Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Fox News Channel Orders
13 Episodes Of Conservative Comedy ½ HOUR NEWS HOUR!!

probably by rockness	Mar 8th, 2007 04:38:58 PM
People love to laugh at the little guy just as much as they like to laugh at those in power. This is America!
Ordering 13 episodes of this show... by Childe Roland	Mar 8th, 2007 04:40:17 PM
...is like buying the super-deluxe jumbo-sized box of condoms before going on a week-long vacation with your wife. It's very optimistic, but you know there's no way in hell all of them are going to see air.
I need to check this thing out by Razorback	Mar 8th, 2007 04:40:29 PM
Sounds like a nice answer to the pinko Daily Show.
When will they cast Matt "Dirty" Sanchez? by HellKing	Mar 8th, 2007 04:40:29 PM
AKA Rod Majors, gay porn actor and gay male prostitute, as a reporter. Fox News channel was inviting virtually on every show for being a Marine crying about being taunted by hecklers on Columbia University. Too bad Fox News just desperate to find stories to attack their enemies with without doing background checks on their poster boys of the month. Maybe Bill O'Reilly talked dirty to him when he was on his show.
This show didn't even get good reviews from by vikingkitty	Mar 8th, 2007 04:43:29 PM
my fellow conservatives. I'd say at least 50% of the posters on Freerepublic.com didn't like the pilot episode. I'll stick with the libertarian leanings of South Park, thank you.
BTW, the show is horrible! by HellKing	Mar 8th, 2007 04:43:45 PM
It's being accused of having a laugh track. I question that since the laughs are tepid and lackluster in the first place. You'd figure they'd turn the volume up if it was a laugh track.
I think this is likely to kiss the point. by jmyoung666	Mar 8th, 2007 04:44:48 PM
The Daily show is funny because it satirizes newsmedia and political attempts to use that process. It will often make fun of the disconnect between speech and action and spin in general. It also makes fun of liberal politicians and pundits as well. It's humor is not dependent upon a liberal audience. Now, if this Conservative DS foucses on the same things, it may be good. PJ O'Rourke is a perfect example of a funny conservative who should be involved in this. However, I fear this will end up appealing more to Anne Coulter fans (ie, braindead morons) than PJ O'rourke fans.
MISS not KISS by jmyoung666	Mar 8th, 2007 04:45:36 PM
Jesus Christ, I have to read what I write.
damnit, I never thought i'd be reduced to this, but by Jed	Mar 8th, 2007 04:48:34 PM
...Anne Coulter's gotta eat. Now, Actually, I mean this; her appearence as VP in that sketch with limbaugh and her recent public appearences in calling a former senator and presidential canidate a faggot have made clear that the woman is anorexic. I don't mean she's thin, I mean I can see her fuckin' neck muscles move when she talks. I want very, very bad things to happen to Anne Coulter but no one should live like that. I think she's worried that she looks puffy next to michelle malkin, and that's unfounded, because they scratch very different itches. Coulter is the hottest to the robert novak demographic while malkin is for the "young", "hip" republicans. both three of them.
I like this show by JuggFuckler	Mar 8th, 2007 04:52:43 PM
Only because it makes conservatives look as sad as they truly are. (insert laugh track)
This show is so unfunny, it's painful. by Novaman5000	Mar 8th, 2007 05:02:56 PM
And conservatives say that liberals have no sense of humor. God, it's so bad, just thinking about it makes me embarassed for them.
"The Daily Show" is not "liburral" by Nodwick	Mar 8th, 2007 05:04:43 PM
They make fun of those in power. The reason Bush and Republicans were the target of TDS for so long is because they controlled ALL THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT. Some people are so myopic about that, it's incredible. Besides, they've made tons of fun of Hillary and Obama as part of their "Clusterf*ck to the White House" feature.
Childe Roland- by MikeTheSpike	Mar 8th, 2007 05:09:51 PM
Who the hell uses condoms for sex with their wife?
Well, Mike, it's like this... by Childe Roland	Mar 8th, 2007 05:16:55 PM
...we don't exactly subscribe to the "every sperm is sacred" concept but we do like the sex. We have nothing against having kids. In fact, we have one. That's enough for now. Hence, the protective measures.
Get Bent Herc. by ZombieSlayer666	Mar 8th, 2007 05:17:16 PM
Seriously- There is no reason for you to post this and waste a talkback space. No one is going to actually watch this show or take it seriously. The only reason you put this up is so you could post your nancy boy comments along with it as well as well as your fucktard links to Franken and Outfoxed. Get your fucking agenda out of the office cumstain, its pathetic. Just another angry liberal. And for the record. I am a REGISTERED independant who is pro-choice and against the ridiculous war in Iraq. Still, people who blather on about how EVIL O Reilly is can lick my anoos because the guy is going on night after night preaching about stricter sentences for child rapists. Sonuds real evil fuckstick.
last time i checked by FakePlasticGuava	Mar 8th, 2007 05:23:10 PM
the daily show was pretty neutral. they get democrats under the knife very often. reason people might see a bias is that the republicans just give them more fodder? jon stewart once said he wishes he had less material to work with. it would be our government didn't like the a bunch of morons. btw, 1/2 hour news hour..."BO" magazine? Yeah, really witty you hacks.
FOX's attempt at replicating the DAILY SHOW's success by RenoNevada2000	Mar 8th, 2007 05:23:45 PM
FOX's attempt at replicating the DAILY SHOW's success only illustrates that those in most desperate need of getting the joke, seldom do.
OK Liberal Douchebags... by Neo Con Snake Plissken	Mar 8th, 2007 05:24:33 PM
Q: Will Rupert Murdoch allow the show to mock the likes of George Bush, Scooter Libby, Dick Cheney and Ann Coulter? A: No. Why would they? It rips on Liberal Traitors. Not Patriots. Q: If not, can the Fox News show hope to ever garner a “Daily Show”-size following? A: Conservative Comedy Garners Ratings (From seraphicpress.com) The preliminary ratings for Sunday "1/2 Hour News Hour" TV's only Conservative leaning comedy show are just about the same and even slightly better than the prelims after the first show on Feb. 18th. The March 4th show got a 0.9 rating, a 1.5 share and approx. 1 million, 38 thousand viewers. Again, the more complete ratings info will surely boost these numbers as they have every week so far. But the early indication is that the show completely held its original audience, (and may have added to it... we won't know for another day), which is extremely rare. And just to compare, at the same time Sunday night the other networks' ratings were: CNN: 0.4 We suspect viewers tune in to see what Anderson Cooper is wearing. MSNBC: 0.2 Does this channel really exist? ESPN: 0.7 Sports, who can argue? HBO: 0.4 Nudity in ancient Rome, catchy. I see the oxen and horses and mules and I go: whoa, over-budget. Bravo: 0.7. The name is like so Italian, I expect subtitles. A&E: 0.6 Sounds like a metal shop in Gary, Indiana. History Channel: 1.6 The Dark Ages. Times were even worse back then. How comforting. MTV: 0.5 Girls, garters, guitars. Enough already! Showtime: 0.3 Suburban mom sells dope. So HBO. Islamic loonies on the loose, but Islam is totally cool. How very HBO. Showtime: not HBO. Food Network: 0.5 Yay, Alton Brown, you are The Man. Love your movie references. But please, no more, bi-valves. So not kosher! Discovery Channel: James Cameron's "Jesus Tomb special," 2.7. I guess everybody is now Jewish. (Hat Tip: This is Dirty Harry's line, Libertas) Oy. Talk about break-a-way minyans, quorums. Disney Channel: 1.5 I love Disney because they cater to a niche audiences. I love a business that's a real business. Spike TV Showing "The Godfather II." 0.9 The best American movie in the last 35 years chopped up by commercials every 6 minutes, a total shandeh! Still, the audience was there. Sci-Fi Channel: 0.9 Their SFX are hilarious! TLC: 0.6 Whenever I feel depressed, I go right to TLC, and immediately feel suicidal. CNBC: 0.1 This is network fare on cable. You can't fool us. Q: And can “1/2” anchors Kurt Long and Jenn Robinson ever hope to find the same level of acclaim and success enjoyed by the likes of Jon Stewart, Steve Carell, Ed Helms, Stephen Colbert, et al? A: Yes, Dumbass.
Limbaugh and Coulter as by FSJGuy	Mar 8th, 2007 05:25:15 PM
Limbaugh and Coulter as president and vice president is not funny, its downright scary. They would nuke half the planet an hour after they took office, then invade the other have the second hour.
This Hour has 22 Minutes vs The ½ Hour News Hour by flint_grifter	Mar 8th, 2007 05:25:35 PM
Canada's CBC has already done it - for a much longer time, and what is likely a much higher quality. But it's nice to see the Lowest Common Denominator can follow political humor in the States now, just the same.
This show is so paifully bad that... by rbatty024	Mar 8th, 2007 05:30:59 PM
it makes me proud to be a liberal. The best art always comes from progressives and now it has become apparent that the same is true of comedy. Sure, the Daily Show has a liberal bent but at least it makes fun of the Democrats almost as much as the Republicans. Lets face it, both parties need to be made fun of, but the Republicans are such dinosaurs that they just make it easy. The Republican soundbites usually get more laughs than the actual punchlines.
Cant wait to see the Daily Show rip into this lameness by Teamwak	Mar 8th, 2007 05:31:27 PM
Should be fun. Pissed neo-cons make me smile! :)
Neo Con Snake Plissken is FAR funnier... by Billyeveryteen	Mar 8th, 2007 05:41:21 PM
More you retarted shitbag, more!
Love the Daily Show but that shit is liberal as fuck by tile_mcgillus	Mar 8th, 2007 05:41:39 PM
Think back when Jon Stewart basically soft balled every interview with a democratic president candidate, including Jon Kerry. He also hits hard when interviewing repubs.
It's cute that conservatives by JacksParasites	Mar 8th, 2007 05:43:04 PM
It's cute that conservatives think they can be comedians. Outside of maybe Dennis Miller, I can't think of a single conservative comedian. Conservatives should just do what they do best, feign manliness, steal candy from babies, spit on the poor, and tell people to shut up. And they should leave the comedy to the professionals.
I think they missed the entire point of a satire show.. by Ridge	Mar 8th, 2007 05:43:08 PM
When the 'satire' they put up, wasn't even: a.)Satirical at best? and b.) Funny in the least. Sorry but when your laugh track is even struggling to laugh properly, that's just tragic.
it's not funny, but what the hey by johnnysunshine	Mar 8th, 2007 05:46:09 PM
I don't care what your political bent is, the show's just not funny at all. That said, a lot more people tooned in to "According to Jim" than "Arrested Development" and Jay Leno is still the most watched of the late night talk shows so maybe comedy shows don't necessarily have to be good or funny to be successful. You just won't catch me trying to sit through any more than the ten minutes of the first episode of this show than I already suffered through.
More like SNL than Daily Show by jccalhoun	Mar 8th, 2007 05:48:56 PM
What I saw was a lot more like SNL's skit and news than the Daily Show. And it was just about as unfunny. The problem of labeling yourself is that you leave no room. While the Daily Show may be very left leaning, it doesn't come out and say it, so they can take shots at whomever they want whenever they want without worrying about it too much. If they were to label themselves as liberal they couldn't. The same thing is the case with this show. By calling itself conservative, it is setting up sacred cows and areas where it can't tread without offending its audience.
Conservative humor no such beast. by EvilWizardGlick	Mar 8th, 2007 05:55:52 PM
Conservatives just aren't funny. Bullying isn't funny. Dennis Miller when he want conservative isn't funny, neither is P.J. O'Rourke. Conservatives don't understand nuance and can not laugh at themselves.It is a character flaw.
Let them have their little show by SPECTRE007	Mar 8th, 2007 05:55:59 PM
What difference does it make? If you like the Daily Show, watch the Daily Show. If you like knee-slapping, Larry the Cable Guy and Terry Bradshaw brand humor, watch the 1/2 Hour News Hour. Too many people adopt the "I don't like it so it must be destroyed" attitude. And what's with the rant about the ratings of other shows on Sundays? Are you convincing us or yourself that this show deserves to be on TV? Everybody chill.....
Nodwick by Quin the Eskimo	Mar 8th, 2007 06:05:12 PM
very clever. "Liberull" Quality humor, I applaud you. And name three comedic shows that hit the ground firing on all cylinders.
Ron White is the only good thing... by Childe Roland	Mar 8th, 2007 06:09:55 PM
...to come out of the Blue COllar Comedy Tour. Foxworthy just isn't funny at all anymore (was for a few seconds in the 80s, but it passed) and I'd be hard pressed to name those other unfunny fuckers. They're just that ignorable/forgettable.
By the way by Quin the Eskimo	Mar 8th, 2007 06:15:38 PM
(R) Oregon AND I FUCKING HATE LARRY THE CABLE GUY
about as funny as a bottle of milk by la_sith	Mar 8th, 2007 06:19:10 PM
I saw a couple clips. Excruciatingly bad. What, Dennis Miller wasn't available?!
It had funny moments by The Skeptical	Mar 8th, 2007 06:22:33 PM
The openeing scene, where Anne Coulter threatens to "Invade, kill and convert" if you change the chanel, was very funny. BO magazine--not so much. But that's kind of how I feel about Daily show and Colbert, occasionaly funny with lots of boring bits.
Loved it by Latauro	Mar 8th, 2007 06:33:29 PM
The show proves my theory: that conservatives can't tell the difference between intelligence and liberalism. I was laughing very hard, but not for the reasons the show's makers were hoping for.
Neo Con Snake Plissken by PurityOfEssence	Mar 8th, 2007 06:38:35 PM
Are you serious. The show fealt like a really bad episode of Weekend Update from SNL. The jokes sucked the (Dailyshow does a better job making fun of the left), its political bias was blatent, and Anne Coulter and Limbaugh's intro was painfully akward (not to mention hackneyed as all hell). The funniest notion about the whole damn thing is how many people on Fox have been critical of "fake news" claiming it is bad for the US and then they fucking make there own damn fake show. (The irony the claims of the show aren't to far from the claims of the regular reporters on the network). Face it the show sucks. And before you start accussing me of being a Liberal, don't even fucking bother, I have no party affiliation and I hate the far left as much as I hate the far right, both are filled with ignorant people who only engage in polemics.
This is my favorite show now by Vern	Mar 8th, 2007 06:44:04 PM
If the rest of the series is as amazingly uncomfortable as the first one I will have to watch some more. If you've ever seen Studio 60, you know how they have those skits-within-the-show where the setups are way too long and try to awkwardly force a political point in there, and then the punchline is completely lame? That's this show except with the added value of an over-the-top laugh track that not only laughs way too hard at the "jokes," but sometimes at the setups! It's like they couldn't even figure out which parts were supposed to be funny. Of course I disagree with their politics, but that has nothing to do with it. These people are so out of touch they couldn't touch whatever it is they're trying to touch with a thousand foot pole. "Harry Potter and the Alternative Lifestyle" is the best you can do? Larry the Cable Guy is probaly funnier. The second best part is that they think there needs to be some counter to the Daily Show. Yes, the Daily Show leans to the left, but they are actual comedians, not people trying to shove propaganda points down your throat. They made fun of John Kerry during the 2004 election better than any of these dickheads would. I hope this thing somehow stays on the air until the next democratic president just so you can see the "liberal" show do a better job of making fun of the president than these people. And the very best part is that it's on the Fox NEWS channel. Those people are so out of it they can't even figure out why it's a bad idea to do a comedy fake news show on what is supposedly an ACTUAL news channel! It's incredible. But hey man, it keeps them off the streets. As long as they are only hurting comedy and not the country, I love it!
I actually found it amusing... by PirateEmery	Mar 8th, 2007 06:47:33 PM
So flame me, but this is MY sense of humor they are writing for, not yours.
Good point Vern by SPECTRE007	Mar 8th, 2007 06:50:02 PM
Wasn't it Fox News that was attacking Jon Stewart for doing fake news? They said it was wrong to present his show as news to an unsuspecting public. Jon's response is that he was doing Comedy on a COMEDY CHANNEL. This is more out of place than ESPN's hour long dramas.
Place fake FOX News angst here by Razorback	Mar 8th, 2007 06:51:15 PM
I love how people pretend like FOX News is somehow less full of shit than CNN.
Sweet Holy Crap by The Brewhammer	Mar 8th, 2007 06:52:06 PM
I haven't watched this before but I will now. If it scares and freaks out the Commies here that much then it's probably something I'll find chuckle-worthy.
Average viewer of Fox News is 65 years old and above by snowpuff	Mar 8th, 2007 06:53:14 PM
Don't be fooled by the ratings for Fox. Most of the people watching are senior citizens. Bill O'Reilly has a median viewership of 71 years old!! If you've ever noticed at your grandparents or parents house, the TV is almost constantly on and it's true, older people like Fox News. I disagree with it, but it often has a sort of hypnotic and soothing message. Anyway, most of their viewers couldn't tell the difference between the 1/2 Hour News Hour and ads for mint flavored denture creme. The ratings for Fox News's comedy hour may actually end up being quite similar to John Stewart's. Madison Avenue only gives a shit about viewers that are 18-35 and that's what Stewart gives them. The Fox show delivers old ladies and cats.
Most of Fox News' audience are over 65... by rbatty024	Mar 8th, 2007 06:53:25 PM
anyway, and probably have no idea it's supposed to be a comedy.
It pulls it's punches by Big Bad Clone	Mar 8th, 2007 06:53:40 PM
Odd how conservative talk hosts can say insane fucking nonesense at the expense of logic and they are lauded for having balls. So, why can't they do funny that way? I mean this shit is as soft as diaherra and about as hard hitting as a staged Jay-Walking segment. Why not let man-goat Coulter cover up her Adam's apple and give a 30 minute set on how John Edwards is a faggot? Or let Limbaugh get loaded up on pills and let him rant on how freedom is killing America.
Fox News IS a comedy network... by Hjermsted	Mar 8th, 2007 06:54:44 PM
...where the joke is on you. It's about time they added the laughtrack.
I did not read snopuff's post before I post. by rbatty024	Mar 8th, 2007 06:54:45 PM
Weird.
Regardless of viewpoint just a total, gigantic abortion by Winterchili	Mar 8th, 2007 06:55:35 PM
Maybe the least funny thing I have ever seen.
Yeah, yeah... by BizarroJerry	Mar 8th, 2007 06:58:25 PM
Sure. All Republicans are gun-toting, Nascar-cheering, bible thumping rednecks. Ugh. Enough with the idiotic stereotypes, people. And wait and see if this show is actually successful before you identify all conservatives with it. Oh, and maybe the Daily Show isn't a complete, blatant liberal-loving show, you know where Stewart leans. And forget about Dennis Miller. Al Franken stopped being funny when he went all full-on liberal political pundit.
Conservatives are useless. by Roll Fizzlebeef	Mar 8th, 2007 06:59:45 PM
Yes, you. You suck. Kill yourself.
Damn, that IS weird, Rbatty by snowpuff	Mar 8th, 2007 07:02:31 PM
The old ladies and their cats probably think there is a conspiracy now.
Why Herc posted this by snowpuff	Mar 8th, 2007 07:08:29 PM
Manny Coto = former Enterprise executive producer. ergo, automatic hype of any new shows by [fill in name] by Herc, even if it seems insanely ill-suited to readership of Coaxial But at least Manny Coto did an awesome job on Enterprise. that is, at least we don't have to listen to something relating to Brannon Braga.
Roll Fizzlebeef by Quin the Eskimo	Mar 8th, 2007 07:18:57 PM
Still angry. Keep on reacting. I love it.
Roll Fizzlebeef by Quin the Eskimo	Mar 8th, 2007 07:19:00 PM
Still angry. Keep on reacting. I love it.
Snowpuff, great minds think alike. by rbatty024	Mar 8th, 2007 07:27:02 PM
However, I am starting to fear that you're just a schizophrenic corner of my mind and that I'm "talking" to myself at this very moment. Scary.
I look at it this way... by Paul T. Ryan	Mar 8th, 2007 07:27:30 PM
If there can be jokebooks for Mormons - and such publications do exist - then there can be political satire for Conservatives. But still, I expect this to be less funny than The O'Reilly Factor and about as depressingly one-sided as Hannity and Whatever (as Jon Stewart called it). You think they could at least bring in Dennis Miller.
TOO VENOMY!!! by gorydon	Mar 8th, 2007 07:27:47 PM
But I heard Shia LaBeouf is signed on to play the sidekick son!
Ann Coultercrackwhore. by wowsah156	Mar 8th, 2007 07:28:19 PM
Aint it cool should not be promoting Fox propaganda. Aintitcool needs to be above political crap or it will tarnish its integrity. I watched a couple of minutes of this show and felt the need to go into my backyard and empty a rifle magazine into the unknown. When i see Ann Coultercrackwhore i feel this urge to get a claw hammer and use it on her. Aint it cool is about entertainment. Not promoting the propaganda of the Murdoch Fox "News " Channel. Dont devalue what this site is about. no politics.
Oh and if you want even worse sketch comedy... by Paul T. Ryan	Mar 8th, 2007 07:29:54 PM
I implore you cast your eyes (then quickly avert them) towards The Wedge, a horrendously awful Australian sketch comedy show full of crass sterotypes and stone-age puns. Seriously, nothing I've ever seen from the US is as bad as The Wedge. Not even Bette. www.thewedge.com.au
When you Think of Rib-Tickling Comedy, Think of 24 by bobbyjoe	Mar 8th, 2007 07:31:45 PM
24 for all its merits is maybe one of the most humorless shows ever in the history of television (you know, except for the unintentional humor of some preposterous plot points). In the entire run of 24, the only intentional humor I ever remember at all is, what... Chloe? So what the hell would you have to be smoking to say: "Gee, we need a comedy show, who should we get?" and the people you come up with are Joel Surnow and Manny Coto? Good God in Heaven.
Man the show is terrible by ChorleyFM	Mar 8th, 2007 07:32:15 PM
But, I don't think it is a conservative thing, just that they have terrible writers who a) aren't funny, and b) have absolutely no idea how to pick out the correct targets. Though the anchors don't come off much better, the woman seems like a real smarmy bitch who would fit in well on SNL.
What's So Funny 'Bout War, Hate and Ignorance? by Flim Springfield	Mar 8th, 2007 07:34:18 PM

Tears by Darth Kosher	Mar 8th, 2007 07:53:56 PM
Every time the 1/2 crew tells a stupid joke, the baby Jesus cries. Seriously, I'd rather watch the edited for tv version of Caddyshack II than watch this piece of shit. When you are a comedy show, your first priority is to be funny. If Jon Stewart went out 4 nights a week and just spouted liberal talking points, who the hell would watch? Nobody.
Sorry, Vern, but that's a totally lame argument... by Triumph poops!	Mar 8th, 2007 07:57:58 PM
You said (quote): "And the very best part is that it's on the Fox NEWS channel. Those people are so out of it they can't even figure out why it's a bad idea to do a comedy fake news show on what is supposedly an ACTUAL news channel!" Your point being...what? Look, here's the bottom line. The show is ADVERTISED as a comedy show and it's clearly PLAYED OUT as a comedy show -- right down to having a live studio audience and laugh track. So I seriously doubt ANYONE is watching this thing and thinking its a REAL newscast. As for a "News" Channel having a "mock" newscast, so what? It's not like it's on every day -- it's only on once a week, Sunday night, in the evening, and is clearly targeted at an adult audience. Taking that into account, Hell, I'd actually argue the direct opposite from you. Namely, if anyone was going to use up a half hour's airtime to mock the news of the week in a lighthearted manner, why NOT let it be a 24/7 news channel? Why SHOULDN'T a 24/7 news channel poke a little fun AT the news? Yes, it's about pleasing a base audience...it's about generating ratings so people leave their TV tuned into the channel...all which simply means Fox is smart enough to do what every other cable station is doing -- namely trying to keep viewers (and thus generate ratings and ad revenue). So basically your gripe is that Fox is being smart enough to find alternate programming ideas to keep viewers tuned in with a show like this or a late night show like RED EYE. But, hey, since you seem to find it so wrong for a 24/7 NEWS channel to be using up airtime to schedule an ENTERTAINMENT show, a little update for you: later tonight on the Msnbc NEWS channel, "Headliners & Legends" will be spending a full hour focusing on Cameron Diaz and her love life. Because, hey, that's REAL news!
wow by Halfbreedqueen	Mar 8th, 2007 07:59:52 PM
this is actually funny. that laugh track alone, wow. it's like the stewie laugh track in that FG eppy. wow. and also, quick question for the Daily Show bashers... if you're so mad that that show has a left wing leaning, why are you suddenly praising this show because it's far right? shouldn't you be angry that this ALSO has a leaning? and don't start in with that shit about liberal media, if anything Cons have a bigger soap box (why are almost all the political pundits conservative... i.e. rush, o'reilly, pretty much anybody on the radio talking politics actually.)
Quin the Eskimo by Roll Fizzlebeef	Mar 8th, 2007 08:02:05 PM
You double-posted. Proves you're a moron.
"If anything Cons have a bigger soap box..." by Triumph poops!	Mar 8th, 2007 08:15:42 PM
Halfbreedqueen, you gotta be kidding me. You wrote, "And don't start in with that shit about liberal media. If anything Cons have a bigger soap box. Why are almost all the political pundits conservative...ie. Rush, O'Reilly, pretty much anybody on the radio talking politics actually." Oh, come on. Gimme a fucking break already. Airwaves and airtime is a matter of public interest and dollars and cents, pure and simple. So let me get this right -- it's pure BIAS on the part of the broadcasting industry to air O'Reilly or Rush, yet actual RATINGS and FINANCES (ie. this little thing called "Economics 101" and profits & losses) somehow DON'T enter the equation? Look, the reason there aren't more Left-leaning commentators burning up the airwaves is because apparently no one gives a shit about listening to them -- and, yes, that finger pointing goes directly at those ON the left themselves. Seriously, I love how the Left STILL refuses to simply admit that Air America, with its great Leftist demigod Al Franken at the helm, completely BOMBED AND WENT BANKRUPT DUE TO UTTERLY SHIT RATINGS BECAUSE NO ONE WANTED TO WASTE THEIR TIME LISTENING TO IT. In short, you can have all the Left-leaning commentators you want on the air...you can challenge the O'Reilly's, Rushs, and Hannity's all you want...the market will support it and let it come to fruition -- but FIRST you have to find someone that people actually WANT to listen to.
"'News' Channel having a 'mock' newscast, so what?" by Voice O. Reason	Mar 8th, 2007 08:29:10 PM
It completely destroys whatever Fox News remaining claim had on being a part of actual journalism. Even shows like O'Reilly, Hannity/Colmes, and Kasich which have extreme biases are still making an attempt to inform rather than just entertain.
Here's the reason liberal talk shows and talk radio... by rbatty024	Mar 8th, 2007 08:32:17 PM
will never work: liberals are not interested in having people stare at the camera and tell them what to think. The only reason I think these shows are popular with conservatives is that they're so insecure they need someone there telling them they're right all the time. Sorry, but most liberals know that in the long run they'll win. From abolisionists to the New Deal liberals have consistently won when you look at the big picture. Sure, conservativism will win some battle in the short term but progressives will always win out in the end. Instead of watching some idiot on television tell me what to think, I would rather read the liberal greats like John Locke, Thomas Paine, and Charles Dickens.
Ha ha ha by Roll Fizzlebeef	Mar 8th, 2007 08:32:26 PM
Look at all the conservatives posting their little opinions. They're so cute!!
Bottom line... by VoteRoslin08	Mar 8th, 2007 08:35:26 PM
This show can never be the the neo-con-daily-show. Why? The average viewer of this show is and will continue to be MUCH older. When I say older I mean the majority of the audience will be 25+ in age. 18-25 is the age range that drives advertising, pop culture trends, etc. That's just a fact. No... This show will have a ton of conservatives slapping their knee at how hilarious it would be if Anne CULT-er were VP, while the rest of the world cringes.
Conservatives: History's Losers by Flim Springfield	Mar 8th, 2007 08:37:09 PM
That needs to be a book.
The 1/2 Hour News Hour is... by DS9Sisko	Mar 8th, 2007 08:46:39 PM
as funny as raping premature AIDS babies and then slathering semen and maggots on dead US soldiers freshly killed by IED's. It's just THAT funny.
harmless by Shakes	Mar 8th, 2007 08:49:12 PM
Well the thing about the Daily Show, is that it evolved into what it is now. Initially it was just a nightly talk show, and then when Stewart came on, and then following the 2000 election, it found it's own as the political satire it is now. To try and start that off from the start is ballsy. But not ballsy enough for Fox to go mano a mano and air the show every weeknight at 11, in direct competition with the Daily Show. Now that would have shown some guts. Instead they tuck it into some Sunday night time slot between Geraldo's mustache and Sean Hannity Does America, that most people are likely to not even notice. Of course it did get pretty good viewers for it's channel/timeslot, so I guess its a hit. I tivoed the first episode, I thought the Rush/Ann opening was pretty funny, but the rest of the show was generally predictable and harmless. There was potential for some good comedy with the Che t-shirts, like if they had gone to an actual college and tried selling them, but instead they had a bad actor pretending to be a shirt salesman in studio. And then there was some running gag through the show about Ed Begley Jr trying to get to the studio. I guess they were saying that he drives a Hybrid car, and that it kept breaking down? Just really weak and timid on their part. And why put this on an actual NEWS channel. Why not put it on the actual Fox network at 11. It's not like we couldn't go without repeats of Seinfeld. Then again the Fox network routinely has characters in its shows doing the type of things that Fox News commentators would get worked up about. Simpsons routinely takes cracks at right wing politics lately, and on a recent episode of House he convinced a pregnant girl who wanted to keep her baby to have an abortion. I'm pro-choice and even i was taken aback by that.
Wow, Rbatty024 and I really do think alike by snowpuff	Mar 8th, 2007 08:51:32 PM
I think another reasons these shows are popular with some people is that they don't tell you "what" - they tell "what... to think." And to use a Chomsky phrase, Fox News is amazingly good at "emotionally potent oversimplification." They take an issue like Al Gore and say "Al Gore's uses 10 more times energy than you do!" They don't care that Al Gore has probably done more to create awareness about the environment than probably any one human being on Earth. They don't care that you could make the same misleading analogies about almost anyone (Snowpuff's apartment uses 5 times less energy than the house down the street! Therefore, the house's owner is an energy waster!!). Sure, Al Gore is RICH. That's all they're saying. He's rich - he's not like you. So turn on the hate, folks! They don't actually care that his message on the environment is correct. They only care about shooting the messenger. And also, ironically, the extremely wealthy people who own and run Fox News, such as Rupert Murdoch, don't care about YOU. In fact, they look down on you. A lot. They simply want to manipulate you. And it so to tap into the fear that is rampant right now. I don't mean to rant, but the same tools Fox News use are the tools used by the Nazis and the Soviet Union to manipulate the masses. The powers that be at Fox don't care about you, they usually don't even give a fuck about they have to say to get your support. They care about maintaing the status quo - a small base of extremely wealthy people and a large group of underpaid workers who are easily galvanized by emotional issues, while politicians use your government to ferry to private interests and themselves.
Dont'cha mean Fox NOISE Channel? by Pennsy	Mar 8th, 2007 08:55:46 PM
;)
Those aren't liberals, they are reactionary idiots by Bronx Cheer	Mar 8th, 2007 09:11:02 PM
I am sick of radicals and extremists giving liberalism a bad name. Probably precisely how conservatives feel about the hijacking of their ideology by the Neocons and fundamentalists.
rbatty by Halfbreedqueen	Mar 8th, 2007 09:12:40 PM
quote - will never work: liberals are not interested in having people stare at the camera and tell them what to think. and I would say yeah, you are right there. and the whole public airwave thing that other guy was bitching about, I never said it was WRONG. just that the whole "OMIGOSH LIBERAL MEDIA" is just a phrase because seeming like you're NOT in power makes it seem like any problems aren't your fault in any way.
oh and... by Halfbreedqueen	Mar 8th, 2007 09:17:05 PM
if it is true that the reason there are no left wing commentators is because NOBODY wants to listen to them, then how exactly is their a liberal media? wouldn't that apply that's what people want to listen to? you gotta pick a side man...
**imply by Halfbreedqueen	Mar 8th, 2007 09:18:17 PM
**imply
If conservatives are history's losers... by zacdilone	Mar 8th, 2007 09:21:29 PM
...then how did the Democrats manage to take back Congress by leaning to the right? Conservatism won the last election. Note I say "conservatism," not what Bush and his cronies try to pass off as "conservatism." I don't know what that shit is.
You folks realize... by PirateEmery	Mar 8th, 2007 09:31:33 PM
That every single community on the web thinks of AICN's talkbacks as the "bottom of the barrel"?
the Horror.... by Exterminans	Mar 8th, 2007 09:47:56 PM
This train wreck sucks ass. It reminds me of when Christians try to use something new and or hip to deliver their message (think bad christian rock or christian rap) and they use sub par talent to do it. If you insist on having a conservative leaning comedy show at least have the good sense to hire funny conservative comics (I'm sure exist). And give them free reign over their material (as Stewart has on the Daily Show). The DS goofs on everyone (yeah it leans to the left big time) this show merely panders to the right and poorly I might add. The only people who find this funny are the same disillusioned idiots who think Ann Coulter is a Hot, Hip, Conservative. Ann Coulter is one ugly cunt (not because she is conservative, she looks masculine, but hey maybe you're into that sorta thing not that there's anything wrong with that). And this is one horrible show (not because its conservative but because its written by unfunny no talent hacks, hire some real writers and make interesting jokes and or observations I'll be happy to laugh at liberals despite the fact that I lean to the left).
When Did The Left Become as Bad as The Right by kevinwillis.net	Mar 8th, 2007 09:49:09 PM
I'm thinking probably when they looked the other way during Stalin's purges? Or during Mao's wholesale slaughter of tens of millions of Chinese? Because those particular despots were supposedly representing the politically correct viewpoint for enlightened nationhood? For me, the left became as bad as I thought the right was in college, where lefties protested art history classes for showing 18th century nudes without condemning them for being objectifying tools of the patriarchy (when, oddly, in life drawing class, the topic was "form and line"). When critiques became politically correct. Then it turned out you weren't supposed to say things the lefties didn't like at all, and it turns out you were naturally sexist if you were a male and a racist if you were a southerner (couldn't help it!--but of course good Northern liberals were naturally not racists, etc). Then when it seemed to be that some right-wing blowhards had good points, I was condemned as a heretic, and I suddenly realized liberalism wasn't really what I had thought it was, and I had better stop thinking of myself as a liberal. At which point I found out conservatism wasn't really what I had thought it was, either, and I would wager for about 90% of liberals, that's true: conservatism isn't about what they think it is, and they could not express a conservative philosophy in terms that a conservative would agree with to save the rain forests. Although I would say that the 1/2 Hour News Hour has not been, so far, anything that's going to advance conservatism. BO Magazine? Oh, jeeze. And the laugh track. Oh, dear lord, the laugh track.
And yet, here you are, PirateEmery... by kintar0	Mar 8th, 2007 10:00:19 PM
here you are.
Keep It On! by Saluki	Mar 8th, 2007 10:04:26 PM
I am loving this show! It makes The Daily Show shine ever so much more brightly... Much in the same way Colbert wouldn't be as cool if O'Reilly wasn't around anymore. Comedy Central NEEDS shitty fox bobbleheads just like South Park needs bullshit paper tigers! Plus, it hammers the nail of conservatives not being able to be funny into the neocon corpse deeper and deeper with every airing! Win/Win!
All I know is Libs will lose the White House AGAIN... by Triumph poops!	Mar 8th, 2007 10:05:15 PM
Hey, it's only a freakin' TV show. I really don't know why people are getting so upset about it. You don't want to watch it? You think that politically its not your cup of tea? Fine, DON'T WATCH IT. I'm sure that given the other 900 or so cable stations that are out there, that you can find something else to watch. For crying out loud, you make it sound like a once a week, freakin' 22 minute comedy show is the end of the world as you know it. To which end I have to say I do love the more vocal Liberals here getting all huffy and condescending about how "Conservatives are history's losers" and acting like they're in control of things. News flash for you morons: the REAL truth that will keep Libs awake at night is that Guiliani now beats Hillary in ALL nationwide polls by a full 10 or more points (not to mention she still has a DISAPPROVAL rating that is so freakin' high that over 40% of the country has said it will NOT vote for her under ANY circumstances), and for all the media love tossed at Obama, Rudy beats him now by nearly TWENTY points nationwide. And McCain beats them both TOO. Bottom line: for all the Liberal feathers up in a hackle here over Fox News and its programming choices and for all your so-called moral or intellectual superiority, you Libs are still going to lose AGAIN in '08...
It was pretty funny by Mon-El	Mar 8th, 2007 10:07:01 PM
I caught the pilot episode and it had some pretty funny moments. The fact that it is on the Fox News Channel is a little weird. But, whatever.
Conservatives suck and need to die. by cutest_of_borg	Mar 8th, 2007 10:10:02 PM
John Edwards/Mark Warner 2008
Rudy and McCain are your heroes, Triumph? by Billyeveryteen	Mar 8th, 2007 10:12:54 PM
Are you sure you're conservative?
Halfbreedqueen . . . by kevinwillis.net	Mar 8th, 2007 10:17:43 PM
What conservatives are bashing The Daily Show? It's good, and has been a lot better than it was when I first saw it when I've recently caught it. And I love the Colbert Report--though it helps that Colbert really understands his subject matter, where as many liberal comedians trashing conservatives wouldn't know the difference between Ronald Reagan and Snidely Whiplash. But . . . I love Colbert. I like the Daily Show. I found the first episode of 1/2 Hour Comedy Hour to be pandering-to-one-side-of-the-a isle sort of humor, as likely to be funny to someone not already far to the right as an Al Franken book is likely to be funny to someone not already far to the left. But the Daily Show rocks! And Colbert rules! I've even been slowly won over by American Dad. Damn you, Seth McFarland. And while much of the liberal is media, and the vast majority of elite academia, both talk radio, the explosion of cable and sattelite, the Internet (from blogs to podcasting) insure that the conservative voice is well-represented in the public square--in fact, that all voices are better represented than they ever possibly could have been in the days of 3 networks, no cable, no podcasting, no blogs. So, 3 cheers for technology! That's all I'm saying. And the 1/2 Hours News Hour should have been 22 minutes of Dennis Miller talking about blowjobs. Now, that's some funny.
Can't wait to watch this... by Zarles	Mar 8th, 2007 10:20:25 PM
...while fucking my boyfriend in the ass and snacking on the remains of my sister's aborted babies! Hurray!
Gore Won in 2000, so . . . by kevinwillis.net	Mar 8th, 2007 10:27:10 PM
I wouldn't say the libs are guaranteed to lose the Whitehouse in 2008. The Republicans could have run a half-used can of deodorant against John Kerry and won, he sucked so hard. Gore won the popular vote in 2000, anyway, and almost the presidency. Clinton won twice. Democrats swept back to power in both houses in 2006 without a great deal of specificity in their campaigns. Republicans have to (a) run a good candidate and (b) the base has to show up and vote. (b) seemed sorely lacking in 2006 and (a) is never guaranteed. McCain would be a bad candidate, for example. And a good candidate, like Rudy, might not play well with the religious right and the pro-life segment of the party, who might abstain from voting on principle (given that abstinence does work, every time it's tried). I'd vote for Gulliani in a heartbeat, however. Wherever he lacks conservative purity, he's got that talent to get things done. Reagan raised taxes and signed off on the pernicious no-fault divorce law in California, yet certainly most conservatives don't fault what he did as president. But I predicted that the Republicans would hold the senate and probably the house in 2006, so I'm not going to count any chickens before they hatch. I just know I'm going to vote against Democrats, straight party line, down the ballot in 2008, just like I did in 2006 (for all the good it did).
Cutest_of_Borg by kevinwillis.net	Mar 8th, 2007 10:34:07 PM
You should reverse your candidates. I would love nothing more, as a conservative Republican, to have John Edwards get the Democratic nomination. It would been Kerry/Dukakis redux. The half-eaten can of tomato paste run by the Republicans would easily beat any ticket with John Edwards on top. Mark Warner would be a much better candidate for prez, by himself. Hillary and Obama are both better candidates than Edwards, who could not win his own state when running for re-election, or in the 2004 election when he was the VP candidate. Plus, he's just a bad campaigner and complains about poverty while lighting cigars with $100 bills before taking a baths in orphan tears. It's just hard to put a positive spin on those orphan-tear baths. . . In my humble opinion, of all the nominees that have a chance now, John Edwards would be the worst for the Dems. So, come to think of it, he's my choice, too! Yay, Edwards/Some-Other-Loser!
Give it half a chance by Neutron	Mar 8th, 2007 10:47:14 PM
The first two episodes were apparently filmed a while back as pilots with no audience. Presumabley the new episodes will be more timely and hopefully funny. I wasn't aware this was the first time a show didn't achieve its full potential right from the start. What's wrong with trying something different? If you don't like it so what - watch something else. If it tanks they'll pull it; it's tv, not rocket science. Enough with the Fox news putdowns, I'll bet most of you critics have never watched five minutes of it. I've seen tons of CNN and MSNBC and they suck like a new Hoover. Jon Stewart lost me as a fan when he had a bit with Bush debating himself with duelling clips. One minute he's against nation-building, then there's a clip of him talking about the need to nation-build! Cue Stewart's trademark 'wha....?' face. One set of clips was from the 2000 election season and the other was from 2002. Gee, I wonder what could have happened in between those times to change Bush's mind on foreign affairs?
All the proof FOX needs that this show hits the mark... by readingwriter	Mar 8th, 2007 10:49:02 PM
...is this talkback. If the show were as lame as you folks say, there'd be three posts here. And it's funny how Neo Con Snake Plisken posted the actual ratings numbers showing how well this thing did against Stewart, and the only responses were insults from the "funny" liberals. The idea that liberals can laugh at themselves is the funniest thing here--Cindy Sheehan, Michael Moore, Bill Maher, Susan Sarandon, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Al Gore--yeah, they can't stop laughing at themselves.
Whatever by Neutron	Mar 8th, 2007 10:53:20 PM
Yeah, I misspelled 'presumably'. So sue me. While I'm here, kevinwillis brings up the popular vote line which is beside the point. That's not how the system works and all the players know it. If they want to switch to a popular vote system then the candidates will have to adjust their campaign styles accordingly. I'm not saying one is better than the other, it just is what it is and Gore lost outright. Check the NYT, they did a recount in Florida and Bush won. I think the Boston Globe and a Florida paper did recounts as well and found the same.
BillyEveryteen, you need to seriously snap out of it by Triumph poops!	Mar 8th, 2007 10:56:39 PM
Politically speaking, your post personifies the complete trap the Democrats are walking straight into, pushed along by the most fucked-up thinking I've seen in quite some time. So let's cut to the chase. When you say, "Rudy and McCain are your heroes, Triumph? Are you sure you're conservative?" you say that as IF I'm going to be COMPLETELY pushed away from either Guiliani or McCain by a particular opinion or two that they might have, and thus a Republican like me will TOTALLY abandon them in the '08 election. So here's a little tip for you. Even if some people in the Republican party do disagee with them on one or two things, they STILL will have more in common with me -- being on the Right -- than Hillary or Obama or Edwards EVER WILL. So that said, do you ACTUALLY think that just because I might disagree with Rudy or McCain on one or two things that that suddenly makes Hillary or Obama far more acceptable? Or more to the point, do you ACTUALLY think it would make people on the Right VOTE for Hillary or Obama? This is the fucked-up logic I was referring to. Only Democrats would be STUPID ENOUGH to actually believe that registered Republicans will "switch sides" and vote for Hillary, Obama, or Edwards just because they don't completely agree (for example) with Rudy's pro-choice stance. You know, the other day they were discussing an interesting poll on MSNBC and FOX, which I'm sure CNN covered as well since they all essentially ape one another on the polls these days. I can't recall who it was by, but it was a reputable polling agency. Basically what it showed was that DESPITE any differences registered Republicans or ultra-right Conservatives might have with Rudy or McCain, the bottom line was that given the candidates who are out there right now...and who it is now likely going to be in the end come Election Day...there was NO WAY they would vote for Hillary, Obama, or Edwards. In short, NONE of those three had ANY crossover appeal, which ironically Bill Clinton managed to pull off with the Southern states during his two runs. In fact, polls in those same southern states that Bill took now show that a large percentage of women who voted FOR Bill would now vote AGAINST Hillary simply because...well, because she's Hillary, the She-Beast from Hell. Look, it's a FACT that Hillary's nationwide DISAPPROVAL rating among the general population STARTS at nearly the 40% mark. That means she's already got nearly HALF the country throwing up their hands and saying "Oh, fuck no! There's NO WAY I want YOU anywhere near the Oval Office again!" So with that much anti-Hillary sentiment out there, and with most people on the Right thinking Obama is simply the latest Leftist flavor of the month -- someone who's never even proven himself -- only the most deluded Democrat would actually believe this fucked-up logic that just because Republicans might disagree with Rudy or McCain over a few things that they're suddenly going to vote for Hillary or Obama or Edwards instead...
Last one from me by Neutron	Mar 8th, 2007 10:59:53 PM
Weiner - are you seriously suggesting that the first season of the Simpsons was their 'A' game? Stewart took over from Kilborn at the Daily Show, so that's hardly out of the gate. And for all the nostalgia, the early years of SNL were not that good. I won't even get into Dream On, which has yet to reach its high point. I didn't say there were no shows that started off great, Futurama comes to mind as does the Venture Bros., but the commenters above were eviscerating this new show for not being excellent already. Most shows need some time to grow and find their rhythm. The show will get better or it won't, and the world will keep turning. The vicious comments from the tolerant left here are both amusing and scary. It's called projection, look into it and get the help you need.
readingwriter... by slappy jones	Mar 8th, 2007 10:59:54 PM
did you really find this thing funny?seriously??it was fucking awful - the thing is they keep going on about the daily show and whats wrong with having a conservative comedy show....there is nothing wrong with havinbg one at all but even if you do think the daily show is liberal(it leans left but mocks everyone)but even if you do think its liberal...its on FUCKING COMEDY CENTRAL...fox is meant to be a news service but how on earth can fox seriously still claim to be fair and balanced and screen this is beyond me.they are a conservative mouthpiece and this unfunny load of grarbage proves it to everyone. all they do on this terrible piece of junk is say the things they wish they could say outright in their news but they get to say it now under the guise of "COMEDY". it wouldn't be so bad if it was actually funny but it isn't. its awful. i like the guy a few post back who said stewart was considered a loser years ago..what the fuck does that have to do with anything?? jesus christ...
Gee Triumph, tell me what you really think... by Billyeveryteen	Mar 8th, 2007 11:03:40 PM
Soo... where are the true conservative canidates?
It's About Time. by uss cygnus	Mar 8th, 2007 11:11:40 PM
The 1/2 hr. News Hour has every right to exist, just as trash like Bill Maher, Colbert and Stewart have every right to exist on the airwaves. And I think it cheap, amusing and childish that ads be placed for liberal hack DVD's below a good piece of news for conservatives in this ridiculously left-wing biased media world we live in. I hope liberals won't play the "We can dish it out, but can't take it" card here.
FUCK LIBERALS by PhillipMarlowe	Mar 8th, 2007 11:16:49 PM
You are not smarter than us, you are not more "in touch" with reality than us, you are not funnier than us, you are not better than us. You are all whiny, sycophantic, failed-at-life losers who have nothing better to do than talk about how much smarter they are than everyone else. GO FUCK YOURSELVES. You are NOT smarter than the President. Go take your pseudo-intellecutal liberal diatribe and shove it up your asses!!!! FREE SCOOTER LIBBY!!! THE HUFFINGTON POST'S BLOGGERS HAVE THE COLLECTED IQ OF 75! HARRY IS FAT!!!!!! FUCK DEMOCRATS!!!! Wooh...too many beers. Don't you love free speech?
what I saw of this show was awful by Frank Duckett	Mar 8th, 2007 11:28:11 PM
I couldn't get thru 3 minutes of it. Not a right-wing/left-wing thing. I just know the difference between a funny show and one that is completely tone-deaf. this is the latter.
Manny Coto directed Dr. Giggles by Frank Duckett	Mar 8th, 2007 11:32:06 PM
that's what he knows about funny.
YOU GOT ME WEINERPENIS by PhillipMarlowe	Mar 8th, 2007 11:32:32 PM
I'm drunk and you got me!!! I WILL RUN CIRCLES AROUND YOUR STUPID OPINION ANY DAY OF THE WEEK!!!!! I HATE YOU!!!!
Seriously, though by PhillipMarlowe	Mar 8th, 2007 11:39:06 PM
WeinerPenis is indicative of everything wrong with this country. Under the guise of "open-mindedness" and "tolerance" he calls conservatives stupid, unfunny, ignorant, and irrelevant. I no doubt disagree with this gentleperson on many different issues, but when it really came down to it, I would never insult his intelligence. But the libs constantly insult conservatives'. Because we have a different opinion, we're "rednecks" or "stupid." Let me tell you, SON, I HIGHLY doubt you are more educated than I am...So go back to the Huffington Post and keep on drinkin' that KOOLAID!!!!
Regarding "how funny" the show was... by Triumph poops!	Mar 8th, 2007 11:41:41 PM
...Keep in mind they were only 2 test pilots, and with Fox now committing to essentially a half season of 13 more, it's a pretty safe bet that both Surnow and Coto will retool and fix a few things, especially now that the show HAS aired and they CAN get real feedback on it across the board. So now that the show is officially a "go" and will have a stable budget, I'm sure they'll bring in more professional comedy writers who are far more slick at producing an actual comedy show. In short, the "funniness quota" for the 2 test pilots will likely NOT be what the next 13 are like. Given their time and their professionalism from being in the business, I'm sure Surnow and Coto will be looking to upscale the comedy quite a bit...
Not so impressed with the pilots by Breotan	Mar 8th, 2007 11:41:54 PM
The pilots were basically throwing raw meat to the wolves. Those who are hard-core partisans will love the jokes. Those who actually like comedy won't. The show was more akin to a right-wing version of Al Franklin on Air America than a comedy couter to The Daily Show. The difference is that while TDS takes swipes at politicals, it does so with professional comedy writers at the helm. The pilots for THHCH had no such skilled wags. Also, conservative icons such as Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter were used in skits, but neither are trained actors and it showed. Hopefully, with an actual budget such shortcomings can be overcome and the show can actually move forward as a professionally produced comedy satire of the left wing. But I do have my doubts. The desire to give the wolves the raw meat they so desperately want will likely be too strong to resist. It's sad because Lord knows we could certainly use a good comedy show oriented in favor of the political right wing.
Well.. by snowpuff	Mar 8th, 2007 11:43:40 PM
I don't hear a lot of substance from the right. There's a lot of rhetoric, a lot of name-calling and a lot of anger. I would actually like to hear other opinions, but it seems like the right starts with what the current administrationd does and then defends it, regardless of what they do. This has never made sense to me. I consider myself independent, but mostly on the left, and I didn't like Clinton at all when he was in office. Simply because I would usually vote Democratic doesn't mean I find a way to support whatever they do. And I find a lot of people on the left like that... and very few people on the right like that. There are a few people here that have pointed out the current administration is NOT actually conservative or Republican and I applaud those few for recognizing that these folks in power care about one thing - power. Not you, not me, not the left or the right. They don't care about the constitution - and while they TALK about the troops, they don't actually support them with the armor or medical care they need... while they talk about security it is all rhetoric. Anyone within their administration who points out security flaws is fired and discredited. They ONLY care about the appearance of things, but that often works and is much easier to accomplish. We are NOT safer right now. Why is it so hard for some people to understand that? It's not about left or right - it's about putting competent people in the right places and this administration is ALL about politics and cronyism.
"Free Scooter Libby" by PhillipMarlowe	Mar 8th, 2007 11:44:23 PM
You think I'm out-of-touch with America? Probably right, since 70% of Americans don't even know who he is. BUT YOU DO, DON'T YOU WEINERPENIS? He's a corrupt bureacrat outing that saint Valerie Plame and her patriotic husband Joseph Wilson!!!! He takes his orders from EVIL CHENEY and FOXNEWS!!!! God you liberals tire me.
SNOWPUFF by PhillipMarlowe	Mar 8th, 2007 11:48:20 PM
No substance from the right??? DO YOU ACTUALLY ATTEMPT TO FIND SUBSTANCE? OR do you prefer to have it brainfed to you by a major media outlet? Go to nationalreview.com...Yes, unabashedly conservative, but intelligent. You want a conservative philosopher, read Roger Scruton...Don't feed me that tired "conservatives have no substance" bullshit.
And WeinerPenis, try and get your facts right... by Triumph poops!	Mar 8th, 2007 11:52:56 PM
Your list of reasons why you think the election of Giuliani will mean the end of the Republican party for all time was pretty laughable, since most of your points were utterly ridiculous. In fact, to BE less laughable, try getting your facts straight next time. You said, "Most people don't yet know that Giuliani's own son will not support him because he thinks his dad is a selfish dick." Well, here's little thing called a FACT for you. When questioned about his Dad what his son (Andrew) ACTUALLY said to the press was "I got my values from my mother. I have problems with my father, but it doesn't mean he won't make a great President." Bottom line: a child saying he might have some outstanding issues with one of his parents -- which would only put in in line with pretty much the majority of ALL kids out there -- while at the same time openly declaring that his Dad would still make a great President is a far, far cry from the bullshit Leftish slant and overplayed hyperbole you were peddling...
Yeah, this is all very interesting... by Mr. Nice Gaius	Mar 8th, 2007 11:54:55 PM
...but when is someone going to bring down Sean Hannity? I mean, I couldn't give a flyin' fuck whether you're a Conservative or a Liberal (there's nothing wrong with being either one - you just need to have a brain, know your shit and back it up), but when is someone going to bring down that hack??? Seriously. Sean Hannity must brougth down. Someone PLEASE tell him it's time to pack it in and disappear before his ignorant, vacant soul causes further damage to all that is wholesome and worthwhile on this good Earth. I'm not kidding about this.
Correction to previous post: by Mr. Nice Gaius	Mar 8th, 2007 11:57:19 PM
"Sean Hannity must BE BROUGHT DOWN." Thank you.
Fake statistic by snowpuff	Mar 9th, 2007 12:00:47 AM
Sigh. That is not true - the "70 percent of Americans don't know who Scooter is." That is straight from Fox. They immediately spun the result by telling viewers "you don't care about this" in the guise of stating that 70 percent of Americans don't know who Scooter is. It's a rather strange way to argue about the highest ranking government official to be convicted in two decades. Actually polls about Scooter in the past found that 70 percent of Americans found the Libby indictment to be a "serious matter." That was before he was found criminally guilty. I'm only responding to the factual inaccuracies you posted. Not to whatever else you were yelling about...
Mr. Nice Gaius by PhillipMarlowe	Mar 9th, 2007 12:02:13 AM
I'll give you Sean Hannity, if you give me your Keith Olbermann. Olbermann is just about the most pompous, self-righteous dumbfuck this side of George Clooney. I mean, seriously, I can't even listen to the guy for more than 10 seconds without wanting to stab my eyes out. And the libs that love him are the best! GOOD NIGHT AND GOOD LUCK!!! give me a break.
HAHA JOKES ON YOU by PhillipMarlowe	Mar 9th, 2007 12:06:21 AM
SNOWPUFF YOU SILLY FUCK. I made the statistic COMPLETELY up! I have no idea how many people know who Scooter Libby is (and neither do you), but I guarantee NOT THAT MANY IN AMERICA KNOW THE SPECIFICS (judging from the pitiful display of one of my grad school classes tonight). BUT IT DOESN'T MATTER...you ASSUMED I got it from FoxNews!!!! YOU ARE A SAD SAD individual!!! WAH WAH WAH!!! FOX NEWS IS SOOOOO EVIL!!!!! THEY LIE ABOUT EVERYTHING!!!...SNOWPUFF YOU ARE A MORON.
"Not to whatever else you were yelling about" by PhillipMarlowe	Mar 9th, 2007 12:08:00 AM
I know, it's a little over your head...
lol by snowpuff	Mar 9th, 2007 12:10:25 AM
Actually, Fox did spin the decision that way, saying "Americans don't care." That is where you got that from. As for the statistic, you're right, I assumed you got it from Fox.
In fact by snowpuff	Mar 9th, 2007 12:13:06 AM
I called my post "fake statistic." So you got me there, by, uh, letting us know your statistic was, uh... fake.
SNOWPUFF WHY CHECK FACTS by PhillipMarlowe	Mar 9th, 2007 12:17:06 AM
When I have the HUFFINGTON POST to give me all of my information????!!!! That's all I need!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm sorry PhillipMarlowe... by Mr. Nice Gaius	Mar 9th, 2007 12:20:43 AM
...but I can't do that. I happen to think Keith Olbermann is doing some important work. More so than Stewart or Colbert. However, does that mean I agree with everything he says or the tone in which he says it? No. But I sure as Hell think he is being more truthful than that no-talent, ignorant, bottom feeder known as Sean "Anyone Who Is Not A Christian Or Has Brown Eyes Is A Terrorist" Hannity. Boy, it must really bust Hannity up to know that when it comes to him sleeping with Ann Coulter, he gets Bill Maher's sloppy seconds. You know that's just got to drive him hog wild.
There are no funny Republicans. by Bob Cryptonight	Mar 9th, 2007 12:54:13 AM
Ronald Reagan doesn't count. His mind was deteriorating at the time. I'm serious.
wow by cvain	Mar 9th, 2007 12:58:59 AM
so usually i skip talk backs and just read the news here because message boards in general are disgusting but seeing the kind of stuff that being said here confirms my greatest fears. it is not radical islam or the media that is destroying the world. its people like all of you, conservative or liberal. youre all a bunch of disgusting scum. get over yourselves, stop passing the buck, and realize that its stuff like this message board that is the source of the worlds problems. never. again.
Triumph by Vern	Mar 9th, 2007 02:23:52 AM
You're misunderstanding me bud. I don't think anybody is stupid enough to watch that show and think it's real news. That's not a problem at all. I'm just saying that a news channel that took itself seriously as journalism wouldn't even THINK of having a comedy show. And if they did they'd probaly have people resigning in protest. I think this show has every right to exist, I'm glad it does because it's hilariously unhilarious, and I think Fox News has every right to exist. But you gotta admit it's goofy that the network that still expects people to believe it's "fair and balanced" would openly attempt to make propaganda. When you justify the almost impossible to achieve unfunniness of the pilot episodes it sounds like you're admitting they just wanted to make a right wing show and figured they would come up with jokes in the later episodes. Which is clearly the approach they are taking. And I don't know if you were saying that it's good that MSNBC and CNN have entertainment shows on the weekends, but I don't think it is. Partly because they always scare me, they're showing a bunch of footage of Oprah or somebody and I think, "Oprah died?" I hate this general blurring of news and entertainment, like E! covering the OJ Simpson trial (I swear it really happened). I'm against it. As for Air America, I think you're wrong on some of that. Number one, Al Franken is not even on Air America anymore, he's running for the senate (or is it congress?) so he left his show. Number two, they and other left wing radio actually do really well in many markets and regularly kick the ass of Hannity, O'Reilly and Limbaugh. But where you are correct is that Air America has been financially disastrous and that their shows mostly suck. Al Franken was really good because he was smart and funny, and approached the show as entertainment as well as political discussion. He brought his many years as a comedy writer and performer to the show. I also thought it was kind of touching how he brought on his "resident dittohead" Mark every week to discuss Rush Limbaugh. They would get so upset with each other but were obviously dear friends. It was a good message and one they had at least once a week. Almost everything Air America has left though is just bitter free-form ranting by a bunch of unlikable assholes. I don't think they're too radical, I generally agree with their politics, but most of them are horrible to listen to. They even have a guy, Ed Schultz, whose voice sounds just like Rush Limbaugh. It's terrible.
Fuck this show by Cruel_Kingdom	Mar 9th, 2007 02:28:51 AM
and anyone who loves it.
Ann Coulter must die by Cruel_Kingdom	Mar 9th, 2007 02:29:19 AM
and soon, I tell ya.
First The Neocons Destroy America by PervOmatic	Mar 9th, 2007 04:09:58 AM
And now they do the same thing to comedy. Rich white men rule!
I don't care what your political beliefs are.. by skydemon	Mar 9th, 2007 04:16:01 AM
ENTERTAINMENT AND POLITICS DO NOT MIX! This entire talkback section is going to do nothing but stir everyboday up and piss people off, so post this crap somewhere else dammit Herc!
PhillipMarlowe by quantize	Mar 9th, 2007 04:20:31 AM
suck my cock you retard.
Laugh Trax by NudeandAroused	Mar 9th, 2007 04:25:59 AM
Suck. This show is full of laugh trax.
I'm glad that a news channel airs fake comedy news by Al_Shut	Mar 9th, 2007 06:30:32 AM
because I watch the Daily Show Global Edition on CNN.
Link? by Dazzler69	Mar 9th, 2007 06:41:57 AM
Are they posting the show for free somewhere? Seems to be the trend now legally.
A news channel doing a comedy show...says it all really by Blarney-Man	Mar 9th, 2007 07:12:09 AM
You'd never get this bollocks on BBC 24. Shows to me Fix News are on the defensive.
Conservatives aren't funny by CTU Mole	Mar 9th, 2007 07:41:31 AM
Unless you think the Blue Collar Comedy guys are a hoot.
Doesn't it kind of miss the point of satire? by vertigo93	Mar 9th, 2007 07:42:00 AM
Satire being something which traditionally is aimed at those in power, not those who aren't. Of course TDS pokes fun at the Bush administration: it's because they're the ones who have the power. Whoever is in the Whitehouse, republican or democrat, is going to be lambasted and lampooned by TDS, that's what it exists for. THHNH is the same thing but back-asswards - it's ostensibly those in power laughing at those who aren't, which is going to be a giggle for some but just come across as snarky and mean spirited for most. Having said that, this is a wonderfully rabid talkback. NeoConSnaePlissken or whatever the name is banging on about 'traitors' and 'patriots' made me laugh out loud. If patriotism is sending troops out ill equipped to fight, then screwing up their care when they come home injured and passing the buck on all of it, then the concept of patriotism is so incredibly screwed. Any decent republican should be looking at the Walter Reed scandal with utter disgust at how the troops are actually being treated.
Roll Fizzlebeef by the_shogun_gunslinger	Mar 9th, 2007 07:42:36 AM
hahaha nice to see another MISTie on the boards. Space Mutiny is the greatest episode of the series...think ill watch it now :P oh yeah, uh...conservative humor. now theres an oxymoron
Of COURSE they don't "get satire"... by Kid Z	Mar 9th, 2007 08:07:58 AM
... red-staters don't "get" satire, red-staters "get" fart jokes! I hear this thing's unwatchable, so of course Fux News orders a half season!
Shrugs by FilmNerdJamie	Mar 9th, 2007 08:10:39 AM
I don't give a shit. Let FNC have their comedy series. From what 2 minutes I could sit through, it was about the same as COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN. Shrugs
hi-larious-libs by Wall Ball Champion	Mar 9th, 2007 08:16:16 AM
Anybody else find it funny that whenever there is a big political argument every fourth or fifth post is a lib saying something like, "ANNE COULTER MUST FUCKING DIE." "I WISH SOMEONE WOULD CHOP CHENEY'S HEAD OFF." Etc. For such an "open" group of people they sure do fucking despise people who disagree with them. I've never once seen a conservative type, "I hope Hitlary is annhilated in a car bomb." Why? Well I guess because most of us aren't batshit crazy like most libs. As for this show it is amazing how up-in-arms you people are. As a conservative I didn't find it very funny, but it had potential (I liked what they tried in the skit about Che tee-shirts then why not Stalin tee-shirts, P.S. if you wear a Che anything you are a freaking douche). Again, the whole I HATE THIS SHOW, stems back to liberals inability to comprehend thoughts other than their own. I can watch the daily show and get a laugh. Most of my republican friends can. The moment you put something on making fun of liberals or disagreeing with them some chemical imbalance occurs in their brain and they freaking lose it. Like I said, you guys are batshit crazy.
If Fox News had any balls at all... by Zarles	Mar 9th, 2007 08:32:07 AM
...they would've tried to sell this thing to Comedy Central. It's supposed to be comedy, right? Then why the hell is it on a news channel? It's almost as if they don't want anyone to see it besides the people that watch Fox News in the first place. Granted, that's a nice, safe way to keep the ratings decent, but it's also the most candy-ass programming choice I've ever heard of. I've seen a few minutes of it here and there, and no matter what side of the political aisle the "comedy" is on, it's awful. It's little more than unfunny cheap shot after unfunny cheap shot, playing like a high school drama department version of the Daily Show. It's going to be hilarious to see what the Daily Show has to say about it after it begins airing, though. As far as all the political shit goes, I think you're ALL nuts, and that you ALL die in a fire very, very soon. All this bickering and infighting nonsense is going to be the REAL end to this country as we know it. Not gay rights, not Obama or Hillary, but nitpicky, closed-minded assholes just like the lot of you. Selah.
generalizations about people's political standing by just pillow talk	Mar 9th, 2007 08:36:16 AM
is great! It always makes your point right. I prefer Colbert over Daily Show now...love the "Know your Congressmen" skit. He always makes democrat/republican look like a buffoon. You do realize our government is really the "batshit crazies" out there?
kevinwillis.net by cutest_of_borg	Mar 9th, 2007 08:45:18 AM
I'll give you a "pass" for needing to die but I have to disagree with Edwards as a bad choice. You and I both know that middle-America will never vote for a black dude or a woman. They will vote for a middle-aged good looking white guy. Then again, fuck middle America. It's the coasts that determine the presidency anyway. I firmly believe if Warner were to change his mind he would have the best shot at beating McCain or Guiliani.
it beats the unfunny daily show by ZO	Mar 9th, 2007 08:45:48 AM
theres nothing funnier out there than loony liberals. i think this will do fine
I am settling this. by askholia	Mar 9th, 2007 08:48:34 AM
From now on all shows are un-funny. OK! Both right wing and left wing antics are NOT FUNNY. All your little conspiratorial changing of words like libtard and shit is just not funny. Its not insulting. We are mostly Americans here and as such are all brain dead idiots. If we werent, would we be sitting here bitching about this. Me included.
we prefer the term 'sheep' askholia by just pillow talk	Mar 9th, 2007 08:53:19 AM
baaaaah....
Drop the act that the Daily Show is neutral by SPECTRE Agent	Mar 9th, 2007 08:53:48 AM
It isn't a news show; it can be as liberal as it wants to be. That's fine. But don't try to say it skewers the left and right equally. The jabs at the left are usually issued when the Democarts back off of something ie not being liberal enough.
SPECTRE Agent by askholia	Mar 9th, 2007 09:03:02 AM
Oh man, way to stick it to the Daily Show. OUch. I bet Jon Stewert is crying himself to sleep on his pillow full of money right now. I bet he is just wiping the tears away with his kleenex made of cash. Fuckin idiots. LISTEN: They are in a business. They could give two shits what you or I think as long as the money rolls in. If you dont like it then...oh, fuck it, your probably going to give some more bland interpretations about shit way above you, just like the rest of us. ME INCLUDED.
Pat Robertson said the military should take out Chavez by Shan	Mar 9th, 2007 09:13:37 AM
didn't he? In response to a post above saying they'd not seen any right wing/Republican threats ... I'm sure if you look about, you can find Right as well as Left leaning people on the extremes who've threatened violence against people who oppose their views. I don't think anyone has a monopoly on threats.
Zarles by askholia	Mar 9th, 2007 09:25:22 AM
Your the only one I agree with out of these feces eating monkeys.
LAST! by biggles2_22	Mar 9th, 2007 09:37:01 AM
We all should BE so lucky.
Oh, and if you guys & gals want... by biggles2_22	Mar 9th, 2007 09:49:24 AM
...I can give you the real reason why liberal radio can't work + as a special bonus, why conservative television can't work. (I've worked in sales and research for both television and radio for over 20 years.) But from studying the above posts, I don't think there's an interest in either. Let the name-calling continue!
Please let me be LAST! by biggles2_22	Mar 9th, 2007 09:49:59 AM
.
Sorry not LAST by RainesMaker	Mar 9th, 2007 09:50:41 AM
Daily Show is overrated.
why I hate politics by Fount of Useless Info	Mar 9th, 2007 09:56:27 AM
This talkback is a great example of why I hate political discussions. Seriously, does anyone think that calling the people with differing views names is useful? Does some poor deluded soul sit in his office chair thinking, "Wait until I call this guy a liberal douchebag. He'll have no choice but to turn Republican." or "If I point out that some of his conservative pundits like Ann Coulter are ugly, he'll join the Green Party"? The fact of the matter is that the real question about this show should be if it is funny (from the few seconds I could stand: no). So, liberal or conservative, I don't care, the name calling should end. It's counterproductive at best and can be self destructive when unchecked. I would personally be ashamed to associate myself with the vitriol coming from people on both the left and right. Sure, I have political opinions, and am even willing to discuss them with people who will have reasonable, rationale conversations. The problem is that right now, those people are pretty rare. Finally, since everyone (ok, several people, not really everyone) seems to be touting their favorite presidential candidate and trashing the others, I'd like to point out a couple of things: 1. We need to remember that while the president is the highest profile member of our government, he cannot make new law. He can't even prevent congress from doing so if they have enough votes to override a veto. 2. He does however, have the ability to make war without them. 3. This may mean that leadership ability and foreign relations may end up being more important than whether his views all line up with yours. ...and just to make sure everyone here hates me if they don't already: The Daily Show was a lot funnier when Kilborn was the host. You know, back when it was still a comedy news show rather than a self-important political quasi-satire.
Curse you RainesMaker! by biggles2_22	Mar 9th, 2007 10:01:58 AM
I really wanted to be last. BTW I agree regarding the Daily Show. It was sooooo much funnier with Kilborne at the helm.
We libs have virtually ALL the creative talent by Blanket-Man	Mar 9th, 2007 10:57:35 AM
That's not exactly Breaking News. I like to imagine that it burns cons to no end to see a great play or movie knowing there's at least a 90% chance that a died-in-the-wool liberal was responsible for it. Me, I have no problem separating Art from the Artist, but it's still fun to point out this dichotomy once in awhile.
So, what tou are saying, KevinWillis.net by Darth Kosher	Mar 9th, 2007 11:21:22 AM
is that middle america is racist and sexist? republicans were falling all over colin powell some years back. did that mean they wanted to lose middle america?
You're so fucking predictable, Herc by Immortal_Fish	Mar 9th, 2007 11:23:27 AM
From downplaying its chances to compairing it to the "unbiased and balanced" Daily Show, to the ads for far left psycho crap. Congrats on the hat trick, moonbat.
No shit Sherlocks!! by DigitalDong	Mar 9th, 2007 11:34:31 AM
I mean we all know this show sucks, It's like saying " hey look everybody, the sky is blue". Then you sit there trying to convince everyone how you're right. But whats really funny is how libs will protest how conservitives are "out of touch" or " force their own agenda" when liberials go right ahead and do the same shit as if it ain't no thang. btw Daily Show hasn't been watchable since Kilborne left. He always looked pretty in the camera, Stewart just sits there with his mouth open looking at his notes. Steve on the other hand rules.
Hire Craig Kilborn. by Christopher3	Mar 9th, 2007 11:35:38 AM
That's the only way to make this POS work.
40% of Americans hate Hillary? by Richard Cranium	Mar 9th, 2007 11:46:02 AM
Well, at least she's twice as popular as the president. Seriously, we need to round up the 10% of so who still approve of the job that Bush is doing, and put them out of their misery. You can still have conservative beliefs and vote Republican in the future, just admit that Bush is an idiot. That's all I ask.
Well Said, Fount of Useless Info by skydemon	Mar 9th, 2007 12:08:00 PM
I'll second that!!
Suck-Ass News Network Gotta EAT!!! by LargoJr	Mar 9th, 2007 12:09:44 PM
Since all they can do is screw up, and every time they do Jon crucifies them for it, it makes sense that they TRY to fight fire WITH fire. But like everything else they do... they can't HELP but fuck it up.... of course giving Jon & Co. even more material with which to crucify them with. You just can't polish a turd.
Ed Schultz isnt on air america radio by iwontwin	Mar 9th, 2007 12:21:55 PM
And I like big eddie.... Republicans are about as funny as this post.
If you want left radio, listen to democracy now by jccalhoun	Mar 9th, 2007 12:57:57 PM
There are no liberals running for office as far as I can tell. They are all centrists. The last election we got to chose between two Yale educated white male millionaires. Hillary Clinton is just about as liberal as Lieberman. Obama is a blank slate which is really the only reason anyone likes him. Does anyone know anything about his actual political stance? I sure don't. None of the candidates have said a word about "enemy combatants" where US citizens can be thrown in military brigs for years without being charged with a crime and denied contact with the outside world and have to fight just to get access to a lawyer. As long as there are injustices like that going on it will be nothing but a case of, "Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss."
All ideology aside... by Harry Weinstein	Mar 9th, 2007 12:59:09 PM
...this is a truly horrid show, not only unfunny but made without any operational knowledge of what comedy even is. Even when SOUTH PARK goes off on one of its patented right-wing tangents, they understand how to be funny... even if I don't agree with the position behind the joke, and even if I don't find the joke funny - I at least see how SOMEONE might theoretically find it funny. Not so with this Fox News offering. It exists only to "catapult the propaganda", to quote Fearless Leader. Being a "comedy" is merely a cover story. If they make fun of Republicans even a quarter as often as DAILY SHOW rips into Democrats, I'll be shocked... because it would not aid in the spreading of the propaganda the show was specifically created to spread, and would therefore be counter-productive.
This Hour has 22 minutes?? by Ratzo	Mar 9th, 2007 01:21:48 PM
As somebody said previously, this sound just like a show that has been airing in Canada for well over a decade.. http://www.cbc.ca/22minutes/22 _single_player.html?archive/20 06-2007/mar_6/soccer http://www.cbc.ca/22minutes/22 _single_player.html?archive/20 06-2007/feb_13/jmurray_feb13 http://www.cbc.ca/22minutes/22 _single_player.html?archive/20 06-2007/dec_5/convention2
I can't wait to see Herc's headline in a few years. by detinue	Mar 9th, 2007 01:40:20 PM
It'll probably read something like this - "WTF?!? Both the Daily Show and the Colbert Report are cancelled, yet the 1/2 Hour News Hour gets renewed AGAIN?!" As for why Fox News is showing this on the weekend instead of during the weeknights, that's easy. Because they already own the weeknight cable news ratings lock, stock, and barrel. Now they are looking to conquor the weekends, too.
Let's get real here... by MattXFLexicon	Mar 9th, 2007 01:48:26 PM
Thank God there's some people who are willing to be honest. Normally I try to avoid these discussions, but man, when people dig their own graves, I have to comment. First Vern made many of the same points I was about to make about AAR. If Triumph and Neo Con Snake Plissken we're truly honest, they'd have to admit a few points. Bill O'Reilly's TV ratings are slipping, while this last year (2006) Keith Oberman's show has seen a 35% increase in ratings, Hum, I wonder why that is? The truth is Hard right conservatives have no real clue how to do satire. Bill almost has a clue that Steven Colbert is doing a parody of him, he sort of get's it, but it's pretty lost on him. The ratings for most of these conservative radio personalities are soft, it's really a PR driven myth that conservative radio is doing well. For a network that was supposed to not last three months, Air America is still plugging away, even with that bankruptcy, which was a fanancial restructuring in truth. You also have Jones radio and Nova M radio, NPR and other left leaning programs on the dial, just make your choice folks. I don't mind Conservative points of view, I just don't like it when people lie, or treat yellow journalism tabloid stories as fact or news. When FOX NEWS starts hiring real reporters, not propagandist cheer leaders, then I'll buy into their 'fair and balanced' claim. Hard right conservatives hate real investigative journalism because it's in conveinent for them. Much in the same way that Neo-Conservatives have demonstrated a hatred for following the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, and the rule of law, because they want a speeded up process with no checks. Oh, by the way, Where's Bin Laden, I thought we got into the 'war on Terrorism' to keep us safe. Fascinating how this leadership has failed protecting our troops, failed with this economy, failed with protecting us domestically. Yet there's plenty of these Hard Right Washington leaders that have been good with their affairs with mystresses, and getting caught with their pants down with under age pages at the capitol. As far as the conservative posters here are concerned, keep digging those holes, keep digging those graves, we'll provide the shovels. You have my sympathy when '08 goes completely south for conservatives, when the Senate becomes more populated with Progressives and independents, when the house retains it's majority, and when a Democrat is back at the White House. Not to worry, McCain and Gulliani will bury themselves soon enough. It's been really entertaining and all. The half-hour News Hour isn't even original, the Monty Python people could have come up with a better title.
The reason Conservative media does well... by zb.brox	Mar 9th, 2007 01:55:00 PM
...Is that their core audience is composed mostly of retirees. Seriously. That's why. That's true for cable news in general and AM radio in general. But, y'know, older people tend to swing right, so right-wing news stations bring them in in droves. That's all there is to it. All the ha-haing over Air America's shoddy business is fairly pointless. The fact is, Democrats outnumber Republicans in this country, and left-wing views are generally more popular than right-wing views. That's just statistically verifiable fact. Seriously, go look it up. The fact that conservatives have talk radio and cable news isn't validation of the conservative viewpoint by any stretch of the imagination.
"1/2 Hour News Hour gets renewed AGAIN?!" by Billyeveryteen	Mar 9th, 2007 02:07:10 PM
Oh Lord, that's funny. Detinue quick, sign up for that show!
Revealing: by zb.brox	Mar 9th, 2007 02:38:50 PM
"The only time I enjoy it is when Stewarts takes a conservative to task for gay rights or some similar human rights issue, but otherwise, I find that he just doesn't give Democrats the same drill that he puts Republicans through, especially in interviews. Fox does the same thing, in reverse" People are comparing a comedy show, on comedy central, to Fox News. As Stewart said on Hardball, if the mainstream media is looking to Comedy Central for its lead on journalistic integrity, that explains a lot.
Fox 'News' by neonist	Mar 9th, 2007 02:55:29 PM
There really should be some kind of standards met to be able to use 'news' in the name of your station.
HERC YOU FUCKTARD by ZombieSlayer666	Mar 9th, 2007 03:08:20 PM
You completely suck ass for even starting this disastorous thread. WTF were you thinking. Oh wait, we know what you were thinking. Your a die hard liberal with an agenda and have a modicum of power on this site so you figured you would stir the pot a bit and be able to link to Franken and Outfoxed at the sametime. Nice job. Your like the trolls at IMDB that drive everyone crazy all day. This is a purely hateful thread, one in which you started. Whether your a libtard or a neocon a-hole like myself, both sides have plenty of faults. Again, you weenis, this is an entertainment site. If I want politics, I'll bang my head against the refridgerator door. I hope they bounce your sorry ass from this site for good.
Get a grip by Neutron	Mar 9th, 2007 03:12:36 PM
To Weiner et al - look through these comments and tell me it's the people on the right who are unhinged and filled with hate. Every time there's a political TB here the left goes Tarantino on Bush, Coulter, Limbaugh etc. Take a deep breath and grow up.
and another thing... by ZombieSlayer666	Mar 9th, 2007 03:17:10 PM
whats so hard to understand about fox. you fuckheads act like youve never seen the sky before. Fox is a "News" network, i.e they have idiots reading the events of the day, whatever that may be. Just watch Shepard Smith if you dont believe. Oh yeah, and hes a FLAMING liberal so stop it already. Fox ALSO has opinion show. Hannity, right wing lunatic. Colmes, left wing apoligizer, O Reilly, a mixture of the 2 and a go who has an axe to grind, especially when it comes to Jessicas Law and weak on crime judges. Stop going on and on about how EVIL Fox News is. CNN slants things left and so does MSNBC so its no big deal. If people like Hannity were on Fox ALL DAY then I wouldnt watch and the ratings would tank, but fortunatle, thats not the case. They have a pretty good mix of people. You know all you LIBTARDS, you know who who you are, need to understand something, theres more to America than NYC and SF. The majority of Americans are conservative on some issue, and liberal on others. This is why Fox is consistently the highest rated cable news network in the country. You can spin that anyway you want to, but thats a fact.
You mean, people actually find this crap funny? by spaceworlder	Mar 9th, 2007 03:19:24 PM
Do we really need more Ann Coulter/Rush Limbaugh skits?
Just one thing... by Knugen	Mar 9th, 2007 03:19:57 PM
fascists are not funny. They're good at killing, exploiting and deceiving but not much else. The only good fascist is a dead fascist, lying next to a dead communist.
And about Fox News' supposed conservative "bias"... by spaceworlder	Mar 9th, 2007 03:21:55 PM
Rupert Murdoch was a Kerry supported in '04.
Knugen by spaceworlder	Mar 9th, 2007 03:23:36 PM
Was that some sort of pathetic attempt to be "xtreme"?
ZombieSlayer666-- by zb.brox	Mar 9th, 2007 03:26:31 PM
I said above, Fox is consistently the highest rated cable news company because retirees are the people who watch cable news all day and they also slant right. That's just how it is, man, sorry. You're right, though, that the majority of the country slants conservative on some issues and liberal on others. This is why the two-party system is such a headache. As a side note, calling Shepherd Smith a liberal is pretty ridiculous. Also, O'Reilley is barely less of a rightwing extremist than Hannity, he just likes to enhance his credibility by claiming to be mainstream. You really can't compare the rightwing spin on Fox with the leftwing slant of CNN. I mean, slice and dice it how you like it, but Fox's bias makes the New York Times look middle of the road.
Spacworlder: by zb.brox	Mar 9th, 2007 03:28:52 PM
Uh, no he wasn't. If he said he was, he was joking. Murdoch has been very open about his support for the right, and Bush in particular.
If Fox were biased... by spaceworlder	Mar 9th, 2007 03:33:29 PM
...then there wouldn't be "Hannity & Colmes"; it would just be "Hannity".
Ummm... by zb.brox	Mar 9th, 2007 03:37:14 PM
....part of what Fox does is try to gain credibility by putting up an appearance of moderation. Bill O'Reilley calling himself an "Independent", the slogan "Fair and Balanced", etc. etc. If Fox WEREN'T biased, they'd have someone who was equally as vocal and ideological as Hannity opposed to him instead of the moderate, apologetic Colmes. He's a strawman.
My bad... by spaceworlder	Mar 9th, 2007 03:41:52 PM
It wasn't Murdoch who endorsed Kerry. It was Peter Chernin, another person who's high up in the Fox/News Corp. organization.
Strawman? by spaceworlder	Mar 9th, 2007 03:45:35 PM
Colmes doesn't seem like a strawman to me.
You people think Colmes is a liberal? by Richard Cranium	Mar 9th, 2007 03:45:54 PM
Sure, he's liberal when compared to Hannity, but who the fuck isn't? They put him on there to pretend to give Hannity some 'opposition', but the fact is that their views really aren't all that different. Plus, he's so Goddamn milquetoast, that when they do disagree on something, he just pretty much just allows Hannity to steamroll right over him most of the time. Fuck Fox News. I have only one cable channel locked out on my cable box, and it's Fox News. I'm just afraid that if I don't lock it out, I might accidentaly flip past it and hear something so backwards and ignorant that my head will explode.
Richard Cranium by spaceworlder	Mar 9th, 2007 03:49:28 PM
I'm sorry that you can't process opposing political positions without suffering a head explosions. I'm amazed you've even managed to survive in this country this long, what with the divisive political views and all..
FUCK FOX NEWS! FUCK IT! FUCK IT FUCK IT! by Proman1984	Mar 9th, 2007 04:06:09 PM
REALLY I THOUGHT THE ENIRE CHANNEL WAS A 24 HOUR "CONSERVATIVE" COMEDY"? DID I MENTION THAT FOX NEWS SHOULD BE FUCKED?
Wow. by David Lazarus Long	Mar 9th, 2007 04:09:14 PM
Wow. Just... Wow. This is the most uninspired drivel just this side of... I can't even come up with anything to compare it to. It defies classification. I'm about 4 minutes in and I already want to bash my head into a wall until I lose conciousness. Wow. I'm going to keep watching... If no one hears from me in the next hour, call an ambulance. I'll be the one on the floor bleeding from my skull.
Before I go any farther actually by David Lazarus Long	Mar 9th, 2007 04:10:46 PM
do they EVER make any jokes about anything but fat people, lesbians and gays?
Let's make fun of electric cars! by David Lazarus Long	Mar 9th, 2007 04:19:28 PM
Because if we make fun of them, people will keep buying big fat gas guzzling SUV's so we can justify all the wars we have planned!! I have to admit tho, I almost chuckled at the "Did I mention I went to Harvard?" bit. Mostly because of the shit-eatin' grin picture of Obama next to it. But these 'anchors'... Are they animatronic? I've seen more life in the Hall of Presidents at Disney Land.
I blame the public schools too by David Lazarus Long	Mar 9th, 2007 04:23:52 PM
but even public school children know funny when they see it, and this ain't funny. But maybe if they put a chick with big tits on the screen, people will come back. Or we could ACTUALLY watch Deal or No Deal and maybe not lose quite so many brain cells. Maybe. o_O;
This show is the new reason by David Lazarus Long	Mar 9th, 2007 04:32:23 PM
people have aneurisms. Forget "If it weren't for my horse..." (Thanks Lewis)
Electronic Cars suck. by spaceworlder	Mar 9th, 2007 04:37:34 PM
The show might not be funny, but truth is truth.
Er, electric cars. by spaceworlder	Mar 9th, 2007 04:43:00 PM

You people are out of your minds by artie langes nut	Mar 9th, 2007 04:59:46 PM
I am so sick and tired of hearing about how FOX NEWS is the great bugaboo in America today. If you don't like it change the fucking channel, period. People are so stupid that they chant it like it's some stupid mantra fox news is evil fox news is evil, all I know is I turn it on and watch it and their are dissenting views all over the goddammned place, I turn on Olbermann and he has 9 people who all suck his balls on any subject. If you dont like it change the goddammned channel
Electronic cars? by David Lazarus Long	Mar 9th, 2007 05:03:22 PM
You mean... anything made after 1990? Because every car has a computer chip. Making it electronic. And I rode in a Prius 3 years ago. It went up hills just fine. Sure, maybe FULLY electric cars are still crap, but hybrids are getting to be very well made. But, of course, feel free to keep paying $40 every other day just to drive 5 miles to work. Yea, that's intelligent.
Ehhh, you beat me to it. by David Lazarus Long	Mar 9th, 2007 05:04:19 PM
=P
Wow. by Jack Burton	Mar 9th, 2007 05:05:05 PM
This is the most depressing talk back I have ever read. And that's saying something.
I actually don't watch the news by David Lazarus Long	Mar 9th, 2007 05:05:33 PM
because all news, conservative or liberal, is fucking depressing.
I'm glad by Joey P. Brenner	Mar 9th, 2007 05:09:58 PM
I don't live in a country that has a democracy with only two parties, creating a political climate that is ridiculously polarized, divisive and myopic, despite the hilarious irony that both parties are not even that dissimilar
Stewart does NOT treat Rep. and Dems differently by oisin5199	Mar 9th, 2007 05:12:45 PM
It depends on the circumstance. He gives John McCain a free pass just as much as he does Dems. And the last time Joe Biden was on, Stewart totally called him on his comments about Obama. If a politician screws up, he calls them on it. Period. The thing I respect Stewart for is the fact that he's polite and respectful to all his guests, whether he agrees with them or not.
WeinerPenis, you are still an idiot by PhillipMarlowe	Mar 9th, 2007 05:19:53 PM
Just because the broadcasters are conservative doesn't mean that they aren't fair...You can be of a particular persuasion and still present both sides of an issue. Democrats are on FoxNews all the time, and they generally make good (wrong) arguments for their causes. 90% of journalists (that's an actual statistic, although I don't remember where I heard it) are either registered Democrats or identify themselves as liberals. Does that mean that 90% of journalists are unfair? Of course not. Just as you can be a conservative and be fair, so, too, can you be a liberal and be fair. I mean, God, Dan Rather is a flaming lib, although I'm not sure I'd call him "fair." I know you suffer from BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome), and attacking FoxNews is a symptom, but get some medicine! I recommend a swift kick in the nuts!
LIBERALS BAND TOGETHER!!! by J-Dizzle	Mar 9th, 2007 05:58:49 PM
We can make Shia LaBeouf the new anchor on the Daily Show!
I've got a joke for them... by JacksParasites	Mar 9th, 2007 06:06:07 PM
What do Bill O'Reilly and I have in common? Neither one of us is a journalist. ha!
Or E.D. Hill, who divides by spaceworlder	Mar 9th, 2007 06:11:05 PM
Or E.D. Hill, who divides her time between being a proudly ignorant woman and asking leading questions like "Democrats say the war is not going well...some are wondering, 'then why did they vote for it'"? Actually, that's a valid question. along with the crippled neocon movement and whats left of the Republican party. Good work, guys! Although you've ruined the country and plunged the world into chaos, at least you had the courtesy to destroy your party and any lingering shread of credibility you may have had. (Now all the rest of us have to do is clean up your mess.) It's funny how alike people like you and Ann Coulter are.
Urg. Wished these talkbacks by spaceworlder	Mar 9th, 2007 06:15:04 PM
Urg. Wished these talkbacks had a 'Preview' button.
Valid question? by zb.brox	Mar 9th, 2007 06:57:06 PM
No. See, they voted for the war BEFORE the Bush administration fucked it up. By this logic, if my boss hires me to do a job, they can never fire me.
Biden??? by McCroskey	Mar 9th, 2007 07:11:20 PM
Going after a guy who has zero chance of getting the Democratic nomination is hardly proof of Stewart giving it to both sides equally. And it was a case of going after a liberal from a liberal point of view. Biden made an innocent remark which ran afoul of some hypersensitive code of proper speech. That dynamic -- a leftist being attacked by the stifling PC rules his kind created -- was the best thing about that whole situation. It was funny, but sad at the same time, because noone should be come under fire for such innocent remarks, be they conservative or leftist.
Politically speaking, the left should love Bush by McCroskey	Mar 9th, 2007 07:23:00 PM
For one thing, he has managed to tarnish the 'conservative' brand, largely through his embrace of a neoconservative foreign policy. But most of all, Bush has not only accepted, but has actually embraced very leftwing views on immigration, and it is the persistence of mass immigration that is altering the nation's demography inevitably in the Democrat's favor. This is no doubt a big reason why so many Democrats support mass immigration despite it obviously not being good for the 'little guy' they claim to champion -- because they know it will create many more new Democrats than Republicans. Bush's highest marks from a conservative point of view must go to his (so far) excellent Sup Court picks in Roberts and Alito.
Fox and its Neocon Buddies are Idiots by Professor Krapp	Mar 9th, 2007 07:47:23 PM
This is another nail in the coffin of radical conservatives, and they don't even realize it. They're trying to be cool and hip, and they look like nuns doing ballet. This is so fucking sad I might watch it just to revel in their ignorance.
The biggest problem with Fox News by Novaman5000	Mar 9th, 2007 07:51:24 PM
Is that they're underhanded. I'm talking declaring Mark Foley a democrat when that scandal first broke, and then, in future broadcasts, simply removing the party moniker altogether, never issuing a correction. Shit like that. Fucking so characteristic of much of the right these days. Truth is barely a factor in what they say anymore.
Zb.brox by spaceworlder	Mar 9th, 2007 07:54:20 PM
If Bush fucked the war up, why haven't the Democrats taken steps to end it? They have a majority in congress right now. They could vote to withhold funding; but they aren't.
Novaman5000 by spaceworlder	Mar 9th, 2007 07:59:04 PM
Truth is barely factor in what any politicians say anymore.
Withhold funding? by David Lazarus Long	Mar 9th, 2007 08:13:05 PM
Sure, let's screw over the poor bastards that are already there even harder. There is no way out at this point. The only way out is to finish the stupid fucking debacle by pouring more troops in. Yea, it sucks. But there is no other answer. Way to start a war with NO EXIT STRATEGY. Screw the dems that voted for it, too. It was a ridiculous idea in the first place and it will go down in history as being the most ill-conceived war EVER FOUGHT. Well, until we invade Iran with two guys and a humvee.
Spaceworlder-- by zb.brox	Mar 9th, 2007 08:16:35 PM
Umm, actually, Dems have introduced a plan to force an end to the war by 2008, but Bush has vowed to veto.
McCroskey-- by zb.brox	Mar 9th, 2007 08:19:04 PM
Actually, assuming that most of the immigrants who'll be fast-tracked to citizenship are hispanic, that splits pretty evenly among Dems and Republicans. Despite the fact that Democrats are clearly friendlier to both Spanish-language support and public services for people with less money, as illegal immigrants tend to have, religion brings them back to the Reps, hard.
Vern, nice response... by Triumph poops!	Mar 9th, 2007 08:19:23 PM
I don't necessarily completely agree with you on a few things -- particularly about Air America -- but I appreciate you taking the time to respond in a thoughtful way. Hope all is well with you otherwise.
David Lazarus Long - I fail to see how more troops by just pillow talk	Mar 9th, 2007 08:25:42 PM
will help. You cannot ever fully extinguish out the enemy there. And do you think that an Iraqi army will ever take control over their country??? There have been numerous write-ups where the Iraqis were supposed to meet up with an American patrol. It would be up to the Iraqis to take the lead, with the U.S. troops lending support and guidance. Guess what? The Iraqis would be 3 hours late and would hem and haw over how the patrol would go. How many years will pass by before the Iraqi army is 'up to speed'? Oh wait, perhaps Bremer shouldn't have disbanded the army in the first place.
Afghanistan needs more troops by just pillow talk	Mar 9th, 2007 08:28:20 PM
Unless they want that country back in the Taliban's hands. Then again, that problem won't go away either. Thanks Pakistan.
More responses. by spaceworlder	Mar 9th, 2007 08:34:26 PM
David Lazarus Long: Withholding funding could pressure Bush into withdrawing the troops. It might cause hardships for American soldiers in the short run, but Democrats are all about ending this apparent blunder at all costs, right? Zb.brox: From what I've read, they're also voting to give the President more funding for the war. This, combined with the convenient 2008 "deadline" (just in time for the elections!), leads me to believe this plan is a half-baked attempt to score election cred with both anti-war and moderate voters.
WeinerPenis by spaceworlder	Mar 9th, 2007 08:40:30 PM
I can't read your post; a giant wall of text is blocking my view.
you are assuming that the funding is actually by just pillow talk	Mar 9th, 2007 08:44:20 PM
going to the places it should. Not sure if I believe that or not. Look at how our soldiers are treated at Walter Reed. It's all bullshit, and both sides are to be blamed with neither side having a backbone. It's always a political decision, never the correct decision. And now Cap is dead. Dirty little billy bastards.
Good point, Just Pillow Talk. by spaceworlder	Mar 9th, 2007 08:47:29 PM

Well, politics ain't my thing by David Lazarus Long	Mar 9th, 2007 08:48:40 PM
So I'm not going to argue any further. Most of what I say as far as politics are concerned is just talking out of my ass. But, is it even possible for the troops we have there now to simply "withdraw"? I mean, if the insurgents get wind that we're tucking tail and running, won't they just go all out and hit us even harder? When I say 'pour more troops in', it would be to the purpose of giving the troops that are already there the ability to get the fuck out safely. But again, I know jack shit about politics or warfare, and I don't even watch the news. Just seems logical to me. Of course, french fries and ice cream seems logical to me too. =D I don't think we should ever have been there in the first place, and I scorn all who ever thought it might be a 'good idea' to go and attack people all willy nilly. Yea, I'll shut up now.
David Lazarus Long - in that case I agree with you by just pillow talk	Mar 9th, 2007 08:54:25 PM
Covering their asses so that they could leave..completely agree. The boys gotta have the protection. It's god damn awful what has happened at Walter Reed. And guess what DL Long...that leaves no one to vote for since all the dickwads voted for this bullshit act of war. The place that EVERYONE knows we should have gone full jacket metal on their ass (Afghanistan), we don't. Um, they were responsible for 9/11. Oh wait, we'll go invade Iraq and divert our resources and stretch us thin. Awesome.
pillow talk by David Lazarus Long	Mar 9th, 2007 09:10:39 PM
I've thought about that, and I'm not sure I'll even vote in 2008. I guess it depends on the candidates, but... I'm not liking my choices too much at this point.
Well... by spaceworlder	Mar 9th, 2007 09:11:59 PM
My point in bringing up the subject of withholding funds is that the Democrats in congress don't seem as devoted to ending the war as they make themselves out to be. They could probably pressure the President into withdrawing troops from Iraq, but they aren't making any intense effort to do so, possibly due to a certain election being around the corner. (There are a lot of pro-war moderates they wouldn't want to alienate.) Anyway, what you're suggesting seems to be a gradual troop withdrawal, which is probably going to the "escape plan" we'll go with, whenever that happens.
Elections. by spaceworlder	Mar 9th, 2007 09:14:36 PM
If you don't like your choices, vote for a third-party candidate. That's probably what I'll be doing, unless Ron Paul gets the Republican ballot. (Unlikely.) :-/
Spaceworker-- by zb.brox	Mar 9th, 2007 09:17:09 PM
Bush asked for 100 billion to run the war. Instead of denying it and forcing god-knows-what cuts to the army right now they tacked on a bill to end the war by 2008. And "just in time for elections?" you mean, um, 11 MONTHS before the elections? Or as far from a major election cycle as you can POSSIBLY GET? Yeah, very cunning.
Err, Space worlder. Not worker. Ah well. by zb.brox	Mar 9th, 2007 09:20:27 PM
Yeah.
David Lazarus Long - listen to spaceworlder by just pillow talk	Mar 9th, 2007 09:21:46 PM
If, and it could be a big IF, there is a viable 3rd party candidate, vote for them. Not voting doesn't help out anybody who needs that help. I'm seriously conflicted by what to do in '08. Historically I vote Democrat, but I'm not digging my choices on that front. And I will not even mention HER name. on the Republican side, if Rudy or McCain get the bid, screw that. 2 parties suck...huge...donkey balls.
you can earn a mean buck in space by just pillow talk	Mar 9th, 2007 09:23:38 PM
easy work too.
Zb.brox by spaceworlder	Mar 9th, 2007 09:27:47 PM
The article I read said that, under this plan, troops would be out of Iraq by September 2008. That would be two months before November. In other words, just in time for elections!
Hmmm by zb.brox	Mar 9th, 2007 09:40:39 PM
What I read just said by 2008. If they meant some time in 2008 rather than the beginning, then I apologize for the misunderstanding. In any case, 1: It's not much political use to say September, 2008 if they know--as they do--that Bush will veto. 2: Even if it IS politically timed--why does that make the act itself insincere? You honestly think all those democrats support the war, but are willing to say otherwise to get votes?
politicians never lie by just pillow talk	Mar 9th, 2007 09:45:07 PM
so they would never mislead the people by saying/doing something contrary to what they said/did before. Those rich bastards will do anything to get votes.
ok zb.brox & spaceworlder... by just pillow talk	Mar 9th, 2007 09:49:53 PM
I expect a resolution on these TB's by Monday as to how we solve our little Middle Eastern problem that we created. Later dudes.
My solution to the Middle Eastern crisis... by spaceworlder	Mar 9th, 2007 10:27:27 PM
Elect talkbackers to congress! Also, raise Lawrence of Arabia from the dead. Zb.brox: In response to No.2: yes, because those same Democrats would stop nothing short of airing manipulative campaign ads to get elected. WeinerPenis: So, educated people see a giant wall of text whenever they flip past Fox?
pillow talk-- by zb.brox	Mar 9th, 2007 10:35:30 PM
I'm not saying the Dems WOULDN'T lie about opposing the war, but given how the war has gone do you honestly think they DON'T oppose the war? Come on. To think that two-thirds of America has come to one conclusion, but when Congress does the same thing--after being elected largely on that platform--they couldn't possibly agree? Eh.
Liberal Humor, Itsa Verry Niice by Roboteer	Mar 9th, 2007 10:37:05 PM
Frau Hilly with the fake southern accent wanting to 'chat', Al giving penance money to his own company that he's the CEO to keep polluting the planet, Movin' On Up Jefferson with his 60 grand in the freezer, ABSCAM Murtha wanting to bravely 'redeploy' to Japan, San Fran Nan demanding her own castle-in-the-sky airbus, the great almost black hope named Saddam, er, Osama, no, Hussein Obama!, Breck Girl Edwards complaining WE don't do enough for the poor from his gazillion dollar mansion he fleeced from insurance cos., Clinton's bimbo eruptions and what the meaning of is is, Burglar stuffing documents down his pants, Swiftboat Kerry and the clueless ketchup queen, KKK Byrd and his "White Nigga" Blues Band, "Chocolate City" Mayor Schoolbus Nagan, Call Me Tawanna, um Al, Sharpton, Madelaine NotSoBright and boyfriend Kim Jong Mentally Ill, Keebler Elf Kucinich, Peanut Brained Jimmmay, and Ted Bridge-Too-Far hic! Kennedy. I think there's veritable goldmine of untapped Liberal stupidity, hypocrisy, and zaniness commie comics like Stewart ignore. Face it, compared to the likes of "You know, uh, Bush, he's like, well, really um, stupid..." GOP fodder, Dems are a hoot. F**k yeah!.... And if the politico fun wears thin, there's always Hollywood. As Homer observed, celebrities can teach us sooo much.
spaceworker-- by zb.brox	Mar 9th, 2007 10:39:27 PM
There are plenty of manipulative ads on both sides, that's not the point. The point is, if you're telling me that in the face of the disaster the war has been and the fact there were no WMD and the numerous reports that al Qaeda has been made stronger as a result etc. etc. how could anyone be skeptical that the dems oppose the war?
Roboteer-- by zb.brox	Mar 9th, 2007 10:43:29 PM
Uh, the Daily Show HAS actually made jokes about most of what you just mentioned--and the stuff they didn't is mostly stupid rightwing bullshit. You don't seriously still buy into the Swiftboat crap, do you?
You guys were not helping by S-Mart shopper	Mar 9th, 2007 10:47:23 PM
my effort to make tintin TB numnber 1! It's okay I forgive you, back to your politic-ing.
strange... by TreeKiller	Mar 9th, 2007 11:04:27 PM
Strange that 90% of the bloggers here are liberal, but only 19% of Americans identified themselves as liberal in a 2003 gallup poll. One can only conclude that so many more liberals post to this site because either movie websites attract liberals, or you guys don't have jobs and can waste more time on the net. I'm only able to use the net during the weekend....because I WORK for living. And I'm a mean conservative. Liberals are so deluded and filled with hate for anyone that disagrees with them. BTW, there is no way that Billary will get herself elected in '08 - that's a liberal pipedream. But, if she does, I won't threaten to move Canada like so many crazy liberals did when Bush kicked Kerry's ass in '04. At least the Supreme Court is in good order. With just one more good conservative justice, we can stop all the baby killing that this country has been engaged in since Roe v. Wade. It's a shame that so much of my generation was wiped out at the abortion table. Think of the lost potential there...future scientists, doctors, engineers, artists, musicians, business men, police and firemen, EMTs...It's incalculable. The cure to cancer may have died in that abortion room. Oh well, anti-lifers just don't put much premium on life - only the convenience of the mother.
For The Record... by Roboteer	Mar 10th, 2007 12:15:48 AM
That Stewart and the mainstream media spend 10% or less of their time attacking Dems doesn't make it fair and balanced. Did you bother to read O'Neill's book or listen to him debate several times on C-Span? I never heard Kerry & Co. able to refute one of their charges, while Kerry had to retract at least half a dozen of his phony wartime claims exposed by O'Neill. So who has monopoly on the truth? The NYTimes dismissed the very believable, eyewitness claims of dozens of vets that contradicted Kerry in favor of the 'official' Navy account, most of which was written by Kerry himself. Not counting training in a secure area, Kerry only spent 4 months at risk in combat zones. He lobbied to turn a couple of scratches that didn't even need stitches into two Purple Hearts. Falsely awarded, because they were not from enemy fire. Then used a rule almost no one knew about to abandon his men and transfer to safety after only 4 months in combat, getting the resume he thought needed for a ploitical career. You didn't hear that on CNN. Not much of a story until he tried to exaggerate and ride those medals into the Oval Office. His so-called Band of Brothers were on the campaign payroll and were paid tens of thousands of dollars to go along. While the Swift Boat Vets for Truth didn't make a dime with some even losing jobs over being counter-attacked and defamed by Campaign Kerry. Combined with telling lies to a Senate commitee about atrocities he "committed and observed personally" (he didn't), there wasn't much heroic about Kerry. Currently he has introduced a bill to punish and humiliate Pakistan, one of our few allies in the Mideast, for not doing enough. Talk about owning defeat!... And FYI, Lib talk radio doesn't work because they cannot defend their lies, conspiracies, and positions when intellectual honesty is allowed. Except FOX, TV panels are always overloaded with Dems and Libs to drown out the other side. In the case of Air America, no opposing viewpoints were allowed. That, along with a philosophy that America is evil, hoping we lose, and that life here stinks, really doesn't play that well in Peoria, or anywhere else.
CAN'T YOU LIBERALS AND CONSERVATIVES LEARN TO.......... by wackybantha	Mar 10th, 2007 12:17:50 AM
.....STOP BASHING EACH OTHER AND JUST RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE!!!! DAMN YOU!!! DAMN YOU ALL TO HELL!!! On another matter, Jessica Alba is HOT!!!!!!!!
Wow Roboteer... by Billyeveryteen	Mar 10th, 2007 12:29:16 AM
You REALLY belive swift boat vets?? Please share what you're smoking. Must be nice in your bubble.
i dunno...it's not 100% shit by Holodigm	Mar 10th, 2007 01:43:37 AM
i always approach pilots with lowered expectations, because they're almost always terrible. that being said, the show has potential. the presentation needs to be completely revamped (ie not a straight Weekend Update copy). talent needs to be replaced by comedians that know the meaning of timing, they need a new director and the head writer should be fired for not polishing up lots of jokes that would have been pretty good. instead they had piss-poor structure and fell flat. the harry potter joke could have worked, but they did a shit job of presenting the joke. all in all, they could have a good show on their hands if they kept some writers and gave it a big makeover. Vern is right though, the laugh track is painfully obvious and stuff like this shouldn't be on a news channel.
god, I'm glad I live in Holland by beamish13	Mar 10th, 2007 02:08:56 AM
where we prefer to keep church and state separate, don't give private citizens guns, subsidize the arts (ever wonder why America has so many serial killers?), and continue to have state-funded mental health services (look at the homeless people on your street corners and give a little "thank you" to Ronald "I love my astrologer" Reagan) Your pathetic country is doomed.
I suppose Holland is cool with putting others down? by wackybantha	Mar 10th, 2007 02:34:09 AM
Probably not. Be a good citizen and give others some hope.
TreeKiller by Professor Krapp	Mar 10th, 2007 02:53:12 AM
"Liberals are so deluded and filled with hate for anyone that disagrees with them" - nice way to paint half the country with a broad brush. And very conservative of you. What you mistake for hate is anger at unevolved modes of thinking, characterized by the average neocon. Your limited thinking is perfectly illustrated in your use of a favorite conservative talking point - abortion. Please, how tired is that? Have the courage to look beyond the simple and manipulative rhetoric of your kind and maybe then we can have an intelligent debate. Instead, you'll probably just throw hateful insults at me.
it always makes me laugh by samsquanch	Mar 10th, 2007 02:58:22 AM
how angry Jon Stewart makes people on the Right. And before you dismiss me as another "liberal", believe me, I'm not. All I'm saying is Stewart is funny, even though I might disagree with a lot of what he obviously believes and promotes on his show, HE'S A FUCKING COMEDIAN, not a journalist, or even a pundit. So anyone who hollers that his show isn't "fair and balanced" is pissing in the wind. If you want your opinion to have any weight at all, if you don't want to be percieved as a total fucking lunatic, you might want to keep that in mind. It'll make things easier for the rest of us when we make reasonable arguments. Thank you very much.
I guess I can sum it all up this way: by samsquanch	Mar 10th, 2007 03:18:21 AM
There's nothing funnier than someone with no sense of humor.
A Sense of Humor is a Sign of Intelligence by Professor Krapp	Mar 10th, 2007 03:25:31 AM
Interesting how the funny people seem to be mostly liberal.
beamish13 by Professor Krapp	Mar 10th, 2007 03:29:18 AM
The United States isn't doomed, but it is a crumbling empire. That's why the neocons are trying to get as rich as they can as fast as they can. They know this is happening. The radical conservatives are hastening our ruin. Any jobs in Holland? Care to sponsor me?
I was hoping no one would bring up by David Lazarus Long	Mar 10th, 2007 03:38:49 AM
the "A" word. Jesus Jalepeno-Poppin'-Christ. Look, we're not in the fucking middle ages anymore. We don't need all the children we can possibly pump out to work the fields. We are a (uh.. somewhat) civilised nation of technology, and we do NOT need to be adding to the world's over population. How many of these 'genius' scientists, doctors, etc etc are ever going to have a chance to BE any of that when they grow up in an orphanage because the mother of the child had NO MEANS of taking care of them and couldn't get a SAFE, LEGAL abortion because "God doesn't like it"? And how about when she does keep it herself and try to raise it, probably alone, with barely any education and therefore NO MEANS to support herself working 3 jobs and letting the TV and the neighbors be the babysitter. If she even HAS neighbors that aren't just as poor and working as many jobs as she is? Not to mention how fucking DISGUSTING our healthcare and welfare services are. I got my girlfriend pregnant in college. Condom broke. ONCE. We had an abortion. And yes, it hurt like no other pain could possibly compare with. To this day when I talk to her, sometimes I wonder what could have been. But would it have been better for us to 'settle down, start a family' with no college degree and no hope of EVER getting out of debt? I think not. Maybe you would have done differently in my shoes, but YOU WEREN'T. It was our choice to make, and how DARE you say that it's a choice we shouldn't have had. By the way, she's going to grad school now. 3.7 GPA Psych major and she still works every weekend at the Salvation Army for free. I'm sure she would have been a great mom, and probably still will, but wouldn't it be nice for her to have a fucking chance to reach her potential first? People that substitute 'God' for 'Reason' are the real cancer eating this country alive. If that happens to describe conservatives more often than liberals, it's not my fault. And I swear to God, Yahweh, Allah, WHOEVER the fuck you think you're talking to up there, if you say ONE WORD about "Well, you shouldn't have had sex if you weren't ready for the responsibility of children", I will kill myself. And when my tainted spirit finds it's destination I will topple the master of that dark place. From my black throne I will lash together a machine of bone and blood, and fueled by my hatred for you this fear engine will bore a hole between this world and that one. A smoking orb of NOTHING will grow above your bed, and from it will emerge a thousand starving crows. As I slip through the widening maw in my new form you will catch only a glimpse of my radiance before you are incinerated. Then, as tears of bubbling pitch stream down my face, my dark work will begin. I will open one of my six mouths, and I will sing the song that ends the Earth. Mmm, that felt good. Thanks Tycho. But seriously. I'll do it. I'm a liberal and i'm fuckin' batshit CRAAAAZZZZZYYY. ;D
Roboteer by Professor Krapp	Mar 10th, 2007 03:40:03 AM
If they gave purple hearts for dodging the draft, Bush would have a chestful. The Swift Boaters are misleading liars, but even if they were right, Kerry makes Bush look cowardly in comparison.
Yea, but by David Lazarus Long	Mar 10th, 2007 03:43:46 AM
Gore makes Kerry look interesting. Heh.
Err... by David Lazarus Long	Mar 10th, 2007 03:45:15 AM
I'm retarded. Kerry makes GORE look interesting. It's late, and I just ended the world with my song of pure hatred, gimme a break... =P
zb.brox -- politics of immigration by McCroskey	Mar 10th, 2007 03:56:12 AM
Hispanics do not split evenly, or 'pretty evenly' among Republicans and Democrats. That claim was based on faulty election-day exit polls that showed President Bush winning 44% of the latino vote in 2004. Subsequent analysis puts the figure significantly lower; in all likelihood, Bush won between 36-40% of the Hispanic vote in 2004, which means he lost to Kerry among that group by closer to twenty points than ten. This idea that religion and social issues will win over the Hispanic community for the GOP is a fantasy, perpetuated by pro-mass immigration conservatives in order to dupe other conservatives into believing that mass immigration is not a complete disaster for the GOP over the long-term. Yes, its true that most latinos oppose, for example, gay marriage (so do whites and blacks), but they turn around and vote Democratic at almost every turn because of other issues. There are only a few instances where a Republican has carried the latino vote in a hotly contested statewide race (Pataki once, Jeb Bush twice??? and that's about it). Asians favored the GOP as recently as the first President Bush, but since then they too have gone solidly towards the Democrats. Believe me, if Democrats were not certain about the political-demographic effects of immigration, they would not be so eager to pass an amnesty for illegals plus a deceptive and enormous increase in permanent legal immigration. When Texas becomes a battleground state sometime in the next decade or so, and when Nevada, Arizona, and Colorado all go blue, then you'll know it to be true.
Professor Krapp and fleeing to Europe by McCroskey	Mar 10th, 2007 04:06:50 AM
Though what you said was probably in jest, I'll respond as if it weren't: If you think the United States is in decline, then what would you say in happening to Europe? If current trends persist there, then the natives who built what you apparently see as a superior system to ours will be replaced by Muslims. Do you really think a future Europe dominated by Islam will be in better shape than the United States? The type of theocracy extremist Muslims would like to impose in Europe would leave liberals hoping for the fantasy one they imagine evangelicals are trying to impose here.
beamish13 by McCroskey	Mar 10th, 2007 04:19:47 AM
We don't 'give private citizens guns'. Believe it or not, one must buy them. But anyway, there may come a day when the Dutch wish they were armed.
zb.brox; leftwing views vs rightwing views by McCroskey	Mar 10th, 2007 04:37:09 AM
You say leftwing views are more popular than rightwing ones. That would actually be an interesting thing to examine. Comprise a long list of positions, and poll Americans. But it might be tricky in determining what is more rightwing a view or a more leftwing one. Take affirmative action, where polls consistently show Americans opposed to racial preferences, yet they do favor aff action generally. Take guns, where majorities oppose banning handguns, yet support handgun registration. Take marriage, where most Americans oppose gay marriage, while at the same time a plurality generally supports civil unions. Take immigration, where a poll will show Americans overwhelmingly opposed to increasing immigration, while another will show them in favor of some 'earned legalization' and guest worker program that will result in massive increases in immigration. Take abortion, where most Americans think it should remain legal, but also oppose abortion on demand. President Bush has tarnished the conservative label, but a conservative is still much more willing to run as a self-described conservative than a liberal is as a self-described leftist. Its not as though the Democrats swept into power by running on a liberal agenda.
McCroskey-- by zb.brox	Mar 10th, 2007 04:39:34 AM
Well, if that's true, then it just shows that somehow I still need to learn not to trust anything this administration says. Sigh. In any case, "Amnesty" implies that all illegals will be granted legality, which isn't the case. And I've heard nothing in the plan which says there will be a dramatic increase in permanent immigration, only in guest-worker passes. Seems to me like a sensible solution--the economy requires these several-million people to be there, but this way they get paid a little more and we get tax revenue off them all. I suppose we could just waste billions of dollars fruitlessly trying to expel 4 million people from the country, but, y'know. I like this better. As for Europe, A: Just because the Muslim population is growing quickly now doesn't mean it will indefinitely, and B: just because there are more Muslims doesn't mean the continent will be "dominated by Islam". Believe it or not, many European Muslims are capable of living in a secular environment. Finally, you can talk all you want about needing your guns in case the big bad government comes for you, but unless you own some tomahawk missiles and F14s, too, it's probably a wasted effort.
Leftwing vs. rightwing by zb.brox	Mar 10th, 2007 04:41:56 AM
Go check out pollingreport.com and look. Dems win, I've done it. And there are more registered dems in the country. Yes, most people are mixed. But just because conservative media has maanged to turn "liberal" into a dirty word doesn't stop people form holding liberal views. Re: stem cells, universal health care, social security, etc. etc.
The problem with guns by David Lazarus Long	Mar 10th, 2007 06:02:24 AM
is that they're not feared anymore. They're so commonplace that any dumbfuck kid who can get his hands on one will try, and chances are he's close to someone that has one. Once he gets said gun, he feels that raw power in his hands and doesn't have the discipline to restrain it. Why not? Because his parents are crackheads, I dunno. Guns are not the problem. People who raise dumbfuck kids are the problem.
After readin this thread by MoshMasterD	Mar 10th, 2007 09:17:35 AM
It appears that close to most of you, not all, truly believe that the 9/11 terrorists forgot to take out the Fox News Channel building. You hate is that this and you minds are that closed
Holland, model country? by Neutron	Mar 10th, 2007 12:20:40 PM
Hey Beamish, you may want to rethink your superiority complex and fill out a US visa form. The most popular boys' name in Holland is 'Mohammed' and muslims will be a majority there in the next 20 years or so. There aren't any politicians in the US is living in hiding and under police guard for fear of being murdered, unlike your wonderful nation. Theo Van Gogh might have something to say about the state of artistic freedoms in Holland as well, but you know... If any place is 'doomed' it's europe, and Holland may well be ground zero. At least the first time islam tried to take over Europe they did it by fighting, now they have demographics and PC appeasement to do the work. Kudos!
Ever hear of the caliphate? by Neutron	Mar 10th, 2007 12:26:33 PM
You might want to google it - there is a plan to dominate europe and bring it under 7th century sharia law. They're not even being coy about it, you can find quotes from many major political and religious leaders. This is not a wack-job delusion either, and not a red-blue issue. Before I leave this thread forever, one last point for the Fox haters. It's one channel on the dial, so calm down. You don't like it, don't watch it.
Jesus Neutron, your post is one of the most by samsquanch	Mar 10th, 2007 02:18:08 PM
Alarmist pieces of text I've read in a long time. According to you the Netherlands (not Holland) is a roiling pit of evil Islamity. Oh yeah, and "PC appeasement" Whatever the fuck that means. Have you ever been there? If you have, then obviously you know that the Netherlands are not "Ground Zero" for anything but maybe good coffee and bike-friendly streets. Bad euro-muzak, but good people (immigrant populations included). My experience there showed me that immigrant populations and european indigenes could live together relatively painlessly. I believe your entire premise is based on the notion that of the billion or so muslims on planet earth, 99% are violent psychos waging jihad on you and your mom. It's just not the case, friend. Calm the fuck down.
hey spaceworlder by Richard Cranium	Mar 10th, 2007 02:21:50 PM
I can listen to differe=ing opinions just fine, but Fox News is (in my opinion) so spinning and biased and one dimensional that it's impossible to listen to. People say if you don't like it, change the channel. So I changed the channel. What exactly is wrong with that? I'm glad you're voting 3rd party, that's what I've been doing for years. However it's completely meaningless unless we force the Dems and Pubbies to change the rules to let others play ball. Which ain't gonna happen since they're the ones in power and the ones making up all the rules for this game.
The Worst Part... by atomheartbrother	Mar 10th, 2007 09:10:23 PM
... is that The Simpsons, one of my favorite shows of ALL TIME will enable this show to stay on the air far longer than it should in a true survival of the fittest situation because it just ain't funny. At all.
Hillary Clinton a liberal's pipe dream? LOL by Harry Weinstein	Mar 10th, 2007 09:10:45 PM
There's horseshit, there's complete and utter horseshit, and then there's "Liberals want Hillary Clinton elected President" AKA fourth-dimensional mirror-universe horseshit. Real liberals want Hillary Clinton to go the fuck away, because she's basically Joe Lieberman with boobies, a Republican-lite who will surely follow in her husband's pro-corporate agenda of screwing over the average men and women of this country. NAFTA? Clinton. The atrocious DCMA? Clinton. Fuck a goddamn Clinton, the only people who want Hillary Clinton elected president are the little people who live in your television trying to tell you what to think. And is this an aristocracy or the United States? It's stomach-turning to think of our country being passed back and forth between the Bush and Clinton families like a fat blunt with hundreds of millions of Americans rolled up inside it, all of us getting fucking BURNED.
Alarmist??? by McCroskey	Mar 10th, 2007 10:29:33 PM
Samsquanch; if Muslims do become a majority in the Netherlands (or close to it), do you think that country will remain the liberal paradise many think it is today? And which do you think has a better chance of winning the hearts and minds of young Muslims in Europe; the post-Christian secular humanism of the ruling natives, or the aggressive, confident doctrine of militant Islam? Assimilation isn't exactly demanded by most Western nations, and its actually undermined by at least two dynamics; (1) Leftwing ideology is itself anti-assimilation, as it instead champions multiculturalism and the worship of diversity, as well as focusing on Western sins and wallowing in white guilt. (2) So long as the Muslim population continues to grow, the actual need to assimilate decreases, as it becomes possible to recreate smaller versions of the places the Muslim immigrants departed from in the first place. So considering current trends, the chances of everything working out nicely in Europe become more and more remote as time goes by. Still, I certainly hope you are right, because Europeans seem intent on turning their lands over to Muslims. And as far as the comparison to the United States goes; I know some like to make the ludicrous claim that evangelical Christians are the American version of Europe's militant Muslims, but one need only think about the point made by Neutron in that you can generally say what you want in the United States w/o fear of violent reprisal. You don't see, for example, evangelicals calling for Bill Maher's head.
zb.brox by McCroskey	Mar 10th, 2007 11:08:41 PM
(1) There's no point really in arguing about what does and does not constitute an amnesty for illegal aliens. The bottom line, though, is that the bill put forward last year by McCain and Kennedy, and the one that will be put forth this year by Kennedy, will make it so that most of the current population of illegals will be allowed to stay, and pursue citizenship if they so choose. That's amnesty to me, but if its 'earned legalization' to you, then so be it. The end result is the same in that it will be a future bonanza for the Democrats. As to the impact on future legal immigration; that you've heard nothing about these bills resulting in enormous increases in permanent legal immigration is not surprising, nor is it a sign that its not so. Consider that most of legal immigration is based on so-called family reunification. Also consider that the so-called 'guest workers' will be allowed to stay permanently if they so choose, and seek citizenship. So in effect, a large segment of the 'guest' population will actually be permanent legal immigrants, and when you add in all of the family members they (and the legalized illegals) will bring, there is the large and unadvertised increase in legal immigration. That Kennedy and the other supporters of this bill would like to keep the public in the dark about this is perfectly understandable, though that makes it no less contemptible. When asked in the most simple terms, most Americans express opposition to increasing immigration, so what do you think they'd say to a plan that would result in many millions more legal immigrants on top of what current policy would admit? This is nothing new for Kennedy; his 1965 immigration reform wound up doing almost everything he and the other sponsors promised it would not do. (2) As to Europe; the only way the Muslim population will stop growing so quickly is if less of them are allowed to immigrate, and/or they start having fewer children once in Europe. Neither seems likely any time soon. The impact of their growth could be muted if Europeans started having more children, but that too is unlikely. Overall, I guess I'm just not all that optimistic about the Religion of Peace and its interaction with the West. Of course there are many secular European Muslims, but the trends seems to be that its the generation of Muslims born in European nations that are most prone to embracing extremism, and not the actual immigrants. That's not a good sign. Whatever the case may be turn out to be, now its a matter of predicting the future, and as I said, I'm much more pessimistic about this. (3) As to guns; actually I don't think I made that argument you attribute to me, but I do consider it a valid reason for maintaining private gun ownership rights. In light of what is going on in Iraq and Afghanistan, I find it a bit strange that you think opposing a superior military force would be futile. But here we are again speculating. Things would indeed be very dark if the United States ever reaches the point where the federal govt attempts to forcibly disarm the population. And considering the demographics of the military, I think it might prove difficult to enforce such a policy should it ever be ordered. But again, this is dark speculation. As to the here and now, if you are so confident that the American people are as liberal as you say, then by all means, do your best to encourage the new Democratic majorities in Congress to take up the banner of aggressive gun control. Campaign on the idea that the Second Amendment protects some worthless collective right instead of an individual one. I'd love it if Hillary/Obama made that a centerpiece of his or her campaign in 08. (4) As to the number of Democrats vs Republicans; well, after 9-11, Republicans almost pulled even in party identification, but the gap did widen back during the rout of 2006. Maybe it is just a return to the norm, and while its not w/o significance, it isn't necessarily decisive or indicative of how elections will turn out. I think several red states have more registered Democrats than Republicans, yet they remain red in most federal elections. But if Democrats put up candidates who don't come across as liberal, they can win in red states, just as Republicans can win in deeply blue states if they put up someone with enough 'moderate' credentials. And party identification does not always indicate how one will vote on particular issues. Most blacks and latinos, for example, vote to ban gay marriage when given the chance, yet they also vote Democrat. That's a conservative-liberal split. And more people self-identify as conservative than liberal. (5) That the liberal brand has been so tarnished is very telling, because it was done long before the onset of the dreaded, all-powerful Fox News. Democrats have been running from the liberal label for decades, and were doing so when the mainstream media (which does have a liberal bias) had a lock on information dissemination. Now, the left is trying to substitute 'progressive' for liberal. So, the idea that conservative media (which afterall, only preaches to the choir) could have turned 'liberal' into a dirty word is absurd.
Who gives a shit? by Gozu	Mar 10th, 2007 11:38:33 PM
Fox News is a joke anyway, so a half-hour of stupid liberal-bashing really doesn't make a difference. Also, "The Daily Show" satirizes both parties, which is, you know, pretty fair and balanced and stuff.
McCroskey by samsquanch	Mar 10th, 2007 11:44:38 PM
..."And which do you think has a better chance of winning the hearts and minds of young Muslims in Europe; the post-Christian secular humanism of the ruling natives, or the aggressive, confident doctrine of militant Islam?" I appreciate your response, but this is exactly what I was pointing out to Neutron, and precicely what I meant by "alarmist". Why do you believe that Muslims are by nature "militant"? There are plenty of Muslims in my neighborhood, and they're all pretty decent folks. There are also plenty of Hassidic Jews in my neighborhood, and you'd think that would be a recipe for disaster, but I see their kids running around together in the summer, the moms chatting on the corner, etc. Your post had some interesting points, but what I find baffling is that someone of your obvious level of intellect and education can't see past this simple prejudice. I have a friend who lives in Vancouver, Canada, who feeds me the same line. He recently told me, wide-eyed and breathless, that he had read that 1 in 3 people in Vancouver can claim some kind of Asian heritage. So I asked him: "SO WHAT?" He lives in Canada, a country that's not even supposed to have a national culture of it's own, much less a racial profile. Unless you can point to some evidence that proves that the changing face of Europe (or Canada, for that matter) is some cause for alarm, I'm going to chalk it up as simple, narrowminded, and yes, alarmist xenophobia. A billion muslims seem to get by without commiting violence of any kind against anyone. We're not at war with muslims, we're at war with terrorism, there's a real difference there, and if we really do want to maintain any kind of moral high ground, we'd do well to remember that.
oh, and one more thing- by samsquanch	Mar 10th, 2007 11:52:28 PM
I'm usually not one to claim that evangelical Christians are the North American equivalent to radical Islamists, but you left the door open- Pat Robertson did, in fact "call for the head" of Hugo Chavez, and who was it that blamed 9/11 on lesbians and the ACLU? Not to mention abortion doctors getting assasinated, Timothy McVeigh, etc etc etc...
I just got a JOB with the DEMS by iwontwin	Mar 11th, 2007 12:27:16 AM
SO EAT SHIT....back to work ruining the lives of the wicked.
Samsquanch by McCroskey	Mar 11th, 2007 12:35:42 AM
Examples of alleged Christian extremism in the United States are literally few and far between. Abortion-clinic bombers are not heroes to the evangelical community, while people like Bin Laden and practices like suicide-bombing enjoy appalling levels of support in several Muslim nations. So, to me it really is apples to oranges. As to the changing face of Europe; I don't see much of a problem with some level of immigration and some level of new blood, but I am concerned about the large amount of immigration combined with a Western psyche too weak to demand assimilation, and low-native birth rates to help absorb the immigrants within a larger society. The prospect now is of the historic native populations being overwhelmed by the new. Maybe the concern will prove to be unfounded. I hope so. But I can't understand the refusal by some to even consider that things won't work out so well, or that if things don't then the bad guy must be the evil natives (i.e. white guys). Its not that I think Muslims are by nature militant, but I do think that Islam is in many ways inherently anti-Western. Its hard for me to imagine a Europe dominated by Muslims that remains the relatively free Europe we know today. But I do try. Maybe a Muslim Europe will be more like the more moderate Muslim nations of the world. That may be what we are left to hope for in the future. Generally speaking, though, I am a pessimist on this question.
McCroskey by samsquanch	Mar 11th, 2007 01:50:42 AM
Fair enough on the apples and oranges argument. Also- trust me, you're preaching to the converted with the whole "white guilt" thing, I never claimed that indigenous europeans (white guys) were the bad guys. It's my perspective that there are no 'bad guys', not inherently, anyway. by the way, I do, in fact, imagine that with rising immigrant populations things might not work out so well, as you put it, especially considering that at this point in history there does seem to be a clash of civilizations coming to some kind of head. I'm not dismissing this as a possibility, or refusing to discuss ways that this could be avoided. In fact, that's exactly where I'm coming from. I prefer to keep a level head and make sure I don't give in to some of the baser emotions that inevitably rise up when considering the way things are going. I see it as our responsibility as a civilized society, to make sure that we aren't exacerbating an already incindiary situation with things that should be beneath us, like dogmatic xenophobia and let's just say it- racism. It does no one any good to be a bad neighbor, to wish the 'others' away, with their weird customs and strange clothes and indecipherable language. It may seem like hollow sloganeering, but this so-called clash of civilizations takes two to tango. We're not so innocent, but I believe that we can be leaders, if only by example, and be truly civilized. Let's save our energy for the real dangers, and not get too distracted by our own shadow. Besides, you don't really think that the Netherlands are around the corner from becoming another Jordan or Syria, do you? Where are all the Dutch in this scenario?
its okay by stvnhthr	Mar 11th, 2007 08:52:22 AM
It could be funnier. It may grow on me, but right now it needs work. The laugh track only laughs has to go. The Daily Show uses a combination of a laugh track and studio feedback and that works better. It needs a live studio audience, better graphics and set pieces. I'm a conservative and I love FOX, but a comedy show is not what I would expect on a news netwerk. Sure the Daily Show is a Liberal Democratic talk show (you only have to see who they choose to book and not to book and who gets softball questions), but they still take an occasional jab at their own party. In fact that is what has always worked well for liberals, being able to attack everything with out offering a position of their own to defend. It doesn't work as well for those with Conservative values.
Wait a min. by MoshMasterD	Mar 11th, 2007 12:14:59 PM
"You hate is that this and you minds are that closed" I swear to god, I didn't write it like that. It was suppose to say "Your hate is just that (meaning extreme), and this is why your minds are that closed." And in other related material. Maybe most of you are DUmmies from the DU. Soooo.... conservativeunderground.com conservativeunderground.com conservativeunderground.com
conservativeunderground.com by MoshMasterD	Mar 11th, 2007 12:16:15 PM
for good measure
Why abortion is fucked up by Halfbreedqueen	Mar 11th, 2007 11:27:17 PM
" I got my girlfriend pregnant in college. Condom broke. ONCE. We had an abortion. And yes, it hurt like no other pain could possibly compare with. To this day when I talk to her, sometimes I wonder what could have been. But would it have been better for us to 'settle down, start a family' with no college degree and no hope of EVER getting out of debt? I think not. Maybe you would have done differently in my shoes, but YOU WEREN'T. It was our choice to make, and how DARE you say that it's a choice we shouldn't have had." Why not put it up for adoption then? Isn't that better than killing the baby. And don't give me shit about... well I raise it or nobody does. I was adopted. It beats having my brains scrambled at a wee age and never being given a chance. There should never really be a reason for an abortion unless the mothers health is at risk where it is absolutely HER choice what she wants to do with HER body. Otherwise it's not just her body, it's the childs body too.
ending the war by Halfbreedqueen	Mar 11th, 2007 11:31:40 PM
"If Bush fucked the war up, why haven't the Democrats taken steps to end it? They have a majority in congress right now. They could vote to withhold funding; but they aren't." If they do that, they won't end the war, they'll just make it worse for the troops and be accused of hating America and stopping funds to help the men fighting the war. Like it or not, as long as Bush is president we ARE staying in Iraq. Whatever shit happens there, good or as it seems to be bad, is on Bush and his administration's head.
liberals vs. conservatives by Halfbreedqueen	Mar 11th, 2007 11:44:23 PM
"In fact that is what has always worked well for liberals, being able to attack everything with out offering a position of their own to defend." and i do think the big thing is between secular progressives and traditionalists, as the great orator Bill O'Reilly said himself. The traditionalists believe that there is some golden standard in the past we need to get back to, while the progressives believe we need to move forward to some different and newer standard to be created. Problems can arise from both (sometimes something "new" is just a Eutopian paradise where we hold hands and sing, etc.), but I am much more on the progressive side (sorry Bill.) I think the Constitution is a blueprint and a guide, something that every day we should try and make America achieve more and more. Since this country began there have been many huge changes (women voting, no slavery, etc.) and each one of these steps has gotten us closer to the basic ideas of the constitution (all men are created equal and so forth) and that we still have not reached the potential that America holds. The moment we stop trying to move forward, the moment we start looking backwards for answers, going "Yeah in THAT time things were grand," is the time I think traditionalism will simply ignite old prejudices and begin pushing us away from the 'dream' of the constitution. And, with all this said, I think over time you see a fluctuation, moving forward and backward if you will, as traditionilists gain power, then go to far to one extreme and progressives take power, and then move too far to one extreme and it goes back and forth like a pendulem. (And by power I mean national thoughts as well, not just political positions.) It is from these basic ideas that all the specific debates sprout, but I think it is these basic ideas that many of us start with. Just my two cents.
** by Halfbreedqueen	Mar 11th, 2007 11:48:41 PM
"In fact that is what has always worked well for liberals, being able to attack everything with out offering a position of their own to defend." my first post got deleted, by this comment I just meant to begin by saying that there are always complainers on BOTH sides, always extremists on BOTH sides, that I think partisan bickering leads people just to attack others. Well if you have this ideology chances are YOU'RE AN IDIOT, UNLIKE ME.
Treekiller for President by just pillow talk	Mar 12th, 2007 06:20:58 AM
'08. Mark it down.
Funny thing about fake news..... by shellfishh	Mar 12th, 2007 02:03:52 PM
When I worked at CNN there was talk of doing a nightly 'fake news' show on the Headline News prime time schedule. Any real news people were aghast at the very thought. But then, Fox already blurs the line by putting 'informational' (read Opinionated) shows on a news network. And yes, Headline News has the idiotic Glenn Beck and Nancy Grace on their air, which are BIG mistakes as well.
Halfbreedqueen by biggles2_22	Mar 13th, 2007 03:33:25 PM
You won't know where you're going until you know where you came from. Simple logic that is often lost on "progressives". Taxation is a great example. Lower taxes = more revenue for the govt. Yet the governor of my fine state is trying to "sell" higher taxes to cover state shortfalls, due to companies leaving the state because of high taxes. Oh, she's a Democrat, but Canandian, so I can kind of forgive her stupidity.
Halfbreedqueen... by DeeJay	Mar 13th, 2007 06:43:16 PM
What was the party affiliation of your current Governor's predecessor? Also, would it be the case that the current shortfalls are a by-product of said-predecessor’s policies? Furthermore, is it not true that the extent of these shortfalls weren't publicly announced until said-predecessor's Lieutenant Governor lost his gubernatorial bid? Where is that predecessor currently living? Lastly... you do realize that the "logic" you cite does not apply to state-level economics in the manner than it has sometimes applied to federal-level economics, don't you?
Aah, I see... by biggles2_22	Mar 14th, 2007 08:23:49 AM
...so even though said-governer of said state has been in charge for over five years, your going to fall back on the previous administration? But not to worry, "In five more years, you're gonna be blown away!"
Biggles... by DeeJay	Mar 14th, 2007 05:43:46 PM
...what's the average time a governor has taken to lead a state in recovering from a deficit of the size that said-governor inherited? If that time period is more than 5 years, I would argue that culpability is not determined by me, but by "reality." Reality, by the way, transcends sound bites (such as the one you cited). Employing your faulty logic, it should be "okay" to convict people that we know have been framed for murder, based on their inability to bring the victim back to life...
I've been watching this show for days by INWOsuxRED	Mar 15th, 2007 08:19:30 PM
It is a hilarious parody of out of people completely out of touch with the world. I've spent hours watching it. Wait, it was only on for a half hour? What was the rest of that stuff?

Talkbacks

Fox News Channel Orders
13 Episodes Of Conservative Comedy ½ HOUR NEWS HOUR!!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks

Talkbacks

Fox News Channel Orders 13 Episodes Of Conservative Comedy ½ HOUR NEWS HOUR!!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks

Fox News Channel Orders
13 Episodes Of Conservative Comedy ½ HOUR NEWS HOUR!!