LEADERSHIP DOWN: Corporate cable star's recent adventures!


With decades of self-defeat:
Precisely one week after April Fools Day, Rachel Maddow started her high-rated "cable news" show in the way she seems to like best—by talking about herself.

Maddow was also "selling the car" this night. She was "humble-bragging" in such a way as to help her roughly four million viewers learn how to adore her more fully.

Cable news bluster has been a fact of American life for at least three decades now. For those of us in the liberal world, the phenomenon has become a major part of the sociological phenomenon now known as "Leadership Down."

Maddow started her April 8 program in the self-referential way her viewers may even enjoy. In a bizarre profile of Maddow for The New Yorker, Janet Malcolm once referred to this sort of thing, gushingly, as Maddow's "performance of the Rachel figure."

Incredibly, Malcolm voiced approval of this silly performance art. On the recent evening in question, the performance started like this:
CHRIS HAYES (4/8/19): That is All In for this evening. The Rachel Maddow Show starts right now. Good evening, Rachel!

MADDOW: Good evening, Chris. Thanks, my friend.

HAYES: You bet

MADDOW: And thanks to you at home for joining us this hour.

Two years ago, in the early weeks of the Trump administration, the spring of 2017, the New Yorker magazine published a story about the new president's business history. And it was a story that was almost too much to believe.
So far, almost so good! Unfortunately, this was a Monday evening. Maddow had had an entire weekend to think about the various attributes and traits found within herself.

Result? As cable news stars have learned to do, she veered off the path of traditional "news." Instead, she encouraged viewers to think about one of her endearing traits. Viewers were now in The Mickey Mouse Club, and Maddow turned into Annette.

For the cultural background, just click here. Rachel continued as follows:
MADDOW (continuing directly): And if you know me from this show, if you have seen this show before, you may know that one of the things that makes me not awesome at this job is that I'm kind of a prude.

I am—I am easily embarrassed. I blush and stutter and get tongue-tied when I am confronted with things that make me uncomfortable on TV, and a lot of things. it turns out, make me uncomfortable on TV.

Anyway, you're probably aware of that about me and my failures as a TV host.
To watch this pure bullsh*t, click here.

This is the part of the Maddow Show colloquially known as the "I I I I I I I Block," according to victims familiar. Right out of the gate, Maddow was talking about herself—and she was humble-bragging.

Readers, poor Rachel Maddow! Because she's such a hopeless prude, a welter of things make her embarrassed, she likes to claim, and therefore uncomfortable on TV.

On this particular evening, Rache was open and honest enough to admit that this is "one of the things that makes [her] not awesome" at her job as a TV host. This familiar type of nonsense is supposed to read as modesty.

In fact, this familiar type of humble-bragging is deigned to make us feel that the emotionally hapless Rachel needs and deserves our love, our support and our understanding, and most of all our help. Or so we're told by industry insiders familiar.

As every Maddow viewer knows, Maddow frequently plays this "I'm embarrassed by sexuality" card. Generally, she does this while going a million miles out of her way to clog her program with silly, gratuitous, dare-we-say-stupid insertions of utterly pointless sexual imagery into the evening's frolick.

On this particular evening, she wouldn't be playing the telephone tape in which Governor Bentley tells his girl friend that he loves touching certain embarrassing parts of her body. (It's a tape she played again and again while covering her ears and closing her eyes to show us that she was embarrassed, indeed a virtual child.)

She wouldn't be watching Ana Marie Cox drop "tea-bagger" dick jokes on the heads of early Tea Party members. (At one point, she did this night after night, constantly saying how embarrassed she was by her guest's double entendres.)

On this night, Maddow the Prude would be embarrassed by a photograph of a hotel in darkest Azerbaijan. She returned to that two-year-old New Yorker report—and to one of the ways her life as a prude ends up making her good at her job:
MADDOW (continuing directly): Anyway, you`re probably aware of that about me and my failures as a TV host. That said, I also think that gives me a little bit of an insight into why some things take off and others don't.

I will tell you, ever since that New Yorker piece was published in March of 2017, that unbelievable article in the New Yorker, I have truly believed, as a prude, that part of the reason it didn't take off, part of the reason it didn't become one of the things that everybody knows about Donald Trump's business history and his potentially serious trouble in that business history, I think one of the reasons that story has stayed kind of obscure instead of becoming part of a, you know, Trump legal trouble pantheon that everybody talks about, I think part of the trouble with that one is because this is what that hotel looks like that is the subject of that business story in the New Yorker from two years ago.


And honestly, I mean, it's just—


I think this is part of it.
A photograph of a large hotel now appeared on the screen. As she continued, Maddow explained that the photo couldn't be shown on daytime TV—and her embarrassment continued.

Ridiculously, Maddow now claimed that the two-year-old New Yorker report never took off because other journalists were too embarrassed by that photograph to discuss the report. Nonsense like this is standard fare on The Maddow Show, a corporate program deeply involved in the destructive phenomenon known as Leadership Down:
MADDOW (continuing directly): I know we're safe to put this on TV right now because it'S 9 PM Eastern or whatever. But would you even be allowed to put this picture up like on a morning news show, or dayside?

Why did they build it to look like this?
What did the people of Baku, Azerbaijan, think about this building in their midst? But this resplendent Georgia O'Keefe homage is the Trump Tower Baku.

Or it was, at least. It never actually opened.

Incidentally, I can actually show you what it looks like on fire. There's actually a bunch of pictures of it on fire, since there are precisely two things this Trump Tower Baku is known for.

One of them is it catching fire last year as it sat empty and unfinished. The other thing it is known for, to the extent that it's known at all, is that gobsmacking reporting that the New Yorker ran about it in 2017, which everyone then promptly filed away, never to talk about in polite company ever again. How could you?

That New Yorker story was the story of the Trump Organization, the president`s business, developing this would-be orchid-shaped Trump luxury tower in a random corner of Baku, Azerbaijan...
In short, Maddow thinks the orchid-shaped O'Keefe homage looks like the female sexual organ. Inanely, she burned the opening three minutes of her show with this lively blend of self-serving self-reference, feigned personal embarrassment and sexual super-stupidity.

The corporate star pretended to think that the New Yorker report went down the memory hole because other journalists were too embarrassed to discuss a building project which ended up looking like somebody's you-know-what! Tomorrow, we'll let you know what Susan said back in 2017 when she caught Rachel reading that article!

At any rate, how could journalists talk about that embarrassing New Yorker report? That was the silly/faux orchid-shaped question this corporate idiot asked.

Some will say that this manifest nonsense was just three entertaining minutes off the top of an hour-long variety show. Others will say that Maddow's "selling of the car" is an important part of the marketing of a major corporate star.

We'd say this type of bogus, self-referential clatter helps define the decades-old problem now known as Leadership Down.

According to Future Anthropologists Huddled in Caves (TM), what is Leadership Down? On cable, it's a problem which has stalked liberal, progressive and Democratic Party interests since the time when Chris Matthews spent a decade calling Hillary Clinton "Nurse Ratched" and "Evita Person" while saying how "witchy" she was.

Matthews spent roughly a decade trashing Clinton that way. During that same era, he spent several years trashing Candidate Gore as "today's man-woman" and as "Albert the waiter" while working extremely hard to send George W, Bush to the White House.

In fairness, some of Candidate Gore's suits featured suit jackets with three buttons instead of just two. Matthews psychoanalyzed that fashion matter for weeks. Along the way, he pleased his owner, GE CEO Jack Welch, with throw-away comments like these:
Chris Matthews on Hillary Clinton: "I hate her. I hate her. I hate everything she stands for."

Chris Matthews on Al Gore:
"He doesn’t look like one of us. He doesn’t seem very American, even."
In short, back when Hardball was more influential, Matthews was a prime example of "Donald J. Trump before Trump."

The liberal world just sat there and took it. Today, Maddow says that her dear friend, Chris Matthews, is the best analyst around!

Maddow's clowning about O'Keefe in Baku was one small recent episode. In the weeks since she sold the car that way, she has also done this:

She has spent ten minutes attempting to revive the idea that there really is a videotape of Donald J. Trump soiling that bed with those Moscow sex persons.

She has spent an entire program pretending to re-discuss the Bridgegate matter, the episode she beat to death while trying to send Governor Christie to jail.

(In that recent presentation, she staged the most incompetent interview of all time, failing to ask the most obvious questions of pitiful alleged victim Bridget Kelly, whose story makes little sense.)

On April 18, she even told Andrew McCabe that it was "an honor" to interview him. We're so old that we can remember her program of May 10, 2017, when she staged one of her crazy nervous breakdowns, devoting the first twenty minutes of her program to this hysterical claim:
MADDOW SITE (5/10/17): New Acting Director of the FBI Andrew McCabe improperly discussed the investigation into the Trump campaign's ties to Russia with Reince Priebus and became part of the Trump disinformation campaign.
Her reporting that night made no earthly sense. We'll only say that, if McCabe "became part of the Trump disinformation campaign," it looks like someone forgot to tell the Trump campaign about it!

How in the world did Donald Trump ever end up in the White House? Decades of crazy attacks on Hillary Clinton played a key role in that matter. No one played that card in an uglier way than MSNBC's Matthews, who is today an integral part of the "corporate pseudo-liberal malinformation machine."

Ugly attacks on Candidate Clinton helped elect Candidate Trump. So did the way The Maddow Show took the side of Comey the God when he launched his initial attack on Candidate Clinton in July 2016.

As liberals, we rarely hear about such matters. Tomorrow, we'll highlight that awkward point as we stave off embarrassment long enough to continue with Leadership Down.

Tomorrow: These (journalist) kids today!


  1. Mark this down as the day Somerby displayed his homophobia by characterizing Maddow's occasional appeal to her lesbian audience as a personality disorder.

    And why go out of his way to malign Annette? Maddow is actually more like Darlene Gillespie among the Mousketeers, but what did Annette ever do to anyone to deserve being used as a symbol of wrongness on TV?

    If anyone is to blame for insufficiently defending Clinton, it is Somerby. I'd love to have seen people everywhere stick up for her against Trump and the conservative slurs, but no one did except her actual supporters, so why single out Maddow?

    I'm beginning to suspect that Somerby cannot stand the times when she introduces her personality into her show because her gayness makes him nauseous, which is homophobia. Annette displayed the more traditional kind of feminine attractiveness, but that isn't OK with Somerby either. Did I mention that he seems ambivalent and troubled about women in general? Here, he reveals his own issues again and the sight isn't pretty.

    1. Baku seems like an interesting city, it has an enjoyable aesthetic. It is one of my favorite grand prix's on the Formula One schedule, way better than Monaco - both visually, and in providing the ability to pass. Unfortunately F1 has yet to solve the problem of inequality, leading to predictable outcomes - Mercedes has won every race and the best driver has left the series.

    2. Mark this down as the day Somerby displayed his homophobia by characterizing Maddow's occasional appeal to her lesbian audience as a personality disorder.

      RM is gay and out, but you’re the only one talking about lesbians. After an April ratings drop, Maddow recently posted a top-watched performance with about 3M viewers. Presumably, most of those watching liked what they saw independent of their sex or orientation.

      And why go out of his way to malign Annette? … [W]hat did Annette ever do to anyone to deserve being used as a symbol of wrongness on TV?

      What makes you think that TDH is slamming Annette? TDH’s link takes us to a YouTube video of Annette’s origin story. I’m afraid the parallel is lost on me, unless it’s to imply that RM’s faux prudery is as fake as Annette’s sweetly naive and wholesome persona. But Annette’s presentation is neither the fault of Annette MacLeod nor Annette Funicello.

      If Somerby has any animus toward Annette, it must be because of the serial’s third episode, “Annette and the Tractatus Logico Philosophicus,” wherein Annette defends Wittgenstein down at the malt shop.

      WARNING: TV past is so white, you gotta wear shades. Preferably the kind for viewing solar eclipses. The linked-to episode aired in February 1958; the Little Rock crisis was less than six months old. You’d never know it from the MMC. The school Annette will be attending is — I kid you not — Old South High.

      If anyone is to blame for insufficiently defending Clinton, it is Somerby. I'd love to have seen people everywhere stick up for her against Trump and the conservative slurs, but no one did except her actual supporters, so why single out Maddow?

      Because Maddow’s insufferable phoniness is such a wasted opportunity.

      I'm beginning to suspect that Somerby cannot stand the times when she introduces her personality into her show because her gayness makes him nauseous, which is homophobia.

      You probably mean nauseated, but it’s clear that TDH objects to the waste of time and the phoniness of RM’s insertion of herself into her show. I haven’t watched RM since she fumbled the Bridgegate coverage, but as I recall when she talks about herself, she doesn’t mention her sexuality. Why are you?

      Annette displayed the more traditional kind of feminine attractiveness, but that isn't OK with Somerby either. Did I mention that he seems ambivalent and troubled about women in general? Here, he reveals his own issues again and the sight isn't pretty.

      Where does TDH complain about Annette’s “feminine attractiveness”? The only person revealing personal issues here is you.

    3. @5:47

      TDH never needs defending but this rather exhaustive defense over a remarkably trivial matter is....hilarious, thank you!

    4. Deadrat, why mention Annette at all? She was pretty innocuous. Not at all like Rachel. Your rundown sounds like you never watched the show, but we can't all be in our 70s I guess.

    5. @8:32,

      "@5:47"? I comment with a nym. You may use it.

      I'm glad you enjoyed my comment. Vivo ut serviam

    6. @10:45,

      My "rundown"? A quick check: you did realize that the comment about Wittgenstein wasn't to be taken seriously, right?

      If you'd actually read my "rundown," you'd have realized that I don't understand what parallel TDH finds between Maddow and Annette. They're both fairly innocuous, though -- Annette by design and Maddow through her narcissism.

      I did watch the show when it aired. I'm not in my 70s, but not by much.

    7. Hello viewers around the Globe, I was despondent because i had a very small penis, about 2.5 inches soft and 4 inches hard not nice enough to satisfy a woman, i have been in so many relationship, but cut off because of my situation, i have used so many product which doctors for me, but none could offer me the help i searched for. i saw some few comments on the INTERNET about this specialist called Dr,OLU and decided to contact him on his email: Drolusolutinthome@gmail.com) so I decided to give his herbal product a try. i emailed him and he got back to me, he gave me some comforting words with his herbal pills for Penis Enlargement, Within 3 week of it, i began to feel the enlargement was surprised when she said that she is satisfied with my sex and i have got a large penis. Am so happy, thanks to Dr OLU I also learn that Dr OLU also help with Breast Enlargement Hips and Bums Enlargement etc.. If you are in any situation with a little Penis, weak ejaculation, small breast_hips_bums do get to Dr OLU now for help on his email (Drolusolutionhome@gmail.com) or add him on whatsapp line +2348140654426

  2. “her roughly four million viewers”

    Her viewership for April was more like 2.63 million on average, but in Somerby’s universe, that’s “roughly four million.”

  3. "Ugly attacks on Candidate Clinton helped elect Candidate Trump."

    Poor psycho-witch. Turns out her coronation plans, with orchestrated interviews and debates, all the dirty work done by the DNC, and nauseating lovefest in the establishment media, were imperfect after all.

    Stay strong, dear Bob, I'm grieving with you. But we will overcome.

  4. Yesterday, several of the Republican senators tried to distract the committee by asking Barr about investigations of Clinton's ties with Russians, the missing emails and her destruction of her server, and the implication that Clinton was behind the witch hunt against Trump. Clinton is the scapegoat and distraction for Republicans.

    Did Somerby devote today's column to analyzing this and decrying the continuing attacks on Clinton? Did he defend her today? Did he say a word about yesterday's horrible performance by Barr? Does he even care about it?

    Somerby clearly thinks it is more important to attack Maddow than to worry about anything happening to Trump or our government. It is another distraction, look over here at Maddow, to defend Trump and Barr from the real discussion that should be taking place after yesterday's hearing. Once again, Somerby serves the interests of Trump and not those of liberals.

    Is Chris Matthews a liberal? According to Wikipedia: "Matthews is a moderate Democrat who has supported Republicans before and said that he is "more conservative than people think I am." However, Matthews has been a long time supporter of Barack Obama." His brother is a Republican politician. Why should Somerby expect anything of Chris Matthews?

    On the other hand, Somerby himself claims to be liberal. But he doesn't behave like a liberal. I think he is lying about his political affiliation and working hard on behalf of Trump, perhaps for money. Based on his behavior, he doesn't support any liberal causes or interests or politicians, except Al Gore, who was his college roommate. He is a wolf in sheep's clothing and he needs to stop pretending to be liberal when he clearly is not.

    1. What's is even more scary is that Barr refused to even answer the question if the prez had asked him to investigate any specific persons.

      "Has the president or anyone at the White House ever asked or suggested that you open an investigation of anyone?"

      Barr stumbled for a second, asked Harris to repeat the question, and then said he was "trying to grapple with the word 'suggest.'"

      So Harris provided a few synonyms — and Barr still didn't quite give an answer.

      Things are going to get a lot darker as 2020 election gets closer and closer.

    2. Harris was excellent with Barr:

      Kamala Harris grills AG Barr during Senate hearing

      Dark things, yes, Trump and company are drooling over the prospect of invading Venezuela and causing more civilian deaths than their immoral sanctions have already resulted in.

      Somerby has dementia.

    3. Notice the cleverness of the Russian programmer's code here which has the bot at 1:15 PM misdirecting, with its half-truths, the thirty likely voters, who are Howler thread readers, away from the fact that Somerby is Putin's agent, e.g.:

      I think he is lying about his political affiliation and working hard on behalf of Trump, perhaps for money.

      Yeah sure, that's what 1:15 PM "thinks."

    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    5. 4:33 PM writes,

      Trump and company are drooling over the prospect of invading Venezuela and causing more civilian deaths than their immoral sanctions have already resulted in.

      Just to expand on what the "and company" droolers think:

      Here's Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY):

      2/13/2019 For too long, the people of Venezuela have suffered a manufactured crisis at the hands of a cruel and corrupt regime. Nicolás Maduro’s effort to block the delivery of desperately needed food and medicine is despicable and should be broadly condemned by leaders across the globe.

      It is time for the entire international community to come together to support Interim President Juan Guaidó and the Venezuelan people in their efforts to restore democracy. Democracies across the ideological spectrum and the leadership at the Organization of American States have sent a clear message – new elections and a return to the rule of law are the only way to end Venezuela’s long nightmare.

      Rather than resorting to reckless bluster, the Trump administration must ensure our closest international partners match our economic sanctions and join the effort to provide humanitarian aid.

      Wouldn't want Trump to confine himself to just bluster at this perilous time, would we? Here's Speaker Pelosi (D-CA):

      2/8/2019 I support the decision of the National Assembly, Venezuela’s sole remaining democratic institution, to recognize Juan Guaidó, President of the National Assembly, as the Interim President until full, fair and free elections can be held. The United States must respect legitimate democratic processes, and support the right of the people of Venezuela to protest and defend their human rights.

      Nicolas Maduro’s regime of repression and impoverishment for his personal enrichment continues to gravely violate human rights, and must be condemned swiftly by the full international community. His recent decision to block bridges and cut off channels of food and supplies imperils the health and futures of the Venezuelan people, and must be immediately reversed.

      During this perilous time, the United States must support the people of Venezuela.

      Here's the latest from the peace loving Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL):

      4/30/2019 I urge Maduro to do the right thing for Venezuela, to avoid bloodshed, to accept Guaidó’s amnesty offer, and to step out of the way of this long overdue transition and return to democracy,” Durbin said. “Until then, I support President Guaidó’s peaceful effort to advance the constitutional transition period in which a credible and timely election can be prepared under his leadership. Mr. Guaidó is literally putting his life on the line for the future of his country.

    6. CMike, Trump wants to send troops. None of the Democrats you quoted are saying anything like that.

    7. None of the Democrats are helping to launch the "rescue narrative" which has been used since McKinley's day justify overt and covert American imperial intervention both in far away lands and in the not so far away lands of the Caribbean Basin? Wake up.

      On War, by U.S General Smedley Butler (1933)

      I spent thirty-three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country's most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high class muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall Street and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.

      I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service.

      I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested.

    8. Thanks Cmike, those quotes are indefensible. One hopes they are part of some ploy with better intentions than what they nominally indicate.

      Dem Ilhan Omar has a good stance on Venezuela, let's see if she can provide guidance and leadership for her fellow members of Congress.

      Unfortunately even Bernie Sanders is not great on foreign affairs:

      Blood Traces: Bernie’s Iraq War Hypocrisy

      Loophole in Bernie Sanders’ Yemen Bill Actually Allows Continued US Involvement in Yemen

      Smedley Butler was a woke badass.

    9. America didn't create the real problems in Venezuela. Acknowledging that those problems exist is not necessarily preparing for an American invasion. To assume that strikes me as a tad paranoid. Perhaps you should have quoted various candidate stances on the Saudis too -- or does that not fit your argument?

    10. Thanks for the sanity 9:37 PM. For the record, I think I could make a stronger critical case against Sanders' foreign policy inclinations than are made at the links you left.

      As far as the loophole warning, our national security state apparatus has found ways around seemingly air-tight legal injunctions in the past. To say the Sanders bill was flawed because it would allow the US to continue to target Sunni extremists specifically in Yemen, be they in what's left of the original bin Laden/Zawahiri Al-Qaeda organization, or its off-shoots like Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and ISIS, when we are committed to fighting anyone so designated world-wide is a bit unfair.

      The Saudis are fighting Shia in Yemen. If a law that forbade US support of the Saudis in Yeman were to be circumvented by exceptions that allowed the US to go after Sunni extremists then no matter what the law said, it would turn out that the American national security military industrial complex was hell-bent on defying it, anyway.

    11. This comment has been removed by the author.

    12. 10:44 PM,

      4:33 PM brought up Venezuela, that's who you should be complaining to for not posting on the subject you wanted discussed.

      Perhaps you should have quoted various candidate stances on the Saudis, too.

      Huh? I didn't quote any candidates in the presidential primary, I quoted three of the five members of the Democratic Party's congressional leadership.

      America didn't create the real problems in Venezuela. Acknowledging that those problems exist is not necessarily preparing for an American invasion.

      Oh I see, you're one of those "the Venezuelans are living on top of our oil so they should do so submissively, ruled by whomever we will deem friendliest to our interests" jackasses.

    13. America did create the real problems in Venezuela, with the purpose of gaining control over it's oil.

      This is neither news nor controversial.

      Economist Jeffrey Sachs: U.S. Sanctions Have Devastated Venezuela & Killed Over 40,000 Since 2017

  5. “Ugly attacks on Candidate Clinton helped elect Candidate Trump”

    Including the ones from the Bernie Bros.

  6. Can you think of even a single homosexual who isn't a narcissist? As with Maddow, so too with Lemon or Cooper. Ancient wisdom warned us of these people, and we opted to cast it aside for a bunch of jewish tricks, with predictable results.

    1. It is hard to think of a person in the media who isn't a narcissist, gay or not.

      Are you saying that Trump is gay, or that he is Jewish. He is definitely narcissistic and tricksy. Lots of homophobic womanizers are hiding latent gayness. Or are you saying he is a latent Jew? I predict he will "come out" after Melania leaves him.

    2. Are you saying Trump possesses sexuality? I doubt our Pillsbury Doughboy-in-chief has seen his 'little head' in quite some time.

    3. Say that reminds me, remember when conservative hero John Fund boinked the daughter of his former girlfriend - Morgan Pillsbury, got her pregnant, had her have an abortion? Family values!

  7. As Somerby wastes everyone’s time with this random pointless attack on Maddow (ironically the day after she conducted a long interview with Hillary Clinton), he is undoubtedly preparing a column attacking Senate Democrats for being rude to poor decent “Other” Billy Barr. Somerby has become Glenn Greenwald without the Fox News platform.

  8. “So did the way The Maddow Show took the side of Comey the God when he launched his initial attack on Candidate Clinton in July 2016.”

    This is such a ridiculous lie. All anyone has to do is read the transcripts of those shows to see how monumentally wrong Somerby is.

    The host that day *wasn’t even Rachel Maddow.*

    It was Steve Kornacki. The date in question is July 5, 2016, and the transcript is here:

    Somerby cannot be seen as a principled critic when he lies like this.

  9. "In short, back when Hardball was more influential, Matthews was a prime example of "Donald J. Trump before Trump." "

    Even on his worst day, Matthews wasn't as bad as Trump on a good day.

    This is an example of trying to normalize Trump. Trump says things that are beyong the pale. Matthews says typical Republican stuff.

    In the quote about Gore, he is suggesting that Democrats aren't American. That is a valid point that several people have made -- the Republicans characterize Democrats as not American and think of themselves as the only true Americans. Of course Trump says that too, but he doesn't do it the polite way Matthews did. He singles out Americans who are brown skinned or naturalized immigrants and refers to them as rapists and murderers, not the best people. He equates not American with terrorist, not three-button suits. Trump takes this way beyond the ugly starting place of Matthews, to an extreme that incites violence against others, advocates elimination of them. Matthews didn't come anywhere close to doing that and it is (1) unfair to imply that Matthews would do that, and (2) wrong to suggest that Trump is like Matthews, a fairly normal conservative, because that implies that Trump is normal when he is far from normal. There is no confusing Matthews with a white supremacist based on language, but Trump talks and talk and walks the walk of white supremacism.

    So, why is Somerby normalizing Trump? Why is he equating extreme bigotry with mild xenophobia? Those working overtime to normalize Trump are trying to make him acceptable to Independents and swing voters, trying to suggest he isn't that bad so Trump can be re-elected.

    Why is Somerby trying to re-elect Trump in the guise of standing up for Al Gore (who isn't running)? I wonder that every day.

    1. TDH is “normalizing Trump” only in your fevered imagination. In fact, TDH thinks that Trump is “disordered,” i.e., mentally ill.

      The question is why you’re trying to normalize Matthews. It’s not wrong to say that Trump is like Matthews and other Republican water carriers and camp followers. In their political and economic policies, their contempt for democracy, and their disregard of American political institutions, there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between Trump and everyday Republicans. Trump just refuses to indulge the usual hypocrisy.

      Why is TDH equating extreme bigotry with “mild” xenophobia? Because xenophobia is extreme bigotry.

    2. @12:21

      Yes the mighty Matthews!

      Excellent summary of this TDH, just masterful.

  10. Somerby apparently thinks that if he can discredit Maddow by portraying her as a disordered personality, he can discredit her reporting and weaken her impact as she goes after Republican wrongdoers.

    There's nothing wrong with Maddow. There is something majorly wrong with Somerby. He says he is liberal but he is working very hard on behalf of Trump and conservatives. No wonder he wants to define lying as something that can't be proven without getting inside someone's head. He knows how many lies he has told and wants to evade the consequences -- for himself, not just Trump.

    1. Maddow's reporting is as dreadful as her portrayal of herself is cringe-worthy and as her toadying to creeps like Matthews is revolting. There's nothing wrong with Maddow that a little hard work as a journalist couldn't fix.

      And what possible "consequences" for Somerby could his blog have?

    2. @4:29

      You are totally onto something there, Maddows' affect often the star of TDH, nevermind @12:29 who is as predictable as diarrhea after McDonalds.

      Not too amp'd about your use of the word "majorly", probably says more about me than you, but it strikes me as kinda an out of place artifact, colloquial like.

      Ok, let's see if it's buses or fire hydrants this time, oooh maybe bicycles.

    3. Not too "amp'd" about your use of "nevermind" for the phrase never mind or for that matter, the use of "amp'd" for amped. Probably says more about you than me, but it seems kinda like your comma splice. And it would have hurt my feelings if I had any.

      Also predictable, by the way -- the gaggle of tribal mind readers who just cannot take any criticism of their side. TDH rightfully criticizes Maddow for the hack that she is and as if on cue, out come the @4:29s and @3:21s to talk direly of TDH as a crypto-conservative out to help Trump.

      Isn't it embarrassing to keep making TDH's point for him?

    4. Perhaps TDH should present better, or maybe TDH presents fine and doesn't need a barnacle.

      I am certain no humor gets past you.

      All creatures with a nervous system have feelings, maybe you have no emotion, idk, but there was no intent to damage either.

      I make no claim to TDH's motives (I suspect they are closer to home than Trump), and Maddow surely earns substantive criticism.

      Parse if you must, but better off enjoying the fruits of my labor, or your labor, I'm not one much for labor, clearly!

      Episode 44: Antonio Damasio on Feelings, Thoughts, and the Evolution of Humanity

  11. Somerby just has an enormous ego that is extremely threatened by Maddow. He's been carrying on this crusade for years (I look at his blog once a year or so) for no other evident reason. She bothers him, and he likes to vent his displeasure.

    1. I'm sure glad you dropped by to tell us about the inner workings of Somerby's mind. See ya next year.

    2. Pretending Somerby's rantings are from his mind is hilarious. Probably just a coincidence Somerby repeats Right-wing nonsense memes on a regular basis. LOL.

    3. Hmm, but perhaps what you call "Right-wing nonsense memes" is what makes sense to most people, dear psycho-dembot.

      And your psycho-ramblings are just that: psycho-ramblings.

      Has it ever occurred to you, dear psycho-dembot?

    4. No. It never occurred to me that anyone could think Right-wing nonsense memes would make sense to most people, sweetheart.
      Probably because I don't think most people are economically illiterate morons, who fail at basic arithmetic. It's one of my blind spots.

    5. 11:52,
      I still don't think most people are bigots. However, YMMV.

    6. Yes, psycho-dembots are definitely a small minority.

    7. Psycho-dembots vs. liberals.

      Just to remind you of the difference, psycho dembots sound a bit like liberals, but with stupidity.
      Where a liberal may say something 100% true, like, "Republicans have no problem with treason against the United States of America", psycho-dembots add stupidity by saying "I can't believe Republicans have no problem with treason against the United States of America."
      Psycho-dembots deserve all the idiocy Mao throws at them.

    8. Meh. No need to analyze that they 'say'.

      Both categories mindlessly and endlessly repeat the talking points supplied by the zombie cult. Some in a one-liner (treason-bigot-lair, blah, blah), others in a long and tedious word-salad.

      All the talking points amount to the same thing: ORANGE MAN BAD.

      That's it, end of story.

    9. Meh. I'm not sure how one can look at Trump, with his bowing and scraping to the Establishment Elite and the red-meat bigotry he throws out to the Republican base, and see some kind of Right-wing outlier. He's a standard-issue Reagan Republican.

      "Bad" is what you call a rump roast left out on the counter for five straight days. Trump's skin tone may look like that rump roast, but "Bad" isn't the word I'd use to describe the economic know-nothing and self-admitted sexual predator. "Right-winger" is a far better description.

  12. If you are suffering from pain and sorrow for being done with your ex . if you are desperate to regain it .And if you're really ready to become the woman he will not be able to resist ...So this may be the most important letter you will read. Here's why.
    You can regain your man back. You can do it in 7 days from now. And this system works, no matter how complicated your situation is .You still love your ex. But all he says is "It's not you, it's me"I know things are not easy for you. You do not understand the behavior of your ex or the things he says now. You are super confused and need a solution.
    Look, let's face it. None of the advice you get from your friends is working, right?
    And you know that not so simple "overcome the end" as everyone says.
    THE PAIN OF NOT BEING WITH HIM IS SIMPLY TOO MUCH Well, hold on to your seat because there is now a revolutionary system that you can use to make sure your ex wants to be with you again .Even though it was a terrible ending .Imagine you could create such pleasant conditions that a man would do anything - even get down on his knees and ask him to marry him - just to keep you always by his side. Dr sharaja the spell caster is here to help and assist in getting your ex back in your life..you can contact him Dr sharajasid@gmail.com

  13. LOTTO, lottery,jackpot.
    Hello all my viewers, I am very happy for sharing this great testimonies,The best thing that has ever happened in my life is how I win the lottery euro million mega jackpot. I am a Woman who believe that one day I will win the lottery. finally my dreams came through when I email believelovespelltemple@gmail.com and tell him I need the lottery numbers. I have spend so much money on ticket just to make sure I win. But I never know that winning was so easy until the day I meant the spell caster online which so many people has talked about that he is very great in casting lottery spell, . so I decide to give it a try.I contacted this great Dr Believe and he did a spell and he gave me the winning lottery numbers. But believe me when the draws were out I was among winners. I win 30,000 million Dollar. Dr Believe truly you are the best, all thanks to you forever