Media Matters for America, a media watchdog group or, if you’re Bill O’Reilly, a “far-left smear website,” has abandoned O’Reilly for the time being to go after MSNBC blowhard Chris Matthews. Specifically, Matthews’ creepy, condescending sexism, particularly when he’s discussing Hillary Clinton, a problem Matthews acknowledged on his show today.

Matthews’ finest moment as a repellent lech came, memorably, last August when he was interviewing CNBC reporter Erin Burnett and got waaay off-topic:

MATTHEWS: Could you get a little closer to the camera? … Come on in closer. No, come in -- come in further -- come in closer. Really close.

BURNETT: What are you -- what are you doing?

MATTHEWS: Just kidding! You look great! Anyway, thanks. Erin, it's great to -- look at that look. You're great.

BURNETT: I don't even know. I'm going to have to go look at the tape here. I'm in a strange location. …

MATTHEWS: No, you're beautiful. I'm just kidding. I'm just kidding. You're a knockout.

But Matthews steps up his woman-hating to an impressive degree in his obsession with Clinton, which does not derive from her being a “knockout.” He hateshateshates her, and Bill as well, for that matter. Nothing too wrong with that – plenty of people do – but Matthews rarely if ever criticizes Hillary for her policies; what sticks in his craw is that she’s a woman.

Matthews hit the trifecta last week when he demeaningly pinched Hillary’s cheek like some pervy old uncle with an adolescent before the New Hampshire primary, declared he’d never underestimate Clinton again after her win and, the very next morning, insisted, "Let's not forget -- and I'll be brutal -- the reason she's a U.S. senator, the reason she's a candidate for president, the reason she may be a front-runner is her husband messed around. That's how she got to be senator from New York. We keep forgetting it. She didn't win there on her merit. She won because everybody felt, 'My God, this woman stood up under humiliation,' right? That's what happened."

When was the last time you voted for someone out of pity?

Anyway, something of an anti-Matthews bandwagon has been firing up since late last week, and now, Media Matters’ top dog David Brock today sent NBC News president Steve Capus a public letter asking, basically, “WTF with Matthews?” (Interestingly, Brock was a prominent hit man for conservatives in the ’90s, writing a book attacking Anita Hill during the Clarence Thomas hearings and the Troopergate story that nearly took down the Clinton Administration, before the scales fell from his eyes and he took to atoning for his sins by pointing out cases of bias in reporting.)

Brock begins with a laundry list of some of the idiotic stuff Matthews has said, then gets to the point:

“Why NBC apparently believes such conduct and speech to be informative, appropriate or responsible broadcasting in the public interest is a question for you and for General Electric's management and Board of Directors.”

Then gets off it again, if a little amusingly:

“In this regard, I should note that gender-based attacks have also been ... on MSNBC's show ‘Tucker,’ hosted by Tucker Carlson. Carlson invoked Lorena Bobbitt to claim that Clinton is tapping into women’s anger toward men, and ... said of Clinton: ‘[W]hen she comes on television, I involuntarily cross my legs.’ During a discussion of how gender might play into Senator Clinton's candidacy, Carlson's right-wing guest Cliff May said, ‘At least call her a Vaginal-American.’”

Then gets back to it again:

“(P)rograms like ‘Hardball’ define wider media narratives and agendas and shape public perceptions about public affairs, especially, as is the case now, when the nation is poised to make critical choices about its future direction. Given Matthews’ record detailed above, I fear that he will continue to insult, misinform, and ultimately disserve the public as we continue to engage in a basic process of our democracy in the coming months.

“Mr. Capus, during the controversy last spring surrounding Don Imus' racist and sexist remarks broadcast on MSNBC … we commended your acknowledgement that NBC has a responsibility to protect the network's trusted reputation for fair and equal coverage and to ‘continue the dialogue about what is appropriate conduct and speech’ on its air. In the case of Chris Matthews, I implore you to once again consider the gravity of that responsibility.”

A letter from women’s leaders such as Gloria Steinem and NOW president Kim Gandy also landed on Capus’s desk today, saying much the same thing:

“Matthews’ history proves that when discussing prominent female figures, he is prone to overt sexism rather than civil political discourse.”

The thing is, just about all TV punditry is showbiz disguised as analysis. You can be brilliantly insightful but if you’re dull, you’re going to lose your airtime to a colorful idiot (which explains why Ann Coulter’s on news shows and not relegated to Chuckle Huts in the deep South).

If Matthews is going to weave “My mommy didn’t love me enough when I was little” or “Pretty girls wouldn’t talk to me in high school” through his narrative threads and people are still going to pay him heed, then Capus probably isn’t going to do too much. Time and again Matthews has said things that should pretty much discredit any opinion that leaks from his brainpan out through his mouth, but there he is, still on the air.

So Brock has diagnosed a symptom, not the disease.

Interestingly enough, there’s speculation out there – from pundits! – that Matthews’ antics have actually helped Hillary, that they’ve underscored, in harsh relief, the bozo-kind of coverage that has dogged her campaign from the beginning. And voters with real-world concerns are sick of hearing about her cleavage or her weird laugh or whatever peccadillo pundits are picking at today and finding the bulk of her policy ideas to be fairly sane. Compared, at least, to Matthews’ rabid misogyny.

As I was writing this, Matthews issued a mea culpa on the air:

“Some people whom I respect, politically concerned people like you who watch this show so faithfully every night, people like me who care about this country, think I've been disrespectful to Hillary Clinton, not as a candidate, but as a woman. …

“Was it fair to imply that Hillary's whole career depended on being a victim of an unfaithful husband? No. And that's what it sounded like I was saying and it hurt people I'd like to think normally like what I say, in fact, normally like me. As I said, I rely on my heart to guide me in the heated, fast-paced talk we have here on ‘Hardball’ -- a heart that bears only goodwill toward people trying to make it out there, especially those who haven't before.

“If my heart has not always controlled my words, on those occasions when I have not taken the time to say things right, or have simply said the inappropriate thing, I'll try to be clearer, smarter, more obviously in support of the right of women -- of all people -- the full equality and respect for their ambitions. So, I get it. … Saying that Senator Clinton got where she's got simply because her husband did what he did to her is just as callous, and I can see now, it comes across just as nasty, worse yet, just as dismissive.”