I love the flashbacks to the campaign - and how Leo got Bartlet to run.

However, what factual benefit is gained by pointing out Leo's falling off the waggon, just when Bartlet collapsed? None. Gibson only knows that Bartlet has collapsed because Leo blurted it out. But it could have been for any reason (heat, too little to drink, not eating anything before the debate... whatever). So, Calley was right to put an end to that kind of questioning (but I'd like to know why the presiding senator went along with it - that's not the attack dog CJ was aiming for then).

Loved the ending with the napkin, loved Josh trying to protect Leo.

However, there are also, again, issues I have with this episode, namely Casper's (not) hitting on Donna, Leo and Bartlet discussing Jordan's wardrobe etc. It's those little things that unfortunately don't let this show age well... and it's Sorkin's one failure.

loading replies
Loading...