# Bush talks at 9pm Wed 09/24



## cheerdude (Feb 27, 2001)

Not sure which channels. Adjust your recordings accordingly (expected to be a 12-14 minute speech).


----------



## scottykempf (Dec 1, 2004)

cheerdude said:


> Not sure which channels. Adjust your recordings accordingly (expected to be a 12-14 minute speech).


Most likely all of them.


----------



## mrmike (May 2, 2001)

EST (I assume)?


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

This is a pain. I think what I will try and do is assume about 15 minutes of air. Then, I can pad America's Got Talent and Criminal Minds (grabbing 90210 during its encore this week) and let the clipping functionality account for "starting" Lipstick Jungle late, and then pad the end of that. What a pain.

Thanks W for choosing to speak in the middle of premiere week. But I guess this is important.

This is one of those rare occasions where the extra start/stop times of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 15, 30 etc. need to be more granular.

[EDIT: I just realized, what makes more sense for me, and would be a lot easier, since AGT and LJ are on the same network, I'll just block record ABC for 2.5 hours and then pad Criminal Minds by 30 minutes, and pick up 90210 on the weekend]


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

Oh $crew.....I just realized tonight is the encore night for 90210. I don't know if I got it last night. I'll forego it if I didn't to make sure I get AGT for my daughter and Criminal Minds...or just forego AGT since it will be synopsized at the beginning of the next episode.

Damn you George.

[Edit]: Thanks to the futoncritic's ability to look at the schedule for past dates, I confirmed that I would have recorded 90210 last night at 8, along with NCIS. So it's just back to passing criminal minds, leaving AGT as is (on the SD channel and not bothering to move it to the HD channel prior to LJ), and padding LJ.

I am obviously having a slow day at work in that I am worrying about this way tooooooooo much.


----------



## Amnesia (Jan 30, 2005)

jlb said:


> EDIT: I just realized, what makes more sense for me, and would be a lot easier, since AGT and LJ are on the same network, I'll just block record ABC for 2.5 hours (...)


Why don't you just pad _Lipstick Jungle_ for 30 minutes?

A: You only need to modify 1 recording, instead of deleting 2 and creating 1.
B: When you're finished watching the part of _America's Got Talent_ that recorded between 9 and 10PM, you can delete the recording, thus freeing up space on your DVR...


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

Oh right, doh. While I record AGT on the SD feed and LJ on the HD feed, the HD feed will still have the end of AGT.

So, yes, my final needs would thus be

Pad Criminal Minds 30 minutes
Pad Lipstick Jungle 30 minutes

That.


----------



## mrmike (May 2, 2001)

I just wish I could adjust this stuff from work. Now I have to choose between hitting the bar after work, going home to fix this first, or missing a couple of premieres I actually kinda care about. Thanks George.


----------



## Amnesia (Jan 30, 2005)

mrmike said:


> I just wish I could adjust this stuff from work. Now I have to choose between hitting the bar after work, going home to fix this first, or missing a couple of premieres I actually kinda care about. Thanks George.


While AFAIK you can't adjust recordings over the Net, you can create new recordings, can't you? Why not just add new 30 minute recordings on the appropriate channels instead of padding the existing scheduled recordings?

(And not to get political, but it hardly makes sense to blame Bush---Congressional Democrats have berated him for *not* speaking to the public about the financial situation...)


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

I guess that would be one use of a slingbox, right? It gives you the ability to adjust things remotely....in addition to being able to watch stuff.

One question, when setting up a recording via TiVo Central Online, doesn't it aask you if you want to pad? If so, I guess you could choose the programs you would need to pad, add the padding in your request, and then tell it to record no matter what (instead of "only if no conflicts". Shouldn't that work????


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

Amnesia said:


> While AFAIK you can't adjust recordings over the Net, you can create new recordings, can't you? Why not just add new 30 minute recordings on the appropriate channels instead of padding the existing scheduled recordings?
> 
> (And not to get political, but it hardly makes sense to blame Bush---Congressional Democrats have berated him for *not* speaking to the public about the financial situation...)


You beat me there by a hair. I think my idea works a little smoother. Assuming I understand the functionality correctly.


----------



## Amnesia (Jan 30, 2005)

jlb said:


> You beat me there by a hair. I think my idea works a little smoother. Assuming I understand the functionality correctly.


I'm not sure that the new recording request will override the existing recording for the same channel at the same time...


----------



## TiVoJerry (Jul 26, 2005)

We've just received two of the official updates (FOX and ABC). Times displayed are Eastern. Adjust as necessary locally. Of course, it's a live event so we can't even guarantee that the speech will last 15 minutes or less.

Fox
Weds. 9/24/08 
***prime time extended***
Add 
9:00pm-9:15pm: Presidential Address (live in all time zones)
9:15pm-9:45pm: 'Til Death
9:45pm-10:15pm: Do Not Disturb
10:15pm-6:00am: Sign Off


ABC
***prime time extended***
Weds. 9/24/08 
Add 
9:00pm-9:15pm: Presidential Address (Live in all time zones)
9:15pm-11:15pm: David Blaine: Dive of Death (Live E/C, same-day taped M/P)
11:15pm-11:50pm: Sign Off
12:35pm-12:05am: Nightline
12:20am-1:20am: Jimmy Kimmel Live
1:20am-2:00am: Sign Off


----------



## mrmike (May 2, 2001)

Amnesia said:


> While AFAIK you can't adjust recordings over the Net, you can create new recordings, can't you? Why not just add new 30 minute recordings on the appropriate channels instead of padding the existing scheduled recordings?


Mostly because I have 4 tuners and don't know which box is recording which channels. So I might end up having to watch the last 15-20 minutes of something on the other TiVo. Which is even more annoying. I may try to do this, though.


----------



## sieglinde (Aug 11, 2002)

I live in the West so it may mess up my news, no big deal for me. I may miss the speech though because I will be out at that time but I always can catch it later on the interwebs. 

(I cannot complain about this one, I was one of the screaming Democrats.)


----------



## TiVoJerry (Jul 26, 2005)

CBS
Wed. 9/24/08  
Add
9:00pm-9:15pm: Presidential Address (Live in all time zones)
9:15pm-10:15pm: Criminal Minds
10:15pm-11:15pm: CSI: NY
11:15pm-11:50pm: Sign Off
11:50pm-12:52am: Late Show With David Letterman
12:52am-1:52am: The Late Late Show With Craig Ferguson
1:52am-2:00am: Sign Off


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

It never ceases to amaze me the number of people who ***** about a presidential speech disturbing their TV schedules, especially in a situation like this where the economy's in shambles and it's not ridiculous to have the president speaking in prime time.


----------



## Bierboy (Jun 12, 2004)

serumgard said:


> It never ceases to amaze me the number of people who ***** about a presidential speech disturbing their TV schedules, especially in a situation like this where the economy's in shambles and it's not ridiculous to have the president speaking in prime time.


Preach it, brother...


----------



## mrmike (May 2, 2001)

serumgard said:


> It never ceases to amaze me the number of people who ***** about a presidential speech disturbing their TV schedules, especially in a situation like this where the economy's in shambles and it's not ridiculous to have the president speaking in prime time.


Maybe it's because we have strong odds he's not going to say anything to us

a) we don't already know if we care enough to be informed
b) we don't want to hear
c) that isn't 100% spin

and we'd prefer he not posture to the public just to do that.

(and for the record, I'd be just as ticked if he were a Democrat, an Indy, or an Aardvark)


----------



## TiVoJerry (Jul 26, 2005)

mrmike said:


> Maybe it's because we have strong odds he's not going to say anything to us
> 
> a) we don't already know if we care enough to be informed
> b) we don't want to hear
> ...


I try to stay out of political discussions, but I've been having a real problem with the Aardvarkian positions as of late. They only seem to focus on the small stuff right in front of them....


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

mrmike said:


> Maybe it's because we have strong odds he's not going to say anything to us
> 
> a) we don't already know if we care enough to be informed
> b) we don't want to hear
> ...


Party has nothing to do with it, I'm a fervent anti-Bush guy. But when the economy's going through crap we haven't heard of since the Depression, I've got no problem with the president stepping up and taking 15 minutes to talk to the nation. And seriously, how many presidential addresses have ever been memorable? 3? And you might not care, but others do.

But damn it, he's cutting into America's Next Top Model. This is bullsh*t!


----------



## andyf (Feb 23, 2000)

jlb said:


> Oh right, doh. While I record AGT on the SD feed and LJ on the HD feed, the HD feed will still have the end of AGT.
> 
> So, yes, my final needs would thus be
> 
> ...


You know the new season of LJ doesn't start this week, right? Maybe you are still recording reruns of last season.


----------



## Amnesia (Jan 30, 2005)

andyf said:


> You know the new season of LJ doesn't start this week, right?


Sure it does.


----------



## trainman (Jan 29, 2001)

TiVoJerry said:


> 11:15pm-11:50pm: Sign Off
> *12:35pm-12:05am: Nightline*
> 12:20am-1:20am: Jimmy Kimmel Live
> 1:20am-2:00am: Sign Off


I assume that's supposed to be 11:50 P.M. to 12:20 A.M. for "Nightline."

Don't worry, I know it's hard to type and tear your hair out at the same time.


----------



## TiVoJerry (Jul 26, 2005)

trainman said:


> I assume that's supposed to be 11:50 P.M. to 12:20 A.M. for "Nightline."
> 
> Don't worry, I know it's hard to type and tear your hair out at the same time.


Something like that. I just "cut and paste". I'll ask for clarification.

If you see my avatar, you'll see I have no hair to pull. On the other hand, the person who originally wrote this up.....


----------



## andyf (Feb 23, 2000)

andyf said:


> You know the new season of LJ doesn't start this week, right? Maybe you are still recording reruns of last season.


I was wrong. Too many shows in TDL is my excuse.

Sorry!


----------



## Johncv (Jun 11, 2002)

Padding may not do any good because the news people will analyze the speech for the next 20 minutes.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

serumgard said:


> It never ceases to amaze me the number of people who ***** about a presidential speech disturbing their TV schedules, especially in a situation like this where the economy's in shambles and it's not ridiculous to have the president speaking in prime time.


A 15 minute speech in prime time isn't going to help the economy.

A 15 minute speech where he offers absolutely nothing new we haven't heard in the news for a week is definitely not going to help the economy.

The networks should be refusing to continually do this kind of coverage; they should develop a rotating pool system so each presidential prime time speech is covered and aired live by one network. I don't think I've seen or heard of a presidential speech during prime time during my lifetime that needed to be live and immediate and reaching out to the maximum sized audience. Well, maybe 9/11 and announcements concerning how the air travel system was being shut down for a few days, et. al. might possibly be the closest good reason for coverage like that -- though even then, it's not like people could do anything right then anyway about it, and it's not like news coverage wasn't mostly continuous already, so there wasn't much to break in to.


----------



## kas25 (Mar 10, 2003)

dswallow said:


> A 15 minute speech in prime time isn't going to help the economy.
> 
> A 15 minute speech where he offers absolutely nothing new we haven't heard in the news for a week is definitely not going to help the economy.
> 
> The networks should be refusing to continually do this kind of coverage; they should develop a rotating pool system so each presidential prime time speech is covered and aired live by one network. I don't think I've seen or heard of a presidential speech during prime time during my lifetime that needed to be live and immediate and reaching out to the maximum sized audience. Well, maybe 9/11 and announcements concerning how the air travel system was being shut down for a few days, et. al. might possibly be the closest good reason for coverage like that -- though even then, it's not like people could do anything right then anyway about it, and it's not like news coverage wasn't mostly continuous already, so there wasn't much to break in to.


I respectfully disagree. While a 15 minute speech won't fix the economy, it can help to assuage peoples fears and explain to them what is going on. Most people aren't like me in that they don't watch CNBC every day. They see headlines that the gov't is giving away $700 billion of their own money and that can lead to irrational behavior and opinions by uninformed people. A 15 minute speech by the President can help to explain why we need (or many believe we need) to provide temporary support to liquidity markets.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

kas25 said:


> I respectfully disagree. While a 15 minute speech won't fix the economy, it can help to assuage peoples fears and explain to them what is going on. Most people aren't like me in that they don't watch CNBC every day. They see headlines that the gov't is giving away $700 billion of their own money and that can lead to irrational behavior and opinions by uninformed people. A 15 minute speech by the President can help to explain why we need (or many believe we need) to provide temporary support to liquidity markets.


You don't need to watch CNBC all day every day. One article. One news report on television news. One article online. Take your pick. Read or watch it and you now have more information than 15 minutes of speech reading by the lame duck president is going to give you.


----------



## kas25 (Mar 10, 2003)

dswallow said:


> You don't need to watch CNBC all day every day. One article. One news report on television news. One article online. Take your pick. Read or watch it and you now have more information than 15 minutes of speech reading by the lame duck president is going to give you.


Except the average American doesn't watch or read the news. If the President can interrupt Dancing with the Stars for 15 minutes to educate millions, that's not a bad thing.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

kas25 said:


> Except the average American doesn't watch or read the news. If the President can interrupt Dancing with the Stars for 15 minutes to educate millions, that's not a bad thing.


If they'd simply have had Bush dancing (literally rather than just figuratively), that'd have been different.


----------



## Sparty99 (Dec 4, 2001)

dswallow said:


> You don't need to watch CNBC all day every day. One article. One news report on television news. One article online. Take your pick. Read or watch it and you now have more information than 15 minutes of speech reading by the lame duck president is going to give you.


The crux of the issue I've got is that people are complaining that their shows are getting disrupted because the president is speaking, and that to me is just an extremely sad state of affairs (and I like TV as much as anyone). And as for your suggestion about a rotating the speech's on the networks, ABC would be pretty pissed if they got an update on Iraq interrupting their Thursday night lineup while NBC gets the invasion interrupting The Biggest Loser. There are things that are well worth complaining about with network television; this isn't one of them.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

TiVoJerry said:


> I try to stay out of political discussions, but I've been having a real problem with the Aardvarkian positions as of late. They only seem to focus on the small stuff right in front of them....


please try and keep the political leanings of Ninjas out of forum threads. Thank You.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

dswallow said:


> A 15 minute speech in prime time isn't going to help the economy.
> 
> A 15 minute speech where he offers absolutely nothing new we haven't heard in the news for a week is definitely not going to help the economy.


Consumer confidence is a major component of the economy. Polling that right no would be rather pointless and something was needed to reach many people who perhaps just watch TV news and only get a part of what is happening and mainly the panic part at that. you were not the main target audience last night. The main target audience would just flip channels if they could.

*full disclosure - I would sign a petition to revoke Bush's citizenship. 
and we did see something we have not seen in 6 years. A Presidential looking and sounding Bush. No goofy grins or chuckles, no odd pronunciations. Just straight up explanations that I found remarkably clear and easy to follow and the reasons for quick action and why his proposal needs to roll now. He ended with a very bipartisan appreciation of the work being done on the deal and how both sides are getting their input into the measure.

All in all I think that speech was the best response on anything this administration has faced and did much to calm things down and restore a bit of balance for everyone.


----------



## sieglinde (Aug 11, 2002)

I am the Queen of the Bush haters and I thought the speech was appropriate. TV is just not that iimportant to cry about missing your favorite shows.


----------



## CrashHD (Nov 10, 2006)

kas25 said:


> I respectfully disagree. While a 15 minute speech won't fix the economy, it can help to assuage peoples fears and explain to them what is going on.


BS. The media created these fears to begin with. Seriously, if it wasn't for the media telling everyone there's a problem with the economy, nobody would even know. 
The only financial complaint I have is $3+ gas, and that's old news, and not worth talking about.
So some big mega-billions$ banks got greedy, and tried to bilk their borrowers for more interest$ than they can afford. F'em. Serves them right. Don't bail them out with my tax dollars. Let em go down in flames. Better yet, throw a little gas on the fire.


----------

