Not bad, it took her a mere 18 months to grasp this.
On her MSNBC show Monday night, the first time it ran after the death of bin Laden, Rachel Maddow cited several post-9/11 examples of terrorism targeting Americans in the US -- including the attack at Fort Hood in November 2009.
"Since Sept. 11, the story of terrorism targeting the United States itself has mostly, thankfully, been the story of thwarted attacks," Maddow said, such as the so-called shoe bomber and underwear bomber, a plot to detonate explosives in the New York City subway system, the failed bombing of Times Square, and the so-called Dallas bomber who targeted former president George W. Bush.
"And then there was the mass-casualty shooting at Fort Hood in Texas in 2009, carried out by Major Nidal Hasan," Maddow said.
Quite a contrast with how Maddow described the incident on her show Nov. 12, 2009, fully a week after the carnage (video after page break) --
Once again, a presumably simpatico guest on "The Rachel Maddow Show" undermined a claim she made on the same show.
This occurred twice in the same week back in March, as I described at the time. It happened again Friday night when Maddow talked about Republican congressmen facing constituents angered by the GOP budget plan. Maddow compared this to the contentious public forums on health reform in August 2009.
Here's what Maddow said about the Republican budget's effect on Medicare, followed by her guest claiming something altogether different (video after page break) --
On his cable show Monday, Schultz claimed that federal tax revenue declined in the seven years following the start of the Bush tax cuts in 2001, a patently bogus assertion demolished by NewsBuster Noel Sheppard.
All of 24 hours later, Schultz stepped in it once more with his revisionist history of federal spending over the last two decades and was again eviscerated by Sheppard.
On his radio show yesterday, self-proclaimed working class hero Schultz showed that his shabby disregard for accuracy also extends to labor union laws, specifically those in Michigan. Here's what Schultz had to say (audio) --
Ed Schultz really hates hoggish behavior. Except when he's planning to engage in it.
On his radio show yesterday, Schultz trotted out his new label for Republicans, one that he clearly labored to create, and with Schultz providing helpful porcine sound effects at the unveiling (audio) (more audio clips after page break) --
At the start of each hour of his weekday radio broadcast, Ed Schultz touts his show as "where America comes to talk." Provided, of course, that you agree with Schultz. Otherwise, it's where Schultz comes to bail.
Nine times in less than three months, and twice in the last week, Schultz has abruptly hung up on callers who don't share his politics. And in the most recent example of this, on April 5, Schultz cited a patently bogus reason for why he did so. (audio)
CALLER: You know, you asked the question earlier about, can the president spend money? No, he's already spent enough money as it is. And ...
SCHULTZ: No, that's not it, it's not whether he's spent enough money or not. He - cannot - spend - money. Not a dime. Thank you, Leonard.
Followed by Schultz saying this to the next caller, who asked Schultz not to hang up on him (more audio clips after page break) --
That's OK, he wasn't planning on any speaking gigs from AARP anyway.
As is his wont, libtalker Ed Schultz revealed his underlying opinion on a specific subject without even being aware he was doing it, this time on senior citizens.
Here's Schultz on his radio show yesterday with his warped take on elders, after initially referring to Republicans' proposed budget plan calling for broad spending cuts over the next decade (audio) --
Ed Schultz is so gungo ho for the Libyan war that he wants Obama to provide weapons to anti-Qadhafi forces -- without scrutinizing who gets them.
Seeing how Qadhafi's opponents in Libya could include al Qaeda and Hezbollah, according to the U.S. NATO commander, what could possibly go wrong?
Here's Schultz engaging in his singular brand of bellicosity while talking to a caller on his radio show yesterday, followed by an unintentionally hilarious remark by Democratic congressman Adam Smith later in the same show (audio) --
For a mercifully fleeting moment, Ed Schultz was considered a possible candidate for Senate.
It came in the wake of Sen. Byron Dorgan, Democrat of North Dakota, announcing in January 2010 that he would not seek re-election. Speculation briefly centered on Schultz running to succeed Dorgan until Schultz adamantly denied he had any intention of doing so.
On Friday, Schultz demonstrated why he is unfit for public office or anything resembling genuine power over other people. It came during a conversation with a caller to Schultz's radio show after the caller complained that "war criminals" in the Bush administration were "not held accountable" for their crimes (audio) --
To tweak the punchline of an old joke -- what's this talk of invading, paleface?
Unleashing the bellicosity that's been kept corked since MSNBC put the kibosh on his "Psycho Talk" segments, Ed Schultz has weighed in at The Huffington Post in an op-ed titled "Why I Support President Obama's Decision to Invade Libya."
Psst, Ed -- we haven't invaded Libya, at least not yet. And I'd venture to say that most Americans don't expect we will, at least if Obama is to be believed. Remember how he said American troops would not be sent there? The president was pretty emphatic about it, as I recall. Agreed, it was all of eight days ago, distant enough that it slipped down your memory hole.
Somewhere the ghost of George Orwell cringes in recognition.
In her eagerness to please, Rachel Maddow occasionally collides headlong into immutable facts of economic reality. To wit, cutting taxes does not constitute new government spending, at least outside of doctrinaire Marxist analysis.
Here's MSNBC's Little Miss Sunshine giving her two-cents' worth on this Tuesday night (video below page break) --
Ed Schultz and a caller to his radio show Thursday got into a heated argument after she criticized him for suggesting last year that Democrats stay away from the polls on election day to express their anger with congressional Democrats for not extending unemployment benefits.
Schultz not only denied what the caller said, he was unequivocal and emphatic about it. Here's how the exchange went (audio) --
Here's an example of a former newspaper man correcting a politician's claim -- and his correction requiring a correction.
Appearing on "The Tonight Show With Jay Leno" on Monday, MSNBC's Chris Matthews offered kneejerk condemnation of Mike Huckabee saying President Obama grew up in Kenya as "racist," an assertion Huckabee had acknowledged as inaccurate.
Matthews piled on, making his own demonstrably false claim in the process (video after page break) --
On her radio show Friday, Rosie O'Donnell fielded a call from a California woman who said she is a member of a correctional officers' union. Although the union has helped her, the caller told O'Donnell, it comes with baggage (audio) --
Not to worry, Moore promises one of those tranquil conflicts devoid of violence.
What is it about self-proclaimed peace lovers that they are so often bellicose?
Latest example -- the agitprop filmmaker's appearance on MSNBC's Rachel Maddow show last night, coming shortly after the GOP-led Wisconsin state senate voted overwhelmingly in favor of Gov. Scott Walker's proposal to curtail collective bargaining for most public employees. After Maddow introduced Moore and praised his "barnburning speech" in Madison over the weekend, Moore said this (video below page break) --
Ed Schultz yesterday slammed Rush Limbaugh for doing something Limbaugh denies but Schultz admits doing.
In response to a story in Tablet Magazine about a "custom caller service" offered by Premier Radio Networks, a vast Clear Channel subsidiary that syndicates Limbaugh and other prominent conservative talkers, Limbaugh adamantly denied unsubstantiated allegations that staged calls were made to his show.
Schultz treated the allegations as factual while revealing that choreographed calls were made to his radio show when it was getting off the ground in 2004 (audio here) --
Never let it be said that Ed Schultz isn't fair. Why, just yesterday he was putting in a good word for German national socialism.
Schultz, who has yet to encounter an infrastructure project that didn't make him swoon (an infatuation he shares with fellow MSNBCer Rachel Maddow), had this to say on his radio show with sidekick James Holm while complaining about Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker rejecting a passenger rail line between Milwaukee and Madison (audio here) --
Liberal radio host and reined-in MSNBC flamethrower Ed Schultz has provided another example of his erratic reverence for the Constitution, specifically that pesky First Amendment.
On his radio show Wednesday, Schultz harkened back to halcyon days of yore involving "old Democrats" made singular by their intolerance for discussion of that most sacred cow, Social Security (audio here) --
If this keeps up, the shrinking number of guests on Rachel Maddow's MSNBC show could dwindle even more.
For the second time this week, a Maddow invitee offered an awkward contrast to what Maddow claimed earlier in the same segment.
On her show Monday, Maddow cited three reports claiming that $61 billion in spending cuts proposed by Republicans on Capitol Hill would lead to massive job losses -- followed by economist Robert Frank telling Maddow minutes later the reductions amount to "just a drop in the bucket."
Don't look now, that tidal wave might be a drop in the bucket instead.
On her MSNBC show Monday, Rachel Maddow cited a trio of reports warning of massive job losses if $61 billion in Republican-pushed spending cuts take effect.
The Economic Policy Institute, which Maddow described as a "liberal group," predicts the GOP budget plan "would likely result in job losses of just over 800,000. A confidential new report" from Goldman Sachs says spending cuts passed in the House "would be a drag on the economy, cutting growth by about two percent of GDP, according to Jonathan Karl at ABC News, the source cited by Maddow. The third warning along these lines came from McCain '08 campaign adviser Mark Zandi, writing at Moody's Analytics, that the Republicans' proposal "would mean some 400,000 fewer jobs created by the end of 2011 ... and 700,000 fewer jobs by the end of 2012."
Search parties continue their wide-ranging efforts to find examples that support Maddow's claim. The dragnet is expected to continue indefinitely.
MSNBC's Rachel Maddow made this apparently straight-faced assertion to media critic Howard Kurtz in a profile of Maddow he wrote for Newsweek and The Daily Beast. The specific quote from Maddow -- "I don't think I always fit the caricature of a liberal." Not surprisingly, Maddow cited no evidence -- such as an aversion to Keith Olbermann, palpable hankering for red meat, or unbridled lust to tap America's vast untapped natural resources -- that would bolster her premise.
Begs the question -- how would you know the "caricature of a liberal" if you saw one? Here's how I'd that describe that unenviable characterization as applied to any given person --