FAKE Comedian Stephen Colbert showed his true colors tonight

Log in / Sign Up

List of Forums + New Post Recipe Box Usergroups Following My Posts Bookmarks

Private Messages Advanced Search Rules New User Guide FAQ Advertise Contact Us

Forum -> Interesting Discussions

Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next

View latest: 24h 48h 72h

Cheiny

Tue, Oct 30 2018, 7:55 am

Jeanette wrote:

Influential as they may be, I dont think anyone can argue they have anywhere near the power of the President of the United States. Yet the same people who spent the last three years dismissing the president's deranged tweets, rallies and interviews as a big joke are now crying about a comedian. They bristle at the suggestion that the president should be responsible for his rhetoric but want to complain about Stephen Colbert. Donald Trump is a comedian and Stephen Colbert is the president.

So are you saying that if Trump suddenly changed his entire tone, began spouting the very presidential like pc appeasementandsaid everything liberals want to hear, you and they would be “influenced” by him,respect him, stop hating him? Don’t think so..,.

Cheiny

Tue, Oct 30 2018, 7:57 am

sushilover wrote:

I disagree with your worldview. Just like it's hypocritical of leftists to only blame trump for causing violence, it's hypocritical of you to only blame the media.

When have I ever said it’s ONLY the media? Oh there’s plenty of blame to go around.

amother

Black

Tue, Oct 30 2018, 7:58 am

simcha2 wrote:

Serious question. What would you consider a legitimate criticismof Trump or his presidency?

Cheiny, it's interesting how you've been avoiding simcha2's question. I wonder why.

Cheiny

Tue, Oct 30 2018, 8:01 am

simcha2 wrote:

Serious question. What would you consider a legitimate criticismof Trump or his presidency?

I believe legitimate criticism would be that he speaks too quickly without thinking first sometimes, and I attribute that to his not having been a politician that we voted on, but just a regular person who happened to spend all his adult life in the business world as well as among Hollywood. He prides himself on NOT being PC, but I believe sometimes you have to be. Unfortunately many take those opportunities to twist his words, precisely because he just speaks like a regular person and not a politician. I also am not happy about his history with women. But when you’re dealing with men, Clinton is an example that expecting morality might not be realistic in this day and age. My priority though are his policies and I’m thrilled with what he’s done for this country and for Israel. It far outweighs his negatives,

Last edited by Cheiny on Tue, Oct 30 2018, 8:05 am; edited 1 time in total

Cheiny

Tue, Oct 30 2018, 8:04 am

amother wrote:

Cheiny, it's interesting how you've been avoiding simcha2's question. I wonder why.

Sorry I wasn’t quick enough for your deadline but I indeed did answer it as soon as I saw it...stop the jumping to conclusions, put downs, wondering and assuming and try fairness instead.

simcha2

Tue, Oct 30 2018, 8:14 am

Cheiny wrote:

So, if people had the same criticisms (speaks too quickly and history with women) but aren't willing to justify the lying and s-xual abuse, would that be ok?

sushilover

Tue, Oct 30 2018, 8:52 am

ora_43 wrote:

... that the caravan was a conspiracy by "bad people," that so many of the migrants are criminals that this is a national emergency, and let's not forget the Middle Easterners, because apparently being Middle Eastern is, in itself, a threat.

These aren't reasonable statements that give a realistic sense of why a caravan like this could be threatening, or what the political forces behind it might be. These are statements that encourage hysteria.

He's also posted things online that are blatantly false, like his claim that 81% of white homicide victims are killed by blacks (in fact, 15% of white homicide victims are killed by blacks - almost perfectly matching the proportion of blacks in the general population - while 82% are killed by whites).

He tweeted that, "Crime in Germany is way up. Big mistake made all over Europe in allowing millions of people in who have so strongly and violently changed their culture!" Crime in Germany is actually down.

This is the kind of thing that would have me mentally categorizing someone's posts as "racist nonsense" on Facebook. And he's the president. He has no excuse not to do better.

Even if he might not be to blame at all for the latest murders and bombings - he's the president. "Might" shouldn't be good enough for him. Even "probably isn't" shouldn't be good enough for him.

I understand your perspective. And I kind of agree . I dislike trump's rhetoric and I have disliked it since the beginning.
It's not nuanced, responsible, and presidential.

Obviously though I don't equate irresponsible rhetoric with violent rhetoric, and it seems that neither do you.

I only disagree in that I generally don't believe there should be different rules for the president vs other influential personalities. If I'm not OK with the president stretching the truth, I should also not be OK with the media stretching the truth.

I'm not OK with the president calling fake news "the enemy of the people". I'm not OK with the media saying that Trump is worse than ISIS. I'm not OK with Fox news spreading conspiracy theories about the caravan, just as I'm not OK with Colbert spreading conspiracy theories about Russia. Yet, I don't think any of the above are responsible if some crazy person commits murder.

Yes, actions are more important than words, but rhetoric definitely matters.

Maya

Tue, Oct 30 2018, 10:49 am

Cheiny wrote:

I would.
My biggest problems with Trump is his personality, his penchant for lying, his gleeful love of violence and fear mongering, his belligerent and bullying mannerisms, his immature and childish understanding of the world, his egotism and narcissism, and his perverted attitudes on women.

I respect people with differing political views if they come to those opinions throughh thoughtful, smart and independent thinking. My dislike for Trump stems from his personality, not his politics. If he would be an articulate, intelligent, well thought out person, I could respect him while disagreeing with him.

Mevater

Tue, Oct 30 2018, 10:58 am

Maya wrote:

Trump's personality is definitely un-Presidential and leaves much to be desired, but Im up to 10 minutes of this clip and he sounds really good. (Side note- Ingraham is 55? Wo.)

Maya

Tue, Oct 30 2018, 11:03 am

Mevater wrote:

Trump's personality is definitely un-Presidential and leaves much to be desired, but Im up to 10 minutes of this clip and he sounds really good. (Side note- Ingraham is 55? Wo.)

I don’t care how good he can make himself sound in a short televised edited interview. I care about how he represents himself at all other times, the words he says when not prompted, and his actions in real life.

Last edited by Maya on Tue, Oct 30 2018, 11:14 am; edited 1 time in total

amother

Blush

Tue, Oct 30 2018, 11:04 am

Squishy wrote:

The Washington Post had a recent headline:

Don't Compare Donald Trump to Trump Hitler. It Belittles Hitler.

This belittles the holocaust and the millions of murdered people and all the people that died on the battlefield. Stop trivializing Hitler.

I will not read The Washington Post again for a long time.

"Recent," in this case, is September 13, 2016. Well before the last presidential election.

And while its certainly an incendiary headline, it isn't an article. And the editorial certainly doesn't praise Hitler. "Hitler was a megalomaniacal psychopath who should burn in H3ll for eternity… who actually believed in something." Trump, he posits, doesn't believe, citing his frequent backtracking and flip-flopping before reaching the conclusion that Trump is a "two bit con man."

Its funny.

Conservative posters regularly tell us that Trump's words really don't mean anything. When he tells us that there are good people among white supremacists, he doesn't mean it. When he says that the press is the enemy of the American people, he doesn't really mean anything by it. When he retweets racist memes, well, that's not really what he means. When he talks about assaulting women, that's just the way men talk.

But let a comedian say anything. Well, now. THEY'RE the ones that we have to worry about. Americans need not care about their politicians. I mean, they're only governing the country and representing our interests. Supposedly. Its the comedians we need to keep in check!

amother

Blush

Tue, Oct 30 2018, 11:11 am

sushilover wrote:

Trump is supposed to be the president of the United States.

Fox is supposed to be a news network.

Colbert is supposed to be a comedian.

Do you really not differentiate among them?

Trump's lies have the imprimatur of the government. When he lies -- and he unquestionably does so habitually -- it is the government lying.

Fox is a news network. Its peddling fake information -- which is sadly mimicked by people like the Pittsburgh mass murderer -- violates our trust in the media.

Colbert is a comedian with a late night talk show. At best he's editorial, not news. You might as well attack Weekend Update for providing fake news.

Mevater

Tue, Oct 30 2018, 11:19 am

If anyone who dislikes Trump cares to watch the clip, can they tell me if are there any untruths in this specific clip?

Maya

Tue, Oct 30 2018, 11:25 am

Mevater wrote:

If anyone who dislikes Trump cares to watch the clip, can they tell me if are there any untruths in this specific clip?

Once again, a short edited televised clip is not proof of anything. Even if he managed to speak only truths during this one time, the fact remains that a lot of things he says on a daily basis are false.

Mevater

Tue, Oct 30 2018, 11:32 am

Maya wrote:

I agree, Ive heard untruths and exaggerations myself, but allow me to ask about this clip, please.

Fox

Tue, Oct 30 2018, 11:33 am

simcha2 wrote:

Serious question. What would you consider a legitimate criticismof Trump or his presidency?

This is an excellent question and deserves an answer.

Right now, the best place to find legitimate criticism of the Trump administration is among conservatives. In fact, it's very close to the only place to find actual, true criticism.

Outlets like the National Review have de facto agreed to disagree about President Trump's style and focus on actions and policies. Once everyone stops braying about what an awful person he is, you can easily discuss the pros and cons of various deregulatory actions; whether he should be addressing the budget deficit; the best way to deal with Chinese theft of intellectual property and spying, and a slew of other topics.

However, most of these topics are more boring and all are less dramatic than telling people how much one hates President Trump, unfriending people on Facebook, and being generally angry that he unexpectedly won the election.

The problem with the constant anti-Trump drumbeat of the media and entertainment world is that repetition is more persuasive than ethos. Hearing a no-name comedian or commentator say something 100 times has a greater effect on our brains than hearing someone we respect say the opposite just once.

Entertainers, and comedians in particular, have a long history as in their role of "speaking truth to power." The court jester and the satirist are part of that tradition. The problem that many people see today, however, is that "speaking truth to power" has degenerated into kvetching -- and often pretty unfunny kvetching, at that.

Growing up in the era of the Vietnam War and Watergate, I remember comedians were plenty topical. George Carlin, the Smothers Brothers, Mort Sahl, even Johnny Carson took aim at President Nixon and other political figures. But there was no underlying anger or disdain for the audience that seems to characterize many of today's entertainers.

I keep reading article after article that depicts President Trump as a symptom rather than a cause of the current political climate. The election of Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil is further evidence of that. Yet few people seem willing to have that discussion, and I'm not sure why.

Whether you love or hate President Trump, there is enormous resentment throughout the world against what are seen as the liberal elite -- financially secure individuals who work in media, technology, finance, and the information economy. True or not, they are widely seen as forcing the costs of their social ideals on their less comfortable countrymen while simultaneously lecturing them on their primitivist views.

I am well and truly tired of hearing how aesthetically displeasing President Trump is to many people. Yes, I get it, and you're not necessarily wrong.

But going over and over that point is both useless and boring. It doesn't address the actual policies of his administration, and it's a way of avoiding the larger dialogue: the fact that a large part of the world sees Stephen Colbert and his cohort not as someone who speaks truth to power, but rather, the power that need to be spoken to.

simcha2

Tue, Oct 30 2018, 12:11 pm

Fox wrote:

Ok, so Cheiny says his lying and s-xually assaulting women are areas of legitimate criticism, and you write his policies are legitimate areas to debate. So what isn't? Because any time anyone writes any criticism we are told we are dumb libs and dems (why the courtesy of writing liberals and Democrats can't be given rather than using the terms as epithets is a separate conversation) who criticize the president for everything and therefore the criticism is sour grapes and can be dismissed.

I'm a registered Republican. I didn't vote for Obama (either time) because I wasn't comfortable with his position on Israel (though I was overcome with emotion and cried when he was sworn in the first time). But I didn't vote for Trump, not because of his policies- though I've been disturbed by his deregulation of financial and environmental policies. But because I found his lack of moral character and integrity to be a deal breaker.

Unfortunately his bombastic attitude, willingness to lie and continued refusal to release his financial records (and therefore leaving the American public unsure of his motivations for foreign policy decisions) have made me more and more certain that not voting for him was the right decision.

The continued defense of the indefensible (claiming s-xual assault of women, defending white supremacistsetc.) by his supporters has pushed me to be voting Democrat in the upcoming election in the hope that a Democrat house will be willing to do what a Republican Congress has refused to do and enforce appropriate checks and balances.

Mevater

Tue, Oct 30 2018, 12:25 pm

simcha2 wrote:

But I didn't vote for Trump.

So I guess you voted for very moral and honest "Pay for Play" Hillary, who made how much money while she was secretary of state????? and enabler of s-xual predator Bill Clinton, who just recently said she doesnt feel that his experience with Monica L involved abuse of power.

Mommyg8

Tue, Oct 30 2018, 12:26 pm

Maya wrote:

As strange as it may seem to you, there are many who voted for him not DESPITE his rhetoric, but BECAUSE of what he says and how he says it. These people- mostly white conseevative men - are glad that he's speaking the truth (the way they see it) and are happy that he's actually fighting back.

They feel, and have felt for a long time, that this country was going in the wrong direction, and were glad to have - and let's call it what it is - a bully on their side. Someone who understands their concerns and sticks up for the things they believe in. And who will not back down from the opposition, no matter what. And will do his best to address their very real concerns.

The question is not- how can we get him out? But the question should be - how did he get in? However you want to tally it up, a lot of people voted for him both in the primaries and in the general election, and you have to ask yourself why.

There must be something that he was getting about the American people that you are just not getting. And until we address that, this conversation is just going to go in endless circles, over and over and over again.

simcha2

Tue, Oct 30 2018, 12:30 pm

Mevater wrote:

Believe me, I wasn't thrilled to vote for Hillary. But, I at least thought she was competent to do the job and I certainly wasn't sure Trump was.

Page 4 of 9

Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next