It’s not every day that a Colorado politician makes it onto “Saturday Night Live.” Any Polsters out there remember the last time a Colorado politico was on SNL?
The joke is in reference to Buck’s disastrous appearance on “Meet the Press” a week ago. We’d say it’s a pretty good bet that you’ve said something seriously significant (alliteration rules!) once your statement crosses over into mainstream popular culture.
B. Why is this relevant? Or rather, what is this relevant to?
I know, right?
How is this not at least noteworthy?
But if you really need more of an explanation, this is pretty strong evidence of just how damaging Buck’s statement has become. When something you say or do crosses over into popular culture, then you know there is a serious impact.
THAT makes things super relevant!!!!
re: “When something you say or do crosses over into popular culture, then you know there is a serious impact.” Does it? What is the impact in this case–the SNL clip, I’m referring to?
The only evidence I could point to on this subject is the hundreds of posts on this site re not voting for either candidate on grounds of Obama’s actions on DADT.
Is there some convincing evidence that social issues are going to determine the outcome of the CO Senate contest in 2010–evidence besides some parties’ wishful thinking?
to what do you attribute Buck’s falling numbers in the polls? I think it’s the social issues, though probably the “buyer’s remorse” comments more than what he said on MTP.
…a large flock of voters stampeded straight out of the service area, calling results of its “our-poll-includes-young-‘uns-with-cell-polls” survey into question. The stampeders evidently were among the millions — no, tens of millions — who skipped Saturday Night Live in order to be sure not to miss even second of Meet the Press, not in order to find out whether Buckaroo/BoyBennet have any substantial ideas to address the economic morass –who cares? –but to find out: “What does Ken Buck (laugh track here) think about…” ‘Cause if you don’t ask, he won’t tell.
as a volunteer, JO. Social issues are pushing Dem and Unaffiliated women into Bennet’s camp in droves and the numbers prove it in polls.
This is funny. Okay? If you don’t get it, maybe you’re just too darn old to be watching SNL. Go work some GOTV and make a difference, for a change.
“This is funny,” okay, but no one wants to explain it. I am wondering why. Could there be some sexual innuendo here?
Sort of reminds me of a famous photo of a march in Memphis, 1968 (striking sanitation workers, the reason MLK was in Memphis that infamous day and year) of a marcher carrying a sign: I Am A Man.
A man just like you, who deserves to be treated in the same way by the law. We can all understand that. We can all sympathize with that. Some of are inclined to step off the curb and join that man.
OTOH, I’ve watched Gay Pride marches in NYC and SF. Gotta say, I didn’t get the impression that the emphasis was: “We are people just like you.”
Mixing sex and politics is a bit of a tricky thing. I am wondering how inside jokes (if that’s what was on SNL) plays into this. As for being on National TeeVee, gee whiz lookee here Ma, I admit it doesn’t do much for me.
As for being too old to watch SNL, possibly so, but luckily, I’m able to see reruns of Ozzie and Harriet when I’m taking a break from studying the Constitution (O Revered Document That We Love).
I was assuming that you weren’t serious since this is a pretty easy joke to figure out. Again, if you really don’t get it, it might just be a bit too young of a show for you.
And I am not Man. I am woman.
“A man just like you.”
No, not “you, Middle of the Road.” Just like “you white folks watching on TeeVee in 1968.” I would be very surprised indeed to learn that the marchers in Memphis, many of whom carried the same sign, were thinking about “you” Middle of the Road, or that “I Am Man” had any sexual implication whatsoever.
But this is my point: equal rights under law for all citizens, yes. But, politically, I have to wonder whether it’s a good idea to mix in sexuality. My reason for mentioning Gay Pride marches. Who am I to say?
But, I observe, in passing, that the “joke” has still not been explained. Afraid of violating the new rules, perhaps.
After all, it’s what you excel at.
And the reason no one is explaining it to you is because most thinking people would assume you aren’t this fucking stupid. Most of us would apparently be wrong.
“this fucking stupid,” brought to you courtesy of Goggle, Ink. See, it’s programmed in. Can’t help it; from code to post in milliseconds. Works real good, don’t it.
Actually, I don’t think that’s the reason no one is explaining it. Which was my point exactly. My joke. Get it?
I thought he was just saying Ken’s name was dumb or something.
win the nature vs. nurture debate? I think this helps Ken, as it makes him more a part of popular culture than Bennet.
“Most scientists today agree that sexual orientation is most likely the result of a complex interaction of environmental, cognitive and biological factors. In most people, sexual orientation is shaped at an early age. There is also considerable recent evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person’s sexuality.”
Ol’ Bucky would be a part of popular culture in the Mad Men era. Fortunately, the rest of us have evolved since then. I’m frankly surprised he didn’t call the moderator Joan at the debate the other night.
I can’t remember, although I’m sure they probably lampooned Gary Hart a bit.
That would be making fun of a Democrat and the mainstream, liberal media would never do that!
Maybe Bill Armstrong did something once to get their notice…
Nobody in the lefty media ever made fun of Bill Clinton? Right?
Sorry to raise your blood pressure
Pretty sure Schroeder made SNL when she cried while giving up her presidential campaign.
Since then, though, we’ve sent such a parade of political midgets to Washington that there hasn’t been any Colorado pol important enough to be worth lampooning.
when she handed out Easter eggs dressed in a bunny suit on the Great Wall of China, but that could be my memory playing tricks on me.
playing Pat Schroeder. It was the best impression until Tina Fey nailed the Moose Slayer.
Diana’s OK, but she’s no Pat Schroeder.
lost their jobs under Pat Schroeder’s watch.
the republicans say we are becoming a laughingstock then go about and PROVE it!
Seth Myers was more offensive to gays than Ken ever was. He called Ken Buck’s name “gay”.
And Seth Meyers compares being gay to Ken Buck’s name.
It’s really a toss-up which is more offensive.
Ken Buck is a tyrant. That’s the difference in how offended I am.
David Chestnut is a far, far gayer name than Ken Buck.
Still, I can easily see both of these nom-de-plumes in black leather ass-chaps enjoying pink mai-tais together on any given Saturday evening.
Let’s see, what do . . . BJ? . . . David Chestnut? . . . and Ken Buck all seem to have in common?
or says it’s more offensive than Buck’s comments:
I sure never knew this stuff. No reason to have run across it. Blame it on Diane Ducey in kindergarten.
Dick Wadhams and BJ Wilson both made the list. Go, Colorado Republicans!
Totally on the list.