Does anyone else really dislike Rachel Maddow?

[Ordr]

I'm sure this will only cause a flame-war against me but perhaps others share my viewpoint. There's something about her that I find profoundly irritating. It isn't what she says, either, but how she says it. She comes across as elitist and condescending.

[virtualobserver]

1. she's the best person on televison

in my opinion

[dkf]

2. Maybe cuz she wipes everyone out with her logic...know it all!

She is pretty damned smart and an excellent debater.

[Ordr]

3. She's definitely smart and quick.

I'll give her that.

[mod mom]

4. She is one smart cookie and has great wit on top of that. I wish MSNBC would give her her own show!

[krkaufman]

95. Well, you might wanna watch Friday night's Countdown w/ KO...

... since she's filling-in for the WHOLE hour, while Keith's away. (2 more replays yet to go)

[mcctatas]

5. Not me...

but you are entitled to your own opinion...even if it is totally wrong. :evilgrin:

[SoFlaJet]

6. only the Clinton supporters

hate her-didn't you get the memo? MSNBC = bad, Fox = fair, balanced and good...

[sam sarrha]

39. someone of the same ilk was dashing all Randy Rhodes has done JUST BECAUSE she didnt support Boma..

[Donnachaidh]

48. total bull!

please leave the primary obsession in GD-P. :eyes:

[eagertolearn]

7. I think she is great!

I love her air of confidence and how fast she can think on her feet. I would give anything to have a mind like that versus my slower processing mind.

[lisa58]

8. To me she comes across as well-informed...

...and I appreciate that.

[a kennedy]

110. not like the bimbo's on faux noise......

I love her intelligence, it's so refreshing, and engaging, I love her. :woohoo: :applause:

[LakeSamish706]

9. No flames here, but I absolutely love Rachel.... She is one of the best on TV....

We are all entitled to our own opinions however (At least so far we are, that may change in time).

Edited to say:

Maybe it's because she is constantly pitted against a**holes like morning Joe.

[hlthe2b]

10. Oh yes....

I much prefer the big-haired blonde, clueless Bush*bots....


:sarcasm:



Rachel's the best... all the kudos in the world to her.

[undeterred]

11. No, I find her just the opposite.

Maybe its because of what I've heard about her. She spends 6-8 hours doing research for every show. Lots of talk show hosts- even the very popular ones- just spend 2 or 3 and take lots of calls to fill the time. She really has a lot more substance to her show than almost anyone else on Air America. And she is a rising star because her commentary is so good. Now Stephanie Miller, I find irritating. 2 hours of toilet humor and 10 seconds of information. Why bother?

[CTyankee]

16. I found Rachel irritating when she did her own show just prior to Stephanie's.

I think it was because she was out of her element, trying to be funny and light yet relevant to the political issues.

Now, on MSNBC, I just love her. She hones her points finely and states them with great confidence. She no longer tries to be funny, altho she can be lighter handed and that's nice to watch.

[undeterred]

53. The show with Liz was a mismatch.

She is better on her own- or when she is interviewing top-notch guests. She asks really good questions. I don't get to see her because I don't have cable. But she keeps her cool. I also love that she keeps a focus on the war.

She's come to Madison twice, and our Air America local guy was thoroughly impressed with how hard she worked to prepare for a live show- he just idolizes her.

[lonestarnot]

12. Must be something about you.

:shrug: Does superior intelligence always grate on your nerves?

[Ordr]

14. No, ad hominem dreck does.

[rateyes]

29. Then you must have irritated yourself with

your ad hominem of Rachel.

[lonestarnot]

71. bwa ha haha hah ha aha.

:rofl: wonderful observation!

[blondeatlast]

88. za-ZING! Excellent, rateyes.

:thumbsup:

[Irishonly]

13. I Like Her

She puts a lot of pundits to shame. Rachel is one of the good ones.

[LakeSamish706]

15. Someone needs to do some kind of poll on this question. n/t

[Ordr]

18. That might be even more discouraging for me, lol.

The single "no" against 25,000 "yes".

[madwivoter]

17. I'm a huge fan of TRMS

And love the fact that she has a pretty regular spot on the MSNBC shows. She's smart, witty and objective. She's a nice contrast to the RW tools Buchanan and Scarborough (oh, and we can't forget little Tucker too).

[fasttense]

19. Hmm, I think she has dark, shy eyes,

and is quite pretty. Every time she says something, she kind of looks down and makes a shy smile. So it's kind of strange that you find her condescending. I get just the opposite feeling from her mannerisms.

I think it comes down to if you are intimidated by smart, articulate women, who have opposing views from you.

[Ordr]

21. Actually I think she's gorgeous.

I think it comes down to if you are intimidated by smart, articulate women, who have opposing views from you.
I doubt that. My girlfriend is one of them.

[renate]

82. I'm so glad someone said it!

I think she is distractingly gorgeous (especially when she lets her hair grow a little longer)--she has a lovely smile, beautiful eyes, and an open, friendly face. I'm a straight woman but I have a little crush on her. :loveya:

It may not be PC to mention her looks, but with the combination of them and her lightning-fast and funny mind, she's quite a dish!

[classof56]

20. I like her a lot--always glad when she's on KO.

My schedule doesn't allow me to listen to her radio show often, but I am constantly amazed at her knowledge, especially about the Constitution and in the legal arena. She's a true intellectual with a ready wit. I like that in a woman. Or in a man, come to think of it. I'm not flaming, wouldn't do that. God knows there are those on the air I react to in the way you react to Rachel. Bill O'Reilly comes to mind, for one...

Tired Old Cynic

[mmonk]

22. No. Why should I?

[Ordr]

23. I'm not saying that you should. :)

[mmonk]

79. Great.

;)

[KharmaTrain]

24. A Confient Woman

That tends to un-nerve some around here. Yes, Rachael can come off "uppity" but with good cause...she knows her shit and she's not afraid to say so. Some may say the extreme of this attitude is Randi Rhodes, but it's all in the style.

I appreciate Rachel's ability to stand up to the spinners and even laugh at them. For years we had unfettered Buchanan and other right wing bullshit with no one near a mike to refute the lies and bullshit and it allowed this regime to plunder the country. At least now there's someone to turn to who fights back...and does so with a style that makes others uncomfortable.

[Zueda]

25. I beleive she's a rhodes scholar...

maybe that gives her a certain amount of condescending air.

I like her alright. I think she has a way of pissing people off on both sides of issues... but that's probably a good thing.

[Ordr]

26. It's certainly a good thing in the context of a political pundit.

[Barrymores Ghost]

27. Allow me to offer a translation:

1) "Elitist" = "Someone with an advanced education who, using pointed argumentation and empirical facts, confidently calls into question my own personal biases and entrenched belief systems, forcing me into a state of crippling cognitive dissonance."

2) "Condescending" = "Someone who doesn't stand for bullshit rhetoric, who defiantly smacks aside an opponent's cliches and half-baked, party-line talking points and forces the adversary to address the issue at hand and respond to a question in an intellectually honest fashion."

Funny, those who'd use these descriptives when talking about Rachel Maddow don't usually find their way into DU...but, hey, to each his or her own.

[annabanana]

87. I'm with you BG. . . . . . .n/t

[Fovea]

28. That would be Rachel Maddow, PhD. in PoliSci

And unlike most other talking heads, she neither plays dumb, or is she actually dumb.

Ok, she strikes you as elitist and condescending. To me she sound like someone who is not afraid to hand me a difficult concept, or term of art. To me she sounds like someone who has a gifted mind, and enjoys using it. Because of that, she lives a life where she perennially has to translate a third of what she says into Faux for the verbally impaired.

There are plenty of 100 IQ pundits out there. Rachel is not one of them.
I can't imagine how a condescending elitist would manage to do a year long radio show with Chuck D.

You want elitist and condescending? Watch Rushbo, and he's cobblestone dumb. As a PoliSci grad student, half her time would have been spent skewering pompous pricks, some of whom would have been instructors. Yeah, I sure wouldn't want her on my case. But hopefully by the simple expedient of me being neither a public person, or a fascist whackjob, that will never happen.

To me, Rachel Maddow is like the love child of Molly Ivens and Bill Moyers.

[Barrymores Ghost]

32. Beautiful riposte! n/t

[Donnachaidh]

50. Rachel is one of the best out there.

If you want elitist and condescending, try Neal Boortz. Or Limpballs. Rachel can actually back her play with something other than ass-stats.

[Frustratedlady]

72. I love your portrayal.

"To me, Rachel Maddow is like the love child of Molly Ivens and Bill Moyers."

Since we have so many pundits who slur their words and stumble around, trying to say something with substance, Rachel distinctly and succinctly states the facts as she sees them. I also feel she is demure in her manner and certainly not boastful.

She is a prize.

[postulater]

30. No, no-one else really dislikes her.

You stand alone.

[Ordr]

31. It certainly seems that way.

[sam sarrha]

33. you are just defensive because she is Really intelligent and are not..??

sorry for the jab, but you did the same thing to her. you are not required to like her, but there is something wrong with dragging her thru the mud, because of her voice inflection.. that leads me to believe you have other issues

i dont listen to Ed, but he also fills an important niche at AAR. AAR is important, it is the ONLY voice of PROGRESSIVE THOUGHT on the air media.. other than PBS, soon to be healed of its negative influence.. people bash NPR, but it isn't their fault

here is my favorite quote:

"a negative thought contenues and increases exponentially
until replaced by a positive thought, however the positive
thought must be cultivated." HHDL

[Ordr]

34. Feel free to believe whatever you wish.

[sam sarrha]

56. well SHORT POST... are you saying AAR is Not the only voive of progressive thought? how long have

you actually listened to her.. you dont believe she is telling the truth.?? she is decieving you.??
you prefer the Fox White House Talking Points Media Theater.. ??

you just dont like her voice, or that she is actually and spreading the censored truth.. keep listening, she will soon wash out the Rush Limpballs Apriori hate loop out of your mind

i am sorry if i took what you said to be petty, trivial and obviously 'Intollerant', i tend to feel the bigger picture is more important.. it did take me a while to warm up to Ed, because Thom Hartman should have got that spot.. ever heard him??

[Ordr]

61. I should have clarified. I've never listened to AAR.

I'm only referring to her appearances on MSNBC. Since I do have XM, though, I will check her out on AAR. I've said before that I absolutely don't disagree with what she is saying. Only how it is said. As for whatever "Rush Limpballs Apriori hate loop out of your mind" means, I'll only guess it refers to me (incorrectly) being a Limbaugh fan. That couldn't be any more false.

[sam sarrha]

69. go to... >>Link>>

http://www.airamericaradio.com click on her box on top, streams 6pm-9 live i think it links to recent shows

http://www.whiterosesociety.org has thom hartman and others.. check out thom

keep at it.. pretty soon it will make sense.. there is a learning curve here.

there are reasons that take a while to understand ..KEEP COMMING BACK..!!

sorry for the attitude.. not feeling well lately

[Ordr]

70. Thank you.

[sam sarrha]

75. i updated my previous link... with another link you may have missed

[Ordr]

Cool. When I'm home from work I'll check them out.

[bbgrunt]

35. I find listening to her on radio is a little bit

grating--she has this schoolmarm, sing-song cadence that could put me in a coma if she did not have one of the most informative shows on AAR. But all that vanishes instantly when I see her on tv. She has such a pleasant affect and smile and seems so willing to listen to others that she totally disarms everyone.

....so I totally love her and am so glad she's become a semi-regular with Keith--they are great together and he doesn't make her counterpunch with asshole cretins.

[KatyaR]

108. I'd take that anyday over the noise that comes from the right.

I think Rachel comes off as being very smart but very down to earth and funny as well. She presents things in a way that shouldn't make anyone fear her intelligence. She's made it onto my "10 people I'd love to have dinner with" list for those very reasons.

And, come on, she makes killer cocktails--who wouldn't want to invite her to a party? :toast:

[immoderate]

36. I really like her.

Maybe she doesn't sound elitist and condescending to me because I think I'm pretty smart. Maybe if you could give some examples...

--IMM

[Ordr]

41. I'd say mostly the smirking dismissal of opinions that differ from her own.

It strikes me as disrespectful and unnecessary.

[immoderate]

51. I usually don't see her when she has an opponent.

So I can't say I've seen that. I do know that she has many guests on her own show, that are invited to impart their wisdom, and Rachel treats them with deference and respect.

Are you saying she's not properly respectful of Pat Buchanan and Joe Scarborough? I'd say she gives them more than they deserve.

It may just come down to aesthetic judgment, and I find her delightful. De gustibus non disputandem est.

--IMM

[sam sarrha]

59. stupidity, Jingoism deserves NO RESPECT, consider who she is talking about.

[susankh4]

37. She has a bit of a "liberal elite" problem....

It don't bother me. But I can see why it would bother alot of folks I know.

I don't think you are alone.

[Ordr]

38. Thank you for your honesty.

[Barrymores Ghost]

43. And the others here who've responded otherwise aren't "honest?"

:eyes:

[Ordr]

45. Yes, that must be it. Silly.

[krkaufman]

97. What? Everyone else here saying they don't see the condescension are being dishonest? : D

Talk about recreational fishing.

[Ian David]

40. That's just because Rachel Maddow personally dislikes you and knows you're listening. n/t

[Ordr]

42. That's just freaky.

Although I'm rather sure she and I would get along in person. I would enjoy debating her face to face.

[Ian David]

44. No, you wouldn't. She would crush you intellectually like a grape. n/t

[Ordr]

46. Okay. :)

[Barrymores Ghost]

47. For some reason, I seriously doubt that.

On both counts.

Or maybe, just maybe, she would read your assessment of her as being "profoundly irritating," "elitist" and "condescending" as the supreme compliment and decide to take you out for tea and crumpets.

[Ordr]

49. Good point.

[sam sarrha]

67. really enlightened people have great compassion for others suffering from stupidity, i cant always

follow that, right now i am VERY MEDICATED on pain killers that dont do all that much good. up for my 4th operation, in 6 months, on my reattached amputated hand, total painful failure useless and totally paralyzed, that is now on its 3rd week of being grafted 3" from my belly button, the 8th it will be detached, i lose my insurance on the 5th, and will be unemployable, in 3 or 4 months my family might be homeless, 87 yr old mom, the wife and 2 dogs living in a ford escort on the streets

so when i see this whiny little "new guy" bitching about noth'n.. i wanta just slap him, grow the Fuck up.!!!!!!!!

[Ian David]

68. More likely she'd invite him out to a late night dinner in a bad part of town and stand him up.

No, wait.

That's what I would do.

[Barrymores Ghost]

90. ROFLMMFAO!! n/t

[bullwinkle428]

62. Since you relish the opportunity to debate her, I'd be curious to know

which of her views would you most particularly enjoy challenging?

:popcorn:

[trotsky]

93. What would you debate about?

After all, you said your problem with her isn't what she says, but "how" she says it. So it would be a debate about...?

[laststeamtrain]

52. Not at all. I think she's the best thing on AAR. She puts together a real fine show.

I fear she will be on TV someday. The big bucks have been known to ruin people. We'll see.

[Lex]

54. Welcome to DU.

Interesting observation.

[mondo joe]

55. Can't see why. Shes one of the only talking heads who seems like a real person I might know,

rather than a processed talking-point bot.

[Ilsa]

57. I like her alot. She is quick, intelligent, and well-educated. Great radio voice.

She has a really intelligent show, covering the news highlights and deeper issues. She is well-composed on TV, an dnever throws a hissy fit like Pat Buchanan and others. She always looks great -- a minimalist, classic look to her wardrobe, hair, and makeup. She isn't condescending at all -- she expects her audiences to be like her -- interested in politics on a detailed level, and that is reasonable.

Find something you like about her and build on that, especially since you like the content of her material.

[nashville_brook]

58. maybe it's not Maddow -- maybe it's the perceived intellectual condescension

instead of perceiving yourself as a subject to her discussion, you see yourself as the object of her dismissal. ??? maybe there someone who condescended to you, and her delivery brings back those memories?

i can't stand Melissa Block on NPR for a similar but opposite reason -- her delivery trivializes everything. everything from genocide in Darfur to global climate change has the same cutesy inflection you would expect to hear on an entertainment story. i seriously can't listen when she's on anymore.

there are times when i'm watching Maddow and she does that thing where she's hearing a point she can't WAIT to respond to and she looks down at her notes with a knowing grin, like the college bowl participant who knows the answer to everything. i can totally understand how that would bring back bad memories of intellectual competition, but i see her as being on "my team" so i'm like "you go girl!"

now that i think about it, you could say that she lacks a "game face." she doesn't hide her eagerness.

[bullwinkle428]

60. NO. The first time I was aware of her was when she did the AAR

show with Lizz Winstead. Decent show, but nothing that really got me excited. She seemed to start coming into her own once she began her solo show, and totally blossomed once she started making appearances on MSNBC!

Some personalities just take time to hit their stride, and she's one of them. on a similar note, I thought Sam Seder sucked in the early days of his show when he co-hosted with Janeane, and now he's just about the best thing on AAR (I rarely get the opportunity to listen to RM's show these days)! I'm hoping Sammy replaces Randi Rhodes sooner rather than later...

[OregonBlue]

63. No.

[trotsky]

64. Here's a little exercise.

Why don't you name a few liberal radio talkers or media figures that you like, and we'll see what's different about them?

I'm sure there must be some you enjoy listening to and agree with.

[Ganja Ninja]

65. No, I think she's great. n/t

[bdamomma]

66. No Rachel is the best, and she has been our voice.

[PA Democrat]

73. Rachel Maddow is a Rhodes Scholar, and IMO one of the brightest political pundits on TV.

I find that some of the men that she debates, like Joe Scarborough and Pat Buchanan to be nasty and condescending at times, and Rachel deals with them quite well. Check out this video as an example.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vE_vW-KL1o

[Johonny]

74. Nope

I'm glad she landed in the LA drive time slot on the radio.

[last_texas_dem]

76. I like Rachel Maddow from what I've seen/heard from her, but I can sympathize

I've never fully warmed up to Keith Olbermann and much of this board thinks he's God. For me, a lot of it just has to do with the general "air" he seems to have about himself; he has always come across as a bit condescending to me, even though he seems very intelligent and is generally spot-on in his commentary.

[Ordr]

77. Yes, I agree with you about Keith.

Dead-on commentary but poorly packaged.

[kmsarvis]

78. ELITIST AND CONDESCENDING?????

I DONT GET THOSE VIBES AT ALL. SHE DOES SEEM TO GET ANNOYED AT THE STUPIDITY OF BUCHANAN,SCARBOROUGH,AND GREGORY SOMETIMES.

[BlooInBloo]

80. Just you.

[devilgrrl]

81. Elitist and condescending in an Ayn Rand kind of way.

You fraud.

[Ordr]

85. lol

[genie_weenie]

83. No. I find her intelligent, well-spoken, disarming, charming and damned cute.

Too bad she is spoken for...

[Marr]

84. I know what you're talking about and I used to feel the same way.

I've always thought she did excellent analysis; that she's an incredibly perceptive and eloquent person. But there was something in her mannerisms that initially put me off... I don't think I'd have called it elitist... more like... overeager. Like one of those little dogs that just won't stop jumping around.

This is completely divorced from her actually commentary-- its purely a matter of television presence. I don't feel that way about her anymore, and I think she actually comes off great on TV now. I don't know whether that's due to my having become accustomed to her mannerisms, or because she's learned to dial it back.

[backscatter712]

86. She sounds like she's smarter than you are probably because she is... nt

[blondeatlast]

89. She's well-informed, not taken in by the memes of the moment, and sees

beyond the obvious. It appears you are more or less alone in this; I think she's way above the rest, myself.

[Mezzo]

91. I like her even when I disagree with her. I think she is getting way better on tv. nt

[Iggo]

92. I love her in the worst way....(n/t)

[krkaufman]

94. If so, I'm OK with being condescended to by a Rhodes scholar ...

... someone who actually *DOES* know more than I do, rather than the rest of the TV pundits who condescend sans merit.

Or maybe Rachel just knowing so damn much comes across as condescending?

[SeattleGirl]

96. I think she's great, but I also understand that people can be affected

differently by someone.

I like Thom Hartmann, but sometimes I get irritated listening to him. It's not really a knock on him, though; it's when he starts stuttering or saying, "uh, uh, uh". Kind of reminds me of my favorite prof in college. His mind was usually racing faster than his mouth could keep up with.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

98. I like her a lot.

She's smart and funny, and I don't find her at all condescending.

[Rhiannon12866]

99. Not me! I think that she's the most intelligent and quickest mind on radio...

And I always manage to learn something from her.:-)

[Canuckistanian]

100. Who would you prefer?

Rachel Maddow... or some blonde bimbo with nice breasts?

[leeroysphitz]

101. I've appreciated Maddow since the early days of AAR. n/t

[liberalla]

102. NO.

That's easy. NO.

[Perry Logan]

103. Nu uh.

[erpowers]

104. I Like Her

I think she is great. In addition, she does not come across as elitist or condescending. She actually comes across as very informed and intelligent. I contend she give great commentary about all the issues. Are you should you are not just letting the fact that she went to Stanford and Oxford get to you? She has always come across as a regular person.

[malaise]

105. On the contrary

she comes across as someone who actually knows what she's talking about, but then she was a Rhodes scholar and has a PhD in Political Science.

I love her.

[KatyaR]

106. Are you KIDDING me?

I think she's amazing. She's intelligent and gets her points across without demeaning anyone.

[Frank Cannon]

107. Like you, I can't stand elitist and condescending people

Rachel Maddow is neither elitist nor condescending.

[B Calm]

109. Isn't she a Rhodes Scholar?

[ElkHunter]

111. While I love Rachel Maddow...

...I can understand why someone even with the same politics might not care for her style. We all have different tastes and there's nothing wrong with that. For instance, as an Air America listener I've always prefered Rachel Maddow to Randi Rhodes. But to each to his/hear own. Thankfully we liberals don't walk in lockstep like the dittoheads do.