New MSNBC Rachel Maddow Ad Highlights Her Hypocrisy

We recently reported that MSNBC new anchor Rachel Maddow took her long-term partner to the gun range for their first date. And recommended busting caps for other potential soul mates. And yet here she is, telling Americans to accept a compromise on their natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. A non-specified compromise. In other [non] words, Ms. Maddow is urging Americans to embrace the concept of change on gun laws, generally. Because guns! It’s the the same non-logic that informs the civilian disarmament movement to which she ascribes. Something must be done! For once I agree: we must roll back all the firearms-related laws that infringe on our gun rights. Lean forward! Move ahead! Try to detect it! It’s not to late . . . to whip it good. Just sayin’ . . . [h/t DrVino]

comments

  1. avatar Full Cleveland says:

    No

  2. avatar Ralph says:

    I’d rather gargle with barbed wire than watch anything with Rachel Maddow.

    1. avatar DJ9 says:

      So much nastiness.

      Maddow is such a nice young man. Spiffy dresser, too.

      /sarc

    2. avatar MacBeth51 says:

      +1

    3. avatar Mark says:

      Charming. Yes, Rach would gag a maggot. I can’t stand to listen to her drivel.

  3. avatar Jack says:

    So much flashy editing; so little substance. It’s like a magician creating a diversion so the typical viewer won’t notice how the illusion works. Only it isn’t entertaining.

  4. avatar former water walker says:

    Rachel Madcow…yikes. I had temporary hysterical blindness the last time you posted “her” video. Cease and desist.

  5. avatar Scrubula says:

    Gotta get those misleading keywords.
    Compromise! Common sense! For the children!

  6. avatar Excedrine says:

    Nope. Not clicking. Not even once.

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      Same here. I found out I couldn’t unsee it last time.

  7. avatar Static NAT says:

    I was a fan of hers back when I didn’t know any better. The hassle I have with these “common sense gun law” requests is that the proponents don’t actually specifically state exactly the change and compromise they expect to see. So it means to me that they’re asking for a “total gun ban” which will more likely result in another Newtown disaster.

    1. avatar Jus Bill says:

      But this time using either a stolen gun or a machete (a la the Congo).

  8. avatar Michael Flatt says:

    Scary

  9. avatar Zachary marrs says:

    No. Stop showing madcow here

  10. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    Great. Now I have guys in black sleeveless turtle necks, wearing upside down flower pots on their head, stuck in my head.
    DEVO!

    1. avatar JoshtheViking says:

    2. avatar Erik says:

      You say that like it’s a bad thing to have DEVO stuck in your head! That song is now stuck in my head and because of that my day just got instantly better!

  11. avatar bambi schmidt says:

    I have a lot of guns I believe in the Constitution I have the right to bear arms

  12. avatar Another Robert says:

    Is Rachel another one of those pro-2A liberals we hear about occasionally?

    1. avatar DJ9 says:

      If so, I’d say a “Pro-gun for me, but not for thee” liberal/prog.

    2. avatar Fred in AZ says:

      People make all sorts of claims. Rudy Giuliani claims to support the second amendment.

      Rachel Maddow is an opportunistic media whore.

  13. avatar Indiana Tom says:

    Guns for me and none for thee, typical liberal elite.

  14. avatar Don1974 says:

    I’ve said it for years…there are very few anti-gun people if you go by the strict meaning that they actually hate firearms. There are however a boat load of anti-you and me and all the other unwashed masses owning-guns elitists out there. They are totally miffed at the fact that in this country the people own the guns thus keeping in check their insatiable appetite for power. God bless the Founding Fathers of this Nation!

  15. avatar Model66 says:

    Hey. If you’re going to continue to discuss anti-gun women can you at least focus on the hot, progressive, liber……….oh. Sigh. Nevermind…I’ll go back to prepping tomorrow’s dinner.

  16. avatar DrVino says:

    Her beliefs do not represent a dichotomy, or paradox or contradiction. They certify her as a useful idiot.
    We all know what the idols do with useful idiots once they’re done being useful (or have an “Oh, wait a minute….” moment) don’t we?…

    1. avatar DJ9 says:

      Line them up for target practice.

      As the targets.

  17. avatar El Mac says:

    Seriously, what did you expect from a Leftard like Mr. Maddow?

  18. avatar Le Chat Gris says:

    This is ridiculous. What make wingnuts think that being for gun safety equates to being anti-gun? Your paranoia is only outpaced by your ignorance.

    1. avatar ChrisB. says:

      Le Chat, Maddow is on record claiming the AR is an “automatic weapon, and that gun murder is up (it is half of levels 20 years ago).

      You and she are the “wing nuts”. You don’t even know the basic facts of the issue

      1. avatar GuyFromV says:

        Half of that statement is correct.

        1. avatar DJ9 says:

          AR-style rifles/carbines are auto-loading/autoloaders, not automatic.

          Automatic is shorthand for fully-automatic (a machinegun), for those who know what the terms actually mean.

        2. avatar ChrisB. says:

          guyfromv, my guess a sockpuppet for “le chat”

          Half the statement is correct? No. both parts of the statements are utterly incorrect.

          Maddow has made dozens of factually incorrect statements on firearms and on firearms violence and law.

      2. avatar Richard In WA says:

        Exposing my brain to the facts, actual facts not regurgitated infographics/talking points got me to change sides from the gun grabbers to the gun owners/defenders.

        Get the basic facts. They support the pro-gun agenda, and not because of spin, because they are the facts.

    2. avatar Mister Fleas says:

      “This is ridiculous. What make wingnuts think that being for gun safety equates to being anti-gun? Your paranoia is only outpaced by your ignorance.”

      Because the term “gun safety” is the new euphemism for “gun control”.

  19. avatar rlc2 says:

    It’s MSNBC. It’s not news it’s propaganda.

    Meadow is a talking head. LGBT flavor, but still a creature of the producers talking points, AND MSNBC as the most glaring example of the StateRunMedia. So, of course she lies, and sadly, she is also a hypocrite. Not the best role model for LGBT who have to push against so it I especially traditional convention, to embrace their own truth.

    I’m in favor of knowing what the anti-freedom crowds think and say, here.

    Keep your friends close and your enemies closer. Didn’t Sun Tzu say something similar?

    1. avatar Pseudo says:

      I guess because I disagree with you I’m ‘anti-freedom’ so I’ll speak up. I think some of the stuff she said is hypocritical but there is nothing inherently hypocritical about liking guns and supporting gun control. I am a gun owner and have had the unfortunate necessity of using one in self defense. I also support some of the much-derided ‘common sense’ gun control like universal background checks and elimination of indiscriminate private sales because it makes sense to me that the laws on the books require this these to be reasonably enforceable and I mostly support the purchasing restrictions currently on the books. AWB, mag cap restrictions,’gun free zones’, CCW restrictions, and NFA status of SBRs and suppressors? These don’t make sense to me.

  20. avatar rlc2 says:

    Ps. That reminds me. W e should stop with the anti-aging shorthand and slang. Jus t as we point out it’s not about the tool, it’s about the person and their behaviour, we should s t art using slang that is more accurate; the anti-self defense mommies, the anti-liberty adventurers, the bitter propagandists for federal control, etc. We need something better.

  21. avatar SGC says:

    Typical do as I say not as I do liberal elitist.

  22. avatar Taurus609 says:

    Actually, it’s her partner who is an NRA member and she took Rachel to the range, not the other way around.

    She remarked on her show (and yes I try and watch all sides of the debate) that she enjoyed shooting (at the range) but that’s where it should be, at the range. No one needs to have a gun for home or carry protection.

    But, when she interviewed the Kansas abortion provider who took over for the one murdered, she had no problem with her protecting herself with a CCW permit and firearm…now that’s hypocrisy!

  23. avatar Pseudo says:

    Christ are you all this bloodthirsty about gun control advocates? At least think long enough to realize that there is no immediate hypocrisy in using/enjoying guns and supporting some gun control measures. There is just no logical contradiction despite how much the author clearly wants there to be. Some of the specific stuff mentioned in the comments, however, is contradictory. Being against ccw permits and carrying in general is indefensible when advocating the opposite for specific cases. The body of this article, though, is rabid and thoughtless.

  24. avatar jimmyjames says:

    Does anyone really watch these talking head, babbling idiots? Watch Big Bang or 2.5 Men instead. Punditocracy indeed.

  25. Another fail in the Rainbow Alliance for the 2nd Amendment.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email