Does anyone think that Rachel Maddow is trying way to hard to look like a female perversion of Sean Hanity?

Perhaps that’s why she wears her little brother’s suits.
If she gets NBC’s ‘Deal or No Deal’ gig, will she shave her head to look like Howie?

If you listen to Rachel she clearly says she is reading the “Cliffs Notes” version from the Committee. And every thing she said is seemingly factually correct. At least no one has yet to point out something that wasn’t.

Also, read the actual text of the Bill and tell me how that is supposed to be read on TV.

On March 11th, 2009 at 1:45 am, Mookie said:

On March 11th, 2009 at 12:45 am, chapoutier said:

Hey Mook…

Have you gotten an answer yet about what Rachel said that was wrong or how she deceived her viewers yet?

Just wondering.
No dice, Chap. I’m thinking we probably shouldn’t hold our breath.

Did either of you read Michelle’s post?

…If Maddow’s viewers actually took her advice and “read the bill”—not the partisan hack job “fact” sheet she pretended was the bill—they would read that if a union turns in cards representing more than 50% of a company’s employees, “the Board shall not direct an election but shall certify the individual or labor organization as the representative described in subsection.“

On March 10th, 2009 at 9:52 pm, AlohaGuy said:

She went to class? At Oxford? What does she think pubs are for?

As of 10 years ago, Oxford was pretty barren when it came to pubs. Coffee houses a plenty, though.

On March 10th, 2009 at 9:55 pm, chapoutier said:

The absolute most disappointing thing about England was that all the pubs closed at like 11pm.

Yes, the 11:00 pub closing was annoying, as was most businesses closing at 5:30 weekdays and all day Sunday.

The great thing about being human and acknowledging it…there is almost always some common ground that you can agree on. I actually enjoy discussing points of contention sharing a dram of the uisge beatha. When the discussion gets heated, you can always remark on the fine taste, and bring it back to earth.

On March 11th, 2009 at 12:45 am, chapoutier said:

Hey Mook…

Have you gotten an answer yet about what Rachel said that was wrong or how she deceived her viewers yet?

Just wondering.

No dice, Chap. I’m thinking we probably shouldn’t hold our breath.

On March 11th, 2009 at 12:27 am, ritwingr said:

I don’t care if Rachel Maddow is into girls. I do care that homosexuals are woefully unrepresented in the media and entertainment….

Sadly, and I am being sincere, they’ll be represented very well on the “goat” side of the Judgement Seat.

Have you gotten an answer yet about what Rachel said that was wrong or how she deceived her viewers yet?

Just wondering.

Rachel loves single-malt scotch!

Sorry, I had to.

And this is why I love Rachel.

Sorry, I had to.