Rachel Maddow in verbal smack-down with former Bush speech writer (guess who won?)

I watched Rachel's show tonight as well and thought that this was one of the most interesting segments I've seen. She was obviously right but never raised her voice. She stated her point without getting overly emotional. I saw this exchange twice and both times thought, "wow, that was handled very well." Rachel said on Leno the other night that she likes debating and tonight she showed that she not only likes it, but is rather good at it as well.

I love watching her show because she is entertaining while delivering facts. The rest of her show tonight was just as good. 

I just finished watching this interview before I checked Afterellen, and here it was! Thanks Sarah! 

I was really impressed with how Rachel Maddow handled Frum, but I am curious what she was actually planning to interview him about. This interview should quiet down some of the people who get annoyed with her for only having people who agree with her on the show (which she does tend to do, but I don't really mind). I think that Maddow raises the quality of political discussion - you don't have to be completely "serious" all the time to be thoughtful and engaging.

i was just reading an interview with rachel where she mentioned the only kind of debates she doesn't like are ones where people personally insult her (which i think this guy kinda did).  so to handle him the way she did, when she was probably pretty shocked at the low blow, shows just how much gravitas rachel really possesses. 

and i would agree with sarah that rachel is DEFINITELY raising the quality of discourse, not only by her manners and her respectfulness, but by her fervent researching and fact-checking.  

bravo rachel!  well done!  

as if I haven't already been immensely impressed by that lady, but I think class just got a whole new definition...

class = Rachel Maddow!

------------------------------------------------------
My Photography

Chyeah. I love that, somehow, "liberal" commentators are responsible for what Sen. McCain's campaign does, and the sort of people they screened into the Minnesota rally (yes; they SCREENED those people before letting them into the Town Hall style event), and the poor manners exhibited at political events. My word. Watching Frum be so passive-aggressive was astounding; it was like watching someone argue with my Grandmother.

Heck, Sen. Obama didn't even tolerate people booing Sen. McCain at his rallies. People in the crowd booed at the mention of Sen. McCain, and Sen. Obama responded, and I quote: "Now, now; we don't need that. All you need to do is vote." If one candidate can exercise a basic standard of manners, why not the other? I've always been taught that there's a time and a place for everything. At formal events, you dress nicely, clap politely, and listen, not holler, cheer, and jeer like it's a sporting event.

But, I digress. Back to the exchange with Rachel and David Frum. I love how conservatives can accuse the "liberal media" of being big mean bullies that are to blame for everything bad in society when, meanwhile, you have people like Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly flippantly throwing around terms like lynching in their broadcasts about Sen. Obama and his wife, never mind their complete disrespect and outright racism against people of Arab descent and the Islamic faith as a whole by brandishing those terms as if they're slurs, regardless of the fact that Sen. Obama shares neither that heritage nor that faith.

Yes, in his crusade against media meanness and cruelty, David Frum challenges...the nice political commentator...who isn't insulting or demeaning to people...good choice there, Frum! I've always been of the belief that stating the obvious is never "uncalled for" or "mean". Frankly, I think he was just upset that she'd made remarks that conflicted with his beliefs during the show, particularly when she was commenting about the war and the potential for a new nuclear arms race, and he probably did feel offended about that, but, you know, just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them mean, snarky and derisive, and it certainly doesn't mean their opinions are inappropriate.

Racheal Maddow is my freaking role model.

The way she handled this moron was very impressive. Cuz I would have lost my cool for sure. He was clearly insulting her and her show. Im so glad that she put him in his place. He talked a lot of nonsense and he couldn't back it up. Comparing humor to death threats??? Seriously??

Kudos to Rachel for being civil and still making him look like a jack ass.

Road scholar bitches!!! 

Wow! I love her so much for standing up for the way she approaches and presents politics. The humor she injects into almost every political story is just her way of showing her excitement and love of politics! It was easy to feel the painful stab that Frum inflicted on her by practically calling her show childish and immature, but at the same time it was also a very proud moment when she stabbed him back with her indelible wit and credible argumentative skills. Frum became a bumbling buffoon under her rebuttal, practically turned to jello, and started making up false claims like the lie that there's controversy over whether the racist and violent shouts at the McCain campaigns were actually said... What!? No, Mr. Frum, there isn't!

 Overall, the always beautiful and composed Rachel Maddow appeared to be the adult, while Frum was the side-stepping, fumbling child trying to inch away from his mistakes, almost tripping over his undone shoe laces. She overwhelmingly proved that she really can and does approach political issues seriously, but that her right and responsibility as an American is to approach, absorb, and present these issues anyway she sees fit. I'm one of the many who appreciate that she's chosen humor.

So glad you decided to post this. Anything about Rachel Maddow and her brilliance fits here.

Well, Badgersprite has covered just about all I wanted to say, and much better than I could say it.

Okay that man is what you find in the dictionary under talking just to hear the sound of your own voice... that ignorant tool was pissing me off aha

Good for her she handled that briliantly

Shes me new hero :D 

I disagree that there was less emotion here. It's just that unlike most, Rachel's able to think clearly and form coherent sentences while actively pissed off. I think she played it a little cooler with Frum because he was a guest and not someone she knows. When arguing with other pundits it seems to me that when she's mad her brain goes into overdrive.

And I think that's ultimately why she might have trouble getting people that disagree with her to come on her show. She doesn't just have an opinion, she knows actual facts and can win debates just by knowing more.

I don't think David Frum knew what he was getting into. I think he was prepared to write her off as another pundit that can only resort to sarcasm and ranting if caught off guard. I half wonder if his remarks against the McCain campaign whipping people into a fury was actually bait to get on a "liberal" show as a "friendly" and then try to push the host's buttons to get them in a fury and to make point about liberals also whipping up fury. IOW, he was seeking to make an example of her.

And well, he got on the wrong show for that. I felt like there was a noticable switch in Rachel's tone that caught him off guard instead. And then she wouldn't let it go, which was kinda awesome. I'm not sure if he sought out Rachel's show, but his opening sentences there were pretty specific with the "including that last 40 minutes"...which did whip up some fury from my side of the TV screen.

I think I'm getting wicked cynical now. The more I watch those first two turns of him talking, which was clearly meant to be a punch straight out of the gate...and a really rude and mean one to be delivered so cooly as it was...the more I'm wondering if he thought she was an easy target because she's a woman and you know...women are emotional and that she'd simply fall apart. I can't recall a guest ever being so nasty to a host, male or female, right from the first words uttered.

But anyway, David Frum got served.

This kind of reminds me of the time Jon Stewart went on Tucker Carlson's show and ripped him to shreds about his journalistic integrity. Much as I love Jon Stewart, he could have taken a few lessons from Rachel Maddow on how to handle that kind of discussion in a mature, considered fashion. We don't get MSNBC here in Aus, but I always watch Rachel online. I am so in love with her intelligence and her class.

The Bush guy does have a point about the media getting in the way of intelligent discussion, but I think he was wrong to use Rachel as an example. Even though I sometimes wish Rachel spent a bit more time harpooning the Dems as well as the Republicans, you can't say she doesn't handle her politics in a grown-up manner.

I love this woman!

I'm self proclaiming myself (is that a correct sentence?) the number one brazilian fan of Rachel Maddow ;P

I was really taken aback by the first few comments from Frum, they were unnecessarily pointed just to get a reaction from Maddow. I was impressed how she kept her cool and managed to stand up for herself without preparation. Everytime she made a comment he just went off on some tangent that didn't really answer the question she had posed and in the end just came out with some repetitive diatribe. From the clip of her show before that discussion I wouldn't call her manner of political reporting at all unintellegent or childish, she was serious yet lighthearted which is more likely to attract people to the issues, not trivialise them.

Frum does have a point though - that many people no longer take politics seriously. That's probably half the reason some people can't be bothered to vote. But he went off-target when he went for Maddow, way off-target. 

The closer you get to the light, the greater your shadow becomes, but don't be afraid...

Like my crush on Rachel Maddow needed any more encouragement.

*Sigh* I think this guy really felt like he was going to somehow catch her by surprise and get the upper hand. And worse, he couched in in this "We should all be doing better" rhetoric - which is a point he could have made without going after her personally.

But she handled him so well. Calm but definitely strong and sticking to her guns. He didn't know what he was getting into.

*Sigh* Yep, Maddow FTW.

...and comedy needs politics.

The two go together like bread and butter.

There is little true enthusiasm over politics in the Western world in the 21st century. I could cite numerous examples of people taking the the streets (in positive and negative ways) throughout the 20th century to protest or support governments and individuals. I can't imagine seeing riots akin to those in Paris in 1934 or the Poll Tax riots of London in 1990. I don't condone some of those actions nor try to compare circumstances, but it does highlight the enormous amount of apathy in US and UK society. The last time we saw a mass protest was against the war in Iraq or against the Olympics, and whilst these were impressive they were aimed towards a specific event as opposed to the democratic system or government as a whole.

I can't claim to know why this apathy is so rampant, but my guess? People are completely bored and disillusioned. The articles that have garnered most attention on this site are the ones commenting on SNL and Rachel Maddow...people who make politics interesting and more importantly ACCESSIBLE. Whilst I understand Frum's frustration at recent events that lower the tone (ie threats to Obama), I can't understand why he isn't applauding comediens and news anchors for getting people interested and involved. (Oh wait...I can...because it's usually at the expense of Republicans...).

You can debate the merits/disadvantages of media intervention, but at the end of the day, if the politicians were doing their jobs properly they wouldn't have to worry about the intervention. People would pay more attention to them and not the jokes.

If you are going to put up candidates like Palin in this global climate, you can't be surprised that people will not take you seriously.

I'm in the UK and can't wait to get home and stream this (sadly work won't allow such a drain on the server).

I'm not a great fan on how the current presidential race is being run. It's such a refreshing change to see an intelliegent woman run rings around very experienced men.

I was just thinking how she would be awesome as first female president. 

Brains are sexy, plus she is beautiful in all her little butchness (sadly which MSNBC has toned down)...and I love her voice and humor and....I could go on.  I am stupidified by her.  Damn I think I just fallen for her.   Why can't I meet a younger butcher version of her with the same amount of goofiness, intelligence, and reserve???

Well I see that I contributed much opinion about her debate but she drives me crazy.

To come on a show and personally attack the host-- he must really have wanted to be on the offensive so that he could avoid talking about what she really wanted to talk about.

She was definitely classy on air, but I can only hope that off camera she went and kicked something!

I love this lady.  Incredibly intelligent.  She handled this guys obvious contempt with class and was able to effectively argue her point without being disrespectful.  He basically accused her of having a "juvenile" or "Something less than grown up" show. Instead of reacting to the personal insult, she used the basis of his argument against him and essentially made him look like a douche face ... politely. 

Rachel.  When you're single.  Holla at 'cha girl.  I'm just sayin.  My girlfriend would understand if it was you I was leaving for.  lol

"Be who you are and say what you feel,
because those who mind don't matter
and those who matter don't mind."    ~Dr. Seuss

In order to change laws in our society, you need to change the culture and the way people think about an issue. Due to ellen and other out lesbians in the media, people are starting to see that hey, we just aren't that bad and even if they don't want to admit it, are starting to like us and in Maddow's case see how influential, smart, charming lesbians in the media can be. (those words do apply to ellen as well...) So, as the media slowly influences the major opinion leaders with simple exposure, the opinion followers will follow suit. Here, the culture change will occur and only then can the law be fully changed because in America, there will never be change without the democratic support of an issue by the people. Unfortunately, right now, the issues we face as lesbians don't have that much major support. But slowly, I think we all see that changing. So, let's work to change the culture we live in and then impose laws with the support of many. It is a slow process, but one that will be worth it.

Feels like i've been run over in traffic...

If only I were half as composed and intelligent as she is. I like how she is able to think clearly and present politics in a humorous yet factual way. Its a tough balance but she's got it. Have to say, American politics right now is looking very interesting, much thanks to Rachel.

Picture of 'light is like water' author

I know AfterEllen isn't heavily into politics... But there's something important that Rachel is doing here in calling the McCain campaign on it's tone that I don't want missed. IMO, she's the one that's been hitting this the hardest out of everyone. Well, except for Rep. Lewis.

What the McCain campaign is doing is ironic, but not in a funny way. Racial violence is domestic terrorism. Bombing black churches, mob lynching, burning crosses in people's yards is domestic terrorism. And though I don't think she's actually point blank said that, she's referenced incidents and you'd kind of have to be stupid to not get it...or just have a totally different definition of domestic terrorism that somehow doesn't include terrorizing a whole racial class of Americans.

This isn't just partisan wanking and wanting McCain to lose. Frum accused liberals of not recognizing threats to America, but racism is a threat to America that conservatives frequently ignore. These days racism is socially unacceptable save for some pockets. We need to keep it that way by criticizing it when we see it, right when it occurs. Because if you don't criticize this behavior it's not only assumed to be okay, but silence is read as support. In this case by a long time Senator and Presidential candidate.

Some guy just tried to put Rachel in her place for speaking out on something that should be spoken out on. And then I think essentially tried to trivialize it by comparing inciting hate to liberal pundits being sarcastic. Seriously, if you want to compare the Republican Party's campaign tactics to pundits, then you need to look at conservative pundits....which is kind of like comparing an apple to itself.

This strategy the Republicans have for winning campaigns is wrong. Using people as wedge issues is wrong. Using people's fear against them and pitting Americans against each other because of race, sexual orientation, religion or gender is really fucking wrong. It robs people of making an autonomous choice, and that isn't freedom.

The McCain campaign saying they can't control their supporters' racism completely misses the point that their entire strategy of inciting fear and hate is wrong. That they were just trying to go for a more generalized sense of fear is kind of absurd. They shouldn't be going to that at all to win elections. And while America has been unfortunately tolerant of this tactic when it comes to gays, feminists and "radical" liberals, our history with racism won't allow us to tolerate it this time.

If you have to appeal to the most irrational part of people's brains by making the majority fear every minority and making minorities fear every other minority to win an election, then you really don't deserve to win.

And it's not Rachel.

Now, I don't think Frum is saying that Rachel's tone is equivalent to the tone at the TH meetings.

Dude is pretty much saying, "don't make fun of my party";  or rather, "don't make fun of my beliefs".  Yeah, sounds like dude got his feelings hurt "in the past 40 minutes" of her show.

As an aside... how do you go on a show and not answer ANY of the questions that the host asked you?

Apparently, the guy thought he was brought on the show for his views on Afghanistan; and was taken aback because he was asked about his critique of McCain's  campaign.  So like the hypocrite he is, he goes after Rachel for.... critiquing McCain's  campaign....

I don't know what planet or country this guy has been living in... but I can't really imagine he actually thinks sarcasm is going to be stripped from political discourse. 

Rachel speaks on the reactions of the parties and the candidates to all sorts of issues. 
If Rachel only spoke to the policies (like Frum wants)... no one would watch the show.

Rachel  makes a definite contribution to this race.  People are concerned about the candidates and their views on the issues.  That's how people make informed decisions when they vote.

I'm sure the tone of her show is going to change come Nov. 4th. Hopefully, focusing more on how  our country (as a whole) responds to the issues of our world.

Be the change you want to see in the world...
David Frum... did I mention he was a hypocrite?  Please Google Frum or look him up on Youtube. 
If only Gandhi could manifest to slap him in the face.

Well, I actually think Rachel is the change I want to see in political commentary. Hell, I'd be happy just watching her and Jon Stewart cover politics from here on out.

Here's some footage of Stewart basically laughing in Frum's face. 

she kicked his a$$!

This guy obviously didn't do his homework and research how well Rachel debates. 

Loved it!! 

I don't know whether I'm more excited that AfterEllen is covering this particular venue of politics or that there are so many responses to the posting! Thanks, Sarah, for posting on this event, as I was personally mesmerized by the exchange, so much that I had to rewind it to share with my spouse last night. Glad to know I wasn't the only one watching!

As expected, Dr. Maddow was magnificent in managing the agenda that David Frum(py) brought to the interview. Clearly, his objective was to poke holes and demean the great work that Rachel is doing in educating the viewers about her particular bent on politics. I suspect Rachel didn't see it coming, but she handled it like the insanely intelligent woman that she is, and I'm beaming with pride!!!

Recently, Maddow's taken to scrolling a list of names of Republicans who have declined invitations to come on her show; I imagine that list is going to get a little bit longer after watching this.

-----

"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly." - MLK

...or does the formidable (geeky butch) Dr. Maddows already have one?

It's awesome to see the numerous thoughtful critiques of that interview on this site. Dr. Maddow's is certainly raising our game too :)

Keep it coming!

Maddow is absolutly brilliant, i'm so impressed.

I'm glad to be able to see it, thanks for posting it Sarah.

Threats of violence from the crowd aside, equating a political campaign based on fear and cheap ploys to a news show using satire and sarcasm is beyond ridiculous.

If the news media didn't use a bit of humor, it would not have an audience. The news is a business like any other and if they don't attract customers, no one will get the news. What matters is that the sarcasm is used to raise important points and deliver accurate information.

In conclusion: Rachel kicks ass. Why don't I get cable?

an intellectual fraud.  He started out saying that the McCain campaign was inciting "fury" among its supporters, but then did a 180 when Maddow asked him to clarify what he was saying.  How hypocritical of him chastize the McCain campaign for its tactics, then make a circuitous argument that only he was allowed to criticize McCain and the Right.  Who does Frum think he is?  He gets to make all the rules, and then change them in midstream as it suits him?  Really?  I don't think so, and he was so inept and visibly uncomfortable when Dr. Maddow kept bringing him back to the point.

All arguments, opinions and threats are not equivalent.  I'm going to guess this guy has a hard time looking himself in the mirror, after attempting to equate disagreement or sarcasm from Rachel Maddow with the vicious mob atmosphere being whipped up at the McCain/Palin town halls.  Well, Maddow brought it to him like the poised intellectual warrior she is.  I have so much respect for her.  She will not be cowed.  A liberal with backbone - she is a great role model.  She makes the point with her very being that a conscience, intellect, education and knowledge are characteristics to be admired.

I actually don't consider TRMS on MSNBC to be the news. These types of shows are commentary and call attention to issues. Though, it is the way a lot of people get their news. Some people are better able to absorb news when they feel engaged by the host as opposed to just being fed information by a talking head. But I don't think she pretends that it's like the 11 o'clock news or that she's not bias. MSNBC is at least responsible enough to insert disclaimers when they have guests that are supporters of a candidate.

In contrast, whenever I watch programs on Fox like O'Reilly Factor, it seems that he's trying to pass himself off as an unbiased journalist when he's nothing of the sort. And that is misleading to the public.

There's nothing wrong with Op-Ed except when people don't know that what they're watching or reading is Op-Ed.

www.myspace.com/lunakiss7

Right on,Rachel,use class to snowball your debators.

I'll defintely will be taking notes from her as a way to handle people when it comes to debating certain issues. I like to see more out lesbians who are smart, funny,sexy, etc,etc are placed in front of the world, they will help shape views and open people's hearts.

For  Obama,asI  see him ,(okay someone lse called him this) is the knight , though not perfect, he is adore by many.  He is seen as the changer and the rescuer.

It is the reason I see them both changing the world's views about being a minority

Both are two different people yet both are breaking grounds of change.

Minorities have come a long way, but are moving forward further and faster.