Print

[razgueado]

Today’s Highlight in History:

In 2004, President George W. Bush criticized a political commercial accusing Democratic nominee John Kerry of inflating his own Vietnam War record, and said broadcast attacks by outside groups had no place in the race for the White House.

We've definitely journeyed a long way since this.

Ah, the good ole days.

The last set of Republican debates had the candidates referring to the size of their dicks. I can't wait to see what tonight brings.

In the end, they're all big dicks anyway.

Lots of talk in the soccer world these days about how much time the ball is actually in play in a match. I wish I could see similar numbers tomorrow for how much time they spend tonight actually discussing political ideas, or even answering the question asked of them.

I do find it rather curious how when they are asked a specific question, they pivot right into whatever they want to talk about.

I think it would be great if in debates, the moderator had control of the mics. You ask someone a question, everyone else's mic is off. If the person you asked the question of veers into one of their talking points, their mic gets cut off and they move on to the next person. Instead of the shitshow we normally get, we might get something of actual value.

Not really, because no leading candidate would show up.

[A Friend of Charlie]

Today’s Highlight in History:

In 2004, President George W. Bush criticized a political commercial accusing Democratic nominee John Kerry of inflating his own Vietnam War record, and said broadcast attacks by outside groups had no place in the race for the White House.

We've definitely journeyed a long way since this.

Ah, the good ole days.

The last set of Republican debates had the candidates referring to the size of their dicks. I can't wait to see what tonight brings.

In the end, they're all big dicks anyway.

Lots of talk in the soccer world these days about how much time the ball is actually in play in a match. I wish I could see similar numbers tomorrow for how much time they spend tonight actually discussing political ideas, or even answering the question asked of them.

I do find it rather curious how when they are asked a specific question, they pivot right into whatever they want to talk about.

I think it would be great if in debates, the moderator had control of the mics. You ask someone a question, everyone else's mic is off. If the person you asked the question of veers into one of their talking points, their mic gets cut off and they move on to the next person. Instead of the shitshow we normally get, we might get something of actual value.

Not really, because no leading candidate would show up.

Also, it wouldn't make for great ratings.

[LuvTooGolf]

Today’s Highlight in History:

In 2004, President George W. Bush criticized a political commercial accusing Democratic nominee John Kerry of inflating his own Vietnam War record, and said broadcast attacks by outside groups had no place in the race for the White House.

We've definitely journeyed a long way since this.

Ah, the good ole days.

The last set of Republican debates had the candidates referring to the size of their dicks. I can't wait to see what tonight brings.

In the end, they're all big dicks anyway.

Lots of talk in the soccer world these days about how much time the ball is actually in play in a match. I wish I could see similar numbers tomorrow for how much time they spend tonight actually discussing political ideas, or even answering the question asked of them.

I do find it rather curious how when they are asked a specific question, they pivot right into whatever they want to talk about.

I think it would be great if in debates, the moderator had control of the mics. You ask someone a question, everyone else's mic is off. If the person you asked the question of veers into one of their talking points, their mic gets cut off and they move on to the next person. Instead of the shitshow we normally get, we might get something of actual value.

Not really, because no leading candidate would show up.

Probably not, but imagine being one of only a couple candidates that show up. It's basically one giant commercial for them at that point.

But alas, I know it's a pipe dream.

[razgueado]

One of my favorite songs, from today's Linda Thompson.

https://youtu.be/57PENuNVapc

[razgueado]

Today’s Highlight in History:

In 2004, President George W. Bush criticized a political commercial accusing Democratic nominee John Kerry of inflating his own Vietnam War record, and said broadcast attacks by outside groups had no place in the race for the White House.

We've definitely journeyed a long way since this.

Ah, the good ole days.

The last set of Republican debates had the candidates referring to the size of their dicks. I can't wait to see what tonight brings.

In the end, they're all big dicks anyway.

Lots of talk in the soccer world these days about how much time the ball is actually in play in a match. I wish I could see similar numbers tomorrow for how much time they spend tonight actually discussing political ideas, or even answering the question asked of them.

I do find it rather curious how when they are asked a specific question, they pivot right into whatever they want to talk about.

I think it would be great if in debates, the moderator had control of the mics. You ask someone a question, everyone else's mic is off. If the person you asked the question of veers into one of their talking points, their mic gets cut off and they move on to the next person. Instead of the shitshow we normally get, we might get something of actual value.

Not really, because no leading candidate would show up.

Probably not, but imagine being one of only a couple candidates that show up. It's basically one giant commercial for them at that point.

But alas, I know it's a pipe dream.

It's not a commercial for them if they can't spin, and demonstrate that they can control the conversation. That's the problem.

[razgueado]

Today’s Highlight in History:

In 2004, President George W. Bush criticized a political commercial accusing Democratic nominee John Kerry of inflating his own Vietnam War record, and said broadcast attacks by outside groups had no place in the race for the White House.

We've definitely journeyed a long way since this.

Ah, the good ole days.

The last set of Republican debates had the candidates referring to the size of their dicks. I can't wait to see what tonight brings.

In the end, they're all big dicks anyway.

Lots of talk in the soccer world these days about how much time the ball is actually in play in a match. I wish I could see similar numbers tomorrow for how much time they spend tonight actually discussing political ideas, or even answering the question asked of them.

I do find it rather curious how when they are asked a specific question, they pivot right into whatever they want to talk about.

I think it would be great if in debates, the moderator had control of the mics. You ask someone a question, everyone else's mic is off. If the person you asked the question of veers into one of their talking points, their mic gets cut off and they move on to the next person. Instead of the shitshow we normally get, we might get something of actual value.

Not really, because no leading candidate would show up.

Probably not, but imagine being one of only a couple candidates that show up. It's basically one giant commercial for them at that point.

But alas, I know it's a pipe dream.

It's not a commercial for them if they can't spin, and demonstrate that they can control the conversation. That's the problem.

The problem with elected officials is the people that elect them.

[LuvTooGolf]

Today’s Highlight in History:

In 2004, President George W. Bush criticized a political commercial accusing Democratic nominee John Kerry of inflating his own Vietnam War record, and said broadcast attacks by outside groups had no place in the race for the White House.

We've definitely journeyed a long way since this.

Ah, the good ole days.

The last set of Republican debates had the candidates referring to the size of their dicks. I can't wait to see what tonight brings.

In the end, they're all big dicks anyway.

Lots of talk in the soccer world these days about how much time the ball is actually in play in a match. I wish I could see similar numbers tomorrow for how much time they spend tonight actually discussing political ideas, or even answering the question asked of them.

I do find it rather curious how when they are asked a specific question, they pivot right into whatever they want to talk about.

I think it would be great if in debates, the moderator had control of the mics. You ask someone a question, everyone else's mic is off. If the person you asked the question of veers into one of their talking points, their mic gets cut off and they move on to the next person. Instead of the shitshow we normally get, we might get something of actual value.

Not really, because no leading candidate would show up.

Probably not, but imagine being one of only a couple candidates that show up. It's basically one giant commercial for them at that point.

But alas, I know it's a pipe dream.

It's not a commercial for them if they can't spin, and demonstrate that they can control the conversation. That's the problem.

I'd argue that it's still a commercial, just maybe not one filled with propaganda like the normal political commercials. Perhaps I should've used the word showcase instead of commercial. But I'm aware of this being nothing more than a wild fantasy. It would just be nice for once to watch a debate where candidates actually, you know, debate.

[A Friend of Charlie]

Today’s Highlight in History:

In 2004, President George W. Bush criticized a political commercial accusing Democratic nominee John Kerry of inflating his own Vietnam War record, and said broadcast attacks by outside groups had no place in the race for the White House.

We've definitely journeyed a long way since this.

Ah, the good ole days.

The last set of Republican debates had the candidates referring to the size of their dicks. I can't wait to see what tonight brings.

In the end, they're all big dicks anyway.

Lots of talk in the soccer world these days about how much time the ball is actually in play in a match. I wish I could see similar numbers tomorrow for how much time they spend tonight actually discussing political ideas, or even answering the question asked of them.

I do find it rather curious how when they are asked a specific question, they pivot right into whatever they want to talk about.

I think it would be great if in debates, the moderator had control of the mics. You ask someone a question, everyone else's mic is off. If the person you asked the question of veers into one of their talking points, their mic gets cut off and they move on to the next person. Instead of the shitshow we normally get, we might get something of actual value.

Not really, because no leading candidate would show up.

Probably not, but imagine being one of only a couple candidates that show up. It's basically one giant commercial for them at that point.

But alas, I know it's a pipe dream.

It's not a commercial for them if they can't spin, and demonstrate that they can control the conversation. That's the problem.

I'd argue that it's still a commercial, just maybe not one filled with propaganda like the normal political commercials. Perhaps I should've used the word showcase instead of commercial. But I'm aware of this being nothing more than a wild fantasy. It would just be nice for once to watch a debate where candidates actually, you know, debate.

You don't enjoy debates brought to you by the World Wrestling Entertainment company?

[LuvTooGolf]

Today’s Highlight in History:

In 2004, President George W. Bush criticized a political commercial accusing Democratic nominee John Kerry of inflating his own Vietnam War record, and said broadcast attacks by outside groups had no place in the race for the White House.

We've definitely journeyed a long way since this.

Ah, the good ole days.

The last set of Republican debates had the candidates referring to the size of their dicks. I can't wait to see what tonight brings.

In the end, they're all big dicks anyway.

Lots of talk in the soccer world these days about how much time the ball is actually in play in a match. I wish I could see similar numbers tomorrow for how much time they spend tonight actually discussing political ideas, or even answering the question asked of them.

I do find it rather curious how when they are asked a specific question, they pivot right into whatever they want to talk about.

I think it would be great if in debates, the moderator had control of the mics. You ask someone a question, everyone else's mic is off. If the person you asked the question of veers into one of their talking points, their mic gets cut off and they move on to the next person. Instead of the shitshow we normally get, we might get something of actual value.

Not really, because no leading candidate would show up.

Probably not, but imagine being one of only a couple candidates that show up. It's basically one giant commercial for them at that point.

But alas, I know it's a pipe dream.

It's not a commercial for them if they can't spin, and demonstrate that they can control the conversation. That's the problem.

I'd argue that it's still a commercial, just maybe not one filled with propaganda like the normal political commercials. Perhaps I should've used the word showcase instead of commercial. But I'm aware of this being nothing more than a wild fantasy. It would just be nice for once to watch a debate where candidates actually, you know, debate.

You don't enjoy debates brought to you by the World Wrestling Entertainment company?

I would say I enjoy them for as long as it takes for it to go from entertaining nonsense to horror, which doesn't take long these days. But given the choice, give me a good old fashioned actual debate any day.

[razgueado]

Today’s Highlight in History:

In 2004, President George W. Bush criticized a political commercial accusing Democratic nominee John Kerry of inflating his own Vietnam War record, and said broadcast attacks by outside groups had no place in the race for the White House.

We've definitely journeyed a long way since this.

Ah, the good ole days.

The last set of Republican debates had the candidates referring to the size of their dicks. I can't wait to see what tonight brings.

In the end, they're all big dicks anyway.

Lots of talk in the soccer world these days about how much time the ball is actually in play in a match. I wish I could see similar numbers tomorrow for how much time they spend tonight actually discussing political ideas, or even answering the question asked of them.

I do find it rather curious how when they are asked a specific question, they pivot right into whatever they want to talk about.

I think it would be great if in debates, the moderator had control of the mics. You ask someone a question, everyone else's mic is off. If the person you asked the question of veers into one of their talking points, their mic gets cut off and they move on to the next person. Instead of the shitshow we normally get, we might get something of actual value.

Not really, because no leading candidate would show up.

Probably not, but imagine being one of only a couple candidates that show up. It's basically one giant commercial for them at that point.

But alas, I know it's a pipe dream.

It's not a commercial for them if they can't spin, and demonstrate that they can control the conversation. That's the problem.

I'd argue that it's still a commercial, just maybe not one filled with propaganda like the normal political commercials. Perhaps I should've used the word showcase instead of commercial. But I'm aware of this being nothing more than a wild fantasy. It would just be nice for once to watch a debate where candidates actually, you know, debate.

Yeah, I get it.  I'm just not sure it has ever happened.  Everyone seems to think that once upon a time politics was civil and journalism was objective, and that's a rosy idea, but I find little historical evidence to support it.  Even the quote from George W Bush that we're reminiscing about - you understand that he was grandstanding, right?  It's real easy to appear noble and indignant about some dirty trick that one is benefitting from.  And if you want an education about political dirty tricks and media manipulation, read Edward J Larson's fascinating book "A Magnificent Catastrophe: The Tumultuous Election of 1800, America's First Presidential Campaign." 

For that matter, read the various Latin and Greek texts that aren't ennobled in the "great conversation" of western civilization, and see how vicious Greek and Roman politics got rhetorically (before the actual knives were pulled out).

So I'm skeptical that even the Lincoln/Douglas debates could be held up as some shining example of civil politics in America. Those debates were pursued by challenging candidate Lincoln in hopes of attracting more media attention.  Douglas had nothing to gain from them, but was dragged into them because Lincoln had taken to speaking on days after Douglas had, such that Douglas could not answer Lincoln's accusations.  The newspapers loyal to Lincoln made much of this, and also portrayed Douglas as a coward for previously refusing to debate. As for the debate content itself, Douglas frequently took Lincoln to the cleaners, making Lincoln answer for half-cocked pronouncements that Lincoln had made about slavery for the sake of headlines, and exposing the fact that Lincoln really had no policy for managing the abolition of slavery, just a lot of noble and provocative bloviations.  And had Lincoln not spun his own statements, when they were hung on him by Douglas, by reassuring the white audiences that he wasn't really proposing that blacks were equal to whites, he'd now be a minor footnote to history, because he'd never have been elected president two years later.

Like I said, I just don't see much historical evidence that politics has ever been civil, nor journalism objective. 

[A Friend of Charlie]

I hear you @razgueado but don't you agree that debates in recent years have gotten exponentially sensational. It's probably necessary given the state of our collective ADHD.

[razgueado]

Breaking News:  Yevgeny Prigozhin, leader of Russia's paramilitary Wagner Group, is listed on the passenger manifest of a plane that crashed north of Moscow. 

Two months after he led an abortive coup against Vladimir Putin. 

What a coincidence, eh?

[razgueado]

I hear you @razgueado but don't you agree that debates in recent years have gotten exponentially sensational. It's probably necessary given the state of our collective ADHD.

Not exponentially, and not proportionally.  What has changed are society's expectations.  The transformation begins with the first televised presidential debate - which is not what you think it is.  The first televised presidential debate took place in 1956, but didn't involve the actual candidates.  Eleanor Roosevelt stood in for Adlai Stevenson, and Maine Senator Margaret Chase Smith for Dwight Eisenhower.  Smith took great care to prepare for the debate, from content to appearance. 

Roosevelt spoke the most, but Smith looked the best and got the zinger at the end, and Roosevelt was so pissed about it that she refused to shake hands with Smith. 

Four years later, John Kennedy learned the lesson, Nixon didn't.  Nixon was the better debater and the more seasoned politician, but took no care about his appearance.  If you read the transcript of the debate, it's pretty clear Nixon won.  But he looked like s**t, so guess who viewers thought won the debate?

From there it's been one long, steady race to the bottom, until we get to Donald Trump.  And here's the thing about Trump - he didn't make America bitterly divided, he exposed the division, and the simmering resentment, for what it was.  That he did it like a WWE huckster was a direct result of the influence of broadcast media.  Trump fit right into what broadcast media - including the internet - as a whole had become.  He ripped away the last vestiges of the rosy illusion of gentility in politics.  Americans as a whole had abandoned the notion of gentility sometime around 1968, but the notion of "gravitas" still held sway over presidential politics, until Trump v. Clinton.  Neither candidate had any gravitas.  Hillary tried desperately to project some, always failing.  Trump didn't bother to try.  He knew it as an antiquated notion.  He was a real estate hustler, a casino investor, a beauty pageant promoter, a WWE promoter, and a reality tv star.  He knew for certain what the electorate valued, and gravitas was no longer it. Americans, regardless of political persuasion, wanted a streetlight. Trump gave it to them.

[LuvTooGolf]

Breaking News:  Yevgeny Prigozhin, leader of Russia's paramilitary Wagner Group, is listed on the passenger manifest of a plane that crashed north of Moscow. 

Two months after he led an abortive coup against Vladimir Putin. 

What a coincidence, eh?

Was he the only passenger?

[A Friend of Charlie]

I hear you @razgueado but don't you agree that debates in recent years have gotten exponentially sensational. It's probably necessary given the state of our collective ADHD.

Not exponentially, and not proportionally.  What has changed are society's expectations.  The transformation begins with the first televised presidential debate - which is not what you think it is.  The first televised presidential debate took place in 1956, but didn't involve the actual candidates.  Eleanor Roosevelt stood in for Adlai Stevenson, and Maine Senator Margaret Chase Smith for Dwight Eisenhower.  Smith took great care to prepare for the debate, from content to appearance. 

Roosevelt spoke the most, but Smith looked the best and got the zinger at the end, and Roosevelt was so pissed about it that she refused to shake hands with Smith. 

Four years later, John Kennedy learned the lesson, Nixon didn't.  Nixon was the better debater and the more seasoned politician, but took no care about his appearance.  If you read the transcript of the debate, it's pretty clear Nixon won.  But he looked like s**t, so guess who viewers thought won the debate?

From there it's been one long, steady race to the bottom, until we get to Donald Trump.  And here's the thing about Trump - he didn't make America bitterly divided, he exposed the division, and the simmering resentment, for what it was.  That he did it like a WWE huckster was a direct result of the influence of broadcast media.  Trump fit right into what broadcast media - including the internet - as a whole had become.  He ripped away the last vestiges of the rosy illusion of gentility in politics.  Americans as a whole had abandoned the notion of gentility sometime around 1968, but the notion of "gravitas" still held sway over presidential politics, until Trump v. Clinton.  Neither candidate had any gravitas.  Hillary tried desperately to project some, always failing.  Trump didn't bother to try.  He knew it as an antiquated notion.  He was a real estate hustler, a casino investor, a beauty pageant promoter, a WWE promoter, and a reality tv star.  He knew for certain what the electorate valued, and gravitas was no longer it. Americans, regardless of political persuasion, wanted a streetlight. Trump gave it to them.

That's interesting. I guess that was just my perception. It's normal that every generation feels like things worsen with time. For example, they don't make music like they used to.