On 3/4/2014 10:06 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/4/14, 10:00 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/4/2014 9:53 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 3/4/14, 9:37 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/4/2014 9:14 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:

... about George W. Bush, but he wouldn't have stood for Russian
aggression in the Ukraine. He'd have invaded New Zealand and Australia
by now, and championed legislation banning gay marriages between
marsupials.


Repeat it often enough and you'll be a guest on the Rachel Maddow Show;
that is after she finishes trying to hang Chris Christie.



I'd be happy just going to lunch with Rachel. Governor Christie seems to
have hanged himself, and it isn't Rachel releasing the trap door. The
New Jersey print media and the NYC print media are the ones nailing
Christie, for the most part, and Rachel is mostly just passing along
their findings and having various NJ politicians as interview subjects
on her show.

I don't know where this is going for Christie. At first I thought, "Oh,
just another governor playing politics," but more and more it seems if
there are much more serious matters worthy of investigation in Jersey
that have little to do with the bridge fiasco, and Christie seems to be
touched or touching in a number of them.

The only joy I really take in this is that the elimination of Christie
as a GOP presidential possibility leaves mostly the GOP crazies in the
running. I never thought Christie was even slightly crazy.


I used to enjoy her show to get different views on things because she
was reasonably fair in her representations. However, in the last year
or so she has turned into a cackling proponent of the ultra left,
"progressive" movement. Makes me wonder if network influence was
brought to bear on her subject matter. Ratings, you know.



I'm not aware of anyone on MSNBC who is a proponent of the "ultra left."
I have friends who are active in the old Social Democrats movement and
even they no longer are ultra left.

Ultra left is a relative term. To you, Maddow is "mainstream".