Maddow Consistently Incapable of Distinguishing Few From Many
Rachel Maddow should never be put in charge of crowd control. Not until she learns to count.
Maddow is clearly flummoxed by what actually constitutes a crowd, as can be seen in her commentary on audiences at Republican presidential debates. (video after page break)
On her show Friday, for example, Maddow gamely tried to make the case that audience reactions at GOP debates have been unintentionally damning, starting with the response that followed Chris Wallace of Fox News putting a question to Ron Paul about drug legalization --
WALLACE: You say marijuana, cocaine, even heroin should be legal if states want to permit it.
PAUL: What you're inferring (sic) is, you know what, if we legalize heroin tomorrow, everybody's going to use heroin. How many people here would use heroin if it were legal? I put nobody would put the, oh yeah (sarcastically) I need the government to take care of me! I don't want to use heroin so I need these laws ... (enthusiastic applause and cheering from audience)
WALLACE: I never thought heroin would get applause here in South Carolina.
MADDOW: Me neither, Chris Wallace! It was such a strange moment, the crowd cheering the idea of legalizing heroin and Ron Paul's sort of ad libby caricature of a person who might want that. It was great.
Which is Maddow's hooked-on-irony way of saying it wasn't really great, rather it was "strange," which is Maddow code for bizarre. And she gets it wrong about Paul's"sort of ad libby caricature" -- it was not of a person who wants drugs legalized, but of someone who wants government to protect him from that. The heavy-handed sarcasm was apparently too subtle for Maddow to decipher.
Still, Maddow's take on this was at least partially accurate -- the audience, hardly devoid of Paul partisans, was reacting to him, much as they would had Paul begun lip-synching "In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida." More specifically, the audience was reacting to Paul's flattery that heroin need not be illegal to prevent them from ingesting it. Alcohol is legal, for example, yet those attending the debate somehow managed to do so without getting falling down drunk.
This was minor, however, compared to the deceit to come from Maddow. She then showed a clip from the NBC debate and Brian Williams pointing out to Texas Gov. Rick Perry that his state leads the nation in executions, followed by the audience clapping in response (and considerably more subdued than the reaction to Ron Paul on drug legalization) --
MADDOW: That was the NBC News debate at the Reagan Library earlier this month, cheering for executions, cheering that was loud enough to be remarked upon by the moderator. The cheering was ultimately praised as a patriotic response by the candidate who was asked the question about it.
It was at this point that Maddow attempted to conflate two examples of audience reaction at GOP debates with two more involving what can accurately be described as heckling --
MADDOW: The next time the crowd became a factor, though, in a Republican debate, it was a little bit harder to defend the crowd.
A clip was then shown of the CNN/Tea Party Express debate and Wolf Blitzer asking Ron Paul about a hypothetical, uninsured 30-year-old man facing a medical emergency --
BLITZER: A healthy, 30-year-old young man has a good job, makes a good living but decides, you know what, I'm not going to spend $200 or $300 a month for health insurance 'cause I'm healthy, I don't need it. But you know, something terrible happens, all of a sudden he needs it. Who's going to pay for it if he goes into a coma, for example? Who pays for that?
PAUL: My advice to him would have a major medical policy but not be forced ...BLITZER: But he doesn't have that, hedoesn't have it and he needs, he needs intensive care for six months. Who pays?
PAUL: That's what freedom is all about, taking your own risks. This whole idea (enthusiastic applause and cheers from audience) that you have to prepare and take care of everybody.BLITZER: But congressman, are you saying that society should just let him die? (Catcalls of "yeah!" heard from audience)
MADDOW (mimicking catcalls): Yeah. Yeah. (while lifting her hands in mock enthusiasm) That was the CNN/Tea Party Express debate. I still can't really believe there was a CNN/Tea Party Express debate, but there was and those were members of the audience cheering the proposal that sick Americans should be left to die without receiving needed medical care if they are uninsured.
Notice how after Maddow showed the clip, she referred to "members of the audience" (and mimicked all of two of them). Yet before showing the clip, Maddow claimed it would be difficult to again defend "the crowd" at a GOP debate. Two or three hecklers in an audience numbering hundreds constitutes a "crowd"?
Maddow did this again on her show Sept. 23, this time in talking about videos submitted to Republican candidates for the Fox News/Google debate --
MEGYN KELLY: Sen. Santorum, this question stirred up a whole lot of controversy online and it comes from Stephen Hill, who is a soldier serving in Iraq.
HILL: In 2010 when I was deployed to Iraq I had to lie about who I was because I'm a gay soldier and I didn't want to lose my job. My question is, under one of your presidencies, do you intend to circumvent the progress that's been made for gay and lesbian soldiers in the military. (scattered booing heard)
MADDOW (imitating boos): Boo. The Republican debate crowd booing the deployed American soldier in Iraq.
Two's company but three's definitely a crowd when it comes to Maddow's take on hecklers at a GOP debate.
This isn't the first time that ideology has rendered Maddow incapable of the observational capacity of a pre-schooler. Back on Sept. 13, right after the CNN/Tea Party Express debate, Maddow said this about reaction from "the audience" to Wolf Blitzer's question about the uninsured man --
MADDOW: If you watched the debate, it is of course your call as to who won this thing. But there's really no debate over who lost last night's debate. The clear loser of last night's Republican candidates' debate was a 30-year-old man who has a good job but who does not have health insurance. He is the clear loser of last night's debate for the stark reason that the audience at the debate wants him dead.
An "audience" consisting of the yahoos in the back row.
More still from Maddow on Sept. 13 --
America should handle the problem of people who get sick and don't have health insurance by letting them die, says the audience, exclamation point.
As if punctuation will swell the paltry numbers.
If you are an aspiring comic who isn't funny, Maddow might be the best friend you'd ever have. Because even though your jokes rarely draw more than chuckles wherever you perform, Maddow will reassure you that, man, you keep bringing down the house.
- Jack Coleman's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Willfull ignorance and outright lies.
Submitted by kata on Tue, 09/27/2011 - 5:24pm.
That pretty much sums up all media involved.
Drugs should be readily available-
Submitted by JIMMY1660 on Tue, 09/27/2011 - 5:26pm.
for school bus drivers before their runs.
cops-firemen-doctors should also be able to indulge.
A stunning performance. Maddow really is a master thespian.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Tue, 09/27/2011 - 5:28pm.
.
The Rachel Maddow show is boring
Submitted by rwnewsnut on Tue, 09/27/2011 - 5:28pm.
What is typical of Maddow is having conservatives on only in video clips. She runs a clip. Then she gets to respond. Count the on-air guests last night. How many were conservative? Same old story with Olbermann. Never someone to debate. Only guests that have the same liberal agenda are invited on-air.
I can only judge the product that is put on the air at MSNBC.
Maddow rumbling with a bunch of video clips or with a bunch of fellow travellers IS BORING.
I don't see her as all that intelligent. I base that on the few times I have seen her outside of her element, specifically Meet the Press. She doesn't impress.
PS - Look out for a troll from MediaMatters named Leedog.
They will always do this.
Submitted by Quasi-socialist on Tue, 09/27/2011 - 6:00pm.
Obama sees no need to be a "speech cop" for the left, as if what Hoffa says is just Hoffa--despite that we have an incident where a union thug bit off a guy's finger--it's just Hoffa and that other guy....
However, from the left, always trying to figure out the syndrome that makes conservative people think what they think, they try to deduce conservative sympathies from overt behavior, which they then imagine to be the tip of the iceberg, and everybody else is just not as boisterous about their "hatred".
To the left, the right is all about reaction , emotional reaction, and because the left--to the left--is about "ideas" there is not as much an emphasis on reactions as indicative of the whole population, because they are just discussing ideas, dissenting where they will, nothing is indicative of the whole group.
That we have a press that runs stories in these modes is a clear indication of the worldview of the press. I mean you still have the example of CBS after the assassination of JFK playing up the story about Dallas' hostility toward JFK as if somehow the actions of a lone communist who lived in Dallas, was indicative of the "atmosphere of hostility" in Dallas, mainly voiced in opposition by Texan conservatives.
Does anybody that watches
Submitted by dennyf51 on Tue, 09/27/2011 - 6:11pm.
Does anybody that watches these shows, meaning maddow's or the rest of the msnbc pundits, not have the capacity to see that a handful, like one to 4 people, on most of these clips are responding in a manner that maddow is referring to. Wow, how hard is she trying to disparage the right and the tea party with false inferences.
I watched fat ed schitz last night, he obviously hadn't done his homework. He kept asking leading questions to a democrat shill teacher, and the answers werent' what ed was hoping for. He looked perturbed. "Don't you think that the republican governor, having taken one billion out of the education budget, has undermined education in your state?" Answer, "No, the teachers are the same teachers and they are maintaining the quality of education in Wisconsin even without the funds!" Whew, Eddie was furious.
Who were these people?
Submitted by wingnut55 on Tue, 09/27/2011 - 7:45pm.
It seems that the media can find people who disagree with the GOP real easy. But who are the people who booed the gay serviceman? Why can't the media find them? Who was the guy who yelled out "yes!" the 30 year old should die? Why can't the media find him? Is it because they were plants in the audience by the Democrat party? Who says that everyone in the debate audience supports the GOP? Why it is the media who says that. I mean they can find the people who heard Sarah Palin say that she could see Russia from her house. Why aren't they trying to find these people to let them express their ideas? Is it because they put them there in the audience in the first place?
Dead. On. Target.
Submitted by Clutch1956 on Tue, 09/27/2011 - 8:44pm.
You nailed it, liberal plants are going to become more and more common at both events to make the left look good and the right look evil. Like the guy that holler "you're the anti-Christ" at Zerobama; how in the world did he get to be in the front row? How come the stuttering knucklehead have a ready and smooth comeback when he normally can't recite his own name without his Teleprompter? Or the "random" millionaire that Obumbles picked out to ask a question about taxes; of course he is OK with "rich folk" paying more? Plants, all of them, and not the kind you would want gracing a table in your room or in a hanging basket (oops, did I just make a racist statement?).
Run with Madcow!
Submitted by djwolf12 on Tue, 09/27/2011 - 9:18pm.
So here we go..........Madcow is playing his selectively edited videos of Chris Christie to portray him a a big fat bully. What a douche.
People actually believe her?
Submitted by Denny Crane on Wed, 09/28/2011 - 2:08am.
That is scary. There are roughly a million people that watch his show every night and most of them actually believe what he says.
We Are The 53%
Madcow Math
Submitted by Pilgrim1949 on Wed, 09/28/2011 - 10:59am.
Many(!) decades ago I remember reading of some primitive people groups whose numbering systems consisted roughly of "1", "2" and then "many".
I think we may at long last have uncovered Ms. Madcow's ethnic roots.
"Ye canne change the laws of physics....." but some politicians believe that with the right legislation you can pretend they don't really apply to your own pet projects...
Pilgrim
Submitted by Agnostic on Wed, 09/28/2011 - 11:05am.
yes, but these tribes did not understand zero as a value and I have a hard time believing that leftist don't understand Zero Value.
Zorro Zero
Submitted by Pilgrim1949 on Wed, 09/28/2011 - 3:37pm.
A former collegiate saber fencer "touche" for that one!
Considering the adoration of the cult that blindly and unquestioningly worships Ozymandias-on-the-Potomac we could conclude that The Left does indeed value Zero quite highly.
"Ye canne change the laws of physics....." but some politicians believe that with the right legislation you can pretend they don't really apply to your own pet projects...
Touche
Submitted by Agnostic on Thu, 09/29/2011 - 8:32am.
Fencing takes too much coordination - I'll have to stick to snappy comebacks and sarcasm.
Low mood stabilizer drug levels are known to cause manic spikes.
Submitted by drsamherman on Wed, 09/28/2011 - 3:43pm.
I wonder when Rache had her lithium or valproate level checked. She seems to be having what we older psychiatrists refer to as a "manic spike", a moment when drug levels are temporarily subtherapeutic but return on the next dosing interval. They don't quite rise to the level of hypomanic or major depressive exacerbations, but instead have a more sudden onset and resolution.
when someone is lacking in a witty response
Submitted by kata on Wed, 09/28/2011 - 5:36pm.
I am going to reference this post so they can take notes. I hope you don't mind :)