Rachel Maddow explains contraception and birth control... for the guys

Yes, there are political undertones to this clip—and if that's a problem, feel free to relocate the thread to Politics—but 80% of it is sex ed. And it's funny. And I love Rachel Maddow.

So enjoy.

 

That was just fucking brilliant.

For all of the Republican bitching and moaning these past few years, they make Obama look like a certified genius. They love guns, but they never fail to shoot themselves in the collective foot.

 

I have a feeling Romney will magically "get it" come the general election - if he manages to clinch the GOP nomination. Thank goodness we'll have Rachel to remind him of his one time, pandering stance on the issue.

 

Maddow is just another partisan talking head. She is no better then Beck, Limbaugh or Olberman. They all slant the news to fit their world view.

Regarding the clip...condescending.

 

I like her but I have a feeling she used to be Ben Savage before the sex change. Notice you never see them together...

As I am, because of this new format, a "new" member, you will just have to Google Ben Savage

 

That's why I said she is as bad as the others. There is no middle ground with any of them. Everything is Us vs Them. This partisan nonsense needs to stop and the sooner the better.

..and what kind of outrage would be happening if it was a male broadcaster making such patronizing comments towards women? Because she is a liberal she gets a free pass? Do as I say not as I do?

Selective editing to make the opposition look stupid or inept. Both sides are guilty of it.

 

Not sure if you were paying attention during the last election, but there were some pretty misogynistic things said about both Clinton and Palin by mainstream, well known talking heads and few people batted an eye. Not to mention that you'll never see Anderson Cooper in a low cut blouse while hosting his show.

All I'm saying: if you're under the impression that women are getting adequate respect in the mainstream media, you aren't paying attention. I am of the male persuasion and it didn't offend me one bit. I relieve you of your obligation to get offended on my behalf.

 

I so wish I were a better writer....

My point is these types of shows are no better than "reality" TV. These types of shows are divisive, they skew perspectives...liberal meanie...conservative bully...enough already.
We need more middle ground. There has been more than enough preaching of extremism dogma in this country.

 

She is challenging a candidate for president to say what he means and mean what he says.
It would be one thing if Romney had chosen to release a statement clarifying his position on this issue. Is that what we got?
No. What we got was yet another example of a republican candidate too piss poor in balls to stand up to his 'constituency.' Even when it makes him look like a fool.
Times like these I know how much it must suck to be a republican with a harvard degree.

 

Rachel Maddow's snarky leftist agenda and incompatible sexual orientation can't deter my throbbing desire to make sweet sticky love to her androgynous body.

 

We have single issue interests writing proposed legislation and candidates taking yea or nay positions without an understanding of the full implications. When pressed beyond the answers their handlers have coached into them, they invariably step in a pile of shit. Then the apologists blame the media for pointing it out.

What would be so wrong about saying, "Generally, I feel (X), but I need to study the issue in more depth," before shooting your mouth off? I, for one, would respect that more than the guy pretending to be an instant expert and, usually, failing.

 

You really are a lesbian trapped in a man's body.

 

"Don'tcha wish your girlfriend was hot like me? Don'tcha wish your girlfriend was a freak like me?"

*flex*

I'd comment on the clip but I can't watch it here at work.

 

Explain to me, in your perfect world, how any issue would be discussed in a non-partisan fashion. A partisan position based on fact, is still a partisan position, but it has the added validity of being fact based.

By the way, when you can point out outright lies that RM puts forward as the truth, then let me know how she is just as bad.
'Both sides are guilty" is also a false conundrum, as there may be more than two sides to a debate. It also doesn't prove that both sides are equally guilty, or that anyone on either side must be as wrong as either side.

There are conservatives that don't use the methods of Beck and Limbaugh, so are they just as wrong? No ( that was my opinion )

 

These are not news shows.
They are political propaganda. Infotainment if you prefer.
The entire reason they exist to to espouse one dogma over another while trying to make the opposite side look incompetent.
Y'all can go on taking their word as gospel if y'all want. I prefer to hear both sides before making up my mind on something and its not going to be from the talking heads at MSNBC or Fox.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_to_moderation
"Argument to moderation (Latin: argumentum ad temperantiam, also known as middle ground, false compromise, gray fallacy and the golden mean fallacy) is a logical fallacy which asserts that given two positions there exists a compromise between them which must be correct."