Stop dumping on Rachel!

[Are_grits_groceries]

Lately, it seems to be the latest trend to dump on Rachel for any number of things. I cannot begin to list them all. It seems that she is to be thrown out by many and replaced.

Have you forgotten that for a long time she was the only voice on teevee even remotely calling out the RW and their lies? She confronted many people and skewered them with their on words. Many were afraid to be on her show.

She gave a platform and a voice to many we now see regularly. I am not claiming that she is perfect. However, this rush to throw her out is amazing. I know that this is not a reflection of all but it is a loud opinion.

She will always be one of the best no matter her faults.

[Kathy M]

1. I have read she can be tutorial , I agree at times but ...

There have been times I appreciate her going through the different connections and how different groups / names are connected .
Example I can think of recently is Trumps commercial he released last week , she showed over 30 years of different groups and connections .

I like her show most nights .

[Purveyor]

2. I only tune in when she has a guest on I'm interested in hearing from. Nothing she has to say is of

interest to me.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

3. Should we leave Britney alone too?

[SleeplessinSoCal]

4. I had to change the channel. That woman took over most of her show.

Rachel is preoccupied with trying to get swill on her show for "the interview". Big misstep IMHO.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

5. What do you have against a cooking show?

[Adrahil]

6. I think Rachel is great. I watch whenever I can. NT

[mopinko]

7. i wonder where bernie would be without her.

i knew bernie from thom hartman, but i think a lot of lefties got to know him from his many, many visits to rachel's show back in the day.

[UTUSN]

8. The abuse piled on her here has been suprising.

Last edited Thu Aug 25, 2016, 11:58 AM - Edit history (2)

Until recently she has been lauded here, entirely deservedly from an ideological view. At the beginning, I thought the adulation was too echo-chamber. And actually in the early years I mostly avoided her and Keith because of their *style* - his convoluted and interminable sentences and her nerdy blow-by-blow contexts, or as a DUer said recently, "Did she take 30 minutes to get to the point again?"

Until this campaign I would only occasionally peep in to her show, but with the saturation of DRUMPF I have craved, like a real craving, an antidote to that and have taken much larger doses of her.

But I have never, ever doubted her being fantastic on our side. In the primary nights' coverage, it *has* seemed that she has played up cosilly to Brian WILLIAMS for some unfathomable reason, but this was offset by my perception of friction between her and the Repuke Nicole whassername.

So I have been not happily surprised at the nastiness aimed at her over the Kellyanne Fitzpatrick CONWAY interview last night. While Faux donates those hours long propaganda "town halls" to Repukes, I don't know of another (besides Rachel vs CONWAY) almost-hour long thing with a clearly opposition figure.

It is tremendously difficult and delicate to handle an opposition interview that keeps the guest from walking out. To conduct a total BASHING can only happen when the guest is locked up, like when Geraldo "interviewed" Charles MANSON, hurling (deserved) abuse constantly, but that is more like carrying on further punishment than garnering information.

As for hopes to see DRUMPF interviewed by Rachel: Dream on. He can't handle it.

[LWolf]

9. I've never "dumped on Rachel," thanks.

I've never even watched her. If people at DU weren't always bringing her up, I wouldn't even know she exists.

I'm not a political talk junkie. I honestly don't give a fuck what talking heads on the radio and tv have to say. It all seems so scripted, like so much propaganda to me. I'm sometimes uncomfortable when it seems like DUers mirror their counterparts on the right; they have Rush and Beck, Democrats have Rachel and whoever.

If she is somehow "thrown out," I won't even know it.

I am continuously amazed by people, and that includes people who are Democrats. I could deliver your rant a hundred times, for a hundred different reasons, about attitudes of people here and everywhere. In that, I feel your pain.

[arthritisR_US]

10. I think calling it propaganda is a fair assessment. Unfortunately that is

what the "news" has devolved into.

[LWolf]

13. Yep. nt

[yortsed snacilbuper]

11. What I like about her program,

she always gives a lead up of what went before to compare to what is happening now.

I highly recommend Rachel.

[Blue Dalek]

12. Rachel and her way of explaining topics so people

like me can understand what the hell is going on, is the reason I pay closer attention to politics than I used to. Thank you Rachel!

[Gabi Hayes]

14. did you see the show last night. what you say is largely correct, but she really dropped

the ball last night

it was cringeworthily embarrassing

RM didn't even bother to show the clip of KAC calling for trump to release his tax returns, AFTER she asked the pol why he wasn't doing it in real time!

that was inexcusable. if I know it was out there, how can she not?

it was either on cnn or msbnc, not some low visibility web site, either

shame on her

sorry, but she blew it, and that's just one example of her slumber party pal approach to the interview