Rachel Maddow’s Anger At U.S. Senate: ‘Game Over’ For Support From Obama Base?

Mediaite ^ | 12/17/10 | Colby Hall

[Libloather]

Rachel Maddow’s Anger At U.S. Senate: ‘Game Over’ For Support From Obama Base?
by Colby Hall | 10:22 am, December 17th, 2010

Last night the U.S. Senate voted on a bill that will extend the current Tax Cuts first put into place by President Bush after Senator Harry Reid appeared to capitulate to the threat of a Republican filibuster. This appeared to frustrate, if not anger MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow last night, and not only because it messed up the rundown of her show. It understandably irked the self-described progressive because it was just another example of, as she put it, “this phenom of passing bills in the house only to see it die in the Senate.”

Maddow ran trough a litany of examples where House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was successful in moving legislation consistent with both Obama’s and the progressive agenda forward through the House, only to see it die in the U.S. Senate. Then Maddow made very clear the stakes put forth by Senator Reid’s consistent surrender to the GOP:

With the endless obstructions and delay tactics. The margins that Democrats have over Republicans has been equal. Things have died in the Senate, not because Democrats didn’t have the votes. They had the votes. The senate broke. Without President Obama recognizing that is the U.S. Senate and acknowledging it is a broken institution that may be should be fixed, it’s sort of game over in terms of the rest of his agenda. It’s therefore sort of game over for his support from his base. Especially with a whole slew of Republicans on their way to Washington in January.

[KevinB]

Rachel who?

The thing on the right, whatever it is, is a Rachel Maddow.

[who knows what evil?]

It’s therefore sort of game over for his support from his base.

BS, Madcow. What are they going to do...vote GOP??? You're on the Dem plantation, and you know it.

[Iron Munro]

More idle and empty threats -

Until The Communist Party USA (CPUSA) runs more viable candidates, lefties like Rachel Madcow won’t have anyone other than democrats to vote for.

[rollo tomasi]

Watch out, this dyke is a Rhodes Scholar in the fine art of throwing feces at a wall and hoping it sticks, or better known as a "Master" in soft sciences.

On a serious note however, she has some excellent studying skills (Being a Rhodes Scholar is nothing to sneeze at) but her world view is sadly skewed (Maybe geared towards how she gets her genitalia "off" and an illogical bleeding heart). Prayers for her and the rest of the blinded "progressives"...

[death2tyrants]

It’s a start. Maybe Maddow can convince her viewers to stay at home in ‘12. All six of them.

[McGruff]

If Rachel Maddow typifies your base...you might just be a homometrosexual.

[A_Former_Democrat]

Forgot about those

[spokeshave]

"Where can they get someone further to the left than Obama?"

I believe Lenin is available from the Russians.

[Mr. K]

“Just how long do you want to wait for glorious socialist revolution, comrades??” she asked

(no wait... she only thought that)

[Mr. C]

No matter what photo I see of this person he/she certainly is a rather odd-looking, er, fellow????

[Realman30]

Maddow was so upset she went home and beat her wife.

[happygrl]

Her grammer is terrible.

Subject does not match the verb.

Also, she may be intelligent, but she has no wisdom, only snark.

[wbarmy]

That is the most egregious case of P**** Envy I have ever seen. She should be a women’s studies professor.

[Beagle8U]

“Maddow was so upset she went home and beat her wife.”

Er..Ah..I don’t think “give her a licking” means the same to her as it does you.

[rollo tomasi]

She had potential



I guess going dyke turns you into whiny ensign.

[BigSkyFreeper]

Gone from homecoming queen to homecoming queer.

[Rebelbase]

ROTF!

[Nosterrex]

There are exceptions to any rule or generalization, but have you ever noticed the connections between lesbians and the progressives? I would venture to guess that there is an inverse proportionality between lesbianism and theism, too. It seems that you have to be a homosexual in order to full grasp the worldview of a liberal or progressive, which is why heterosexuals and Christians have a difficult time in understanding how someone can be a liberal/socialist/Marxist/progressive.

[sinanju]

Something tells me her trademark smug look was not in evidence when she said this.

[BenLurkin]

And altogether that’s about 35% of the voters (mostly because of the hugely bloated government unions).