| |
|
This page contains all of the posts and discussion on MemeStreams referencing the following web page: Gwen Awful. You can find discussions on MemeStreams as you surf the web, even if you aren't a MemeStreams member, using the Threads Bookmarklet.
|
Gwen Awful
by k at 11:46 am EDT, Oct 7, 2004 |
] Some detected animus toward Edwards in Ifill's
] interrogations but for me the overwhelming impression,
] which I've gathered over the years from watching her on
] PBS's Wash Week in Review, is that this is a person with
] a case of the cutes. There's a preening coyness to her,
] as if she's smiling at herself rather than at the camera
] and expecting a cookie. [ I kinda felt that way too. Some seriously silly moments she cooked up. I'm glad Edwards brought it up when he said "I can use his name again now?" That's was pure silliness. -k] |
| |
RE: Gwen Awful
by Vile at 7:29 pm EDT, Oct 7, 2004 |
k wrote:
] ] Some detected animus toward Edwards in Ifill's
] ] interrogations but for me the overwhelming impression,
] ] which I've gathered over the years from watching her on
] ] PBS's Wash Week in Review, is that this is a person with
] ] a case of the cutes. There's a preening coyness to her,
] ] as if she's smiling at herself rather than at the camera
] ] and expecting a cookie.
]
] [ I kinda felt that way too. Some seriously silly moments she
] cooked up. I'm glad Edwards brought it up when he said "I can
] use his name again now?" That's was pure silliness. -k] Gee, k. You read Vanity Fair? What are you? Gay? |
|
Gwen Awful
by Decius at 12:35 pm EDT, Oct 7, 2004 |
] Some detected animus toward Edwards in Ifill's
] interrogations but for me the overwhelming impression,
] which I've gathered over the years from watching her on
] PBS's Wash Week in Review, is that this is a person with
] a case of the cutes. There's a preening coyness to her,
] as if she's smiling at herself rather than at the camera
] and expecting a cookie. She did a good job of putting them both on the spot, but on the other hand, the "without using his name" bit was quite silly. This isn't a game show. (At least its not supposed to be.) |
| |
RE: Gwen Awful
by Elonka at 12:42 pm EDT, Oct 7, 2004 |
Decius wrote:
] ] Some detected animus toward Edwards in Ifill's
] ] interrogations but for me the overwhelming impression,
] ] which I've gathered over the years from watching her on
] ] PBS's Wash Week in Review, is that this is a person with
] ] a case of the cutes. There's a preening coyness to her,
] ] as if she's smiling at herself rather than at the camera
] ] and expecting a cookie.
]
] She did a good job of putting them both on the spot, but on
] the other hand, the "without using his name" bit was quite
] silly. This isn't a game show. (At least its not supposed to
] be.) I actually quite liked that part. To me, it was the perfect way to illuminate which candidates were able to form original sentences, and which ones were just on auto-pilot and repeating sentences they'd already used a thousand times before. I think the interviewer did a great job, and if she's being attacked, I see a lot of political motivation there. "If the candidate didn't do well answering the interviewer's questions, let's attack the interviewer." Bah. Are we going to do the same in the Town Forum, where if one of the candidates stumbles when answering a question, we're going to blame the person who asked it for "not asking a real question"? |
|
Gwen Awful
by adamist at 10:50 am EDT, Oct 8, 2004 |
] Some detected animus toward Edwards in Ifill's
] interrogations but for me the overwhelming impression,
] which I've gathered over the years from watching her on
] PBS's Wash Week in Review, is that this is a person with
] a case of the cutes. There's a preening coyness to her,
] as if she's smiling at herself rather than at the camera
] and expecting a cookie. [ I kinda felt that way too. Some seriously silly moments she cooked up. I'm glad Edwards brought it up when he said "I can use his name again now?" That's was pure silliness. -k] I was unimpressed by her. I did think she was more even handed than Jim Lehrer was during the first debate -- I thought he hit Bush with harder questions than Kerry. But Lehrer's questions were harder hitting and more interesting. I'm not expecting much from tonight's moderator: Good Morning America's Charlie Gibson. He's about as light weight as you can get, and both he and Diane Sawyer were fairly open about their support for Bush's Iraq policy (for those who don't know, Diane Sawyer was a Nixon speechwriter). That said, I'm less concerned about his bias than his unlikeliness to ask tough questions. This is the guy who said he thought the Vice Presidential debate was way too nasty. |
|
|
