ASS and NEVER
appear on any MSNBC Show!
Any of them would Kill, to have her as a guest, now, but they would be
setting her up for an Ambush!
Matthews

Matthews is a slobbering idiot!

WildMan said:
Oh and Bill Maher is the biggest idiotic, moronic, imbecilic Ignoramus on the planet. The pigheaded comedian wanna-be, is not, has not and never will be funny! Stupid…Yes!!! Funny and smart…No!

He calls Bachmann “a crazy girl with mean ideas” ………a description that fits him to a T.

tatboy said:
It’s just and “entrant” but I think it has a chance to go all the way. I’ve heard Palin described a lot of ways… but never “smug. That’s a first.

BTW… thanks for proving my point :).

He does not realize that every post of his exemplifies the left’s inability to reason honestly and just hate because it’s such a raw emotion and doesn’t require any thought. Somehow thinking people who base their opinions on fact and not heresy and false accusations are wingnuts. We wonder why we have a problem in this Country when this behaviour is acceptable and in fact encouraged by some.

Hate to say it guys but the Republicans will never in our lifetimes get the perfect combination of Stupid/Charismatic like they did with Reagan. That plus after suffering a negro in the White House the base could not bear anything less than a white man. Period.

Do you really hate saying it?

Matthews now refers to Bachmann as his hero. Recently he said that he “made her” by having her appear on his show in the past. As others have noted, he has mocked and insulted her to her face in the past. Now that she looks like a probable winner in Iowa, he wants to let be bygones be bygones, turn on the charm and have her as a guest again on his show. I hope she has a long memory and tells him to f*** off. Let him try to get his ratings up some other way.

Chris Mathews is not the only praising Bachmann, so is CNN, and the rest of the media. It’s an attempt to stop Palin, pure and simple…..you just need to check out the political blogs to see what’s going on.

slickerwick said:
Yeah, and it was hard to tell from that clip whether he was bullsh*tting. Maher and the other guests seemed flummoxed as well. He may be thinking that Romney could win and that Bachmann can’t and so he’s pumping her up. He really mocked her some time ago, calling her a zombie to her face. I remember that. He was an ass, completely unprofessional during that interview.

That’s my take on it.

Liberal Tormentor - tormenting liberals with logic and facts since 1972 said:
slickerwick said:
Yeah, and it was hard to tell from that clip whether he was bullsh*tting. Maher and the other guests seemed flummoxed as well. He may be thinking that Romney could win and that Bachmann can’t and so he’s pumping her up. He really mocked her some time ago, calling her a zombie to her face. I remember that. He was an ass, completely unprofessional during that interview.
That’s my take on it.

Of course both of you would see it that way, You run to conspiracy theories like Chris Christie to an all you can eat pizza buffet, like the Weeper of the House to the Cigarette Bar at the Duty Free Shop, like Mitt McDonald to a junket, like Willard to a mass firing party, like Palin to an Aqua Net “two-fer” at WalMart. Matthews, for all of his many faults never hides his motives. They are abundantly clear. Bachmann is his girl because she provides mountains of sound bites, volumes of copy. Much like Palin and Trump are the late night comedians’ best friend, Mad Michelle and the Newt are journalists’ best friends.

Palin was mentioned in the article?

writer said:
Palin was mentioned in the article?

Not that I am aware of.

” like Palin to an Aqua Net “two-fer” at WalMart.”

writer said:
” like Palin to an Aqua Net “two-fer” at WalMart.”

That was in my comment, not in the article, and it was used with several other individuals and their characteristics, attitudes and behaviors to make an analogy.

Just messin’ with ya, King. I know that the majority of your posts have to take a swipe at Palin, no matter what the article is about.

Can anyone actually take Bachman seriously anyway? This whole debate is silly, because anyone who believes in intelligent design, and thinks it should be taught in science classes, should not be running a 7-11, let alone an entire country. This isn’t even a left/right thing, it’s just common sense.

Bachman didn’t say teach intelligent design in lieu of science. She just wants kids to be aware of some other theories.

writer said:
Bachman didn’t say teach intelligent design in lieu of science. She just wants kids to be aware of some other theories.

What she said was she wants both taught, side by side. And the problem with that is that ID is just a crazy theory, that cannot be proven, that is based in one mythical storybook that’s been re-written and re-translated hundreds of times. Evoulution has evidence to prove it happened, and isn’t a theory, it’s actual science. You can teach ID in religion class, but not in science class, as it has no place there.

Evolution can indeed be proven. As for the actual creation, what caused the big bang? Where’d the material come from to make the bang? When it comes to actual creation, science has no more answers than religion.

writer said:
Evolution can indeed be proven. As for the actual creation, what caused the big bang? Where’d the material come from to make the bang? When it comes to actual creation, science has no more answers than religion.

That’s what I said, evolution can be proven. And while the question of the Big Bang hasn’t been solved yet, science is inching closer to more answers…more than some etherial being sneezing everything up, then taking a nap. Anyway, my point is that intelligent design should not be taught in science class, because it’s not science.

Okay, not in science class. But if a kid asks where the material came from to make the big bang, and what caused it to bang together, what does science say? They don’t know. So saying there’s a supreme being, as opposed to saying that everything just somehow appeared and banged together, they both sound kind of far fetched.

ProudCanadian said:
That’s what I said, evolution can be proven. And while the question of the Big Bang hasn’t been solved yet, science is inching closer to more answers…more than some etherial being sneezing everything up, then taking a nap. Anyway, my point is that intelligent design should not be taught in science class, because it’s not science.

there was nothing….bang…..there was something., science

Yep. A supreme being is silly. Everything just appearing from nothing, now that makes sense.

writer said:
Okay, not in science class. But if a kid asks where the material came from to make the big bang, and what caused it to bang together, what does science say? They don’t know. So saying there’s a supreme being, as opposed to saying that everything just somehow appeared and banged together, they both sound kind of far fetched.

Yeah, science does not have all the answers…yet. But when I took science, we didn’t even talk about the big bang. We did talk about evolution though, not ID. If I asked my science teacher what caused the creation of the universe, and he said god, I’d laugh in his face. All I’m saying is science class should stick to the proven stuff, and leave the theories to the lab to be proven. If they want to teach ID in religion class, then great, go for it.

cjd ohio 1 said:
there was nothing….bang…..there was something., science

What I said was that it hasn’t been proven yet. At one point, people thought the earth was flat, till science proved otherwise. You just gotta give things time, till the science can catch up with the explanation.

ProudCanadian said:
What I said was that it hasn’t been proven yet. At one point, people thought the earth was flat, till science proved otherwise. You just gotta give things time, till the science can catch up with the explanation.

now you are making a leap of faith, science will explain everything

Semantics. Did Bachman say along with science class, or in science class? Don’t know. Don’t really care. Mainly I’m saying that people like Maher who sneer at the idea of a supreme being should ask themselves how silly it also sounds to say that everything just appeared from nothing.

writer said:
Semantics. Did Bachman say along with science class, or in science class? Don’t know. Don’t really care. Mainly I’m saying that people like Maher who sneer at the idea of a supreme being should ask themselves how silly it also sounds to say that everything just appeared from nothing.

While I find the idea of some magical guy who created the universe to be pretty silly, if it was proven to me, I’d be cool with it. I just find it fascinating that there’s still people out there who don’t believe in evolution, and think that we started when the bible said we did, it’s lunacy. And I don’t think it’s a leap of faith to think science will explain everything…you just can’t sit with your head in the sand and say it’s alright, god will take care of everything. Stuff has to be explained, it’s human nature to explore the unknown. And there’s no easy answers, and sometimes we have to wait for them.

its like the chicken and the egg, paradox, some things science will not be able to explain

ProudCanadian said:
What I said was that it hasn’t been proven yet. At one point, people thought the earth was flat, till science proved otherwise. You just gotta give things time, till the science can catch up with the explanation.

What you’re saying is you think your “theory” is better than her “theory” so your “theory” should be the only one taught in science. Who the hell made you God?

Do you understand the meaning of the word “theory”?

What? No *leg thrill* barb by Maher? I bet Stewart would have had the guts to tease Matthews…Sheesh!

seek said:
What you’re saying is you think your “theory” is better than her “theory” so your “theory” should be the only one taught in science. Who the hell made you God?

Do you understand the meaning of the word “theory”?

You’re a moron…the difference is, one is theory, and the other is fact.

ProudCanadian said:
You’re a moron…the difference is, one is theory, and the other is fact.

thanks so much mr proud and obnoxious canadian – it’s called “the big bang THEORY”.

Ever take a science course? What did you learn about theories?

Talk about moronic. Where the hell are you from Ontario?

seek said:
thanks so much mr proud and obnoxious canadian – it’s called “the big bang THEORY”.

Ever take a science course? What did you learn about theories?

Talk about moronic. Where the hell are you from Ontario?

Next time when adults are talking, you should maybe read the whole conversation. We were talking about intelligent design and evolution, and whether or not they should be taught in science class, as one is a theory (ID), and the other is proven (evolution). The big bang theory was more off-topic, and if you would go back and look at what was said, I agreed that it was a theory, and no one knows the what happened. It’s called reading comprehension, look into it. Where the hell are you from…Utah? Duh.

God Almighty this forum is filled with idiots. Religion is faith is myth is religion, and science is reason, rational experimentation and empirical facts. EMPIRICISM is not a word religious folk use often to discuss ‘faith’.

idesign said:
Chris Mathews is not the only praising Bachmann, so is CNN, and the rest of the media. It’s an attempt to stop Palin, pure and simple…..you just need to check out the political blogs to see what’s going on.

Agreed. Build up Bachmann to discourage Sarah from getting in. Many in the media feel that if Bachmann gets traction, Sarah would not run. My question is, why does the media assume there is only room for one woman in the race?

Ladies and gentlemen,Hello everybody,
input this URL: === http://globalsell.org/ ===
shirts, bags, hat and the decorations.
you can find many cheap and fashion stuff (jor dan shoes)
(NBA NFL NHL MLB jersey)
( lv handbag)
(cha nel wallet)
(D&G sunglasses)
(ed har dy jacket)
(UGG boot)
and so on..welcome to our website:
( http://globalsell.org/)
we sincerely hope to establish the business relation with you.
Looking forward your visit.

ProudCanadian said:
Next time when adults are talking, you should maybe read the whole conversation. We were talking about intelligent design and evolution, and whether or not they should be taught in science class, as one is a theory (ID), and the other is proven (evolution). The big bang theory was more off-topic, and if you would go back and look at what was said, I agreed that it was a theory, and no one knows the what happened. It’s called reading comprehension, look into it. Where the hell are you from…Utah? Duh.

No wonder Ralph wanted the eastern bums to freeze. lol

Lest we forget:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/geoffrey-dickens/2011/01/06/matthews-mocks-bachmanns-appointment-intelligence-committee-and-wo

seek said:
No wonder Ralph wanted the eastern bums to freeze. lol

Witty retort…of course, when a republican can’t come up with an intelligent response, it always goes to insults…guess you actually are from Utah.

ProudCanadian said:
Witty retort…of course, when a republican can’t come up with an intelligent response, it always goes to insults…guess you actually are from Utah.

I didn’t know Ralph resided in Utah. You seem to have a fondness for it – why? You didn’t deserve any other retort. When you attempt to elevate your own intelligence at the expense of someone else’s, you’ve lost your argument.

Now – don’t attempt to deceive,. and figure you won’t be called on it.

seek said:
I didn’t know Ralph resided in Utah. You seem to have a fondness for it – why? You didn’t deserve any other retort. When you attempt to elevate your own intelligence at the expense of someone else’s, you’ve lost your argument.

Now – don’t attempt to deceive,. and figure you won’t be called on it.

Wow…please show me where I attempted to deceive, I’d really like to see that. I said evolution is fact, which is true. I said that intelligent design and the big bang are theories, both unproven, which is true. And I said that you had no idea what you were talking about, which was true as well. I don’t think I’m smarter than the average bear, but I’m definitely smarter than you, kid…so stop drooling all over yourself, and leave the adult talk to the grown-ups, okay?

ProudCanadian said:
Wow…please show me where I attempted to deceive, I’d really like to see that. I said evolution is fact, which is true. I said that intelligent design and the big bang are theories, both unproven, which is true. And I said that you had no idea what you were talking about, which was true as well. I don’t think I’m smarter than the average bear, but I’m definitely smarter than you, kid…so stop drooling all over yourself, and leave the adult talk to the grown-ups, okay?

I have two words for you ———– —

You blowhard know nothing twit.
It is called “the theory of evolution” moron. Fact my sorry ass.
You’re not even smarter than Yogi doofus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_theory_and_fact

p.s. it isn’t drool – it’s a spit wad aimed right between your eyes.

You’re a not a well informed Canadian because you had no idea what I mean’t by Ralph – obviously living in the hills of Utah with your umpteen wives.

seek said:
I have two words for you ———– —

You blowhard know nothing twit.
It is called “the theory of evolution” moron. Fact my sorry ass.
You’re not even smarter than Yogi doofus.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_theory_and_fact

p.s. it isn’t drool – it’s a spit wad aimed right between your eyes.

You’re a not a well informed Canadian because you had no idea what I mean’t by Ralph – obviously living in the hills of Utah with your umpteen wives.

You’re a fine one to talk…for one thing, posting a Wikipedia link really doesn’t support your case; I could write a wiki article and quote it, anyone can. Besides that, the article doesn’t even state whether it’s fact or theory, just that there’s arguments for both. It seems to support more the fact side of evolution than the theory, if you actually read it, which I doubt you did since you don’t seem to have 2 brain cells to rub together, you ignorant, self-deluded, empty-headed child.

P.S. I did understand your Klein reference, I just ignored it as it doesn’t really apply to me, and also because I didn’t see the need to pat you on the head and give you a cookie by acknowledging that you have an ear for obscure Canadian trivia. Congrats, skippy.

Matthews’ mental instability and grandiosity makes me think the dude’s on some sort of crack. Just a couple weeks ago, he was calling Michele names like the doofus he is. Tsk, tsk, tsk.

I wonder what Kool-Aid he was on when he started to campaign for a run for a US Senate Seat in PA? Dog catcher, maybe, but nothing else.

there is only one Michele Bachmann … http://www.michelebachmann.ch