Definitely need to see the video for Addicted to Love to do justice to the joke.
While Orange County, California still leans Republican, it is becoming more and more diverse and it also is electing more Democrats. There is a Democrat from Orange County in Congress right now (Loretta Sanchez of the 46th district).
I really doubt that an OC resident passing through a hotel there would either 1) insult a US representative to her face or 2) make an outwardly racist verbal attack on an African-American.
They’re conservatives, not monsters.
I would also think that Secret Service or hotel security people would have intervened.
Toby- in both of the last episodes. But it is suble- one time he is in a bar, and you see smoke curling up from a ashtray on their table for eg. The, when he calls Will into his office with the ball- the first time, he has one in his hand.
But surely you remember the “Prez” lighting one up, and then crushing it out on the floor of the cathedral, as he was angry at God for Mrs Laninghams death? And again, down in the situation room?
Well, “anti-smoking” is a liberal issue. Not that actual personal use of smoking may or may not be concentrated in one wing or not- but that opposition to it tends to be liberal.
Interesting question…do White House staffers get Secret Service protection? Remember that CJ only had one temporarily when she was receiving threats.
I imagine hotel security became involved at the point where punches were thrown, which we didn’t get to see.
Well, I really doubt that a typical OC resident passing through a hotel would recognize their own senator, much less one from another state. That’s where the magic of TV comes in. Seriously, how many of you could pick Jesse Helms out of a crowd in a hotel bar?
Ivylass, did you also think that the episode implied that all conservatives are angry drunks? (Also, IIRC, it was the drunk guy’s wife that said that “he’s the one” crack.)
-lv
They’re not. The tax plan proposed by the Bartlett administration would raise the taxes on the top 1% of the population by 1% in order to allow 100% of tuition payments for people making under $80,000/yr (I think was the cutoff mentioned) to be tax deductible. The government wouldn’t be providing the education, it would be allowing a tax deduction on the amount spent by families to pay for their own education.
[sub]Sorry, I added the emphasis on the quote above. I forgot to mention that.[/sub]
He wasn’t implying that any more than he was implying that everyone who wears a hawaiian shirt is a bigot.
Fitzwallace is a conservative. Is Sorkin implying that all conservatives are intelligent and charismatic? Or maybe he’s implying that all conservatives are admirals?
I would recognize that particular congresswoman because she is very attractive. I think I would be able to pick out OC’s only Democratic representative (Loretta Sanchez) because she’s rather attractive IMO.
However, I wouldn’t be able to recognize my own representative (Adam Schiff).
You know, that tuition payment thing sounds great… until you realize that there are State & Community colleges that issue the same sheepskins, and charge residents a much smaller tuition. Sure, I’d guess there are some advantages in getting your sheepskin from Harvard or Caltech. There are also some advantages to owning a Mercedes over a Chevy. But- when all you can afford is the Chevy, and they both get you there, then … well, you know, it’s OK for the rich to be able to buy nicer stuff. As long as us Middle class can still get a decent car, or a decent education, or decent healthcare- then that’s fine. The rich have every right to get BETTER healthcare, cars & educations. That guys daughter doesn’t NEED a $20000/year college. The local State college at some $2000/yr is just fine. Want better? Fine- then pay for it- but don’t whine about it “not being fair”.
Now, with the new credits & such, a middle class family basicly gets the basic “local college” tuition free anyway. And the lower incomes will get grants & stuff. So- just about everyone in America can afford a “decent” college education. And that is wonderful. But- some of us just can’t afford that Mercedes, even if it IS safer or nicer, or… Live with it.
Why should the rich pay higher taxes so that that guys daughter can go to an expensive college? They already pay more so that she can go to a decent local college- and that IS fair.
Why should they? Why shouldn’t they?
Rich people already pay more taxes. Those taxes already help support education and other programs that benefit middle- and lower- class people.
Some people would like this to happen more. Some would like it to happen less. But it’s hardly a revolutionary, evil, anti-capitalist, anti-American, radical-leftie idea.
And the tax increase proposed seems completely in character for the Bartlett presidency as portrayed on TWW.
By the way, what was so racist about what the drunk guy’s wife said about Charlie?
And I don’t see how that incident implied anything about OC people in general. Heck, the vast majority of the people in the bar didn’t act like jerks. So TWW is strongly implying that the vast majority of people in OC aren’t jerks. What a liberal agenda!
(And what about that idiotic jerk of a campaign manager! Damn TWW for implying that all democratic political operatives are incompetent, self-centered assholes!)
It all depends on what you consider decent. Maybe some people think that 8th grade education is enough for a “decent” education, so the government should not subsidize high schools? Colleges are very different from each other; I think it’s reasonable to insist that in order to get a decent college education, you need a good deal of flexibility.
And it’s not like the government is paying for the college education anyway; they were just giving the people paying it a tax break.
Racism could be inferred in that the statement was said with obvious disgust. She obviously wasn’t pleased with the fact that Charlie was dating Zoe and I doubt the couple was so conservative that they were against the act of dating before marriage.
Also “the one” is the same sort of dismissive term like “you people” that got Perot in a bunch of trouble back in '92.
No, you can’t buy your way into a selective college like you can buy an expensive car. Admission to university is based on merit, not on whether you can afford it. School tuition is set by operating costs, not by supply and demand like with cars. It’s just not the same thing.
Darn it! I hate it when television makes me think (or at least try to)!
Say, did Bartlett go to Notre Dame? I seem to remember hearing that, but I really have no idea. I guess from this episode that he got his degree in economics. What’s his story?
How often do you watch this show? I remember thinking Fitzwallace was such a poor excuse for Sorkin to say he isn’t bashing conservatives in every show.
It was obvious that the general impression was the OC conservative residents were against pregnancy outside of marriage and racially mixed couples. It isn’t like Sorkin tends to be subtle about things.
I think he did. He’s worn a Norte Dame sweatshirt a couple of times when they’ve been “off hours and casual”. He also won the Nobel Prize in Economics. That was from when Toby was on his back psychoanalyzing him during the re-election campaign. Toby related how he was “folksy” and talked to King Gustav about his daughter’s soccer game. I imagine he also taught economics for a while. Any one else have more background?
Bartlet was also governor of New Hampshire and served in Congress, although I don’t believe it’s been indicated if it was the House or Senate.
Here’s a screen capture…
Eric
He went to Notre Dame - originally to become a priest, but he met Abby, and the rest is history and an economics degree.
I do think he spent time studying overseas. He did win the Nobel in Economics. I’m pretty sure he taught at Dartmouth. And previous to being president, he was Governor of New Hampshire.
House. He makes a comment in “The Stackhouse Filibuster,” when Donna figures out that Senator Stackhouse is filibustering because he is the grandfather of an autistic child, that he (Bartlet) served in the House and so knows nothing about Senate rules.