VIDEO COMPILATION: Matthews Obsessed With Clinton Sex Speculation
VIDEO COMPILATION: Matthews Obsessed With Clinton Sex Speculation
MSNBC host Chris Matthews is obsessed with Bill Clinton’s sex life. Over the last four weeks, Matthews has incessantly raised baseless speculation that President Clinton may have an extramarital affair or engage in inappropriate behavior that would impact Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY).
He has called Clinton’s sex life the “800-pound gorilla stalking behind” Hillary Clinton, and suggested it would sink her presidential campaign. Earlier this month, Matthews asked about Bill Clinton’s “personal behavior” 10 separate times in a single interview.
Watch a video compilation:
Matthews’ baseless speculation has the effect of turning President Clinton into a liability for progressives, and Matthews isn’t alone. In December, the Washington Post questioned whether Bill Clinton will be the “biggest issue” in Hillary Clinton’s presidential candidacy.
But as Media Matters documented, “nowhere does the article offer any concrete evidence that Bill Clinton is anything but an asset to his wife or that the public sees in him the ‘massive and messy distraction’ the article suggests the ‘media-industrial complex’ sees.” A Feb. 15 Gallup report found that Bill Clinton’s approval rating, “more than six years after leaving office, is near an all-time high.”
Quotes:
MATTHEWS: I love the way you smile. I’m just thinking, is Bill Clinton going to stop trying to play Holly Golightly up in New York. I’m just wondering when he stops that, if he’s doing it, she’ll be better off.
2/26/2007
MATTHEWS: Here to dig into all are the HARDBALLers, the Washingtonpost.com’s Chris Cilizza and Lynn Sweet of “The Chicago Sun-Times.” Lynn, “The Washington Post’s” Ann Kornblut is on this program a lot, wrote this big piece this weekend about, once again, Bill Clinton’s the target of conversation. Is this going to go away, or does he have to issue a statement of some kind, I’m not going to be a problem for my wife’s campaign? How’s this going to end, this buzz?
2/25/2007
MATTHEWS: Tuesday, and then Maureen Dowd of The New York Times published Geffen’s piercing critique of Hillary and husband Bill. Quote, “‘I don’t think anybody believes that in the last six years, all of a sudden, Bill Clinton has become a different person’…
MATTHEWS: After The New York Times, Michelle, a couple of–couple of months ago wrote that big front page piece saying the Democrats are worried about Bill Clinton’s personal behavior right now, not ‘98. The Clinton response to that, the campaign response is ‘That’s personal, that’s private.’ That’s a fallback position from ‘There’s no trouble there.’ It’s like saying, ‘Don’t talk about that stuff, whatever it is.’
Ms. NORRIS: Well, you…
MATTHEWS: Is that going to work?
2/23/2007
MATTHEWS: Mike Barnicle, I didn’t think the Bill and Hillary issue would get — the husband issue would get so hot so fast, and now you got this guy, David Geffen, a liberal money-raising guy out in California, Hollywood, in Tinseltown, raising the issue of Bill Clinton’s personal behavior so early in the campaign.
2/23/2007
CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Below the belt? Is it wrong for a Democrat like Barack Obama to say Bill Clinton’s personal behavior could be a great Republican issue in 2008? …
MATTHEWS: Does your side, the Clinton side, believe it’s a foul for any shot against Bill Clinton, the fact that he was impeached or anything to do with his personal behavior? You believe that’s a foul? …
MATTHEWS: Has anyone in the campaign, you or John — does Ann Lewis or Howard Wolfson — Howard Wolfson — does anybody have the status to walk up to Hillary and say, you have got to get Bill together on this; he could distract from this campaign; let’s make sure a winning campaign doesn’t become a losing campaign because of personal behavior?
2/15/2007:
MATTHEWS: It’s like she didn’t know anything about Bill and his behavior? How many times is she going to be confused by men?
2/8/2007
MATTHEWS: Is your friend Bill going to be in this campaign? Going to be busy with the campaign, not get any distractions going with other things?
MCAULIFFE: He`s going to be very busy.
MATTHEWS: No distractions? He`s writing a book.
MCAULIFFE: He`s got a distraction right now. He`s writing a book for the next two months.
MATTHEWS: Will he distract our attention from his wife by misbehavior?
MCAULIFFE: No sir.
MATTHEWS: He won’t? He’s going to be a good boy?
MCAULIFFE: His wife is running for president. He`s going to do everything — he`s the most popular man in the world today.
MATTHEWS: It doesn’t kill me if he does distract from this campaign. We do not want to go back to 1998. Some people do.
2/2/2007
MATTHEWS: Is Bill Clinton going to be a problem in this campaign?
LEWIS: Absolutely not.
MATTHEWS: Is he going to behave himself?
LEWIS: Bill Clinton has been around — in the first place, he’s been around the world saving lives.
MATTHEWS: Is he going to behave himself?
LEWIS: He’s going to do what he does best.
MATTHEWS: Is he going to behave himself…
LEWIS: Yes, he is.
MATTHEWS: … not cause a publicity that gets her embarrassed? …
LEWIS: There’s no there there. No. I think Bill Clinton is going to continue doing his work, going around the world, saving lives.
MATTHEWS: So he’s going to behave himself.
LEWIS: He’s going to be out on the campaign trail…
MATTHEWS: And he’s going to behave himself so Hillary can be the first woman president.
LEWIS: You’re all going to be applauding…
MATTHEWS: I think it’d be great for the country … if we were not once again distracted…
LEWIS: So do I.
MATTHEWS: … by what you call private life. And I think the way to avoid getting distracted is to have nothing there to distract us.
LEWIS: Well, I agree with that. But we just spent how many minutes of this segment, three minutes, talking about there should be nothing to distract us? Why don’t we stop talking about it and talk about the issues?
MATTHEWS: Well, because I want to have some assurances from people that I trust and like to spread the word that…
LEWIS: Why don’t you watch…
MATTHEWS: … he better watch it …
LEWIS: … what he’s been doing? Why not see what he’s done for the last…
MATTHEWS: I am watching, unfortunately. Anyway, thank you, Ann Lewis
1/29/2007
MATTHEWS: …So we don’t know what she was thinking. That audience, though, was keyed to laugh, thinking she was kidding about her husband’s philandering, Monica Lewinsky and all that. What I’m asking is, is she that unaware of that 800-pound gorilla stalking behind her, the baggage of her husband?
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Where do you come up with baseless?
February 28th, 2007 at 2:00 pmWOW I never knew they kept statistics on approval ratings that far out. I’ve certainly never got a call!
Man, that is absolutely hillarious… Clinton’s rating is twice that of W’s… EVEN NOW!
Amazing…
February 28th, 2007 at 2:02 pmnow come out the closet, chris went and locked himself in the closet
February 28th, 2007 at 2:04 pmhe’s tweeting now, but somehow he’s got to come out of the closet
The candidate I can’t trust to be faithful is serial adulterer Rudy Guiliani. America doesn’t want a First Mistressâ„¢ in the White House.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:05 pmAnd, Matthews is a guy who has major man-love for Rudy Guilani. Guilani not only openly had a mistress while still married, he brought is mistress to his house for a sleepover WHILE HIS WIFE AND KIDS WERE STILL THERE!
The double-standards are unbelievable.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:05 pmWhen a woman has a husband constantly cheat on her and does not leave him, her credibility is hurt.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:05 pmIt’s a cliche that people who obsess over the hypothetical sex lives of others are in desperate need of getting some. In this case, I suspect there’s truth to the cliche.
Oh, and Patrick1, baseless means “without basis”. If Matthews isn’t offering up evidence, the speculation is baseless by definition.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:06 pmClinton’s rating is really high with Al Qaeda.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:07 pmDemocrat Ratings
A Candidates: Dennis Kucinch, Russ Feingold (not running damnit!), Al Gore
B Candidiates: None
C Candidates: Bill Richardson, Hillary Clinton
Wildcard: Barack O’bama
February 28th, 2007 at 2:08 pmHigh level politics.
Civility, right, Dale boy?
February 28th, 2007 at 2:09 pmDear Tweety,
Shut up.
Love,
Keyser
February 28th, 2007 at 2:10 pmAll the evidence he needs is the Clinton presidency, the loons are getting very desperate.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:10 pmHaving noticed Matthew’s obsession a long time ago I have been surprised that no one else seemed to find it inappropriate from a man who constantly pushes Gulianni as his pick. Guess once you have been unfaithful to wife number two you get a pass. ??? Whatever the reason, Matthews chronic Hillary bashing and suggestions that Bill is out of control makes you wonder if Matthews is taking his meds. (Last night he asked Congressman Chris Shays his opinion about the market drop seeing as how he was from Connecticut and that is near Wall Street. Huh?)
February 28th, 2007 at 2:10 pmWhat a joke. That line of questioning is right up there with ‘have you stopped beating your wife?’. Tweety must be auditioning for a spot at FOX.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:11 pmthis is another example of a media driven meme…
i don’t understand the polls that say hillary is in the 50s…
i’ve NEVER heard of anyone that wants her to run…
i wonder WHO they are polling…
chris is only spouting his own obsessions and getting the notion drilled into the minds of the mindless…
February 28th, 2007 at 2:11 pmjust like all the other memes that are out there…
…
Wow Patrick… talk about baseless…
February 28th, 2007 at 2:12 pmstanman: “When a woman has a husband constantly cheat on her and does not leave him, her credibility is hurt.”
I thought conservatives were all about “preserving the family.” I thought conservatives valued keeping a family together for the kids. I thought conservative christians had a thing about a woman “being loyal to her husband” and “forgiving his sins.” But most of all, I remember many conservatives expressing the opinion that Hillary was only with Bill because of his power and would leave him as soon as his presidency was over. Do you remember those predictions, stanman?
February 28th, 2007 at 2:12 pmI miss that 800 pound gorilla, especially considering the 800 ton jackass that replaced him.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:13 pm#9; Let me add that Wesley Clark should be the Secretary of Defense.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:13 pmDesperate is posting inane one line comment after one line inane comment projecting your frustrations about the fact that your own party is corrupt and going down the tubes on a daily basis.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:14 pmChris Matthews’ credibility on the subject of “Teh Clenis” went out the window when he started fawning and drooling over the Codpiece of Destiny during that whole carrier landing fiasco
February 28th, 2007 at 2:15 pmSaddam misses him too.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:15 pmMatthews must not be getting any.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:18 pmChris Matthews on Gore during the 2000 election: “He just doesn’t look American.”
On Bush: “He’s authentic.”
Matthews knows who signs his big fat checks — Jack Welsh and his buddies. Matthews is a good boy. He’ll sit up, roll over and do all manner of tricks for his bosses.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:18 pmThe stable of Republicans campaigning for president should be bowing down and thanking Bill Clinton or the only one of them who would have any shot at the office is Romney. The rest are also proven philandering men who divorced their wives and would have had absolutely no chance without Clinton’s presidency opening the door.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:18 pmPatrick1:
if by “al Qaeda” you mean the majority of Americans who liked having an educated and capable President who wasn’t shedding lives for the profits of his oil company pals and didn’t sound like he lost braincells every time he took a dump than you might be on to something, otherwise just feel free to make the pie higher, dude.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:20 pmThe Number #1 job of the next President is to disentangle the Corporate tentacles that are intertwined around our government’s neck. Seriously, I don’t know where our government begins and where the corporation ends.
Hillary Clinton would be the last person capable of performing this delicate surgery. I’m sick of hearing about her already. Only three candidates posses the character to accomplish this corporate-ectomy. Dennis Kucinich, Russ Feingold or Al Gore.
Until this is accomplished the corporate cancer that’s swallowed our government will continue to metastisize.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:22 pmPaddy.01: Saddam can take consolation that his old pal and partner Ron Reagan is probably roasting on the rotisserie right next to him and Ayatollah Khomeini. Those three have a lot of catching up to do, you know.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:23 pmHey ex presidents get horny too!
February 28th, 2007 at 2:23 pmLet’s see Bill Clinton is a (smart/dumb) man who is incredibly politically (savvy/naive). He (supports/doesn’t support) his wife’s bid for the prresidency which he found out about (ages ago/last week). Knowing the media obsession about (his penis/his wife’s qualifications), Bill will obviously (indulge in, not indulge in) possibly compromising activities.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:25 pmWhere do you come up with baseless?
Comment by Patrick1 — February 28, 2007 @ 2:00 pm
Try White House press conferences. That’s usually a pretty good source of baseless.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:25 pmOut of all the different people to be thinking sexual about. The Clinton’s aren’t what comes to mind.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:25 pmPatrick1 bleated, “Clinton’s rating is really high with Al Qaeda.”
Yeah … That’s why indicted Al Qaeda money man Abdul Tawala Ibn Ali Alishtari gave $35,000 dollars to the Republicans. Let’s face it, Republicans are doing a great job as far Al Qaeda is concerned.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:25 pmLet me clarify, Al Qaeda LOVES the Republicans. They even let them regroup in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Heckuva job George!
February 28th, 2007 at 2:27 pmMatthews is a buffoon.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:28 pmIf Chris is so worried about Bill Clinton’s sex life I sugges that he don a blue dress and do the deed so its accomplished and he can get on to other more pressing issues like how much semen Jenna Bush is consuming during her Argentina partying.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:29 pmAll the evidence he needs is the Clinton presidency, the loons are getting very desperate.
Comment by Patrick1 — February 28, 2007 @ 2:10 pm
I’m so happy you can admit to that.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:29 pmChris is an alcoholic and an angry one to boot.Im sure in his past he has been denied by many a woman and thus he hates any man who can get some. Sad but true…..why do you think he disappears from time to time and reappears with no on location special? He is a problem for MSNBC with his drinking.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:29 pmThe Clinton have always had major problems like this reported in Boston Globe (today). And there are many that will not vote for Clinton.
Senator Clinton’s brother Tony is battling an order to repay more than $100,000 he received from a couple pardoned by President Clinton.
Tony Rodham, who acknowledged approaching the president about a pardon for the couple, is the second of Hillary Clinton’s brothers to receive money from people who were eventually pardoned by President Clinton. Hugh Rodham received $400,000 from two people, one of whom was pardoned and one whose sentence was commuted.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:30 pmLaughable. The left is always entertaining and wrong.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:31 pmI’d like to know why it matters if a candidate’s husband cheats, yet it doesn’t matter that Rudy has had at least 4 mistresses?
February 28th, 2007 at 2:35 pmMatthews also likes his women stupid and subserviant like laura bush. A strong woman like Hillary gives him performance anxiety.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:37 pmI’ve always thought of Tweety as someone who is surprisingly inept, socially, for a man in his exalted position. That he continues to refer to Hillary’s “joke” about evil men without any understanding of what the joke was about, and how funny it must have been to those assembled there, strikes me as odd. How does Hillary know about evil men? Well think about it: all those Christianists, and self-righteous members of the Republican right who went after her with every weapon at their disposal — every day — for eight years. To the extent that her attackers were men, her experience with “evil men” was pretty thorough.
If I had been in that room (where they reportedly laughed for a full minute after her remark) I would have laughed too, as I remembered so many Evil Men in her history …
Tweety, I think, has a rather pre-adolescent, giggly take on all this stuff. His open adoration of “tough” guys is just more of the same. He must have been a real drag in college …the kid who just won’t grow up.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:38 pmThose that obsess about sex, especially among others, are usually the one’s having sex the least!
Those that don’t obsess about sex, are usually having alot more sex, and more fulfilling!
Those that joke about sex are the ones getting it the most! (HA!)
I’d put Matthews and Patrick1 in the first category
February 28th, 2007 at 2:38 pm“Laughable. The left is always entertaining and wrong”
i guess 60% of america is “wrong”
February 28th, 2007 at 2:39 pmIf by wrong Patrick1 means we have been on the money on every single topic for the past six years, then yes, we are wrong.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:40 pm“Rudy has had at least 4 mistresses?”
4? does that include bernie kerik?
February 28th, 2007 at 2:40 pmWho watches Matthews????????????????????
If you watch NBC, you watch Olbermann.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:41 pmIf you watch Olbermann, you don’t watch Matthews OR Imus. Period.
I think Matthews is fantasizing and projecting to get a clearer picture in his mind of “how it would be” for him and Hillary.
I think he has a crush or an obsession with Hillary.
———————————————————-
On another side not,
Patrick 1 is a TROLL of the HIGHEST ORDER!
DO NOT ENGAGE! I REPEAT! DO NOT ENGAGE!
Don’t give the GOP the satisfaction of disrupting our blog!
February 28th, 2007 at 2:41 pmPatrick 1.0
February 28th, 2007 at 2:43 pmThis beta test isn’t working.
Bad clone.
We’ll wait for version 2.0 to see if the bugs have been worked out.
Speaks, but incoherent.
Thinks it thinks, but no evidence of intelligence.
Prone to spewing ‘garbage in, garbage out’.
Technically inoperable.
This is a piece of junk, boys; back to the workshop.
Victor Ashe, Foley,Gannon, Haggard,Rudy, and the list goes on and on for our presidents homosexual flings. Ever notice how the ones most disgusted by the gay community are the ones who swallow?
February 28th, 2007 at 2:43 pmRudy dresses in drag and Bill O’Reilly’s himself.
-GSD
February 28th, 2007 at 2:44 pmBill Clinton has raised over $40,000,000 in speaking fees since he left office in DC and went to office on 125 Str.
But the man does have a problem, Hillary does, too, and it is no secret if I know about it.
(He’s getting head from many women, and she’s holding back from the same targets. Yep-she’s gay!)
February 28th, 2007 at 2:46 pmI didnt understand it when Clinton was in office and I dont understand it now… HOW? is a persons personal sex life any of our business? Are they trying to claim he is breaking the law and having sex with minors? Otherwise this isnt anyones business.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:49 pmI cannot believe that anybody would waste an hour of their time time to watch that egomaniac, Chris Matthews. He is so over as far as I am concerned.
He wouldn’t know good journalism if it bit him in his very adequate ass. Maybe, this is wishful thinking on Chris’ part. When one is constantly pointing out the shortcomings in another, it is usually because the person doing the pointing is very insecure and wanting themselves. Knowing Chris, I do believe he is a very shallow, insecure person–despite the $5million a year contract plus speaking fees etc., for the next 5 years.
I refuse to watch MSNBC or NBC any longer. Libby’s trial confirmed what I had suspected for a very long time–Russert is in bed with the Administration and Matthews is a wannabe.
As I have written on this site ad nauseum, these people are 18 carat frauds–we hope they will find a new playground for the summer months because they are NOT LIKED nor WANTED on Nantucket. Talk about nouveau riche–they give new meaning to the word. You may have money, but you have no manners or breeding.
Help get rid of Matthews and Russert–QUIT watching their hideous programs.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:49 pmHillary is her own liability. She has been a supporter of Bush’s illegal war, untill she thought it was politically expedient to be against it. Her trying to co-sponsor the Republican flag burning ammendment was the last straw for me as far as I am concerned.
Bill and his loose zipper has nothing to do with me not liking Hillary.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:49 pmI thought conservatives were all about “preserving the family.†I thought conservatives valued keeping a family together for the kids. I thought conservative christians had a thing about a woman “being loyal to her husband†and “forgiving his sins.†But most of all, I remember many conservatives expressing the opinion that Hillary was only with Bill because of his power and would leave him as soon as his presidency was over. Do you remember those predictions, stanman?
What makes you think I am a Christian or a “conservative”? I simply think that I would not want somebody as president if they are constantly cheated on by their spouse. I would not trust their judgement.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:54 pm#46, let’s count: Donna Hanover (wife #2 was mistress when married to wife #1), Christine Latagano, Judy Nathan (both while married to wife #2)and Bernie Kerik. Yeah, 4.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:55 pmSo Democrats screw bimbos. Republicans screw you.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:56 pmMatthews is obsessed with Bill Clinton’s penis. He is becoming more and more unhinged. The guy looks like a closet case.
Interesting thing is he does not seem to care about Rudy Guiliani’s marriage and how it will impact his campaign. Rudy was cheating on his wife while living in the mayor’s mansion. He is a serial adulterer. And yet you don’t see Matthews and the media obsessing about it.
Hillary has not cheated on her spouse.
Rudy, the candidate, is a serial adulterer.
Why doesn’t Chris Matthews talk about that?
February 28th, 2007 at 3:00 pmI’d like to know why it matters if a candidate’s husband cheats, yet it doesn’t matter that Rudy has had at least 4 mistresses?
Comment by cynicalgirl — February 28, 2007 @ 2:35 pm
Personally, I could care less if Rudy or Bill cheated. All I care about is who lied about it during a Grand Jury investigation.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:00 pmMy solution is to watch Chris Matthews for over the top laughable questions and then another snicker when he answers them himself. Sexual deviance seems to be his “expertise” ,either real or in his own mind. I buy the schnops theory, which explains that glare he gets when mentioning the Clintons. He’s bought and paid for and a Fox Noise wannabe. No journalism here. Goto Keith Olbermann for that.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:01 pm“I simply think that I would not want somebody as president if they are constantly cheated on by their spouse. I would not trust their judgement.”
as opposed to a vice president who shot a man in the face, a first lady who killed a man [and unlike vince foster conspiracy theory, this incident is actually documented], and a president who nearly died eating a pretzel.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:02 pmPersonally, I could care less if Rudy or Bill cheated. All I care about is who lied about it during a Grand Jury investigation.
Comment by hacker bob — February 28, 2007 @ 3:00 pm
Cheney? That seems unrelated.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:03 pm“All I care about is who lied about it during a Grand Jury investigation.”
don’t worry, they’ll get that meddlesome scooter libby.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:03 pmI look at it this way…Hillary is formitable, smart and willing to work hard, and she’s married to the smartest guy in the room, with 8 successful years in the White House despite Republican b*llshit being thrown at him daily. He’s probably her biggest asset.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:03 pmClinton should get her marital act together. Giuliani could give her some pointers. Or Gingrich.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:04 pm“All I care about is who lied about it during a Grand Jury investigation.”
You are ill informed.
Clinton didn’t lie about it “during a Grand Jury investigation”. He lied about it in a civil suit deposition.
And how exactly is Hillary to blame for this?
February 28th, 2007 at 3:08 pmChrissy is truly obsessed with the hummer Willy scored.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:13 pmPerhaps he should be attending to his own feats of prowess, assuming such feats are within his manly arsenal.
What is it with Roman Catholics and sexual obession? “Tweety” tawt he taw a pooty tang.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:14 pmHow would the media and the right wing slime machine have reacted to President Clinton had he left Hillary Clinton and married his mistress, Monica Lewinsky?
February 28th, 2007 at 3:16 pmI think we all know the answer to that question.
Yet, this is exactly what Rudy Giuliani did to his SECOND WIFE, and the media is silent on Giuliani’s behavior and whether or not a thrice married philanderer might ruin his election chances by being his philandering self.
She is just too much of a polarizing figure. Not only do the people on the right hate her, but the people on the left hate her too.
Comment by CaptainVideo — February 28, 2007 @ 3:04 pm
see, i don’t see HER as a polarizing figure…
i see the REPUBLICS as making her an excuse to further polarize the country… it is the REPUBLICS who are dividing the country…
i don’t HATE hillary… i want the country to come together…
and the REPUBLICS won’t let that happen if she is president…
… come to think of it, the REPUBLICS won’t let the country heal no matter which dem gets elected…
February 28th, 2007 at 3:18 pmselfish, self-serving bastards, all of ‘em…
disgusting…
All I care about is who lied about it during a Grand Jury investigation.
Comment by hacker bob
Who would that be?
Since with Bill it was a civil suit deposition, NOT a Grand Jury.
I could care less who Bill or Hillary sleep with, that is no one’s business but theirs.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:19 pmI won’t vote for Hillary because of her record in the Senate.
[...] if they are constantly cheated on by their spouse. I would not trust their judgement.
Comment by stanman — February 28, 2007 @ 2:54 pm
Someone’s marital sex arrangements (or lack thereof) are relevant during a job interview, how exactly? I don’t care if it’s a public figure, this is a private matter between Hillary Clinton and her husband. It has no place on the airwaves.
Whatever her husband’s alleged dalliances, I fail to see how they could be a liablity in her campaign. It is such a non sequitur.
Once more, Matthews is engaging in tabloid-style “journalism” that is devoid of any substance, but full of gossip and seedy allegations. Methinks his obsession with Bill Clinton’s sex life is a little… creepy.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:19 pm(sigh)
February 28th, 2007 at 3:24 pmEverytime I bring up this question, I get filtered by the TP police, probably because of using anatomically correct terms. I’ll now try to bring forth an argument using kaka language
hacker bob says:
All I care about is who lied about it during a Grand Jury investigation.
Wasn’t the investigation defining sex, per the Paula Jones case, as penetration per the tender trap via the purple headed missle launcher (aka pee-pee)?
(gee, I feel so…..Patrick1-isk)
So wasn’t the lie technically not a lie, as defined.
Just asking…..
And I’d prefer a president be orally satisified, if that will relax his itchy trigger finger from sending thousands to die.
Okay, let’s see if this post made it….
I read on another blog that Tweety is obsessed with and can’t stay out of Hillary Clinton’s panty drawer. That pretty much sums it up for me.
I stopped watching him a long time ago. He is puerile and a blithering idiot. He interrupts his guests, has opinions that border on the pathologic and only asks questions he has the answers to (and then inserts them).
Frankly, one gets a more in-depth political analysis watching “The Weather Channel”. Don’t waste your time.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:25 pmAt least Bill likes women…the vile slugs on the other side of the aisle thump the bible with one hand while diddling young boys with the other. Bunch of perverts.
Bill’s biggest crime was getting caught with his pants down, and lying about it at the same time. Bushco has done FAR WORSE to this country and we, the citizens living therein.
P.S. This accusation is baseless. ;)
February 28th, 2007 at 3:25 pmsex life? hell, i’d do her, but i’ve already proven not to have great taste. i even voted for perot once.
of course, it’s not like taste matters. as long as it feels good, it can’t be a bad thing. if only repugnickans could understand that.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:27 pmPersonally, I could care less if Rudy or Bill cheated. All I care about is who lied about it during a Grand Jury investigation.
Comment by hacker bob
Seriously, lying the entire nation into a bogus WAR is far more egregious than lying about oral sex during an investigation.
Get some persepective retard!
February 28th, 2007 at 3:32 pmScrew Clinton, Nominate Gore or Obama and win in a Landslide. Hell, I would even vote for Gore or Obama. Hell would freeze over before Hillary gets my vote though. It is time to shed this “Party of Losers” tag already. Pick a canidate people actually want and you can’t lose. Obama or Gore will win without question.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:34 pmOne time I sent an email to Chris Matthews (sure he didn’t read it), asking him why he appears to hate Hillary Clinton so much. He’s been harping on her for the last year. I quit watching his show for awhile. But, he’s finally realized that the Bush Administration is evil and incompetent and has been focusing more on the real issues. However, again he’s ticking me off about Hillary.
I am a lifelong Democrat, but I’m not voting for Hillary in the primaries because of two reasons. One is I’m not enthused about people that signed the resolution to authorize Bush to attack Iraq, if Saddam did not comply with the UN rules. Of course, we all know that’s not why he wanted to invade, and that he had made up his mind at least as far as after 9/11. Second reason is she has too much baggage (as those like Matthews brings up all the time), and they are going to fling so much slime at her that we’ll all be crying. I will vote for her if she is our final candidate.
Chris Matthews keeps harping on will she be able to not sound “strident” when she’s talking. Which means that women are “strident”, and men are “forceful” when they exert the same tone. This shows his seemingly prejudice towards women. I’ve noticed a gleam in his eye when he was recently a judge at the Miss America contest. .
February 28th, 2007 at 3:38 pmHow about this:
We repeal the 22nd amendment, and let Pres. Bush run against Fmr. Pres. Clinton!
Everyone knows that Pres. Bush would get his a$$ handed to him on a platter by the US when they voted overwhelmingly for Pres. Clinton!
Why does Usama bin Laden LOVE Pres. Bush? Because he refuses to look for him.
Why does al Quida LOVE Pres. Bush? Because he’s the best recruiting tool they ever had.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:39 pmI remember when Clinton first got his knob waxed. I was in high school, and I think our social studies class had more intelligent debate than the one here. This is a question that has to be asked. Let’s all stop pretending we’re in a liberal nation and realize that this is an issue to the electorate, and factor it in to our characterization of Senator Clinton’s electability. Unless you want a Mormon running the country until 2012, I suggest we all take candidates’ electability very seriously. There is strength in scrutiny
February 28th, 2007 at 3:39 pmPatrick1 –
No argumentation skills, vulgar, intolerant, paranoid, and spews hate. Another shining example of the Republican party.
I love it when you come to this site and prove us right again and again.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:41 pmI think Bill is a huge asset for his wife’s candidacy. He is a “people person” with excellent political instincts. People like HIM. Her chilliness reminds too many people of John Kerry or pre 9/11 Al Gore. The fact that CAP’s John Podesta worked for Bill (and doesn’t appear too gung-ho for Obama) gives me pause to wonder. Silly me! But you must admit, half of you almost expect to see Bill on those cialis or viagra commercials.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:41 pm#83 – “Pick a canidate people actually want and you can’t lose. Obama or Gore will win without question.” Comment by Roger_Roger — February 28, 2007 @ 3:34 pm
We did in 2000. America voted for Pres. Gore. It was the Supremes that didn’t want democracy to work.
Don’t forget, when they did the report about how Florida would have gone during a recount, 6 of the 9 scenarios went for Pres. Gore! The irony is those are the 6 scenarios that then-Gov. Bush was pushing for during the recount!
February 28th, 2007 at 3:44 pmPatrick1: Has anyone ever told you you are a complete idiot? They have? Well, good, because you are. Saddam is dead, btw, so he doesn’t miss anyone, including Bill Clinton. Do you really need to be reminded that your Boy Dubya still hasn’t caught bin Laden, after over 5 years? The who who he was going to smoke out, dead or alive? If bin Laden loves anyone, it’s George W. Bush, who responded to 9/11 exactly the way bin Laden wanted, while leaving bin Laden himself safe and sound somewhere in the caves of Afghanistan/Pakistan.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:48 pm“Let’s all stop pretending we’re in a liberal nation and realize that this is an issue to the electorate”
“This is interesting: A new poll finds that Americans believe by an overwhelming margin that Bill Clinton would be an asset in the White House should his wife be elected President. The new survey by Gallup asked Americans if they thought Bill would be “mostly helpful” or “mostly hurtful” to a President Hillary. The answers? Respondents picked “mostly helpful” by a more than two-to-one margin, 70%-29%. ”
via tpm cafe
February 28th, 2007 at 3:49 pmMore on Matthews’ obsessions (”I just saw the most incredible prostitute!”).
February 28th, 2007 at 3:55 pm#88
In 2000 Gore was a loser canidate and proved it by losing. Today, he has a rockstar status and his passion for Global warming as turned alot of people towards him. His inability to talk and his ice cold feel won’t hurt him like it did last time simply because global warming has proving he actually does care deeply about something. I always thought he was a brilliant man, but he used to be unelectable simply because he wasn’t likeable. Today that has all changed. You have Gore or Obama. Either will win in a landslide. Clinton on the other hand has an uphill battle and I would put money on her losing. Why take the chance when you have 2 canidates that win easily. I don’t know enough about Obama, but Gore is a brilliant mind that would do wonders.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:58 pmGreat post DRXj, Larry from C and many other’s…..Matthew’s like Beck is nothing more than a political hack for the reich winged evil doer’s….His blasts at Hillery like many show their fear and smear for all they are jealious of….Poor little boy’s are forced by strong good women to do with out…LOL…Since they get no sex they must attack, the very thing they want the most…..ROTFL..Blessings all
February 28th, 2007 at 3:59 pmIn 2000 Gore was a loser canidate and proved it by losing. Comment by Roger_Roger — February 28, 2007 @ 3:58 pm
Is that why he received a half million more votes than Bush, so Bush had to whine and cry to the supreme court to appoint him victor?
You’re a st*pid old c*nt.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:05 pmChris Matthews–THE LOUDMOUTH BLOWHARD who HAS SUCH A FIXATION ON Bill Clinton’s MEMBRUM VIRILE…Oh I’m Sorry! DID I SAY “SUCH”? I MEANT “SUCK”!!!!!! Chris wants to BLOW HARD Bill Clinton’s MEMBRUM VIRILE, or is that to “Blow Bill’s HARD?” Oh, Chris, YOU”RE SO FUNNY, YOU repugnant-repub rightwingnut crank-LOVER!!!!! BITE CHIMPya and Torticola Cheney’s CRANKS, Chris–Oh That’s Right–YOU ALWAYS LAP THEM LIKE A GOOD LAP-DOG!!!!!
February 28th, 2007 at 4:05 pmNice of ex-Clintonite, John Pod and company, to fire on Chris Matthews….You guys must really be angry with Dave Geffen!
February 28th, 2007 at 4:08 pmComment by myrna frap — February 28, 2007 @ 3:32 pm
Gee, since this thread is discussing Clinton, I think I have the proper perspective.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:10 pmI’ve said this before elsewhere, and I’ll say it again here — if the press is going to bring up the marital infidelities of Bill Clinton in relation to Hillary’s candidacy, then they must in the interest of fairness bring up the marital infidelities of Rudy Giuliani. Just about anyone who was living here in NYC while Rudy was mayor knew that he was having an affair with the woman who later became his third wife (Judy Nathan) while he was still married to his second wife (Donna Hanover) — hell, when he announced to the world that he was going to separate from Hanover, he hadn’t even bothered to tell her first! Supposedly, this was not the first time that Rudy had cheated on his wife, either.
If you’re going to target a candidate of one party on a personal issue, failing to target a candidate of the opposing party who has the same issues is nothing more than hypocrisy and favoritism — even more so in this case, since Rudy was the unfaithful spouse while Hillary was the betrayed spouse.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:15 pmIf you’re going to target a candidate of one party on a personal issue, failing to target a candidate of the opposing party who has the same issues is nothing more than hypocrisy and favoritism — even more so in this case, since Rudy was the unfaithful spouse while Hillary was the betrayed spouse.
Comment by Bluestocking — February 28, 2007 @ 4:15 pm
Nail. Head. Impact.
So Bill no longer gets a pass if Rudy doesn’t.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:22 pmWhy doesn’t he show as much interest in all the multiply-married, parallely-philandering right wing nut jobs?
February 28th, 2007 at 4:25 pmNail. Head. Impact.
So Bill no longer gets a pass if Rudy doesn’t.
Comment by hacker bob — February 28, 2007 @ 4:22 pm
Ask your fellow Cons – they were the ones that wouldn’t give Bill the pass, but seem perfectly willing to give it to Rudy! This kind of Hypocrisy and double standards are why americans distrust you Cons.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:26 pmNice of ex-Clintonite, John Pod and company, to fire on Chris Matthews….You guys must really be angry with Dave Geffen!
Comment by valiant venus — February 28, 2007 @ 4:08 pm
Not as angry as Cons are with Swift Boat financier Sam Fox for calling Kerry ‘A hero’, and criticizing the actions of the Swift Boaters!
You whiners fold at the first chance you get to make a buck on the federal dole! What cowardly hypocrites you are – Mighty Aphrodite!
February 28th, 2007 at 4:30 pm“So Bill no longer gets a pass if Rudy doesn’t.”
” A new poll finds that Americans believe by an overwhelming margin that Bill Clinton would be an asset in the White House should his wife be elected President.”
good luck with that.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:36 pmSo Bill no longer gets a pass if Rudy doesn’t. — hacker bob
*********************************
But Rudy IS getting a pass, Bob, and the Clintons aren’t — that’s the whole point, which I notice you rather conveniently chose to avoid. While we’re at it, let’s focus on what’s happening now and not what might happen if the press ever decides to start going after Giuliani. Let’s turn your question on its head, Bob — why is Rudy getting a pass when the Clintons aren’t, and should he continue to get one? You tell me…
When I start seeing Rudy getting hammered in the press over his extramarital affairs, then I’ll concede their right to go after the Clintons — but not until then! If they continue to give Rudy a pass, then they should offer the Clintons a pass. Go after them for other issues if you must, but don’t talk about the marital infidelities unless you’re prepared to go after Republican candidates who have problems with the same issue. If something’s important enough to criticize candidates from one party, it’s important enough to criticize candidates from any party — that’s all there is to it. I don’t happen to respect anyone who engages in extramarital affairs, regardless of their affiliation — but for the record, I have reasons for not wanting either Rudy or Hillary to be president which have nothing to do with their marital lives.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:47 pm[...] an asset to his wife on the campaign trail, both in the primaries and the general election. Despite the weird ruminations of people like Chris Matthews, the fact is that Bill remains an extremely popular politician with a large majority of the [...]
February 28th, 2007 at 4:58 pmI could careless about Bill’s cigars or Rudy’s peccadillos – none of MY business… But I bet both guys are thankful for viagra/cialis….
Maybe we should have a Rudy/Bill Ticket – Rudy is hawkish on terrorists and cleans up a city nicely – Bill is great at gladhanding and implementing alot of the Republican agenda. Such a deal!
February 28th, 2007 at 4:59 pmMaybe Clinton should have used the Scooter Libby defense and claimed that he had forgotten the event.
I thought that was the Reagan defense on Iran-contra, after he said, “If this ever gets out we’ll all be hanging by our thumbs.” That was after the appeasement of Islamic fundamentalists, of course, by providing them with WEAPONS.
February 28th, 2007 at 5:05 pm#92 – Roger_Roger, I’m liking you more and more every day!
Ever consider the gay side of life? (Wink, wink)
Just kidding! My partner of 7 years keeps me more than happy, but his eyes go blank when I start talking politics.
February 28th, 2007 at 5:07 pmDRxJ #79
You are absolutely correct. Further, perjury requires the fact lied about to be material to the issue under consideration. A consensual sexual act (Lewinski) is not relevant to a sexual harrassment charge (Jones). So, even if Clinton lied (which he did not) he did not commit perjury.
February 28th, 2007 at 5:23 pmSpeaking of gay, it turns out George W. Bush used to service other men:
“In 1984 I watched George W. Bush enthusiastically and expertly perform a homosexual act on another man, one Victor Ashe.” http://bushssecretlifein84.tripod.com/
February 28th, 2007 at 5:31 pmTo #106-where does this say anything about facts being material to the issue under consideration only.
PERJURY – When a person, having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in any case in which a law of the U.S. authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by him subscribed, is true, willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true; or in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury, willfully subscribes as true any material matter which he does not believe to be true; 18 USC
February 28th, 2007 at 5:51 pmIs Matthews’ personal behavior going to be a hindrance to his career? I mean, is he going to behave himself? Is Chris Matthews having unprotected sex with crack whores? I’m just asking the questions, people.
February 28th, 2007 at 5:54 pmTo #106-where does this say anything about facts being material to the issue under consideration only. Comment by stanman — February 28, 2007 @ 5:51 pm
Another fcuking incompetent conservative. You’re citing the wrong law, you fcuking fool.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00001623—-000-.html
Whether they had sex was immaterial to whitewater or the grand jury’s investigation – fcukhead. That’s why the Senate found him not guilty.
February 28th, 2007 at 6:15 pmRoger: “In 2000 Gore was a loser canidate and proved it by losing.”
Sorry. That’s just not what happened. Gore won the popular vote and the consortium investigation showed that he won the majority of votes in Florida as well. Gore did not lose the election. Bush was installed by judicial coup. No, there are simply too many Americans who know the truth about 2000 for you to revise it or flush it down the memory hole.
February 28th, 2007 at 6:25 pmIs Chris Matthews having unprotected sex with crack whores? I’m just asking the questions, people.
Comment by And You Thought REAGAN Was Stupid — February 28, 2007 @ 5:54 pm
“some say” that Chris Matthews COULD BE having unprotected sex with crack whores… hey, i’m just repeating what i’ve heard…
February 28th, 2007 at 6:26 pm…
Thanks for the response on perjury, VVGFU. They just can’t seem to get it through their thick mellons. If it’s not about the case before the docket, it’s just not perjury, period.
February 28th, 2007 at 6:28 pmAs I understand the Clenis problem, the LAW on the books in D.C. where the alleged hummering took place was that SEXUAL RELATIONS were defined as PENETRATION. I.E. – peni into vagini. Therefore, Clenis didn’t lie, as there was no PENETRATION of the peni into the vagini. Furthermore – who gives a shit who anybody is sexing up as long as it’s not little boys – repugs!! or girls.
February 28th, 2007 at 6:31 pmWhile Matthews is definitely over the top on this, he’s doing Dems a favor. One of the problems with Hillary as the Democratic nominee is that the MSM, especially cable, will focus on “Mr. Bill” 24/7, totally at the expense of policy.
Geffen is right to be concerned; if Matthews, at this stage of the election cycle is merely the preview of coming attractions, imagine what it will be like the minute the ballons drop on the Democratic Convention. Whatever one thinks about Hillary as President, Bill (and Monica) is the real issue. At least, that’s how it will play out in the media.
February 28th, 2007 at 6:32 pmFrankly, I think mostly everyone here is talking around the real issue: The GOP Smear/Propaganda/Brainwashing Machine and its presstitutes in the so-called “liberal media.” No matter who the Dems nominate, no matter if they nominate Jesus Christ, the nominee is gonna be smeared, and smeared, and smeared, and smeared again.
And meanwhile, to take one typical example, if the Repubs nominate Rudy Giuliani, we will hear next to nothing about his “incest problem” (first marriage to second cousin), about his serial adultery, or his whitewashing of his own children from his exploratory committee website. IMHO, Giuliani’s messy marriages and multiple mistresses are of no intrinsic interest to me…but I am well aware that if he were a Dem candidate for prez, his personal problems would be pushed down our throats 24/7 as long as he remains a candidate.
What has to happen is that we — and I mean “we the people” — have to make the GOP Smear Machine the issue in order to neutralize it. We have to scream bloody murder each and every time they manufacture a new outrage.
February 28th, 2007 at 6:33 pmI guess one would have to look at whether having sex with a subordinate at ones place of work would be relevent to a sexual harrassment case involving a governor and a state employee that could be considered a subordinate. Certainly it would go to pattern and possibly even a sexual addiction. If somebody would be willing to jepordize his career with the most powerful job in the world who would say that he would not do the same thing when he is governor of a state? I certainly think that it is material and so did Clinton, which is why he lied. Looks like perjury to me.
February 28th, 2007 at 6:38 pmAnastasia, with respect, let me paraphrase what you just posted: I don’t think Hillary is electable because of the horrible things a bunch of creeps have ginned up about her over the years. I’m going to reward those creeps by not supporting Hillary.
February 28th, 2007 at 6:38 pm[...] One of the topics that makes me do so rather quickly is when he gets on the subject of the Clinton marriage. Here’s a nice little rundown of how obsessed he is with it. [...]
February 28th, 2007 at 6:53 pmdon’t want to start trouble but…
…Why can’t it be:
“Crack whores said to be at risk for having unprotected sex with Chris Matthews” ?
…just asking…
February 28th, 2007 at 7:00 pmAnd, let me just add, as a lifetime liberal, that the situation today is typical. Everyone is clamoring for Democrats to explain this or apologize for that. For the last 6 years Repubs were in charge, enabled everything this administration did, and everyone just stared off into space. How about this: Repubs need to start apologizing for the state of the world today because they’re responsible for it. This is their thing, not the democrats. None of the Democratic candidates would have invaded Iraq. None. Those in power are the ones that need to apologize, god dammit!
February 28th, 2007 at 7:02 pmChris Matthews is so obsessed with the Cintons he’d give his first born just to lie in bed between the two of them, just once.
February 28th, 2007 at 7:12 pmCreep!
Bluedog,
It may not be fair, but since politics has been reduced to a game of “gottcha” it doesn’t make sense to nominate anyone with a big red target on their back.
In any case, I’m personally uncomfortable with the trend towards “legacy” candidates in this country, and I think if we’re to remain a healthy Republic, instead of morphing into an some kind of quasi aristocracy, we need to break out of this Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton thing.
February 28th, 2007 at 7:30 pmPatrick1 won’t blow me again. Patrick1 has the herpes. Patrick1 is lucid in private and that’s enough for any CSR. Patrick1 makes Patrick0 look like GWB on a cocaine bender. Patrick1 makes pies out of poo. Patrick1 will find the one, true sentence. The one true sentence that Patrick1 finds won’t be accurate, but it will dislodge Patrick1’s bowel obstruction. Patrick1 is not, himself, a bowel obstruction, unless one is a poet in need of a crushingly obvious metaphor. Patrick1 has unsatisfying relations with Miss Left, which, nonetheless, make Mister Right very jealous.
And I DARE you to try and make me prove any of it! PatrickN means truth-telling CSR in the old tongue. Also no snakes. And I won’t prove that, either, you big bullies!
February 28th, 2007 at 7:31 pmPatrick1: “Clinton’s rating is really high with Al Qaeda.”
Ooh, how creative! I bet you sat at your desk for hours before thinking of that gem.
February 28th, 2007 at 7:38 pmAnastasia, you’re comparing the Bush aristocracy to a married couple from Arkansas. Bush was the 17th legacy at Yale, going back to the 1840’s. Clinton was married to a guy who raised himself up through his own talent to the highest office in the country. You have bought into a Repub talking point which has absolutely no substance. Clinton is self-made and all Hillary has done is defer any ambitions she had for her own career to her husband’s career, something many women do all the time. Moreover, nobody in her family has ever held public office. To compare the Clintons with the Bush family in this way is just more of this absurd spinning the right is doing to try to undermine her with slurs and smears. When you can’t compete on the issues, personal smears are your only option. Don’t buy into these personal smears. Look, Hillary isn’t even my favorite candidate, but this idea that they are as much an aristocracy as the Bush family is just flat wrong.
February 28th, 2007 at 7:41 pmTweety, youre not getting a blow job, so stop whining!
February 28th, 2007 at 7:43 pmAnd, Anastasia, I may be wrong about this, but I don’t remember much hand-wringing about this aristocracy thing when Bush was running in 2000.
February 28th, 2007 at 7:52 pmWould Hillary be running for President if she’s never met bill Clinton?
With the whole “Barak stole my man” song that Hil was singing, it became pretty clear that the Clinton’s believe that she’s entitled to the nomination, and all of the donor’s that have been in the family rolodex for years.
Actually, if Hillary had never been married to Bill, I might be more inclined to vote for her.
February 28th, 2007 at 7:57 pmRepublicans and their supporters certainly have lots of nerve to try to push the sex scandals on democrats. All they have to do is read the news of the last “6″ years. That right they don’t read real facts the invent stories of their own… I would publish the republican’s sex scandals in the recent years, but no one wants to take that much time in reading a comment… Republican senators, congressmen, religious conservative ministers, the list goes on and on…..
February 28th, 2007 at 8:04 pmWhy didn’t someone say, “Well, you’re pretty distracted right now, Chris. Are you planning to make a habit of it?”
February 28th, 2007 at 9:05 pmMatthews, why are you continuing with all the sex stories about Bill Clinton? Do you beleive that his lies to his wife and family were more offensive or sinful than the lies told to the citizens of the United States and the rest of the world. Wonder what the kids and men that went and came home missing limbs would answer to that?
You are sliding right back into your pre November ‘06 mode and it is ugly and very distorted for the benefit of the “Right”.
Danny Robinson
February 28th, 2007 at 9:12 pmCleveland, Ohio 44077
#110 – “Whether they had sex was immaterial to whitewater or the grand jury’s investigation – fcukhead. That’s why the Senate found him not guilty.”
As usual, you are wrong. His lie was material as a pattern of sexual harassment (you remember – one of the pet peeves of libruls?) was being established in the lawsuit brought by Paula Jones. (I forgot – libruls only object to women being sexually groped by conservatives.) It would have been immaterial if the suit was about shady money laundering or land deals in Arkansas.
Now sit down and be quiet – you might learn something.
February 28th, 2007 at 9:20 pmAs usual, you are wrong. Comment by valiant venus — February 28, 2007 @ 9:20 pm
As usual you’re wrong – st*pid c*nt.
His lie was material as a pattern of sexual harassment (you remember – one of the pet peeves of libruls?) Comment by valiant venus — February 28, 2007 @ 9:20 pm
Yet the articles of impeachment on the Jones case failed. Wow, how shocking!
Sorry c*nt, but it was immaterial. If he had *harassed* Lewinsky, that would have been material. Having consensual sex with another adult isn’t material to an harassment suit. You’ve spent too much time up Ann Coulter’s c*nt.
was being established in the lawsuit brought by Paula Jones. Comment by valiant venus — February 28, 2007 @ 9:20 pm
Yet the perjury in the Jones trial failed even a House Impeachment by a 205-229 vote. Dum c*nt.
(I forgot – libruls only object to women being sexually groped by conservatives.) Comment by valiant venus — February 28, 2007 @ 9:20 pm
People can grope whoever they want – if it’s consensual and adults. Clinton settled with Jones to shut the ugly b*tch up. If she was anything like, you miserable c*nt – it’s easy to see why he might.
It would have been immaterial if the suit was about shady money laundering or land deals in Arkansas. Comment by valiant venus — February 28, 2007 @ 9:20 pm
Yet that’s exactly what the independent investigation was about.
Now sit down and be quiet – you might learn something.
Comment by valiant venus — February 28, 2007 @ 9:20 pm
I might – but not from a st*pid ignorant c*nt like yourself! You have one of those ‘overinflated’ compensating behaviors that project an overinflated sense of self worth, stemming from a lack of self confidence that’s so prevalent in the 20 year old bimbo crowd. Why don’t you sit down and eat something, you st*pid Anorexic c*nt?
Let me guess, you were daddy’s ‘princess’, right? St*pid spoiled little c*nt.
February 28th, 2007 at 9:33 pmWhat Tweety wouldn’t give for a blow job.
February 28th, 2007 at 10:14 pmParaphrasing just bit from Robin William’s character, Adrian Cronauer in
Good Morning, Vietnam,
Chris Matthews is “in more dire need of a blowjob than any white man in history.”
February 28th, 2007 at 10:23 pmI guess one would have to look at whether having sex with a subordinate at ones place of work would be relevent to a sexual harrassment case involving a governor and a state employee that could be considered a subordinate.
Hmm, considering Clinton was never even close to even being on trial for sexual harrasment I would guess you are just trying to throw up dust.
February 28th, 2007 at 11:16 pmHis lie was material as a pattern of sexual harassment (you remember – one of the pet peeves of libruls?) was being established in the lawsuit brought by Paula Jones.
Wow, and he was convicted of sexual harassment, right? Your understanding of the law is lacking, idiot.
February 28th, 2007 at 11:17 pmIt’s sweet justice that Olbermann has supplanted Matthews as the face of the network, and why his show consistently gets pre-empted by Anna Nicole breaking news.
March 1st, 2007 at 12:22 amWhat is WRONG with Matthews? He really is obssessed!
March 1st, 2007 at 2:41 amGeorge Bush is a queer with his own MALE PROSTITUTES, Jeff Gannon and Patrick1.
They are also TRAITORS to the USA and need to be sent to Gitmo and TORTURED for 10 years.
By the prisoners sent there WITHOUT TRIAL.
God Bless America.
FCVK TRAITOR Bush and Patrick1.
Burn in hell, TRAITORS.
March 1st, 2007 at 3:14 am[...] Matthews has been obsessing over the possibility that Bill Clinton’s been running around on Hillary again. Matthews doesn’t seem to have any evidence that the Big Dawg’s snapped his [...]
March 1st, 2007 at 10:45 amBill Clinton will be remembered as the Horniest President .
March 1st, 2007 at 11:45 amHmm, considering Clinton was never even close to even being on trial for sexual harrasment I would guess you are just trying to throw up dust.
What do you think the Paula Jones thing was about? How could his lie not be material? The fact that he had sex with his subordinate is very relevent, he could have propositioned Lewinsky the same way Jones claimed he did. We don’t know because he lied about the relationship. It goes to pattern. Just because Lewinsky was consentual does not matter. It shows a pattern that he uses his power to get chicks. People can twist it as much as they want, it was perjury.
March 1st, 2007 at 12:00 pm#123
Funniest thing I’ve read all damned day!
ROFLMAO!!!
March 1st, 2007 at 12:13 pmPerjury!
March 1st, 2007 at 12:15 pmPerjury!
Perjury!
Perjury!
Perjury from Clinton no way!
Who’d of thunk?
You have to wonder why Tweety isn’t as concerned about the much more sordid marriage histories of Giuliani, Gingrich, and McCain.
March 1st, 2007 at 12:30 pmThe Chrises Wallace and Mathews represents what’s bad in America, at this time. The entire military media complex is deliberately leading the American people into somenthing we’ll never recover from. Fascism! To hell with honest and truthful reporting of the news. To hell with forthright analysis of the events that affect us all. As long as these complicit beasts keep collecting their fat paychecks they’ll continue shilling for the regime we had rammed up our tailpipes by SCOTUS. Damn them.
March 1st, 2007 at 1:28 pmFor God sake, can you all get your heads out of Clinton’s fly?
You creeps make me sick going on about Bill Clinton’s sexual escapades. He’s a man. He apparently enjoys sex. That makes him okay in my book! If you’d pay some attention to the creep and his concubine that are taking this country down, you’d have little time remaining to be considering what BC has in his pants.
Ya prickheads. You know who I’m talking about!
March 1st, 2007 at 1:36 pmWell, with al Quida having worked to get pres. Bush re-elected, the neo-cons have to do something to deflect the truth of their obsession with Fmr. Pres. Clinton.
We all know that Usama bin Laden wanted Pres. Bush re-elected, because he knew that Pres. Bush would do NOTHING to find him. Usama bin Laden is running around, free, helping al Quida and the Taliban get back into power in Afghanistan. Pres. Bush decided that oil was more important than finishing the job in Afghanistan.
Pres. Bush’s continuing failed war in Iraq is tacit support for Usama bin Laden, al Quida, and the Taliban.
March 1st, 2007 at 1:48 pmIt looks like Chris is jealous of the pussy that Bill gets. I’m no big fan of Hillary’s but jeez, Chris is on a personal jihad against Slick Willie here. Heads up Chris–no one cares what he’s doing with his johnson anymore and if you are, it says more about you than him.
March 2nd, 2007 at 3:13 pmChris obsessed over W’s demeanor and gushed as to how “prince-like” he looked in his flight suit during the Mission Accomplised fiasco. I believe he has a man-crush on W and maybe also on Pre Clinton
March 2nd, 2007 at 4:45 pmWould somebody please find a boyfriend for Chris Matthews?
March 15th, 2007 at 2:25 amOne that is at least as well endowed as Chris fantasizes that Mr. Clinton is? He seems to be lonely and agitated by men’s crotches.
Chris Matthews absolutely resents the fact that a female might become our next President. He is disturbed and incensed over the very thought of such a thing happening.
Sure he hates the Clintons, but Matthews has a real problem with women.
They scare the shit out of him. Especially when they are smart, determined and powerful.
Chris Matthews has managed to turn me into a Hillary Clinton admirer, just based on the insane things he says about her.
March 30th, 2007 at 10:42 pm[...] the media’s obsession with Bill Clinton’s sex life: “Nothing the New York senator says or does will ever be [...]
April 2nd, 2007 at 2:23 pm