|
Is anyone having problems trying to watch yesterday's episode of the Daily Show? I'm on Comedy Central's website right now, and it's telling me "this video is not found".
rjryan3 fucked around with this message at 00:27 on Mar 10, 2016 |
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 00:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 17:04 |
|
|
rjryan3 posted:Is anyone having problems trying to watch yesterday's episode of the Daily Show? I'm on Comedy Central's website right now, and it's telling me "this video is not found". Yeah, it says the video expired and something about rights. Hulu works fine though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 01:15
|
|
|
Cerony posted:Yeah, it says the video expired and something about rights. Hulu works fine though. Alright, so I wasn't the only one then. Well anyway, it's looks like its up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 03:37
|
|
|
Comedy Central's web player has always been dog poo poo for me so I don't even try anymore.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 04:17
|
|
|
The constant stream of bullshit that comes out of Trump against all odds is almost impressive. In another life he would have made a fine Iraqi Minister of Information.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 05:17
|
|
|
Those steaks were from a company called Bush Brothers. There's a joke there somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 05:22
|
|
|
Trevor Noah is exactly right. Until further notice, all candidates should drink the local water. either it gets fixed or we get a few more Caligulas that we can impeach :p.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 13:35
|
|
|
It's just an extension of a greater issue. There are fewer and fewer reasons why our reps in general need to generally BE in Washington so much with the technology we have today. Force them to live local as much as possible so they can see what effect their policies are having and it also requires that lobbies have to work far harder since people will be geographically distributed. Getting rid the the insular culture is the first step in getting rid of the career politician.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 17:29
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:Getting rid the the insular culture is the first step in getting rid of the career politician. There's not actually anything wrong with the career politician. Bad politicians are bad and should be voted out, good politicians are fine and should not be voted out even if it's their 17th election.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 18:46
|
|
|
Semantics. A career politician is one who's primary goal is to be re-elected regardless on if it's the best for their constituents. I want to see a culture where a politician does not seek rejection, not because they are doing a bad job, but because they think someone can do that job better.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 19:20
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:Semantics. A career politician is one who's primary goal is to be re-elected regardless on if it's the best for their constituents. I want to see a culture where a politician does not seek rejection, not because they are doing a bad job, but because they think someone can do that job better. Considering the ego needed to get up one morning and decide that that you're totally the best voice for nearly a million/millions/tens of millions of people, good luck with that. It's the job of the voters to decide if their representative is poo poo or not. If 50% +1 have horrible standards to which they compare representatives, then they're still getting the representation they want.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
The interfaith group thing makes me super hopeful. Love it. And the old Imam is super adorable. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 06:49
|
|
|
I liked that the Nightly Show made sure to show that even a lot of African-Americans and women didn't know who Harriet Tubman was in the first segment.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 08:58
|
|
|
Franchesca Ramsey is the fuckin worst, she belongs on the nightly show.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 15:42
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Considering the ego needed to get up one morning and decide that that you're totally the best voice for nearly a million/millions/tens of millions of people, good luck with that. You also have to factor in the American propensity for tradition against all logic. People will vote for a lovely politician over and over solely on the basis of being the incumbent. Justin_Brett posted:I liked that the Nightly Show made sure to show that even a lot of African-Americans and women didn't know who Harriet Tubman was in the first segment. What was that about, I changed the channel as soon as she showed up on screen.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
raditts posted:What was that about, I changed the channel as soon as she showed up on screen. A man-on-the-street bit (1:20)
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 16:29
|
|
|
What happened to his eyebrows? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
Cotato posted:Franchesca Ramsey is the fuckin worst, she belongs on the nightly show. I didn't mind her first couple segments but now she's looking like a bad version of Jessica.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 18:23
|
|
|
Uh... I liked that Franchesca bit. Are people that put off by anything that remotely defends KimK on anything? I'm honestly sick of people who really hate her but pretend they don't care about her.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
So, a segment basically saying that people shouldn't protest Trump rallies because it validates Trump when he says there are people opposed to him, followed by a segment that was 7 minutes of white knighting for Kim Kardashian. This is... an odd Daily Show.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
In fairness I think he was saying that the people actually pushing and shoving and tearing up signs were giving Trump what he wants, not protestors in general. It's a simplistic view that doesn't address a lot of the bigger issues but i don't think it was anti-protest. And I actually found the KimK segment funny, but I actually come from that exact place where people say to me "they're everywhere" and I respond with "no, they're on like half a dozen gossip media outlets that I don't give a crap about so I almost never see them." So that smarmy nerd probably spoke to me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2016 06:27
|
|
|
Maybe I'm just projecting, but I thought Trevor was suggesting that protesters need to find a way to not play by Trump's playbook, not that they shouldn't be protesting at all. I can get behind the idea that progressive minded people should stop hating on KimK. It's essentially a form of slutshaming, but KK hasn't postured herself as a white feminist icon, so it's considered acceptable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2016 13:39
|
|
|
I would prefer if she just hosed off and I don't have to hear any more crypieces about her either way, does that make me a misogynist or
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2016 14:12
|
|
|
But nearly everyone tries to play the "I'm above her" shtick. They're being disingenuous. It's quite clear they hold a certain malice towards her and the idea that she, of all people, is the avatar of everything wrong with our narcissistic media culture feels like a cover for that malice. She's doing fine, so I'm only going to defend her so much. But people were angry that she spoke out against The whitewashing of the Armenian genocide because how dare she have something to say.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2016 14:35
|
|
|
Echo Chamber posted:But nearly everyone tries to play the "I'm above her" shtick. They're being disingenuous. It's quite clear they hold a certain malice towards her and the idea that she, of all people, is the avatar of everything wrong with our narcissistic media culture feels like a cover for that malice. I'll cop to being annoyed with the Kardashians, although not really at Kim herself. I AM genuinely pretty disgusted with American culture for embracing the Kardashians as they have, though. I'm disgusted with Americans for being so receptive to having this factory for manufactured controversy being cynically shoved down their throats by TV execs. It really annoys me that we, as a country, only got marriage equality less than a year ago, yet I can walk into Sears or other stores with cardboard cutouts of someone who is literally only famous because she made a sex tape with Ray J, and then was offered a reality show. That's pathetic. And yes, I'm also pretty tired of people white knighting for her. On the one hand, gently caress body shaming. I'm glad people are calling that poo poo out more often when they see it. Kim's got a great body, it's good that she's proud of it, and it's fine that she likes to show it off. But on the other hand, let's not pretend that she's anything more than a completely manufactured celebrity with no discernible talents whatsoever. She's a brunette Paris Hilton, except not quite as rich from the get-go. In summary, I liked some of Neil Brennan's segment but really did not like other parts of it. quote:But people were angry that she spoke out against The whitewashing of the Armenian genocide because how dare she have something to say. Well, that's admittedly extremely weird if people got up in arms about that. I don't care if it's Donald Trump saying the Holocaust was bad; guess what? It was. Really, really bad.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
http://thirdmonthmania.com So i got wall street vs global warming with global warming winning, the semifinal was between wall street and our inevitable deaths and honestly wall street makes me angrier. Edit: My semifinal on the other side was no wifi vs global warming 
Fragmented fucked around with this message at 19:00 on Mar 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2016 18:53
|
|
|
It's not fair to have both "Drumpf supporters" and "White terrorists" in the same bracket. http://thirdmonthmania.com/generate...dtxcPcBtGtetgt3 raditts fucked around with this message at 23:04 on Mar 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
raditts posted:It's not fair to have both "Drumpf supporters" and "White terrorists" in the same bracket. It's also not fair to have Congress/Wall Street as a 1st round matchup.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2016 22:57
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:And I actually found the KimK segment funny, but I actually come from that exact place where people say to me "they're everywhere" and I respond with "no, they're on like half a dozen gossip media outlets that I don't give a crap about so I almost never see them." So that smarmy nerd probably spoke to me. Also to claim ignoring them is easy because they're just on the internet might've been a good argument in 1995 but it's 2016 and the internet is kind of central to a lot of people's lives, especially people who fall into the age demographic of typical Kardashian fans.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2016 00:09
|
|
|
FrensaGeran posted:The Brennan piece was confusing because in the preamble he mentions that the Kardashians are in fact everywhere (CNN, World Star, the New York Times), but then later goes on to attempt to dispel the myth that the Kardashians are everywhere by saying theyre just in gossip mags. Which is it? I'm probably just going to swear off Huffington Post forever before long, because it seems like every day there's a new frontpage think piece on how hey, Kim is ACTUALLY a great feminist figure and role model and should be the embodiment of feminism and body acceptance - or failing that, how Jaden Smith is a hero of genderqueer aesthetic. Both of them are actually truly awful and untalented, and terrible mascots for any of those genuinely admirable and necessary causes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2016 00:18
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I'm probably just going to swear off Huffington Post forever before long, because it seems like every day there's a new frontpage think piece on how hey, Kim is ACTUALLY a great feminist figure and role model and should be the embodiment of feminism and body acceptance - or failing that, how Jaden Smith is a hero of genderqueer aesthetic. Both of them are actually truly awful and untalented, and terrible mascots for any of those genuinely admirable and necessary causes. A forgiving reading of this phenomenon might be that society has chosen its icons, so let's try and paint these turds gold. It's not necessarily that they want to talk about Kim Kardashian over feminist icons in the Muslim world etc, it's just the realities of modern journalism have tied their hands and they have no other choice. Since you're going to read about Kim Kardashian anyways, allow us to stealthily educate you about gender equality and slumshaming.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2016 01:28
|
|
|
FrensaGeran posted:A forgiving reading of this phenomenon might be that society has chosen its icons, so let's try and paint these turds gold. It's not necessarily that they want to talk about Kim Kardashian over feminist icons in the Muslim world etc, it's just the realities of modern journalism have tied their hands and they have no other choice. Ugh, if only I could believe that. But I've made the mistake of actually reading some of the pieces in question, and they're way too enthusiastic about Kim's "clapping back" at her "critics" (ie: people who dare audibly roll their eyes at her over twitter). Even so, that might have been what Neil Brennan was doing, and I like him as a comedian, so I'll pretend like it was.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2016 17:02
|
|
|
I hate to play the "People who complain about X are just as obnoxious as X" card... but that's the vibe I get. The thing is I don't watch the reality shows or the celebrity gossip directly. I go out of my way to avoid HuffPo. All the KimK stuff on my radar are people on my Facebook who wants everyone to know how they're above her. And I almost appreciate people trolling them, precisely because I've seen this high horse stuff from everyone who thinks they're Will McAvoy. And I disagree that KimK is an absolutely worthless human being. I kind of follow makeup accounts on Instagram, and she definitely popularized a lot of stuff in that field. And she probably did stuff in fashion. Yes, most people don't care about cosmetics or point out she's only relevant in that field because leveraged her fame after a sex tape. So what? I best understand her as a sex symbol in our modern period of American culture where things are more polarized and balkanized. I see her as merely a product of our culture. Not a particularly harmful one, considering how many real monsters our culture has enabled. And she's certainly not a cancer. Yes, I'm willing to change my opinion of KK if she actually does something like say something racist, etc. But that hasn't happened. So did all five TDS alumni shows cover Hillary's HIV comments? You know you screwed up for sure when that happens.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2016 17:25
|
|
|
The Black Lady Sign Language bit was pretty funny.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
Echo Chamber posted:I hate to play the "People who complain about X are just as obnoxious as X" card... but that's the vibe I get. The thing is I don't watch the reality shows or the celebrity gossip directly. I go out of my way to avoid HuffPo. All the KimK stuff on my radar are people on my Facebook who wants everyone to know how they're above her. And I almost appreciate people trolling them, precisely because I've seen this high horse stuff from everyone who thinks they're Will McAvoy. No, gently caress her. She's the female equivalent of Donald Trump.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2016 23:34
|
|
|
All the Kardashian arguments I've ever seen eventually boil down to "Too many people like them, and I can't see why, so they shouldn't", which isn't going to convince me they're awful garbage people. I guess I'm lucky enough that her fans mostly stay out of my hair, though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 00:31
|
|
|
rjryan3 posted:No, gently caress her. She's the female equivalent of Donald Trump. Kim K. isn't trying to gently caress America, and she's easy to avoid (I honestly haven't heard a peep from her until the Instagram thing). That was Sarah Palin.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
Catching up on TDS and Trevor's had a good run of episodes. Except Cheng remains ruthlessly unfunny. That bit about interfaiths took a good concept, found the easiest angle, an drove it straight into the ground for seven straight minutes. I've been with the daily show since 2005. Cheng might be the first correspondent I entirely skip whenever he pops up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 09:35
|
|
|
Cheng is setting back Asian comedy by decades. I say this as an Asian.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 09:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 17:04 |
|
|
I've liked Ronnie since his first appearance. Different strokes folks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2016 10:28
|
|
