Why is Rachel Maddow such a bit%#?

Here's what happened... She went up against Rand in an "interview" during his Senate run. She knew she was demagoguing and so did he. He pointed it out, and it made her go off the rails. She spent the next few weeks trying to convince her audience how she "caught" him. The backlash she received, though, from the Paul people pissed her off.

So, she did as all wounded animals do when they feel threatened, she went bat-shit crazy on the object of the threat - Rand Paul. He, and his minions, treated her like a little girl and she took great offense. It only steeled her opposition. By the way, she is not alone in this. The same vitriol can be seen in Hannity, Levin, McCain, Santorum, and Cain. When you show these folks up, they label you the enemy - it doesn't matter if they may agree with you on some issues.
 
juleswin said:
Rachel is a real hater and no she will not lose her job. Liberals will tune back to her show they lost the senate. She shines bright when there are republicans in power to bash. Chris Matthew really impressed me in that panel and Al Sharpton was his ignorant self. He said Rand doesn't have any policy proposal for prison reform. Yea, I don't know exactly what his policy is but I have heard him talk about it before. These people are supposed to be experts in politics but they are just partisans
Click to expand...

Sentencing reform for non-violent offenders. Eliminate the disparity in cocain and crack sentences. Restore voting rights to ex-convicts. Nope, seems like Rand doesn't have any policy about prison reform at all. :rolleyes:
 
CaptUSA said:
Here's what happened... She went up against Rand in an "interview" during his Senate run. She knew she was demagoguing and so did he. He pointed it out, and it made her go off the rails. She spent the next few weeks trying to convince her audience how she "caught" him. The backlash she received, though, from the Paul people pissed her off.

So, she did as all wounded animals do when they feel threatened, she went bat-shit crazy on the object of the threat - Rand Paul. He, and his minions, treated her like a little girl and she took great offense. It only steeled her opposition. By the way, she is not alone in this. The same vitriol can be seen in Hannity, Levin, McCain, Santorum, and Cain. When you show these folks up, they label you the enemy - it doesn't matter if they may agree with you on some issues.
Click to expand...


Yep which is why you can't call her or Hannity journalists. They don't even attempt any sort of objectivity.
 
phill4paul said:
Sentencing reform for non-violent offenders. Eliminate the disparity in cocain and crack sentences. Restore voting rights to ex-convicts. Nope, seems like Rand doesn't have any policy about prison reform at all. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting that. I know a few of his policy proposals like expunging the records and restoring voter rights to non violent offenders. But yea, I did not know the whole story which the so called pundits should look into before opening their mouths.
 
So far Rand Paul has been the Rock of Gibraltar. Let them bash themselves against this Rock all they want. Let's hope he can stick bees up the butts of all these propagandists, and cause them all to make fools of themselves just like Maddow.

The comparison has been made between Rand Paul and Reagan. For those of you who don't see the resemblance, allow me to explain it to you. Reagan had a way to play off criticism--several ways, actually--which got him through being pretty much the most thoroughly attacked president ever. Even Nixon didn't have to deal with anything like it until his last year in office, if then. But nothing stuck. The press attacked, and if it made any difference to his poll numbers at all, they went up. It was labeled the 'Reagan Teflon'. Only Iran-Contra, which I believe Reagan had nothing to do with and blindsided him completely, unruffled him so much he couldn't make his Teflon.

Reagan was good at that. But he wasn't as smart as Rand Paul. If Rand has the strength to keep his Teflon smooth for the next ten years, he can potentially do amazing things for this nation. And a lot of propagandists are going to dash themselves to pieces attacking this rock.
 
I enjoyed watching her eyes flutter repeatedly as she was clearly disturbed. Maddow only destroys her own credibility with her stupid comments. She can't even see the situation clearly, which I think is great. Democrats like her are so far out of touch with the average voter that she can't even comprehend what is happening.

ron_paul_revolution_sign.jpg
 
anaconda said:
The dude with the glasses had a fascinating segment a few weeks back where he compared Rand's finesse of his talking points to that of Ronald Reagan's methodology.
Click to expand...

The dude with the glasses also had a good point that Scott Walker could be a formidable 2016 candidate.
 
RonPaulGeorge&Ringo said:
Maddow is trying to take over the MSNBC election coverage right now with a pointless rant just trashing Rand Paul as an idiot or something... even the other hosts are like, "Shut up, bitch."
Click to expand...

I watched all the election returns on #MSDNC for the laughs last night. Maddow grew increasingly irrational over the course of the night. It was pretty funny.
 
meh...reminds me of someone taking their last breath, so she decided to go down with her own middle finger stuck in her ass...
 
Maddow: "It is a joke. He is the inheritor of a legacy built by his father on direct mail."

Hmmmm, how can I avoid an ad hominem attack on her and make my point.... :)

I'm trying to think of how/when I came to be so enthusiastic about Ron Paul. I'm pretty sure it wasn't due to direct mail, because I hate direct email and trash/delete whatever I get without really looking at it.

I think I somehow found out about "Dr. No" and came to love what he was saying.

So, I think she's wrong on that point, from my perspective.

I want so much to like Maddow, because she often does decent research to support the points she makes. However, her delivery and smug/sneering tone just put me right off. She's not funny like Stewart/Colbert/Oliver when she tries to be, she just comes off as a know-it-all. So, I switch/click away. ;)

An earlier post about Maddow having some sort of personal vendetta against Rand Paul seems to fit, unfortunately.

I'm surprised Chris Matthews doesn't get hate mail for his "girl's night out" comment...hehe.
 
Brian4Liberty said:
Because he is a Marxist, and cultural Marxism and political correctness do not apply to their own.
Click to expand...

And if you don't believe this, just look at how many have apologized for and downplayed (to the point of engineering a coverup) Stalin starving tens of millions of Soviets, torturing tens of thousands to death, and working millions more to death in Siberian gulags.
 
Maddow attempted to claim a victory based on the number of women elected to Congress.

Too bad she didn't go into any details on that, and talk about any of the new women in Congress. Perhaps Maddow didn't want to talk about Joni Ernst, Shelley Moore Capito, Mia Love, or Elise Stefanik "the youngest woman ever elected to Congress".

Maybe it's because they are all Republican.
 
anaconda said:
Thanks! I enjoyed that immensely. Some other good videos to choose from as well.

Maddow comes across as having a personal grudge against Paul. It impairs her objectivity and looks rather unprofessional. Matthews comes across as the wise sage in that group. What are we to make of Sharpton's inability to distinguish between "Ron" and "Rand" Paul? The dude with the glasses had a fascinating segment a few weeks back where he compared Rand's finesse of his talking points to that of Ronald Reagan's methodology.
Click to expand...

She tried to destroy his career and failed miserably. It probably sticks in her craw that she's such an irrelevant, feckless twat.
 
juleswin said:
Click to expand...


I tried to watch this. I really did. My general policy - developed from long and weary experience - is to refuse to waste a moment of my time watching or listening to the crap that hacks like these present as some kind of "analysis." But I made an exception in this case, out of curiosity as to just how much of an ass Maddow was making of herself (and with regard to Matthews' putative defense of Rand) ...

But I wasn't able to get past Matthews' blather about how Rand is going to "offer up this Ayn Rand Objectivist view to the American people."
I had to shut it off at that point. like a gag reflex. There is only so much cringe-inducing stupidity I can take in one dose from these bozos ...
 
Bryan said:
Maddox said Rand didn't know anything about monetary policy.... Seriously, that's not even rational, and given that his dad is a clear expert on the topic you'd think he would have learned a few things growing up....
Click to expand...

Rand has read all the Austrians and has forgotten more about monetary policy than Maddow knows.
 
twomp said:
She said he didn't know anything about monetary policy, drone policy or criminal justice reform without going into detail on why she disagrees. She is entering into Bill O'Reilly levels of stupidity. A simple search on google would show all the bills he's attempted to pass and all the writings he's made on those topics. IF she is a semi-intelligent person, she would refute him with facts. Instead she rambles aimlessly like O'Reilly does. Without stating any facts.
Click to expand...

LOL. Rachel Madcow is even in disagreement with her own fellow liberals at MSNBC. Melissa Perry has practically fawned over Rand Paul with regards to Criminal Justice reform. You know, the way Rachel used to do before Rand actually won the GOP senate primary?

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top