What is Digg?682 Comments
- 7papa7, on 11/06/2008, -172/+458So much for journalistic integrity. You have proven with your words that journalism is the antithesis of integrity. Way to go clown. How deep in the tank can you get? I don't now, but I will make sure beyond a shadow of a doubt that I NEVER listen to you. Don't they teach ethics in school anymore.
- XEKEdotcom, on 11/06/2008, -88/+372Could this be the final nail in the Chris Matthews coffin? It ought to be, but I'm not holding my breath.
- ChronicColonic, on 11/06/2008, -41/+257...and make everything that he doesn't agree with fail? Nice to know that he thinks he has so much control. Ego much?
Chris Matthews 'Hardball' is an opinion-based show and not the news....but journalism lately in the MSM is non-existent.
Could you image if Bill O'Reilly said this about the Bush Administration? It would be front page with 8000 diggs. - kswan04, on 11/06/2008, -41/+244Maybe he's trying to get a job with the new administration...
- kaelyiesta, on 11/06/2008, -51/+197I watched the link thinking it would be out of context. Wow was I wrong.
At least he admits it. Just makes it easier for me to steer clear of this liar. Not that I watch tv news for anything other than entertainment anyhow. The internet is so much better than MSM. With the internet, I get a lot of *****, but I also get the knowledge refuting said *****. - YoYo91, on 11/06/2008, -66/+198Good. This will remind me NOT to watch his show.
- mmrch, on 11/06/2008, -47/+150Chris has no choice. Maddow & Olbermann are lapping him ratings wise, so if he doesn't go hyper-partisan (instead just partisan) he'll be out of a job.
- jimw428, on 11/06/2008, -56/+149Wow, what a patriot.
He's spent the last few years doing everything possible to discredit and destroy the Bush administration. What a hypocrite. In the end, it doesn't really matter, nobody watches that stupid ***** anyway. - AnneP, on 11/06/2008, -48/+133This guy, like so many others, has made the term 'professional journalist' an oxymoron. I'm glad Tim Russert didn't have to see this.
- IrishJoe, on 11/06/2008, -53/+136Correction: It's all Americans' responsibility to make Obama's presidency a success. We face some of the most troubling times our nation has ever faced and it is in all (all Americans that is) of our best interests for the US to be as successful as possible. That requires us contacting our members of Congress and voting them out in two years if they are not helping the country. That means contacting Obama's office frequently with our opinions on the issues of the day. That includes becoming involved in grass roots efforts in our communities making sure our opinions are heard by our local and state elected officials. It means taking charge of our future. Obama is just a guy who we hired to do a job for 4 years. An important job, I'll grant you, probably the most important job in the world, but a job nonetheless. It is all of our jobs to make sure that he and the other elected officials do the best job they can and hold their feet to the fire when they mess up so that they can correct their behavior the next time. For too long we have expected that officials in Washington will do what we want without pushing them to make the right decisions that benefit us personally and the entire country as a whole. Those days are over. I call upon 300 million Americans to hold Obama accountable and at the same time work to make sure he and the others in office do the best job they can. Our future depends upon it.
- slvrbullet87, on 11/07/2008, -16/+80But people on digg tell me every day that the media is in the republicans back pocket... Where was matthews for Bush?
- fakekevinrose, on 11/07/2008, -10/+71Matthews is a pundit, not a journalist. he offers his opinion or commentary on subjects (in this case it's american politics) which he feels knowledgeable in. a journalist gathers and disseminates information. it's 2 different species you're talking about.
- Lilycat1, on 11/06/2008, -44/+100My advice to Matthews is to try and redeem his own reputation after he destroyed it by kissing Obama's ass. I swear, if Obama had stopped short they'd have had to call a surgeon to have Matthews extracted!
- inactive, on 11/06/2008, -10/+64That's not what they taught when I went to J-school.
- professor357, on 11/06/2008, -31/+81This is undoubtedly the reason that a "tingle" runs up his leg every time he hears Obama speak. This guy is so far in the tank for Obama that he cannot possibly be an inpartial reporter of ANYTHING during the Obama Presidency.
He should turn in his resignation effective January 20th, when Obama is sworn in as President. - ChronicColonic, on 11/06/2008, -20/+66Nice to know he enjoys who he is working for - Obama was elected and Chris Matthews, other than his usual salary, pretty much helped him for free. He is on the Obama ticket - pro bono. What a complete and utterly pathetic tool. Enjoy your tingly legs...that is all you are going to have with an Obama presidency.
- VoodooPunk, on 11/06/2008, -31/+77The only difference between Mathews and 90% of the news media is Mathews actually came out and admitted to being Obama's bitch.
- JoEBlack982, on 11/07/2008, -11/+54July 22, 2008
Chris Matthews endorsed Obama on Leno.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/22/chris-mat ...
He's been out of the closet for a while. - DonWigler, on 11/06/2008, -21/+63Boy, they're not even pretending anymore.
- 12198, on 11/06/2008, -47/+86I saw this live. I kept hoping someone would ask this putz why his job wasn't to make President Bush's presidency a success.
‘Your job’ EGADS!
Your "Job" is a journalist you putz. How about trying to do that for a welcome change.
Chrissy you ignorant slut.
Sometimes you actually tell the truth.
This is what everyone knew. You finally admit your bias.
Putz. - gmarie624, on 11/06/2008, -31/+69Is this a preview of what we can expect from 'journalists' once the Fairness Doctrine is reinstated??
- DrewTheITGuy, on 11/06/2008, -21/+59Hate to break it to you Chris, but it is NOT your job to make this presidency work. Your one and only job is to report what goes on without a bias. If you want to help the presidency work take a job in his staff as the Press Secretary.
- CaptCarrot, on 11/06/2008, -4/+40Press secretary, maybe?
- Temlakos, on 11/06/2008, -18/+53Ironically, Chris Matthews, in taking that attitude, will do Obama no good, and might even do him harm. One who refuses to admit even to himself that a friend is making a mistake, much less say the same to that friend, does that friend no favors.
- deema1, on 11/06/2008, -18/+52There used to be a time when the media actually reported the news and devoted small segments to editorializing. What a reversal we've seen. Oh, the demise of journalistic integrity.
- Shiftgood, on 11/07/2008, -23/+56O M F G SHUT UP.
If you listen to the discussion in the beginning they are talking about speculating motive. Which Mathews deems irresponsible and audacious.
He says he doesn't want to do that because he doesnt want to start tearing down a president that he thinks needs to be successful in order to not bring about the end of civilization as we know it.
You ***** bitter republicans and you moon struck liberals need to both just look at reality and STFU and DO YOUR DAMN JOBS so we can get out of this. B/C its not going to happen if you guys just sit around and yell at each other your cynical view. - inactive, on 11/07/2008, -25/+56You don't know what fascism is. Here you go:
fascism: an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. - ironhide, on 11/07/2008, -2/+33Tell me how there was.
- alais, on 11/06/2008, -47/+77Un-freaking-believable.
- USArugula, on 11/07/2008, -6/+35PatNolan:
That clip is posted out of context. I would suggest watching the entire interview before passing judgment.
The context is that Joe Scarborough was calling Rahm Emanuel's on-air indecision over taking the job of Chief of Staff as a major Obama blunder out of the gate. Matthews argued that Scarborough was making an issue out of something that wasn't an issue, and considering the present state of the nation, we shouldn't be trying to cripple Obama out of the gate by creating distractions.
Matthews goes on to say: "There's a big difference between trying to argue over policy, which we're going to definitely have to do -- questioning and being skeptical over the right policy in terms of healthcare, in terms of getting the fiscal house in order --all that is appropriate debate, you and I agree on this. But whether there's an effective role out of cabinet people, whether there is an effective execution -- I think that's all in our interest that there be an effective one, that this administration take office with some crackle, with some discipline, without having a lot of distractions -- I think that's in the national interest. It benefits all of us."
The panel agreed with Matthews on this.
Again, I suggest watching the entire piece for context. I've uploaded it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_QJj1z9lf8 - BowieX, on 11/07/2008, -27/+54Isn't this submission a bit misleading?
If you watch the full video, it becomes clear that Matthews somewhat misspoke when he said it was his "job to make the Presidency a success", and to use just that quote is blatantly removing the context.
You can argue whether it was a Freudian slip and debate his partisan interests all you like, but for the rest of the interview he seemed to hone in on the point that the SPECIFIC MEDIA DISCUSSION about the manner in which Rahm Emanuel's PRESS CONFERENCE came to be is simply totally journalistically irrelevant and focussing on things such as these could potentially undermine the quality and clarity of journalism on actual policy decisions, which is a valid point for Matthews to make, whether or not you agree with it.
Journalists should not unduly undermine the success of the President.
I'm not a Matthews fan by a long shot, but this whole submission is out-of-context and unfair. - Trekhawk, on 11/06/2008, -7/+34Why are we concentrating on voting Congress out in two years IF they don't help. The last two years the Congress hasn't done anything positive, had the lowest approval rating in history AND they only mentionable thing they did was vote for the bailout with $150 billion in pork on top. THIS should have been the year to vote them out.
- VoodooPunk, on 11/06/2008, -13/+39"Correction: It's all Americans' responsibility to make Obama's presidency a success." - IrishJoe
No, it's Obama's responsibility to make Obama's presidency a success. It's our responsibility to hold him accountable and make sure he only serves one term if he can't do the job. His success or failure is up to him. Our job is recognize it if he's failed and boot him. - mspisars, on 11/06/2008, -59/+84Not surprised... saddened but not surprised.
www.oc4life.com - PuterPrsn, on 11/06/2008, -20/+44I'm shocked he just came out and said it, in plain English, no equivocation. If he keeps his job as a "journalist", the network's news management should be immediately fired. He's not anywhere close to reporting news - he's just working for whomever he thinks should be in a political office? Jeez!
- LeRenard, on 11/07/2008, -0/+24If you expect journalistic integrity from a 24 hour news channel, you are either naive or a fool. The major 24 hour news networks are info-tainment at best. Have they ever once admitted that there may not have been enough news to fill 24 hours of continuous coverage?
- richirwin, on 11/07/2008, -9/+32Chris Matthews is a commentator and an entertainer.
His job is not to be "fair and balanced."
But really, aren't we all working to make Obama's Presidency a success? - bittley, on 11/06/2008, -19/+42Thanks, Chris. I always thought your loyalty was supposed to be to your audience - you know, to tell them the truth? Why would anyone believe anything you say now?
- these3remain, on 11/07/2008, -7/+29And twice as many death threats, no doubt.
- zekefrog, on 11/07/2008, -3/+25Actually, this is what they said about Fox:
"On Fox News, in contrast, coverage of Obama was more negative than the norm (40% of stories vs. 29% overall) and less positive (25% of stories vs. 36% generally). For McCain, the news channel was somewhat more positive (22% vs. 14% in the press overall) and substantially less negative (40% vs. 57% in the press overall)."
Don't look very fair or balance. - HenryJonesJr, on 11/06/2008, -42/+63It's his job?!? Wow. Anyone who ever denied the liberal bias that exists in the media needs to apologize now.
- ChronicColonic, on 11/06/2008, -13/+34Hey, stop it! You might offend both his viewers!
- kettlehead, on 11/07/2008, -2/+23Don't misunderstand; we're all pretty excited about an Obama administration; but what we should *never* do is repeat anything resembling the post 9-11 "supportive" silence of scrutiny and dissenting opinion, no matter WHO is in office; it's not healthy.
If this is what Matthews thinks his job should be, he should submit himself to the president-elect as a possible press secretary for the upcoming administration; but media shills don't help the country. - emailowndme, on 11/07/2008, -23/+44He's a pundit, not a journalist, he's paid to supply his opinion, as opposed to a journalist who is paid to deliver the news.
I've never had a problem with any pundit, because their slant is easy to recognize, and frankly why I watch the program.
Except for those fair and balanced peoples(because that's a lie), but hey, that's a different story. - inactive, on 11/07/2008, -4/+23Except that Matthews claims to be a journalist, not a pundit. Remember his moderating the debate? Pundits don't get to do that, right? I personally don't care who he is in the tank for, but I don't like hypocrites. If it is his job to make sure Obama has a successful presidency, why was he so tough on Bush? Was it his job to make sure Bush failed? I just can't imagine watching a "news" show, political or otherwise, when the host claims his job is to promote the success of a certain politician. That just lets me know that Obama's mistakes will be glossed over and spun to look not so bad.
- vault, on 11/06/2008, -10/+29We can only hope, xeke.
- esteskid, on 11/07/2008, -9/+28Oh noes! a television reportorter openly admitted he's biased! must be fascism!
seriously wtf people you over react - pyrobaby, on 11/07/2008, -15/+34Considering "journalists" on supposedly non-biased stations like CNN are already spouting ***** like the last time we had a 1-party majority in the executive and legislative branches was Clinton or Carter (did 2001-6 never happen for these hacks?) to try and paint the new President/Congress as bad for the country before they even get sworn in, I'm welcome to have someone like Matthews to cancel it out.
Funny how the people bitching on here likely didn't care when Fox News had their tongues up the Bush administration's asses for the last 8 years. - Landthatilove, on 11/06/2008, -7/+25No. It will be much, much worse.
- extracashnow, on 11/06/2008, -31/+49Wow, I am stunned.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 686 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is