The Last Election Thread

[KrazyHorse]

Better than open season on skyscrapers.

[Imran Siddiqui]

http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/mccain-qvc-open/805381/

[Aeson]

I started watching SNL tonight cause the opening was pretty good. I sure hope McCain/Palin dont win, cause while the related clips tend to be funny, the skits which followed had me clawing my eyes out. Once this election is over, I can safely just avoid any new SNL without the fear of missing anything

[Seedle]

Originally posted by Lancer
My dog was a golden named Rommel, kind of like your Shadow but bigger with less hair. Completely goofy and full of joy. Also had a Irish Setter, Daisy. She could run for hours chasing sandpipers here in Oregon on the beach. Daisy knocked some of the joy out of Rommel. Would run full tilt from another room and plant her paws into the sleeping Rommel's belly, the *****. Long years ago, both gone now. Rommel either died of something he ate or his stomach just gave out under the bombardment. Daisy got a steriod shot for bad hips and died the day after.

Good memories.

Excuse me while I thread jack...

Bigger than Shadow? That's a big golden. Thank you for sharing. And where do you even get Irish Setters? I never see them, which is sad, because they are beautiful.

[The Emperor Fabulous]

Originally posted by Aeson
Once this election is over, I can safely just avoid any new SNL without the fear of missing anything

You can do that anyway. YouTube (or hulu.com).

[Lancer]

Originally posted by Seedle


Excuse me while I thread jack...

Bigger than Shadow? That's a big golden. Thank you for sharing. And where do you even get Irish Setters? I never see them, which is sad, because they are beautiful.

Got her in Jersey. Lots of personality, and tons of energy. Tons. Unless you have huge open fields or a dererted beach don't even bother. She couldn't relax until she had run 10 miles.

[Aeson]

Originally posted by The Emperor Fabulous
You can do that anyway. YouTube (or hulu.com).

Doesn't help me when channel surfing though...

[The Emperor Fabulous]

SNL's on NBC at 11:30pm EST. No surfing necessary.

You can get the whole skit online you want to see, too, not just the bits you miss while checking out the day's college football scores.

[Lancer]

No SNL in the Phils. Lancer, the problem solver.

[Lancer]

In the Phils the big show is Wo Wo Wei.

[Guynemer]

Okay, that skit was pretty funny. Good on McCain for being a good sport about the "going rogue" stuff.

I heard this on Dr. Demento this morning, and nearly crashed the car I was laughing so much.

[Darius871]

meh

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
True, but revoking said privilege because they criticise you completely destroys the whole point of freedom of speech. Yeah, they are gonna criticise you and make fun of you, it's a fact of life. Obama needs a thicker skin.

No, it doesn't. If you're in my house and you say something that makes me want to kick you out, I haven't "destroyed" freedom of speech. You'd still be free to say what you want.

Freedom of speech is a right that says the government can't censor you. It has nothing to do with being allowed on the private charter plane of a political candidate.

As for thicker skin, I find it amusing you're stating this, considering the last 8 years of the Bush Administration being notorious for cutting off reporters' access to the President should they be seen as giving unfavorable coverage. And once again... John McCain & Joe Klein.

Surrounding yourself with sycophants isn't my idea of free speech or someone open to it's exercise.

See my comment above.

If I had used the phrase "sitting in the back of the bus" would you have said the same. This is an argument over form, not substance.

This is unintelligible. I have the direct quote of what you meant in my signature. You were equating this reporter flap to the black civil rights struggle.

What it means is that conservatives have to pay twice, once for liberals and once for themselves. I don't see fairness applying the other way since we all know there are no true liberals out there.

This makes no sense. If you really believe the media has a liberal bias--which you've stated many times--then the Fairness Doctrine would have to cut more against liberals than conservatives.

At any rate, once again--it doesn't call for censorship. It requires certain media to provide equal time for contrary viewpoints. I'm not sold on it, but it's not what you're portraying it to be.

Which is why democrats are seeking to renew it? If there was nothing partisan, why didn't Bush bring it back?

Perhaps because Bush is the most blatantly partisan President in modern history?

I'd not even heard about it. I don't believe McCain said it was because he disagreed with Klein.

Wow. So you haven't even heard about it, but immediately believe it wasn't because of the exact reason the McCain campaign said, as Guynemer cited? Kudos to your critical thinking skills.

Ahh, now we get to the crux of it.

How exactly has Fox news been critical?

[Boris Godunov]

So, two more days... here's McCain's big comeback!

[Ben Kenobi]

No, it doesn't. If you're in my house and you say something that makes me want to kick you out, I haven't "destroyed" freedom of speech. You'd still be free to say what you want.

If I invited the press into my house to talk to me about my election platform, then I lose the right to censor what they publish about me. If someone that I choose to invite into my house for the express purpose of an interview, later publishes an article that is critical of me, that is their right. To give preferential treatment to those who suck up to me is wrong.

Freedom of speech is a right that says the government can't censor you. It has nothing to do with being allowed on the private charter plane of a political candidate.

It does mean you cannot censor what the reporters you choose to bring on your plane actually report.

As for thicker skin, I find it amusing you're stating this, considering the last 8 years of the Bush Administration being notorious for cutting off reporters' access to the President should they be seen as giving unfavorable coverage. And once again... John McCain & Joe Klein.

Which is why coverage has been uniformly positive? I'd be hard pressed to find anyone actually publish something good about Bush.

This makes no sense. If you really believe the media has a liberal bias--which you've stated many times--then the Fairness Doctrine would have to cut more against liberals than conservatives.

Actually no. If the media is liberally biased, then they will not see the need to 'balance' liberal speech which they consider to be moderate.

For example.

Me: Far Left - Left - Moderate - Conservative - Far Conservative

You:Moderate -Conservative - Far conservative

What I consider to be far left, you would consider to be moderate. What you would consider to be conservative, I would consider to be on the left, ergo, you would end up limiting conservative speech without any such restrictions on liberals.

At any rate, once again--it doesn't call for censorship. It requires certain media to provide equal time for contrary viewpoints. I'm not sold on it, but it's not what you're portraying it to be.

Which is in effect censorship. Why should I be forced to pay for my opponents just to express my own point of view? I should be able to express myself without hindrance, and so should my opposition.

Perhaps because Bush is the most blatantly partisan President in modern history?

Even more so then FDR?

Wow. So you haven't even heard about it, but immediately believe it wasn't because of the exact reason the McCain campaign said, as Guynemer cited? Kudos to your critical thinking skills.

No I haven't heard of it. Critical thinking requires me to read actual evidence in order to change my position. If I were to say it was wrong just on your say-so that would hardly be critical thinking.