The Rally to Restore Sanity

Non-spam and Anime things that don't fit in C&C. Also where talk that you don't want to turn into spam goes. So No Spam allowed

Re: The Rally to Restore Sanity

Postby frice2000 » Sat Sep 18, 2010 8:56 pm

Comartemis wrote:Then you have business talking about them. At all.

And if you read any further you'd see that I was talking about currently. I watched the Daily Show in the past and clips from both shows on occassion. I guess you're saying they've evolved beyond anything I watched in the early days of both programs and due to that I can't possibly construed them as biased or in some way something I don't enjoy? Can I make up my mind that I dislike something after watching it a good 15 minutes on an hour show in the not too distant past? You're saying what that I must watch it now and stare at it to determine if I like or can analyze a persons bias? Or that I can't trust a multitude of sources quoting both individuals on what the goal and inspiration behind this rally is? Have they come out and apologized for rampant and easy to document bias (not that I feel they have a need they are marketing themselves to a audience)? If not why should I expect either program or individual to change and thus have to readjust my opinion?

Whatever enjoy your rally, arguing politics on the Internet when someone can't even give a single piece of ground is more pointless and less enjoyable then it usually is. If I lived near DC I'd be happy to give you a cot to sleep on for the night regardless of how much I would disagree with your politics. Sadly I live in the Hudson Valley in New York so...
frice2000
User avatar
Asteroid Senshi
Posts: 572
 

Re: The Rally to Restore Sanity

Postby Comartemis » Sat Sep 18, 2010 10:27 pm

And if you read any further you'd see that I was talking about currently.

I did read further. That just means your info is a few years out of date, which is barely any better than trying to talk about a subject you don't know jack about.

Personally I don't watch the Colbert Report very frequently just because I don't watch television in general very frequently, but I like pretty much everything I've seen from him. However I don't consider a few episodes here and there to be enough to form an educated opinion on the subject and so I have nothing to say in regards to the rest of your points. By the same token, however, I don't believe you have any business having an opinion on Colbert when you admit to being barely any more informed than I am (and I consider second-hand information to be a poor substitute for personal experience, so all those reviews and second opinions you mentioned mean very little to me).
Currently Watching: Gaiking: Legend of Daiku Maryu
Currently Playing: Kingdom Hearts: Birth By Sleep
Currently Reading: Sora no Otoshimono

KILL the darkfic. BURN the angst. PURGE the Bad End.
Comartemis
User avatar
Crystal Power Senshi
Posts: 4559
 

Re: The Rally to Restore Sanity

Postby Crescent Pulsar R » Sat Sep 18, 2010 11:15 pm

frice2000 wrote:And if you read any further you'd see that I was talking about currently. I watched the Daily Show in the past and clips from both shows on occassion. I guess you're saying they've evolved beyond anything I watched in the early days of both programs and due to that I can't possibly construed them as biased or in some way something I don't enjoy? Can I make up my mind that I dislike something after watching it a good 15 minutes on an hour show in the not too distant past? You're saying what that I must watch it now and stare at it to determine if I like or can analyze a persons bias? Or that I can't trust a multitude of sources quoting both individuals on what the goal and inspiration behind this rally is? Have they come out and apologized for rampant and easy to document bias (not that I feel they have a need they are marketing themselves to a audience)? If not why should I expect either program or individual to change and thus have to readjust my opinion?
Basically, while you can make up your own mind, it's not exactly sensible to do so on outdated information, and thus using a basis that is irrelevant to the here and now.

And if you believe that what they do is rampant bias, then I doubt that any passage of time could change your mind about them; even had anyone been trying to. I just don't think what I've heard from you has made much in the way of sense. In part because you're uninformed and thus potentially being prejudicial in your reasoning.

frice2000 wrote:Actually judging from various news articles I saw while looking through Google news aggregate this morning and judging solely from headlines from a variety of them and then checking out some in response to your assertion I've gathered that it seems to be a parody of the Tea Party rallies (which no I'm not a active supporter of) and more specifically the Glenn Beck rally (which I do on occasion listen to he's pretty humorous in my opinion but by no means do I religiously follow or listen to him) so no not really. 'It's more our opposition are a bunch of wackos let's laugh at them' old tired line.

Just because it's an inspired parody on the surface doesn't mean that it's not what they say it is. The great thing about comedy is that it's a good medium to get controversial ideas across to an audience. Some might say that it's sneaky, or wrong, but it's not. Sometimes something can't be discussed reasonably unless it's delivered in a non-serious and thus seemingly non-threatening manner.

And it's not about an "opposition." It's about hearing the voices that can't be heard over the talking heads and the other preening peacocks that are babbling a bunch of nonsense. Democracies only work well when its population is educated and critical-thinking, and the trend in the mainstream is by and large anything but.

Actually from the very very early beginnings when I did watch the show regularly they had some political news which was just fine but they balanced it with other humor. I remember a early program where they interviewed scientists trying to create a black hole and they had no idea what they would do if they succeeded or how much danger one could create. That was a very entertaining and well put together piece. I also remember when the stories used to go after other funny news elements and while some were political, they didn't throw in a political slant on all of the stories like they did when I finally gave up watching the show. I gave up when they became a mouthpiece when those with cash figured out their demographics and tossed them a sizable amount of money to reach the 'young'. Quite a nefarious way to go about that indoctrination too. And no, I didn't come to that opinion because someone told me to, I came to that opinion via what the program evolved into. I was a loyal watcher of the Daily Show for a bit.

"For a bit?" That isn't what someone says when they watch something evolve, because it takes more than "a bit" for that to happen. That aside, the program hasn't really changed all that much. It does do plenty of interviews with people pushing various books, or new movies, and other things that have nothing to do with politics. You'd know that if you watched it, like I have for the last seven years. Also, it's a comedy show, and it's going to take advantage of whatever material someone or something gives them to work with, so you can hardly blame them if they seem to favor whoever you happen to perceive as "your own" or "their opposition." Tough cookies, there. It doesn't bother me because I don't identify with any political party, group or ideology.

I don't even want to know about the indoctrination... That's just about one of the silliest topics one can argue about, since indoctrination is a normal part of life, starting with parents and what they want their children to learn, and how they want them to act. That, religion, tradition, culture... it's everywhere.

Do I watch their shows? No. I've seen a couple Colbert pieces and hated them. From a non-political standpoint when Colbert isn't doing political comedy I don't think he's at all funny either so... On the other hand I used to watch the Daily Show and thought Jon Stewart was himself pretty funny but then the writing and he himself moved to a level of political vitriol I'm not comfortable with. Could this have changed in the years I've not watched either program (since the constant Bush lambasting)...yes. Do I think it has especially with the goal of this rally, and political candidates feeling comfortable enough to announce their candidacy on those programs, and Colbert's quite frankly absolutely disgusting un-professional and unprecedented vitriol at a White House correspondence dinner no. It's nice that you think they go after both sides equally. You're likely on the side that agrees with most of what they say and that's fine. I'm sure they do make the occasional joke at a Democratic position. But by no means are they 'balanced' (nor do I claim anyone else that says that about themselves is telling the truth).

"Hate" is a strong word. And it sounds like, beginning with the mention of "Bush lambasting," that this is a personal issue with you. It's a shame that you take it personally, and that your perception is skewed by it. Because saying what you have, and claiming to know what you do, while admitting that you haven't seen the show in years is the exact kind of nonsense that the rally is about. It's exactly what both shows look for to make fun of, because it makes no sense. (For instance, McCain's stance on a lot of issues (and thus policies) have changed from being one way to the other, and they point out that kind of inconsistency.)

Beyond that, I never said anything about the shows going after both sides equally, nor did I say that it was balanced. They can only do so much with what bones are tossed their way, and it just so happens that a greater number of them come from people with certain political associations.

And if either show was really good for the Democrats, then why would Rahm Emanuel and Pelosi warn against going on the Colbert Report? Because it's a comedy show, not a political platform, and that means equal opportunity.

Right that's fine. If he really believed that though he'd offer or at least attempt to offer a neutral perspective. I've seen his interviews of political candidates on both sides. The show is weighted towards humor I'll give it that but when he asks softies to people he agrees with and then attempts biting humor with those he disagrees with...Yeah equal respect and listening to others views huh? The man has his mind made up and that's perfectly fine he has his belief system and I have mine.

Every time that he disagrees with someone, he makes a reasonable argument, with or without the humor. It's not so much about his beliefs or being neutral, as it is about him pointing out that there's something wrong with an idea, a flaw -- or even that it's nonsensical. It only seems like he has it out for one group because they're often the ones with the silly ideas and beliefs.

And, I'll tell you one thing: Bush asked for the kind of attention that he got from both comedy shows.
Crescent Pulsar R
User avatar
Crystal Power Senshi
Posts: 4122
 

Re: The Rally to Restore Sanity

Postby Quickshot0 » Sun Sep 19, 2010 6:47 am

I'll have to agree with the Bush thing, from a foreign point of view Bush did seem like an easy target for comedy.
Quickshot0
User avatar
Moon Senshi
Posts: 1550
 

Re: The Rally to Restore Sanity

Postby Spokavriel » Sun Sep 19, 2010 9:08 am

He also had a good sense of humor about it when it was appropriate. But there were allot of times where the press decided to take up the comedy instead of actually reporting the news or letting his full sentences from press conferences be played truncating the endings because he said something that could be used to make him look sillier. There was a web site I can't find now that had documented how many times they didn't play his whole sentences on CBS ABC and MSNBC with MSNBC being the one that did the most interruptions. It was something like 80% of his speeches they never aired without interruption by the "anchors"
Image
Spamville Character ProfileArchived Current Senshi of Ophelia (Uranus VII).
My Console Video Games
Spokavriel
User avatar
Eternal Power Senshi
Posts: 47773
 

Re: The Rally to Restore Sanity

Postby Wyrd » Sun Sep 19, 2010 9:24 am

Quickshot0 wrote:I'll have to agree with the Bush thing, from a foreign point of view Bush did seem like an easy target for comedy.


His tendency to use the wrong words alone was enough to inspire a series of books called Bushisms. He gave comedians a lot of material to work with.

Colbert's style of humour is not for everyone. I didn't particularly care for it when the show started, but gave him time as he was developing his character's personality from a skit character to one with his own show. The biggest thing to know about him is that he means practically nothing of what he says. His character makes statements that happen to be accidentally true while being totally opposite to what the character means to say. As far as that dinner you were referencing goes, I saw an interview with Stephen afterwards, out of character(he is only in character for interviews if he is doing the interview), where he said that he kept going because the tables near to him, including Bush himself IIRC, were laughing their heads off. It was the people in the background who he wasn't directly involved with that were silent and offended. Think of it as a roast. I hate roasts. I don't think they are funny at all. There are lots of people who enjoy them, however, and very rarely is anything said in one meant mean spiritedly, despite how things may sound.

Stewart asks cutting questions of people of all political parties who appear on his show. I think he has had Green party, Communist party, and Libertarian's on his show in addition to Democrats and Republicans. Most of the 'softies' he has done were with actors, whose political stance really doesn't matter unless it is a political movie, and with people who are on the show to promote some particular charity. Bill Clinton was on the show recently, for example, promoting an organization he is a part of which helps businesses know how best to use their charitable contributions to do the most good, and which pressures the big businesses involved to actually follow through on their pledges by not letting them participate if they don't do what they say they are going to do. It doesn't force them to make big pledges, merely to follow through or not come back(I'm sure exceptions can be made for bad fiscal years resulting in less available resources). I'm not certain I'm describing the organization accurately, so don't hold it against me if I'm misinterpreting. This was a pretty soft interview, but then again it wasn't about any of the issues that cutting questions would have been appropriate for.

@Spokavriel Unfortunately, that happens with just about every politician, which is why one of the things Stewart has started doing is pointing out when the media's interpretation of something someone said is completely at odds with what they actually said. Sometimes, just including the entire sentence completely changes the meaning of the sound bite.
Wyrd
User avatar
Senshi Cadet
Posts: 126
 

Re: The Rally to Restore Sanity

Postby CRBWildcat » Mon Sep 20, 2010 7:36 am

Ah, politics and comedy. A dangerous combination if I've ever seen one.

Yeah, I think it's better if I drop out of this conversation. Ciao mein. 8)
Senshi of Zeta Aquilae
Spammer Rank C --- from Himitsu, 10-25-07. "Holy @!#%!, she made Zelas cry."
SpamLady Supreme --- from Colonel Caprice, 8-16-2017
Song of the week. Updated Sundays/Mondays.
CRBWildcat
User avatar
Super Power Senshi
Posts: 32135
 

Previous

Return to Other Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users