Is Rachael Maddow Out of Control?

[Sallow]

she hates your party like every patriotic American does.

You cheat and its proven


Your traitors

You are wrong there.

She doesn't "hate" anyone.

Actually, she's quite nice to both conservatives and republicans.

Some of the best shows was when she had Pat Buchanan on. They had a great chemistry and showed real respect for each other. Megan McCain is also a great guest. She regularly has Republicans on as well and treats them with a great deal of respect. So much so, sometimes they wind up saying some really stupid things. Like Rand Paul.

 

[bodecea]

I just thought I'd throw that out there. She seems a bit manic these days and out on a "if you are conservative, I'm going to punish you severely, destroy you, ruin your career" kick. You can tell when she's a bit manic because she stutters more. It seems anyway that she has a speech issue that gets worse when she's keyed up, or worried about something?

If she keeps actively destroying people's careers, when does journalism cross that fine line into an active vendetta? Has she crossed that line? Her guests even seem a bit frightened of her, unless they're gay.

Seems somebody put a bee in her bonnet. Let me guess. It has to do with gay stuff.

She has announced several times and quite conspicuously that she is a culture warrior or part of a culture war. Could it be she wants to do a pre-emptive strike? It seems like her MO is "beat up this and that conservative" to send a message to other politicians lest they cross her, their, "agenda"..

I wonder if she's trying to send a message to the US Supreme Court Justices? You know, with the Utah case coming up this year..

So I've got a poll going here to weigh in on what you think Ms. Maddow's fury seems to be all about.

Those quotes you have of her....where are the links to her saying those things?

They aren't quotes. I often include the "..." when I'm trying to paraphrase or indicate a general view of something. Sorry to confuse you.

Ok, so where are some links of her saying things or behaving in such a way that you paraphrased it?

 

[Sallow]

Her audience isn't big enough to warrant any level of concern.
She is well credentialed but her Abortion and Same Sex shtick bores me to tears.

The size of her audience may not be the question here. The question is her relentless advertisement and persecution in a public venue of key conservative figures in what she openly admits is a "culture war". We don't need a civil war right now, in case you hadn't noticed. Yet she has been at least instrumental in unseating a couple careers for what most would see as petty issues. So a governor on Virginia took some clothes and jewelry in exchange for some favors. Show me a politician, dem or GOP who hasn't done that? People expect it to some degree.

I think the "message" is more "if you don't fall in line with what we want, you will pay with your career". Of note, just after the Virginia governor was unseated, the Virginia AG suddenly announced s/he would no longer uphold the ban on gay marriage in that state...

...It's literally feeling like it's Rachael Maddow vs the right of people to govern themselves. What will she do to Utah? The Supreme Court? Or are they already shaking in their boots for fear of crossing her? If this is a form of orchestrated blackmail, and it may very well be, where do people draw the line and stop the advancement? There is no proof at all that gay is "born that way". There is a mountain of observed fact that gay is more like a cult. A "Cult"rure war if you will. Is the US being advanced upon by a cult of LGBT descriptive behaviors against its will, forcibly, via blackmail or extortion?

Extortion is defined as "if you don't do "thing A" or give me "thing B", I will deliver on my threat, overt or implied, to do "thing C". Is this happening? If it is, it isn't legal.

That's laughable.

You folks are constantly downplaying the audience of MSNBC shows.

NOW you are saying they have this kind of power?

Since when?

Maddow essentially just reports on stuff..and stuff the mainstream media misses.

Sometimes they catch up..sometimes they don't.

But she does have a knack for getting some amazing scoops.

 

[blastoff]

Rach acts like a raving lunatic out of frustration. After all, how would you like to look like that? The answer is you wouldn't. Then layer in everyone she meets is conflicted about her/him/it because they can't tell if they're dealing with just a dyke, a cross-dressing guy, or a transsexual.

But to those into ugly with a huge keister, Maddows worth a look at least.

 

[Sarah G]

Nope, she's completely in control. Rachel is doing some in depth reporting and research on the stories of the day lately. You may not want to hear about your corrupt governors but I do.

 

[Vox]

who?

 

[Sarah G]

she hates your party like every patriotic American does.

You cheat and its proven


Your traitors

You are wrong there.

She doesn't "hate" anyone.

Actually, she's quite nice to both conservatives and republicans.

Some of the best shows was when she had Pat Buchanan on. They had a great chemistry and showed real respect for each other. Megan McCain is also a great guest. She regularly has Republicans on as well and treats them with a great deal of respect. So much so, sometimes they wind up saying some really stupid things. Like Rand Paul.

She'd love to have one or both Koch brothers on her show. You're right, she doesn't hate them but the interview would be extremely hard on them. Like it was on Rand Paul.

 

[bodecea]

Rach acts like a raving lunatic out of frustration. After all, how would you like to look like that? The answer is you wouldn't. Then layer in everyone she meets is conflicted about her/him/it because they can't tell if they're dealing with just a dyke, a cross-dressing guy, or a transsexual.

But to those into ugly with a huge keister, Maddows worth a look at least.

So, you watch her show a lot...?

 

[mamooth]

Only thing that bugs me about Rachel is that she usually says everything twice. Always has. Dang it Rachel, I got it the first time, no need to say it again.

 

[NLT]

Rachel Madcow just another angry dyke with an agenda. woopie de do

 

[Fang]

Impossible to say since I don't watch her. I did try and watch her a few years back just to see what she's all about and she was factually incorrect on 3 separate items in a span of 5 minutes. Needless to say I never tuned back in.

 

[Sallow]

Rachel Madcow just another angry dyke with an agenda. woopie de do

Yeah..she's so angry she has a cocktail night to show everyone how to make drinks.

That's angry you betcha.

 

[Nosmo King]

I just thought I'd throw that out there. She seems a bit manic these days and out on a if-you-are-conservative,-I'm-going-to-punish-you-severely,-destroy-you,-ruin -your-career kick. You can tell when she's a bit manic because she stutters more. It seems anyway that she has a speech issue that gets worse when she's keyed up, or worried about something?

If she keeps actively destroying people's careers, when does journalism cross that fine line into an active vendetta? Has she crossed that line? Her guests even seem a bit frightened of her, unless they're gay.

Seems somebody put a bee in her bonnet. Let me guess. It has to do with gay stuff.

She has announced several times and quite conspicuously that she is a culture warrior or part of a culture war. Could it be she wants to do a pre-emptive strike? It seems like her MO is "beat up this and that conservative" to send a message to other politicians lest they cross her, their, "agenda"..

I wonder if she's trying to send a message to the US Supreme Court Justices? You know, with the Utah case coming up this year..

So I've got a poll going here to weigh in on what you think Ms. Maddow's fury seems to be all about.

Do you consider her a journalist? It seems as if she holds the same status as Limbaugh. She breaks no news, does no investigative reporting. She reads the news and makes comments on the affairs of the day. I don't think she has crossed a line between journalism and any other pursuit as she has never been a journalist.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Rachel should give tips to the angry women of Fox, Megyn and Gretchen.

 

[Sallow]

she hates your party like every patriotic American does.

You cheat and its proven


Your traitors

You are wrong there.

She doesn't "hate" anyone.

Actually, she's quite nice to both conservatives and republicans.

Some of the best shows was when she had Pat Buchanan on. They had a great chemistry and showed real respect for each other. Megan McCain is also a great guest. She regularly has Republicans on as well and treats them with a great deal of respect. So much so, sometimes they wind up saying some really stupid things. Like Rand Paul.

She'd love to have one or both Koch brothers on her show. You're right, she doesn't hate them but the interview would be extremely hard on them. Like it was on Rand Paul.

That's kind of what makes her pretty good at interviews.

She doesn't hate anyone, like say Lawrence O'Donnell does. She's pretty fair and never shows any anger. But she is a very good listener.

Which makes her a bit more "deadly".

 

[Sallow]

I just thought I'd throw that out there. She seems a bit manic these days and out on a if-you-are-conservative,-I'm-going-to-punish-you-severely,-destroy-you,-ruin -your-career kick. You can tell when she's a bit manic because she stutters more. It seems anyway that she has a speech issue that gets worse when she's keyed up, or worried about something?

If she keeps actively destroying people's careers, when does journalism cross that fine line into an active vendetta? Has she crossed that line? Her guests even seem a bit frightened of her, unless they're gay.

Seems somebody put a bee in her bonnet. Let me guess. It has to do with gay stuff.

She has announced several times and quite conspicuously that she is a culture warrior or part of a culture war. Could it be she wants to do a pre-emptive strike? It seems like her MO is "beat up this and that conservative" to send a message to other politicians lest they cross her, their, "agenda"..

I wonder if she's trying to send a message to the US Supreme Court Justices? You know, with the Utah case coming up this year..

So I've got a poll going here to weigh in on what you think Ms. Maddow's fury seems to be all about.

Do you consider her a journalist? It seems as if she holds the same status as Limbaugh. She breaks no news, does no investigative reporting. She reads the news and makes comments on the affairs of the day. I don't think she has crossed a line between journalism and any other pursuit as she has never been a journalist.

Actually she does.

Not often..but she's generally spot on when she goes to work.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I like Buchanan, I like Maddow, I am thinking Krauthammer is starting to synthesize instead of just hold the line.

 

[bodecea]

Rachel Madcow just another angry dyke with an agenda. woopie de do

Yeah..she's so angry she has a cocktail night to show everyone how to make drinks.

That's angry you betcha.

She does? Didn't know that. May have to watch.

 

[Silhouette]

Those quotes you have of her....where are the links to her saying those things?

They aren't quotes. I often include the "..." when I'm trying to paraphrase or indicate a general view of something. Sorry to confuse you.

Ok, so where are some links of her saying things or behaving in such a way that you paraphrased it?

Declaring a culture war:

Rachel Maddow: The Culture War Is Back (VIDEO) Rachel Maddow: The Culture War Is Back (VIDEO)

Rachel Maddow's Quiet War Rachel Maddow's Quiet War | Politics News | Rolling Stone
"But Maddow's skills are different: She strives not for the expression of political anger but for its suppression, to distance herself from the partisan debate rather than engage it, to steward progressive fury into a world of certainty, of charts, graphs, statistics, a real world that matters and that the political debate can't corrupt. Maddow's producers say, unexpectedly, that the closest analog for her style as a broadcaster is Glenn Beck, whose abilities as a performer she very much admires. Though their worldviews could not be more different, Maddow and Beck both attempt to pull off a similar trick: to reflect and redirect their audience's rage at politics without succumbing to it. What Maddow is trying to build is a different channel for liberal anger, an outsider's channel, one that steers the viewer's attention away from the theater of politics and toward the exercise of power, which is to say toward policy..."

The Rolling Stone's analogy skirts along the edge of the truth much like Maddow's "pushing it" skirts along the edge of journalism and towards a vendetta. That's how I see it anyway. She is walking a very fine line between the two and some say she has crossed it:

Rachel Maddow To Politifact: 'You Are Terrible' And Someone Should 'Sue You' (VIDEO) Rachel Maddow To Politifact: 'You Are Terrible' And Someone Should 'Sue You' (VIDEO)
Rachel Maddow has grown infuriated with Politifact multiple times in the past, but the rage she displayed towards her arch-nemesis on her Monday MSNBC show was truly unparalleled.

Tue Jan 14, 2014 at 11:33 PM PST.

Rachel Maddow Destroys Any Credibility Chris Christie Might Think He Still Has. Daily Kos: Rachel Maddow Destroys Any Credibility Chris Christie Might Think He Still Has

...I wonder what cable news channel Christ Christie watched tonight? Was he curious enough to sit through what Rachel Maddow had to say about him and his disproved denials?
Needless to say, it was must see t.v. and something wonderful to behold. With the skills of Sherlock Holmes, she identified every discrepancy in Christie's assertions and tore apart every inkling of credibility that he might have hoped to retain. She flat out said that statements he has made are provably not true. She might as well have just used the word liar. And then she went on to prove it.

If you weren't glued to your television when it aired, here is the video at MSNBC. And if you are not able to watch video, the transcript is below the orange mangled traffic cone. (H/T to NYFM for that description.)

One wonders where Miss Maddow's links to concrete proof that Chris Christie was lying are? If insinuation can destroy careers without proof, then the civil judicial system will unravel. There has to be some sort of check on reporting facts vs speculation in journalism if people's entire lives and political careers can be destroyed by mere guessing. For instance, if I hire a guy to dig a ditch, am I responsible if he then goes on to commit tax fraud on the wages I paid him? Am I directly responsible for every person I've ever had work under me? Sometimes people in lower ranks are involved in chicanery and power-climbing that has nothing to do with their employer; and that their employer has no idea about. This lower-ranked scuffling is quite likely the source of the "Christie scandal" from all the reports of actual facts I've seen. To crucify Chris Christie on a guess or because if he gets elected in 2016 he might roll back some of the gay agenda's strong-armed advancements, is not fair. It wouldn't surprise me if Christie launched a lawsuit for defamation on Maddow and other journalists quick to pronounce him guilty and destroy his career without a trial on the facts.

 

[Sallow]

Rachel Madcow just another angry dyke with an agenda. woopie de do

Yeah..she's so angry she has a cocktail night to show everyone how to make drinks.

That's angry you betcha.

She does? Didn't know that. May have to watch.

Friday nights..generally.