Why is MSNBC censoring Rachel Maddow?

UPDATE: Here is the video that MSNBC is trying to censor, courtesy of my friend John in Vermont:


Because she smacked down Pat Buchanan. Read what happened. Then read what some folks are doing about it.

CyberDisobedience on Substack | @aravosis | Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn. John Aravosis is the Executive Editor of AMERICAblog, which he founded in 2004. He has a joint law degree (JD) and masters in Foreign Service from Georgetown; and has worked in the US Senate, World Bank, Children's Defense Fund, the United Nations Development Programme, and as a stringer for the Economist. He is a frequent TV pundit, having appeared on the O'Reilly Factor, Hardball, World News Tonight, Nightline, AM Joy & Reliable Sources, among others. John lives in Washington, DC. .

Share This Post

No Responses to “Why is MSNBC censoring Rachel Maddow?”

  1. I was watching this show when this segment happened and I shouted at the screen, Woo Hoo! You go, Rachel. Let’s face it, Rachel Maddow is the smartest, best educated, most savvy political analyst on television today – bar none. Who else would have the guts to tell it like it is? Too bad MSNBC doesn’t get their act together and give her a show.

  2. bfraser55 says:

    I am sick of MSNBC keeping that Ole foo;lBuchanan on he’s getting as bad as his idiot sister. I wish they would get rid of him.You go Rachel!!!!! We need to get rid of Gregory Too and give Rachel his job

  3. MElouise says:

    Our 13 yr old daughter now routinely watches KO with us and loves when Rachel sits in as much as we do. She is FAB!

  4. Corpsman1 says:

    Rachel is one of few truly courageous Americans (such as Kucinich, and Olbermann and Feingold) that I can think of really standing tall for the Constitution and the middle class against all odds. I really hope MSNBC isn’t going the way of Faux News and starting to censor and edit and alter truth.

  5. Guest says:

    “protecting a Holocaust denier is job 1”-MSNBC

  6. Butch1 says:

    Very true.

  7. tlsintx says:

    i heard part of an interesting discussion on NPR today about how blacks and whites perceive racism so differently…a bi-racial man was saying his white family members think racism is gone, but his black family members do NOT.

    we’ve got a long way to go…

  8. tlsintx says:

    i thought the point being made was they just cut Rachel’s smackdown from the middle of the clip…

    you can be the voice of reason all you like, just don’t say ‘you people’ ok?

  9. Butch1 says:

    Ford essentially, pushed Rachel under the bus. I thought the host was actually being racial without even realizing it since he asked a black man if he thought he was being dissed only because he wanted a black man to answer that question. Ford doesn’t like having to answer racial questions. The host, to me, was being racial. He should have asked other panel members that question as well.

    I also expected to see Rachel on Keith Olbermann’s show this evening but it appears MSNBC is going to “silence” her and Keith on this. Sad.

  10. tlsintx says:

    oh, and what good is Harold Ford, i ask you? please.

  11. tlsintx says:

    i think the fact Rachel’s gay really makes old Pat quiver….in a bad way.


  12. dad says:

    umm, because she successfully discredits two regular msnbc contributors

  13. xen says:

    I find that this is an unfortunately common tactic for some pundits, or merely those who wish to be pundits yet who lack the intellect and awareness to come off as anything but fools. I agree with LiberalDemDave as well that Buchanan does not feel the need to treat her as his intellectual equal (or, given the aptness of her statement, better) because of his own prejudices.

  14. Guest says:

    Keith and Rachel did last night.

  15. Guest says:

    I love her too. And my partner has the warms for her, so I need to keep an eye on the situation. :-)

  16. KarenMrsLloydRichards says:

    Harold Ford, Jr. reveals himself to be a wuss, who has internalized all the GOP slime directed against him in 2006, and now believes that if he can ingratiate himself with the corporate masters at NBC he can have a career as a TV pundit.

  17. Guest says:

    Glad you were able to post that.

    Patrick Buchanan is a sleaze and Rachel pointed that out.

    MSNBC is owned by a staunch Rethug corporate giant, and I am surprised he puts up with Rachel Maddow.

  18. I hate to be the voice of reason, because I so not am usually, but here I am again on this blog doing so.

    I post stuff at my blog from MSNBC.com all the time, and the fact is that they don’t post all of the video from all the shows. They just don’t.

    If you would have asked a web administrator there to do so, they probably would have, after all the idea is to get the stuff up with a pre-roll ad and some embed code, that’s the business model. They want people to go there for the video.

    And, by the way, the clip isn’t being censored because it aired live (on a show which btw does nothing in the ratings) and there are multiple copies on video sharing sites and we all have them posted on our blogs (or at least I will soon) so please just relax.

    Sometimes you people make so much out of nothing.

    The race is against McCain, not Pat Buchanan.

    (Who, granted, is a Nazi bigot tool.)

  19. Butch1 says:

    Is MSNBC afraid of the republicans? Rachel was 100% correct. Harold Ford sounded like he was still stumping for senator with his statement. Of course, it’s racially motivated and the republican side conveniently forgets that McBush’s trips were all politically motivated and yet they can’t stand when Obama gets a better response for doing even less and not making it a total political trip.

  20. let’s see… no explatives… no slurs… no genitalia exposed…

    what exactly were they ‘protecting the public’ from??

    this was CNN not Faux, right??

    I’m confused.

  21. nah… shoebox works… he’s ‘big-boned’.


  22. Bostonian_Queer_in_Dallas says:

    actually a thimble

  23. RobertSanDimas says:

    You’ve raised a clear-thinking young woman, canuck. I’m 4X your daughter’s age and I agree with her and you.

  24. ron071 says:


    V O T E Mc C A I N !!!!!!!!

    Will the voters be fooled again by the mud and smears and winks?

  25. color me surprised, tlsintx! why on earth would pat “1865” buchanan feel the “need” to respond to a woman…and a strong, uber-intelligent lesbian, to boot!

    buchanan needs to be put to pasture.

  26. don’t you mean MATCHbox, Bostonian? (Do they still make matchboxes? GAWD, i’m feeling old today)….

  27. tlsintx says:

    MSNBC can’t handle the truth.

    however, we sure as hell can.

  28. canuck55 says:

    Amen to all of that. I also like the way that she can be smart and confident but do it with good manners. The stereotypical talking head who is rude and shouts a lot is not the only way (and indeed, not the best way) to make a point persuasively and forcefully.

  29. tlsintx says:

    oh me too.

  30. bunnyjump says:

    It’s time for all the old white geezers to hoist up their diapers and waddle off to the nursing home!
    A new day a’comma!

  31. osage says:

    I love Rachel Maddow! She is a brilliantly intelligent, admirably comported and extremely talented woman who also is very attractive. All I can say is WOW!

  32. canuck55 says:

    Rachel rocks!
    I love her, my 17 year old daughter thinks she rocks.
    MSNBC “self censoring” Rachel calling Buchanan out for being the racist that he is, is crazy. If Fox did the same thing, they would have to go off the air. I hope Keith and Rachel eviscerate the pin heads in management tonight.

  33. OlderAndWiser says:

    I saw a report of this on CNN and can’t get it out of my mind…what a horrible thing. Surely an act of madness?


  34. scooter in brooklyn says:

    rachel rules. if i wasnt gay and married i’d propose to her.

  35. Webster says:

    Someone wanta tell the CorporateMSM that if I’m getting f*cked without my permission I consider that rape?

  36. tlsintx says:

    go Rachel!

    her exchanges with Buchanan are grand. the poor old geezer just argues and argues and spits and sputters and wham! she gets him every time.

    he never answers her directly, always just keeps arguing for racism or hatred or bigotry.

  37. OlderAndWiser says:

    Hear! Hear! : )

  38. “we have to self-censor. Some truths are just too painful, and we have a responsibility to protect the public as well as inform them.”

    Unbelievable…..they consider us to be a nation of 5 year olds. No wonder I find the MSM news so insufferable.

  39. Bostonian_Queer_in_Dallas says:

    Bette Davis once asked Claude Rains, “Who do you have to fuck to get out of this movie? Rains replied, “The same guy you fucked to get the part, dear.”

  40. Dianne_in_DC says:

    Right on Rachel! I saw this last night and was quite impressed. I know she wants her own show, but I like her as Buchanan’s foil.

  41. scooter in brooklyn says:

    john: here’s the clip


  42. KarenMrsLloydRichards says:

    Rachel got across the idea of Obama being “presumptuous” as racist code for “uppity”. Needed to be said.

  43. Webster says:

    Who do you have to f*ck in this country to get some TRUTH around here?

  44. OlderAndWiser says:

    NBC “self-censored” that particular part…if they want to do that with “dirty words” and nipples, fine…but not the TRUTH.

  45. Bostonian_Queer_in_Dallas says:

    If you gave Pat Buchanan an enema, he could be buried in a shoebox.

  46. Guest says:

    Keith! KEITH!!

  47. OlderAndWiser says:

    Saw that yesterday; so Old Thin Skin got his back up? Idiot. I was cheering Rachel on!

    Meanwhile, did anyone notice that Exxon again racked up the largest profit last quarter of any corp in history? $11.8B. Shell was second with $10B. And did anyone on CNBC say, wow, no wonder gas is so high? Hell NO.

    Oh, that’s only $1,485.88 per minute in profit, BTW.

  48. nsr says:


© 2021 AMERICAblog Media, LLC. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS