Why can't Tweety do this more often?

It's easy for Chris Matthews to be hard on random idiots like Rick Barber who talk about less government while angling for a government paycheck. Why can't he be this tough on those already entrenched in Washington?

Uh, Tweety? If you knew anything about Scott Garrett you'd know he IS a wingnut

On Tuesday, Tweety declared that Rep. Scott Garrett, lunatic right Congressman from NJ-5, isn't one of those "wackys" in the Republican Party:

I know all about Scott Garrett, because he's my Congressman. I've worked on three different campaigns to oust him. Scott Garrett keeps getting re-elected because the populous part of his district, Bergen County, is a party-line-voting district in which the majority is registered as Republican. Marge Roukema was our representative for 25 years, and she was the kind of moderate Republican that today Jim DeMint would drum right out of the party.

Garrett is a doctrinaire conservative who opposes extensions of unemployment benefits, relief for victims of natural disasters, and anything in opposition to the Tom DeLay/Jim DeMint/Looney DeLooney ideology of I Got Mine and Fuck You.

Matthews once again shows himself to be an uninformed idiot.

(h/t)

Why Tweety is so infuriating -- in a nutshell

Yesterday Chris Matthews pointed out to Ron Christie [insert your own sound clip of closet door closing here], the toadying former aide to Dick Cheney the FACT, the double standard that Cheney and the entire Republican Party REALITY of the Bush Administration's lack of response to both the threats before the 9/11 attacks and to Richard Reid, the December 2001 shoe bomber. Of course he had to, given Joan Walsh's ferocious presentation of facts. But Tweety didn't stop there; he went on to point out that everyone on the right (and that includes Joe Lieberman) is using the attempted bombing on Christmas Day as an excuse to beat the drums for an expanded war in the Middle East.

Watch:

What's hilarious about this exchange is the Republicans regard the Democrats as the "Pussy Party", a bunch of overwrought, overly-emotional girly-men, not the real manly-man chest-beaters like Dick Cheney. Except who is it that's running around like a chicken without a head because a depressed, angry, alienated 23-year-old decided to get laid by 72 virgins in heaven? And yet here is Cheney's ventriloquist's dummy, complaining that Barack Obama isn't emotional enough.

So why is this an example of Why I Hate Chris Matthews? Because it shows that TWEETY KNOWS BETTER, even more often than what we saw last night, he does crap like this:

The press loves the boogeyman story because it makes them feel like crusaders for freedom and allows them to make common cause with macho right wingers. It's far more exciting than dull stories about losers who don't have jobs --- you can see the exhilaration coming off of them in waves. They love it.

Case in point, Chris Matthews, who is ready to force everyone to be cavity searched in the ticket line:

Matthews: You know what when we get on an airplane, we give up all kinds of checks we don't do by just walking down the street. I think we give up a certain amount of rights just getting on an airplane and I think you've got to recognize that your safety is tied up with everyone else on that plane's safety and anybody else that gets hit on that plane. You don't own the right to be on that plane because you're getting on an airplane so you do have to yield some civil rights...And by the way, Cliff, you know it and I know it, they're going to get smarter and smarter and sooner or later they're going to get all kinds of people to do their dirty work for them. They're the enemy. They're going to use any means they can to get us. They're out to kill us. Let's be as smart as they are because they are already smart.

Run fer yer lives!

Apparently, Matthews thinks that there is some Koranic law that requires all attacks against America to take place on an airplane. If some terrorist with imagination succeeds in a mall or on a bridge will we have to submit to profiliong and screening there too? Sounds like it.(And if he thinks these would-be terrorists like Richard Reid and Abdulmutallab are super criminals, no wonder he's petrified.)

And that's why we hate Chris Matthews -- because he's not stupid. He's not even a craven political opportunist like Pete Hoekstra, trying to pull in campaign cash from a bunch of unemployed people in Michigan who can no longer afford to fly anywhere but who can't see a connection between the money squandered by the Bush Administration on pointless and badly-conducted wars and the fact that they have no health care. He's a media opportunist, and that may be worse.

(cross-posted at Brilliant at Breakfast.)

I'm not fooled that Matthews is on our side, but this is pretty good

I would have liked to have seen Tweety stomp on this "birther"'s head a few times, but we'll take what we can get:

HAH! Tweety Puts on a Sweater and hangs With the Peeps in NH!

Tweety is back on his home nest, after a harrowing couplea days of having to go head to head in with the stylings of the ever more popular Keith Olbermann. Just Botox smooth enough, and in relaxed sweater garb for the "country" feel, he hit New Hampshire with a big "HAH," set to take the town on with his teetering bluster and that down home red faced bark that only our Tweety can muster. Thinner and older, and smacked down over and over, you've got to hand it to him in that he just keeps going...one hand on Dowd's knee the other cupping his own crotch (or the the man crotch of Ann Coulter)...HAH!!

Its an example of narcisissio-egotitus that rivals that the drawbacks of Bush himself. The swaggering oaf act was dampened by the presence of Rachel Maddow, representing the devastatingly smart contingent of pundits who manage to tell the truth and sweetly point out the lies. So smart is she, and so high is her Q-rating, that she is on every show in a row on MSNBC these days, and Tweet does not seem all so happy with this turn of events. Indeed, old Tweet seems taken aback to find himself on a set next to Rachel, considering that his usual foils have been the scary Maureen Dowd, the scarier Ann Coulter, and the Scariest Michelle Malkin, interspersed with a little Johnny Mac for good measure.

Given the choice, would Tweet find himself, at this late stage, so horribly wrong, unable to influence this thing even though hes tried, being schooled by a younger, prettier, smarter, WOMAN, who can intellectually and in just about every way, kick his ass all the way to the polls and back! In a few smart words, Rachel's dry sarcasm in the face of Tweety's wrong assertions, make him redder and redder; sometimes I watch just to see if he'll stroke out on national TV.

I keep thinking, "I am SO TIRED of this slimmed down, botoxed up, FUCK, telling me who the choice of my party is before the votes are even in. What gives him the right to plant shit in every lazy American's head, until no one bothers to even go to the polls because its a done deal. Tweety's stock and trade is to plant the talking point conversationally and just let it do it's job. And of course he never fails to jump from one sinking ship into the cult of another visionary leader. Is this guy a reporter?

So, no Tweety, I am not wondering whats next for the BIG LOSER(S,) Edwards and Huck-ominy . I do not buy that Edwards is the big loser at all, when the frontrunner's are within a couple thousand votes of eachother, and, to paraphrase Trippi, are caught in battle while circling round the drain; you gotta just stand on the edge of the tub and watch...because anything can happen! Edwards was third and maybe a low third, at 16%, but take away either one of the front runners and half of that percent of voters will peel off and join HIM. The people with him are with him...so I believe that would be 16% and then half of the rest..? The anti Hillary people are never gonna vote for her...not now, anyway.
Don't you ever learn, Tweets?

Its all a big gamble for him, and his ilk, and hes got a gambling problem. He approaches this thing like its So exciting; so much fun. But what has his role been in preventing certain information from getting out, and promoting misconceptions and swiftboating? What role has he played in the continuation of this war, with his dense reporting of the talking points for...YEARS!!....

And tonight's hardball!!!: I haven't had time to really study this, but I think that he diminishes all women by suggesting that Hillary won mostly because 'every woman can remember being passed over for that big promotion or denied a job because they were women.' If thats true, Obama has it in the bag when we get to the states with people of color living in them! So, what Tweet is saying is that after seeing Hillary CRY, we all remember the times we were kept down...and in the grips of that we lose our ability to make a decision? He wished this evening that he had even one woman on the panel, but maybe it would have to be a particular woman, because Rachel might just have to say that there were alot of times in her career when she was kept down for being a Lesbian...no?...so, lets only ask certain women, OK? BUT there were no women....so a panel of men discussed how a part of Hillary's surprise win must have been disappointed women feeling sorry for her. hell, maybe...

Or one could see Keith Olbermann for some REAL information about polling and all that...

I missed the beginning of the show, but I'm sure that part of the reasoning must have been the fact that people in open Cauci are less likely to vote certain discriminations, as opposed to others, in public. The secrecy of the voting booth is a big part of this. But that cuts both ways as we move towards different states. Could it also have been that after the Iowa Cauci, there was a certain clear picture of what it might feel like to have Obama be our candidate, and it felt a little dangerous and...too soon because of his youth and idealism?....BECAUSE, Tweet would have it be all sewn up right there as Obama was supposed to roll right through New Hampshire on a streak.

I know that there is alot of dead air to fill for these guys, but I resent like hell how knee jerk quickly the script went over to "How will Hillary drop out gracefully in the face of the Obama phenomenon?" And in that way, I'm happy that they were as good as tied in NH. I don't want to have it decided now, and I want them to circle the drain for a little while longer just to give Edwards a chance to talk more...because more than anything else, what Edwards is saying to the American people is really, really important to our future. To that end, I hope that everyone will send him some cash. If for nothing else, just for message!

Tweety's question tonight about Romney and Edwards "Is he still alive?"...
God forgive me if I'm just a little sick and tired of wondering how Tweety even has a job anymore. Are you listening MSNBC suits? Ditch Tucker and Matthews...and throw out Giest while you're at it; consider this the baby and the bathwater because this is Damien the Omen and we should cut it off before it kills again!

Oh, and an aside to Hillary: I don't want to see us "fall backwards" either...but I don't feel like we should try to "reverse it," by keeping a presence in Iraq as a gushing wound, represent large corporations as if they were individual people, and continue this deregulated globalism insanity without some careful reconsideration. Don't cry for me, Hillary....If you are elected, I'll keep working to make it better just the same way as I have been all along, with no expectation that my government is going to help; with the full expectation that my government will work against me!

RIPCoco