Peter Posted September 26, 2004 Posted September 26, 2004 I read in Saturday's paper that the legal document that the campaigns negotiated and recently signed for the debates stipulates that the networks are not allowed to show reaction shots -- shots of a candidate reacting to what the other is saying. In other words, they must only shoot the person who is talking. Odd. It always is fun to watch the other guy fumbling around, grimacing, etc. I especially loved it when Mondale was seen laughing (with everyone else) when Reagan said that he was not going to make age an issue -- Mondale's youth and inexperience.
OnTheRocks Posted September 26, 2004 Posted September 26, 2004 I read in Saturday's paper that the legal document that the campaigns negotiated and recently signed for the debates stipulates that the networks are not allowed to show reaction shots -- shots of a candidate reacting to what the other is saying. In other words, they must only shoot the person who is talking. Odd. It always is fun to watch the other guy fumbling around, grimacing, etc. I especially loved it when Mondale was seen laughing (with everyone else) when Reagan said that he was not going to make age an issue -- Mondale's youth and inexperience. 45635[/snapback] it would be a shame to see a rule saying they had to be muted as well. it would have been awful to miss Al Gore **SIGHING** every three seconds 4 years ago.
KD in CA Posted September 26, 2004 Posted September 26, 2004 it would be a shame to see a rule saying they had to be muted as well. it would have been awful to miss Al Gore **SIGHING** every three seconds 4 years ago. 45700[/snapback] I recently caught an SNL rerun from when they were spoofing the Bush/Gore debates in 2000. Some of the funniest stuff I've ever seen out of SNL.
ExiledInIllinois Posted September 26, 2004 Posted September 26, 2004 It is a shame there are rules at all! Have a cage match. Two enter, ones leaves kinda thing! Is this the America where Senators used to get beat on the Senate floor? Bunch of wimps I say...
Guest RabidBillsFanVT Posted September 26, 2004 Posted September 26, 2004 Damn it man, you are right!!! Every time Bush comes out with a stupid sound bite that seeks laughter, or Kerry says something like he is drilling into your chest, they should administer electric shocks to the candidate. YEAH! Sounds like a blast. WHOOP WHOOP WHOOP!! hehe
Kelly the Dog Posted September 27, 2004 Posted September 27, 2004 I wonder if George Bush will start smiling and virtually laughing with glee when he speaks about how many people he put to death in Texas again, like he did last debate. That was one of the most repulsive things I have ever seen in my life, and I am for the death penalty, not against it. That was the first time I can honestly say that I hated a politician.
Rich in Ohio Posted September 27, 2004 Posted September 27, 2004 I read in Saturday's paper that the legal document that the campaigns negotiated and recently signed for the debates stipulates that the networks are not allowed to show reaction shots -- shots of a candidate reacting to what the other is saying. In other words, they must only shoot the person who is talking. Odd. It always is fun to watch the other guy fumbling around, grimacing, etc. I especially loved it when Mondale was seen laughing (with everyone else) when Reagan said that he was not going to make age an issue -- Mondale's youth and inexperience. 45635[/snapback] I think this is referred to as the algore sigh rule. After all the shots of him panting and sighing last time like a little school boy is more then likely what caused him the election. Well, that and his little "Lock Box"
Peter Posted September 27, 2004 Author Posted September 27, 2004 I think this is referred to as the algore sigh rule. After all the shots of him panting and sighing last time like a little school boy is more then likely what caused him the election. Well, that and his little "Lock Box" 46536[/snapback] Gore was absolutely horrible in the debates.
KD in CA Posted September 27, 2004 Posted September 27, 2004 I wonder if George Bush will start smiling and virtually laughing with glee when he speaks about how many people he put to death in Texas again, like he did last debate. That was one of the most repulsive things I have ever seen in my life, and I am for the death penalty, not against it. That was the first time I can honestly say that I hated a politician. 46527[/snapback] I don't recall that, but if you are for the death penalty, what is the problem with him extolling his accomplishment for doing the job? Isn't that what you are supposed to do during a debate? What should he have done, hung his head in shame over executing sub-human scum?
Adam Posted September 28, 2004 Posted September 28, 2004 I don't recall that, but if you are for the death penalty, what is the problem with him extolling his accomplishment for doing the job? Isn't that what you are supposed to do during a debate? What should he have done, hung his head in shame over executing sub-human scum? 47360[/snapback] One should NEVER celebrate the loss of human life- even when it is deserved.
KD in CA Posted September 28, 2004 Posted September 28, 2004 One should NEVER celebrate the loss of human life- even when it is deserved. 48221[/snapback] Says who? You wouldn't celebrate if some Marine put a bullet in OBL's head tomorrow? I would.
VABills Posted September 28, 2004 Posted September 28, 2004 Says who? You wouldn't celebrate if some Marine put a bullet in OBL's head tomorrow? I would. 48249[/snapback] DING DING DING. Of course if the Army catches him in a hole, they won't throw the gernade in this time either.
stuckincincy Posted September 28, 2004 Posted September 28, 2004 Presidential debates and anyone that gets swayed by them are a joke. They are an entertainment. Rush Limbaugh, like him or not, could destroy any candidate in that venue, but does that mean Limbaugh is fit for the Presidency?
PastaJoe Posted September 28, 2004 Posted September 28, 2004 These debates are mislabeled. They aren't debates at all, they've been reduced to parallel stump speeches. A real debate would allow the candidates to interact and directly ask and answer each other's questions. The best debate I've seen recently was the last Canadian election. They had the four major party P.M. candidates debating directly with each other, asking each other questions, and directly pointing out when another was not being factually correct. Abe Lincoln would have never had a chance with today's rules, it's all style over substance.
OnTheRocks Posted September 28, 2004 Posted September 28, 2004 One should NEVER celebrate the loss of human life- even when it is deserved. 48221[/snapback] have you considered some of the scum that have been executed in Texas? better yet....how about Timothy McVeigh. Or Jeff Dahmer? (who wasn't executed by the State...but was executed) You think these people deserve to live? OH...I am sorry...you said "human life". Sorry.
PastaJoe Posted September 28, 2004 Posted September 28, 2004 You think these people deserve to live? He didn't say they deserved to live. In fact he agrees that the death penalty is sometimes deserved. His point was that you shouldn't celebrate the death of another, regardless of the circumstances.
ExiledInIllinois Posted September 28, 2004 Posted September 28, 2004 have you considered some of the scum that have been executed in Texas?better yet....how about Timothy McVeigh. Or Jeff Dahmer? (who wasn't executed by the State...but was executed) You think these people deserve to live? OH...I am sorry...you said "human life". Sorry. 48369[/snapback] It doesn't matter if you think they deserve to die. Incarcerate them and let God deal with them someday. You can only make YOUR life a better place. It shouldn't be a control issue. If it is, you are committing the same crime.
KD in CA Posted September 28, 2004 Posted September 28, 2004 It doesn't matter if you think they deserve to die. Incarcerate them and let God deal with them someday. You can only make YOUR life a better place. It shouldn't be a control issue. If it is, you are committing the same crime. 48378[/snapback] Yes, I can make MY life a better place by ending the life of someone who has demonstrated that they don't deserve the privledge. We can let God deal them right now. Knowing that the guy who killed my loved one is alive and well, doing drugs and raping new fish in prison really doesn't satasfy my desire for justice.
OnTheRocks Posted September 28, 2004 Posted September 28, 2004 He didn't say they deserved to live. In fact he agrees that the death penalty is sometimes deserved. His point was that you shouldn't celebrate the death of another, regardless of the circumstances. 48374[/snapback] i stand corrected. i misread the post. however...i think people mourn and respond to death and justice in different ways. if the father of a young girl who is raped and muredered celebrates the execution of scum responsible for the rape and death of his daughter.....so be it. i wouldn't be the one to tell him he is wrong.
ExiledInIllinois Posted September 28, 2004 Posted September 28, 2004 Yes, I can make MY life a better place by ending the life of someone who has demonstrated that they don't deserve the privledge. We can let God deal them right now. Knowing that the guy who killed my loved one is alive and well, doing drugs and raping new fish in prison really doesn't satasfy my desire for justice. 48384[/snapback] Move on, stay positive. Who says, YOUR desire for justice needs to be satisfied? You really think you count in this world as an individual? As long as YOU say put 'em to death, then they die?
Recommended Posts