Rachel Maddow Supports Aid to Mubarak

So you thought it was only the wackos on the neocon right who support Mubarak? Wrong! I’m listening right now to Rachel Maddow, MSNBC’s resident ultra-liberal, attack Rand Paul for being “offshore” because he calls for ending the $1.5 billion in “aid” to the Egyptian military. 


Well, uh, yes, because you see “politics stops at the water’s edge,” everyone in both parties supports the President’s non-policy regarding the Egyptian events, and only “offshore” (read: off-the-wall) types, like the “isolationist” (Rachel’s word) Rand Paul think otherwise.  Stupidly, she lumps in Paul with John “Invade the World” Bolton — who supports Mubarak (just like the Obama administration, which continues to fund Mubarak’s secret police thugs). She also noted that Paul wants to end aid to Israel — “Of course,” as she put it. 

“Of course”? Really? Rand Paul’s bravery in sticking his neck out on this sensitive issue is to be commended — but not if you’re Rachel Maddow, who has never — ever — critcized Israel on her oh-so-“liberal” show.

Back when she was just another Air America airhead, Maddow invited me to be on her program: I declined, just because I wasn’t in the mood for liberal bromides that day. I thought she was a hack then, and now that she’s famous she’s even more of a partisan hack than before.

What I’d like to know is this, though: why does Maddow think funding the Egyptian torture machine, and the Israeli occupation of Palestine, is good for America? How does it serve our legitimate interests? Is it “stimulus” money? Does she just support any and all government spending as a matter of high principle? Or does she really think it’s a good idea for us to be subsidizing a regime so brutal that even the US State Department characterizes it as “repressive”?

Rachel, Rachel, Rachel — you can’t be serious. The Egyptian people want us to stop supporting Mubarak: it’s that simple. If that’s “offshore,” then so be it.


“The Ed Show’ follows the Maddow tirade on MSNBC, and there’s good old Ed — a protectionist China-basher with a slightly thuggish look — demanding to know why the US sends $1.5 billion a year to Mubarak. Maybe he should ask Rachel that question. Oh, and he’s pushing a poll — you text in your vote — asking people whether they think the US should cut the aid. I guess Rachel will be voting “yes.”

6 thoughts on “Rachel Maddow Supports Aid to Mubarak”

  1. I wouldn't call her liberal, just…well, Rachel. She's someone who thinks taking the opposite tack against the percieved Right (Whether actually right-wing or not).

    That being said, Rand Paul is a filthy statist

      1. “When it is said that nothing, including a nuclear strike, is off the table on Iran, are those who say it not also threatening genocide?”
        – Rep. Ron Paul, May 22, 2007
        “I don’t think you take [nuclear weapons] off the table.”
        – Rand Paul on Iran, The O’Reilly Factor, May 19, 2010

        “Rand Paul believes in a strong national defense, opposes closing Guantanamo Bay, and believes that Iran is a serious threat….”
        – Text of Rand Paul campaign ad, March 2010 (removed from YouTube “by the user” in the last 72 hours)

        Rand Paul is an ass

    1. End ALL foreign aid, except for emergency aid for contingencies like famine and natural disasters.

      Why are we putting our own country in peril in order to further the selfish interests of an expansionist, J-ws-only regime in Palestine?

    2. andy; just want to add a bit –

      (1) The Lords of Poverty (Graham Hancock) 20 years ago asked the question "why are some of the richest people in the world found in the poorest countries of the world". I don't recall the correct number but something like 70% of American "foreign aid" dollars never leaves the US – it is corporate welfare under another name.

      (2) Sadly – & cruelly amusing – are the MSM commentators who beat foreign countries over the head with the bullshit argument "we give your country X doallars blah-blah-blah". Uncle Sam doesn't give anything out of altruism; I submit as exhibit 1 the 750+ military bases outside US territory & I hear Newspeak used to disguise rent payments as "foreign aid", hiding the cost of Empire from the American people.

  2. Maddow's conceit and hypocrisy is just sickening.

    But perhaps the unifying theme in her political positions is hostility to the self-determination and independence of the native people of a given country, be it Egypt, Iran, of even the United States.

    I recall how she has ridiculed President Ahmadinejad as "little Mach-mood." Turns out Iran's government is one of the few (the only?) in the region to support the Egyptian demonstrators.

    "Iran expects Egyptian officials to listen to the voice of their Muslim people, respond to their rightful demands and refrain from exerting violence by security forces and police against an Islamic wave of awareness that has spread through the country in form of a popular movement."

    –Iran spokesman

    Thanks for the post Justin.

  3. Post a new comment. No thanks. Don't even want to read the ones that have been posted. The tone here is simply terrible. Too bad too, JR is normally great reading, but all the sarcasm and name calling is over the top. It's not even interesting.

    1. You don't find it interesting that Rachel Maddow thinks it's "offshore" to oppose aid to a regime that's killing its own citizens with our tax dollars? Or that she thinks it's somehow off the reservation to call for ending US aid to Israel? And you'll pardon the sarcasm, but I don't know how else to respond to an ostensible "liberal" who nonetheless expresses these views. But I guess it's ok for me to be as sarcastic as I can be as long as my target is on the right, but when it comes to leftie sacred cows, suddenly the "tone" is a Big Issue. Except, guess what: there aren't any sacred cows around here.

      1. This is a good analysis, Justin! Bravo. The problem with 'liberals' on the left is so many of them are also Zionists. Thus, they support fascism, ethnic cleansing and religious tyranny so long as these are done by Jews.

        This has utterly killed the peace movement on the left. And also has destroyed the movement to stop free trade and the fiat money machine that is pouring out tons of debt and destroying capital.

  4. Rachel Maddow will kiss the ass of whomever is writing her paychecks. Period and end of story. Maddow is literally worse than Arianna Huff 'n' Puff. Oh please forgive, I need to find my vomit bag…

  5. Maddow is not a leftist, she is an establishment liberal. She is interested in maintaining the established order. I have a close friend who like Maddow is closed to any criticism of Obama. The war in Afghanistan, Iraq, drone strikes. Well better than Bush is his feeling.

    A true leftist is a socialist. They reject the establishment capitalist system. They are aware of the fact that both parties are ultimately the same in that they cater to the capitalist system.

    1. mostly agreed, but the power of the establishment rests upon the State, not upon the capitalist system. crony capitalism is only a symptom, as horrible as it is.

      what we need is to stop believing in the legitimacy of the State, and to afford one another a basic level of decency and respect as human beings. that means respect for persons and property.

  6. Why the $1.5 billion to Egypt? For the control it gives the US. For instance: know why the army hasn't opened fire on the protesters? Because we gave them over 1000 M1 tanks, but no ammunition! Which was very clever when you come to think of it.

    1. The Army hasn't opened fire on the protesters because the Army isn't stupid- they know which way the wind is blowing. Besides, service is compulsory in Egypt- would you, as a draftee, want to fire on your friends and family you will likely be going home to in a few months? I think not.

      Ammo for the M1's? Not that big a deal- in fact, maybe their home-grown ammo is better since it won't be the top-grade Depleted Uranium that destroyed the babies of Fallujah.

  7. hi .WoW this lady must be from Mars.This is not how life is to be lived.You have lost your soul as a govt and so you get away with it.SHAME

  8. Rachel Maddow remindes me of Jane Fonda.She was against war against the Vietnamese people ,but was all for Israel wars against the Palestinians.

    By the way where are George Clooney and Mia Farrow?

  9. This is the same Rachel Maddow who looked stuck on stupid when she appeared on the Bill Maher Show and pretended she was clueless about Obermann's departure from MSNBC.

    Even Imus called her a coward for failing to defend Keith.

    As someone here said, she's a slave to anyone who writes her paycheck. She's not a liberal, she's a statist.

    1. Maddow's paycheck is signed by one of the largest gov't contractors of the military-industrial-complex… General Electric, who owns MSNBC.

  10. Maddow is an opinion moulder for the left, just as Hannity is for the right, they absolutely hate that comparison and deny it all the time, but it's so true, she's following talking points from her bosses in the military industrial complex, after all, they are the true beneficiaries of all this aid.

    scratch the surface of liberals, there's a beast underneath.

  11. I lost all respect for Maddow when she sided with the government against WikiLeaks. OF COURSE she supports Mubarak against his own people and supports Israel against US interests (and human decency). She got notice from Jabbering Joe Biden that was the Obama party line.

    1. Her show has aired wikileaks videos and discussed documents, so I don't think it is fair to say she sided with the government. I haven't been following all her remarks about wikileaks, but I know when she was speaking with Michael Moore about his donation she said she thought they should be selective about what was released. She approved of the collateral murder video, the important stuff, but thought the personal stuff was unnecessary and other stuff turned out to be not true. Here– begin at 8:30 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPiv5T76ve8 Doesn't sound like back the government to me. really guys, this half-truth bashing is a turnoff for antiwar people who aren't your particular stripe.

      1. Deb, I saw her on one of the late-night shows (Leno's Tonight Show, I think) saying she didn't want some "anonymous (sic) Australian" deciding what government documents should be declassified. On that same day or the next, I heard her on her own show lecturing her audience on how it was such a bad and dangerous idea to leak cables because they aren't always factual. That was the last time I watched her show.

        WikiLeaks has been selective about what to leak and what to redact. Everyone should know that the cables aren't completely factual. That doesn't mean they have no value. They are still a window into the thinking and scheming of government officials at a particular time concerning a particular issue.

        My particular stripe is that I am one of the liberals who frequent this site.

  12. American talkingheads seem or pretend to be clueless when to other people.One was so surprised to hear from Americans being interviewed by Anderson Cooper that the Egyptian people were friendly and were protecting them.She was so shocked to find that the Egyptians were nice people .

      1. Learning that Mohamed Atta did coke, liked hookers and strippers and lived with a blond "Lingerie Model" named Amanda Keller…… also doesn't fit the interventionist narrative…

        Welcome to terrorland………… http://madcowprod.com

  13. The saddest mistake the western governments have done was to sit by for the past few days and say nothing because of the perceived fear of a radical islamic Egypt. The mulsim brotherhood only represent 1 million of the Egyptian population—that's out of 80 million people. These peaceful protests began by students that were Christian, Muslim, Druze, etc…, it wasn't until yesterday that the brotherhood started to weigh-in, supporting and calling for unity. You want to know who the real terrorists are in the region? It's the despot governments that we bolster and support for exactly the notion of empire building. Does it really suit us to have dictators, and non-democractic regimes in power? Isn't it really more about what resources and financial gains we get by having these people in power?

    1. "The mulsim brotherhood only represent 1 million of the Egyptian population—that's out of 80 million people. These peaceful protests began by students that were Christian, Muslim, Druze, etc.."

      Where are you getting your facts ?

      Muslim Brotherhood represent only 1 million ???

      What is the Druze population in Egypt ???

    1. you can stream it online.. .http://english.aljazeera.net/watch_now/

      I know, it's not the same as having it on your tv, but it's a good start. and of all the news networks, I must say that they are the only ones that are sticking to reporting what's happening on the ground and not "discussing" the issue. i.e., Not much by way of talking heads pontificating and speculating.

  14. I'm unhappy with Maddow's wimpy handling of Israel, but your characterising her as a neocon who supports aid for Mubarek is just weird. That segment you refer to was silly, but I think you read too much into it. I watched the show's coverage Fri and Monday (1/28 & 1/31) and she's clearly in harmony with antiwar.com readers in support for the Egyptian protesters, opposing torture, US addiction to dictators, Obama administration fence-sitting, and so on. Please go back and check those out, there's nothing about health care or other "demlib" things for you to get worked up about. If you really are serious about right-left antiwar people listening to each other, you need to know encouraging this prejudiced visceral trashing of an antiwar liberal is a real turn off.

  15. not a neocon
    neo liberal

    And not only does she support aid for Mubarak. She attempts to ridicule people for not supporting that aid. As this incident is an example of

  16. ask rachael about cutting aide to israeli's – so that then the necessity of sending so much aide to Egypt would not be necessary. Then perhaps Palestine would be liberated as well. Oh, I forgot who is paying Rachael!!! Just another Left Gatekeeper doing her job…

  17. She’s a douche. She has no consistent philosophy.

    They are all scared of getting fired if they speak their minds anyway.

    Either way “can’t truss it”

  18. I saw the full clip and she wasn't really condemning Rand Paul's position, but she was lumping him in with 'far rightists' who were demanding full-fledged US military intervention in Egypt on behalf of A Certain Country.

    Her little graphic of all the 'rightists' in rowboats with oversized heads was a cutesy-pie way to avoid discussing the merits of Rand Paul's proposal, which of course would force her to side with him and get fired, or oppose him and lose her liberal pro-democracy credentials which would cause her ratings (such as they are) to plummet and then also get her fired.

    It's kind of like how the TV networks cover the presidential campaigns like a horse race, rather than discuss the issues, which might actually lead to real political change and so can never be permitted by the corporate overlords. Hey, can we discuss the Federal Reserve? No, let's bicker about gay marriage instead for the zillionth time.

  19. Since Israel is the real crybaby in all of this, why not let them offer Mubarak the IDF and cash to restore him to power? They're much closer than we are, and know the territory and language much better and since they're such good friends of Mubarak how can they refuse him a favor of military support?

    Oh yeah, Jewish troops in the streets of Cairo- that image is so full of FAIL I don't even know where to begin.

  20. If Maddow thinks that “politics stops at the water’s edge,” then she is just wrong. Ethics, morality and principles do not stop at the water's edge, and any form of politics which violates our principles is wrong, wherever it is, whether here at home or abroad. The reason why America has become a hated nation around the world is because so many Americans, like Rachael Maddow, have stopped having principles and have come to believe that whatever is in their own self interest is right, morality be damned.

  21. Rachel Maddow reminds me of what were called "cocktail liberals" in the 1960s. Phil Och’s great song "Love Me I'm a Liberal” satirizes the sort of person who proudly espouses a position for social change as long it upholds the status quo.

    Change will not come until people seriously oppose the militarism and corruption exemplified in the US military-industrial complex. As many have pointed out over the years, the intellectual class, as a rule, de facto serves the powerful in every society. That does not mean "know-nothingism" is preferable and intellectuals should be targeted; it means those privileged with education and positions of power need to understand their own power and influence and use it more responsibly– as did Howard Zinn, Dr, King, and Ghandi–in the interest of the powerless and oppressed.

  22. Ever heard of "advocacy journalism"? Rupert Murdoch certainly has. He advocates gutting the American mainstream media for purposes of yachts, mansions, ranches, and, of course, sensational lying.

  23. I've never thought of Maddow as a liberal pundit. Keith Olbermann is a real liberal. Ed Schulz is even closer to being a liberal than Maddow. But not Maddow. She's definitely an establishment Democrat unless it's a pet issue for her like gay rights. She's always been a hawk on foreign policy and an establishment wonk. When she was on AAR in the very beginning, she was at least tempered by the brilliant Lizz Winstead and Chuck D who didn't really let her get away with that crap.

  24. That is not what Rachel Maddow said, and it's not what Rand Paul said. Here is the transcript, with emphasis mine:

    But there are boats offshore, off the right wing of American politics out into that open water. For example, there's Tea Party Republican Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, who promised that he'd be an isolationist despite his fellow Republicans thinking otherwise. Rand Paul is using the situation in Egypt now to call for an elimination of all U.S. aid to foreign countries. Yes, including Egypt, and yes, including Israel. This crisis in Egypt is the perfect opportunity to end that dastardly foreign aid once and for all, what do they need us for? Rand Paul is not at the water's edge.

    So saying Rand Paul's idea is dumb is not "supporting aid to Mubarak". It's supporting the idea that foreign aid should not be completely zeroed out, worldwide.

    1. "And yes, including Israel." Very telling. Of course she doesn't want to cut foreign aid, because how else are we going to control the composition — and foreign policy — of a future post-Mubarak foreign policy? Foreign aid is imperialist aggression just as surely as was the invasion of Iraq: it comes with plenty of strings. Non-intervention means not only not sending troops, it also means not sending money, or "advisors," or anything except normal commercial relations. "Foreign aid" is just another phrase for "constant meddling."

  25. Rachel's negative comments about Rand Paul were related to his statement about ending all foreign aid, including to Israel. She did not support continued aid to Mubarak specifically. One must wonder about commenters here who are expert critics of her positions but seem to be unfamiliar with her program and what she actually says.

    1. So aid to Israel is okay, but aid to Egypt isn't? By what standard? One must wonder about commenters who don't understand that "foreign aid" is not only a scam — a subsidy for US exporters — but also an instrument of America's imperialist foreign policy. See above…

  26. People: what is happening in Egypt is yet another orchestrated police and secret service Mubarak thugs whom are attacking people.., if you want to do something about it call the White House and demand from President Obama to act and cut off the aid to Egypt until Mubarak is out.., this has been the demand by the people of Egypt and thus far is been a peaceful demand. For democracy to flourish democracy needs to help democrats’ whom demands are based on the principals in democracy, helping Mubarak is helping his thugs.., so where is that democracy that US is talking about. plz call Obama's hotline 202-456-1111.

  27. Rachel apologizes for falling for bogus story…
    Raimondo keeps posting discredited frothy mouth ad hominem crap-rant against same segment.
    Justin Justin Justin

  28. Once again, Rachel Maddow does not support aid to Mubarak. Please stop posting lies. Your rant is only slightly less obnoxious than David Duke’s (you know, the one about Maddox being a freak of nature.) This is bogus, seriously bogus. You must be really highly placed in antiwar.com to get away with this crap-journalism. If you don’t like her, or hate her, that’s your business. But please stop posting untruths. And please stop acting like you really care about right-left antiwar stuff. Because you clearly have issues with the left, regardless of any left person’s stance on war. I will no longer encourage people to come here for right-left antiwar stuff. Clearly it is more important for you to indulge your daily uninformed rants than to build bridges.

  29. I'll work with anyone on the left, within reason, but that doesn't mean I'll withhold criticism of those "liberals" who maintain we must continue to send "foreign aid" to Egypt — or Israel, or whomever. Why is it okay — merely "silly" — for Rachel Mad Cow to attack Rand Paul because he wants to cut off the foreign aid spigot to Mubarak, but not okay for me to mention it?

  30. I’ve watched one or two episodes of Glenn Beck’s show cause Obermann, Maddow, and Jon Stweart keep talking about it and I wanted to see what he is doing.

    It seems Glenn Beck makes many errors in logic on his show. Either they’re by mistake or deliberate. He also uses the deceptive technique of “guilty by association” where he conflates two subjects not really related and by conflating the two makes both look like cause and effect even though they’re not.

    The more I watch Maddow’s show the more she seems sounds Glenn beck and uses the same deceptive techniques.

  31. But perhaps the unifying theme in her political positions is hostility to the self-determination and independence of the native people of a given country, be it Egypt, Iran, of even the United States.

  32. Obama administration, which continues to fund Mubarak’s secret police thugs). She also noted that Paul wants to end aid to Israel — “Of course,” as she put it.Â

  33. I declined, just because I wasn’t in the mood for liberal bromides that day. I thought she was a hack then, and now that she’s famous she’s even more of a partisan hack than before.

  34. high principle? Or does she really think its a good idea for us to be subsidizing a regime so brutal that even the US State Department characterizes it as repressive?

  35. Mubarak against his own people and supports Israel against US interests (and human decency). She got notice from Jabbering Joe Biden that was the Obama party line.

Comments are closed.