Support NeoGAF

[capslock]

-

CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Tonight, political war breaks out over the swift boat ad, and John Kerry come out swinging against the president.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN KERRY (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: Well, if he wants to have a debate about our service in Vietnam, here is my answer: Bring it on!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTHEWS: Plus, do military records contradict one of Kerry‘s harshest critics? We‘ll talk to the former swift boat commander at the center of this political firestorm, Larry Thurlow. And Kerry-Edwards supporter former senator Max Cleland talks about why the war in Vietnam haunts this election.

Let‘s play HARDBALL.

Good evening. I‘m Chris Matthews. The shots at John Kerry‘s Vietnam record were dealt a blow today when a “Washington Post” reporter uncovered military records of one of Kerry‘s war critics that, in fact, support Kerry‘s version of events in Vietnam. We‘re going to talk to that reporter in a minute.

But first, Larry Thurlow is the Vietnam veteran who was the subject of today‘s “Washington Post” report. He commanded a Navy swift boat alongside Kerry in Vietnam and says Kerry‘s boat did not come under enemy fire when he retrieved Lieutenant James Rassmann out of the water. He also appeared in the swift boat veterans ad that‘s called Veterans for Truth.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN EDWARDS (D-NC), VICE PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: If you ask any question about what John Kerry‘s made of, just spend three minutes with the men who served with him.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I served with John Kerry.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I served with John Kerry.

GEORGE ELLIOTT, LT. COMMANDER, 2 BRONZE STARS: John Kerry has not been honest about what happened in Vietnam.

AL FRENCH, ENSIGN, TWO BRONZE STARS: He is lying about his record.

LOUIS LETSON, MEDICAL OFFICER, LT. COMMANDER: I know John Kerry is lying about his first Purple Heart because I treated him for that injury.

VAN ODELL, GUNNER‘S MATE 2ND CLASS: John Kerry lied to get his Bronze Star. I know. I was there. I saw what happened.

JACK CHENOWETH, LT. J.G., NAVY COMMENDATION MEDAL: His account of what happened and what actually happened are the difference between night and day.

ROY HOFFMAN: John Kerry has not been honest.

ADRIAN LONSDALE: And he lacks the capacity to lead.

LARRY THURLOW: When the chips were down, you could not count on John Kerry.

BOB ELDER: John Kerry is no war hero.

GRANT HIBBARD: He betrayed all his shipmates. He lied before the Senate.

SHELTON WHITE: John Kerry betrayed the men and women he served with in Vietnam.

JOE PONDER: He dishonored his country. He most certainly did.

BOB HILDRETH: I served with John Kerry. John Kerry cannot be trusted.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Swift Boat Veterans for Truth is responsible for the content of this advertisement.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATTHEWS: Larry Thurlow, thank you very much for joining us tonight. I admire your service, certainly. Let me ask you, sir, about the quote that you have in this ad. It says—and these are your words, speaking them in the advertisement—“When the chips were down, you could not count on John Kerry.” Why do you say that?

LARRY THURLOW, ANTI-KERRY SWIFT BOAT VETERAN: Mr. Matthews, the main reason I say that is because it became apparent early on that John Kerry had a master plan that went far beyond the service in the swift boats, and because of the fact that he was trying to engineer a record, so to speak, for himself, he was not a trustworthy member of a very tightly-knit unit that counted on each other at every second. And once it became apparent that he had this plan that kind of excluded what was required of us at certain times, it became apparent to me that you could not count on him.

MATTHEWS: When did you first become aware of this plan?

THURLOW: I became aware of it as a combination of events started to transpire, where it became apparent to me that he wasn‘t being truthful about how he reported certain incidents and how he—in his own description back then was, he was quite a cowboy, which at that particular time, that you didn‘t follow orders, did you as you pleased and you kind of just looked out for yourself and didn‘t really care about your shipmates.

MATTHEWS: Tell me about the time you discovered that he wasn‘t honest about his account of events. When did you first discover that habit of his, as you say?

THURLOW: Well, on a firsthand basis, I understood that the Purple Heart that he received at Cam Ranh Bay was fabricated and wasn‘t based on any factuality at all, but...

MATTHEWS: How did you learn that, sir?

THURLOW: I learned that from the people who had been with him at that time, when he reported that he received an injury from hostile fire, when in fact, there was none.

MATTHEWS: Who was the person who told you this, that he didn‘t deserve the Purple Heart?

THURLOW: The people—keep in mind...

MATTHEWS: Can you give me a name, sir?

THURLOW: The name I would give you, after the fact, is Dr. Letson.

MATTHEWS: No. At the time. At the time. You said at the time this happened, you discovered he had a habit of fabricating the truth.

THURLOW: I can‘t give you a specific name. It was a crew member that came from Cam Ranh Bay to our division.

MATTHEWS: But could you help us figure out who it might be? You‘re saying the man had a record of not being honest about his battle bravery. I just want to know how we know this is true or not.

THURLOW: OK. The only name that comes to mind now is a guy that is actually a member of our group. But what I‘m telling you...

MATTHEWS: What‘s his name?

THURLOW: ... is the story...

MATTHEWS: We want to talk to him.

THURLOW: Steve Gardener (ph).

MATTHEWS: Since he‘s your—since he‘s your source, we just want to know who he is.

THURLOW: Steve Gardener.

MATTHEWS: Steve Gardener. And he told you at the time that John Kerry received his first Purple Heart that he didn‘t deserve it?

THURLOW: Well, what happened is he said that he received an injury due to a mistake he made when he fired an M-79 close aboard and was hit by his own shrapnel. That doesn‘t constitute a Purple Heart. You‘ve got to be injured by hostile fire.

MATTHEWS: And he told you that at the time? Steve Gardener—in other words, if I get him on the show, he‘ll say he told you, Mr. Thurlow, at the time this happened...

THURLOW: He‘s going to say...

MATTHEWS: ... that he didn‘t deserve...

THURLOW: He‘s going to say...

MATTHEWS: ... that John Kerry got an award he didn‘t deserve?

THURLOW: He‘s going to say that he reported—John Kerry was awarded the Purple Heart eventually. Or actually, he‘s going to tell you that John Kerry applied for a Purple Heart that he did not merit.

MATTHEWS: At the time he told you. OK, let‘s go on to the issue of the Bronze Star, which is far more important here. You received a Bronze Star in action for going back to that—or going to that ship that had—your fellow swift boat, that had hit a mine. Why did you get the Bronze Star?

THURLOW: I felt like I got the Bronze Star because I helped save the guys that were injured on there and then helped save boat from sinking.

MATTHEWS: Were you under enemy fire at this time?

THURLOW: No, I was not.

MATTHEWS: Why did your citation say so?

THURLOW: Because John Kerry had written an after-action report to cover the entire incident. And in this after-action report, he reported that we were not only under enemy fire, we were under intense enemy fire.

MATTHEWS: Did his after-action report—did that become the report that was the language in your citation? Do you know that for a fact?

THURLOW: Well...

MATTHEWS: For a fact? Do you know the—in other words, do you know for a fact that it was his account of the action that you both survived that led to the language in your citation? Do you know that for a fact, sir, Mr. Thurlow?

THURLOW: Well, because my commanding officer wrote up the citation, and the only thing he had available to him was that report, yes, the part about the hostile fire would have come from that report.

MATTHEWS: Do you know for a fact that it was John Kerry‘s words or account that led to your—the language in your citation? Do you know it for a fact? Would you swear to it? This is what we‘re getting into here. We need clear accounts of what happened with John Kerry and whether he really did deserve to get a Bronze Star or not.

THURLOW: The fact of the matter...

MATTHEWS: Can you say for a fact that he wrote himself up, that he got credit because he gave himself credit and that‘s why you got credit for taking the action you did, the brave action you did to save the men and save that boat, that fellow swift boat? You both benefited, you‘re saying to me now, because of his after-action report. You both benefited in the citations.

THURLOW: Well, actually...

MATTHEWS: You‘re saying that.

THURLOW: His after-action report reported none of the action I took about saving the men or the boat. His after-action report...

MATTHEWS: But do you know now—right now that the testimony that you were both under fire, intense enemy fire...

THURLOW: Came from his report.

MATTHEWS: ... you say that was not the case—you know for a fact it was his report that led to the language in your citation? That‘s all I want to know.

THURLOW: The reason I believe it was from his report is because he‘s the only one that filed one and the fact that he—and the reason I know he filed it is because his boat was the central figure in the report. The 3 boat was the one that was mine and badly damaged, but yet the report tells about John Kerry coming back to get Rassmann under intense fire and only casually mentions anything else that even happened that day.

MATTHEWS: What I don‘t understand is why you deserve a Purple Heart for taking the action you did, and you say...

THURLOW: I (UNINTELLIGIBLE) Purple Heart.

MATTHEWS: ... you were not under—no—no—no, not the Purple Heart...

THURLOW: I didn‘t get a Purple Heart.

MATTHEWS: ... the Bronze Star. The Bronze Star, that you deserve the Bronze Star, you were awarded the Bronze Star, fair enough, and you say you were not under enemy fire. You‘re now saying that John Kerry doesn‘t deserve the Bronze Start because he wasn‘t under enemy fire. Aren‘t you both in the same boat? Didn‘t you both do about the same thing, both get same award? And why are you complaining that he doesn‘t deserve it, if you deserved it?

THURLOW: I felt like I got the award because I saved some people‘s lives and saved the boat. What I say...

MATTHEWS: Well, he saved Rassmann‘s life, according to Rassmann‘s own account.

THURLOW: OK...MATTHEWS: Why doesn‘t he deserve the award?

THURLOW: Well, I—I don‘t—I‘m not quibbling about the award.

I‘m saying he lied about the...

MATTHEWS: Oh, yes, you are, sir!

THURLOW: ... account.

MATTHEWS: You are out here in an advertisement saying, quote, “When the chips were down, you could not count on John Kerry.”

THURLOW: That‘s exactly right.

MATTHEWS: That‘s a pretty strong—because of what are you saying this?

THURLOW: Because he had this master plan that was...

MATTHEWS: You got—give me an example.

THURLOW: ... to promote his...

MATTHEWS: OK, let‘s to go your theory of the plan. Have you seen it written down? Have you heard him tell his account to someone? How do you know, in any real way, he had this plan?

THURLOW: Because of the fact that he engineered three Purple Heart incidences that allowed him to go home after he spent about one third of his tour there.

MATTHEWS: But that‘s your account of what happened. He was there for four months.

THURLOW: That‘s exactly right.

MATTHEWS: He did win the three Purple Hearts. He did get the Bronze and the Silver. And you say he had some plan to get an award as a battle hero ahead of time, but you can‘t tell me how you know he had this plan.

THURLOW: I know he had this plan because of what happened not only then but after the fact.

MATTHEWS: Did you have a plan to win the Bronze Star? You won the Bronze Star. Did you have a plan?

THURLOW: No, in fact, I didn‘t...

MATTHEWS: Why is winning the Bronze Star...

THURLOW: I didn‘t apply for it.

MATTHEWS: Why is winning the Bronze Star evidence of having had a plan to win one? I don‘t get it.

THURLOW: Well, I—we‘re not even talking about him having a plan to win the Bronze Star.

MATTHEWS: Can you honestly tell me now, sir, that you could swear in open court that you know that John Kerry, when he was a lieutenant JG in the same theater you were in had some plan for winning medals? Do you know that for a fact?

THURLOW: OK. In other words, present evidence that he had this plan?

MATTHEWS: Yes.

THURLOW: Of course, I couldn‘t.

MATTHEWS: Well, what...

THURLOW: I‘m basing it on my observations.

MATTHEWS: These are after-the-fact observations. You say he had a plan ahead of time to make himself a war hero to get elected to office.

THURLOW: I‘m saying that he had a plan that included not only being a war hero but getting an early out.

MATTHEWS: But you admit you have no tangible evidence.

THURLOW: I have my own personal observations.

MATTHEWS: Of what?

THURLOW: And you‘re right, it is not tangible evidence.

MATTHEWS: OK, so you don‘t. Let me ask you about...

THURLOW: I‘m not in a court of law here.

MATTHEWS: Well, I‘m just trying to get...

THURLOW: I‘m telling you what I...

MATTHEWS: I‘ll tell you what. You have involved yourself in a presidential election. Let me ask you this.

THURLOW: Yes, I have.

MATTHEWS: Is John Kerry‘s war record a legitimate issue in this presidential campaign?

THURLOW: I think it is because he‘s made it the central plank of his run for nomination.

MATTHEWS: Fair enough. Then should the president have a legitimate right, should he choose to do so, to talk about it?

THURLOW: Should the president?

MATTHEWS: Should the president of the United States, who‘s running against John Kerry, have the—does he have the right, as we speak, as you see it, to raise this issue in debate, if it comes up?

THURLOW: Does the president...

MATTHEWS: Is he allowed to talk about it?

THURLOW: You talking about President Bush?

MATTHEWS: That‘s right.

THURLOW: Does he have the right to bring it up?

MATTHEWS: Yes.

THURLOW: President Bush wasn‘t there. So why would he bring it up?

THURLOW: No, no. I‘m talking about, is he allowed to raise what you‘ve said about your fellow officer? Is he allowed to go into the debate and say, I hear from your fellow officers that you were not the hero you claim to be? Is that a fair enough tack for the president to take in this campaign? Is it a legitimate issue? You‘re raising it as a campaign issue. I‘m asking you, if it‘s a campaign issue, why can‘t both candidates talk about it? That‘s all I‘m asking.

THURLOW: No, I‘m not—I‘m raising the campaign—the reason I‘ve raised this issue is because I want the American people to hear the truth that I know...

MATTHEWS: Right, but you‘re...

THURLOW: ... and then let them make a decision.

MATTHEWS: But isn‘t it fair to say you‘re doing this because John Kerry is a candidate for president?

THURLOW: Yes.

MATTHEWS: OK.

THURLOW: This is the first time I would have ever had a chance to vote for him.

MATTHEWS: Well, of course. Of course. That‘s fair enough. But is it fair enough for the president to counter-charge and say he doesn‘t believe John Kerry‘s the hero he claimed to be at the Democratic convention?

THURLOW: I don‘t think so because he wasn‘t there. He doesn‘t have the evidence I do.

MATTHEWS: Is he allowed to believe you?

THURLOW: He‘s allowed to believe whoever he wants.

MATTHEWS: In other words, you want everybody in the country...

THURLOW: He‘s an American citizen.

MATTHEWS: ... to believe what you‘re saying right now, Mr. Thurlow...

THURLOW: Certainly.

MATTHEWS: ... but not to let the president of the United States count on it as a campaign issue.

THURLOW: That‘s entirely up to him. I‘m telling you...

MATTHEWS: Oh, it is up to him. OK. I‘m (UNINTELLIGIBLE) Why do you think it‘s OK for a person who didn‘t serve in Vietnam to criticize someone who did?

THURLOW: I did serve in Vietnam.

MATTHEWS: I‘m asking you about the president. You said it‘s up to him. If it‘s up to the president whether to attack John Kerry for being in Vietnam, what did he over there, is it OK with you, that a guy who didn‘t serve criticizes a guy who did?

THURLOW: Well, I don‘t know that he has criticized...

MATTHEWS: As a veteran.

THURLOW: As a veteran?

MATTHEWS: I‘m just asking you a simple question. Is this a campaign issue for both candidates to contend with or isn‘t it?

THURLOW: Well, it‘s a campaign...

MATTHEWS: Or is it just you against John Kerry as a side shot at one of the candidates?

THURLOW: ... issue that John Kerry ran out there. And the thing I think is that the president wouldn‘t have any—you know, what would he base...

MATTHEWS: OK, let me ask you this...

THURLOW: ... the statements on?

MATTHEWS: ... very simply. If President Bush the other—is asked a question, he come out and says, Well, I hear from this fellow officer, in fact, he was the commander of the swift boat, the head of the team—he says this guy didn‘t deserve all the acclaim he got at the convention. Would that be OK with you?

THURLOW: Well, it would be OK with me if he wanted to do it, but why would he want to do it?

MATTHEWS: To defeat his opponent.

THURLOW: He‘s got—he‘s got...

MATTHEWS: The same reason you want to defeat this guy. You don‘t think he should be president.

THURLOW: Well—that‘s exactly right. I don‘t think he should be president.

MATTHEWS: Well, that‘s fair enough. There‘s nothing wrong with it. Say it—you have a million times in this country a free opportunity to say so. I‘m asking you...

THURLOW: You‘re—you‘re exactly right.

MATTHEWS: ... should George Bush be allowed to raise this issue in the campaign?

THURLOW: If he wants to, he...

MATTHEWS: Otherwise, it‘s just you.

THURLOW: ... certainly should be able to.

MATTHEWS: In other words, it‘s OK, for you, for a guy who didn‘t serve in Vietnam to attack a guy who did? That‘s all I want to know.

THURLOW: Well, I don‘t think a guy that didn‘t serve in Vietnam should attack some guy‘s record that did serve in Vietnam, if he has no personal knowledge of it.

MATTHEWS: But if he has the knowledge because of you, should he be able to do it?

THURLOW: He has no personal knowledge. He‘s...

MATTHEWS: OK.

THURLOW: What my—what I feel...

MATTHEWS: OK, we‘re going back to your personal knowledge, sir.

THURLOW: ... on him is he hasn‘t...

MATTHEWS: The problem is, you haven‘t produced any personal knowledge about this plan you talked about, Mr. Thurlow, and that‘s the problem tonight.

THURLOW: No, what I—what I...

MATTHEWS: This plan has not been authenticated. That‘s the concern I have. Anyway, thanks for coming on.

Coming up, the “Washington Post” reporter who broke the story about Larry Thurlow‘s Bronze medal and the citation accompanying it.

You‘re watching HARDBALL on MSNBC.

 

[Claus]

tl;dr

 

[Cloudy]

There was even better ownage after that...

Here's the link from the other thread:

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/Nomad666/MM_WB.wmv

 

[StoOgE]

What I want to know is why this guy never brought any of this stuff up before the election?

I would think that vets and people who won awards would want to make sure people didnt unfairly get them on principle... if I knew someone lied to get medals I would say something at the time, or as soon as I found out about it to try and stop him from getting something he didnt earn, because it would diminish that award for people who did earn it...

not wait until he is running for president for the party you dont support.

 

[StoOgE]

There was even better ownage after that...

Here's the link from the other thread:

http://mywebpages.comcast.net/Nomad666/MM_WB.wmv

that women is either slime or really stupid. There are questions as to weather or not shrapnal from his own gun richoted and hit him in the leg (I think its political BS stirred up by Rove), but no one even accused him of pointing a gun at his leg and pulling the trigger.

 

[Christoff Yurievich]

MATTHEWS: Should the president of the United States, who‘s running against John Kerry, have the—does he have the right, as we speak, as you see it, to raise this issue in debate, if it comes up?

THURLOW: Does the president...

MATTHEWS: Is he allowed to talk about it?

THURLOW: You talking about President Bush?

lol what other president of the united states would we be talking about here?

 

[Pimpwerx]

Just curious, but when the hell did Chris Matthews start caring about integrity? I mean, he's had so many idiots spewing all sorts of nonsense on his show, not mentioning the travesty that was the Lewinskygate witch hunt. Now suddenly he's gonna act like he gives a rat's ass about false accusations? Color me unimpressed. But I'm glad he used his obnoxious questioning style for good this time. Malkowned. PEACE.

 

[Makura]

Matthews is an embaressment to journalism and this show was his magnum opus of ignorance. Not only did he fail to debunk Thurlows account with his incessant shouting that accomplishes nothing, but his ambush on Michelle Malkin was absolutely ridiculous. If Matthews had bothered to read the book (which on air he admits he didn't) he would know exactly what Malkin was referring to and wouldn't have made a total fool of himself.

Matthews is about as hypocritical, slanted and unprofessional as they come.

If you want to read Michelle's account (which is far more genuine and revealing IMO):
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/000418.htm

 

[Triumph]

Matthews is an embaressment to journalism and this show was his magnum opus of ignorance. Not only did he fail to debunk Thurlows account with his incessant shouting that accomplishes nothing, but his ambush on Michelle Malkin was absolutely ridiculous. If Matthews had bothered to read the book (which on air he admits he didn't) he would know exactly what Malkin was referring to and wouldn't have made a total fool of himself.

Matthews is about as hypocritical, slanted and unprofessional as they come.

Yep, he's the O'reilly/Hannity/Coulter of the Left. His hypocrisy, slant and unprofessionalism makes up for a legion of idiot right wing commentators and talking heads. You are SO right.

 

[Dilbert]

Matthews is an embaressment to journalism and this show was his magnum opus of ignorance. Not only did he fail to debunk Thurlows account with his incessant shouting that accomplishes nothing, but his ambush on Michelle Malkin was absolutely ridiculous. If Matthews had bothered to read the book (which on air he admits he didn't) he would know exactly what Malkin was referring to and wouldn't have made a total fool of himself.

Matthews is about as hypocritical, slanted and unprofessional as they come.

Translation: I don't like his politics, and I refuse to listen! Look, my fingers are in my ears! Nyah nyah nyah YOU CAN'T MAAAAAAAKE MEEEEEEE....

 

[Makura]

Translation: I don't like his politics, and I refuse to listen! Look, my fingers are in my ears! Nyah nyah nyah YOU CAN'T MAAAAAAAKE MEEEEEEE....

Wrong.

 

[Triumph]

Wrong.

So you're willing to slam O'reilly in a similar fashion for the exact same tactics? I'm waiting for you to denounce Bill O'reilly as a hypocritical, slanted and unprofessional journalist.

 

[Makura]

So you're willing to slam O'reilly in a similar fashion for the exact same tactics? I'm waiting for you to denounce Bill O'reilly as a hypocritical, slanted and unprofessional journalist.

Why? So we can move the discussion away from what Matthews did?

 

[Triumph]

Why? So we can move the discussion away from what Matthews did?

Matthews did his job. He caught that little shit in a lie. So he did it in an obnoxious, pushy manner. So what? That Thurlow character was trying to have his cake and eat it too.

All I'm trying to get out of you is to admit that you refuse to see that because of your personal politics.

 

[Makura]

You're never going to see me defend O'Rielly and his ilk as unbiased, but I'm not going any further into it.

And if you think that A) trying to get someone to admit something she never said, and B) commenting on a book you have never read - is a journalist's "job" then things are in a sadder state than I imagined.

 

[xsarien]

Why? So we can move the discussion away from what Matthews did?

Which is what, precisely? Using his powers for good for a change? I'm not a fan of ANY of the talking heads, I think as a whole, their tactics are slimey; they don't allow for conversation because they're either interrupting or stuffing words into mouths, or make sure that the guest who opposes their view is vastly outnumbered.

That said, it should be clear to anyone with even the slightest amount of reason that the accusations being thrown at Kerry by the Swiftboat Veterans for Truth are unmitigated bullshit. If for no other reason than more level-headed journalists have done the same digging and found steep, damning connections to the White House, Bush's financial contributors, military records falling in favor of Kerry's version of the events, and men under Kerry who validate his story.

It seems almost stupid to even bring it up, but "designing" a political career by going to war is a ridiculous accusation. We've got a whole mess of people in DC who made their political careers just fine without setting one foot onto a battlefield, Kerry certainly could've taken that route instead. Suggesting that he went to Vietnam, got injured, and left early, all in some grand conspiracy to make himself electable is a pretty disgusting accusation, and the need for proof falls on the people who are saying it, not on Kerry to disprove it.

And from what Thurow was able to inch out of his mouth between Matthews' shouting, his only evidence seems to be "Because!"

 

[Dilbert]

You're never going to see me defend O'Rielly and his ilk as unbiased, but I'm not going any further into it.

And if you think that A) trying to get someone to admit something she never said, and B) commenting on a book you have never read - is a journalist's "job" then things are in a sadder state than I imagined.

Translation: I don't like his politics, and I refuse to listen! Look, my fingers are in my ears! Nyah nyah nyah YOU CAN'T MAAAAAAAKE MEEEEEEE....

 

[Makura]

Which is what, precisely? Using his powers for good for a change?

Sheesh, I'm done.

 

[Hitokage]

Obligatory Daily Howler link:
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh082104.shtml

 

[capslock]

Just curious, but when the hell did Chris Matthews start caring about integrity? I mean, he's had so many idiots spewing all sorts of nonsense on his show, not mentioning the travesty that was the Lewinskygate witch hunt. Now suddenly he's gonna act like he gives a rat's ass about false accusations? Color me unimpressed. But I'm glad he used his obnoxious questioning style for good this time. Malkowned. PEACE.

2 true! I remember how he basically trashed Gore for 2 years before the 2000 election, basically damaging his character with no basis whatsoever, seems like Bush's 4 years has made him grow a conscience, go figure!

 

[Makura]

Obligatory Daily Howler link:
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh082104.shtml

It was really something to see Michelle Malkin bluster and whine on C-SPAN Friday morning.

LOL. Seen it. Michelle was very professional,curteous and composed. She completely shreaded what happened on Matthews' show apart.

You can watch the full video on the CSPAN Washington Journal site.

 

[capslock]

Obligatory Daily Howler link:
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh082104.shtml

Shit, you beat me to it!

 

[Dilbert]

LOL. Seen it. Michelle was very professional,curteous and composed. She completely shreaded what happened on Matthews' show apart.

You can watch the full video on the CSPAN Washington Journal site.

Translation: I don't like your politics, and I refuse to listen! Look, my fingers are in my ears! Nyah nyah nyah YOU CAN'T MAAAAAAAKE MEEEEEEE....

 

[Eric-GCA]

I have to admire Makura for being the only voice of dissent on this lefty board.

I just can't wait for November when Bush is re-elected, this board and OA are gonna go nuts.

 

[Triumph]

I have to admire Makura for being the only voice of dissent on this lefty board.

I just can't wait for November when Bush is re-elected, this board and OA are gonna go nuts.

So you admire someone for blatantly ignoring facts right in front of their face just because it doesn't suit their "ideology"? Ok.

 

[Christoff Yurievich]

I have to admire Makura for being the only voice of dissent on this lefty board.

I just can't wait for November when Bush is re-elected, this board and OA are gonna go nuts.

it's amazing how every time I come into a political thread I find another person to put on my ignore list. It might be the same as putting my fingers in my ears, I'm aware of that, but it helps to keep the ulcer's down in the long run.

 

[Journeywalker]

I am in no way supporting the belligerence of Chris Matthews or his counterparts Hannity and O'Reilly on the opposite end of the political spectrum, but Michelle Malkin is no stranger to absolute sliminess with words. She embraces it, and it's unfortunate that when she gets out-shouted and out-spun, she calls foul on the opposing speaker. Those Howler reports convince me that Al Gore brought up the issue of prison furloughs in a completely societal, apersonal context. The Bush Sr. team made it about race, bringing up Willie Horton.

Similarly, Malkin contorts the words of Willie Brown on the same show. She quotes him in her "genuine and revealing account" as saying, "There are questions about the shrapnel wounds. So what else is there? How much he got shot? How deep? How much shrapnel does he have?" And continues her commentary, "Note that I didn't bring the subject of shrapnel. (Got that, Keith Olbermann?) Willie Brown raised the issue." Listen to the video again. He doesn't say anything of the sort. Michelle Malkin (either through ignorance or otherwise) made up a quote. Unless I'm going deaf, what I hear is:

"There's no question he volunteered twice, he volunteered twice for Vietnam. He literally got shot. There's no question about any of those things. So what else is there to discuss? How much he got shot? How deep? How much shrapnel does he have? Give me a break."

EDIT: my hearing is confirmed--the transcript that Malkin links to as part of her rant states, "BROWN: He volunteered twice. He volunteered twice in Vietnam. He literally got shot. There‘s no question about any of those things. So what else is there to discuss? How much he got shot, how deep, how much shrapnel?"

Any reasonable person would see that Willie Brown is bringing up the shrapnel as the Swift Boat Veterans are making ludicrous suggestions, yet Malkin spins it to appear as a legitimate question.

There's also the issue of the self-inflicted wounds. Firstly, in most heavy conflict situations, it is unclear where the the shrapnel or bullets are coming from, so I find it hard to believe that anyone can declare with absolute certainty that they are self-inflicted wounds, especially people who were not there (Malkin and Thurlow). Matthews incorrectly assumes that Malkin has claimed Kerry shot himself on purpose. Yet when asked for a yes-or-no answer on whether she was making this claim, she would not commit. Giving her the benefit of the doubt, she was probably flustered by Matthews' tactics, but she could have clarified with a simple "no" instead of defiantly yelling, "Self-inflicted wounds" repeatedly. There's also the problem that she eventually spits out, "Yes, some of the veterans say that!" Giving her more benefit of doubt, she was probably refering to her own claims of self-inflicted wounds, not the purposeful self-shooting that Matthews berates her for. Yet there is a disconnect here. Earlier on the spot, she defends Thurlow and never doubts his statements. Thurlow, above, clearly claims that a.) the wounds are self-inflicted and b.) they were inflicted with the intent of earning awards, getting out of combat, and running for political office. I'm sorry, but I find it within reason to ask for serious evidence when making such crackpot claims, and neither Thurlow nor Malkin have the evidence to back up the conspiracy theory.

 

[Slurpy]

Matthews is an embaressment to journalism and this show was his magnum opus of ignorance. Not only did he fail to debunk Thurlows account with his incessant shouting that accomplishes nothing, but his ambush on Michelle Malkin was absolutely ridiculous. If Matthews had bothered to read the book (which on air he admits he didn't) he would know exactly what Malkin was referring to and wouldn't have made a total fool of himself.

Matthews is about as hypocritical, slanted and unprofessional as they come.

If you want to read Michelle's account (which is far more genuine and revealing IMO):
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/000418.htm

I watched the damn segment Makura, and I read her pathetic response (basically being a whiny bitch). Matthews had every right to rip into her. If she cant back up what she says, she should shut the fuck up. Thats what it comes down to. These people havent brought an ounce of evidence about anything, yet they know if they repeat something enough the public will buy it. Thats not the way things should work. He did the right thing.

ANd Makura, have some self respect. You're becoming embarrassing.

 

[Cloudy]

but his ambush on Michelle Malkin was absolutely ridiculous.

I personally thought she got what she deserved. You don't go on national tv and imply horrible things about someone when you KNOW it's not true!!! Haven't seen Matthews blast someone like that in a while. Refreshing

 

[SickBoy]

I read the transcript and I definitely got an O'Reilly-esque vibe from the style. Matthews sounds like a goof.

That said, the Swift Boat vets suck.

-SB

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

If Matthews had bothered to read the book (which on air he admits he didn't) he would know exactly what Malkin was referring to and wouldn't have made a total fool of himself.

So she was correct in claiming that the Swift Boat Veterans book includes a section quoting people who claim John Kerry shot himself?

 

[Makura]

I watched the damn segment Makura, and I read her pathetic response (basically being a whiny bitch). Matthews had every right to rip into her. If she cant back up what she says, she should shut the **** up. Thats what it comes down to.

If these comments are any indication, then it seems you did not watch the segment or do not know what the conversation was about.

 

[Makura]

So she was correct in claiming that the Swift Boat Veterans book includes a section quoting people who claim John Kerry shot himself?

She never claimed that.

 

[Makura]

I personally thought she got what she deserved. You don't go on national tv and imply horrible things about someone when you KNOW it's not true!!! Haven't seen Matthews blast someone like that in a while. Refreshing

Well, the problem is she never implied the things that Matthews assumed she was, if he had read the book, he would have known that.

 

[Hitokage]

Damn, just realized I meant to post this link instead:
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh082004.shtml
(Regarding Thurlow and Matthews)

Might as well throw this one in too, because DH is good for the mind and soul.
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh082304.shtml
(John O'Neill and the Washington Post, Bob Dole and the NYT, and more on Malkin and Matthews)

 

[Ninja Scooter]

She never claimed that.

bullshit. Thats exactly what she was implying. Not that it was an accidental wound from a stray grenade or something, but that he shot himself deliberately just to get a medal. And Mathews gave her multiple opportunities to offer up where she read that or clarify her statement and she did no such thing asking her MORE THAN ONCE "are you saying you believe its possible John Kerry purposely inflicted wounds on himself to get a medal/purple heart" and she never once clarified or said "no thats crazy talk", only saying (im paraphrasing) "well maybe we should ask John Kerry about that? Don't you want to know if he shot himself?" The bitch knew exactly the bullshit she was spewing, and thats why she started backtracking when Mathews called her out on it.

 

[videogamer]

I have to admire Makura for being the only voice of dissent on this lefty board.

I just can't wait for November when Bush is re-elected, this board and OA are gonna go nuts.

There are other posters, like ripclaw, dj_tet, msw (cooter), gorgie, xenon, kobun heat, efralope, fusebox, haohmaru, zilch or those various other posters. It's a terrible hyperbole to say that he's the "only" conservative voice. It really shouldn't matter how many posters are on what side. The argument is what should matter, and it's not like real life where one could be yelled over or intimidated by the crowd. It's quality, not quantity.

Anyways, lets hope that Bush is not re-elected. He's even worse than Kerry on the issue of homosexual equality.

 

[capslock]

Damn, just realized I meant to post this link instead:
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh082004.shtml
(Regarding Thurlow and Matthews)

Might as well throw this one in too, because DH is good for the mind and soul.
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh082304.shtml
(John O'Neill and the Washington Post, Bob Dole and the NYT, and more on Malkin and Matthews)

I always get the feeling that Bob Somerby takes a look at each morning's national daily and immediately grows 5 ulcers.

 

[FightyF]

So you admire someone for blatantly ignoring facts right in front of their face just because it doesn't suit their "ideology"? Ok.

Haha. Well this issue is a bit more one sided than most.

I don't see how people could defend these hatorists. Sure, it's one thing to understand where they are coming from, but to say that it's actually legit criticism, is laughably ridiculous.

 

[videogamer]

I always get the feeling that Bob Somerby takes a look at each morning's national daily and immediately grows 5 ulcers.

How does this guy make a living? It seems like he spends a lot of time on the Howler.

 

[Hitokage]

How does this guy make a living? It seems like he spends a lot of time on the Howler.

According to the site, he used to be a writer for the Baltimore Sun and now his day job is as a comedian.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

She never claimed that.

MATTHEWS: Your saying there are—he shot himself on purpose, that‘s a criminal act?

MALKIN: I‘m saying that I‘ve read the book and some of the...

(CROSSTALK)

MATTHEWS: I want an answer yes or no, Michelle.

MALKIN: Some of the veterans say...

MATTHEWS: No. No one has every accused him of shooting himself on purpose.

MALKIN: Yes. Some of them say that.

.

 

[videogamer]

According to the site, he used to be a writer for the Baltimore Sun and now his day job is as a comedian.

Yeah, I thought that he was once a comedian and now focuses on the Howlser by the way I read that page. But that must be one long workweek. :/

 

[Willco]

In other news, who thinks Michelle Malkin is kind of cute? I do!

 

[Makura]

You're cherry-picking Joshua, read the enitre section w/Michelle, she NEVER suggested Kerry shot himself.

 

[xsarien]

You're cherry-picking Joshua, read the enitre section w/Michelle, she NEVER suggested Kerry shot himself.

MALKIN: Yes. Some of them say that.

What part of that are all of us misunderstanding, then?

 

[Makura]

In other news, who thinks Michelle Malkin is kind of cute? I do!

She's married.

 

[Makura]

What part of that are all of us misunderstanding, then?

Ok, for the last time, here is the entire thing:

BROWN: He volunteered twice. He volunteered twice in Vietnam. He literally got shot. There‘s no question about any of those things. So what else is there to discuss? How much he got shot, how deep, how much shrapnel?

MALKIN: Well, yes. Why don‘t people ask him more specific questions about the shrapnel in his leg. They are legitimate questions about whether or not it was a self-inflicted wound.

*(this part is especially mystifying - Michelle is CLEARLY referring to the "shrapnel in his leg" when she says "self-inflicted" and Matthews (next line) foolishly misses this and starts his tantrum...)

(CROSSTALK)

MATTHEWS: What do you mean by self-inflicted? Are you saying he shot himself on purpose? Is that what you‘re saying?

MALKIN: Did you read the book...

MATTHEWS: I‘m asking a simple question. Are you saying that he shot himself on purpose.

MALKIN: I‘m saying some of these soldiers...

MATTHEWS: And I‘m asking question.

MALKIN: And I‘m answering it.

MATTHEWS: Did he shoot himself on purpose.

MALKIN: Some of the soldiers have made allegations that these were self-inflicted wounds.

MATTHEWS: No one has ever accused him of shooting himself on purpose.

MALKIN: That these were self-inflicted wounds.

MATTHEWS: Your saying there are—he shot himself on purpose, that‘s a criminal act?

MALKIN: I‘m saying that I‘ve read the book and some of the...

(CROSSTALK)

MATTHEWS: I want an answer yes or no, Michelle.

MALKIN: Some of the veterans say...

MATTHEWS: No. No one has every accused him of shooting himself on purpose.

MALKIN: Yes. Some of them say that.

MATTHEWS: Tell me where that...

MALKIN: Self-inflicted wounds—in February, 1969.

MATTHEWS: This is not a show for this kind of talk. Are you accusing him of shooting himself on purpose to avoid combat or to get credit?

MALKIN: I‘m saying that‘s what some of these...

MATTHEWS: Give me a name.

MALKIN: Patrick Runyan (ph) and William Zeldonaz (ph).

MATTHEWS: They said—Patrick Runyan...

MALKIN: These people have...

MATTHEWS: And they said he shot himself on purpose to avoid combat or take credit for a wound?

MALKIN: These people have cast a lot of doubt on whether or not...

MATTHEWS: That‘s cast a lot of doubt. That‘s complete nonsense.

MALKIN: Did you read the section in the book...

MATTHEWS: I want a statement from you on this program, say to me right, that you believe he shot himself to get credit for a purpose of heart.

MALKIN: I‘m not sure. I‘m saying...

MATTHEWS: Why did you say?

MALKIN: I‘m talking about what‘s in the book.

MATTHEWS: What is in the book. Is there—is there a direct accusation in any book you‘ve ever read in your life that says John Kerry ever shot himself on purpose to get credit for a purple heart? On purpose?

MALKIN: On.

MATTHEWS: On purpose? Yes or no, Michelle.

MALKIN: In the February 1969 -- in the February 1969 event.

MATTHEWS: Did he say on it purpose.

MALKIN: There are doubts about whether or not it was intense rifle fire or not. And I wish you would ask these questions of John Kerry instead of me.

MATTHEWS: I have never heard anyone say he shot himself on purpose.

I haven‘t heard you say it.

MALKIN: Have you tried to ask—have you tried ask John Kerry these questions?

MATTHEWS: If he shot himself on purpose. No. I have not asked him that.

MALKIN: Don‘t you wonder?

MATTHEWS: No, I don‘t. It‘s never occurred to me.

Look, thank you Mayor Brown. We‘ll stay with Michelle Malkin.

I think anyone who can read can see clearly that:

1. Michelle brought up the accusations regarding self-inflicted wounds in the Unfit for Command book.

2. Matthews, having not read the book, assumes Michelle is talking about Kerry shooting himself.

3. Mattews tries to badger Malkin (yes or no!!!) into admitting something she NEVER implied, and everytime she tries to correct him he interrupts her. I think Matthews took a gamble, and lost - big time. Next time, before discussing a book, maybe Matthews will READ IT.

 

[Willco]

Listen, I haven't read the book. I've never watched Hardball before. And the only one who looked stupid in that clip was her.

But it's alright, because she is cute.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

Chris Matthews being stupid and Michelle Malkin being stupid are not mutually exclusive possibilities.