Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

Rachel Maddow is a shill for murder, as long as Democrats are the killers.

Rachel Maddow, Shill for the Regime

(Last night), MSNBC's Rachel Maddow had a sickeningly sycophantic interview with war criminal Madeline Albright about her new book on the creepy pins she wears. Is Albright a witch, or does she just look like one? One of her pins is a poisonous serpent. Ha ha ha. Did Maddow ask about Albright's help in the starvation of a million Iraqis because of Saddam Hussein's "WMDs"�? Nope. Her statement that the killing of 400,000 Iraqi children through murderous Bush I-Clinton I sanctions was "worth it"�? Nope. Meanwhile, Albright hopes to help kill Iranian children and adults because of Iranian "WMDs,"� and Maddow is helping her. Can you believe I was dumb enough, when I listened to her old radio show, to think Maddow was pro-peace? Is she a neocon like Albright? No. Like virtually all progressives, she is a bloodthirsty warmonger when the Democrats do the murder.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 32October 9, 2009 2:27 PM





by Anonymousreply 1September 29, 2009 1:32 PM

Why, R1? She was vehemently anti-torture and anti-war prior to the election of Obama, but now she supports both as long as Obama is doing the torturing and the killing. It's called cognitive dissonance, and you should look it up.

I really loved her before the election, but now she's just a suck up to the idiots that run Mordor on the Potomac.

by Anonymousreply 2September 29, 2009 1:37 PM

OP = R2 = delusional

by Anonymousreply 3September 29, 2009 2:00 PM

Freakety freakety freak!

Freakety freakety freak!

Freakety freakety freak!

Freakety freakety freak!

Freakety freakety freak!

Freakety freakety freak!

Freak! Freak! Freak! Freak!

by Anonymousreply 4September 29, 2009 2:02 PM


by Anonymousreply 5September 29, 2009 2:10 PM

Isn't the Lew Rockwell site the one that also doesn't believe in AIDS? It's a fringe site.

by Anonymousreply 6September 29, 2009 2:13 PM

Albrecht did retract that "worth it" statement, which Maddow and Olbermann have often noted. Make of that what you will.

by Anonymousreply 7September 29, 2009 2:13 PM

Does F&F still work these days? What does it do exactly?

by Anonymousreply 8September 29, 2009 2:15 PM

Consider the source; in this case, CRACKPOT CITY.

OP, you are a maroon of the highest order.

by Anonymousreply 9September 29, 2009 2:15 PM

I'm with you, OP. I find it chilling how many people are willing to overlook killing, torture and starvation as long as they have their approval of the people who advocate it.

It is sad that we are required to get this information from "fringe sites," whose credibility can always be attacked for the mere fact of their not being Mainstream enough. Our wars are being brought to us with the enthusiastic support of Murdoch, GE, Viacom and Disney. I want to like Maddow but I think she's just another in a long list of paid-for tools.

by Anonymousreply 10September 29, 2009 3:34 PM

It's a fringe site because it is written by retards.

[quote]She was also criticized for defending the UN sanctions against Iraq (under Saddam Hussein) in a 1996 interview with Lesley Stahl on a segment of CBS's 60 Minutes[45] that, according to Albright, ignored

[quote]Saddam's culpability, his misuse of Iraqi resources, [bold][italic]or the fact that we were not embargoing medicine or food.[/bold][/italic] I was exasperated that our TV was showing what amounted to Iraqi propaganda.[46]

So, OP, if Madeleine is a murderer, then Clinton is too, since he was Pres while she was SOS?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 11September 29, 2009 4:17 PM

OP = r10

I tried to read the original post. Too confusing. Think before you post. You might have a point there, somewhere. But it gets very lost in your ramblings OP.

by Anonymousreply 12September 29, 2009 4:17 PM

Nah, no point whatsoever.

by Anonymousreply 13September 29, 2009 4:27 PM

OP, you are narrow minded, full of yourself, very angry and need to get helpp

by Anonymousreply 14September 29, 2009 4:32 PM


by Anonymousreply 15September 29, 2009 11:29 PM

OP is obviously drunk. Methinks she drank up all this year's batch of applejack!

by Anonymousreply 16September 29, 2009 11:32 PM

Rachael Maddow is seriously kicking ass on her ACORN reporting...

by Anonymousreply 17September 30, 2009 6:13 AM

She does rock.

by Anonymousreply 18September 30, 2009 10:57 AM

This anti-ACORN shit is really making me mad.

Why the FUCK are the Democrats caving and folding and falling for this crap?!?

by Anonymousreply 19September 30, 2009 2:08 PM

R19, because they're guilty.

by Anonymousreply 20October 6, 2009 1:07 PM

No, R20. It's not because they're guilty.

It's because they're cowards afraid to stand up to the big ugly bullies.

by Anonymousreply 21October 6, 2009 1:57 PM

"It's because they're cowards afraid to stand up to the big ugly bullies."

Bullies are often cowards, and if you push back they will turn and run.

The Dems are bullies and cowards, the Reps are cowards and bullies. They're both lying, thieving, murdering thugs who need to be neutered.

Washington DC needs to be eliminated, and a new form of government implemented- preferably one that obeys the constitution, especially the 10th amendment. DC has WAY too much power, and it abuses it more and more each day.

by Anonymousreply 22October 6, 2009 9:31 PM

R22 = the tediously tiresome false equivalency troll.

by Anonymousreply 23October 6, 2009 10:20 PM

r19, they're running an illegal operation. Stop being a dumb fuck.

by Anonymousreply 24October 6, 2009 11:02 PM

NO. They're NOT.

Stop being a gullible tool of the right-wing smear machine.

by Anonymousreply 25October 6, 2009 11:10 PM

im smellin helen...

misshelenbedd... your work smells a mile away.

by Anonymousreply 26October 6, 2009 11:18 PM

Before Obama was elected, I LOVED Rachel. She was a firebrand, calling out the president for his criminal behavior.

Now that Obama is president, she defends and cheers his criminal actions. She's no better than Limbaugh or Beck or Hannity- just another partisan hack who needs to go away.

by Anonymousreply 27October 9, 2009 2:47 AM

So do are you the idiots that believe the Queen of England deals heroin, or is that the LaRouche freaks?

by Anonymousreply 28October 9, 2009 3:09 AM

R27, you're full of shit.

She calls him out on all sorts of shit.

You're being an idiot.

by Anonymousreply 29October 9, 2009 4:08 AM

The implication of the fact that our troops have been in Afghanistan for eight years while the opium trade in that nation is prospering is lost on you, isn't it, R28?

We could eradicate the poppy crop in one day if we had any mind to do so. If the billions that the opium generates are going into the pockets of our enemies, then the crop is a valid target in the War on Terror. If, on the other hand, the money is being made by our allies (or ourselves), then our own War on Drugs is a fraud.

I wish just once someone anywhere on US television would tell us the truth about what we are attempting to accomplish in Afghanistan.

by Anonymousreply 30October 9, 2009 4:09 AM

"...our own War on Drugs is a fraud"

Ding! Ding! We have a winner! Why do you think that people attacked Ron Paul so loudly when he proposed legalizing ALL drugs? Our Corporate/Government masters make BILLIONS off of the drug trade.

by Anonymousreply 31October 9, 2009 12:32 PM

They'd make even more if they legalized pot and taxed it.

Because the war on drugs costs billions, it sorta offsets the moeny they're making.

by Anonymousreply 32October 9, 2009 2:27 PM
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.


Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!