Chris Mattrews calls Obama passive aggressive

for Clinton supporters two weeks ago... now he speaks the truth... convenient.

I guess he fell from grace!

I am a clinton "hater" and I always thought the guy was an idiot... isn't it obvious...

one week and the other side the next week.

Of course, in this case, I guess the Repubs are always happy with him. So much for objectivity. ;)

... the 'gist being, that newspapers should stake an idealogical/issues-based position, and judge/reprimand/critique all candidates based on that position; as opposed to what we have now, which is a personality-driven approach to newspaper endorsements and punditry preferences, with endorsements/praise seemingly contradictory.

http://www.attytood.com/2008/01/you_cant_support_obama_and_mcc.html

Matthews is *all over the place* when it comes to issues, but he displays some latent tendencies when it comes to politicians.

p.s. and not-so-latent, as well.

and he is very very very good at it.

Matthews was, is and, apparently, always will be an idiot. I'm dead-set against Hillary as our candidate (ack'g that she'll be better than any Rethug), but empathize with her when it comes to Matthews' and others' blatant misogyny and overt loathing of her. Matthews is like the Romney of pundits, bouncing back and forth, wherever his latent tendencies lead him.

Personally, I'm even growing less fond of Keith O, owing to his slanted coverage, painful attempts at humor, and continued inclusion of nonsensical pop culture segments. What I wouldn't give for a decent, objective news program that is willing to do some god d**n truth squadding and put an end to the he-said/he-said "balanced" approach to news commentary.

Twetty is now going to attempt to take out Obama now that they have selectively eliminated all other candidates.

Twetty has a hard on for the Clinton's, he just can't wait to ridicule everything Hillary does and any move Bill does in the shadows.

Big media is responsible for causing the arguments and not reporting accurately the Lies and Attacks by the Obama campaign on Hillary. The media knowingly aided and abetted Obama and his minions to keep up the negative attacks on Hillary hoping she'd break! She didn't!..haha!

Bill turned the focus on himself, breaking the dynamic of the media feeding frenzy had going for themselves. And the reason why they wanted him to shut up and sit down..haha! He didn't do that either..

So, for now folks, we'll be stuck listening to the ever whining Obama, complaining how mean Hillary is because she's winning, no matter what tricks he uses, she still comes out on top!..haha!

He was effusive the other night, when interviewing McCain. see: http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/01/29/chris-matthews-to-mccain-youre-in-my-heart

The media can't wait for their "maverick" hero to run in the GE.

inaccurate, making it safe to "disagree" with Mr. Matthews on this.

lol, we do not want to be forced to agree with Tweety, even by accident!

But I try to keep my sources straight.

... warning alarms should be going off in your head.

He said it was a possible explanation, but he didn't directly say that Obama was passive aggressive (at least that is how I heard it).

The OP is inaccurate.

Which is true. The National Organization for Women did say this about Obama. Matthews was just stating some of the things people are saying about Obama.

more than passive aggressive, however, i think he is two faced, hides behind the clara mcKaskill skirts (spelling of last name?), served himself to ted and caroline kennedy on a silver platter, and he is not at all the shining diamond in the rough that people think he is.

}(

as much as I'm immune to the Obama mystique. To me he's an empty suit.

Leno's joke was a little over the top.

Leno said: "Obama had so many Kennedy's around him, he wasn't sure if Obama was running for president or Tending Bar."

And as the empty suit that he is ... he deserves the barb on him made by jay leno. good for leno!
(and thank you for posting it ... it has brought a smile to my face)).

Framing it as "others are saying..." ... rather than being either objective, or owning the statement, himself?

Did "NOW" say this, or was it one of the state branches? e.g. The NY branch put out an unbelievably sexist rant deriding Ted Kennedy for having the temerity not to put his support behind a female candidate, regardless of the candidates' positions. The NOW national org, however, endorsed Clinton while managing not to deride Obama.

that would get Tweety's brain hard ...

... if he were to see McCain in uniform.

at times he looks toothless, when he opens that big mouth of his.

But the media is playing us all for fools. We're like puppets on strings to them. They yank our strings this way and that way, while we dance for their amusement. My belief is the corporate media moguls see Obama as their fascist dream come true. That's because an Obama nomination practically guarantees Dems lose the White House, at a point in time when we should have it in the bag.

In their zeal to pull this fast one off they often go so far over the line, that they have to start pretending to be a little fair again. That's what Tweety is doing, imho. There's no way he wants to say anything nice about Hillary, or negative about Obama. He is just jerking Hillary supporters strings a bit hoping we'll turn MSNBC back on again. Not going to happen Tweety, you POS.

Everybody is passive / aggressive

What makes each of us different is what we choose to be passive or aggressive about

The OP is irrelevant as to any substance

by keeping us little people of "the pajama hudeen" (his terminology) at each other's throats. :thumbsdown:

Tweety changes his opinion every news cycle.

If you don't like what he's saying now... just wait.... he'll have the exact opposite opinion soon.

nt

Broke for Rudy, will mend with some McCain lovin'