A couple of points on the recent rant of Chris Matthews at his big Hardball birthday bash that Kathryn linked to. Here’s what’s reported to have been said by Matthews:

In front of an audience that included such notables as Alan Greenspan, Rep. Patrick Kennedy and Sen. Ted Kennedy, Matthews began his remarks by declaring that he wanted to “make some news” and he certainly didn’t disappoint. After praising the drafters of the First Amendment for allowing him to make a living, he outlined what he said was the fundamental difference between the Bush and Clinton administrations. The Clinton camp, he said, never put pressure on his bosses to silence him. “Not so this crowd,” he added, explaining that Bush White House officials — especially those from Vice President Cheney’s office — called MSNBC brass to complain about the content of his show and attempted to influence its editorial content. “They will not silence me!” Matthews declared.

One, Hardball was really a nothing show in terms of ratings until the Lewinsky scandal. Thanks to the now free NY Times archive, you can see the progression of the show as the ratings increase. Here’s a great example:

Similarly, ‘’Hardball With Chris Matthews,’’ which started a year and a half ago and appears just before Mr. Rivera’s program on CNBC, saw its prime-time ratings increase 57 percent for July compared with last year and 147 percent in the program’s midnight time slot, when it is rebroadcast.
Not all cable news anchors are quite so proud. Keith Olbermann, whose program ‘’White House in Crisis’’ on MSNBC was started in February in response to the Lewinsky matter, has done some public chest-thumping about his own coverage. In a May 23 speech to his alma mater, Cornell University, he said:
’’There are days now when my line of work makes me ashamed, makes me depressed, makes me cry. . . . About three weeks ago, I awakened from my stupor on this subject and told my employers that I simply could not continue doing this show about the endless investigation and the investigation of the investigation, and the investigation of the investigation of the investigation. I had to choose what I felt in my heart was right, over what I felt in my wallet was smart.’’
Yet Mr. Olbermann, who declined to comment, is on the air every night, discussing the latest Lewinsky speculation. Erik Sorensen, the executive vice president in charge of programming at MSNBC who just started at the network, said this kind of ambivalence came with the territory.
’’There is a lot about this story that a lot of us covering it aren’t particularly crazy about,’’ Mr. Sorensen said. ‘’But that’s what we do for a living.’’

In a lot of ways, it was the Lewinsky scandal that made the Hardball genre to begin with. And here you have everyone admitting that even though they hate what they’re doing, they’re making money off of it, so why stop?

Two, another thing Matthews doesn’t really want to talk about is the reason the Clinton White House felt no need to “silence” the meida has a lot to do with the fact that the Clinton White House was using the over the top media coverage to their advantage to build sympathy.

And another reason not to ”silence” Chris Matthews – he might come in handy in the defense of the President. Here’s an excerpt from the presentation of Charles Ruff, the White House counsel, in defence of President Clinton at the Senate impeachment trial:

Yet strangely, when Mr. Manager Rogan was asked about these very charges, as late as Jan. 20, he quite clearly abandoned them. I direct your attention to the exhibits before you and to the chart. Appearing on television on Jan. 20 with Chris Matthews, this is what transpired:
Mr. Matthews: Now defend these elements: one, that the President lied when he had said, ‘’These relationships with her on certain occasions.’’ Is that the language?
Representative Rogan: That is the—-
And Matthews: And why is that perjurious? Perjurious?
Representative Rogan: In fact, I’m not, I don’t think it’s necessarily perjurious. That is — that’s one little piece of this answer he gave at the grand jury.
Matthews: Well, another time he used a phrase with regard to this ridiculous thing called phone sex, he referred to it as ‘’occasional’’ or ‘’on occasion.’’ Why do you add them in as part of the perjury indictment?
Representative Rogan: That’s not added in as part of the perjury indictment in Article I. I simply raised that issue when I was addressing the Senate.
Matthews: You better get to those Senators, because I think they made the mistake I did of thinking that was one of the elements in the perjury charge.

As for the Bush team trying to “silence” Chris Matthews, it’s interesting that this is the first anyone has heard of this. I’m sure examples will be forthcoming.