Jump to content
Forums forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

Community Reputation

25.6k Excellent

1 Follower

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. This is basically how I see Ashley's situation. She can't be that stupid. She'll lie to herself until she believes it but she's not willing to jeopardize the money or lifestyle...even if it means that her husband is in fact guilty of molesting people. I know being poor sucks but she done sold her soul. Candiace has been frustrating to watch. Every sensible point she can make is overthrown by her poor temperament and her immediate need to rebuttal with low blows. It's like she's trying really hard to gain a reputation of being the 'shade queen' instead of focusing on simply getting her point across. And she was frustrating up until the point she was angering when she made the hood comment. She thinks that because she grew up in a nice community that her nasty behaviour can't be described as 'hood'? Her sense of entitlement is mind boggling to me. And that's why I can't get on board with people who call her husband a gold digger. Candiace is the gold digger and she's digging in her momma's purse.
  11. I started watching this new season (though I'm behind today and yesterday's episodes) and I'm going to be honest, aside from a few 'typical catty' moments with her co-hosts and guests, I found Meghan's overall demeanor to be improved from last season (still don't agree with most of her opinions and do think she conflates and is intellectually dishonest when positioning her points), however, now I'm reading she stomps off set...who the hell pissed her off? lol. Guess what I thought was a 'playing nicer' Meghan may have left the building already.
  12. Andy called it a breakout season for the show. He's happy with it and it's likely that Bravo feels the same way. It's all a matter of personal opinion though. I happen to disagree with you - I enjoyed the season and much prefer it to the recycled garbage that I see on the OC and BH franchises yet they keep coming back. But again, personal opinion. I'm really excited for the reunion. I'm hoping they really drag Ashley and Michael.
  13. I'd be surprised if they didn't. Apparently the seasons are the best yet and Andy has called it Potomac's real breakout season.
  14. She didn't claim Bianca was an immigrant. In fact, she specifically mentioned that it was Bianca's parents that were immigrants to Canada. When she made the comment something to the effect of 'this is what immigration looks like' she meant holistically, that is what immigration often looks like - not a slew of rapists and murderers, but most immigrants become fruitful contributors to their communities and born first-generation children who have even better opportunities to succeed in life - like Bianca.
  15. I actually find it funny that 3 days into the new season, the woman who speaks for 50% of America (50% she is claiming to be Republican/Conservative to which I would challenge that 'stat') she has basically described them as violent (don't take their guns away) and ignorant (doesn't matter what you say, they can't be taught any different than what they know...at least when it comes to climate change). Even if I did share her views, I would be mortified that someone as inarticulate and unprofessional as Meghan McCain would be considered the face of what I stand for.
  • Create New...

Customize font-size