Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Showing posts with label Rachel Maddow Show. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rachel Maddow Show. Show all posts
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Umm, is there a way @MSNBC can force Chris Matthews to watch his own Network and learn somethin'? (VIDEO)
First Chris Matthews had on E.J. Dionne and Susan Milligan, and barely let Susan get in a word in edgewise:
And then Lawrence O'Donnell had Mark Shields on to pontificate just a little bit more:
And yes, despite Lawrence's admonition, Mark Shields went on and on.
Unanswered was the question, in both segments was this: Why should the Catholic Church be able to enforce Catholic Dogma on it's employees who work for Catholic Organization who are not Catholic.
Instead all we heard was the alleged oppression being put upon the Church, which...if you remember history, is just a damn joke.
Another way to ask the question is: Why should the Catholic Church control the sex lives of Non-Catholic, or anyone else for that matter?
Or how about this one: Mad as I am about the Catholic Sex Scandal, I don't want to pay for Father Donovan's Heart Medication. Can I have a exemption, too? Or is it more important that we have a Civilization here, and pay for each other's stuff...even if we don't use it?
But finally buried in the din...was Rachel Maddow...and Rachel sounding uber-reasonable, and quiet, underhandedly scolding her journalistic colleages (namely Shields and Matthews).
And she did it again, the next night:
And Lawrence had an actual lawyer on (the legendary David Boies) to explain why the contretemps over the Birth Control issue was total bullshit:
Basically, I want two things from Chris Matthews...but expect only one.
It'd be really nice if stop hawking his book on Jack Kennedy every ten seconds, but hey a fella can dream, can't he?
But what I really expect is for Chris Matthews to stop using MSNBC as a personal platform to provide cover for the Church, of which he and I are members. He has not provided an impartial platform and instead used the network to flog and issue that is 110% bullshit.
Ethics, Chris. I thought they were important to Catholics. Maybe that's just lip service.
(Actually, as a Catholic, and knowing our history...yeah, it's lip service.)
And then Lawrence O'Donnell had Mark Shields on to pontificate just a little bit more:
And yes, despite Lawrence's admonition, Mark Shields went on and on.
Unanswered was the question, in both segments was this: Why should the Catholic Church be able to enforce Catholic Dogma on it's employees who work for Catholic Organization who are not Catholic.
Instead all we heard was the alleged oppression being put upon the Church, which...if you remember history, is just a damn joke.
Another way to ask the question is: Why should the Catholic Church control the sex lives of Non-Catholic, or anyone else for that matter?
Or how about this one: Mad as I am about the Catholic Sex Scandal, I don't want to pay for Father Donovan's Heart Medication. Can I have a exemption, too? Or is it more important that we have a Civilization here, and pay for each other's stuff...even if we don't use it?
But finally buried in the din...was Rachel Maddow...and Rachel sounding uber-reasonable, and quiet, underhandedly scolding her journalistic colleages (namely Shields and Matthews).
And she did it again, the next night:
And Lawrence had an actual lawyer on (the legendary David Boies) to explain why the contretemps over the Birth Control issue was total bullshit:
Basically, I want two things from Chris Matthews...but expect only one.
It'd be really nice if stop hawking his book on Jack Kennedy every ten seconds, but hey a fella can dream, can't he?
But what I really expect is for Chris Matthews to stop using MSNBC as a personal platform to provide cover for the Church, of which he and I are members. He has not provided an impartial platform and instead used the network to flog and issue that is 110% bullshit.
Ethics, Chris. I thought they were important to Catholics. Maybe that's just lip service.
(Actually, as a Catholic, and knowing our history...yeah, it's lip service.)
Friday, January 27, 2012
It turns out, Mittens is so rich, he's actually FORGOTTEN how much money he has.
Dang, Rachel had a busy night tonight. Didn't she?
Don't worry about the Space suit. You know it was all about Newt's Moon Base before this clip, right?
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Don't worry about the Space suit. You know it was all about Newt's Moon Base before this clip, right?
Wow. Apparently, Mittens believes in "Pray Away the Gay"... (VIDEO)
Uhhh, this is gonna be a problem for Mittens...
MSNBC: The unfortunately slow death of the Birther Movement (VIDEO)
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Overall turnout for NH Primary was up, but actual GOP Participation fell by 16 percent. (VIDEO)
So let's remember what Rachel said. The New Hampshire Secretary of State predicted Record turnout for the GOP Primary, and pretty much nailed the number. You can't stick a landing any better than that. What was not clear what how much of that record turnout was powered by Independents (or even mischievous Democrats), since New Hampshire has an Open Primary. And we won't know the damage until the SOS comes out with the full tableaux of figures later on.
Well, the uber Conservative Washington Examiner has got itself a projection...and its a damn good reason to panic, if you're a Republican:
Though overall turnout in the primary is projected to set a record, eclipsing the 2008 tally, turnout among Republican voters is on track to be down by roughly 16 percent.
The reason for the discrepancy is that because there was no competitive Democratic primary this time around (as well as several GOP candidates aggressively chasing their votes), there was a huge spike in the number of independents and Democrats who were voting in the Republican race, something Granite Staters can do in the open primary system.
When you eliminate independents and Democrats from the 2008 equation, actual registered Republicans made up 61 percent of the roughly 239,000 votes cast in the GOP primary, putting the turnout among Republicans at around 145,790. But last night, actual Republicans only comprised 49 percent of the electorate, according to exits. Even if we round up the final 2012 turnout number to 250,000, which would be slightly higher than current projections, that would only leave actual Republican turnout at 122,500, which would represent a 16 percent drop.
Remember, the Examiner's figures are projections based on Exit Polls, but the math is pretty compelling, and accurate, when verified by Professor Dad.
Monday, August 22, 2011
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Rachel Maddow's Interview with Elizabeth Warren (VIDEO)
Frankly, she sounds pissed...at Republicans:
That was from an Atlantic piece that's out today. I would like to note that Nancy Scola made it sound like Obama passed her over for Richard Cordray.
Actually, no, that's exactly what Nancy said:
Uh...no.
And if you watch the interview below, she gets even more specific.
This is a little seen, little read blog. I should not be doing more reporting than Atlantic Monthly professionals.
Rachel wisely held back, and let the Professor do her thing.
UPDATE: 11:57AM Pacific. Watching that last part again. Rachel pretty much asked her "Are you running for Senate", and not only did Dr. Warren not say no, that was as much in the affirmative as I'd seen her say. Dr. Warren still did not say she was running, but this was the closest I've seen her come to saying she was in.
"Let me put it this way," said Warren on yesterday's call. "I'm saving all the rocks in my pockets for Republicans. And if that's too partisan for you, then shame on me."
That was from an Atlantic piece that's out today. I would like to note that Nancy Scola made it sound like Obama passed her over for Richard Cordray.
Actually, no, that's exactly what Nancy said:
Elizabeth Warren is ready to name and shame. After 10 long months spent crafting a brand-new federal agency in her image and likeness, years before that willing the institution into statutory existence, only to be passed over on Sunday in favor of Richard Cordray just as the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is moving out of beta, Warren, on a press call late yesterday afternoon, was eager to share her clarity on who's to blame for the especially precarious position the new federal-friend-to-the-American-consumer now finds itself in.
Uh...no.
Rich will be a strong leader for this agency. He has a proven track record of fighting for families during his time as head of the CFPB enforcement division, as Attorney General of Ohio, and throughout his career. He was one of the first senior executives I recruited for the agency, and his hard work and deep commitment make it clear he can make many important contributions in leading it. Rich is smart, he is tough, and he will make a stellar Director. I am very pleased for him and very pleased for the CFPB.
And if you watch the interview below, she gets even more specific.
This is a little seen, little read blog. I should not be doing more reporting than Atlantic Monthly professionals.
Rachel wisely held back, and let the Professor do her thing.
UPDATE: 11:57AM Pacific. Watching that last part again. Rachel pretty much asked her "Are you running for Senate", and not only did Dr. Warren not say no, that was as much in the affirmative as I'd seen her say. Dr. Warren still did not say she was running, but this was the closest I've seen her come to saying she was in.
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
If you don't mention Congress in your pushback of the President, @Maddow, then you are lying to us
Per yesterday:
If you have piece about Obama's retreat on GITMO, you are of course free to blast the President. That is your right.
However, if you don't mention Congress's responsibility in this, you are lying to us, and wasting our time.
If you have piece about Obama's retreat on GITMO, you are of course free to blast the President. That is your right.
However, if you don't mention Congress's responsibility in this, you are lying to us, and wasting our time.
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Rachel does a very good job of explaining the difference between Three Mile Island, Chernobyl...and what's going on now (VIDEO)
Here I am, trying to take a week off (from work), and Japan keeps pulling me in:
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Friday, March 4, 2011
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Everything's going to hell...unless it isn't...
In the span of twenty minutes, you were told, most assuredly that things were either total crap on the Violent rhetoric front...or getting much better...by two Hosts of two different shows on the same network.
First, we had Keith's Special Comment from Monday night...
...which bled into Rachel's segment containing happiness, sunshine, rainbows and unicorns (well, happiness, sunshine, rainbows and unicorns for her):
In truth, this is Liberalism. We have debates even among each other. We don't always agree (see: Deal, Tax Cut...and Option, Public), but at least we have the debate. It's not like a version of Colbert's frequent question: "George Bush, Great President...or the Greatest President?!?"
First, we had Keith's Special Comment from Monday night...
...which bled into Rachel's segment containing happiness, sunshine, rainbows and unicorns (well, happiness, sunshine, rainbows and unicorns for her):
In truth, this is Liberalism. We have debates even among each other. We don't always agree (see: Deal, Tax Cut...and Option, Public), but at least we have the debate. It's not like a version of Colbert's frequent question: "George Bush, Great President...or the Greatest President?!?"
| The Colbert Report | Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
| Great President...or Greatest President? | ||||
| ||||
Sunday, December 19, 2010
One day, this will be normal. One day there will be a GLBT President, and no one will know the difference.
I was in the air headed to (shudder) Texas for the Christmas Holiday when the first cloture vote was cast, and I had just gotten in a hearty Goode Barbecue Company lunch when I got the word, via the CNN iPad App, that DADT was dead once and for all. All day, all I managed was a Tweet paraphrasing my standard phrase of joy: "DADT Repealed...and let the church say Amen."
And yes, that is my hand held up in praise of the almighty as I type/say that.
I'm a straight man, so I don't think I'm ever going to fully comprehend the joy (at least, I hope its joy) that our friends in the GLBT Community are feeling today, but I am Black, so I think I have an idea.
In 1948, a Democratic President (Truman) signed an Executive Order desegregating the Military.
(Side note: Unfortunately, it was a complete and utter misreading of this bit of history that gave rise to the bull@#$ notion that President Obama could simply wipe away DADT with the stroke of a pen...isn't that right Jane Hamsher?)
Anyway, what happened after that wasn't just a bunch of black Soldiers fighting and dying alongside whites (it was Korea, after all). What really happened was African-Americans finally had a feeling of true citizenship, a feeling that finally, finally, there was a place for us in America. Finally, we counted...or at least we started to in a major way.
I remember typing something along those lines when President Obama was first elected in 2008, the absolute lift and joy I felt as a black man, and the pride as a similar feeling came over me. It was just as the First Lady (may or may not have) said, for the first time I felt proud to be an American, and I hoped that one day my fellow Latino Americans feel the same way when President Martinez or Solares takes the Oath of Office, or my fellow Asian Americans when President Cho or Leung is sworn in.
Now is the GLBT's moment. No, this isn't an openly Gay President...but it could be the start to one.
Don't tell me that a Gay man or woman, straight-laced, and suited up, bearing none of the stereotypical bull@#$% characteristics best left to Sitcoms, openly in love with the partner of their choosing, and carrying with them a resume of medals won, and valor attained, can't one day, and one day within my lifetime, stand before the Chief Justice of the United States (who doesn't screw up the ceremony), and become our next President.
The miracle won't be that magic moment happening...
...the miracle, is that magic moment happening, and no one noticing the difference.
I know there is still a long way to go between that day, and today. But my fellow Americans, you will one day be able to look back on this day, and do something that maybe you haven't been able to do in a while...
You will look back on DADT repeal...and know hope.
Note: Special hat tip to Andrew Sullivan for that last line which is almost his signature nowadays, and to The Only Adult in the Room for hitting that Rachel footage first.
And yes, that is my hand held up in praise of the almighty as I type/say that.
I'm a straight man, so I don't think I'm ever going to fully comprehend the joy (at least, I hope its joy) that our friends in the GLBT Community are feeling today, but I am Black, so I think I have an idea.
In 1948, a Democratic President (Truman) signed an Executive Order desegregating the Military.
(Side note: Unfortunately, it was a complete and utter misreading of this bit of history that gave rise to the bull@#$ notion that President Obama could simply wipe away DADT with the stroke of a pen...isn't that right Jane Hamsher?)
Anyway, what happened after that wasn't just a bunch of black Soldiers fighting and dying alongside whites (it was Korea, after all). What really happened was African-Americans finally had a feeling of true citizenship, a feeling that finally, finally, there was a place for us in America. Finally, we counted...or at least we started to in a major way.
I remember typing something along those lines when President Obama was first elected in 2008, the absolute lift and joy I felt as a black man, and the pride as a similar feeling came over me. It was just as the First Lady (may or may not have) said, for the first time I felt proud to be an American, and I hoped that one day my fellow Latino Americans feel the same way when President Martinez or Solares takes the Oath of Office, or my fellow Asian Americans when President Cho or Leung is sworn in.
Now is the GLBT's moment. No, this isn't an openly Gay President...but it could be the start to one.
Don't tell me that a Gay man or woman, straight-laced, and suited up, bearing none of the stereotypical bull@#$% characteristics best left to Sitcoms, openly in love with the partner of their choosing, and carrying with them a resume of medals won, and valor attained, can't one day, and one day within my lifetime, stand before the Chief Justice of the United States (who doesn't screw up the ceremony), and become our next President.
The miracle won't be that magic moment happening...
...the miracle, is that magic moment happening, and no one noticing the difference.
I know there is still a long way to go between that day, and today. But my fellow Americans, you will one day be able to look back on this day, and do something that maybe you haven't been able to do in a while...
You will look back on DADT repeal...and know hope.
Note: Special hat tip to Andrew Sullivan for that last line which is almost his signature nowadays, and to The Only Adult in the Room for hitting that Rachel footage first.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Jon Stewart and Rachel Maddow are telling you the same thing America, John McCain is a flake! (VIDEO)
Of course, both of these clips of video got a fair amount of airplay in the Blogosphere. I just thought it'd be useful to have them in the same place for once.
For the record, Jon's funnier.
Then again, he's not trying to be news.
And finally, the Daily Show (which I saw first):
I don't want to forget this special moment of Daily Show goodness, discussion the static nature of our contemporary political discourse...
And, your moment of Zen...
For the record, Jon's funnier.
Then again, he's not trying to be news.
And finally, the Daily Show (which I saw first):
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| It Gets Worse PSA | ||||
| ||||
I don't want to forget this special moment of Daily Show goodness, discussion the static nature of our contemporary political discourse...
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Republicans Miss Bill Clinton | ||||
| ||||
And, your moment of Zen...
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Moment of Zen - John McCain Questions Homosexual Conduct | ||||
| ||||
Friday, November 12, 2010
Rachel Maddow's Unedited Interview with Jon "I have the boubons" Stewart (VIDEO)
Jon was sick, so for about the first ten minutes, he's off his game. But he warms up as time goes on, and he did not throw up once during the interview. Kudos!
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Rachel Maddow notices that there hasn't been much of a price to pay for racist comments this year (VIDEO)
This is what Rachel does well, broad historical perspective with evidence.
Followed up by an interview with Melissa Harris-Lacewell.
Followed up by an interview with Melissa Harris-Lacewell.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
MSNBC: "Other than that, Delaware's great!" (VIDEO)
After speaking with Christine O'Donnell staffers multiple times about speaking someone from Christine O'Donnell's campaign, Rahcel Maddow rudely ejected from O'Donnell campaign headquaters.
UPDATE: October 6, 2010:
Now, with video!
UPDATE: October 6, 2010:
Now, with video!
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
MSNBC: Pundit Reaction to the Speech
Reactions to the Iraq Speech:
First, Rachel Maddow:
Eugene Robinson (Dead trees):
Adam Server (bit of whining):
Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson:
And Eugene again, this time on Video:
First, Rachel Maddow:
Eugene Robinson (Dead trees):
President Obama’s Oval Office speech was good, but the iconography was great.
In his address marking the effective end of the Iraq War, Obama used the setting well. The flags behind him, the family pictures on either side, the flag pin in his lapel, the red tie, white shirt and blue suit... it all projected patriotism and authority.
One thing that worked in the speech was his drawing a straight line between the vast monetary cost of the war and the economic slough of despond in which we're mired. One thing that didn't work was his assertion that with the end of combat in Iraq, we were turning a page. We're still at war, and Obama said that now more resources are available for Afghanistan.
Politicos will be universally dissatisfied. Liberals will say he gave George W. Bush too much credit; conservatives, not enough. But I think he did himself and his party some good tonight. He was generous enough to Bush, resolute in his intentions and obviously sincere in his praise of the troops. He wore the presidency with an accessory that Americans expect and appreciate: gravitas.
Adam Server (bit of whining):
Conversely, while conservatives are busy angrily denouncing the president for not giving more credit to Bush for implementing the surge -- by which they mean not acknowledging that conservatives were right -- that wouldn't have been appropriate either. This speech was about the commitment of those who actually served, not the better part of valor displayed by those who sat in front of their keyboards and hammered out empirical or ideological arguments for or against the war.
That's not to say that the speech was devoid of politics. Obama's style of politics is to pretend he's above politics, and this speech fits that mold. But the biggest reason not to rehash the argument over going to war in Iraq is that he won it already. It's part of why he's president. Obama doesn't need to convince the American people that the war in Iraq was a mistake, because a majority of Americans already believe that. Conservatives want to reargue the war from 2007 onward, but treating the Iraq war as though it began with the surge is a bit like running over someone on the street, backing up over the body a few times, and then demanding a special merit badge for finally deciding to call 911. And as I wrote yesterday, this still isn't really over.
The most disappointing part of the speech was that the president failed to acknowledge the suffering of the Iraqi people as a result of the war. Doing so would not have diminished his tribute towards American servicemembers, but it would have been a helpful reminder that treating the rest of the world like a game of RISK has real human consequences. Unlike the president's refusal to reargue the war, his failure to acknowledge the suffering of Iraqi civilians -- more than an estimated 100,000 of whom died as a result -- is an inexcusable omission.
Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson:
And Eugene again, this time on Video:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)