Now That Trump's President... (not any more!)

  On 9/17/2016 at 8:05 AM, usagi said:

it's not like Fallon's show is supposed to have any sort of political spine, it's pablum for the masses. (which means Trump, or any other political candidate for that matter, should never have been on it in the first place.)

i guess the bar for me was set pretty high with Letterman who could actually interview anyone, ask the hard questions and still make people laugh. 

  On 9/17/2016 at 8:08 AM, bitroast said:

fallon is, always has been, always will be.. a massive gimboid.

Yes! Finally someone agrees with me!

  Quote

 

 

gimboid

had to google.

seems on point 

  On 9/17/2016 at 11:06 AM, Squee said:

 

  On 9/17/2016 at 8:08 AM, bitroast said:

fallon is, always has been, always will be.. a massive gimboid.

Yes! Finally someone agrees with me!

 

I've yet to meet the person who disagrees.  No one likes Fallon.  At least, not anyone you meet in real life.  Obviously he has his own show... so someone likes him.  But I've never met that someone.  Fallon is the ultimate tofu celebrity.

No offense to tofu....

he's so unfunny it hurts.

As far as I can tell his whole schtick is not being able to keep a straight face during comediy sketches he's involved in.  Somehow that got him his own late night talk show.  

  On 9/17/2016 at 7:41 AM, phling said:

 

  On 9/17/2016 at 1:28 AM, auxien said:

really it's the long term trend that points most towards the winner.

the trend is the long-term gradient, not the historical levels in isolation. so if you're going to use that specific term, then the "trend" doesn't look good for Clington.

but these models are all abstractions anyway, nothing will really tell you exactly what will happen on election night until it happens.

yea and everything leading up to that is pretty ridiculous tbh. Stopping and contemplating that Trump could actually be elected still boggles the mind. To me all of this has been purely amusement/entertainment, I mean is this even real? Is there any other country where politics can be remotely as silly as what's going on here? Only things I can think of are the funky outfits of a Gaddafi, or Kim Yong looking at things.

did anyone really expect Jimmy Fallon of all people to be confrontational or challenging to a guest? He's the tamest even for late night show host standards

  On 9/17/2016 at 12:31 PM, Zephyr_Nova said:

 

  On 9/17/2016 at 11:06 AM, Squee said:

 

  On 9/17/2016 at 8:08 AM, bitroast said:

fallon is, always has been, always will be.. a massive gimboid.

Yes! Finally someone agrees with me!

 

I've yet to meet the person who disagrees.  No one likes Fallon.  At least, not anyone you meet in real life.  Obviously he has his own show... so someone likes him.  But I've never met that someone.  Fallon is the ultimate tofu celebrity.

 

No offense to tofu....

 

  On 9/17/2016 at 12:08 AM, caze said:

 

  On 9/16/2016 at 11:27 PM, Alcofribas said:

Murray is a self-described neo-con and director of a neo-con think tank which also includes such luminaries as oliver kamm, richard perle and william kristol. it's not as though there isn't a robust and voluminous criticism of bro-conservative ideology extant in both scholarly and journalistic forms. they are by and large a disgraced group whose ideology has provided an underpinning for some of the most repulsive acts of western powers for decades now.

 

I'm glad you and caze don't agree with murray on absolutely everything I suppose. I for one find him to be a repulsive mandarin who often lends ideological support to the more shameful sides of ruling class endeavors.

 

bonus points for his pathetic arguments against the very existence of islamophobia (particularly repulsive in light of this week's news), arguing against greenwald that Boris Johnson has proved that the snowden leaks taught terrorists how to commit attacks like in paris and for his think tanks super deluxe smear campaign against noam chomsky. a most impressive résumé.

 

edit: lol @ "bro-conservative" autocorrect. thanks Obama.

his arguments against the existence of Islamophobia are far from pathetic, in fact they're entirely accurate. he quite clearly doesn't try and put forward the case that there doesn't exist any racism/bigotry towards muslims, simply that there really is very little irrational fear of islam amongst the usual suspects in the public sphere who are most frequently being accused of it, and that there is quite a lot of justified fear of certain forms of islam (of which he is acutely aware as a gay man). fundamentally 'Islamophobia' was an invention of Islamists as a means for fostering useful idiocy amongst western leftists, and it's been incredibly successful sadly.

 

also, while he does call himself a neoconservative, his definition is quite a bit different from the american version, just as British conservatism in general is different from the American kind I suppose. but still, that's another area where I disagree with him, as I have little time for any kind of conservatism.

islamophobia is the racism and bigotry you mention he acknowledges. clearly this exists, one would have to have their head deeply buried in the sand to think otherwise. neither his disagreement with the term's application to certain public figures nor the fact that there are rational reasons to object to or perhaps fear islam are adequate arguments against the existence of islamophobia.

I think the very obvious problem here is that Murray and his ilk represent the flip side of the wishy washy liberals who seek to sanitize islam and try to deflect serious criticism by misusing the term. Murray (and your other bro harris) swing entirely to the other side, claiming it can hardly even be said to exist and in so doing tend to align themselves with state power and veritable hoodlums like alan dershowitz. they ignore the serious thought on this subject just like softy liberals ignore serious critiques of islam. It's a one-dimensional and unsophisticated position.

  On 9/17/2016 at 11:06 AM, Squee said:

 

  On 9/17/2016 at 8:08 AM, bitroast said:

fallon is, always has been, always will be.. a massive gimboid.

Yes! Finally someone agrees with me!

 

I have the same thing with Steven Colbert tbqh

  On 9/17/2016 at 4:33 PM, Alcofribas said:

 

  On 9/17/2016 at 12:08 AM, caze said:

 

  On 9/16/2016 at 11:27 PM, Alcofribas said:

Murray is a self-described neo-con and director of a neo-con think tank which also includes such luminaries as oliver kamm, richard perle and william kristol. it's not as though there isn't a robust and voluminous criticism of bro-conservative ideology extant in both scholarly and journalistic forms. they are by and large a disgraced group whose ideology has provided an underpinning for some of the most repulsive acts of western powers for decades now.

 

I'm glad you and caze don't agree with murray on absolutely everything I suppose. I for one find him to be a repulsive mandarin who often lends ideological support to the more shameful sides of ruling class endeavors.

 

bonus points for his pathetic arguments against the very existence of islamophobia (particularly repulsive in light of this week's news), arguing against greenwald that Boris Johnson has proved that the snowden leaks taught terrorists how to commit attacks like in paris and for his think tanks super deluxe smear campaign against noam chomsky. a most impressive résumé.

 

edit: lol @ "bro-conservative" autocorrect. thanks Obama.

his arguments against the existence of Islamophobia are far from pathetic, in fact they're entirely accurate. he quite clearly doesn't try and put forward the case that there doesn't exist any racism/bigotry towards muslims, simply that there really is very little irrational fear of islam amongst the usual suspects in the public sphere who are most frequently being accused of it, and that there is quite a lot of justified fear of certain forms of islam (of which he is acutely aware as a gay man). fundamentally 'Islamophobia' was an invention of Islamists as a means for fostering useful idiocy amongst western leftists, and it's been incredibly successful sadly.

 

also, while he does call himself a neoconservative, his definition is quite a bit different from the american version, just as British conservatism in general is different from the American kind I suppose. but still, that's another area where I disagree with him, as I have little time for any kind of conservatism.

islamophobia is the racism and bigotry you mention he acknowledges. clearly this exists, one would have to have their head deeply buried in the sand to think otherwise. neither his disagreement with the term's application to certain public figures nor the fact that there are rational reasons to object to or perhaps fear islam are adequate arguments against the existence of islamophobia.

 

I think the very obvious problem here is that Murray and his ilk represent the flip side of the wishy washy liberals who seek to sanitize islam and try to deflect serious criticism by misusing the term. Murray (and your other bro harris) swing entirely to the other side, claiming it can hardly even be said to exist and in so doing tend to align themselves with state power and veritable hoodlums like alan dershowitz. they ignore the serious thought on this subject just like softy liberals ignore serious critiques of islam. It's a one-dimensional and unsophisticated position.

 

Islam is useless, dangerous, insanity with geo-political ambitions. "Islamophobia" is a rational reaction to such insanity. There is no good Islam, just bad Muslims doing rational, good things while ignoring the holy texts. It is a well-known almost cliché phrase but it is absolutely true. Nobody was able to dispute that yet. Period. I have yet to hear a good pro-Muslim argument. There were none so far. None. Just "Islam is not THAT bad" or completely false statements from Muslims ignorant of their own religion. I say reform the shit or let it finally disappear. It's just a relic and burden. Nobody should support it anymore.

Sometimes I wish all agnostic and atheist people of the world peacefully formed a new (otherwise) democratic, liberal state where organised religion would be illegal or at least had no rights for anything.

Fuck religions and fuck the never-ending kid-gloves debate about religious rights. Fuck it, fuck it, fuck it.

  On 8/31/2016 at 7:20 AM, goDel said:

 

  On 8/31/2016 at 1:54 AM, WNS000 said:

Fixt

  On 9/17/2016 at 12:45 PM, Zephyr_Nova said:

As far as I can tell his whole schtick is not being able to keep a straight face during comediy sketches he's involved in.  Somehow that got him his own late night talk show.  

get in good with lorne michaels and you can get anything. look at seth meyers...

  On 9/17/2016 at 5:24 PM, keanu reeves said:

 

  On 9/17/2016 at 12:45 PM, Zephyr_Nova said:

As far as I can tell his whole schtick is not being able to keep a straight face during comediy sketches he's involved in. Somehow that got him his own late night talk show.

get in good with lorne michaels and you can get anything. look at seth meyers...

ugh seth fucking meyers

  On 9/17/2016 at 5:23 PM, phling said:

 

  On 8/31/2016 at 7:20 AM, goDel said:

 

  On 8/31/2016 at 1:54 AM, WNS000 said:

Fixt

 

lol

could jev be so liberal that he would use the smiling musulman as his avatar?

FTGE

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=l59cg62wqpY

^

musulman avatar week

i still lol @ "celestials"

ad verecundiam

ad hominem

false dilemma

LOL, ready for action!

HRC supporters trying to sway disenfranchised-former-Bernie-supporters-turned-third-party voters. So far it's not working lol