Small Talk: This Just In

[Dagny]

Rachel Maddow is host of the Emmy Award-winning “The Rachel Maddow Show” on MSNBC. “The Rachel Maddow Show” features Maddow’s take on the biggest stories of the day, political and otherwise, including lively debate with guests from all sides of the issues, in-depth analysis and stories no other shows in cable news will cover.

Oh hey, she hasn't heard all of the jokes how she looks like a guy or her last name is like "mad cow." Keep them coming.

We need a place to hang out please...

[David T. Cole]

I converted the show request into the Small Talk thread for the show -- a social thread and not generally for specific show discussion.


Please feel free to start new threads for characters, episodes, media mentions, actors, etc.

If you (collectively) would like to change/add the name of the Small Talk thread jokey bit just figure it out amongst yourselves and then email david@previously.tv and he'll change it.

[Dagny]

Thanks.  With the resignation of Samson, I guess MSNBC's entire Friday through Sunday programming just got booked. Well, maybe not MHP.

[Egg]

Thanks for making this exist! I am the poster in some parts known as Gregorio, but in today's hustle and bustle that's just too many characters.

I am one of those who hasn't really enjoyed all the Christie coverage, BUT I think Rachel did a fantastic job in her coverage last night, and I look forward to seeing how she covers it tonight. Especially with Bridget Kelly's lawyer rightly calling the Mastro Report out for it's disgusting sexism.

[Lillybee]

I give RM credit for making Bridgegate a national topic.

[Zalyn]

A thread for my favorite news show, how exciting!  (I consider MHP to be my favorite panel discussion show)

RM is awesome for her focus on educating viewers about political wonkery in interesting ways.  She's a great resource for helping get friends up to speed on issues when they aren't political nerds like me. 

Glad to be here!

[TheGongOfDoom]

I like Rachel but her...I guess tic is maybe the best word for it, of repeating the same line or tidbit of information over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over until it has been turned to a liquid ooze is offputting and VERY condescending. Look we all know the average viewers attention span is no more than  45 se--HEY LOOGIT THAT IT'S AN ISLAND IN JAPAN THAT'S BEEN OVERRUN WITH BUNNIES!!!!!!! THOUSANDS OF THEM!!!!! ZOMG!!!!!!!!!!!!!! SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ADORABS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (HAS FATAL HEART ATTACK FROM THE CUTE)* -conds but you're losing people when you treat them like idiots who can't hold a thought in their head for more than a minute.

The other thing I don;t like about her show and Chris Hayes is how the commercial breaks are structured. Now the pattern seems to be do a story, go to commercials, come back do another short piece, go to commercials, come back to hype the main interview, cut to MORE commercials, come back and hype the main piece YET AGAIN and more commercials. That gets boring REAL fast.

 

*Yeah I hear you snickering, and muttering, "No way man, don't toy with me like that, no way that's true, stop lying." Fair warning, prepare to die from the cute adorableness.

 

[Dagny]

That report was about one sentence short of blaming PMS for the Bridgegate scandal. Oh and:

Bunnies aren’t just cute like everyone supposes. They got them hoppy legs and twitchy little noses, and what’s with all the carrots!? What do they need such good eyesight for anyway!? Bunnies, bunnies, it must be bunnies!!

 

DVR fixes most of the watching ticks I have with Rachel.  I know the first segment will be long and she will always circle back to a relevant topic of the week no matter how left field it maybe.  There will be a three minute break...five minutes of talk, three commercials, a teaser, three commercials, 5 talk...BUNNIES

I wonder if Rachel is going to cover Kansas? They want to ditch the EPA and allow themselves the ability to regulate their own stuff.

[Gemma Violet]

I love Rachel's show.  Yes, she does tend to repeat a bit, but not enough for me to tune out.  I usually DVR a week's worth of shows and then have a Rachel marathon on the weekend.

[Zalyn]

Podcast, baby !  

D'awwww, bunnies! 

[attica]

I caught Rachel's appearance on Watch What Happens Tuesday night. She seemed to enjoy herself a good deal, despite being a popcult naïf. Andy asked her who her favorite Kardashian was: "Yes! Whoo!" was the vigorously nodded response. Which was also her answer to which Lionel Richie song is her favorite. When a caller asked her "Whom would you rather [bone]?" between Coulter and Palin, Rachel cheerfully opted for Death.

[cali1981]

I respect and admire Rachel and have from her debut on MSNBC but her show has become increasingly difficult for me to watch.  It has become a virtual commercial fest with too little actual content.  It is very annoying when Rachel comes back from one commercial break, gives a 20 second tease for an upcoming story and then goes right to another round of commercials.  I realize that ad revenue is always the bottom line but when it chops a valuable source of news up so badly. one has to wonder.  I find myself, more and more changing the channel during Rachel's show and not coming back to it.  Rachel and her fans deserve better than this.

Edited July 19, 2016 by cali1981

[Moose135]

1 hour ago, cali1981 said:

It is very annoying when Rachel comes back from one commercial break, gives a 20 second tease for an upcoming story and then goes right to another round of commercials.

I hate that! And like you, too many times I end up changing the channel, I get distracted, and don't come back.

[Grommet]

This is why I DVR the show and start watching at 9:30.

[chessiegal]

There are so many yummy ways to get Vitamin D. After my lumpectomy almost 5 years ago, my oncologist put me on an anti-estrogen drug, and said I needed to take Vitamin D supplements to keep from deteriorating bone density. At my 6 month check-up, I fessed up I couldn't take swallowing the large pills. She went to her office and brought me some chocolate chewables. I'm supposed to take 2 a day. I take Viactiv chocolate in the morning (they also come in caramel) and at night I take Adora,, a real chocolate supplement, I buy at Whole Foods. My oncologist says I have the best bone density of any of her patients. Regular walking on a treadmill helps too.

[Medicine Crow]

1 hour ago, chessiegal said:

There are so many yummy ways to get Vitamin D. After my lumpectomy almost 5 years ago, my oncologist put me on an anti-estrogen drug, and said I needed to take Vitamin D supplements to keep from deteriorating bone density. At my 6 month check-up, I fessed up I couldn't take swallowing the large pills. She went to her office and brought me some chocolate chewables. I'm supposed to take 2 a day. I take Viactiv chocolate in the morning (they also come in caramel) and at night I take Adora,, a real chocolate supplement, I buy at Whole Foods. My oncologist says I have the best bone density of any of her patients. Regular walking on a treadmill helps too.

Thanks.  Good to know!!!

[AmandaPanda]

Thanks for the tips @chessiegal! I have terribly low Vitamin D. I was a vegetarian for almost 7 years, but recently had to start eating meat again for other health reasons. Plus, I'm a ginger, so going outside without sunscreen is pretty much just me asking to be roasted alive. I will definitely check out Viactiv!

[AmandaPanda]

Want to discuss random things not related to show discussion or Rachel discussion? Reminder that you can do so here!

[M. Darcy]

Happy New Year fellow Maddowites!  Rachelfans?  I guess we don't have a catchy name. 

[Galloway Cave]

With Star Wars swirling about, are we Maddowans?

[M. Darcy]

Quote

With Star Wars swirling about, are we Maddowans?

We have a winner! 

[thosme]

Every time I see Scott Pruitt on TV, he reminds me of the security head in the movie "Catching Fire."  I guess it's the hair.

[M. Darcy]

Happy Ed Balls Day!

[freddi]

The November 2-4 2018 six-hour documentary on Watergate was mentioned over in the Rachel episode thread, and I wanted to add how good it is.  And I thought I knew most of the details.  But the antics of the Nixon White House in 1971-72 are amazing, even before the break-in.  I'm watching On Demand, and it's letting me fast forward through commercials. 

[Quilt Fairy]

Two things about the Watergate documentary: 1) the editing in of the commercial breaks was absolutely atrocious, no screen-goes-to-black or even a fraction of a second between the show and the next commercial; and 2) I really need to watch All the President's Men again.

[suomi]

I didn't hear about the doc in time to watch from the beginning (previous plans), didn't want to jump in for the last 2 hours. Gah! I'm definitely on the hunt for future airings. Watched ATPM twice last summer; as well as I think I know the events I find that I notice something new each time I see it. 

[freddi]

Both these reasons made the On Demand option a good choice.  And this provides so much more background material for All the President's Men.  Especially all the clips and observations from current-day Woodward and  Bernstein. 

27 minutes ago, Quilt Fairy said:

Two things about the Watergate documentary: 1) the editing in of the commercial breaks was absolutely atrocious, no screen-goes-to-black or even a fraction of a second between the show and the next commercial; and 2) I really need to watch All the President's Men again.

 

8 minutes ago, suomi said:

I didn't hear about the doc in time to watch from the beginning (previous plans), didn't want to jump in for the last 2 hours. Gah! I'm definitely on the hunt for future airings. Watched ATPM twice last summer; as well as I think I know the events I find that I notice something new each time I see it. 

[Sharpie66]

The post here got me to watch the first two eps On Demand last night then see the third off my dvr. Thanks for the rec—that was excellent! Better than the Redford-hosted MSNBC show about All the President’s Men and Watergate which featured Rachel as one of the talking heads. Having 5 hours to delve into it gave them room to explore different people/angles than the usual perfunctory docs do. 

[Calvada]

I too have been watching the Watergate doc on the History Channel.  I've watched the first 2 episodes, but haven't had a chance to watch the third episode. In addition to the lousy editing in the commercial breaks, I do not like the actors playing Nixon, Kissinger, Haldeman, et al. as they recreate conversations from the tapes.  This is a huge mistake.  I cannot understand why they aren't simply playing the tapes.  The tapes are chilling - the President of the United States committing obstruction of justice in the Oval Office!  People at the highest levels of the Executive Branch conspiring to cover up multiple felonies!  We don't need actors, we have the actual people saying the words.  

[freddi]

Luckily, the interludes with the actors are limited, but every time, I also am thinking "just play the actual tape!"  They could do that while showing still pictures of the speakers or the empty Oval Office .

But overall, it is a gold mine of details I never knew.  

26 minutes ago, Calvada said:

I too have been watching the Watergate doc on the History Channel.  I've watched the first 2 episodes, but haven't had a chance to watch the third episode. In addition to the lousy editing in the commercial breaks, I do not like the actors playing Nixon, Kissinger, Haldeman, et al. as they recreate conversations from the tapes.  This is a huge mistake.  I cannot understand why they aren't simply playing the tapes.  The tapes are chilling - the President of the United States committing obstruction of justice in the Oval Office!  People at the highest levels of the Executive Branch conspiring to cover up multiple felonies!  We don't need actors, we have the actual people saying the words.  

[tessaray]

23 hours ago, suomi said:

I didn't hear about the doc in time to watch from the beginning (previous plans), didn't want to jump in for the last 2 hours. Gah! I'm definitely on the hunt for future airings. Watched ATPM twice last summer; as well as I think I know the events I find that I notice something new each time I see it. 

Does your cable company offer access to the tv anywhere type apps?  Or log-ins to network websites? 

Philo (the online streaming service) has The History Channel. I believe they have a one week free trial.  If it isn't available on demand, you should probably be able to log in to the Discovery website.  https://try.philo.com/ 

[suomi]

Thank you, tessaray. I will look into that ASAP. :)

[BuckeyeLou]

Did anyone see Rachel's appearance on The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon?  It was Monday night....she always seems like she is having fun, and she came out dancing to The Roots music...I love it when she shows her "silly" side

[Quilt Fairy]

8 hours ago, BuckeyeLou said:

...I love it when she shows her "silly" side

Well, she hasn't had much of a chance to do that the last 24 months.

[suomi]

Quote

It was interesting to me because I live in the next district over (RIP, Peter Roskam!) and I never saw a single commercial for her.  I guess cable TV commercials can target very discriminately.

(Hoping this is OK because we're in a social thread. Mea culpa if not. I think it's something Rach would be into. If so, maybe she took a knife to the RFID in her new canoe).

RFID (radio-frequency identification) was a huge breakthrough for many reasons. RFID tags used to be thrown out with the packaging but now they're embedded everywhere, in the seams of clothing and shoes, inside furniture and electronics, etc. The original intent was to use them for shipping and taking inventory - electronic readers very quickly and efficiently scan cartons and pallets in stores and warehouses instead of using humans to count manually. It turned out that the RFID wave was just getting started. Smart refrigerators that can read barcodes and RFIDs? At this point they require human input to inventory the food, create shopping lists and reminders, while being promoted as automatically regulating humidity and temperature for the scanned items. "Use the eggs, they're nearing Best By date" - how convenient, and eventually your fridge will share info about your food with cable/satellite/wifi providers who will share it with advertisers. The sharing capability is built-in and automatic and must be disabled by the consumer, and how many will do that? TPTB anticipate that very few will disable, especially those in the wifi generation. The basic premise is that, for example, if you have Hunt's ketchup in your fridge then Hunt's is wasting their advertising $$$ on you so your TVs/devices will carry Del Monte ketchup commercials instead - along with coupons to lure you. We'll get our feet wet with Amazon's Alexa fridge app and after awhile we'll get used to spy chips in our homes and won't give it a second thought. The pilot uses will be in the fridges that have touchscreen computers in the door, fridges that now have cameras inside so you can use your smart phone to see which items to shop for on the way home, or to generate recipes using what you already have. Customized food commercials will eventually be an everyday thing, just like the discriminate political commercials mentioned in the post above. The next phase will promote the use of readers and cameras in pantries and cupboards to inventory non-refrigerated foods, ka ching for the manufacturers of those devices and, again, it's really about your convenience. *wink wink* It sounds like a cross between The Jetsons and 1984's Big Brother but it's already here and gaining popularity. Also found under this umbrella are the apps used to remotely control lights, ceiling fans, door locks and burglar alarms in your home or business. I read about a criminal case where the defendant's grocery store loyalty card was scanned in his wallet when he walked into and out of the store and, in addition to other evidence, helped to provide reasonable doubt that he was at the scene of the no-witnesses crime: not guilty verdict. RFIDs are embedded in tires, use your imagination. If there's a reader nearby, where was your vehicle parked on a certain date at a certain time? It's sort of like CCTV. If it's being used in the area where you're at, gotcha. CCTV films you and an RFID reader verifies your presence. RFID currently can't be read/scanned at highway speed but that will happen, given enough time and improved technology. If the tires on your vehicle travel too quickly from one roadside reader to another, automatic speeding ticket. These are also the chips implanted in pets and livestock and the shoes worn by those with Alzheimer's and dementia; the frequency of each chip can be registered like a vehicle. (RFID bounces from a reader/GPS triangulates via cellular networks).  

Anyway, the post above reminded me of this fascinating and frightening concept.   

Edited November 8, 2018 by suomi

[BuckeyeLou]

On ‎11‎/‎8‎/‎2018 at 4:38 AM, suomi said:

(Hoping this is OK because we're in a social thread. Mea culpa if not. I think it's something Rach would be into. If so, maybe she took a knife to the RFID in her new canoe).

RFID (radio-frequency identification) was a huge breakthrough for many reasons. RFID tags used to be thrown out with the packaging but now they're embedded everywhere, in the seams of clothing and shoes, inside furniture and electronics, etc. The original intent was to use them for shipping and taking inventory - electronic readers very quickly and efficiently scan cartons and pallets in stores and warehouses instead of using humans to count manually. It turned out that the RFID wave was just getting started. Smart refrigerators that can read barcodes and RFIDs? At this point they require human input to inventory the food, create shopping lists and reminders, while being promoted as automatically regulating humidity and temperature for the scanned items. "Use the eggs, they're nearing Best By date" - how convenient, and eventually your fridge will share info about your food with cable/satellite/wifi providers who will share it with advertisers. The sharing capability is built-in and automatic and must be disabled by the consumer, and how many will do that? TPTB anticipate that very few will disable, especially those in the wifi generation. The basic premise is that, for example, if you have Hunt's ketchup in your fridge then Hunt's is wasting their advertising $$$ on you so your TVs/devices will carry Del Monte ketchup commercials instead - along with coupons to lure you. We'll get our feet wet with Amazon's Alexa fridge app and after awhile we'll get used to spy chips in our homes and won't give it a second thought. The pilot uses will be in the fridges that have touchscreen computers in the door, fridges that now have cameras inside so you can use your smart phone to see which items to shop for on the way home, or to generate recipes using what you already have. Customized food commercials will eventually be an everyday thing, just like the discriminate political commercials mentioned in the post above. The next phase will promote the use of readers and cameras in pantries and cupboards to inventory non-refrigerated foods, ka ching for the manufacturers of those devices and, again, it's really about your convenience. *wink wink* It sounds like a cross between The Jetsons and 1984's Big Brother but it's already here and gaining popularity. Also found under this umbrella are the apps used to remotely control lights, ceiling fans, door locks and burglar alarms in your home or business. I read about a criminal case where the defendant's grocery store loyalty card was scanned in his wallet when he walked into and out of the store and, in addition to other evidence, helped to provide reasonable doubt that he was at the scene of the no-witnesses crime: not guilty verdict. RFIDs are embedded in tires, use your imagination. If there's a reader nearby, where was your vehicle parked on a certain date at a certain time? It's sort of like CCTV. If it's being used in the area where you're at, gotcha. CCTV films you and an RFID reader verifies your presence. RFID currently can't be read/scanned at highway speed but that will happen, given enough time and improved technology. If the tires on your vehicle travel too quickly from one roadside reader to another, automatic speeding ticket. These are also the chips implanted in pets and livestock and the shoes worn by those with Alzheimer's and dementia; the frequency of each chip can be registered like a vehicle. (RFID bounces from a reader/GPS triangulates via cellular networks).  

Anyway, the post above reminded me of this fascinating and frightening concept.   

Yikes! "1984" indeed!  I will stick to my old-school appliances :)

[Calvada]

Another comment on the Watergate documentary on the History Channel now that I've seen the third and final episode - Elizabeth Holtzman and Barbara Jordan were so impressive, a harbinger of the type of women elected to Congress this week, the women Rachel has begun to feature.  I remember how people marveled at how articulate Barbara Jordan was, and even as a young kid I knew that was somehow wrong.  I couldn't understand it.  Of course she was articulate!  She was a lawyer!  Just like Perry Mason!  Were they saying that because she was a woman??  I was a budding preteen feminist and I was outraged.  My mother had to explain to me that most people saying that were omitting "for a black person" at the end of that sentence, although there were probably some omitting "for a woman" and worst of all, some omitting "for a black woman."  It was a valuable lesson to me, a white kid from a very white area of Wisconsin, that racism is not shown only by fire hoses being turned on black people in the South.  

Rachel has spoken about how her mother watched the Watergate hearings when Rachel was a baby - I think some of Holtzman's & Jordon's smarts went to Rachel through some type of TV osmosis.

[Quilt Fairy]

On ‎11‎/‎5‎/‎2018 at 8:38 PM, Calvada said:

I do not like the actors playing Nixon, Kissinger, Haldeman, et al. as they recreate conversations from the tapes.  This is a huge mistake.  I cannot understand why they aren't simply playing the tapes.

I just want to say that I feel completely the opposite.  The tapes are of such a poor quality (listening to the 4th episode of Bagman confirmed that for me) that having them recreated with actors helped me greatly to not only understand them but their context. 

Also,  regarding Bagman, is Rachel a secret sadist?  Listening to this fascinating story in 30 minute chunks once a week is sheer torture!

[Calvada]

6 hours ago, Quilt Fairy said:

Also,  regarding Bagman, is Rachel a secret sadist?  Listening to this fascinating story in 30 minute chunks once a week is sheer torture!

On this, I agree with you completely!  I just get settled in, fascinated by what Rachel is telling me, and the episode is over.  I briefly thought of waiting until all had been posted, then listening to them in sequence in one sitting, but then I realized I was just kidding myself.  I can't resist!  

[ahisma]

Our tv boyfriend Michael Beschloss just had a great interview with Preet Bharara on the Stay Tuned with Preet podcast. Two extremely intelligent and expert people talking about historical circumstances and current affairs in a very accessible way—HIGHLY recommended!

[tessaray]

Just wanted to remind everyone that links to Rachel's specific outside appearances and projects can go in the Rhodes Scholar thread. (I'm leaving the Bagman comments here since they are mixed with the Watergate documentary.)

[Sharpie66]

All of Rachel’s discussions about the Flynn document’s redactions reminded me of the first time I ever dealt with governmental primary source documents. In the mid-80s, I was taking a history seminar class on J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI and how they framed protesters/lefties/civil rights advocates/etc. The bulk of the final grade was for the group project using FBI docs from the ‘50s and ‘60s. So much redaction!!

My favorite doc was one I couldn’t find a space for in my portion of the paper, but I mentioned it in the presentation. It was a report from a young undercover agent in Chicago during the Democratic convention in ‘68. He was walking down Michigan Avenue at 3 am when “REDACTION” until the last line of the two-page doc, which read “Regardless of what happened to me, I do not believe that the CPD used excessive force.” So, he was mistaken for a protester and got beat up by the Chicago cops. Amazing what you can figure out even from a heavily redacted document!

[suomi]

Reading Russ Baker's book  Family of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty, America's Invisible Government, and The Hidden History of the Last Fifty Years

I knew that Poppy was career CIA and about the JFK assassin "tip" he phoned in to the FBI 30 minutes after the shooting and 30 minutes before the death was announced, which served to cloak his whereabouts that day... but am I the only one who didn't know that Bob Woodward is career Naval Intelligence and CIA?

And (as Nixon/his insiders perceived) Watergate was a domestic CIA op? Is this covered in Bagman? (I'm old and I don't know a podcast from a peapod). TIA

Edited December 7, 2018 by suomi
typo

[ottoDbusdriver]

On 12/7/2018 at 5:45 AM, suomi said:

but am I the only one who didn't know that Bob Woodward is career Naval Intelligence and CIA?

Bob Woodward the journalist  ?  How could Bob Woodward be career Naval Intelligence and CIA ?  
He spent 5 years in the Navy after graduating from college, and then went to work for the Washington Post in 1971 at the age of 28.
Per his Wikipedia page -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Woodward

[freddi]

I'm not sure if all the "Small Talk" threads will get a notification before they are removed, but in case not, here is the Previously.tv announcement about the reorganization of these threads:  'The conversion of many forums to topics means all the “small talk” topics for smaller shows won’t be crunched into the condensed show topics and will be removed. If you have any bon mots in Small Talk areas, you may want to save them for your scrapbook (in the future, the general idea of “Small Talk” will be covered by a new clubs feature but we’ll have more on that later)'

[ottoDbusdriver]

28 minutes ago, freddi said:

I'm not sure if all the "Small Talk" threads will get a notification before they are removed, but in case not, here is the Previously.tv announcement about the reorganization of these threads:  'The conversion of many forums to topics means all the “small talk” topics for smaller shows won’t be crunched into the condensed show topics and will be removed. If you have any bon mots in Small Talk areas, you may want to save them for your scrapbook (in the future, the general idea of “Small Talk” will be covered by a new clubs feature but we’ll have more on that later)'

Took a look at the shows in the 'U' section (where they are trying it out)-- not sure how I feel about it.

[tessaray]

I think people will like the new Clubs feature.  With them it will be possible to create groups for all kinds of topics. For instance, it might be that someone would create one for MSNBC fans, which would let people discuss things like frequent guests, books being promoted across the various shows, Watergate, etc. - stuff that's interesting but not on-topic for the individual shows.   

There are a few things I'm not terribly crazy about but this version of the forum software is creaky and hard to maintain. The new forum will be more stable and more importantly, upgrade-able.  It will definitely be worth the brief adjustment once things are up and running.    

[suomi]

9 hours ago, ottoDbusdriver said:

Bob Woodward the journalist  ?  How could Bob Woodward be career Naval Intelligence and CIA ?  
He spent 5 years in the Navy after graduating from college, and then went to work for the Washington Post in 1971 at the age of 28.
Per his Wikipedia page -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Woodward

Career as in lifelong, long-standing, of long duration - not that he punched a time clock at Langley. It appears to be well documented in Baker's book and after reading it I learned that his (side) career as a spook has been referenced and common knowledge for years. Which is why I wondered if I was one of the few who weren't aware and if it was mentioned in the podcast.

A person's endeavors for Naval Intelligence are not bookended by their stint in the military. 

Deep Throat was at least three people; Woodward pinning the rose on Mark Felt (and writing a book about it) is just one example of his work with CIA/ONI. 

[possibilities]

RE Woodward: I certainly didn't know that.

[BuckeyeLou]

Don't know if some folks here watched the 2 hour movie/wrap-up of "Timeless"....but I chuckled when Lucy(portraying a journalist during the Korean War, when asked her name, said "Rachel Maddow" :)  The writers of that show must be Rachel fans...