I'm Thomas Jefferson and I approve this message.
October 30, 2010 2:01 PM Subscribe
Some political watchers are saying this could be the nastiest, most negative election season of all time. [SLYT]
Except the people in 1800 actually differed on matters of substance. The US election of 2010 is about which set of Wall Street oligarchs and parasitic lobbyists gets protection and access top the public trough.
posted by Yakuman at 2:10 PM on October 30, 2010 [3 favorites]
posted by Yakuman at 2:10 PM on October 30, 2010 [3 favorites]
Hmm, yes no difference between the Tea Party wanting to get rid of healthcare, Social Security, etc and strip the government down to its bare minimum; and what Democrats want. I think there are some pretty substantive issues at stake about the role of the government, but the actual debate does focus (or at least the media focuses) on the schoolyard insults and stunts.
posted by wildcrdj at 2:15 PM on October 30, 2010 [14 favorites]
posted by wildcrdj at 2:15 PM on October 30, 2010 [14 favorites]
Jefferfon '00.
posted by morganannie at 2:21 PM on October 30, 2010 [3 favorites]
posted by morganannie at 2:21 PM on October 30, 2010 [3 favorites]
That ain't shit.
I really wished I hadn't watched that.
posted by Taft at 2:25 PM on October 30, 2010 [16 favorites]
I really wished I hadn't watched that.
posted by Taft at 2:25 PM on October 30, 2010 [16 favorites]
I'm not sure this is a real ad, but if it is, it's the meanest/bestest ever.
posted by drezdn at 2:29 PM on October 30, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by drezdn at 2:29 PM on October 30, 2010 [2 favorites]
This kind of post really shows you who clicks the link and who doesn't.
posted by nasreddin at 2:29 PM on October 30, 2010 [4 favorites]
posted by nasreddin at 2:29 PM on October 30, 2010 [4 favorites]
That ain't shit.
Holy fucking shit my christing fuck. That's got to be a parody, right? Please tell me it's a parody. Please? It's a parody, isn't?
Its not a parody, is it?
posted by dersins at 2:36 PM on October 30, 2010 [9 favorites]
Holy fucking shit my christing fuck. That's got to be a parody, right? Please tell me it's a parody. Please? It's a parody, isn't?
Its not a parody, is it?
posted by dersins at 2:36 PM on October 30, 2010 [9 favorites]
ms.clav and I are in tears
frikkin fine find ennui.z . A gem.
The political after-life
John: " I had worse teeth then that..."
Tom: "My friend, your teeth are the least of my worries"
John: "That may well be Thomas but political landscape looks to much worn for weare"
Tom: "To raise the issue of the French is both..."
John: "OUR landscape Thomas, remember, you bought half of it"
Tom: "At little less then that"
John: "uh-well-yes I did forget Alaska, yes... that is indeed NOT THE POINT Thomas, Thomas?
Tom: "...Yes John"
posted by clavdivs at 2:43 PM on October 30, 2010
frikkin fine find ennui.z . A gem.
The political after-life
John: " I had worse teeth then that..."
Tom: "My friend, your teeth are the least of my worries"
John: "That may well be Thomas but political landscape looks to much worn for weare"
Tom: "To raise the issue of the French is both..."
John: "OUR landscape Thomas, remember, you bought half of it"
Tom: "At little less then that"
John: "uh-well-yes I did forget Alaska, yes... that is indeed NOT THE POINT Thomas, Thomas?
Tom: "...Yes John"
posted by clavdivs at 2:43 PM on October 30, 2010
I doubt it is the nastiest.
In the end, all election campaigns tend to regress to mean.
posted by MuffinMan at 3:16 PM on October 30, 2010 [2 favorites]
In the end, all election campaigns tend to regress to mean.
posted by MuffinMan at 3:16 PM on October 30, 2010 [2 favorites]
That ain't shit.
I know hey, that new Michael Bay movie looks crazy!
posted by mannequito at 3:16 PM on October 30, 2010 [1 favorite]
I know hey, that new Michael Bay movie looks crazy!
posted by mannequito at 3:16 PM on October 30, 2010 [1 favorite]
And yet, I still think democracy has proven better than past alternatives.
posted by Xezlec at 3:33 PM on October 30, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by Xezlec at 3:33 PM on October 30, 2010 [2 favorites]
I like how if you really disagreed with somebody back in the day, it was 40 paces with loaded weapons.
posted by disclaimer at 3:36 PM on October 30, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by disclaimer at 3:36 PM on October 30, 2010 [2 favorites]
I seem to remember an American political cartoon from the 18th century with the two candidates' portraits leaning against stacks of books. One was leaning against books like THE BIBLE and VIRTUE and GOOD GOVERNMENT and the other was against books labeled UNCTION, GREED and SATANISM.
posted by The Whelk at 3:42 PM on October 30, 2010 [3 favorites]
posted by The Whelk at 3:42 PM on October 30, 2010 [3 favorites]
I disapprove of Jefferson's chastity-violation policies, but I approve of his children-on-a-pike policies, so I'm undecided.
posted by Ritchie at 3:44 PM on October 30, 2010 [3 favorites]
posted by Ritchie at 3:44 PM on October 30, 2010 [3 favorites]
And 1820's election killed Andrew Jackson's wife, involved gangs of partisans thrashing each other with sticks, and tremendous wagons of hard cider.
posted by klangklangston at 3:47 PM on October 30, 2010 [4 favorites]
posted by klangklangston at 3:47 PM on October 30, 2010 [4 favorites]
I'm having "UNCTION, GREED and SATANISM" put on my coat of arms.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 3:58 PM on October 30, 2010 [9 favorites]
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 3:58 PM on October 30, 2010 [9 favorites]
I liked the part where Jonathan Swift held a Rally To Show Disdain For Calumny.
posted by fungible at 3:58 PM on October 30, 2010 [27 favorites]
posted by fungible at 3:58 PM on October 30, 2010 [27 favorites]
Metafilter: UNCTION, GREED and SATANISM.
posted by joe lisboa at 4:06 PM on October 30, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by joe lisboa at 4:06 PM on October 30, 2010 [1 favorite]
That ain't shit.
Sorry friends. It's real. I just voted against the measure. It was on the ballot between the amendment abolishing taxes and the other amendment negating health insurance reform.
That's not a joke either.
posted by clarknova at 4:21 PM on October 30, 2010 [4 favorites]
Sorry friends. It's real. I just voted against the measure. It was on the ballot between the amendment abolishing taxes and the other amendment negating health insurance reform.
That's not a joke either.
posted by clarknova at 4:21 PM on October 30, 2010 [4 favorites]
And 1820's election killed Andrew Jackson's wife, involved gangs of partisans thrashing each other with sticks, and tremendous wagons of hard cider.
[citation NEEDED!!!!]
posted by mek at 4:45 PM on October 30, 2010
[citation NEEDED!!!!]
posted by mek at 4:45 PM on October 30, 2010
This has been the most annoying election I've been through so far. I'm getting between 3 and 5 political calls a day, and those are just the ones that actually talk to my answering machine (I've stopped answering my landline, and I'm getting plenty of calls that just hang up, too).
I get attack ads in the mail every day--STUPID ones, I mean seriously stupid, like "Liberal so-and-so's position on [X] might surprise you!" and bizarrely enough, it's a liberal position. WTF? And it seems like they're just the same ads over and over, but arriving every day for weeks now; who has that kind of budget? (Oh, and the guy sending at least one of these last week jumped up and said that we need to "stop the attack ads." I notice I haven't received a single ad about HIM, but have a stack several inches high bitching about his opponent.)
Some of the choices are so bad that my husband decided who to vote for based on a campaign TV ad where the candidate used poor trigger discipline (voting against her), because there was *nothing of substance* available on EITHER candidate in that election. There's lots of crap being said about everybody, and no actual facts anywhere, and THEY WON'T STOP FUCKING CALLING ME.
And I live in a rural part of a tiny county where there is absolutely nothing important being decided in this election.
posted by galadriel at 5:07 PM on October 30, 2010 [3 favorites]
I get attack ads in the mail every day--STUPID ones, I mean seriously stupid, like "Liberal so-and-so's position on [X] might surprise you!" and bizarrely enough, it's a liberal position. WTF? And it seems like they're just the same ads over and over, but arriving every day for weeks now; who has that kind of budget? (Oh, and the guy sending at least one of these last week jumped up and said that we need to "stop the attack ads." I notice I haven't received a single ad about HIM, but have a stack several inches high bitching about his opponent.)
Some of the choices are so bad that my husband decided who to vote for based on a campaign TV ad where the candidate used poor trigger discipline (voting against her), because there was *nothing of substance* available on EITHER candidate in that election. There's lots of crap being said about everybody, and no actual facts anywhere, and THEY WON'T STOP FUCKING CALLING ME.
And I live in a rural part of a tiny county where there is absolutely nothing important being decided in this election.
posted by galadriel at 5:07 PM on October 30, 2010 [3 favorites]
Reason.TV isn't that some bunch of white kids with trust funds complaining about how oppressed they are?
posted by humanfont at 5:11 PM on October 30, 2010 [9 favorites]
posted by humanfont at 5:11 PM on October 30, 2010 [9 favorites]
The Vice president of the united states murdered a former treasury secretary over politics. That's a pretty high bar to cross.
posted by empath at 5:20 PM on October 30, 2010 [3 favorites]
posted by empath at 5:20 PM on October 30, 2010 [3 favorites]
And I live in a rural part of a tiny county where there is absolutely nothing important being decided in this election.
Your bio says you're in Florida - there is a Senate race going on?
posted by naoko at 5:37 PM on October 30, 2010
Your bio says you're in Florida - there is a Senate race going on?
posted by naoko at 5:37 PM on October 30, 2010
well now that we have all these dead babies, we might as well eat them.
posted by philip-random at 5:41 PM on October 30, 2010
posted by philip-random at 5:41 PM on October 30, 2010
in the military ma'am is quite proper address
She is not a member of the military, but an elected public official. It was a dumb mistake by the General.
He and others, yourself included, honestly look worse off for not moving on from his dumb mistake, particularly since the animus for Senator Boxer by right-wing extremists makes what you and Zucker are doing the continuation of a petty political grudge than an actual disagreement about terminology.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 5:42 PM on October 30, 2010 [2 favorites]
She is not a member of the military, but an elected public official. It was a dumb mistake by the General.
He and others, yourself included, honestly look worse off for not moving on from his dumb mistake, particularly since the animus for Senator Boxer by right-wing extremists makes what you and Zucker are doing the continuation of a petty political grudge than an actual disagreement about terminology.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 5:42 PM on October 30, 2010 [2 favorites]
I think I'm more disappointed that Clint Howard's in on that Zucker bullshit.
posted by fungible at 5:48 PM on October 30, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by fungible at 5:48 PM on October 30, 2010 [1 favorite]
there is a Senate race going on?
Oh, yes. Bill Nelson (Dem) isn't up for reelection, so we're replacing outgoing LeMieux (Rep). There are *ten* candidates on the ballot, including our current governor who's running as an independent. But my tiny county isn't going to have an impact in that race either. We never do.
I am certainly voting, of course, and I'm doing my best to be informed. What I can't understand is all the freaking attention this year, considering our location and how penny-ante our whole county is. If it's this annoying, intrusive, and nonstop here, what are they doing in the urban areas?
posted by galadriel at 5:52 PM on October 30, 2010 [1 favorite]
Oh, yes. Bill Nelson (Dem) isn't up for reelection, so we're replacing outgoing LeMieux (Rep). There are *ten* candidates on the ballot, including our current governor who's running as an independent. But my tiny county isn't going to have an impact in that race either. We never do.
I am certainly voting, of course, and I'm doing my best to be informed. What I can't understand is all the freaking attention this year, considering our location and how penny-ante our whole county is. If it's this annoying, intrusive, and nonstop here, what are they doing in the urban areas?
posted by galadriel at 5:52 PM on October 30, 2010 [1 favorite]
Blazecock, for me the humor in the video is taking the error and multiplying it to total absurdity. One of my (liberal) friends found it to be hilarious.
I suppose I feel the way about what she said as I do about folks around here who are a wee bit too proud of their military rank. Occasionally you will get a brand new sergeant (or Captain, or General, or whatever) who is a wee bit too fond of their title and forget that I, a civilian, am not all that concerned with it. Because, A) I can't read stripes and B) I am a civilian, not a private, and I'm not expected to be ABLE to read stripes and C) if you are a jackass to me then the fact that you are General Jackass doesn't make you less of one and D) did I mention I can't read stripes?
The fact that that General or whoever he was slipped up and called her by the default proper military term was not that big a deal and did not rob the Senator of her gravitas. Her calling him on it in such (in my opinion) a rude manner DID take the shine off her halo just a tad. But reasonable people can have different opinions on that. That's just mine. I just respect people more if they can overlook gaffes like that (if indeed it was one) and not make a federal case out of it. I personally feel that a person is expressing insecurity if they do. Again, just me.
posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 5:59 PM on October 30, 2010
I suppose I feel the way about what she said as I do about folks around here who are a wee bit too proud of their military rank. Occasionally you will get a brand new sergeant (or Captain, or General, or whatever) who is a wee bit too fond of their title and forget that I, a civilian, am not all that concerned with it. Because, A) I can't read stripes and B) I am a civilian, not a private, and I'm not expected to be ABLE to read stripes and C) if you are a jackass to me then the fact that you are General Jackass doesn't make you less of one and D) did I mention I can't read stripes?
The fact that that General or whoever he was slipped up and called her by the default proper military term was not that big a deal and did not rob the Senator of her gravitas. Her calling him on it in such (in my opinion) a rude manner DID take the shine off her halo just a tad. But reasonable people can have different opinions on that. That's just mine. I just respect people more if they can overlook gaffes like that (if indeed it was one) and not make a federal case out of it. I personally feel that a person is expressing insecurity if they do. Again, just me.
posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 5:59 PM on October 30, 2010
Your bio says you're in Florida - there is a Senate race going on?
And a tight governor's race, and, in my area, a tight (and ugly, of course) state senate race. Nearly every day for two weeks, I've gotten an anti-Steve Oelrich mailer. Every commercial break contains 2 or 3 vicious attack ads*. I've never seen such a sustained onslaught of rancor as I've seen in this election.
*This wouldn't be so bad, but I'm mostly watching live sports these days and can FF through the commercials.
posted by dirigibleman at 6:07 PM on October 30, 2010
And a tight governor's race, and, in my area, a tight (and ugly, of course) state senate race. Nearly every day for two weeks, I've gotten an anti-Steve Oelrich mailer. Every commercial break contains 2 or 3 vicious attack ads*. I've never seen such a sustained onslaught of rancor as I've seen in this election.
*This wouldn't be so bad, but I'm mostly watching live sports these days and can FF through the commercials.
posted by dirigibleman at 6:07 PM on October 30, 2010
clarknova: "That ain't shit."
Lulz, then the irony of them actually wanting to deny the government helping people get healthcare. Oh yeah. MURDER PANELS! *sigh*
I think the issue isn't "negative" ads, it's the lack of substance. I can deal with negative, but stupid non-issues being brought up, or lack of specific proposals (i.e. lemme guess, Mr. Republican candidate your "solution" is "cut taxes" and nothing else? and that's all you have to say?)
I watched Jon Stewart's speech today, and I read the reply of the girl who's head got stomped on by that dude... (read it, if you haven't. It's damn good - I kinda wanted to tear up a bit at it)
And seeing the two candidates in Connecticut. It looks like there are voices out there trying to do the right thing. But damn. It's hard to fight against such vitriol.
posted by symbioid at 6:36 PM on October 30, 2010 [1 favorite]
Lulz, then the irony of them actually wanting to deny the government helping people get healthcare. Oh yeah. MURDER PANELS! *sigh*
I think the issue isn't "negative" ads, it's the lack of substance. I can deal with negative, but stupid non-issues being brought up, or lack of specific proposals (i.e. lemme guess, Mr. Republican candidate your "solution" is "cut taxes" and nothing else? and that's all you have to say?)
I watched Jon Stewart's speech today, and I read the reply of the girl who's head got stomped on by that dude... (read it, if you haven't. It's damn good - I kinda wanted to tear up a bit at it)
And seeing the two candidates in Connecticut. It looks like there are voices out there trying to do the right thing. But damn. It's hard to fight against such vitriol.
posted by symbioid at 6:36 PM on October 30, 2010 [1 favorite]
Waitaminnit, the second quote of that video says the decline began in 1967, but I was *distinctly* told by my fundie indoctrination that it began in 1963 when the Supreme Court "took prayer out of schools" because of that filthy atheist Madeleine Murray O'Hair.
I'm so confused, what's the actual cause for America's downfall!!!
posted by symbioid at 6:37 PM on October 30, 2010
I'm so confused, what's the actual cause for America's downfall!!!
posted by symbioid at 6:37 PM on October 30, 2010
It was a dumb mistake by the General.
No, it was a perfectly understandable mistake. When you call all the women you normally work with "ma'am," it is hard to suddenly switch to a different term of address without ever slipping up. Besides, the military guys call male elected officials "sir" all the time and nobody says a word about it. It was obnoxious for her to bend someone over her knee for something like that. It would have been more appropriate for her to say something in private, if she was that bothered.
Does it have any bearing on her value as a senator? Of course not. The clip was stupid as a political ad, but quite funny as a humor piece. If it were a Republican being lampooned, there would be no shortage of favorites. I'm sorry, but once Red Cloud got into the act, it was just too great.
posted by Xezlec at 7:25 PM on October 30, 2010 [2 favorites]
No, it was a perfectly understandable mistake. When you call all the women you normally work with "ma'am," it is hard to suddenly switch to a different term of address without ever slipping up. Besides, the military guys call male elected officials "sir" all the time and nobody says a word about it. It was obnoxious for her to bend someone over her knee for something like that. It would have been more appropriate for her to say something in private, if she was that bothered.
Does it have any bearing on her value as a senator? Of course not. The clip was stupid as a political ad, but quite funny as a humor piece. If it were a Republican being lampooned, there would be no shortage of favorites. I'm sorry, but once Red Cloud got into the act, it was just too great.
posted by Xezlec at 7:25 PM on October 30, 2010 [2 favorites]
This is why Stewart's rally and that whole smug oh-if-only-they'd-keep-their-voices-down contingent frustrate me. No, it is not the volume or the force of the rhetoric being used that are the problem. Shouting and nastiness are routine modes of political discourse. The problem is the terrible policies born of the terrible ideas which are so prevalent. They are bad policies that don't work and they aren't going to suddenly start working if tomorrow their proponents start talking like they're in a Jane Austen novel.
posted by enn at 8:04 PM on October 30, 2010 [6 favorites]
posted by enn at 8:04 PM on October 30, 2010 [6 favorites]
"A noble spirit embiggens the smallest man."
posted by blue_beetle at 8:25 PM on October 30, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by blue_beetle at 8:25 PM on October 30, 2010 [2 favorites]
This is why Stewart's rally and that whole smug oh-if-only-they'd-keep-their-voices-down contingent frustrate me. No, it is not the volume or the force of the rhetoric being used that are the problem. Shouting and nastiness are routine modes of political discourse. The problem is the terrible policies born of the terrible ideas which are so prevalent. They are bad policies that don't work and they aren't going to suddenly start working if tomorrow their proponents start talking like they're in a Jane Austen novel.
Not to mention the fallacy of the whole 'we're just sandwiched between two crazy sides of left and right extremists and what we need are some moderates!' thing. Newsflash: the two dominant parties in the US are corporate radical right and corporate center-right.
posted by threeants at 8:26 PM on October 30, 2010 [3 favorites]
Not to mention the fallacy of the whole 'we're just sandwiched between two crazy sides of left and right extremists and what we need are some moderates!' thing. Newsflash: the two dominant parties in the US are corporate radical right and corporate center-right.
posted by threeants at 8:26 PM on October 30, 2010 [3 favorites]
Yeah... stupid smug centerists... at least Glenn Beck is revolting!
posted by vectr at 8:51 PM on October 30, 2010
posted by vectr at 8:51 PM on October 30, 2010
That ain't shit.
That's gotta be a false flag job, surely?
posted by alby at 10:53 PM on October 30, 2010
That's gotta be a false flag job, surely?
posted by alby at 10:53 PM on October 30, 2010
Blazecock, for me the humor in the video is taking the error and multiplying it to total absurdity.
Said without a trace of self-awareness or anything, for that matter.
One of my (liberal) friends found it to be hilarious.
WELL THEN. Please do tell us how your one black friend found it amusing. Oh wait, you do that every time this bullshit comes up. Give it a rest, already. Jesus called, he wants your schtick back. Also: he is jewish. Do tell us how your one jewish friend absolves you of your ignorant hatred.
I give up. You are the problem you have been looking for.
posted by joe lisboa at 11:12 PM on October 30, 2010 [1 favorite]
Said without a trace of self-awareness or anything, for that matter.
One of my (liberal) friends found it to be hilarious.
WELL THEN. Please do tell us how your one black friend found it amusing. Oh wait, you do that every time this bullshit comes up. Give it a rest, already. Jesus called, he wants your schtick back. Also: he is jewish. Do tell us how your one jewish friend absolves you of your ignorant hatred.
I give up. You are the problem you have been looking for.
posted by joe lisboa at 11:12 PM on October 30, 2010 [1 favorite]
Also too (speaking your language, now): lazy misogyny is lazy. Flim at Zucker o clock.
posted by joe lisboa at 11:13 PM on October 30, 2010
posted by joe lisboa at 11:13 PM on October 30, 2010
Blazecock, for me the humor in the video is taking the error and multiplying it to total absurdity.
I also saw some humour in the vid. In fact, I even laughed. Yes, I admit it. I laughed at the expense of a progressive-leftleaning-non-God-fearing-non-fundamentalist woman. Because what she originally said was ill-conceived, self-absorbed, ultimately stupid. And the vid, regardless of its sponsors, did a good job of pointing this out, (making hay as it were).
We must laugh, unrestricted and LOUD, at the absurd (even if it implicates us; maybe particularly because it implicates us). Anything else is madness.
posted by philip-random at 11:42 PM on October 30, 2010
I also saw some humour in the vid. In fact, I even laughed. Yes, I admit it. I laughed at the expense of a progressive-leftleaning-non-God-fearing-non-fundamentalist woman. Because what she originally said was ill-conceived, self-absorbed, ultimately stupid. And the vid, regardless of its sponsors, did a good job of pointing this out, (making hay as it were).
We must laugh, unrestricted and LOUD, at the absurd (even if it implicates us; maybe particularly because it implicates us). Anything else is madness.
posted by philip-random at 11:42 PM on October 30, 2010
It was obnoxious for her to bend someone over her knee for something like that.
Yes, because Lord knows it's such a rare occurrence for any other member of the Senate to be obnoxious. Boxer, in fact, is probably the most obnoxious Senator ever to hold the office.
posted by blucevalo at 12:01 AM on October 31, 2010
Yes, because Lord knows it's such a rare occurrence for any other member of the Senate to be obnoxious. Boxer, in fact, is probably the most obnoxious Senator ever to hold the office.
posted by blucevalo at 12:01 AM on October 31, 2010
Metafilter: the problem you have been looking for.
Metafilter: without a trace of self-awareness or anything.
Metafilter: ill-conceived, self-absorbed, ultimately stupid.
Metafilter: speaking your language.
posted by ryanrs at 12:25 AM on October 31, 2010 [1 favorite]
Metafilter: without a trace of self-awareness or anything.
Metafilter: ill-conceived, self-absorbed, ultimately stupid.
Metafilter: speaking your language.
posted by ryanrs at 12:25 AM on October 31, 2010 [1 favorite]
Having had a HS civics level of understanding of politics at the time, A Magnificent Catastrophe was a pretty fun read about the election of 1800. Got me on a bit of a kick about early American government. I bet that if tea-party types actually knew what it was like they'd act a bit more reasonable.
posted by a robot made out of meat at 12:36 AM on October 31, 2010
posted by a robot made out of meat at 12:36 AM on October 31, 2010
Now, am I crazy, or did this whole "ma'am" thing come out of nowhere in this thread?
posted by cthuljew at 1:16 AM on October 31, 2010
posted by cthuljew at 1:16 AM on October 31, 2010
Now, am I crazy, or did this whole "ma'am" thing come out of nowhere in this thread?
Pretty much. But it is a good demonstration of the kind of right-wing political incivility that is eating away at the foundations of the country like a cancer.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 4:22 AM on October 31, 2010
Pretty much. But it is a good demonstration of the kind of right-wing political incivility that is eating away at the foundations of the country like a cancer.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 4:22 AM on October 31, 2010
I'm in Canada and most of my HD tv channels are broadcast from Detroit. Last night, watching Saturday Night Live, we had a hard time deciding which politcal ads were skits and which were "real". None were SNL skits, which made it even funnier each time one began.
posted by jeffmik at 7:06 AM on October 31, 2010
posted by jeffmik at 7:06 AM on October 31, 2010
I'd posted a political video (that a LOT of people found funny but maybe not so much here) and it was regarding Barbara Boxer correcting a general for calling her Ma'am instead of Senator. For whatever reason it was deleted. So, yeah, continuity error. It happens.
(Joe, for the love of God and your blood pressure, it's okay to have a sense of humor. Sheesh.)
posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 7:18 AM on October 31, 2010
(Joe, for the love of God and your blood pressure, it's okay to have a sense of humor. Sheesh.)
posted by St. Alia of the Bunnies at 7:18 AM on October 31, 2010
Boxer, in fact, is probably the most obnoxious Senator ever to hold the office.
Imma say Preston Brooks was more obnoxious. Him or Charles Sumner.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:43 AM on October 31, 2010
Imma say Preston Brooks was more obnoxious. Him or Charles Sumner.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:43 AM on October 31, 2010
When you call all the women you normally work with 'ma'am,' it is hard to suddenly switch to a different term of address without ever slipping up.
So if she'd called Brigadier General Michael Walsh "Mister Walsh" instead of "General Walsh" because she doesn't normally work with military officers he wouldn't have minded?
posted by kirkaracha at 9:29 AM on October 31, 2010 [1 favorite]
...and tremendous wagons of hard cider.
Good to know some things never change. In my house, every election involves tremendous wagons of hard cider.
posted by rusty at 11:58 AM on October 31, 2010
Good to know some things never change. In my house, every election involves tremendous wagons of hard cider.
posted by rusty at 11:58 AM on October 31, 2010
Wasn't there the thing where Jefferson and Adams died on the same day and Adams said "Jefferson still lives" and he was actually dead at the time? Was that a different Adams or some other dude or was he actually cursing Jefferson for having the audacity to still be (allegedly) living?
Not to like, derail this post with something relevant to the actual link or anything.
posted by sonika at 1:42 PM on October 31, 2010
Not to like, derail this post with something relevant to the actual link or anything.
posted by sonika at 1:42 PM on October 31, 2010
Once again for the record: As a sign of respect for the taxpayer and subordination to civilian command, before they're even taught to shine their shoes military personnel are taught to address all civilians as "Ma'am" or "Sir" just as they would a superior officer. Furthermore, while addressing a superior by their rank is also acceptable under military etiquette, doing so can carry a connotation of disrespect. For these reasons, I do not believe an insult was either intended or implied on the part of Gen. Walsh.
However, all people have the prerogative to be addressed as they wish within reason, and Sen. Boxer was correct in pointing out that United States Senators should be addressed as "Senator". Her correction of the General could have been stated with more grace, but it was not the despicable insult to the man, his uniform, and the flag it was made out to be.
What is despicable is to continue this ridiculous debate over forms of address from more than a year ago when Californians have real problems and the rest of the nation has domestic and foreign policy concerns that should be addressed instead.
posted by ob1quixote at 3:07 PM on October 31, 2010
However, all people have the prerogative to be addressed as they wish within reason, and Sen. Boxer was correct in pointing out that United States Senators should be addressed as "Senator". Her correction of the General could have been stated with more grace, but it was not the despicable insult to the man, his uniform, and the flag it was made out to be.
What is despicable is to continue this ridiculous debate over forms of address from more than a year ago when Californians have real problems and the rest of the nation has domestic and foreign policy concerns that should be addressed instead.
posted by ob1quixote at 3:07 PM on October 31, 2010
What exactly is the point Reason is trying to make here (other than the spot itself being kind of an attack ad against Obama and conflating the specifics of his statement with an unrelated one from CNN)?
The democratic process evolved for more than two centuries in the US alone. In addition to the "american as apple pie" practice of vilifying your political opponents, we've similarly embraced ballot stuffing, vote buying, voter suppression, and cooping (the practice of kidnapping, drugging and force-marching citizens from poll to poll, likely the cause of death of Edgar Allan Poe). Does this historical fact somehow legitimize injecting passerby with thorazine and dragging them into a voting booth in 2010?
I mean, yes, the CNN statement is technically incorrect in that, in the history of democracy, public rhetoric has at times been more inflammatory than it is now. You could probably find even more outrageous examples from the Roman Republic, though those wouldn't have that patriotic tinge.
How about exploring this trend over time? You could easily throw all available campaign literature for the 1789-1996 elections into a NLP sentiment classifier and see if candidates have generally become more civil to each other over this time. I'll eat my hat if they haven't.
posted by parkan at 4:01 PM on October 31, 2010
The democratic process evolved for more than two centuries in the US alone. In addition to the "american as apple pie" practice of vilifying your political opponents, we've similarly embraced ballot stuffing, vote buying, voter suppression, and cooping (the practice of kidnapping, drugging and force-marching citizens from poll to poll, likely the cause of death of Edgar Allan Poe). Does this historical fact somehow legitimize injecting passerby with thorazine and dragging them into a voting booth in 2010?
I mean, yes, the CNN statement is technically incorrect in that, in the history of democracy, public rhetoric has at times been more inflammatory than it is now. You could probably find even more outrageous examples from the Roman Republic, though those wouldn't have that patriotic tinge.
How about exploring this trend over time? You could easily throw all available campaign literature for the 1789-1996 elections into a NLP sentiment classifier and see if candidates have generally become more civil to each other over this time. I'll eat my hat if they haven't.
posted by parkan at 4:01 PM on October 31, 2010
Grover Cleveland was rumored to have an illegitimate son, a fact which supporters of James Blaine were not shy about pointing out in their chants.
"Ma! Ma! Where's my Pa? Gone to the White House, HA! HA! HA!"
to which Cleveland's supporters would reply:
"Blaine! Blaine! James G. Blaine! Continental liar from the State of Maine!"
posted by snottydick at 8:32 AM on November 1, 2010 [1 favorite]
"Ma! Ma! Where's my Pa? Gone to the White House, HA! HA! HA!"
to which Cleveland's supporters would reply:
"Blaine! Blaine! James G. Blaine! Continental liar from the State of Maine!"
posted by snottydick at 8:32 AM on November 1, 2010 [1 favorite]
sonika: Jefferson and Adams both died on July 4, 1826, which also happens to be fifty years after the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Adams' last words were "Thomas Jefferson survives", but Jefferson actually died first.
posted by madcaptenor at 8:53 AM on November 1, 2010
posted by madcaptenor at 8:53 AM on November 1, 2010
Adams' last words were "Thomas Jefferson survives", but Jefferson actually died first.
Yeah, this is what I thought. But I always thought it was in a reverent kind of way. But with these quotes? Hmmmm. Maybe it was more of a backhanded "THAT JERKFACE IS STILL ALIVE" tone.
posted by sonika at 9:04 AM on November 1, 2010
Yeah, this is what I thought. But I always thought it was in a reverent kind of way. But with these quotes? Hmmmm. Maybe it was more of a backhanded "THAT JERKFACE IS STILL ALIVE" tone.
posted by sonika at 9:04 AM on November 1, 2010
My understanding was the same as yours, sonika. Adams and Jefferson had been reconciled for a decade or so (?) by the time of their deaths.
posted by gaspode at 11:47 AM on November 1, 2010
posted by gaspode at 11:47 AM on November 1, 2010
I said: This has been the most annoying election I've been through so far.
Hey, it's election day! I can start answering my phone again.
posted by galadriel at 12:09 PM on November 2, 2010
Hey, it's election day! I can start answering my phone again.
posted by galadriel at 12:09 PM on November 2, 2010
« Older From Shakespeare To The Sitcom | Word to your Mo-Ther! Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by drezdn at 2:08 PM on October 30, 2010 [7 favorites]