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 Womenâ€™s Policy ResearchÂ foundÂ that women earn 77 cents to every dollar earned by men. Itâ€™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 areÂ upping their attacksÂ 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 â€œstructural discrimination that women really do face that Republicans donâ€™t believe is happening.â€ 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, â€œI love how passionate you are. I wish you are as right about what youâ€™re saying as you are passionate about it. I really do.â€
â€œThatâ€™s really condescending,â€ Maddow replied. â€œI mean this is a stylistic issue. My passion on this issue is actually me making a factual argument.â€
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 aÂ 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 inÂ arguingÂ 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.
Transcript via MSNBC:
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?”
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.
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–
Women don’t make less than men?
Actually, if you start looking at the numbers, Rachel, there are lots of reasons for that.
Wait, wait. No.
Well, first of all, we–
Don’t tell me what the reasons are. Do women make less than men for the (UNINTEL PHRASE)?
No? (LAUGH) Okay. No.
Well, for example–
–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–
Listen, this is not a math is hard type of conversation.
No, no. Yes, it is, actually.
No, it isn’t.
We’re having to look–
All right, let Rachel–
–by the way (UNINTEL).
Right now women are making 77 cents–
–on the dollar for what men are making, so–
Well, that’s not true.
If so every–
All right, let Rachel make her point.
–greedy businessman in America would hire only women, save 25% and be hugely profitable.
I feel like this is actually–
–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.
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–
–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.
It’s policy is the argument.
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.
That’s really condescending.
For example– no.
I mean this is a stylistic issue.
I’ll tell you what–
My passion on this issue–
Here’s a fact–
–is actually me making a factual argument–
Can I share one–
–on it, Alex.
May I share one fact with us?
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.
All right. Well, let me bring it back–
And that’s the Obama strategy in this election.
All right, but–
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.
Tucker Carlson Attacks Biden With Same Words Found in ‘Manifesto’ of Accused El Paso Mass Shooter
Tucker Carlson is the face of Fox News. 3.3 million Americans tune in nightly to his top-rated show – the number one cable “news” show in the month of August – including among the key demographic advertisers love: viewers 25-54 years old, according to Forbes.
Wednesday night Carlson ramped up his white nationalist and white supremacist attacks on President Joe Biden, which is a regular theme on his Fox News show, “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” using the same words that the white 21-year old suspected mass murderer in El Paso, Texas did in his “manifesto,” right before he allegedly gunned down 23 innocent Americans in August of 2019. (He has pleaded not guilty. Two years later, his case has yet to go to trial.)
Carlson and the suspected shooter talked about the “great replacement,” a conspiracy theory that claims white people are being “replaced” by people of color and minorities. (Remember the neo-Nazis marching in Charlotte, chanting, “you will not replace us”?)
And he talked about “eugenics,” a grotesque term tied to the Nazis, as if it were a guiding principle of the Biden administration.
In “What is the Great Replacement?” The New York Times published this about the alleged El Paso mass murderer:
“Echoing the man accused of fatally shooting dozens of people at two mosques in New Zealand in March, the El Paso gunman’s manifesto mentioned the ‘great replacement,’ a conspiracy theory that warns of white genocide.”
Tucker Carlson’s racist rhetoric reached fevered heights back in April, eliciting headlines like “Tucker Carlson’s latest white supremacist tirade might be his most dangerous yet (MSNBC),” “White Supremacy Has Its Coming Out Party, and Tucker Carlson Is There,” (Daily Beast), and an Associated Press report that reads: “The Anti-Defamation League has called for Fox News to fire prime-time opinion host Tucker Carlson because he defended a white-supremacist theory that says whites are being ‘replaced’ by people of color.”
Fox News did not fire Tucker Carlson, and if anything it appears they support his white supremacist words.
Carlson this week has not disappointed his superiors, which include Fox Corporation board members Rupert Murdoch, Lachlan Murdoch, and Republican former U.S. Speaker of the House Paul Ryan.
On Wednesday, Carlson told his millions of Fox News viewers that President Biden has intentionally orchestrated an “unrelenting stream of immigration,” as Media Matters reported (video below).
“Promising the poorest people on the planet that they can have endless free taxpayer funded services if they show up and break your laws? That’s not just stupid, it’s suicidal,” Carlson said.
“For generations, middle-class Americans have had access to the best healthcare in the world, but not anymore. That’s over for good. Our system cannot handle this many destitute newcomers, period. Imagine what hospitals are going to look like a year from now. How about schools?”
In 2019 The Washington Post reported the El Paso mass shooting suspect’s manifesto “mentioned a ‘Hispanic invasion’ of Texas and expressed worries that the United States was in the process of a ‘cultural and ethnic replacement.’ It cited fears that immigrants would swamp taxpayers with free health care and other benefits, take over jobs and intensify the strain on environmental resources.”
“But why?” Carlson continued Wednesday. “Well, Joe Biden just said it, to change the racial mix of the country,” he claimed, having quoted Biden from 2015, only seconds later twisting his words. “That’s the reason, to reduce the political power of people whose ancestors lived here, and dramatically increase the proportion of Americans newly-arrived from the third world.”
“And then Biden went further,” Carlson continued, “he said that non-white DNA is the quote, ‘the source of our strength.’ Imagine saying that. This is the language of eugenics, it’s horrifying. But there’s a reason Biden said it.”
Biden did not say “non-white DNA,” as Carlson implied.
In 2015, Tucker Carlson’s own far right wing website, Daily Caller (which he sold last year) reported on then-Vice President Biden’s “introductory remarks at a three-day summit to address violent extremism:
“I’m proud of the American record on culture and economic integration of not only our Muslim communities but African communities, Asian communities, Hispanic communities,” Biden said. “And the wave still continues. It’s not going to stop. Nor should we want it to stop. As a matter of fact, it’s one of the things I think we can be most proud of.”
Embracing immigration was part of the theme of the summit — stated numerous times by Biden — that “inclusion counts.”
“We are a melting pot,” Biden said of the U.S. “It is the ultimate source of our strength. It is the source of who we are.”
After falsely accusing Biden of using “the language of eugenics,” Carlson Wednesday went on to say: “In political terms, this policy is called ‘the great replacement,’ the replacement of legacy Americans with more obedient people from far-away countries. They brag about it all the time, but if you dare to say it’s happening they will scream at you with maximum hysteria.”
The “great replacement” is not a “political term.” It’s a white supremacist conspiracy theory.
Tucker Carlson outright calls Biden’s immigration policy a “great replacement” likens it to “eugenics.” pic.twitter.com/K228CnNK1H
— nikki mccann ramírez (@NikkiMcR) September 23, 2021
‘Very Credible’ Allegations Against Matt Gaetz Were Divulged to Dilbert Cartoonist Before Becoming Public: Report
Three days before news broke of a child sex-abuse investigation involving Florida Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz, Trump-loving Dilbert cartoonist Scott Adams and an employee of the Israeli consulate began a text-message exchange concerning the FBI probe.
In a bizarre, largely overlooked aspect of the ongoing Gaetz investigation and scandal, Adams and Jake Novak, broadcast media director of the Consulate General of Israel in New York, had apparently become friends on social media, Politico reported Thursday.
“Scoop I can’t report: Rep. Gaetz is the subject of a sex with minor…. I trust the source. Charges/accusations apparently ‘very credible’,” Novak wrote to Adams, adding “told ya” after news of the investigation broke, and decrying claims from Gaetz’s father alleging that he and his son had become victims of an “extortion” plot.
Adams responded by repeatedly casting doubt on the allegations against Gaetz and said “the extortion counterclaim sounds credible. Has witnesses apparently.”
Novak then suggested he was personally involved in an effort to get $25 million out of Gaetz’s father, Don Gaetz, to help free Bob Levinson, an American hostage in Iran whom most intelligence officials believe is dead.
“The backstory is this is screwing up my efforts to free Bob Levinson,” Novak wrote. “I’ve got a commando team leader friend of mine nervously waiting for wire transfers to clear.”
Novak later told Adams that “the real documents do not extort. And we only asked for $25 million as an estimate at first. We came way down.”
Last month, a federal grand jury indicted Stephen Alford on charges that he tried to defraud Gaetz’s father. Alford, a Florida developer, allegedly told Don Gaetz that in return for financing the Levinson rescue effort, he would use his influence to ensure the congressman “receives a presidential pardon, thus alleviating all his legal issues.”
“The allegation that a foreign official may be involved in a shakedown scheme of a U.S. congressman — a highly unusual development in its own right — could help provide a fuller picture of a scandal that has captivated the nation’s capital but where many pieces are still unknown,” Politico reported, adding that while the Israeli official’s apparent involvement “doesn’t speak to Gaetz’ guilt or innocence,” it is “concerning.”
Ronald E. Neumann, a career former ambassador and president of the American Academy of Diplomacy, told the site: “It’s certainly problematic, if it’s true. Anytime you have criminal or potential criminal behavior, and somebody who’s part of a foreign embassy or consulate, it’s a problem.”
Susan Collins, Under Fire for Refusing to Support Abortion Rights Bill, Endorses Racist Pro-Trump Ex-Governor
U.S. Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) is under mounting criticism for refusing to support a Democratic bill that would make access to abortion the law of the land, as the U.S. Supreme Court, experts believe, prepares to reverse its historic 1973 ruling in Roe v. Wade.
Senator Collins, who repeatedly claims to be pro-choice, is being criticized after years of supporting then-President Donald Trump’s judicial nominees at every level of the federal judiciary, including two of his three Supreme Court picks.
According to the progressive group Suit Up Maine, Collins voted to confirm of 208 of Trump’s judicial nominees. She voted to confirm Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, but against Amy Coney Barrett, reportedly because she felt the vote should not take place so close to an election. But Collins did vote to put Barrett on the federal bench in 2017.
The anger against Collins on social media has been palpable Wednesday, but it may be about to get worse.
According to NBC News affiliate News Center Maine, Collins just endorsed former Maine Republican Governor Paul LePage for a third term. LePage was term-limited after two consecutive terms, but announced in April he is running once again.
For those who don’t remember, LePage is a Trump acolyte known for making outrageous and vulgar remarks, is anti-choice, anti-LGBTQ, and pro-death penalty. He opposes legalization of marijuana, opposes renewable energy, supports “school choice,” opposes ObamaCare, wants to reduce the number of hospitals in the state, and has made racist remarks.
This was Gov. LePage in 2016:
The Governor of Maine. pic.twitter.com/UjjVZYEscA
— Adam Parkhomenko (@AdamParkhomenko) August 27, 2016
“As Maine recovers from the pandemic, Paul is the best candidate to grow our economy,” Collins said Wednesday in a pre-recorded video endorsing LePage, who once called himself “Baby Trump.”
#BREAKING Sen. Susan Collins has endorsed Paul LePage for Governor via video message. During her speech, there were a number of boos heard from the crowd, but some folks did cheer at the end @newscentermaine pic.twitter.com/mmnj7fBoPI
— Sean Stackhouse (@StackhouseNCME) September 22, 2021
The outpouring of outrage against Collins is tremendous.
The fact that Susan Collins won’t participate in this last chance to save Roe tells you all you need to know https://t.co/QlScePu8Cx
— Molly Jong-Fast (@MollyJongFast) September 22, 2021
Typo here. Should read “Sen. Susan Collins, who says she supports abortion rights but votes to confirm anti-choice judges who take away abortion rights and who opposes legislation to legalize abortion nationwide, says she opposes Senate Dems’ bill.” https://t.co/94FWZrzCRI
— Jamison Foser (@jamisonfoser) September 22, 2021
First, Senator Susan Collins lied and told us Brett “cries over beer” Kavanaugh wouldn’t overturn Roe v. Wade
Now she’s saying she won’t vote to codify Roe because “other provisions go too far”
Don’t be fooled by her slow-talking demeanor. She’s a liar through and through
— Lindy Li (@lindyli) September 22, 2021
Susan Collins doesn’t actually support abortion rights.
Why is this hard to grasp? https://t.co/tYa4oerTi2
— Pé (@4everNeverTrump) September 22, 2021
Susan Collins is anti-choice.
This shouldn’t surprise anyone.
— Chris Hahn (@ChristopherHahn) September 22, 2021
It’s almost as if Susan Collins isn’t really pro-choice after all. https://t.co/HiPJrZfZTE
— Molly Jong-Fast (@MollyJongFast) September 22, 2021
Susan Collins does not support abortion rights. Hello?!!
Supporters of reproductive choice don’t hand control of the Supreme Court to anti-choice justices. https://t.co/ZunnOvfJz1
— The Hoarse Whisperer (@TheRealHoarse) September 22, 2021
I have no words left for the hypocrisy of Susan Collins. https://t.co/mZlHo2HLHU
— Ilyse Hogue (@ilyseh) September 22, 2021
At what point do we just stop perpetuating the myth that Susan Collins actually supports abortion rights? In how many more high-stakes ways can she fall short of the bare minimum in defending them? https://t.co/w4T7xRxT1Y
— Emmy Bengtson (@EmmyA2) September 22, 2021
Most of the time, political endorsements are rooted in ideological alliances or self-interest.
In some rare situations, because of the person endorsed, there is no way it cannot but also point to one’s character.
This is the case with Susan Collins’ endorsement of Paul LePage.
— Dean Barker (@deanbarker) September 22, 2021
Today, @SenSusanCollins has:
❌ Opposed abortion rights for women
❌ Endorsed racist bigot Paul LePage
❌ Opposed funding to keep the government open
Doesn’t sound like a “moderate” to me. https://t.co/6UufQERZnG
— Protect Robert Mueller ✊ (@DisavowTrump20) September 22, 2021
- RIGHT WING EXTREMISM3 days ago
‘Brutal’: Far Right Commentator Who Threatened ‘Lead Injection’ for Anyone Trying to Vaccinate Him Contracts COVID
- News1 day ago
President Biden Had Two Vulgar Words to Say When He First Encountered One of Trump’s ‘Toys’ in the White House
- AMERICAN IDIOT3 days ago
‘Let Me Explain to You Again Peter How Our Process Works’: Psaki, Growing Tired, Forced to School Doocy Again
- RIGHT WING EXTREMISM3 days ago
Texas AG Ken Paxton Sues Biden Admin Over LGBTQ Policies He Falsely Claims Put ‘Women and Children at Risk’
- RIGHT WING EXTREMISM3 days ago
Watch: Marjorie Taylor Greene Threatens ‘God Will No Longer Provide Protection Over America’
- RIGHT WING EXTREMISM2 days ago
DeSantis Hires New Surgeon General: A Hydroxychloroquine-Pushing Physician Who Appeared in ‘Demon Sperm’ Doc’s Video
- RIGHT WING EXTREMISM3 days ago
Supreme Court Schedules ‘Major’ Case That Could Overturn Roe and Allow Bans on Abortion
- RIGHT WING EXTREMISM2 days ago
Head of Anti-LGBTQ Group Worked With Trump on Secret Scheme to Try to Get Pence to Overturn Election: CNN