The conversation soon shifted to the "war on drugs," which Gillespie denounced while he was denouncing the Fast and Furious case. Maher agreed that it was a terrible policy. Maddow then chimed in.
"I feel so contrarian I feel like a narc," she said. "Like I'm against the drug war too but I just want to disagree with you the way you talk about it."
"You should not be forced by your Democratic partisanship —" Gillespie said.
"I’m just trying to say a nice thing, and already, ‘You’re a hack!’" Maddow cried. "Listen, dude, I’m not even a Democrat!"
"You will always take the side of a Democrat over a Republican," Gillespie replied.
"No, I won’t," Maddow shot back. "You don’t even know me."
"I've seen your show," Gillsepie said.
"You're spectacular, man," Maddow said. Later, she wondered aloud what was going on. "What are you mad about?" she said. "Why don't we talk about what you're mad about?"
Anyone who has been listening to and been a fan of Rachel for a long time knows this already. I've been listening to her since 2004 when she was on Air America.
She has always said that she is a policy liberal, not a partisan. The Democrats and Republicans are a political party. Liberals and Conservatives are ideological and more focused on policies.
Know the difference.
That Reason Magazine guy always filibusters when he's on.
I love Rachel Maddow.
I used to love her, then she devoted half her show to Corey Booker (in order for him to redeem himself after he criticized Obama on MTP for going after Romney's Bain record) - and she trashed liberals in her introduction to him.
She had him on her show because they were long time friends from her days at Standford. I couldn't believe it. It was like everything I always thought she stood for just went down the drain, just so she could help a personal friend who got himself into hot water.
So I have to question her journalistic ethics as well as her loyalties. I used to watch her show several nights a week and now I rarely watch it.
Well R4, you know she's a LESBIAN. And you know what that means.
Seriously are we sure she's a lesbian? I know plenty of mannish women who crave dick.
What are her "loyalties?" To Obama? She pissed you off because she had on Booker who criticized Obama? This is what people are talking about when they talk about the cult of Obama. r4 has a vendetta against anyone who criticizes Obama. Grow up! He's the President, not your father.
Booker was the story of the day and everyone wanted to interview him. He had been trashed by the partisan left and praised by the right. The one voice we had not heard from since his MTP appearance was Booker himself. She allowed him to respond to the right-wing's "praise." Whether or not you agree with what he did, allowing him to respond to both critics and faux-supporters is what journalism is about.
If you don't watch her show anymore, who cares? I think Rachel will do fine in whatever medium she's in.
Are any of these people supposed to represent me and my views about anything? I didn't elect any of them to any position. Why atre they talking as if I care what they think? Why are you posting what they say as if they were important?
Calm down, R7. I don't even like Obama and voted for Hillary in my state's primary - but I do want him to beat Romney and would think you would, too. And people like Booker make that harder. In case you haven't heard, this is an ELECTION year.
Plus, I just don't like Booker. Trying to privatize WATER is something no REAL Democrat would do...but you go ahead an defend him.
I think what Rachel did was unethical. She never would have had that guy on her show if he wasn't a personal friend.
and now you're accusing me of defending Booker? What a twisted partisan mind you have.
r9 your mind is so twisted in thinking that any Democrat who criticizes Obama should be silenced. It's illogical. First of all, Booker made his statements and it was all over the news and it was unrelenting. Whether or not he appeared on Rachel's show, our mainstream media wasn't going to stop talking about the faux-controversy. Booker was going to have to "defend" his statement again on a national news show. The difference is that on Rachel's show, he was allowed to just speak (and boy did he ever go on and on).
Any other mainstream media outlet and I would guarantee you there will be another gotcha moment and soundbites they can play over and over. As Booker is prone to put a foot in his mouth, that wouldn't be hard.
Blaming Rachel for getting a scoop that every journalist wanted? Unrealistic world you live in.
I detest this aspect of campaigning. Instead of microscopically examining every possible facet of some potentially controversial thing someone said, they should talk about how the hell we're going to fix health care, and why no wall street criminals are in prison.
But the medical insurance industry is too tied in with the corporate media, so all we get is fluff.
Like she doesn't vote Democrat down the line. I've discovered less is more whenit comes to Rachel.
Gillespie is a douchebag.
She's like me. She knows that government is by and large, evil or at least stupid, but when faced with an "alternative" such as Republicans, she'll vote Democrat every time. She knows (like I do) that Americans aren't quite ready for what we imagine is the perfect style of government. We're like the people in ancient Egypt who said "I don't think the king IS God, maybe just appointed by God...Now everyone thinks that they're God b/c they get to vote every 4 years. Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert are the same. Call us "Classical Liberals" I only call myself libertarian here.
I just can't get past MSNBC being owned by GE and having those oil corporation promotions on every commercial break. Seeing the first Occupy protesters sentenced to jail time in New York City this past week after the judge said guilty in a make believe trial proves we all should have evolved from liberal tv to liberal activism a long time ago.
Gillespie is all 'look at me, i'm so cool in my leather jacket, and i'm a libertarian, kids! and the government is bad...'
So puerile and stupid. I can't tell if he knows better, and is just an attention whore who lives for these punditry gigs, or he's just kind of dim.
Nobody ever asks these clowns what they think the legit functions of government are.
Rachel is the one show I can bear to watch.
My attitude is this: Those shows are like any other TV show, or soap opera….they are making 250 episodes a year. And not all of them are home runs.
But Rachel does her homework, and although I don't agree with every point she makes, I know that her and her team do relentless factchecking, and I respect and appreciate that.
She's also the one person in the cesspool of those talk shows - either side - who reaches out to people on the other side. She's never rude, or disrespectful. She DOES expect them to answer questions and not just give unrelated PR babble, and they've often grilled her for that (like when she had the Rapture book authors on) but she at least makes an effort, something no person on Fox does.
I find most people dislike her for the same reasons people dislike the grammar trolls on here. They find a way to make it about her, somehow, because it's hard to find fault with the way she does things.
Thank you R16, that's what I instinctively thought about Gillespie the few times I've seen him, but you put it into words better than I ever could.
I didn't like her on Bill Maher. I never like her. She is a liberal Ann Coulter.
R19 Please explain your comment. I think you're absolutely wrong, as Ann Coulter talks out of her ass all the time with no supporting facts.
R9 should should choke on a bag of cocks.
Nuanced Thinking Alert: DL Beware!!!
Bill Clinton signed the repeal of Glass Steagall Act, which many people point to as the beginning of the current economic crisis.
Barack Obama signed the NDAA law.
I would never vote for a republican. But I often hold my nose while voting for a democrat.
Gillespie is what I like to call a Kochsucking Libertarian. He's why moral people don't call themselves libertarian (and rightly so, thanks asshole). Nice leather jacket, douchebag.
A good portion on the left are policy liberals and not partisan liberals which is why it's hard for Democrats to organize.
No longer have TV and haven't followed political commentary for years since trying to stay sober. Used to love Rachel.
Would someone please explain to me on what basis Booker criticized Obama for attacking Romney's atrocious practices with Bain?
She said last night that she never takes sides. BULLSHIT.
Libertarians just like being assholes. That's their deal. They don't believe in government for any reason. The free market will cure all.
I wish they would find a country where they could ply this ideaology until their heart's content. The problem is they are all in the wrong country, but instead of leaving and finding some country that's willing to practice this douchebaggery they stay here and try to convince us all what a great idea it is with their sparkling wit and dazzling personalities.
R22 makes a good point. Obviously one has to support the Democrats because they are better the Republicans and because they do SOME good things while the Republicans do NONE.
But today's Democratic Party is a shell of its former self. There are several books out there documenting why this is. Over the past 50 or so years, the Democrats have allowed themselves to be pushed farther and farther to the right by the Republicans. They have allowed the New Deal and Great Society to be rolled back and no longer fight for major social programs or policy initiatives.
Obama and Clinton are farther to the right than FDR, LBJ, Eisenhower and Nixon.
The Primaries are this Tuesday in New York. We know she's not a Republican and since Independents can't vote in a primary, if Rachel shows up at her WestBeth polling location everyone there will know the answer.
Compared to Obama, JFK was a right of center Republican.
[quote]She said last night that she never takes sides. BULLSHIT.
She does take sides... the side of facts. This frequently has her criticizing Democrats as well as Republicans.
[quote]Compared to Obama, JFK was a right of center Republican.
Um, no. Obama is a moderate centrist and corporatist. JFK was MUCH more liberal.
Um, R6? She's as openly gay as they get. Talks about her partner frequently on the show.
r31, can I offer you some Wisconsin cheese with that intoxicating wine?
R33, what on earth are you going on about? What can you possibly take as "whining" in R31? Do you even know what the word "whine" means? Because I have to wonder...
r29 Rachel is a resident of Northampton, MA. If she votes, she's voting there. You're not going to find her voting in NY.
LMAO R33, i WAS boasting about Wi win against the unions!! dumb shit!!! wine is the alcoholic drink
Thanks for confirming that you're a complete moron, R36.
ditto r37 lol would you like some cheese with that wine? is that better lib?
r29, Rachel lives in the West Village and works in Manhattan five-days-a-week which is 240 days a year. The law requires physical presence of 183 days to prove residence in a state. If she claims Massachusetts as her home, the Bay State and IRS should be on the alert.
She's a liberal, not a democrat. No big news there. She's more informed on the issues than most of the politicians we're cajoled into voting for.
if she's catholic she's probably a christian socialist
Calling you a moron isn't whining, wingnut troll, it's an irrefutable statement of fact. (Correct that to "childish moron".)
You get right on that, R39.
You Obamabots are awesome! so predictable
Dems will see a HUGE loss this NOV
R44, that would be a huge loss for this country and The American People.
He's so handsome and all you guys fawn all over Anderson Cooper. I just don't get it.
43/44 has a disorder.
The guy in the fake leather jacket did get Rachel and Bill to start bad mouthing the democrats...
r45, I can not imagine it being any greater loss than 4 yrs of Obama
That's because you're an ignorant idiot, R49.
I can't blame her. I'm a neo-liberal, not a Democrat. Dems are pussies. I want the right called out for every lie, every hypocrisy and I don't want to pay for shit in red states. I want a bowl of popcorn and an Eames chair as I watch natural disasters take down the middle of the country with zero federal aid going their way. Let's see how self-sufficient they really are when they don't have the blue states paying for them.
I'll pay for my blue state welfare mothers. Hicks can pay for their own states.
"Can not" is one word, you dumb fuck.
So, how many of darlings have now put a curse on RM because she is not a Democrat?
Come on now...fess up sweeties.
(R7) I love this: "the cult of Obama".
RIGHT ON BABY, RIGHT ON.
That's almost better than Obamabots.
r53, the true dembots are impervious to facts and logic
r50, is an angry black man
R55 = More evidence that everything conservatives and republicans say about liberals or democrats, is actually just projection of what is true of themselves.
I have to wonder what it's like going through life getting everything so completely backwards.
R56, are you EVER going to learn how to use a comma? EVER?
R56 = 40 year old racist loser. He admits it.
r58, pick that booger out of your big nostril BOY!!
She's a Democratic Party apologist, and this was clear when she said that she was a Eisenhower voter. Listen, I'm a fan of many of the things Eisenhower did and stood for, BUT he banned homosexuals from working in the US government. Her dyke ass would have been blacklisted.
Liberals call themselves Progressives, because "Liberal" is a dirty word. They also won't admit to being Democrats most of the time, just like they did during the Bush years.
Rachel is a coward. She tries to make herself more appealing by pretending not to be partisan. She's your typical, "I'm an Independent". Yes, and so is Bill O'Reilly, babe. I'm surprised she came out as gay, since she knows that turns off most of the country.
She's a dirtbag.
How can she have been an Eisenhower voter when she wasn't even born then?
And Eisenhower was in power at a time when everyone was banning gays, so there's no point in singling him out for that.
Ignore the freeper troll. Go fuck yourself, r60.
everyone knows Rachel is Lesbian American
Rachel has been out for ages.
r60 is clearly a Rove-ian disinformationist. Don't take the bait.
Rachel is a fact-based reporter and analyst. She is not an official PR arm of the democratic party. As she said on Bill Maher, what she believes in personally is really beside the point, her job is to report and comment on various issues and policy considerations.
Sadly 'balanced' now often means 'consider the stupid/illogical perspective'. This is often spouted by a Republican. Just because Rachel doesn't often include the stupid/illogical perspective doesn't mean she's officially a Democrat, even though it might seem that way, because she doesn't usually give airtime or consideration to the stupid people, who just happen to usually be Republican.
Got it? It's really not a partisan thing at all.
[quote]Ignore the freeper troll. Go fuck yourself, [R60].
Go fuck YOURSELF, Freeperbot! I just called out DINOS, dickhead. You are one, and need a broom shoved up your twat!
[quote]Obama and Clinton are farther to the right than FDR, LBJ, Eisenhower and Nixon.
And yet she bashes Clinton, but keeps sucking Obama's dick for Michelle.
I'm not a Democrat either. I only vote for and donate to Democratic candidates; however, I absolutely refuse to give money to the DNC.
[quote]Libertarians just like being assholes. That's their deal. They don't believe in government for any reason. The free market will cure all.
Wrong (well, the part about being assholes may have some truth to it). Most libertarians believe in government doing what government does best, AND NOTHING MORE.
See, that's really not so hard to understand. Try not to get confused again.
I have never seen Rachel's show but I loved her in the clip before Real Time. Fake leather Jacket Guy did make her look bad..
Demos are pussies but what other choice do we have?
R69, except they think the government doesn't do anything well, so....
Because it's clear that they hate the concept of single payer universal health care, and yet it's clear that government DOES do that well (Medicare in this country, or any number of systems in other countries, all FAR more efficient and cost effective than our private system).
They're very short sighted, and completely ignorant of history, and how and why things like social safety nets evolved, regulations, etc.
There's a reason most libertarians are upper middle class white men with a good education. They have no clue about their own level of privilege, and have no concept of how half the people in this country live. They don't take into account illness, disability, mental illness and disability, or anything else. They're extremely self-absorbed and selfish, and very quick to volunteer other people for suffering the consequences of their ideology.
Never mind that never in the history of the world has any sort of "libertarian" social order ever worked.
Thank you R71.
r61 saying "How can she have been an Eisenhower voter when she wasn't even born then?" reminded me of Hillary Clinton claiming to be named after Sir Edmond Hillary. One problem. She was born six years before he climbed Mount Everest and was unknown until then.
Libertarianism my work in a place like Idaho where there are more cows than people. Otherwise it's a selfish fantasy.
I don't care what she calls herself, I want her inside me. Deeply.
"What are you mad about?" she said. "Why don't we talk about what you're mad about?"
This is good. It should be said to all of the foaming-at-the-mouth Republicans, "libertarians," and psychos that are on TV.
me, too, R76.
R71, is there anything you don't think government does well? Perhaps we can start by agreeing on some of these and you might find you're more "Libertarian" than you think.
Nick Gillespie ruined the show. That's what he does. He doesn't just have opinions, he has to interrupt and talk over everyone else and shout people down and try to make them answer his assumptions about them.
Asshole. I'm adding him to my list of Bill Maher guests who, when I see their names in the crawl a the beginning of the show, I go watch something else.
Amazing interview with her in Rolling Stone. Lots of behind-the-scenes stuff and a great pic of her and her gal.
The Rolling Stone article has some great material but the bit about women and lesbians (or any minority, really) not being aloud to show anger is quite to the point.
[quote]"Anger is like sugar in a cocktail," Maddow tells me. "I'd rather have none at all than a grain too much."
[quote]But this time, apparently, she lets a grain too much show. "Rachel, I love how passionate you are," Castellanos says, coolly pivoting the argument from the facts to her barely contained fury.
[quote]"That's really condescending," Maddow replies.
[quote]This is Maddow's battle with television: to try to bring a different, more objective model of inquiry to a world of political talking points. Later that week, conferring with her staff, Maddow recounts what had actually flickered across her mind in that instant with Castellanos. "I wanted to say, 'Are you saying I'm cute when I'm angry?'" she recalls. "But I didn't, because when you're a woman on television, you can't even say the word angry."
Fucking spot on. She delivers facts and does so tactfully.
Corey Booker is a revolting mess of a rightwing republican disguised as a democrat. Rachel let him off the hook. I will never trust her again.
Lesbians who want Rachel inside you, I'm curious, are you speaking of her hand?
You're silly, R74. It's possible that's what Clinton's parents told her. At any rate, I hardly see it as a major offense. It certainly doesn't rise to the level of some of the rather enormous lies we've been told in the course of politics and government.
R1: Pretty much. I've been watching her since the start of her show, too, and agree with her outlook, being an Independent whom is very socially liberal.
I actually saw that episode and Gillespie looked very foolish. He was taking contrary positions the entire program just to prove how "open minded" he was. *nods with R16's depiction*
are the photos only in the print edition, R82?
r84. I don't know the interview you're speaking of but I love it when she has conservative guests one. For all I've seen she does well with them, meets them point by point and she retains control of the conversation without being a bully.
These kinds of conversations are changing the shouting back and forth rhetoric that dominates most media. She brings conservative viewers to the show and, well, at least leads them to clearer (more factual) waters – even if they don't want to drink it.
I have heard that Olberman's people changed the tune of his show after they realized how good Maddow was doing.
Yes, of course, r88 but if you google you'll find them. Look on tumblr.
She's been all over the Obama Administration about this Drone shit. Her program has been one of the most outspoken about it.
She is a democrat. I wonder has she ever voted for a Republican. Because she always likes to tear them to pieces on her show. If it quacks like a duck- it is a duck. Stop trying to play cute.
fuck off r92.
People who are liberal can vote Democrat or they might vote for a green party ticket, or something.
We're not all lockstep party-or-die morons like Rethuglicans.
The cuter thing is that r92 really believes there are only 2 parties in this world.
So many Democrats are self-loathing. They make it that they are either not Democrats, or only Democrats because the Right is against (insert issue like gay marriage - once Republicans are pro, said individual will change pol affiliation). Just own it, and be proud of it, goddamnit! It's the same with the 'progressives,' who don't want to be labeled 'liberals.' Chris Matthews used to make fun of this.
Bullshit r95. Its the Republicans that are calling themselves "independents" or "libertarians" because they're too embarrassed by their own sinking party.
Rachel said "Moo" tonight. I don't know why yet. I am a big proponent of the bovine race. I supose this might mean anything. I'm waiting for the commercials to end so this will all be explained.
I don't get out a lot.
So far we've had an owl; plus some hints of quacking; and a teaser for a couple of bears, but nothing of the bovine persuasion.
Damn it! There was no mooing or even an allusion to mooing for the remainder of the show. Nothing, absolutely nothing. I want my 34 minutes back. And I trusted her, too.
It's impossible to have any brand of serious discussion if Ed Gillespie is part of it. The man simply has no credibility.