The Beast With No Name
By Old Grumpy Guy on November 16, 2008 at 9:00 AM in Humor, OldGrumpyGuy, Rachel Maddow
After Friday’s piece on the person whose name I don’t like mentioning, I am posting an earlier video on this person. A close relative of mine is a lesbian (an exceptionally nice person) and she doesn’t like her either. To cheer you up and remove the bad taste in your mouth, I’ve added some footage of my cat Sara.
[My apologies to Old Grumpy and all of you for posting about the woman-who-shall-not-be-mentioned. Sometimes I wander off but I always have good faith that I can return untainted. And sometimes I actually learn a thing or two from the unmentionables. But that's just me and I needn't subject you to the same. Old Grumpy, you're the best, and I really dig your high principles - Susan]
(Release: November 13)
on sale for only $16.95.
has a spatula.)
8% Off at $11.95, with a rare five-star ranking by 294 customers: 
And check out these: 
("This crazy redhead is on to something. Her pink Rambler story alone is worth the price of the book," writes 
- “Richard Sale’s reportage on Washington, the CIA, the American armed forces, and foreign intrigue has created a perfect background for this account of the steady growth of President Clinton as a master of the game of nations.”--W. Patrick Lang, former head of Middle East Operations, DIA
"Anne C. Heller's stunning biography of Ayn Rand" uses a "plethora of newly unearthed research and fresh insight."
Larry: Remember something that smart Republicans, and more than a few smart Democrats, figured out about Olbermann: he’s Ted Baxter.
He thinks he’s Edward R. Murrow. He’s not. Edward R. Murrow is remembered for taking out Tailgunner Joe. But Murrow went after politicians in both parties with gusto and engaged in groundbreaking radio reportage from London during the Blitz. Keith is just a blowhard with writers.
In that respect, it is worth remembering that Keith is not Murrow, but rather, he’s Ted Baxter. When you get that, you’ll understand the deep level of intellectual corruption that infected that network.
Maddow’s interview with Obama was both obsequious and hard to watch. Aside from being an open display of craven bootlicking, I wouldn’t be surprised if her partner had issues with her. Matthews has gone over the side as well and has lost any sense of critical faculty.
It appears that only Joe Scarborough is the only one with any sense of integrity over there.
I love it…..he IS a Ted Baxter type.
I think he tried to PRETEND he was Ed Murrow, but clearly is not. He removed that disguise almost a year ago now.
Ted Baxter he is. Off camera, a crying wimp who needs other to do for hiim.
That is an insult to Ted Baxter. At least he was a loveable fool.
If he’s Ted Baxter, then he’s Ted Baxter on bad crack.
Hilarious piece……thank you!!
I am relieved to learn there are others out there who think similarly of that one who shall not be named. I was wondering why she has gotten a free pass for so long–is gayism the new racism? Are we so afraid of being accused of being anti-gay that we will not speak out on this horrible, mean, and biased person?
It’s a sad day when you can’t turn your TV on without being absolutely REPULSED. These people are NOT journalists. That word died a long time ago for America. I’ve seen about 15 seconds of this lunatic woman rant and turned it off. Sigh. No more for me of ANY of these biased, drooling fools.
Ted Baxter? That’s the funniest thing I’ve ever heard. But it REALLY puts the whole Olberbozo and Matthews situation into perspective. Thanks!
Frankly, I agree on both ends of the spectrum. I do not like ranters, period, on TV or radio.
I personally think that TV pundits are in a vacuum of real talent. There simply aren’t that many people available, who truly have earned the label, “Pundit,” who can handle the job.
Hence, we get wanna-be types.
Great piece……..; however, the adorable Sara was minimally demonstrative due to the dark rug backdrop vs. her dark fur. For optimal viewing potentiality as to this obviously charming creature, a lighter milieu would go far to enhance her enchanting physicality.
Me a big time cat person!!!!!!
OH MY Grumpy your kitty looks like a furry version of my Figaro LOL
but nothing beat the MOOSE aka Logan (last year) LOL
Thanks for the laughs
You are so right about the beast who shall not be named. To me, she is much more offensive than Olberman and certainly more offensive than Matthews. She is obviously very intelligent (I understand she is a Rhodes Scholar) but she exhibits it by being sarcastic with snide hateful remarks spewing out of her mouth with hateful glee. She is by far the worst on MSNBC. She is a true viper.
Being a Rhodes scholar is an indication of academic thinking but not necessarily of clear, objective thinking. A lot of people who excel academically are people who are able to absorb and reflect back what their tutors want them to. In some ways they are like soft cushions, retaining the imprint of the last person to have sat on them. The Moonies and other cults have had a high percentage of college graduates who were academically bright. Dr. Theodore Kaczynski the Unabomber was academically outstanding. I had a girlfriend once who was academically outstanding and had an IQ that was so high it went off the scale, but she was totally lacking in any vestige of common sense and spent a great deal of time attacking people who didn’t agree with her opnions on even the most trivial matters. So the fact that the beast was a Rhodes scholar has to be seen in perspective.
Omigosh……SOMEONE who gets that! *haha
I post constantly on this. Good golly, but people are overly impressed with these academic credentials.
If they only knew…….
So right you are.
In a simple example of this. My brother in law, a VERY academically smart man, with many social and common sense problems, came out to us for a visit. We gave him our old Espresso machine and instructed the use and the very first, to prime the machine.
Weeks went by and we didn’t hear from him. Gave him a call and asked how he was enjoying the Espresso at home. He answered, it wouldn’t work when I got it home, no water came out. Hubby asked if he primed it like we advised. His reply, “no, forgot”. Hubby told him he’ll walk him through it again, and b-i-l responded “I can’t. I threw it away already”.
???
He didn’t call to ask what may be wrong, he didn’t remember how to work the machine, so he threw away a perfectly good espresso machine. OK
Oh, don’t worry, both she and the Olberbeast get it, although it doesn’t make them any less foul.
KO is a raging misogynist so he had to jump on the barky express because there was no way in hell he’d support Hillary.
Maddow’s reasons? Maybe it started with the “Hillary voted for the war” thing and with so much encouragement at MSNBC, blossomed in to a full blown and conveniently career facilitating bias. After all, she did get her own show out of it.
I’m sure the irony of forsaking the first viable female presidential candidate and in doing so aiding the defeat of Prop 8, is not lost on her.
LOL x infinity! Thank you for this Sunday morning’s hearty giggles.
Bigoted and self-righteous, indeed! Thanks for the soft-spoken, acerbic takedown of The Beast with No Name, Grumpy Old Guy!
As someone upthread commented, ‘gayism’ may be the new ‘racism’ as practised by the BH0 campaign and surrogates – indeed, you may be attacked by some in the GLBT community for this, dear Grumpy Old Guy. That Beast with No Name is abhorrent in her bias for BH0, and it matters not a whit to me that she is a lesbian. She could be a green Martian for all I care, I’d despise her equally well.
Oooh, and Ted Baxter is sooo right for Olbermann, too! If one doesn’t like Olbermann for his clownish ‘punditry’, does that mean one is anti-male? LOLOLOL!
Thanks for the funny clip of Sara the cat – but we can barely see her against that very dark background!
LOl Thank you OGG.
Good morning. Mmmm, cup of coffee in hand. Hopefully less typos.
Man has Rachel dropped a long way. I feel like these on air personalities just remake themselves in to a character that is marketable for the time. She is the perfect example, along with Keithies early days.
Her on air personality was NOTHING like what she became to get on Keith Olbermann’s show. She had to make a nasty deal with the Devil to either 1, become something she wasn’t, all in the name of entertainment. Or 2, have no problem creating a new character, all for the sake of money and power, or 3, she was hiding her true self on the early days of AAR and Obama brought out her true radical self, again, making it ok to be a radical on the left to “get in their face, argue with them, say anything”, and just happy to be back to whom she is.
Either way, this Rachel, I do not like, respect or want to hear a word from. The dark path she took when she had the chance to become a regular on Keith Olberman and MSNBC, to start wrongly accusing Hillary and trashing her, like Randi Rhodes, not much difference, except, she didn’t call Hillary a F@cking Whore, makes me so regret possibly giving her the ability to do this. As I was one of those that sent letters, complained and called local stations to get her show back on.
But, this gives us an opportunity to see who they really are, and that we should be thankful for. As the only following Rachel will now have are the void kookaid drinking, ignorant followers that don’t have a Obama campaign to work on. They will rally their tv’s each night, shout, throw there hands up in the air and become the new cult.
And Rachel will not have much place in the real world to have to worry about. All of her own doing.
Sorry, I used the beasts name. It seems I wasn’t awake enough.
The Mainstream Media of 2008 can learn much from Edward R. Murrow, who had the integrity to do his job without bias.
Al
it’s unfortunate when someone who seems so intelligent, is so biased and one sided, that they can’t even be taken seriously. if she ever decided to become more fair and balanced, she would probably have a much broader base of viewers.
she just comes across so ridiculous and biased, it is nauseating.
I like to get the gist of what the partisan pundits have to say. That’s why I listened to Rush this year for the first time. He made some excellent points at times, in the midst of his usual partisan rants.
I must say, I never heard a word from O that struck me as remotely legitimate. Some of the others, maybe at times, but he was really, really bizarro to me.
Here’s the good news for Republicans. He came to represent the left to me. I frankly think I switched parties because of him. LOL*
He drove me out of the Democratic party, and I was more quick to get over the primary loss than some here were. Politics is ugly. Don’t like that? Then don’t follow it, or that’s my take, anyway.
But O represented the “progressives” for whom this election was the biggest win.
I couldn’t in good conscience go along with that frame of thinking.
It seemed highly irresponsible to me.
After the Biden-Palin debate you could see her facial muscles straining in her effort to crow that Biden had overwhelmingly trounced Palin, when any unbiased observer could have seen that Palin gave a very good account of herself and was more polished and straghtfoward than Biden.
You know, these people have been placed in positions far, far beyond their skill level.
Ego is probably the biggest issue that anyone who succeeds in life must deal with effectively, or you WILL be a flash in the pan.
The media has turned these people, not really prepared, into stars.
I think many of them will fall to the Earth.
I’m not much for snark on peoples’ looks, especially women’s. I suppose media personalities could be different, but it’s still bothersome. We saw way too much of that with first Hillary, then Sarah Palin.
I do think most of these newsreaders, “pundits”, commentators come to us from a sports meme: the air has to be filled constantly with words, much of it “color”. Olberman comes from sports (their loss is our gain???) and I think much of the TV world grew up with that, which is another reason why so much of what passes for news is vacuous and trivial.
Yes, Tess, it’s not very gentlemanly of me to attack Maddow on her looks, but then her looks are part of the total unpleasant package and what I said was pretty mild compared to the attacks on Palin, McCain and even Hillary by the rabid dogs of the left.
Grumpy Guy – the problem is we women are SICK of having our looks dissected – be it our bodies, our facial features, our accessories, hair – what have you.
That said, I love the title : “the Beast With No Name” and do hope it sticks!! And I think the Beast is a sell-out, a traitor to her gender and a traitor to lesbians. But she’s rich & famous now so unless her ratings dive (which I hope they do) she will never realize what a shallow, vicious and blind Beast she has become…
Now, I really would like to see Olbermann with a dead squirrel on his head…would you photoshop that for us??
Hold up…. I will poke fun of her on screen appearance because I have seen Maddow out and about in downtown Northampton. She looks NOTHING like how she appears on TV. She is totally made over. A creation for our viewing.
MSNBC must have a stylist for her wardrobe, make-up, and hair(!?) Yet, she totally lampooned Sarah. Oh hell no.
http://www.maddowfans.com/media/photos/main.php?g2_view=core.ShowItem&g2_itemId=219
Ditto for me, Tess. The blogs are the same.
I said repeatedly in the primaries that about 90% of Huffpo’s articles were from people rushing on their way to soccer games.
Thoughtful? Hardly.
Rachel was a columnist for The Nation, so she wears her Left opinions on her sleeve. The notion that she should have been given an anchor chair makes as much sense as giving Michael Savage an anchor chair.
Bear in mind, this is MSNBC catering to its Bush hating Base. The problem is, Bush and the Republicans are leaving town (all to the good, btw, and I say this as a Republican who believes that turnover in power is good for the country).
Rachel Maddow and Olbermann are symptomatic of a general problem with the MSM: they’ve made a decision to become Cheerleaders for the New Order. This will lead to greater distrust of the MSM in the long run, as Americans don’t like being force fed propaganda, despite with the news media thinks.
This should be the takeaway: Maddow and Ted Baxter are, in and of themselves, not important. They are symptoms of a deeply corrupt and partisan news media that cheeleads for one set of politicians over the other. This is good for Democrats, but bad for democracy and good government.
Long, long ago in my previous incarnation as a hard-core Democrat, I listened to Air America all day every day. The one Air America host I really did not much care for was Rachel Maddow.
Why didn’t you like Rachel Maddow, you may ask? Well, she was just boring. So pedantic, arrogant and self-righteous. I thought she was one of the Air America hosts least likely to succeed. And now she’s on television, with Keith Obamaman no less!
My gosh, Old Grumpy Guy, you do make me laugh so. Thanks for the wonderful rants. Sara is precious as well as cute as a button. I used to have a parakeet who could dance like that, believe it or not!
Old Grumpy Guy,
I can’t stand the beast with no name either, but unfortunaely your video brought her back into my conciousness. I had just completed the difficult task of repressing memories of the beast and her snotty sidekick.
Oh, well, Sara really conducts (yes, pun intended) herself far more admirably on video and I am currently repressing memories that were let out for a moment.
I apologize profusely if I’ve opened up traumatic wounds for you Diana. But one has to wade through a lot of yucky stuff in our efforts to beat the smuggites and the pod people.
Grumpy Old Guy
OMG, that was one funny video! Thanks for laugh, and laugh, and laugh…… The very best part; of course, was Sara.
Cheers!
sara reminds me of nora the piano playing cat. both are just adorable! when i want to smile, i go watch nora play the piano.