GOP lawmaker SLAMS Rachel Maddow: ‘Stop being a cheerleader and be a journalist’ [VIDEO]

The Daily Caller ^ | 1-29-2014 | Brendan Bordelon

[smoothsailing]

January 29, 2014

GOP lawmaker SLAMS Rachel Maddow: ‘Stop being a cheerleader and be a journalist’ [VIDEO]

Brendan Bordelon

Kansas Republican lawmaker Tim Huelskamp took MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow to task during a post-State of the Union interview on Benghazi secrecy, noting that if Maddow “would stop being a cheerleader and be a journalist, you’d recognize we’re not getting those answers.”

Huelskamp spoke with Maddow about an hour after President Barack Obama wrapped up his State of the Union address Tuesday night, with the MSNBC reporter taking the congressman to task for anti-Obama tweets she deemed offensive and inaccurate.

She zeroed in on one tweet, suggesting that President Obama was deliberately ignoring the ongoing Benghazi controversy, asking the lawmaker if he voted to cut State Department security at any point.

“Don’t forget, the fact of the matter is Hillary Clinton did not request security enhancements,” Huelskamp responded. “And we do believe that this administration let our troops down and let this diplomat down.

“We need more answers there,” he continued. “We need answers about a lot of things. This administration promised to be the most transparent in history, Rachel. And I think if you would stop being a cheerleader and be a journalist, you’d recognize we’re not getting those answers.”

Maddow, always eager to pounce on the slightest hint of Republican sexism, imaginary or not, was furious:

MADDOW: Did you just call me a cheerleader?

HUELSKAMP: Uh, I dunno. Maybe you have that history. I’m saying look at the facts –

MADDOW: No, wait, wait, wait. No, hold on, hold on, hold on. Did you –

HUELSKAMP: I’m saying–

MADDOW: Hold on!

HUELSKAMP: – you’re a cheerleader for the administration –

MADDOW: Ok, so I’m a cheerleader?

HUELSKAMP: – you’re not being a journalist when you’re not willing to look at the facts! If it was Bush you would be jumping and screaming –

MADDOW: You’re amazing.

HUELSKAMP: – but because it’s Hillary Clinton, you don’t want the answers, Rachel. Face the facts! We don’t know the answers there.

The two then got into a contentious debate over whether Obama’s promise to take executive action without Congress — along with unilateral changes already made to Obamacare — constitute “lawlessness,” with Maddow suggesting Huelskamp’s comment come from another universe.

“It’s the universe of reality, Rachel,” he retorted. “The universe of outside this Beltway. The president’s speech fell flat in the real world.”

VIDEO

[h/t RCP]

[NFHale]

Yeah, they’re not hiding it anymore, are they.

[Peet]

HUELSKAMP: – you’re not being a journalist when you’re not willing to look at the facts! If it was Bush you would be jumping and screaming –

MADDOW: You’re amazing.

---

I have never seen a journ-0-list ever honestly address that. Like Madcow here, they:

1) Discount the message
2) Discredit the messenger
3) Distract attention

Oh, and Rachel? You sucked as a DJ on WRSI also. Sucked.

[sergeantdave]

“Yeah, they’re not hiding it anymore, are they.”

Tru dat, buddy. We have a congressman telling a toadie neo-Nazi propagandist to go F’ himself, and neo-con weenies are pouring out of the FR cracks, telling everyone how gawd-awful it is that a man insulted a turd. Everyone complains that we’re not confronting leftists, and when it happens, the hand-wringing GOPe leftists cry about it, like little girls who find a fly in their dolly’s teacup.

It’s way past time to tell these GOPe traitors at FR to get lost or suffer the consequences.

[NFHale]

“toadie” best describes about 90% of the media. Perfect word.

You know, there IS a way to broach the subject with the Congressman - that would have been to call his office ahead of time, and ask him for an interview to tell HIS side of the story. If he chose to speak about it, then fine. If not, then you do due diligence as an investigative reporter and find it out for yourself, get it fact-checked, and go to press if it’s accurate.

But this little punkass weasel chump thought he could shortcut the guy, ambushed him, and then actually acted surprised when he got pissed about it.

Too many on our side are content to sit and take it. I don’t know where they learned that crap, or who taught them it, but that’s not the way I was brought up.

[smoothsailing]

It’s way past time to tell these GOPe traitors at FR to get lost or suffer the consequences.

Hey guys. I agree with you, Sarge. They are coming out of the woodwork and really stinking up the place.

They're as bad as DU trolls as far as I'm concerned.

And speaking of trolls, I'm going to stop using that term.

Back when I first got involved here with FR the term Disruptor was used before it evolved into troll around 2003 or so, and it applied to anyone who didn't adhere to our first principles as spelled out by Jim Robinson and IMO that definitely applies to GOPe jackoffs.

IIRC, It was freeper Joe Brower who first introduced me to the proper use of the word and he had a great little jpg that he posted, usually when he or someone else successfully rid FR of the Disruptor vermin.

[NFHale]

Well, it IS an opinion forum, and we do pride ourselves on being able to listen to and hold dissenting opinions (unlike the left who can’t tolerate dissent). I may not always agree with folks but I don’t intentionally try to be disagreeable - unless of course the other goes into complete jackass mode. And that does happen sometimes, yeah..

But people that are out to genuinely disrupt and start flame wars are relatively easy to spot and should get “da boot”.

Like the graphic too.

“Disruptor”... hmm... wasn’t that a Klingon or Romulan hand-held weapon in in the original Star Trek?? Sounds familiar..

[Joe Brower]

Thanks for the kind words, smoothsailing.

As for .jpgs, I keep a store of these on my website here. Some are a bit dated, but some of these photo-memes are timeless. Feel free to link to them as you deem fit. $:-)

[smoothsailing]

Man, that’s quite a library you have there! B-)