Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
maraleia

Rhodes Scholar Reporting the News Show Discussion

Recommended Posts

I bet Santorum wishes he'd gone to that U2 concert, although I can't imagine Bono letting him off the hook either.

 

Rachel got him to admit that homosexuality may be an immutable characteristic, he doesn't know, but that he still wants to enact laws to discriminate against homosexuals. You could actually see the uh-oh! in his eyes when he admitted it and then tried to walk it back. Good work, Rachel.

 

For real. I did a fist pump when she actually asked him if he thought people could be born gay. How he could stare a gay woman in the face and give that stupid answer about knowing some people who were cured, I have no idea. You could see the wheels turning in his head and I'm impressed she got him to admit that comparing gayness to beastiality was wrong. Baby steps, I guess.

 

She's too nice. I'd pay to see him go on Chris Matthews' show. Martin  Bashir would also be fun (I really miss his show - the snark was off the charts).

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I loved watching Rachel debunk the Perot myth. I didn't realize Perot took voters from both Clinton and Bush, myself. I just remember Rush Limbaugh whining about how Clinton wasn't really elected by the people and running graphics on his TV show counting the days the country was being held hostage.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

If I ever had known about the Perot conspiracy theories ("they're trying to ruin my daughter's wedding"), I have completely forgotten about them, so appreciate the history lesson!  And I don't like the Friday news dump, but am hoping Perot is on this week's! 

 

Audio podcast (and video of the first segment) is available for one day on iTunes, if anyone missed the first airing of TRMS yesterday -- the re-airings later in the night only had part of the first segment, then were pre-empted by news briefings of the terrible shooting in Louisiana. 

Share this post


Link to post

I was happy to read in the Washington Post (sorry, no link) that it looks like Rachel's show is safe from whatever hashing they're doing to the MSNBC lineup.

Share this post


Link to post

Wow, had not heard about the shakeup, but it looks serious -- and here is a link with some details (too bad if Chris Hayes and Alex Wagner end up getting cut).  But as you say, Rachel's show looks safe for now.  I'll also post this over in the Network thread for more general MSNBC discussion, if I can find the right thread!

 

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/07/24/tanking-msnbc-gets-a-serious-shakeup.html

 

Plus, "unless your last name is Matthews, Maddow or your first name Joe or Mika, nobody appears safe...":

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/exclusive-more-msnbc-changes-coming-with-three-shows-out-hard-news-and-chuck-todd-back/

Edited by jjj

Share this post


Link to post

Oh, I'd hate to lose Chris Hayes.  I really like him.

 

Did Rachel say "Christ almighty" in the piece about Trump's lawyer last night or was I imagining things? I liked how truly pissed off she was about the depths to which the Republicans drag down our political discourse.

Share this post


Link to post

 

I liked how truly pissed off she was about the depths to which the Republicans drag down our political discourse.

She was so disgusted at the thought that she had to actually explain that it is not legal to rape your wife.  I'd say its going to be a long year and a half but it never ends.  As soon as the next President is elected, the next election will begin.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Did Rachel say "Christ almighty" in the piece about Trump's lawyer last night or was I imagining things?

 

I was wondering the same thing! A bit extreme maybe, but she was caught up in the moment. Safe to say, she was really, really pissed off.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

She said, and I quote, "Jeeeeesus Christ!" which actually is even more old-school blasphemous. I'm old enough to remember when that would have been bleeped on network tv, and that wasn't all that long ago.

Share this post


Link to post

I was hoping that Jonathan Pollard's cat would be part of the Friday News Dump.  Oh well, it was the cactus!

 

Loved the Trump Game!  More to the point, I loved how thrilled Rachel was with it.  When that segment started, I could tell that she was heading to today's release of health records, and thought the move to financial records was the payoff.  But no, it was all a setup for the Trump Game!  I did think it was way too much time on the older health issue. 

Edited by jjj

Share this post


Link to post

The best part of the Friday night show is Rachel's segue to Lock Up. Adventure and unexpected relationships await you!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

The best part of the Friday night show is Rachel's segue to Lock Up. Adventure and unexpected relationships await you!

I usually watch her show on television, but today was watching in HD on my computer on the live MSNBC feed.  And they cut off all the leadup to "Lockup!"!  So I'll have to catch that in the podcast.  Good to know for the future, because I truly enjoy her comments about "Lockup!".  After Alec Baldwin's show went off the air (after four weeks, when of course her lead-in was to his show), there was some period of respect where she had no lead-in to "Lockup!", because they were pretending the Baldwin show might come back. I was glad when her "Lockup!" comments came back.

Share this post


Link to post

Really? No one is talking about Limberbutt McCcubbins?


Republican candidate "Deez Nuts"?  I miss the fun and interest of that other board.  Nothing on those items? I literally LMAO for 5 minutes.  K.. Just me then . . .

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

 

Adventure and unexpected relationships await you!

Hee, that was a new one. I hope Rachel knows how much we enjoy the lead in to Lock Up.

Share this post


Link to post

Republican candidate "Deez Nuts"?  I miss the fun and interest of that other board.  Nothing on those items? I literally LMAO for 5 minutes.  K.. Just me then . . .

Oh, I meant to come over here and post "'Deez Nuts' -- that is all", but then got distracted.  And I looked him up; sure enough, he (is it a "he"? -- I would assume so!) has filed for the primary.  "Deez Nuts", heh! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Wow.  Rachel was angry last night.  And, she's right.  Its Democracy that being cheated.  I know it happens all the time and honestly, anything that hurts the Rs I'm not too sad about but what Fox is doing is just wrong.

Share this post


Link to post

A few days ago (before the debate lineup had been announced) Jon Stewart quipped "we all know it's going to be whoever Roger Ailes picks" which struck me all of a sudden as "oh, right, of course." And since then, I've been watching Rachel's umbrage through that lens. Rachel can't come out and say "Roger picked 'em" (although I'm increasingly wondering why not), and watching her try to explain one man's whim in the terms of party machinery and the Way Things Are Done made me actually impatient.

 

Yes, it's a travesty of democracy, but I don't see any evidence that Ailes or his audience care about that. They like it this way, on their terms on their own turf, financed by money from their own kind. It'll be November of 2016 before anybody at Fox recognizes (if they ever do) that the people who pull the voting levers aren't the same demo as the people that tune in to Hannity, O'Reilly, Kelly et al.

 

The way I see it, the more the Rs try to 'program' a presidential candidate, the more likely the Ds will win in a walk.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Was it on Rachel's Tuesday show (I think so) that she or a guest mentioned that the following R debate on CNN in September is subject to similar rules regarding the selection of participants.  I have to admit I have paid little attention to the R debate process, so had not realized that the next one is on CNN.  But as I heard on her show, the "top 10 according to polls" will be part of a more inclusive debate that will have a separate group of debaters who are not in the top 10 "according to polls".  I hope Rachel will pursue this point of manipulation of the Fox network, especially when the presumably less skewed CNN debate slate emerges.  http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/20/politics/cnn-republican-candidates-debate/

 

Alas, it appears that even the second group will not include "Deez Nuts", according to the criteria.   

Share this post


Link to post

The way I see it, the more the Rs try to 'program' a presidential candidate, the more likely the Ds will win in a walk.

 

Well, let's hope so.  I'm not sure if Ailes is hoping for Trump to be the nominee, though - he's got too much of his own money (as he reminds everyone all the time).

Share this post


Link to post

I thought Rachel's show would be pre-empted for the debate, but it looks like it is just on Fox -- so I'll be curious to see how they handle the live action on Rachel's show.  Duh, of course I knew it was a Fox show (thanks, Rachel!), but had not made the connection that it was an exclusive broadcast. 

 

Great opening segment on Jon Stewart, and I thought the interview was new until the end, when he mentioned having the flu, and I remembered that from another time.  But it certainly felt fresh! 

 

And shallow point:  so surprised to see her pale blazer and coral blouse, which looked great.

Edited by jjj

Share this post


Link to post

As much as I loved Rachel showing her interview from several years ago with Jon Stewart, it reminded me of Jon on CNN's Crossfire.

Jon, it seems, is always uncomfortable talking about The Daily Show and the process that has made it so brilliant.

Waa.  I will miss him and the 2016 election will be boring without The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.

Share this post


Link to post

24 million watched the debate. One of the political events of the year.

 

And the following day, Rachel is off, replaced by a Jon Stewart documentary.

 

And so is Chris Hayes, replaced by the most boring fill-in.

 

Man, this sucks.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

What did I miss most today?  Hint:  I missed it at 6:59:59 PM Pacific Time. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

...in prison!

Rachel's sincere admiration of Jon reaffirms my belief that she and I should be BFFs. I live within a few hours driving distance of both NYC and western MA, so I think it could work.

Edited by Grommet
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

24 million watched the debate. One of the political events of the year.

 

And the following day, Rachel is off, replaced by a Jon Stewart documentary.

 

And so is Chris Hayes, replaced by the most boring fill-in.

 

Man, this sucks.

 

Is THAT why the show didn't record Friday? I was so pissed at my DVR because I had been looking forward to her post-debate commentary. Good to know my annoyance was misplaced. I was also disappointed not to see her on the Hardball panel pre- and post-debate too. Those panels are my favorite part of an election cycle. Her immediate reaction to Clint Eastwood's crazy RNC speech is one of my all-time favorite television moments.

 

I doesn't give a crap about Jon Stewart (no offense to him or his fans, just never been interested). Give me my Rachel!

Edited by EarlGreyTea
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

 

And so is Chris Hayes, replaced by the most boring fill-in.

 

I've got to defend Thomas Roberts. He's more of the old school mold but when he was the only out gay male anchor he was using his position to discuss gay issues, issues Rachel wasn't discussing, at a time when caring too much about gay issues was perceived as "bias" and when the Miss Universe pageant went to Russia, he took the hosting gig and used to do reports on being gay in Russia. He's not snarky and he's not going to introduce a story talking about how Ryan Gosling memes relate to a major issue but he's a rare treat in news. He's got the style and format of a "traditional" anchor but he doesn't follow the beltway rules about caring first and foremost about the majority.

 

Is THAT why the show didn't record Friday? I was so pissed at my DVR because I had been looking forward to her post-debate commentary. Good to know my annoyance was misplaced.

 

It was a fairly last-minute special. My DVR still recorded it as TRMS.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

...in prison!

Rachel's sincere admiration of Jon reaffirms my belief that she and I should be BFFs. I live within a few hours driving distance of both NYC and western MA, so I think it could work.

I got my fingers crossed for you Grommet!

Share this post


Link to post

I picture Rachel and Grommet hanging out on the porch, Rachel mixing cocktails while explaining the history of chemical spills in Nebraska rivers. Grommet tosses 'em back, every now and again interrupting with a 'I know, RIGHT?!?' At some point, a new drink called 'Befouled River' is invented. Nick walks by with his 'You know more now' cardboard shooting star every so often, and Rachel's "Thanks, Nick" is the cue to chug.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

6:01 PM  Aaaand, I will go read something.   Have a good break, Rachel!

 

Yep. Man, what gives? I know Rachel needs time off, Steve Kornacki is really cute, and we're in the "silly season," but I was really looking forward to her post-debate discussion. She did a segment last year or so where she talked about how the midterm election process was being strung out so long that news anchors were extra tired lately, since they were in the thick of the election cycle and could not take any time off. Maybe she's getting her rest now before the primaries really heat up.

 

Guess I'll have to settle for hoping she randomly pops up on this House of Cards episode I'm watching.

Edited by EarlGreyTea
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I was really looking forward to her interpretation of the complex situation regarding Bernie Sanders' reception in Seattle, as she had been devoting time to his triumphant tour.  But that won't happen, as it will be very old news by the time she is back.

 

I know she has definitely earned a break!  And that we can count on her for the major election coverage in the coming 15 months! 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

IIRC when she was last off (two weeks ago?) she said she came back early for breaking news (which I've already forgotten about) so maybe she's taking those remaining vacation days off.

Share this post


Link to post

The magic of the podcast tells me that she came back on the 29th, when the top story was that wing from the missing airliner coming ashore in Madacascar.  I don't think she came back for that -- and the guest host the preceding night had said "Rachel will be back tomorrow."  I got the sense she took a few days off.  It has been a while since she had a full week off. 

 

I could kick myself that I forgot to download the Thursday podcast opening segment about Jon Stewart -- that pizza episode will never get old! 

Edited by jjj
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

From your lips, Attica. I don't drink (a taste thing, not a moral stand) but I'm willing to start!

 

So Rachel is off all week? She does indeed deserve a break but I won't watch the show without her, no offense to her guest hosts. I'll use this time to read something other than articles about how Trump will soon flame out, or not.

Share this post


Link to post

Steve Kornacki is filling in today on Hardball too. I'm imagining him frantically running from studio to studio changing his tie and wolfing down a sandwich. Come back soon to give the guy a rest, Rachel!

 

Apropos of nothing, they should have had Ronan Farrow doing the filling in for various MSNBC hosts, paying his dues and building up a following before tossing him to the wolves with his own show. It's how they had trained Maddow, Kornacki, Hayes, and others, and it worked well for all them. I wonder at them not doing it for Ronan. Rachel really built up her fanbase, IMO, when she filled in for Olbermann.

Share this post


Link to post

I have noticed on Rachel's and Chris Hayes's show, that they tend to have several anchors if the host is gone for a week.  Not sure why.  (Build up the benchers?  Keep viewers form getting attached to a new host?)  Have not seen Melissa Harris-Perry be a host on a weekday show for quite a while; other weekend hosts sometimes fill in on the weekday programs.  She used to be a regular fill-in on TRMS.

Share this post


Link to post

I have noticed on Rachel's and Chris Hayes's show, that they tend to have several anchors if the host is gone for a week.  Not sure why.  (Build up the benchers?  Keep viewers form getting attached to a new host?)  Have not seen Melissa Harris-Perry be a host on a weekday show for quite a while; other weekend hosts sometimes fill in on the weekday programs.  She used to be a regular fill-in on TRMS.

 

This guy who's filling in tonight - cannot for the life of me remember his name - is pretty enthusiastic. I like him. I was going to say they should put him on The Cycle which seems like the next step after filling in for various hosts, but alas. It's gone.

 

MHP also teaches and I think lives in Louisiana, so maybe it got to be too much work to fill in on weeknights. Now that a bunch of MSNBC shows got the axe, I wonder if we'll have some of those people bouncing around filling in for Rachel and other anchors who still have their shows. Still bitter about Bashir. He took snark to new levels.

Share this post


Link to post

MHP now lives in North Carolina, so an easier commute -- and she used to fill in on TRMS some Fridays. Just a observation that MHP is less visible in prime time (and I know there had been some public relations issues a couple of years ago) -- and that there are few women who fill in for Rachel.  I have no candidates!  And no one from The [defunct] Cycle!!!  Chris Hayes is a great younger layer (not generation), and I don't see women of his vintage or a bit younger who could be on a track to be a host in 3-6 years. 


 Still bitter about Bashir. He took snark to new levels.

Yes, I wish time would heal that situation enough for him to come back to MSNBC. 

Share this post


Link to post

Steve Kornacki is filling in today on Hardball too. I'm imagining him frantically running from studio to studio changing his tie and wolfing down a sandwich. Come back soon to give the guy a rest, Rachel!

 

 

Kornacki wasn't filling in for Rachel the last couple of days - that's Ari Melber.

 

This guy who's filling in tonight - cannot for the life of me remember his name - is pretty enthusiastic. I like him. I was going to say they should put him on The Cycle which seems like the next step after filling in for various hosts, but alas. It's gone.

 

 

As I noted above, it's Ari Melber and he was one of the original hosts of The Cycle. So been there, done that. ;)

 

Ari was the one who did most of Lawrence O'Donnell's shows when Lawrence was off after his car accident. He's always been pretty good (IMO) and I'm kind of surprised he didn't get his own show at some point because he's been around MSNBC for quite awhile.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Hurrah!  "Rachel will be back on Thursday"!  to explore "The Tale of the Tape" -- information she and her team have been assembling on candidates.  I've seen the pictures of Hillary Rodham (recent Yale Law grad) in the 1974 impeachment hearings, but had not seen the good-quality video footage they were showing as a teaser tonight.  And great footage from the mid-1980s of George W. and Jed Bush.  Golly gee, everyone looks like they are in high school!  Even Mrs. Clinton (as she was in 1993) looks so young at the health care hearings that year.  These will be episodes to record -- Thursday and Friday. 

Share this post


Link to post

Rachel returns Thursday. She seems to take a lot of partial week vacations. Why not take the whole week off?

 

Edit: Thursday's show was probably pre-taped.

Edited by nowandlater

Share this post


Link to post

Rachel returns Thursday. She seems to take a lot of partial week vacations. Why not take the whole week off?

 

Edit: Thursday's show was probably pre-taped.

Just a thought, but maybe she just uses her vacation time to spend the week at her home with Susan rather than going on some extended vacation. I get the impression Rachel stays in NYC by herself a lot while taping, and then goes home weekends.

 

...I've given this too much thought and have creeped myself out.

Edited by EarlGreyTea

Share this post


Link to post

Edit: Thursday's show was probably pre-taped.

You are probably right.  Two pre-taped shows is a lot, though. 

 

ETA, Thursday at showtime:  You are so smart, nowandlater!  Pre-taped, but I'll take it!  And watch it!  Good heavens, Matt Lauer was young 22 years ago!!!  And Andrea Mitchell!!!  (I'll stop now and be grateful no one is showing pictures of me from 22 years ago...)

Edited by jjj

Share this post


Link to post

M. Darcy: Thanks for telling me that Rachel was off last night. I'm sans TV the next two weeks, and as read your comment I was trying (struggling) to get Rachel's show to play on the web with no such luck (it gets bogged down once I enter my cable provider log in -- and I'm talking about the full episodes, not the clips.)

 

As for the specials, while they were intriguing, I was kind of underwhelmed, especially with the Democrats' past videos. With the exception of Hillary, I don't care about the Democrats' past, even Bernie Sanders. Even Martin O'Malley, who inspired a character on The Wire.

 

 

Here's an even younger Matt Lauer -- from the 1987 unaired Fox pilot for "The Howard Stern Show."

 

Lauer appears in the first minute.

 

Edited by nowandlater
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Because I'm 12, I enjoyed hearing Rachel say "underpants" in reference to that sheriff in the first piece.

Bad lip reading is hilarious!

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size