Quantcast

RACHEL MADDOW EMBARASSES SELF ON AIR

SunShine 2012/03/16 20:20:37

WASHINGTON – It had to be an embarrassing moment for MSNBC host Rachel Maddow – who didn’t do quite enough homework before interviewing Sen. James Inhofe about his new book about climate change alarmism, “The Greatest Hoax.”


During a pre-recorded, 30-minute segment airing last night, Maddow revealed that she doesn’t read guests’ books very carefully – and apparently doesn’t even pay much attention to her own TV show.


Maddow grilled the senator about allegedly taking her words out of context when he cited her Dec. 3, 2009, program in his book.


Referring to a section of “The Greatest Hoax” in which Inhofe takes Maddow to task for having attacked his positions on climate change, Maddow claimed last night that the 2009 show in question was actually about Inhofe’s supposed efforts in support of anti-homosexual policies in Uganda.


However, in her enthusiasm to nail Inhofe over the Uganda segment, which mentioned Inhofe among other officials, Maddow completely neglected a separate, lengthy segment on that same day’s show that attacked Inhofe over his positions on climate change.


That was the segment Inhofe clearly cited in “The Greatest Hoax,” which Maddow claimed to have read, even excerpting the exact dialogue from that night’s show. A video and a transcript of the 2009 show are still available.


Nevertheless, during last night’s interview with Inhofe, Maddow completely neglected the segment in which she criticized Inhofe’s views on climate change and instead returned to her preferred line of attack regarding homosexuality in Africa.


Thus, instead of a discussion – as advertised – on global warming and his new book, viewers were treated to a lengthy digression on proposed sexual-morality legislation in Uganda.


Maddow even suggested that Inhofe might be supportive of executing homosexuals, asking him if he was for or against a “kill-the-gays bill.”


Her mistake probably would have been edited from a taped interview. However, after being bumped from his scheduled appearance last Tuesday, Inhofe secured a promise that his segment would be broadcast unedited and uncut, before he would agree to appear.


As a result, Maddow’s big mistake made it on the air.







rachel MADDOW
You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

  • RJ~PWCM~JLA 2012/03/16 21:04:03
    RJ~PWCM~JLA
    +16
    Maddow is an imperious ignoramus. She's committed these types of errors before. She's not interested in news, only in promoting her agenda.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • darthtbone mwg0735 2012/03/17 09:40:30
    darthtbone
    +1
    Does it matter?
  • Hawkeye darthtbone 2012/03/17 10:16:19
    Hawkeye
    +8
    It does if she's a militant Lesbian.. It matters a LOT..
  • toni Hawkeye 2012/03/17 12:08:56
    toni
    +1
    You have to be militant to oppose killing people for being gay?
  • Hawkeye toni 2012/03/17 12:26:52
    Hawkeye
    +8
    DIDN'T say that but NOW that YOU brought it up...

    You have to be MILITANT to FALSELY accuse OTHERS of supporting the killing of people for being gay..
  • toni Hawkeye 2012/03/17 17:17:27
    toni
    There is nothing false about the accusation.

    "Inhofe took David Bahati under his wing, making him a core member of the Family. Bahati is the author of Uganda's Anti-Homosexuality Bill. The Bill creates a new crime called "aggravated homosexuality" in Uganda and imposes automatic life imprisonment or the death penalty for its offense. "Aggravated homosexuality" is defined by the Bill as sex with a disabled person, having HIV/AIDS, use of drugs or alcohol that leads to gay sex, knowing a gay person and not reporting it, or speaking positively about same-sex marriage. "

    http://www.examiner.com/inter...
  • Hawkeye toni 2012/03/17 17:29:06
    Hawkeye
    +2
    EVEN if you're NOT lying,,

    NOTHING that YOU have posted makes the accusation that Inhofe HIMSELF supports the Killing of people because they are Gay true....

    Because of the LACK of ANY real evidence to support the contention that Inhofe himself has EVER come out ans said anything like this,, then the accusation and THIS, "There is nothing false about the accusation." are BOTH nothing but BALDFACED LIES..

    Left Wingers LOVE to Convict on the notion of "Guilt " by association but it doesn't work in the REAL world or we'd be executing the entire families of convicted murderers right alongside the muderers themselves..
  • darthtbone Hawkeye 2012/03/17 16:41:53
    darthtbone
    +1
    Regardless of sexual preference I prefer to go with, "she's a militant idiot."
  • Hawkeye darthtbone 2012/03/17 17:03:51
    Hawkeye
    +1
    She's obviously one of those Militant Feminist's that Limbaugh has been known to refer to as a Feminazi and contrary to the current "War on Women" vitriollic hyperbole,, is NOT a term that Limbaugh uses to describe ALL women..
  • darthtbone Hawkeye 2012/03/18 16:05:44
    darthtbone
    I wouldn't even go so far as she is militantly supporting women. Sheiks militantly supporting liberalism. She could careless if woman who doesn't support her ideology suffers some rights violation or is slandered.
  • mwg0735 darthtbone 2012/03/17 14:36:41
  • toni mwg0735 2012/03/17 12:07:59
    toni
    +4
    Yes and openly.
  • mwg0735 toni 2012/03/17 14:37:14
  • Wahvlvke mwg0735 2012/03/17 12:36:13
    Wahvlvke
    +7
    Yes ... she's the MSLSD token dyke.
  • mwg0735 Wahvlvke 2012/03/17 14:37:45
  • Wahvlvke mwg0735 2012/03/18 11:47:14
    Wahvlvke
    +1
    And besides ... she is ugly.
  • seadog6... mwg0735 2012/03/17 13:20:12
  • mwg0735 seadog6... 2012/03/17 14:38:02
  • NPC mwg0735 2012/03/17 15:34:50
    NPC
    +2
    I heard she was married to a man and uses this masquerade for acceptance as a spokesperson for aberrant behavior or maybe just her sick behavior ?
  • Catita mwg0735 2012/03/17 16:06:33
  • Bob S mwg0735 2012/03/17 17:26:40
    Bob S
    +1
    You be the judge. Maybe Ellen and Rosie O'donnell will help you figure it all out.
  • Brian Tristan MacQuillan 2012/03/17 07:30:07
    Brian Tristan MacQuillan
    +3
    Sen. James Inhofe is one of the most informed members of Congress on the subject of climate change. He could run circles around Al Gore.

    MSNBC host Rachel Maddow is a intelligent and well spoken woman, but when she has an axe to grind, she has an axe to grind, and it should come as not surprise it was about the persecution of gays. I have not read Sen. Inhofe's book, but if he wrote something in it about Ms. Maddow then she does have a right to bring it up, and correct it.

    Her characterization of Sen. Inhofe's position is that man made global warming does not exist is not quite correct, what he does is exposes how the man made global warming people want it to be settled and not questioned, and how we as a country could be energy independent. He does lay out that man made global warming is not settled science, and does back up his assertion that climate change's main causes are something other than man. In the end he is arguing that climate change has very little to do with man, but not that man does not affect the environment.
  • Elementer Brian T... 2012/03/17 08:56:54
    Elementer
    +3
    As much as I love Rachel, this is a growing problem in the media. Reporters love pushing their own agenda and opinions and it overrides their journalistic integrity. They neglect, ignore, and even alter facts to support their opinion.
  • Brian T... Elementer 2012/03/17 18:00:47
    Brian Tristan MacQuillan
    +2
    Perhaps, yes. But Rachel Maddow does an opinion show of news analysis, so you know exactly what you are getting when you turn in. It is the opinion shows that dominate prime time, as that is what people want to watch. And 60 minutes, 20 20, or Dateline all have actually been doing that for years under the cover of "news". At least Maddow and Hannity are honest about what their shows actually are.

    Certainly actual reporters should strive to report the news, as opposed to towing opinion. It would be nice if there were more of that. I would not hold my breath though.
  • Hawkeye Brian T... 2012/03/17 10:26:40
    Hawkeye
    +2
    And one cannot address the issue of Climate Change without pointing out that establishing the problem is merely the FIRST step.. That there MUST be a healthy debate over how to go from there.. It is NOT simply a matter of,,

    "Okay.. THIS is the PROBLEM and the ONLY solution is to adopt the most RADICAL ideas possible to fix the problem"..

    Like ANY problem there are different approaches towards finding a solution and the challenge is to find the BEST one to solve the problem,, NOT to increase the powers of the Government over the people..

    And ONE of those options is to address whether a Phenomenon that has been around since the dawn of time is even actually a problem in the FIRST place..

    Do we " FIX " it or do we merely do what has been the most successful strategy throughout History??

    Do we ADAPT to it???
  • Brian T... Hawkeye 2012/03/17 18:21:47
    Brian Tristan MacQuillan
    Yes indeed Hawkeye, you are spot on. If it climate change was allowed to be explored in an independent scientific manner, we would have about 10 to 15 different theories as to why it is happening, not just one approved reason. Serious study uncovers many reasons why something is happening.

    Having just one reason why climate change is happening is telling, as the people who hold this view all seem to want increase government controls to deal with the problem. It is science done backwards, solution then find the problem that supports that solution.

    Any intelligent person can see that solar activity has more to do with climate change than any other factor, and trying to replace that with man's activity is disingenuous. Cleaner air and cleaner water is certainly something we all can agree on, but there has to be a balance also. Fossil fuels provide more bang for the buck than any fuel ever used on the earth, and it simply can not be replaced overnight with some alternative fuel. Much like the diesel locomotive replaced the steam locomotive real solutions will be adopted by the market, fantasy solutions will not. The reality is then, that economic philosophy seems to drive the "man made global warming" viewpoint much more than scientific data, and that is not science, it is po...

    Yes indeed Hawkeye, you are spot on. If it climate change was allowed to be explored in an independent scientific manner, we would have about 10 to 15 different theories as to why it is happening, not just one approved reason. Serious study uncovers many reasons why something is happening.

    Having just one reason why climate change is happening is telling, as the people who hold this view all seem to want increase government controls to deal with the problem. It is science done backwards, solution then find the problem that supports that solution.

    Any intelligent person can see that solar activity has more to do with climate change than any other factor, and trying to replace that with man's activity is disingenuous. Cleaner air and cleaner water is certainly something we all can agree on, but there has to be a balance also. Fossil fuels provide more bang for the buck than any fuel ever used on the earth, and it simply can not be replaced overnight with some alternative fuel. Much like the diesel locomotive replaced the steam locomotive real solutions will be adopted by the market, fantasy solutions will not. The reality is then, that economic philosophy seems to drive the "man made global warming" viewpoint much more than scientific data, and that is not science, it is political philosophy.

    The charge brought against the "man made global warming" camp is that they highjacked the environmental movement to further their designs on more government control. Considering on of the founders of Greenpeace says exactly that, along with more than a few people who are actually concerned with the environment is telling. The view of these folks is that politicizing the environment hurts efforts to protect it, as conservation is not a left or right thing, but just good stewardship. That is hard to argue with, and the charge that the environmental has been highjacked certainly seems to be the case.
    (more)
  • Hawkeye Brian T... 2012/03/17 19:12:42
    Hawkeye
    +1
    It is not debatable that the CLimate is changing.. The Climate is ALWAYS changing.. WE have been in a Warming trend since the OFFICIAL end of the "Mini Ice Age" dated BY scientists to be somewhere around the year 1850.. One does NOT come out of an ice age,, mini or otherwise,, without,, BY definition,, going INTO a warming trend..

    That the Political Hacks are trying to EXPLOIT this for their OWN agendas is CLEAR and their motivations are equally clear..

    You CONTROL a population by controlling their lifestyles and CONTROL is the ultimate goal....

    YOU educate them YOUR way.. You destroy their belief system and replace it with the STATE.. The Sugar Daddy Government.. You take over the raising of their children and you completely deny access to ANY information that is NOT approved by the State.. THEN you limit the options for a society by limiting the engine of that society .. You limit ,, in THIS case,, OIL and force that society to switch to another form of energy that can be more easilly regulated and rationed.

    THIS isn't about the Climate OR the Natural environment around us.. it is ALL about the Societal environment that WE,, the People,, are going to be allowed to LIVE in..
  • Brian T... Hawkeye 2012/03/17 19:16:13
    Brian Tristan MacQuillan
    Could not have said it any better than you just did.
  • chaoskitty123 2012/03/17 05:03:03
    chaoskitty123
    +3
    Maddow makes these type of boneheaded responses all the time but notice that MOX News presents this as they are an anti FOX News parody of sorts attacking the political right.

    At the end of the second video, Maddow doesn't even catch her own slip up where she on the one hand says Obama is trying to stop domestic oil production while bragging how oil production in the US has grown under Obama... which is it? Obama is successfully preventing oil drilling in the US or he is successfully increasing the amount of domestic oil drilling? Toss in the fact that Democrats opposed Bush drilling for more oil but Republicans support Obama doing it... and so do Democrats but only because Obama has made his deals with Big Oil and has been in bed with them since before becoming President.

    The story was supposed to be about Global Warming but Maddows instead interrogated the Senator about Conservatives from the US visiting Uganda leading to a "Kill The Gays" bill in that nation calling for killing all gays with AIDS. Turns out, the Senator didn't even know the man Maddow was talking about behind the law and Maddow didn't provide a single source to prove that any Conservatives from the US knew this man... that's sorta like Liberals visiting Russia and this automatically means they are to blam...















    Maddow makes these type of boneheaded responses all the time but notice that MOX News presents this as they are an anti FOX News parody of sorts attacking the political right.

    At the end of the second video, Maddow doesn't even catch her own slip up where she on the one hand says Obama is trying to stop domestic oil production while bragging how oil production in the US has grown under Obama... which is it? Obama is successfully preventing oil drilling in the US or he is successfully increasing the amount of domestic oil drilling? Toss in the fact that Democrats opposed Bush drilling for more oil but Republicans support Obama doing it... and so do Democrats but only because Obama has made his deals with Big Oil and has been in bed with them since before becoming President.

    The story was supposed to be about Global Warming but Maddows instead interrogated the Senator about Conservatives from the US visiting Uganda leading to a "Kill The Gays" bill in that nation calling for killing all gays with AIDS. Turns out, the Senator didn't even know the man Maddow was talking about behind the law and Maddow didn't provide a single source to prove that any Conservatives from the US knew this man... that's sorta like Liberals visiting Russia and this automatically means they are to blame for new legislation to execute Muslim extremists.

    Maddow loves to laugh and play the cutesy rabbit deal but often, the woman seems out of sorts and unclear about anything she's saying. What she tries to capitalize on is when she attacks someone that they also don't know what she is talking about so she comes off more in control as if she knows what she's talking about... lol, in other words, she's an idiot.

    It's like her pal Keith Olbermann whose team went out to gather the information for his show and about 70% of the time he tossed it aside going on insane rage fests against people until MSNBC's new owners Comcast fired him.

    Maddow learned everything she knows from Olbermann and while he used rage as his emotional status symbol, Maddows uses being cutesy to her advantage as she'll sit there laughing even when her guests catch her in a falsehood or clearly uneducated about a subject she's trying to discuss.

    Maddows never acts like a reporter as she is nothing more than a news entertainer where facts and truth are not required. She has done many shows where the topics she discusses are completely beyond her understanding so she shifts to some other way to attack the issue.

    Notice when she criticizes the Senator for trying to make it look like the majority of scientists are anti Global Warming? First, she had not even talked about the topic until he tried bringing her back to it and she proceeded to criticize him for saying all scientists support the anti Global Warming side... he did no such thing, it was Maddow who repeatedly said that almost all scientists support Global Warming. What the Senator was saying is that a large number of scientists are now rejecting the theory, actively disproving it and that even many sources in the media are now turning against it.

    Maddow earns her name Madcow because for all the cutesy smiley stuff... she's often wrong and even many Moderates are now calling her out on her many many mistakes.

    http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it....

    Fox is still killing all the others combined. Maddow, however, actually pulls respectable numbers as FOX dominates the day and is almost twice viewed at night vs MSNBC.
    (more)
  • Lucy 2012/03/17 04:46:28
    Lucy
    Well I despise Inhofe, because he hates animals and votes against any bill for the welfare of them.
  • cmdrbnd007 2012/03/17 04:32:25
    cmdrbnd007
    +4
    My question for my Senator, Mr. Inhoff is why the Hell you went on the show to begin with. About 14 people watch it and none of them would buy your book because they have already consumed too much Kool Aid as it is.
  • hazel cmdrbnd007 2012/03/17 05:05:07
    hazel
    +3
    great question,.. good point
  • cmdrbnd007 hazel 2012/03/17 05:23:03
    cmdrbnd007
    +3
    I sometimes wonder if they just go on shows like that just to be seen on TV.
  • Hawkeye cmdrbnd007 2012/03/17 10:30:26
    Hawkeye
    +3
    If he had gone on,, Oh,, Let's say,, FOX NEWS,, he would have reached a greater audience AT THAT TIME but then again,, WE would probably NOT be having this discussion today..
  • cmdrbnd007 Hawkeye 2012/03/17 13:37:20
    cmdrbnd007
    +1
    He would have had a greater audience if he had gone on just about any other network but you are right we wouldn't be talking about it now.
  • Hawkeye cmdrbnd007 2012/03/17 13:41:36
    Hawkeye
    +2
    I heard that there are three canceled shows that get more of an audience then Maddow..ROFLMAO..

    I'm NOT Joking.. Sienfeld gets a bigger audience..
  • cmdrbnd007 Hawkeye 2012/03/17 13:52:56
    cmdrbnd007
    +1
    Now that is sad but I can believe it. I have tried and I can't sit and watch it for any length of time.
  • K. Katt 2012/03/17 04:17:52
    K. Katt
    +3
    Inhoffe makes a nice presentation. Worth watching. Maddow doesn't get very far on the homosexual issue.
  • Mike W 2012/03/17 04:11:22
    Mike W
    +6
    What a ditz, as vain as she is ignorant.
  • BlueRepublican 2012/03/17 03:33:13
    BlueRepublican
    +5
    Who is Mr. Maddow and why is he so interested in African gays?
    Why does he have a show if no one cares to watch?
  • Gracie ~Gun Totin' Gracie~ 2012/03/17 03:21:27
    Gracie ~Gun Totin' Gracie~
    +7
    She don't have to go on air to make an a&& out of herself. I think she was born an a&&hole......actually; the a&&hole; song was wrote for her. :)

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/09/02 12:25:44

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals