DRW50

I've mostly been responding to the comments here which are horrified at the thought of the media ever being pro-Romney. I'm not too shocked about the public reaction, even if it's probably not totally accurate in polling. Remember in 2008 that the public began to move toward supporting McCain/Palin until the economy collapsed and McCain clearly had no idea how to respond. Romney and Paul both know how to smile at the camera and at their best, they know what to say to pull a con job. They will always remind you of your place, and they will always remind you in code words to hate those (the poor, minorities) who have forgotten their place. And that is deeply popular with many in the public.

Whoo I love this Flo/Jill scene! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beo3zrP3gw4&feature=autoplay&list=ULWNB4kE8RBBo&playnext=4

He was better than Obama, but he also told a ton of lies which would have been picked apart if someone like Al Gore had been in his place. You only get away with a debate performance if the media lets you get away with it.

SNL isn't political (Sarah Palin was a national joke, not just to liberals). I think Lorne Michaels donated to McCain. They go after what is easy pickings, on either side of the fence. It's why their political stuff has sucked for the last fifteen or so years. The coverage often isn't about Obama sucking as much as it's about how awesome Mitt is and how he kicked ass. Romney needed a win. Obama was awful but that wouldn't have mattered. Kerry did a good job in 2004 and the media still focused on his mistakes.

What are you referring to? The media never went this wild over Obama in any debate. McCain sunk himself in the debates but that was never seen as being about Obama's great abilities. If you mean gushing media coverage for Obama in 2008, there was still plenty of garbage (Rev. Wright, lipstick on a pig, Michelle Obama hating America). Have you noticed some of the slightly relieved, quasi-gushing tones lately to stories about Mitt going "back to the center" and "being a moderate"? That's where you will most see the bias. The Beltway needs to believe Mitt is their secret friend, who might try to placate those crazies, but will go talk to the "real media" privately about Serious Issues and tell them how important and special they are.

This is a very odd decision. Blackburn led a period of ratings decline and fan dislike at Emmerdale. While some of that wasn't his fault (Gavin Blythe started the rot) I can't remember anyone who approved of his work at Emmerdale. But Collinson has been awful, and gutted the show almost as soon as he arrived. I just hope Blackburn doesn't keep the worst and stamp out the one or two good things going on.

It tells you a lot about Scalia's influence that even Scott Brown, the self-professed moderate senator from Massachusetts, eagerly said he would support Scalia-like justices. This guy is so powerful within far right circles that even political death is worth risking in order to support him.

Thomas probably would, just not for himself. He has the money and power to make sure he'd be exempted. That's the "gift" of that type of conservatism - if I have the money to do anything I want, then I can make sure no one else does.

They can be the new Jammy (GL reference), the main difference being I can see why she'd want to have sex with him.

I'm never sure whether I am disgusted by Scalia and Thomas or if I should be happy they're still serving because under Romney their replacements will probably be even worse, and just less vocal about it.

Hollyoaks, as you mentioned. I think this was also when Brookside began dumping people, but I'm not sure.

I think there was a lesbian Hart - that must be who I'm remembering. Yes, he played Sean. It seems like a lot of the lower-rated soaps started having high cast turnover in the late 90s. The soaps that need it most, like Corrie, never get it.

Shocking that nonstop gushing media coverage would affect poll results.

Are you sad about any of these departures? I guess the teacher/student affair stories are always likely to get a following, for one reason or another.

I thought this was a nice little project. Apparently it's being put out for Christmas. http://doctorwho.tumblr.com/image/33006823749 They had Katarina twice, for some reason. Perhaps they were taunting the people who still insist Katarina and Sara were not companions (even though apparently someone who knows the Doctor for a few hours and then commits suicide is). "You don't want Sara? Fine. Here's KATARINA! KATARINA!" Michael Craze was a beautiful man.

They had a jury made up of real people, I think.

Oh I just meant the constant sh!t-stirring she does and how obsessive she is. All the stuff bringing up Theresa's parents seemed like a low blow. It seems to go beyond just famewhoring aspirations.

That's what the blog said. You know so much about these matters so I was wondering what your opinion would be. I get the impression this is something the show doesn't like to talk about, so they go along with Jacqueline changing the subject. It seems like RHONJ has become so bogged down with all these landmines which they can hint at or recreate (where's Robert Stack when we need him most), but can never seriously go near oncamera. There's always the unspoken, and unpleasant, situation with the Guidices/Gorgas, especially pitbull Kathy.

Yes. I saw a quote from him on IMDB I'd never heard before. I don't know why this surprised me, but it did. Pathetic. I'm glad he was repulsed by this. If not for the paycheck I wonder if he would have stayed past a year or two.

I never even bothered with the reboot so I'd be fine with a third try. I know it's airbrushing but Doug Savant looks exactly the same.

I don't think Kerry's done anything that bad since he lost the Presidency. He remained in the Senate and has been doing a decent job, apparently, and seems to be effective enough as a surrogate for the Obama campaign. W supposedly never really even wanted to be in politics and the whole reason he was was based on father issues. If so then that would be why he's happily walked away.

Have any of you read that Fauxreality blog which talks about RHONJ? Some pretty unpleasant stuff about the Laurita bankruptcy. I don't know what is or isn't accurate.

The whole thing was a little dumb. I think viewers just went along because they loved both Megan and Sarah and wanted to see the conflict with Viki. Rauch seemed to really throw new characters in without build up. When it didn't work, it didn't work, but when it did, the characters became hugely popular.

Scalia assures everyone that he already has his mind made up on any cases on matters such as "homosexual sodomy." I guess we'll see if anyone asks him to recuse himself from cases that he clearly isn't going to be unbiased on. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gQpgauFJXFBrMENK8e0qOFe7RvzQ?docId=ed2dfa8c955c4a8b98497c59d9839527

They can do whatever they want. Obama was awful but it was irrelevant. Remember when Kerry cleaned Bush's clock and the media focused on Mary Cheney? Or when they focused on Al Gore sighing? That's just how they work.