Numerous media outlets have recently reported that MSNBC's Chris Matthews has "met" with party officials in Pennsylvania to discuss a potential run for the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate seat currently held by Republican Arlen Specter. In a December 4 article, Politico reported Matthews "is dead serious about running for the Senate in Pennsylvania -- and is shopping for a house in the state and privately discussing quitting MSNBC as proof of his intense interest, according to NBC colleagues, political operatives and friends." Blogger and Democratic strategist Phil Singer asserted in a December 1 blog post, "If Chris Matthews is seriously considering a run ... he shouldn't be on the air right now." Singer, who was communications director for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee in 2006 and deputy communications director for Sen. Hillary Clinton during her presidential campaign, went on to ask: "How could he do an interview with [Democratic Pennsylvania Gov.] Ed Rendell?" Noting the interview question raised by Singer, Huffington Post political reporter Jason Linkins wrote the same day that "Singer should take a peek at some of Matthews' interviews with Rendell from over the past year! They are highlighted by a lot of gooey ass-kissing."

Indeed, examples over the past year of Matthews' gushing over Rendell during interviews with the governor or when talking about him are numerous, and include the following:

• During the 6 p.m. ET hour of MSNBC's November 4 presidential election coverage, during an interview with Rendell in which Rendell said, "We're doing especially well in the Philadelphia suburbs, which you know have always been a swing area," Matthews replied: "Well, that's the Rendell strength you've just described. That's where you've always done incredibly well: the suburbs of Philly, the city itself, of course, where you were mayor." Matthews later said, "Well, you're the best political analyst in Pennsylvania, Governor."
• During the 8 p.m. ET hour of MSNBC's November 4 presidential election coverage, after MSNBC called Pennsylvania for President-elect Barack Obama, Matthews said, "I think it's a big victory for the young people who ran the Pennsylvania campaign -- Craig Schirmer, Sean Smith, Leslie -- no, I feel like the Academy Award giving out the awards here. Of course, the Philadelphia organization led by Bob Brady and Michael Nutter, of course, the mayor. And, of course, the big winner here, besides the candidate: Ed Rendell, who delivered. This was not his favorite candidate, Barack Obama."
• During the 9 p.m. ET hour of MSNBC's November 4 presidential election coverage, Matthews said, "You know, you're going to see, perhaps, the emergence of Cabinet material already tonight. Of course, [New Mexico Gov.] Bill Richardson could fill almost any role in the new government, and [Gov. Ted] Strickland of Ohio and, of course, Rendell of Pennsylvania. These are big governors, big wins, essential wins, but big wins. They're going to play a part in this next administration."
• During an interview with Rendell on the October 23 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, Matthews prefaced a question by saying, "I want to run this by you because you're the best pol in the state."
• During the April 2 edition of MSNBC's Race for the White House with David Gregory, Matthews said of the Pennsylvania governor: "I think Eddie Rendell is the smartest politician in this state, as we know."
• During an interview with Rendell on the March 31 edition of Hardball, Matthews asked Rendell: "Would you be available ... to be a running mate with [then-Democratic primary rivals Sens.] Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton?" Matthews later went on to say, "I think you'd be a great running -- I understand the situation at home and your responsibilities to the commonwealth. Anyway, I'm here to build you up because I do think you're the best pol around." He added: "[Y]ou're running a hell of a campaign for Hillary Clinton."
• During the opening of the February 13 edition of Hardball, during which he teased an upcoming interview with Rendell, Matthews said: "We'll ask one of the smartest people in politics, Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, the former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, who's on Senator Clinton's side in this fight."
• During the 8 p.m. ET hour of MSNBC's January 8 presidential primary election coverage and during an interview with Rendell in which Rendell and Matthews discussed potential vice-presidential choices for the Democratic ticket, Rendell said: "[T]here are a wealth of good candidates. I mean, if Barack Obama was our candidate for president, I think Joe Biden with his foreign policy and terrorism experience would be perfect. I mean, we've got a whole host of good candidates." Matthews replied: "No, you'd be actually better, because you're very good at slicing up the opposition." He went on to say, "You'd be a great VP running mate."

Media coverage of Matthews' potential Senate run dates back at least to April of 2008. On the April 14 edition of Comedy Central's The Colbert Report, host Stephen Colbert said, "There's a lot of talk that you might be running for Arlen Specter's seat." Matthews responded, in part, "I want to be a senator." Around that time, other reported rumors of Matthews' possible run for U.S. Senate emerged. In the May 2 edition of the Politically Uncorrected Column, titled, "Chris Matthews: Ready to Play Hardball in PA," Dr. G. Terry Madonna, professor of public affairs at Franklin & Marshall College, and Dr. Michael Young, managing partner of Michael Young Strategic Research wrote:

Now no longer the center ring for the traveling Democratic presidential nomination circus, Pennsylvania's inventive political community has discovered a new favorite political parlor game to while away the brisk springtime evenings: will Chris Matthews, the irrepressible host of MSNBC's Hardball, step down from his pundits perch to run for the US Senate against Arlen Specter in 2010? To a remarkable degree, speculation abounds over this possibility in the Keystone State.

In a May 6 post to the Pennsylvania Avenue blog titled "The Chris Matthews rumor gets legs," Josh Drobnyk reported that "two of the state's [Pennsylvania's] top political scientists, G. Terry Madonna and Mike Young, have now weighed in. They think the 'Hardball' host is likely to do it." The post continued:

A Matthews candidacy has been the stuff of rumors so far -- and it is likely to stay that way for the next several months -- but the 62-year-old Pennsylvania native fueled talk when he told Stephen Colbert last month that he wants "to be a senator."

"The indications that Matthews will run are abundant," Madonna and Young wrote. "His MSNBC contract runs out next summer, and both he and the network show signs they might be ready for a break from each other. In addition, journalists are reporting that Matthews has been seeking advice privately from key Democrats across the state about his chances against Specter. Reportedly these contacts have included discussion with Governor Rendell concerning campaign resources."

Then, in a May 9 post to the Chicago Tribune's blog The Swamp, Drobnyk reported that Matthews' brother, "Republican Jim Matthews, a Montgomery County Commissioner," said of Chris Matthews' potential run for Senate: "It is kind of neat to see a guy at the top of his game contemplating a complete change in direction." Drobnyk wrote:

"His intrigue with the idea is certainly on his mind," Jim Matthews said of a Senate run. "That is real."

But Jim said his older brother isn't yet taking any formal steps towards a run.

"Of course he has had dialogue with friends," he said. "He has friends he has dialogue with about the Phillies too. ... You talk with friends and it comes up now and then."

In an April 13 article, Mark Leibovich suggested in The New York Times Magazine that Matthews has been talking with Rendell about a possible Senate run. From the article:

The more intriguing notion is that Matthews could challenge Senator Arlen Specter, who is up for re-election in Pennsylvania in 2010. This has been rumored before, but Matthews has been particularly obsessed with Pennsylvania of late, devoting hours on and off the air to the state's upcoming Democratic primary, staying in close contact with the state's party apparatus. "I talked to Eddie Rendell today," Matthew [sic] told me on the phone a few weeks ago, urging me again to call the Pennsylvania governor.

[...]

I asked him about the Senate rumors. He thinks Specter has hung on way too long, he said, but running would require Matthews to give up a career he loves. Still, "I get a great feeling when I go home," he told me. "Is Thomas Wolfe right? Can you go home again?

"Really, you should talk to Eddie Rendell."

Additionally, a July 27 Patriot-News article quoted Matthews' wife as saying, " 'I think the idea of being a U.S. senator is one of the most romantic things he can think about, so he's got to make a tough decision.' " Moreover, the article quoted Rendell saying that he had given "advice" to Matthews about his potential bid. From the article:

"I told Chris that I think it's going to be tough," said Gov. Ed Rendell, a Matthews favorite on "Hardball."

"I said that if Arlen Specter is the candidate -- and I have every reason to believe he will be -- it's going to be a tough battle for anybody," Rendell said. He said that the only advice he has given Matthews is: "Go into it with your eyes wide open. This isn't going to be a slam dunk."

Matthews has previously denied that he intends to run. In an April 22 Philadelphia Inquirer piece (accessed via Nexis) by columnist Jonathan Storm, titled "10 questions to Chris Matthews, and the uninterrupted answers," Matthews was asked if he was "really going to run for the Senate against Arlen Specter in 2010?" He responded, "I am still honoring the commitment I made in 1987 to cover politics, not engage in it."

Media outlets, including Politico and Roll Call, have reported that several other Democrats are considering running in the primary. According to a November 29 report on The Patriot-News' website, "If Matthews decides to run, he could face a fight for the Democratic nomination." The Patriot-News added: "Three other Democrats are believed to be interested in the Senate seat: two-term U.S. Rep. Joe Sestak of Delaware County, state Rep. Josh Shapiro of Montgomery County, and three-term U.S. Rep. Allyson Schwartz, who represents parts of Montgomery County and Philadelphia."

In his December 1 blog post, Singer wrote that "when one of the network's most visible anchors is reported to be exploring a run for elected office, the network has an obligation to remove that person from its airwaves." Singer continued, providing "a few reasons why":

If Matthews is going to run as a Democrat in what will likely be a contested primary, will he be willing to play hardball when his fellow Democrats are in the news? How could he do an interview with Ed Rendell? How could he be trusted to cover the Obama transition and other political issues without fear or favor? More to the point, will viewers think he is covering politics without fear or favor? [emphasis in original]

From the November 4 edition of MSNBC's presidential election coverage:

MATTHEWS: You know, you're going to see, perhaps, the emergence of cabinet material already tonight. Of course, [New Mexico Gov.] Bill Richardson could fill almost any role in the new government, and [Gov. Ted] Strickland of Ohio and, of course, Rendell of Pennsylvania. These are big governors, big wins, essential wins, but big wins. They're gonna play a part in this next administration.

From the November 4 edition of MSNBC's presidential election coverage:

DAVID GREGORY (NBC chief White House correspondent): And so, here we are. This is a look at the national vote. You see it's Obama with the lead, 103 electoral votes, McCain now with 34. He needs 270 to win. Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, Chris Matthews.

MATTHEWS: I thought it might happen tonight. And I have to say right now that the McCain campaign strategy for victory has crashed. Their plan to win was to go through Pennsylvania, to get to the White House through that state. The second battle of Gettysburg has gone the same as the first one, a failure for the Republicans.

I think it's a big victory for the young people who ran the Pennsylvania campaign -- Craig Schirmer, Sean Smith, Leslie -- I feel like the Academy Award giving out the awards here. Of course, the Philadelphia organization led by Bob Brady and Michael Nutter, of course, the mayor. And, of course, the big winner here, besides the candidate: Ed Rendell, who delivered. This was not his favorite candidate, Barack Obama.

GREGORY: Right.

From the November 4 edition of MSNBC's presidential election coverage:

MATTHEWS: Let's go to the action now. Governor Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania joins us now. Governor Rendell, you've playing -- you've been playing defense in those blue states. The number one target, it seems to me, of the Republicans has been to take Pennsylvania away from the Democrats. How does it look tonight?

RENDELL: Well, Senator McCain and Governor Palin spent so much time here the last five weeks, Chris, I was thinking of charging them state income tax. But -- but they really made a terrific effort here, and I congratulate them for trying to convert retail campaigning into a victory. They did a good job, and I think they energized their base. But I think we're gonna win.

The turnouts are exceptional statewide. I think we're gonna break the record that -- for modern-day voting that we had in the Kennedy-Nixon election. We're doing especially well in the Philadelphia suburbs, which you know have always been a swing area. I think Barack Obama may come out of the Philadelphia suburbs 200,000 votes up, out of the city at least 400,000 votes up, out of the Lehigh Valley 25,000 votes up. And if he puts together that string, and he's 625 to 650 up, he can't be caught in any other part of the state, regardless of what happens.

MATTHEWS: Well, that's the Rendell strength you've just described. That's where you've always done incredibly well: the suburbs of Philly, the city itself, of course, where you were mayor. How does it look out west? I know that has been a troubling area, Westmoreland County. It's culturally conservative, Jack Murtha's area. What's it look like out there?

RENDELL: Well, my guess is it's gonna be a lot closer out there, and we'll know pretty fast. I'm gonna try to get some divisions reported to me in the first 10 or 15 minutes. Take Beaver County, 51-49 for Kerry. That's right north of Pittsburgh. It's white working class predominantly. If Barack Obama can stay close to the Kerry total -- 50, 51, 49 percent -- he's going to win the state and win it handily. If he gets down into the 40s -- 43, 44, 42 -- then there could be -- it could be a long night here in Pennsylvania. That's Beaver and Washington, Westmoreland, as you said, those counties.

It's gonna be interesting to watch. I think Barack's gonna do better in central Pennsylvania than a lot of people give him credit for. The northeast, he's helped mightily by Joe Biden. So it's a tough road to hoe for the McCain forces. But again, give them credit, the retail campaign, they did it well. They fired up the base. There was so much red meat going around, it was unbelievable.

MATTHEWS: How was Hillary -- Senator Clinton was up there a lot with you. You're very close to her and, of course, the former President Bill Clinton. He has been campaigning, I saw the other day, for Murtha and for [Rep. Paul] Kanjorski [D-PA]. How powerful were they in delivering their vote today?

RENDELL: I think you'll get -- of the women supporters for Hillary Clinton, I think close to 95 percent will vote for Barack Obama. Hillary did an extraordinary job with her presence throughout the state. She was in Pittsburgh yesterday. Bill Clinton was in Wilkes-Barre, Johnstown, and Erie yesterday. So, I think the Clinton feminist voters are all for Barack.

The working-class, blue-collar white voters who Hillary did so well with and, really, became the champion of, they're gonna split. I think Barack's gonna maintain a significant hunk of them, a good enough hunk to win. Obviously not going to do as well as Hillary did among that group, but I think he's gonna surprise some people.

MATTHEWS: Well, you're the best political analyst in Pennsylvania, Governor. Thank you. You really split it there. I think you're -- that was very interesting, what he just said. The fact that the women who care about women's issues -- of choice, of minimum wage, the concerns women want for equal employment, equal pay -- Hillary delivered the vote. It is very hard to deliver some of the vote, however, it's very culturally conservative, that liked Hillary because she was a traditional Democrat, and to bring them all over was a hard job for her.

From the October 23 edition of MSNBC's Hardball (accessed via Nexis):

RENDELL: Well, I think their theory is that most of the undecided votes will break for them and that there are some people who are not answering the question when pollsters ask them, "Who are you voting for?" Some people refuse to answer, and they're finding solace in that.

But as you know, Chris, the polls have been almost exclusively double digits. Susquehanna had a poll beginning of the week that said it was 8 points, but the polls have -- other polls have consistently held it at double digits.

But look, I'm nervous, and I'm nervous for no other reason than they're making a great effort here. Senator McCain and Governor Palin are here a lot. Governor Palin back again today, Senator McCain in three spots yesterday. So they're pulling out all the stops here, and we've got to be ready to defend. And you know, we're doing a good job defending. The issues speak for themselves. And most Pennsylvanians are targeted on the economy and health care, and those issues break strongly for the Obama campaign.

MATTHEWS: I know you've been very supportive of Governor -- of Senator McCain, and you were very supportive, extremely supportive of Senator Clinton and Bill Clinton before that. I'm trying to figure out what's missing in this campaign that would bring it home for the Democrats in Pennsylvania. And I just wonder if there's something that hasn't been said by either candidate, including by Barack. I want to run this by you because you're the best pol in the state, and ask this question.

When you talk to the average guy out there, especially the guy -- and let's be blunt, the white guy because he's in play right now -- he takes pride in being a provider. My dad -- you know, my dad was like that. You take pride in bringing the food home, getting the kids something for Christmas, maybe a week vacation somewhere at the shore. You take pride in being able to take care of your family, and that's the crisis everybody faces right now, taking care of your family.

Do you think Barack Obama has done a good enough job of talking to that average guy out there about how he will be of some modest help and will not get in the guy's way by raising taxes on him?

RENDELL: Yes. I think in the last six, seven weeks, since the economy became in a crisis mode, I think he's done a terrific job speaking to what the average person is worried about -- their own pocketbook, their own budget. I think he's been enormously effective. He's driven home the fact that for working families that make less than $250,000, he's going to give them a tax cut bigger than McCain. He's not going to raise taxes. I think he's driven that home.

From the April 2 edition of MSNBC's Race for the White House with David Gregory:

MATTHEWS: That said, I think Eddie Rendell is the smartest politician in this state, as we know, and he said the lead is shrinking. I think Eddie would like us to think going into this that it's going to be about three points for Hillary Clinton, his candidate. It ends up being about eight. The confetti comes down, they say they beat the spread. I would say that's the game they're playing right now.

From the March 31 edition of MSNBC's Hardball:

MATTHEWS: Would you be available, Governor, to be a running mate with Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton?

RENDELL: No. No. I said, Chris, I'm going to finish my term here. And who in their right mind would want someone like me to be their running mate? You know, if they came up and said, "What do you think of the presidential candidates' environmental policy that he released today?"

MATTHEWS: Oh, yeah, I'll tell you -

RENDELL: I'd say, "Fair, you know, fair." You know, I have this problem of telling the truth all the time and --

MATTHEWS: Well, I think you'd carry Pennsylvania and save it for the Democrats 'cause it is a little bit precarious with John McCain running. And I think you'd bring back in -- you'd bring Ohio in. And I think you'd make Hillary competitive -- or Barack competitive in Florida. I think you'd be a great running -- I understand the situation at home and your responsibilities to the commonwealth. Anyway, I'm here to build you up because I do think you're the best pol around. Hey, thank you, Governor --

RENDELL: Thanks, Chris.

MATTHEWS: -- you're running a hell of a campaign for Hillary Clinton.

RENDELL: And we're gonna --

MATTHEWS: If she doesn't win by 10 points, it's not your fault.

RENDELL: There you go.

MATTHEWS: OK, thank you, sir.

RENDELL: See you.

MATTHEWS: Thank you, Governor Ed Rendell of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

From the February 13 edition of MSNBC's Hardball:

MATTHEWS: So how will the Clinton campaign stop Obama? Put another way, can the Clinton campaign stop Obama? We'll ask one of the smartest people in politics, Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, the former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, who's on Senator Clinton's side in this fight.

From MSNBC's January 8 primary election coverage:

MATTHEWS: You know, everybody would have said, maybe even a couple weeks ago, the idea of the first woman president and the first African-American vice-president serving together was unbelievable, incredible. But you know, when you look at the excitement for Barack Obama, as I and the other reporters have seen up there in New Hampshire, and you look at the results out of Iowa and the unclear results tonight, but yet the fact that the national polls now show Hillary and Obama very close, you begin to think maybe this could be a ticket. Why not? Why do we think so traditionally and say one has to win and one has to go home?

RENDELL: Well, you're absolutely right, Chris. Remember, when Bill Clinton picked Al Gore, that was political heresy. You don't pick two guys from neighboring states. Never done before. And yet it turned out to be a pretty dynamic ticket that energized Democrats and independents throughout the country. So, I'm not saying that's impractical, but my hope is -- and I've been listening to you guys for a couple days now -- my hope is if this is close tonight and if it has a long length, this primary battle, that it doesn't turn nasty. Because if it turns nasty, that would be hard to construct a ticket based on Obama and Clinton.

OLBERMANN: Governor--

RENDELL: You know, there's a -- there are a wealth of good candidates. I mean, if Barack Obama was our candidate for president, I think Joe Biden with his foreign policy and terrorism experience would be perfect. I mean, we've got a whole host of good candidates.

MATTHEWS: No, you'd be actually better, because you're very good at slicing up the opposition. You know, the Democrats have not been well-served by their last two vice-presidential nominees. Neither Al Gore -- or, rather, neither Joe Lieberman, certainly, who seemed to be wanting to join the club that Dick Cheney was the boss of, or John Edwards, who was running for his own campaign four years hence -- neither wanted to play that role of the VP nominee, which you know is to take apart the nominee for the presidency of the other party. And if you don't do that job, you really don't deserve to get the big one, do you?

RENDELL: Well, I think that's right, Chris. Politics is obviously a contact sport. But you've got to take them apart fairly and on substance. I think if you look at the poll, the Romney poll from tonight, that 30 percent of -- of the people who voted in the Republican primary were turned off by those ads. The ads have got to be substantial, they've got to point out real problems. I mean, you've got to be able to say, "Hey, guys, do we want to go back to the days when a woman who wanted an abortion was forced to have it in the back alley with a, you know, a hanger?" You don't want to do that. Do you want to have health care for all Americans and contain health care costs? Those are the type of things you've got to point out. And there are weaknesses in what I believe the approach has been of the Bush administration, and I haven't heard any difference among any of the candidates about a different approach. Tell me, has anybody said --

MATTHEWS: You're making my point, Governor. You're making my point. You'd be a great VP running mate.

RENDELL: There you go. There you go.

OLBERMANN: All right, Governor Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania. Great thanks. We're going to cut away and go up to Romney headquarters, where the man who is going to finish second tonight in New Hampshire is about to address his supporters.

On the December 3 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor, Fox News analyst and syndicated columnist Dick Morris asked host Bill O'Reilly, "Do you believe [Sen.] Hillary Clinton will run a primary against [President-elect] Barack Obama for president in 2012?" After O'Reilly responded, "Yes," Morris said, "Damn right she will." Later in the segment, Morris added that Obama has "built in to his administration the seeds of his own destruction." But as a prognosticator of political events, as Media Matters for America has documented, Morris has at times been wildly off the mark. Morris' latest prediction is also inconsistent with his April 25 column, in which he wrote: "Does Hillary want to beat up Obama so that he can't win the general election in November, assuring [Sen. John] McCain of the presidency so that she can have a clear field to run again in 2012? Obviously, if Obama beats McCain, Hillary is out of the picture until 2016, by which time, at 69 years old, she might be too old to run."

As Media Matters documented, in columns in The Hill and the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review and appearances on Fox News in 2005, Morris repeatedly touted New York Republican Jeanine Pirro's 2006 Senate campaign against Clinton. Morris asserted, regarding Clinton running for a second Senate term, "[T]he first thing I would tell Hillary, if I were advising Hillary, is you're crazy to run for the Senate." He also asserted that Clinton "might just take a pass" rather than face Pirro in the election, and even stated, "My bet is that Clinton thinks the better of it and drops out of the race if Pirro comes on strong." However, it was Pirro -- not Clinton -- who, trailing badly in polls, dropped out of the race on December 21, 2005.

Morris also predicted that Rep. Rick Lazio (R-NY) would defeat Clinton in the 2000 New York Senate race. One day prior to the election, on the November 6, 2000, edition of The O'Reilly Factor, Morris asserted: "I think Lazio is, at this point, more likely to win it than Hillary, because, if Hillary is at 48 percent -- or even at 49 percent, or even at 50 percent -- a lot of her vote of minorities, a lot of her -- who have no real reason to vote in the presidential race." Lazio lost to Clinton by more than 12 percentage points, even though he outspent her by nearly $11 million.

Morris also made significantly off-base predictions about the 2008 presidential election. According to his final predicted electoral map, released on October 27, Morris labeled Arkansas "lean Obama." McCain won Arkansas by 20 percentage points, and according to Pollster.com, Obama led in that state in only one poll throughout the entire race -- by two percentage points in a June 11-30 Zogby Internet survey. Morris' final electoral map also had Louisiana and Tennessee as "tossup" states; McCain won each of these states by at least 15 percentage points.

From the December 3 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:

O'REILLY: I don't mind Hillary Clinton as secretary of state. I'm thinking she has a certain gravitas out there, and I think she's pretty tough. You would agree with that. She's tough.

MORRIS: She's -- she's tough. She's to the right of him, which is good.

O'REILLY: Right.

MORRIS: She'd be tougher on national security issues, and I think she'd be good from that point of view. My concern --

O'REILLY: All right, so you have no problem --

MORRIS: My concern -- and I think, by the way, the disclosure deal that Bill has agreed to isn't a bad one, about Dubai and all that stuff. The thing that worries me from Obama's point of view about Hillary Clinton -- let's follow your logic. Let's say there's a terror attack. And let's say Obama's popularity drops. Let's say the economy doesn't improve, and his popularity's down around 27 percent. Do you believe Hillary Clinton will run a primary against Barack Obama for president --

O'REILLY: Yes.

MORRIS: -- in 2012? Damn right she will.

O'REILLY: Yeah, everybody knows that.

MORRIS: From -- from the State Department.

O'REILLY: Well, no, she'll resign.

MORRIS: Yeah, a week before she does.

O'REILLY: She'll resign --

MORRIS: It's just like when Johnson --

O'REILLY: Right.

MORRIS: -- inherited Bobby Kennedy at the Justice Department.

O'REILLY: But she's famous enough, like, if she feels that she can be president in four years, she'll resign.

MORRIS: She'll go for it.

O'REILLY: And, yeah, and run against him like Kennedy and [inaudible].

MORRIS: So what Obama is doing is he's built in to his administration the seeds of his own destruction.

O'REILLY: I don't know about that. She'd run against him anyway --

MORRIS: Yeah, but --

O'REILLY: -- if she were the senator from New York.

MORRIS: Yeah, but she wouldn't have the rationale that, "This guy thought I was so qualified he put me in charge of foreign policy."

O'REILLY: This is where -- this is where you go off the cliff. If she's gonna run, if she sees him in trouble, no matter where she is --

MORRIS: Yes, but the credential --

O'REILLY: But I think it was a smart pick.

MORRIS: But the credential of secretary of state would make that candidacy so much more powerful.

O'REILLY: That I'm not sure. If there was a terror attack, it could work against her. All right, Dick Morris, everybody. Check out Fleeced for Christmas gifts.

During the December 3 broadcast of The Rush Limbaugh Show, guest host Mark Davis asserted that Cecilia Muñoz, senior vice president of the Office of Research, Advocacy, and Legislation at the National Council of La Raza, and others at NCLR "are amnesty fetishists" and said, "[T]hat is what you get" in an Obama administration -- "a fan of amnesty." In fact, the position taken by NCLR and Muñoz, who has been named by Obama to be the director of intergovernmental affairs in his administration, on immigration is far from radical, contrary to Davis' suggestion. NCLR strongly advocates passage of comprehensive immigration reform, a position that is shared in principle by members of Congress from both parties and by President Bush.

NCLR states on its website:

NCLR supports comprehensive immigration reform that includes the following principles: 1) a path to citizenship for the current undocumented population; 2) the creation of new legal channels for future immigrant workers; 3) a reduction of family immigration backlogs; and 4) the protection of civil rights and civil liberties. By legalizing immigrants who live, work, and contribute to life in the U.S., the U.S. could deal fairly with hardworking people who have responded to an economic reality ignored by the law. At the same time, the U.S. can become more secure by enforcing the new law and by allowing undocumented immigrants to come out of the shadows and participate fully in their communities.

Bush supported a bipartisan bill that would have "creat[ed] a temporary worker program" and given undocumented immigrants who passed criminal background checks and remained employed the opportunity to apply for a green card in the future, and ultimately citizenship. NCLR sharply criticized the "Senate's failure to move a comprehensive immigration reform bill forward" when a cloture motion to cut off debate on that bill failed. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) once sponsored a bill with Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) and several other Democrats and Republicans to create a temporary worker program and give illegal immigrants a path to apply for a green card and ultimately for citizenship. (As Media Matters for America has noted, during the presidential campaign, McCain abandoned his support for that bill, saying during CNN's January 30 Republican presidential primary debate that he would no longer vote for it if it came up for a vote in the Senate.)

From the December 3 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:

DAVIS: One quick tidbit in transition news. I believe a president-elect is judged by those he brings into the fold. So, joining the White House staff in the Obama administration will be Cecilia Muñoz. She currently serves as senior vice president for the Office of Research, Advocacy, and Legislation at the National Council of La Raza. The National Council of La Raza makes LULAC look reasonable. These folks are amnesty fetishists. Cecilia Muñoz, in her post, [reading] "advocated for federal legislation to give the estimated 12 million" -- this from CNS News, Penny Starr has the byline -- and I guess the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants -- yeah, that's estimated by people who lowball that figure -- to give them [reading] "a path to citizenship." And she has been tapped for the job of director of Intergovernmental Affairs.

And again, it's funny -- I just offer this not to raise an eyebrow, I mean, hello, it's a fan of amnesty in the Obama administration. Whoa, that's shocking. This is what you get. I love the emails that I sometimes get. "Mark, I'm concerned that Janet Napolitano will not be, you know, strong enough on our borders." Really? Really? Well, if enough Americans had been concerned about that, they would not have voted for Senator Obama. Of course, no -- no Homeland Security chief under President Obama is going to be ardent enough about protecting our borders. It's only in the last 18 months that President Bush's Homeland Security chief has been ardent enough about our borders.

Karl Rove / Wall Street Journal:
McCain Couldn't Compete With Obama's Money  —  America affirms Chicago's Golden Rule.  —  If money talks, we'll likely soon hear the real reason why Barack Obama beat John McCain.  Both men and the national parties will report to the Federal Election Commission today how much money they raised in October and November.

Des primaires démocrates à l’élection présidentielle, le nouveau POTUS n’a pas fini de faire parler de lui en BD. IDW avait été le premier éditeur à dégainer avec son Presidential Material, soit un numéro spécial consacré à Barack Obama et un autre sur John McCain, suivi de près par Antartic Press qui éditait deux comics au principe identique. On attend de nouvelles choses dans les mois à venir aux USA mais la surprise vient de chez nous, avec l’édition d’Obama, le premier tome d’une série dessinée par Efix et scénarisée par Nappez, qui vient de paraître aux éditions Petit à petit.

Réalisé en un temps record – on parle d’une dizaine de jours – cette BD au format poche parle de l’espoir généré par le Président Obama et s’attache avant tout à contextualiser les idées du candidat. Exit le ton dithyrambique, le premier tome d’une série qui en comptera 4 autres (pour chaque année du mandat) est à la limite du factuel et tâche de prendre distance avec l’Obamania. Dommage que ce parti pris donne un petit côté froid à l’ensemble, sans doute accentué par l’utilisation de nombreux montages photographiques sur les planches de personnages pourtant très ronds et chaleureux d’Efix. L’ouvrage vient tout juste de paraître en librairie pour 10 euros, alors qu’au même moment, les affiches “Sarkobama” de Greenpeace sont à découvrir dans le métro Parisien. Ne leur reste plus qu’à éditer un livre à charge !

© Petit à petit-Efix-Nappez.

Several media figures have recently promoted the notion of division among supporters of President-elect Barack Obama, claiming that "the left" has been or should be disappointed with his Cabinet selections. But the media figures fostering this notion of significant disappointment with Obama's actions rarely offer actual support for their position, which is undermined by recent polling data. A USA Today/Gallup poll released December 2 found that 94 percent of Democrats "approve of the way Obama is handling his presidential transition." The poll also found that 89 percent of Democrats approve of Sen. Hillary Clinton's nomination to be secretary of state and that 79 percent of Democrats approve of Obama's decision to reappoint Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

In a December 2 USA Today column headlined "Left behind: Obama's centrist Cabinet picks must have Democratic ideologues wondering what happened to the change they can believe in," conservative commentator Jonah Goldberg wrote that Obama's Cabinet picks have yielded "dismayed followers" among "the left." Goldberg wrote:

You almost have to feel sorry for the left.

President-elect Barack Obama was supposed to be their guy. That woman, Hillary Clinton, was the centrist, reach-across-the-aisle type. They picked Obama because he was going to be the "transformative" leader who didn't need to compromise with the right or even with reality. Heck, Obama the Wise would magically change reality itself, right around the same moment he'd force those pesky oceans to recede.

[...]

Obama promised to turn the page on, first and foremost, the Bush years, but also the political approach that marked the Clinton years. Nonetheless, he has not only embraced Hillary, he also has hired Bill Clinton's Treasury secretary, Larry Summers, to head his National Economic Council, tapped former Clintonite fixer Rahm Emanuel to be his chief of staff, and former Clinton chief of staff John Podesta to run his transition.

[...]

Even Bush holdovers, nominal and actual, outnumber and outrank serious progressives in the Obama Cabinet. Leading the pack is Robert Gates, President Bush's secretary of Defense -- the man who oversaw the very troop surge in Iraq that Obama opposed. Timothy Geithner, head of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, will run the Obama Treasury Department. But Geithner has been a de facto right-hand man of current Bush Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson.

Indeed, of all Obama's confirmed or reported picks, only Eric Holder, Obama's nominee for attorney general, will cause any furor from the right. Even so, the former Clinton deputy AG is no darling of the left.

To his dismayed followers, Obama says fear not, I am the change. "Understand where the vision for change comes from, first and foremost," he told supporters. "It comes from me. That's my job, to provide a vision in terms of where we are going, and to make sure, then, that my team is implementing."

Similarly, Weekly Standard executive editor Fred Barnes wrote in a column posted on the Weekly Standard's website as of December 3 that Obama's Treasury Department and national security selections indicated "he's pragmatic (so far) in one direction -- rightward. Who knew?" Barnes wrote:

So the scoreboard looks like this: Three of the four cabinet posts that matter most are going to those with views acceptable to the center-right of the Democratic party. That's Geithner, Clinton, and Gates. The fourth, attorney general, will provoke a confirmation fight if Obama chooses his buddy Eric Holder, famous as President Clinton's deputy attorney general for facilitating the pardon of Marc Rich.

Three out of four isn't bad. Conservatives aren't jumping for joy. But imagine how the left wing of the Democratic party -- the dominant wing, after all -- feels. Let down would be an understatement.

[...]

If Obama wants to pursue economic and national security policies that would thrill MoveOn.org, William Ayers, and the Democratic left, he has a funny way of showing it. The only reasonable conclusion is he's spurning the left.

Obama has dozens of lesser posts to fill, and no doubt he'll use some of those jobs to assuage the left.

During the November 26 edition of his Cincinnati-based radio show, Bill Cunningham characterized Obama's Cabinet selections as "Reagan's economic team, Clinton retreads, and George Bush's national defense secretary" and stated, "If you're a Democrat and a liberal, especially an African-American Democrat liberal, are you this stupid?" He continued: "Don't you grasp what he's doing to you? Or are you gonna sit with your -- with your mouths shut, not voicing concern about the guy you thought you were electing, and you weren't electing him." Cunningham later stated:

Maybe Barack Hussein Obama is a brilliant politician. He gets the liberals to vote for him, then he governs like a conservative. And the liberals are so stupid; they're never gonna vote against Obama, right? In fact, I look forward -- if you voted for Obama, especially if you're an African-American -- more than 97 percent voted for Obama -- you should have a big sign put around your neck that says, "I am a dumb ass." Because you thought you were voting for change. Instead, you were voting for Ronald Reagan and George Bush. Get the signs out, put them around your neck like a sandwich board, and say, "I am a dumb ass."

In a December 3 Politico article headlined "Obama enemies are cheering," senior political writer Jonathan Martin reported that Republicans are "heaping praise on Obama's national security and economic teams" and uncritically quoted "Republican strategist and the former spokesman for the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq" Dan Senor's claim that Obama's "real fight will be with the hard left of his own party." Martin wrote:

Patience isn't easy, especially for a GOP that is already frustrated at having taken severe beatings in consecutive elections. Yet the hope is that Obama's moves, however shrewd in the sunshine of his honeymoon period, will eventually create openings.

"This may be frustrating for Republicans," acknowledged Senor. "But it's an opportunity. It signals that Obama's real fight will be with the hard left of his own party. We should stand with him when he breaks with the left. It's looking like it will be a target-rich environment. This is a much better course than nit-picking on details, while he's doing the right thing on big issues."

In a December 1 CNN.com commentary, Julian E. Zelizer asserted that "[s]ome of Obama's core supporters are surprised and upset with his [Cabinet] choices," but did not cite or quote any of these purported "core supporters."

Also on December 1, Kirsten Powers wrote in a New York Post column, "They're Ba-a-ack: Obama Hires Hill -- and Bill," that Obama's selection of Hillary Clinton as secretary of state "infuriates many Obama supporters. Pulling the lever for Obama was supposed to usher out the Clinton era of baby-boomer entitlement and drama." Like Zelizer, Powers did not provide any examples of "infuriat[ed] Obama supporters."

But a USA Today/Gallup poll, conducted December 1, undermines the suggestion of significant disappointment with Obama. That poll found that in addition to Democrats' approval of Obama's handling of the transition and their support for Obama's selections of Clinton and Gates, 77 percent of Democrats indicated that Obama's administration will be "more effective" because he has chosen individuals who held positions in Bill Clinton's administration, with only 3 percent saying those choices will render his administration "less effective."

From the November 26 broadcast of the Clear Channel's The Big Show with Bill Cunningham:

CUNNINGHAM: You know, (Watchdog on Wall Street radio show host) Chris Markowski, Obama is redoing the Bush administration. For the last two years, he complained from pillar to post, from New Hampshire to California, all 58 states -- complained vociferously, Obama did -- about the conduction of the Iraqi war, especially the last two or three years. He voted against the surge, correct?

MARKOWSKI: Yep.

CUNNINGHAM: And who did he keep as -- as secretary of defense?

MARKOWSKI: Gates is back.

CUNNINGHAM: Robert Gates, who was in charge of the surge.

MARKOWSKI: Yeah.

CUNNINGHAM: And I'm thinking, "Wait a minute, I got Paul Volcker, I got Robert Gates, I have a slew of moderate to conservatives appointed by Obama." And I hear nothing from the African-American community or lefties that this is a remake of the Bush-Reagan administration.

[...]

CUNNINGHAM: The fact of the matter is he has just appointed Ronald Reagan's chief economic adviser, Paul Volcker, and he kept George Bush's secretary of defense, who for the last two years has been in charge of the Iraqi war that he campaigned against. Does anyone other than me see the delicious irony in any of this? Remember "change you can believe in?" Every sign, every bumper sticker, the commercials he ran. USA Today's got a story today that during this election cycle, Obama ran 450,000 commercials on television. I said 450,000 separate commercials on television. And after the election, who does he keep? Ronald Reagan's economic adviser and George Bush's secretary of defense.

Wow. Now that's change you can believe in. If you're a Democrat and a liberal, especially an African-American Democrat liberal, are you this stupid? Don't you grasp what he's doing to you? Or are you gonna sit with your -- with your mouths shut, not voicing concern about the guy you thought you were electing, and you weren't electing him. I support Barack Hussein Obama. I think the guy's gonna do a great job. With Reagan's economic team and George Bush's military team, how can Obama fail? Twenty-nine minutes after the hour, Billie Cunningham. You've been suckered.

[...]

CUNNINGHAM: Every day that goes by it becomes more obvious to me that Obama suckered something like 62 million people into voting for change when change ain't coming. I said it before the election, and I'm saying it after the election: This guy's gonna run like a liberal and he's gonna govern like a moderate to a conservative. He has three things: Ronald Reagan's economic team, Clinton retreads, and George Bush's national defense secretary, which, when you think about it, is not bad.

[...]

CUNNINGHAM: At this point, the war is over. America won, and the soldiers will start coming home. So, Obama -- who talked about the disasters in Iraq, about the hundreds of billions of dollars that were wasted, voting against the surge; keeps as the secretary of defense a guy who was in favor of the surge and participated in the strategy that resulted in Obama's election by criticizing it. Obama said nothing nice about George Bush and Robert Gates during the campaign, but once he gets into office, he says, give me Bush's military policy, give me the Clinton retreads, and give me Ronald Reagan's economic team.

And I can't believe that the 62 million fools and idiots and misinformed that put this guy in office can be happy with this. Because, you know what? I am. If I knew that this was the Obama that was gonna campaign -- I didn't want to vote for McCain. I held my nose and voted for John Sidney McCain III. I didn't want to do it. If I would have known that Paul Volcker was gonna -- Paul Volcker was gonna be there, and Robert Gates was gonna be there, and that Bubba and Hillary would be secretary of state, dodging the sniper fire in Bosnia for years to come, I would have voted for Obama in a heartbeat.

[...]

CUNNINGHAM: Maybe Barack Hussein Obama is a brilliant politician. He gets the liberals to vote for him, then he governs like a conservative. And the liberals are so stupid; they're never gonna vote against Obama, right? In fact, I look forward -- if you voted for Obama, especially if you're an African-American -- more than 97 percent voted for Obama -- you should have a big sign put around your neck that says, "I am a dumb ass." Because you thought you were voting for change. Instead, you were voting for Ronald Reagan and George Bush. Get the signs out, put them around your neck like a sandwich board, and say, "I am a dumb ass." I love this guy. Bill Cunningham stands with Barack Obama. B.O., keep doing what you're doing, because you're making, to me, a lot of sense -- especially that stuff about no tax increases for high-income Americans. Good job, I like that, too.