Rachel Maddow
Muppets Go Partisan, They Probably Prefer Self Admitted Socialists and Marxists At MSNBC
Lawrence O’Donnell admitting he is a socialist:
Rachel Maddow admits she is to the left of Marxist Mao:
No Clue! Rachel maddow FAIL
George Soros Admits He is a `Useful Idiot` of Lenin
What is it with these admissions as of late? Rachel Maddow and now Soros.
Sununu Tearing It Up! Spankin the MSNBC Hosts
Red State Job Engine
Via NewsBusters:
The establishment press will never tell their readers, listeners and viewers that the five best-performing states in job growth through the first eleven months of this year, as well as nine of the top eleven, have relatively conservative Republicans occupying their respective governors’ mansions. If these eleven star performers had only performed as well as the rest of the nation, over 300,000 fewer people would be working, and the unemployment rate would be at least 0.2% higher.
As will be seen after the jump, the list, based on date released today by Uncle Sam’s Bureau of Labor Statistics, includes several against which the Obama administration has undertaken significant job-killing or job-deferring actions (i.e., these states have outperformed despite the handicaps, and would have done much better without them):
I wanted to say something about Rachel Maddow’s “debunking” of Texas jobs,
and that is that she skews her stats on this a bit. Firstly however, minimum wage laws (which play a part in this waxing of the numbers) play a big roll in keeping people unemployed. This isn’t my main point however, here are some points made elswhere:
But there’s no escaping it. The number is real. Which means that if you care about putting people back to work at a time when nearly 14 million in this country are unemployed, maybe Texas has something to teach us.
Unfortunately, that’s not the posture many commentators have taken. Instead, when the data from Texas emerged — touted first by Richard Fisher, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas — conservatives were quick to celebrate, embracing the jobs tally as powerful evidence of the superiority of Republican ideas as well as proof that Texas Gov. Rick Perry would make a good president. But that’s overly simplistic.
Meanwhile, those on the liberal end of the spectrum immediately set out to shoot the numbers down. MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, for instance, held up a giant bologna and mocked the notion of a “Texas miracle.” That view, however, is too cavalier….
To be sure, Texas is not without lots of problems. And its remarkable employment growth is not without attendant concerns. But for those on the left to dismiss the state’s jobs story out of hand, just because Republicans have embraced it as a showpiece, is counterproductive and foolish.
(LA Times)
While the LA Times article struggled a bit, but ended up shining at the end, the following is what Maddow and the LA Times writer didn’t fully account for:
In her column for The Daily, Reason Foundation’s Shikha Dalmia delves into Gov. Rick Perry’s record and writes that Texas “has one of the lightest personal tax burdens in the country and a low cost of living, which are hugely attractive to out-of-work Americans. Their flocking to the state has bumped up Texas’ unemployment rate to 8 percent, prompting Rachel Maddow to jeer on the air that Perry’s jobs record is not a whole lot better than many other states. What she refuses to see is that while in those states high unemployment is due to anemic job growth, in Texas it is due to robust population growth. If anything, Texas offers proof that people prefer jobs, even low-paying ones, to lavish social benefits — repudiating the liberal tax-and-spend economic model.
Just wanted to include a quick rebuttal to Madcow’s many, many mistakes.
Rachel Maddow Scolds McCain for Meeting Kaddafi in 2009~Ignores Obama Meeting Him Month Prior
I [Bill Maher] hate them [Republicans] as much as you [Rachel Maddow] do
Red or Black?
Maddow Epic Fail-Again
This correction from BigJournalism on the numbers Maddow typically runs:
The study on which Maddow based her claim was conducted by Robert Lang. And while it did project a $121 million surplus for the state budget by the end of June, 2011, had Maddow read further she would have seen that Lang also “[outlined] $258 million in unpaid bills or expected shortfalls in programs such as Medicaid services for the needy, [and] the public defender’s office and corrections.”
Hmmm … I’m not great at math but let me try this: $258 million in outstanding payments minus $121 million in state budget “surplus” equals a $137 million shortfall in funds available (which is the very shortfall Governor Walker is trying to forestall when he talks about the pending “$137 million deficit”).
The last time Maddow got something this wrong was just last month, when she mocked Sarah Palin for suggesting that the American military ought to invade Egypt. The problem was that Palin had never suggested such an invasion. (Maddow was eventually forced into the uncomfortable position of admitting that the source she’d used to support the Egyptian invasion theory was from a satire website rather than a news outlet.)
Take note Rachel also makes this mistake that Chris Matthews and others have made. And that is that police and fire unions supported the Wisconsin governor:
Propping Up? Maddows Jump In Logic Shot Down by former US ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk
Baltimore Sun Lays Into Rachel Maddow
Some on the left have been crying foul at CNN’s decision to air live Rep. Michele Bachmann’s response to the president’s State of the Union address Tuesday night. None have been more vocal than MSNBC libtalker Rachel Maddow.
One media critic had enough. On Thursday, the Baltimore Sun’s David Zurawik laid into Maddow’s criticism, saying it derives from “the mentality of a lockstep party member, not a journalist.” Zurawik’s gripe was Maddow’s insistence that because Bachmann was not officially representing a political party, her speech should not have been given comparable treatment to the president’s or to Rep. Paul Ryan’s Republican response.
Journalists “don’t let political parties tell us who we should and shouldn’t cover,” Zurawik added. “I have a West Highland terrier named Bugsy who has better journalism credentials and chops than you do,” he quipped.
…(click here to see video of Maddow)…
Here is the portion of the Baltimore Sun article that I think sums up the corrupted thinking at MSNBC and specifically Rachel “Madcow.” Take note “Z on TV” references the video, which can be seen in the link above:
….The essence of my critique: The Tea Party has played a major role in shaping the new Congress, and it has already had a significant effect on American life. Given that, if you aren’t sure about whether or not to cover, you err on the side of inclusion — not exclusion. Provide citizens with as much information as you can so that they can make the best decisions about their lives.
But check out the video MSNBC thinks I should see and note that Maddow’s argument boils down to this: Bachmann should not have been covered because she was not “ordained” by the Republican Party as its official responder.
This is the mentality of a lockstep party member, not a journalist. Unless the party “ordains” someone to speak, they shouldn’t be covered by the press, in Maddow’s thinking.
Memo to Maddow: That’s not the way journalists think. We bring citizens as much information as we can whether THE PARTY ordains it or not. Just like we don’t let the executive branch tell us which news operation is a “legitimate” journalistic enterprise, and which isn’t, we don’t let political parties tell us who we should and shouldn’t cover. Journalism 101 at Goucher College where I teach.
CNN was right in covering Bachmann. And by the way, there are interns at CNN’s Washington bureau who have better journalism credentials than you do, Ms. Party Operative Think. In fact, I have a West Highland terrier named Bugsy that has better journalism credentials and chops than you do….
So easy a child should get it.
- 3 of 4
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next »




