>> ^atara:
They were invited to the campus for a memorial service a year or two after the massacre, but CSN&Y refused to come play.

Were they invited by the same authority that invited the National Guard to campus? I wouldn't blame them if they refused a request from Rhodes. I'm just throwing that out there - I have no idea what the circumstances were.

My point is that one doesn't have to have been present at, or a participant in, a cultural event to have been affected by or qualified to comment on that event. Young's song resonated throughout the country (and still does), despite his reluctance to visit. Kind of like "Southern Man". I doubt Neil has spent much time in the deep south - he certainly didn't grow up there like I did, but his lyrics still ring true.

>> ^soulmonarch:
This video perfectly demonstrates my problem with Ms. Maddow. In her opening on the subject she says, with much scorn:
"Global warming doesn't exist. The media is full of liberals! Someboday wants to take away you guns. And, of course, the refrain of the moment... Obama is a socialist!"
As if reading those statements aloud in a mocking tone of voice will somehow make them either more or less true than they were previously? She provides zero backup for 95% of her disparaging opinions. She also seems to automatically correlate, the word 'socialist' with 'communist'. (This really bothers me.)
And it's not that I don't agree with some of the stuff she says either! Perhaps she really has good reasons for feeling the way she does, but she does a terrible job of communicating her reasoning to others. As it is, I can't tell if she just likes to hear herself talk, or if she really has a point there.


...on the other hand, maybe she's just a blithering idiot. It's so hard to tell these days.


I think you're kind of missing the point. She's making fun of conservatives who confuse "socialist" and "communist" and freely throw them around interchangeably. She has a degree in Public Policy and a Doctorate in Political Science. I'm sure she knows the differences between Socialism and Communism, probably better than you. And they don't just hand out Rhodes Scholarships, ya know - she was the first openly gay Rhodes scholar.

There's no point in disputing the other ideas both you and she pointed out (global warming, gun rights, the liberal media myth) because her audience is smart enough to realize those arguments are ridiculous and legitimizing them with debate is beneath her and her audience, aside from being outside the scope of the topic at hand.

I always love how we uncover these rare items of antiquity and immediately we start labeling it as The Hanging Gardens of Babylon, or the Colussus of Rhodes. -sigh- Human optimism to blame, I suppose.

>> ^rottenseed:

$$$...that's your equal but opposing force right there. As long as there's a market for either side, you'll be able to find news for each. Doesn't make the news any more reliable with or without. Best leave things for yourself to decide.


I don't know, hombre. I just don't think it's as simple as that.

For instance, the Dems now have the upper hand, but they are outnumbered on talk shows two-to-one by the cons.

Randi Rhodes has a greater market share than Rush Limbaugh in many cities, but Clear Channel still won't run her on a station that carries Rush.

The right-wing ideologues will sacrifice profits in order to push their agenda.

The jobs in the stimulus aren't digging ditches to fill them back up. If they were, then Steele may have a point. But they're not, and he doesn't.

What he's doing would be similar to calling JFK's idea to go to the moon a one-off, temporary job with no long-term employment opportunities. (digging a ditch on the moon just to fill it back up again).

But then NASA happened, and JPL, and velcro n shit.


And Blanky: Maddow is undoubtedly partisan. But in no way is she a hack. It's pretty ridiculous to attack her as such. She's an extremely smart woman with a pretty wicked sense of humor.

• degree in public policy from Stanford University
• Rhodes scholar
• postgrad at Lincoln
• phd @ Oxford - political science

can't blame this one on Obama though.. (yet, right QM?)

Thanks for singling me out the way Obama does Rush Limbaugh.

While the whole Middle East mess is centuries old, we can still thank socialist moron Jimmy Carter for enabling the rise of Islamic fundamentalcases in Iran.

The reality is, the Arabs want the Jews wiped out. Israel could be the size of Rhode Island (instead of New Jersey) and have only 3.5 million Jews instead of 7 million. That wouldn't matter to the Arabs.

Compare the size of the Arab world to Israel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_World

Could you seriously believe the Arab world still blames Israel for all their problems?

Some Arab countries have reached peace agreements with Israel and things have improved, but the other Arab countries won't ever accept peace.

The next best thing would be for Israel to permanently destroy its enemies. It really depends on whether or not one believes Israel has the right to exist.

You say the Arab world is supporting Palestinian efforts but don't acknowledge the large military and political help the Israelis receive from the US.

I acknowledge it, but I consider it non-germaine to the topic. The issue is whether countries have the right to defend their citizens? In Isreal's case, there is a large population of armed partisans, geurilla fighters, terrorists, and agent provokateurs right at the door. Sadly, among the population of bad guys are a lot of innocents who don't have anywhere else to go. It is grossly unfair.

But suppose Isreal makes nice, gives Gaza to the Palestinians, pulls down the walls, and disbands the border security. Now the Palestinians can move freely. What happens next? History has proven for the past 60 years that if Isreal doesn't have walls, checkpoints, buffer zones, and blockades then they get car explosions, suicide bombers, and dead citizens. Past treaties made MANY concessions to the Palestinains but the violence never stopped.

Clearly some of you are of the mind that the Isreali government should put its citizens at risk from the bad guys so as to relieve the pressure on the innocent Palestinians. You may also believe that doing this will make the bad guys less prone to violence, and make the Palestinian people in general 'more favorable' to Isreal. I would ask you to supply the logic and evidence that leads you to that conclusion, because it runs counter to over 50 years of evidence.

The kicker is that you want to put the most incompetent organization on the planet (the U.N.) in charge of Isreal's security. No one in thier right mind could believe that is a good idea.

Personally I still think my solution is best. 1. American gives Rhode Island to the Palestinians and relocates them. 2. Italy gives Sicily to Isreal and relocates them. 3. Jerusalem and all the surrounding region is turned into a historical landmark where no one is allowed to live.

I think the world just needs to carve a territory out of somewhere in the middle east and call it Palestine. Just like they did for Israel. Arbitrarily give them some chunk of land at least 2 miles away from Israel. The 2 mile buffer must be an uninhabited demilitarized zone. Put the Palestinians in this new country and never the twain shall meet again. Not realistic I know, but that's what needs to happen. There will never be a solution to this mess if the two people are allowed to remain in proximity to each other. They just need to 'moat' off Isreal from its terrorist neighbors and then any violence becomes a matter of internal Isreali security.

Who should give up the Territory? Two options depending on how you view it...

1. The United States should create a 51st state "Palestine" from its own territory. This is because the US was (primarily) the one that took away all the Palestinian land after WW2 and displaced its people. All the Palestinans get relocated to this New Palestine and it is ceded to them forever. Maybe we should give them Rhode Island...

2. Italy should create a new country "Isreal" from its own territory. This is because Isreal was destroyed by the Roman Empire which took away all the Isreali land, scattered its people, and turned it into Palestine. All Isrealis are are relocated to this New Isreal and it is ceded to them forever. Maybe they should give them Sicily...

>> ^CaptainPlanet420:
She leads an entire state, and the extremist Hussein boy has never led anything. Yet she's the one not ready to lead. Amazing liberal lies and ignorance.


She leads the largest state in the union that has less people then rhode island.

Rachel's a Rhodes Scholar. The intelligence of the interview comes as no surprise at all.

Well, it's northwest of Rhode Island!

I <3 Rachel Maddow. I know she likes chicks (which I think makes her even more awesome), but few women make me smile the way she does.

She handed him an intellectual ass-kicking, and she did it a completely civil manner. He bashed her show, and clearly she took offense, yet she handled herself the way you'd expect a Rhodes scholar to. She's a smart cookie, and this is a prime example of just how mentally tough she is.

Organized? Do they have a union, or something?

"Young Unionized Molesters-Babyraping Our Youth: YUMBOY, Chapter 17, Weekipah, Rhode Island.

Or...NAMBLA."

"Religiocity" ... I think I really like this Maddow chick. What, she likes girls too??? Be still my beating heart... Hell, looking at her Wikipedia entry, even SHE'S more qualified than Palin.

Quoth the Wikipedia:
A graduate of Castro Valley High School in Castro Valley, California, Maddow later obtained a degree in public policy from Stanford University in 1994. She then received a Rhodes Scholarship in 1995 and used it to obtain a D.Phil. in political science from Lincoln College, Oxford University.[2]

A degree in Public Policy AND a Doctorate in Poli-Sci >>> A degree in communications-journalism

is it my puny little laptopspeakers... but thats the sound of maybe a baby grand i hear when she is playing on the rhodes. blasphemy.

but... mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...torrrrrrrrrrrrrri.