The "good" Chris Matthews said THIS about Obama Tuesday:

[jenmito]

In response to Joan Walsh (and Josh Marshal) whining about the WH telling Dems. to "buck up," after Walsh said that Obama gave away too much to the corporations and not producing change:

MATTHEWS: Well, the corporations don‘t think he‘s given them anything. Let me tell you, I—here‘s my view in response to what you both said. And I think it‘s smart, both of you have said—I respect those views from everybody. Anybody who‘s passionate about politics, I believe in. But I know this. This president has done what we were all taught in graduate school to do, what progressives have believed in from years and years, decades ago. One, you deal an economic downfall with Keynesian economics. You compensate for the loss of consumer spending and business investment with government spending. That‘s what you do. That‘s what you‘re supposed to do. No one has had a better idea since the 1930s.

Number two, the Wall Street crowd needed governing. They didn‘t have any. Now they‘ve got some. Number three, he‘s pushed for progressive taxation. He‘s going after the rich. He‘s not giving them their tax cut. I think on all the (INAUDIBLE) he‘s put through like Eric Holder in Justice. He‘s done a lot of things on the environment he‘s tried to do.

He has done what a progressive should have tried to do. And we can argue about tone and degree of successful politics and personality, but I don‘t know how a liberal or progressive can turn their back on this guy and say they‘ve got something better waiting in the closet because I don‘t know who that person is.

MARSHALL: Couldn‘t agree with you more, Chris.

MATTHEWS: And nobody talking does. Anyway—there ain‘t nobody out there but this guy, and certainly, nobody—no more progressive who could win election for sheriff! Anyway, thank you, Josh Marshall—maybe I‘m getting mad—

http://rss.msnbc.msn.com/id/39420061/ns/msnbc_tv-hardball_with_chris_matthews/

[Enrique]

1. that's the bad Chris Matthews

the sucking up to power Chris Matthews.

[jenmito]

3. In your Bizarro World maybe,

but not in the real world where Obama deserves credit for his accomplishments.

[The Wielding Truth]

5. He is not .You forget who the media power really is.

[CakeGrrl]

10. Who is your "something better" alternative to the President?

Who is the Progressive you think will compel Republicans to suddenly drop all their opposition and do what's best for the country?

Who is the Progressive you think will win a majority of the national vote in the General Election with Progressive ideals (remembering that Dennis Kucinich couldn't make a significant dent in the Democratic primary)?

Sounds like Matthews was addressing people like you.

And why did you assume that a positive statement about Obama is "sucking up to power"? I think that says quite a bit about your mindset right there.

[jenmito]

14. Perfectly put. Especially this:

"And why did you assume that a positive statement about Obama is "sucking up to power"? I think that says quite a bit about your mindset right there." :thumbsup:

[treestar]

27. Just what I was going to say

Even if the most leftward progressive were elected, he/she would be in power then.

[mzmolly]

17. Corporate

power? Lobbyist power?

[DevonRex]

20. in your fucked-up world. Bless your little heart. nt

[Pirate Smile]

29. That says a lot about you.

[WeekendWarrior]

63. So Tell Us All Then

Who do you have waiting in the wings who can win more than Sheriff?

[FrenchieCat]

2. Lucid moment for Matthews.

Guess he got tired that no one wants to watch his show.

[jenmito]

4. He's been talking like that pretty much all week.

He is politically bipolar IMO. (I love that pic-is it an old one of your daughter?)

[FrenchieCat]

6. She's the youngest......

of my set of two. :)

[jenmito]

7. Yeah...

I know you have a set of two. They're both beautiful. :)

[FrenchieCat]

8. Thanks!

I think of them when gathering my political thoughts! :hi:

[jenmito]

12. I don't blame you...

I'd feel the same way. I DO feel that way-but about my neices and nephews-I don't have any kids. :hi:

[elleng]

9. He's in Ireland, isn't he? Cleared the air here!

[jenmito]

13. Yup. n/t

[eleny]

11. Sorry, Chris, it's not about how much was accomplished

I can even deal with losing a confrontation.

I'd like to know how the administration went about trying to get single payer or Medicare for all. What was the process of trying to get those services?

The problem I'm having is that I never saw evidence of taking the negotiations in that direction. If it happened, I'd just like to know the details. After all, I'm helping to pay for the salaries of all those involved and expect some accountability.

And I don't give a rats ass about those who don't like how I feel about this.

[Uzybone]

16. " it's not about how much was accomplished"

LOL.

[gateley]

18. You may be correct, but I'm feeling very nervous about what's around the bend

(just caught a moment of Boehner on C-Span talking about what they will do if they get the House back :scared:) so I think now we HAVE to focus on what we can do from this day forward. What we can still fight for, and if we get a teeny concession, keep fighting for more.

I'm also energized because I heard Bernie Sanders on Thom Hartmann this morning and, as he said and as we know, he's one of the members of Congress who are fighting hard for us, and he said we have to keep fighting and keep fighting and keep fighting, no matter what we're dealt.

So although I'm pissed/disappointed/frustrated about so much that has or hasn't transpired, I'm in agreement with Bernie that we have to keep our eye on the goals and keep on keepin' on.

[DevonRex]

21. Well, then I don't give a rat's ass that you do feel like that. You want to be conferenced in on

his phone calls and meetings? Good fucking luck. And BTW, when did you get that with any OTHER president? It's stupid. So, again, I don't give a rat's ass that you feel that way. Who would?

[impik]

22. You don't know what "progress" means

And you certainly don't know how Washington politics works. This president has done done amazing things, achieving things that Liberals didn't dare to dream of until 2-3 years ago. Ask Elizabeth Warren, who one year ago did not believe that the consumer agency will ever be created.

But hey, i don't really spend time liking or disliking how you feel.

[tomp]

39. right, he closed the barn door after the horse was gone....

....paid the horse thieves for their trouble, and said, "really, guys, horse stealing is bad. btw, nice ranch."

[phleshdef]

23. The administration attempted to pass single payer in every way that had a possibility of success.

Dwell on the indisputability of that statement for a moment.

[RaleighNCDUer]

28. By not talking about it at all.

He said he wanted a public option.

If you want a public option then come out FORCEFULLY for single-payer, then grudgingly back down and settle for a public option.

We could, and should, have had a public option, but he chose to START with it in negotiating, which means he could not compromise at all without losing what he wanted. Unless, of course, he never really wanted a public option and he was just LYING from the beginning.

Poor negotiator, or liar? You choose.

[phleshdef]

32. Talking about single payer to THIS Senate = Utter waste of time

I didn't vote for Obama so he can waste our fucking time. Get over it.

Your explanation of what happened with the public option is entirely dishonest. There was no fight to be had. Either we were going to get the votes or we weren't, the way it went down, the numbers just were not there. Bitch and moan all you want, the numbers still weren't there. Whine about how he should have threatened to fuck Lieberman's wife and make him watch while Joe Biden filmed, the numbers weren't there. Its not a matter of god damn negotiation. You watch too much television. Minds were made up and the numbers were not there. And if you think he should have thrown away the chance to do all the great things the HCR bill DID do just so you can feel like he properly scratched your back and made your values feel all warm and fuzzy, then that makes me doubly glad that someone like him is President and not someone like you.

[RaleighNCDUer]

41. A good majority leader does not count the votes - he MAKES the votes.

A leader like LBJ would have gotten the votes out of the senate for a public option - and one tool to accomplish that is 'overreaching' - whip up public support for for single-payer (and the support WAS there - over 50%) and let the obstructionists back you down to a public option (public support 70%).

Such is the result of the demise of the unions - nobody knows how to fucking negotiate.

Why do you think the insignificant numbers of teapartiers seem to have so much influence? Because they are not afraid of reminding their leadership that THEY are the voters. It is a travesty that the senate is not only so much more conservative than the people that elected them, but that they feel they have no obligation to listen to what the majority of the people want.

Go ahead, make excuses for the conservaturds - and don't be surprised when the Democrats lose congress.

The sooner you realize that RW Dems are mere placeholders for Republicans, the sooner we will have a functional party.

[phleshdef]

43. LBJ forced women to sit in the bathroom and talk to him while he took shits.

Thats my response from now on whenever someone digs up Johnson.

Aside from that, "A good majority leader does not count the votes - he MAKES the votes." = Empty bravado talk that I have no time for.

And where in anything I said did I defend conservative Democrats or Lieberman? I'm just stating what the reality was. They didn't want to vote for a public option and, even worse, would have joined a filibuster against it.

The fact is, unless we have 60 solid progressives in the Senate OR we have like a 65-68 vote majority, we are not going to get new government programs on the level of Social Security or Medicare. The fact that we got a huge government subsidy program to pay for people's premiums on a progressive income scale, with the Senate that we have, is an amazing feat in and of itself.

[RaleighNCDUer]

44. Poor negotiator or liar? nt

[phleshdef]

45. Fortunately for me, you don't GET to narrow down my choice to 2 BS options.

[RaleighNCDUer]

46. I'm not the one who gave you those options. He did.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32718713/39370286

He said he wanted it, but didn't fight for it, and didn't get it.

So, is he a really poor negotiator, or did he lie about it from the beginning. When 70% of the public WANTS something, and the President WANTS something, how can he fuck it up so bad that he doesn't get it?

If he had stumped for it, if he had pressured Congress in ways only the President can, if he had not only said 'it is important' but said 'I know the vast majority of Americans want it and it would be the height of irresponsibility for their representatives in congress to not heed their wishes' - we'd have gotten it.

He didn't. There is nothing out there that shows he did.

Poor negotiator, or liar?

[phleshdef]

47. LOL, you think a President citing polling actually pressures Congress?

He has said exactly that on the Bush tax cuts, yet we are still getting the same shit from the same people like we did on the healthcare bill.

You live in a fantasy world. I REFUSE to answer your question because the options you are presenting are both based on a pile of shit disconnect from reality.

[RaleighNCDUer]

48. LA LA LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU

Great response.

[treestar]

53. Congressmen are elected by districts, Senators by states

So polling regarding the nation as a whole means nothing to them. Only polling from their district.

[stevenleser]

49. Sounds like you are making an ad from Diebold to the GOP n/t

[stevenleser]

50. Yeah, really hard to push a Liberal agenda in the 1960s. He wouldnt even get elected to Senate now

You realize that, right? He was from Texas.

So make sure you account for everything when you are trying to push that mountain of crap. Johnson as majority leader now doesnt survive a re-election attempt in Texas. But of course, he wouldnt have even been elected in the first place so that is even getting ahead of ourselves.

[RaleighNCDUer]

52. Do you seriously think the blue dogs today are harder to rein in than

the Dixiecrats of Johnson's day were? Seriously?

I'm talking about the strength of personality and a certain degree of ruthlessness that is needed to bring reluctant party members into line - LBJ had it, Reid doesn't, and apparently Obama doesn't. Rahm might, but he applied it in support of the insurgent dems, not against them - good riddance. There is no excuse for not keeping Nelson or Lincoln in support of the party; offer carrots as necessary, but let them see the stick you're holding, whatever it takes to enact real progressive legislation.

This administration either doesn't WANT real progressive legislation, or it doesn't know any comeback to their first 'no'.

[stevenleser]

54. How can you even ask that being from NC? Look at your statewide elected Dems in NC and the south

What are state wide elected Democrats like in the Carolinas? Throughout the rest of the south, or the midwest? Can any of them be what it seems like you are asking of Democrats and be elected or re-elected? Point to a Democrat in those regions who you like who is elected statewide. Just one.

[RaleighNCDUer]

56. There you go, changing the subject again. We are not talking about

electing far lefties in red states - we are talking about the supposedly progressive administration and congressional leadership using its influence to keep the right wing of the party voting FOR progressive legislation. If Ben Nelson was certain the congress would cut several billion in earmarks that would have gone to Nebraska if he did not vote for a public option, you can be damn well sure he would vote for a public option; at the same time, if he was promised a billion dollar carrot for cooperating, he just might cooperate, also. Besides that, if he's REALLY recalcitrant the party leadership could assure him that he WOULD face a primary challenge, supported by the party, in his next election.

While the Republicans play hardball, we're playing whiffle ball.

[stevenleser]

57. And the person you are touting blamed "the preachers, liberals and professors" when his popularity

waned.

[stevenleser]

58. And p.s., I am not changing the subject. I am answering the question you asked. n/t

[RaleighNCDUer]

59. No, you didn't. My question was, do you think today's blue dogs are

harder to rein in than the Dixiecrats of Johnson's time were.

That question was not answered - instead, you started talking about ELECTING progressives in red states - particularly in NC.

Me - Controlling out of control RWers.

You - Electing progressives in adverse conditions.

Two VERY different subjects.

[stevenleser]

61. Yes, I did answer the question. You choose not to see it n/t

[treestar]

55. You are advocating a cult of personality?

You are claiming the President's personality is what drives Congress.

[RaleighNCDUer]

60. ???

I have no idea where that came from.

[treestar]

62. ...

"I'm talking about the strength of personality and a certain degree of ruthlessness that is needed to bring reluctant party members into line"

Why does it have to be "ruthless?" If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. If Bush were Ruthless enough, he could have gotten Congress to pass a law making him dictator. This is a representative republic. We don't want our representatives threatened, or forced, or overwhelmed by a heavy personality. We put limits on power because of it.

[treestar]

26. You speak of those things as if they were on some hidden mountain

Or in reach some way.

There was no point in trying to get those things out of Congress.

[uponit7771]

42. BULLSHIT it aint! A bird in the hand is worth 2 in the Bush...

[WeekendWarrior]

64. Will this record EVER get unstuck?

The bottom line is this. It was no single payer or no healthcare reform at all. That much was obvious very early on in the game.

But now that we have SOME reform, maybe if the Dems remain in power (and I believe they will), some more reforms can be added.

I am so sick and tired of the bullshit notion that this could have been done without some sort of major compromise. Have you ever worked in Washington? Do you ever pay attention to what goes on there?

And I don't give a rat's ass about how you feel about it. But apparently you seem to think somebody does.

[Uzybone]

15. I did a double take when I heard that from Tweety

you know what they say about broken clocks.

I'm sure the Hamshireites will contend that she and her ilk can be elected for dogcatcher or sheriff.

[mzmolly]

19. K and R.

Obama has done an excellent job on many fronts, but a lack of jobs is dragging him down. I don't think he'd be under such a microscope if we had better job numbers.

[ClarkUSA]

24. Walsh was an Hillary booster in 2008. Has she gone over to the PUMA side like Jane Hamsher?

Everytime I see her, she's so concerned and usually whining about something that the Obama dministration did or didn't do. She's not unhinged about it like Cenk The Young Turkey or PUMA Jane, but then again, she is the editor of Salon.com so she can't afford to be.

In response to Joan Walsh (and Josh Marshal) whining about the WH telling Dems. to "buck up," after Walsh said that Obama gave away too much to the corporations and not producing change:

MATTHEWS: Well, the corporations don‘t think he‘s given them anything. Let me tell you, I—here‘s my view in response to what you both said. And I think it‘s smart, both of you have said—I respect those views from everybody. Anybody who‘s passionate about politics, I believe in. But I know this. This president has done what we were all taught in graduate school to do, what progressives have believed in from years and years, decades ago. One, you deal an economic downfall with Keynesian economics. You compensate for the loss of consumer spending and business investment with government spending. That‘s what you do. That‘s what you‘re supposed to do. No one has had a better idea since the 1930s.

Number two, the Wall Street crowd needed governing. They didn‘t have any. Now they‘ve got some. Number three, he‘s pushed for progressive taxation. He‘s going after the rich. He‘s not giving them their tax cut. I think on all the (INAUDIBLE) he‘s put through like Eric Holder in Justice. He‘s done a lot of things on the environment he‘s tried to do.

He has done what a progressive should have tried to do. And we can argue about tone and degree of successful politics and personality, but I don‘t know how a liberal or progressive can turn their back on this guy and say they‘ve got something better waiting in the closet because I don‘t know who that person is.

MARSHALL: Couldn‘t agree with you more, Chris.

MATTHEWS: And nobody talking does. Anyway—there ain‘t nobody out there but this guy, and certainly, nobody—no more progressive who could win election for sheriff! Anyway, thank you, Josh Marshall—maybe I‘m getting mad—

http://rss.msnbc.msn.com/id/39420061/ns/msnbc_tv-hardball_with_chris_matthews

Good on Chris Matthews and TPM's Josh Marshall for schooling Her Whinyness.

[Pirate Smile]

30. Joan's usually pretty good. She gets disappointed but tends to keep things in perspective.

[treestar]

25. Good Tweety

:pats Tweety on back:

[Pirate Smile]

31. Here is the video - it is the whole segment but if you wait through the

commercial, it will let you fast-forward by dragging the little thingy at the bottom over to around minute 8:45.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/#39407393

[jenmito]

33. Thanks! n/t

[GeorgeGist]

34. I can see the spittle flying ...

but it's lame just the same.

[jenmito]

35. No you can't...

he's in Ireland. But what's "lame" about what he said?

[Arkana]

36. Tomorrow, Matthews will say that Obama is Satan.

He's the most schizophrenic pundit there is.

[jeanpalmer]

37. "the Wall Street crowd needed governing.

They didn‘t have any. Now they‘ve got some." Name one Wall St. scam the goverrnment has stopped. There aren't any. Blowhard.

[girl gone mad]

38. Keynesian?

Not even close. Krugman is kind of a moderate-right Keynesian, and even Krugman said the stimulus was way too small.

What's more, Keynes would have been dead set against the $23 trillion unfettered bank giveaway.

What qualifies Mathews to give economic opinion? He certainly doesn't seem well versed on economic theory, based on these statements.

[tomp]

40. thank you. nt

[progressoid]

51. Yep - more like Keynesianish

Or Keynesian-lite.

[Umbral]

65. There is no such thing as a "Good" Chris Mathews, there is only Mathews 'in love' or 'out of love'.

nt