It is of particular insult to hear Chris Matthews suggest that President Barack Obama is somehow doing the bidding of Iraq War neocons, especially knowing that, while Barack Obama was against the war in Iraq, Matthews was lavishing praise on the individuals who were the architects of that ugly misadventure.
Yesterday on his MSNBC program Matthews unleashed an ugly tribal tirade at the President and U.S. Congressman Gregory Meeks (D-NY) for using the term “homeland” to geographically differentiate the United States from the Middle East as it relates to the activities of Islamic terrorist group ISIS.
In a broadcast that also featured Seattle Congressman Jim McDermott (D-WA) and journalist David Corn of Mother Jones, Matthews described the President as adopting neocon language, a' la George W. Bush, to make his case against ISIS, an utterly ridiculous assertion, and one he has been offensively promulgating against the President for weeks.
He presented a portion of an interview that his network conducted with the President:
President Obama: I want everybody to understand that we have not seen any immediate intelligence about threats to the homeland from ISIL…that this is not what this is about. What it is about is an organization that, if allowed, to control significant amounts of territory…to amass more resources, more arms. To attract more foreign fighters, including from areas like Europe, who have…Europeans who have visas and that could travel to the United States unimpeded...that over time that could be a serious threat to the homeland.
Emphasis diarist....
It should be noted that there was no talk of some smoking gun that could lead to a "mushroom cloud" anywhere in that passage.
Matthews: I am very uncomfortable with the phrase homeland…it strikes me as totalitarian. It’s a term used by the neocons; they love it, it suggest something strange to me. Like who else are we defending except America. Why don’t you say America? Why doesn't he say we’re defending against attacks against this country? As if we’re facing some existential Armageddon threats from these people.
Yes, he did say that the President's calm, subdued, statement above struck him as “totalitarian” and as if “we’re facing some existential Armageddon threat”. After looking at that unfair characterization of the President's statement closely, one can only see a clear and perfect illustration of Obama derangement, where, no matter what the President says, there are individuals always prepared to ascribe all sorts of outlandish and insane motives to him.
This imbecilic unfounded accusation should be heard while the contradictory statement of the President’s is echoed in the background:
Obama: I want everybody to understand that we have not seen any immediate intelligence about threats to the homeland from ISIL.
As indicated, there was no inflammatory call to arms in the President's statement. What was so disappointing, however, was the fact that McDermott and Corn both joined hands with the insane Matthews and danced off with him into fantasy land.
I am incredibly grateful for Congressman Meeks, who had the temerity to step in and point out to Matthews that he had fallen off the crazy cliff in terms of the President resembling George W. Bush, or Dick Cheney, and about to drag us off into a war.
Gregory Meeks: I think what the President has said is he’s not gonna do that. The President has been very clear. I think it would have been easy for him to say something that would make people fearful; I agree with Jim that’s what was done before. What’s he’s said here, and I think he utilized the term homeland to distinguish from the immediate attack here in the United States as opposed to what is taking place in Syria and Iraq now.
So that, and he’s been clear, he’s saying, you know, others, I think the ones that are really wanting war, they’re trying to make it seem it’s an imminent threat on the United States. He’s clearly said it is not. He said it could be in the future if they were left unchecked, but by putting this coalition together and by dealing, not on the homeland, but, dealing there, doing what we have to do there, then we won’t have to worry about the homeland, but keep the homeland safe.
With this truthful description of the President’s stance on this crisis and utter rejection of the argument put forth by the program’s host, Matthews launched into an angry expletive-verged tirade at the Congressman, similar to anything you might have heard gushing from the mouths of those on the Right who view the President as an “other” or not being sufficiently understanding of what it means to be an American. He accused the President of talking “internationally” and accused him of talking “weirdly” about war, as he amazingly conflated the neocon agenda with that of Barack Obama’s and, perhaps, Meeks. It had no rhyme or reason and was absolutely stunning:
Matthews: Well, you and I grow up with the term America. It’s good enough for me and it should be good enough for the neocons. It’s America, it’s not the frickin’ homeland, it’s America! It’s our country! Stop talking internationally and weirdly about war and this Armageddon struggle that you are obsessed with; it’s not world war two either.
This was not an attack on neocons, as will soon be illustrated, this was a shockingly angry attack on the President, which Matthews has been doing for quite a while now....
It is important to point out, for the record, that the usage of the word “homeland” as a geographical designation does not, as Chris Matthews is attempting to imply, make the President a charter member of the “mushroom cloud” club. What is more echoing of neocon sentiment is the gushing over George W. Bush for ruthlessly invading a sovereign nation based on false pretenses and prematurely boast of its ending. As Media Matters so ably documented years ago, here is Matthews swooning over the neocon president as he appeared on an aircraft carrier, in the guise of a movie hero, to announce his misguided mission in Iraq had been accomplished:
On May 1, 2003, President Bush landed on the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln aboard an S-3B Viking jet, emerged from the aircraft in full flight gear, and proceeded to "press[] flesh," as The Washington Post put it, as he shook hands and hugged crew members in front of the cameras. Later that day, Bush delivered a nationally televised speech from the deck of the Abraham Lincoln in which he declared that "[m]ajor combat operations in Iraq have ended," all the while standing under a banner reading: "Mission Accomplished."
There were many on the Right who praised President Bush’s stagecraft that day. Among those voices was our “Obama is a neocon” MSNBC host:
Chief among the cheerleaders was MSNBC's Chris Matthews. On the May 1, 2003, edition of Hardball, Matthews was joined in his effusive praise of Bush by right-wing pundit Ann Coulter and "Democrat" Pat Caddell. Former U.S. Rep. Robert K. Dornan (R-CA) also appeared on the program.:
MATTHEWS: What's the importance of the president's amazing display of leadership tonight?
[...]
MATTHEWS: What do you make of the actual visual that people will see on TV and probably, as you know, as well as I, will remember a lot longer than words spoken tonight? And that's the president looking very much like a jet, you know, a high-flying jet star. A guy who is a jet pilot. Has been in the past when he was younger, obviously. What does that image mean to the American people, a guy who can actually get into a supersonic plane and actually fly in an unpressurized cabin like an actual jet pilot?
[...]
MATTHEWS: Do you think this role, and I want to talk politically [...], the president deserves everything he's doing tonight in terms of his leadership. He won the war. He was an effective commander. Everybody recognizes that, I believe, except a few critics. Do you think he is defining the office of the presidency, at least for this time, as basically that of commander in chief? That [...] if you're going to run against him, you'd better be ready to take [that] away from him.
[...]
MATTHEWS: Let me ask you, Bob Dornan, you were a congressman all those years. Here's a president who's really nonverbal. He's like Eisenhower. He looks great in a military uniform. He looks great in that cowboy costume he wears when he goes West. I remember him standing at that fence with Colin Powell. Was [that] the best picture in the 2000 campaign?
[...]
MATTHEWS: Ann Coulter, you're the first to speak tonight on the buzz. The president's performance tonight, redolent of the best of Reagan -- what do you think?
COULTER: It's stunning. It's amazing. I think it's huge. I mean, he's landing on a boat at 150 miles per hour. It's tremendous. It's hard to imagine any Democrat being able to do that. And it doesn't matter if Democrats try to ridicule it. It's stunning, and it speaks for itself.
MATTHEWS: Pat Caddell, the president's performance tonight on television, his arrival on ship?
CADDELL: Well, first of all, Chris, the -- I think that -- you know, I was -- when I first heard about it, I was kind of annoyed. It sounded like the kind of PR stunt that Bill Clinton would pull. But and then I saw it. And you know, there's a real -- there's a real affection between him and the troops.
[...]
MATTHEWS: The president there -- look at this guy! We're watching him. He looks like he flew the plane. He only flew it as a passenger, but he's flown --
CADDELL: He looks like a fighter pilot.
MATTHEWS: He looks for real. What is it about the commander in chief role, the hat that he does wear, that makes him -- I mean, he seems like -- he didn't fight in a war, but he looks like he does.
CADDELL: Yes. It's a -- I don't know. You know, it's an internal thing. I don't know if you can put it into words. [...] You can see it with him and the troops, the ease with which he talks to them. I was amazed by that, frankly, because as I said, I was originally appalled, particularly when I heard he was going in an F-18. But -- on there -- but the -- but you know, that was --
MATTHEWS: Look at this guy!
CADDELL: -- was hard not to be moved by their reaction to him and his reaction to them and --
MATTHEWS: You know, Ann --
CADDELL: -- you know, they -- it's a quality. It's an innate quality. It's a real quality.
MATTHEWS: I know. I think you're right.
This is the same Chris Matthews who is accusing the current President of being in league with neocons. An obsurdity that makes me wonder if Matthews is attempting to deflect from his own feelings in terms of being desirous of a war, despite his protestations. It should be noted that Matthews made it slip last week that we should be fighting a war as he joined the John McCain crowd in attacking the President for not magically stopping the beheading of Americans held by terrorists.
It makes you wonder, where was his urgency and that of a myriad of Conservative pundits and writers while George W. Bush was in office and Americans were also being beheaded by terrorists? They uttered nary a peep of opprobrium when militants associated with Al-Qaeda beheaded journalist Daniel Pearl in 2002 or American businessman Nicholas Berg in 2004.
Still, as mentioned, Matthews offered an insight into his own views last week on his program when he said this to Reuters' reporter David Rhode:
Chris Matthews: Well let me ex…I don’t know if you are getting at my point, there’s a nationalistic reaction…. This country’s been attacked; it’s not a criminal act by one group of people against a couple of our people. This is an attack on our country. How can the President stop this attack on our country, this humiliation, this taunting of him, and our country by beheading people on national…international television? They’re sending us pictures of this. And we just what?
Rhode: I don’t know how the American people will react if these beheadings keep happening.
Chris Matthews: This is a war that we are not fighting.
A war we're not fighting, yet he's on television feigning outrage over a word. Chris Matthews is revealing himself to his viewers more and more everyday. Somehow, I will never be able to forget the deeply discomforting and insane tirade he unleashed on Representative Gregory Meeks, over his supposed "anger" at neocons. If he is big enough, he would offer Mr. Meeks an apology. I won't hold my breath....