Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
She may not get the ratings, but then intelligence doesn't get the respect it used to anymore. In other words, if the audience can't grasp it, it's "bad". That's really a shame.
It really is a shame, us rubes just ain't smart enough to appreciate her.
If only there were more smart people, her ratings wouldn't suck.
I'm not sure if it's her very awkward debate style or interview skills but I believe she could really polish up her style, and debate in a much more factual, informative, and judgmental manner.
I disagree with most of this.
I don't see anything "very awkward" about her style, and I think her interview skills are excellent. She's one of the very few political commentators - maybe the only? - who lets the person she's interviewing actually answer the question without interrupting. (When I say "political commentators", I'm discounting most of the talking heads on FOX "News" - with the softball questions they lob up to their guests, more often than not they serve as unofficial mouthpieces for the GOP.)
I like Rachel Maddow's style. She asks tough questions, she's not afraid to have anyone on her show from anywhere on the political spectrum, and every time I watch her show, I come away knowing more than I did when the show started.
She has a Ph.D from Oxford. What degrees do Beck and Hannity have?
What is an example of her "intellectual" dishonesty?
Well Dr. Maddow reported a hoax as a fact. I don't think she is the sharpest pencil in the pack. I have come across several well educated folks who weren't all that smart, it happens.
Yeah, neither did Bill Gates. What does lack of college education prove? Or more importantly what does having a college education prove (asked by a college graduate, with advanced degree)
If your beliefs range from far left liberal to moderate do you believe that Rachel Maddow is a sincere reporter who wants to enforce equality or do you think she inadequately covers social adversities e.g., she has debated Bahati (who proposed extreme authoritarian legislation against gay people in his African country), Rand Paul (who believes private business should not be restricted to discriminate on race, etc.), and others.
I'm not sure if it's her very awkward debate style or interview skills but I believe she could really polish up her style, and debate in a much more factual, informative, and judgmental manner. I write judgmental because it's hard to tell what groups she is attempting help. It's rather hard to tell whose side she is on because she gives these authoritarian people (other than Rand Paul who makes good points, too) so much time on her show. It's rather interesting that her style of journalism is exposing them to more people and giving them positive attention rather than truly debating and correcting social inequalities.
Polish up her style?
Being an idiot requires style?
It isn't her debating style that is the issue.
Just like other liberals who base their opinions on what they most want to be true, what she believes to be true is not, and her most thoughtful views are self-contradictory. That she or any other liberal can advocate special rights for women and gays while granting moral carte blanche to Islam is just one example. Another would be their opposition to school vouchers which are wildly popular among impoverished inner-city black families who seek an alternative to the failed public school monopoly, but liberals will have none of it since they support the teacher's unions which make meaningful educational reforms nearly impossible.
So how does a person venture so far from rational thought?
Easy, liberalism requires victims. Without victims of an unjust and oppressive society, who needs a liberal? Then the problem becomes the ever shrinking supply of victims who have need of liberal's social justice. After all, it's not like George Wallace and Bull Connor are still running around fighting against segregation. Out of desperation to remain relevant, liberals have had to create new oppressors to justify their bizarre allegiances. Enter Sarah Palin and the Tea Party movement.
Here the left's full-frontal stupidity is on display for all to see.
Racists?
Violent rhetoric?
Cross-hairs on maps?
How absolutely pitiful it is that the once dominant political force in America has become so desperate for anything they can use to smear those who, like Reagan, say what Americans are already thinking. Maddow has even become so desperate to trash Palin, evangelicals and conservatives generally that she has even reported a spoof website as though it were real. Can you imagine such a thing? A woman with her own show on cable TV believed a fake evangelical website was calling for Sarah Palin to lead an invasion of North Africa.
I guess it's true what they say. People believe what they want to believe, and in this case, Maddow desperately wanted to believe those on the right were actually calling for an invasion, not only of politically unstable Egypt, but all of North Africa and with General Palin leading the way.
Maddow falls hard for Palin led "Egypt Invasion" spoof (http://madmikesamerica.com/2011/02/maddow-falls-hard-for-palin-led-egypt-invasion-spoof/ - broken link)
She's like a high school journalist who think she's so talented and clever and then aims her show at middle schoolers who are supposed to be impressed. That's about it. She looks down on her viewers just like Olbermann did. I just can't tolerate somebody like that who thinks people who disagree with her are idiots and that anybody who agrees with her is an even bigger idiot. At least Limbaugh and Hannity and Beck realize that to get decent ratings they have to at least be professional and reach out to the mainstream even if they don't agree with them 100%. They can clown around and be goofy like Maddow is much of the time but ratings do matter to them. She just puts so little effort into her job. A hack is what describes her best. I know MSNBC is now supported by the government now through GE but even they can't just toss money away with a news network that is becoming a joke.
A fledgling liberal news network done seriously could be started and that would push MSNBC quickly back into fourth place. I guess the broadcasting monopoly is now set up to prevent that but it would be fun to watch.
Well Dr. Maddow reported a hoax as a fact. I don't think she is the sharpest pencil in the pack. I have come across several well educated folks who weren't all that smart, it happens.
I'd say that Dr. Maddow, the Rhodes Scholar, is sharper than you.
It really is a shame, us rubes just ain't smart enough to appreciate her.
If only there were more smart people, her ratings wouldn't suck.
Yes, it is a shame.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
