LOL Norm. When I saw this last night, I was certain that I would see this clip posted here at 1gm. This man was an idiot. It was painful to watch this! lol

The Obama team will no doubt be emailing Obama's legislative accomplishments to all of the Obama supporters.

Here's an article explaining Obama's achievments

Taken together, these accomplishments demonstrate that Obama has what Dillard, the Republican state senator, calls a "unique" ability "to deal with extremely complex issues, to reach across the aisle and to deal with diverse people." In other words, Obama's campaign claim that he can persuade us to rise above what divides us is not just rhetoric.

I do not think that a candidate's legislative record is the only measure of presidential potential, simply that Obama's is revealing enough to merit far more attention than it has received. Indeed, the media have been equally delinquent in reporting the legislative achievements of Hillary Clinton and John Edwards, both of whom spent years in the U.S. Senate. The media should compare their legislative records to Obama's, devoting special attention to their heart-and-soul bills and how effective each was in actually making law.

Obama also has some U.S. Senate legislative work

This shows once again how can work with Republicans for meaningful legislation.

After returning to Washington, Lugar and Obama co-sponsored legislation to update the Nunn-Lugar program. The resulting law, which expands the nonproliferation program for nuclear arms to conventional weapons and WMDs, is called the Lugar-Obama Act, a name that "virtually rolls off the tongue," in the approving words of Scripps-Howard columnist Martin Schram. This March, Lugar and Obama introduced the American Fuels Act of 2006, an ambitious bill that would drive investment in biomass ethanol. And, in late July, the two senators were among the co-sponsors of a bill to raise automobile fuel-efficiency standards.

Nice Obama hit piece Norm.

I agree that this guy is a jackass and should never have been put on TV as Obama's representative. However just because he can't list the legislative accomplishments doesn't mean they don't exist. You want to know his voting record? Look it up. For starters, he voted against the war.

In-fighting is going to cause Democrats to lose another crucial election. Clinton needs to stop this crap right now, pull out of the race and begin supporting Obama full-on, before she causes any more damage to the party.

• Obama has won the last 10 straight primaries
• Obama has won the majority of states
• Obama wins by large magins in red states, where it counts. Who cares about CA and NY? They're voting blue anyway.
• In order to pull ahead of Obama now, Clinton needs to win by almost 70% in every remaining contest. A number she hasn't pulled even once so far.

Clinton is the new Nader.

Did they ask the same question of the Congresswoman?

I predict that this controversy will end up helping Barack Obama as it will give him the opportunity to highlight all of his achievements.

ObsidianWings has a good breakdown of his legislative acheivements

Another article on Obama's superior legislative abilities

Along the way, he played an important role in drafting bipartisan ethics legislation and health-care reform. He overcame law enforcement objections to codify changes designed to curb racial profiling and to make capital punishment, which he favors, more equitable.

"When you come in, especially as a freshman, and work on something like ethics reform, it's not necessarily a way to endear yourself to some of the veteran members of the Illinois General Assembly," said state Sen. Kirk W. Dillard, a Republican who became a friend. "And working on issues like racial profiling was contentious, but Barack had a way both intellectually and in demeanor that defused skeptics."

Andy,

Did they ask the same question of the Congresswoman?

Nope! lol

No need, we all know all the Great accomplishments of the Clinton Senate office. And all the accomplishments she made in the white house.

She has been fighting the right wing attack machine and winning for decades.

Let me find that long list....

I knew it was around here somewhere...

Did they ask the same question of the Congresswoman?

Nope! lol

Indeed.

Not to deny how painful and cringe-inducing this clip is, it certainly is, but come on now.

The Hillary camp has complained endlessly about the "free pass" Obama has been given in the press; yet Hillary has constantly been allowed to claim the "experience" advantage without ever seriously being challenged to back up the claim.

I stand corrected Norm, his official position was against the war, but he was not in the Senate and so did not vote.

Interesting that you didn't post the rest of the clip though...

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/02/20/draft-olbermann-to-matthews-but-this-isnt-hardball-were-doing-election-results/

Wow, I had no idea that Hillary had "legislative accomplishments all around the world!" Maybe she should be president with that sort of power...

Are we supposed to believe that Chris Matthews is a journalist now? What does Obama's legislative accomplishments have to do with him becoming president? How can anyone even mention that Obama may not be qualified to be president after the chimp we've had masquerading in the White House since Clinton left? Turn off television news, it's poison.

It's not an Obama hit piece. It's a hit piece on Obama supporters like you and Senator Kirk.

Norm, Kirk is just some Podunk politician that finally got his chance to get his 15 minutes and wasn't so quick on his feet when his talking points failed him. I find it funny as anybody, but it isn't like he reveals the underbelly of ignorant obama masses that you seem to be searching for.

Maybe Chad is, but I will let him defend himself.

Today's column by Glenn Greenwald:A week of petty though typical attacks on Obama produced nothing

Most importantly of all, the guardians of our political discourse -- the Chris Matthews and Howie Kurtzs and Mark Halperins and The Politicos, all of whom dwell in Matt Drudge's kingdom -- traffic almost exclusively in puerile, vapid fixations with these types of petty conflicts and substance-free controversies. They're the decadent ringleaders of the freak show which dominates our political discourse and dictates the outcome of our elections.

I just want to point out that the only election Aberham Lincoln ever won was his bid for the White House...not that a strong Legislative record doesn't stand for something, just pointing out that a Great Presidents don't have to live in Washington there whole lives to be able to accomplish great things as a President....and yes I know it can go the other way as well.

BTW, if it's the most experienced Candidate that your interested in, you should have looked into Joe Bidden...he makes Hillary's record look like that of a College Freshmen. lol

sorry for the poor grammar and typos. :P

I am wistfully daydreaming about how freaking awesome it would have been if Chris Mathews (or anyone!) had taken this strong, resolute, you-WILL-answer-the-question-sir, tone with just one of the dozens of Bush/Cheney shills who were trotted out before him to sell us the Iraq war.

Olbermann tells Matthews, "This Isn't Hardball

Thank you Norm.

Be Prepared

That sums it up. I think the longer this goes on the better chance Obama has to win the general election. We need this type of vetting. I'm glad that he's up against one of the best political minds of our day.

I'll say it again. I think both candidates can beat McCain, and both are great candidates in their own right. But after running them both through my matrix, I come down on the side of Obama.

Keep up these posts. He is an unknown and we need to keep on him big time.

(btw if I was to just go off the top of my head, I couldn't list the 'accomplishments' of either one.)

No matter who you support you have to admit the question, as posed, is pretty lame. (Go figure considering who asked it!)

Nearly half of the US presidents; Washington, J. Adams, Jefferson, Taylor, Grant, Arthur, Cleveland, T. Roosevelt, Taft, Wilson, Coolidge, Hoover, F. Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Carter, Reagan, and Bill Clinton, never served in congress.

(Neither did shrub, but he is not worthy of the title so who cares.)

Now that I think of it most of my political heros never served in congress or were even state governors. Activists and rabble rousers mostly…Thomas Paine, Malcom X, Quanah Parker, Martin Luther King Jr, the more radical the better.

Barack: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=400629&tab=bills

Hillary: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=300022&tab=bills

thaddeusphoenix,

Very good! Nothing but the facts. Barack Obama also has his legislative record as a state senator

Note Obama's record as a state legislator for bills which were not only introduced, but also passed :

A number of measures that would extend health care coverage for those just above the federal poverty line.

A bill that would establish a commission to develop a plan for provided universal health care in Illinos.

A bill that would initiate a long-tern study about welfare success rates, making the information available to universites and research institutions.

A bill that would provide job skills training for recipients of federal aid.

A bill that would establish a program to help juvenile offenders re-integrate into the community after their sentences. Senator Obama also spoke against a provision that would allow minors to be prosecuted as adults in certain criminal cases

A bill that would require police to videotape interrogations of criminal suspects

A bill that would initiate a study of the race of people stopped for traffic violations. This was paired with a bill that would allow officers to stope cares for seat belt violations.

A bill that would ban nearly all gifts by lobbyists and barred the use of campaign money.

A bill that would add state inspectors to investigate violations

A bill that would create an office immigrant asistance to provide education and outreach services.

Nice nit Norm you want people to think Obama has done nothing. There were people who did this to MLK too. They wanted MLK to look like he didn't accomplish anything at school. You are a racist norm. Plain and simple. You like to live in Utah to be far away from blacks

Mathews is too much of a drama whore. Sure, you can say the same about Jon Stuart, but atleast he admits it.

It's more telling that you posted a clip that cuts off just before Olbermann busts Matthews by asking him if HE could list ANY Senate accomplishments from the past 7 years. Of course Chris folded without being able to cite a single item.

C'mon, that's a lame interview drive-by tactic to bust someone's balls on camera.

Hey Matthews, can you recite all 50 states in alphabetical order off the top of your head? No? Why are you so un-American?!

Sorry, but this is smelling of anti-Obama bullshit Norm.

Super J.

This is gotcha journalism - and there is nothing wrong with it in this case. As we've seen, Matthews isn't much of a reporter. However, he does have experience with sizing people in his inch-deep way. I suspect that he quickly guessed that this guy was a bullshit artist, and exposed him as such.

I think this carries about as much weight as any piece of anecdotal evidence. I have absolutely no doubt that one could find supporters of every single candidate who ran for office this or any year who could be made to look foolish like this (and deservedly so). I agree with Norm that this is a hit piece on Senator Kirk and that someone who claims that Obama "voted against" the war is also in error (less egregiously so, in my opinion, since he did at least go on public record against the war). However, since I doubt the that anyone, including Norm, has any evidence that supporters like Senator Kirk are any more common among Obama supporters than any other candidate's supporters, this piece is ultimately meaningless as a gauge of Obama's fitness for office.

The pernicious implication that Obama supporters are a more gullible, easily-swayed group than Clinton supporters is getting tiresome and is not particularly plausible either. Obama is now broadening his appeal to blue-collar supporters that Clinton had been doing better with in early primaries. Obama was polling better with more educated, higher-income Democrats and independents early on. I could make the claim that Clinton supporters are rank-and-file Democrats who are voting for her only because she has better name recognition - and not because of any particular thing she has accomplished as far as they know. Further, I could claim that as voters have gotten more familiar with Obama, he has overcome her name-recognition advantage. My claim is not particularly complimentary towards Clinton supporters, but has exactly as much support for it is this 'Obamaniacs-are-sheep' meme: none! Let's give this crap a rest, shall we?

Of course, this is gotcha journalism. But how can you look that helpless as a senator? How did this guy even win elections??

I'm a Hillary supporter, but really: this is more of a problem for this empty suit of a senator than for Obama himself. First off, before going on television he should have looked some basic points about his candidate up. If he didn't care to do this he should at least have shot back at Matthews the very thing Olbermann did: Could you name some accomplishments by Hillary Clinton, now, right now, to my face? I'm waiting..

And then: usually "pundits" like Matthews tend to laugh off legislative accomplishments by candidates. Legislation is for losers like John Kerry - real presidential candidates have spent the fortune of poppy and cleared brush in Texas, remember?

No, really. It is disgusting by Matthews - but this loser (which senator is it, in the first place?) just brought it on himself.

Can anyone name some legislative accomplishments by Biden? Dodd? Richardson?

It is very sad that the most qualified (as in, folks that have long careers of demonstrated competence) were eliminated from the prom popularity contest first. It didn't have to be Obama or Clinton, there were more choices. And these other choices had documented histories of resisting the Republican onslaught of the American citizen.

If you want people who will enact new and progressive policy, than you go for candidates who talk about new and progressive policies they would implement. Instead, Democrats have put forth the two individuals (soon to be one) who "look" the newest and most progressive, but act and sound like pandering, self-serving, establishment tools.

Anyone in a serious profession can tell you that the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. With the backlash against Bush, we could have put someone in office this next time with a real mandate to enact progressive reform. Instead, I fear we're putting someone forward with a strong past of watching their own behind, and little else.

Watching the primary process has been sanity in reverse. The candidates dropped out in order of demonstrated competence, leaving someone with lots of charisma and inspirational rhetoric, and no demonstrated capacity to make decisions or implement policy.

Norm stop being bitter that your own candidates sucked and got owned by Clinton and Obama.

Anyone up for another historical aspect to this election? Every viable candidate still in the race is a current senator. It's been difficult for anyone with a voting record to get up to the big house in the past quarter century. Yeah, daddy Bush was a rep, but he was also VP for Reagan. It's basically been governors since 1980. Now that we have only those in the legislature headed to the WH, their voting record and legislative acts are all fair game. They can't claim a partisan legislative branch that stone-walled ideas this go round.

So Matthews played his "hardball" with a lame senator. New rule: don't fucking go on the tele supporting your candidate without some info. Sacre bleu!

Go to http://thomas.loc.gov if you have time to dig out all the voting records, as well as the sponsored bills.

Wasn't it governors or VPs since 1968? Nixon was a Representative and a Senator, but his most prominent role was being Ike's veep, and Carter was governor of Georgia. Ford was never really elected to the White House. So the last Senator who made it there on his own was JFK – 48 years ago...

really, bob, don't be such a (haven't seen this one on here in awhile)FUCKTARD.

I didn't see this as an attack on Obama...more of an attack on numbnuts supporters who don't actually know anything about the candidate(s) that they're supporting. I'm willing to bet that if this same interview happened with a Clinton supporter having no clue of her accomplishments, Norm would have posted that as well.

The sad truth is the average American doesn't know or care about policy. S/he votes for the person s/he is most willing to put up with on the TV for the next four years.

By the way...where are all the people whining about Norm's bias when he posts something that bashes Bush? Oh right, bias only matters if it's against the person you're going to vote for...even if you don't know why you're voting.

Well Norm, I think people need to catch up on Obama and think about some of the 'memes' they are spreading.

Do they really have validity? I had to do my homework myself when my fav candidate dropped out. I am an over 50 Independent who is now supporting Obama. The more I learn about him the more I like him.

http://huffingtonpost/robert-creamer/to-vilify-obama-for-his-ab87366

The demographics have changed, the media has changed, there is a call for a new way of doing things in Washington.

He would certainly, and by his persona alone, raise the standing of America in the world. I get this from my extensive travels for business the past two years. Imagine finally having an eloquent person to speak for us.

It's such an odd twist of fate that this exact same video was posted both here, a progressive liberal blog, as well as on multiple hardcore conservative sites, with basically the same intent...Obama is uniting both sides in more ways than one it seems....

Again, with the cult business. Let it go norm, nobody is committing mass suicide so they can get to the spaceship. We just support a candidate.

Huffington post is a left wing opinion site that posts the opinions of both Clinton and Obama supporters. Obama may outnumber Hillary but I think they reflect progressives pretty accurately.

As John Stewart says, more people are voting for Obama.

Hillary supporters need to get behind this man, Obama, if she loses Texas and/or Ohio. Even Bill is saying this.

Obama is an exceptional person.

I cannot wait for him to debate McCain.

Nice nit Norm you want people to think Obama has done nothing. There were people who did this to MLK too. They wanted MLK to look like he didn't accomplish anything at school. You are a racist norm. Plain and simple. You like to live in Utah to be far away from blacks

Too far Bob.

"Too far Bob."

Yes I agree!...and just as a side note there is more than one Bob on here. I make some stupid comments from time to time, but the one you are commenting on isn't mine. Just wanted to make that clear...maybe I should start posting under my FULL name. :P

Maybe, "the good Bob"

Norm a racist? Now that is a dumb-ass remark.

He's from Texas...figures.

I've noticed another Brett on this website as well... I will have to remain vigilant!

And to "the good bob" - I volunteered for Joe Biden in Iowa. The man's achievements overshadow Hillary and Obama's combined.

I wonder if Chris Matthews wants to distance himself from this.

Hillary actually brought the Watson appearance up during last night's debate, and I didn't see Chris Mathews refer to it at all during his post-debate analysis segment.

Maybe he did and I missed it. It is unimaginable that a cable TV news host would flatly ignore such attention.