Only a homosexual could love Obama the way Chris does.
A debate should require that each candidate address each other by names, not titles.
I think the real answer is much easier - Matthews is a drunk.
Actually, everybody that Matthews knows would agree with him - maybe that is his real problem. He should be placed into a home for the mentally challenged and let his friends visit whenever they want. That way, he is happy and the rest of us are happy...
Was this the debate in which Obama was allowed to speak for an additional 4 minutes or was it the one where he was allowed to speak for an additional 9 minutes? I get them confused.
If Romney doesn’t understand that it is grievously unconstitutional to tell the president no to speak out of turn, obama will have no choice but to issue an Executive Order telling him to cease such commands. This will hold until the Presidential Debate Presidential Freedom to Rudely Butt In and to Get Help from the Moderator constitutional amendment requiring the same is approved.
This Romney guy just has to understand how wrong it is to want to make the president follow the rules! That archaic custom was thrown out the window 4 years ago due to its inherent racism, homophobism, hubrism, and anti-illegal immigrantism and it isn’t coming back in this new era of enlightmentism. /s
The very suggestion that Obama be accorded any special privilege or right above another candidate goes against all of the supposed values that Democrats pander their masses with.
We don't have kings here, Chris. At least not your vision of Messiah Obama.
With this kind of comment, Mathews removes all doubt of just how stupid he really is.
Unless, of course, it is an "affirmative action" debate. In an "affirmative action" debate, the disadvantaged participant does, indeed, get to play by special rules. It could be reasonable to argue that president Obama is disadvantaged. He's dumber than a box of rocks.
Privacy, abortion, gay marriage, always being very nice to the President—my God, liberals certainly have a remarkable way of reading things into the Constitution. What’s the point of even having a Constitution, if it means whatever someone wants it to say (whether it’s actually in the Constitution itself or not...)? I think the left’s attitude toward the Constitution just shows how much contempt they have for it.
Why would any credible news agency hire Chris Mathews?
The answer is that it wouldn’t.
There is no really credible news agency in America today.
“You don’t say, ‘You’ll get your chance.’””
I LOVED that. It was really great to see Romney talk DOWN to the Fraud.
FU Hussein!
2001-2009 dissent against the President is not only patriotic but necessary for the children! 2009-2013 dissent against the President is racist,disrespectful,and should be a crime since it keeps us from moving forward!2013-2021 dissent against the President is not only patriotic but necessary for the children!
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else.” - Theodore Roosevelt
My Constitution directs the President as stated above. Note that it doesn't say "once a year"
Result: WHENEVER the president provides "state of the Union" (status) of an issue he is providing that status to the Congress. Lying to Congress is PERJURY, and is an impeachable offense.
I'm sure that the current President, being a Constitutional scholar, knows this and purposely violated his Constitutional oath (for the umpteenth time).
He's gotta go.
What Matthews knows about the Constitution..
You could put in a douchbag..
Maybe Hissy Crissy thinks Obama should be king? I bet so with that “tingle going up his leg” and all.
Allowing prissy chrissie matthews to have a mic to spout into every day should be un Consitutional.
Since when are radical libtards concerned about the Constitution?