Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Oh Jeez, Not AGAIN!!

Oh Jeez, Not AGAIN!! (Page 4)
Thread Tools
CRASH HARDDRIVE
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Zip, Boom, Bam
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2011, 04:54 AM
 
Ahh yes, the old "She asked for it" excuse, used by stalkers everywhere to justify nutty obsessive behavior. How original.
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2011, 06:33 AM
 
Originally Posted by AKcrab View Post
Please do explain how she got it right.
Sarah Palin, Paul Revere And the Importance Of An Armed Populace - Bill Flax - The Courage To Do Nothing - Forbes

She's has been caught a few times writing notes on her palm. Maybe one of those was supposed to be "funny" but she's done it twice to actually remember something.
And? People use notes to remember things all the time. Obama has to have an expensive note reading machine for even his most basic speeches.
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2011, 06:34 AM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
By finding one person who agreed with her and giving them as much air-time as possible.
There were a bunch of experts who weighted in - even many who don't particularly care for her. Apparently, you missed it.
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2011, 06:43 AM
 
Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh View Post
Regarding the Revere thing, I'm with you. She didn't get it wrong.

Regarding the teleprompter, she needs one.
I see her giving speeches all over the country, most of the time without a prompter. Obama takes his to speak to Kindergarten classes.

When asked, Palin couldn't answer the question "what kind of magazines do you read."
I'm pretty sure that it wasn't that she "couldn't" answer it, but rather knew that whatever she answered, unless they were periodicals pre-approved by the elite left, that the answer would be made to be used against her. How did Obama answer that question?

[quote[Final note, if you look at the little city in Alaska that she managed, she didn't do a bad job, but she was far from perfect. Taking funds from a museum and moving them to sports arenas. And people wonder what's wrong with this country.[/quote]

Obama - Advanced Law Degree, Senator
McCain - Extensive Military Background
Biden - Law Degree, Extensive Government Background =
Palin - Communications Degree, Local Government
Senator who had little to show in the way of accomplishments because he was busy running for another office.

I'm pretty sure that it is an exaggeration to call the governor of a state a "local" government official, and she had multiple positions in government over a greater number of years, where she was actually exercising executive powers and was actually responsible for things. Obama's career in government was lackluster and short, to be kind.

Like I said - neither probably had the experience needed. However, only one was running for President at the time. If Obama can be elected with his flimsy resume, there shouldn't be a reason Palin couldn't with hers either. She's left Alaska's economy in much better shape after leaving office than Obama will likely the US.
     
mitchell_pgh
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2011, 08:22 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Like I said - neither probably had the experience needed. However, only one was running for President at the time. If Obama can be elected with his flimsy resume, there shouldn't be a reason Palin couldn't with hers either. She's left Alaska's economy in much better shape after leaving office than Obama will likely the US.
Flimsy resume?

Palin was in LOCAL government (city with a population of ~8,000 for EIGHT YEARS). That is LOCAL... Council members from medium sized cities have more constituents. She was so under qualified, that I just couldn't vote for McCain, especially with his age and health related issues.

She was then Governor for UNDER TWO YEARS before running for the #2 spot.

Obama has an advanced law degree from one of the most prestigious universities in the world (Yes, he went to Harvard, Yes, he has a law degree... but any law degree would be a good thing and NO, I don't think Harvard or any other ivy league school is a requirement, but it absolutely shouldn't be viewed as a negative). On top of that, he had also written book (before being nominated), and was a senator. If you call that flimsy, Palin is a piece of dust, blowing in in the Alaskan breeze.
     
mitchell_pgh
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2011, 08:27 AM
 
Originally Posted by screener View Post
Didn't she claim it was a gotcha question a local reporter asked.
Something along the line of, what are you going to take away with you from Boston.

Trying to claim that as a gotcha question is hilarious, just like her and her supporters.
Gotcha Question = Anything I don't know or is contrary to what I believe
     
SpaceMonkey
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2011, 09:19 AM
 
The article you linked to does not address the matter in question, by the author's own admission:

The latest Sarah Palin controversy over Paul Revere distracts from the essential lesson of this pivotal slice of American lore. Whether Paul Revere warned the British not to tangle with the heavily armed minutemen or whether she botched the tale makes engaging blog banter, but other than Palin’s credibility, it’s largely moot.
This is a better link:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/mas...vere_comments/

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2011, 09:27 AM
 
Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh View Post
Flimsy resume?
Besides a law degree from a college no one seems to be able to explain how he got into, and what he did that was so impressive while he was there, he had no real accomplishments that I can see. Some time as a "community organizer"? A less than memorable time as a state legislator? What exactly did HE DO besides give a good prepared speech?

Palin was in LOCAL government (city with a population of ~8,000 for EIGHT YEARS). That is LOCAL... Council members from medium sized cities have more constituents. She was so under qualified, that I just couldn't vote for McCain, especially with his age and health related issues.
Obama was so unqualified I couldn't vote for Obama.


She was then Governor for UNDER TWO YEARS before running for the #2 spot.
The same amount of time Obama was in the Senate, where he did little to nothing. Palin actually had some major accomplishments as governor and in "local government." She was in charge in an executive position and the entities she was in charge of didn't end up worse than what she started with - something Obama never experienced, and his inexperience has proven disastrous.
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2011, 09:39 AM
 
Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey View Post
The article you linked to does not address the matter in question, by the author's own admission
Here's another link and quote from NPR where a historian is asked about Palin's claims:
How Accurate Were Palin's Paul Revere Comments? : NPR

BLOCK: So you think basically, on the whole, Sarah Palin got her history right.

Prof. ALLISON: Well, yeah, she did.
I'd posted that link before. You must have missed it.

Again, when people pick apart every word she says and even tries to belittle the information she gives accurately, EVERY question she is asked becomes a "gotcha." It's sad, really. If only Obama would have had to face such scrutiny and vetting, we'd not be in the mess we are now.
     
SpaceMonkey
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2011, 09:56 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Here's another link and quote from NPR where a historian is asked about Palin's claims:
How Accurate Were Palin's Paul Revere Comments? : NPR

I'd posted that link before. You must have missed it.
And in the link I posted, the quoted expert makes it clear that he thinks that Palin had the essence correct, but her details were factually wrong. Revere did not set out to warn the British, but it turned out that way on account of his capture.

Again, when people pick apart every word she says and even tries to belittle the information she gives accurately, EVERY question she is asked becomes a "gotcha."
I agree that Palin's views on Paul Revere's ride are not particularly relevant. Which makes it even more bizarre when she chooses to double-down on her remarks without any hint of nuance, further eroding her credibility.

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2011, 09:58 AM
 
Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey View Post
I agree that Palin's views on Paul Revere's ride are not particularly relevant. Which makes it even more bizarre when she chooses to double-down on her remarks without any hint of nuance, further eroding her credibility.
What Would a Mamma Grizzly Do?
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2011, 11:15 AM
 
Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey View Post
And in the link I posted, the quoted expert makes it clear that he thinks that Palin had the essence correct...
Which in the end, is what is important.

...but her details were factually wrong. Revere did not set out to warn the British, but it turned out that way on account of his capture.
The link I quoted seemed to feel Sarah was giving the events a spin to make a Second Amendment point, while getting the stuff she was accused of getting wrong, right. The only one whose credibility is hurt are those who tried to make a big point of this without knowing as much as Palin did.

I agree that Palin's views on Paul Revere's ride are not particularly relevant. Which makes it even more bizarre when she chooses to double-down on her remarks without any hint of nuance, further eroding her credibility.
See above. The person with more knowledge, who doubles down is much more credible then the people who know less and keep doubling down on unjustified criticism. At some point, her critics should just STFU if they don't want to make themselves look dumb.

Some never learn...
     
SpaceMonkey
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2011, 11:30 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman
The link I quoted seemed to feel Sarah was giving the events a spin to make a Second Amendment point, while getting the stuff she was accused of getting wrong, right. The only one whose credibility is hurt are those who tried to make a big point of this without knowing as much as Palin did.
What Palin said was:

Revere "warned the British that they weren’t going to be taking away our arms. By ringing those bells and making sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be secure and we were going to be free.’’

Further clarified as:

"Here is what Paul Revere did. He warned the Americans that the British were coming . . . and they were going to try take our arms and we got to make sure that we were protecting ourselves and shoring up all of ammunitions and our firearms so that they couldn’t take it....But remember that the British had already been there, many soldiers for seven years in that area. And part of Paul Revere’s ride — and it wasn’t just one ride — he was a courier, he was a messenger. Part of his ride was to warn the British that we’re already there. . . . You are not going to beat our own well-armed persons, individual, private militia that we have. He did warn the British."

She is correct that he warned the British (when he was captured) that they had lost the element of surprise and would face resistance. She is incorrect that "part of his ride was to warn the British." He was avoiding contact with British soldiers in order to carry out his mission to warn the Concord area of the British troops' objective and, more specifically, to warn Samuel Adams and John Hancock that they faced arrest. Precisely because he figured that if British troops saw him doing this they would detain him, which, as it happens, they did.

Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
See above. The person with more knowledge, who doubles down is much more credible then the people who know less and keep doubling down on unjustified criticism. At some point, her critics should just STFU if they don't want to make themselves look dumb.

Some never learn...
Huh? No, she was right and wrong, as described above (or as described in my link by Brendan McConville of Boston University, she was "lucky in her history as opposed to knowledgeable in her history"). She insists she was right, with no hint of being wrong. That's what I mean. That's what hurts her credibility, which is the entire point of those trying to make a big deal about this in the first place.

If she said, "You know what, it was a busy trip and I guess I conflated a few of the details in my mind about the Paul Revere story, but the point I was trying to make was [insert spiel about second amendment]" I think people would have more respect for her. But that's not the route that she went.
( Last edited by SpaceMonkey; Jun 21, 2011 at 11:52 AM. )

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
screener
Senior User
Join Date: May 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2011, 11:48 AM
 
Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey View Post
If she said, "You know what, it was a busy trip and I guess I conflated a few of the details in my mind about the Paul Revere story, but the point I was trying to make was [insert spiel about second amendment]" I think people would have more respect for her. But that's not the route that she went.
Which would have been completely reasonable.

Wasn't there a story about Palin followers trying to change Wikipedia's Revere info page to reflect her new order of events?

I'm sure they tried to insinuate Obama in there somewhere defending their queen, like a couple on this forum.
     
mitchell_pgh
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2011, 11:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Besides a law degree from a college no one seems to be able to explain how he got into, and what he did that was so impressive while he was there
First off, getting into Columbia University isn't simple. Second, while at Harvard Law (where he graduated magna cum laude), he was the president of the Harvard Law Review.

If you don't value education or an international background, that's fine... but that isn't the behavior of a person "on a free ride" as you attempt to say.
     
BadKosh  (op)
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2011, 01:09 PM
 
With how little most people ACTUALLY KNOW of history, why even trust a news reader? Their record of knowing history is even more dismal than a typical 2nd grader.
     
SpaceMonkey
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2011, 01:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
With how little most people ACTUALLY KNOW of history, why even trust a news reader?
Or a politician.

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2011, 02:35 PM
 
Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey View Post
She is incorrect that "part of his ride was to warn the British."
Semantics. Either as part of what he did he warned the British or he didn't. History shows that he indeed did what Palin suggested whether it was planned or not. She never specifically said that was part of the original plan, just that it was part of the "ride."

You guys go to great lengths to pick apart stuff that most other Americans have less of a clue about, even media critics, than Palin.

Huh? No, she was right and wrong, as described above (or as described in my link by Brendan McConville of Boston University, she was "lucky in her history as opposed to knowledgeable in her history").
A total assumption made by someone who probably was inclined to assume such a thing in the first place.]
( Last edited by stupendousman; Jun 21, 2011 at 02:43 PM. )
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2011, 02:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh View Post
First off, getting into Columbia University isn't simple.
Harvard grad school either, right? I mean, W got in, so he must be really smart too, right?

Could I see some of Obama's brilliance by browsing through some of his scholarly works? Please? It would be interesting to know if Bill Ayres ghostwrote some of his college papers as well! :lol

If you don't value education or an international background, that's fine... but that isn't the behavior of a person "on a free ride" as you attempt to say.
I value education. The fallacy is that one is required to attend an institution favored by the elite in order to have a good education. Especially when historically, people who would not have been able to make it into some of these colleges on their own got in via different affirmative actions (parentage, race, etc.), and then were helped along the way as part of the process.
     
SpaceMonkey
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2011, 02:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Semantics. Either as part of what he did he warned the British or he didn't. History shows that he indeed did what Palin suggested whether it was planned or not. She never specifically said that was part of the original plan, just that it was part of the "ride."
You're right, it's "semantics," which believe it or not, are important. It's about Palin's credibility in understanding the meaning of what she says, and her ability to make corrections where appropriate. The question of Revere's intent is the whole crux of the dispute. Any common English reading of "part of his ride was to" suggests intent. If Palin didn't mean to suggest it was his intent, she's had ample opportunity to clarify in her numerous media appearances since, but she hasn't. Therefore, the episode speaks poorly of her credibility.

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
mitchell_pgh
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2011, 04:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Harvard grad school either, right? I mean, W got in, so he must be really smart too, right?
Thanks for making my point. George W. Bush was actually a very poor student. Obama on the other hand received high honors on top of being very active in the Harvard Law Review.

Back to Palin... I'm just amazed that in such a short time as the governor, she had her own gate. Troopergate lets you take a look at her personality. Even the Republicans asked that an independent group look into her actions.

Sure, what she did wasn't illegal... just unethical.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 21, 2011, 04:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey View Post
You're right, it's "semantics," which believe it or not, are important. It's about Palin's credibility in understanding the meaning of what she says, and her ability to make corrections where appropriate. The question of Revere's intent is the whole crux of the dispute. Any common English reading of "part of his ride was to" suggests intent. If Palin didn't mean to suggest it was his intent, she's had ample opportunity to clarify in her numerous media appearances since, but she hasn't. Therefore, the episode speaks poorly of her credibility.

Besides, even jumping aboard the stupendousman band wagon, a sign of a leader or at the very least somebody with a fairly keen intellect is somebody who can recognize the source of a semantic dispute like this and address it head on rather than just doubling down on rhetoric.

At the end of the day to most non-committed Republicans like stupendousman, Palin comes across as a complete dumbass in comparison to Obama in general, which she will need to address before we can begin to compare the two. I know that stupendousman will make the argument that Obama is just as much of a dumbass, but I see no evidence that the public as a whole buys into this, which is what I'm addressing here: common public perceptions which are relevant in shaping narrative and reality (the latter to some). All of this can be false and transparent, but usually not so across a large sample size. On the whole, Obama's political problems are not that he's dumb.

Narratives can be shaped and influenced over time, people can evolve. Like has been said before, Palin would have been much better off working on becoming more of a policy wonk and demonstrating a sharp intellect in the last 2-3 years than just getting herself a Twitter account, a stupid bus, and a better PR machine.
     
screener
Senior User
Join Date: May 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 22, 2011, 03:21 AM
 
Palin supporters have to be the dumbest people ever.
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 22, 2011, 07:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by screener View Post
Palin supporters have to be the dumbest people ever.
Not dumb ... just naive.
     
mitchell_pgh
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 22, 2011, 08:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
Not dumb ... just naive.
I place Palin supporters on par with those that refused to accept that the world was round, and persecuted anyone that didn't fully agree with their point of view.

I can hear them now:
- "The 'scientists' would have you believe that the earth is round, the earth revolves around the sun, and that we AREN'T the center of the universe!"
     
SpaceMonkey
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 22, 2011, 09:10 AM
 
Lamestream scientists.

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 22, 2011, 10:53 AM
 
intillektual elite scientists.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 22, 2011, 01:04 PM
 
Originally Posted by screener View Post
Palin supporters have to be the dumbest people ever.
Like these guys?
YouTube -How Obama Got Elected... Interviews With Obama Voters
YouTube -Obama Is Going To Pay For My Gas And Mortgage!!!
     
screener
Senior User
Join Date: May 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 22, 2011, 01:18 PM
 
Said it before, and again, I'm not now or have I ever been a big supporter of Obama.
Hilary in my opinion would have been a better president.

That said, if all you have in support is comparing her to Obama you're playing a losing hand.

Oh look, Bristol has a book,
Bristol Palin's memoir hits stores - chicagotribune.com
Cool.
     
CRASH HARDDRIVE
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Zip, Boom, Bam
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 22, 2011, 01:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh View Post
I place Palin supporters on par with those that refused to accept that the world was round, and persecuted anyone that didn't fully agree with their point of view.

I can hear them now:
- "The 'scientists' would have you believe that the earth is round, the earth revolves around the sun, and that we AREN'T the center of the universe!"
Complete reverse analogy. The MMGlo-warmers are the equivalent of the 'earth is flat' people. So long as a majority believe something then it must be right and you must persecute anyone that doesn't fully agree with your point of view. Those that first found that the earth wasn't flat and wasn't the center of the universe were NOT the consensus, they were the persecuted.
     
mattyb
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Standing on the shoulders of giants
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 23, 2011, 03:09 AM
 
Ah fook it, whats the point.
     
screener
Senior User
Join Date: May 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 23, 2011, 04:56 AM
 
Originally Posted by mattyb View Post
Ah fook it, whats the point.
For those that missed it,
The same could be said of other politicians, from both the left and the right.
is why he fooked it.
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2011, 11:56 AM
 
Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh View Post
Thanks for making my point. George W. Bush was actually a very poor student. Obama on the other hand received high honors on top of being very active in the Harvard Law Review.
What does that mean? What exactly were his grades? Is there a reason he refuses to allow any information about his time in college be released? Did Bill Ayres ghost write his college papers too, or possibly did some of Obama's very wealthy friends arrange for him to have some "help?" We have no idea.

Based on the intelligence he's shown post-college and even before he was "chosen" for bigger and better things by getting into some pretty high-end colleges with less than stellar grades, it doesn't seem as though Obama's intelligence really is much of a selling point. Especially with little to no real accomplishments after than other than looking and sounding good when giving presentations.
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2011, 12:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
At the end of the day to most non-committed Republicans like stupendousman, Palin comes across as a complete dumbass in comparison to Obama in general..
...because that's the way the media markets her. Obama has made as many, and even more serious verbal/intellectual gaffes than Palin. They just don't get that much airplay to the people who aren't "committed" and as such are not part of the mainstream's script, so they are not focused on.

You never had an SNL skit about Obama not knowing how many states there are, his teleprompter screw-ups, or claiming to have personally given a dead man a military honor, because the committed democrats on the left are selling Obama as smart, when he obviously really isn't.

Michelle Obama | Media | RealClearPolitics
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2011, 12:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
...because that's the way the media markets her.
So, Sarah Palin's marketing message is completely at the mercy of the media?
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2011, 04:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
So, Sarah Palin's marketing message is completely at the mercy of the media?
Just for the ones who really don't pay close attention. Maybe 1/3 of the population.
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 25, 2011, 05:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Just for the ones who really don't pay close attention. Maybe 1/3 of the population.
You think 2/3 of the population pays close attention to the media? That's rather optimistic of you.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 27, 2011, 05:56 PM
 
     
sek929
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 27, 2011, 06:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
You never had an SNL skit about Obama...
That's because Palin is a far more humorous character, but I wouldn't expect you to know what is and isn't funny if your life depended on it. It has nothing to do with 'who gaffes worse' it's all about who is a more exaggerated individual, and therefore brings more to the table on a sketch comedy show.
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2011, 01:12 AM
 
Originally Posted by sek929 View Post
That's because Palin is a far more humorous character...
For the left. I know.

[quote[...but I wouldn't expect you to know what is and isn't funny if your life depended on it.[/quote]

..and what position do you have where you are paid for your sense of humor?

It has nothing to do with 'who gaffes worse' it's all about who is a more exaggerated individual, and therefore brings more to the table on a sketch comedy show.
I know. I doesn't matter that Obama flubs things worse. It's that Palin is more hated by the left. Yeah...I get it.
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2011, 08:08 AM
 
SNL makes fun of Obama too. They make fun of Clinton and dems. So?
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2011, 08:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
I know. I doesn't matter that Obama flubs things worse. It's that Palin is more hated by the left. Yeah...I get it.
Rather than continuously whine about it, why don't you do something about it? Put together an Obama SNL skit filled with all the comedy-worthy things you think Obama does. Fly it past MacNN, we can all edit it and the send it in to SNL.
     
ironknee
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 1999
Location: New York City
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 28, 2011, 09:52 PM
 
yeah snl makes fun of obama a lot

anyone around iowa who watched the plain movie?
     
screener
Senior User
Join Date: May 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 29, 2011, 05:13 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
I know. I doesn't matter that Obama flubs things worse. It's that Palin is more hated by the left. Yeah...I get it.
It doesn't help her credibility by blaming her gaffs on "gotcha questions" that never happened.

Hell, even Michele Bachmann admitted her gaffe re: John Wayne.

Palin's pinheadedness doesn't deserve defending and those that do, well...

I don't hate her, she's a joke, but doesn't deserve to be hated, just a shake of the head and a WTF comment.
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 29, 2011, 06:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
Rather than continuously whine about it, why don't you do something about it? Put together an Obama SNL skit filled with all the comedy-worthy things you think Obama does. Fly it past MacNN, we can all edit it and the send it in to SNL.
Why should it be my job to try to compete with biased licensees of public airwaves?
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 29, 2011, 06:28 AM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
SNL makes fun of Obama too. They make fun of Clinton and dems. So?
Not in the same, brutally consistent way. Normally they are poked fun of instead of mocked and ridiculed. Clinton for instance, they'd have Phil Hartman come out and bite his lower lip and push his clenched fist with extended thumb, saying someone humorous about the issue, while they would dress John Goodman up in drag as Linda Tripp and make the Republicans the laughing stocks. Have they done many skits on Obama's often times humorous inability to communicate without a teleprompter? I've not seen it get much play. Not like when they are making fun of people like Palin and replaying the clips over and over. Apples to oranges, really.
( Last edited by stupendousman; Jun 29, 2011 at 06:34 AM. )
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 29, 2011, 06:33 AM
 
Originally Posted by screener View Post
It doesn't help her credibility by blaming her gaffs on "gotcha questions" that never happened.
I already explained how lots of the questions are "gotcha" by design, and aren't the types of questions normally asked of Democrats.

What magazines did Obama reply with when asked his preference, for example? How many questions did he get asking him for a definition of policies that have had many meanings? I don't remember him getting many questions where his answers required specific questions aimed at judging his knowledge or intelligence. The media didn't seem much interested in vetting him and he wanted to be President, not a largely ceremonial "second in command."

Hell, even Michele Bachmann admitted her gaffe re: John Wayne.

Palin's pinheadedness doesn't deserve defending and those that do, well...

I don't hate her, she's a joke, but doesn't deserve to be hated, just a shake of the head and a WTF comment.
Most of Palin's "gaffes" aren't gaffes. They are attempts to pick apart her words so she can be mocked as a stupid woman, as is the sexist game plan the left and media has for conservative women who don't espouse pro-choice feminism.
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 29, 2011, 08:07 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Why should it be my job to try to compete with biased licensees of public airwaves?
I see. So, in other words, you can't think of anything about Obama that viewers would find funny in a comedy skit. Until you can, I would suggest you quit whining.
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 29, 2011, 10:12 AM
 
I still don't see how "what magazines do you read" is a gotcha question. It's a softball question. I don't care that Obama was never asked that question. I could pretend Obama doesn't exist and still find her response bizarre.

Her answer "all of them" was either evasive (she doesn't read any, is ashamed of what she does read, can't decide which one would be politically correct... does this Republican tea partier admit to reading the New Yorker and Ms Magazine? Or just Reader's Digest? Who would be offended by what? ) or ignorant (can't think of any, don't read any, can't look ignorant by saying "none").

I think we've had this SNL conversation before, but don't feel like searching for the thread. Basically, SNL goes for the easy joke. The Couric interview skit was almost word for word from the real thing. No one twisted her words.

I also find it amusing the folks accusing her critics of being sexist, especially since those same people live in glass houses. Ask Hillary Clinton or any other female candidate about that. "Put on your big girl panties and deal with it."

I read Highlights, Scouting, and Wired online. What magazines do you read S-man?
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 29, 2011, 12:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by Wiskedjak View Post
I see. So, in other words, you can't think of anything about Obama that viewers would find funny in a comedy skit.
His constant gaffs are more than enough. I was skipping around the radio channels yesterday after work and Shawn Hannity had a pretty hilarious compilation of Obama gaffes, and I don't remember the mainstream media or SNL covering any of them.

Again, I'm not a professional comedian and I have never requested a federal license to broadcast on the airwaves to all Americans. When that is the case, I'll consider it my job to go on national television and produce Obama parodies equal to that of the Republicans that are most often the brunt of parody.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:50 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,