but the big difference between Colbert and Stewart is that I could see Colbert doing something similar (to the correspondent’s dinner) to, say, Clinton.

Correspondents’ Dinner

Wikipedia Article

Non sequitur. Although, you could have figured it out based on the title of this diary.

Come on, Jon – nearly everyone puts up OT fanposts and fanshots. Don’t act like it’s something extraordinary.

The right kind of OT posts to be beneficial. You learn whose opinions you trust and value on this site, and the right kind of OT discussions (other sports, entertainment, some politics) lead to some quality stuff. Naturally, you don’t want to overload the diary section with OT crap, but a solid topic or a sporadic nonsense thread can spice it up around here.

We’re all here because we love the Rangers, but how many times can we really talk about Salty’s defense or MY’s range. Some randomness helps out, especially this time of year.

I didn’t say that it wasn’t funny because there in an agenda. Obviously Colbert’s show is a big joke about conservatives, but it works because that is the joke. The Daily Show is a fundamentally different joke, laughing at news and politicians in general by finding (or creating) humor in the daily news. Its a great idea, but not one that really fits with infusing a political agenda. I think it just kidn of sucks the innocent fun out of it and makes it too serious. Which makes it unfunny. At least that is my opinion.

Maybe it is because I originally watched the Daily Show in the Craig Kilborn days and early Jon Stewart days that I don’t find the current show as funny. I’m just an old fogey.

I agreed with the last half of your thought, but I could never vote for a man that has voted against the life of a unborn child. Or who counts among his peers an unrepentant terrorist, and has a bigot for a spiritual advisor. “Change we can believe in” has been the biggest “bumper sticker” slogan in over 20 years. What does he want to change, and what does he want to change it to?

I have 5 major agendas that I use to make a decision on a candidate.

1) National Security: In the last 16 years the military has been slashed to the point that we have barely been able to fight a 2 front war, and by the standards that our grandfathers fought under in WWII these are small. I want a President who’s 1st mission is to rebuild and strengthen our military to the point, that a moments notice we can send troops to any fight in the world. This is how Reagan brought the Soviet Union to its knees in the late 80’s

2) Energy Policy: There is enough oil, natural gas, and coal to keep this country powered and on the move well in to the next century, but for more than 30 years, one party has block our ability to put it to good use. I will only support a candidate that
    a) would fight to use the resource available to us on our own soil
    b) rebuild the energy infrastructure in theis country to include new refineries and the use of nuclear power as a source for
         electrical production
     c) has a SENSIBLE plan to bring alternative energy to the market

3) Life Policy: I HAVE NOT AND WILL NEVER support, endorse, or vote for a candidate that believes that a child is due the rights ond freedoms of this country, until it draws its first breath outside the womb.

4) Tax policy: The constitution require the government to spend or allocat money for one purpose only, and that is for the raising an army and navy for the defense of this great nation. In that regard it irks me to know end when a politician tell me that I have to give up my hard earned money to the government so that it can provide for lazy and worthless individual that would rather live off the government dole than support himself. Having said all that I look for a candidate that believes in and supports reducing the tax rates on every individual in theis country. As an aside to that, never buy the notion that your taxes can lowered , if only we taxed the rich and corporations more. For one, I never was hired for a job by a poor person, and corporations don’t pay taxes, that simply raise their pass the cost on to us, the consumer.

5) Immigration policy: This tends to be the 3rd rail of politics, but I believe that we have ot secure our borders. I support a guest worker program, but only if it is tied in with welfare reform, where recipients are offered a job before it is allowed to be filled by a guest worker.

that McCain is like 70% a communist. Probably brainwashed as a POW to be the Manchurian Candidate.

I’m not one who likes to use pat statements like that, but I find the belief that McCain is a “maverick” to be ridiculous. He’s no more a maverick than Biden is.