So I was watching Chris Matthews’ Hardball on MSNBC Thursday evening and Matthews had Kellyanne Conway on to defend Trump’s disastrous first two weeks. For some reason, Matthews declines to challenge her when she flat-out lies, although he is quick to get in the face of most other guests. He used to turn his show over to Trump, with no commentary or fact-checking, most nights at 7:30 pm during the presidential campaign, so bears some responsibility for our president catastrophe (though to be fair no doubt his bosses instructed him to do this).
And now, a history lesson from INGSOC:
At least when the GW Bush Administration lied, they mainly lied for one reason, to get their Iraq war on. With the Trump Administration, it seems that the goal is a complete annihilation of nearly everything I hope for in the political sphere by basically making "alternative facts" acceptable to many or most Americans. I'm sure we will have many polls in the coming months and years (if civilization lasts that long) that will gauge the degree of success (gullibility) of the truthiness assault on our thought processes.
I believe it is was Bowling Green, Kentucky, where the "massacre" occurred, not Bowling Green, Ohio.
Thank you Dr Cole, this was important information. It is becoming more and more difficult to access real news. Most Americans are NOT taught critical thinking skills in public school and so function intellectually like middle schoolers. It's disheartening. What's worse, is that people like DeVos want everyone to slide down to that level so they can be indoctrinated more easily.
“We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”
Former CIA Director William Casey.
Dear Dr Cole
Do you get hazard pay to watch Chris Matthews?
I hope so...
Is anyone here at Common Dreams still watching Chris Matthews on MSNBC? I think it was one night back in late November of 2015 when Matthews said to his guest, "There will be no revolution(referring to Bernie’s Political Revolution), there will simply be a Coronation(referring to Clinton’s eventual win) and then, business as usual." That arrogance was enough for me to know he had lost all objectivity as a journalist, and I refuse to ever watch his 'Fake News' program again.
In regards to KellyAnne Conway, you can pay a presstitute to do or say anything. Seeing her choke out the phrase, 'Alternative Facts', that day she was responding to Sean Sphincter, claiming Trumps Inauguration crowd was the largest in history, was PRICELESS.
And it was actually an FBI sting (AKA "entrapment") of two people who were provided guns and money and fake undercover FBI ISIL members providing them with guns and money that they could have never actually sent to ISIL - not an act of terrorism, not a massacre.
edit: Ok, the most heinous "crime" they committed was, prior to migrating to the US, involvement in planting IEDs against US (AKA savage foreign invader) forces during the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
I think we can assume everything said by Trump and his surrogates is untrue unless proven otherwise. Truth has not value for the Trump administration. The objective is only to push their agenda. We are in the mdst of a climate emergency which seems likely to end modern civilization some time during the second half of this century. If truth mattered to the Trump people they would recognize this emergency situation and take action. But since it conflicts with their agenda they just put out false information going so far as to claim it is a hoax.
What you good people do not understand is that as those 7 countries have not committed a terrorist act on USAian soil as of yet, so there is a 100% chance that they will and this threat needs to be overcome. It is one of those unknown unknowns. Get with the logic, USA.
Nope, gave up Tee Vee years ago.
Occasional clips of his stupid comments like the one you cite.
Chris Matthews always gave me a headache; can't stand his voice for starters.
This is the part of our essay that I have a problem with:
"These Zaydis are angry that the Saudis tried to proselytize them into becoming Wahhabis (and who wouldn’t be). They are a nativist movement resenting foreign influence, not proxies for Iran (they have a different branch of Shiism)."
Really? The Saudis tried to proselytize them. That reasoning gets your approval for hitting a Saudi vessle with a missile?
They "resent foreign influence" so it's okay to blow up a ship? We've had more than our fair share of "foreign influence" here, I'd say. I'm just guessing you wouldn't approve of hitting an occupied area with a missle in response.