HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Politics 2014 (Forum) » Wow. Rachel Maddow Manage...

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 09:32 PM

Wow. Rachel Maddow Manages to Sound Like Both a Nitpicker and a Know-Nothing

regarding the "launch" of the OFA campaign with a Friday at 4:25pm email to call Congress ("They're not there!").

She's devoted a whole session to beating up on this. Bill Burton - her guest - sounds like he's patiently explaining calculus to a fourth grader.

70 replies, 9026 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 70 replies Author Time Post
Reply Wow. Rachel Maddow Manages to Sound Like Both a Nitpicker and a Know-Nothing (Original post)
alcibiades_mystery Jan 2013 OP
MotherPetrie Jan 2013 #1
alcibiades_mystery Jan 2013 #5
Swamp Lover Jan 2013 #8
alcibiades_mystery Jan 2013 #11
Swamp Lover Jan 2013 #13
brush Jan 2013 #15
LiberalFighter Jan 2013 #20
Arkana Jan 2013 #46
Cosmocat Jan 2013 #38
MotherPetrie Jan 2013 #12
russspeakeasy Jan 2013 #14
Jeff In Milwaukee Jan 2013 #17
TeamPooka Feb 2013 #70
bbkenn92 Jan 2013 #16
rug Jan 2013 #18
alcibiades_mystery Jan 2013 #39
rug Jan 2013 #40
LostinRed Jan 2013 #19
intaglio Jan 2013 #21
Cali_Democrat Jan 2013 #24
dballance Jan 2013 #26
lame54 Jan 2013 #30
lunatica Jan 2013 #33
jcgoldie Jan 2013 #41
Rider3 Jan 2013 #51
bunnies Jan 2013 #52
WeekendWarrior Jan 2013 #68
southernyankeebelle Jan 2013 #28
bluestateguy Jan 2013 #2
Drunken Irishman Jan 2013 #25
lunatica Jan 2013 #34
pscot Jan 2013 #3
HERVEPA Jan 2013 #4
EastKYLiberal Jan 2013 #6
Enrique Jan 2013 #7
alcibiades_mystery Jan 2013 #10
ancianita Jan 2013 #22
Chathamization Jan 2013 #23
Bluenorthwest Jan 2013 #32
Chathamization Jan 2013 #36
ancianita Jan 2013 #43
Chathamization Jan 2013 #50
ancianita Jan 2013 #42
lunatica Jan 2013 #35
vi5 Jan 2013 #37
Katorama Jan 2013 #58
vi5 Jan 2013 #61
Katorama Jan 2013 #56
Cha Jan 2013 #9
ancianita Jan 2013 #44
Cha Jan 2013 #48
Katorama Jan 2013 #55
Cha Jan 2013 #59
kjackson227 Jan 2013 #63
Katorama Jan 2013 #57
veganlush Jan 2013 #27
southernyankeebelle Jan 2013 #29
ancianita Jan 2013 #45
southernyankeebelle Jan 2013 #47
Kolesar Jan 2013 #53
southernyankeebelle Jan 2013 #54
Doctor_J Jan 2013 #64
southernyankeebelle Jan 2013 #65
Doctor_J Jan 2013 #66
southernyankeebelle Jan 2013 #67
MrYikes Jan 2013 #31
Jersey Devil Jan 2013 #49
veganlush Jan 2013 #60
Katorama Jan 2013 #62
Chathamization Jan 2013 #69

Response to alcibiades_mystery (Original post)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 09:36 PM

1. Would you care to explain what you're talking about?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #1)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 10:03 PM

5. There's a television show called The Rachel Maddow Show. The show plays on the MSNBC cable network

usually at 9 Eastern, 8 Central. The show involves a woman named Rachel Maddow, who is something like a commentator on political matters in the United States of America. She generally sits behind a desk and explains an issue. She may then interview a guest about that same issue. Let me be clear: this show appears on the television, which is the electronic device commonly kept in one's living room or sometimes bedroom, and which shows programming broadcast from various studios. It used to be that people received a television signal through the airwaves, but mostly now people receive a digital signal through a cable line or some sort. One connects this line through the wall to the television.

Anyhoo. Ms. Maddow, who is, let's recall, the host of this particular political commentary show, decided to discuss an organization called Organizing for Action, which is the transformed version of Barack Obama's campaign organization. Barack Obama is the President of the United States of America. His campaign organization is the group that helped him be elected to this position. This group is now re-organized as Organizing for Action; they are going to be used to put pressure on politicians, particularly those in Congress.

So, what had happened was...OFA sent out an email to its list of supporters asking them to call Congress. This was - in Maddow's view - the big "roll-out" or launch of this new organization. But that launch email happened at 4:25 on a Friday - when no Congressperson would presumably be there. Ms. Maddow spent 10 minutes on this, upset for some reason. She then interviewed a communications professional who actually does this sort of thing for a living - that would be Bill Burton - and he told her she was being ridiculous, though in a far more diplomatic way. My original post on this matter was noting the rather difficult task that Ms. Maddow accomplished, appearing to be both a nitpicker and as somebody who doesn't know what she's talking about at all.

Hope that helped!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #5)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 10:12 PM

8. I watched the segment.

 

Your synopsis is accurate.

Can you explain how to change the starter on a 2004 Toyota Tacoma, 2-wheel drive?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Swamp Lover (Reply #8)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 10:18 PM

11. No, 'Cause Chevy didn't make a 327 in '55, the 327 didn't come out till '62.

And it wasn't offered in the Bel Air with a four-barrel carb till '64. However, in 1964, the correct ignition timing would be four degrees before top-dead-center.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #11)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 10:20 PM

13. I guess I'll have to ask some yutes.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #11)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 11:20 PM

15. Good one, young lady

Last edited Tue Jan 29, 2013, 09:22 AM - Edit history (1)

The small block Chevy, one of the all-time best engines (265, 283, 327), and still being used in some form. And how's Vinny?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #11)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 12:25 AM

20. At first, I thought you were an expert expert on that then I remembered hearing that in a movie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #11)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 11:42 AM

46. Thank you, Ms. Vito. You have been a lovely, lovely witness.

(That movie is fuckin' awesome)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Swamp Lover (Reply #8)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:13 AM

38. She clearly was implying

they they really were not going all in on the gun control fight.

That aside, I found the next segment, on the republican controlled states doing away with income taxes and going to a higher sales tax to be truly disturbing.

It really is helpless.

They just keep spewing their bullshit unchecked nationally, while at the state level they find ways to have people smile and happily chow down on the shit sandwiches they can't whip up fast enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #5)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 10:19 PM

12. You could have skipped the first two paragraphs

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #5)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 11:17 PM

14. Either I need to take a nap, or that was a damn funny response.

Either way, thanks for the laugh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to russspeakeasy (Reply #14)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 12:05 AM

17. Oh no, it WAS damned funny (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jeff In Milwaukee (Reply #17)

Sat Feb 2, 2013, 01:45 PM

70. lmao funny

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #5)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 11:27 PM

16. Just saying

My email came in at 12:03pm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #5)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 12:12 AM

18. 9 Eastern what?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #18)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:24 AM

39. I considered two additional paragraphs on the nature of time

drawing on both Ilya Prigogine's From being to Becoming and E.P. Thompson's Time, Work Discipline, and Industrial Capitalism. They were, unfortunately, left on the cutting room floor. It was a beautiful song, but it ran too long, as the Long Islanders say.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #39)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 10:07 AM

40. A loss to all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #5)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 12:17 AM

19. Just had to put in a lol here

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #5)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 02:05 AM

21. Being a nitpicker and know-nothing is one thing

demonstrating vast amounts of snark, as you have just done, is another.

Someone asking for an explanation of an obscure post is not insulting you, nor are they demonstrating ignorance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #5)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 04:00 AM

24. ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #5)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 05:40 AM

26. For Someone who has been on DU for so long I'm surprised at your rude reply

You were simply asked to explain what you thought was nit-picking and "know-nothing." A valid request for people who didn't see the segment.

Your response was completely out of proportion to the non-insulting, non-snark question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #5)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:14 AM

30. Please simplify - i still don't get it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #5)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:30 AM

33. You really should have put that, sans the heavy snark, in your OP

Because your original post was lacking in usable information.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #5)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 10:31 AM

41. lol

Quite a smart assed response to a relatively innocuous question... kudos for that

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #5)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 04:31 PM

51. Wow, that post just showed what a jerk you can be.

I'll stay in Ms. Maddow's corner.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #5)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 04:47 PM

52. alcibiades_mystery, Snark Master.

bravo. braaaavo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #5)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 03:57 PM

68. Wow. Condescending at all?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MotherPetrie (Reply #1)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 06:46 AM

28. Don't worry about it, I thought she explained herself pretty well on the subject. Go over

 

and see it on her Video of her show on MSNBC. I can't explain it here. Basically its about us calling our representatives and senators in mass on a issue to we support (such as gun control). The email went out on 4:30 pm on a Friday. She thought the time was kind of late in the day and on a Friday. That was basically it. As usual Maddow explains it better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Original post)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 09:39 PM

2. She's quite intelligent, but she is not known for her chipper optimism

nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestateguy (Reply #2)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 05:08 AM

25. No she's not. It drove me up the walls in '08 how many times she said Obama would lose to McCain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drunken Irishman (Reply #25)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:32 AM

34. And how many times did we all have that exact same fear after

knowing that Bush stole the election via the Supreme Court?

I remember she used to say she wanted someone to talk her down. We all did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Original post)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 09:39 PM

3. Why is she beating up on

the Ontario Federation of Agriculture? Makes no sense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Original post)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 09:46 PM

4. An alcibiades_mystery it is

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Original post)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 10:06 PM

6. MSNBC is really scraping the bottom of the "Bash Obama" barrell to report something like that. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Original post)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 10:10 PM

7. by beating up

you mean she asked him questions?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enrique (Reply #7)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 10:15 PM

10. Yes, I absolutely forbid anyone to ask questions to Dear Leader or any of His Representatives

So, needless to say, should any of the Unrighteous Heretics dare to ask any question at all, I will immediately attack that person, and portray him or her as being a violent attacker of Dear Leader and all He stands for!

There, I saved you the effort and just went straight to your eventual point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #10)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 02:57 AM

22. I saw the segment. Rachael was entirely fair. OFA was stupid in putting that out.

I was a full donor to Obama in his first term, and did a bunch of other stuff, and because of that I got OFA pronouncements DAILY on "The Latest Outrage!" I was cheerily cheered to "man the phones!" "send us money!" After reading enough Outrage Templates, I told them to quit running an Activity Treadmill, that Obama supporters were not their monkey army, that The Democratic Party Leadership should unite around the merits of their own arguments and do their fucking jobs right there in Washington.

I made the point that if citizens have to constantly prod and poke reps to get them to vote the greatest good for the greatest number, whatever the hell we have is more like do-it-yourself democracy than representative democracy.

Being asleep and unaware about politics is bad, sure. But being constantly prodded to "action" to nag people who make ten times what 95% of us do -- and often won't even show up to conduct The People's business -- strikes me as naive. Joining this "Action" group just won't do it for me. Those of you who join, let me know how it works out for you. Just my opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #22)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 03:57 AM

23. We have a "do-it-yourself democracy"

Believe me, representatives are meeting with interested parties all the time. If we only show up once every 2 - 4 years, then we can't ask ourselves why our leaders are so awful. Politics needs constant action, and if the other side is the only one that shows up, then they win by default.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chathamization (Reply #23)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:24 AM

32. Ah, the precious political class must be cajoled into doing that for which they are paid six figures

to do. If they are so fucking awful without others doing their motivation for them they should not take the pay, and their defenders should not whine when it is pointed out that other adults do their jobs without hand holding and sweet notes of encouragement from Mommy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #32)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:38 AM

36. Yes, it would be nice

if politicians were just great people doing the darn best they could for their country. But taking your ball and going home because you don't like the fact that politicians act like most human beings is a good way to let the country fall apart. If you want to get things done politically, you're going to have to deal with politicians. You can also try to find candidates on our side that will stick to their guns no matter what, but those are few and far between, and getting them elected is going to take even more work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chathamization (Reply #36)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 10:46 AM

43. Not going home, but not running on the OFA Outrage Treadmill, either. I WOULD deal with

politicians IF they would deal with me. But there is NO evidence that they listen to the phone polls of their offices. There is NO response that isn't canned. These guys spend their time in Washington figuring their Bribe/Vote Ratio for every bill. I'm not going to be a desperate David in the David vs. corporate Goliath buyout battle that is part of their auctioneering.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #43)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 04:26 PM

50. Well, they listen

and they have their staff keep a record of what constituents are saying. I'm not sure what an individual call is worth for an individual bill, but I imagine it's more effective than an individual vote in changing things. Yeah, Reps spend a lot of their time talking with backers, and have their staff gauging constituants - this will continue until people pay attention to how much reps are in election mode, and try to elect people that aren't like that instead. I'd be happy to give reps a pay cut, but as long as they have any salary, they're going to use some to answer the phone and keep track of constituents (and they often use free labor - interns - for that task).

I'm on the OFA list but it doesn't seem that bad. Sure, they send somewhat often, but if you don't have time to make a call there's no obligation to. I prefer the organization keep people in the loop and let them do what they can when they have time. Sure, it's a reminder that a constant battle is being waged, but a constant battle has to be waged if we want change in this country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Chathamization (Reply #23)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 10:42 AM

42. I'm talking about the kind of CONSTANTLY that OFA put me through. Are you? Because if you are,

then such close monitoring means that we've got overpaid assistants instead of reps. A quarterly poll from constituents should sufficiently gauge their positions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #22)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:37 AM

35. I so agree with your frustration ancianita!

Every time I get a letter begging for money for them to do their goddamned jobs which they use our tax dollars for it just twists my gut a little bit more. We vote them in and then they get a great salary and health benefits on our dime and then they're acting like doing their jobs is just another reason to demand more money from us.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #22)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:46 AM

37. This was amazing...

..Thank you for summing it up so well and so clearly. It's all little more than a clearly calculated way for them to abdicate responsibility when things don't get passed especially when they don't get passed because of Democratic party disarray or a failure to unite around a solid, Democratic principle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vi5 (Reply #37)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:49 PM

58. Yeah, I wonder why it's that way now? Used to be more unified, not all these splinter groups.

 

I don't know if it is the overly competitive eagerness of younger party members, social media, or the fact that values have changed?

I try to patiently remember that most of these young people grew up in "ME" generations, or gained a lot of their illusions about politics from watching "The West Wing".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Katorama (Reply #58)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 09:37 AM

61. It's all about money at this point.

The Dems want it just as badly as the Republicans, but they need to pretend that they don't and pretend that they're not beholden to those interests. That's why it's much easier for them to make Republicans the scapegoats for why they can't get anything done. Now don't get me wrong a good chunk of the time they are at fault and they are blocking. But on the other hand there have been too many times where the dems are content to just let it happen and only put a half hearted effort into stopping them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #22)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:10 PM

56. I absof****nglutely understand this. Not sure why they opted for this format. Seems divisive.

 

I've heard both sides of this one, and I'm not motivated to get involved, nor am I motivated to rip on it.


One of the huge concerns I have about this is how how they plan to allow for access to resources OFA wishes to offer to organizers.
Apparently, they plan to offer free access to voter files if a chapter (or whatever organizing unit they are breaking it down into) raises a certain tier level of money, and they've also discussed providing or paying for office space if a larger tier is reached. Which means essentially that having access to money, fundraising, etc makes access cheaper or free?

A lot of things aren't clear about OFA, including what they intend to disclose to the public. Having another level of t*rd polishing just isn't going to get me that excited either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Original post)

Mon Jan 28, 2013, 10:12 PM

9. I haven't seen it so I'm not sure...

what you're talking about but OFA is a good thing.

Good on Bill Burton for explaining it to her, patiently.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #9)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 10:54 AM

44. His story line that OFA was 'testing' was patroniizing, excuse-making bullshit. He wasn't patient...

He was respectful, because being slammed by the most respected journalist on TV today is something he'd better address. There was no patience about it.

As for Burton's fake-ass explanation, OFA has ALREADY tested its entire operation through the last four years of online so-called 'activism.' If, after they've gotten criticized for not being more than electronically activist -- if after they've collected four years of suggestions by email recipients about what they could DO better -- they want to take their show on the road, to announce it on a Friday -- to a youthful demographic, of all groups -- really is pretty stupid.

Rachael is totally right. We'll see just what kind of action Burton takes OFA through at state levels where the real battles are being waged right now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #44)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 01:51 PM

48. Yeah, I get you don't like OFA.. well, I do.

And, good for them being alive and well and getting us President Obama. And, bring it for 2013, 2014 and beyond.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #48)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 06:46 PM

55. My understanding about OFA is that they are going to fund/run local chapters, in which local members

 

...decide what issues to tackle.

I think they are currently sorting out how they are going to do this exactly. Whether this is viable for the long tern remains to be seen.

What I have seen is them getting it from both sides. I hope they can become something that has some huevos. But I can see why people might be skeptical.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Katorama (Reply #55)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 08:56 PM

59. They can be skeptical

all they want. I know how far they've come in building their ground game. I can see that the First Lady and the President are happy about how good Organizing For Action is turning out.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #48)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 11:51 AM

63. I also like OFA...

I don't understand why it's bad to coalesce and rally voters who are concerned with the same issues, and some of us voters do need a little nudging. If some don't, then that's great also.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #44)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:45 PM

57. Here's the problem - "Respect, Empower, Include and Win" MUST include all of us, regardless of age

 

The "youthful demographic" you speak of here has taken over to some degree.

Why are there now "Democrats Under 40" groups, "Senior Democrats", and "Second Generation Colorado Democratic Descendants of Arapaho Indians Who Graduated From Taft High School in Los Angeles" groups?

Not too long ago, it was just the Democratic Party, everyone of all ages worked together, and there weren't all these damned social groups.

We just all got it done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 06:05 AM

27. either way,

Rachel Maddow is the best we got on tv, hands down

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 06:49 AM

29. Gee we have allot of Maddow bashing today. I thought the segment on this was right.

 

I think she is very intelligent and I like the way she explains things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to southernyankeebelle (Reply #29)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 11:02 AM

45. She's doubtful because she tries to ferret out signal from noise. Her past analyses have

frustrated and annoyed me, but there's no one I trust better to give historical context to current issues. Rachael bashing in this case is unwarranted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ancianita (Reply #45)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 01:36 PM

47. It's just my observation. :D

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to southernyankeebelle (Reply #47)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 04:59 PM

53. Did you hear the "governors of Arizona" segment last night?

Her droll humor at its best

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #53)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 05:40 PM

54. She always sound drunk to me. No I didn't hear her last night. But bet you its

 

all about her on any issue. She doesn't care about the people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to southernyankeebelle (Reply #29)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 12:26 PM

64. Any criticism of the president (or his operation) tends to

cause some to snap at the source of the criticism. Rachel is now in the dog house for her perceived impertinence

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #64)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 01:20 PM

65. Well I saw the piece she did and I thought it was well done.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to southernyankeebelle (Reply #65)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 02:16 PM

66. Pretty much everything she does is well done.

Some of it doesn't conform to the purity circle that a subset of DU has erected.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #66)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 02:18 PM

67. I really like watching her because she explains topic that even a high school person

 

can understand like me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 07:18 AM

31. reminded me of this

I don't like country music, but I don't mean to denigrate those who do. And for the people who like country music, denigrate means "put down" - Bob Newhart

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Original post)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 02:26 PM

49. Well, she's right unless the aim was for congress NOT to be there when calls came in

Who knows? Maybe they intended to fill up congressional voice mail boxes to piss them off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:01 AM

60. wow, you couldnt be more wrong

Just caught that segment on podcast. It was the opposite of what you said. She was right about the failed timing and he was on the defensive looking a little sheepish

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Katorama (Reply #62)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 07:30 PM

69. What...?

Who's running the organization? They want to do online organizing by didn't register their own domains?

I don't think it will be that much of a problem in the long run, but it's somewhat bizarre they overlooked it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread