Categorized | Domestic Affairs, Media, Page2
Rachel Maddow: When left is right
by hardybear
Posted on 16 October 2009 | 10:46 am 
Print This Post
We love her. Or at least I love her, and I can’t say that about many pundits these days. When Rachel arrived on the scene as an occasional fill-in for MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann, it was quite a change in style for Countdown. She had subtlety. She had genuine, dry wry wit. She wasn’t bombastic, but was still passionate.
It was beautiful. She seemed brilliant.
As campaign 2008 heated up (how long was that anyway, three and a half years?), she began to get more air time on the tee vee machine, as well as a growing audience for her Air America broadcasts. It wasn’t long before she was given the choice 9 p.m. slot, following KO. Then her true talents sprang to the fore, and she began to make a difference.
Likely Dick Armey wishes she’d stayed on the radio.
This is an older article, but I found it in depth and as relevant as when I first read it. From Newsweek:
When Left is Right
By Julia Baird | NEWSWEEK
Rachel Maddow always thought she was an outsider. How did she become a star?
“Can you believe that sellout, Barack Obama?” says Rachel Maddow, looking around the room. “Let’s hit him from the left!” It’s 1:30 p.m. on Nov. 5, and the six-foot-tall Maddow, wearing her trademark baggy 501 jeans and thick-soled sneakers, has just burst into her staff meeting in a small office at 30 Rockefeller Plaza, home of MSNBC. Her team of political junkies, mostly in their 20s and 30s, perk up, laugh and start talking about how Obama is looking at hiring former Clinton staffers. “Yes!” Maddow responds, beaming. “He’s already triangulating, the bastard.” It’s the day after the election, and Maddow has had two hours of “drunk sleep.” Just a few minutes before, her intense executive producer, Bill Wolff, was giving the staff a pep talk, and a warning: don’t get too cynical too soon. They may be feeling “tired and cranky” because they were up late working and drinking, but “the country is still aglow,” he says. “Holy s–––, Barack Obama is president of the United States. People are almost universally feeling quite proud and quite moved by it and I don’t think we want to be too fast to speed away from that.” When Maddow arrives, she energizes the room. She flops to the floor, alternately lying on her back, throwing a small foam basketball in the air and kneeling to scribble in a notebook. Her ideas are all tough-minded: Who will be in the new cabinet? Who are the Republican bosses now? How will Bush handle his “lameduckitude”?
But Maddow’s Obama joke prompts an interesting question: how does a liberal, left-leaning “Rachel Maddow Show” behave when a left-leaning president is elected? Her extraordinarily quick success has been due at least in part to the fervor and passion this presidential campaign inspired. Since the show debuted on Sept. 8, she has more than doubled the ratings of her predecessor, Dan Abrams, with 1.9 million average total viewers, and she’s beaten CNN’s Larry King 27 out of 44 nights among viewers 25 to 54.
All the ensuing hype and excitement about Maddow’s rapid rise, and her quirks—the smart, self-described “butch dyke” who somehow broke into the cable-news boys’ club—has masked the true reason for her success. It’s not despite her differences from other talking heads, but because of them. A funny, cerebral and likable young woman who reads graphic novels and hungers for political change is more representative of the times than the older, angrier male pundits who’ve dominated the debate for so long. Maddow is not angry—her fans find her adorable, often confessing to crushes on her—but she is anxious, driven and determined. She did not stumble into a boys’ club. She elbowed her way in, smiling.
Finish the article here.
She is different. Not just because she is the first openly gay woman to achieve this kind of media success ~ though that is a stellar accomplishment. But also because she cares. She genuinely has heart and soul, and they are both involved in how she reports on the issues. This quote from the article had particular resonance for me:
So what happens when the outsider is leading the pack? When the disgruntled left becomes the sober, powerful mainstream? How disgruntled is Maddow, anyway? Does her joviality mask a deep partisan fury? Or is she motivated more by a “pure flame of public service,” as Olbermann puts it? At a midnight dinner at a bar in downtown Manhattan, over a meal of fish and red wine, she admits, uncomfortably, that she is driven by fear of failure: “It’s very boring and sad. I want to convince myself that my existence matters.” She says she is not an angry person—just emotional. “I get teary a lot,” she says cheerfully, pulling one of the handkerchiefs she carries with her at all times out of her pocket and pointing out the bubble pattern on it. She believes in ghosts and is “knock on wood” superstitious. She is also anxious, often lying awake worrying about America’s need for improved infrastructure and national security.
Another fabulous Rachel selling point: conservatives cannot stand her. As if her liberal-progressive opinions didn’t annoy them enough, it’s just got to hurt that she’s gay and in such a position of influence. She’s also not a Faux News blond bimbette. Her stories are well-researched, her guests not always eager to back her up … a nice change on MSNBC.
I must also confess that I enjoy her style immeasurably, the news delivered sarcastically is often just what we want when the cons are up to their worst.
When she went to town on the C Street crowd, they felt the heat. When she took on the astroturfers and their corporate roots – cue Dick Armey – they took notice. If you are visible enough to have one of the posters pictured at the left photoshopped of you, you have most certainly reached the heights of Rethuglican infamy.
She even makes Meet the Press watchable of a Sunday morning, which is no mean feat after the loss of Tim Russert. I feel that her sincerity translates. Those of us who agree with her most of the time find that appealing, those who oppose her views find it properly threatening. Which is how the Fourth Estate should work in a democracy, imo.
With great thanks to Roberta, a piece just ran in the Guardian UK that merits a look. It’s always marvey to have that perspective, the one from the other side of the pond. It’s called “Rachel Maddow, Voice of America” and offers up such favorable observations as these:
But 2008 was a year for re-arranging American expectations about who gets to have a voice in public. The Democratic candidate was not only black, but also overtly professorial, and this didn’t diminish his popularity with the public. Hillary Clinton and, yes, even Sarah Palin normalised the idea of more female authority in politics. In a very short period of time, the unthinkable became the reality, and Maddow had her very own MSNBC programme.
But what really endears her to American liberals is the way she takes her job and the authority it gives her seriously. Maddow is less interested in the shouting fests that dominate most cable news and instead favours in-depth interviews with experts who are permitted to show their expertise on air without being interrupted. Hers may be the only show on cable news were feminists come on air to speak their minds without being paired off with belligerent sexists who dominate the conversation by yelling over their points.
For a look at how conservatives feel about Rachel, I did a bit of sleuthing on some moderate (more moderate than Stormfront, at least) Republican sites. They had plenty of slime to offer, and on occasion, managed to sound almost marginally clever; as with this blurb from David Swindle who writes for David Horowitz’s Newsreal.
Our friend and colleague David Swindle wrote that Rachel Maddow is the Mary Poppins of the left–pleasant and reasonable-sounding enough that she comes off as more reasonable than her actual stance might be. Mary Poppins used a spoonful of sugar to help the medicine go down, but Maddow’s sweetener of choice is something different. Hers is pure fiction–a calorie-and-truth-free artificial sweetener to help the leftist ideology go down. And (with apologies to diet soda aficionados) like most artificial sweeteners something about it tastes wrong, it’s a poor substitute for the real thing, consuming too much can give you a headache, and prolonged exposure can lead to cancer. OK, so that last part of the analogy doesn’t really hold. But observe the artificial truth flavoring her latest show.
Less clever, more loathsome, was a piece entitled ” Psychotic lesbian Rachel Maddow on protest, then and now”, at erudite site MOFOPOLITICS (frequently linked by Free Republic). MOFO’s staff also like to write about how “overweight and unattractive” her [as they type it] death partner life partner Mikula is. They used the pic at right to link that particular story, and the comments on that thread are more abusive and repulsive than you can likely imagine.
It’s just one more incidence of the change of tone in this country lately. It’s not enough to have civil debate anymore, it’s as if the dialogue has to be shocking, whether it be sick speculation about a gay female journalist, or derision of the president.
Watch Keith and Rachel respond to Bush 41’s assertions that they are “sick puppies”:
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Related posts:
If you liked this article,
This post was written by:
 |
hardybear - who has written 603 posts on Free Range Talk.
Life is one long and lusty education. |
Submit your own article via this simple form and we will format it for you for publishing.
Jump to Leave New Comment 
Comments
Recent Comments
- X 2
- It's time to take away their tax exempt status. That'll get rid of a lot of them.
- on MOD ThursdayUgh. You broke arm? Get better soon
- on MOD ThursdayUgh, I've got some kind of virus that my guy gave me, but besides that I'm well thanks.
- 51% insane -- hmmmm. That could be. but of the remaining 49%, how many are barely hanging on? I was...
- Never, because the greedy and fake Christians who like them, are just like them. And burning the Qur...
- a lot of churches are cults and get away with calling themselves a religion.
Posts
Tags
Authors
Categories
© 2009 Free Range Talk. Powered by your Donations.
242,004 Comments Since March 2009 
-->
(Report comment)
Very good article… Oddly enough, I like Rachel but do not like her show. I thought she was excellent as a panelist during the primaries and general election campaigns yet, I can’t watch her
show. Go figure.
As a side note observation: what’s with the glasses when she appears as a guest on other shows; seems somewhat contrived.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
h/t to Roberta for suggesting I add the “sick puppies” response vid, it’s fascinating … KO and Rachel had some good rebuttal.
[Reply]
October 17th, 2009 at 9:02 am
(Report comment)
the Rightees have seriously lost it. The few who haven’t gone completely off the deep end are teetering on the edge.
[Reply]
October 17th, 2009 at 9:03 am
(Report comment)
Keith really had some good points about 41’s culpability in the tradition of slam journalism …
[Reply]
October 17th, 2009 at 9:07 am
(Report comment)
indeed! I’m guessing the fucktards will not heed the pleas of 41 for “civility” and will be protesting Obama’s appearance at TA&M with their usual classiness and misspelled racist signs
[Reply]
October 17th, 2009 at 9:13 am
(Report comment)
What happens to suth-ahn gentility, hospitality and manners in situations like these?
Was it Jon Stewart who said that the teabaggers, who used to be called The Klan, were reaching new lows?
[Reply]
October 17th, 2009 at 9:06 am
(Report comment)
Have you read Suskind’s latest book, kel? I have it on my wish list, but am not there yet. Mired in ‘Blackwater’ at the moment.
[Reply]
October 17th, 2009 at 9:14 am
(Report comment)
no, just wrapping up Blumenthal’s and then going to start in on Frank Schaeffer’s new one — which I’m not sure is going to grab my attention, judging by the thumb-through I did last night. But I’ll give it a go.
going to Amazon now to look up Suskind’s
[Reply]
October 17th, 2009 at 9:23 am
(Report comment)
Thanks for posting this. Poppy is doddering, and this whole incivility thing is laid at his feet.
“Fox News and some of the compradres there…its sort of “Willie Horton” 24/7.”
Ain’t that the truth?
[Reply]
October 17th, 2009 at 9:27 am
(Report comment)
Indubitably, a2p. Non-stop Willie, is an apt way to look at it … the WH wasn’t a millimeter off base about the Repubs having their own news channel.
But kudos to Roberta for suggesting the video, it’s a goodun’.
[Reply]
October 17th, 2009 at 9:34 am
(Report comment)
I’m quite sure the Repubs are entitled to confidence in their ownership, since it is surely bought and paid for.
[Reply]
October 17th, 2009 at 9:39 am
(Report comment)
Ha! Canny observation, that. They’ve invested.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
No on 1 (Maine) sends a thanks to the netroots community for the support!!!
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Great post, HB!
The more the rabid right screams and yells and whines and puts-down Rachel, obviously the more she is getting her points across.
I gave up on Meet The Press when they chose Tim’s replacement – can’t stand this guy. But when she is on, it becomes watchable and educational – again.
Her wit and that great sly smile always puts a smile on my face. Not bad – for a chick!
[Reply]
October 17th, 2009 at 9:41 am
(Report comment)
[Reply]
(Report comment)
How the neos can even DARE compare her to their nimrods, is beyond me. Rachel has a degree from Oxford AND has a PhD. in Political Science!
When I point that out to one of them, they pull out the old musty, pointy headed, intellectual, liberal card. They have an “answer” for everything.
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
(Report comment)
That is so aggravating.
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
(Report comment)
Phillips claims that she is no different from him
the woman is a Rhode’s Scholar — in fact, she was the first openly gay person to win a Rhode’s scholarship.
Keeryst! the fucktards are so lame!
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
(Report comment)
They didn’t like that Rhodes Scholar aspect about Clinton, either. Instead of them always making fun that smart people are libruls, perhaps they should look at the reason why lots of smart people are liberal: they’re SMART!
Hellllooooooo!
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:55 pm
(Report comment)
the study released today from Kansas re support for teaching creationism in schools shows the more education the respondent has, the less likely they are to favor the Creationism miseducation
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
(Report comment)
No big surprise there, huh? Sad thing is, the nimrods will use this fact to advance their agenda. They will just malign education even more. Sad, sad, sad. They just use the excuse that those big universities brainwashed them with their big ol elitist ways.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Every time she’s a guest on MTP, David (The Dork) Gregory’s rating goes up….She’s the one thing I miss since I canceled my cable service….
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
(Report comment)
you can watch her show live online, I think, at MSNBC.com
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
(Report comment)
Kelly – ygfm
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:46 pm
(Report comment)
replied
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
(Report comment)
You can get the show via podcast in iTunes, if you can play them. I catch up via those if it’s a busy week.
Or the podcasts that are on MSNBC: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28981762/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:19 pm
(Report comment)
Thanks Kelly and HB….I will check it out…
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Rachel’s shredding of Tim Phillips (Teabagger) last night was beautiful!
she called him a “PARASITE”
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
(Report comment)
Thanks kel, that was such a great segment, and I didn’t take the time to find it and throw it in the post … wonderful to see it again.
By the by, have a post scheduled to go up around 5 my time for music night.
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
(Report comment)
guess I better find my party dress and dancing shoes
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
(Report comment)
But you know darn well ep will out-dress us.
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:19 pm
(Report comment)
if he can pry that tiara away from Clemmie
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
(Report comment)
Oh, crap – do I have time to get my hair done?
What is EP wearing – I hate when we clash…..
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
(Report comment)
See Kell’s above.Clemmies tiara.
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 2:32 pm
(Report comment)
Well, guess I’ll dress down and just wear the triple strand of pearls and the Emerald brooch.
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
(Report comment)
Very Queen Liz!!
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
(Report comment)
Thank you, it’s stressful enough competing with ep.
Blackwell could be watching.
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
(Report comment)
Her research staff is top notch…….Thanks for posting Kelly….
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
(Report comment)
rachel was on fire last night…..
especially when she said “i want to say this to your face”…. (or something like that)
that’s my girl….
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
(Report comment)
kitty!!!!
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 3:22 pm
(Report comment)
Cool, a kitty on the piano smiley!
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 3:23 pm
(Report comment)
hi, mh!
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
(Report comment)
Great to see you, kitty! I’m learning how to play Brahms Intermezzo, Op. 118, No. 2 in A major. It’s really beautiful. It should take me about a year
to figure it out. 
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
(Report comment)
beautiful piece!!
good luck with your practice…
[Reply]
(Report comment)
I absolutely adore Rachel Maddow. What a treasure. Even my husband loves her, and he rarely likes any media personalities.
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
(Report comment)
Dave digs her as well, and it’s not easy to wring praise from him on pundits as a rule.
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:27 pm
(Report comment)
I’ve been meaning to ask you, is “Dave” your hubby, and is he the Dave that posts so great on HuffPo?
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
(Report comment)
Sweet of you to ask … yes he’s my hubs, but he doesn’t post. He reads, and gets a big charge out of the site, but isn’t a commenter.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
I think she’s beautiful…. She is not a cookie cutter blonde and her face has character to burn.
I’m at the point where I can’t tell one blonde news reader from another… and they all seem to babble in exactly the same inane way.
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
(Report comment)
I think her looks are adorable! She’s got lashes out to THERE!!!!
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
(Report comment)
She’s lovely, imo.
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
(Report comment)
remember her first week on air, and they tried to “fem” her up? They actually put big black fake eyelashes on her.
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
(Report comment)
You know, I don’t think those were fake. She has gorgeous long black lashes. I think they put one of those mascaras on her that are so vouminous and it made them POP! When my very blonde daughter in law wears mascara, she looks like she has on false ones, they are so long and thick.
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
(Report comment)
I have ridiculously long lashes, and those new mascaras make me look like I’m sporting tarantulas. It’s scary, rather.
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
(Report comment)
maybe it was just mascara overload, but the first two days of her show, she could barely keep her eyes open, and she kept trying to adjust the lashes. it was painful to watch
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
(Report comment)
I think NASA designed some of the new mascara formulas.
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
(Report comment)
Ha!
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
(Report comment)
Lucky You! this is the only one I could find with big lashes….
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
(Report comment)
Aaw, that’s adorable!
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
(Report comment)
I used to have eyelashes, but I think the cat ate them.
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
(Report comment)
Oh MsD, you crack me.
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
(Report comment)
It’s all in the bones.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
One of the reasons I wish an upgrade weren’t so expensive. I wish I could pick and choose. I’d choose her. Very nice post, MsBear.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Awesome post HB!!! Rachel Maddow is one of the reasons I still watch cable news.
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 11:12 am
(Report comment)
Thanks guys, it’s not finished yet but I hit the wrong button … I still do things like that.
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 11:13 am
(Report comment)
ygm….
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
(Report comment)
Thanks again for the link to the Guardian Roberta, so great to have that perspective.
[Reply]
October 16th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]