|
IRQ posted:But there's nothing wrong or out of the ordinary with strangers walking around brandishing firearms! As long as those citizens aren't of the suspicious type your grandmother would warn you about.
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 15:35 |
|
|
Ra Ra Rasputin posted:Noah, no, please, sit back down at the desk, sit down there, standing up and annoucing whats coming up next, your making me associate the daily show with the nightly show, and I don't want that to happen. I get more of a Stone Philips, totally serious newsmagazine show intro, feel. It's still not good. IRQ posted:Those oregon dipshits being nothing but the butt of late night jokes is pretty great. I say just turn off the water and power and let everyone laugh at the clowns. I know it's actually counterproductive and they'll just crawl home when they realize no one gives a poo poo about how hard they're flipping off daddy with this totally intense idiocy, but I'm really wanting big daddy "governmental overreach" to come give them a reason to cry. All these Bundys are just really annoying with being able to point their guns and rattle off treasonous tripe with impunity while that National Guard rolls in with tanks and poo poo to Ferguson and Baltimore.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2016 03:04
|
|
|
M_Gargantua posted:I wrote an email to CC asking them to not change to this awful remixed intro they're using now. Dog on Fire is an institution and should be upheld for future generations. I actually like the remix.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2016 05:21
|
|
|
Steve Vader posted:I mean that it used to be considered something off-limits, like news divisions of media companies were not expected to be profit centers because the public trust was something important, and I thought even the gubmint made some write-off-style benefits for that, even. I suppose I'll just go do my own research about this. It's a combination of things that got to this point. First, the networks themselves don't make shitloads of money anymore, which is what was used to fund the News divisions which operated at a loss. Second, the FCC has drastically relaxed it's Public Service requirements for broadcasters, which was previously being filled by the broadcast news. Third, cable was never under the jurisdiction of the FCC and always operated with the expectation of profit. Fourth, the abundance of entertainment options has diluted viewership to the point where turning a profit requires far more work than just informing the people and as a result lovely, opinion reinforcing, infotainment is the name of the game. So now you're left with PBS, which is losing ever more government funding and turning to private sponsorship, and CSPAN, which is boring as poo poo unless you loving love watching the Well of the Senate, poorly set up book talks, and listening to call in shows where crazy people rant at dispassionate hosts who possess inhuman patience.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2016 03:37
|
|
|
bobjr posted:Didn't one of the Obama daughters go to a college and be in pictures where beer was around? I didn't pay attention to Fox at the time but they probably tried to make that a thing. That was the Bush girls. The Obama girls have gotten mild poo poo for what they wear and looking like they don't want to be at some function. Unless I missed something.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2016 12:29
|
|
|
spronk posted:What I don't like is the guest lineups though. I'd find about 70% of Jon's guests interesting just from the DVR blurb and want to watch the next day. Its closer to... honestly 0% with Noah. I've maybe watched 3 of the last 20 episodes, just that quick second decision of "who the gently caress is this guest? I dunno, too busy gonna delete this episode" kicks in. Trevor has to build up his reputation to the point where Jon was, which was part of why the guests were generally good by the time Jon quit. Of course Jon did still have guests you don't care about, but you forgot about them over time so you have a skewed view of the average Daily Show guest. Most of the time the guest portion is the weakest part of the episode anyway and the most common viewing recommendation is to watch the first two segments and either fast forward to the moment of zen or turn it off.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
What the fact is good, but talking about O'Malley wasn't good. Poor guy's entire branding looks like some sort of Buddhist knock off Miracle Whip. It's text book punching down, like making fun of the fat smelly kid when his mom doesn't pick him up after school.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
Echo Chamber posted:That children's book is lovely and racist not just for how it portrays slavery as a whole, but because we know specifically about house slaves who hated their treatment from the Washingtons that they escaped. Outside of immediately freeing them and setting up a reasonable farm tenant relationship, is it even possible to practice the chattel slavery of the American South without those enslaved hating their treatment?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
Trevor has a lot to answer for after that sleep over.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2016 05:02
|
|
|
Never forget that Trump is a WWE hall of famer. Right there beside Hulk Hogan.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2016 05:12
|
|
|
GutBomb posted:Yeah I'm the equivalent of the dumb old guy who doesn't know how to talk to black people because I think that something that isn't racist isn't racist. Half of the people referenced by the seal are unhappy with it. A representative of theirs sat down and chatted with Jessica about how they didn't like it. Yes, after you explain the seal it does look less racist. However if everyone who sees it's first reaction is that your city seal is a white dude choking a native american, you should really go back and rethink the design. At the very least have it be the white guy doing a leg drop from the turnbuckle so that everyone knows it's wrasslin and not attempted murder.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2016 04:56
|
|
|
Pillow Hat posted:I'm glad the seal was changed because despite a (surprisingly) reasonable explanation that (surprisingly) checks out, it's important to consider how it looks regardless. It's sort of like people who get swastika tattoos for Buddhist reasons (which, by the way mcbexx, would have been a much less asinine comparison). Like sure, maybe you're not racist and maybe it's a symbol of peace in your mind -- but you sure as hell look like a racist rear end in a top hat. I thought of the buddhist swastika, but it's not really the same thing since wrestling is being mistaken for throttling, not the bad wrestling. Though years ago when I worked in a car wash I did have to talk some guys down about how hosed up the Nazi car was that came through, driven by an old Asian couple. It seems more like using a stylized eagle in your seal. If everyone is telling you that your eagle is looking a little too much like one of the infamous stylized eagles, you should probably go back and reexamine it. Like the town apparently did back in the 70s. There's got to be a way to depict wrestling that doesn't look like choking/pushing to the ground.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
Pillow Hat posted:Alright man. Go ahead and get a manji tattoo, and you're welcome to explain to everyone that you're not a racist rear end in a top hat, you're just a tone deaf fat toddler. Buddhists and Hindus, notorious tone deaf fat toddlers.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
Pillow Hat posted:Yeah that's what most Americans think of when they see a swastika. If you're getting a manji or other swastika like symbol tattooed on you or embedded in you possessions and you're not a white supremacist, it's almost certainly going to be religious. rear end in a top hat loving Buddhists, man.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2016 22:37
|
|
|
Soylentbits posted:There are people other than Americans. Are you really a person if you haven't imbibed the sweet freedom available only to American citizens? It was all just a bunch of smelly apes until 1789 when god wrote the secrets of humanity on parchment.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2016 01:30
|
|
|
Narcissus1916 posted:I'll never forget my US history high school teacher getting into a big row with another student in 2004. Funny thing, the Confederate Flag actually is about traitorous shitstacks trying to own black people and nothing else. There is no heritage about it and it only "coincidentally" reappeared in the 1960s when the South started flying it to honor the history as the Civil Rights movement was underway. At the very least they could have used one of the lovely actual Confederate flags instead of talking up the honor and history of the glorious 4 year existence of the Confederate Navy, by using their second flag which they used for only 2 years.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2016 22:08
|
|
|
JazzFlight posted:I find the problem is that Trevor Noah is almost a non-entity. He reads a bunch of jokes in a row in a jovial manner. It seems fake. I want him to say something off the cuff or get fired up about something. Hell, talk about interesting things going on in Africa that us Americans might not know about. I like John Oliver because he gets pissed about stuff and uncovers interesting stories that the media glosses over. This was true about 97% of all Jon Stewart Daily Shows. We'll have to wait for Trevor to get 9/11ed or something completely heinous, like all the times Jon got fired up.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2016 02:53
|
|
|
When you believe people trying to be Big Macs is a totally valid comparison to gay people trying to get married, you've gone so far beyond sanity that it is impossible for others to mock you.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2016 00:57
|
|
|
Botnit posted:I'm getting real annoyed with Trevor though. Comedic wise his voice imitations are terrible and it's like his most go to move. How will we make it through this torture after so many years of Jon's impeccable imitations.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2016 03:56
|
|
|
Trump is not something to worry about. He is a farce and the fact that he is leading the Republican field is indeed the height of comedy. If by some miracle he actually wins he will be crushed in the general, because outside of 30% of the Republican base he is never going to be taken seriously as an option.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2016 08:40
|
|
|
Pillow Hat posted:Agreed. Furthermore, in the fivethirtyeight piece I linked a couple posts ago, Bernie Sanders is the only candidate on either side of the aisle with a net positive favorability rating. Completely anecdotal, but I always find it hilarious that in the stupid Red area of Florida I live in everyone respects your choice of Bernie Sanders. Talk to a Trump supporter, Cruz supporter, or endangered Bushie, and they'll accept your vote for Bernie as a reasonable choice. Most Hillary supporters also respect your decision, though they will argue way more with you about it. It is goddamn amazing to listen to some crackpot rant about the Mexicans and the Muslims and the treasonous pretender in chief, followed by a completely respectful acceptance that you're for the Socialist Jew from New York City.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2016 02:24
|
|
|
raditts posted:That said, either the GOP establishment is going to manage to oust him and put up one of the other bumblers in their sideshow to lose the election, or it's too late and they've already lost all control because they've fed the beast too much. Either way, there's gonna be a meltdown, and it's gonna be glorious. The establishment is straight hosed, because if they do manage to dump the Trump by the end of next month, they end up with Cruz. It really is amazing how well Cruz positioned himself to go from absolutely no chance in hell of getting the nomination to having one of the most plausible paths of anyone. The debate format is really helping to gently caress the establishment too. So long as there are a bakers dozen people on stage no one is ever going to go with a "reasonable" candidate. Rubio is screwed until the debates get wittled down to a reasonable size, but by that time it'll be too late and he'll be playing from the same position of strength John Edwards held in 2008. Toxxupation posted:for reference, Sanders insists on the (in my opinion totally true) opinion that race relations in America is more a class issue than an overt racism issue (and as a result strongly advocates for wealth redistribution) which ruffles a lot of tumblr-esque feathers In addition to an, at least in my opinion, over simplification of the issue to that of simple economics, Bernie is the victim of perception. Early on he stumbled because while he's a good dude, he's spent quite a while representing Vermont which seems to have left him somewhat rusty when it comes to non-white, non-maple syrup issues. He was most certainly not helped by legions of well meaning Sandernistas talking past people asking questions and just yelling about what he did in the 60s. Bernie has been doing much better in getting his message out and addressing issues after he sat down with BLM and hired a consultant. However the narrative remains, and fair or not he's got to do more to prove his bona fides as the Senator from Vermont than Hillary does.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2016 04:08
|
|
|
That supposes that they actually cared in the first place though.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2016 14:33
|
|
|
Need more of that Bernie minority outreach.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2016 05:17
|
|
|
M_Gargantua posted:I don't understand how Bernie doesn't have the minority vote though. He's got the vote of everybody I know my age, he's got the vote of all my texas raised veteran friends, he's got the vote for a huge majority of our local college population. Never has someone complained about how skewed the polling aggregate is and been accurate. Also the idea that minorities hate Clinton is just silly. Is Bernie a better option for them? That is the opinion of quite a few people and is not a wrong opinion to have. But Hillary isn't bad for them and she does have more of a political history with minorities readily available for consumption. Remember that in 2008 she was crushing Obama with minorities until after he won Iowa. There's lots and lots of factors that converge into Clinton starting off with a majority share of the minority vote, not least of which is that she's far better known. There is no conspiracy or trickery involved. As a whole, minority groups currently favor Clinton over Sanders. raditts posted:Somebody I know has been talking about how she is voting for Hillary based upon how "Bernie bros" act online. I'm sure there's some insufferable contingent of Sanders supporters as there is for every candidate, but is it to a Ron Paul-ish degree where they've earned a label for themselves? Yes, especially in the beginnings of the argument that Bernie had issues with minorities. It was cringworthy even beyond the usual levels of idiocy exhibited by hard core supporters of a politician. When the Black Live Matter ladies took the stage in protest before his speech on medicare in, I think, Seattle it just went insane. Imagine a bunch of rich, young, white college kids angrily explaining to Black and Latino people why they were wrong for not feeling the Bern. On Twitter.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
OMG JC a Bomb! posted:Awfully convienient that this narrative is being pushed in favor of a candidate whose messaging seems to be exclusively "Hey guys, I know I'm basically a Republican with an insatiable lust for power, but wouldn't it be neat to have a woman president?" Why can't people just admit that Hillary actually is an American liberal? She's not the model liberal, but the idea that she's just a DINO looking to satiate her power fetish is ridiculous. There's shitloads more to actually attack her on than stupid Shillary the stealth Republican weaksauce.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2016 23:56
|
|
|
Echo Chamber posted:Specific issues? Not to really defend Booker, but a lot of the educational "reform" stuff does seem to come from a genuine place. It's misguided and is probably just going to make things worse, but it seems like it's coming from the same place as your friend who's just going on their gut instinct and is against the less intuitive aspects of sovereign state economics. I know that when I first heard some of their ideas I at first thought there might be something to that, because it was really truthy, in a non-pejorative way. Then I looked at arguments against it and read more on it and came to a different conclusion. Yes, it's people like Corey Booker's job to actually understand this poo poo, but it seems pretty easy to think you've got a grasp on something like that and it just turn out all your aids are loving idiots and you were to stupid to realize. On the Wall Street, Iran, and Chris Christie front, I don't want to say that he should get the benefit of the doubt, but there is a certain measure of Senators representing their dumb state. Every Senator should definitely have their positions and records held against them, but there should also probably be some level of mitigation where they're allowed to change position without too much distrust on issues that they would have otherwise been a poor Senator had they not supported. I don't really want him running for or being appointed to anything higher than Senior Senator from New Jersey, personally. Hopefully he can get that prison reform bill through one day, it seemed like it was actually pretty decent.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2016 04:41
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Winkie01 posted:Lindsey Graham would own so much... if he wasn't a republican Lindsey Graham's problem is that he's down to bomb any and everything. It it weren't for that he'd be a Susan Collins/Olympia Snow Republican, which are downright refreshing.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2016 18:37
|
|
|
Pillow Hat posted:Yeah lovely people can be and often are charming. Just look at Chris Christie. He's downright entertaining in interviews, despite the fact that he's a vengeful slime ball. In fact, I went out to dinner with someone last week whom I found quite likeable until politics came up and he told me I didn't know how hard it was to be a white man. You just think you're white because society has been trying to destroy the concept of whiteness ever since America decided the filthy Irish were suddenly white. If you ain't Teutonic, you ain't white. Quit trying to appropriate our heavy cultural burden.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
Echo Chamber posted:Sorry for the double post, but we got another "thing that happened while The Daily Show is on vacation". I'm not sure Trevor has supped at the tit of freedom long enough to understand the blasphemy Kasich performed. We might need Stew Beef to stop the presses and shine the divine light of truth on the matter.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2016 00:30
|
|
|
IRQ posted:Isn't knife and fork pizza yet another of Trumps culinary war crimes? He only orders steak well done and has never had coffee or alcohol. He's literally unamerican. Worst of all he's from New York, it's like a native of Vatican City eating meat only on Fridays.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2016 16:38
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Holy gently caress, though, did I hear the Moment of Zen correctly? Yeah, I think that was the first Moment of Zen to ever make me say What The gently caress? out loud.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2016 13:32
|
|
|
I'm surprised people aren't using modern spy tech and recording through their "glasses" or something.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2016 15:31
|
|
|
Hastert didn't get any leniency though. The Judge went beyond the plea recommendation and noted that he wished he could give an even harsher penalty. Unfortunately the statute of limitations was up for the child molestation so all they could get him for was lying to the FBI and some low level banking crimes. Personally I'm way more pissed off at all the loving poo poo stains who actually wrote letters to the court asking for leniency for that fat piece of poo poo. I'd hope they burned in Hell for such a thing, but they all were already in possession of first class tickets on the ferry.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
I hope Trump's Cino de Mayo tweet was early enough in the day to make the show tonight.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2016 01:21
|
|
|
tarlibone posted:I said it before in another thread (or maybe this one?), but the idea that Trump could win? It's not as preposterous as people seem to assume it is. And how people are assuming that after how he so dominantly won the nomination in the first place is beyond me, because Trump's odds of winning even just the GOP nomination were also laughably remote until suddenly they weren't. The GOP nomination and the general election are entirely different animals. For several cycles the GOP primary has been a smoldering dumpster fire that actively hurt the eventual nominee. This year it finally caught and moved to a full blown, three alarm, dumpster inferno. A plurality of the extreme minority of Republicans who actually show up for primaries got Trumped up. The growing inevitability finally happened and the monster the establishment had been feeding red meat to broke it's chains and ran rampant. The proud conservative warriors fought hard to get to the point where their choice was Satan Incarnate or a Tiny Handed Clown. The odds that Trump beat were the odds that the RNC could continue to corral the anger of its base as a tool. Those are entirely different odds than someone who enthusiastically met the standards of the conservative base also being a real threat in the general. Yes, it is possible that Trump wins because Republican or Democrat are the only options. Beating the odds to be the GOP nominee don't actually carry over to an increased probability that the all new odds are beaten.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2016 21:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 15:35 |
|
|
tarlibone posted:You say that, but a couple of posts up, we have Bernie Supporter A accusing Bernie Supporter B of being part of the problem, and BSA then goes on to say that he* will not vote for Hillary if she gets the nomination. If enough people have that attitude, the Democrat vote will effectively be split--just like we were all hoping would happen to the GOP vote when Trump inevitably lost the nomination and then ran as independent or write-in or 3rd party--and suddenly, you have a united party against a split one. Every primary people swear up and down that they're totally not supporting the person who beat their guy. They're just going to sit on their hands and not vote, or perhaps even really show those clowns who didn't vote for their candidate by voting for the other party's candidate. They come around. The percentages of Bernie supporters swearing to withhold their vote in protest are pretty much the same as the numbers for Clinton supporters who swore they wouldn't vote for Obama. Most of the GOP people gnashing their teeth about Trump are probably going to come around and vote for the orange galute come November. Though the GOP has less of a history with supporters loudly declaring they're not going to vote for the guy who beat their guy. Trump's biggest liability is with all the people who didn't vote in the primaries who really, really don't like him.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2016 22:30
|
|