We’ve always known Rachel Maddow was dumb. Now we find out she’s also deaf.

Fer Christ’s sake, this is one woman who refuses to hear the message in the Massachusetts election. Deaf as the proverbial doornail. How far to the left does someone have to be to make Chris Matthews look rational?

Let’s just hope the rest of the Dems are as deaf as she is.

Chris Matthewselection 2010MassachusettsMSNBCRachel MaddowScott Brown
editor:

View Comments (162)

  • Simkins, you probably think that Big Bird on Sesame Street is pretty smart too. Speaking of Sara Palin, at least Sara Palin knows that there are 50 states in the union, not 57. Your guy in the oval office said there was 57.

    After getting a "thrill up your leg" from watching "Hardball", you probably watch "Ricks List" too. Just don't go to any football games with him. :)

  • Oh please, Maddow has more IQ points in her fingernail clippings than Sara Palin or Breitbart have in their empty heads. She is killing in the ratings and growing every day, because she does something Conservatives would never actually be competent or able to recognize: she reports complicated issues with facts, instead of spouting lies and drivel ala Fox Noise.

    • Simkins, This last week a repeat of Two and a Half Men beat out Glen Beck and Maddow in the ratings. Trying to explain to the wing nuts on this thread that ratings have no barring on quality will only make their pin heads explode. Maddow's rating, none the less, continue to grow and Beck's are plummeting maybe explaining why Beck is moving his stick from a cry baby Libertarian to a would be prophet hoping his entertainment show will attract the perfect storm of dimwittedness: wing nut and evangelical.
      I can hear their heads popping right now!

      • Ahhh, another delusional lefty. Fact is, Maddows ratings are lower than they were two years ago. No growth whatsoever.

        • There's that comprehension issue again. Read it slower... The point was, ratings do not make something right or wrong. In fact there are a lot more low quality people in the pool then high quality to pull viewers from. Beck is an entertainer who will say anything to make a dime, even if it harms society in the process. It’s low quality that he is aiming for, those who are most easily played, those who “feel” they are right and don’t care to hear any facts that go against that “feeling”

          • I don't' watch it that much, but I'm betting I watch it way more they anyone here has ever watched Maddow.

            When I do watch, you think I should watch it slower? Are you suggesting seeing him say "the only thing worst then getting sick in America, is the American health care system" and then on another day when the propaganda needs to say the opposite he says "American has the greatest health care system", this will sound more creditable if I listen to it slower? Or saying America has some responsibility for 911 because of our past foreign polices and now turning it around and accuse the Imam in NY as a terrorist supporter for saying the exact same thing?
            If I watch those videos slower, it's not going to change the fact that Beck is a propagandist.
            Maddow is a liberal, her views are consistent and backed up with facts, but like all views people will have honest disagreement. Beck is not consistent, his views change to support what ever his handlers want him to support for the purpose of misleading or distracting his viewer.

          • LOL, Maddow is a liberal, her views are consistent and backed up with facts. Thanks, that was a good one. Liberal facts are lies. Like the so-called "fact" that practicing Keynesian economics will improve the economy. Can we all agree that the $800+ billion stimulus bill failed?

          • Jim Bo, "Feels" he's right. Do you twirl a lock of your hair when you talk?
            If facts are lies, prove it. I don't realy care what you feel, Jim Bo.

          • You said: "When I do watch, you think I should watch it slower?"

            It's your words ("Read it slower… ") from your comment that I picked up on. Had you been more clever than that in the first place, I could have been more clever back. But by parroting your words, it made my words sound as dumb as yours. So, I caused you to make fun of yourself. My apologies.

          • Dude, if you don't have an answer and it's just a "feeling" that you are right, just say so. Your theater is boring, and not worth the effort.

          • Oh I get it now! Maddow appeals to the high quality people while Beck appeals to the low quality people. But Mike, you come across as a bit of a high quality, elitist ass.

          • When stated by a wing nut, I considered it a compliment. Now the opposite of an "elitist ass" would be a "dumb ass", JimbO.

      • Mike, where are you finding the numbers that say Maddow's ratings are growing and Beck's are declining? On Tuesday Sept 7 Beck had 1,790 ,000 viewers and Maddow had 1,003,000. On Sept 1, Beck 2,591,000; Maddow 1,176,000. For Aug 30, Beck 2,600,000; Maddow 1,027,000. Aug 25, Beck 2,116,000; Maddow 922,000. Besides that Beck is on at 5pm compared to Maddow being on in prime time at 9pm.

        Pick any day and Beck clobbers anything on MSNBC. I know that things called facts get in the way of liberal fantasies but that's the reality here on Planet Earth where the rest of us live.

        • Business Insider: "Glenn Beck's total number of viewers are down by almost 30%, from 2.9 million in January to 2.1 million in April." In June he was regularly falling below 2 million. You own numbers have him down from the first of the year.
          I never stated a MSNBC show beat Beck in the ratings, I said "One and a Half Men" beat Maddow and Beck in the ratings. You lack a little in the comprehension department.
          The point was, ratings do not make something right or wrong. In fact there are a lot more low quality people in the pool then high quality to pull viewers from. Beck is an entertainer who will say anything to make a dime, even if it harms society in the process. It's low quality that he is aiming for, those who are most easily played, those who "feel" they are right and don't care to hear any facts that go against that "feeling"

          • Nonsense. Once again, you're making up "facts", Mike.

            Ratings studies have shown again and again that Fox viewers are more highly educated than viewers of the other cable news networks. Are those the "low quality" viewers you're referring to?

            In addition, the Fox audience is so huge compared to MSNBC audience that the conservative network actually has more liberal viewers than the liberal networks. Are those the "low quality" viewers you're referring to?

            How do you explain away those facts?

          • Easy statement "your just making up facts." What "Ratings studies have shown again and again" that Fox viewers are more highly educated? How does that compare to the studies that show Fox viewers are the most misinformed viewers?
            "Study Finds Widespread Misperceptions on Iraq Highly Related to Support for War"
            http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Iraq/IraqMedia_Oct03/IraqMedia_Oct03_pr.pdf
            More recently, Fox viewers misinformed on health care reform: http://fredegrar.newsvine.com/_news/2009/08/19/3168989-fox-news-viewers-overwhelmingly-misinformed-about-health-care-reform-proposals

            You say "How do you explain away those facts?" They aren't facts they're just talking points until you back them up with facts.

            I have no idea how many liberals watch Fox, I bet it's more then wing nuts watch MSNBC. By nature liberals are more informed because they get their information from more then one news outlet or point of view. Your statement supports that.

    • Maddow is killing in the ratings? On what planet? Certainly not this one.

      Despite NBC's attempt to promote Maddow by showcasing her on other NBC shows and networks, her ratings are abysmal. You can find many articles on this website and many others that detail her lack of viewers as measured by Nielsen, the only recognized source for ratings in the television industry.

      You may watch her and believe every word she says, but not many others do.

      • I am sick of asking this, but here goes...AGAIN. Who in the hell is behind this effing loser? Rachel Maddow is A RATINGS LOSER, she could'nt get people to listen to her when she was on AirAmerica, & she has less then stellar ratings with her MSNBC gig. This is supposed to be "the next big thing", the next superstar in the media.

        She had dozens of media stories about her telling America how she was ready to kick ass & take over our media. But it has not happened, & IT WILL NOT HAPPEN. Instead, at about the same time, some guy named Glenn Beck started his TV career, & was dismissed. Failure was predicted for Beck because he's not to be taken seriously, & we were told he as unwatchable. All this from the same media types.We have seen the exact opposite results from what was predicted, & I'll tell you why. Maddow is lazy, she has had elites kissing her ass for years now, & these people have promoted her despite her failures. Beck on the other hand busts his ass. He has been reading everything he can get his hands on in order to learn about our history that some have attempted to bury. He's kicking ass in radio ratings , TV ratings , book sales, & on stage. All of this with people from the President on down denouncing him.

        Glenn Beck is like the band Rush, nobdoy really took them seriously, but 30 years later, they are standing near the top of the heap, same goes for Beck, he will be near the top for a long time. GET USED TO IT.

  • Rachel, you are so wrong. The law in Arizona will not split the repuplican party. The Democrats will be ousted. I was an emigrant in 1964, had to show my greencard very often. I had to take my drivers license in english, which I had to learn very quickly, than take a test before I got my citizenship. I never thaught I was discriminated, I thought it was the law.

    • The Republican party is split NOW on this issue, who knows if it will cause problems later. I hope it does, the last thing we need is more exploding deficits and shrinking middle class wealth.

      You are missing the bigger picture, for lots of people this isn't about illegal foreign nationals breaking our laws, it's about asking Americans to show their papers to prove they are Americans. That is against the American Constitution and is all about big government. Something the Teabaggers supposedly don't like; guess it must be something else they don't like...

  • nah, i just don't really want to be lectured to about how dumb and knuckle-dragging we are if we don't see the genius of rachel.

    • I understand the lecturing issue, but the heading of this thread is "We’ve always known Rachel Maddow was dumb. Now we find out she’s also deaf" There is a huge difference between that, and saying someone is a genius. There are informed conservatives who might not like her politics, but respect her journalism and don't have a need to make up BS just because of her politics. Her work on the C Street House exposing BOTH Democrats and Republicans breaking Congressional gift rules is appreciated by liberals and true conservatives. Again, I doubt most, if any Maddow haters on this thread, watch the show, but are simply repeating talking point.

      But then I don't think there are any real conservatives around here.

  • Nick...if you are going to lecture us here please try to correct the spelling....

    Especially if you are attempting to channel the "smartest man to ever live".

    Thanks.....

  • I'm curious as to why there is such a huge effort to defend Madcow? She's not too big to fail, but maybe she's too important to fail. Note to her defenders, you are gonna have to try harder, she's gonna flame out whther you like or not because America has rejected her on radio & TV.

  • PLATO, argueable the smartist man to ever live, Was not very popular, but was brilliant and sought the truth. He never claimed to know the truth befor the dialogs. Thats why he never would sit down and have a dialog with Sophists. Those ex military out of work story tellers who pretended know the truth and charged money to the masses to teach them! That is Fox News! All Sophists, all ignorant. None seeking the truth. Starting form a pre conceived idea and working backwards to try to show it...leaving all truth on the floor.
    You can turn the volume off and just ask yourselves what would the lobbyists like me to hear on this subject. Then role back the TIVO turn up the volume and Viola exactly the same every time....Does not this bespeak of Bagdad Bob?

    "Ignorance is not merely the lack of knowledge, but self-destructive turning away from truth in all areas of life. Persons develop a taste for ignorance, the predisposition to embrace erroneous beliefs based on presumption or mere authority. The ignorant person believes he knows what he actually doesn't know. He becomes delusional. He is deranged." - Plato

    "To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead" Thomas Paine

  • So nice to see Rachel's brother come on to defend her.

    Didn't we just hear a few months ago about how all those "really smart" people from the great schools like Harvard and Stanford and the like are the ones that got us into the financial crisis?

    Really.....Public Policy? Philosophy? WOW! She is qualified to be what? A law school student perhaps?

    Please take your smug degrees somewhere else.

  • Maddow has a degree in public policy from Stanford and Doctor of Philosophy degree (DPhil) in politics from Oxford University. Everything on her program is documented, but the mouthbreaters would rather believe lies from college dropouts Hannity and Beck.

    • Beck has a telephone on his show. The phone number was sent directly to the white house with an invitation to call anytime to clear up any facts presented on the show. It has never rung.

      • arlen said "So what you’re saying is..." No, that's not what I'm saying. Dude, you're a troll.

        • Then explain yourself if you can. Maddow is a success because she moved from radio, to tv and has had important guests. So has everyone else, however, some are actually being watched by people who don't necessarily agree with them.
          Every time I've tried to watch Maddow I was singularly impressed with the ridicule she heaped upon anyone she didn't agree with. Not with whatever opinions they gave, but how they looked, if they scratched their nose, that type of thing. Snarky is the term used by another poster here. She comes across as a self important b*tch. That's why no one watchers her. Successful commentators entertain, not act like their audience is a bunch of rubes and idiots.

    • Madcow has had a ton of "elite" university education, but can barely function in the free market. For all of her years of education, she is worthless. Jump on Hannity, Beck, or Limbaugh if you must, nut they live, work, & conduct buisiness in the real world, not a theoretical world of unicorns & rainbows. Madcow will never be a success in broadcasting because she does not respect those who live, work & pay taxes in places outside of Manhattan, the Beltway, Hollywood, the Bay area, & a handful of gender studies students living in college dorms.

      • Danytoy, Maddow is a success, her career is not moving down, it's moving up. If you watched her show and didn't just repeat, like a good puppy, wing nut talking points, you would know that.

        Ratings have nothing to do with real world value, if it did, we could get all our answers from American Idol, but then again, maybe you do.

        BTW, she doesn't spend her life in Manhattan, the Beltway, Hollywood, or the Bay area.

        • If Madcow is a broadcasting success in your eyes, I really would hate to see a what constitute a broadcasting failure. For all of the puff piece stories about her & how she is the "It Girl", nobody gives a sh!t, few tune in, & you bloody know it.

          You might need to bone up on your geography son, she grew up in the Bay Area, went to college at Stanford, which is in Palo Alto, CA, which is also in the Bay Area. She did a few things in various places & now works in...wait for it...Manhattan. I'm guessing she goes to the Beltway from time to time & it's not really much of a trip from MANHATTAN. As for Hollywood, you might actually be right. But hey, 1 out of 4 ain't bad.

          • Danyquack, We know where she grew up, what you left out was her home is in rural Massachusetts.

            Everything you're saying, clearly, come from right wing talking points put out by those who want to keep fools from listening to facts that contradict their propaganda. If only a "few tune in" she wouldn't be on the minds of every wing nut I talk to.

            Maddow is a success because her career is moving up, not down. Why are you having such a big problem understanding such simple fact? She went from a successful, for progressive, talk radio show to guest spots on CNN and MSNBC, to subbing for Olbermann, to her own show, doubling viewers for the time slot, to beating out CNN and Larry King in ratings for the time slot, to interviewing top people including Obama, Huckabee, Al Gore, Robert Redford, Edie Falco, John Kerry, Pat Buchanan, Jane Fonda, Seymour Hersh, Tucker Carlson, Roseanne Cash, Lili Taylor, Ben Harper, and Michael Isikoff. Her appearances on Meet the Press increase their ratings. Most of this, just in the last year and a half.

            You don't watch Maddow for one of two reasons. Your a troll spreading BS to keep the wing nuts stupid or your a wing nut. If you actually watched the show and other outlets, even if you keep on watching Fox, your lemming nature would start to fade away like a bad dream.

          • Ok , wanna know why I don't atch Madcow? She's a bore, she is more about snark then smart, & I would rather have someone talk TO me, not AT me. Besides, I can only take so much of her before I want to put a revolver in my mouth with one in the chamber, but that's just me.

            BTW, have you actually seen her ratings? Or the ratings at BSNBC? I can only conclude that you try not looking at them because the fools at 30Rock are unable to add viewers. 1 of the biggest problems the progressive movement has is that nobody wants to tune in to them on the tv or radio. That's why A-holes like Special Ed Schultz & Bill Press are for crap like the "Fairness Doctrine" or "Net Neutrality" in the name of "fairness" in media. Learn to compete in the arena of ideas in a free market, & maybe you could shut me up about Madcow or BathTubBoy sucking a$$ when the ratings come out.

            P.S. You might want to get a hold a John Padesta & get a gig working for the Center For American Progress...if you don't have 1 there already.

          • So what you're saying is that she's a success because you feel she tells the truth and that truth wins out. If truth always wins out, then obviously since Fox News is the highest rated cable news channel, by a very large margin, then they must be the most truthful and Maddow is less than honest in her diatribes on air. Maybe you should re-evaluate truth. Maybe you are the troll with no desire to see the truth, accepting the brainwashing people like Maddow are pushing on her audience. lolololololololol

          • You think Maddow is a bore, at least it's an honest answer. When I see Michelle Malkin I see a succubus, but then she opens her mouth and I realize she's just a liar.

            With the free flow of information, truth wins. If you actually thing those with unlimited money and power would not use it to manipulate and mislead the masses, your foolish. When Fox News viewers are asked simple factual questions and score the lowest of all media viewers, how does the arena of ideas in a free market explain it? Do you believe good ratings is a measure of truth? I question your understanding of a free market and how it relates to truth and profit. If a statement makes the rich richer, makes a business money, truth is not just irrelevant, but unprofitable. A business telling the truth about smoking is not profitable to a tobacco company.

        • now stomp your foot, push out your lower lip and demand that Maddow be successful. The fact that you want her to be successful does not make it so.

Related Post
  1. AT&T’s DirecTV Cancels NEWSMAX in Censorship Move
  2. Joy Behar is an incoherent plagarist. Whoopi Goldberg says, “Hey, that’s my job.”