69 votes

Maddow Talking RP Again and Quoting DP

She is on it this week !

http://youtu.be/TI3t7Grt5Sk

Also, it might be nice to get one of our folks on her show to discuss what WE are doing and not these neo con hacks.

Let's encourage Rachael to have Doug Weed on again or Jack Hunter.
The best explanation is from the source.



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Would she be interviewed by DP Radio?

There's been a lot of speculation here about Maddow's frequent comments about Dr. Paul. She is, by her own admission, a "left wing nut job," yet her reports are usually sympathetic and cover RP news rarely seen on the MSM. So what's her motivation? Is it really to undermine Mittens? I somehow don't think so. Her book Drift apparently critically discusses our country's love of perpetual war so she may have something in common with Dr Paul, at least on some issues.

So, I'd love for someone to ask her directly what she thinks about the good doctor. Any chance she'd be willing to be interviewed by Daily Paul Radio? What do you think, Kurt?

Oh, and please remember folks....

...by state conventions, she is referring to Republican state conventions only and made sure to make that obvious distinction over and over in this piece.

I got some news for you Ms. Maddow: If republican state conventions are not relevant then democratic state conventions aren't either.

what she is really trying to say is

that if RP supporters take over at the state level, the state level becomes irrevelant. This is the same thing they said about Iowa (in January) If RP wins "throw it out"
This was a total hack job by Miss Madcow

Check out my new book; Edibolic Stress-How the Lies you are Being Fed are Making you Sick. www.edibolic.com

sadly it seems that we have many here who don't understand that

a little yeast leavens the whole loaf. Rachel can't just be "a little" against us "sometimes". No- she's a full-on, clever, charming yeast infection.

A Few Days of Diflucan Should Take Care of That Yeast

A Few Days of Diflucan Should Take Care of That Yeast

Check out my new book; Edibolic Stress-How the Lies you are Being Fed are Making you Sick. www.edibolic.com

This country won't be saved

by TV addicts who actually listen to Maddow.

My take away:

What voting should be in this country: Informed citizens making moral and rational choices.

What voting is in this country:

6:58 "learn how to knock on doors and turn out bodies to go to voting booths and vote, because in this country that's still how we vote"

7:18 "people don't have to vote, they have to be inspired to get out and go vote, so just understanding sort of the mechanics and the structural way to motivate voters to vote for a candidate"

Biggest body moving machine wins -- just a perverse variation on "might makes right".

"Voting"

ROTFL

Sorry....after all the blatant vote fraud in this last cycle, it's harder than ever to take the people seriously when they talk about "our right to vote" and cr*p like that.

We no longer have a representational form of government.

It's over.

She is

an Obama supporter therefore by keeping Paul in the spotlight weakens Mitt that is her contrabution! But beware Rachel the ideas of Paul and his supporters are addictive!

freedomdreemzz

"Concentrate on Oregon and Idaho this weekend!"

...was the DP post Rachel had shown:

http://www.dailypaul.com/241044/time-to-concentrate-on-whats...

I believe we should!

Ron Paul ... forever.

Guerrillas in the Mist

I like the "guerrillas in the midst" title. i'll take that :)

Her coverage of RP is always painful.

Did anyone notice the subliminal suggestion that RP supporters are 'Guerrillas in the Midst'? And they can 'Get something done with what the got [snicker]', I am guessing she is implying the guerrillas have arms. She always portrays us as gun-toting tea-baggin' redneck simpletons. She did not get a Rhodes scholarship for her love of grassroot movements nor her alleged 'liberal' stance against wars.

I disagree

The context is warfare over a political party; guerrillas (Ron Paul activists) have infiltrated the army (establishment Republican party) and are beginning to gain control on what was once their stronghold.

However, she is trying to subtly paint the State parties, which Ron Paul activists are taking over, as irrelevant. So i'm not sure what her intentions are.

Her Q was: are the state parties relevant?

Through the discussion I believe both ladies agreed that they are relevant.

Ron Paul ... forever.

If she keeps reading the DP,

If she keeps reading the DP, maybe she will even know what a Democratic Republic is. Ya think???

Democracy

Democracy....democracy....democracy.. whatever happened to democratic republic? these morons need a proper education

I pledge allegiance...to the

I pledge allegiance...to the REPUBLIC...

As with all Maddow stuff - this is just seed planting

Yes - she is shining a light on the movement and it's success- but she is doing so with a negative connotation . She is basically planting the seed of "see what happens when you let small government govern - you get bad results and kooky people taking over - this is WHY you should trust in your federal overlords".
Do the states matter? Well - Iowa only mattered if someone other than Paul won. States only matter if they are there to put Obama in power. Make no mistake - she is not helping us here. Yes - there is no such thing as bad publicity - but she is doing more to move people to centralized government than she is to turning them on to Paul.

The next question - do elections matter? Mark my words.

well, elections are democracy...

...not republic.

Ron Paul ... forever.

Perhaps she is warning...

...the opposition to get more involved and not let us have so many victories. Either way I don't trust her!

ConstitutionHugger's picture

see her fast and furious segment this week

she makes people who are upset about fast and furious look like complete nuts. She doesn't mention anything about how they botched it intentionally, how US border agents were murdered, or anything about the cover up. Someone who knows about fast and furious needs to get her some better evidence than what she was relying on. Otherwise, she really is just a propaganda mouthpiece.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XS3rR5N5vAA

I like her but

I found it very disappointing that she took that line. As far as I know people died because of those gun sales. That's the story. Not anything else. It's incidental that it could be used as a pretext for gun control.

I got the impression that

I got the impression that state parties do not matter and "America is not a dictatorship" because our dictators want to give us this impression. The same propaganda as before. You have freedom in so much as you do not use it to threaten our power and control in any way.

It is a good piece on our progress, BUT...

I don't trust her.

More likely, she (and others) are paying us lip service to keep us viewing. They want to keep us in the system; thus, they know it is critical to keep us consuming political programming...not to mention the ratings so they can charge alot for ads and keep that revenue coming.

I think you are part right

Perhaps she is trying to appeal to blue repubs and younger voters, but my suspicions that that is only a small part of her motivation. I believe her goal in talking about Ron Paul is to discredit the Republican party. She isn't praising our victories; she is gloating over the failure and buffoonery of the republican party.

Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito

Sorry Nicolle ...

Sorry Nicolle, it is small 'r' republicanism, not small 'd' democracy.

Maddow Fears Liberty

Is it me or does Rachel Maddow really seem to be afraid of Ron Paul and his supporters? Does the concept of liberty frighten her?

ConstitutionHugger's picture

quick theory on why maddow fears liberty

Historically, homosexuals have been treated very badly. They have come to rely on big government as protectors of them personally and civil liberties in general. To remove those protections would leave them feeling vulnerable to attacks. We believe that regular laws can protect them. But they don't believe local law enforcement or courts will protect them, but instead will use their new found liberty to treat them just as unfairly as before. They have seen the ugly side of human nature and don't trust individuals.

Paul frightens a lot of people

Lets' face it - win lose or draw on the nomination - this movement has WON. It is not OWS, it is not the Tea Party - both fizzled and failed.
BOTH parties see this as a threat - why did they want to keep Paul out? Because it would have meant something new in America - people would have voted principle - not politics - and that scares both parties. Paul appeals to true American values - not all that popular in Washington these days. I believe he could severely weaken both parties if given an honest play in the media. He appeals to a very broad range of people once they have their eyes opened.

I don't get it. Maddow is

I don't get it. Maddow is saying nothing nice about Ron Paul, his policies, his supporters, and instead is using subtle words to discredit us. Yet people read the headline and vote it up? Yesterday's Madcow thread showed that most DP users "got it", yet somehow this drivel makes the front page again? Possibly due to the title?

I watched the video but must have missed where DP was mentioned. Would the uploaded be as kind to tell me the time it was mentioned at?

Madcow was in no way praising the efforts of Ron Paul or his supporters, but instead was trying to make the point that state parties no longer mattered. Even here guest, who was promoting a book, said they were still had some use...as an outlet for enthusiasm. That makes them sound quite relevant. Madcow also makes the point to call Mitt the NOMINEE multiple times before subtly telling the average American that Republican state parties are no longer relevant, and that the party itself is in disarray. I'm sorry, I'm not going to praise her for this. I will mention again that in the past she was more openly hostile to the Pauls, and on another occasion cackled about the deaths of innocent Palestinians.

As long as she is promoted on here as something she is not, and as long as a single person doesn't see what she is accomplishing with her antics, I will continue to post in the interest of truth and liberty. I will also openly question why this GARBAGE continually makes the front page, while non-rah rah videos like war veteran, event organizer, and former liberty candidate Adam Kokesh's interview of 10 year campaign advisor to Ron Paul, Penny Freeman, doesn't receive the same treatment. Again, is it because it tackles some uncomfortable truths and may lead to actual realizations instead of more mindless cheerleading? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dX4DdfSGiFs

If I seem repetitive, it's because apparently I have to be. If I have to keep seeing thread after thread of people ripping on people who have given of their lift for the liberty movement(Rand, Adam, Penny, etc) and am told that I should support vile human beings that despise us like Rachel Maddow, I am going to have righteous indignation and am going to let everyone know how a good number of us on here and in real life(I'll explain the distinction between the cultures in another post) think. I do not with to support evil with my mouth, my mind, my clicks, my wallet, or my time. If anyone is with me, feel free to vote this up. If you disagree, feel free to vote it down. A lot of people are curious what type of people are on this site, or at least these type of threads. I'd bet money sociologists are on here, at least at times. If not, they are missing a golden opportunity. Rip the chains of fear off, my friends. Peace, love, liberty, and prosperity. Go Ron Paul, lets win this thing with dignity.