« this is halloween(2): more movie talk and another survey | Main | A Sexy VP and a Good Blaster at Your Side »

wrestlemania VP debate chat tonight

Command Post debate chat tonight at 8:45 EDT. Join us as we watch the great showdown, the steel cage match, the face-off between the fluffy kitty and the the vicious tiger. The golden-tongued southern boy vs. the aging, balding attack dog. Charlotte Church v. Marilyn Manson. Family Circus v. Achewood. The toy poodle v. the pit bull. Mike Rotundo v. The Iron Sheik. Well, that's what they're making it sound like. My money is on the Sheik, every time. Even without Volkoff by his side.


Listed below are links to weblogs that reference wrestlemania VP debate chat tonight:

» Previously recorded blogging from Editors in Pajamas
So, tonight is the VP debate, but I'm not going to be live blogging the event. I'm not even going to be watching it. Instead, I had promised you a review of FahrenHYPE 9/11. You are going to get something a step farther - I'll blog it while watching ... [Read More]

» Obligatory VP Debate Post from d-42.com: Josh Cohen online
I didn't watch any of the debates. And I'm pissed that there's another one on Friday, because it'll probably impinge upon actual television programming that I'd like to watch. (Since it starts at 9, maybe I won't miss Joan of... [Read More]


A commenter on CNN called it Darth Vader versus Robin this morning. (As in Batman and...) That made me chuckle.

Another commentator called Cheney "the most powerful Vice-Preident in U.S. history". Nope, no bias there.

Bias? In the Media? Enough of your lies...

I like the idea of Edwards as Robin. Cheney has that Burgess Meredith as the Penguin routine down pat.

Kerry as Batman? He's definitely got the boring, authoritative voice. Who's Bush? Not the Riddler, certainly. Joker isn't in him. Someone's got to know.

wonkkett just made an ass of herself...lol

Watching Dick Cheney tap-dance on John Edwards's nuts was probably the funniest thing I've seen in a week. Pity I had to help my in-laws move furniture and couldn't watch all of it or participate in the chat.

Cheney is definitely a better debator than Bush. And Edwards is definitely not as good as Kerry.

George Bailey vs Mr Potter.

Cheney takes it. Really, he's that really great professor trying to deal with the class snot.

On a hilarious note, recall how the Angry Left was caught with the boilerplate "letter to the editor" reaching newspaper even before the Bush/Kerry debate? Looks like this week's tactic is to swarm online polls.

Edwards numbers are close to Saddam's "election" ones.


umm- wow

Never really looked at Cheney as Presidential material until tonight. Did a relly good job. Edwards in a way acted (in a way) like GW in the debate so its a minus - which in a way somewhat (repeating the same thing in the first 20 minutes) but not totatly negates the performance of GW the other night. He repeated things to much (set score card of things THAT MUST BE SAID - ala GW), and didn't seem to think on his feet as much as we were led to believe he would - Lawyers tend to give practiced speeches to a jury - they don't debate the jury.

In the end I would say Dick 60, John 40. Still doesn't pull things - but Dick did sound like he knew what he was doing and had much better control of things than GW did - which makes him a much better VP and ready to step in to the POTUS shoes than Edward's would if he got there.

I have always thought that in '08 Condi would be a good candidate for POTUS - maybe Dick would tap her as VP if he gets the incubent nod (seeing a win for the RNC in a month - which means Dick stepping down after 1 term or Condi goes in '12).

I was doing cardio during the pre-debate run-up (from about 8:20 to 8:50), and my gym has 16 TVs. In front of me were:

Twins vs. Yankees
DirecTV instructional channel.

So my eyes kept clicking from ESPNews upward to CNN and over to the left to MTV (I'm sorry, but the sex-loving girl on the new Real World is quite attractive, and I'm a lech).

Did anyone else get the feeling that the pre-debate thing on CNN was nothing more than the run-up to a gigantic wrestling pay-per-view? They had pundits (interviews), they had clips leading up to this (montages), and they had their announcers -- not the announcers that'd be running the debate, but the other announcers -- discussing what was coming up.

I admit, I was watching the playoffs and MTV and ESPNews much more than I was watching CNN, but on the other hand, before a wrestling PPV, I used to play video games up until 7:55 and then flip on the PPV channel.

There's something not quite right here. This is not a wrestling event.

For one thing, they're not hitting each other (metaphorically or physically) nearly enough. Bush and Kerry especially. It's almost like, because people aren't voting for Cheney or Edwards, they have leave to do a lot more with their time.

Think about it: the best matches in the PPVs of the mid-to-late 90s weren't the marquee matchups (ie: Goldberg vs. DDP or Hulk Hogan vs. Bret Hart or whatever). It was the midcard. It was Chris Benoit vs. the reigning US champion, or Arn Anderson and Tully Blanchard vs. the Midnight Express. Because they didn't have to live up to the rules or expectations of a Hulk Hogan or a Ric Flair, they were free to do a lot more in the ring. And they rarely disappointed.

I think I've drawn this metaphor as far out as I can, and way farther than Michele intended.

Great post - but I think you're so wrong.

Very nice blog.

Great post, thanks!