Rachel Maddow: "100% of my hate mail is about my appearance"

[William769]

In this clip from Thursday’s Ellen, Rachel Maddow talks about how 14% of her mail is hate mail and 100% of that is about her appearance, rather than an argument or position she has taken.

“You’re Rachel Mad-cow, ‘cause you look like a cow,” she said, referring to one of the frequent insults she receives.

http://www.gay.net/tv/2011/10/23/rachel-maddow-100-my-hate-mail-about-my-appearance

Great video clip. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZd_AdfE2hA&feature=player_embedded

[arbusto_baboso]

1. Of course. There's nothing substantive to hate her for.

You certainly can't attack the accuracy of her statements on the air.

So what does that leave? Vicious ad hominem attacks. The right is good at those. Because it's all they've got.

[woo me with science]

76. Yup. An inability to argue on policy ALWAYS goes to the personal,

as we see for ourselves every day.

[KamaAina]

2. Oh, how very mature.

:sarcasm:

I think she looks terrific. :loveya: I used to like how she had her hair cut kind of like Keith's, and wore the same liknds of suits. She looked like his little sis!

[William769]

3. I think she looks terrific Also.

[JDPriestly]

52. She dresses like a lawyer or other professional woman.

[Missy Vixen]

4. She's gorgeous. Time to update the glasses prescription. n/t

[CTyankee]

11. Nah, it's just her. Let's accept that and move on...

[Missy Vixen]

26. She's someone my mom would have said is beautiful inside and out

Gorgeous AND brilliant.

Plus, she makes the RW pee themselves on a regular basis.

:woohoo:

[CTyankee]

27. Isn't that the BEST? Boy, do I love that.

She gets them all in a bother and they can't even take THAT? Whattsamatta U.?

[defendandprotect]

166. +1 -- Rachel is beautiful -- and brilliant at her work -- all of that annoys the RW ....

Plus she cares about people -- her hearts in the right place!

[itsallhappening]

42. As TV hosts go, this is gorgeous

Brooke Baldwin from CNN. Now THIS is really what gorgeous is.

[JDPriestly]

53. Brooke Baldwin dresses like I dressed in the 1960s.

A business suit would be more appropriate in my book, but it's her business.

Doesn't help her credibility in my book.

[itsallhappening]

60. Maybe a burka would make you happy?

[Javaman]

81. ah the old 0 to 60 rational.

only two shades of reality to you.

you're sad.

[itsallhappening]

99. Nah. I'm quite happy.

Probably because I don't sit around looking for things to wring my hands over and get outraged about. I think that's what's going on in this thread. Lighten up. :hi:

[Javaman]

103. Yup, that's life in a black and white world.

why worry your pretty little mind over the gray areas.

Here's some koolaid, oh wait, I see you already have your fill.

[itsallhappening]

124. Really? The "kool aid" response?

Is this 1998 again?

[Javaman]

146. Sure, if it applies. And it seems as if it does.

it appears as if you had no problem though with the Black and White view comment.

bottoms up!

[itsallhappening]

150. The only problem I had with it

was that, like many of your responses in this thread, it had nothing to do with anything.

[Javaman]

154. much as yours...

yet you choose to look at life in a black and white sort of way. And have yet to deny it.

[itsallhappening]

161. LOL

That's the "I know you are but what am I?" response.

When you run out of things to say, it's best to stop. Try it.

[Javaman]

167. no, that's what started this whole ridiculous thread...

yet you still don't answer it.

Look, I'm done.

you live in a plastic world easily manipulated by sex, I one the other hand choose not to participate.

and like most people ill prepared for life, you may now have the last word, because it appears that's what gives meaning to your sad life.

cheers!

[JDPriestly]

132. No, but Brooke looks immature to me.

Men wear suits on TV. I like that.

[lunatica]

58. Oh yeah, the Basic Instinct look

If you crane your neck enough you can peek up my dress look. And you probably think it isn't deliberate right?

[itsallhappening]

61. Right. Because every time a woman sits like that....

Is that what you're saying?

I mean, at least as far as women who could pull it off? Some couldn't.

[lunatica]

65. When she's in front of a camera, why yes, I think that's the whole point

The manipulation in that photo you posted is so obvious I'm surprised you missed it.

[itsallhappening]

66. Maybe one difference

is that she delivers news and not commentary. I'd rather look at someone attractive and make up my own mind, than look at someone who isn't attractive telling me what to think.

I guess you could say I'd rather be manipulated on a sexual level than on an intellectual one.

But that's just me.

[LanternWaste]

73. precisely when and what has she told you what to think?

Precisely when and what has she told you what to think...?

[itsallhappening]

77. It's not a news show.

It's an advocacy show.

It exists for the same reason Hannity's show exists: marching orders.

As long as people recognize it, it's probably not that big a deal. But I've seen people on this site and others acting as though she just "tells it like it is." She doesn't do that anymore than Hannity does. That's not their goal.

[LanternWaste]

82. No relevant answer to the question posed, then...?

No precise and relevant answer to the question posed, then...?

[itsallhappening]

96. I answered it.

You don't like the fact that it's an advocacy show and the whole thing is designed to influence people a certain way? I can't help you see that if it eludes you.

[bullwinkle428]

107. Hannity lies out his fucking ass. Please share with us the

inaccuracies you feel Rachel foists upon her viewers each night.

[itsallhappening]

114. I'll give you a few that I've seen.

She lied about Bart Stupak during the health care debate. She said he was lying about what was in the bill, and in order to "prove" it to her audience, she quoted from the section. But...only part of the section. Stupak was right, she was wrong, and she called him a liar.

She did a hit job a while back about 401ks, stating that they were scams. She totally misrepresented the investment aspect and how a person's money is used, and went on from there to condemn the whole idea. Not only stupid, but wrong. And quite bad for anyone who is able to plan for their future but might be turned away by a talking head.

She has stated on numerous occasions that Wisconsin will have a surplus this year. Not true. Everybody in Wisconsin knows there's going to be a deficit.

The other night while talking about the animals in Ohio, she said there were giraffes and camels on the loose. There were no giraffes or camels involved at all. I don't know where the hell she got that, but hey, why not just say it?!

[Ikonoklast]

164. Early reports had giraffes and camels loose in Ohio.

Early police reports; Maddow wasn't the only one that repeated early official sources that were mistaken.

That is not lying, not even close.

Enjoy your stay.

[Texas Lawyer]

108. Are you thinking that Brooke Baldwin/CNN Newsroom is a "news show" but the Rachel Maddow Show is

advocacy?

That is naive.

Everything on the broadcast media is advocacy.

If you think otherwise, you need to ask "why is Brooke Baldwin/CNN Newsroom reporting on this story and not that story? why is Brooke Baldwin/CNN Newsroom skeptically questioning certain facts while its questions implicitly assume the accuracy of other facts? why is Brooke Baldwin/CNN Newsroom selecting this person as an 'expert' without interviewing a more qualified expert with contrary views?"

Both shows are advocacy. The main difference is that the Rachel Maddow Show doesn't pretend otherwise.

[itsallhappening]

112. Wow.

You are seriously saying that Brooke Baldwin and Rachel Maddow are the same when it comes to advocating for a particular position? Really?

[Texas Lawyer]

118. No, I'm not saying that Brooke Baldwin and Rachel Maddow are the same; I'm saying that the Rachel

Maddow Show is candid about its bias, and if you are unable to detect a bias from Brooke Baldwin, then she is less candid in revealing the biases which underlie her advocacy, and her show has succeeded in persuading you to accept its biases without question.

Whether you perceive the advocacy embedded within a program is not a reflection of whether or not that advocacy exists (it is impossible to create a commercial "news" program without biases and the broadcasting of those biases is itself a subtler form of advocacy); instead, it is a reflection of whether the programs biases are candidly revealed and readily perceived or hidden and accepted without question.

[itsallhappening]

119. Are you able to detect bias in her show?

Examples?

I've never been one to accept anything without question. (Except for the time I found a $100 bill in my driveway. I kept it.) I see a lot of people on this site saying Maddow just "tells it like it is," so perhaps you have an issue there.

[Texas Lawyer]

125. Yes. Just watch her show and see what stories it covers.Then watch for comparison Sean Hannity and

Rachel Maddow.

Do the three shows cover all the same stories? No.

To the extent that there is overlap in the stories the three shows cover, do they talk to the same "experts" and disclose the same facts and reach the same conclusions? No.

You may more readily identify the biases that Sean Hannity or Rachel Maddow promote, but there is no less cunning put into the decision about what stories Brooke Baldwin covers and how she covers those stories.

The choice of what stories to cover and how to report them necessarily reflects a certain perspective. Here is an example of agendas that are more subtle than Sean Hannity's but less subtle than Brooke Baldwin's: If a young pretty white girl goes missing under unexplained circumstances, will Nancy Grace cover that story? Yes. If an old plain minority woman goes missing under equally inexplicable circumstances, will Nancy Grace cover that story? Not too fucking likely. There are agendas at the heart of that decision.

The agendas promoted by Sean Hannity and Rachel Maddow are more candidly revealed than the agendas promoted by Nancy Grace or Brooke Baldwin, but there are agendas at the heart of any commercial broadcast.

[itsallhappening]

128. (edit) This....

"You may more readily identify the biases the Sean Hannity or Rachel Maddow promote"

...is exactly right. And the reason is that they are 100% advocacy/propaganda shows. That's the point I was making.

It's easy to say there's bias in story selection. That's more likely a function of time constraints than anything else.

But Hannity and Maddow exist for the express purpose of running stories (and spinning stories) for political reasons.

Big difference.

[Texas Lawyer]

157. CNN does not have less "propaganda" than Fox or MSNBC -- CNN's propaganda is just more subtle and

therefore less candid.

Every decision on what stories to cover, what order to cover those stories, who to interview as part of those stories, how much time to devote to those stories, which parts of the stories should be questioned and which parts should be accepted as fact without question, etc., reflects a series of decisions. Each decision is based on the idea of achieving a number of goals. Setting those goals is defining an agenda. CNN promotes an agenda to the same degree that MSNBC and Fox promote an agenda, but CNN is more opaque about its agenda.

You agree with me when you say: "'You may more readily identify the biases that Sean Hannity or Rachel Maddow promote' ...is exactly right."

Just because you are unable to readily identify the biases that Brooke Baldwin promotes does not mean there are no biases -- it just means the biases are hidden by a veil of pretend neutrality.

[itsallhappening]

159. Okay, just for kicks...

What is CNN's version of Rachel Maddow or Sean Hannity?

[itsallhappening]

122. By the way, response #1 in this thread is a good example of what I mean.

[Texas Lawyer]

126. I don't agree. When someone says "Maddow just 'tells it like it is,'" that is likely the reaction

of someone who happens to agree with biases promoted in Rachel Maddow's show (I also happen to agree with many of those same biases).

If someone were to say "Baldwin just 'tells it like it is,'" that would likely be the reaction of someone who agrees with biases promoted by Brooke Baldwin.

Neither show is without bias. Rachel Maddow's biases are just more openly revealed.

[redqueen]

92. How about leaving sexiness out of it altogether?

She's not doing a striptease. She's not a model. She's presenting the news, and the fact that some men get whatever 'needs' met by having the person delivering the news (or the forecast, or whatever the hell) is not an excuse for treating women as if they should accept being treated as if their looks matter more than anything else about them.

It's a sign that we still have a long, long way to go.

[itsallhappening]

97. We all have our preferences.

Nothing wrong with that.

[tnlefty]

105. Sexually manipulated news...

:rofl: and not on an intellectual level? Color me surprised, but I needed a good laugh today, and I got one.

[roody]

68. boring

[redqueen]

94. Thanks for sharing your evaluation of a woman's looks with us.

As a woman who is on tv not to show off her looks, but to deliver news, I'm sure she's quite pleased that this is what happens to her images on the net. Furthermore I'm sure everyone here appreciates being informed about your tastes in ... whatever it is you're evaluating her for.

(The above is sarcasm, in case you couldn't tell.)

[itsallhappening]

98. LOL

Thank you so much for pointing out that your post was sarcastic. (That sentence was meant as sarcasm, in case you couldn't tell!)

I don't know what Brooke Baldwin thinks about any of this. She looks good, and she tries to look good. Nothing wrong with that.

[sabrina 1]

113. She's very ordinary looking to me. I know lots of wome who

look like that and/or better. Since I rarely watch Corporate Media anymore, I don't know anything important about her, such as 'is she a professional journalist or just another 'stenographer' reading a script'. The attempt to look sexy is something any woman can do, but few of those I've seen on Fox or CNN can do what Rachel Maddow does, with or without the show of legs and/or cleavage.

Can't say I watch the news to find sexy men, that I look for elsewhere. But the Corporate media has such a low opinion of the average American they assume they will be distracted by sexy images. I'm not sure that's working too well anymore. Not unless it is accompanied by a brain.

[Mendocino]

133. You actually watch CNN?

That explains quite a bit.

[kestrel91316]

5. This is how people attack when they have no rational basis to do so.

They become irrational.

I happen to think she's beautiful. And I'm straight.

[eridani]

54. I think that Rachel has turned more straight women heteroflexible

--than just about any other public figure.

[snooper2]

72. Heteroflexible ROFL--- Had to look up the wiki on that..

So we got a name now for frat girls in college who get drunk and give each other a little tongue :rofl:

[eridani]

134. That and "friends with benefits" are two expressions that the young folks have come up with

--that I think are very useful. Now "bisexual" can refer mainly to people who can fall in love with members of either sex.

[spinbaby]

109. My husband and I both think she's sexy

So she has to have something going.

[polichick]

6. They're threatened but too stupid to know why, so they lash out like middle school kids.

[bluestateguy]

7. And yet, I don't think she's bad looking at all

I prefer long hair in women, but that's just a personal preference for me.

She's a smart, professional and attractive woman.

[annabanana]

24. You might like her High School pic then:

[DonCoquixote]

86. WTF?

I had to look ten minutes before I realized this was not a photoshop.. She is a BLONDE?

[iris27]

129. Nah, if you look at her roots and eyebrows, you can see it's dyed.

But still, yeah, pretty drastic change.

I have no factual basis for this assumption, but given the speed with which she shaved her head once she was on her own, I'm guessing her appearance in this pic is due to parental pressure.

[lindysalsagal]

120. She's gorgeous! Whoa!

[Worship Money]

38. I think she's gorgeous

Like, seriously.

I have a mad crush on Rachel Maddow, for her looks, intellect, and humor/personality. She's seems like such a cool person.

[Book Lover]

8. Just imagine what it would be like were she actually unattractive

Not that she's get any airtime if that were the case, of course; just sayin'.

[orpupilofnature57]

9. She's a cutie and has the perspicacity of Thomas Paine ,we love her!!!

[RKP5637]

10. I think she's quite attractive. I can just imagine the uglies sending her the mail. n/t

[guyton]

12. if that's how mad-cow looked ...

... I'd still be eating beef :-)

[sandyj999]

13. Maybe she should go blond and get big boobs? She is fine just as she is.

[gtar100]

14. Oh how hate can distort perception.

They sound like insults from very immature kids. It would be interesting to see who they are actually coming from. Some very unhappy people, I would guess.

[seabeyond]

15. because a womans worth is in how she looks, not in what she does, or who she is

repeat it over enough and society will buy into it. including our girls. and certainly our boys.

fortunately, maddow is beyond that....

[William769]

16. Sad but true.

[Sparky 1]

45. That's exactly how they think. Well said. np

[redqueen]

49. Yes, and this attitude isn't only found on the right.

Far from it.

[ehrnst]

91. You bet. The "Hottie Mystique" replaced the Feminine Mystique.

The latest backlash against feminism. You can only be successful if you are hot.

[redqueen]

95. I don't know... I think brogressives still appreciate not-hot women...

but they just appreciate the hot ones more. And they are oh so generous in sharing their opinions on female hotness with us. Isn't that nice of them? It's good to be reminded of our place. Can't be thinking that being left means being aware of context or anything... hotness matters no matter what! Context be damned!

[ehrnst]

141. I remember 18 year old boys saying the same thing about Roseanne when her series came out.

The fact is - she didn't give a crap what they thought. Not about her looks, not about what she said - and she said it anyway.

Many are threatened by a woman that won't be put in her place, and the thing that puts so many women they know in their place is male disapproval of how they look.

[ehrnst]

142. self delete

[seabeyond]

152. Many are threatened by a woman that won't be put in her place

so very very true.

"the thing that puts so many women they know in their place is male disapproval of how they look."

and since girls are told from birth that it is their appearance that matters, in every way, shape and form in both words and play, when a women is very young, just embracing her sexuality, it is so important, the looks. as maturity happens, so many women are able to put it in its place. but teens and twenty, the woman just cannot figure it out yet. ah.... but when freedom comes.

then men really can no longer put woman in her place, regardless of efforts

[WinkyDink]

17. Because thoroughly ugly men can't abide the fact she will never be attracted to them.

[Warpy]

18. If you're female, that's just what you're going to get

because everybody knows if you're female, your looks are all you've got going for you.

:sarcasm:

[Fuzz]

19. Those people don't watch her show long enough to actually argue against a position she has taken.

[lindysalsagal]

123. They can't think fast enough to understand anything she's saying.

That's not a joke. They really can't.

[Warren DeMontague]

20. because her critics are generally drooling, low IQ morons who don't know any multi-syllable words?

Just a guess.

[DesertFlower]

21. Jesus H. Christ. rachel is a good looking

woman even when she's wearing her nerdy glasses.

[Papagoose]

22. Good Lord, she's beautiful...and much, much smarter than me.

and THAT is attractive!

[ejbr]

23. I can only imagine what those dweebs look like. n/t

[TNLib]

25. I think misogynist males that are somehow threatened by intelligent women

allways seem to attack the women's physical appearance.

[CTyankee]

28. Ain't noplace else to go, I guess...and that's a tip off to them, isn't it?

Heh...

[Warren DeMontague]

29. One of the things I think pisses RWers off about Maddow most is that she's not only smart, she's

pretty well-nigh unflappable, and she manages to do a good job of eviscerating GOP positions without coming off as angry, petty, or mean, i.e. stooping to their level. She's well informed and sharp as a fucking tack.

She really is one of the best voices in the media right now, bar none.

[Raine]

30. These are the people who think Ann Coulter & Sarah Palin are hot.

Rachel is much better off that they think she unattractive otherwise they would be either stalking her or "beating off" while watching her. x(

[ThoughtCriminal]

31. It's from people who think Ann Coulter is attractive

:shrug:

[Sparky 1]

48. Haha!

[MrMickeysMom]

51. This begs the question about Coulter's hate mail...

I can't be bothered writing hate mail, but I can't stomach Coulter.

Two seconds in, I could see Coulter as a trashy, phony, ugly person... honestly disgusted by her appearance and mannerism. Maddow is beautiful to me because of her affect, intellect, and appearance. I think my sexuality has nothing to do with it, my husband feels the same way.

Therefore, are 14% of the people who watch and listen to media that lame? Yeah....

[iris27]

130. Sadly, if DU is any indicator, a large part of Coulter's hate mail is probably devoted

to insinuations that she's transgendered.

[Codeine]

32. She's gorgeous.

Not to mention brilliant.

[Rob H.]

33. Those haters are fucking crazy

She's not only very physically attractive (I happen to love short hair on women), but she's also impossibly smart and that's really attractive.

[Ilsa]

34. She's lovely and brilliant and they are jealous. nt

[HipChick]

35. I think she is gorgeous and intelligent

[Swede]

36. I think Rachel is just too cool!

Haters gott a hate.

[Odin2005]

37. Bastards are just jealous of her brains and attractiveness.

[markpkessinger]

39. Rachel looks terrific ...

... so much so that I could possibly be convinced to switch teams (not that it would interest her, mind you!).

[morningglory]

40. Yah! I hate her! She's 1000 times prettier than me! nt

[Motown_Johnny]

41. I must admit I find this rather amusing

Ellen was dubbed "Ellen Degenerate" and now Rachel is dubbed "Rachel Mad-Cow". Personally I find her very attractive, but then I always liked strong smart women.

[Jakes Progress]

43. The good news is that only stupid people send you hate mail.

[athenasatanjesus]

44. Most right wing attacks on Hillary Clinton,and Nancy Pelosi are the same thing.

[Aristus]

46. Not a word yet about her drop-dead sexy voice.

Husky and low-pitched. Fantastically hot, just like the rest of her... :loveya:

[Arkana]

47. If that's the best they can do, they're losing their touch.

[FLAprogressive]

50. it's because they know they can't hold a candle to her intellectually.

[liberal_mama]

55. That's just awful.

I think Rachel is a beautiful woman.

[justiceischeap]

56. They hate her cause she has "teh gay"

That'd be my guess anyway. I mean, I'm sure they send shit like that cause she's liberal too but I think it's mostly cause she's gay.

I grew up around cows, and she, sir, is no cow.

[Vinca]

57. How nasty. What's wrong with her appearance?

In any case, in the wise words of Judge Judy, "Beauty fades, dumb is forever."

[itsallhappening]

63. I think it's because she's not very feminine.

The long neck and oddly-shaped nose don't help, either. I guess different people might have different reasons.

She kind of looks like actor Ralph Macchio.

[seabeyond]

64. you are pretty consistent in your posts. nt

[LanternWaste]

74. I imagine if you think she looks like a particular actor

I imagine if you think she looks like a particular actor, that's wholly on you rather than her, as I imagine we often see what we're predisposed to see, and fail to see those things which do not better validate our world-views.

[itsallhappening]

78. Maybe. I imagine that if you think

it's that's wholly on me rather than her, then your opinion is that's wholly on you rather than me, as I imagine we often see what we're predisposed to see, and fail to see those things which do not better validate our world-views.

Fancy way of saying: "Different people have different opinions."

Congrats!

[LanternWaste]

83. Not fancy. Although I imagine you may perceive it as such

Not fancy. Although I imagine you may perceive it as such while avoiding the relevant... :shrug:

[itsallhappening]

100. You're trying too hard.

[Vinca]

87. She many not be a frilly-girl type, but she sure as hell doesn't look like Ralph Macchio!

[ehrnst]

93. Feminine like a Fox Bleach brain fembot? Ever hear of Katherine Hepburn?

or Audrey Hepburn?

Look up Gamine.

Remember Rush talking about Chelsea being "the White House dog?"

[varelse]

127. Oh, grow up

Now, please

:eyes:

[BEZERKO]

135. Your comment is interesting...

You proved her point. Nearly all of the criticism of her is based on her appearance and not on substance.

It's interesting what you focus on.

You're trying to distract us from the point of this discussion.

[itsallhappening]

144. .....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=2178504&mesg_id=2184261

[quinnox]

59. She is sexy

I wouldn't call her pretty, but sexy. I like short hair on women.

[w8liftinglady]

62. Rachel is EXACTLY what I am atracted to.

I think she is very hot!

Of course,I guess an IQ greater than 80 is required to understand why....

[Zebedeo]

67. Well . . .

She does have that Cheneyesque snarl where half her mouth moves and the other half stays still.

She is kinda "butch." Some people like that. Some don't.

Personally, I don't care one way or the other about her looks. The main thing that annoys me about her is how she can't seem to get a sentence out without interrupting herself.

[bdamomma]

69. people are just plain nasty

Rachel is great.

[pipi_k]

70. So this is an example

of how wrong it is to focus on/attack someone because of his or her appearance.

No matter WHICH side does it.


I wonder how many here badmouthing those Rachel-bashers have done the very same bashing on their most hated Republican figures.

Michelle Bachmann's batshit crazy eyes.

Chris Christie's fat.

Rush Limbaugh's resemblance to a pig.


IMO, anybody who has done that has no business being all outraged now over what some RW imbeciles said about Rachel Maddow's appearance.

Double standards suck.

[Puzzledtraveller]

71. I think they are all attractive

Rachel, Greta, and many other women in cable news. I don't care what their politics are, they are humans and they are all beautiful.

[ErikJ]

75. Like schoolyard Bullies

I debate these idiots all the time. They do it with every liberal woman. You should see what they say about "Moochelle" as they call her Obama. Or Susan Wasserman Schultz.

They obviously have not matured or developed since their schoolyard bully days.

[truebrit71]

79. Look, I know she bats for the other team, but I find her very attractive...

...but then I have always found outspoken, intelligent women to be quite the turn-on....

[yellowcanine]

80. “You’re Rachel Mad-cow, ‘cause you look like a cow,” Wow. What a zinger.

For a third grader maybe.

[Javaman]

84. Never understood why a tv reporter needs to "look good".

just give the damn news without the candy bullshit.

[ehrnst]

90. Because we are not in a post-feminist era, we're in a backlash.

You can be a success if you're a woman, but only if you're hot.

[itsallhappening]

101. How many nights would you tune in to watch this guy's "news" show?

A bit extreme? Sure. But you have to admit that nobody wants to see that face night after night. So what we're really arguing here is "how good" a person has to look, which is completely subjective, but we all do it.

[Javaman]

104. I don't watch tv news.

I find it nothing but pedantic bullshit covered in glitter.

[itsallhappening]

115. Uh huh...

[Javaman]

116. ohhhh blistering come back.

You hurt me with your razor sharp wit.

I listen to rachel on my podcast.

anything else I get off the net.

I know, you find it hard to believe that someone can actually pry themselves away from the stupid box, because you can't.

[itsallhappening]

121. Not a "come-back." Just responding to your unwillingness

to answer the question I asked.

Don't worry. I know why you didn't answer it.

[Javaman]

139. Logic is not your strong point, is it?

I don't watch tv. So therefore, it matters not what someone looks like. I think that answers your question.

And it seems as if you are easily swayed by pretty pictures and over made up tv bobble heads. Usually a sign of someone who has trouble deciding what is good or bad news, if you require some over made up spokes model to feed you your marching orders.

try breathing through your nose, it's all the rage.

[itsallhappening]

145. Keep dodging.

Your refusal to answer the question says it all.

[Javaman]

147. what are you talking about?

I have answered your question, you just didn't like the answer.

I don't watch tv. How many different ways do I need to explain that to you before it actually sinks into your brain?

It's becoming glaringly apparent that your issue is not that you think I didn't answer your question, but you can't wrap your brain around the fact that I don't watch TV.

your odd sense of trying to feel some sort of moral superiority is fascinating.

there are much bigger issues out there than trying to defend, in your mind, the "pretty" and disgrace the unattractive.

You have a very odd sense of priorities, if this is an issue you feel passionate about, I suggest working for entertainment tonight.

on edit: (in your own words) "I guess you could say I'd rather be manipulated on a sexual level than on an intellectual one."

we are done.

[itsallhappening]

149. I'll make this really simple for you.

You said: "Never understood why a tv reporter needs to "look good"."

I attempted to assist you in understanding it by posting the picture and pointing out that the only real debate is about how good someone has to look, and that it's subjective.

You answered with the non sequitur: "I don't watch TV."

Listen, I know why you don't want to answer the question. We all do. So, nice try, but it's not working.

And, yes, I would much rather be manipulated on a sexual level than an intellectual one. Sounds like you'd prefer the other way around. Fine, that's your right.

[Javaman]

153. again, if I don't watch tv then I don't have a horse in your race.

you seem to be unable to comprehend that.

yet you state yourself that sex in tv is what makes you pay attention.

I, on the other hand, choose not to be manipulated either by sex nor by "intellect" (as if those are the only two choices), I decide for myself.

And while you try to put words in my mouth and fail miserably at it, I will state once again, I get my news from the net and decide for myself, rather than have some overpaid moron, over made up tool who regurgitates talking points decide how I am to think.

You seem unable to comprehend that people don't have the same opinion or belief system as yours and that just eats at you.

I don't watch tv for a reason and that reason is completely highlighted by your odd opinions.

I still have zero idea what you are after. what that mysterious answer you claim to think I have or believe I have, baffles me.

I love the know-it-all-types, such as yourself, who claim to know exactly what I'm thinking and how I feel. While I completely know what you are thinking when you claim that sex is your motivator to believing propaganda.

you are an odd person and frankly, pretty damn shallow.

[itsallhappening]

160. I understand that you're baffled.

You raised an issue about why looks matter, implying that they shouldn't.

You can't admit that they do and should, so you're twisting yourself up like a pretzel trying to muddy the waters.

Think before you post.

[Javaman]

168. No, I stated that they don't matter to me.

you are the one that is implying everything else.

we are done.

You have nothing.

and as I stated up thread, you may now have the last word, because in your odd little world, that really means something to you.

Cheers!

[Quantess]

111. Rachel Maddow is more than just a typical reporter,although I do see your point.

There are people who just spew the events of the day, and in my opinion, they should be attractive, whether male or female. At least, get a few good looking men in there to make it fair. I am not impressed when a channel has young "hottie" women, but unattractive men doing the same job. I am thinking to myself, why can't I get the same viewing satisfaction that the male viewers are probably getting? No, I actually would rather see a good looking guy be the talking head, instead of a saggy-jowled old man sharing the screen with a 23 year old woman. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, as the saying goes.

But I agree, Rachel Maddow, and other anchors who are more independent and substantive, deserve to be judged on their work.

LOL, that was more rant than you asked for!

[hamsterjill]

85. I think she's fine.

I think her haircut is just adorable on her. She's obviously very smart and very well-informed. Her overall dress is professional and appropriate for her job. I do, though, get tired of seeing her in gray most of the time. And that's very shallow of me, I admit. That does not stop me from watching her show and being better informed politically because of that.

[ehrnst]

88. Conservatives like women who spackle on Mary Kay & Aquanet and talk like they've

been living on diet pills for a month.

They can't understand why such a creature such as Rachel would be allowed on television.

[JohnnyRingo]

89. Because that's what Hannity and Limbaugh focus on.

These people have never seen her show, and just get angry enough after a couple hours of AM radio to send her an email that parrots what they just heard. There has to be something in the squealing static of amplitude modulation that hypnotizes listeners.

[mimitabby]

102. and i thought she was cute as a bug!

some people have no taste.

[Divine Discontent]

106. Of course! THEY never can argue facts, and THEY are jealous she's a strong person about who she is!

Get it here now, or one of a million other designs! http://www.zazzle.com/republicans_2012_keeping_millions_out_of_work_bumper_sticker-128659602907896843?rf=238107662556833486

[Major Hogwash]

110. For Halloween, she should dress up as an ugly old witch.

Since that is what the rightwingers think of her anyway.

She should get a really long nose, like Little Witchy used to wear in H.R. Puffenstuff, and a big pointed hat, like the one the Wicked Witch of the West had in the Wizard of Oz, and a broomstick and do her Halloween show totally campy that way.

And then cackle like a crazed lunatic stirring over a brewing black kettle whenever she mentions the tea party, like she is stirring up some special "tea" for the tea party members.

[Joey Liberal]

117. I think she's hot

Love the nerd glasses. I wear them too. I don't care if she's a lesbian. She's hot and I love her show.

[iris27]

131. Not surprising. She's a woman who has dared to show her face on TV without being dyed, starved,

coiffed, tanned, waxed, plucked, and sprayed within an inch of her life.

Personally? I think she is HOT.

[Firebrand Gary]

136. I hope she promoted the film Miss Representation that she was recently in.

Every person really should see the film.

[Phentex]

138. Especially the people in this thread!...

Wasn't that a great documentary? I was angered and saddened and hopeful all at the same time.

[redqueen]

151. I agree... everyone should see it. (nt)

[Delphinus]

137. So glad to have seen this.

Had not heard of the film.

[amb123]

140. Yeah, all them thinkin' wimmin are ugly!

Major League :sarcasm:!!!

[ehrnst]

143. That's how those men usually put women 'in their place' - slam their looks or feminity. (nt)

[66 dmhlt]

148. One more thing right-wing hate-mongers are WRONG about ...

[Name removed]

155. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ecstatic]

156. ??

??

[ecstatic]

158. That means she's doing a good job.

Clearly, the people commenting on her looks are not intelligent enough to listen to the actual show and judge based on content. I don't watch prime time political shows that much, but from what I've seen of her show, I think she is so smart, fair, and funny. I don't always agree with her, but I love her delivery, the props she uses, etc.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

162. The haters have no facts.

So they sling ad feminem attacks.

(Yes I took two years of Latin in high school) :D

[opihimoimoi]

163. BULLY TALK....its what they do when frustrated,,,attack with insults

They are Losing and BULLIES hate to lose...so they pout shout insults...we see that all the t5ime from Bullies

[defendandprotect]

165. The aggression of the RW -- unbelievable!! Could it have something to do with her

being a homosexual? ??????????????????

And I can certainly picture how beautiful the criticizers are -- !!! ROFL