Rachel Maddow Tops "Short List" For Own MSNBC Show
By SilentPatriot Thursday Jul 17, 2008 9:30am
(Bess Greenberg/The New York Times)
For clues about who might be next to get a show on MSNBC, viewers need not have looked further than “Countdown” earlier this month. For eight nights beginning just before the Fourth of July, Rachel Maddow, the host of a program on Air America, the liberal talk-radio network, served as a substitute for the vacationing Keith Olbermann.
“At some point, I don’t know when, she should have a show,” said Phil Griffin, hours before he was promoted on Wednesday to president of MSNBC. “She’s on the short list. It’s a very short list. She’s at the top.”
Despite being in agreement with Rachel on mostly everything, I think she would make a fantastic host. She has an uncanny ability not only to make sense of every issue by logically stringing together facts, she is always able to explain it clearly and coherently. We'll keep out fingers crossed, Rachel.
Anyone got any ideas for a title? (h/t Jamie)
Login or Register to post comments.
At this point, how is MSNBC any different than Fox News? Partisan journalism is partisan journalism no matter where it comes from, and it does us no good in the long run.
"Reality Check with Rachel Maddow"?
"Really Rachel"? (well, not really)
Whatever they call it it about damn time.
Boy I bet BillO and Co. are steaming now.
Well deserved.
Ta-Dow with Rachel Maddow.
Gravitas.
She deserves it and may get it but it won't last. She'll make the viewers/guest feel inadequate.
Rachel has done an excellent job subbing for Keith. This is great news!! If she gets her own show, will she leave Air America? If so would Sam Seder get her spot? No offense to Ron Kuby but I think Sam would've been a better fit in Randi's spot.
Oh HELL yeah!
Sweeeeet!
Maddow, gettin her own show! This is gonna be good!
And Jersey Jay...MSNBC is so very different from fox news, as it's not propanganda. It's not blatant lies and half-truths...it's FACT based reporting. Which is just the shot in the arm this nation needs.
MSNBC seems to be attracting actual journalists, not commentators. People with integrity, class, and unlike most everyone on fox, at LEAST a degree in journalism. Fox just has asshole propagandists spewing the party line.
straight talk with rachel maddow
I'd like "Maddow's Meadow" because of my fondness for good ol' "Milo's Meadow", but "Reality Check" is a truly excellent title.
And partisan journalism that is partisan in that it looks harder at right-wingers really is better than partisan journalism that looks harder at left-wingers and liberals and lies about them. At this point in time, it's even necessary.
Jersey Jay @ 1:
Welll...it may be partisan, but at least Rachel is no bimbo like the "eye candy" Faux Noise seems to employ.
I think she is overdue for a solo show.....
Get her own show already! AAR and MSNBC's sharing of Rachel has wrecked her show. She is lost to talk radio, I fear, where she is exemplary.
Put the old AAR team back together with Liz. MSNBC should dump the old and tired cable news format for a free wheeling cast show with guests, ala Stern, perhaps.
Jersey Jay @ 1:
I would suggest, nay insist that there is a qualitative difference between partisans on one side telling the truth and partisans on FOX "news" lying their asses off. In fact I'm reminded of a deal that Adlai Stevenson offered to one of his Republican opponents - I believe it was in the 1948 Illinois gubernatorial race, "I'll stop telling the truth about you if you stop lying about me."
See the difference?
Way too biased. Uses the same joke over and over and over again to a put of wanting to cringe.
How about giving Andre Eggelletion a shoot?
Munching the Political Carpet...
Munchdown...
Bumping Politics...
News in Comfortable Shoes
You know I'm just kidding. I totally love Rachael. It's Friday though.
"Anyone got any ideas for a title? "
How about, "The time slot formerly occupied by Chris Matthews"?
Anyone notice that none of the article's pictures show her face (except from far away)? Why?
"The Former Chris Mathews Show starring Rachel Maddow"
Despite being a crypto-reactionary who lies about actually being a liberal and stuff, I think Rachel Maddow would be a great choice. in fact, I think she's even better than Olberman. Of course, I think Olberman's turning into an unctious blowhard so what do I know?
liberalNmoderation @ 8:
I'm not saying they fabricate like Fox. What they're doing now on Countdown and The Verdict is reporting with that "Get what this dumbass Republican is saying" attitude. It creates a mindset and makes them less will and/or able to take a hard look at the Democrats or Obama. I want straight facts without the color. I can't get that at CNN [Fox News Lite] either.
Please give this lady a show. After enduring Intern Murderer Scarborough, Right wing dildo Gregory, and that elitist homosexual hating/loving pussy Carlson, you owe us big time MSNBC!
'Keepin' it Gangsta with Rachel Maddow'
"Maddow as Hell"
Hieronymus Braintree @ 19:
Olbermann wants the Monday Night Football gig. If he gets it I am not sure if he will stay on at MSNBC.
SadButTrue @ 13:
"Partisan truth"? No I guess I don't. I expect more.
How about "Going Maddow"?
Kinda symbolizes the times don't you think?
Sembtex @ 10:
I bow to your Bloom County reference...
It's about bloody time. She is smart as hell and deserves a show on any network with her wit, and even I'd say, dry comedic timing. Maybe Kent Jones can comeback and again we could hear the wonderful cry of "vigilance!"
BTW: what happened to Kent Jones?
I think she's definitely good enough to have her own show. She does get on my nerves sometimes when someone disagrees with her and she pulls out that steamrolling debate tactic of shouting down her opponent, which is something I usually associate with right wingers.
Just curious, but is she a lesbian? She seems to downplay are attractiveness in exchange for a more masculine look.
Jersey Jay @ 1:
It may be partisan, but at least they are reporting truth rather than half truth, innuendo and lies.
I love Rachel. But, Jersey Jay is right. Even though we now live in a time where "Liberal" seems to mean "Person-who-knows-facts", the term is still a political label and she has it. I listen to AM1090 (Seattle's Air America station) all the time [unrelated side note, I won tickets for a basketball game two weeks ago and got to sit with hosts in a VIP Suite :D]. Having her have her own show would cause people to turn away from MSNBC, and they just might start getting more “news” from FOX. Do we want that? Really? I don’t. Any more on one side or the other will tip the balance of the common citizen. MSNBC already has its token Liberal (Keith) and Conservative (Joe). Let's not make the same mistake that John Kerry made by over-estimating the intelligence of the U.S. populace.
Del Capslock @ 28:
Her normal move is start that stupid laughing over everyone to avoid answering a direct question. Ha ha ha - that is so funny - ha ha ha - you make me laugh - ha ha ha - trying to get the clock to run out.
Yes they are partisan but Rachel and Keith do not employ misleading and deceptive practices such as Fair and Balanced. They also rely on facts and logic. And rachel is gorgeous. In fact there's your title for her show Gorgeous
I hope they dump Morning Joe (should have happened a long time ago) and give that slot to Rachel. It would make morning tv interesting and tolerable again. Even though Joe is seldom on the show anymore, Mika makes me nuts with her giggles, sighs and useless comments.
Jersey Jay @ 1:
There isn't any difference. Watch Faux and MSNBC between 7 am and 6 pm and both channels attack Obama constantly. MSNBC takes a break from the bashing for 60 minutes during Count Down.
Jersey Jay @ 20:
I see your point. But the "get what this dumbass republican is saying" attitude is...well...somewhat justified I think...after all, they're giving up so much material for that type of coverage...
They just make it so easy to ridicule them...it's hard to resist.
"Reality B(i)ased with Rachel Maddow"
Ben wrote: "Having her have her own show would cause people to turn away from MSNBC, and they just might start getting more “news” from FOX."
???!!! What? I can't see how her being a liberal will turn people away from MSNBC. To understate things greatly, Olbermann's liberal tendencies haven't exactly wrecked MSNBC's ratings.
Jersey Jay @ 20:
Then stop watching cable news.
How about "A Finger in the Dyke"?
Kind of off topic but is Pelosi up for reelection or something?
She suddenly has found something that resembles a backbone. Now that it is to late to do anything, she has that tough talk going.
Del Capslock @ 28:
If you've heard her show, you have heard her mention her female partner (don't recall her name) so yes, she is openly gay.
I do hope this happens soon, because of Air America's decision to air that joke of a cable show in her first hour, I've lost my time to listen to her. As soon as I hear that lame ass intro to "Race for the Crap, er Whitehouse" I tune out.
Ivan @ 22:
LOL!
That a good one...don't think it would work though.
well, when i misread the title, i thought her show was called "Short List with Rachel Maddow" ... which would be sweeeet
Cherokee Fats @ 2:
I think that's a great title.
Good, more partisanship, this pretending to be objective spiel didn't work that effectively anyway, so it's good to have a partisan left voice to drown out the partisan right.
Intellectual honesty is not a partisan issue. I couldn't imagine any news organization fighting for the right to lie, or to deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves -- but that's exactly what Fox attorneys did in March of 2003. Fox is more than welcome to stop obfuscating the truth anytime it chooses to. So far, it has not. An agenda and a total lack of accountability are the chief difference between it, and actual news organizations like MSNBC.
steve duncan @ 39:
Clever...stay up all night comin up with that turd?
"Far from the Maddowing Crowd"
Who cares if she likes making the tortillas and downplays her femininity- she's gorgeous (See #32 here) in her own right- and what's more quick witted and super smart.
SadButTrue @ 13:
Excellent point. I enjoy Olbermann as the anti-O'Reilly but I pity anyone who believes it's a serious news programme.
But you're right that for all his naked partisanship, most of what he says is intellectually defensible whereas Fox really are just robots saying what they've been programmed to say.
'Rachels Reality' sounds good to me.
"The Madd-hour."
General_Rennenkampf @ 45:
steve duncan @ 39:
You bigots never take a day off.
harley @ 40:
If you're referring to her comment about the Bush presidency being a complete failure, it hardly takes a backbone to say that about the worst president our country has ever known.
The only way she regains ANY credibility is to start impeachment proceedings on Mukasey, Cheney and Bush. Until she does, she should be recalled for failure to uphold her oath "to protect our nation from enemies foreign or DOMESTIC".
Possible names coming to mind: The Doctor is In; A Doctor in the House.
Neither would be acceptable by any in charge, RM included, because of the pomposity, but given those with spurious or irrelevant credentials and the frequent tendency of conservatives to refer to the Secy of State as "Dr. Rice" to suggest unwarranted validity, it would seem apt to note the superior credentials. Also, it is not clear to me that Ms Maddow is especially liberal in her presentation except to the extent that fact/reality based argument is considered liberal. While she likely is a liberal, nothing she has said to date (of which I'm aware) has seemed other than in tune with mainstream thinking prior to the time that the lunatic fringe and camp followers began to receive genuflections to their incessant bleating.
liberalNmoderation @ 53:
Uh...not quite sure what happened here...
I think Rachel is a little partisan maybe...but her having her own show will be a very good thing in my opinion.
Great for Rachel. Another great show I would watch.
Ooh Ooh Ooh
"Eternal Vigilance with Rachel Maddow"
Maybe MSNBC can dump that Joe 'Loserman' Scarborough.
Left&Left @ 54:
I guess being so full of hate, fear and ignorance keeps them busy.
Jersey Jay @ 20
It's to a point where you watch MSNBC or CNN for only the viewpoints and commentaries instead of the news. The configuration of the cable news seems to be a staggering of partisan viewpoints. It would be nice to watch the news without the anchor or pundit telling me their perspective. Even on the weather channel , I've seen the forecasters breakout into a monologue about they feel about "global warming." Don't get me wrong though, if this is the way they're running "the cables", I'd love to see Maddow with her own show.
Dr. Hussein Matt - "Then stop watching cable news."
Thanks. Why didn't I think of that simple answer? Turn off the cable news and go back to the broadcast anchor system. No - That's completely shot, so back to the newspapers. Hmm, a day/week late doesn't work in these times. That leaves me with the blogs. And here I am at C&L. I hope they don't go completely partisan in their reporting...oh wait.
I have the right to at least expect and want better from what's out there. That's all.
Limp-Dick Blimpaugh @ 58:
Simply stated- I concurr. (Your screen name made me howl, BTW)
Jersey Jay @ 1:
If you consider the truth partisan I guess so.
"You Will Never, Ever See Joe Scarborough or Pat Buchanon On My Show" with Rachel Maddow.
I love that woman like she was my own personal deity.
harley @ 40:
It is off topic but yes Pelosi is up for reelection. I live in her district. Cindy Sheehan is running against her on the green ticket and I was planning on voting for Cindy. However, Sheehan's campaign has been non-existent as far as I can tell. Her web site has just a few pages and several of them have no content. I've NEVER heard Sheehan on any local radio nor seen any op-eds or stories by her in local papers. This is the problem with the Green party. They talk a good game but when it comes to actually running campaigns that have a chance to win they are pretty inept from what I've seen.
I like when she makes Sean Insanity's head explode. More of that please.
The O'Maddow Factor
The Bitching Hour
The Maddow Knows.
devildog21 @ 55:
Thank you for your insight. She is firing more of them off this morning:
"Two Oil Men in the White House Are to Blame for Gas Prices"
I think she is making noise to have something to run on in a couple months. Sorry thing they will fall for it.
Sorry - Just had to get that off my chest. Since Pelosi threads are far and in between on this board.
Yes, she is an out of the closet lesbian - but in this day and age who cares? She is a Rhodes Scholar - smart and able to distill the essential points of a story. She is part of the fact based community which, to quote Colbert "reality has a liberal bias." I have listened to both her radio show and watched her and she would be great. When she has subbed for "kiss the feet of Rove" Gregory recently, she did a great job keeping the show on track, letting the others speak their piece but keeping up the pace. Scarborough subbed as well but he just when on and on turned in into a right wing show rather than the bipartisan piece it is supposed to be. She would be an asset to MSNBC. She is no Randi Rhodes, a blowhard for the left. And I agree I would LOVE to see more Sam Seder on Air America.
Title: The Rachel Mad-hour (pronounced Maddow-er)
She could even keep her Campaign asylum tagline with that.
Bill @ 50:
Since when does truth become partisan? Faux News is just as responsible for creating a divide in this country as the neocons are. If you start adjusting to their attempt to pull everything to the right, we will continue to regress like we have for the last 7 plus years. We have allowed the right to dictate the conversation for far too long. It is time to realize that liberal isn't a dirty word like the right makes it seem. Look up liberal in a dictionary. I'll give you two of the meanings here:
5. Respectful of the ideas or behavior of others; tolerant. 6. Favoring democratic reform and the use of governmental resources to effect social progress.
The right has to lie to their base or they risk losing even the ditto heads. Some people will never, ever see truth and they will watch Faux News or listen to Limbaugh til the day they die. So be it, but the vast majority of Americans, when they hear the truth, will lean forward, not left, FORWARD toward progress.
Stop being afraid of being liberal and just start being proud of it. It's the only chance our country has if we want to regain our democracy.
Oh, yeah, also:
Stark Raving Maddow.
I'm not sure how audiences (outside our echo chamber) will handle matter-of-fact reporting that doesn't talk down to them. Without a regular platform, or making her personality (or persona) the centerpiece, like, say Michelle Malkin, Rachel has nevertheless had a huge impact on nighttime cable opinion and events talkers.
Jamey @ 69:
Countering Reich Wing Propaganda with Maddow
Taking Our Country Back with Maddow
Patriotism and Love of Country Means Telling the Truth with Maddow
(I like my titles better)
Woo Hoo! The cream has risen to the TOP! Way to go, Rachel!
Jersey Jay @ 1:
Well, MSNBC as a whole is indeed nothing great. But when it comes to Keith Olbermann's show, I actually disagree. Take for example Obama's nonsense on FISA; Olbermann crucified him.
When McCain screws up, we can see how REAL partisan reporting deals with it; Through either studied ignorance or apologia.
The reason that Keith's show looks partisan is that Bush/McCain politics are insane and recklessly delusional nearly all the time; this means that just telling the truth is going to look like partisan bashing. Countdown is certainly driven by leftist ideals, but that's not at all the same as Democratic partisan voice-boxing, which it is not.
Peter Grace @ 32:
She's beautiful in a healthy, scrubbed, all-American girl kind of way, in contrast to those freakish mini-skirted fried-haired dimpleganger second place prom queens on Fax-Free. She'll grow on people in a different way than KO did, and she will draw the exhausted, jaded, despairing listeners to her. And there will be hope again that facts and news will no longer be an oxymoron, yes there will.
Far from the Maddowing Crowd
or just
The Maddowing Crowd
75:
of course you do...
MikeD @ 67:
I thought it must have been something. After November I guess we can expect her to crawl back in bed with those who hate her.....and us. Get Cindy (or anyone) on the ballot please. Show Pelosi she won't play us for election year fools.
MikeD @ 67:
Have you donated to the Green Party? My guess is that they don't have a lot of money and will likely save it for closer to the election. My question to you is, why hasn't anyone in your district started a recall effort for Pelosi? Or have they?
For a title, is "Maddow About You" too frivolous?
I'm Maddow as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore!!!
shagnaski @ 56:
You are right, she tries to do objective analysis more than advocating a position. You should try her radio show though. She can get into more detail there and you can definitely tell, at least in my opinion, that she is looking at things from a very left wing perspective.
Given MSNBC's track record of one-word titles (Hardball, Countdown, Verdict, etc), my bet is the title of RM's show will follow suit.
Jamey @ 80:
Always like to throw a wrench in the trolling works...
The O-Reality Factor
Leadership @ 84:
ding, ding, ding! We have a winner!!
devildog21 @ 55:
Spot on.
Feet to the Fire
Ruthless People @ 75:
Taking Our Country Back with Maddow
That's another good one.
How about: "The only television news feature not hosted by an over-paid twelve-year-old"
or
"Time-Out, with Rachel Maddow"
Maddow is one of the very few reasonable/informed voices on cable news. She should take David Gregory's time slot, as his show has proven to be a substantial failure (except when Rachel joins the panel).
"This Ain't Scarborough Country"
harley @ 70:
Apology not necessary. Ms. Pelosi should go back to California and do what she is best at; being a grandmother.
Dr Acula @ 90:
I 2nd that. Until she does she's part of the problem. She needs a strong primary challenge to remind her of her constitutional responsibilities. Maybe that would light a fire under her ass.
I hope so, she deserves it.
"Reality Check with Dr. Rachel Maddow."
Bust that simpering self-righteous Dr. Laura one right in the chops.
We the People
with host Rachel Maddow
"Truth Has a Liberal Bias" with Rachel Maddow.
As to what to name the show, I'd like to see a revival of the name she used for her Air America show with Lizz Winstead - "Unfiltered."
I'm sure the lawyers from AA and MSNBC would have to work it out, but I'm sure it's doable.
Jersey Jay @ 20:
Absolutely correct. While one commenter has noted that Olbermann criticized Obama for his stand on granting the telecoms immunity, Olbermann has praised Obama for wanting to send more troops into Afghanistan. Perhaps Olbermann and Obama can explain why it is all right for an Iraqi to die for his country but not for an Afghani to do the same thing while defending his country against the invaders and occupiers, i.e. the United States. Olbermann is quite good at describing McCain as a warmonger but is also reticent in pointing out the militaristic policies of Barack Obama.
devildog21 @ 55:
In this case especially "domestic". Our foreign enemies didn't and couldn't have depleted our military, busted our budget, trample our constitution, embolden our enemies and alienate our allies. A domestic enemy did that. The Bush regime has done more damage to this country than any foreign enemy to date. We were able to rebuild after Pearl Harbor and 911. Rebuilding after the Bush regime is going to be tougher, it's going to be a long hard slog. Impeachment is the first step.
Rachel is simply the best. Intelligent, funny & kills
any right wing Republican in a debate with ease.
We need more Rachel Maddow's. The right pisses their
pants when facing her. Give us a break from the Right
loons that eat up 99% of the opinion media whatever it
may be.
This maybe would have been a better idea than creating the nightly testament to the media's love affairs with John McCain that is The Race to the White House. Where, of course, Rachel Maddow provides a consistent antidote to the forces of evil (read: Jay Carney).
MikeD @ 67:
I do not believe the Green Party is inept as it is sorely lacking in funds to combat the deep money pockets that Nancy Pelosi has in conjunction with the Democratic machine. If Ms. Sheehan were to have as much cash flow as Nancy Pelosi, then she would have a fighting chance against Pelosi.
What's the holdup? Couldn't MSNBC delete an hour of their daily Prison Channel marathon to make room for Rachel? Or how about taking an hour away from the News Models yammering away all day long about white women in peril and other pressing issues of the day? Or put Buchanan out to pasture....his hot air cranky old man routine is getting really long in the tooth. That would save half an hour a day right there....it seems like he's on EVERY talking head show MSNBC airs!
Raving Liberal in WV @ 11:
Sorry. The truth isn't partisan and reality has a liberal bias. I am not buying into "liberals do it too". I haven't been jammed in the pooper by a neodem Administration & Congress for the last 7 years. No, that would be the scumsucking neocons lining up to run a train on all of us.
Sorry if that is too objectionable a metaphor, but I am sick and fucking tired of false equivalences. You all have had your faces pushed into the sand by the republicans. Slowly now: The REE PUB LICK ANS!
Besides, I thought we were talking about Rachel Maddow, not fucking Joe Scarborough.
(Sorry, too early for this. I'll finish my coffee and shut up now)
MikeD @ 67:
My understanding is that Sheehan is trying to collect the signatures to qualify as an Independent and she only has a few more weeks to collect them. She had about $115,000 at one point and apparently it has been spent! It seems to me that money should have been used to pay signature gatherers.
Perhaps John Amato would consider doing an audio interview with Cindy and posting it here? No better way to get an update than straight from the horses mouth, right?
She does do radio interviews on NPR etc.
As to Rachel Maddow, I too hope she gets her own show.
Couldn't care less what they call the show as long as she gets one.
For the longest time, CNN and MSNBC they tried women hosts who were news reporters or broadcast columnist types. They didn't work. What you need is host personalities. That's why David Gregory is such a failure at this. MSNBC need to hire Rachel for evening (9PM?), Stephanie Miller and her fabulous West Coast crew for mornings (totally out Imuses Imus at his peak). Mica is exceptional as a host for midmorning. And Frangela (out of L.A., Stephanie's replacements) for 6PM. That would drive Fox and CNN out of first place mighty quick. Can Morning Joe, a blithering embarrassment.
Bonkers @ 108:
You may want to consider a switch to decaf! lol
Kind of a scary/happy thought to think of a raving liberal in WV! That's kind of taking your life into your own hands isn't it?
Hey Rachel, how are you doing? Good, good. I am excited to hear about the potential of your own show. but, not to dampen the excitement, be careful. be damn careful. tread cautiously further into the distended abdomen of the corporate msm. it will lure you with the sound of the siren, and before you know it you spend more time arguing the he said/she said partisan BS against pat buchanan every single day (ok, that is what you do already). or, even worse, you take your incredible talent and spend even more time talking about flag pins, terrorist fist jabs, nut-cutting, etc. when your real talent and skill starts to wilt.
good luck, you deserve it, but the msm does NOT deserve you. be careful, you might not be the same rachel after the beast sinks its fangs into your spine.
liberalNmoderation @ 61:
I can totally see where you two are coming from, but I live with a lesbian who would probably find that very funny. It's just puerile adult humor without knowing what kind of person 'steve duncan' really is. It was clever and didn't use any offensive words while managing to be offensive and even had a politically sly inference in there. I will run it past her and if I stand corrected, then that will be that. Got no problem with being wrong or your being offended.
Not a good name for Rachel's show, though.
:D
Hmmm, how about...well, I can't think of one!
Samson- @ 113:
True, true...
Erroll @ 106:
that's the price the green's pay when they don't cater to our corporate overlords.
Erroll @ 106:
I'm sure you are right that they are being out spent. But none of the stuff I was talking about takes much if any money. As you can probably guess there is plenty of local media in SF that is sympathetic to the left. She could get on the local Pacifica radio station easily if she tried. The same for her web site, there are plenty of local people who could lend web development talent.
Rachel Maddow's Media Asylum
harley @ 40:
Backbone?!?!? What are you TALKING about? An Impeachment vote is still "off the table" according to Ms. Pelosi. By making that declaration she is guaranteeing Bush War Criminals are never held accountable.
"Drunk as Shit with Rachel Maddow and Pat Buchanan"
come one that would be the best show ever
Bill@50 and Laribee
Thank you for enunciating my opinion more concisely than I could have !!!
Oh and I love the above suggest
"The spot formally occupied by Chris Mathhews. "
Can we have a host that doesn't routinely interrupt their guests ?
POP @ 33 I agree that Joe S must go. What a hack. But Mika is a completely different person when Joe isn't there and I can actually tolerate her a little more. Sometimes the show (without Joe) is pretty good.
If Rachel does get her own show please drop the format that K.O. uses. Hate his childish ranting about O'Reilly and 'Bushed' and some of the other quirky things he does. Why can't he just play it straight and interview and talk without all the theatrics and voice imitations? Hope Rachel has her own style and forgets all the funny stuff. I tend to watch only the first half hour of his show. The last half is often too silly.
Haven't quite figured out Matthews yet. Some days he is for and some days he is against. He is playing both sides of the road and gets confused a lot. Forgets who he is for and who he is against. His spitting and drooling are a definite drawback.
Anyone got any ideas for a title?
How about, Come in My Ear?
ratfood @ 83:
No just brings back these creepy, icky memories
Of Paul Reiser.
she's gay. when will the attacks from the right be unleashed?
I've long wished that MSNBC would dump Tweety and give Maddow his slot.
I can't stand him, but really enjoy watching her.
Titles:
"Yes! It's the Rachael Maddow Show"
"Serving it cold - With Dr. Rachael Maddow"
"Rachel Maddow - On Politics"
Taglines:
"Your hour of sanity"
"It's why bias is good"
"Not afraid of the facts"
"The show that defines credence"
"making politics fun again"
Oh crap! I actually hate all of these, but it's fun to talk about them. Man, I'm gonna miss her radio program. She's absolutely fantastic on the radio. I'll second those clamoring for Sam Cedar to get a regular time slot again. He's way under sold, IMHO. He was the leader in the use of Internet technologies in combination with the radio program, and dipped deep into the netroots / blogger communities, introducing them to many who would not have otherwise looked at them.
Rachael needs to own a word or two, and that's the tough part of the title. It has to be something distinctive and catchy. Problem is that she is complex, but in an absolutely good way!
Keywords:
Clarity, smarts, analytical, funny, real, potent, fearless, honest, passionate, curious, intelligent, social, female, random, hip, geek, acuity, cute, professional, quick, energetic, approachable, friendly, dangerous, addictive.
Random:
Politics for dinner - Rachael Maddow
Dangerous Commentary
Politics for the rest of us - Rachael Maddow
"Just watch this show once and you too will know where the political junkies are coming from"
"You can't make this stuff up! - Political Commentary and analysis with Dr. Maddow"
Raw Politics
ghostrider @ 7:
air america shills for the dlc (owner: mark green). Sam is Exec Website Editor or some such. They are still afraid of his truthfulness and lack of collegiality.
rpppolyp @ 27:
lost in a round of budget cutting at AARadio
"The Maddow"
"new show"
Thomas Mc @ 126:
Secondeded. Regardless of your opinion on journalism versus editorializing, we've got to balance every wingnut on the right with a truthsayer on the left if we ever hope to get something resembling fair journalism from the mainstream. (Note: don't hold breath)
You know what Rachel is thinking while she looks at this photo? Same as most of us:
"Is that what my hair looks like from the back?"
lol
I mean, really:
How often do you actually see the back of your own head?
devildog21 @ 29:
It's like Colbert said, reality has a liberal bias.
devildog21 @ 73:
There's NOTHING WRONG WITH PARTISANSHIP, in fact it is a necessary indeed indispensable element of political discourse in a democracy. What the reight have introduced into the mix is the idea that if you yell 'partisan' loud enough you can shut up the other side, or that if you point to DINOs like Joe LIE-berman et al you can claim your radical wrongheaded point of view to be bipartisan, centrist and reasonable. Which is of course partisan bullshit.
Being partisan only becomes wrong when you are spending taxpayers's money to advance a political agenda rather than one that is good for the common weal. That's why the Hatch Act exists. And BTW, if the Hatch Act was ever really enforced in full KKKarl Rove would have to give back his entire TAXPAYER-funded salary since he's been working in the White House, and spend the rest of his life in jail.
If the RICO (Racketeering Influenced Corrupt Organization) statutes were fully enforced, you'd have to put most of the Republican Party leadership in jail. Then the frickin' Dimocrats would be unopposed, and you'd have to create a new party just to maintain the illusion of democracy.
Meet the Press
I certainly wouldn't label Rachel Maddow a "bimbo", but, in my opinion, the more time she spends on MSNBC with David Gregory, the more of a talking head she's become. I stopped listening to her show about a month ago and I have no intention of going back. She's become little more than another horse-race analyst who'd rather discuss the day-to-day election events rather than dig into any issues that matter. Naturally, she then criticizes the media, in typical talking head fashion, for not covering the issues.
devildog21 @ 82:
This is where the democratic model is breaking down - visibility of one's message is tied to cost, and there's no longer a Fairness Doctrine to make sure everyone gets equal time.
One place that could ostensibly change is on the net - a camera and a broadband connection gives everyone a platform ... but if we lose the concept of net neutrality, then the internet becomes another pay-to-play platform controlled by the corporations.
When the times be too confusing
And the political rancor to intense
I like to listen to this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1IoQJ_PVoM
Bonkers @ 133:
Too funny!!
Its.
Thomas Mc @ 126:
me 2
Jersey Jay @ 1:
I you do not see the difference yourself, there is little hope you can be encouraged to do so.
How about "The Smug Hour?"
Bonkers @ 114:
Well...you do make a good point I guess...but I think he's just a hit&run type. So such analysis may be wasted on this guy....unless I've missed it, I haven't seen Mr. Duncan reply or post anything new since his original post. And I think my friend L&L nailed it by calling him out as a bigot.
Oh and as for a name for her show....howsabout....oh I dunno....
Rachel Maddows Asswhompin Hour...takin ass and kickin names old skool!
ok...that totally sucked...I got nothin...
if/when rachel is given a show let's just cross our collective-fingers that the show WON'T be about political strategy, and the "coverage" of said strategy.
let's hope (exercise in futility) that if rachel agreed to host a show it would break from the inside baseball type of political show. the problem is not that people aren't familiar with the candidates, the problem is that people aren't familiar with the issues. yes, they might have HEARD of an issue, but their understanding of it stems solely from the political sound bytes/spin, instead of an unbiased/nonpartisan investigation.
of course, if that were to happen i would expect my next flight to be delayed b/c of all the pigs in the air
Another thought: "Madd Libs", with Rachel Maddow...
"An Hour at a Time with Rachel Maddow."
Love her. Get her her own show soonest.
liberalNmoderation @ 145:
Yeah, in all likelihood L&L is correct. But if I said, it would have been funny.
LOL
Login or Register to post comments.