LawTalkers

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)
-   Politics (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Know new taxes! (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=819)

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 01-08-2009 02:52 PM

Re: For Penkse
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) (Post 376800)
Does she have an agent who also books for a bunch of other people whom they want on the show?

Why did they bring Tom Cruise back, btw?

Why would anyone other than Fox book this woman? I know she's in a desparate fight for relevance and book sales, but come January 20th, anyone needing an attractive conservative can book Dana Perino.

No contest.

Tyrone Slothrop 01-08-2009 03:01 PM

Re: For Penkse
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Penske_Account (Post 376791)
I imagine that, eventually, if the only people that they have on are keith Olbermann, Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow, eventually a segment of their market will tune out there and in somewhere else.

It's like you live in some parallel universe where MSNBC doesn't air Joe Scarborough as much as all those guys. Can I come visit? Is the pinot just as good?

Quote:

I shop all of the above except Walmart. Its too fucking crowded (and their labour practices are questionable....). It has nothing to do with post-partisanship and everything to do with value pricing. does politic partisanship colour your consummer habits? Is there a blog that guides you?
I thought this was conventional wisdom. When I have lived in blue places, it has been easy to get to Target and Costco, and not Wal-Mart and Sears. When I have lived in red places, the opposite was true, and I shopped at Wal-Mart and Sears. YMMV?

Atticus Grinch 01-08-2009 03:35 PM

Re: For Penkse
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 376765)
how does one appeal something like that? Do you just appeal broad decisions like whether to count catagories?

It's a Writ of Mandate. You argue to the judge that a specific action (not a methodology generally) violated a non-discretionary mandatory duty to count a particular ballot (or petition signature or what-have-you). Locally, protests are numbered sequentially and classed according to defect. The judge's order tends to group ballots with similar flaws and either uphold the action or direct that they be treated differently. "The following protests are valid for extraneous markings: 224, 406, 448 . . . "

If I were the lawyer for the elections official, I would not want an order saying something like "is directed to count all ballots with extraeneous markings," because that offers no end to the litigation. "Shall count ballot 406" is much better. That's something like what we do here, at least.

ThurgreedMarshall 01-08-2009 03:48 PM

Re: For Penkse
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Penske_Account (Post 376794)
Why? the start up production costs would be huge and the risk, especially in such a saturated market would probably make financing prohibitively costly. In the alternative she has been on, at the least, the Today show, in two segments, FoxNews and CBS morning, this week, all for free, and that is just based on my very imperfect knowledge of her TV appearances. Seems she is making some good moves and the result is, her schtick produces a lot more income for her than either of our relative talents produce for us. no offence.

I think you're completely full of shit. My point isn't that her shrill, annoying complaints and bullshit aren't effective when it comes to getting on tv and selling books to morons (in fact, I was implying that she's just as annoying as O'Reilly and probably could have her own show). This is not a study in business 101 where we are analyzing her barriers to entry in the television business. And I don't know why the hell you're comparing her income to ours since that has absolutely nothing to do with anything.

The point I made is, NBC need not play her stupid fucking game. I doubt the people who tune in to The Today Show would change the channel because Coulter yelled about being banned and I'm sure they wouldn't if they watched that interview with her (where she was rude, condescending and stupid all at the same time) and Lauer simply said, "Fuck off" (or the sanitized early-morning equivalent). If you think they need her more than she needs them, you are delusional.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Penske_Account (Post 376794)
Based on your take on what she should do, i.e. start her own show, maybe you should start your own net based on the above principle. I, for one, would watch it, as I would with any entertainment appearances you might make.....that said, I'll take a wild guess that given the historical success, relatively, of NBC's Today show, that everything that they did this week was strategically motivated and that they consider it, essentially, a win.

Jesus Christ. Of course they do. I'm saying that they needn't. She knew her bitching would bring her more attention. They knew bringing her back would bring higher ratings. The question I am essentially asking is: When does the nuisance of dealing with her exceed the return that blip yields? You seem to think never. I think it was 10 years ago. Stop treating this topic like you're being objective and acknowledge that you're really just saying, "But MSNBC gave Olbermann a show and lots of money and I hate him, so I need to defend Coulter." I will be happy to acknowledge that I was in no way being objective either.

TM

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 01-08-2009 05:00 PM

Re: For Penkse
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 376815)
I think you're completely full of shit. My point isn't that her shrill, annoying complaints and bullshit aren't effective when it comes to getting on tv and selling books to morons (in fact, I was implying that she's just as annoying as O'Reilly and probably could have her own show). This is not a study in business 101 where we are analyzing her barriers to entry in the television business. And I don't know why the hell you're comparing her income to ours since that has absolutely nothing to do with anything.

The point I made is, NBC need not play her stupid fucking game. I doubt the people who tune in to The Today Show would change the channel because Coulter yelled about being banned and I'm sure they wouldn't if they watched that interview with her (where she was rude, condescending and stupid all at the same time) and Lauer simply said, "Fuck off" (or the sanitized early-morning equivalent). If you think they need her more than she needs them, you are delusional.

Jesus Christ. Of course they do. I'm saying that they needn't. She knew her bitching would bring her more attention. They knew bringing her back would bring higher ratings. The question I am essentially asking is: When does the nuisance of dealing with her exceed the return that blip yields? You seem to think never. I think it was 10 years ago. Stop treating this topic like you're being objective and acknowledge that you're really just saying, "But MSNBC gave Olbermann a show and lots of money and I hate him, so I need to defend Coulter." I will be happy to acknowledge that I was in no way being objective either.

TM

Talking about that woman is just feeding the trolls, of whom she is queen.

Penske_Account 01-08-2009 06:21 PM

Re: For Penkse
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) (Post 376800)
Does she have an agent who also books for a bunch of other people whom they want on the show?

Why did they bring Tom Cruise back, btw?

To preserve ad dollars from the Church of Scientology.

Penske_Account 01-08-2009 06:22 PM

Re: For Penkse
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy (Post 376801)
Why would anyone other than Fox book this woman? I know she's in a desparate fight for relevance and book sales, but come January 20th, anyone needing an attractive conservative can book Dana Perino.

No contest.

I have never read one of her books, but as long as she is a best selling author, isn't she sort of culturally relevant and potentially a ratings generator?

Penske_Account 01-08-2009 06:30 PM

Re: For Penkse
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 376802)
It's like you live in some parallel universe where MSNBC doesn't air Joe Scarborough as much as all those guys. Can I come visit? Is the pinot just as good?
?

I was mostly talking about the Today show. I see Matthews and OLbermann on it more than Scarborough. I should have left Racehl Maddow out as I don't think she does spots on the Today show that often, if at all. I'm partial to either pinot from Burgundy, or Santa Rita Hills region of CA these days. Its all good, although I don't typically serve it during the Today show. Yet.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 376802)

I thought this was conventional wisdom. When I have lived in blue places, it has been easy to get to Target and Costco, and not Wal-Mart and Sears. When I have lived in red places, the opposite was true, and I shopped at Wal-Mart and Sears. YMMV?

Several of the adjacent suburbs of Seattle, which is very very red, only slightly less so than Berkeley, are blue or blueish. The Costcos in Seattle or Bellevue (or Redmond or wherever it is on the eastside) probably get a target demo shopper like me. The Costco in Tukwila is blue, and is within a mile or two of Sears, Walmart and Target, all of which are also blue. I live relatively close to Tukwila and tend to shop at the blue Costco most of the time for convenience, to the extent that I shop. At Costco.

Adder 01-08-2009 06:35 PM

Re: For Penkse
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Penske_Account (Post 376832)
I was mostly talking about the Today show. I see Matthews and OLbermann on it more than Scarborough.

Why would anyone in their right mind watch the Today show?

Okay, so obviously that question isn't directed at you.

Penske_Account 01-08-2009 06:35 PM

Re: For Penkse
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 376815)
I think you're completely full of shit. My point isn't that her shrill, annoying complaints and bullshit aren't effective when it comes to getting on tv and selling books to morons (in fact, I was implying that she's just as annoying as O'Reilly and probably could have her own show). This is not a study in business 101 where we are analyzing her barriers to entry in the television business. And I don't know why the hell you're comparing her income to ours since that has absolutely nothing to do with anything.

The point I made is, NBC need not play her stupid fucking game. I doubt the people who tune in to The Today Show would change the channel because Coulter yelled about being banned and I'm sure they wouldn't if they watched that interview with her (where she was rude, condescending and stupid all at the same time) and Lauer simply said, "Fuck off" (or the sanitized early-morning equivalent). If you think they need her more than she needs them, you are delusional.

Jesus Christ. Of course they do. I'm saying that they needn't. She knew her bitching would bring her more attention. They knew bringing her back would bring higher ratings. The question I am essentially asking is: When does the nuisance of dealing with her exceed the return that blip yields? You seem to think never. I think it was 10 years ago. Stop treating this topic like you're being objective and acknowledge that you're really just saying, "But MSNBC gave Olbermann a show and lots of money and I hate him, so I need to defend Coulter." I will be happy to acknowledge that I was in no way being objective either.

TM


I think there need for each other is symbiotic.

I dislike Coulter and Olbermann equally. they both dumb down the dialogue, just from different points. That said, they bring her back because she's topical. When she stops being topical they won't. Of course, neither you nor I know how much nof this is theater and/or how difficult she is to deal with behind the scenes. I tend to thinjk all of it, from the Today show people to coulter is contrived theater.

Penske_Account 01-08-2009 06:40 PM

Re: For Penkse
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 376833)
Why would anyone in their right mind watch the Today show?

Okay, so obviously that question isn't directed at you.

Why not? Its 7 am. I can work and drink coffee when I am watching. I get the news headlines. I get local weather and traffic and it can be entertaining. A`nd its moderately age appropriate for a 10 yo as well. Of course, not everyone can be as erudite as you know. Hopefully someday I can go to lawschool and become a fancy lawyer associate person and watch intellectual stuff at 7 in the morning before I go to work in......do you have a corner office?

Adder 01-08-2009 06:45 PM

Re: For Penkse
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Penske_Account (Post 376835)
Why not? Its 7 am. I can work and drink coffee when I am watching. I get the news headlines. I get local weather and traffic and it can be entertaining. A`nd its moderately age appropriate for a 10 yo as well. Of course, not everyone can be as erudite as you know. Hopefully someday I can go to lawschool and become a fancy lawyer associate person and watch intellectual stuff at 7 in the morning before I go to work in......do you have a corner office?

Us intellectuals with corner-ish offices (damn partner next door) watch Mike and Mike and Sports Center in the mornings. High brow stuff, I tell you.

Penske_Account 01-08-2009 06:48 PM

Re: For Penkse
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 376836)
Us intellectuals with corner-ish offices (damn partner next door) watch Mike and Mike and Sports Center in the mornings. High brow stuff, I tell you.

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. I stopped following sports when I become a quasi-competitive athlete. I didn't have the time and my interest in the more major sports waned. After I retired I never really went back. So the network sports stuff is sort of out for me.

Penske_Account 01-08-2009 06:52 PM

Re: For Penkse
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Penske_Account (Post 376835)
Why not? Its 7 am. I can work and drink coffee when I am watching. I get the news headlines. I get local weather and traffic and it can be entertaining. A`nd its moderately age appropriate for a 10 yo as well. Of course, not everyone can be as erudite as you know. Hopefully someday I can go to lawschool and become a fancy lawyer associate person and watch intellectual stuff at 7 in the morning before I go to work in......do you have a corner office?

I don't normally respond to my own posts, but in this special instance, I will make an exception.......I noted "local weather" above. That was a lie. If I want local weather, I look out the window. Local traffic, otoh, can be helpful, and, with the exception of the as the crow flies route, I can't see my commute from my window.

Hank Chinaski 01-08-2009 06:53 PM

Re: For Penkse
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Penske_Account (Post 376835)
Why not? Its 7 am. I can work and drink coffee when I am watching. I get the news headlines. I get local weather and traffic and it can be entertaining. A`nd its moderately age appropriate for a 10 yo as well.

does this mean you watch with your child? If so, I'd think you would want her yanked from the air so he doesn't see such behavior.

Quote:

Of course, not everyone can be as erudite as you know. Hopefully someday I can go to lawschool and become a fancy lawyer associate person and watch intellectual stuff at 7 in the morning before I go to work in......do you have a corner office?
There is no one here I can ask this, but you're the closest to competent to answer.

Four years ago I took over one side of our building, so I now have a corners office. Still, I'd like room for a wine cave, and perhaps a greenhouse. I'm considering expanding to take over a third corner, but to do so would really limit my interaction with the little people, as they'll mostly be on other floors. Plus, when I yell for associate support, fewer factotems will hear me.

Thoughts?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:27 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Hosted By: URLJet.com