RHJunkie

I guess that would explain why the other articles didn't mention that part. Thanks for clarifying!

Exactly. His response and his comments were pretty clear from the get go, she just wanted to ask it again so that when he confirmed his point of view, she could have her moment.

I had to go to the second page of google before I stumbled on an article that wasn't a regurgitation of all the others. People.com reported that the woman walked off and a voting official approached her and helped her change her vote to Elizabeth Warren. Meghan is probably too obsessed with that 2016 map of red and her small brain has forgotten how to comprehend that all those votes don't mean Republican voters.

And it's moment like Megan's Twitter retweet that make me question her intelligence and ability to think for herself. When Mayor Pete answered her abortion question, she thanked him for clarifying and then went on to lecture him about how he's not going to get votes because of it. Now she's retweeting a headline that's saying that Mayor Pete refused to give his stance on partial birth abortion with a clip of her question and his response from today. Are people stupid or just need to clean the wax out of their ears? He clearly answered the question - the government has no business making those decisions for a woman and that he will put his trust in a woman making that decision for herself. That's a pretty obvious point of view. But Meghan can't pass up an opportunity to feel like she had a 'gotcha' moment, lol.

Today just proved to me what I always suspected about Meghan. Meghan is the type of person who can hear one person say something and if that person is a Democrat, then she's going to repeat that information and misrepresent it in a way that makes it seem like there's a large body of people that feel this way when in truth she only knows of one source. She gets offended that Whoopi gave her a taste of her own medicine but she doesn't recognize how dismissive it is that she basically attributes the exact same thought and opinions to all 3 women on the panel just because they all happen to be Democrats. She doesn't recognize how dismissive it is for her to misinterpret what the women were saying and then acting like they were being naive about Mitt Romney. None of them praised him for being a good guy. They simply gave him credit for a specific situation. Meghan turned it into something that it wasn't and the saddest part is that she didn't even have the awareness to recognize this and apologize or own what she did. She turned herself into a victim the moment she said 'I knew this was going to happen'. She's the poster child for people who say 'I'm not a victim' but then go on to say and behave like a victim. It was really disheartening to see that voter wanting to withdraw her vote when she found out Pete is gay. She believed in what he stood for, enough to give her vote to him but is willing to sacrifice that vote because of something that really is of no consequence to her. What does she really lose in her life knowing that Pete is gay? Out of curiousity, was she able to get her vote back? And if so, was she allowed to vote for someone else? I appreciate that Pete corrected Meghan about having a substantial lead on Sanders in Iowa. His dig at Trump's service was incredibly smooth. I've said it from the first interview I saw of him, he is incredibly thoughtful and well spoken in his delivery. I loved how he handled the abortion question and even laughed at the stupidity of what people like Meghan think about late term abortion. Even on its surface, the idea that a woman would go through an entire pregnancy and only within weeks of giving birth would so casually and dismissively decide that she didn't want to have a child...so absurd. He can explain it until he's blue in the face, but it won't resonate for some people and you have to just be okay with knowing that sometimes you just can't fix stupid. And let's be real - Meghan keeps talking about what's going to win over Republicans. Everyone knows that elections come down to independents. He doesn't need Meghan's vote because unless he suddenly announced that he was joining the Republican party and espousing their talking points, there was no way in hell that she would ever vote for him anyway. Gotta cut your losses and speak to people who are open minded.

Damn, I had no idea that they were siblings!

Justin has literally replaced the role of Kelly this season. I'm starting to see how this was all envisioned. Season 1 Kirsten needed to promote her business and thought the best way to do it is to let her messy employees bring the drama while she enjoys the storyline arc of a mother, wife and businesswoman doing it all and learning that she needs to stop being the boss everyone loves and become the boss everyone respects. Season 2 Kirsten saw the fruits of her business being promoted and once again leaned on her employees to bring the drama while she solidified her role as a boss bitch, making hard decisions to ensure success of her company. Season 3 Kirsten can't use come into a third season making the same boss lady mistakes when she also wants to run with the storyline of UJ being a crazy success and with great potential to expand. So now, it feels like she's making a mountain out of molehill with Kelly, shifting the drama from the business lens to a more personal lens without having to sacrifice her husband or her closest friends to do it.

I didn't look at that segment but I think she looks great in that colour! She pulls off bright colours really well, in my opinion.

Yeah that's why she's full of shit. She's very careful of how she criticizes Republicans (mostly by turning the conversation into a 'both sides' argument but let it be a Democrat then all of her entire talking points will be focused on Democrats) but she claims that she calls balls and strikes. She is still beholden to her politics above all else. That's why you would think that she took a mood stabilizer when a Republican guest is on the show but with Democrats, she acts like a raging raccoon with rabies that drank a crate of Red Bull. She's got all energy then. I'm being excessive with my descriptions of her but I have little rope for people who demonstrate a disgusting lack of self-awareness and expect from others what they are unwilling to give of themselves. That is Meghan McCain on this show.

So they why is Meghan mentioning Corey? There should be a certain level of decorum as a host interviewing a guest. Nothing wrong with tough questions, but everything is wrong with an unprofessional attitude. It's forgivable once in a while when dealing with intentionally difficult guests or guests who say things that are very racist or bigoted and endorse hate speech. People can be entertained by her and agree with her politics, but there is not a single person on planet earth who can believably do the mental gymnastics required to deny that this woman isn't a hypocrite when it comes to 'views'. She polices other peoples reactions and behaviours and even hot topics but takes issue when people do just a fraction of that toward her. She doesn't speak to uncover facts or clarify points, she speaks to be condescending and shame people and that's what makes her a bitch on this show. She acts like a dumb donkey when Donald Trump Jr. is on after all the shit he said about her family or all of the shady shit her 'uncles' take part in right now and she has mum to say but has all the energy in the world for Democrats who come on the show when very few of her Republican people bother to show up.

First of all, don't bring up being a woman of colour when it suits your attempts at dodging criticism. The criticisms against Gabbard had nothing to do with her being a woman or a person of colour (which is a far different experience when you are white-passing by the way). Defend your intellectualism, that's fair enough...but all the other comments was so cheap and sickening to listen to her bring up. As a person of colour, don't cheapen my experiences in this world as though someone's criticism of you and your campaign platform is some kind of affront to me and my very existence. As far as I'm concerned, Gabbard can take her cult-ish leader speak far away and never come back. She came prepared, I'll give her that, but she came prepared to be a victim. I read the transcript and heard the full answer from HC. The question was about Republican strategy and in response, Clinton said they (Republicans) were grooming a third party candidate (Gabbard). And then she made reference to the Russian interest in Gabbard given the rise of bots and fake sites in support of her. She said that Jill Stein was a Russian asset (pretty sure an asset not in the sense that she's on the phone with Russia conspiring against the United States, but a Russian asset in the sense that they have special interest in her for a reason (as they do with Gabbard). Clinton's spokesperson did in a roundabout way confirm that it was Gabbard that HC was referencing, BUT Gabbard is continuing to push a false narrative that HC is saying she is being groomed by the Russians even though there has since been corrections to clarify this. This has nothing to do with calling into question her patriotism. When I read the actual transcript and heard the podcast, I wondered if so many people can be so obtuse...can people not keep up with conversation and simultaneously have consideration of context? Is this not what we learn in grade school when we read stories and have to write summaries on them? I find it alarming that anyone would consider Gabbard a real candidate for President when her comprehension skills are so clearly lacking which is a good basis to suggest that maybe she isn't as smart as she thinks she is. And I say all of this as someone who can't stand HC. It's unfortunate, because I agree on her general sentiment with respect to war. When you topple other governments, you give rise the chaos and instability. Pretty sure Meghan's turnabout on Gabbard is because Gabbard has said she won't take her guns. Joy is often flippant with her remarks and she was called to task today. I don't mind that she doubled down but she didn't do it all that well. I get that her issue with Tucker Carlson is that she feels that Gabbard is giving someone a platform they don't deserve and it's a matter of principle for Joy and even the likes of Warren but that's a personal decision. Nothing wrong with understanding that you have to promote yourself to many different demographics and going on popular Fox shows is just part of playing the game. I wish Sunny would have been there today as I do think she would have a done a better job at not only clarifying the comments, but also pushing back on Gabbard's insistence that HC's camp confirmed it was her that HC claimed was being groomed by Russian as a Russian asset.

Cute concept with the Flintstones theme but the edit on Chicago is pretty bad but I don't blame Kim for specifically mentioning that she was edited it because she probably would have gotten called out for forgetting one of her children and having to edit her in after the fact, lol.

No. She was misleading as usual. She tried to turn into a moment exposing leftist hypocrisy but the issue pressed right now is not about the President withholding funds to Ukraine, but within the context of a phone call that may have included extortion which eventually led to the release of funds that was being withheld in an unprecedented capacity. That is the crux of the issue that the Democrats were raising eyebrows over - they were not getting on a pedestal and proclaiming how immoral it was not to provide funding to Ukraine. Here's what she did, she quoted the Washington Post with her Obama comments but she conveniently forgot read the quote in full - Obama resisted efforts to send lethal military assistance to Ukraine because he was worried that it might provoke Russia but he was not against the general concept of funding for military assistance to Ukraine. She also 'forgot' to mention that Congress has steadily appropriated more for those programs than what has been requested by Obama OR Trump. She selectively left out words and whole sentences that provided more context in an effort to make an apples and oranges situation seem alike when they weren't. Ignorance is forgivable, but what she does is exactly what she blames the media for doing it but rationalizes her behaviour by claiming she's not a 'journalist'. As though that exempts her from bearing any responsibility for propagating false information with the intent to mislead.

I don't recall her lying about the Amistad comment. She repeated the word as Monique said it and when prodded about what it meant, she confirmed it in the way she interpreted it. It was a stupid reference to make and Candiace shouldn't be blamed for how she interpreted it, however, she was not a good friend sharing that information with Gizelle knowing Monique's history with her and when prodded by Gizelle, she should have simply said 'honestly, I don't know exactly what she meant by it but I'm going to give her the benefit of the doubt that it wasn't meant maliciously'. Because that's what you do for your friends - you give them an opportunity to explain themselves rather than throw them under the bus with other people.

Straight out of Meghan's own mouth, she said the reason she loves politics is because there are winners and losers. That lens views politics as a reflection of power and ego. You can try to disguise it with portraits of Founding Fathers and hang as many flags as you want but anyone with a lick of sense can see that those intentions are not patriotic.