Obama Cheerleader Rachel Maddow upset at being called an Obama Cheerleader
What’s “amazing” is that Maddow won’t fess up to what everyone knows.
Well what should we call her?
The money quotes start at 2:20 of this video.
Off topic — has she apologized yet for her inaccurate anti-Koch Brothers conspiracy theory?
“This administration promised to be the most transparent in history, Rachel,” an animated [Tim] Huelskamp [R-KS] told Maddow. “And if you would stop being a cheerleader and be a journalist, you’d recognize that we’re not getting those answers.”
“Did you just call me a cheerleader?” Maddow asked.
“I don’t know, maybe you have that history,” Huelskamp scoffed, before saying, “If it was [George W.] Bush, you would be jumping and screaming.”
“You’re amazing,” a visibly perturbed Maddow said.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
The truth hurts.
I ALWAYS FELT THAT RACHEL WAS A NICE LOOKING YOUNG MAN
She can’t possibly think otherwise. She must just be dumbfounded because no one has ever said it to her face before.
Seeing Maddow’s reaction reminds of the wife who finds her husband in bed with another woman. The husband immediately says that he’s not having an affair and concludes by asking, “Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?”
No, really…this shows how profound the self-delusion is among the truly in-bubbled.
Collectivists, remember, LIVE day-to-day in deep delusion, and it has a corrosive effect on their ability to deal with any reality.
So the just don’t.
Why are you referring to *anything* that has to do with MSNBC?
I’m not sure she was upset about being called out for being a blatant Obama supporter as she was upset at being called a “Cheerleader.” Can’t you just see her in school hating on the cheerleaders. Note that her reaction was, “Did you just call me a CHEERLEADER?”
Exactly. Her entire persona is to avoid looking like, sounding like, or being anything like the real source of her animus.
In her book, loving Obama and promoting his agenda is a good thing, but being an actual cheerleader is definitely not.
I think of her more as just another Obama bagwoman.
I agree… it was the cheerleader part that upset her… I think the correct term would be yell leader. Isn’t that what they call guy cheerleaders?
That’s exactly what she was mad about.
I can see her thinking, “Cheerleader? When have you seen a cheerleader this butch, Bucko? I’ll beat your ass when this spot is over.”
You are probably right on target with that. If you have never seen it, do a search for her high school picture. I was shocked to see she appeared to be an attractive female at the time. Considering her choice of style now, I can see why that would be very upsetting to her, as she’s gone to such great lengths to hide from that.
Benghazi brings out the apparatchik in the cheerleader. How black is the heart of a person who still tries the “Republican budget cuts” misdirection?
I’d call her a liar, and a willful one, at that. This woman pretends to be all concerned about children and education, but she is more interested in raising indoctrinated Democrats than thoughtful adults.
Cheerleader, cultist, worshiper, delusional paranoid schizophrenic …
What difference, at this point, does it make?
The infantile (and, obscenely overcompensated) Leftist lemming media icons really want to have it both ways, don’t they? They want the plaudits and revered status and liberal merit badges (and, of course, lucre) that come with toeing the Party line, and with reflexively supporting Obama’s every word and deed, and never making a pretense of objectivity or critical analysis with respect to the same, and, yet, when called out on their obvious biases and unwavering political fealty, they take umbrage and act as if they’ve been insulted? It’s absurd.
Many of them have probably learned in J-school that advocacy is central to the journalistic mission. And many probably chose journalism for that purpose in the first place. They just don’t want the great unwashed to know they put agenda before fact.
Agreed. And, the fact that the can’t concede their biases is revealing. Because, it reveals a palpable insecurity. These talking heads view an admission of the obvious — their reflexive political fealty to the Left — as casting aspersions on their intellectual integrity — or, something.
You have a penchant for Leftist politics? Fine; but, at least have the honesty to admit as much, rather than playing this charade of denial.
Reporters used to have high school diplomas and work their ways up from copy boys to covering garden club events to the crime blotter to finally City Hall when they gained experience. The emphasis was on getting the story right and getting it fast and leaving the opinions for the editorial pages.
Journalism Schools changed all that. They arose suddenly, only a few existed before Watergate and all the hype over Woodward and Bernstein. Since there were never really any qualified professors of “journalism” anywhere, schools assigned the least qualified faculty from the English Department – the guys they could not trust to teach Shakespeare or 20th Century AmLit.
And it became a process of liberal indoctrination from “professors” who had never been published in a newspaper in their lives.
Today’s “journalists” don’t see themselves as biased because they were taught that liberal views are the correct ones and others are “uneducated” views to be instructed. They really have no clue they are slanting their coverage – because their entire view of the world is tilted to the left.
What I found the most amazing part of the interview was Rachel’s inability to understand his tweet about Benghazi. I inferred from the tweet that the Congressman felt that Obama was acting as if the deaths never occurred. What Rachel seemed to inferred was that the Congressman was denying that the deaths ever happened. She came back to this point a number of times before he hit her in the pompoms.
I caught that, too. She clearly thought the question was a real ‘gotcha’. It confirmed suspicions on her so-called intelligence.
She can, at times, act like a journalist. Just not very often. She did a piece on political corruption in NY/NJ earlier this week that was ‘bipartisan’ and really pretty good – slammed the Dems as hard as the Repubs.
But turned right around, threw her blinders back on and reverted to form during the same broadcast, of course.
I thought that Republicans were boycotting MSNBC? According to Rance Preibus, they are not supposed to go on that network. A Republican on MSNBC is like a Likud politician going on Hamas television.
“What should we call her?”
We can call her, but she won’t come out of Obama’s colon.
Huelskamp has proved that some male cheerleaders are, in fact, gay.
Interesting that she is more upset about being told she is a cheerleader than that she is not a journalist.
GOP should give that network the freeze. They are not news and should not be dignified as such.
No, actually, I think Republicans, especially conservatives like Ted Cruz, should go on MSNBC and confront them on their “cheerleading.” I suspect they will all wilt like the political “hothouse orchids” they are. I figured Maddow would be the one least likely to get the vapors, but look what happened here.
Agreed – EVERY single Republican who goes on should immediately challenge their biases. Every time.
Be like Obama spokesmen, answer the question we want to answer no matter what was asked. And the question is, “Why is MSNBC such a bunch of leftist weenies?”
Hit them on their bias and bogus racism charges every time, no matter the subject. When they stop inviting conservatives on, they can no longer even pretend to be journalists.
Way back when I was in high school, we did not have male cheerleaders. Sorry, Rachel.
How could he think she was a cheerleader?
Definitely looks more like softball player to me.
I’d love to do a short video/cartoon with Maddow joining ranks with her cohort Melissa Harris Perry (of tampon earring fame) where Maddow sports her new PomPom earrings… Just a thought…
“Cheerleader” is being way too kind. What I’d have said is: “If you were on your feet looking for answers, instead of on your knees under the desk of this incompetent fool…”
This is what ticks me off sometimes about the GOP. They’re too nice. Call this crap for what it is, even if it means going for the cheap shot.