Rachel Maddow called out for 'dangerous' rhetoric toward Supreme Court: 'Fueling the

I have come to understand people who enjoy National Parks.
It took longer than it should have.

I can't tell you how many people I've met who don't get excited about neon lights and night life
which, when I was young,
were just about the only way I knew how to have a good time.

We're not all exactly the same,
but we should all have the opportunity to enjoy ourselves
by any reasonable means which does the trick for us.

Not sure what this has to do with Dr. Maddow whom I greatly admire,
but we seem to have swung in this direction.
 
LurchAddams said:
You said a lot of stuff except addressing the issue of this thread. Does Rachel Maddow have the right to state her opinion about SCOTUS or not?
Click to expand...

Sure, but that doesn't mean her opinion is a well informed one, which is why I said she was out of line.
 
LurchAddams said:
You said a lot of stuff except addressing the issue of this thread. Does Rachel Maddow have the right to state her opinion about SCOTUS or not?

The whiney trumtard bitches who support all the maga propaganda that has resulted in injury or death, have no problem when their fucknuts do it. But when Democrats give opinions? OH NOOOOO!!! It's terrrribull!

Maga shitheads are the whineyist, most hypocritical bitches I've ever seen.
Click to expand...

its called consequence culture....

maddow is inciting violence, clearly.
 
Phoenyx said:
Sure, but that doesn't mean her opinion is a well informed one, which is why I said she was out of line.
Click to expand...

Well, at least we agree she has the right to state her opinion. As well as her opinion "not being well-informed", she's a Rhodes scholar with a degree in politics, a best-selling author, one of the top-rated tv hosts and a prolific podcaster. So, I think she's probably better informed that both you and I.
 
LurchAddams said:
Well, at least we agree she has the right to state her opinion. As well as her opinion "not being well-informed", she's a Rhodes scholar with a degree in politics, a best-selling author, one of the top-rated tv hosts and a prolific podcaster. So, I think she's probably better informed that both you and I.
Click to expand...

Having fancy degrees doesn't mean the person is well informed on any given subject. I'm wondering if you're aware of the following news story:

A Court Ruled Rachel Maddow’s Viewers Know She’s Not Offering Facts | Glenn Greenwald
 
Phoenyx said:
Having fancy degrees doesn't mean the person is well informed on any given subject. I'm wondering if you're aware of the following news story:

A Court Ruled Rachel Maddow’s Viewers Know She’s Not Offering Facts | Glenn Greenwald
Click to expand...

So, you're posting an opinion piece by another opinion writer. Why would Greenwald's opinion be the superior one? Because he's a "he"?

Here's an interesting take on what's happened to Greenwald:

https://damonlinker.substack.com/p/how-glenn-greenwald-lost-his-way

How Glenn Greenwald lost his way
He’s a case study in the deleterious consequences of selective skepticism
Click to expand...

Greenwald spent almost the entirety of the Trump administration eviscerating center-left Democrats and journalists for pushing the story of Russian collusion in the 2016 election, about which he was thoroughly (and sometimes justifiedly) skeptical, and yet had very little critical to say about the rampant corruption, incompetence, and insurrectionary lies of the 45th president and his political and media enablers.
Click to expand...

Again and again, Greenwald applies intense skepticism to a finite list of political and journalistic enemies while applying none at all to those with whom he shares antipathies. The enemies of his enemies are his friends, and friends apparently get an automatic pass.
Click to expand...
 
NiftyNiblick said:
I fully support Dr. Maddow on this issue.

Biden should in fact arrest or at least disband the current SCOTUS
and install his own justices unilaterally.
Click to expand...
Only a moron cites Turley for anything.

Clarence Thomas has a whore wife who is a co conspirator in the insurrection. Why is he allowed to sit on this case?
 
Althea said:
Something is going on in the community. Several otherwise credible journalists are now hopelessly partisan, and only care about sensationalism for increased views
Click to expand...

My theory about Greenwald is he lost his mind when his husband was detained and interrogated in London and has since passed away. I sympathize with Greenwald over his loss but feel that it has changed Glen not for the better.
 
Althea said:
Only a moron cites Turley for anything.

Clarence Thomas has a whore wife who is a co conspirator in the insurrection. Why is he allowed to sit on this case?
Click to expand...

Did you see John Oliver's piece last week on Clarance Thomas? OMG, he nailed it!

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/feb/19/john-oliver-clarence-thomas-resign-1-million-offer

The late-night talkshow host John Oliver has offered to pay Clarence Thomas $1m annually – as well as give him a $2m tour bus – if the Republican judge resigns from the US supreme court.

Oliver made the proposal on Sunday’s episode of his HBO show Last Week Tonight, saying the supreme court justice had 30 days to accept or it would expire.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top