Sometimes I wish Rachel would just get to it, already

[Jack_Dawson]

She's brilliant, and her intros are very thoughtfully laid out. But it's always one topic - oftentimes relatively obscure - that takes 15 minutes for her to unwind. LOD on the other hand recaps the entire political spectrum in a nice 2-minute capsule. Here's where you call me ADD and such. :beer:

[hlthe2b]

1. As long as she's not doing her "tiny.. teennnneee teenseeeee" little

...... effect. I really love Rachel, but that gets SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO on my nerves.

[targetpractice]

2. I like her very much... But, humor is not her thing. n/t

[Jack_Dawson]

3. you have it backwards

"Teeny, teeny, tiny"...

[hlthe2b]

7. Every bit as annoying...

I run to turn the sound down, every times she starts in... Not sure why, but it is like fingernails on the chalkboard to me.

[targetpractice]

5. I think she's channelling Gilda Radner as Emily Litella...

...discussing her book "Tiny Kingdom"...

http://www.hulu.com/watch/1395/saturday-night-live-looks-at-books

[targetpractice]

4. True... Her scripts contain a lot of repetitiveness for emphasis...

It's almost like "My summer was very, very, very fun. Very fun. So much fun, in fact, that..." It's obvious she's padding to fill time.

Also... Whatever happened to Kent? I only watch the podcast versions, and occasionally she'll mention him... But, I never see him on the podcast versions.

I assume MSNBC budget cuts.

[LooseWilly]

11. I disagree that she's padding for time.

I would contend that she is using repetitiveness to tie together her points. That is to say... when she is putting together a relatively complex explanation/argument... sometimes there is a detail which connects to two different threads of her developing ideas... at which point a few moments of repetition of a previously elaborated point is called for to explicitly connect all that previously developed information to the thread about to be picked up. Likewise, sometimes multiple threads of thought/development that Rachel explores lead to a "next step" of her tracing of a theme ... and repetition becomes necessary in order to tie the multiple threads of thought together into the next step of her developmental tracing of a story.

I'm not sure what happened to Kent, now that you mention it... that is odd. Maybe he's on a comedy tour?

[lordsummerisle]

6. I like those long intros

they're thought provoking and articulate, not to mention entertaining. "LOD" as you refer to him is overly concerned about his self-importance and being right about everything...

[JaneQPublic]

8. Tonight on the subject of the single funder of most Carolina GOP activity

Rachel took so long on the buildup before telling us who that one person was that I decided I really didn't care anymore and changed the channel to Letterman.

[Jamastiene]

9. I love her views, but I can't listen to her for very long.

I feel the same way as you.

Geez, get to the point already.

K&R

[Raine]

10. Rachel gets on my last nerve, drives me up the wall.

:crazy:

[blogslut]

12. I dig her style

She puts a lot of overview into her finite points. I like over view. Plus, I think she's funny as hell.

I dig Larry too.

[Javaman]

13. Right there with you. Also when she reported on the Brooklyn Bridge arrests last night

she failed to mention that the cops allowed the protesters on the bridge.

it was a bait and switch operation which she failed to report on.