Showing All 9 Matching Links Found
Tag(s) Selected:  Rachel Maddow
                   + Advanced Options                    + Search Tips
11/6/2012  Chris Matthews: "I'm so glad we had that storm last week."
Chris Matthews probably wishes he could take back his closing remarks on election night. The MSNBC anchor casually said about Hurricane Sandy and its affect on the election: "I'm so glad we had that storm last week." Now, co-anchor Rachel Maddow voiced displeasure with an "ooh." Matthews quickly, then, added a caveat: the storm was only good "politically" not "in terms of hurting people." Still, he said it "brought in the possibility for good politics," possibly referring to Obama coming together with NJ Gov. Chris Christie. (MSNBC)
posted: 11/7/12      
            		 0       26
#1 



1/1/2012  Ron Paul Will Win In The End
Ron Paul will win in the end. That’s right. It doesn’t matter anymore how the criminals in charge try to change the vote, or how they conjure lies and attack him and his ideas. None of that is going to work anymore. Don’t get me wrong. There is no way in hell that Ron Paul will win his quest for the Presidency. The corporate criminals and their toadies in the media will never let that happen. They will do everything they can to squash Ron Paul and his ideas. Who has the uncanny ability to unite Rush Limbaugh, Rachel Maddow, Dick Morris, Bill Clinton, Sean Hannity, Keith Olbermann, MSNBC, Fox News, CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC, The New York Times, Move On, Media Matters? Answer: Ron Paul. Why does he unite everyone on the left and right? What is it about Ron Paul that unites the media? Ron Paul and his movement are a direct result of the Internet. The Internet also showed the thinking people of the world that there is a corporate criminal mafia and it is in charge of everything. It owns the military, the media, the religions, the educational system the banks and most of the major corporations. This revelation that we are ruled by a small group of corporate criminals is the real fuel behind Ron Paul. (Jay Weidner)
posted: 1/29/12                   0       17
#2 



4/11/2011  Obama's Off Base
Maddow: A Democratic President kicks his base in the teeth on something as fundamental as civil liberties—he puts the nail in the coffin of a civil liberties promise he made on his first full day in office—and he does it on the first day of his re-election effort. And Beltway reaction to that is... huh, good move. That's the difference between Republican politics and Democratic politics. The Republicans may not love their base, but they fear them and play to them. The Democratic Party institutional structures of D.C., and the Beltway press in particular, not only hate the Democratic base—they think it's good politics for Democratic politicians to kick that base publicly whenever possible. Only the base itself will ever change that. Greenwald: One thing is for certain: right now, the Democratic Party is absolutely correct in its assessment that kicking its base is good politics. Why is that? Because they know that they have inculcated their base with sufficient levels of fear and hatred of the GOP, so that no matter how often the Party kicks its base, no matter how often Party leaders break their promises and betray their ostensible values, the base will loyally and dutifully support the Party and its leaders (at least in presidential elections; there is a good case that the Democrats got crushed in 2010 in large part because their base was so unenthusiastic). In light of that fact, ask yourself this: if you were a Democratic Party official, wouldn't you also ignore—and, when desirable, step on—the people who you know will support you no matter what you do to them? (The Stranger)
posted: 4/12/11                   0       7
#3 



12/4/2010  Save Obama's presidency by challenging him on the left
People who used to say, "Give President Obama more time" when the president was criticized for capitulating to the right, or who argued that Obama must have a plan to turn things around, are now largely depressed and angry. To many liberals and progressives, the president's unwillingness to veto any measure that includes continued tax relief for billionaires is the last straw, building on a record of spinelessness that includes his escalation of the war in Afghanistan, abandonment of a public option for health-care reform, refusal to prosecute those who tortured in Iraq or lied us into that war, and unwillingness to tax carbon emissions. With his base deeply disillusioned, many progressives are starting to believe that Obama has little chance of winning reelection unless he enthusiastically embraces a populist agenda and worldview - soon. Yet there is little chance that will happen without a massive public revolt by his constituency that goes beyond rallies, snide remarks from television personalities or indignant op-eds. Those of us who worry that a full-scale Republican return to power in 2012 would be a disaster not just for those hurting from the Republican-policy-inspired economic meltdown but also for the environment, social justice and world peace believe it is critical to get Obama to become the candidate whom most Americans believed they elected in 2008. Despite the outcome of last month's election, it is unlikely that the level of his base's alienation will register with the president until late in the 2012 election cycle - far too late for society today and our future tomorrow. (Washington Post)
posted: 12/7/10                   0       15
#4 



1/4/2010  Wolffe Reports WH May Be Investigating Possibility of Intentional Failure by Intel. Community (MSNBC)
posted: 1/28/10      
            		 0       16
#5 



6/5/2009  Barack Obama's Cairo Speech: Zbigniew Brzezinski on Rachel Maddow
"There's no doubt over recent years, both many Americans viewed the world in a very very skewed fashion," Brzezinski replied, "and many outside of America, had a totally conspiratorial view of America, including even the idea that 9/11 was somehow or other a put up job and really wasn't done by Osama Bin Laden and others, so I think president Obama is breaking through a whole mythology that has paralysed American dealings with the world." (MSNBC)
posted: 6/8/09      
            		 7       30
#6 



5/12/2009  Elliot Spitzer on Rachel Maddow criticizing Obama and the handling of Wall Street putting taxpayers at risk (MSNBC)
posted: 5/13/09      
            		 7       30
#7 



5/6/2009  Naomi Klein, columnist for The Nation, author of "The Shock Doctrine", and joins Rachel Maddow to analyze the financial sector bailouts as "disaster capitalism" (MSNBC)
posted: 5/13/09      
            		 5       30
#8 



2/9/2009  Talk radio: The return of 'fairness'?
For five days, Sen. Debbie Stabenow’s face has greeted visitors of Hannity.com. It may seem like an unlikely venue for a Michigan Democrat, but conservative television and radio host Sean Hannity has made Stabenow public enemy No. 1 in the conservative talk radio world. Hannity has plastered Stabenow’s face and office number on his site following comments she made last week about the Fairness Doctrine, telling liberal radio host Bill Press it may be “time to be bringing accountability to the airwaves.” And then she mentioned the possibility of hearings, which sparked a make-my-day moment with Hannity, who said, “You want this microphone? Come and get it!” Stabenow press secretary Brad Carroll has since backed off, telling Politico, “Sen. Stabenow is not calling for hearings.” Indeed, no member of Congress has scheduled hearings, there is no Fairness Doctrine legislation being introduced, and the long-dormant broadcast law is likely to stay that way. (Politico)
posted: 5/4/09                   1       13
#9 




Showing All 9 Matching Links Found