Posted on 04/23/2010 6:42:22 AM PDT by MsLady
I need some help on this one. All feedback is welcome. It's all I can do to listen to this woman. My niece sent this to me, after I posted about the Geico guy being fired on my facebook page. She is some what opened to other points of view but, is definitely on the left.
Rachel Maddow openly lives with a female partner (I saw in People magazine a profile on her) and speaks evil.
She is a warrior in the ongoing spiritual warfare of our time, and she is not on our side. ‘Pod
I totally understand that. What I need is facts to what she is saying. I know it’s not the truth, the far left only speaks lies.
I don't talk to commies and I don't listen to them, least of all for over 9 minutes.
A synopsis of what she said woud be nice. And wth is TRMS?
Then please tell us what she is saying. I don't have 9 minutes to waste listening to her while my blood pressure rises.
The Rabid Madcow Show
That’s how I felt, nauseated after a couple of minutes. I know what she is saying is lies, what I need are the facts. I know them, but, I need written facts to back it up, so I can give them to my niece. She won’t believe just what I say.
I can’t because I can’t listen to her that long.....LOL I was hoping someone had more will power than me.
Ask your niece to source the claims Rachel is making.
Tell her you can’t afford to be physically ill under the current circumstances.
Search for video of her explaining where the “teabagging” epithet came from.
She is vile.
Your niece needs to consider the source. If she’s unable to, well...
Source Rachel’s claims. Good idea!!!!
Maddow does not like the fact that she cannot steal our earnings, our children and grandchildren, and our private healthcare without a serious fight.
This vid shows how the moochers and looters were desperate when they thought they were going to lose, so they did a story to make sinister those who were their political opponents.
As per usual with the left, they can't debate policy and win, so they must dehumanize us to foster hate and fear.
Typical for the last 40 years.
Send her these to show we were right about Obamacare after all.
today.com/news/washington/2010-04-22-health-care-costs_N.htm?csp=24&RM_Exclude=Juno
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100421/ap_on_go_co/us_congress_budget
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/04/22/cbo-millions-of-middle-class-a
What is “TRMS”?
Claims of Fights about healthcare and not discussions or debates are somewhat valid. What she doesn’t note is that questions to supporters are never answered, but dodged, ignored and diverted to strawman claims and accusations against tea partiers. Dems never appeared to actually want to debate the ISSUES of reform or the SPECIFICS of what the bills included.
The MadCow is definitive in her disgust at calls for antis to be aggressive and disruptive...tactics the left has employed for decades.
She picks on one individual’s comment that the goal is no reformation of the system, as if everyone against THIS plan agrees with that assessment. Most do not, and have clearly said that changes are needed, but that THESE proposed changes and overtake by government fiat are not the way. Besides, the bill does not address its stated objectives of reducing health care costs, but simply (well, ok, complexly) says it reduces costs by spreading the higher costs over more people plus government subsidies...and you know when gov’t puts a penny in, it controls all activities through rules and regulations.
Minutes are taken describing the cozy relationships between some medical and insurance companies and Freedom Works. Granted this is not grassroots, but it is only one small part of the Tea Party movement. I bet if you reviewed Rachel’s shows (perish the thought) you would find no comments on the numerous “regular people” asking questions at media-controlled Republican debates who were Dem campaign operatives, radical activists, heavy gay rights promoters—trying to make it seem as if America’s pressing issues for Rep. candidates were the issues of the far left.
Her conclusion was that, while these people have a right to “shout down” debate, we have the right to know who pays them to do that— in the same way she shouted that we have a right to know about the illegal campaign contributions to Clinton/Gore/Clinton/Obama...oh, wait, she didn’t shout that, did she. (Remember how Obama couldn’t verify who was making all the small campaign contributions by credit card last election? By disabling verification safeties built into EVERY cc transaction, they couldn’t know how many times someone donated $100 (for a total from that person which could’ve well eclipsed the legal limits),or that any contributor was actually an American legally allowed to contribute.)
Thats just a start for you off the top of my head. More research into theses suggestions and you would find WAAAAAY more ammunition. GL
took me a while, too...The Radical Madcow Sh**
Excellent!!!! I quit listening after about 6 minutes. I could barely make it through that much. I did answer my niece back already, but, I’m sure she’s going to argue with me about something. So now I have a little more ammo, thank you. I told her basically that Racheal thinks anyone on the right are idiots and robots out to do Dick Armey and Freedomworks bidding. And that unlike ACORN these organizations aren’t funded by the government.
>> Rachel Maddow openly lives with a female partner
“Is she retarded” - the fired GEICO guy might be curious.
Rachel Maddow lives in Massachusetts. Why isn’t she married since homosexual marriage is legal there? Why is she betraying the lesbian sisterhood by NOT exercising her judge given constitutional right to marry a same sex partner????????
>> Why...
Maybe the fired GEICO guy should investigate. /s
Good on GEICO for the disassociation.
Also see Ann Coulter’s columns on Maddow and how she links things to smeaar the right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.