McClatchy: Rachel Maddow brings ‘civility’ to cable news.
McClatchy: Rachel Maddow brings ‘civility’ to cable news.
McClatchy profiles the success of MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow and concludes that “her intent is for those watching to actually learn something” from her show. Maddow said she does not like TV news shows that pit two talking heads against one another, a format she calls “boxing masquerading as news.” “I’m not going to tell anybody to shut up unless they say something about my mom,” she added. Maddow also explained that her show won’t be making too many adjustments in the wake of President Bush’s departure from office:
“So wherever there are bad ideas, I will find ways to make fun of them,” Maddow says. “Sometimes, that’s going to be bad Democratic ideas. It’s going to be bad Republican ideas. It’s just going to be bad ideas.
“So I don’t worry about not having George Bush to beat up on anymore.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Rachel is an amazingly brilliant woman, and hers is the best news show on the teevee machine. :-)
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:58 amA totally class act. Keep it coming, Ms. Maddow.
April 22nd, 2009 at 11:58 am…and concludes that “her intent is for those watching to actually learn something”
I was wondering why I like her show so much, but couldn’t put my finger on it. It’s… what’s the word, it’s a very old word out of use… oh yeah, informative. That’s it.
She’s also the best debater I’ve ever seen. Incredible command of all the relevant facts, at lightning speed.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:00 pmOne of my favorite Maddow techniques is her presentation of a summary of a circumstance, introduction of the guest of whom she asks if her summary is accurate, and then her shutting up and listening. She also asks probing follow up questions as well.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:00 pmI wonder if anyone on the right can see the civility of Maddow’s show and how it contrasts with rightwing talking heads Limbaugh and O’Reilly? One need not engage in ambush journalism, scream at guests, or just make sh!t up in order to succeed on the airwaves.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:01 pmZooey Says:
Rachel is an amazingly brilliant woman, and hers is the best news show on the teevee machine. :-)
Absolutely! My 15 year old daughter and I watch her together all the time. How cool is that? My daughter’s name is also Rachel. My kid is learnin’.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:01 pmThe fact that we have access to Rachel’s thinking and research on radio, teebee and the intertubes gives me some comfort that not all of our media outlets are useless.
Just, you know, most of them…
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:02 pm<3 Rachel
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:02 pmI love this women, I watch her show EVERY night. I watch “HANNITY” doing the breaks for a good laugh. One thing I always say about Rachel is she doesn’t just tell you the news she entertains you with it. She really has a way of making politics revelant and fun to follow. And even though she loves president Obama she’s not afraid to disagree with him and ask the tough questions.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:05 pmi LOVE rachel maddow… THE smartest person on the teevee…
the weirdest thing? she does not have a television in her home…
all this time, her radio and now tv, never been polluted by the box.
maybe that’s the secret…
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:08 pmZooey
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:08 pmI don’t argue you point. I would just note the the inauguration is over. Pull the plug! You are amazingly brilliant as well. Why subject yourself to World’s most ridiculous white trash videos and Dancing with the has beens? It isn’t like Ricardo Monteban is throwing knifes at Alan Thicke on Circus of the Stars or anything worthy of broadcasting…
Hers is the only network/ cable news show that I watch and that I trust to provide truth and accuracy. She sets a level of integrity that should be used as the benchmark for all news shows.
Maybe someday she will be asked to be the moderator for Meet The Press; instead of right-wing lap dog David Gregory. She would have been a much more apt and respectable caretaker of it after the passing of Tim Russert.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:09 pmMcClatchy: Rachel Maddow brings ‘civility’ to cable news.
– - I wish she’d wear those thick black eyeglasses on air. Lesbian notwithstanding, there’s something seductively hot about a wonkish female nerd in thick black glasses. But that’s just me.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:10 pmWatching her interview Obama was a joy to watch. And you could tell that Obama enjoyed being asked serious substantive questions by someone who knew their stuff, and could ask substantive follow-up questions.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:11 pmWith a PhD in politics from Oxford University Rachel is head and shoulders above so many on the tube. I sit in a we of her every night I watch her. One of my biggest fantasies is to see Rachel in a debate situation with Rush Limpballs and any of a dozen “journalists” on the Fixed News Channel. Calling it an intellecutal blood bath would be putting it mildly. I only hope that MSNBC appreciates her abilities half as much as any of the intelligent and informed people who watch her every night.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:12 pmJoy of intellect
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:13 pmComes out of the magic box
When Rachel is on
Of all the smarmy pompous jerks that say this (and they are ALL smarmy pompous jerks) I hate Ms. Maddow the least. I do however wish she’d stop mentioning it on EVERY SINGLE NON MSNBC APPEARANCE SHE MAKES.
PS. Yes I am aware that I over-react to minutiae, but “Im too cool to own a TV” is a major pet peeve of mine.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:13 pmthe thing about RM that i absolutely LOVE is that she is actually prepared for her interviews. apparently, she goes to her office each day and STUDIES HER SUBJECTS and she STUDIES THE TOPIC AT HAND and then she does her interviews.
i watched her hand mccain’s campaign talking heads their asses every day for about 3 weeks. it was brutal. and then they stopped coming on altogether. i guess they finally figured out that RM was not going to give them the fox news reacharound.
keep up the good work RM. we appreciate it.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:13 pmBadmoodman Says:
Doctor Who calls them his ‘Smart Glasses’ that he wears only so that it makes him look smarter.
and I agree….
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:14 pmRachel is indeed a breath of fresh air. That said, you still need to put your linguistic hat on because she does slant her delivery to match her beliefs. Case in point is the last Israeli military incursion into Gaza. Her brief history of Israel, from 1947 to present, didn’t once include the life Palestinians face due to Israels blockages or the maiming and death caused by the IDF, only the maiming and death of Israelis by Hamas and Hezbula.
Other than Democracy Now!, her program is better than most, very informative and at times in depth.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:14 pmI got hooked on her (Rachel) surfing channels and just caught the spot “Lame Duck Watch” which turned into “The GOP in Exile”. What funny stuff. I can’t STAND that FOX Noise crud! I want to throw something at the TV when ever I see that idiot Handjob-ity speak! Don’t get me started on that worthless Mormon jerk Glen Beck!
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:14 pmRachel’s show rocks! Her show ads some balance to the right-leaning cable ‘news’. I like her style and sense of humor too. She’s a welcomed break from alot of the cable news talking heads. I don’t think Rachel Maddow will ever run out of things to discuss on her show with all of the GOP’s antics.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:15 pmHere come the TROLLS! It was only a matter of time ……
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:18 pmProud Says:
Such a success it is truly amazing, I love it when nutjobs libs consider a consistent 3rd place out of 4 shows a success. I guess that is the same mentality they use to crow about the great successs of ERR America Radio. She is an idiot who along with the rest of MSNBC used tea bagging jokes like a bunch of 7 graders thinking they were funny.
***
gets under your skin, eh?
:)
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:19 pmI agree with McClatchy. She treats viewers with respect for their intelligence, has a decent lineup of regular bobbleheads, and is unapologetic about her own politics. Add being the smartest anchor on TV, and whats not to like?
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:19 pmActually I’d analogize most cable newsiness to all-star wrestling rather than boxing, but maybe Rachel knows more about the latter than I.
Rachel Maddow and Fareed Zahariah are doing more for public affairs information/reporting than pretty much all the rest of the talking screeds put together.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:20 pmProud,
We’re not laughing with you, we’re laughing at you.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:21 pmHey Proud, could you help me out? I’d like to compare credentials of all those “top rated” pundits, with Rachel Maddow. Maybe seeing them side by side would shed some light on things.
Because everyone knows really crappy shows have high ratings all the time.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:21 pmBushie Says:
Rachel is indeed a breath of fresh air.
Oddly enough, this is appropriate because she reminds me a lot of Terry Gross, who does the best radio interviews ever on Fresh Air.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:22 pmProud(to be ignorant)
Up yours!
(:-D)
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:22 pmBesides PBS, Rachel is the only one to give the news with a brief back ground on the situation. I enjoy her show, her off the cuff humor, her ability to listen and finally her ability to rebuttle any misinformation some of her guests provide.
Your integrity is everything Rachel, Don’t let the corp media change anything about you or the way you inform us!!!
Keep up the great work, Canada apprieciates you as well!!!
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:23 pmThe reason I enjoy her show so much is because there is not a bunch of talking heads yelling back and forth. Even when crazy Pat is on he is polite and almost likable…still nuts though.
I’m always amazed when folks will limp her in with the rest of the partisan talking heads because while she may have a bias, she comports herself with level headed smarts and complete courtesy with her guests, even if she disagrees with them.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:23 pmHer show actually calms me down while some of the others make me feel like I might have a heart attack just watching them.
Favorite Rachel quote…BULLPUCKY!!!
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:23 pmProud Says
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:16 pm
I love it when nutjobs libs consider a consistent 3rd place out of 4 shows a success.
____________________________________________________________
And we love it when trolls like you continually bring up ratings numbers like they are the end-all measure of a show’s quality, accuracy, or intellectual content. Every time you go with this angle, you prove to us you don’t have anything else.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:23 pmdeebaser… ick.
i seldom hear her admit to not owning a tv on her tv show…
and she seldom mentioned it on her RADIO show, before tv found her…
it does come up when relative to the subject at hand.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:24 pm***
where’s reality christ?
he’s a “tea baggin’”
son of a gun :)
**
;0
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:24 pmwithout Rachel i would be on suicide watch
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:24 pmdeebaser @ 17: “Im too cool to own a TV” is a major pet peeve of mine.
The way that Keith’s “I don’t vote” is one of mine…
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:24 pmProud provides exactly the “pro-wrestling” style analysis you’d expect from a dullard who thinks BillO speaks the truth.
It’s sad when the slow kids demonize the smart kids, and make learning “unpopular”. It’s been going on at least since I was in First Grade, and in that time it has dragged the collective IQ down 20 points.
Rachel’s exactly the antidote for that ailment. She’s singlehandedly making “being the smart kid in class” popular again.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:26 pmdearest proud:
i know that she is not as highly rated as your main man jerry springer was back in the day. maybe someday she will get there.
until then, dont forget to take out the trash. you know how your mom gets with the “blah blah 44 years old blah blah trash day blah blah get a job blah blah ”
best of luck with that gender reassignment counseling.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:26 pmI wonder if anyone on the right can see the civility of Maddow’s show and how it contrasts with rightwing talking heads Limbaugh and O’Reilly? One need not engage in ambush journalism, scream at guests, or just make sh!t up in order to succeed on the airwaves.
I believe you are not seeing the big picture about the goal of Faux Noise……..It is not to inform, it is to propagandize. They don’t need to worry about succeeding by ratings—they have Rupert Murdoch behind them. Faux Noise lost 500 Million dollars before it became a ratings success. As long as old Rupert has money, Faux will continue to pollute the airwaves with their verbal poison. We libs and progressives just have to be thankful that there is someone with the brains and ability that Rachel has to counter the crap spewed by Faux Noise. And we need to watch and get others to watch to support her so she stays on the teevee machine! Go, Rachel!!
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:26 pmThe reason why Fox is so popular is because stupid people watch tv all day….they keep it on as background noise. Smart people choose their shows and watch very little tv. I know this for a fact – have lots of red neck acquaintances who do this.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:26 pmI did just read on Huffington Post that her numbers are down. She had a very weak March. Could be that people are cutting out cable as a way to survive.
Realness Says
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:21 pm
Because everyone knows really crappy shows have high ratings all the time.
________________________________________________________
Highest rated show on the teevee last week was American Idol. ‘Nuff said.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:26 pmShe is an idiot who along with the rest of MSNBC used tea bagging jokes like a bunch of 7 graders thinking they were funny.
But they were funny.
Espically when you consider that the whole “tea bag” meme came from the good folks over at Free Republic.
“Tea bag the white house before they tea bag you. freerepublic.com” read the sign at the 1st tea party.
Now of course the wingnuts are all up in arms claiming that liberals gave their “tea parties” the teabag moniker. Same thing with the Palin story concerning her baby not being hers, but her Bristol’s. That also came from the freeper message boards and then was picked up by Sullivan.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:30 pmLord love them, they just can’t help it.
p.s. from Proud
“The Little Nickel” is America’s most prestigious newspaper, and Dr. Nick is a way better Doctor than Jonas Salk was.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:31 pmProud Says:
Such a success it is truly amazing, I love it when nutjobs libs…
_____________
Derogatory stereotype… cool… and ever-so-meaningful. Does that make it okay for me to refer to Republicans as fudge packers?
_____________
… consider a consistent 3rd place out of 4 shows a success.
_____________
Of course, if you compare Fox’s numbers to free TV, the Fox audience is rather small, huh? And since you’re so fond of derogatory stereotypes, I guess it’s fair to call the Fox demographic the “Creamed Corn and Spittle Gang”… right?
_____________
I guess that is the same mentality they use to crow about the great successs of ERR America Radio.
_____________
Gee… could deliberate corporate blacklisting have anything to do w/ that? On the other hand, we do know that the folks behind Rush Blohard’s show actually GIVE IT AWAY in return for the advertising slots.
_____________
She is an idiot…
_____________
Actually, she’s quite bright. You come across as bitter and resentful here. She’s most likely got a substantially higher IQ than you. Of course, most of us here do.
_____________
who along with the rest of MSNBC used tea bagging jokes like a bunch of 7 graders thinking they were funny…
_____________
They were funny. Why do you think so many of us were laughing so hard? You’d think SOMEONE would have pointed out to the GOOPers what “teabagging” was slang for. I guess they’re just completely out of touch w/… well… damned near everything, huh?
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:31 pmProud Says:
I think I got under the skin of the Madcow fans.
__________
All you’ve done is embarrass yourself.
Why are you so threatened by Rachel Maddow?
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:33 pmbut you’re right, Proud – Fox has way more viewers in State Penitentiaries than anyone, and that’s a major victory.
care for some tea? i have flavors.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:33 pmShe is pretty darn good at what she does…I watch her most every night.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:33 pmRush Limbaugh has a BS degree in propaganda from Oxturd.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:34 pmI would dearly love to see a program that would have Rachel, Keith and Jon in a tag team debate with Sean, Billo and Glenn. Totally impromptu, no script, just a general discussion of topics from the current news.
That would be reality TV.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:34 pmProud blows goats and all the local dogs..
…what an idiot.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:35 pmProud is just angry because he has the totally unrequited hots for Rachel.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:35 pmProud Says:
I think I got under the skin of the Madcow fans. She is not a success, she is a failure. Success is measured by ratings, and she is failing miserably. Civility, she doesn’t know the meaning of the word. Nightly Obama infomercials are not news, I understand she is not intelligent enough to form her own opinions, as long as Olbermann keeps telling her what to say she will continue to be a laughingstock.
***
you are angry.
:|
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:37 pmglogrrl Says:
As long as old Rupert has money, Faux will continue to pollute the airwaves with their verbal poison.
____________
An awful lot of Rupert’s wealth is tied up in newspapers. And w/ newspapers failing, Rupert’s in BIG TROUBLE.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see Rupert file for bankruptcy in the next year.
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/02/25/problems-mount-for-rupert-murdoch/
Problems mount for Rupert Murdoch
Jonathan Berr
Feb 25th 2009 at 3:15PMText SizeAAA
Filed under: Company News, Columns, People
For News Corp. (NWS) Chief Executive Rupert Murdoch, all of the news lately has been bad.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:37 pmI like “mmm….Infrastructure…”
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:37 pmtotally Miss Molly:
TV is used usually as lowest common denominator entertainment, as any ratings chart would say, with lots of distracting flashes, short scenes for a shrinking attention span, etc.
On the pundit side- the more inflammatory you are, the more sensational, the more you tap into basic human anxiety turned to resentment, hatred, and a primitive tribalism- of course the higher your ratings are going to be- it’s that indulgent escapism part of television that dictates ratings. Why would it be any wonder that the pundits most separated from this reality would get the most views?
I don’t say that to be elitist. but it’s an age-old argument that TV really needs to be utilised and looked at with a far more critical eye- and probably especially for our information needs. Rachel Maddow raises the bar when it’s all too easy to sink into the gutter.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:37 pmWould Fox security be there?
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:38 pmActually, she’s quite bright. You come across as bitter and resentful here. She’s most likely got a substantially higher IQ than you. Of course, most of us here do.
As do most slime molds, toasters and sea urchins.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:38 pmHighest rated show on the teevee last week was American Idol. ‘Nuff said.
Sad! Although I do watch TV (mostly news shows, movies & The Daily Show), it is true that it has dumbed down the collective brains of the American people–especially reality shows. Who in their right mind likes to watch people make jackasses of themselves on national TV? I guess that just underscores the bankruptcy of the human condition. Whereas people used to read books (what a concept) and mingle and converse with other people, we are now reduced to staring at a big flat box that simulates real life but leaves us with a bitter aftertaste. Thank God for Rachel……she tells it like it is. Let’s put her in place of bootlicker David Gregory on Meet The Press!
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:38 pmProud Says:
I think I got under the skin of the Madcow fans. She is not a success, she is a failure.
Hey, Proud. Talking about failure, what did you think of that lame-assed “Tea Bag Party” you mentioned earlier? I mean, you have to admit, those were the saddest looking rag-tag band of hillbillies the Republican party has ever put together at one time.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:39 pmWhen were you a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford?
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:40 pmProud is scared.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:40 pmShe had a guy on last night who wrote an opposing opinion to the torture memos. He was a bit of a weasel and Rachel asked him some pretty tough questions. She asked him why he didn’t quit or blow the whistle on them. I thought that was a pretty gutsy question. He tried to weasel out of the question and she came back and asked it again in a more forceful manner. He still weaseled out of answering directly and at that time she backed off.
I enjoy watching Rachel even though I think at times she is a little judgmental of President Obama where she looks at things in black and white. But, it’s not enough to make me stop watching her show.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:41 pmthe foxbots come along a make ridiculous statements thinking that just saying it makes it fact…
just like they’re used to from their favorite propaganda channel…
yeesh…
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:41 pmShoeless @ 60. I think Rachel could make any of them cry like puppies so the only reason for Faux Security to be there would be as stretcher bearers for their heroes.
But a shock cart might come in handy.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:41 pmshoeless Chilopoda Says:
Proud Says: ——————————————————————————–
I understand she is not intelligent enough to form her own opinions,
When were you a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford?
I think Proud has a hard time reading a road map.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:44 pmThe Republic of Hymenoptera Stupidity Says: I wouldn’t be surprised to see Rupert file for bankruptcy in the next year.
Hey, Republic–from your lips to God’s ears.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:45 pmZooey Says:
Proud is scared.
***
he needs to get to a gun, fast.
:\
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:47 pmProud Says
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:30 pm
“I think I got under the skin of the Madcow fans.”
– Do not confuse our laughter at you as any result of you getting under our skin. And — “Madcow”? Coming from a person criticizing the use of “teabagging”?
“She is not a success, she is a failure. Success is measured by ratings, and she is failing miserably.”
– There you go with the ratings meme again. You’re permanently stuck in that groove because it’s the only benchmark where your idols compare favorably to Maddow. But then, that’s kind of the GOP way — the number of advertising dollars brought in is all that matters.
“Civility, she doesn’t know the meaning of the word.”
– Would you care to expound on that thought? Please provide an intelligent argument that will convince us that Maddow is less civil than — say — O’Reilly. With enough specific examples to make your case.
“Nightly Obama infomercials are not news”
– And neither is nightly Obama bashing. Of course, Maddow doesn’t act the mindless sycophant — she both praises and criticizes when it’s due. President Obama doesn’t get a free pass, and neither does anyone else. Of course, you don’t actually watch the show, so you wouldn’t know this. You’re just doing random trash talk and presenting your little troll turds as facts.
“I understand she is not intelligent enough to form her own opinions…”
– You “understand” this? Would you enlighten us with the body of evidence that led you to this “understanding”?
“…as long as Olbermann keeps telling her what to say…”
– Again, we need some evidence of this. Your merely stating this doesn’t make it true.
“…she will continue to be a laughingstock.”
– Most of us aren’t laughing. Even her critics respect her as an intelligent, hard-working journalist, even though they don’t always agree with her political views. A true laughingstock is someone like Ann Coulter.
You appear to be off your game today. Did you take your vitamins?
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:48 pmBilbo,
That was Philip Zelikow — trying to save his sorry hide.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:48 pmThe Republic of Hymenoptera Stupidity Says: I wouldn’t be surprised to see Rupert file for bankruptcy in the next year.
But, but, but, he’s too big to fail! His propaganda channel and other news outlets need to remain viable if Obama is to fail.
Rush says so.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:48 pmBilbo Huessein Baggins says: I enjoy watching Rachel even though I think at times she is a little judgmental of President Obama
Come on, Bilbo…….would you like it better if she were just a bootlicker like the Faux boys are with Repugs? That proves she is not bought and paid for by the Dems. In the words of Pres. Obama himself, if he doesn’t do what he promised in the campaign, “make me.”
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:49 pmProud Says:
Such a success it is truly amazing, I love it when nutjobs libs consider a consistent 3rd place out of 4 shows a success.
First of all, Rachel consistently comes in first in the coveted 25-50 age group.
Second, when it is a level playing field between Fox and MSNBC, then and only then can you compare ratings. Fox is available to many more households than MSNBC is. The Cable companies have Fox in their regular lineup and MSNBC in their premium lineup. So, for people who either can’t afford to or don’t want to pay more for their TV watching, MSNBC is not an available station for them to watch.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:50 pmYou see Joe, in the Bizzarro world of right-wing Republican fanatics, the inbred, mouth-breathing, slopeheads who were used by Richard Mellon Scaife and the Competitive Enterprise Institute to spread their global corporate propaganda are considered to be insightful geniuses. Brilliant Rhodes Scholars with IQs higher than these knuckledraggers can count are believed to be so unintelligent that they cannot form their own opinions.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:52 pmOnce again, Proud, you opt to yell “Scoreboard!” at the wrong time. Ratings are meaningless, and I would be saying the same thing if the numbers were reversed. It’s just a definition of the number of idiot-boxes that have the show on, not a definition of the people watching the show itself.
Maddow brings something to the table that Fox would never have on their network: a sense that being calm, unobtrusive and occassionally self-depreciating CAN be adjectives that suit a pundit. I’m not arguing against the fact that Rachel is a pundit–her views are mostly progressive–but she does not unleash the hounds on the opposition like an Olbermann or Chris Matthews would on MSNBC.
If anything, Rachel is a grassroots pundit. She’s down-to-earth and identifiable with her listeners/viewers, and I appreciate that in a pundit.
Besides, Proud, if we were to apply the “Scoreboard!” argument to everything in politics, you’d have to certifiably agree that Obama’s “ratings” constitute him a success, would you not?
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:53 pmHigh ratings measure
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:54 pmGullibility factor
Of the Sham-Wow crowd
I forgot about that. Man that’s a stupid thing to do.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:54 pmProud Says:
…who along with the rest of MSNBC used tea bagging jokes…
Maybe y’all shouldn’t have called what you were doing “teabagging” or referred to yourself as “teabaggers” to begin with. I mean, really. For the last time: it’s not our fault you’re dumb.
As for the rest of your post, I can’t even get a handle on how to respond. It’s like you said “up is down, left is right, black is white!” Umm, OK. It’s wrong, but it’s also kind of a waste of my time explaining why.
It’s worth mentioning here that FAUX News doesn’t count as a cable news channel, so comparing its ratings to actual news shows is meaningless.
.
Proud Says:
She is not a success, she is a failure
Again, saying a bunch of opposite-world things isn’t really cutting it. Why don’t you have some coffee and come back and try a little harder? I’ll do my best to get all offended or whatnot.
.
Bilbo Hussein Baggins Says:
He tried to weasel out of the question and she came back and asked it again in a more forceful manner. He still weaseled out of answering directly and at that time she backed off.
I think two is the appropriate number of times to give a question to somebody who doesn’t want to answer it. If you keep hammering the same point, the interview stops being informative.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:54 pmCheeseFlap Says:
High ratings measure
Gullibility factor
Of the Sham-Wow crowd
***
call in the next twenty minutes
and we’ll send you two sham wows
for the price of one!
*
(we can’t do this all day)
**
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:57 pm@77 Bilbo,
Also, a good portion of Fox’s audience HAS to be ironic viewers. I DVR Glen Beck because he’s hilariously out of his g’damn mind and I can throw it on at 7 because Matthews sucks.
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:58 pmblackwidow Says:
The reason I enjoy her show so much is because there is not a bunch of talking heads yelling back and forth. Even when crazy Pat is on he is polite and almost likable…still nuts though.
When she first started out she had crazy Pat on her show on a regular basis. I think that the network made her do it. When he would be off on one of his rants, they would pan to Rachel and she would be rolling her eyes like she was thinking “oh boy, there goes Crazy Uncle Pat again”.
Fortunately for us she rarely has him on these days. I think her success has given her the ability to say who she wants on her show and who she doesn’t.
Also, I just love her current best girlfriend on the show
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:59 pmAnna Marie Cox. She’s a hoot and a good foil for Rachel.
No! She doesn’t have Pat Buchannon on her show anymore because she is a failure!
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:02 pm#86… LOL
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:04 pmI am so happy that she is recognized for her ability and talent. She is totally professional in her interviews, asks great questions, comes back with follow up questions; even when she is in disagreement, she never loses her cool, never gets into arguments, but always stays focused.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:08 pmglogrrl Says:
Bilbo Huessein Baggins says: I enjoy watching Rachel even though I think at times she is a little judgmental of President Obama
Come on, Bilbo…….would you like it better if she were just a bootlicker like the Faux boys are with Repugs? That proves she is not bought and paid for by the Dems. In the words of Pres. Obama himself, if he doesn’t do what he promised in the campaign, “make me.”
Absolutely not. But, I think that she needs to stop looking at things that President Obama is trying to do in something other than black and white. He’s operating a lot in a gray area right now trying to keep his priorities going. If you buy into the “If he doesn’t declare war on the Bush Crime Family today, that means that he’s not going to prosecute” you are being judgmental and making the same mistake the Republicans make (either you are with us or against us). If President Obama were to declare war on the Bush Crime family tomorrow, our government would come to a grinding screeching halt. The Republicans would be screaming “partisan politics” and “witch hunt” and any small amount of cooperation Obama was finding out of Republicans would vanish.
President Obama needs to get the American people to back him up before he will be able to go after them and not bring our government to a halt.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:08 pmJust the other day I had lunch in a McDonalds. (I know but it was the only eatery within distance and I was hungry. I paid the price with heartburn the rest of the day.) All of their TV’s were on the Fox channel. Corporate do love corporate.
Faux buys a great deal of their precious ‘ratings’.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:09 pmProud,
Yer a “Great American”
And mega dittos to ya!
Thanks for teachin us libs bout ignorance!
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:10 pmProud ~ for your edification:
Rachel Maddow
“A graduate of Castro Valley High School in Castro Valley, California, Maddow earned a degree in public policy from Stanford University in 1994.[4] At graduation she was awarded the John Gardner Fellowship. She was also the recipient of a Rhodes Scholarship and began her postgraduate study in 1995 at Lincoln College, Oxford. In 2001, she completed her Doctor of Philosophy degree (styled a DPhil) in political science from the University of Oxford.[5] Her doctoral thesis is titled HIV/AIDS and Health Care Reform in British and American Prisons. She was the first openly gay American to win a Rhodes scholarship.[6][7]“
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:11 pmBTW, Rachel recently bought her first TV.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:13 pmPresident Obama needs to get the American people to back him up before he will be able to go after them and not bring our government to a halt.
A caveat…the President needs to acknowledge the American people who elected him and not worry so much about the 25% of whackos who will whine and screech no matter what he does.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:15 pmNot that formal education is an automatic given –
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:16 pmbut Maddow = Rhodes scholar who still does her homework daily.
and Hannity = high school grad, eschews homework, instead, relies on talking points from the boss.
I knew a thread about civility would lure Proud out from under the rock. The loyal opposition to defend the other side of the coin.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:17 pmHoodathunktick Says:
Just the other day I had lunch in a McDonalds. (I know but it was the only eatery within distance and I was hungry. I paid the price with heartburn the rest of the day.) All of their TV’s were on the Fox channel. Corporate do love corporate.
Many places like hotels and chain bars have no choice what they have on their TV’s. What they are playing is a feed from Corporate. I know this because I was once in a Holiday Inn bar on a business trip and I asked the bartender to change the station from Fox. He said he couldn’t change the station since the TV was a feed from corporate and they had no way to change it. I did talk him into turning the TV off, though. His comment was “god that’s great…I can’t stand listening to them babble on for hours at a time”. He also told me that no one paid any attention to the TV anyway.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:18 pmYes, I hope that this is smart peoples’ time. The age of supreme ignorance or the supremacy of ignorance, as now fully documented regarding the Bush regime, is now over…. Let’s hope it never returns.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:18 pmHoodathunktick Says:
A caveat…the President needs to acknowledge the American people who elected him and not worry so much about the 25% of whackos who will whine and screech no matter what he does.
It’s not the 25%ers that he’s worried about. Polls consistently show that a majority of the people in this country don’t have the desire or stomach to see the Bush Crime Family prosecuted. That’s why, I believe, Obama is releasing the torture memos. He wants the public to know the full extent of what went on so that, hopefully, they will demand justice. As long as the demand for justice only comes from the liberal blogging community, he doesn’t have much cover.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:21 pmYour mom……. YOUR MOM!!!…….
…… raised one helluva terrific daughter.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:22 pmConservativeForProgress Says:
She is a very bright lady and a pretty good political entertainer. Still, her ratings pale compared to O’Reilly, Beck, Hannity, etc… even Nancy Grace is beating Maddow. http://www.ihatethemedia.com/ glenn-beck-ratings-skyrocket-olbermann-up-maddow-down
Read my post #76. Once again, when it is a level playing field, then and only then can you compare ratings between the two stations and their shows.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:23 pmBilbo: President Obama needs to get the American people to back him up before he will be able to go after them and not bring our government to a halt.
True, but unfortunately, even if 99% of the American voting public backed him up, you would still have the Republican Congressional Reps voting “NO” on everything because that’s how they roll–and the only ideas they have is tax cuts and tax cuts. They started their smear Obama campaign on November 5 and will continue with it until another Republican is in the White House. They embody the term, “Sore Losers”. Dems just have to work around it. And I do agree with you about the grey areas, but I’m just so happy to see a reasonable, thinking human being on the tube that doesn’t kowtow to the powers that be, I get a little giddy.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:23 pmBilbo Hussein Baggins Says: As long as the demand for justice only comes from the liberal blogging community, he doesn’t have much cover.
I hear what you are saying and agree. Sad state of affairs when the President, a Constitutional lawyer, is more concerned with ‘cover’ than right or legal.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:24 pm#66 Bilbo, that was Zelikow last night on her show — former top aide to Condoleezza Rice. He’s really a toady, and I don’t like him, and he’s trying to cover his ass today. He says he was opposed to Bush policies, but not opposed enough to quit, or blow the whistle — that is what takes real courage.
It seems that this thread is irksome to Proud — he seems threatened by the fact that Maddow is smart and respected. Who would ever say that about Hannity — his ratings remain high because low-IQ people tend to get stuck in a rut, and Hannity appeals to the least common denominator.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:24 pmAnother thing to consider on ratings. Keith and Rachel are both on two times a night. But when they compare ratings, they only compare their prime time ratings. To be honest, they need to add the two audiences together because different people watch at different times, according to their schedules. I doubt that anyone is watching them twice in one evening.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:25 pmHoodathunktick Says:
Bilbo Hussein Baggins Says: As long as the demand for justice only comes from the liberal blogging community, he doesn’t have much cover.
I hear what you are saying and agree. Sad state of affairs when the President, a Constitutional lawyer, is more concerned with ‘cover’ than right or legal.
So you would rather that he come out now saying he is going to prosecute and see our government come to a grinding screeching halt? Because that is what will happen. You can kiss health care and energy policies goodby until after the 2010 election? This is what I mean by seeing the issue in black and white.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:27 pmConservativeForProgress Says:
She is a very bright lady and a pretty good political entertainer. Still, her ratings pale compared to O’Reilly, Beck, Hannity, etc… even Nancy Grace is beating Maddow. http://www.ihatethemedia.com/ glenn-beck-ratings-skyrocket-olbermann-up-maddow-down
Bought ratings aren’t ratings. Cable packaging, corporate deals on what channels are shown at businesses, do not provide ratings. They provide information as to how many TV sets are owned by corporate entities.
On free TV, Faux is a joke.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:27 pmThis factual comment from Bilbo is worth repeating here for those who think everything is a ratings game:
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:28 pmThe Cable companies have Fox in their regular lineup and MSNBC in their premium lineup. So, for people who either can’t afford to or don’t want to pay more for their TV watching, MSNBC is not an available station for them to watch.
“I hear what you are saying and agree. Sad state of affairs when the President, a Constitutional lawyer, is more concerned with ‘cover’ than right or legal.”
Interesting article at Counterpunch worth a read.
(My new anti-virus won’t let me link for some reason)
http://www.counterpunch.org/
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:28 pmCfP – gun sales are through the roof, too.
doesn’t make the people pissing their $ away on them smart.
ever hear of quality, vs. quantity?
yeah, thought not.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:29 pmHere’s another for the dummies…
The Dow is WAAAAAAyy down vs. its historic highs of a few years back, so…
…how failed and stupid is capitalism?
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:31 pmBilbo Hussein Baggins Says: So you would rather that he come out now saying he is going to prosecute and see our government come to a grinding screeching halt? Because that is what will happen. You can kiss health care and energy policies goodby until after the 2010 election? This is what I mean by seeing the issue in black and white.
Again, I hear what you are saying but I have a lot more faith in the American public. Maybe it is time to quit living in fear of what might happen and just accept there will be costs.
While I want health care and energy policies and such, I’d rather have my country back. And I want to see everyone, Republican or Democrat, who sold it to the Bushies, brought to task.
Not willing to trade.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:32 pmWay to COMPLETELY miss the point, ConservativeForProgress.
**eyes rolling**
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:45 pmExcept, it isn’t. We’ve been over this before.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:46 pmdullard.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:50 pmConservativeForProgress Says:
Fine, don’t compare MSNBC to FOX. Compare MSNBC then and now. Maddow’s ratings are tanking, down 40%. Excuses?
MSNBC’s audience has better things to do than watch tv?
Or because MSNBC has competition for their programming while Fox has an audience desperate for affirmation that they’re not fringe losers, after having lost badly in the 2008 election?
McDonald’s sells a ton of burgers because they’re familiar, they’re consistent and they’re ubiquitous. It doesn’t mean the burgers don’t suck.
Personally, I prefer quality over fitting in with the herd. Your mileage may vary.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:52 pmConservativeForProgress Says:
Fine, don’t compare MSNBC to FOX. Compare MSNBC then and now. Maddow’s ratings are tanking, down 40%. Excuses?
Her prime time hour may be down, but if you add in her second show of the night, I’m betting her ratings are not down. It’s spring, the weather is great, it gets dark later. Maybe many people who watched her at 6:00 (on the West Coast) are now watching her at 8:00 because of the above factors.
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:59 pmJust why is it that the Republicans and corporate America are trying to sell the idea that we have to accept their standards? Turn our back on prosecuting war crimes because it will make America look bad? Ignore intelligent and entertaining news programs because the ratings say so? Listen to propaganda because the ratings say so?
They are trying so hard to make us believe they know the ‘right’ way and every time they open their mouths they lie and spout fear. America used to be about independence and freedom. Corporate Republican America is about fear.
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:00 pmHoodathunktick Says:
Again, I hear what you are saying but I have a lot more faith in the American public. Maybe it is time to quit living in fear of what might happen and just accept there will be costs.
While I want health care and energy policies and such, I’d rather have my country back. And I want to see everyone, Republican or Democrat, who sold it to the Bushies, brought to task.
Not willing to trade.
I’m not willing to trade either. But I am willing to wait. This is something you and others seem to be unable or unwilling to do. I would rather see him get universal health care passed (for selfish reasons because I’m going to need it in 9 months) and get us on the road to clean energy, and then go after the Bush Crime Family. After the 2010 election we will have a much larger majority in the House and the Senate and then Obama can do what needs to be done without having to worry about the Republicans blocking him at every intersection.
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:02 pmThere is another aspect to the whole ratings thing.
I don’t watch Rachel or Keith.
Or rather, I do at Crooks and Liars or elswhere where there’s a particularly juicy video clip. Sad to say I’m not doing my job on the ratings wars, but there you go.
And I’m not alone.
A lot of people on the left turned away from TV and radio as a source of news when not only where they clearly lying, they were throwing invective at us. We discovered that the Net provided us not only with good political writing, trenchant media criticism, but access to top flight news reporting from places like the BBC, Deutscche Welle, and the Christian Science Monitor.
While I think this has been healthy, it has served to put the (late-arriving) progresssive broadcaqst media at a disadvantage. A lot of progressives have simply changed their media habits. Absolutely no offense to Dr. Maddow, but after 5 years of broadcasting Orwellian heel, I’m not going to switch back to watching the teevee to get my new s fix.
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:08 pmNo matter how good Rachel’s show is, a lot of progressives have (to coin a phrase) moved on.
BHB, you make very valid points. I have long been a believer that prosecution of war crimes does, out of necessity, need to take something of a back seat to issues like health care. There are many things that need attention but the ambivalent attitude of the President and his DOJ doesn’t help.
I can understand priorities but we need to hear something more definitive about the war crimes issue. Not Congress, but the American people who listened when he promised change, when he said, yes we can. Folks might not like it but they might be heartened to hear ‘yes we can, as soon as we get this other stuff straight.’
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:10 pmMSNBC primetime shows seems to have low ratings, but they provide more opportunities for watching their shows. MSNBC primetime shows are available an hour after the live show on thier website. MSNBC website is the most popular news website in the country (partly because they MSN links to them for news). MSNBC shows provide full podcasts on itunes and they are highly rated on itunes. Rachel Maddow Show, Countdown, and NBC Nightly news are in the top 20 video podcasts. MSNBC viewers tend to be younger, so there is a higher probability they watch entertainment shows during primetime and watch the news later on their TiVO or DVR or other places but live TV. Clips of their shows that have to do with the Obama Administration are also available on Hulu.
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:10 pmBilbo Hussein Baggins Says:
I’m not willing to trade either. But I am willing to wait. This is something you and others seem to be unable or unwilling to do. I would rather see him get universal health care passed (for selfish reasons because I’m going to need it in 9 months) and get us on the road to clean energy, and then go after the Bush Crime Family. After the 2010 election we will have a much larger majority in the House and the Senate and then Obama can do what needs to be done without having to worry about the Republicans blocking him at every intersection.
I’m with Bilbo. As much as I’d love to see Cheney in chains (hey! great name for a band!), I would much rather see actual, fundamental progress bringing the US into the 21st Century.
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:13 pmHoodathunktick Says
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:00 pm
Just why is it that the Republicans and corporate America are trying to sell the idea that we have to[...]Ignore intelligent and entertaining news programs because the ratings say so? Listen to propaganda because the ratings say so?
__________________________________________________________
I have a theory that because a lot of the conservatives prefer to be told how to think, they want everyone to be told how to think. And since they’ve adopted “ratings” as some standard of quality, we’re supposed to adopt the same standard just to validate them. Interestingly, this little numbers game only applies to television ratings, not opinion polls or election results. To them, a high viewership is a clear mark of quality when it comes to television (Bill O’Reilly has the most viewers, therefore he must be the best). Yet, they don’t see high approval ratings (or most votes) as a similar indicator of President Obama’s quality.
As far as corporate America goes, they just want a soft-brained, absorbent, gullible audience of non-thinkers they can sell their stuff to. Audiences that can be told how to think can also be told what to buy.
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:13 pmmisscoleopteramolly Says:
I have a theory that because a lot of the conservatives prefer to be told how to think, they want everyone to be told how to think. And since they’ve adopted “ratings” as some standard of quality, we’re supposed to adopt the same standard just to validate them. Interestingly, this little numbers game only applies to television ratings, not opinion polls or election results. To them, a high viewership is a clear mark of quality when it comes to television (Bill O’Reilly has the most viewers, therefore he must be the best). Yet, they don’t see high approval ratings (or most votes) as a similar indicator of President Obama’s quality.
“We’re not ruled by polls!” Conservative response when Americans disapprove of Republican administration.
“We’ve got bigger numbers!” Conservative response when the polling numbers are positive.
Basic Republican hypocrisy; it’s not rocket science.
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:19 pmshe’s pretty cool.
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:21 pmConservativeForProgress Says
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:41 pm
Fine, don’t compare MSNBC to FOX. Compare MSNBC then and now. Maddow’s ratings are tanking, down 40%. Excuses?
___________________________________________________________
Down 40% from what? Link, please.
In the meantime, let me provide one:
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/ratings/q1_2009_ratings_msnbc_tops_cnn_in_prime_time_112780.asp
All of MSNBC prime-time shows are ahead of what they were at this time last year (surprising, when you consider that political primaries were really buzz-heavy back then), and MSNBC is now ahead of CNN in the ratings. Rachel Maddow wasn’t part of the line-up a year ago, but she’s showing a 98% increase over the show she replaced.
When you consider that the economy is in rough shape (causing many viewers to eliminate all but basic cable), and we don’t have a presidential election to get exciting about, the fact that MSNBC prime-time shows these increases over last year hardly indicates that anyone is “tanking”.
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:24 pmCorporate America and the Republicans are modern day lightning rod/snake oil salesmen. They have invested 30 years in selling America a version of life they would like to see. They are now getting pissed because folks are saying ‘what? Are you nuts?”
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:24 pm#106 – ConservativeForProgress Says:
——————————————————-
“Maddow has suffered some steep audience erosion in recent months, down more than 40 percent in viewership from her peak.”
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:26 pm
Kind of reminds me of the Limbaugh ratings when he first started his radio show, which was provided for free for a few years to get radio stations to play it. This was after his failure at a television show, which tanked within the very first day when he asked for audience participation. Seems Rush cannot abide anyone who disagrees with his extremist opinions.
Rachel Maddow will be around for longer than Rush, simply because she’s not a bobmastic blow-hard, and she’s beyond civil to her guests, AND she invites people with stated opinions that differ from hers!
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:24 pmmisscoleopteramolly Says:
When you consider that the economy is in rough shape (causing many viewers to eliminate all but basic cable), and we don’t have a presidential election to get exciting about, the fact that MSNBC prime-time shows these increases over last year hardly indicates that anyone is “tanking”.
Yes, and she’s only had the show since September. As opposed to the loud-mouthed loons at FoxNoose.
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:27 pmRepublicans have racist, drug addicted, anti-American, teabagging Rush Limbaugh. The rest of us have Rachel Maddow.
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:42 pmI’m not willing to trade either. But I am willing to wait. This is something you and others seem to be unable or unwilling to do. I would rather see him get universal health care passed (for selfish reasons because I’m going to need it in 9 months) and get us on the road to clean energy, and then go after the Bush Crime Family. After the 2010 election we will have a much larger majority in the House and the Senate and then Obama can do what needs to be done without having to worry about the Republicans blocking him at every intersection.
This presupposes that he CAN get either program past the republicans. At this point, I don’t see any real chance of that happening either, so I think we’re reduced to standing for principle, or accomodating republicans, who don’t want any democratic successes to stand in their way in 2010.
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:48 pmI never miss her show in particular I love the fact that there is no cross talking screaming to make a point. Her hotness is another factor. The lure of the unattainable I suspect. If a debate was fairly monitored eliminating the screaming down factor she wins hands down ask Joe Scarborough. He turn tail and ran!
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:55 pmLess people watch her because you need a brain to comprehend what she reports on, unlike fox news which just spoon feeds crap into empty minded sheepish masses which include old people, people with mental disabilities and rural farm folk. All people that are not up to date with today’s world.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:17 pmProud, I have been meaning to ask you then, who do you see as the “good” pundits? I understand your image of “hacks”, but specifically who do you consider to be dependable?
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:19 pmdeebaser Says:
Also, a good portion of Fox’s audience HAS to be ironic viewers. I DVR Glen Beck because he’s hilariously out of his g’damn mind and I can throw it on at 7 because Matthews sucks.
I’d probably watch Beck if he went back to his “crazy eyes closeup” thing and made that a constant part of the show. That was awesome. He should also start doing his show in front of a green screen.
.
ConservativeForProgress Says:
Maddow has suffered some steep audience erosion in recent months, down more than 40 percent in viewership from her peak.
You mean when everybody was watching news shows because they were excited about that big election we had? Then they gradually stopped watching so much news and did other stuff? Nice cherry-pick there.
.
ConservativeForProgress Says:
And yet, our standard of living is WAAAAAAyy higher vs. most socialist countries, so….
Not so much. Not for a while. That might’ve been the case when the Soviet Bloc was still around, but now our competition is stuff like Sweden and Switzerland. And I think they’ve actually got us beat on most of the relevant statistics.
.
Proud Says:
All such positive reviews for this liberal hack. It makes me realize why dems are fighting so hard for the return of the so called “fairness doctrine”.
Except that they’re not.
.
Proud Says:
They realize that spouting hate 24/7 without facts is a ratings disaster. Stop being jealous of Fox News, they speak the truth and it gets the ratings.
OK, you almost had me. Now I know for sure you’re pulling our leg.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:32 pmdeebaser says (at #17):
I think Ms. Maddow’s point is that she too much of a nerd to own a TV. “Cool” is most definitely NOT an adjective she’d use to describe herself.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:54 pmGotta thank Maddow for the service see is providing. Same for Olbermann and most of the rest of the gang at MSNBC.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:58 pm______
Democrat Soldier Says:
Rachel Maddow will be around for longer than Rush, simply because she’s not a bobmastic blow-hard, and she’s beyond civil to her guests, AND she invites people with stated opinions that differ from hers!
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:24 pm
______
I’ve not seen many guests that disagree with her, but she does do a great job of keeping it civil. Her show is a good source of the liberal viewpoint, except for those times when she tries a little too hard to be snarky and, instead, sounds like a silly teenage girl.
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:59 pmProud Says:
All such positive reviews for this liberal hack. It makes me realize why dems are fighting so hard for the return of the so called “fairness doctrine”. They realize that spouting hate 24/7 without facts is a ratings disaster. Stop being jealous of Fox News, they speak the truth and it gets the ratings.
***
wow, your bp must be through the roof.
:\
April 22nd, 2009 at 4:19 pmjoe cantwell Says:
wow, your bp must be through the roof.
If it’s causing full blown delusions, then he’s probably in the midst of a stroke.
April 22nd, 2009 at 4:49 pmAmerican Patsy Says:
You people drool, much?
Funny you should mention that. I think the CDC did a study on the composition of drool in liberals and conservatives recently. Liberal drool was found to be composed of higher-than-average levels of caffeine, hemp, and botox, while conservative drool contained higher-than-average levels of crude oil, Pabst Blue Ribbon, and falafel extract.
April 22nd, 2009 at 5:51 pmI’d probably watch Beck if he went back to his “crazy eyes closeup” thing and made that a constant part of the show. That was awesome. He should also start doing his show in front of a green screen.
I’d watch if the “doom bunker” (or whatever the hell it was called) was a nightly part of the show.
April 22nd, 2009 at 8:55 pmThat is some crazy shiz….
Proud @ 138 says:
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:19 pmOh my god. The Irony.
Not that Proud would recognize it. Unless it hit him like a 2×4 upside his head.
I just got home from work and saw this thread. I second the McClatchy piece on Rachel. She is a class act. Her education, especially at Oxford University explains alot.. Mostly the class, grace, great good humour and intelligence and hard work.
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:23 pmKeep it going Rachel.
I must say that she actually makes me care about some stories that I didn’t care about before. That’s makes me a better person for understanding the world a little better. Oh wait, I want to go work for her!
April 23rd, 2009 at 12:20 amI did not know that anyone had lower ratings that kieth olberman. Enter maddow.
April 23rd, 2009 at 1:03 amAmerican Patsy Says:
You people drool, much?
April 22nd, 2009 at 5:29 pm
Y’all trolls are sure working hard to show us how.
April 23rd, 2009 at 1:22 amAmerican Patsy Says:
You people drool, much?
What can I say? Intelligence and competence just does it for us.
April 23rd, 2009 at 2:23 amI never knew who she was until I started watching MSNBC in search of something resembling national TV news journalism. I was an NBC news watcher during the days of the Huntley Brinkley Reports as a kid and then during the times when Tom Brokaw was on the air. Now, I’m a fan of Ms. Maddow, because she is intelligent, well spoken, witty and not to mention, easy on the eyes. Let’s face it she’s a hell of a lot easier on the eyes than BO, RL and GB right? I’ve also been a fan of Keith Olberman during his days in Los Angeles as a sportscaster at KTLA. So needless to say, I watch Countdown which leads into Maddow’s show.
April 23rd, 2009 at 6:10 amWhen Rachel is talking to Elizabeth Warren, I am really conflicted about who I love the most.
April 23rd, 2009 at 7:59 amI guess McClatchy hasn’t been reading the incomparable Bob Somerby.
http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh042009.shtml
Carolyn Kay
April 23rd, 2009 at 10:39 amMakeThemAccountable.com
#153 – Tim43 Says:
———————————————————
“I did not know that anyone had lower ratings that kieth olberman. Enter maddow.”
April 23rd, 2009 at 1:03 am
I did not know that anyone had lower ratings than Rachel maddow. Enter Glen Back: he is the biggest loser! Wonder when he’s going to admit this and say “goodbye”?
It doesn’t matter, his audience is already doing it for him: Goodbye Beck-ster, you lose out to two liberals! The truth will set you fre, but first it’s going to tick you off!
April 24th, 2009 at 9:34 am