Joe2008 Videos

On the September 12 edition of MSNBC s Morning Joe, Vanity Fair columnist Christopher Hitchens asserted: "The Democratic candidates are all pretending to be as pious as they possibly can be. You see Mrs. [Sen. Hillary Rodham] Clinton [D-NY], looking like the dog being washed, and talking about how her faith got her through the impeachment crisis with her husband." After host Joe Scarborough asked him whether he thought that "Hillary Clinton is pretending to be religious," Hitchens replied: "It can t be that she suddenly decides that she s a person of faith. She has never particularly mentioned it before." Hitchens claimed that Clinton was feigning faith in order to "play to what are called the values voters. " He concluded: "[A]s with everything Mrs. Clinton does, you can see the machinery working, you can see the wheels turning inside her head as she makes her maneuvers." In fact, contrary to Hitchens claim that she has only recently begun asserting that she is a person of faith as part of her campaign for president, Clinton has publicly discussed her faith for years. In her 1996 book, It Takes a Village and Other Lessons Children Teach Us (Simon and Shuster), Clinton discussed the role of her faith in her childhood: We attended a big church with an active congregation, the First United Methodist Church in Park Ridge. The church was a center for preaching and practicing the social gospel, so important to our Methodist traditions. Our spiritual life as a family was spirited and constant. We talked with God, walked with God, ate, studied, and argued with God. Each night, we knelt by our beds to pray before we went to sleep. We said grace at dinner, thanking God for all the blessing bestowed. My brother Hugh had his own characteristic renditions, along the lines of "Good food, good meat, good God, let s eat!" But despite our occasional irreverence, God was always present to us, a much-esteemed, much-addressed member of the family. [Page 171] Clinton also wrote in her book that "there is no greater gift that God has given any of us than to be loved and to love" [Page 178], and stated that "prayer allows us to let go of our children and to let them find their own ways, with faith to guid and sustain them against the cruelties and indifference of the world" [Page 181]. Additionally, in her 2003 book, Living History (Simon t believed in prayer before 1992, life in the White House would have persuaded me" [Page 167]. Moreover, the media have frequently reported about Clinton s religious faith. As Media Matters for America has noted, an article for the May 23, 1993, edition of the Los Angeles Times Magazine reported that Clinton said during an interview: "Faith is a wonderful gift of grace ... It gives you a sense of being rooted in meaning and love that goes far beyond your own life. It gives you a base of assurance as to what is really important and stands the test of time day after day, minute after minute, so that many of the pressures that come to bear from the outside world are not seen as that significant." Similarly, in an October 31, 1994, Newsweek profile, reporter Kenneth L. Woodward wrote: "But long before she was a Democrat, a lawyer, or a Clinton, Hillary Rodham was a Methodist. And that, say those who know her now as well as those who knew her when, is the way the First Lady is best understood. She thinks like a Methodist, talks like a Methodist and wants to reform society just like a well-Sunday-schooled Methodist churchwoman should." Woodward also reported that during an interview with Clinton, she "even submitted to a brief examination of her faith." From the article: Indeed, at one point in the conversation, the First Lady even submitted to a brief examination of her faith: "Do you believe in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit?" "Yes." "The atoning death of Jesus?" "Yes." "The resurrection of Christ? "Yes." Woodward also reported that "In Arkansas, Mrs. Clinton taught Methodist Sunday school. She also attended church regularly and, in the Methodist tradition of favoring lay preachers, she spoke often at church gatherings on Why I am a United Methodist. " Discussing the Clinton family s religious practices after President Clinton s inauguration, Woodward noted: "As long as they are in the White House, the First Family has elected to worship at Foundry United Methodist Church, less than a mile away." Further, in direct contradiction to Hitchens claims, it was widely reported at the time that her faith "got her through the impeachment crisis with her husband." Indeed, an August 19, 1998, Boston Globe article discussing Hillary Clinton s reaction to President Clinton s admission that he had had an extramarital affair with former White House intern Monica Lewinsky, reported: "[Clinton s spokeswoman Marsha] Berry said Mrs. Clinton, a Methodist, also was relying on a strong religious faith. The Rev. Jesse Jackson visited the White House Sunday night, reportedly at the request of 18-year-old Chelsea Clinton, to pray with Mrs. Clinton and her daughter for two hours." Similarly, an August 2, 1999, Los Angeles Times article about an interview Clinton gave to Talk magazine reported that Clinton "said she survived the Lewinsky episode and her husband s impeachment through soul-searching, friends, religious faith and long, hard discussions. " From the September 12 edition of MSNBC s Morning Joe: SCARBOROUGH: How do you think the success of your book and these other books, and you said the changing of the zeitgeist in America regarding faith and religion, is going to impact the 2008 election? Do you think that somebody like Rudy Giuliani, who s more of a secular candidate than, say, Mitt Romney, is going to have a leg up in the Republican primary because of this change of zeitgeist that you speak of? HITCHENS: Well, it s actually -- at the moment I have to say, it seems to be having the opposite effect. The Democratic candidates are all pretending to be as pious as they possibly can be. You see this with Clinton, looking like the dog being washed, and talking about how her faith got her through the impeachment crisis with her husband. People forget, of course, that it was Billy Graham and Jesse Jackson who got Clinton through that crisis by allowing him to pretend that he too was a person of faith. It really is sordid. I think, actually, the Democrats are making a mistake by doing this, because I think people who genuinely are faithful in their hearts don t like to see religious hypocrisy, don t like people pretending to be more pious then they are. SCARBOROUGH: So you think Hillary Clinton is pretending to be religious? You think Barack Obama is pretending to be religious? HITCHENS: It can t be that she suddenly decides that she s a person of faith. She has never particularly mentioned it before. And all the Democrats seem to have concluded from the last midterms that, the finding is, that it goes down well if you play to what are called the "values voters," that s a code word for the evangelicals. It s so obvious, you can see, as with everything Mrs. Clinton does, you can see the machinery working, you can see the wheels turning inside her head as she makes her maneuvers. SCARBOROUGH: Well, you know, Barack Obama and John Edwards also talking about Jesus -- HITCHENS: Well, actually, I know the Senator Edwards slightly, and I think actually he does have a genuine, rather uncomplicated faith, and I gather that Mr. Obama s been going to some rather rock-and-roll ethnic church in Chicago for some time. So for all I know, he believes that stuff. But I mean, if he does, then so much the worse.

On the September 6 edition of MSNBC s Morning Joe, host Joe Scarborough said that Norman Hsu -- a Democratic contributor and fund-raiser for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton s (D-NY) campaigns -- was "on the lam again," referring to Hsu s failure to appear in a San Mateo, California, court on September 5 to address charges pending against him. Scarborough asked guest Craig Crawford of Congressional Quarterly whether this was "bad news" for Clinton, and Crawford replied that "Democrats aren t taking her on because of glass houses," adding "You know, [former Sen. John] Edwards [NC] has his hedge fund problems, [Sen. Barack] Obama [IL] has a fund-raiser problem himself in Chicago." However, neither Scarborough nor Crawford noted that leading Republican presidential candidates are facing questions regarding figures involved in their campaign finances. Additionally, in a September 6 post on the New York Times blog The Caucus, reporting on the arrest of Passaic, New Jersey, Mayor Samuel Rivera -- a former member Clinton s "Mayor s Council" -- Patrick Healy asserted that "Clinton advisers this spring and summer have been aggressively touting their long list of endorsements from elected officials and prominent Democratic donors, to indicate the breadth of establishment support that Mrs. Clinton enjoys," and continued: "Yet, in the case of Mr. Hsu and now Mayor Rivera, the criminal allegations indicate a cost that can come with quickly rounding up political support from far and wide." But, like Scarborough and Crawford, Healy did not mention any of the numerous individuals who have supported Republican presidential candidates and have been subject to "criminal allegations." For example: Mitt Romney supporters As Media Matters for America has documented, Romney s national finance committee co-chairman Alan B. Fabian was, according to an August 9 Associated Press article, "charged in a 23-count indictment unsealed Thursday [August 9] with mail fraud, money laundering, bankruptcy fraud, perjury and obstruction of justice." The AP reported that Fabian "allegedly ran a scheme to make $32 million in false purchases of computer equipment, spending the money instead on beach real estate and private jet travel." Fabian resigned from Romney s finance committee shortly after being indicted, and the Romney campaign said it would return Fabian s $2,300 contribution, but not, however, "contributions from donors who were recruited by or have ties to Fabian," as The Boston Globe reported. According to a June 20 article in The Hill, "133 plaintiffs have alleged that Robert Lichfield, co-chairman of Romney s Utah finance committee owned or operated residential boarding schools for troubled teenagers where students were subjected to physical abuse, emotional abuse and sexual abuse. " The article also noted that a second lawsuit "alleges that Lichfield and several partners entered into a scheme to defraud them by operating an unlicensed boarding school in upstate New York." The Deseret Morning News (Utah) reported September 7 that Lichfeld "resigned on his own accord" in July, according to a Romney spokeswoman. Rudy Giuliani supporters Giuliani s former South Carolina state chairman, former South Carolina Treasurer Thomas Ravenel, pleaded guilty September 6 "to a federal charge of possession with intent to distribute cocaine," as the Associated Press noted. According to the AP, Ravenel "faces up to 20 years in prison and a $1 million fine, though his plea agreement calls for a reduced sentence because he is helping prosecutors with their investigation." On June 20, the New York Post reported that Ravenal had stepped down from his "volunteer responsibilities with the campaign" following his indictment, according to Giuliani political director Mark Campbell. The New York Times reported June 7 that Robert B. Asher, "a prominent Pennsylvania Republican and prolific fund-raiser," had recently acknowledged to donors that he had agreed to be the state political chairman for Giuliani. The article noted that Asher "was convicted in 1986 of bribery-related charges as part of a scheme to award a no-bid contract to a company in exchange for promises of $300,000 in payoffs and political contributions." According to a July 10 post on The Caucus, "[o]nly after public reports that Mr. Asher had been convicted in a famous public corruption case two decades earlier did the campaign back away from the choice." John Wren, the "Media/PR/Advertising Industry Leader" for Giuliani s finance team, faced fraud allegations as the CEO of Omnicom, for "off-loading" certain personal stocks to avoid recording any operating losses associated with those investments. The December 13, 2006, edition (subscription required) of Jack O Dwyer s Newsletter, a weekly publication that covers the public relations industry, reported: Court papers that Omnicom has been trying to keep sealed for five years have been made public and they detail charges of fraud against CEO John Wren and CFO Randall Weisenburger as well as charges against OMC itself. Wren and Weisenburger are said to have participated in the off-loading of certain dot-com investments in 2000-2001 via personal ownership of stock and stock options and personal control of entities and that this was not fully reported to the SEC or even OMC s board of directors. [...] It s charged that OMC parked interests that it held in Agency.com and Organic with related-party entities to avoid recording operating losses linked with those investments. OMC ultimately took private the two entities it repurchased from Seneca. CEO John Wren and CFO Randall Weisenburger are said to be involved in the parking of stock in Organic that they personally owned. Media Matters for America has noted several media outlets that have touted alleged scandals involving supporters of Democratic presidential candidates, while ignoring those involving individuals who support Republicans: During his September 5 washingtonpost.com "Post Politics" discussion, Washington Post money and politics reporter John Solomon was asked why a September 3 Post article he co-wrote with staff writer Matthew Mosk -- which discussed "a growing number of fundraisers in the 2008 presidential campaign whose backgrounds have prompted questions" -- did not mention that "Mitt Romney s national finance co-chairman, Alan B. Fabian, recently was indicted on 23 counts of money laundering, fraud, perjury, and obstruction of justice, among other crimes." The version of the article published by the Post mentioned only scandals involving supporters of Democratic candidates. Solomon responded by claiming that "my colleague Matt Mosk and I reported on the Romney matter." But rather than discussing Fabian, Solomon proceeded to claim that they had included a paragraph about another Romney fundraiser in their draft of the article: "Likewise, Republican Mitt Romney faced questions about one of his Utah finance chairmen, Robert Lichfield, because of lawsuits he is facing alleging abusive treatment at boarding schools he founded to handle troubled youths." Solomon added: "Unfortunately, it was edited out. That sometimes happen when stories get trimmed to make room for late-breaking news." A September 5 New York Times editorial criticizing presidential candidates use of "bundlers" -- fundraisers who solicit friends, family, and associates to make campaign contributions to specific candidates -- said that "Senator Hillary Clinton has been burned twice lately by so-called bundlers." The editorial noted specifically, "One Clinton bundler turned out to have an outstanding arrest warrant for business fraud; the other has a history of tax liens, fraud charges and bankruptcy proceedings on two continents," apparent references to Hsu, the person with a warrant against him, and Sant Chatwal, who, according to a September 3 Washington Post report, "resolved the last" of the regulatory and tax charges against him "this spring." The Times went on to note that "[o]ther candidates in both parties have been similarly embarrassed" but did not specifically mention any Republican candidate. Between August 28 and August 31, NBC, CNN, and Fox News all aired reports or discussions on Hsu, but did not air reports or discussions about Fabian s indictment on mail fraud, money laundering, bankruptcy fraud, perjury and obstruction of justice charges during programs available in the Nexis database. From the September 6 edition of MSNBC s Morning Joe: SCARBOROUGH: Let s talk about Hillary Clinton for a second. This big fund-raiser of hers is on the lam again. Is this bad news for Hillary Clinton? CRAWFORD: It ought to be, but the Democrats aren t taking her on because of glass houses. You know, Edwards has his hedge fund problems, Obama has a fund-raiser problem himself in Chicago. SCARBOROUGH: In Chicago, right. CRAWFORD: It s been interesting to see how the Republicans are beating her up, but the Democrats have been real quiet. So, she had a terrible last couple of weeks of August actually. She had her little slip-up -- some saw it that way -- talking about how another terrorist attack would help the Republicans and she s the only Democrat who can fight that. People thought that was a bit of a misstep. But lucky for her, there was a lot else going on, [Sen.] Larry Craig [R-ID] and other things, when she was having a couple of her worst weeks so far, at least in the preseason. SCARBOROUGH: Yeah. MATTHEW FELLING (media director of the Center for Media and Public Affairs): What was it about -- she made some sort of a mistake last week. She did Ellen the other day, and she s trying to build it up through pop culture support. And she did Letterman last week, I believe, and the Clintons are coming out with their whole new media campaign right about now. CRAWFORD: And Clinton -- I mean, Bill Clinton s got a book out. So he s all over the place. Larry King, I think, Letterman also, and Oprah. SCARBOROUGH: But again, that doesn t help her with her base. It s kind of like Fred Thompson on The Tonight Show. That s more of a general election strategy. CRAWFORD: Yeah, I think they re trying to clamp down. She s the one to beat. She s on top thinking about the general election that certainly has to -- she has run, I have to give her and [Republican candidate Rudy] Giuliani the nods for the preseason. They both won their preseason. SCARBOROUGH: That s right. CRAWFORD: Now everything could change. Because they have talented people against them and enough time, I think, for things to change. SCARBOROUGH: We ll see what happens. Preseason is over.

On the August 23 edition of MSNBC s Morning Joe, in discussing President Bush s speech at the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) convention, host Joe Scarborough stated that "you always have the VFW, and you always have military groups, giving Republicans standing ovations and being very cool to people like [Sen.] Barack Obama [D-IL] and [Sen.] Hillary Clinton [D-NY]." However, both Obama and Clinton reportedly received "standing ovations" from the VFW. As Media Matters for America has previously noted, on August 20, The New York Times Jeff Zeleny wrote on the Times Caucus blog that Clinton was greeted with a "standing ovation" at the VFW national convention: The audience of hundreds of veterans and spouses listened respectfully, greeting her with a standing ovation. During the Iraq portion of the speech, there was silence in the downtown convention hall, but at several other points, moderate applause rang out. In an August 22 article, the Chicago Tribune reported that Obama received a standing ovation from the VFW audience: Both Obama and Thompson, neither of whom served in the military, were welcomed respectfully and received standing ovations from an audience that included veterans from every war since World II. Still, several in the crowd said they do not agree with Obama s position on the Iraq war. In addition, on the August 21 edition of Fox News Special Report, Fox News correspondent Steve Brown reported that former Republican Sen. Fred Thompson (TN) "was interrupted by applause seven times"; "[b]y contrast," he continued, "Obama was interrupted by applauding VFW conventioneers 18 times." From the August 21 edition of Fox News Special Report with Brit Hume: BRIT HUME (host): Welcome to Washington, I m Brit Hume. In Kansas City today, Republican Fred Thompson and Democrat Barack Obama each tried to convince the Veterans of Foreign Wars that he is best qualified to become president. For Thompson, it seemed a golden opportunity to score points with a friendly audience, but as correspondent Steve Brown reports, his performance may have reinforced worries about his candidacy. [begin video clip] UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Senator, when are you going to do the right thing and run. I m serious? THOMPSON: Well, give me -- we re putting it together. It takes a little time, but we re getting there. BROWN: It was a ready-made audience for the yet to announce presidential candidate Fred Thompson; the annual convention of the VFW is largely made up of older, more conservative military veterans in support of the U.S. troop surge in Iraq, many eager to hear Thompson speak. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Everybody knows he is an actor, you know, so, most of our actors, you know, they should be able to get in front of a camera and speak, you know, and talk to a crowd. BROWN: And while Thompson said things most of the vets wanted to hear about soldiering on in Iraq, the former U.S. senator seemed to struggle at times delivering his speech. An example: when Thompson was describing an encounter with a double amputee Iraqi veteran. THOMPSON: What kind of a nation we must be to produce such people. BROWN: Thompson seemed unfamiliar with the applause lines in his own speech. All told, he was interrupted by applause seven times. By contrast, anti-Iraq war Democrat Barack Obama was interrupted by applauding VFW conventioneers 18 times. OBAMA: I want to be absolutely clear: Our troops have performed brilliantly in Iraq. They have done everything we have asked of them. From the August 23 edition of Morning Joe: SCARBOROUGH: So, what s interesting is, though the timing is obviously great for the White House -- and you do have the president going to the VFW and getting, I mean, getting rousing applause. It s so interesting, you know. I love listening to people, Democratic candidates, talking about all the troops that are against the war and all the veterans who are against the war, and yet, you have these speeches and you always have the VFW, and you always have military groups, giving Republicans standing ovations and being very cool to people like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Discussing the August 19 Democratic presidential debate with Huffington Post co-founder Arianna Huffington during MSNBC s Morning Joe on August 20, host Joe Scarborough asked, "Any news out of the debate yesterday other than [Sen.] Barack Obama s [D-IL] people are saying, We don t want to debate anymore ?" Obama s campaign, however, has not said that Obama "do[es]n t want to debate anymore." Rather, in an August 18 statement, campaign manager David Plouffe wrote that Obama has committed to participating in eight more debates in 2007, but will not participate in any other debates beyond those eight during that period and is "unlikely to accept many" invitations to additional candidate forums, citing the need to "balance the important role of debates" while "run[ning] a campaign true to the bottom up movement for change that propelled Barack into this race." Plouffe wrote: As we head into the fall, the campaign is entering a new more engaged phase that will give voters an even greater sense of Barack s message of change and require the campaign to make decisions that balance the important role of debates and maximize time to run the kind of campaign we need to. [...] So far, Barack has attended seven Democratic debates and nineteen candidate forums. There are five remaining sanctioned DNC debates, which we are committed to attend and two Iowa debates normally held in January, which are being held in December, which we are also committed to attend. We will also be attending the Univision debate in Florida on September 9. This means that by the end of this year, Obama will have participated in a total of 15 Democratic debates. [...] Therefore, after this week, we will only be attending the five DNC debates through the sanctioning period of December 10, Univision, and the two Iowa debates previously mentioned. Candidate forums - where candidates appear sequentially will be considered, but we are unlikely to accept many of these. Instead, Barack will spend his time answering questions directly from voters in places like Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Nevada, and elsewhere. We simply cannot continue to hopscotch from forum to forum and run a campaign true to the bottom up movement for change that propelled Barack into this race. After the sanctioning period, there will undoubtedly be a large number of debates scheduled in the early states and in February 5 states. We will make decisions on those as we get closer, but will clearly be doing a healthy number of debates after the sanctioning period. From the August 20 edition of MSNBC s Morning Joe: SCARBOROUGH: Let s go from Utah to the Democratic debate. Any news out of the debate yesterday other than Barack Obama s people are saying, "We don t want to debate anymore"? HUFFINGTON: Well, they said that before, but Barack actually did very well in the debate. I think that he started very well with his joke -- about the bumper rides in the Iowa State Fair, kind of making fun of all this talk about him being na ve and inexperienced. SCARBOROUGH: Yeah. HUFFINGTON: And he seemed much more relaxed and more authoritative. And, you know, he was making a very good point about leveling with the American people. That, I think, was what came out so clearly. While Hillary Clinton continued about what Barack called "strategic ambiguity" with the American people, he said, "Let s have some change here. Let s be honest and direct with the American people when it comes to the country s foreign policy," and that, I think, came across very well.

On the August 7 edition of MSNBC s Morning Joe, MSNBC political analyst and nationally syndicated radio host Monica Crowley referred to Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards as "the metrosexual in the race" and said he is "the prettiest one of the Democrats." In response, co-host Mika Brzezinski said: "I think he and [Republican presidential candidate] Mitt Romney are taking a spa day." As Media Matters for America has documented (here, here, here, and here), media have repeatedly echoed conservatives characterizations of Edwards as effeminate. From the August 7 edition of MSNBC s Morning Joe, guest-hosted by MSNBC correspondent Willie Geist: GEIST: I think, John Edwards -- we ve been paying so much attention to [Sen. Barack] Obama [D-IL] and [Sen.] Hillary [Rodham Clinton] [D-NY] over the last couple of weeks -- he s got to be feeling a little left out here -- I mean, the third-place guy. Do you think he s going to take advantage tonight and try to -- maybe he engages Hillary, maybe he picks a fight with her? CROWLEY: Yeah, the metrosexual in the race is really lagging. Not a lot of traction here for John Edwards, much to his surprise and chagrin, I think, because he s the prettiest one of the Democrats. BRZEZINSKI: I think he and Mitt Romney are taking a spa day. Is -- GEIST: No. You know, why are you objectifying men? I hate when you do that. CROWLEY: The one time! BRZEZINSKI: The one time! Whatever -- I m sorry. GEIST: Talk about the issues. CROWLEY: You know what? I think that John Edwards is trying to get headlines wherever he can and, a couple of days ago, he criticized News Corporation -- Rupert Murdoch s company -- and urged all Democrats to boycott everything News Corp., and to return money if they ve got it from Rupert Murdoch, or any of his top executives. And, look, I think at this point, even though Edwards is leading in Iowa, his lead there is slipping, and he s grasping at some straws here, which might make for some great fireworks tonight because he s got to try somehow to upstage both Hillary and Obama.

On the July 19 edition of MSNBC s Morning Joe, host Joe Scarborough discussed an ABC News report on comments Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) made at a Planned Parenthood event, which appeared under the headline "Sex Ed for Kindergartners Right Thing to Do, Says Obama." Scarborough said, "I m gonna tell you why Democrats don t get elected president regularly, all right? Because they say things that lend themselves to the type of headlines, this Associated Press headline, and you gotta be careful." Scarborough, co-host Mika Brzezinski, and guest John Ridley, an NPR contributor, proceeded to sharply criticize Obama -- with Brzezinski exclaiming, "Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa" and Scarborough and Ridley sharply questioning Obama s political judgment. None, however, actually spelled out what Obama was advocating. By contrast, the ABCNews.com article to which Scarborough referred elaborated on Obama s position: When Obama s campaign was asked by ABC News to explain what kind of sex education Obama considers "age appropriate" for kindergarteners, the Obama campaign pointed to an Oct. 6, 2004 story from the Daily Herald in which Obama had "moved to clarify" in his Senate campaign that he "does not support teaching explicit sex education to children in kindergarten. . . The legislation in question was a state Senate measure last year that aimed to update Illinois sex education standards with medically accurate information . . . Nobody s suggesting that kindergartners are going to be getting information about sex in the way that we think about it, Obama said. If they ask a teacher where do babies come from, that providing information that the fact is that it s not a stork is probably not an unhealthy thing. Although again, that s going to be determined on a case by case basis by local communities and local school boards. " In addition to local schools informing kindergarteners that babies do not come from the stork, the state legislation Obama supported in Illinois, which contained an "opt out" provision for parents, also envisioned teaching kindergarteners about "inappropriate touching," according to Obama s presidential campaign. Despite Obama s support, the legislation was not enacted. Scarborough noted that Obama "says, of course, that it needs to be age-appropriate," but did not discuss what Obama meant by age-appropriate. Brzezinski stated, "I d like to know what age-appropriate sex education for kindergarten is." Ridley said, "I don t want my kid, 4 or 5 years old, to be sexually aware at that point." Scarborough did not note that Obama was quoted in the ABCNews.com article saying, "Nobody s suggesting that kindergartners are going to be getting information about sex in the way that we think about it." Nor did he mention the article s reference to "teaching kindergarteners about inappropriate touching. " From the July 19 edition of MSNBC s Morning Joe: SCARBOROUGH: OK, I m gonna tell you why Democrats don t get elected president regularly, all right? Because they say things that lend themselves to the type of headlines, this Associated Press headline, and you gotta be careful. You gotta be careful. Barack Obama hasn t been on the national stage very long. This is a headline, actually it s from ABC News: "Sex Ed for Kindergartners: The Right Thing to Do" -- BRZEZINSKI: Whoa. SCARBOROUGH: -- "says Obama." BRZEZINSKI: Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. SCARBOROUGH: I could get in and I could explain the subtleties. BRZEZINSKI: Could I see that? SCARBOROUGH: Yeah. Do you believe that? But he says, of course it needs to be age-appropriate, but he made fun of [Illinois 2004 Republican Senate candidate] Alan Keyes for suggesting that it was wrong to teach kids in kindergarten sex education and imitated Alan Keyes, but then went on to say -- he was talking to Planned Parenthood, who is very big into sex education -- I have nothing against sex education, you know. I wish I would have gotten some sex education, you know, by the time I went off to college. BRZEZINSKI: But what are you teaching a kindergartner? RIDLEY: Yeah, kindergarten! SCARBOROUGH: But kindergarten is insane. Do you understand, John Ridley, how Democrats always seem to be tone deaf? They talk to Planned Parenthood. They talk to these groups that have left-leaning agendas. They say these outrageous things and they come up, and they blow up in their face later. Whereas Republicans -- people say, "Well, Republicans talk to right-wing nuts." I ll tell you something, most people are not offended by the things that Republicans say regarding faith, etc. etc. in Middle America. But when you say sex ed for kids in kindergarten, that s insane. RIDLEY: It s more than a little much, and I don t know how you defend it. And, you know, again, there are so many other policy issues going on. It s one of those things when you say it, it takes over everything else. The Democrats have been talking about faith, they ve been talking about national security. It all sounds good, but this is like, "Oh my God. For my kid?" SCARBOROUGH: It s symbolic. BRZEZINSKI: I would like to know what they re teaching. I d like to know what age-appropriate sex education for kindergarten is. RIDLEY: I don t want it at all. I don t want my kid, 4 or 5 years old, to be sexually aware at that point. Don t need it, don t want it. You talk about high school, fine. Not five-year-olds. SCARBOROUGH: And this is the problem, again, where Democrats have disconnected with Middle America many times -- parents mainly -- who may be progressive, but also have kids and are very concerned about the world that their kids are growing up in. And somebody sees this headline in the morning, "Barack Obama Supports Sex Education for Kindergarten Kids." They don t care about the subtleties. They just check it off.

During the 6 a.m. ET and 8 a.m. ET hours of the July 18 edition of MSNBC s Morning Joe, commentator John Ridley said he was "curious" about syndicated columnist Robert D. Novak s July 15 assertion during a panel discussion on NBC s Meet the Press that, as Media Matters for America documented, "Republicans are very pessimistic about 2008. When you talk to them off the record, they don t see how they can win this thing. And then they think for a minute, and only the Democratic Party, with everything in their favor, would say that, OK, this is the year either to have a woman or an African-American to break precedent, to do things the country has never done before. " During the 6 a.m. ET hour of the show, Ridley -- who wrote about Novak s comments in a July 17 post on the Huffington Post blog -- quoted Novak s statement and said: "I m actually curious. I hope that Mr. Novak will clarify this." Ridley continued: "So are the Republicans hopeful for change? Or are they hopeful that when you have a black or a woman running on the Democratic ticket, a majority of Americans will go, Nah. I ain t voting for that. " Novak was scheduled to appear during the 8 a.m. ET hour of the show. During the 8 a.m. ET hour, before the interview with Novak, Ridley again quoted Novak s statement and said: "And so I was curious, just hopefully he could elaborate, what he means by hope." Ridley then stated, "By the way, if he is talking about a Wilder effect, here, referencing [former Virginia] Governor Doug Wilder [D], I don t necessarily disagree with that." The "Wilder effect" refers to the theory that African American candidates sometimes do better in pre-election polling than they do in the actual election because some voters tell pollsters that they will vote for the African American candidate but choose a white candidate instead on Election Day. After mentioning the Wilder effect, Ridley then asked: "[I]s he saying that the Republicans only hope come November is hoping that there is some latent bigotry in America who -- that wouldn t vote for a man of color or a woman for president?" As Media Matters noted, neither Meet the Press host Tim Russert nor any of Novak s fellow panelists, Bloomberg News Washington managing editor Al Hunt, Republican strategist Mike Murphy, and Democratic strategist Bob Shrum -- all of whom are, like Novak, white men -- commented on or challenged Novak s assertion. As Media Matters has also documented, a breakdown of the guests on Meet the Press from 2005 to 2006 shows that 76 percent of the guests on the program were white men. During the interview -- which, according to Scarborough, occurred later in the broadcast than expected due to "some mix-up" -- Novak was not asked about his comments on Meet the Press. Scarborough did state, however, that Novak would return at 7:30 a.m. ET on the July 19 edition of MSNBC s Morning Joe to continue the conversation. From the 6 a.m. ET hour of the July 18 edition of MSNBC s Morning Joe: SCARBOROUGH: So John Ridley has a -- your Huffington Post. RIDLEY: On Huffington. SCARBOROUGH: And you ve written this column saying that the only thing the Republicans have going for them, according to Bob Novak, are that they re white. RIDLEY: Well, it was interesting. They had the roundtable discussion with Tim Russert on Meet the Press. Everybody was, you know, galvanized by the [Sen. Jim] Webb [D-VA]-[Sen. Lindsey] Graham [R-SC] cage fight. But there was something that he said. Republicans, right now, as you probably know, are a little pessimistic. I think you had something interesting yesterday that 21 percent of the people -- they still don t know who they re gonna vote for. SCARBOROUGH: Unknown is leading on the Republican side. RIDLEY: Unknown leads the pack for the Republicans. SCARBOROUGH: So what s the Republicans hope? RIDLEY: Well, as -- and I want to -- I m actually curious. I hope that Mr. Novak will clarify this, but he was talking about, that this year -- and this is a quote from him -- "the Democrats will either have a woman or an African-American to break precedent, to do things the country has never done before, and it gives the Republicans hope." So are the Republicans hopeful for change? Or are they hopeful that when you have a black or a woman running on the Democratic ticket, a majority of Americans will go, "Nah. I ain t voting for that." SCARBOROUGH: Well, I think it s the latter. I really do. I think a lot of people will stop and think -- I think it s a little different with Hillary because Hillary s been around for a long time. She has her sort of own identity. Barack Obama, though, I think for a lot of people out there that, again, have not followed these candidates as much as anybody else are thinking: "Hey, he s that young black guy that s really energetic and exciting." And so it s going to be very interesting. From the 8 a.m. ET hour of the July 18 edition of MSNBC s Morning Joe: SCARBOROUGH: Now, you had concerns with Bob Novak -- who s supposed to be calling in -- about Novak and what he said this weekend on Meet the Press. RIDLEY: Well, more curiosity because I don t -- SCARBOROUGH: And this, by the way, this is on the top of Huffington Post right now. RIDLEY: Yeah. This is Huffington Post. I wrote about it. Look, it was a heck of a show on Meet the Press on Sunday. Something happened -- SCARBOROUGH: Oh. Great show. RIDLEY: Yeah. You had the Webb-Graham cage match. But at the roundtable, Tim Russert was talking to some other individuals about how the Republican Party is disenfranchised at this point. They re not raising money, they don t know who they want their front-runner to be. And Mr. Novak said something regarding the Democrats that -- and this is a quote -- "This is a year either to have a woman or an African-American to break precedent, do things the country has never done before, and it gives the Republicans hope." And so I was curious, just hopefully he could elaborate, what he means by hope. And, by the way, if he is talking about a Wilder effect here, referencing Governor Doug Wilder, I don t necessarily disagree with that. But is he saying that the Republicans only hope come November is hoping that there is some latent bigotry in America who -- that wouldn t vote for a man of color or a woman for president? SCARBOROUGH: Well, I think it s -- I think it is obviously something that s never been done before. So -- MIKA BRZEZINSKI [news anchor]: And the question is, are the times right, is the historic moment here? RIDLEY: It is, but the bigger question for me is, is that what he s saying the Republicans -- that s what they re running on? They can t run on the war, they can t run on national security, they can t run on family values. SCARBOROUGH: You know what they can run on? RIDLEY: What can they run on? SCARBOROUGH: They can run on the fact that they ve got a president that, every time he opens his mouth, makes history. You see, [late-night talk show host David] Letterman has these things -- great moments in presidential speeches. RIDLEY: Yeah. SCARBOROUGH: Had another one last night. [...] SCARBOROUGH: All right, hey, Bob, we ve got to go because we, unfortunately, we had some mix-up -- NOVAK: Sorry, but I look forward to talking to you tomorrow. SCARBOROUGH: I ll see you tomorrow morning at 7:30. NOVAK: Terrific. Thank you, Joe.

During an interview with right-wing pundit Ann Coulter on the June 28 edition of MSNBC s Morning Joe, host Joe Scarborough asked Coulter about an exchange Coulter had with Elizabeth Edwards, wife of Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, on the June 26 edition of MSNBC s Hardball with Chris Matthews. Scarborough noted that Elizabeth Edwards "said that you had written some column where you had made light of John Edwards dead son," and asked Coulter: "What s the story behind that?" Coulter replied: "Needless to say, that is not true. ... You can look it up. It s all over the Web. It s a fabulous column, titled The Party of Ideas, written in 2003. I had to go back and get the full gist of the column. It was about all of the Democratic primary opponents." In the column, published on November 19, 2003, Coulter, addressing John Edwards, wrote: "If you want points for not using your son s death politically, don t you have to take down all those Ask me about my son s death in a horrific car accident bumper stickers?" Coulter further said on Morning Joe, "I m the only person in America who has to go back and constantly explain an entire column when it is lied about like this. ... I am getting a little fed up with being described as the aggressor in these matters. In any event, it was about the Democratic presidential nominees back then." But Coulter did not explain how what Elizabeth Edwards said constituted a "lie[]." On the June 26 Hardball, Elizabeth Edwards, who called into the show to speak to Coulter, said: "You had a column a couple of years ago, which made fun of the moment of [brother of then-presidential candidate and Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean] Charlie Dean s death, and suggested that my husband had a bumper sticker on the back of his car that said, Ask me about my dead son. " But contrary to Coulter s claim on Morning Joe that Edwards "lied about" the content of her November 2003 column, Coulter did joke that John Edwards "had a bumper sticker ... that said, Ask me about my dead son. " From the column: John Edwards injects his son s fatal car accident into his campaign by demanding that everyone notice how he refuses to inject his son s fatal car accident into his campaign. Edwards has talked about his son s death in a 1996 car accident on "Good Morning America," in dozens of profiles and in his new book. ("It was and is the most important fact of my life.") His 1998 Senate campaign ads featured film footage of Edwards at a learning lab he founded in honor of his son, titled "The Wade Edwards Learning Lab." He wears his son s Outward Bound pin on his suit lapel. He was going to wear it on his sleeve, until someone suggested that might be a little too "on the nose." If you want points for not using your son s death politically, don t you have to take down all those "Ask me about my son s death in a horrific car accident" bumper stickers? Edwards is like a politician who keeps announcing that he will not use his opponent s criminal record for partisan political advantage. I absolutely refuse to mention the name of my dearly beloved and recently departed son killed horribly in a car accident, which affected me deeply, to score cheap political points. I wouldn t want John Edwards to be president, but I think even [White House senior adviser] Karl Rove would be willing to stipulate that the death of a son is a terrible thing. Furthermore, Coulter wrote of Charlie Dean s death in the same column: Howard Dean talks about his brother Charlie s murder at the hands of North Vietnamese communists. Bizarrely, after working on the failed George McGovern campaign, Charlie Dean went to Indochina in 1974 to witness the ravages of the war he had opposed. Not long after he arrived, the apparently ungrateful communists captured and killed him. Hey fellas! I m on your s-- CLUNK! When Edwards mentioned the column on Hardball, Coulter did not claim -- as she would later on Morning Joe -- that her column had been "lied about"; she merely responded, "That s now three years ago," and, echoing an audience member, asked, "[W]hy isn t John Edwards making this call?" Also on Morning Joe, Coulter claimed that her March 2 comments at a meeting of the Conservative Political Action Committee (CPAC) were misunderstood. She said, "And if you want to go back to CPAC, I was speaking to a group of 7,000 College Republicans and no, I will not be arranging my words so the stupidest person in the liberal blogosphere understands what I m saying." On the June 25 edition of ABC s Good Morning America, Coulter similarly suggested that her CPAC comments had been misconstrued, asserting, "I did not call John Edwards the F-word. I said I couldn t talk about him because you go into rehab for using that word." At CPAC, Coulter concluded her speech by saying: "Oh, and I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidential candidate, John Edwards, but it turns out that you have to go into rehab if you use the word faggot ... so I m kind of at an impasse, can t really talk about Edwards. So I think I ll just conclude here and take your questions." From the June 28 edition of MSNBC s Morning Joe: SCARBOROUGH: OK, but Ann, you -- I think sometimes you give people too much credit when you make references to Isaiah Washington at CPAC, from Grey s Anatomy, when you make references to Bill Maher -- COULTER: I described the entire Bill Maher scenario in one sentence. If the Good Morning America audience -- which is pretty large and pretty broad -- gets the joke and no one figured out a way to truncate that sentence until 36 hours later -- I mean, it s not like the liberal blogs weren t -- as they always do -- watching my appearance and instantly posting from the moment I walked off Good Morning America all of their indignation, which apparently centered on my comparing George Bush to FDR, because he s great on foreign policy, lousy on domestic policy. Nobody even thought of how to lie about what I said for 36 hours. So don t tell me I was giving them ammunition. And if you want to go back to CPAC, I was speaking to a group of 7,000 College Republicans and no, I will not be arranging my words so the stupidest person in the liberal blogosphere understands what I m saying. [...] SCARBOROUGH: Now, I will tell you the part of that Elizabeth Edwards interview that jarred the most people -- jarred me, jarred just about everybody I spoke with -- was the part where she brought up the fact -- she said that you had written some column where you had made light of John Edwards dead son. What s the story behind that? COULTER: Needless to say, that is not true. And coming from people who have done what we have just seen them do in the earlier segment, I don t think they deserve a lot of credibility on this. You can look it up. It s all over the Web. It s a fabulous column, titled "The Party of Ideas," written in 2003. I had to go back and get the full gist of the column. It was about all of the Democratic primary opponents. And by the way, lifting a quote out of context from a short, five-minute TV interview is a little quicker to correct than an entire column -- SCARBOROUGH: Right. COULTER: -- written four years ago. There is a point to a column. There is a woof and a wharf, and let s see -- oh yeah, that s right. I m the only person in America who has to go back and constantly explain an entire column when it is lied about like this and describe why I chose this adverb rather than that adverb. And was this a joke? Was that a joke? So, you know, I am getting a little fed up with being described as the aggressor in these matters. In any event, it was about the Democratic presidential nominees back then. You know, [former Rep. Dick] Gephardt [MO], Dean, of course, this guy -- the trial lawyer -- and how they were not talking about the war, they were not talking about the economy. What they were talking about was either they re running for president either because they had a dead relative -- "Vote for me!" -- or had suddenly discovered a Jewish heritage. And in the various dead relative categories, that included, of course, "well, one who wasn t running, but the one who started it all" Al Gore in two, two speeches at the Democratic National Convention. Once, it was the sister, once, it was the near fatal accident of his son, so that it got to the point that all of his family members had to start fearing more runs for higher office. You had Dean s brother. You had Gephardt s -- I don t know -- sister or the close death of a child. And then I went through the trial lawyer. A fact that is now memorialized in Bob Shrum s book, who describes John Edwards telling -- John Kerry felt queasy about it and almost didn t put John Edwards -- SCARBOROUGH: That s right. Yeah. COULTER: -- on the ticket because Edwards kept saying to him, "I ve never told anyone this story before," and then tells a tear-jerking story about how he climbed up onto his dead son s slab at the funeral home. [...] SCARBOROUGH: Again, I wouldn t have written that in a column, Ann, but certainly, nobody s talking about this. COULTER: Why not? SCARBOROUGH: Because it s not just who I am. I don t do that. COULTER: You would write what in a column? [inaudible] SCARBOROUGH: I wouldn t have put on a bumper sticker -- I would not have put on a bumper sticker ask me about my dead son. That s just not me. That is you. And there are certainly people out there that provoke thought that way. I don t do that, but at the same time -- COULTER: Well, I kinda think you have to read the full thing in context. SCARBOROUGH: OK. COULTER: And apparently, however I write -- SCARBOROUGH: OK, fine. Hold on a second, Ann. Let me make a point. COULTER: I have written five New York Times best-sellers. SCARBOROUGH: OK. COULTER: People like the way I write. SCARBOROUGH: All right, Ann. Let me make my point, Ann. COULTER: I comment on America in a lively and entertaining way. These are legitimate topics and I m a little sick of being browbeaten by a bunch of harridans about why I chose this word or why I told that joke. And then people turn around and say "Oh, you re so mean! You re so mean!" SCARBOROUGH: Well, Ann, I m not browbeating you here. I m trying to put it in proper context. COULTER: Well, you haven t spent 24 hours being asked, "Oh, why did you use this word?" SCARBOROUGH: OK. COULTER: I ve never seen people avoid ideas so much in such an obvious way and try to alert Americans not to read anything, not to listen to something someone says -- not because of what she s saying, but by trying to portray her as a Nazi. This happens every time I put a book out, and I m getting a little bored with it. To use a Smith College word, it s getting a little tiresome. SCARBOROUGH: Yeah, that is a Smith College word. I -- again, trying to put this in context. We re reading Shrum s words, and -- COULTER: "The Party of Ideas" -- November 20th, 2003. It is one of the greatest columns ever written and I highly recommend it. SCARBOROUGH: OK, well, we will recommend that to everybody Ann, and I greatly appreciate you being on with us. And again, the thing is -- I appreciate it, Ann. The thing is, you know, obviously Ann is very angry right now. And you all have been around me when I ve been angry because my words have been wrenched from their context. And, you know, the thing is, again, whether you talk about the first issue -- whether it s Good Morning America where they just cut out the last part of that instead of telling the whole story about it, you know, it s misleading. There s no doubt. The wire services have been misleading, a lot of news shows, because people hate Ann Coulter so much that you can get away with it. That s just the bottom line. From the June 25 edition of ABC s Good Morning America: CHRIS CUOMO (co-host): Some tough words for you by the three top candidates in response to what you had said. Some were calling it a homosexual slur, you said it was a taunt. They all came out when you were talking about John Edwards and said, "This was wrong. We must deny it." Fair criticism of you or a shift towards the tolerant among the GOP? COULTER: No, no. There were -- I was denounced all over. All over. I think the one that hurt the most was from I mALittleGirlInAPinkPartyDress.com. CUOMO: Why? COULTER: Very upsetting. CUOMO: You -- COULTER: Though about the same time, Bill Maher said -- and by the way, I did not call John Edwards the F-word. I said I couldn t talk about him because you go into rehab for using that word. CUOMO: You say you were joking. COULTER: About the same -- oh yeah. I wouldn t insult gays by comparing them to John Edwards. Now, that would be mean. But about the same time, you know, Bill Maher was not joking and saying he wished Dick Cheney had been killed in a terrorist attack. So I ve learned my lesson. If I m gonna say anything about John Edwards in the future, I ll just wish he had been killed in a terrorist assassination plot.

On the June 12 edition of MSNBC s Morning Joe, Chris Matthews, host of MSNBC s Hardball, called Republican presidential candidate and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani "the ultimate street politician," adding, "He was there on the curb when 9-11 struck. He had soot on his face." He also called Giuliani a "street fighter" and described him as "somebody who s clear and present and right there answering our questions," and who "gives us the awful truth." As Media Matters for America has noted, Matthews has repeatedly lauded Giuliani for being "on the street corner" during the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. However, authors Wayne Barrett and Dan Collins wrote in their book, Grand Illusion: The Untold Story of Rudy Giuliani and 9/11 (HarperCollins, August 2006), that when Giuliani heard about the disaster, his "original destination" wasn t "the curb" or "the street corner" but rather his "much-ballyhooed command center" in the World Trade Center complex (Page 6). According to Barrett and Collins, then-New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik, "who was waiting to meet [Giuliani], decided it was too dangerous to bring the mayor up to the command center [Giuliani] had so carefully and expensively built" (Page 340). According to Barrett and Collins, Giuliani selected 7 World Trade Center as the site of his Office of Emergency Management s (OEM) command center after "overrul[ing]" warnings from a previous police commissioner, Howard Safir, and NYPD chief operating officer Lou Anemone not to locate it there and "[r]ejecting an already secure, technologically advanced city facility across the Brooklyn Bridge" because Giuliani "insisted on a command center within walking distance of City Hall" (Page 41). That building, 7 WTC, ultimately collapsed on 9-11. Thus, Barrett and Collins concluded that if the command center had not posed such a safety risk to Giuliani, "all the dramatic visuals ... would instead have been tense but tame footage from its barren press conference room" (Page 41). During the May 1 edition of MSNBC s Hardball, while discussing Giuliani s performance on 9-11, HBO host Bill Maher asserted that "the reason why [Giuliani] was on the streets that day is because his office was blown up," adding, "All of the experts told him to move the command-and-control center out of the World Trade Center. He put it in the World Trade Center." Maher also said: "He s not a terrorism fighter. He has no credentials in this. In fact, he failed at the one time he had an opportunity, just like Bush." In response, Matthews asked, "So, why do people think he did serve well and perform well, as the leader of New York, during that crisis? Why do people think that?" Additionally, during his June 12 appearance on Morning Joe, Matthews said of Giuliani: "[P]eople who ve dealt with him in New York over the years -- the press, the police, minorities -- don t like him." But beyond mentioning Giuliani s "brusque style," Matthews did not provide other reasons cited by first responders for criticizing Giuliani. New York City s firefighters have also been critical of Giuliani for what they cite as his failure to ensure that the New York police and fire departments had interoperable radios, as Media Matters has repeatedly documented. According to Barrett and Collins, "Everyone agrees that a critical problem that day was that the police and fire departments could not communicate; that s one of the reasons the lack of interoperable radios became such a focus of fury." (Page 343) Indeed, at the time of the attacks, the New York fire department was using outdated VHF radios that were incompatible with the police department s UHF radios. On March 14, The New York Times reported Harold A. Schaitberger, general president of the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), as saying of Giuliani: "The whole issue of the radios is unforgivable. ... Everyone knew they needed a better system, and he didn t get it done." As Media Matters has also noted, in a March 15 article, Cox News Service reported: "As revered as he is by many for his efforts after the attacks, Giuliani is reviled by some firefighters who believe he mishandled the development of a radio system that could have saved lives on 9/11 and turned his back on first responders remains in the rubble." On March 30, the Associated Press further noted criticisms by the IAFF and by Sally Regenhard, chairwoman of the Skyscraper Safety Campaign and mother of a firefighter killed on 9-11. The AP noted that the Giuliani "administration s failure to provide the World Trade Center s first responders with adequate radios [is] a long-standing complaint from relatives of the firefighters killed when the twin towers collapsed. The Sept. 11 Commission noted the firefighters at the World Trade Center were using the same ineffective radios employed by the first responders to the 1993 terrorist attack on the trade center." From the June 12 edition of MSNBC s Morning Joe: JOE SCARBOROUGH (host): This guy is getting votes from a large chunk of Evangelicals, despite the fact he is pro-choice, and if that s the case, who stops him? MATTHEWS: Well, I just think it comes down to this, Joe. Every time there s a presidential election -- and this has nothing to do with ideology or partisanship -- the people try to solve the current problem. Back when it was Eisenhower against Truman, I mean, Truman was bogged down in Korea, and he was a bit -- a little tainted, let s put it that way, so they brought in a general as clean as a hound s tooth who had received the Nazi surrender who said, "I will go to Korea." And in 60, Eisenhower looked like he had lost a few steps because of the U2 and Cuba and Sputnik, and we bring in the youngest guy ever elected. It seems like, throughout our history, we re always solving the problem, even to the point in 19 -- or rather 2000, when we had the Monica mess, we brought in a guy with a very regular marriage, and he said, "When I take the oath to the Constitution, I mean to -- I promise to protect the dignity of the Oval Office." And he got close enough to get it in Florida, so what s the problem right now? It s a president who seems to be not in touch with on-the-ground American and Iraqi reality, who seems to be either distracted or theoretical or somehow not tied down to the hard-core street reality. Now, Rudy s the ultimate street politician. He was there on the curb when 9-11 struck. He had soot on his face. He seems like he doesn t have a ranch or a place to go to. He s always there, right in your face, dealing with reality. I think that s what -- with all his aggravations and personality stuff and roughness -- I think that s what people are looking for: somebody who s clear and present and right there answering our questions, not rolling disclosure, telling us what a committee s gonna tell us. The problem with Hillary of course, in the end, is that she will be -- not lazy; she s not lazy -- but she ll be coming at us with -- after she s met with her advisers, and she s groomed an answer, like she does on the war, and she ll finally come out three or four days later with some sort of perfectly fashioned answer that s been tested, and we won t really feel that it s the truth -- the hard truth we need. Rudy, for all his awfulness in many ways, gives us the awful truth, I think. At least, that s the way people are taking him right now. SCARBOROUGH: When you say "all his awfulness," you re talking about his -- MATTHEWS: His manner -- his brusque manner. The fact that people who ve dealt with him in New York over the years -- the press, the police, minorities -- don t like him. I m always impressed when I meet reporters who covered him in New York, cause I had no problem at all with him, who meet him and say, "He s awful. He s just awful." Because he is a street fighter. SCARBOROUGH: He s a tough guy. MATTHEWS: I mean, he doesn t like a piece you write, he goes to war with you. You know, and I ve had that experience with him, actually. I ve dealt with him that way. SCARBOROUGH: And I ll tell you what. And I think you can say that maybe one reason why Richard Nixon, a guy that wasn t cuddly, who you d want to invite to your Thanksgiving dinner, most likely, Richard Nixon elected in 1968, post-Tet, in the midst of -- in all the mess that s going on over there. So, we ll see. Hey, let s talk about -- MATTHEWS: So, right now, it s Rudy. I think you re on the ball.