Posted on 09/17/2015 3:30:31 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
In the late hours of Wednesday night after the Republican debate, MSNBCs Hardball host Chris Matthews was in his element as he whined about the 2016 GOP candidates being very ideological tonight and targeted the Cuban-American heritage of Senators Marco Rubio (Fl.) and Ted Cruz (Tex.) for thinking that they still are fighting a Cold War and treat[ing] Obama like hes Castro. As for the latter and more inflammatory remarks, it started when Matthews wondered aloud to Eugene Robinson of The Washington Post that whenever he hears Cruz or Rubio speak, he swear[s] they are still fighting a Cold War and [t]hey speak about apocalyptic terms by us[ing] terms like existential.
(VIDEO-AT-LINK)
Dismissing their backgrounds and any hardships their families suffered in coming to the Untied States, the MSNBC mainstay screamed about the pair talk[ing] about ICBMs (Inter-Continental Ballastic Missles) hitting this country and being trapped in a mindset that began in the 1950s and to these guys, it never left them.
Matthews ended his latest rant by informing Robinson and viewers of his belief that they treat Obama like hes Castro and while he first thought that I dont get it, he immediately corrected himself and gushed over Republican Governor John Kasich (Ohio): I dont know I guess I do get it. The only guy that stood up to them tonight was Kasich.
Moments before all that, the man whose wife is a Democrat running for Congress in Maryland complained about how the 2016 GOP field was very ideological tonight and observed that he found it interesting how they all agreed on certain things.
Painting the GOP as a hawk party to begin with, Matthews bloviated about them being the anti-Mexican immigration party and against Planned Parenthood with strong, clear strokes of ideology.
While he undermined his own point by stating that there were [n]o surprises for him, he maintained nonetheless that: [T]here wasn't a lot of debate about the principle of the ideology. They were all ideologues.
Asking Mother Jones David Corn for his thoughts on the debate, Corn had nothing but praise for Kasich:
The one standout I thought was maybe John Kasich. Seemed he was running a general election, not a Republican primary. When it came to tone, he talked about working and bringing people together, not being partisan, not being overly ideological or overly argumentative and you know, Im a practical, pragmatic governor. The kind that the Republican establishment was talking about before Trump came along.
In the hour leading up to the main event, Matthews brought on liberal Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer (Calif.) to relive her 2010 Senate reelection victory of Carly Fiorina and bash the businesswoman ahead of her participation in the lead debate (after being relegated to the earlier event the first time around).
The relevant portions of the transcript from MSNBCs Hardball with Chris Matthews after the GOP debate on September 16 can be found below.
MSNBCs Hardball with Chris Matthews September 16, 2015 11:39 p.m. Eastern
CHRIS MATTEWS: Anyway, let me go to David Corn. I thought it was very ideological tonight. I thought it was interesting how they all agreed on certain things. It is a hawk party to be begin with. It is an anti-Mexican immigration party. Call it illegal or whatever you want to call it, they dont like Mexican immigrants. It doesn't like Planned Parenthood. These are strong, clear strokes of ideology. No surprises, but there wasn't a lot of debate about the principle of the ideology. They were all ideologues. Your thoughts.
MOTHER JONES WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF DAVID CORN: The one standout I thought was maybe John Kasich. Seemed he was running a general election, not a Republican primary. When it came to tone, he talked about working and bringing people together, not being partisan, not being overly ideological or overly argumentative and you know, Im a practical, pragmatic governor. The kind that the Republican establishment was talking about before Trump came along. He wasnt he didn't get a big reaction. I dont think he sold it that well.
(....)
11:53 p.m. Eastern
MATTHEWS: You know, Gene Robinson, I know you remember this certainly better than I do, but I when these guys talks, Rubio talks, a Cuban-American, and Cruz talks, a Cuban American, I swear they still are fighting a Cold War. They talk about apocalyptic terms. They use terms like existential. They talk about ICBMs hitting this country. They are they are trapped in a mindset that began in the 1950s and to these guys, it never left them. I dont know they treat Obama like he's Castro. I don't get it. I dont know I guess I do get it. The only guy that stood up to them tonight was Kasich.
THE WASHINGTON POSTs EUGENE ROBINSON: They certainly believe that's what the Republican establishment wants to hear and thats what their donors want to hear.
MATTHEWS: The money people do.
ROBINSON: They laid it on thick. I think I thought Kasich had a very good night that and I thought that was a good exchange for him because he sounded reasonable.
And Obummer’s Global Warming schtick isn’t apocalyptic?
COHIBA!
Oh...you mean the warm feeling running down his leg guy?
Sacré bleu!
Chris’ depends are leaking
The Libs whine and gripe that the Fox Network is GOP and Conservative. Yet they have regular cohosts and guests who are clearly not. MSNBC? Wow, show your true colors here. Who is the token conservative, hmmm?
Jefferson laid out what he considered to be "qualifications" for the American presidency. We might consult an excerpted portion of the 1801 Inaugural Address of Thomas Jefferson for guidance on the seriousness of the undertaking:
(Excerpt) "Let us, then, with courage and confidence pursue our own Federal and Republican principles, our attachment to union and representative government. Kindly separated by nature and a wide ocean from the exterminating havoc of one quarter of the globe; too high-minded to endure the degradations of the others; possessing a chosen country, with room enough for our descendants to the thousandth and thousandth generation; entertaining a due sense of our equal right to the use of our own faculties, to the acquisitions of our own industry, to honor and confidence from our fellow-citizens, resulting not from birth, but from our actions and their sense of them; enlightened by a benign religion, professed, indeed, and practiced in various forms, yet all of them inculcating honesty, truth, temperance, gratitude, and the love of man; acknowledging and adoring an overruling Providence, which by all its dispensations proves that it delights in the happiness of man here and his greater happiness hereafterwith all these blessings, what more is necessary to make us a happy and a prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow-citizensa wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities.
"About to enter, fellow-citizens, on the exercise of duties which comprehend everything dear and valuable to you, it is proper you should understand what I deem the essential principles of our Government, and consequently those which ought to shape its Administration. I will compress them within the narrowest compass they will bear, stating the general principle, but not all its limitations. Equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political; peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none; the support of the State governments in all their rights, as the most competent administrations for our domestic concerns and the surest bulwarks against antirepublican tendencies; the preservation of the General Government in its whole constitutional vigor, as the sheet anchor of our peace at home and safety abroad; a jealous care of the right of election by the peoplea mild and safe corrective of abuses which are lopped by the sword of revolution where peaceable remedies are unprovided; absolute acquiescence in the decisions of the majority, the vital principle of republics, from which is no appeal but to force, the vital principle and immediate parent of despotism; a well disciplined militia, our best reliance in peace and for the first moments of war, till regulars may relieve them; the supremacy of the civil over the military authority; economy in the public expense, that labor may be lightly burthened; the honest payment of our debts and sacred preservation of the public faith; encouragement of agriculture, and of commerce as its handmaid; the diffusion of information and arraignment of all abuses at the bar of the public reason; freedom of religion; freedom of the press, and freedom of person under the protection of the habeas corpus, and trial by juries impartially selected. These principles form the bright constellation which has gone before us and guided our steps through an age of revolution and reformation. The wisdom of our sages and blood of our heroes have been devoted to their attainment. They should be the creed of our political faith, the text of civic instruction, the touchstone by which to try the services of those we trust; and should we wander from them in moments of error or of alarm, let us hasten to retrace our steps and to regain the road which alone leads to peace, liberty, and safety."
Now, the question is: would Chris Matthews consider these to be "reasonable"?
As if.
bttt
Too many big words and complicated thoughts for the denizens of Puffball.
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Are there any politicians now who could write like this ?
You all know where to find me on FR.
I can feel the tingles down my leg right now.
FMCDH(BITS)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.