SNL Writer Surprised By Clinton Remark, Ordered To Write More

NEW YORK — James Downey knew something odd had happened when he stepped away from watching the Democratic presidential debate on Tuesday night to check on something in the kitchen and his phones started ringing.

Hillary Clinton had cited the "Saturday Night Live" skit Downey had written to complain about her treatment by moderators Brian Williams and Tim Russert.

"In the last several debates I seem to get the first question all the time," she said. "I don't mind. I'll be happy to field it. I just find it curious if anybody saw `Saturday Night Live,' maybe we should ask Barack if he's comfortable and needs another pillow."

The skit about an Obama-Clinton debate featured a lovestruck press corps fawning over Barack Obama, while treating Clinton as an annoyance in their way. A fictional Campbell Brown fanned herself in excitement after an Obama answer, while a John King impersonator suggested he had "nailed it."

Downey stayed up for the midnight rerun of MSNBC's Tuesday debate just to see what she had said.

"That usually doesn't happen unless it resonates," said Downey, "so that's nice. It's good for the show."

Downey is an original "Saturday Night Live" writer who's also been head writer for David Letterman. He's been back at "SNL" since 2000, when he wrote skits about Bush-Gore debates; and he's been the lead writer at the comedy show on political material since then.

He said it's hard to recall a more dazzling political personality than Obama in his lifetime.

Story continues below

advertisement

Still, Downey can't help but notice how many people in the news media have been seduced by the Illinois senator. The Clinton campaign has expressed frustration that it is getting a tougher ride from the press.

Clinton has been the first person questioned in six of the past 10 Democratic debates, and some argue this puts her at a disadvantage.

"It's like when the mom is in the grocery store and the kids rush up with this brand new cereal saying `We've got to get it, we've got to get it!'" Downey said. "The mom is the one who is supposed to read the box, check the ingredients. She's not supposed to go, `Oh, my gosh, this is great! It has marshmallows and chocolates and sprinkles."

While he loved getting his work noticed and understands what Clinton must be feeling, Downey said mentioning the skit might not have been her best move.

"It might, on balance, make her look a little whiny," he said. "She might have been better off if other people pointed it out for them."

MSNBC might have also been a source of some of Clinton's annoyance. Both Chris Matthews and David Shuster have apologized over the past months for remarks about the Clinton campaign, which briefly considered backing out of the network-sponsored debate. Tuesday's debate was seen by 7.8 million people, the largest audience in the network's history, according to Nielsen Media Research.

Already, "Saturday Night Live" executive producer Lorne Michaels has ordered Downey to write another skit on the campaign for this weekend's show.

"That's Lorne," Downey said. "He likes to paint you in a corner and if you do it, your reward is to get to jump out of a deeper corner. I pray to God it's my last debate."

Comments

[MoeSart]

He said it's hard to recall a more dazzling political personality than Obama in his lifetime.
-----------------

Dazzling? Based on what? Being as vague as possible? People taking an American Idol approach to politics? Yeah, see what that gets ya. Obama is nothing but a rookie and America needs something better than that.

His wife has already proven that she would be a far bigger annoyance than Hillary was to Bill, too. That's quite an accomplishment in itself.

[Didi47]

MoeSart:

Dazzling because the press made it so. The American press also does NOT report deliberate lies Obama tell the American public - even though it's all over Canadian News: Here's a short sample of how Obama is PLAYING the public!

A new report from Canada's CTV says that according to Canadian government sources, a senior official from the Obama campaign secretly assured a Canadian official not to take Obama's talk about threatening to pull out of NAFTA too seriously, noting that it was just "campaign rhetoric":

Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs did not strictly deny the allegations, only saying that it sounded implausible to him. "Senator Obama does not make promises he doesn't intend to keep," Gibbs added. Clinton campaign officials strongly denied similar allegations.

If this report catches on, it has the potential undermine Obama's outreach to working-class whites in Ohio, many of whom still resent the Clinton Administration's passage of the free trade deal back in the 90s. It could also take the steam out of the Obama campaign's claims that Hillary favored NAFTA, something she denies.
(And which has time and again been proven to be true. Hillary NEVER favored NAFTA - ergo another Obama LIE. This guy will do and say ANYTHING to win. Like shooting fish in a barrel.)

[mageduley]

Low-level sources also suggested the Clinton campaign may have given a similar warning to Ottawa

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/

[tbone99]

they've both voted exactly the same on NAFTA.

[mageduley]

UPDATE THIS JUST IN FROM CANADA!!!!!!!
Canadian Embassy: Report On Obama And NAFTA Is False
By Greg Sargent - February 28, 2008, 12:47PM
Canadian Embassy: Report On Obama And NAFTA Is False

Roy Norton, the minister of public affairs for the Canadian embassy, is flatly denying that any Obama campaign official spoke to the Canadian ambassador in recent days or told him that Obama's anti-NAFTA stump speech is merely "campaign rhetoric."

"No, none," Norton told me when I asked him if Michael Wilson, Canada's ambassador to the U.S., had spoken to any Obama advisers recently. He added: "Neither before the Ohio debate nor since has any presidential campaign called Ambassador Wilson about NAFTA."
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/canadian_embassy_report_on_oba.php
Just goes to show a lie can get around the world before the truth gets its boots on

[WillPower]

Will Obama's wife immediately fires the travel staff and writes a health care bill in secret that eventually fails? No, it will be hard to top Hillary.

[AnninCA]

The Republican talking points from 15 years ago are a bit stale and old.

Now, if that was your hobby then.....don't let me discourage you.

But the rest of us are over it.

[stoprollingover]

Sorry, I don't understand your point. You're just using words. Don't you understand that words are meaningless and have no value? Didn't you learn in school that it's impossible to communicate using words?

[uglybetty]

I can understood it perfectly !!
Are you, stoprolling,refering to Obama,when you say words are meaningless and have no value ??
Otherwise ,you made no sense !!!

[tehriaz]

I really hope you're attempting the whole "satire" thing. because, damn.

[jojojo]

Mnay others have pointed this out, but it bears repeating:

If Obama had lost 10 contests ( or is it 12 now?) in a row, would he be treated as a viable candidate any longer? Would the media be running around trying to make sure they didn't offend him? Jeez, the media are as afraid of the Clintons as they are of Bush.

I voted for HRC twice for senator, but her vote to allow Bush to start his war, and her continued support for it, made it impossible for me to support her in the primary

[democratICnpround]

jojojo, I doubt if Obama was only 150 delegates behind, regardless of how many in a row he had lost, his viability would be in question. There is no benefit to continue vilifying HRC at this point since we all see the hand writing on the ol' wall. I will energetically vote for Mr. Obama in Nov and yes, I am an HRC supporter. I hope the Obama camp know how to be gracious winners so we don't snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory !!

[accountability]

The villification of Hillary Clinton began long before Obama and will continue long after.

People who have this malignant hate will not give itup willingly.
They just do not see that the rpoblem with America is not Hillary Clinton it is the malignant haters spewing bile all over anyone they do not like and do not agree with.

I have to say I can understand it against the neo-con slime machine... and though the kind of sophomoric scatological referencing that passes for wit around here sometimes makes me want to tear my hair out at the level of ignorance that is being exhibited by so called Progressives I have been able to laugh when it is done with real wit rather than unmitigated malice.

What I cannot understand is this malevolence that is directed at Hillary Clinton. It's pretty disgusting and shows me the dark side of having this unyielding strict ideology that brooks no nuance and allows for no deviation from the ideologues truth without demonization.
There is a mob mentality at work akin to "If you're not with us you're against us."

When you read the comments and the hate and narrowness of the thought processes (and i use the term loosely)
all I can see is the idiot king and his 26%'hard core supporters with their narrowness of vision, of what is acceptable and their breadth of hatefulness.

This was disgusting enough before the election but now it is plain stupid, not to mention unreasoned and illogical in that it is the antithesis of the message that they are claiming to support.
And also they cannot seem to grasp the conflicting "facts" they espouse.

The fact that some people get duped by the neo-con's into carrying on and propagating their campaign to ruin the Clinton's and either marginalize or destroy Hillary Clinton is not surprising. They are masters at this.

The fact that so many of those willing to carry on in this savage crucifixion are from the left is a tragedy.

Once again the far right and neo con slime machine have us eating our own and sit their smugly, feet on the desk, hands behind their head enjoying a good laugh, a good cigar and congratulating themselves.

Heartbreaking.

[Bulbul]

Media Bias ?
Anyone who missed the Daily Show last night, I do urge viewers to watch the rerun.
In his humor , the blunt truth is there.

[AnninCA]

Wasn't that funny? He always cracks me up. Even when he's lamblasting Hillary, I laugh.

[accountability]

I did watch it and I love the way they used this kind of reverse satire to speak the truth about the pillorying of Hillary Clinton while at the same time pointing out where she is not perfect.
One doesn't exclude the other.

The fact that a non partisan research group looking at truth in media reported that Hillary gets favorable coverage 51% of the time which means 49% negative coverage while Barack Obama gets 87% positive coverage... do the math.

Now that is dealing in percentages. If we were to deal in actual numbers rather than in ratios Hillary will have far higher numbers just because they cover her more... as they are all too willing to say, they love blood, they love a fight to the death, they want to go to convention all the while pretending that it shouldn't.

But don't take my word for it, go look it up.

I have to find the link and post it.

[dmac]

What percentage did the poll indicate had been influenced by Clinton's complaining that the media were negative about her?

Not just being sarcky with that comment. Read any Comments thread on the site; folks don't think in order to develop their opinions....they crib them from sound bites. It's easier.

[rmetz74]

I did too, it was fantastic.

My boyfriend didn't watch the debate, but when he saw the 'I always get the first question' and 'denounce vs. reject' things, he turned to me and sai, "jeez, someone's defensive!"

[SamanthaJaneSalem]

Campbell Brown did a good job moderating and the SNL Obama didn't even look or sound like the real Obama-- so the whole thing is just part of Clinton's "kitchen sink." In order to be funny it has to be partially true.

[WH]

I thought the SNL skit was funny, but far from the truth.

The reason Hillary has received so much attention and was frequently given the first question is because the media has been trying to treat her as a frontrunner (even after she lost 11 contests in a row).

They are reluctantly referring to Obama as the frontrunner now, but even so there are still articles and stories about how Clinton may make a comeback.

If the roles were reversed you would see a very different story in the media.

[dawlishgal]

Clinton would have complained too if she had been second to be asked a question. She is looking for stuff to make her seem like a victim. A very bad strategy for a political campaign, especially one for which the flack was paid two million dollars to promote HER, not to make her seem like a fool.

It's that loyalty to cronies thing...first the hapless healthcare crowd, now it's the corporate DLC pals. Is there any indication at all that this ISN'T the way she would run her White House, any sign that she would be more interested in competence than in cronyism?

[Didi47]

Dazzling because the press made it so. The American press also does NOT report deliberate lies Obama tell the American public - even though it's all over Canadian News: Here's a short sample of how Obama is PLAYING the public!

A new report from Canada's CTV says that according to Canadian government sources, a senior official from the Obama campaign secretly assured a Canadian official not to take Obama's talk about threatening to pull out of NAFTA too seriously, noting that it was just "campaign rhetoric":
Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs did not strictly deny the allegations, only saying that it sounded implausible to him. "Senator Obama does not make promises he doesn't intend to keep," Gibbs added. Clinton campaign officials strongly denied similar allegations.
If this report catches on, it has the potential undermine Obama's outreach to working-class whites in Ohio, many of whom still resent the Clinton Administration's passage of the free trade deal back in the 90s. It could also take the steam out of the Obama campaign's claims that Hillary favored NAFTA, something she denies.(And which has time and again been proven to be true. Hillary NEVER favored NAFTA - ergo another Obama LIE. This guy will do and say ANYTHING to win. Like shooting fish in a barrel.)

[AnninCA]

A noticeable symptom of Obamamania is the disappearance of a sense of humor.

It's the reaction to the religious overtones, no doubt.

You have to stifle laughter in church. :)

[rmetz74]

I don't know, we thought this was pretty hillarous...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/28/the-daily-show-reports-_n_88866.html

[accountability]

well I thought it was hilarious.
Equally Has funny is Matthews trying to say that it was coming down on CNN. It was a comment on all the media not on Campbell Brown and CNN. It just so happened that CNN had just broadcast the debate.
I think they should have had Chris Matthews sitting in the audience with Olbermann and schuster telling them he had a thrill running up his leg.

That would have been spit take funny.

[MizLiz]

I thought the skit was hilarious, and the actor portraying Obama did very well. You can bet he'll get plenty of opportunities to fine-tune his portrayal. Oh Hillary, you really put your foot in it. All that whining and carping is going to go viral in no time.

[mageduley]

Aw SNL is just caving to Hillary whining that "everybody is against her". Because SNL did another skit about her early on,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pd8_Fjj2uuk

they only had to be fair and do one that favored Hillary. The problem is, there is no truth to this new one. Why the hell whine that you get the first question? Most candidates would relish being able to set the tone in the debate instead of playing defense. It is astounding what she will complain about.

[candlewax]

The "actor" playing Obama was horrible but I guess that's okay when the main point is just to highlight the "plight" of poor Hillary. New York writers helping out the NY senator, that's all it seemed like to me.

[londubh]

I don't know what MSM you guys are watching, but Obama isn't getting the royal treatment. MSM is probably annoyed that Hillary isn't behaving like their MSM darling. She actually has more in common with them than Obama does. The problem is Hillary didn't expect a real race for the primary.

[Centauri]

Obama told the canadians to ignore his NAFTA comments. What a demogauge. Here is the link.


www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LtbLEKHsi0

[mageduley]

Low-level sources also suggested the Clinton campaign may have given a similar warning to Ottawa

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/

[DanielJarv]

Let's face it. United States is still a sexist country and women are looked down as weak and incapable of leadership. For most men women have difficulty doing their work since they periodically have emotional imbalance. I personally experienced it in the office setting. I was in sales then. We have a female manager who is basically a can do attitude and will never take no for answer and she gets things done. During conferences, whenever she discusses the need to achieve a target quota and feel passionate about it, the male chauvinists will say derogatory remarks behind her back like “Ms….. is pushing us again, must be the period, huh”.

A lot of male in the electorate will not admit to it but subconsciously, whenever a female above their rank asks them to accomplish a task, they silently say “who the f** are you, bi**”. It is no surprise that the same is being reflected in the current election.

Also it is a fact that the media, through the idiot box called television, dictates who to vote for in this coming election.

The same media who promoted a uniter and stained Al Gore eight years ago. The same media who kept quite about the election anomalies in Florida. The same media who kept quiet in the run up to the Iraq war. The same media who made Howard Dean look bad when he rallied his followers almost four years ago so the vulnerable John Kerry will make it to the nomination. The same media who pictured John Kerry as a flip flopper and made him lose the election. The same media who kept quiet about the anomalies in Ohio.

Now the media is at it again. For almost a year now they have stained the Clintons and constantly harped on the negatives while putting Obama on a pedestal as if he is pure and holy and devoid of sins.

I have always been a fan of Keith Olberman and never missed any of his shows until of late when I noticed that he kept hitting Sen Clinton and treated her with disdain while singing song of praises for Sen Obama. It is a pity. Keith should have stayed neutral. Unfortunately he proved himself no different from the man he loves to chastise – Bill Oreilly. The only difference is that they are in the opposite side of the political spectrum and have opposite agenda.

Let me give an example of the latest media partiality. A civil rights leader jump ships to Obama camp because he has to follow the will of his constituents and it is featured in the news every fifteen minutes. Now, how come nobody in the media ever mentioned the fact that John Kerry, Edward Kennedy and Deval Patrick haven’t changed their vote from Obama to Clinton to follow the will of their constituents?? Is it because it may hurt the chances of Sen Obama and hinder the bandwagon for him?

[rmetz74]

"...since they periodically have emotional imbalance."

THAT is incredibly sexist (and absurd.)

"Now, how come nobody in the media ever mentioned the fact that John Kerry, Edward Kennedy and Deval Patrick haven"t changed their vote from Obama to Clinton to follow the will of their constituents?? Is it because it may hurt the chances of Sen Obama and hinder the bandwagon for him?"

No, it's because it would be ridiculous to write a news story about people NOT doing something.

I have news for you. The media bias against Hillary is a) exaggerated by people who can't accept that she's losing because of her own bad strategy, and b) isn't about her being a woman, it's about her being a Clinton. You'll notice that every time Bill opens his mouth, they jump all over him too. They were a part of the biggest, juiciest, most profitable political scandal in recent history. (And Hillary loved the media 'bias' when it was all about her being the frontrunner. She's only started calling foul when she fell behind.)

Finally, wouldn't it make sense to elect someone who generally inspires people to agree with and give him/her the benefit of the doubt, over someone who inspires people to dig their heels into the ground? If the bias is as bad as you say, it wouldn't go away if HRC got elected - and then everything she tried to do would be thwarted by it. I'd rather have someone who can actually get things done, bias or not.

[mageduley]

"I have always been a fan of Keith Olberman and never missed any of his shows until of late when I noticed that he kept hitting Sen Clinton and treated her with disdain"

I love Keith Olbermann as well. His special comments are especially poignent. He calls out the fear mongering and deciet of the Bush and Republican machine.

It is no wonder then that he has disdain for her and I know exactly why. It happened during Hillary campaigning in NH. Here is his report. Her GOP campaign tactics are what disgusted any self respecting democrat. But see for yourself. Keith was disgusted, and so was I. Go past the almost crying part it is about 2:20 into the clip. That did it for me. And anyone with any kind of distain for the Republican tactics of using FEAR to scare up votes would feel the same.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BB4Vvgn_4k

[AnninCA]

I heard Bill O'Reilly yesterday argue with a caller who said, "Hey, I was in the Union and heard Hillary stumping for NAFTA, and I can tell you that we all knew she wasn't gung-ho and had some very real reservations."

O'Reilly's response? Then why did she vote for it?

I am NOT kidding you!

The guy was actually embarassed to point out to O'Reilly that Hillary was First Lady and obviously didn't have a vote.

That's how effective Obama's lies have been.

Can you believe it?

I was shocked.

O'Reilly then said, "I'll have my people check it out."

*gulp*

[accountability]

Can you explainn for me why they haven't covered Obama admitting that the SC rac card and the continuation of it came from the Obama campaign and surrogates?
Obama admitted it so why hasn't it been covered.
He said he regretted it in hindsight when he was "confronted" ( an overstatement) by Tim Russert who showed 4 pages of annotated talking points that came from the Obama campaign showing how this or that word, statement could be shown or construed to be racist and directions on how to talk about it.

This is changing politics as usual?

This is fair media coverage?

People keep saying if the situation were reversed you would see a whole other story coming out.

Yes, you would. There would be even more malignant hate and vitriol from the so called Progressives against Hillary and their would be boycotts,protests, accusation of racism, and the normal hatred of MSM you read on the Progressive blogs.

Apparently the MSM isn't really so onerous after all, not the corporate whore, right wing tools that you usually portray them as.

I have never been more disappointed in my political party membership or ashamed of the people who call themselves Progressives.

The self indulgent, sanctimonious, self righteous malevolence and willing collusion with typical neo-con divisiveness is the height of perfidy.

The injustice and hypocrisy is stunning.

[mageduley]

I noticed you did not address the fact that she said "It was no accident that Al queda chose to test the British PM on his first day. That the terrorist watch our elections closer than we do. She told us not to forget that we are hiring a president who will know what to do if terrorists strike on DAY ONE!

Sounds like a BUSH ADMINISTRATION tactic to me. FISA anyone?

So please explain how a DEMOCRAT RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT can possibly explain SCARING THE CRAP OUT OF PEOPLE FOR THEIR VOTE.

We have had one of those, thank you very much.

Keith Olbermann hits it right on the head.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BB4Vvgn_4k

[JohnJames]

Regarding women and gay people as inferior seems to be part of the mentality of all countries that imagine they have a "universal" message - always conveniently self-serving. Besides the US, think of Russia, Iran and Saudi Arabia. Now think of the Czech Republic, Ireland and Iceland. See the difference?

[AnninCA]

Well, we have the worst mortality rate of any country in the Western World, too, along with embarassingly high infant mortality rates.

There's no question that we do not cherish people or really care much.

We just want our bluetooth connections in our SUV's.

[candlewax]

and one more thing...

Obama has an impressive record for his 8 years as a state senator. In fact he has more experience as an elected official that Hillary Clinton, 12 years to her 8 come November.

[mageduley]

Could it be that the MSM and America is sick of Hillary acting like a GOP operative. We saw it early on in NH. Keith Olbermann caught her in her disgusting display.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BB4Vvgn_4k

Obama has completely remained above the fray and people like him for that. The world has disinterated into Brittney Spears American Idol morons. That is why Obama is a breath of fresh air. Hillary and the GOP treat us like we are morons. Obama at least respects the American people. I think that would be the best quality in a president, dont you?

[candlewax]

Obama does respect our intelligence, I agree. And he understands that a true movement comes from the ground up, not top down. The people in control will never willingly relinquish it... they may make minor changes to appease the masses but nothing more. To me, Hillary is a guardian of the status quo. Barack Obama symbolizes the beginning for real change. And he understands this, he says "We are the change we've been waiting for."

Below is a youtube video that came out just last week when, because of redistricting in Texas that favored disenfranchisement over ease of voting, resulted in thousands marching to their polling location for early voting that was over 7 miles away. They not only voted, they made a point of showing what the establishment will do to keep their power, in this instance by making it more difficult to vote.

http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=718

"We are the change we've been waiting for." Barack Obama

[tehriaz]

are you fucking kidding me? obama is turning this race into american fucking idol.

[Centauri]

Obama told the canadians in advance to ignore his NAFTA comments. What a demogauge. Here is the link.


www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LtbLEKHsi0

[mageduley]

Low-level sources also suggested the Clinton campaign may have given a similar warning to Ottawa

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/

[WH]

Nice comment spam.

[mageduley]

UPDATE THIS JUST IN FROM CANADA!!!!!!!
Canadian Embassy: Report On Obama And NAFTA Is False
By Greg Sargent - February 28, 2008, 12:47PM
Canadian Embassy: Report On Obama And NAFTA Is False

Roy Norton, the minister of public affairs for the Canadian embassy, is flatly denying that any Obama campaign official spoke to the Canadian ambassador in recent days or told him that Obama's anti-NAFTA stump speech is merely "campaign rhetoric."

"No, none," Norton told me when I asked him if Michael Wilson, Canada's ambassador to the U.S., had spoken to any Obama advisers recently. He added: "Neither before the Ohio debate nor since has any presidential campaign called Ambassador Wilson about NAFTA."
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/canadian_embassy_report_on_oba.php
Just goes to show a lie can get around the world before the truth gets its boots on

[rmetz74]

I wish he would point that out directly.

[anghiari]

Perhaps Downy could use the following as a premise for his next SNL show

If Hillary Clinton wins in 2008 And Bill Clinton is 'appointed' to fill her Senate Seat And either of them live to retire... (together or alone)

they would get...two US Presidential retirement checks, two US Senate retirement checks,and A retirement check from the State of Arkansas .

About the only thing they MIGHT NOT get is... A Social Security Check....

But I wouldn't bet on it.... I understand ole Bill has earned $40,000,000 in the past six years. What a guy! AND THE REST OF THE STORY...

Hillary Clinto, as a New York State Senator, N comes under the 'Congressional Retirement and Staffing Plan,' which means that even if she never gets re-elected, She STILL receives her Congressional salary until she dies. (Would it not be nice if all Americans Were pension eligible after only 4 years?)

If Bill outlives her, He then inherits HER salary until HE dies.

He is already getting his Presidential salary until he dies.

If Hillary outlives Bill, She also gets HIS salary until she dies. Guess who pays for that?

It's common knowledge that in order for Hillary To establish NY residency, They purchased a million dollar-plus house In upscale Chappaqu, New York. Makes sense! They are entitled to Secret Service protection for life.

Here is where it becomes even more interesting. Their mortgage payments hover at around $10,000 per month.

BUT, an extra residence 'had' to be built within the acreage to house The Secret Service agents.

The Clintons' charge The Federal government $10,000 monthly rent for the use of that extra residence, which is about equal to their mortgage payment.

This means that we taxpayers,are paying for the Clintons' salaries, mortgage, transportation, and security, as well as the salaries for their 12 person staff -- and, it is all perfectly legal!

[tbone99]

So you're saying that since we have to pay that anyway , we'd save money by voting against Obama ?

[dlkincaid]

There is a myth afront - Obama is nothing like King and everyone, including the MEDIA. The MEDIA needed a hero and god forbid they care anything about the country. The sanction Bush and look at where we are. The destroyed, or tried to, Gore and his comeback makes them look like idiots. SNL did a good take on Campbell Brown and the other CNN clowns, but the nation is in awe of an African American, who has transcended race so much that he can't even be seen in the room of several Blacks (thus his snub of the State of the Black Union). We can vote for him, but he can't be seen with us (I think not - he will never get my vote). But I am a Black female - he wouldn't need me anyway.

[Centauri]

Obama told the canadians to ignore his NAFTA comments. What a demogauge. Here is the link.


www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LtbLEKHsi0

[mageduley]

Low-level sources also suggested the Clinton campaign may have given a similar warning to Ottawa

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/

[junglejane]

What was remarkable about the SNL skit is that it didn't attack Obama so much as it attacked the media. It simply portrayed Obama as someone who is going along with and benefiting from all of the bias. Yet, the Obama supporters act like it was a vicious attack on their candidate. The guy playing Obama barely even said anything. Of course, these Obama supporters are the same people who think it would be fair to let Obama play himself on SNL. So consider the source.

[foneric]

It is an attack on Sen. Obama. It is the same attack that they have been making all along. That is that he hasn't had to answer the tough questions and he isn't qualified because all he does is give speeches. I also don't think that the media has been unfair to Sen. Clinton. If she does something that is worthy of negative coverage is the medias fault that they cover it?

[mikekev58]

It's called satire, writing something very large in a way that mocks something that has a kernel of truth to it.
SNL has always, or at least at its best, done political humor. They did skits on the Bush/Perot/Clinton debates back in 92, and then Clinton/Dole in '96.
And if the SNL is considered an attack on Obama, I think you're overly sensitive. He's going to be made fun of, so get used to it.

[Centauri]

Obama told the canadians to ignore his NAFTA comments. What a demogauge. Here is the link.


www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LtbLEKHsi0

[MutualDisdain]

For some of us who used to be fans of SNL, we see this type of "message" writing a symptom of the disease that SNL currently has.

We would much rather the humor came before the message. I happen to agree that Obama is getting a free ride from the press, but I am so tired of SNL's political agenda BS. I don't mind comedy having a message so long as it is actually funny.

[mshawn]

I didn't see it as a vicious attack on Obama. I saw it as a defense of Lorne Michael's choice for president, Hillary Clinton. The tone of the skit just seemed a bit heavy-handed, and then Tina Fey endorsed Hillary in the news segment, which sort of violates the rules of political satire.

I don't think there's a media bias in either direction, really. The media is too busy trying to find its ass with both hands to be bias. They just file whatever story is juiciest and requires the least amount of work.

I think the larger point is that Hillary Clinton is blaming everyone but herself and her campaign for her demise. She blames it on red states that don't matter. She blames it on black people who are voting because of race. She blames it on the media for being bias. And what has become abundantly clear is that Hillary's not just pretending to be dumbfounded by Obama's success. She is really so out of touch with the American electorate that she truly doesn't understand why Obama's message is resonating with voters.

Hillary believed in her own inevitability, and she never really devised a legitimate campaign strategy. That's a Bush-esque "We'll be greeted as liberators" sort of incompetence. Being a fighter is about more than being tough. It's about using the right tactics to win the fight, and Hillary has shown through the years that she is woefully inept at doing anything but being combative toward all those who dare oppose her.

[cameoz]

Yeah, as Al Franken pointed out, if there's a media bias, it's toward laziness.

[AnninCA]

Obamamaniacs are called that for a reason. I agree.

[MutualDisdain]

"It's like when the mom is in the grocery store and the kids rush up with this brand new cereal saying `We've got to get it, we've got to get it!'" Downey said. "The mom is the one who is supposed to read the box, check the ingredients. She's not supposed to go, `Oh, my gosh, this is great! It has marshmallows and chocolates and sprinkles."

Thank goodness we have James Downey's hack writing ability to protect us from those evil, sugary politics!

[tbone99]

I will support any Dem now running, .I am thorougly committed to get take down the Repugs and all that they stand for.The present candidates don't differ enough but they are who we have.

The truth is I like McCains folksiness and self depreciating humor most of all the candidates. However I am not voting on Ms or Mr Congeniality or Best Smile,but who can deliver on the issues I believe in - decreased militarism, corporatism, and corruption.

I admire Hilary's ability to get up again and again and keep going against all odds and some very vicious media. She is commited for the long haul and is not a quitter.She should get more credit for that.!

[UkieOlie]

McCain's "folksiness" is a lot like Obama's charisma. The important issues are what's inside the package. McCain is the leader of the Jack Bauer Republicans, forget what he used to say about torture.

[apresdeluge]

The SNL writers and producers got it exactly right. The media has been captivated by Obama from the beginning. They have cited his "rock star" image for over a year. Young voters flocked to him like the latest hit TV reality show. It has become a mania.

My guess is the phenomenon is the result of our consumer driven economy where Madison Avenue rules and Americans are encouraged to buy the "new and improved" product. Chris Matthews even used the word "new" to describe the media's infatuation with Obama. I just hope that Democrats don't end up with a sever case of buyer's remorse when this is all done.

[k6007]

I'll take my chances on that apre, I base my decisions on pass performances rather than
popular emotional sentiment.