The Rachel Maddow Show first aired on television in 2008.  She was first seen as a guest political analyst on MSNBC and CNN, and first heard on her syndicated radio show, The Rachel Maddow Show, in 2005.

Rachel Maddow was born in California and came out as a lesbian when she was a teenager. When in college at Stanford University, she was one of only two openly gay freshmen, according to her university paper.

At Stanford, Maddow majored in public policy and she was an AIDS activist.

In 1995, she received a Rhodes Scholarship to travel to Oxford for graduate studies at Lincoln College. She earned her doctorate degree in political science with a concentration in prison reform and AIDS.

1. Nothing wrong with being against health care reform but if you pimp out death panels talking points, you are either dumb, intellectually dishonest, or a combo of the two.

2. Anyone who is for health care reform should be reading Megan McArdle. She offers a fair, honest, and smart rebuttal.

3. Why is Rosie O’Donnell stoking her old feud with Elisabeth Hasselbeck?

4. No more Woodstock stories! Please. It was a freaking concert! That’s all.

5. Levi Johnston adores his gay fans. Hanging out with Kathy Griffin has done him wonders. Will Sarah Palin twitter (or is it tweet?) about this?

6. Anyone see MSNBC’a Rachel Maddow on Meet the Press yesterday? What do you think of her performance?

7. Buddy Guy equals cool.

8. Gay Division 1 football players! Get out!  I’ll spare you a list of the ones I wish played for Dorothy.

9. George Michael just needs to hire a driver.

10. My fingers are too fat for texting.

I should begin by saying I’m all for reasonable disagreement and debate. I think people who refuse to acknowledge that any viewpoint besides their own might be valid or worthwhile obviously don’t have any faith in their own points of view. If your opinion can’t stand up to a little questioning, how strongly can you really believe it?

But there’s a difference between honest disagreement and attempting to debate with someone who is coming from a place of hate or disrespect or misinformation.

And Pat Robertson embodies all three of those things.

In his most recent rant, Robertson declared on the radio yesterday that most gays are “made homosexual because of a coach or a guidance counselor or some other male figure who has abused them.”

Setting aside the fact that Robertson apparently believes all gay people are male, his statement reeks of dishonesty and absurdity. Surely he can’t actually believe that gay people are created through acts of abuse? Surely he can’t actually believe that only, as he says, a few gays are a result of “biological problems?” But whether he believes the untruths he’s spraying or not, Pat Robertson says them, and says them frequently.

And that level of discourse– one that stems from his refusing to acknowledge the most basic truths about homosexuality– is about what I’ve come to expect from him.

Given that I know, you know, we all know, how unreasonable Pat Robertson is, why do we continue to engage with him? And by we, I mean MSNBC who has a long-term contract with Robertson to provide commentary, and specifically, Rachel Maddow who frequently invites Robertson on her show as a sparring partner.

Engaging with Robertson doesn’t mean you agree with him,but it does certainly imply that you believe his viewpoint belongs within the bounds of rational discourse. And that’s dangerous.

So I’m all for engaging with conservatives. I’m confidant our arguments will win every time, but not if we are willing to lower the debate to acnowlege and engage with base misinformation promulgated by the likes of Pat Robertson.

She’s been showing increasing frustration over the way lawmakers on both sides seem to be prioritizing political gamesmanship over, say, actually recognizing what economists say will get things going again and then doing that.

But hey, why worry about keeping the economy from crashing and burning when there’s a pissing match to be had?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#29062213

The music and graphics folks have clearly been having fun with intros for the new “GOP in Exile” segment. Friday’s featured Annie Lennox singing “Here Comes that Sinking Feeling,” for a brief but intriguing juxtaposition of strong women with short haircuts and rich, throaty voices.

Rachel reported on Dick Cheney’s troubles with the state of Vermont, which are awesome enough that I don’t want to spoil it, so please do click the link. The clip is short and gratifying.

That sound you just heard was me ordering several truckloads of maple syrup. (Personal to the good people of Vermont: If you do get the chance to arrest him, please, please, please have cameras on hand when you do it. Also please keep in mind the fact that Mr. Cheney is totally fine with waterboarding.)

But the time for frivolity was over almost as soon as it had begun, as Rachel moved back to the stimulus plan with a bracingly direct Rachel Re: segment. She called out Senate Republicans on the fact that they are either complete freaking idiots about economics or are not negotiating in good faith.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#29062335

Number of uses of the word “bullpuckey” during this segment: Nine. Plus extra bonus points for one use of the excellent new word “pucked.”

Feel like checking those facts but not quite enough to look up the URLs? Never fear! You can look up terrifying stats about the U.S. economy to your heart’s content on Moody’s.

…And you can download a pdf with some “bang for your buck” comparisons between tax cuts and spending over here, as recommended by Ms. Maddow’s Twitter feed. (No, the fact that I know this was on Rachel’s Twitter feed is not creepy. The word you are looking for is “thorough”.)

Next page: More bullpuckey

Take Rachel Maddow, host of The Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC. To me, she epitomizes a second wave of out lesbians in the media, one who didn’t have to come out to the public like Ellen Degeneres, Melissa Etheridge, or Rosie O’Donnell, because she has always been there.

When I mentioned to a close relative of mine that I’ve been watching her show because it’s great to see another Oxford-educated lesbian around, he looked at me in surprise and said, “Oh, I didn’t realize she was a lesbian.”

Now, this is a man to whom I’ve nattered on at length about LGBT issues. He’s as accepting as one could imagine a straight man to be, and reasonably tuned in to LGBT matters. Maddow, however, despite having a haircut suspiciously similar to my partner’s, didn’t register as a lesbian to him.

Maybe it was the eyeshadow MSNBC thrusts upon her, confusing his less-developed sense of these things. Maybe, however, it was the fact that although Maddow is as out as can be to anyone who asks or bothers to read her bio on the MSNBC Web site, she has had no reason to mention her sexual orientation during her show (or if she has, it was an in-passing remark that I missed).

She is not hiding anything; it just hasn’t come up.

I’ve experienced this myself when dealing with the parents and teachers at my son’s school. With my partner employed outside the home, I am the one who takes our son to school, shows up at the parent’s association meetings, and helps coach his soccer team.

Despite a predilection, like Maddow, for dressing “like a first grader” (I shop in the Old Navy boy’s department with my son), to most observers, I’m just another suburban mom. I don’t hesitate to mention my partner when it’s relevant, and I admit to making a point of saying “my partner Helen and I” on occasion, to get people used to the idea.

Sometimes, though, as with Maddow, it doesn’t make sense to plonk it down in the middle of an unrelated conversation.

It has become something of a truism in LGBT parenting circles to talk about how having kids means being out to everyone–teachers, plumbers, cashiers at the grocery store. Kids, as any parent will tell you, can’t keep closet doors closed.

One “Hey, Mommy and Mama!” across the produce aisle, and your cover is blown.

For me, however, the problem is not being outed, it’s assuming everyone knows I’m a lesbian when in fact, I am as invisible as Maddow was to my relative. Even when I try to be open about it, people hear “Alan” when I talk of “Helen” and miss my use of pronouns.

My son once received an invitation to the birthday party of a new school friend, and Helen and I got a doubletake at the door because one of the friend’s parents hadn’t realized we were a two-mom family. Sometimes I think it would be easier if I’d gone to all of the school’s beginning-of-the-year events wearing an “I’m a lesbian” t-shirt. It would save us from those awkward moments.

The other problem is that as a matter of overall identity, I’d rather be known as my son’s mom, not his “lesbian mom.” The commonalities of parenthood far outweigh the differences of sexual orientation.

More importantly, I want my son to be known for his own qualities, not for the fact that he’s “the boy with the lesbian moms.” Yes, his lesbian moms will always be part of his identity, but I want us to be a piece of a much richer whole, not a leading indicator. I hope he never wants to hide the fact that he has two moms, but I also realize, as he gets older, that he may want to come out about his family in his own time and in his own way.

Visibility, however, has its perks.

It may motivate my son’s school to be more inclusive in its materials and curriculum. It may open his classmate’s eyes to the fact that families come in all kinds of shapes and sizes. In an election year, talking with other parents about how the candidates’ differing LGBT policies would affect our family might bring another vote to the side we support.

Being out as a parent is therefore more complex than just dressing our infants in “I love my mommies” jumpers or being outed by our toddlers at the supermarket. It raises issues we may not even have thought of when we started our families or first came out to them. Coming out is often described as an ongoing journey. As parents, it is a journey we take with our children.

We need to be sensitive to each others’ need for rest stops and side trips along the way.

For the moment, with my son still young and unaware that there are those who disparage our family, I will continue with my quiet but firm visibility. Around his school, I do not want to make such a point of being a lesbian that my son feels defined by his parents’ orientation, but neither do I want him ever to see me hide who I am, or what our family is. I know our visibility can do much good, not only for him, but also for other LGBT families and non-traditional families of all types.

It is a fine balance, and I may not always get it right. This week of National Coming Out Day, however, is a good chance to remind myself why I have to try.
Dana Rudolph is the founder and publisher of Mombian, a blog and resource directory for LGBT parents.

When Patti Murray, Carol Moseley Braun, Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein stormed into the Senate in 1992, the press dubbed it the “year of the woman.”

But I’ve always thought that the real mark of change came a year later, when Bill Clinton appointed Dee Dee Myers, age 31, as White House Press Secretary, the first woman to hold the position. For the next two years, she was–day in, day out–the face and voice of the administration, and of America.

It would be a riot to see Rachel Maddow – a former Rhodes Scholar, AIDS activist, butch lesbian with a PhD – take up that slot. On MSNBC and CNN, she manages to goad right-wing talking heads like Chris Matthews and Tucker Carlson into fits of imbecility, but she never stoops to their level.

So come on Barack, ask Rachel. I doubt she’d abandon her journalistic post to become a political operative – but hey, it worked for Tony Snow.

Richard Kim is associate editor of The Nation.

Go back to the main story for more opinions on where we need LGBT officials.

Openly gay political commentator Rachel Maddow, 35, is getting her own prime-time show on MSNBC, the cable news channel confirmed on Tuesday.

“This just completes our prime-time lineup,” MSNBC President Phil Griffin told the New York Times.

Beginning Sept. 8, Maddow will replace commentator Dan Abrams in the 9 p.m. time slot. Her show will initially focus on the presidential race but will become more of a general news program after the election.

“This is great,” Maddow told the Times. “Getting a regular cable show is something I’ve wanted.”

Maddow will be the first out lesbian to host a prime-time news or political commentary show on American television, and one of the very few women ever to do so. MSNBC does not have any other news or political commentary shows hosted by women.

Maddow currently divides her time between Manhattan and western Massachusetts, where she lives with her partner of 10 years, artist Susan Mikula.

Maddow has hosted a popular liberal talk radio show on Air America since 2004. She has also been a frequent guest commentator on political talk shows like MSNBC’s Tucker and CNN’s Paula Zahn Now, and is currently a regular panelist on MSNBC’s Race for the White House With David Gregory.

Last year, Maddow told PageOne Q she believed her career in television hadn’t taken off, “not only because I am gay, but because of what I look like. I am not a Barbie girl with Barbie doll-like looks. Because in television, what you look like is a huge deal.”

But if the events of Maddow’s career since then are any indication, perhaps America is warming up to women who are not “Barbie girls.”

In April, Maddow began filling in occasionally as the guest host on the cable network’s popular show Countdown With Keith Olbermann, and her episodes quickly became the show’s most-watched by viewers ages 25 to 54, a highly desirable advertising demographic. Shortly thereafter, she became Olbermann’s official fill-in host.

Last month, MSNBC’s Griffin hinted that Maddow was at the top of “a very short list” to headline her own show, and he made it official this week.

“We’re hiring Rachel because she’s a smart person,” Griffin explained to the Times. “Rachel goes far beyond politics. She’s an expert on military affairs. She was a Rhodes scholar.” Maddow was the first openly gay American to win a Rhodes scholarship.

When asked in a 2005 interview with Velvet Park magazine what it’s like to debate men like Pat Buchanan, Maddow responded:

They see me as a novelty. I’ve slipped through the cracks, this butch dyke. They always try to bring up gay marriage with me. We’re talking about Syria, Bosnia, Rwanda refugees on CNN and they’re like “Rachel, now how does this relate to gay marriage?” It’s also an interesting challenge to have to be so concise on TV, using language to bring people along with you and also to provoke them. People say, “Isn’t it hard to only have three minutes to argue against the death penalty?” But, don’t you rebel against the restraints, you work within them.

She also chalks up her debating skill to coming out at an early age. “You have to learn to survive and prosper in a hostile environment,” she said in an interview with AfterEllen.com last year. “It’s kind of a talent that gay people bring to everything we do.”