Thursday before the holiday, Rachel Maddow (KPTK m-f, 3-5p) and Joe Snarlborough again clashed on MSNBC's The Race To The White House.
It wasn't pleasant with fill-in host Joe going prickishly for the throat with his parting shot, "You might support Obama but you've got the Clinton cackle down, Rachel. I'm proud of ya."
We believe "douche" is the word.
They've clashed twice before on the show; once, Scarborough got up in the middle of everything, and walked off the set.
It started when Rachel said Obama's "developing Iraq policy" statements were really nothing new, and cited a bunch of his remarks going back to March saying he'd make withdrawal plans in Iraq with the considerations of the conditions on the ground as provided by his commanders.
But Scarborough kept repeating a remark Obama made to Charlie Gibson that he'd get the troops out in 16 months -- no matter that Obama's stump speech given hundreds of times included the conditions on the ground part.
The conversation continued circling, with Joe repeating the same question as if she hadn't answered it, and Rachel reiterating to no avail. In frustration, she laughed in his face, "You're so wrong, I can't even hold it together. You're so wrong."
Not the fun kind of debate with two minds and two voices battling entertainingly, but the crappy talk radio model where the host presses his advantage and bullies a guest using his position's inherent authority, and control of the technology. Scarborough haslawyerly skills.
It was not good teevee. Scarborough would never do that to anyone else on that panel. There's bad chemistry there for some reason -- perhaps the incipient misogyny or homophobia of Joe's Southern frat house background.
As we learned from Hillary's campaign, some people just can't stand a smart woman no matter whose side she's on.
Scarborough is a Newt Gingrich Republican. We hope his higher status at MSNBC -- he's on his second show of his own -- won't effect Rachel's prospects in the company.
We're huge Maddow (pronounced mad-oh) fans and we're not the only ones: The Kansas City Star recently called her: "... young, gay, geeky and one of the few unapologetic left-wing voices in mainstream media."
Rarely have we seen a newstalk career rise as fast as hers.
After Stanford she won a Rhodes scholarship and used it to earn a Ph.d in political science from
Cambridge. A onetime barista and morning-zoo sidekick on Massachsetts radio, she interned at Air
America as the network was attempting take off in 2004. She
distinguished herself, or was pushy enough to get on-air on the late Unfiltered
with Chuck D and Lizz Winstead. It was cancelled, after which it didn't
take much time for her to get her own show. Then came the MSNBC analyst
gig with guest shots with Tucker, Olbermann, and biscuit- baking
segments on The Today Show.
We made that last one up but soon she was filling in for Olbermann on the popular Countdown; and named to be a permanent panelist on The Race To the White House. MSNBC, and Air America broke ground simulcasting The Race on Rachel's weekdaily radio show.
“She’s terrific,” Olbermann says, “Wonderfully informed, totally prepared, forceful and yet respectful.”
Of all the women Snarlborough could have chosen to snipe at, you'd think the smooth-faced ex-politician might have tried someone dumber, or more vulnerable to his sneering challenges.
On-air, Rachel's not pissed off -- and doesn't feign it. She uses little hyperbole yet she loves her irony! She's smart, and immaculately prepped; a total wonk (not a geek) with an on-air disposition that makes wonkiness seem sexy, and hip.
(Yes damn it, there IS a difference between a wonk and a geek: "A person who is single-minded or accomplished in scientific or technical pursuits but is felt to be socially inept".... is a geek. A wonk is "one who studies an issue or a topic thoroughly or excessively.” We love geeks here in Seattle, the code-writing, pocket protector class became role models and sex symbols and started getting laid like the normal people they aren't, years ago in this high-tech town. But lusting-for-geeks-ism didn't tamp down anti-intellectualism, a trend that's been meta since Ronald Reagan. We're hoping that Rachel's success marks a megatrend of pro-intellectual, wonk-worshipping that will help our friends in the blogosphere get laid too).
Plus she's an out gay woman in front of the camera and behind the microphone -- that's rare on radio or teevee, and a first in cable news, as far as we can tell.
No in-your-face sexual activist, Rachel's got the haircut, but her sexuality only comes up on the radio in by-the-by mentions of her partner Susan Mikula, an artist who shares the Massachusetts end of Rachel's crazed, bifurcated Massachusetts/Manhattan wonk's life.
The right (left) people support Maddow. There's us, there's Olbermann -- and we were delighted to see a majority on a recent Daily Kos poll split between the propositions that Rachel should be compensated for putting up with Scarborough either by being given his morning slot, or being allowed to waterboard him.
I love this column! It took me a while to totally love Rachel. Still a few very minor peeves but really a nice person who is well informed, courageous in her convictions and honest in her reporting. And I like watching her better even than listening to her.
I heard that on the simulcast and it got kind of uncomfortable. Scarborough just couldn't let it go and Rachel was at the top of her "I'm right and you're not" game. I loved it.
Scarborough always strikes me as being a covert snot anyway. I like his views sometimes but you always get the feeling that beneath the surface is a privileged brat. The same feeling I get when I watch Gingrich. Ew! on both of them.
Posted by: joanie | July 07, 2008 at 02:05 AM
Clinton cackle
I don't know who Rachel Maddow is but that line is classic! As a gay man I get angry when fellow gays and lesbians play into - by playing up-to - media stereotypes.
If she's in the media in some capacity and wants to put herself out there as a representative of the queer community she needs to make an attempt to look not quite as gross. In the picture it looks like she's wearing a GAP shirt and a digital Timex? UGH. And please, the angry crew-cut is like -- WHA?
As a community we've come so far but we still can't make that final leap by supporting the image of sexy lesbians in the media and calling-out those who aren't. It's really frustrating to me sometimes.
Posted by: Gay Gary | July 07, 2008 at 02:44 AM
Great post.. Joe Scarborough is nothing but a filthy smear artist who tries to occasionally mask his brand of political ugliness with feigned objectivity - he's the "Eddie Haskell" of pundits. I saw that episode of "Race to the White House" that he hosted and it was downright pathetic, what a petulant and intellectually small man he is. This isn't a slam to Hillary Clinton, but the behavior of Joe last week is simply karma to all of the HRC supporters who thought that he had their best interests at heart and unfortunately decided to post clips of that moron to make their case against Obama.
Posted by: HumanityCritic | July 07, 2008 at 04:31 AM
Joe was never a Hillary supporter..he was just another RW pundit who was hoping she would win so he could gleefully scrape up any juicy gossip about her.
Rachel has more smarts in her left little finger than Joe has in his whole body. He knows it, she knows it, and MSNBC knows it. As soon as the election is over, there will be no need for the Race to the WhiteHouse show, and I expect they will get Rachel on the air, on her own show as soon as they can.
Unfortunately, the network probably just loves it when Joe behaves in this way because it means ratings everytime they appear together.
GG, I am disappointed in your superficial sounding reaction to Rachel. If you ever listened to her, you would realize that she neither hides nor promotes her sexuality. Her looks mean nothing on the radio, and if it really matters to you, they "pretty" her up for her television appearances. Can't have someone looking too much like a lesbian, apparently. If you really are a gay man, I would think you would find it revolting that anyone would focus more on her looking "butch" and less on her impressive intelligence. She represents all the smart women everywhere, regardless of their sexual preference.
Posted by: sparky | July 07, 2008 at 08:31 AM
Joe still hasn't explained the intern found dead in his office when he was in Congress and resigned shortly thereafter.
Posted by: coiler | July 07, 2008 at 09:23 AM
Also, Joe is a lousy debater, if you look back at an earlier Race for the WH video,
Huffy Joe
Joe gets the last word in after Rachel insists on making her point and then the audio hears Joe removing his mic and suddenly his face is gone from the panel of the 4 others shown.
Posted by: coiler | July 07, 2008 at 10:12 AM
GG, I am disappointed in your superficial sounding reaction to Rachel. If you ever listened to her, you would realize that she neither hides nor promotes her sexuality. Her looks mean nothing on the radio, and if it really matters to you, they "pretty" her up for her television appearances. Can't have someone looking too much like a lesbian, apparently.
Well I've never listened to her (I guess she's on radio?) but that's okay if they make her look a tad less groddy for TV. Even just a little bit helps! As for looks, I'm sick of people giving peoples looks second-shrift as though they don't matter. They *do* matter.
Posted by: Gay Gary | July 07, 2008 at 10:58 AM
Gay Gary- now lesbians must obey gay male fashion laws like straight men do? shit.
Posted by: marcos | July 07, 2008 at 11:00 AM
Disappointing, Gigi. You call yourself a flaming whatever so why call her on anything? Esp. if you've never watched or listened to her.
She sounds and acts very conventional. Integrity dictates that she disclose influences because she's a commentator and editorializes. And on TV she's actually very pretty. As if that matters...
Try tearing yourself away from the manly men on KVI and listen/watch her: 3:00 on 1090 (when David Bender, another gay guy, isn't subbing - but that's another story.).
Posted by: joanie | July 07, 2008 at 12:07 PM
Tonight on TGTL Jen Andrews chuckled adoringly at Luke's "funnies", Luke mentioned his girlfriend Furnessa once again, and demonstrated what a passive aggressive freak he is. Under that controlled mask of studied, "coolcat" irony lies not a hip Daddio of the new millenium, but a vicious wolverine, a man who, as Gay Gary noted, once wished for anyone who criticizes him to have been molested in childhood.
Posted by: Tommy008 | July 07, 2008 at 08:56 PM
I listened to Ross off and on this morning. He was silly. He talked a lot and sounded kind of weird. Sort of pumped up on something. Probably just sunshine in his case but still, he was weird.
Speaking of silly, I am very tired of Lee Callahan on KPTK. She's created these nonsense - supposed to be cute and funny - little psa's for environmentally-friendly ideas.
I like the ideas but would prefer to get them straight. I hate "cute."
Just found out that Seder will be in for Malloy tomorrow. I love Seder!
Today radioland has been a wasteland.
Posted by: joanie | July 07, 2008 at 11:12 PM
Gay Gary- now lesbians must obey gay male fashion laws like straight men do? shit.
IF ONLY THEY DID! LMAO!
OK, so I watched this Rachel chick from an April MSNBC show (it was the only one I could find on YouTube) and she was a total you-know-what! She kept yelling at Joe not to interrupt her but she wouldn't shut-up for 2 seconds to let anyone else talk … who filibusters a TV show?!!?!! LOL!
That said, however, Harold Ford Jr. was a MEGA-HUNK!!! Let's see and hear more of him and less of old man Scarborough and the Rachel lady! Even you straight arrows have to agree with me on this one. Are you guys with me or what? AuthenticAndrew? Ford Jr. – hot or not?
Try tearing yourself away from the manly men on KVI and listen/watch her: 3:00 on 1090 (when David Bender, another gay guy, isn't subbing - but that's another story.).
Well the only national shows I really listen to since Drudge went off-air are Coast to Coast AM and occasionally Democracy Now (now there’s a less-than-attractive lady – Amy Goodman – but what a FABULOUS voice … what a female radio host should sound like).
Posted by: Gay Gary | July 07, 2008 at 11:37 PM
Speaking of Amy Goodman’s, I remember Dori did this as a topic like a year ago, but what are people’s favorite news-talk radio voices?
My Top Locals are:
#5 – Don O’Neil
#4 – Phil Van Vort, Jean Lockhart (sp? – the lady who does the news on the weekends on KIRO occasionally) or Elisa Woodward (TIE)
#3 – Greg Herschel
#2 – Bill Yeend
#1 – Dave Ross or Lion Archer (TIE)
My Top Nationals are:
#5 – Billy Bush
#4 – Don Imus
#3 – Amy Goodman
#2 – Bob Brinker
#1 – Art Bell (counts b/c he’s still O/A occasionally)
Worst Local Voices:
#5 – David Goldstein (even though he’s not on anymore this is an honorary since it was the worst in the history of radio, perhaps even radio-telephonic communication more generally)
#4 – Carleen Johnson
#3 – Ron Upshaw
#2 – Dori Monson
#1 – Jenn Anderson
Posted by: Gay Gary | July 07, 2008 at 11:40 PM
By "voice" I don't mean the "words", just the tone & timbre.
Posted by: Gay Gary | July 07, 2008 at 11:43 PM
Off the top of my head four worst:
Amy Goodman - she drive me nuts!
Lee Callahan
Lionel - whose voice I used to like late at night but can't tolerate in the early AM. I think he used to be more interesting.
Monson
I can't count Goldstein. When he subbed for Ross and modulated, he was fine. But on his own show, shrill, shrill, shrill.
Best: Ross, Groz (KJR)
Best female: Rehm; Craft(to whom I'm currently listening on KGO)
Honorable mention: Maddow (she laughs funny - doesn't always sound genuine to me.
Names keep coming so I'm sure I'll think of more. You are so organized, Gigi.
Posted by: joanie | July 07, 2008 at 11:54 PM
Joe wants to bend Rachel over and teach her how to be a woman.
Posted by: mrogi | July 07, 2008 at 11:56 PM
Names keep coming so I'm sure I'll think of more. You are so organized, Gigi.
I iron my socks!
Posted by: Gay Gary | July 07, 2008 at 11:56 PM
I'd have to add Jane Shannon's voice to the best female list.
Posted by: joanie | July 08, 2008 at 12:00 AM
That's not organized. That's compulsive.
Posted by: joanie | July 08, 2008 at 12:01 AM
Sparky is an idiot....and who made the comment about the Frat House...Joe never even joined a Frat in college...y'all area bunch of blogging idiots who make up lies to try to hurt people...grow up!
Posted by: BamaFlora | July 08, 2008 at 06:14 AM
Hey, chucks, did you hear that Iraq wants us to leave? Hmmm?
Winning? If they want us gone, doesn't that mean we've won and should leave?
I'd love to see Rachel take over Meet the Press. I'd start watching it again. She'd find guests who were not the usual suspects repeating the same inside-Washington pc hogwash over and over. That would be refreshing.
Meet the Press - a show old men sit and watch with their fathers. (Now where did I hear that?)
Posted by: joanie | July 08, 2008 at 11:08 AM
But what do the people of Iraq want?
The folks that I am aware of want us to leave. Just not yet.
Anyway, we can't leave until Iran is fixed. They have/are building weapons of mass destruction and are threatening to use them on our allies and our troops. I am certain that you understand that Miss Joanie.
Posted by: chucks | July 08, 2008 at 11:44 AM
oh, chucks, where do you get such information? Really. Where? Point me to the source of that incredibly ignorant information.
BTW, replying to Sparkie's post, you said China was too far away. Across which ocean are you looking?
Posted by: joanie | July 08, 2008 at 12:00 PM
I did not discuss China with Sparky. At least I did not have that conversation with Spark.
Arramadamadingdong has ordered the digging of some 300,000 graves to bury our troops in.
He needs a spanking, and I don't mean that in the good way.
Posted by: chucks | July 08, 2008 at 12:44 PM
Arramadamadingdong has ordered the digging of some 300,000 graves to bury our troops in.
Where'd you get it? C'mon chucks. You pulled it out of your proverbial a** didn't you?
China: sparky gave you a perfectly analogized example of our presence in Iraq. You said China wouldn't invade us - too far away. 'Member now?
Good discussion online on Ed Schultz right now. Get yourself some more learnin' - they are discussing Limbaugh off and on and how his show is for "entertainment purposes only" and facts are not guaranteed.
He give you the dirt on the grave digging?
Posted by: joanie | July 08, 2008 at 01:18 PM
I think that your China issue is with nevets Miss Joanie.
At work right now, I can't listen to the radio.
Posted by: chucks | July 08, 2008 at 01:37 PM
We cannot leave until Iran is fixed? We can not win a guerilla war, just like we could not win in Vietnam. Only crazy people who aren't even mainstream republicans believe we should stay.
Posted by: coiler | July 08, 2008 at 03:08 PM
The war that our military can not win does not, nor ever has existed.
Your lack of faith in our military is unfounded.
We have been fighting a guerrilla war in Iraq. In case you have not been paying attention, our guys are kicking ass. Shit, even Jack Murtha and Pulosi had to admit that. I get great joy watching them cringe and spin while they are forced to concede victory to our troops.
It must suck to have to concede victory after declaring defeat.
But they need not worry, many of us will still consider the defeatocrats as losers, even in victory.
Posted by: chucks | July 08, 2008 at 03:51 PM
We're still there, after 5 years. Still there in Afghanistan, after 7....looks like your shit is fucked up. How many homeless vets is this going to create?
Posted by: coiler | July 08, 2008 at 04:00 PM
Forget China. You didn't post a stupid comment about china but about Iran. Now back it up if you can.
Of course you listen to the radio . . . while you're playing on the computer.
Posted by: joanie | July 08, 2008 at 04:02 PM
It's obscene the fantasies that turn chucks on. It's obscene to take such pleasure in so much killing and maiming of our kids and the Iraqis.
Pitiful, chucks. Just pitiful.
Posted by: joanie | July 08, 2008 at 04:06 PM
I wish everyone on this blog could be friends.
Posted by: Gay Gary | July 08, 2008 at 04:06 PM
News Flash: Iraq wants us out ASAP, and wants a time table to do so. Watching Hardball right now and even McCain is quoted that if they want us out, that is what we said we would do.
I will bet that doesn't include long term presence, what with that multi billion dollar embassy going in.
Posted by: sparky | July 08, 2008 at 04:13 PM
OH My bad...Mccain is now saying he doesn't think that the Iraq government really wants us to leave. And another person in the government said that they would have to see how things go.
Why did I think anything would be different...
Posted by: sparky | July 08, 2008 at 04:21 PM
Gary
I think we are friends. Just an occasional, moderate disagreement.
LOL.
Posted by: chucks | July 08, 2008 at 04:36 PM
That's what prompted this conversation. It isn't only Maliki but other Iraqi officials have commented as well. Chucks doesn't care what
I guess he thinks Iraq is his toy country just like all the kids that are dying are toy soldiers to him.
Nadler was just on with David Bender and both agreed this FISA bill is redundant because the old one make illegal wire taps illegal but this new one has more questionable things in it.
Hopefully, Nadler said, the AG in the next admin will look into it on the criminal side.
Posted by: joanie | July 08, 2008 at 04:39 PM
Nothing moderate about you. You are one of a very small percentage of people that think we should still be there.
Posted by: joanie | July 08, 2008 at 04:40 PM
Joanie
I do not care if I am the only one that thinks we should still be there. The job is not yet done. We need to stay until it is done.
What have you done with all of the men in Seattle? You can't have feminized all of them. Is there any testosterone left in that burg?
Posted by: chucks | July 08, 2008 at 05:14 PM
Feminized means thinking with your brain, making decisions following informed analysis? And still make a woman happy?
If you are an example of a "real man," then I'll take "feminized." No Barney Rubble for me, chucks.
Coiler seems like someone who can walk and chew gum at the same time. Not sure 'bout you...
As for being the decider, sorry that job is filled, at least until January. One of you is enough.
You know, you sound like you think Iraq should be our fifty-second state. That would solve our oil problem, wouldn't it?
Posted by: joanie | July 08, 2008 at 05:28 PM
Make that fifty-first! Sorry 'bout that. Of course, we could always add Iran. Might be easier to get their oil that way than starting a third war.
Not as much for for the testosterone-addicted, however.
Posted by: joanie | July 08, 2008 at 05:32 PM
58th joanie.
We have 57 now. per u know who.
No, if Iraq were to become a state, all oil production would be cut off by congress. We must rely on "foreign" sources for oil. Can't be drilling for that stuff here.
Posted by: chucks | July 08, 2008 at 05:37 PM
Yes, those sweet little oil companies who always want more. I wonder...will they ever use the ones they have?
Naw. It's simple economics, stupid: too much oil and we'll have to bring the price down. Why would we want to do that...?
Posted by: joanie | July 08, 2008 at 07:04 PM
Feminized also means politically corrected, easy to offend and wussified when applied to males.
The dysfunctional women's lib movement had a lot to do with that big mistake, which led to other dysfunction like confusion in roles, broken families, etc.. Not saying that a women's lib movement wasn't needed, but Gloria Steinem's and the others were bad role models and the rest is history.
Posted by: KS | July 08, 2008 at 07:44 PM
Gary
I think we are friends. Just an occasional, moderate disagreement.
LOL.
WE NEED A PICNIC.
Here's what I'm assigning everyone to bring:
Joanie - potato salad
Gay Gary - Corona
Oculus Bleu - Gay Gary
Chucks - tuna casserole
KS - gardenburgers
Puget Sound - laptop computer with WiFi card, speakers and the KKOL homepage bookmarked so we can stream it online during the picnic and have some background buzz (how on earth did they listen to radio outdoors before laptops with WiFi?)
Sparky - American Flag
Wild Bill - Luke Burbank
AuthenticAndrew - the funk
Bryan Suits - TBD
Who am I missing?
Posted by: Gay Gary | July 08, 2008 at 09:25 PM
OK Gary
But those of us with cwp's should probably leave our toys home. I think a couple of these folks get upset over the littlest things.
Posted by: chuck | July 08, 2008 at 09:30 PM
But those of us with cwp's should probably leave our toys home.
Sorry everyone, picnic's off. I don't step out of the shower without at least my CZ-75 ... outdoors I'm pretty much a walking Blackwater armory (in slightly brighter - usually pastel - colors).
Posted by: Gay Gary | July 08, 2008 at 09:39 PM
CZ-75
OK, maybe I was a little hasty. Proper tools for any job is important. I'm kinda old fashioned though. Python is my tool of choice. Very uncomplicated and reliable.
Posted by: chuck | July 08, 2008 at 09:44 PM
Chucks, I'm still with you. Even those Iraqis that Joanie talked about think it will take 3-5 years before we can bring our troops home. Do you think Hartman, Miller, Randi, Bender, or Seder will bring that tidbit of info up on the radio. Naw, that would make Hussein look foolish thinking he could bring them home in 16 months when the Iraqi government thinks it would take alot longer..
As far as Iran. The only talk of attacking Iran I hear is coming from those on the left. A scare tactic to get votes for their Hussein. Just like his namesake did in the 80's.
Posted by: nevets | July 08, 2008 at 10:08 PM
tuna casserole, potato salad, garden burgers and Corona?
That's it?
Posted by: sparky | July 08, 2008 at 10:11 PM
What's for dessert? (It better be chocolate...)
Posted by: joanie | July 08, 2008 at 10:24 PM