It’s not easy to be both smug and dumb, but Rachel Maddow somehow manages to pull it off

by editor on September 10, 2009

Six months ago, had you attempted to tell us that Rachel Maddow could become even more smug and annoying, we would have said it was impossible.

We were wrong.

Leave a Reply

25 Comments on "It’s not easy to be both smug and dumb, but Rachel Maddow somehow manages to pull it off"

Notify of
Brian
Guest

Just occurred to me. I have never seen Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann in the same room at the same time.

danybhoy
Member

I have, & it’s fugly.

Jack
Guest

The reason why insurance companies have been able to manipulate the markets they serve is the result of government regulation. Specifically, State government regulations which deny residents the ability to purchase insurance from a provider outside of the State they reside in.

If Congress was sincere in their effort to make health insurance affordable to all then they would pass legislation to make it possible for someone to buy insurance from any carrier, anywhere. And, I mean anywhere. If an insurer in China wants to sell me health insurance I should be able to buy it from them.

That’s the free market solution to the problem. Its called competition and it always works.

The really absurd thing the legislation that I just described is exactly what the founders envisioned when they penned the “Commerce Clause” (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3) as a part of the enumerated powers of the Congress.

Why haven’t they enacted this simple legislation? Insurance company lobbyists. Insurance companies don’t want to have to compete. Congress should enable the free market to work and then get out of the way.

Jack
Guest

“What greater purpose can a government serve than that of taking care of its citizens?”

Well how about getting out of the way and let the citizens take care of themselves, and each other. That’s the way this country used to work, before the progressives took over government in the early 19th century. I didn’t say liberals, democrats, republicans or conservatives. I said progressives.

This country has been on a long slow decline since the advent of the progressive era. Who was it that said “bankruptcy occurs slowly, then all at once”? http://www.sprott.com/Docs/MarketsataGlance/MAAG_10_2009.pdf

David Yuhnke
Guest

Have you seen what Wendell Potter, former health insurance company executive had to say about the state of health care in this country ? Thank God one of them developed a functioning conscience:

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07102009/watch2.html

The guy has no axes to grind. He’s personally seen what happens when people are left to fend for themselves and he says it’s shameful.

David Yuhnke
Guest

Re: “however when the president is appointing people that think like him”

What President doesn’t?
GWB appointed only those who would advance his objectives, and it’s my opinion that his advisors didn’t THINK much at all beyond how to increase the size of their bank accounts and the profits of corporations they had ties to.
While I’m here, I might as well say that insurance lobbyists are nothing more than bribery experts. They have unlimited funds provided by the insurance cartels & just like the drug cartels will stop at nothing where their profits are concerned. Every other developed nation on earth provides its citizens with means of providing for their health care. What greater purpose can a government serve than that of taking care of its citizens?
The insurance companies have created a massive campaign to spread lies in order to prevent any real competition and so-called conservatives have bought those lies wholesale.

Kathy
Member

David, would you please stop it with the “evil insurance companys” routine? Like most companys they only make about 3% profit. I agree with Jack, the key to bringing down rates is competition. This way each of us only pay for the insurance we want. As proof, I refer you to automobile insurance, and of course the phone companys. It is not evil to want to make a profit, I’m sure you have profit as your incentive to work, and anyone who makes as much as Obama does should not tell others how much is enough.

jasonwedge
Guest

Thats great…however when the president is appointing people that think like him and are yes men and yes women…I am not sure how this leads to better decisions….It seems like to me that they are there so when people dont like the final decisions the czars can take the hit….

Remember what the president said…if you want to know who I am look at the people who i surround myself with….(unless it hurts how he looks that is)

grampadave
Guest

“Dont you think there is something wrong with this?”

No, rather I think that every President has had a number of advisors and it makes not a lot of difference what they are or have been called.

Generally, the more information one can glean about any situation, the better to make informed decisions.

Unless of course they’ve decided in advance what they’re going to do and it’s therefore set in stone.

jasonwedge
Guest

grampadave October 1, 2009, 3:42 pm at 3:42 pm
‘Czar’ is simply a word first used by Ronald Reagan and continued by GWB to describe advisors.

Interviews with some of the people at the March on Washington a few weeks back showed a great deal of concern over the fact that Obama had appointed ‘Czars’.

Wrong….it was not started by Reagan…but he did have them…

Franklin Roosevelt was the first to have appointed Czars….big suprise huh? A guy who wanted the Federal Govt to run everything created Czars….
Bush had a bunch also…now Obama has the most ever….They are APPOINTED and not elected or voted upon….They reporte directly to the President….Dont you think there is something wrong with this?

grampadave
Guest

‘Czar’ is simply a word first used by Ronald Reagan and continued by GWB to describe advisors.

Interviews with some of the people at the March on Washington a few weeks back showed a great deal of concern over the fact that Obama had appointed ‘Czars’.

IMO
Member

Rachel MadCow Disease> “blind to any BHO issue unless it impacts directly & negatively any gay rights issue”. Rachel MadCow > new Gay Rights Czar

Steve H
Guest

“Rachel MadCow Disease” — what are you, IMO, a third-grader?

gs425
Guest

Typical liberal two-step

bcronos
Guest

Rachel who?

jmiller
Guest

right on I doubt her mother watches this crappy show

jasonwedge
Guest

I can’t even play this video…the better than thou attitude from this person is really quite pathetic….

Pat from Michigan
Guest

I can’t believe that ocmadem posted exactly what I was going to say. This women has serious stalker issues at media matters. She is a sicko magnet apparently

who'sa  gizza what
Guest

her best punishment would be to make her procreate with olberdouche

danybhoy
Member

Now that would be a fruitless endeavor, as well as a disturbing image.

rs
Member

She’s about as cute as a 4-year old with vomiting and diarrhea.

barny
Member

Her voice is so irritating, I can’t even sit through a four min. clip.

Lauren
Guest

I’m so sick of her female sportscaster voice. Using a baritone affection doesn’t make you appear smarter – just self-conscious.

Greywolfe
Guest

This is what this woman uses to defend Barry? That others have had czars too? Good grief, this woman is an idiot. The problem you Leftist boob, is their history and ideological leanings. The fact that they were given jobs and never got vetted or approved through congress.

Oh and let’s not forget, they aren’t “czars” because we aren’t in russia. You leftist she-male twit. its a nicname. Good lord, how stupid do these leftists in the media really think we are?

ocmadam
Member

the scary part are the posts under this video on media matters…

wpDiscuz