Connect with us

Watch: Rachel Maddow Attacked By GOP On War On Women, Strikes Back, Wins

Published

on

Rachel Maddow, the top MSNBC anchor, appeared on “Meet The Press” on Sunday, and was immediately attacked by Republican guests. Maddow, whose book, Drift, is a number one best-seller, eloquently held her ground despite not even being allowed to speak by Alex Castellanos, a GOP political operative and CNN pundit. The topic: pay inequality; women are paid less than men. Castellanos actually said — while interrupting Madddow — “Men go into professions like engineering, science and math that earn more. Women want more flexibility.”

“A new study released in April by the Institute for Women’s Policy Research found that women earn 77 cents to every dollar earned by men. It’s one of several studies showing women are paid less than men for doing the same work over the same number of hours. The exchange comes just as Democrats and President Obama are upping their attacks on Republicans over issues affecting women, from equal pay to mandatory ultrasound laws,” Talking Points Memo reported:

Maddow rejoined that the disparity is the result of “structural discrimination that women really do face that Republicans don’t believe is happening.” She needled Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), a Romney surrogate who was also on the panel, for her vote against the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act that makes it easier for women to sue for gender-based pay discrimination.

The tussle took a more personal turn when Castellanos told Maddow, “I love how passionate you are. I wish you are as right about what you’re saying as you are passionate about it. I really do.”

“That’s really condescending,” Maddow replied. “I mean this is a stylistic issue. My passion on this issue is actually me making a factual argument.”

This is what the GOP does. When it can’t win, it interjects doubt, and allows some weak-minded voters to cling to their old beliefs that shore up their own ignorance, which Republican strategists like Castellanos use.

“Beware people who begin the arguments with the word ‘actually’ because, more often than not, they’re about to lay down a thick layer of nasally, affected condescension,” Doug Barry at Jezebel writes.

At least, that’s what happens in this clip from a Meet the Pressconfrontation between fact-marshalling Rachel Maddow and obfuscating GOP strategist Alex Castellanos, who incorrectly believed he could smarm and squirm his way past Maddow in arguing that, actually, women don’t make only 77 cents on the dollar compared to what men make. I say “confrontation” rather than “debate” because Castellanos is full of shit and Maddow says as much by swiveling her head so sharply when he contradicts her litany of persistent inequalities that it seems she’s in danger of losing it. Her head, I mean, not the confrontation, for which Castellanos, as plodding as Snuffleupagus with his words, was ill-prepared.

Frankly, Castellanos was extremely arrogant and an excellent example of how Republicans view and treat women. They don’t like Rachel Maddow because she represents everything they are against: intelligence and education (Maddow is a Rhodes Scholar and has a PhD from Oxford), independent women and women in general, and homosexuality.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Transcript via MSNBC:

DAVID GREGORY:
How, Rachel, should this conversation actually be framed? I made the comment when I’ve done this topic before. In a lot of ways, men bringing up this question it’s almost a condescending question. “Well, what is it that women want?”
RACHEL MADDOW:
Right.
DAVID GREGORY:

So what is the right way to be framing this conversation and this debate, which is a very serious debate, because we’re talking about the real deciders in the race.

RACHEL MADDOW:
Policy. It should be about policy. And all of our best debates are always about policy. And it should be about policy that affects women specifically. The Romney campaign wants to talk about women and the economy. Women in this country still make 77 cents on the dollar for what men make. So if–
ALEX CASTELLANOS:
Not exactly.
RACHEL MADDOW:
Women don’t make less than men?
ALEX CASTELLANOS:
Actually, if you start looking at the numbers, Rachel, there are lots of reasons for that.
RACHEL MADDOW:

Wait, wait. No.

ALEX CASTELLANOS:
Well, first of all, we–
RACHEL MADDOW:
Don’t tell me what the reasons are. Do women make less than men for the (UNINTEL PHRASE)?
ALEX CASTELLANOS:
Actually–
FEMALE VOICE:
Not (UNINTEL).
ALEX CASTELLANOS:
–because.

RACHEL MADDOW:
No? (LAUGH) Okay. No.
ALEX CASTELLANOS:
Well, for example–
(OVERTALK)
ALEX CASTELLANOS:
–men work an average of 44 hours a week. Women work 41 hours a week. Men go into professions like engineering, science and math that earn more. Women want more flexibility–
(OVERTALK)
RACHEL MADDOW:
Listen, this is not a math is hard type of conversation.
ALEX CASTELLANOS:

No, no. Yes, it is, actually.
RACHEL MADDOW:
No, it isn’t.
ALEX CASTELLANOS:
We’re having to look–
RACHEL MADDOW:
No, listen–
DAVID GREGORY:
All right, let Rachel–
(OVERTALK)
DAVID GREGORY:

–by the way (UNINTEL).
RACHEL MADDOW:
Right now women are making 77 cents–
ALEX CASTELLANOS:
And litigated–
RACHEL MADDOW:
–on the dollar for what men are making, so–
ALEX CASTELLANOS:
Well, that’s not true.
RACHEL MADDOW:
–so–

ALEX CASTELLANOS:
If so every–
DAVID GREGORY:
All right, let Rachel make her point.
ALEX CASTELLANOS:
–greedy businessman in America would hire only women, save 25% and be hugely profitable.
RACHEL MADDOW:
I feel like this is actually–
ALEX CASTELLANOS:
That’s it.
RACHEL MADDOW:

–and it’s weird that you’re interrupting me and not letting me make my point, because we get along so well. So let me make my point.
ALEX CASTELLANOS:
I will.
RACHEL MADDOW:
But it is important, I think, the interruption is important, I think, because now we know, at least from both of your perspectives, that women are not faring worse than men in the economy. That women aren’t getting paid less for equal work. I think that’s a serious difference in factual understanding of the world.
But given that some of us believe that women are getting paid less than men for doing the same work, there is something called the Fair Pay Act. There was a court ruling that said the statute of limitations, if you’re getting paid less than a men, if you’re subject to discrimination, starts before you know that discrimination is happening, effectively cutting off your recourse to the courts. You didn’t know you were being discriminated against. You can’t go.
The first law passed by this administration is the Fair Pay Act. To remedy that court ruling. The Mitt Romney campaign put you out as a surrogate to shore up people’s feelings about this issue after they could not say whether or not Mitt Romney would have signed that bill. You’re supposed to make us feel better about it. You voted against the Fair Pay Act. It’s not about–
(OVERTALK)
RACHEL MADDOW:
–whether or not you have a female surrogate. It’s about policy and whether or not you want to fix some of the structural discrimination that women really do face that Republicans don’t believe is happening.
DAVID GREGORY:

It’s policy is the argument.

ALEX CASTELLANOS:
It’s policy. And I love how passionate you are. I wish you are as right about what you’re saying as you are passionate about it. I really do.
RACHEL MADDOW:
That’s really condescending.
ALEX CASTELLANOS:
For example– no.
RACHEL MADDOW:
I mean this is a stylistic issue.
ALEX CASTELLANOS:
I’ll tell you what–

RACHEL MADDOW:
My passion on this issue–
ALEX CASTELLANOS:
Here’s a fact–
RACHEL MADDOW:
–is actually me making a factual argument–
ALEX CASTELLANOS:
Can I share one–
RACHEL MADDOW:
–on it, Alex.
ALEX CASTELLANOS:

May I share one fact with us?
RACHEL MADDOW:
Please share.
ALEX CASTELLANOS:
When you look at, for example, single women working in America today between the ages of, I think, 40 and 64, who makes more? Men or women, on average? Men make $40,000 a year. Women make $47,000. When you take out the marriage factor, look at some economics. My point here is that we’re manufacturing a political crisis to get away from what this election really wants to be about.
DAVID GREGORY:
All right. Well, let me bring it back–
ALEX CASTELLANOS:
And that’s the Obama strategy in this election.
DAVID GREGORY:
All right, but–

RACHEL MADDOW:
No–

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘You Don’t Care’: Gay Congressman Blasts Defense Secretary Over LGBTQ Troops

Published

1 day ago

on

June 13, 2025

By

U.S. Rep. Eric Sorensen, a Democrat and the first openly gay member of Congress from Illinois, delivered strong criticism of U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, accusing the embattled Pentagon chief of not caring about LGBTQ service members, and fostering an environment where LGBTQ people do not want to join the military. He also brought up the planned renaming of the USNS Harvey Milk, which the Secretary reportedly ordered to intentionally coincide with LGBTQ Pride Month.

Congressman Sorensen told Secretary Hegseth that Harvey Milk, the first openly gay elected official in California, who was assassinated in 1978, served “courageously,” but was forced to resign from the Navy because he was gay.

“You see,” Congressman Sorensen said, “as a kid, all I wanted to be was the weatherman on TV. You know, I learned that I could have gone into the Army or the Navy to learn meteorology. But someone like me was not allowed. They didn’t want someone like me, Mr. Secretary.”

READ MORE: ‘Coup’: What DHS Secretary’s ‘Liberate’ Comment Means, According to Experts

“There wasn’t anything that I could do to change myself, or the way that my nation thought of me. And so I want to keep this very simple. Do you believe that Harvey Milk is a veteran who deserves his country’s thanks?”

Hegseth attempted to dodge the question.

“Sir, the decision to rename the ship was—” Hegseth began.

“I’m just asking, do you believe that Harvey Milk is a veteran who deserves his country’s thanks? Yes or no,” Sorensen pressed.

“If his service was deemed honorable, yes,” the Secretary replied.

“I disagree with your leadership,” Sorensen said, “because I believe that every veteran deserves our thanks. We all walk in the footsteps of leaders before us, and you may not find the value in the fact that many of those people are women, with different skin colors, different backgrounds, different talents, immigrants, gay, straight, transgender, disabled.”

READ MORE: In Reversal, Trump Uses Term Tied to Ethnic Cleansing Amid Renewed Mass Deportation Demand

“You may want to change it, but you can’t. Because the America that you and I both serve is a place where everyone has the ability—or should have the ability—to grow up and be the hero their grandpa was. I wanted to do that when I was a kid.”

“We’re going back to that time,” the congressman warned. “Gay kids like me, they don’t want to go into the Army. They don’t want to go into the Navy, because you don’t care for them. It’s happening all over our country.”

“My grandpa taught me never to judge the value of a veteran’s service. And I hope, Mr. Secretary, you learn to do the same in your capacity, and you can find it in your heart, to make that part of your process.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: Democrats Demand Noem Testify After Handcuffing of US Senator Padilla

Continue Reading

News

‘Coup’: What DHS Secretary’s ‘Liberate’ Comment Means, According to Experts

Published

1 day ago

on

June 13, 2025

By

Before her protective squad forcibly removed, detained, and handcuffed a sitting U.S. Senator asking a question at her Los Angeles press conference, U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem delivered remarks that legal and political experts warn are explosive.

“We are not going away,” Secretary Noem vowed, regarding herself and her Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents, other DHS operatives, and the U.S. Military, all of whom she promised would “continue to sustain and increase our operations in this city.”

“We are staying here to liberate this city from the socialist and the burdensome leadership that this governor and that this mayor have placed on this country here,” she declared, referring to Democratic California Governor Gavin Newsom and Democratic Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass.

Experts are once again sounding the alarm.

READ MORE: In Reversal, Trump Uses Term Tied to Ethnic Cleansing Amid Renewed Mass Deportation Demand

“I think the governor and mayor of Los Angeles are right,” declared U.S. Senator Adam Schiff (D-CA) on MSNBC on Thursday night. “I think they’re testing out their ability to essentially commandeer National Guards throughout the country, and use them for their own purposes.”

“One thing that got lost in the horrendous treatment of Alex Padilla today,” Schiff continued, “was what Kristi Noem said at that press conference in saying that it was necessary to have these troops there to ‘liberate’ the city from the socialists. That’s the kind of rhetoric the administration is using.”

He went on to say that “the fact that they would abuse the military that way and justify it that way is unconscionable.”

Other critics weighed in as well.

Quoting Secretary Noem’s remarks, Harvard University Professor Emeritus Laurence Tribe, a top constitutional law scholar, wrote: “Using military force to displace a democratically elected state government is called a coup.”

Former prosecutor and former Hill staffer Stephen Rodio remarked, “Trump’s regime is going to liberate us from the people that we elected to represent us.”

“Be clear on what she’s saying here,” wrote podcaster Joe Walsh, a former GOP Tea Party Congressman and now a Democrat and political commentator. “She’s saying that Trump is going to use the U.S. military to overthrow both the duly elected Mayor of Los Angeles & the Governor of California. I understand she’s not very bright, but, in essence, she’s saying the federal government has declared war on California.”

READ MORE: Democrats Demand Noem Testify After Handcuffing of US Senator Padilla

“Quiet Part Out Loud?” asked U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI). “Sounds a lot like she’s saying they’re there to liberate the city from its elected government.

Lincoln Project senior advisor Stuart Stevens also quoted Noem’s remarks, then wrote: “That’s a statement of intent of a coup, to ‘liberate’ a state from legally elected officials. Then armed men tackle and shackle one of those leaders. Nothing about we are here to arrest violent offenders and support law enforcement.”

“The declared purpose is to undo the choice of voters. Nothing like this has ever happened in modern America except the insurrection of Jan. 6th, which Noem supported, including her support for pardoning those who assaulted law enforcement.”

“Greeted as liberators, you say?” wrote Wall Street Journal reporter Alex Ward, appearing to echo former Bush 43 Vice President Dick Cheney’s fated 2003 Iraq War claim.

“Do the decent thing and resign, Noem,” urged former U.S, Rep. Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH). “The world is watching.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Not Today Hegseth’: Dem Slams Defense Secretary as ‘Unfit to Lead’ in Fiery Exchange

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

In Reversal, Trump Uses Term Tied to Ethnic Cleansing Amid Renewed Mass Deportation Demand

Published

1 day ago

on

June 13, 2025

By

Facing backlash from his base over an announced, possible exemption for undocumented immigrants working in agriculture and hospitality, President Donald Trump has entirely reversed course, now calling for the mass “remigration” of all undocumented individuals. The term “remigration” is closely associated with ethnic cleansing and far-right European movements, including the neo-fascist political party backed by both Trump and his vice president.

In a wild rant steeped in fascist and ethnonationalist rhetoric, Trump baselessly attacked the Biden administration and characterized all undocumented immigrants as takers costing the country billions—despite the fact that the undocumented population is a net economic positive for the United States.

“The Biden Administration and Governor Newscum,” Trump declared Tuesday evening—using his derogatory nickname for California Governor Gavin Newsom—“flooded America with 21 Million Illegal Aliens, destroying Schools, Hospitals and Communities, and consuming untold Billions of Dollars in Free Welfare.”

READ MORE: Democrats Demand Noem Testify After Handcuffing of US Senator Padilla

These claims are not supported by evidence.

“All of them have to go home, as do countless other Illegals and Criminals, who will turn us into a bankrupt Third World Nation. America was invaded and occupied. I am reversing the Invasion. It’s called Remigration. Our courageous ICE Officers, who are daily being subjected to doxxing and murder threats, are HEROES. We will always have their back as they carry out this noble mission. America will be for Americans again!”

Just one day earlier, Trump had declared that undocumented immigrants working on farms, in agriculture, the hotel and entertainment industries are “very good, long time workers,” who are “almost impossible to replace.”

READ MORE: ‘Not Today Hegseth’: Dem Slams Defense Secretary as ‘Unfit to Lead’ in Fiery Exchange

“Changes are coming!” he vowed.

“Our farmers,” Trump also said Thursday at a press conference, according to The New York Times, “are being hurt badly by, you know, they have very good workers, they have worked for them for 20 years.”

“They’re not citizens, but they’ve turned out to be, you know, great. And we’re going to have to do something about that. We can’t take farmers and take all their people and send them back because they don’t have maybe what they’re supposed to have, maybe not.”

“We can’t do that to our farmers and leisure, too, hotels,” he said, suggesting an executive order was in the works. “We’re going to have to use a lot of common sense on that.”

All that appears to have been a blip.

READ MORE: ‘Mouthpiece for the Kremlin’: Rubio Scorched for ‘Russia Day’ Congratulations

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.