Web Letters: Mad for Rachel Maddow

By Rebecca Traister

This article appeared in the August 18, 2008 edition of The Nation.

July 30, 2008

Write a Web letter about this article.

What's a Web Letter?

Web Letters are continuously published e-mails from real people, signed with their real names. No registration is required. Each article page on The Nation includes a Web Letters link.

Read the best Web Letters on this page.

We're committed to publishing your comments as they are received. We place a red star () on the best submissions and may edit your e-mail for length or content. Your e-mail address will not be published or shared with any third party without your consent.

If you prefer, you may submit a letter to the print edition only.

We look forward to hearing from you.

  • Finally! Rachel Maddow is a female counterpart to Stephen Colbert. I would love to see those two go head to head in a debate. They both have the gift of gab and an eye for the absurd, fearlessly claim freedom of speech, and tell it like it is. Love ya, guys. Rock on!

    Maggie Arackelian

    Los Angeles, CA

    01/04/2009 @ 8:24pm


  • At 85 I've been listening to TV and radio for a long time and never have I heard a more refreshing, unhidden bias, informed commentator. She is attractive and intelligent with a wonderful sense of humor that reminds us all not to take life too seriously lest we had it wrong. Don't let her leave the airwaves.

    Daniel Long

    Salem, OR

    11/03/2008 @ 10:33pm


  • I look so forward to Rachel's honest, direct, funny delivery of the days political news... never have before! I like her clean, damn if they don't like me attitude and commentary. She is a very fresh face... not to mention honest and soooo well informed. Love her show and can't wait for lots more zingers. Hooray and more Hooray. Rachel makes this election palatable and zeros in on what's important with a great sense of humor as well. More, More. More.

    Tosca Giorgi

    San Francisco, CA

    09/17/2008 @ 12:09pm


  • Thank you for your article on Rachel Maddow. My husband and I have loved her insightful comments since we first saw her. NBC is making a smart decision, as we need more hosts that question the status quo. Most news reporting is so lacking in every way: one, it is the same news being reported on every channel; and two, it is totally biased and promotes "talking points" instead of questioning our government and its policies and informing the general public. Hiring Maddow is a move toward intelligent dialogue regarding important issues instead of the lurid minutia that seems to have invaded our daily lives. It is time to put the American interests first, and we know that Rachel will do that. Thankfully, we have Olberman and now Maddow. Phil Donahue would approve.

    Shirley Esquivel

    Miami Lakes, FL

    08/21/2008 @ 11:42pm


  • I have watched Rachel since her inception on MSNBC and have been an ardent fan from day one, so you must forgive my enthusiasm.

    While reading Rebecca Traister’s bio it occurred to me that, with the untimely death of Tim Russert, MSNBC had in their hands someone with the same kind of sunny persona and capability. Someone with the ability to take facts, dissect them and use them, not in a mean or hateful way, but use them to get to the truth in an answer (ask Chris Matthews about this one).

    I would go back to watching Meet the Press with her there.

    J.W. Barnett

    San Diego, CA

    08/09/2008 @ 4:23pm


  • Rachel Maddow is indeed a clear thinker and a good left-wing pundit to join the ever expanding liberal tribe of Matthews, Barnacle, Abrams, Gregory and the rabid left of liberal Olberman. But with all the bluster of merit thrown at Ms. Maddow, it was Tucker Carlson that tapped her for the front. No-one would have figure that after reading this Nation piece.

    Hugh Maguire

    New York, NY

    08/09/2008 @ 3:35pm


  • The hatchet job Maddow and Olbermann did on Dana Milbank wasn't different from the one, back in the 1857, carried out by disguised Mormons against more than 120 settlers and not excluding infants in their mothers' arms.

    Barack Obama, would-be Democratic ambassador to the world, isn't enough of a leader even to take back from Nancy Pelosi his people's right to impeach Bush, and whether those people would impeach Bush in order to end the war or for any other of the many reasons why they'd impeach him.

    This might be a good time to remind ourselves that Maddow, Olbermann, Obama, Pelosi and even Bruce Springsteen all figure their income taxes according to a form which is not labeled Democrat.

    Cameron Jones

    Indiana, PA

    08/06/2008 @ 10:42am


  • I know that a lot of people would like the troops out pronto and that includes me, my husband is active duty army, but you cannot move the army any faster. I like Ms. Maddow very much and enjoy her comments, but when it comes to moving the troops out of Iraq, it will take time. They bring lots of equipment they would have to tear down and pack up, tons of stuff, and keep everyone safe while they do it. We are talking about seven years in Iraq so far. Just to make a point, when a unit is getting close to redeployment to come back home it takes 120 days to pack out and account for all the equipment, and that includes doing your regular duty. I support Sen. Obama, so do a lot of my close friends who are army wives, and we are very aware of the cost of this war in Iraq, we see the human cost of it every day.

    Rhonda Fraser

    Fayetteville, NC

    08/04/2008 @ 6:08pm


  • I've watched Rachel for several weeks now as I peruse the news channels looking for the most objective commentators. She does have a clear, insightful mind, although she takes great sarcastic delight in attacking conservatism in almost any form. As an "Air America" type this is known and understandable, though it renders her opinions too subjective to be taken very seriously and makes her, like her right-wing counterpart O'Reilly, part of America's polarization problem.

    William Harry

    Timonium, MD

    08/04/2008 @ 3:49pm


  • I watch Rachel whenever, however, possible. this gal has a clear, clean-thinking mind that is unafraid of going solo into the dark night of television spin and shine a clear light of logic. She never seems to need to explain any statement that she makes--every sentence seems to stand alone and correct.

    James Pinette

    Caribou, ME

    08/02/2008 @ 11:49pm


Advertisement
Advertisement

Blogs

» The Beat

House Passes Health Reform, But Without Reproductive Rights | Pelosi secures necessary votes, but only after allowing anti-choice Dems to bar access to abortion in new programs.
John Nichols
187 Comments

» Editor's Cut

Around The Nation | Obama, one year on. Plus: Jeremy Scahill takes your questions, and a new video series from The Nation.
Katrina vanden Heuvel
38 Comments

» The Notion

Injustice in Illinois | Prosecutors in Illinois should be more concerned with an innocent man behind bars than journalism students' grades.
Ari Berman
31 Comments

» The Dreyfuss Report

Obama Fails in Middle East | Clinton delivers the ultimate diss to Abbas.
Robert Dreyfuss
170 Comments

» Act Now!

Equality Across America | This week, young LBGT activists are staging a National Week of Initiative.
Peter Rothberg
16 Comments

» Altercation

Slacker Thursday | Dying laptops, recapping the election, the Dow, and the Yankees with the World Series.
Eric Alterman