Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Senator Simpson, why refer to Rachel Maddow as a "that"?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
gort Donating Member (567 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 12:40 AM
Original message
Senator Simpson, why refer to Rachel Maddow as a "that"?
"Rachel Minnow or whatever that is..."

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/11/alan-simpson-greedy-generation-wont-leave-me-alone-after-debt-commission-leak.php?ref=fpb

What makes Rachel a "that"?

I would love to hear someone in the media ask him what he means when he calls Rachel a "that".

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
krispos42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 12:49 AM
Response to Original message
1. A highly educated liberal lesbian must of course be denigrated as much as possible
She has a doctorate, after all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DesertFlower Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 12:50 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. i agree. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JVS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 12:49 AM
Response to Original message
2. Why did Obama inflict this butt-nugget on us?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DJ13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 01:54 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. Because he agrees with that butt nugget
I think we elected a closet conservative (at least on most fiscal matters).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 03:09 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 02:54 AM
Response to Reply #2
8. Can only think he agrees with his approach & he appointed Bowles, a known hater of the New Deal. nm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nashville_brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #8
16. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco6 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #2
21. He obviously wanted him.
You don't choose people you DON'T want. So he wanted him on purpose. And his positions on SS and Welfare in general are very, very well-known.

The only conclusion is that he wanted him to try to get his ideas built into law. Even if they are completely antithetical to everything the Democratic Party has stood for for 60-odd years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
baldguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 01:11 AM
Response to Original message
4. Because gays aren't human.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geckosfeet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 01:23 AM
Response to Original message
5. what a total asshat
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eShirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 02:49 AM
Response to Original message
7. Because he's a blowhard with no manners or sense of decency.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 06:37 AM
Response to Original message
10. Simpson = scum nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pinboy3niner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 06:43 AM
Response to Original message
11. Why should I repond to former Sen. Simpson--or whatever "that" is? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lpbk2713 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 09:47 AM
Response to Original message
12. Simpson always was a contemptible individual.
Edited on Fri Nov-26-10 10:06 AM by lpbk2713



And I don't look for him to change at this late stage of the game.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lunatica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 09:51 AM
Response to Original message
13. Senator Simpson, I almost feel sorry for you when Rachel
starts looking into your record. You're most likely going to regret finding out what 'that' is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iggo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 09:58 AM
Response to Original message
14. He says 'that' to let you know she's icky.
The fuck.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 10:00 AM
Response to Original message
15. In person I'd be tempted to slap a person referring to her as a that
In her flaws as all of us have she is wonderful, truthful and very insightful. A pedestal come to mind when I think of her. Yes she is that good at what she does, no one is coming close to her effectiveness as an interviewer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 11:28 AM
Response to Original message
17. That impudent girl? That snippet of overpriviledged idiocy.
In other words, except for the gender, he's projecting. He's also practicing a bit of misogyny that most women recognize.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Little Star Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
18. I'm so glad Obama appointed him........
:sarcasm:

What an ass-wipe Simpson is!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
COLGATE4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
19. Simpson is a vile, nasty vituperative husk of an imitation Senator
who has long since outlived any possible usefulness he could have had to the people who voted for him and the American people in general. In the words of Parliament to Oliver Cromwell, "...for God's sake, go".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lunatica Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
20. He obviously doesn't know Rachel.
Pity the fool
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessionalLeftist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 02:42 PM
Response to Original message
22. Obama needs to shut this guy up. He's insulting everyone
Edited on Fri Nov-26-10 02:42 PM by ProfessionalLeftist
in the freaking country. :wtf: What an abusive jerk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 06:33 PM
Response to Original message
23. He doens't like women in the world of
politics and business. He's old fart who hopefully will kick that big bucket real soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gort Donating Member (567 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 09:01 PM
Response to Original message
24. Others starting to pick up on Simpson's smear against Maddow
Edited on Fri Nov-26-10 09:05 PM by gort
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Terra Alta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-26-10 09:07 PM
Response to Original message
25. Simpson is an idiot
who is probably jealous of Rachel's success, intelligence, and popularity. I hope Rachel hits him hard and shows him who that "that" is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 09:45 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC