Maddow to Liz Cheney: Come on my show, I won’t bite

By David Edwards and Daniel Tencer
Tuesday, October 20th, 2009 -- 10:54 am
Share on Facebook Stumble This!

lizcheney Maddow to Liz Cheney: Come on my show, I wont biteMSNBC's Rachel Maddow is challenging Liz Cheney, daughter of the former vice president, to come on The Rachel Maddow Show after Cheney's new advocacy group launched an attack ad claiming that news networks like MSNBC are afraid of debating the issues.

"On Friday, Liz Cheney's pressure group, Keep America Safe ... launched a web ad showing clips of her organization receiving critical coverage on MSNBC," Maddow said. "And those clips were interspersed with provocative questions like these: Why don't they want to talk substance? Why are they panicked? Why don't they want to debate the issues? What are they so afraid of?"

Maddow made it clear she is not afraid of debating the younger Cheney.

"Our booking producers have been calling Liz Cheney and asking her to come on this show and discuss her ideas, debate the issues, for months," Maddow said. "We have called her many, many, many times, including twice on Friday. So far she has declined every single invitation that we have extended."

Added Maddow: "I understand. A lot of people say no to being on this show, but not a lot of them do so while claiming that MSNBC is afraid to debate them."

Story continues below...

But, as Faiz Shakir reports at ThinkProgress, it appears Cheney has declined to be on Maddow's show once again, and "has instead chosen to appear in a much friendlier setting." Shakir says a Fox News email announced that Cheney would be appearing Tuesday on Fox's Hannity with Sean Hannity.

Cheney, along with conservative commentator Bill Kristol and others, announced the launch of Keep America Safe earlier this month, saying the group will "make the case for an unapologetic approach to fighting terrorism around the world, for victory in the wars this country fights, for democracy, freedom and human rights, and for a strong American military that is needed in the dangerous world in which we live."

This video is from MSNBC's The Rachel Maddow Show, broadcast Oct. 19, 2009.


Download video via RawReplay.com

The following Web ad was posted to YouTube by Keep America Safe on October 16, 2009.

Share this article:
  • Print
  • email
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Facebook

Story comments are below...

  • M3vega
    Maybe she can use Daddy's connections to get a few Rachel Maddow show deferments?

    The Cheney Yellow streak is on display again for all to see. Hopefully, thousands won't have to die this time to make the Cheney's feel brave and patriotic.
  • thepoliticalcat
    Rachel Maddow FTW. And cute as all get out, too!
  • damixaustex
    5 minutes of Olberman, Maddow or Mathews is more substantive than all of Ms. Cheney's rhetoric and excuses combined.
  • jbrantow
    Notice how liz cheney never shuts up and always interrupts.. She's a rude lying witch. Typical of her father dick, hiding behind her skirt. Chicken hawk cowards...sending in other peoples kids to fight for the wars the love to start.
  • kimbutgar
    She is a coward and bully. All talk no action. She has no experience only the Cheney name. Daddy got her a job in the State Department. Keith, Rachel and Ed should call her out every night to appear on their shows.
  • Name
    Gee, where do I sign up for Keep America Safe. I want to give money to Cheney and Kristol. Multimillionaires like them can never have enough of other people's money. It helps pad their wallets with chump change. And they're always watching out for the little guy- to roll him.
  • jbrantow
    another chicken hawk cheney.......C is for coward and C is for cheney. They're good at history revisionism and sadistic torture cheerleading. What a sorry excuse for human beings.
  • Satan
    FOX and MSNBC are merely two sides of the same coin, propaganda.
  • richaust
    Au contraire, mon ami. I beg to differ. Guests are treated with far more respect on Rachel Maddow than they are on O'Reilly , Hannity or Beck; they are allowed to speak without being interrupted. Rachel listens attentively and responds to their arguments. I have never seen her resort to name-calling or shouting. Also, I have seen both Rchel and Keith Olbermann criticize Democrats as well as Republicans.
  • damixaustex
    The tenor is different for sure, but both networks are guilty of thinking that reporting on the opinion of a journalist on some comments about a journalist on the opinion of another journalist regarding the events of the day is news.
  • richaust
    Yes, it is true that journalism has suffered in the last 40 years or so. If you're interested, you might want to read The Image: A guide to pseudo-events in America by Daniel Boorstin. It's a very easy read. I always wondered how much value there is in having journalists interview each other. Of course, very few newsmakers want to go a news show that they perceive as unfriendly; look at how reluctant Mary Cheney is to appear on Rachel Maddow. You can usually tell the political inclination of a news show by who its guests are. I also long for the days when journalists would actually ask intelligent questions or confront someone on the facts. Whenever someone says "We have the best health care in the world.", I think that should be challenged. Such is the state of journalism in America and I am not sure what can be done about it.
    BTW, are you in Austin, Texas? So am I!
  • damixaustex
    Yes, Austin, love it. Travel a lot always love coming home. Music fills the streets (and the airport, live music while you wait for your luggage, yeah!).

    I will check out that book. Thanks.
    I'm old enough to remember when there was a requirement that if you called yourself a news program, you had to provide 2 sides to the issue. I didn't really like that, there's never just 2 sides.
    The problem I see with the current thing is people have been slow to realize that almost everything that's called news is one sided. The word "news" has changed in meaning.
    I agree, I miss the intelligent questions. So many of them now are simply feeding crap to support some opinion or another.
    The opinion shows are fine, they're good to have, it makes the whole analysis more rich. But it's like we have a generation that hasn't figured out that much of the news is no longer news, just opinion.
    There's no simple national answer other than educating people about it, which is why I like Obama calling Fox out, draws attention to it.
    What do you think about the British approach?
  • richaust
    I'm not sure what you mean by the "British approach". If you mean the BBC, I do like them better than most American news.

    News has become entertainment, although we're not at the point of Howard Beal (from Network) who famously shouted: "We're mad as hell and we're not going to take it any more!!!" Sometimes I feel that way.




    ________________________________
  • damixaustex
    By British I mean, they moved from government controlled TV into a more competitive environment, but still, the government fees for TV seem to bring BBC's actions up for discussion a lot. There's always this feeling their charter could be revoked if people get angry enough at what they do.
    People in the US seem powerless against the networks.
  • richaust
    I'm not sure what you mean by the "British approach". If you mean the BBC, I do like them better than most American news.

    News has become entertainment, although we're not at the point of Howard Beal (from Network) who famously shouted: "We're mad as hell and we're not going to take it any more!!!" Sometimes I feel that way.
  • damixaustex
    The most insidious trend lately is the scrolling text. I watched Obama speaking on health care while the text both at the bottom and on the sides of him were refuting what he was saying. That's not journalism, not reporting, it's just an auxiliary live feed to "our regularly scheduled program."
    They cut to "panel discussion" before he was even finished speaking, some panelists were saying the opposite what Obama was saying.
    Luckily I have split screen and was able watch his speech in it's entirety, unadulterated.
    Another disturbing trend is flashing images in the corner that have nothing to do with the story.
  • richaust
    I hadn't noticed the interjection of discussion panels, but the chyrons are very annoying, especially the ones which mis-identify the party a person belongs to or mis-spell someone's name (e.g., Osama instead of Obama).
  • Savantster
    .
    "Keep America Safe".. how Orwellian.

    destroying 3rd world countries for their oil and other resources is what breeds the deep seeded hatred for "America" (even though it's really only the top 1% making the invasion decisions, and the top 10% making the biggest profits from it, and the top 40% living like gods compared to the countries we invade). Shitting on the globe and spitting in people's faces is what _creates_ terrorism. Can't hardly keep us safe by picking fights with people who have nothing left to live for.

    Time to change the paradigm. Time to move into the future because we've out grown the past. There is no more "free room" for people to just roam off to, no more resource pockets someone can just "claim" and use to live on.. Our living arrangement on the planet is fundamentally different now than it was when we created the current paradigm. We must adapt (as a species) or we'll tear ourselves apart.

    www.thevenusproject.com
    .
  • Savantster
    .
    "Keep America Safe".. how Orwellian.

    destroying 3rd world countries for their oil and other resources is what breeds the deep seeded hatred for "America" (even though it's really only the top 1% making the invasion decisions, and the top 10% making the biggest profits from it, and the top 40% living like gods compared to the countries we invade). Shitting on the globe and spitting in people's faces is what _creates_ terrorism. Can't hardly keep us safe by picking fights with people who have nothing left to live for.

    Time to change the paradigm. Time to move into the future because we've out grown the past. There is no more "free room" for people to just roam off to, no more resource pockets someone can just "claim" and use to live on.. Our living arrangement on the planet is fundamentally different now than it was when we created the current paradigm. We must adapt (as a species) or we'll tear ourselves apart.

    www.thevenusproject.com (getting tired of this inconsistent posting crap, raw)
  • dennycrane
    I would definitely wear a respirator around that "reptile". She would lace herself with anthrax to "take" someone down. Watch out!
blog comments powered by Disqus