RECENT POSTS
- Free Bird
- The "Good" War
- The Presidential Planner
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
- White House State Dinner – Who Made the Exclusive Guest List?
- Admiral Mike Mullen To Geneva for START Talks
- VP Biden to Indian Prime Minister: “You’re the Hottest Ticket in Town”
- FLOTUS on the State Dinner: Like a Swan, "Calm and Serene Above Water, But We're Paddling Like Mad, Going Crazy Underneath"
- White House State Dinner: The Menu, Entertainment, and Decor
- Dan Pfeiffer, White House Blogger
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
SNL Skits Hillary Clinton Won't Be Referencing Anytime Soon
February 28, 2008 8:42 AM
Since Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., thinks a "Saturday Night Live" skit skewering media infatuation with Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., is so poignant, perhaps it's worth mentioning other skits from that show should be considered authoritative sources as well?
The show, it should be pointed out, has done skits in the past poking fun of the media being unfair to her during debates...
Such as this one from eight years ago where "Tim Russert" is portrayed as being unfair to her during a Senate debate.
But then there are some other skits that maybe Clinton wouldn't find as amusing
Such as the brilliant one from last year where Amy Poehler as "Hillary Clinton" discusses her Iraq war vote on "Hardball."
"Chris, I think most Democrats know me. They understand that my support for the war was always insincere," Poehler-as-Clinton says. "Of course, knowing what we know now, that you could vote against the war and still be elected president, I would never have pretended to support it."
Or this one where "Hillary Clinton," played by Ana Gasteyer, gives incriminating information about Sen. Phil Gramm, R-Texas, to Larry Flynt.
Or this one from eight years ago where "she" announces her Senate candidacy as the "new" Hillary, contrasted with the old Hillary..."driven by blind ambition and fueled by rage over her wasted potential and her husband's chronic skank-pronging"...
Or this 1993 skit with Jan Hooks playing "Clinton" in "Real Stories of the Arkansas Highway Patrol" ('nuff said)...
And on and on...
SNL -- the new authority on politics, according to the Clinton campaign. Right?
-jpt
February 28, 2008 in Weblogs | Permalink | Share | User Comments (58)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
The media does not "bash" Hillary. Hillary brings the negatives upon herself with her selfish, slash-and-burn tactics. Hillary and Bill are weak and corrupt, they have NO power within themselves so have to get it from others so they can feel powerful. They don't care about our country, and they even care less about its citizens. Those of you who think Hillary will work for you are delusional. Just ask New Yorkers; she has done NOTHING for them! She has not done anything to help the impoverished or the middle class. She has been too busy naming postoffices, libraries, and courthouses, and attending funerals to find time for the poor. Hillary is an insult to women who have reached their goals on their own, not by riding somebody else's back and coattails. Hillary is not fit to be President; heck she cannot even manage her campaign and campaign finances and you believe she can lead the country?? Wake up from your Clinton slumbers, wipe the Clinton cobwebs from your eyes, and face the truth about Hillary. She is a corrupt, manipulating, lying witch!
Posted by: NinaK | Feb 29, 2008 11:41:20 PM
bushee's for Obama? Nuff' said. Now, this Canadian business in the above post is really troubling.
Posted by: LCF | Feb 29, 2008 10:07:30 PM
jake, the SNL skit was big because the media hasnt been vetting Obama at ALL, it took a sketch comedy show to embarrass some at the media to even pretend to do their jobs without bias and cover both candidates with a skillfull eye...that is why it is so big
also the rampant sexism has been all over the media and many women were glad someone acknowledged it, even in a sketch
Posted by: ginaswo | Feb 29, 2008 1:57:06 PM
Hey folks...reality check! Accidents get more news than sunny days...
Hillary thought she was going to be "Coronated" the Queen. She and Billy boy believed this to their core.
They underestimated the angst, frustration, and utter dis-satisfaction of the USA citizens for politicians in general. They really suk!
Selfish-self centered-ego maniacs while inferiority complexes that do what gets them elected by pandering to whomever they have to. Screw us once they take office!
Well, the people are speaking back! Go home now you liars-cheats-thieves!
I hear the message of "Hope for the future" of our great country and our grandchildren(I have 2, 4 & 6 yr old)!
A very similiar message delivered by Bill Clinton in 1992, only we knew he was a liar and cheat then, we still electe him, we believed his hope too!
Maybe now we have someone who can invite us in, make us part of, and restore our dignity and strength!!!
(PS: I am a 'Bushee 4 Obama')
Posted by: Holy Mackeral | Feb 29, 2008 12:43:32 PM
Does anyone want some butter and jam on Hillary's Campaign Machine? The reason HRC's double digit leads in Texas and Ohio have slipped so badly is that her former monopoly on "the establishment" support evaporated as voters became more familiar with her opponents.
Let's stop the blame game. Voters are not stupid, only under-informed until they see both candidates close to the election dates.
I will choose faith and hope anyday over the devisiveness of of partisian politics of the past. Experience? What experience? Playing the gender or victim card whenever it suits oneself?
Posted by: SilverEagle47 | Feb 29, 2008 7:30:47 AM
Ohh-poor baby. Did Hillary's criticism of the press hurt your feelings.
The press led this country into the war in Iraq with is fawning press coverage of Bush. I think if Hillary gets elected she should do more than criticize them.
Posted by: Bill | Feb 29, 2008 7:21:39 AM
WOW!
I knew that the politics of blame fixing rather than problem fixing was ever present with Hillary Clinton & her supporters.
No wonder Bill Cunningham, Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh & Sean Hannity are now on board the team Clinton local.
Birds of a feather do flock together.
Posted by: paul94611 | Feb 29, 2008 6:08:27 AM
That there media sure is biased against Hillary, no doubt about. It's not like Ted Turner, the biggest media mogul out there, is best friends with Bill Clinton and has received several awards from the Clinton-run DLC, right? And it's not like CNN consistently relays Clinton campaign talking points as soon as they come out of Wolfson's mouth, eh?
Please, stop deluding yourself Clinton supporters. The only reason your candidate is losing is because of her campaign's absolutely horrific mismanagement. From not bothering with caucus states to spending extravagant amounts in the months leading up to Iowa with no concern for a budget, the Clinton campaign has been a train wreck from the start. Stop making excuses for your candidate's failures and accept that she won't be the nominee not because the media is out to get her, but because she's simply a bad nominee.
Posted by: Nick | Feb 29, 2008 4:06:32 AM
SJ, neat imagination you have there.
"Rather than ABC spend so much time trying to bash Hillary, why do they not do some work for a change and get a explanation as to this latest report ****all over the Canadian news.****???
A top staff member for Obama's campaign telephoned Michael Wilson, Canada's ambassador to the United States, and warned him that Obama would speak out against NAFTA, according to Canadian sources.The staff member reassured Wilson that the criticisms would only be campaign rhetoric, and should not be taken at face value."
Funny thing is, the two Largest Newspapers in Canada don't have anything on this supposed telephone call. ???
The US Media has been discussing a great deal more than 'Hillary's actions, her clothes, and SNL.' (BTW, Hillary brought up SNL to prove she is being picked on.)
The media has discussed:
Her inability as the person in charge, to manage her own campaign.
Her loss of 10 Primaries in a row, by double digets at that.
Her frequent mood swings.
Her outright lies. (Vote on the Iraq War that she continued to lie about during 19 Debates)
Her refusal to provide her Tax Returns.
And the list goes on.
These are all indicators that she would make a lousy president, but you think the Media should't remark on them???
On the Otherhand, you think it is fair to blast Obama for not wearing a pin?? One that Hillary doesn't wear either??
He has managed his Campaign better than anyone running for this office in recent history if not forever.
He has won the last 10 Primaries in a row.
He stays calm cool and collected no matter what she throws at him.
Hasn't been caught in a lie yet, despite being accused of doing so numerous times by both Clinton and the Media.
He has provided his Tax Returns as has EVERYONE else on the Campaign trail.
Evidentally you think she shouldn't have to provide hers. Why not? I think it is asinine to not require that all candidates do so BEFORE the Primarys. Rather late to find out someone broke the law after they become a nominee.
It isn't the Media's fault that clinton keeps shooting herself in the foot. They have certainly tried to make hay from each tiny incident they can turn up on Obama. Trouble is, the Public is smarter than that.
Well, actually it isn't just the Media. Even the Clinton Backers have gotten into manufacturing stories, as evidenced by your post. Trouble for Clinton is that these stories are so easy to debunk.
Posted by: Rebecka | Feb 29, 2008 12:58:50 AM
I'm not sure Hillary knows who Hillary really is. Her insincerity and odd personality changes reflect her many years as a professional politician. Her bipolar tendencies could explain why she is so polarizing. It's hard to relate to multiple personalities.
Posted by: Denise | Feb 29, 2008 12:23:05 AM
Yes, because citing a nugget of truth on one skit means you think that SNL is an authority in politics. Very good leap, that makes tons of sense.
Posted by: njguy | Feb 28, 2008 8:18:38 PM
just reposting a good note...
I believe in the basic wisdom of the American voters. I feel, however, that the media's relentless barrage against Hillary does a disservice to the political process and insults American voters. Going back to 1993 for SNL skits to bash Hillary is stooping very low. I wonder how many people have been driven into the Hillary camp by the media's irrational hatred.
Posted by: Alice | Feb 28, 2008 6:25:21 PM
To: H. Aslan Aslani-Far
You are totally right about the first election of Bush's first term! I should be clearer in my comment that I am talking about the second term for Bush, when he won fair and square due to the people's vote.
Thanks for pointing out the difference. This is the kind of exchanges that helps us sorting out facts vs. fiction.
Posted by: Sylvie | Feb 28, 2008 3:49:18 PM
First the press created Obama, that is why they are supporting him over Clinton, but if Clinton wins the primary they will act like everything they reported was fantasy and support her.
So right now she is getting a taste of what the Republicans and our troops get an unfair reporting!! by a Liberal Controlled press.
Posted by: spock | Feb 28, 2008 3:17:23 PM
Jodi: As a follow-up...your argument that the press would rather have anyone beat Hillary brings up two interesting questions: (1) If this is so, how will this change in 4 years to compel a Hillary run in 2012? and, (2) If this is true, how come Sen. Clinton is one of the 2 remaining candidates in the race? Why isn't it John Edwards and Obama, or Kucinich and Obama left standing? As well, it discounts the fact that Sen. Clinton came out of the gate as the frontrunner. To claim that it is the press that is destroying her is to gloss over the fact that she is simply not getting her message across.
Posted by: H. Aslan Aslani-Far | Feb 28, 2008 2:56:02 PM
Jodi: As a lifelong Democrat in Massachussetts you'd rather vote for Sen. McCain than Sen. Obama? Really? That sounds petty, but, if you'd like to continue helping run this country into the ground, I'd guess that's your perogative...but, frankly, it is absolutely mindblowing...tax cuts for the rich, another 5...10...50...100 years in Iraq.
Posted by: H. Aslan Aslani-Far | Feb 28, 2008 2:46:20 PM
The press has clearly set it sights on having anyone beat Hillary because they know despite the polls they like to show that Hillary will easily beat McCain and Obama does not have a chance. The press was just waiting untill they are sure Hillary is out before stomping on Obama.
This bears repeating and investigating (from a previous post)
"A top staff member for Obama's campaign telephoned Michael Wilson, Canada's ambassador to the United States, and warned him that Obama would speak out against NAFTA, according to Canadian sources.The staff member reassured Wilson that the criticisms would only be campaign rhetoric, and should not be taken at face value."
The press will get what they want if Obama is nominated.......McCain wins!!!I am a life time democrat but will not remain part of party that can be had by the press or by a great speaker with no accomplishments. I am a Massachusettes resident and will vote McCain if my option is McCain vs Obama. I would hope that Hillary would not accept a VP position under Obama since it is a losing ticket and instead hope she runs again in 4 years.
Posted by: jodi | Feb 28, 2008 2:38:39 PM
Sylvie...you have no idea what you're talking about...don't blame the Bush disaster on a public being blackmailed, blame it on President Bush's brother handing him the election in Florida, or the conservative Supreme Court ruling against VP Gore, or on the fact that that egocentric boob Ralph Nader stole 97,000 votes from Gore in Florida where the margin was less than 600 votes.
Posted by: H. Aslan Aslani-Far | Feb 28, 2008 2:36:14 PM
to SJ: please don't resign to Obama's nomination. Sometimes the 'people's voice' is wrong because the voice is being emotionally blackmailed instead of by rational thoughts. Just remember what the people's voice gave us, Bush, because we were emotionally blackmailed by fear.
Let's do what we can to inject rational thoughts into this election. With Lewis, the highly regard civil right leader, not only stabs his friend in the back, but also stomps on another minority, a white woman, has publicly declared that this election is all about race; it is all about putting a black man in the white house because if he truly cares about the voters then he should not endorse anybody until all the votes are counted. I don't care about which candidate these delegates support but I do care to see that their words mean something.
Don't give up because we can still show the democrats that they can and will loose the general election with the ways they are doing. Nancy Pelosi claims neutrality yet all her lieutenants are going around to pressure Clinton's superdelegates to switch...that is just shameful and deceitful.
I would like to hear both good and bad news about both candidates so that we can make an informed decision rather than an irrational and emotional decision.
Since the media can't seem to do its job, it is up to us to find tidbits and share with each other so that we can sort out facts vs. fiction.
Posted by: Sylvie | Feb 28, 2008 1:51:28 PM
You seem to miss the point is that SNL tends to make fun of the obvious and the ridiculous! Media, instead of wakes up and redeems themselves by doing their job at covering the two candidates in a balanced way, misses the point again and continues to be led by the nose by Obama.
It is just shameful attitude!
Posted by: Sylvie | Feb 28, 2008 1:38:40 PM
Post a comment


