Real VP Debate vs. SNL VP Debate … can I vote for Queen Latifah?
OK, so the real VP debate was an embarrassment to any educated voter. Palin rambled nonsensically, and the moderator didn't say a word about any of the blatant instances of the candidates (mostly Palin) completely ignoring her questions in favor of delivering their own little stump speeches. It's painful to watch, and I don't blame anyone out there who couldn't bring themselves to sit through the whole thing.
Saturday Night Live, on the other hand, did a succinct summary of the whole debate, and managed to do it without missing too many major substantive issues addressed in the original:
Tina Fey is just waaaaayyyy too good.
Oh, and if you want to torment yourself by watching the actual debate, CSPAN has done us all the favor of putting the whole cringeworthy thing on YouTube …
Tina Fey is waaay too good at that.
6th October 2008 at 4:37 am | permalink |I'm thinking Colbert/Fey in 2012 …
6th October 2008 at 5:13 am | permalink |I was just thinking that last night… that they might as well just have used the SNL version of it instead of the real debate. :o
It's funny though… to think about how many comedians and 'fringe' characters in the US media are so strangely perceivably more fit to lead.
Imagine a US with some sort of coalition 'government-council' (directly replacing the president), including stewart, colbert, gravel, paul etc. Now that'd be a kickass country. :p
6th October 2008 at 1:50 pm | permalink |I have to say, if McPalin pulls something out and manages to win, at least we'll have 4 years of VP Fey skits =p
6th October 2008 at 6:34 pm | permalink |I'm simply amazed, ok, I'm not, by who "wins" the debates and how it's decided purely on your position, left or right. The disparity is statistically impossible for all the people on the left who watch CNN and declare their man the winner while the polar opposite occurs on FOX. It's the same fucking debate. You see, hear and feel what you want. I suppose it's your blog and you can say what you want. Just know that right-wing blogs are saying the proportional opposite. Somebody's wrong!
No wait, it occurred to me all the candidates are unqualified idiots and so are most of the talking heads, pundits and bloggers declaring "winners." There, I feel better now that I have figured it all out. Carry on…
7th October 2008 at 6:04 am | permalink |@Zef: Don't leave out Keith Olbermann! Colbert/Olbermann is my dream ticket. ;-)
@grimbles. Three words: NOT. FUCKING. WORTH. IT.
(OK, that was four, but "fucking" had to be in there for necessary minimum emphasis.)
@Dave Watson: See my next post for what I have to say to that.
7th October 2008 at 12:43 pm | permalink |Oh, of course not, but it'd be like a consolation prize.
Satire in Australia has suffered terribly since we did away with the guy who spent most of his time with his lips firmly latched to Bush's anus. The worst we've got on the new guy is he's a bit geeky. Ooooooo!
7th October 2008 at 6:14 pm | permalink |There are actual ways to score a debate that have nothing to do with parties. To say that the winner only is decided by who you are voting for already is akin to just giving up. You do that and you can easily go "oh it doesn't matter" and resolve yourself of any civic responsibility. A nice cowards way out.
8th October 2008 at 12:08 pm | permalink |the GOP would dare schedule any more unscripted air time for Palin b/c this will give people more time to realize that she doesn't have a clue… the prospect of her becoming the Commander in Chief is frightening
10th October 2008 at 11:25 am | permalink |@grimbles: Somehow, although it would no doubt be funny as fuck, I don't think it would be much consolation. ;-)
@Larry: But … but … political apathy is the American Way!
@movie fan: Thank goodness, despite keeping her off interview shows, word seems to be getting out anyhow. hehe
11th October 2008 at 6:00 am | permalink |