Fact Checking NBC: SNL Palin Incest Skit

Page 2 of 2 First 12
  1. Senior Member
    jarhead's Avatar
    Stats
    5'7"  243 lbs.
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Age
    40
    Posts
    1,295
    Rep Power
    820
    Level
    29
    Lv. Percent
    12.37%
    Achievements Posting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by RobInKuwait View Post
    . I said NBC should apologize for their skit. Apples and oranges.
    Or you could have -oh I don't know turned the channel and maybe not posted a link exposing other people to something you say is offensive.

  2. New Member
    HardTrainer's Avatar
    Stats
    5'11"  212 lbs.
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    181
    Rep Power
    171
    Level
    11
    Lv. Percent
    53.36%

    Quote Originally Posted by arizonanewbie View Post
    As was mentioned earlier in the discussion, the skit was clearly not intended as a slight to the Palin family, but as a critique of journalism, as evinced by the headline about the journalist who excelled at exposing stories that have no proof or negative proof. I don't want to be disrespectful of the people in this discussion, but it seemed readily apparent to me that the skit was not an indictment of Todd Palin at all and to interpret it as such seriously misses the point.
    Couldn't agree more. It astonishes me that someone could miss that point.

    Some people seem to get off on 'being offended'.
  3. Registered User
    RobInKuwait's Avatar
    Stats
    6'4"  269 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    35
    Posts
    2,272
    Rep Power
    1266
    Level
    34
    Lv. Percent
    69.76%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by HardTrainer View Post
    Couldn't agree more. It astonishes me that someone could miss that point.

    Some people seem to get off on 'being offended'.
    I got the point. It was to talk about how "reckless the New York Times is in their journalistic practices". Bullsh1t. They wanted to see how far they could go with Palin and they succeeded. You can't go further than saying her husband a child molester.

    Can you imagine the uproar if they called Barrack Hussein a child molester in a skit? This guy gets apologies for being called by his full name. The double standard is sickening.

    As for "getting off on being offended", I don't get offended. This is the first time I can ever recall being offended by anything on TV. I'm offended that they had the audacity to say what they said, knowing how wrong they were. They said it because they knew that nobody in the press would say a negative word about it, because she is a republican VP candidate.
    •   
       

  4. I am faster than 80% of all snakes
    Dwight Schrute's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  221 lbs.
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Age
    41
    Posts
    12,911
    Rep Power
    7019

    It was just coincidence
    For answers to board issues, read the Suggestion and News forum at the bottom of the main page.
  5. New Member
    HardTrainer's Avatar
    Stats
    5'11"  212 lbs.
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    181
    Rep Power
    171
    Level
    11
    Lv. Percent
    53.36%

    Quote Originally Posted by RobInKuwait View Post
    ... You can't go further than saying her husband a child molester.

    Can you imagine the uproar if they called Barrack Hussein a child molester in a skit? This guy gets apologies for being called by his full name. The double standard is sickening...
    But they didn't call her husband a child molester. If you watch the sketch, they actually say the exact opposite: that there is absolutely no evidence to support such an accusation. If I say: "The NY Times is so reckless, they would even go so far as to call Sarah Palin's husband a child molester without any proof." It's not the same as saying: "I think Sarah Palin's husband is a child molester."

    I don't see how you could confuse the two.
  6. Registered User
    RobInKuwait's Avatar
    Stats
    6'4"  269 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    35
    Posts
    2,272
    Rep Power
    1266
    Level
    34
    Lv. Percent
    69.76%
    Achievements Activity ProPosting Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by HardTrainer View Post
    But they didn't call her husband a child molester. If you watch the sketch, they actually say the exact opposite: that there is absolutely no evidence to support such an accusation. If I say: "The NY Times is so reckless, they would even go so far as to call Sarah Palin's husband a child molester without any proof." It's not the same as saying: "I think Sarah Palin's husband is a child molester."

    I don't see how you could confuse the two.
    I watched the sketch....I was the one who posted it.

    They could've said, "Sarah Palin's husband has sex with polar bears."

    Thats funny because its in no way believable. Nobody has sex with polar bears.

    Tell me to put on a tinfoil hat if you want, but they said that just to put that idea in people's head. Pedophiles are the lowest of the low in society. They're the one group of people that is universally hated by the entire country. This wasn't an off the wall satire, this was calculated attack to push the envelope and associate the Palin's with pedophilia.

    Really though, can you honestly tell me there wouldn't be a backlash if they made the same skit, but made Obama the pedophile?
  

  
 

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Hilarious Chris Farley skit
    By RenegadeRows in forum General Chat
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-20-2008, 11:25 AM
  2. Fact-Checking Palin: On Energy
    By BodyWizard in forum Politics
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-19-2008, 03:10 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-17-2008, 09:13 PM
  4. Parody skit of Darth Vader
    By bombBoogie in forum General Chat
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-30-2007, 01:37 PM
  5. Best "live" Comedy Skit Ever !!!
    By anabolicrhino in forum General Chat
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-06-2007, 12:47 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Log in
Log in