Paul Revere by Cyrus Dallin, North End, Boston

~~~

~~~

.

.
.

Friday, April 2, 2010

RACHEL MADDOW TAKES ON MASSACHUSETTS SENATOR SCOTT BROWN: STOP LYING!

MSNBC political analyst and host of The Rachel Maddow Show, Rachel Maddow, has been asking Republican Senator Scott Brown to stop using her for fund raising purposes.  In letters to his constituents, Brown has lied about Maddow's intentions to run against him in the next senatorial election. 

Maddow has emphatically stated that she has no intention of running against him, that the DNC has NOT asked her to run against him, and that he is raising money on a lie.

That didn't take long, did it.  Republican Scott Brown, Massachusetts Senator for 7 whole weeks, already lying so that he'll be re-elected.  That's change we can believe in.

Personally, I wish Maddow would run against Brown.  She'd clean his little mendacious clock.


14 comments:

libhom said...

This is a not so subtle gay baiting strategy. Jon Stewart should apologize for ridiculing Olberman for saying Brown is homophobic.

Ralph Cramden said...

Remember the crowing done by the conservatives when Brown was elected in Mass.? Yup. He was gonna stop Obama's health care. He was the Messiah to the conservatives.

Yeah. Right.

molecontent said...

Scott Brown a liar? Nooooo!

Next thing Rachel will tell us is that water's wet.

Soloman said...

Why should Scott Brown leave Rachel Maddow out of discussions and fund raising if he's able to use her name effectively?

After all, our president is out on the campaign trail trying to sell people on redistribution, invoking the names of Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, which is the most un-presidential behavior I've ever witnessed.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Soloman, my friend.

The difference is this: Mr. Obama is telling the truth about Limbaugh and Beck. They are doomsday Cassandras filling their listeners' heads with fear, lies, and loathing. They make big bucks keeping their easily led audience listening to their demagogery. IT MAKES THEM RICH.

Rachel Maddow is NOT a candidate for senator in Massachusetts, therefore, Brown is a liar raising money from a lie.

How can you not understand the difference?

You believe there's nothing shameful about lying about who's running against a politician in order to raise money? Really? And you're in with the group who criticizes Mr. Obama as a liar?


That's rich. Actually, it's hypocrisy. And it's something the Right practices--assiduously.

Soloman said...

So you're willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt regarding this most un-presidential behavior.

All I needed to know.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Solomon, have you studied American history?

Obama is not the only president to go after his critics. He's NOT being "unpresidential." LOL! I'm surprised you don't know this.

Let's start with Harry Truman and go all the way to Obama!

If you are unaware of this, you need to bone up on American history.

LOL!

You think because you're unaware of the history of American presidents going after their critics that Obama is somehow different from other presidents?

Really?

I suggest you research this. You'll discover that Mr. Obama is as American as apple pie when it comes to answering his critics.

Have fun learning about your American history.

How old are you?

libhom said...

Soloman: Do you think it is OK for Brown to defraud his supporters by lying and saying that someone is going to run against him when he knows it isn't true?

Ralph Cramden said...

The Rethugs wouldn't know the truth if it sat on their faces. They listen to people like Limbaugh and Beck and Palin and think Hey! if they say so it must be true.

No wonder this country is so effed up. Half of it listens to entertainers for information.

Yeah. Mickey Mouse said no one but Obama attacked critics, it's "unpresidential!" Mickey Mouse said it, so it must be true!

Soloman said...

@ libhom -

The truth of this story thus far is that a bunch of Maddow supporters want her to run for office.

She has said that she is not running, yet in doing so has begun a full-fledged anti-Scott Brown campaign on her television show. She's discussed him every night since.

That, in my opinion, gives him the right to use her in any way he sees fit, including using her statements as he seeks campaign contributions.

If she wants him to stop invoking her name, perhaps she should take him off her list of possible subjects to discuss.

sounds like you have a problem with free speech when it doesn't work in your interest.

Please do not be hypocritical and say that's not what it's all about - I was just told by our host that Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck being brought up by President Obama is perfectly fine, although I know of no other president in history who has gone out on stump speeches - while holding office, no less - and directly called out a TV host, individual writer, or other pundit by name.

Actually, I've never seen a president need to stump for a bill that's been passed as much as this guy has stumped after the fact for the "stimulus" and this redistribution legislation, but that's a whole different subject.

BTW, Shaw Kenawe - I'm not sure what you mean when you say Obama is right when he calls out Beck and Limbaugh by name. Beck and Limbaugh must be right, or Obama wouldn't be bothering to get entangled with them. That's what Alinsky disciples do - try to marginalize their opponents, and clearly Obama feels the need to marginalize FNC and talk radio. He's fortunate in that he's got the rest of the media on his side, although support is waning...

And @ Ralph Cramden - you say that people who listen to Beck and Limbaugh wouldn't know truth "if it sat on their faces."

However, I suppose you believe everything that you're spoon fed by Maddow, Olbermann, Moulitsas, and HuffPo is absolute truth...

Those of us who are intelligent seek our information from multiple sources. I appreciate the opinions of Limbaugh and Beck and I get some news from them and other pundits because they do indeed offer some news the MSM will never bring to light, but I turn to the internet for the majority of my news information. I also don't check with just the AP or other American wire services, but rely on foreign news agencies as well.

And by the way - Mickey Mouse owns ABC, the broadcast network that gave Obama a full two hours free of charge to sell his redistributive legislation. So I guess it's you who believes whatever Mickey has to say.

Shaw Kenawe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Shaw Kenawe said...

SOLOMAN WROTE: "She has said that she is not running, yet in doing so has begun a full-fledged anti-Scott Brown campaign on her television show. She's discussed him every night since."

It is so perfectly usual for certain members of the rightwing to blame the victim. As Mr. Soloman has done here.

He admits that Maddow in no way is running against Brown [a bunch of people on facebook does not make it real, since people on facbook could set up a page for Bullwinkle to run against Brown.

After Maddow emphatically asked Brown not to use HER NAME to fill his coffers by lying, she was ignored by the opportunistic 7-week in office senator. He ignored her asking him to not use her name. Get it?

And you blame Maddow? Really.

BTW, it is not an infraction against free speech. The First Amendment prohibits GOVERNMENT interference with free speech. That's another issue that the rightwing ALWAYS gets wrong.

If someone were to use your name, Mr. Soloman, to raise funds for a Democratic candidate, would you find it amusing.

And speaking of free speech, which you quickly used as a defense for Brown's perfidity, that applies to Mr. Obama as well.

There is absolutely nothing wrong or improper for a president to call out jerks and propaganda machines that infect people with lies.

That you don't like it and try to imply some nefarious motive to it says more about your thinking than it does Mr. Obama's.

The Saul Alinsky charge is more of the Right's sneaky and underhanded way of trying to paint Nr. Obama as a Communist. I studied Karl Marx in school, does that make me a Marxist? I also learned about Mussolini, am I a Fascist too? One of my relatives in Italy actually belonged to the Partita Communista! So that MUST mean I'm a commie!

SOLOMAN WROTE: "And by the way - Mickey Mouse owns ABC, the broadcast network that gave Obama a full two hours free of charge to sell his redistributive legislation. So I guess it's you who believes whatever Mickey has to say."

This is the logic to your above statement:

Disney Corporation owns ABC; Mr. Obama spoke to the nation on ABC; therefore I believe what Mickey Mouse has to say.

And you love listening to Limbaugh, Beck, and FAUX News? Gosh, I never would have guessed that!

Soloman said...

Okay, let's take your points one by one so I can help you learn something today.

"Blame the Victim."

Really. Ray Maddow is not a victim, she and her minions are the perpetrator. They started this issue by putting her up on Facebook as a possible candidate. That ends your wrongness there.

And regarding my reference to free speech, the only way to stop Brown from acting as he is would be to have the government impose its will, so I am actually correct. Thank you.

If someone used my name to raise campaign funds it would say more about their pathetic campaign than about me, but that's another story entirely.

Funny - you hypocritically turn around and use my reference to free speech as it pertains to Obama. Cake, eat it.

BTW - you keep claiming Obama's so correct about Limbaugh and Beck, yet Beck has only had to issue one correction since he began offering the WH a method to directly issue corrections in real-time, and Beck handled that correction internally. I don't even remember what it was, but it was nonsensical, not serious. Beck and Limbaugh are exactly correct about Obama, and that's what bothers you leftists most about talk radio. It is opinion based in factual information, well researched, and verifiable.

This includes Alinsky. I'd recommend you learn more about the Chosen Won. Her is a pure Alinsky disciple, and he's proven as much time and time again.

Regarding Mickey... I guess when you crazy leftists get all angry and stuff you lose your ability to understand sarcasm - although the chain of company ownership I present is correct, just as is NBC being a wholly owned subsidiary of the federal government, given the billions of bailout and stimulus dollars given to GE, NBC's parent company.

The Place for pro-Obama Politics, don't you know...

Shaw Kenawe said...

SOLOMAN WROTE" Really. Ray Maddow is not a victim, she and her minions are the perpetrator. They started this issue by putting her up on Facebook as a possible candidate. That ends your wrongness there."


SK answered: "...she and her minions...?" Now you're accusing MADDOW of being involved AND calling people she doesn't know "her minions?"

You've just made stuff up to try to prove your point. I could continue this debate by saying you're high on drugs and that's why you wrote this--and that statement would be just as useless as the one you made above--because both are stated without proof.

Unless you can give us proof--link to evidence--that Maddow or her friends started the rumor, what you just posted is made-up and totally without merit.

SOLOMAN WROTE:"And regarding my reference to free speech, the only way to stop Brown from acting as he is would be to have the government impose its will, so I am actually correct. Thank you."


SK WROTE: Uh-huh, Mr. Soloman. This is what you wrote and it is NOTHING CLOSE to what you said in the above paragraph:

SOLOMAN: "If she wants him to stop invoking her name, perhaps she should take him off her list of possible subjects to discuss.

sounds like you have a problem with free speech when it doesn't work in your interest.


You implied that it is I who has a problem with free speech--another accusation you made up--and suggested that Maddow stop telling Brown to cease and desist from using HER NAME to raise money. You have more twists to your statement than a pretzel on acid.


SOLOMAN WROTE "Funny - you hypocritically turn around and use my reference to free speech as it pertains to Obama. Cake, eat it."

SK WROTE: This is a waste of time, I know. My friends tell me not to engage with people like this. I'm going to type this really, really slowly so you understand how inane your above statement is:

I SUGGESTED THAT WHEN YOU INVOKE BROWN'S FREE SPEECH RIGHTS TO DEFEND HIS USING MADDOW'S NAME FOR RAISING MONEY, THEN THERE IS NO MERIT IN GETTING UPSET OVER MR. OBAMA'S USING HIS FREE SPEECH RIGHTS TO GO AFTER PEOPLE WHO INCITE THEIR AUDIENCES AGAINST HIM WITH FEAR AND LIES.

To say Mr. Obama is using his Free Speech rights as is Mr. Brown is NOT being hypocritical, it is being accurate.

I never brought Free Speech as an issue into the discussion YOU did.

SOLOMAN WROTE: "Beck and Limbaugh are exactly correct about Obama, and that's what bothers you leftists most about talk radio. It is opinion based in factual information, well researched, and verifiable."

SK: That is hugely debatable. Beck told his audience that the US government was installing FEMA concentration camps A LIE, and he actually praised a provision in the Constitution that actually "barred Congress from ending the international slave trade before 1808." That's how stupid he is.


Lastly SOLOMAN WROTE: "This includes Alinsky. I'd recommend you learn more about the Chosen Won. Her is a pure Alinsky disciple, and he's proven as much time and time again."

I don't know if you ever had to write a paper in school, but when you make accusations like "he's proven as much time and time again," you need to give examples, otherwise people tend to regard baseless accusations as nothing more than soap bubbles. They're easy to make but they're made out of air.


SOLOMON WROTE: "I guess when you crazy leftists get all angry..."

SK WROTE: Yes. I expected as much. We're crazy, but you, who listen to AND respect Glenn Beck are, well, we'll just leave it there.