Chris Matthews responds to View hosts
by Winnie McCarthy
Yesterday, the ladies on The View took MSNBC’s Hardball host Chris Matthews to task for comments he made that Hillary Clinton would not have won a U.S. Senate seat or be running for president if Bill Clinton had not cheated on her. He asserted this morning on Morning Joe that he knows more political history than Barbara and “that other woman” (Joy Behar) and said that he does not like being criticized when he is not giving his opinion, but rather is stating historical fact. He stated that his commentary was an historical assessment.
If you want to check out the video, go here.
Thanks to rainlillie for the tip!
Did You Enjoy this Post? Subscribe to Watching The View. It's Free!
January 11th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
I have never really liked Chris Matthews and this is further proof that his ego is much larger than his intellect!
January 11th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
Historical “assessment” is different from “historical fact.” A “fact” would be data that read the minds of female voters and found out that more women voted for HC because her husband cheated on her than for other reasons. In the absence of this kind of data, we have exit polls. Is Chris saying that the exit polls (which is based on what people say is their reason for their votes, not based on actual “facts”) showed that more women SAID they voted for HC because she was cheated on?
Or is he saying that he and others have assumed that was the reason she won? And that his “assessment” has more validity than BW’s and Joy’s?
I’m very frustrated because busy people who consume major media outlets like fast food, and major media outlets who dispense “news” like it’s fast food, will come away with this thinking it is a FACT that HC became senator because women felt sorry for her being cheated on. All it will take is all the talking heads repeating it over and over again, especially on Fox. It will have a life of its own and will be considered a truth.
January 11th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Great points, Think85.
Wow, Barb must have hit a nerve with Chris. Guess he won’t return to The View to plug another book? Nahhh, Barb will probably kiss up and play nice-y nice-y like she did with Trump and BillO just to avoid bad press :/
January 11th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
ugh that’s ridiculous to me. I have heard women comment on how the cheating situation affects their opinions of HC and it has ALWAYS been in a negative sense - that they don’t like that she ’stood by her man’ and should have dumped him to the curb and it makes them dislike her rather than want to vote for her. So obviously his ‘facts’ seem to depend on who he’s asking. :/
January 11th, 2008 at 11:10 pm
If you think Chris Mattspews is whacked.. check out his link from the NH Primary coverage. Odd to look at Keith Olberman looking at Mattspews. THis guy is truly whacked and if Keith had any self respect.. he should refuse to work with him..
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/10/stewart-vs-matthews-roun_n_80941.html
January 12th, 2008 at 8:02 am
Chris can argue all he wants about “political HISTORY”
but his sexist and personal attacks on Clinton have too often had NOTHING to do with “the facts” or “POLITICAL HISTORY”
Calling her laugh a “cackle”
Comparing her voice to “fingernails on a blackboard”
Talking about “smothering the young senator in his CRIB”!
Saying “I hate her - I HATE HER”
Saying she “looked more witchy” because she criticized the Bush administration’s homeland security spending priorities…
Saying that if Clinton received the expected 30 percent, it would mean that seven of 10 Iowa voters did not “like her”, but not making the obvious SAME point about the male candidates.
Saying that she only was able to become a senator because of Bill’s affair? But not bothering to notice she’s a lawyer - and has a lifetime of experience working in politics.
Asking if the Republicans can win by demonizing her - when he has been one of the worst in demonizing her!
“She Devil?” Republicans are absolutely demonizing Hillary Clinton. Rudy [Giuliani] openly mocks her, and Mitt [Romney] says she’ll run the country into the ground. Are Republicans trying to win by branding a President Hillary as unthinkable?
And then he responds in such a petulant and condescending way to this criticism - by suggesting anyone who takes offense at his behavior of attacking her so personally and vehemently - should “study history”.
To Chris I say…
We have studied history Chris - and just as importantly - we’ve lived it. We don’t need you to lecture us on how calling someone “witchy” is based on historical “fact”!
He has been smearing her - in a sexist and personal way - that has nothing to do with “political history” - and is beyond any semblance of fairness - and so his personal mud slinging - not the “facts” - have finally lost me as a viewer!
January 12th, 2008 at 11:53 am
I’m not a fan of Chris Mathews. I find him very irritating. When he really gets going, you notice the drool is just about to drop from his mouth.
If he’s going to go after Hilary he should go after her about her voting record, which is fair. He could do that to any of the candidates running not just her.
I can’t stand it when men think they can speak for the female voter. I’m a woman and Bill’s infidelity never mattered to me, he’s not my husband so why should I care? That’s between him and his wife. I just want a competent, intelligent president. Basically the opposite of what we have now.
January 12th, 2008 at 7:22 pm
Certainly sounds to me like “opinion”. Which he certainly has a right to have. However opinion is FAR from fact.