Wednesday, December 24, 2008

Glass Houses And Rachel Maddow

I normally enjoy the "Rachel Maddow Show" on MSNBC and evidently I am not alone. Rachel Maddow's show has already surpassed CNN's offering of "Larry King Live" and has held her own against FoxNews' "Hannity and Colmes" in terms of ratings of the key 25-54 demographic. But since the announcement that Rick Warren would be giving the invocation for President Elect Barack Obama's inauguration, she has taken time out of every show to attack Obama for inviting him. Now I understand that this is actually a personal issue for Ms Maddow because she herself is gay, but she is also a television host and it seems she is personalizing a news story quite a bit too much for my liking. Evidently she sees Obama inviting Rick Warren to do the invocation as an unforgivable sin because in her world that honor is furthering Rick Warren's agenda. But I have a question for Rachel Maddow, using your own purity test, what does that say about you having Patrick J. Buchanan on your show repeatedly? Is not he as bad or worse than Rick Warren on the subject of homosexuality and gay marriage? And doesn't your willingness to allow him to come on your highly rated show legitimize his feelings? To refresh your memory lets take a look back on some of the things Pat Buchanan has said about gay marriage and homosexuality.

First direct quotes from when Pat Buchanan was running for President 8 short years ago:

Buchanan has said that AIDS is nature’s “retribution against homosexuals.”

“If someone is an out-of-the-closet homosexual and if someone advocates the homosexual rights agenda publicly they’re not going to be in my Cabinet. I believe that homosexuality is a disorder. It’s a wrong orientation.”

“Rampant homosexuality, a sign of cultural decadence and moral decline from Rome to Weimar, is celebrated, as our first lady parades up Fifth Avenue to share her ‘pride’ in a lifestyle ruinous to body and soul alike.” He condemned the Democratic Party for ignoring the “moral crisis” and the GOP for seeking “peace” with gay groups.

I think civil unions are absurd. They passed these up in Vermont where homosexual couples have been put on the same level as traditional marriage. And I’m delighted to say that five Republicans that voted for that were defeated and thrown out in the primary. If this country accepts the idea that homosexual liaisons are the same as traditional marriage, which is a God-ordained building block of society, this country is on the road to hell in a handbasket.

Q: Mr. Buchanan mentioned before that he has not embraced the gay rights agenda in its entirety.

A: I don’t apologize for my views with regards to gay rights. I oppose the gay rights agenda in its entirety. I was saying that tongue-in-cheek. Third, I did say that AIDS is in effect what happens to people as a consequence of unnatural and immoral sex. And, as you know, homosexual conduct is the primary--or was the primary way by which AIDS was spread. It was a truthful statement.

And this is all from the person whom you affectionately refer to as "Uncle Pat" and allow to be seen as a serious person on your show.

I know what you are thinking, that was so long ago and Uncle Pat has changed. Well lets look at some more recent insight from Mr. Buchanan.

What about when he vehemently argued against the decision by justices to overturn a ban on gay marriage in California?

What about when he blogged on town hall and compared the fight against gay marriage to "Shays Rebellion"?

And yet another quote about how he sees homosexuality.

"To some of us, homosexuality is an affliction, like alcoholism, and hellishly difficult to control."

Hell lets watch him advocate forcefully against gay marriage yesterday on another MSNBC show.

So Ms. Maddow are you going to ban "Uncle Pat" from coming back on your show? Or are you going to show the hypocrisy of your attacks on President Elect Obama and welcome him back with open arms while still throwing Obama under the bus? Of course there is a third option. You could cut Obama the same kind of slack that you would want afforded you in this situation. The ball is squarely in your court. It will be interesting to see which way she goes on this.

(h/t Coates)


  1. No doubt....I concur 100%. She has moved to Tivo material since the Warren announcement. Thats not a good sign, considering I am a fan. The only regret I have is that she will more than likely not receive any pushback due to the prickly nature of the subject matter. I thought it was brilliant by Obama from a political standpoint. As a brother raised in the church, you can be late for the invocation, but you cannot walk out on the benediction. Rev Lowery has the most important part.

  2. The truth is that both Maddow and Olberman have shows that hardly ever have dissenting voices on. Don't get me wrong, I think that Maddow actually reaches out to the other side and invites them on the show but gets rejected many times but somehow I doubt she will be inviting anybody on to discuss the Rick Warren issue that might stand up to her. Notice that you haven't seen "Uncle Pat" on to talk about that, and I don't think you ever will.

    I understand that its personal for her but she is trying to make it seem like the majority of Americans feel the way she does and with the new CNN poll showing Obama with an 82% approval rating I think its obvious the majority does not agree with her. She even refers to Obama having Rick Warren on program as a "scandal". Funny that she was earnest on her pushback against the quilty by association charges leveled at Obama wrt Rev Wright, but then again Rev Wright wasn't singling out homosexuals or gay marriage.

    I am hoping someone taps her on the shoulder and gets her to let it go because I do like her show. If not her ratings are going to fall off of a cliff and then MSNBC will go right back to the drawing board trying to compete with FoxNews

  3. Well sg, I urge you to address your complaint to her show at They seem to listen to complaints. I think it's fine to play that bit once or twice, but it gets old, I agree with you.

    As far as having dissenting voices, I disagree with you about the Maddow show. She tries, she invites them, but a lot of the Repubs won't go on her show, because she is too well-prepared and doesn't let them blather on. but she's had Eric Cantor on and of course he ended up looking like the screwball fool that he is. The Repubs don't really have any arguments that make sense, and it shows when there isn't that split screen format with the air-headed anchor who pretends not to know anything that let them just repeat their nonsense talking points while the other person tries to get a word in edgewise. That format is so 1990's, but it's the only way the Repubs can get their message out, and they are happy to go on CNN because they get away with it.

    One thing about MADDOW show, she has some interesting people on. Like journos that are not your average Roladex face-time grabbers, she gets the ones that are actually working on the story. And she gets not-run-of-the-mill politicians, like the speaker of the Illinois Senate for example. She gets people on who actually know something about the story. So you've got to give her that.

  4. James LA

    You and I actually agree. Reread the second paragraph of my comment above. I know she tries to get Repubs on most of the time, however I do not thing she is trying hard if at all to get any repubs on with regards to this subject. The proof is in the pudding because Pat Buchanan has never changed one iota on his views on gay marriage and she has him on for any other subject but all of a sudden you don't see his face? If she ever wanted a Repub to spar with over Rick Warren I would venture to say that Buchanan would VOLUNTEER for the job.

  5. Yeah, probably you are right she doesn't want to hear dissenting voices on this subject. Hey, everyone has their rant, ya know. More reason for you to write in and give your opinion. It would be great if she'd get the man hisself on. Maybe she's tried. Maybe Unca Pat doesn't want to talk about it on her show. Who knows what goes on behind the scenes, is all I'm sayin'.

  6. That word verification thang is burdensome, bro.'


Come Hard Or Not At All!