Charlie Rose

jojohnst  06/02/2009 12:04 AM Report

ricege, thanks for responding, i appreciate the dialogue.

in many ways i agree with: obama is a politician who is deeply pragmatic and, yes, even opportunistic. and by the standards of the average american, he might even come off, if you knew him, somewhat arrogant (but i think this would apply to literally anyone with the gall to run for prez). but, i also think he is curious, and can admit when he's made a mistake so there is a measure of humility there too. he is only condescending as any president trying to relate to a huge country with many sub-cultures, and certainly no more condescending than W.Bush. It is true that Obama is liberalish (not liberal enough for many) but moreover, he is pragmatic. He has 3 main priorities (for which he has a mandate) health care, environment and education and he is determined to see progress on these issues even if he has to compromise a little (but not, you're right, compromise very much). Is that "thug" politics?

I tried to draw out what you were implying by what Obama "really stood for" and you tell me that he is pragmatic and opportunistic. All politicians are like that, even Abe and Washington and Reagan. You seem to see something sinister in the democratic process.

as for matthews: calling him a "hack" is pretty tired, no? it is true that he is a reporter who often looks to "make" a story and i do think he was unfair to hillary. nevertheless, he is a smart, driven figure whose point of view is formulated through (mostly) logical argumentation and not, generally, ideological rigidity. also, i'm not chris' mother since there seemed to be some confusion on that issue.

ricege  06/01/2009 10:19 PM Report

jojohnst.....journalist Chris Matthews is not. He's a very leftist political hack straight out of Tip Oneil's left desk drawer. His every calculation is politically driven and if you didn't even notice how he swooned and slubbered over Obama throught 2008 then you're just too smitten as well. He was even taking the ax to poor Hill and Bill. What I saw nightly for months throughout the Fall was a Chris Matthews getting a hard-on talking of Barack Obama. If he is a philosopher-journalist...keep him. Give him a classroom next to the fake native American Ward Chamberlain.

What does Barack Obama stand for???? Read his books. Carefully and thoroughly. Then look at his life earnestly. Then study his stands, his philosophy, and yes voting record on issues throughout his local, state, national career. You must fancy yourself some oracle or soothsayer. You presuppose what I think far to much. Angry I may be. Paranoid and scared I'm not. "Some secret plan...scary socialism or lurking fascism" Those are your words, not mine. I never said Obama was a "sleeper president" Those are your words again. Why are you trying to put them in my "mouth"? Barack Obama is nothing more than the crassest of politicans who has spent every waking hour in the advance of himself on the politcial, or any other, stage. He's an opportunist of the highest degree. If you study him he is very arrogant and, to use your word, "condescending" to those Bible-carrying, gun-clutching home folk. He's taken to Chicago "thug" politics and used it craftfully. He claims to have an open, inclusive thought process, which is....you tell me your ideas, I'll tell you mine, and then we'll do it my way. Look at his voting record. His votes were 90+% left until someone, not Matthews, pointed it out, so he latched on to some Republican bill to cosign so he could tout his bipartisanship. Opportunistic. He sure likes to fancy himself another Abe Lincoln. Well "you can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time"...right? He's got you sucked in, but not this guy. Not this bumpkin OK smarty pants. The thing is, Matthews isn't just sucked in by the great "Svengali". Matthews knows what Obama's true colors are because Matthews is a creature of the same political cloth. Matthews knows and if he were a journalist he would be exposing the con, not advancing it. Matthew's hardballs are very, very selective and none will be thrown at President Obama. ..........Tim Russert you are sorely missed.

You know...I really had no formed opinion of Barack Obama until I read his books. They solidified my opinion.

Christopher  05/29/2009 06:17 PM Report

I thought it was a great interview. His comments about that "I would rather be wrong and it be good for the country" than the opposite. Very honest. I liked the depth he showed. I might start watching him once in a while, but I prefer the Charlie Rose format than the Fox, MSNBC format.

NoPardonforMichaelMilken  05/29/2009 02:13 AM Report

"charlizecourriers 05/26/2009 06:00 PM

These fools are both draft dogders..."

From the fingertips of the blind follower of Vietnam vets (sic) Rush, Dick Cheney, Newt Gingrich, Rudy Giuliani, Tom DeLay, Bill O'Reilly, and Roger Ailes comes this interesting insight about Matthews and Charlie.

doodahdaze  05/28/2009 05:38 PM Report

"Wow Chris is getting it from the right and the left on this page."

LOL. Are you his mother?. Because only his mother and Chris Matthews himself, would be 'SURPRISED' that the masses think he's a joke.

jojohnst  05/28/2009 05:54 AM Report

Wow Chris is getting it from the right and the left on this page. Look, he is a journalist who has a point-of-view but is genuinely curious. If you watch him regularly you can see that he is honestly searching for answers both large and small (and even sometimes petty). But his is a philosopher-journalist and despite being loud, he is nothing like O'Reily or Olberman. He is more like a Thomas Friedman-like figure. Anyhow, to respond to "ricege", I'd just ask this hardball: so what does Obama "really stand for" that Matthews "skewed and stretched"? Some secret plan? Is it scary "socialism" or lurking fascism? Your rhetoric of a devious, "sleeper" president is troubling to me. When you say "you liberals" I can hear the anger and paranoia in your voice. You probably think I'm naive and condescending. Here's a deal. I'll examine that about my views if you examine, in yourself, the source of the insinuations you are making about the president of our country. Deal?

ricege  05/27/2009 08:22 PM Report

Journalist???? In the words of Chris Matthews....HA! Now he tells us he's a little concerned about the numbers (deficit) getting so large? Well, bright boy, it was your slobbering "chill up my leg" propagandising day and night that helped get your dream crowd elected. Your the ones who skewed and stretched the truth and ignored the what Obama really stood for. I like how even now you keep trying to alter truth when you expounded on how he was raised by a black father when he really never knew the man. Nice try. He's the one you liberals wanted. Oh, that's right. You're a Libertarian.....HA. It's amazing, you don't even have the courage to claim your true political colors to a public forum. Libertarian...that's a good one Matthews. Charlie Rose called you on that one too. Well this is one American who sees through your crap. Journalist? You shame the profession by claiming you are one.

Gregthorn54  05/27/2009 04:13 AM Report

I live in Melbourne, Asutralia and I have ben watching this interview and I came to the conclusion that the US is fortunate to have such great contributors to political and social debate per se. Both of these guys appear to be very real and seriously engaged in deep discussion. So I have to differ with some of the previous comments on this page. Cheers.

lulu35  05/26/2009 11:09 PM Report

Chris Matthews is a blabbing idiot.

doodahdaze  05/26/2009 07:50 PM Report

I'm watching the interview now, and I can't help but wonder if Chris Matthews is really as stupid as he appears to be. He's a typical limousine liberal, who "trys" to change his colors to whatever he thinks will make him popular at any particular time or moment. He's a little boy who thinks, because he's dressed up like a cowboy, then he MUST be John Wayne... Could he really be that stupid and pathetic of an excuse for a man?

charlizecourriers  05/26/2009 06:00 PM Report

These fools are both draft dogders, both flunkies for the Dumbocrats, and both mediocrities spawned by television. Isn't that why they giggle in unison?

doodahdaze  05/26/2009 04:59 PM Report

I think it has something to do with the stress of, "Keeping up with the Jones" and that old business adage and fortune cookie nicety, "fuck the next guy before he fucks you", something that you, tartufe, are far evolved from, but our subject, Chris Matthews seems to revel in, in typical "Hardball" made for TV fashion.

tartufe  05/26/2009 04:44 PM Report

REMant always leaves a residue to ponder. I'm still working on this: "Ppl who want to get ahead want to get even. They are motivated by envy." Too insightful or what?

REMant  05/26/2009 03:53 PM Report

I see his show often on Sunday AM, but I have never thought they actually talk much of what I'd call politics. I agree, he is no more a libertarian than Reagan was. His politics I'd think come directly out of his Catholicism, as no doubt did O'Neill's, and Reagan's, too, if you allow that most evangelicals are not far in practice from it. Instead of Swaziland, when I was his age I went to Vietnam, where like most of the ppl sent there, I learned to hate army and country, as well. At least he admits he networked his way into things, and so we really ought not be hearing anything out of him about protectionism. Networking is what most ppl do to get ahead, but I don't see getting ahead contributing much to the imperative of living and working smarter, or to achieving peace. Ppl who want to get ahead want to get even. They are motivated by envy. It is not love of other men, but love of God that is required and sorely lacking. Personally, I think we are not only well behind much of the rest of the world, but that we have been getting a lot of their misfits. Even if that were not so, we aren't welcoming them so they can get ahead. Not only did Hilary get herself into a position to run against Obama, but also she seems to have extorted not just a cabinet post, but undue influence for the Clintonians. Anymore and the man will become just a figurehead.

doodahdaze  05/26/2009 03:37 PM Report

Agreed, NoPardon. That would make him a "liberal version" of Patrick Buchanan. A sensationalist, "tough-guy" Drama-Queen! <smile>

NoPardonforMichaelMilken  05/26/2009 02:50 PM Report

Chris Matthews is a self-serving punk whose only interest is Chris Matthews. Why somebody hasn't punched out this D.C.-Georgetown thug remains one of the greatest mysteries in American history.