Rachel Maddow, Sean Hannity, & Liberal Math

Posted by on Nov 8th, 2010 and filed under Defense. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry from your site

In the interest of fairness, I will admit right up front, I don’t care for Rachel Maddow. In my role as a political commentator, I watch, listen to, and read the ideas, positions, and beliefs of perhaps hundreds of people each week, many with whom I don’t agree. I can respect people who don’t share my positions, provided they are thoughtful, genuine, and fair. In my opinion Rachel Maddow is none of these. Aside from her snarky, sarcastic comments and sweeping, erroneous, generations about the beliefs of conservatives, she suffers from “liberal math.” 

The Keith Olbermann situation is a perfect case in point. As most of you now know, Keith Olbermann, star of MSNBC’s Countdown was suspended without pay, indefinitely on Friday for previously contributing the campaigns of three politicians. The terms of Olbermann’s contract with MSNBC clearly state that he is not allowed to make political campaign contributions or endorse political candidates without receiving permission to do so, in advance, from MSNBC. 

The math is simple. Employment contract stating that Olbermann can’t make political contributions + Olbermann making political contribution = Olbermann suspension. 

Unfortunately, Rachel Maddow doesn’t understand actual math, but she offers us all her “insight” anyway.  Does Maddow point out that MSNBC, supposedly an unbiased “news” organization, funnels millions of dollars into the campaigns of liberal candidates? No. Does she chide Olbermann for knowingly violating the terms of his contract, not once but at least three times? No. Does she even recognize the simple math behind Olbermann’s suspension? NO. Apparently, using “liberal math,” Olbermann is NOT to blame in this situation. In fact Maddow doesn’t recognize any of the players as being at fault. Using “liberal math” the real culprit is…..Sean Hannity. 

Sean Hannity, Fox superstar and conservative talk show hero has made no secret of the causes he supports, the politicians he respects and endorses, and the contributions that he has made. He doesn’t have to; his contract doesn’t require him to do so. Yet Maddow decries this as a double standard. 

Using “liberal math,” Sean Hannity’s ability to make endorsements and contributions under the terms of his contract with Fox + Olbermann’s inability to do so under his contract with MSNBC = conservative conspiracy. 

And this, my friends, is exactly what is wrong with liberalism. People like Rachel Maddow equate completely unrelated things. They see one person’s success and link it to another person’s failure. And in this case (as is often the case) they attempt to damage the reputation of a person they don’t like by attempting to paint them with the same tainted brush as their own disgraced compatriot. It’s always someone else’s fault. It’s society’s fault that people commit crimes. It’s America’s fault that illegals sneak across the border. And of course, it’s Sean Hannity’s fault that Keith Olbermann can’t abide by his own contract. 

Thanks Rachel, ‘liberal math” is tough for us conservatives to understand. See to the rest of us, Olbermann had a contract that included a clause preventing him from making political contributions without previous authority. He chose to violate that clause and as a result, he received an indefinite (actually two day) suspension. It’s all pretty clear. The math is pretty easy. But I want to thank you for reminding us (after this historic Republican sweep) that we have a long way to go to rid this country of the insidious disease that is “liberal math.”

1 Response for “Rachel Maddow, Sean Hannity, & Liberal Math”

  1. AK says:

    Thanks Alexandra, my words exactly. Reason Mag (as we all know, no fans of Fox or Republicans) also had some choice words for Maddow’s math. http://reason.com/blog/2010/11/08/no-you-pretty-clearly-run-a-po

    Report this comment

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to our newsletter

This Week's Poll

Archive