Quantcast

Kill the Bastards! Chris Matthews on BP: “It’s Maddening”

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews clearly goes over the top when suggesting in any literal sense that the CEO’s for BP, Transocean, or Halliburton be “executed” for their failure. But Matthews’ anger, frustration, and sadness over the situation in the Gulf belies his desire to execute them figuratively. He reflects a growing sentiment, one that appears ever more justified with each statement from BP defending its performance in the operation of the offshore well it owns and the aftermath of its catastrophic failure.

JOIN OUR NEWSLETTER
I agree to have my personal information transfered to MailChimp ( more information )
Get the latest news and commentary on climate, energy and sustainability delivered every week right to your inbox
We hate spam. Your email address will not be sold or shared with anyone else.

Comments

  1. Did uh…did you give the same sort of pass to anyone on the right who used hyperbole to make a point? Seriously, did you? Or did you make THAT the story. Because it seems like you would have made it “RUSH LIMBAUGH CALLS FOR EXECUTIONS” or something like that. I’m not trying to be partisan or say that Matthews is wrong but I’m commenting on your treatment of one aspect of it compared to if it were done by your political adversary.

  2. Thanks for responding ๐Ÿ˜€ If I came off accusatory I didn’t mean to. I also wanted to clarify that I’m not “outraged” or anything by Matthews saying that. I just think both sides are just waiting to make hay on something the other side says but then excusing it on their own side. The solution is not more condemnation but less ๐Ÿ˜€ So in that sense I agree completely with your downlpay of it. Have a great day!

  3. So, you praise Matthews rants by not damning it? Would you so ambivalent and forgiving had a similar comment be made by Sarah Palin? I seriously doubt it. Why is it that the liberal media is not held to task as are conservatives? Case in point, during a Tea Party rally there was a picture captioned “angry white man with fully automatic weapon near where the Pres might be” Interesting isn’t it that the shot was from shoulder to wrist, no skin color showing. When the entire picture was shown it was , in truth, a black man with an AR-15. Now, why the intentional lie?
    I’ll tell you why, the intent was to label those of us who strongly disagree with the progressives and their agenda as racists, and bigots, and to try minimize us.
    If a statement is garbage, regardless of ideology then it’s garbage period. By your limp comments it appears that you are indeed giving left-wing hate speech a pass.
    As for “condemnation”, it is imperative that everyone SHOULD condemn hate speech whenever and wherever it is uttered. To do any less will label those who aren’t outraged as supportingsaid hate speech

    • Thanks for the comment. Would it help if I condemned Matthews’ comments as way over the top? Is there really anything I could say that would please you? Is it possible that what is happening in the Gulf goes beyond progressives, tea-party members, or any of the other politically polarizing issues you are so wont to bring up here?
      I take the point in regard to Matthews, as I did some time ago. Your political rant is certainly your right, but before you demonize everyone who might disagree with your views, try to imagine some common ground for what you assume are my politics and your own.
      It could start with the devastated lives of the people of the Gulf Coast and an environment damaged for at least a generation.
      Or you could continue to assume the worst in anyone with whom you don’t agree.
      The point you make is as good for you as it is for me.

Leave a Reply