The Twilight Effect

1:41 am EST January 2nd, 2007 | Uncategorized | 13 Comments

I spent a good portion of New Year’s Day watching the Twilight Zone marathon on Sci-Fi. I now expect everything to have an ironic twist, narrated by Rod Serling.

Topic:

Related Posts

«
»

13 Responses to “The Twilight Effect”

  1. fd10801 says:
    January 2, 2007 at 2:04 am

    I know what you mean. Wait until Labor Day ’08. I’ll follow the Election in the MSM, and be convinced that the Democratic Candidate will win.

    Then, the day after Election Day — the Republican candidate will be the winner.

    “A dimension more of sight than of sound.”

  2. Nimrod Gently says:
    January 2, 2007 at 7:59 am

    Given how the GOP got raped in the midterms, that would be quite a turnaround.

  3. Dugger says:
    January 2, 2007 at 11:30 am

    “I now expect everything to have an ironic twist”

    So you expect a sarcastic, mocking Chubby Checker dance?

    You have entered the daylight zone.

  4. fd10801 says:
    January 2, 2007 at 1:07 pm

    N G :: What the hell do you know about American politics? What you read in this thread?

    First, the Republicans were hardly “raped” in the last election. The Democrats were expected to walk all over the Republicans. As usual, their cheerleaders in the MSM were wrong.

    They have a one seat lead in the Senate, which they can lose by flubbing in Iraq. Chances of that happening? (See Vietnam, Korea, Red China, and 75 years experience with the USSR) 99%

    They won a few seats in the House, some of which were gained by playing “strong on Defense” and other making other conservative noises.
    Their chances of keeping those seats (given their love of senseless spending programs, lack of support for the military, and never passing up a chance to raise taxes) 10%.

    What are the chances that the Americans will vote Democrats into the White House in 2008? far less than 50 – 50.

  5. Nimrod Gently says:
    January 2, 2007 at 1:33 pm

    First, the Republicans were hardly “raped” in the last election. The Democrats were expected to walk all over the Republicans. As usual, their cheerleaders in the MSM were wrong.

    No, Frank, no they weren’t, that’s precisely what happened, you self-deluding maniac.

  6. anuj says:
    January 2, 2007 at 1:52 pm

    hey mr willis,
    i thought you might injoy this!
    http://thesuperficial.com/
    2007/01/
    jessica_alba_plays_football_
    in.html

    Sorry i couldnt get the entire link it you might need to cut and past it

  7. Mike says:
    January 2, 2007 at 2:41 pm

    They have a one… fd10801

    I see that you do, in fact, live in the twilight zone, as in the Twilight of Republicanism. Do you realize that this is the first time both houses of Congress flipped since 1954? Do you realize that not one challenged Democrat lost their seat?
    Just keep escalating your Iraq debacle and your loses will increase.
    Let this election be a lesson on American politics to you: Americans don’t like having their children killed for illegal wars run by incompetent, dishonest idiots whose only concern is the lobbyist dollar and the partisan smear.

  8. Rex Mundane says:
    January 2, 2007 at 3:31 pm

    The Democrats took a total of 35 seats, and Republicans took a total of zero. In any other sport that would be a shutout, but to the republicans (and lets not forget to the MSM like Time Magazine declaring this a victory for centrism) it is only a marginal victory that serves to set up a devastating loss the next time. I suppose its what we can come to expect from people who look at, for instance, BushJr’s year 2000 1% loss to Gore as an undenyable mandate from the people. If the republicans win big in ’08, it will only be because the American people are dense enough to believe that Iraq has (as it will have done) gotten much worse only because of the democratic obstruction to sending more troops over to die in the name of an undefined objective. So if it does happen, feel free to gloat about how stupid Americans that they voted for you again in spite of sense and evidence, but please do shut up about how very 3vil teh librul are.

  9. fd10801 says:
    January 2, 2007 at 4:04 pm

    OK, OK, you’re right!

    But in November, 2008 you’re going to wake up and find that the new President, barring some unforeseeable circumstances*, will be a Republican.

    * One set of such circumstances might be that the Republicans believe that they can’t possibly win. Then, since they can’t find a candidate willing to risk putting a zero in the win column on his first time out, they end up with a half hearted attempt at a campaign, and the subsequent loss to follow.

  10. Nimrod Gently says:
    January 2, 2007 at 4:15 pm

    September 1st, 2001.

    Germany 1-5 England.

    Rudi Voeller, Lothar Matthaus and Jurgen Klinsmann line up to claim that it only really counts as a draw, really.

  11. muzza says:
    January 2, 2007 at 4:47 pm

    Another unforeseen circumstance for 2008 would be that somehow all votes get counted. That could cost the republicans the White House as well.

  12. Dugger says:
    January 2, 2007 at 5:29 pm

    “Another unforeseen circumstance for 2008 would be that somehow all votes get counted. ”

    Nahh. We’ve taken care of that, muzza. Mr Diebold and I could tell you the exact count/outcome of the 2008 election right now, if we wanted. The fix is in baby. Repub president again. Money talks.

    But by all means go out and vote. The machine knows what to do with your votes.

    PS. Please don’t tell anybody about this.

    Hoo hahahahaha!

  13. Muzza says:
    January 3, 2007 at 5:27 am

    Diebold – now that’s a name Rod Serling would come up with.