People's opinions don't matter. Ratings do.

According to a press release by ABC News, over 10.7 million viewers watched the debates, earning ABC the top television ratings spot for the hour. It was also the highest number of viewers ABC had since 11/28/07.

Additionally, the debate retained 96% of it total audience, retaining 100% of adults aged 25-54, and grew 4% among adults aged 18-49 from the first hour to the second hour.

That's called drama, and that's what hooks 'em line and sinker. Expect this debate to set the standard for some time to come.


/flag lapel pins in MY vagina? It's more likely than you think.

Dinjiin: /flag lapel pins in MY vagina? It's more likely than you think.

If Obama had only purchased and worn a flag pin the size of a license plate, none of this would have happened.

/not really

Dinjiin: Additionally, the debate retained 96% of it total audience, retaining 100% of adults aged 25-54, and grew 4% among adults aged 18-49 from the first hour to the second hour.

I swear to god if this election comes down to farking made in China lapel pins I'm giving up on this country.

hondamikesd: Dinjiin: Additionally, the debate retained 96% of it total audience, retaining 100% of adults aged 25-54, and grew 4% among adults aged 18-49 from the first hour to the second hour.

I swear to god if this election comes down to farking made in China lapel pins I'm giving up on this country.

don't worry. This is the media filling time - if it started the general election right now, people would be sick of it before the conventions. So they're playing up how horribly stretched out these godawful primaries are.... except it's all perfectly in the law. So what do they do? they talk BS about nothing, just to have something to say.

Oh, the Obamalibs are just sad that someone ask their Communist Overlord hard questions. I bet they're just bitter about it, like when Reverend Wright found out that Obama was actually a radical Muslim.

There, now the Freepers can have the night off, on me.

Yay, let's perpetuate the distraction!

Louder And More Dissonant: Yay, let's perpetuate the distraction!

It generates clicks.

Irony: When the distraction becomes the discourse about the distraction.

outatime: Oh, the Obamalibs are just sad that someone ask their Communist Overlord hard questions. I bet they're just bitter about it, like when Reverend Wright found out that Obama was actually a radical Muslim.

There, now the Freepers can have the night off, on me.

Don't worry, I'm sure rush_limbaugh_sent_me will be here soon enough, and we'll have all the freeper nuttiness we'll need.

On a tangential note: I've been surprised at NPR's aping the cable news channels in regards to the "bitter" pseudo-gaffe and their kid-gloves discourse on the most recent debate. Then lo and behold, what do I hear mid-broadcast yesterday?

"Support for NPR comes from... ABC..."

Son. Of a motherfarking. biatch. That's some fine impartial journalism there, Lou.

Occam's Chainsaw: On a tangential note: I've been surprised at NPR's aping the cable news channels in regards to the "bitter" pseudo-gaffe and their kid-gloves discourse on the most recent debate. Then lo and behold, what do I hear mid-broadcast yesterday?

"Support for NPR comes from... ABC..."

Son. Of a motherfarking. biatch. That's some fine impartial journalism there, Lou.

NPR had right wing hacks appointed in every position it was possible as soon as Bush gopt elected. Decent journalism is the enemy of the Republicans.

hondamikesd: Dinjiin: Additionally, the debate retained 96% of it total audience, retaining 100% of adults aged 25-54, and grew 4% among adults aged 18-49 from the first hour to the second hour.

I swear to god if this election comes down to farking made in China lapel pins I'm giving up on this country.

No joke. I mean, really?? Really, you backwoods hayseed rube?? You don't want to know about the economy or Iraq or gun control or taxes or any one of ten thousand other more important issues?? No, you get on national television and ask him IF HE BELIEVES IN THE GODDAMN FLAG?? I'm speechless. I'm floored. I am AT A LOSS for words. I tell you, it takes some kind of something for Obama to be able to stand there and not say something to the effect of "Are you people serious with this shiat??" Meaning that, and the lapel pin, and the pledge, and all this other irrelevant crap that no one but Joe Sixpack deep in the cousinfarking BFE part of every southern state cares about. I praise that kind of stoicity and self-restraint. I couldn't do it, faced with that kind of question.


There should be a test to vote. I'm dead goddamn serious. Perhaps we'd actually have a shot at electing someone who's not an inept dickbag if half the farking electorate wasn't too busy trying to bang its sister to pay attention.

Selector: But the really important question is, do those Joe Sixpacks out there in the boondocks love America as much as Rev. Wright does?

Don't forget, these will be important questions in November.

themindiswatching: Dinjiin: /flag lapel pins in MY vagina? It's more likely than you think.

If Obama had only purchased and worn a flag pin the size of a license plate as a belt buckel, none of this would have happened.

/not really

FTFY

Rotsky!

Dubya's_Coke_Dealer: NPR had right wing hacks appointed in every position it was possible as soon as Bush gopt elected. Decent journalism An informed electorate is the enemy of the Republicans.

FTFY, but not much. One goes hand in hand with the other.

I dunno, shiat raining down from on high sounds plausable. A month ago, NPR was pretty much the only kid on the block reporting from a semi-neutral standpoint on all three campaigns. Fox News is banned from all TVs within my shouting range, CNN is called the Clinton News Network for a reason, MSNBC seems to suffer from DID, and it's hard to catch the Beeb on a regular basis. Now suddenly, they go all milquetoast on context and meaningful discourse, two topics on which they usually pounce like starving leopards. I was expecting Daniel Shore to go all Lewis Black over the debate, he barely gives it three sentences. (Although I suppose ignoring something so putrid is better than giving it the attention it craves.) Then an ad for ABC, barely two weeks after the seasonal funding drives... I'm not going to jump to conclusions, but something smells.

Selector: There should be a test to vote. I'm dead goddamn serious. Perhaps we'd actually have a shot at electing someone who's not an inept dickbag if half the farking electorate wasn't too busy trying to bang its sister to pay attention.

Dude, have you seen its sister?

Dinjiin: People's opinions don't matter. Ratings do.

According to a press release by ABC News, over 10.7 million viewers watched the debates, earning ABC the top television ratings spot for the hour. It was also the highest number of viewers ABC had since 11/28/07.

Additionally, the debate retained 96% of it total audience, retaining 100% of adults aged 25-54, and grew 4% among adults aged 18-49 from the first hour to the second hour.

That's called drama, and that's what hooks 'em line and sinker. Expect this debate to set the standard for some time to come.


/flag lapel pins in MY vagina? It's more likely than you think.

Considering the context in which the debates were occurring (and that debates almost presumptively carry some imperative towards watching them), viewership probably would have been high regardless of the content so long as it resembled a debate.

I think the debates were poorly ran and some of the questions were downright asinine. I was disappointed in Gibson talking like Laffer had his hand up Gibson's ass when the debate turned to taxes. I was also disappointed in the relative treatment of the candidates. I didn't think it was administrated fairly, and I didn't think they did a good job of sticking to important issues.

With that said, I think Obama really needs to work on his game when it comes to situations for which he isn't prepared. Someone needs to instruct him on how to give concise answers in a crunch, and he needs to avoid looking so frazzled. He seems like a pretty good, and competent, fellow to me but there is definitely room for improvement in terms of how he carries himself in debate. I think he probably is the Dems' guy for this one; Clinton might be fiercer in some circumstances but she also has a truckload of baggage, some fairly serious deficiency in interpersonal skills, and is pretty unlikely to attract so-called "swing" or "independent" votes (e.g. me and I imagine at least a few others on this forum).

Selector: I praise that kind of stoicity and self-restraint. I couldn't do it, faced with that kind of question.

Well, the flag-believers have to be in the conversation. People too busy living to watch the national scene constantly, disconnected enough to think these discussions are the biggest things going on, have as much right to representation as anyone else.

Obama's (poorly stated, often twisted) point with the whole "people are bitter" remark was that people less connected to their government were less connected to his campaign. He didn't seem particularly proud of that in those remarks, and he often speaks about how we need to all use the government together to work as a country to solve our most serious problems.

Personally, I'm willing to give him a try and see if he can entice Americans to think more deeply about America, to see if he can change the politics of the nation to raise the baseline level of discussion, to raise the conversation to where the ratings for crap debates drop.

A higher level of literacy about what is important in how the nation works might let us be less scared when planes hit buildings, might let us work better together when levees break and when national commitments need to be made and unmade.

I don't see McCain or Clinton giving us this sort of chance, and I don't see anything else being as effective in making our country greater over the next four years. So, hey, it's Obama.

And hey, let's go ahead and talk about flag pins, even as we talk about there being more important things about flag pins. We're going to have a tough enough decade for the American story without locking some of the storytellers out of the script room. The challenge is to get everyone writing better chapters.

They showed the same clip on Colbert, you all might remember. Stephanopoulos: What a tool.

Bud the Spud:

Let's just say I seriously doubt that.

Yes, we get it... ABC asked some questions you didn't like and Obama was unable to give good answers. Your messiah looked stupid and you're pissed about it.

randomjsa: Yes, we get it... ABC asked some questions you didn't like and Obama was unable to give good answers. Your messiah looked stupid and you're pissed about it.

Postscript: it's a serious challenge.

Remove all Republicans:Post-postscript: be careful as the Antichrist may steal the nomination from him. =)

I'd rather have Obama as president than Hillary and I'm a Republican. I'm just amused that Democrats now feel the same way about Hillary as we Republicans felt 15 years ago...

We TOLD you so.

randomjsa: Your messiah looked stupid and you're pissed about it.

Dude, at least change your macro from day to day, or you'll look like Bevets.

randomjsa: Remove all Republicans:Post-postscript: be careful as the Antichrist may steal the nomination from him. =)

I'd rather have Obama as president than Hillary and I'm a Republican. I'm just amused that Democrats now feel the same way about Hillary as we Republicans felt 15 years ago...

We TOLD you so.

Yeah, but the best examples you provided then were:

"They had Vince Foster killed!!"
"He has sex with a number of ugly women!"
"They may have been involved in a shady land deal in Backwoods, Nowhere!"
"He lied about getting a beej from a manatee in blue!"

Nowadays, you've got split-screen video of Hillary hugging some cute little Bosnian girl and her 12 years later giving a speech involving sniper fire. And another split-screen video of her saying that the primaries in Florida and Michigan were meaningless, then her a few months later ranting about disenfranchisement. A little bit stronger case there, bucko.

syrynxx: Dude, at least change your macro from day to day, or you'll look like Bevets.

Why change? It's completely accurate. The following of Obama reminds me of a religious cult based on how they react to everything negative about Obama or anything positive about him. Every little slight is savagely attacked and everything else is fawned over as if it were the greatest thing ever.

Wow, someone involved in a presidential campaign tried to divert the media's attention away from thorny issues in their candidate's past? THE HELL YOU SAY!

randomjsa: Yes, we get it... ABC asked some questions you didn't like and Obama was unable to give good answers. Your messiah looked stupid and you're pissed about it.

Shut up, you cock.

randomjsa: Yes, we get it... ABC asked some questions you didn't like and Obama was unable to give good answers. Your messiah looked stupid and you're pissed about it.

and your messiah led you straight into hell with no plan to get out.

I want to hear today's version of why he won't wear the flag pin.
I'm sure the others charged with protecting that flag would want to know who is in charge.

See the Republicans have to prove their humanity and the Dem's have to prove their willingness to protect the Republic. That's a trade off.
I think the Republicans need to adopt a bumper sticker mantra for the 08 election.

" Ask not what your country can do for you , but what you can do for your country".
Sounds pretty good doesn't it ?
Sounds like something a Republican would say.

everyone knows ABC is in the tank for McCain. Look at how they came to his defense again just yesterday. ^{(^)}

So much for McCain agreeing with Obama to take the underhanded tactics out of the campaign with that Hamas email. Like Obama solicited their support. Well if we're going to draw those kind of ties then AQ wants McCain to win because they want us to stay in Iraq and bleed more of our treasure into the sand. The said so themselves. They even want us to bomb Iran.

So McCain gets the Al Qaeda endorsement.

larry00: I want to hear today's version of why he won't wear the flag pin.

same as it's always been. he thinks that its a cheap form of "patriotism" that requires nothing but symbolism. he'd rather you judge his actions. But that's far too deep for the knuckle dragging crowd.
you can't buy patriotism for 2 bucks and pin it onto your jacket

randomjsa: Yes, we get it... ABC asked some questions you didn't like and Obama was unable to give good answers. Your messiah looked stupid and you're pissed about it.

THIS!

larry00: I want to hear today's version of why he won't wear the flag pin.
just to continue on this for a minute.

do you judge people by whether or not they have a flag pin on?
when you see a flag pin do you automatically think "that person must be a true patriot"?
because if you do then that's exactly what they want.
They don't want you looking any farther than that pin to know where they stand.
As far as I can remember Ronald Reagan. never wore a flag pin.
or he never made a habit of it.
anyone can wrap themselves in a flag and carry a bible.
doesn't show you what they're really about though does it?

larry00: I want to hear today's version of why he won't wear the flag pin.
I'm sure the others charged with protecting that flag would want to know who is in charge.

for caring about the stupid flag pin.

Dinjiin: That's called drama, and that's what hooks 'em line and sinker.

I'm not here to argue with your post, except to say that you might consider avoiding fishing metaphors in the future.

Descartes: img169.imageshack.us

Every last one of 'em with their backs to the flag. Those bastards.

randomjsa: Yes, we get it... ABC asked some questions you didn't like and Obama was unable to give good answers. Your messiah looked stupid and you're pissed about it.

ABC asked a lot of questions I didn't like, the answers to which were irrelevant.

That said, I'll acknowledge this: They asked one decent question to which I thought Obama's answer was absolutely atrocious.

I still see little reason to change my vote, as yet, given the options.

larry00: I want to hear today's version of why he won't wear the flag pin.

I want to know why Regan didn't wear one and why guys like you don't care that he didn't wear one.

Relatively Obscure: That said, I'll acknowledge this: They asked one decent question to which I thought Obama's answer was absolutely atrocious.

Morbid curiosity: which one?

Relatively Obscure: Every last one of 'em with their backs to the flag. Those bastards.

No, I think you got it wrong. That flag was just the backdrop.

is this where we are? that the republicans have redefined patriotism so that now it means wearing a flag pin? patriotism isn't that easy and you cheapen it by equating it to 5 cents worth of Chinese lead and gold paint. all to bend everyone to your conformity.
No patriotism is hard and it takes sacrifice. It's not waving flags.
It's doing things to improve the country. Anything other than that is just symbolism and words. Anyone can wear a pin or say they love their country. but what have you done for it lately other than whine about paying taxes? have you gotten involved in your community? Are you in the military? If not then that pin is a lie. I put a high bar on patriotism. It's more than just professing your love your country. it's proving it.

larry00: I want to hear today's version of why he won't wear the flag pin.
I'm sure the others charged with protecting that flag would want to know who is in charge.

larry00: " Ask not what your country can do for you , but what you can do wear for your country".

Occam's Chainsaw: Morbid curiosity: which one?

One sec, and I'll dig up the transcript. I'd stay and converse about it, but I absolutely HAVE to go to bed thereafter, I'm afraid.

Occam's Chainsaw: Morbid curiosity: which one?

As a general principle, I believe that the Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms. But just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can't constrain the exercise of that right, and, you know, in the same way that we have a right to private property but local governments can establish zoning ordinances that determine how you can use it.

That. To clarify a bit, I'm not even that affronted by the fact that he supports some form of gun control (I know a great many are), though I disagree with the extent.

What aroused my distaste was this rationale that he gave. It just flies in the face of reason, to me. The founders and the US government took pains to specifically guarantee certain rights, and I don't think they meant for those to be "constrained" by state and local authorities.

As an example of what I'm trying to say, let me re-paste this with a small change:

As a general principle, I believe that the Constitution confers an individual right to the free exercise of religion. But just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can't constrain the exercise of that right, and, you know, in the same way that we have a right to private property but local governments can establish zoning ordinances that determine how you can use it.

Do I think Senator Obama, or any other candidate, would have dreamed of saying this? Not for one minute. Nor do I think many people would have supported that notion. But those are both in the very same Bill of Rights.

I hope you can see what I'm saying. I found it to be a very terrible answer. I'll probably be awake for another 15 minutes if you manage to comment, but past that I'm afraid I'm gonna be dead to the world (or at least I hope so).

Relatively Obscure: Occam's Chainsaw: Morbid curiosity: which one?

One sec, and I'll dig up the transcript. I'd stay and converse about it, but I absolutely HAVE to go to bed thereafter, I'm afraid.

When I was a kid I thought there were monsters under my bed and I too was afraid.

The Iconoclast: When I was a kid I thought there were monsters under my bed and I too was afraid.

I lol'd. They're only hiding under there because they don't want to see what I do ON it. ... I don't blame 'em.

Louder And More Dissonant: Obama's (poorly stated, often twisted) point with the whole "people are bitter" remark was that people less connected to their government were less connected to his campaign. He didn't seem particularly proud of that in those remarks, and he often speaks about how we need to all use the government together to work as a country to solve our most serious problems.

Between now and the election, if McCain's smart he will seize on Reagan's core philosophy - namely, that we don't necessarily need so much government to work as a country to solve our problems.

I don't think McCain's that smart.

Personally, I'm willing to give him a try and see if he can entice Americans to think more deeply about America, to see if he can change the politics of the nation to raise the baseline level of discussion, to raise the conversation to where the ratings for crap debates drop.

I don't trust Obama, or Clinton, and McCain I trust only slightly more. Giving Obama a try is also giving Clinton a try. No matter how the primaries go from here on in, she'll still be in position to extract lots of promises from Obama in exchange for her support. She will be calling lots of shots during an Obama presidency. No, thank you.

A higher level of literacy about what is important in how the nation works might let us be less scared when planes hit buildings, might let us work better together when levees break and when national commitments need to be made and unmade.

How about seeing them work together before the levees break, and maybe even ask the question of whether they're needed in the first place considering the damage that's been done by them in the past? I don't care of Obama can walk on water and take ten strokes off my golf game while whitening my teeth and fixing up that muddy patch in my lawn - it comes down to Congress. And what they care about is how much federal money gets poured into their districts. I see no sign of Obama being willing or able to change any of that. Do you really think he's going to veto something his party's congressional majority dumps on his desk, no matter how full of waste, pandering and pork it is?

I don't see McCain or Clinton giving us this sort of chance, and I don't see anything else being as effective in making our country greater over the next four years. So, hey, it's Obama.

Vote gridlock. Keep them at each other's throats, and maybe they'll stay distracted long enough for the rest of us to accomplish something.

Relatively Obscure:

Preaching to the mosque, Osama, preaching to the mosque. Your commentary on perception regarding the 2nd -vs- perception regarding the 1st is spot-on. "Shall not be infringed" is some pretty ironclad language. This is the one singular bright spot of the Bush years: the SCOTUS looks as though it regards RKBA as a strictly personal right. The sooner we can get the, "MILISHA AM TEH NASHUNAL GARD!!!" nonsense behind us, the better.

This is also an issue where I differ from Obama. That said, with his background in Constitutional law, I am confident that a strongly worded ruling out of the Supremes (here's hoping) would be accepted and adhered to by Obama. Queen Hillary, not so much.

And if it only takes one or two issues to sway me from a candidate, I have absolutely no business voting.