Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
public announcements

How Scott Brown Got Rachel Maddow to Waste Some of MSNBC’s Salary

Having already shot down Scott Brown’s sad fundraising rumormongering about Rachel Maddow running for a U.S. Senate seat, and then assailing him for refusing to correct his transparent ploy, the MSNBC host arrived in this morning’s Boston Globe with a full-page ad.

It reads in part: “Do you remember when Mitt Romney ran for President after being our Governor and he went around the country insulting Massachusetts, talking about what an awful state we are? To have our new Senator raising money around the country by saying how terrible one of his Massachusetts constituents is, kind of feels the same way to me.”

Maybe playing the victim card in the media works better when you are the media?

On:           Mar 26, 2010
Tagged: , , , , , ,
    • Curtis Jensen

      Sounds like you disapprove of Maddow’s efforts to dispel what is essentially a lie being told by Brown in order to bilk people of money. I think it would be far worse for his little scam to go unanswered and unchallenged. So many political lies get ignored gain a life of their own, become accepted fact by whackos and end up stuffing the coffers of the liar with funds they use to get into/retain office and then work against us (LGBTs and progressives). Screw Brown. Go Rachel!

      Mar 26, 2010 at 10:56 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael

      Since when is standing up for yourself considered playing the victim card?

      Usually, saying that a person is playing the victim implies you are trying to cut them down for your own gain. Queerty grow a set, and actually have something more to say than a being curt bitches.

      Mar 26, 2010 at 11:02 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ChicagoJimmy

      Playing the “victim card” works when you’re actually the victim. In this case, the victim of a smear campaign to raise political donations.

      Totally agree with Michael. Grow a set of balls Queerty, and support those who stand up for themselves.

      Mar 26, 2010 at 11:25 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • romeo

      Maddow is perfectly correct and cudos to her. I’ve said all along, you can’t be “above it all” with the right wing. The people who actually believe their shit are low and gullible, but they can vote, and often do. We have to confront these lies loud and clear. If the dems had done that with health care, it wouldn’t have been nearly the arduous thing it turned out to be.

      Actually, I’m a little surprised at Brown. Looks like he’s turning out to be just a soft core porn model after all.

      Mar 26, 2010 at 11:27 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Calgary_Mike

      I agree with the previous commenters. Grow up and realize that making up an opponent rather than doing your job is ridiculousness and the victim card Rachel is playing is justified.

      Mar 26, 2010 at 11:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • greenmanTN

      The subtext of Brown’s fundraising attempt using Rachel Maddow’s name is “help me defeat this scary liberal dyke!” so she’s doing the right thing by exposing the lie.

      I think Rachel M is the best commentator both liberals and gays have and it’s hardly “playing the victim card” for her to refute a lie that uses her name. It doesn’t surprise me that Scott Brown has so far refused to appear on Rachel’s show. First of all she has caught him in a deliberate lie, which tends to put one in an awkward position at the very beginning of an interview. Also, Rachel isn’t a dim talking head; she knows her stuff and goes into her interviews with a firm command of the facts, ready and able to dismantle silly arguments and ignore attempts to derail the topic. They are actually afraid of facing her, which is why Brown used her name in the first place.

      Mar 26, 2010 at 11:53 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Hyhybt

      Wow, that makes my signature practically *legible* by comparison.

      Mar 26, 2010 at 2:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Rasa

      Yes, Queerty Editors, please clarify…


      Do you mean that “playing the ‘victim card’ ” is wrong in this case?

      His campaign strategy was misleading.

      It needed (and still needs) to be addressed directly and vigorously, before he and others continue to capitalize on this type of manipulative and deceptive approach.

      My sense is that you are usually quite appreciative of Rachel Maddow — and how she continues to take a stand for human rights of all kinds.

      Perhaps you mean that, by playing the “victim card”, she is “fighting fire with fire”?

      I think it would have been wrong for her to say nothing– and in this case, she is going quite a bit further in her attempts not only to defend herself from being used by his campaign, but also to decry his overall tactics for what they are– slippery and deceitful.


      Mar 26, 2010 at 2:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jeffree

      Rachel caught Scott in a bold faced lie. She exposed him & his lie. Good for her!!
      His was a stupid rookie mistake, & i hope Mass. citizens will recognise his CHEAP SHOT.

      Rachel doesnt need to cry VICTIM because she dealt w/ the situation with the facts! Remember Ann Coulter cried she was VICTIM of a HATE CRIME when reminded of Canadian limits on hate speech.

      Mar 26, 2010 at 5:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • andy_d

      Maddow and NBC should sue him for unauthorized use of likeness, etc.

      Mar 26, 2010 at 6:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • eames

      Seems to me that Queerty is mirroring Scott Brown’s tactics in accusing Rachel of the victim label, not to mention “assailing”. She has every right to demand a retraction/correction and since he didn’t, stepped up for herself. A bit of media envy, Queerty?

      Mar 26, 2010 at 7:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jd

      @Curtis Jensen: Sarcasm! Sarcasm everyone!

      Mar 26, 2010 at 8:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael

      @jd: Unfortunately, your attempt at sarcasm wasn’t funny or vaguely appropriate.

      Mar 27, 2010 at 2:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.

  • Copyright 2016 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.