Also, after one of the debates, Maddow said that an answer Hillary gave about her Iraq AUMF vote "insults me personally." Given the consistent bashing that Hillary got from Olbermann, Matthews, Russert, and company, and the sampling of comments I've encountered, I'd be quite surprised if these are close to the only ones.

Yeah, I've disagreed with things Rachel has said before. I think the criticisms about Hillary's RFK comments were wildly off-base.

Therefore, Rachel shouldn't have her own show, because only people with whom I agree on everything and never utter a misguided comment should be on TV.

Who are your candidates? Lanny Davis? Mark Penn? Taylor Marhs? Who should get the slot instead?

Loss of "nuance or intellectual rigor" is Establishment pundit slang for "we're losing the kids".

The MSM concensus that has coddled the right-wing "wrecking crew" is terrified of losing free-spending, 25-54 viewers to an alternate model that, while partisan, is also more rational and fact-based, at its best combining the enthusiasm and individuality of Yellow journalists with the objectivity, depth and smarts of the stolid Greys.

The media-kleptocracy lovefest has been riding an anomalous youth wave ever since right-wing college activism erupted in its full glory in the 80's. Now, after 6 years of Republican national dominance and 2 of GOP lite, a generation raised on Stewart and Colbert, not Reagan(who?), is feeling their progressive oats.

Living as they do in a truly bipartisan/amoral world of media-for-profit, this can only terrify the mouthpieces and space-fillers still making payments on their cottages in the Hamptons.

thought that initially about maturity...but it gave me pause. The post lack the innocent impishness of sarcasm.

There is someithing very strange going on behind those words. And as always, I mean this in the nicest way possible.

I usually find Glenn Greenwald one of the most prescient columnists I read on the web. I access him regularly through the libertarian website of Lew Rockwell. So I was surprised to read this column criticizing a writer at the New Republic who seems to prefer Tucker Carlson to Rachel Maddow.

I prefer to watch MSNBC, and usually nod my head in agreement with Keith Olbermann, as I do with Glenn Greenwald, not because I am a liberal, but because I am a "true" conservative of the stripe of MSNBC personalities Pat Buchanan and Tucker Carlson. How can you lump Carlson and CNN's Glenn Beck in with the neocon crazies and defenders of the Bush Administration when both of them are supporting Ron Paul, with Carlson even speaking at Paul's counter-convention in Minneapolis after Labor Day?

On the issues of war and foreign policy you should have long realized that the old "red-blue", "liberal-conservative" divisions of the Cold War years no longer apply. Tucker Carlson may be more moderate in tone, but in substance he is as critical of the Bush Administration foreign and military policy as David Gregory and Rachel Maddow. If there is anyone at the New Republic who appreciates any of these commentators, it should be refreshing news.

I get it now. You don't have a problem with her saying things that aren't factually true, you have a problem with her giving her opinion when it is not favorable to your preferred candidate. Okay. Well, good luck finding someone who agrees with you 100% of the time.

@maturity,

You are a liar, and I mean that in the nicest way possible. There is no way a former Hillary supporter went from a Democratic wingnut to a Republican troll because of Obama. You said that as a Hillary supporter, you canceled your NYT subscription and now watches Fox News exclusively?!? If Obama and Chris Matthews led you to Karl Rove's anaylsis on Fox, then if you aren't a liar, you must be a racist.

Again, I mean all this in the nicest way possible and suggest you get some help. You must crave attention in the worst way or have some anti-social personality disorder.

Take Care and good luck.

Amazing that there are still so many people who see the entire world through -- every last square inch of it -- exclusively through the prism of their specific preference in the Obama v. Hillary wars (Hard-core Obama fanatics now think that Chris Matthews and other Hilary-haters are exemplars of great journalism and hard-core Hillary fanatics think that Fox is Fair and Balanced).

what is amazing is that Greenwald continues to carry water for the outrageous misogyny and Clinton bashing that characterized Olbermann's show. Glenn even throws in some of his own misogyny ("shrew") while flat out lying about Maddow ("didn't support Hillary vorciferously enough"? how about "trashed Hillary Clinton at nearly every opportunity -- including false accusations of racism... of course, Greenwald already showed he's a master of that particular brand of calumny).

BTW, Glenn, no one I know said that Fox was "fair" -- it was merely 'balanced' to the extent that it generally treated Clinton and Obama with equal disdain -- which for those of us who supported Clinton, was as close as we could get to decent coverage of the primaries.

Seriously -- the fact that you ignored the blatant bias and misogyny of the media, and your peers in the blogosphere, means that you can no longer claim any credibility as a media critic. Stick to FISA, and torture, and anthrax, etc.... because as a media critic, you're simply John Avarosis with slightly better table manners.

Haven't followed the whole thread--but to me, "maturity"'s first post sounded very much like someone who had her/his tongue very firmly planted in her/his cheek.

I, too, appreciate Ms. Maddow's insights. The number of people who are hoping that her show goes deeper than Keith's is quite numerous. Count me among them.

I sincerely hope we get more substance and less fluff. Congrats and good luck with your show!

I used to read TNR as a magazine of thoughtful compromise. The Overton Window shifted decisively for them in the run up to the Iraq war. It now gazes out upon the Ariel Sharon-inspired landscape (hey, he's not Bibi!) where the compromise is between the center and the right only. Any attempt (no matter how rare) by mainstream media in America to move out of this window must be condemned.