Help the Host!

Oh, hell Alison, don't you have interns for this kind of crap? Was I supposed to combine all three topics? OK, uhm...what if we had Matt Drudge stand all day at the border, in his stupid-ass fedora and a half-price Hillary Halloween mask, and just...SCARE away all the immigrants? Would YOU cross any border with THAT greeting you?

Hmmm. Can you imagine if, instead of the Statue of Liberty, we had a 200' tall Statue of Matt Drudge? In a half-price Hillary mask? Oh my God, that's actually kind of cool, isn't it?

Alison, you're welcome. But unless you're paying me, I have to go goof off somewhere else now.

Sent by Brent Danzig | 3:04 PM | 11-1-2007

You should argue for a primary scheduled on the same day across the country. It would keep people honest in the primary instead of one state basing who they vote for in the primaries on "electable" candidates within each party. It would also keep the primaries out of December!

Sent by Isaac Wingfield | 4:36 PM | 11-1-2007

Regarding Issac's post --- eh. God knows our primary system right now is a sham and needs radical reform, but I think that a one-day national primary defeats the "good" purpose of primaries in the first place: to give under-funded, little-known candidates a chance to barnstorm, grass-roots organize, build momentum and have a (theoretical) shot at taking on the parties' establishment candidates. Personally, I don't have a good suggestion on how to fix the primary process, but a national primary isn't it.

Hey Alison: ask Bill Maher if he still thinks that the 9/11 hijackers were "heroes". If he says yes, don't do anything to embarrass yourself on TV. Just wait until you're all backstage, and then start throwing fingers foods from the green room at him. Repeatedly. If they have pigs-in-a-blanket? Throw them and say, "That's from Brent. You stupid tool."

Heh. Thanks. Good luck!

Sent by Brent Danzig | 5:10 PM | 11-1-2007

I always thought that the old "I think the voters/states/individual should decide" line is the best response to tricky questions where maintaining impartiality is key.

However, using it too freely can make you look like either Mitt Romney or a two-faced obfuscating weasel. This can be mitigated however by occasionally agreeing with the other panelists and then adding a cleverly placed "but," just to hedge your bets.

Sent by Will G | 11:16 PM | 11-1-2007

Brent,
You honestly made me laugh out loud with the image of me hurling cocktail weenies at Mr. Maher!
And no---we don't have a ton of interns --I am my own Google monkey. I also happen to know our listeners are damn smart....so why not exploit y'all--- with affection of course.

Sent by Alison Stewart | 2:33 PM | 11-2-2007

Alison, you were great. It must be a fine line for a journalist to walk on a show like that. You're encouraged to advocate an opinion to make it entertaining, but can't go too far if you want to maintain objectivity. Nicely done.

Sent by Maura | 10:31 AM | 11-3-2007

I second Maura's comments. Solid journalistic observations and pitch-perfect impartiality. Bravo!

Sent by Will G | 7:11 PM | 11-5-2007