Okay so how many examples of him criticizing dems/libs would it require for you to admit he’s not relentlessly one sided?
OOTB's Political Thread . ..
- Thread starter BillyL
- Start date
Jesus Christ you raving lunatic READ. I AGREED he might have been bothsided in your video You get that? I AGREED with you. What I was mocking you for was your conclusion that one couldn't argue otherwise, in total disregard of his biased, left-leaning Daily Show history which you admit isn't familiar to you. I am, so I made my completely appropriate comment.
you're hopelessly lost, my friend. Nothing I could say would satisfy you that common sense should prevail. What would convince me that he isn't relentlessly one-sided is for him to NOT be relentlessly one sided. That would entail not just one example of him being fair and balanced, but a pattern of such to offset his track record. I don't have an actual number, sorry. But definitely more than one. Get drunk and think on that, it isn't rocket surgery.
lol at you judging common sense
And hell no, don’t try to move the goalposts to say it’s about whether he’s fair and balanced you claim. He’s totally one-sided relentlessly, one-sided in fact, and totally biased to one side, so what evidence would it take to prove that he’s not that? It’s not rocket science. My only claim was he gives it to both sides. Which he does.
You in turned mock me for saying that, and laughed at me for saying it, so pony up asshole how many examples do you require to show that you’re wrong? How many examples do you need of him, “giving it to both sides” to satisfy you? To show “a pattern”. Cause i got them. Unless you’re CHICKEN
not sure how you mean that to be the case. It's when one side is chosen that 'bosides' comes into play here. It's a foil, as in 'my side did that? Well what about your side doing that'. Bosides. So how does NOT taking a side contribute, especially when you give your example of one side promoting it?
And BTW, where you mention the right being guilty...what about your side.
I don't think Stewart is a demagogue. I used to hold out hope that rational minds could spot the demagogues, but that's a memory.
I only watched TDS occasionally, and it was usually just snippets. I wanted to see the first one when Stewart returned. You can rewatch anything nowadays. Shows like TDS and SNL are satire and intended to get laughs. But, they are also playing on people's fears along the way. I once heard that "through humor, you can tell the truth." I believe that 100%. You can especially convey an unpleasant truth EASIER through a humorous messenger. I just think that their humor unintentionally fosters more skeptical apathy than it does to help create a devoted opposition. MAGA people, for example, are full-blown terrified, individually and collectively. There's no joking in that group. Even though, from a rational perspective, they are hilarious. The people themselves are not fooling around. It's a good thing that the country isn't really in bad shape. If it were really hopeless, it could get really bad, really quick.
Skeptical apathy is probably about the best I can ever hope to offer. I have very little impact on the outcome at a certain level. I've found it helpful to accept that fact.
he does IN THIS ONE VIDEO, which I made sure to not disagree with. In disagreeing with the overall conclusion you drew, I referred to his past, WELL KNOWN and documented history of his bias against the right side of things. The Daily Show was famous for this when he was hosting it. That is all I need to know that I'm right. You can take your imaginary examples and shove them up your crazy, unhinged ass and store them there with all your other nonsense. LMAO.
I think people are obscenely bullshitting themselves when they believe they're always on one side, all the time. But, humans are tribal... so be it. They can't seem to have an identity without the "us vs. them" shit they make up.
Will Stewart walk the line? I have no idea. He's getting paid for his on-camera personality. If you think he is going to change anyone's mind, I'm sorry.
mostly agree, but I posit that humor is only an effective tool when it is presented in a balanced fashion. An example of humor being balanced in my mind would be the video posted. Maybe not balanced as if put on a scale, but enough to touch on all sides of an issue and not just one, time after time.
It's funny that you pick on the right as being nonhumorous when it's the left that shows so much hate over the right's concerns. There's plenty of satire to be directed, and both sides are more than adequate targets for it. I believe that if Stewart (and others like Maher) continues the approach in the video, it will be a very good tool for making both sides see their faults.
maybe not, but if he'll even things out at least he'll stop reinforcing a bias. As I mentioned before, the huge part of his audience put him on a pedestal because he played to their prejudices.
I don't usually even think of humor as a "tool", not consciously. I also don't usually ask myself "is this balanced humor?" Something strikes me as funny or it doesn't. I guess it does get into the weeds, and becomes a tool, if you're writing jokes, or you use humor as a livelihood somehow. I'm usually the audience, and not the source.
well, evidently that's what you are, because nothing's stopping you from posting those examples you referred to. Otherwise, you're just being stupid because you're the one who made the challenge that you could. So do so, Chicken Little.
And of course you'll ignore that I said this, but don't try cherry-picking a gag here and there. I referred to a preponderance of bias, you need to show a preponderant lack of same. So get off the pot and start cluckin'.
The conclusion I drew is that Stewart “gives it to both sides”. That’s all I said. I didn’t claim it was equal. I said he “gives it to both sides”. You denied that. You laughed at the ide. In response, you claim, not that he’s left leaning which would be reasonable, but completely biased to the left. Which any objective reasonable person would know is a lie. So how many times does someone have to criticize the left to show they’re not completely biased to the left? Now you’ve been called out and you got nothing but back pedaling and moving the goal posts as usual. Now you say I have to show a preponderance of criticism against the left. Lol. Keep moving them goal posts.
I don't necessarily LIKE to see humor as a tool, unless there is a strong need or reason for it. But when there's a need, humor reaches farther into the psyche than complaining does. Reagan for a good example made himself better understood and more popular by using humor.
When I was a kid, my mother used to bring my brother and I Mad magazine and some others from her trips to the grocery. I thought they were hilarious until I got a little older and it hit me like a ton of bricks that it wasn't just goofy, but that they were trying to make a point. I was actually pissed because it took the humor out of it for me. But then I started reading again and once I did I could begin to relate to the pointedness, and it became far funnier and much more gratifying to get my hands on the latest issue.
This is how it used to be - comedians made fun of all those in power. Both sides. That changed with our half white President. He was not allowed to be lampooned. And then Trump came and the gloves came back off. And that’s fair. But now people on the left and the MSM act like certain things should be off limits for Biden. I can appreciate Stewart for going after him. I also like that Mahar does the same.
Wait, …you’re saying bothsidesism (being impartial) is a bad thing? lol
The Daily Show being abbreviated as such is …*chef’s kiss*
I like you but you are just a fvcking idiot sometimes. It's like you take the words from my post that allow you to whine like a bitch and throw away the ones that don't.
Better yet though, even as you accuse me of moving the goalposts and backtracking, all of a sudden you are the one backtracking and moving the goalposts by putting words in my mouth and changing your intent. I have done exactly NONE of that and you can't demonstrate otherwise.
I haven't misspoken here and I have explained myself clearly. Yet your responses are as if you're responding to someone else. Get some help, because I can't help you.
LMAO that you say I've been called out. Called out for what that I haven't responded to? You called yourself out and then I reiterated that, and you STILL haven't as much as laid one egg. But I'll wait patiently as always, if you want to stop moving the goalpost and back up your threat.
National Lampoon was absolutely awesome. I still have old issues that belonged to my older cousins that I would steal on my summer trips to stay w/grandparents and family. They were, and still are, hilarious to me. MAD was the same way.
I think Stewart does a pretty good job at poling fun at the right AND the left, as much as someone who apparently falls on the left side in their own personal values can possibly be in that role. He's probably going to seem to hit harder to whatever he opposes, especially if you're someone who believes they are on the "other side." Personally, I think these sides are a fantasy and people are addicted to perpetuating them because it just feels good to do it.
No, it didn't. It absolutely did NOT change. Making fun of the POTUS never stopped.
I completely disagree about Stewart. A long time back, when he had Colbert and others as 'correspondents' on a previous iteration, was some of the funniest stuff I've ever seen. They satIrized everything. One of my favorite bits was Colbert interviewing some guy of questionable sexuality and trying to get him to admit he was gay.
Times change though. And Stewart became highly political in selecting targets for his humor, and it was definitely one-sided.
I was a young adult when I discovered the National Lampoon, and yeah it was a treasure trove of funny stuff of all kinds. Doug Kenney was a comedy genius. I still have somewhere the issue with the dog on the cover with a gun to its head captioned 'buy this magazine or we'll shoot this dog'.
Last edited:
lol. Did any of that come from The Daily Show?
You idiot. We’re talking mainstream shit.
I wasn't glued to the TV for 8 years trying to find confirmation bias about some preconceived bullshit that no one was allowed to mock Barack Obama. And, I guess there was some cross-reference showbiz slide-rule that formulates how totally out-of-balance it was from 08-16. They made fun of him just like they made fun of all of them. The bias was magnified only because you hated Obama. Well, that was a perfect opportunity for the legions of right-wing satirists, with an abundance of humor, to create shows with the sole purpose of offering an ocean of sarcasm and lampooning of his administration. They don't exist, so that couldn't happen. You're stuck with "the left" making fun of themselves, I guess.
I think we both must have a raging case of misunderstanding what the other is trying to express. I feel the same way. So let’s just call it a day. The video was hilarious. Dems are pissed over it. That tells me something.
A lot of them really are. He didn't make a direct hit on the evils of DJT and how Joe Biden is the only thing saving America from complete ruin. They expected him to choose Biden over Trump and make sure everyone watching did the same. That's not his job.
I love these redneck lefties that have created a livelihood on YT. This is an example:
Damn! I had no idea the racism against Obama ran that deep. I knew it was there -- all you have to do is listen to white-hooded crackers like @gunslingerdick making his racist comments while denying Trump is a racist -- but I had no idea there is actually a museum with the hardcore bigotry on full display.
Then STFU and take it from someone in the know. I’m in the know. Thanks.
I’ll be worried the day I get evicted from inside your head. Lots of room and rent free.
I suppose flattering yourself is all you really have left anymore. Oh, how the not-so-mighty have fallen.
I always kinda figured that a president's ability to be mocked sort of goes hand-in-hand with how seriously they take themselves. It's always changing. I doubt that presidents were mocked on TV until LBJ and Nixon. The Smothers Brothers and shows like that might take jabs. Nixon was on Rowan & Martin and did a "Sock It To Me" bit.
If you take each POTUS individually, they were all openly lampooned on TV and in movies. Admittedly, I didn't watch SNL much in the later 2000s, so I don't know if they had any good Obama impersonations. He seems like he'd have a sense of humor about it. I think I remember seeing him on Kimmel reading the mean tweets about himself. Obama did have a verbal cadence that could be replicated. I guess they all do. Donald Trump has no sense of humor... literally. He's like Steven Seagal. He cannot be self-deprecating in a comedic sense. His ego is too fragile to be the butt of a joke.
Yeah... from someone who has to have everything explained to them because you "don't get it." What you don't get could just about fill the Grand Canyon.
it's truly incredible how much people see what they want to see and don't see what they care not to see.
Relatively and figuratively speaking, obama was treated by the media and by his supporters like a baby bird that had fallen out of the nest. Of course that was because they were liberal and he was black, and there was no way he was going to be made to look like any shortcomings or mistakes could be due to his race. Or to his being liberal, but mostly it was the race.
That could be understood to some extent, all things considered. But the protective shield put around him was ridiculous and IMO harmful. If you want a black person or any other person to demonstrate competence, you don't cast doubt on that by covering up his deficiencies. And you don't allow those deficiencies to create problems by not bringing them to light.
Additionally and accordingly, any criticism directed at him would more often than not brand the critic a racist. Race relations took a big step backwards under his stewardship, and to this day those who support him will say it's because of racism imbedded in the right-wing mentality, or some other such nonsense, as if that burgeoned or just popped up out of nowhere completely incidental to his eight years of leadership. The uptick in mistrust and alienation is still with us.
Honesty should always be the best policy excepting certain questions your wife might pose to you. The biggest problem we have right now is treating the truth like the proverbial red-headed stepchild even if that means pushing an agenda to idiotic proportions..
Relatively and figuratively speaking, obama was treated by the media and by his supporters like a baby bird that had fallen out of the nest. Of course that was because they were liberal and he was black, and there was no way he was going to be made to look like any shortcomings or mistakes could be due to his race. Or to his being liberal, but mostly it was the race.
That could be understood to some extent, all things considered. But the protective shield put around him was ridiculous and IMO harmful. If you want a black person or any other person to demonstrate competence, you don't cast doubt on that by covering up his deficiencies. And you don't allow those deficiencies to create problems by not bringing them to light.
Additionally and accordingly, any criticism directed at him would more often than not brand the critic a racist. Race relations took a big step backwards under his stewardship, and to this day those who support him will say it's because of racism imbedded in the right-wing mentality, or some other such nonsense, as if that burgeoned or just popped up out of nowhere completely incidental to his eight years of leadership. The uptick in mistrust and alienation is still with us.
Honesty should always be the best policy excepting certain questions your wife might pose to you. The biggest problem we have right now is treating the truth like the proverbial red-headed stepchild even if that means pushing an agenda to idiotic proportions..
What a racist garbage post. It looks like your mother has your clothes laid out for tomorrow:
Last edited:
I don’t get it. I’m sorry I’m not familiar with your brand of absurdity. The onus is on you to explain your lunacy. Not on me to already understand it.
I've got 2 of them. 1 is actually red with the white patch. Looks like red velvet.What a racist garbage post. It looks like your mother has your clothes laid out for tomorrow:
Similar threads
