Aw, Nuts!

it just occurred to me.......next Tuesday is election day, no KOTH for us in the States! dang,first baseball, now democracy............is KOTH gonna turn me into a Commie? ^_^

well, looks like i was wrong about next week............whew, that's a load off. i wasn't lookin' forward to havin' to learn to read cyrillic!

In article , [email] wrote:

Don't forget, KOTH is on Fox! I don't think they cut in for breaking news for anything.

I checked on www.clicktv.com, and there will be two episodes next week, a new one (which somebody spoiled on this newsgroup without warning, by the way) and the old one where Hank and Kahn take the families down to Mexico.

Rick

On Tue, 27 Oct 1998 16:07:28 -0800 (PST), [email] wrote:

FOX doesn't break in for elections and KOTH will be new. The only breaking coverage they will do is let the local stations have some cut ins, but those are built into the show.

Teh other networks are doing their specials at 10-11pm, 8pm is a little early.

Brad

Dancer wrote in article ...

They should. As much as we like KOTH, the elections are far more important.

Will Miller wrote:

Not to be a cynic, but who the Alderman in the 13th district is less important than a cartoon.

John Mosey wrote in article ...

But who is elected to be your congressman is of the highest importance. And what happens on the national scale is important as well.

I'll tape KOTH and watch it the next day. This is one of the most crucial elections in years and I will be watching the election coverage

Will Miller wrote:

Pfffffft. About as important as which cheek of my ass has more hair. First of all, he (in my district) is onr of what, 500 and some? Regardless of who it is, they operate on party lines, etc... That's besides the fact that Congress hasn't done one iota of anything that affects my life since probably the Gulf War or the invention of the internet.

Crucial how? The Republicans won't lose either house and won't gain enough seats to overturn a veto. It's Status Quo no matter who wins.

When they name a new FED chairman I'll pay attention.

John Mosey wrote in article ...

You couldn't be more wrong. EVERY election is important (even Hank Hill would agree with me).

Regardless

It is your responsibility to care

enough

Have you been living in a cave? Who keeps or gains the house has crucial implications as this is basically a referendum on the president. (I hope the Republicans not only keep the house, but gain a substancial number of seats.)

Going back to the original point, the election is far more important than KOTH and I'll gladly tape it and wait until all the election news is over and THEN enjoy KOTH.

Will Miller wrote:

Awww, it's cute that you are still in that delusional state you get from attending Civics class in high school. Every election is importsnt. You almost made me spit my soda I was laughing so hard.

Ummm, no it isn't that wasn't in the American Manual I received.

But the GOP won't lose the house or gain enough for to over0turn a veto. i.e. it doesn't mattter who wins.

Ok, dude, whatever, they will be elected in the morning and the next day and at least two years after but if you have to know at that moment, it's your life.

John Mosey wrote in article ...

almost

You scare me, and it's apathy like yours that creates many of the problems we have now.

Whether you like it or not Every elections IS important.

and

your

And the KOTH tape will be there for me to enjoy the next day (and I can fast forward through the commercials)

Will Miller wrote:

And what problems has apathy created? (this should be good)

well, i can see my work here is done! i'm off to sow pointless discord in other NGs.............Instigator Man, up up and AWAAAYYY........................ummh, nah, i guess i'll just hang around here.......

Hank and Peggy take voting _very_ seriously.
Dale doesn't vote at all ( there's a  camera hidden inside every booth,
recording every vote---" you _knew_ that, didn't you? my friend, you are
so naive...got anymore beer? " ).
Bill forgot what day elections were being held.
Boomhauer is still out front, tryin' his best to tell the election
workers his name and address........_he_ ain't getting in there before
closing time.
Khan and his wife _would_ vote, but they've      ( koff...) "mislaid
their papers."
Nancy's too busy covering the Tricounty Area's big day to make it to her
own polling place, and ( speaking of "polling" ) John Redcorn's
travelling with her in case she gets a sudden migraine attack ( the
guy's got his priorities ).
Is Luanne even _old_ enough to vote? Well, if she is, she's writing in
Leonardo deCaprio for senator, congressman, judge and dog catcher    (
well, maybe not dog catcher ).

and that's why it's so important to get out there next Tuesday.....you'll probably be voting for five or six other bozos, too!

John Mosey wrote in article ...

Goverment corruption, an out-of-control beauracracy, election of people for sale and puppets of special interest, etc

Will Miller wrote:

Well, considering that even in societies where over 90 percent of hte people vote there is MORE curroption, I'd say this is not an attribute of apahty.

0-1

an out-of-control beauracracy,

• I thought the Republicans and "those who care" were fixing that. Wait, no the budget is balanced and all is good, it's fixed.

2. If you've ever worked for a Fortune 500 company you know that Bearucracy is not limited to government and is hardly an attibute of apthy, in fact just the opposite. It's from too many people trying too hard to voice their opion and get their thing done.

0-2

election of people for

This just makes no sense. Couldn't you even come up with something decent. Aghain, this is actually the result of non-apathy since there have been corralations between soft-money and high voter turnout, hence the specal interests buy non-apthy and voter turn out.

BIG 0-3

Thanks for playing,Charlie tell him what he won.

On 29 Oct 98 12:49:37 GMT, "Will Miller" wrote:

The point, which you seem to miss every time, is that there won't be much election news for 1/2 an hour. If you are willing to spend your entire day watching election news coverage, that's fine - but don't sit there and assume no one else cares. You don't have to care to be a mindless drone watching hours of pointless election coverage that you can read about or see the next day. You can at least take 1/2 hour out and not really miss anything - and best of all, you'll still be a 'good American'.

Brad

Dancer wrote in article ...

The point you keep missing is that the coverage is NOT pointless.

No I cannot, the only option is to tape KOTH and watch it the next day.

Will Miller wrote:

I'm seriously trying to figure out if this guy is a kook, a troll, or kidding and we don't get it.

you never answered why you need "up to the minute" election results. What do you plan on doing with that information RIGHT THEN. Unless you work for the AP and have a deadline, or plan on making a drinking game out of it. you'd be hard pressed to convinvce me it is IMPORTANT that you know who is "winning" 10 minutes after the polls close.

John Mosey wrote in article ...

kidding

The answer is c) you don't get it

How about a desire, and a responsibility to know.

Will Miller wrote:

You seem to be the only person here who "gets it" and frankly I don't want it.

Where is the responsibility to know which guy is leading at 9:17 for the local dog catcher race?

Will it matter the next day, or monts down the road when someone finally takes office who was leading at 9:17?

Person 1: I'm glad Joones won Person 2: Yeah, but he ws losing at 9:17. Person 1: Yeah Thank God they cancelled KOTH that night or I wouldn't have known that.

You seem like the kind of guy who couldn't buy a clue with soft money.

John Mosey wrote in article ...

want it.

Fine, be that way. But don't expect the rest of us to put aside our principles and join you.

I'm a citizen, it's my responsisbility to know. I don't have the right to decide to watch cartoons on election night.

Matters to me. And why can't you wait a day to see KOTH?

I can endure your meaningless insults, I cannot shirk my duty as a citizen to be an active participant in the electoral process.

Bottom line: KOTH can wait a day.

In article ,

Oh yes you do. There is not a darn thing you can do after you vote. So why bother to watch. You mentioned in anoter post that it is your desire to watch. That is fine. But we have no responsibility to watch the results.

An active person in the electoral process can do no more than vote. After that, there is not a darn thing he can do.

For you it will. For me, the election results can wait. That doesn't mean I won't vote.

Paul

Paul Tomko wrote in article ...

to

why

Don't give me rights I don't have. Watching the returns is the last step in particiapting in the process. Maybe you don't want to. Given the political ads I've seen, I might want to watch KOTH, but I don't have the right to.

Do what you want, but within my house, TV on Nove 3rd is election-only

Yes, watch the returns

excellent

Will Miller wrote:

Seriously, you're a troll, right?

what's the proverbial Big Freakin' Deal here? we'll vote, we'll watch KOTH, we'll switch over to election coverage until we're as glazed as crullers, we'll stagger off to bed.............sounds like a plan for an also proverbial Rich, Full Evening!

Will Miller wrote in article ...

results.

in

political

That's fine. If you want to switch to another channel and watch the returns, do it. Just don't force everyone else to. Once we vote, we've done our duty and can watch King of the Hill or whatever the heck we want to watch. Personally, I'll vote, watch KOTH, go to bed and read the paper the next day to see who won.

After

And what difference is it going to make whether I find out that night or the next day who won? None at all. After you vote, nothing you do is going to change a thing.

Johnny Rhyne wrote in article ...

I'm not forcing you to, I'm saying that you should watch them. A cartoon can wait.

Maybe YOU can, I cannnot.

To me it makes a lot of difference. And to a lot of others. I know of at least 5 return parties where people are getting together to watch the returns.

Well, since you said KOTH should be preemtpted (and if I remember, every show should be) and that it is our "responsibility" to do so... that's forcing.

WOW! Five whole parties! Rock on! Considering that every candidate holds one, I'm guessing that's not so special.

John Mosey wrote in article ...

show

forcing.

Forcing would be if someone makes you do it. I cannot force you to do that, but I think YOU should force yourself.

one,

We're not talking about candidate parties! We're talking about parites held by concerned citizens who know that CARTOONS can wait until the next day.

Will Miller wrote:

Rest of us? What do you mean? YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE LIVINING YOUR LITTLE WORLD! Seriously, if you think that I'm the 1 percent and you are the 99 percent y ou need to find help like RIGHT NOW!

Ummm, you have a right to watch TV. I didn't see that laid out in the Constittion or the Federal Papers, but I'm pretty sure it's implied.

but it doesn't matter to ME or almost everyone but you. So why should the world change to fit your seriously warped views?

Does it take you a half hour to vote? If not, your "dutys" are done by the time KOTH comes on.

I'm guessing you already know who you will be voting for, and did when the candidates came out.

John Mosey wrote in article ...

WORLD!

y

It's probably about 50-50

If interest in the process is now considered "warped views", then this country has had it.

Voting is done, but the results are just begining to come in.

For the most part, yes I did.

Will Miller wrote:

Considering you can't even get 50 percent to vote for President you are already in the hole, and considering further that not one person has agred with you, I'd say it's 99 to 1.

Interest and obsession are two different things. Many people are the former, you are obviously the latter.

And so are you planning on lending your moral support? How is your watching the results minute by n\minute going to change the results?

Right after you saw the R or D after their name, which is kind of hypocritcal since you say that this is supposed to be such a mind-burning decision.

John Mosey wrote in article ...

already

you,

That's what you'd like to think.

former,

Obviously you don't know the difference

I DON'T vote by party nor do I vote straight ticket ( I think the straight ticket option shouldn't even be on the ballot), I vote for the candidate.

I still haven't seen anyone agree with you yet...

Let see: interest: voting, paying attention, getting on with your life

Obsession: watching miute by minute returns and suggesting that everyelse does, no, forcing everyone else to by making the day a national holiday where "only the bare essentials" run, pre-empting all tv shows, going to return parties. And of course, declaring that it is your duty to do so. and everyone who doesn't isn't pulling their weight.

No, I'm pretty sure I got it right.

On 30 Oct 98 21:47:03 GMT, "Will Miller" wrote:

What are you talking about? Are you serious? This trolling is getting a little annoying. If you honestly think its 50-50 you have a problem. I fear for the future of our country if that the day of election we drop everything and sit around and watch minute-by-minute returns. You have yet to give a reason why every station in this country should be covering the elections all day. Its not a duty, your duty is to vote. Quit being a poor excuse for a troll and drop it.

I'll tell you what, while I'm watching KOTH, I'll write some letters to my congressmen - that's doing more than you'll ever do by watching the returns.

Brad

Dancer wrote: ] On 30 Oct 98 21:47:03 GMT, "Will Miller" wrote: ] ]>John Mosey wrote in article ]>... ]> ]>> Rest of us? What do you mean? YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE LIVINING YOUR LITTLE ]>WORLD! ]>> Seriously, if you think that I'm the 1 percent and you are the 99 percent ]>y ]>> ou need to find help like RIGHT NOW! ]> ]>It's probably about 50-50 ] ] What are you talking about? Are you serious? ] This trolling is getting a little annoying.

Just to inject a minor point here, if it is trolling it's fairly successful, and getting annoying is merely a side benefit. There is no virtue to pointing fingers at something and calling it trolling, and the only proper post-newbie reaction to trolling is to ignore it, unless of course you're having fun (and you include some _King of the Hill_ content).

Will Miller has a valid point here in that it is good to know about the results of some of the elections, but he is wrong that he or we have no right to watch KOTH instead. The right in the USA is stated right there in the 10th and 14th amendments to the Constitution ("The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States, respectively, or to the people." And "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;" respectively). The federal or state governments might be _able_ to pass a law to prohibit watching KOTH on election night; but they haven't yet, and I doubt that politicians are stupid enough to try. No, really.

He's got the right to watch election returns, but any duty he feels to do so is of his own making. I've got the right to watch KOTH on election night (if it's on), and I object to any premption of a scheduled first run of an episode, whether by election returns, baseball, or presidential speeches. A single beep and a text crawl on the bottom of the screen is all I want even for an impending tornado. The problem this year is that the highest offices contested are probably governors and senators, and there is limited interest actoss the country in any particular one. There's a vague interest in how much the balance will shift in Congress, but John Mosey's assessment of that is pretty much on the mark, and for all the Republicans' pre-election posturing, you've got to ask if they really want to give Al Gore a two-year head start on the next presidential election. It'll make for an interesting half hour or two on next Saturday's yell shows. But apathy is a tenable position.

] If you honestly think its 50-50 you have a problem.

I'd guess that maybe half the people watching television would be vaguely interested in an unusual development on election night, but that can generally be handled either by a text crawl or by a voice-over during the credits.

] I fear for the future of our country if that the day of ] election we drop everything and sit around and ] watch minute-by-minute returns.

Especially if a new episode of _King of the Hill_ is on.

] You have yet to give a reason why every station in this ] country should be covering the elections all day.

Actually, this was competently established during the baseball discussion. The TV stations are in the commercial-selling business, which is highly influenced by the ratings business. If there are better ratings to be had than by doing what they had planned, it's in their interest to change their plans. However disinterested I was in watching someone break a baseball record, I could at least appreciate why they pre-empted a lower-rated show for it.

The election thing is a little different. There is mighty little that can be reported early in the day, except that town in New Hampshire that votes at midnight and they can close the polls when everyone has voted. Until noon or so, the best they can do is give the results of exit interviews at polling places that in the past have been good indicators of national trends. There is frankly very little that can be reported during _King of the Hill_ in the eastern USA, and that can be done by text crawls and voice-overs during the credits. But a half an hour before polling places close, a civic-minded volunteer will show up at nearly every polling place in the USA and watch as the election judges copy down the results from each machine (and presumably do what they can whenever they can to find out the results in slower-counting places), then go home and call a special number and report the results that you see moments later on television. They already know how each polling place relates to the population at large, so they can get good indications fairly early, starting at about the time _King of the Hill_ is over in the east.

The real problem is in the west, especially in Hawaii and Alaska. When _King of the Hill_ is on there, the networks are fairly bursting to tell who probably won and what it may mean to the country. But there is a real ethical issue in reporting it before the polls close in Hawaii, so people who are really eager for election returns are not doing anyone a favor by putting pressure on the networks to announce them early. It may even be aa Bad Thing (tm). Better for the country maybe that everyone watch _King of the Hill_, and THEN worry about the election results.

] Its not a duty, your duty is to vote.

Not even that. It's a _right_ to vote. But (thank God) in the USA it is not mandatory, as it is in some other countries. They'll come and get you if you don't show up for jury duty (a real duty), but it's actually okay not to vote. Not voting is merely a vote for the winner. If the winner is fine with you, you've done your duty. The people I worry about are the ones who don't vote, then complain about the results.

] Quit being a poor excuse for a troll and drop it.

I suspect he may be serious, but even if he's trolling, he's doing a good job of it and getting plenty of reaction. The violation if any is in not having _King of the Hill_ content to the posts. Speculating that Anthony would always vote, but that Dale might well never vote, and that the Hills would vote early, then watch something else on TV, then watch the 10 o'clock news to see who won in their Congressional district and grumble about all the other districts being reported, too, now THAT would be _King of the Hill_ content, right or wrong.

] I'll tell you what, while I'm watching KOTH, I'll ] write some letters to my congressmen - that's doing ] more than you'll ever do by watching the returns.

And more than I'll be doing while watching KOTH. You are to be commended for writing the letters, but he shouldn't be ridiculed for watching election returns all day, if that's what he wants to do. He should be ridiculed for suggesting on alt.tv.king-of-hill that we don't have a right to watch _King of the Hill_, and even that _he_ doesn't have that right (whether or not he chooses to exercise it).

ObATKOH: How many times has Bobby Hill gone into Cornholio mode from eating too much sugar since the beginning? I have vague recollections of only once, but it wasn't more than twice, was it?

I'm pretty sure your long-winded political diatribe was even more boring and worthless than the other guy's troll. (about 1000 words snipped)

R J Valentine wrote:

John Mosey wrote:

] I'm pretty sure your long-winded political diatribe was even more boring ] and worthless than the other guy's troll. ] (about 1000 words snipped) ] ] R J Valentine wrote: ] ] -- ] John Mosey ICQ #5374423 (Always willing to talk shop) ] "Fire Bando!" ] ] www.mosey.com John Mosey's Fantasy Baseball Home Page

I do not doubt for a minute that you believe what you say. The post in question did, however, have some _King of the Hill_ content, which (you may notice) your post (quoted in its entirety above) did not. In fairness, I should mention that some of your posts actually do have _King of the Hill_ content. But the last one I recall was the one that suggested that Buckley (it was actually Dooley) told Bobby Hill that his father had died (he actually said that he had been "blown up", with the smoke from the explosion still in the background), and I believe in a separate post you cited (as evidence that Hank had died) the clip they reused from the episode about Hank's unmentionable problem, when he dreamed about his own funeral. While I admire the courage it took to take an unusual and unpopular position on something that had not yet been confirmed on the show, those little lapses from the actual history of the show weakened the position.

As to the other guy's supposed troll, though I disagree with him on the cosmic importance of early election returns when a first-run _King of the Hill_ episode is scheduled (just as I disagreed with you on the cosmic importance of a televised baseball game when a first-run _King of the Hill_ episode was scheduled, and this one the long-promoted season premiere), I give him credit for supporting his position with actual arguments, just as I give you credit for supporting your position with actual arguments. You provide additional amusement by apparently being constantly flabbergasted by the stupididy of anyone who makes bold to disagree with you. You are on the side of the angels in this discussion, but I fail to see how the strength of your arguments on the baseball case differ from the strength of the other guy's arguments on the election-returns issue. Whatever ridicule you heap on him on this issue contrasts strangely with your position on the other issue. Participatory baseball is one thing; spectator baseball is a bit removed; televised baseball is far removed; and I have no idea what attraction fantasy baseball might hold. Yet still there are parallels with the participatory politics that Brad mentioned, the spectator politics in the parties someone mentioned, the televised politics proposed by the other guy as an alternative to watching a first-run _King of the Hill_ episode, and the heretofore mercifully-unmentioned concept of fantasy politics (unless you count all of the above).

In casting about to speculate as to which of the characters on _King of the Hill_ could best represent the tone and depth of your arguments, the closest I could come up with is Kahn, and that probably does an injustice to Kahn. Boomhauer could probably articulate them as well and provide more amusement in doing so. Dale would probably detract from the actual merits of your arguments by his suspicious attitude. Bill would probably agree with them right down the line, but wouldn't be able to support them as well as you do. Hank is too patriotic to show the other guy so much disrespect. Nancy could probably summarize them well once she steps up to the anchor chair from her current job at the station. Anthony would probably take the opposing position. What do you think?

But by all means keep those valuable and fascinating postings coming. It's even worse when there are no postings at all to read on alt.tv.king-of-hill.

it may just be the shellshock talking, but who's Anthony? i can't recall this character at all.......not one little bit. if he turns out to be a recurrent member of the show who i _should_ have no problem remembering, anybody know a good neurologist?

( and remember, if Dale voted at all, he'd vote libertarian.........that may account for their showings at the polls! )

[email] wrote: ] it may just be the shellshock talking, but who's Anthony? i can't recall ] this character at all.......not one little bit. if he turns out to be a ] recurrent member of the show who i _should_ have no problem remembering, ] anybody know a good neurologist?

He was the social worker with the state in the first episode who came to rescue Bobby Hill when there was evidence that he had been mistreated, but got sent back to Los Angeles on the bus at the end of that episode. He showed up later as a government employee in the episode when allowances had to be made at Strickland Propane for an employee with apparent drug problems, which got solved only by Hank's departure, which dropped the number of employees below the threshold, allowing them to fire the guy and rehire Hank. Anthony himself seems to suffer from carpal-tunnel syndrome, causing him great discomfort when he removes his wrist braces.

ooohh.........Stick Boy! oh, ok, i know the guy...........thanks, R.J!

Dancer wrote in article ...

Caring about the future and the country is not trolling.

That AND being involved to the end which means following the returns

Quit namecalling.

In article ,

The desire is fine. That's your opinion. But a responsibility to know? Okay, so it makes sense for you to know who your representatives are, but does that mean you have put your life on hold and sit in front of the TV wetting your pants over who is going to win? I think not. The results aren't going to change any if you wait until 9 PM, or 10 PM, or the next day, or a week later, or a month.

Well, maybe here in Chicago the results might change, but that's different.

Paul

Paul Tomko wrote in article ...

Yes, a responsibility/

If I can't take one day a year for the elections, I have no right to watch TV the other 364

different.

Can the dead still vote in Chicago?

Will Miller wrote:

Ok, that's REALLY warped. Odf all the screwed up things you said so far, this takes the ake. What kind of political masicist(sic) are you?

In article ,

You betcha. My cats are even registered.

Vote early and vote often. Then watch KOTH.

Paul

On 29 Oct 98 21:35:43 GMT, "Will Miller" wrote:

Okay, I'm assuming your a troll now, because if not and your sense of reality is that warped, then I'm way too scared for my own good.

Brad

On the east coast, sure. However, on the west coast, 8:00 PM PST is 11:00 PM EST, and there is usually lots of election news at that hour.

That being said, Fox is not going to be pre-empting KOTH for a midterm election. Baseball, yes, but not a midterm election. I, for one, will be tuned to KCPQ for a new episode of KOTH.

J-Mag wrote:

No, you're wrong. You could have local stations like ours that really, really want to show us all of the nifty new live reporting equipment they have. On election night they spent what seemed like an eternity bouncing from campaign headquarters to campaign headquarters interviewing the various candidates and asking them how they felt about the 2% of the returns that had been counted.

I voted and did my duty as a citizen. After that, I really didn't want to here anything else about the election until the results became final. I did watch some of the coverage (it was difficult not to since it was on about 1 out of every 5 channels on the cable), but I ended up going to Blockbuster and renting a movie, When I felt the returns would be final, I turned to CNN and got all of the results in around 10 minutes. Amazingly enough, my inattention to the election results did not seem to have any lasting effect on the election itself.

If the stories that I have heard about the former Soviet Union are correct, I believe that they did have to watch the election results in their entirety. Since I am not the biggest fan of totalitarian regimes, I think that I'll watch King of the Hill.

On 28 Oct 98 15:48:00 GMT, "Will Miller" wrote:

at 8pm? All you hear about is a minute by minute analysis, which is meaningless. ABC, NBC, CBS aren't doing anything until 10pm, when most of the votes will be in and they can get more information. No need for everyone to cover the elections, it doesn't make any sense. When FOX goes off at 10pm, the local stations with newscasts will be covering elections. I think that more than covers anything important.

Brad

Dancer wrote in article ...

important.

It's not meaningless because there are a lot of people who want to hear that, including myself. In fact I'll be watching the coverage all day on the news channels.

A cartoon can wait until the next day. Nov 3rd's TV time belongs to the election.

Are you not aware of the national implcations of the results of this election?

Will Miller wrote:

Watch CNN or CSPAN or PBS then. I dare say this is far less important and probably entertaining than McGwire's home run.

No, why don't you tell us, I need a good laugh.

John Mosey wrote:

] Will Miller wrote: ... ] : Are you not aware of the national implcations of the results of this ] : election? ] ] No, why don't you tell us, I need a good laugh.

It's because somebody may win the election with fewer votes than anyone has won an election with IN OVER THIRTY YEARS. If the same thing happens next week or next year "the moment" just won't be the same. How can you compare a cartoon with a *moment*?

I hope this is sarcasm because it's the single dumbest arguement I've ever heard.

John Mosey wrote: ] R J Valentine wrote: ] : John Mosey wrote: ] ] : ] Will Miller wrote: ] : ... ] : ] : Are you not aware of the national implcations of the results of this ] : ] : election? ] : ] ] : ] No, why don't you tell us, I need a good laugh. ] ] : It's because somebody may win the election with fewer votes than anyone ] : has won an election with IN OVER THIRTY YEARS. If the same thing happens ] : next week or next year "the moment" just won't be the same. How can you ] : compare a cartoon with a *moment*? ] ] I hope this is sarcasm because it's the single dumbest arguement I've ever ] heard.

Thanks. As I recall, it's exactly the argument you used with regard to a baseball game a few weeks back.

It seems there are two outspoken groups, one ranking the cosmic importance of three events as follows:

• A baseball game
• The first showing of a _King of the Hill_ episode
• Election returns

and the other ranking them as follows:

• Election returns
• The first showing of a _King of the Hill_ episode
• A baseball game

A minority (to which I belong, and to which I see indications that Brad may belong) appear to rank them as follows:

• The first showing of a _King of the Hill_ episode
• Election returns
• A baseball game

• The first showing of a _King of the Hill_ episode
• A baseball game
• Election returns

I imagine that people who might rank them as follows might be too busy watching baseball and election returns to be much concerned with _King of the Hill_ much before December, and then only for a couple of months (which is hardly time enough to work up enough enthusiasm to read alt.tv.king-of-hill, much less post to it):

• A baseball game
• Election returns
• The first showing of a _King of the Hill_ episode

or:

• Election returns
• A baseball game
• The first showing of a _King of the Hill_ episode

But, since baseball records don't become official until the end of the season and since newly elected officials don't take office until January or so, I am content to wait until the evening news or the next morning's newspaper to catch up on what I missed while watching an all-new _King of the Hill_ episode.

I'm sorry if the dumbness of the reasoning pains you. Hank and Peggy seem to use BC Fast Pain Relief (a product of Block Drug Company, Inc., Jersey City, NJ 07302), but you should see your doctor to see if it is appropriate for you.

John Mosey wrote in article ...

I intend to watch them, all day long. I'll tape KOTH and then watch that on Wed after the election news is over.

Tell that to the thousands of veterans who risked life an limb in WWII, Korea, Vietnam, the Persian Gulf, etc. Tell that to the families of servicemen that died for our freedom to vote. I'm sure all of these people would be very disgusted to hear that you consider cartoons and baseball more important than your most important civic duty.

Apathetic people like you scare me, and are the ruination of this country.

My point: If you can't devote one day to the election, then you have NO RIGHT to watch KOTH.

In article ,

Apathetic? Not necessarily. I still vote. But I'm not going to wet my pants waiting to see whether my candidate won or not. I did my part, now it's back to KOTH.

Paul

Will Miller wrote:

Good for you. Nice to know you will be getting good use out of your Cable channels.

Are you retarded?!? We aren't at war, this election MEANS NBOTHING. And frankly, baseball ewas considered a great force in the local and overseas moral in WWII and Vietnam.

You make it sound as if every person who was ever at war is a political junkie like yourself. guess what chester, t ain't true.

And probably sinners too. I suppose you think that we should shut down the counrty for the day once every other year so we can all ponder who we will vote for.

This is even MORE retarded I plan on voting, but I wouldn't cry if I missed it. Just because your meaningless little pathetic existance revolves around which bad suit wearing palem pressing dipshit gets to "voice" your .05% of your vote on how much money goes to fund money fart experiments doesn't mean you are "more American" or "more patriotic" or more anything except probably annoying, friendless and boring at parties.

Damn John,you are funny.I cracked up.

John Mosey wrote in article ...

I hope so, they cost enough.

NO election means nothing.

the

will

Yes, I do think that Election day should be a national holiday with only the essentials operating

John Mosey wrote:

<LOL> Go get 'im, John! I'm so fed up with politicians and politicians' ads attacking other politicians by this time that I will have a comfortable seat in front of the T.V. to watch "KOTH" on election night. I can ALWAYS listen to politicians' bullshit, but KOTH only comes on once-a-week.

In article ,

The election may as well wait until the next day. What difference does it make if you find out candidate X won today or if you don't find out until tomorrow. Either way, he still won and he still won't take office until next year, or is that just president?

Me, I'd rather see the cartoon. Then, if I care who won, I can watch the news at 9:00 or 10:00. Even if I don't watch the news, I'm sure someone will tell me who won.

Paul

Paul Tomko wrote in article ...

To me it makes a lot of difference.

The president isn't even up for reelection. Perhaps you need to watch a few less cartoons and take a government class.

In article ,

How so? How is your life changed by finding out 12 hours later who won the local elections?

The current president will never be up for re-election. Of course I realize these are local elections. What I do not know, is whether there is a lame duck period for the previous local legislators before the newly elected ones take office. Obviously there is some period, but I am not aware what it is. They don't teach that in government class because I have had several.

Paul

On 28 Oct 98 21:47:20 GMT, "Will Miller" wrote:

Okay, so why does every channel have to cover it? That's complete overkill!

Why? You have given no reason that every channel should cover it, what's the point? Do you need minute by minute analysis? Is your life that wrapped up in the vote? It doesn't matter if I even find out Tuesday - I can wait until the next morning and read about it, it won't affect my life at all. What exactly are you going to do with this information that you need so desperately?

So what's your point? Local stations shouldn't cover the election? Local newscast don't cover the national? People want to first hear about their district and then about the rest of the country and what is happening.

Brad