Your video, Rachel Maddow "Last night the Republicans got shellacked", has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

>> ^VoodooV:

Oh Rachel, so smart, but so dumb.
did it ever occur to you that the two party system is BAD. Our founders did NOT want Parties,
One party may be less bad than the other, but the system of parties is BAD. How many people, on both sides of the aisle, voted not for Obama or for Romney, they voted for democrat or republican.
Don't you see a fundamental problem with that....with the party being more important than the person...than the country.
The two party system needs to go. ban all parties. vote for the person, not the party


No, vote for the ideas, not the person, nor the party. (but I think that's what you meant, amirite?)

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

I thought this was brilliant.

In reply to this comment by MrFisk:
*news *controversy *promote

>> ^bobknight33:

Ignorance is blind.>> ^EvilDeathBee:
Maybe America will be alright after all...



It sure is, hence yourself and all the staunch republican losers that lost their losing battle. You lost, btw

Ignorance is blind.

This economy has been held together by unsustainable government spending and Federal Reserve manipulation. If a true bottom had been reached in this economy, the Federal Reserve would not need to be intervening again and again. While some hopeful signs have emerged in housing and in other areas due to the stimulus and QE3 programs, that is likely to unravel in 2013. The real Obama economy (not the one that has been artificially propped up to win an election) and austerity is coming to America, whether it is induced by politicians or by the markets.

The marked drop 316 points the day after election for a reason. Obama is bad for America.
>> ^EvilDeathBee:

Maybe America will be alright after all...

Tags for this video have been changed from 'mitt romney, photo op, hurricane sandy, barely affected ohio' to 'mitt romney, photo op, hurricane sandy, barely affected ohio, Rachel Maddow' - edited by Boise_Lib

Tags for this video have been changed from 'mitt romney, fema, cut funding' to 'mitt romney, fema, cut funding, Rachel Maddow' - edited by Boise_Lib

I don't see where we disagree... Maybe I wasn't clear; the opinion pages and editorials in the NYTimes are left-leaning, just as the opinion pieces and editorials on MSNBC are left-leaning. The news on MSNBC and NYTimes are NOT left-leaning, just as the news (typically) is not presented as right-leaning on Fox News.

People don't blog about or tweet about Fox News or MSNBC when they are just presenting the news, they share Rachel Maddow digging into someone, or Bill O'Reilly yelling about something. These aren't the news, just as the opinion pages of the NYT or the WSJ are not the news.


---------
In reply to this comment by Yogi:
>> ^bamdrew:

This is MSNBC. MSNBC is the New York Times of networks... informative, accurate, and often very well presented, but with a left-wing opinion page. They don't pretend otherwise, unlike 'fair and balanced' Fox News. If you want the middle ground watch PBS or CNN (or BBC in the UK or ABC in Australia); the only bias on these networks is the unavoidable bias of choosing which stories to showcase (about international policy, about the environment, etc. can appear 'biased' but cover a topic of journalistic interest).
>> ^My_design:
Boy these guys are clearly routing for Obama ...



The New York Times is definitely not Left Wing. For instance they report WITH GUSTO the atrocities of others but not of the United States. The New York Times only appears Left because it reports some things that the US does wrong around the world, where as other papers around the planet report much much more. We are insulated from these things so things appear Left when they are actually very much Right and in support of the State.

I believe there is some potential truth to his claim though. there are reports of supposed voter suppression in the republican primaries. Someone, somewhere decided that Romney was going to be the nominee so there was something about how some precincts called in to report their vote counts and the response was that they already had their count.

I think Rachel Maddow reported on it, It might even be a sift here somewhere EDIT: Found it: http://videosift.com/video/Maddow-Maine-may-withdraw-declaration-that-Romney-won

Also, when did Rachel Maddow start wearing glasses?

http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2012/08/20/paul-ryan-argued-for-the-stimulus-when-it-was-bushs-idea

The Stranger blog agrees with you.
Excerpt: Apparently, Chris Hayes is MSNBC's newest Rachel Maddow impersonator?


>> ^VoodooV:

I don't disagree with the reporter, but why does he sound exactly like Maddow?

@vaire2ube, I'm glad you brought up Patrice O'Neal, because he is a perfect example of the disingenuousness of the "It's just comedy, folks" defense. There is plenty of evidence that O'Neal was a bona fide misogynist, with genuinely toxic views about women. But because he usually expressed those views humorously, any criticism was met with something like "God, can't you take a joke, you humorless feminazi?"

I'm sorry, but that's bullshit. Hateful views don't get a pass just because they're followed by a punchline. Good (and even some not-so-good) comedians don't just tell jokes, they convey ideas, and those ideas should be subject to scrutiny just as they would be if they came from Rachel Maddow or Charles Krauthammer. To treat comedy otherwise, to treat it as if it is just light entertainment that shouldn't be taken seriously, is to trivialize it. And the trivialization of comedy is precisely what the greats -- Bruce, Pryor, Carlin -- fought against. To anyone who loves the artform of comedy, the phrase "just a joke" should be anathema.

Patrice O'Neal was a very funny man, but he was also a bigot. His funniness does not excuse his bigotry in the slightest. And Tosh doesn't even have that figleaf. His act is shot through with causal misogyny and disregard for the valid concerns of rape victims. Look, that woman shouldn't have heckled him in the middle of the act. But his response was hugely dickish. Especially given the fact that she had just voiced strong sentiments against rape jokes, which in the mind of most considerate human beings would have triggered a little alarm to the effect of "Maybe she reacts so strongly to rape jokes because she is a rape victim."

http://videosift.com/video/Rachel-Maddow-Simpsons-on-Fox-News

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

This achievement has earned you your "Silver Tongue" Level 1 Badge!

@Yogi

http://videosift.com/video/Maddow-Obamas-Legacy-on-Gay-Rights

Watch this. Rachel Maddow makes a huge distinction between words and actions.

Too long? Bottom line -- his actions have promoted gay rights while his words have seemed soft. Other presidents have privately said "hey, gay rights" to gay supporters, but their actions led to DOMA, Don't Ask Don't Tell, and something else, I forget.

I hope you watch the video. It is eye-opening.