character. i thought this was a plum gig, getting to host the oscars, but in the industry, is it not seen that way? it reminds me how the trump chief of staff job is expected to a plum gig and yet it is hard to fill it. everybody has an armchair critique of what this host is doing. and they don t get paid a lot, right? tmz reported that the host gets paid $16,000. i mean, a lot of these folks who would be on our dream list, the people we have been tweeting about that should be the host, they could get that for showing up at a store. they are supposed to be able to do this for the exposure, but this day and age i don t think it is worth the fact that everyone will be sitting at home complaining how about 11:00 p.m. and we haven t gotten to the best picture yet and it is clearly the host s fault.
disgusted by a format that was often like a game show than an honest and serious debate about some important issues of being president and leading the country. and i remember the lift your hand stuff from chris mathews and getting religious questions about the origins of the earth that didn t have one thing to do with being commander-in-chief and equally frustrating when a moderator would pend three or four minutes asking a question and demand that i answer it in 30 seconds or less. i sometimes wondered if the so-called debate was about the candidates or the media stars who posed the questions. these events are sometimes staged for entertainment and ratings, but they re life and death to the campaigns of people who have risked everything to run for president. and while i realized how easy it is to offer armchair critique of the candidates, their answers and even what they wear is often lost to the depth of the issues. and some of the debate moderators ballet tonightly create an otts fe