The more that I think about Rache's comments, the more I come to understand how totally ignorant (s)he really is. There was a thread about a year or so ago, by a member who is just as clueless as Rache, and who will go unnamed; (Lil'MarxistMoonbatTommyTomTomForNews, the resident Asshole of PF) who strongly proclaimed that Rache was literally brilliant.
Based on these comments......You make the call....... On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 1:06 AM, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]>wrote: > Rachel Maddow: Fox Is All About Electing GOP, But MSNBC Has No Political > Objective! > > Rachael Maddow: What a guy! Clueless, but the epitome of a Moonbat! To > top it off, there are many of those clueless "Left of Center" individuals > that truly believe her! Of course, these are the folks who more likely > than not depend upon Rache for their news..... > > > > > http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2012/01/01/rachel-maddow-fox-all-about-electing-gop-msnbc-has-no-political-objectiv#ixzz1tmPevmBG > > By Tim Graham | January 02, 2012 | 00:10 > > [image: Tim Graham's picture]<http://newsbusters.org/bios/tim-graham.html> > > In an interview with Slate.com, MSNBC's Rachel Maddow unloaded the bizarre > claim that Fox News is "operating with a political objective to elect > Republican candidates," but MSNBC doesn't resemble that in any way. > > "I think the thing that is underappreciated about MSNBC is that we don't > really do anything as a company, that we all sorta get to do our own > thing," she claimed. "There may be liberals on TV at MSNBC, but the network > is *not operating with a political objective*." > > I think that the new model in cable in news broadcasting is that when you > hear a host talk, you are expecting that they are saying exactly what they > believe...We are actually saying what we think. We are not playing a role. > We are not being fake-objective. We are not being directed in political > talking points in any way. That it’s us. That means management has to be > hands off with all of us, because in order for you to believe that The > Rachel Maddow Show is saying what this person named Rachel Maddow believes, > there can’t be anybody else telling me what to say. So that’s the rule with > everybody. Everybody gets to say their own piece. > > Slate's Jacob Weisberg unspooled the usual liberal attack line: "There’s > no Roger Ailes moving the chess pieces around with the goal of advancing > the conservative cause, you know ‘Glenn Beck, you’re good for the cause,’ > ‘Nope, you’re not good for the cause any more. You’re out.’ He somehow > ignored that MSNBC dumped Keith Olbermann (like Beck left Fox), or that all > around Maddow, they've moved the chess pieces of Ed Schultz and Larry > O'Donnell. > > Maddow played along. "Yeah. That’s exactly right. We are not, we, there > may be liberals on TV at MSNBC, but the network is not operating with a > political objective. Whereas Fox is operating with a political objective to > elect Republican candidates, and particularly, to elect Republican > candidates Roger Ailes likes. I think Roger Ailes is a really good TV > executive, but their operation is essentially a political operation to > elect Republicans." > > Weisberg asked if the network was a propaganda channel and if liberal > journalists should refuse to appear on Fox News and help it out, since it's > apparently not real journalism (like Newsweek when Weisberg was there?) > Maddow seemed to agree with that boycotting idea. > > MADDOW: I don’t think that the Republican Party calls Fox in the morning > and tells Fox what to do. I think that Fox essentially starts broadcasting > every day and the Republican Party takes their cues from them. I think that > Roger Ailes is a Republican political operative, but that the arrows go > from him out, not toward him. I can’t imagine him taking direction from > anybody. He doesn’t need to. I mean, who’s going to call him? Reince > Priebus? [Laughter] Really? Tell Roger Ailes what to do? I don’t think it > works that way. > > WEISBERG: It’s the other way around. > > MADDOW: Yeah. So you have to consider if you’re going to make a decision > to help Fox out, to get more people to watch them, and to validate what > they do by being there, you have to decide if you want to be part of their > project, and their project is to elect Republicans, and to move the > Republican Party right on specific issues that Roger Ailes cares about, and > Rupert Murdoch cares about. > > -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
