Third EYe
06-25-2004, 06:19 PM
I was watching MSNBC because I had pizza in my hand and I need two hands to run the remote. Countdown with Keith Oberman was the show, but Keith was suspiciously absent, alien abduction? Diferent thread, for later perhaps. Back on track as it were.
I was watching this show, and they got to a point where Bush is being interviewed by an over zealous Irish reporter. Forget the subject matter, it's irrelevant for this exercise. It's not really an exercise, but the language was flowing so I used the term, and you'll understand, someday you too will have watched this program sans Keith Oberman and realize it's lacking in it's essence. Back to the beggining, dammit, I just go on about nothing for hours.
This reporter would ask a question, then Bush would respond, but only in part, and she'd try to ask another question, but instead of allowing her to push him around, he beat the crap out of her (no he didn't), he actually stopped her by putting up his hand slightly (ala supremes) and telling her to hang on, he wasn't finished. This happened 3 or 4 times that they showed us in the interview.
This isn't about Bush, it's about reporters, and perhaps lawyers too who ask questions and then don't wait for the response, they just ask another question. They do this all the time and rarely do you see anyone rebuff them, (yes, they are usually a bit dull at this point and require rebuffing, I'm just learning from a previous thread)
I'm always irritated by this, even if it's a diferent reporter. I remember Reagan waving to reporters putting his hand to his ear as if he couldn't hear them. I always had it in my head that if he were more like Trudeau that he would have said something like this ' hey you banshees, one at a time and stop that frothing'
I've seen it with actors and puppeteers too, (leave out the pupeteers and you got union problems) where a barrage of questions are hurled at the poor (but filthy rich) actor or other famous type and then they, the famous type, because they dont respond or respond poorly (even though they are filthy rich, is there an echo in here?) and get chastized for it.
thoughts?
I was watching this show, and they got to a point where Bush is being interviewed by an over zealous Irish reporter. Forget the subject matter, it's irrelevant for this exercise. It's not really an exercise, but the language was flowing so I used the term, and you'll understand, someday you too will have watched this program sans Keith Oberman and realize it's lacking in it's essence. Back to the beggining, dammit, I just go on about nothing for hours.
This reporter would ask a question, then Bush would respond, but only in part, and she'd try to ask another question, but instead of allowing her to push him around, he beat the crap out of her (no he didn't), he actually stopped her by putting up his hand slightly (ala supremes) and telling her to hang on, he wasn't finished. This happened 3 or 4 times that they showed us in the interview.
This isn't about Bush, it's about reporters, and perhaps lawyers too who ask questions and then don't wait for the response, they just ask another question. They do this all the time and rarely do you see anyone rebuff them, (yes, they are usually a bit dull at this point and require rebuffing, I'm just learning from a previous thread)
I'm always irritated by this, even if it's a diferent reporter. I remember Reagan waving to reporters putting his hand to his ear as if he couldn't hear them. I always had it in my head that if he were more like Trudeau that he would have said something like this ' hey you banshees, one at a time and stop that frothing'
I've seen it with actors and puppeteers too, (leave out the pupeteers and you got union problems) where a barrage of questions are hurled at the poor (but filthy rich) actor or other famous type and then they, the famous type, because they dont respond or respond poorly (even though they are filthy rich, is there an echo in here?) and get chastized for it.
thoughts?