With political pundits across the fruited plain believing that NBC's "Saturday Night Live" transformed the Democrat presidential campaign by exposing media's love affair with Barack Obama as well as their apparent disdain for Hillary Clinton, one has to wonder just how far the program's producers and writers are willing to go to advance their candidate of choice.
After all, for the third week in a row, "SNL" began with a skit highly favorable to Clinton, and this time made Obama look like an incompetent, inexperienced fool.
In this week's opening sketch, Hillary, played by Amy Poehler, introduced a campaign advertisement depicting a frightened President Obama calling a sleeping Senator Clinton at 3:00 in the morning:
Uh, Hillary, I'm sorry to call this late again. I need your help. ...The CIA just confirmed that Iran has completed a nuclear device. It looks like the Russians, the North Koreans, and Hugo Chavez have been helping them. ...Oh my God. ...What do I do, Hillary? What do I do?
After Hillary tried to calm him down, Obama began crying:
I can't. Don't you see that I'm in a panic -- a blind, unreasoning, inexperienced panic?
Hillary calmly instructed Obama what to do, as he busily took notes. After resolving this issue, the junior senator from New York guided the President as to how to turn the furnace back on in the White House. A grateful Obama stated:
Once again, I am amazed by the range and depth of your experience. I'd gladly trade all of my superficial charm and rock-star appeal for even a part of it. ...Because this job is hard! I had no idea. I mean, it is a bleeping ballbuster!
After the ad ended, Hillary told the audience:
The point is, the future we've described doesn't have to be. If you want a different future, a safe, competent, more experienced future, there is something you can do. You can call or write the offices of the Democratic National Committee and tell them, "Wait, we've changed our minds." With enough pressure, we can convince Party leaders that nominating my opponent would be a huge mistake.
Add it all up, and for the third week in a row, "SNL" has stumped for Hillary.
Sure, cynics will counter that this is just a comedy show, and that those concerned about this level of political activism on television are overreacting.
However, there's no denying that since "SNL" has returned to the airwaves, press members have indeed pointed to these skits as having turned the tide on campaign coverage. In fact, there's no doubt that in the past couple of weeks, the media have been scrutinizing the junior senator from Illinois in a manner not seen throughout 2007 and the early part of this year.
With that in mind, it is quite clear "SNL" has impacted this race, and appears interested in continuing to do so.
*****Update: Ann Althouse agrees:
We're seeing [Hillary's] long, completely unfair ad — and, yes, they've told us to think about how unfair it is. But the ad really does push us to think that Hillary Clinton has a lot of experience and Barack Obama is a neophyte. The fact that we know it's an exaggeration doesn't prevent it from stimulating our anxieties about the underlying truths. And if we're disposed to look at a comedy sketch and find it funny, then our minds slip into the place where we perceive the thing that is being exaggerated. Our defenses are down. Don't you love Amy Poehler? In the tank!
Exactly. In fact, one could make the case that since it is presented as a parody, and the viewer's defenses are indeed down as a result of being in "entertain me" mode, the message is actually more powerful than if "SNL" was playing it straight.
In the end, the audience is laughing with Hillary as they laugh at Obama. That's powerful indeed.
*****Update II: Don't miss Ed Driscoll's mash-up of all the web parodies of Hillary's original 3:00 AM ad.
*****Update III: Allah also agrees:
The butt of the joke, ostensibly, is Her Majesty and the overblown aspersions she’s been casting on Obama’s fitness to lead, but in practice it’s five and a half minutes of him sounding like a buffoon while she keeps a steady hand on the wheel. The ‘Busters say it amounts to another de facto SNL ad for Hillary; I’m inclined to agree.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Whap on the Head
March 9, 2008 - 12:16 ET by allanfWell someone needed to give these clowns a whap on the side of the head. The swooning was unbecoming of even teenaged girls.
Hillary was skewered, too
March 9, 2008 - 12:29 ET by BlondeOh, the "dramatization" was an Obama takedown, but Amy Pohlen has been doing a spot-on Shrill for a while, and she did it again, here.
The avaricious, sneaky, conniving Hillary, pulling all of the dirty tricks out of her bag, was on display for all to see. The only thing she missed was a couple of tears.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
B
March 9, 2008 - 12:30 ET by Noel SheppardB,
Do you see this segment as positive to Obama and negative to Hillary? ns
NS
March 9, 2008 - 12:39 ET by BlondeNo. I think it accurately skewered both of them.
For all the right reasons, too. Hillary for being the most devious pol on the planet, Obama for having no there, there.
I linked the transcript of the first SNL Gore/Bush debate (I couldn't find a video) on the Open Thread. This video was reminiscent of that one...I think they spoofed both parties. My memory of the earlier one was that it was a total slam on Gore (perception), which it wasn't, of course, after I read the transcript. It was just great politcal satire.
I think this one is as well.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
B
March 9, 2008 - 12:44 ET by Noel SheppardB,
Yeah, I'm not seeing it that way. A cowering, quivering, weeping President Obama calling Hillary for help at 3:00 in the morning isn't skewering her. It's continuing the attack that he's an empty suit, and she's the brightest woman in the world.
Are they doing this at the same time they present her as calculating and devious? Sure. But, on balance, this made him look like an inexperienced fool that can't be trusted, with her at the end actually instructing folks what they need do to prevent this disaster. ns
NS...Agree to Disagree
March 9, 2008 - 12:52 ET by BlondeI'm not seeing it that way. The second half, after the "dramatization" of the 3 a.m. call, is where the real Hillary shows her true colors. The devious and driven madwoman who will do anything to win. Including a new scheme instructing voters call the DNC to say they'd changed their minds.
Oh...this might prove your point, but I have to put it on the table. What was the phone number they flashed at the end? Was it really the DNC? It had a DC area code, I thought.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
What was the phone number
March 9, 2008 - 12:57 ET by motherbeltWhat was the phone number they flashed at the end? Was it really the DNC? It had a DC area code, I thought
I didn't notice the area code, but the 555 prefix is the giveaway of a fake number...it's the one they always use on TV and in movies.
B
March 9, 2008 - 12:57 ET by Noel SheppardB,
It's a DC area code, but all numbers beginning with 555 are nonexistent. This prefix was created years ago for television programs to use to prevent the possibility of it being a real number. Make sense? ns
Phone #
March 9, 2008 - 13:05 ET by BlondeSorry all...I thought it was 212.
Multi-tasking, as usual.
Must really run now, I'm late.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
What was the phone number
March 9, 2008 - 12:58 ET by motherbeltWhat was the phone number they flashed at the end? Was it really the DNC? It had a DC area code, I thought
The area code is DC, but the 555 is the fake prefix they always use on TV and in movies...it doesn't exist.
This is all rooted in
March 9, 2008 - 13:02 ET by spiderdanThis is all rooted in the assumption SNL writers -- during production meetings -- are developing a strategy to convert satire into actionable influence among voters. We give them far too much credit, but just when I feel comfortable with that assessment, I realize just how many clueless idiots are taking the extra step in liberal logic to declare this satirical nonsense as truth disguised behind a thin veil of comedy.
It's true -- the wife of an impeached, disbarred, and disgraced former Arkansas governor is a scheming political maniac. It's also true her opponent is the prototypical pandering socialist and rank amateur. Being portrayed as such is no stretch of anyone's imagination, nor is it satire.
Blonde and Noel - as I said below - just
March 9, 2008 - 12:54 ET by Dee Bunkwait until the skit is Obama and McCain and you will see the stark difference in how they are portrayed. Obama will be the intelligent pondering one behind the desk while McCain will be portrayed as someone who just wants to Nuke everyone and doesn't care to listen.
If they really wanted to slam Hillary, they could have portrayed her that way, but it's their very calculated trick to make fun of her in a way that doesn't do as much damage. They can say - look we made fun of both. It's the same kind of thing Jon Stewart and many other leftist comedians do.
Dee & NS
March 9, 2008 - 13:02 ET by BlondeYou may have a point with your second paragraph. Maybe I'm just letting my intense dislike of Hillary slant my perception of this video.
Last week's was such an obvious slam at the media's Obama pandering, which was favorable to Hillary. This one just doesn't reach that level for me, though.
It's been fun, you two...must run. Have a lovely Sunday.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Definitely more positive for
March 9, 2008 - 12:44 ET by balboaDefinitely more positive for Hillary, but some shots at her.
They took a good shot at Hillary on the Weekend Update, too.
Since few legitimately
March 9, 2008 - 12:33 ET by spiderdanSince few legitimately informed and responsible Americans give two hoots in hell what the comedy writers at SNL think of the political process, it bodes well for those legitimate Americans to have the Clinton vs. Obama contest reduced to self fulfilling prophecies.
It is funny -- hardly worth consideration as a politically viable statement. However, seeing how masses of gutless, clueless, and wandering dopes in this country seek guidance and counsel from this crap -- including huge chunks of the mass media -- we can only hope the SNL people continue to portray the Democratic ticket as little more than comic fare (with equal parts tragedy thrown in for dramatic effect).
Not everyone is informed
March 9, 2008 - 16:03 ET by Tom PaineUnfortunately I am becoming more concerned that the general election ultimately will not be decided by the legitimately informed and
responsible Americans. It may well hinge on the turnout of Saturday Night Live
viewers and the other assorted slackers who make their political decisions based on Letterman monologues,
and believe that the Daily Show and Cobert Report are "News" programs.
The big red flag I see has been the voter turnout figures in
the primaries. Republican figures are
flat at best while the Democrats are turning out in record numbers. It could just be that there has been no real competition
on the Republican side. However, if conservative voters sit on their hands
again this time around it could hand the liberals not only the Whitehouse but
commanding majorities in Congress. This
would give a green light to a President B Hussein Obama or Chubby McPantsuit to
enact policies that will wreck this country.
Rest assured, regardless of how it may appear now, once the
Democrat challenger has been decided, any future SNL skits will show the Democrat
as a calm, intelligent and nuanced professional while McCain will be the old coot with a
hair trigger temper.
Unfortunately I am becoming
March 9, 2008 - 16:18 ET by motherbeltUnfortunately I am becoming more concerned that the general election
ultimately will not be decided by the legitimately informed and responsible Americans. It may well hinge on the turnout of Saturday Night Live viewers and the other assorted slackers who make their political decisions based on Letterman monologues, and believe that the Daily Show and Cobert Report are "News" programs.
And how is that different from the past? Americans are notorious for voting based on a superficial things rather than knowledge of the candidates. Why do you think candidates go on Letterman and Leno and SNL? To give policy speeches? They want to look "cool." How do you think Jesse Ventura got elected governor of Minnesota?
This time is different
March 9, 2008 - 21:58 ET by Tom PaineYes, but they wern't able to close the deal with either Gore or Kerry although they came close. I am afraid they will pull it off this time. The conservatives will stand on principle and the liberals, who have no principles, will roll right in.
Just wait till the General Elections when SNL portrays McCain
March 9, 2008 - 12:46 ET by Dee Bunkas the stupid one and Obama as the all knowing intellectual.
I wanted to post this
March 9, 2008 - 12:52 ET by balboaI wanted to post this because I thought it was pretty funny. (This is pretty close to verbatim)
Seth Meyers: On the eve of Tuesday's primary victories, a defiant Hillary Clinton declared, "I'm just getting warmed up." Which begs the question, Hey Hillary, how're you going to be ready on Day 1 if it takes you 31 primaries to get warmed up?
I don't find it funny Balboa - surprise surprise
March 9, 2008 - 13:00 ET by Dee Bunkyou do because you think Obama's ability to win primaries has relevance to how to win over dictators and despots. Winning a primary has nothing to do with Foreign policy experience at all. If anything it's the opposite. Most of the public are stupid and naive when it comes to Foreign policy
Most of the public are
March 9, 2008 - 13:16 ET by MrShyMost of the public are stupid and naive when it comes to Foreign policy.
Yes, and no small thanks to the media devoting 98% of their "news" coverage -- for what will be almost two years ('07 & '08) come this November -- to the primary and general election, which is a joke. A president serves four years, and one half of it is overshadowed by the election process for the next president. To the back-burner goes all news, national and even more-so international, rendering Americans ignorant of what's really going on around the world.
Think... we're in a war, and whadda know -- 2007 is our first real success in the Middle East and suddenly the Democratic primary and all these new domestic "crisis's" take center stage. Well, okay, let's whip up a frenzy on Global Warming, so we're looked at as still concerned about the "globe" and "foreign affairs".
But no more news from Iraq, mostly good (and some bad, also not reported) no updates on Isreal-Palistine or Lebenon (remember that summer-long war in 2006? Yeah, I can hardly remember it to, go figure) unless there's a major suicide bomb. Little to no news on the goings-on of any issues/affairs in Europe, Russia, N. Korea, Pakistan/Afgahnastan (unless it's to quickly "report" new "findings" that the Taliban and Al Qaeda are resurgent -- for the 7th, 8th time in the last few years) etc..
* * * SOCKS THE CAT '08 * * *
For REAL Change
you do because you think
March 9, 2008 - 13:16 ET by balboayou do because you think Obama's ability to win primaries has relevance to how to win over dictators and despots.
Uh, no, I didn't put that much thought into it.
That was some funny stuff,
March 9, 2008 - 15:40 ET by wiwfThat was some funny stuff, I'll admit!
The Rocky Mountain Collegian: Illustrating Idiocy
LOL balboa - that is kind of my point - you obviously didn't
March 9, 2008 - 16:33 ET by Dee Bunkthink about it. Neither did I - it just sounded stupid to me because I don't see campaigning well or not as any indication of how experienced someone is at fighting terrorism. If Hillary had said she's just warming for her evening exercises and some comedian thought that would be a good joke about her lack of experience, I think you would think it was stupid. You wouldn't think about it, you'd just think "how lame" Her warming up comment in either case would have no relation to experience in fighting terrorism and either case sounds equaly lame to me.
»→ Dee
March 9, 2008 - 17:53 ET by Cool ArrowReagan was extremely good at selling (campaigning) his ideas to the American public.
I half expected his off the cuff remark questioning the validity of the corporate income tax would take wings. He should've followed up on that one.
♣ a seal
it just sounded stupid to me
March 9, 2008 - 19:30 ET by balboait just sounded stupid to me because I don't see campaigning well or not as any indication of how experienced someone is at fighting terrorism.
You really are over-analyzing this.
If Hillary had said she's just warming for her evening exercises and some comedian thought that would be a good joke about her lack of experience, I think you would think it was stupid.
You're going to have to phrase that as an actual joke for me to tell.
»→ Just getting warmed up
March 9, 2008 - 19:47 ET by Cool ArrowJohn Paul Jones alleged response when asked if he was ready to surrender: "I have not yet begun to fight"
Maybe Hillary's response was along the lines of Jones who was in dire straits at the time of the quote attributed him. Nothing funny about it, but a statement of defiance.
General Anthony McCauliff allegedly retorted to his adbersary at the battle of the bulge "Nuts to You". A now famous reply that still lacks explanation.
Hillary probably felt she had to say something so maybe she was doing her best Pacino "Scent of a Woman" I'm just gettin' started"
♣ a seal
what a waste of time
March 9, 2008 - 15:59 ET by goldboughThat was stupid. I didn't laugh. SNL needs to get away from politics and write regular skits that are actually funny. The audience had to really stretch to get their laughs out in this one.
The nature of parody
March 9, 2008 - 17:46 ET by redrock505I think you completely misunderstand the nature of parody, and therefore of the SNL skit in question. This skit makes fun of Clinton's portrayal of Obama. It is an anti-Clinton skit.
redrock
March 9, 2008 - 18:39 ET by Noel Sheppardrr,
I think you completely misunderstand the nature of parody, and therefore of the SNL skit in question.
Don't you think that's a rather arrogant statement? You've come to this sweeping conclusion because I saw this skit as far more debasing of Obama than Hillary? Do you think Barack, Michelle, their friends, family members, and supporters agree more with my view irrespective of my unfortunately poor understanding of the nature of parody, or your clearly more enlightened one?
I'm breathless with antici........pation. ns
»→ No doubt
March 9, 2008 - 18:48 ET by Cool ArrowThe picture of Hillary calmly swatting away every hysterical fear Obama fretted over definitely made Hillary look the more equipped for CIC.
Nothing in the presentation was the least bit flattering to Obama.
To me it was parody only from the standpoint that it took very real perceptions to the extreme. Oh yeah, that's what parody is, isn't it?
♣ a seal
Oh yes... the smartest
March 9, 2008 - 19:19 ET by bigtimerOh yes... the smartest woman in the world just got a huge political ad buy via SNL and NBC.
Pathetic.
Not that I personally think any of these skits on SNL will help her out that much in the end of it all.
Seems to me SNL skewered Hillary
March 9, 2008 - 19:35 ET by nkviking75With respect, Noel, this strikes me as a parody of Hillary. It takes her original concept and exaggerates it to the extreme. It skewers her "smartest woman" image by portraying her as conceited enough that Obama would call her for help in the middle of the night.
It might be that SNL felt stung by the "pro-Hillary" comments and did this skit to try to appear more balanced. With libs divided among themselves right now, it's not hard to imagine pro-Obama lefties on the SNL writing staff arguing to be heard, just as pro-Clinton writers have been.
Just my opinion, for what it's worth. Eventually they'll turn all their guns on McCain.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
nkv
March 9, 2008 - 19:43 ET by Noel Sheppardnkv,
Well, of course this is a parody of Hillary. No doubt. However, it's far more debasing of Obama. In fact, it's not even close.
Regardless, I think it's cool that we're not all seeing this the same way. It disproves that whole conservative group-think meme liberals like to throw around.
Of course, something else to consider is what one's expectation is. After the last two weeks' skits, might I be looking for pro-Hillary bias from this program? Or, might you be looking for anti-Hillary bias? Maybe we're both seeing what we want.
And, maybe the writers really saw this as an equal opportunity debasement of both candidates. We don't really know, do we? ns
Point of view
March 9, 2008 - 19:53 ET by nkviking75No, we really don't know. IMHO, the debasement of Obama in the skit suggests that Hillary will say anything about her opponent to be elected.
Let's enjoy the media skewering Democrats while we can. It won't last much longer.
P.S. Did you catch the subtle aside about the "Limbaugh factor", where Hillary drops a hint to Republicans to vote for her?
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
»→ Another clue
March 9, 2008 - 20:01 ET by Cool ArrowI remember a SNL skit over 30 years ago where the Jimmy Carter character took control of a phone call and talked the guy on the other end of the line down from a bad acid trip. Identified it as Orange Sunshine and told him to put some Allman Brothers on the stereo.
The only degrading thing about Hillary's character was her pancake makeup in this case. And that could have been no more than cover because they really had no derogatory angle at Clinton in the presentation.
Wow, found the transcript of SNL.
♣ a seal
I think the interesting
March 9, 2008 - 21:42 ET by balboaI think the interesting thing, Noel -- or another way of looking at it -- is that the imitation of HRC is like a "given" in geometry: We already know about Amy's solid HRC imitation, so the "new" part is making fun of Obama.
Noel this is a parody of a
March 10, 2008 - 15:59 ET by red_dragon311Noel this is a parody of a Hillary AD, that brought into question Barak H-word Obama's lack of exprience. hence taking a jab at her thighness.
so it's a parody of a parody of sorts
I was a professional twice over - an analyst and a therapist. The world's first analrapist
Great tag
March 10, 2008 - 16:36 ET by Hero SquadGreat tag line, buster!
No no, it's pronounced ah-NAL-rah-pist.
*****
"People only insist that a debate stop when they are afraid of what might be learned if it continues." - George Will
I used to watch Saturday
March 9, 2008 - 20:32 ET by fitzfongI used to watch Saturday Night Live. Then Tina Fey and Jimmy Fallon joined the cast and I got a social life instead.
When I watched it, it
March 10, 2008 - 09:32 ET by Hero SquadWhen I watched it, it definitely felt like a pro-Hillary ad. I thought the style and set up were very cleverly done, using still photos instead of live action.
But I think the intent was to use exaggeration of perceptions to reach a comedic effect. They made Obama look so inept and Hillary so manipulative that the rational person would see that it was over-the-top.
I liken it to when The Simpsons shows a Republican meeting and Count Dracula is there. It pokes fun at people who think Republicans are evil as much as it pokes fun at Republicans.
*****
"People only insist that a debate stop when they are afraid of what might be learned if it continues." - George Will