Page 1 of 2
The Debate..... as Seen By The New Yorker
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 7:05 pm
by JALLEN
The cover of the next issue....
Re: The Debate..... as Seen By The New Yorker
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 7:12 pm
by 77346
The empty chair would have done much better than BHO

Re: The Debate..... as Seen By The New Yorker
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 9:24 pm
by The Annoyed Man
Yeah.....well they also said that he (Romney) was a big fat liar about everything.
Re: The Debate..... as Seen By The New Yorker
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 10:00 pm
by C-dub
The Annoyed Man wrote:Yeah.....well they also said that he (Romney) was a big fat liar about everything.
So, they got it half right.

Re: The Debate..... as Seen By The New Yorker
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 8:41 am
by Jumping Frog
I don't waste my time reading the New Yorker and could care less about its opinion.
Had former girlfriend in the early 80's who was a regular reader/subscriber. I read a few issues, clearly recognized the enemy, and haven't looked at it since.
Actually the difference in perspective between someone who likes the New Yorker versus someone who consider it the enemy is a good predictor of why she became a former girlfriend.
Funny cover though.
Re: The Debate..... as Seen By The New Yorker
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 11:55 am
by bizarrenormality
Jumping Frog wrote:I don't waste my time reading the New Yorker and could care less about its opinion.
OK but it would be more useful to tell us how much less you could care if you tried.

Re: The Debate..... as Seen By The New Yorker
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 1:48 pm
by Stripes Dude
The enemy is starting to freak out. Rasmussen polls are moving in the right direction - and I am inclined to believe they are skewed toward dems. Who else is home waiting to answer the phone, or taking polls online all day - dems on the government meal plan, that's who. Obama gave me a phone lady is getting way more than the phone......
Re: The Debate..... as Seen By The New Yorker
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 4:43 pm
by JALLEN
Maybe we should have paid more attention to this one:

Re: The Debate..... as Seen By The New Yorker
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 5:21 pm
by Texas Dan Mosby
Didn't watch the debate, as I believe there is nothing TO debate concerning the need to elect a new POTUS.
Nothing AT ALL.
However, I KNEW the POTUS must have gotten a proverbial tail "whoopin" due to the fact that there was a COMPLETE absence of liberal celebration and "noise" following the debate around the web.
Silence speaks louder than words sometimes....
I still don't have the faith to believe there will be enough of my fellow citizens voting against our current POTUS to remove him from office, but at least it won't be the blow out I thought it would be originally. That's something, I guess.
I foresee an election that will mirror the events that unfolded in 2000, with the victory going to the current POTUS based on a court decision.
We'll see.
Re: The Debate..... as Seen By The New Yorker
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 8:00 pm
by rubio
The thing I noticed on the New Yorker covers is more than 30% inflation in just 4 years of Obama.
Re: The Debate..... as Seen By The New Yorker
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:25 pm
by atticus
King Hussein is an empty suit in an empty chair. Soon we will have an empty white house, waiting for its new occupants. Whoever is president come January, the job will be a huge mess, thanks to Barry. At least MR would be able to make better Supreme Court appointments, and to strengthen our national defense. Improving the domestic scene will take some doing.
Re: The Debate..... as Seen By The New Yorker
Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2012 9:16 am
by sjfcontrol
Re: The Debate..... as Seen By The New Yorker
Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2012 9:38 am
by Oldgringo
rubio wrote:The thing I noticed on the New Yorker covers is more than 30% inflation in just 4 years of Obama.
Good Eye!

Re: The Debate..... as Seen By The New Yorker
Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2012 4:01 pm
by tacticool
I heard that Ryan wanted to use a laser pointer during the debate but they wouldn't allow it for safety reasons. They were worried the VP would hurt himself chasing the dot.
Re: The Debate..... as Seen By The New Yorker
Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2012 6:59 pm
by JALLEN
I have long thought that they should have let well enough alone and let him keep giving Neil Kinnock's speeches, as they were far better than anything Cackling Joe would have said.
Ben Franklin told a story about a preacher who showed up in Philadelphia, and quickly attracted a following for the quality of his sermons. When it was discovered that he was parroting the sermons of others, many quit the congregation in disgust, but Franklin kept up his support, preferring good sermons of others to bad ones of the preacher's own devising.