Probably "high as a paper kite" corrupted, I suggest five years too late.

Probably "high as a paper kite" corrupted, I suggest five years too late.

Midwest like Michigan, Indiana, Wisconsin, Minnesota, North Dakota, Kansas, Nebraska…? I'll grant you that Clinton scraped past Sanders by 0.2% in Iowa and again by 0.2% in Missouri.

He's told like 95% of this story on Conan before; see https://www.youtube.com/wat….

Oh, wow, yeah, would've been nice if they'd used that ending with re-finding the phone.

Also, their April Fools “Netflix Live” video was all Will Arnett.

While matching in all the other details, the main character (and many of the side characters as well) in that one isn't white.

Similarly, in the background while others are talking over the TV, you can also hear mentioned, dimly, Amelia Earhart, Patsy Cline, and Buddy Holly; there's also a more prominent joke about a Jayne Mansfield school for driving or some such. So not nearly all assassinations, or civil rights leaders, or people of color,…

Whatever you say, Kaczynski…

Cletus Darrow. I had to look this up, and now save others some work in doing so.

I think he's just indicating how he was originally shown false numbers, and wasn't merely misremembering in court. He used that Magna Carta line in an earlier episode, too.

I think he's indicating how he was originally shown false numbers, and wasn't merely misremembering in court. He used that Magna Carta line in an earlier episode, too.

I've been wondering for a while, but never asked: Why do all these SNL recaps start with "I'm not an actor, I'm a [whatever…]"? Is this a reference to something?

Oh, yeah, I agree that, taken as a body of work, Norm MacDonald has a weird, disappointing fixation on the topic of gay people. But that "I am a deeply closeted gay man" bit in particular seems to me one of the most defensible, innocuous bits in that area he's ever done. It almost has nothing to do with homosexuality.…

If you're seriously asking, for "oll korrect". Really.

Huh. I was at (very likely) that same Cobb's show, and I found the closeted gay man bit really funny. But, granted, I had seen it on Conan the night before as well… What was problematic about it, though?

People owe politicians votes without politicians owing people anything? Votes aren't to be earnt from communities of color, but gathered as tithe?

Suppose Nate says 75% Clinton. Jack says Nate is wrong; it's actually 55% Clinton. Susan says close, but it's actually 58%. How do I determine which is right? If I can't determine one is right about this rather than the others, why should I care about these precise yet unfalsifiable claims? In what way should I change…

Fine, but what then is the value of Nate Silver's non-falsifiable "prediction" of the 2016 election winner? Why is anyone expected to care about it? And what WOULD count as there being something wrong with the numbers he chooses to assign?

If you want to say "killed precisely one out of ten Roman soldiers", nothing's stopping you. The language hasn't lost the ability to express that concept.