Voting For The Guy You Like The Least?

I understand why Stewart is on TV, he is one funny dude. For those that did not catch his rant about the Trump/Palin pizza meeting, make sure your chair has a seatbelt installed. And, although he caters to the stoner/liberal/academician (clueless)/unemployed types, he rips people from both parties, so his success and longevity is pretty much set in stone. But Maher, I could never figure out the demand side of the supply/demand dynamic. Sure, he mouthpieces the typical Hollywood pablum, liberals are caring folks who champion all the causes of the little folk, who care about the environment and want everyone to be taken care off, those that would not push wheel chair bound grandma over a cliff. Some folks still buy that nonsense, and are the one’s that laugh heartily when Maher makes a retarded joke about one of Palin’s off spring, or how she deserves to get gang raped by ghetto dwellers, funny stuff. Dick Cheney and a slow painful death are also big laugh grabbers. But a TV show where liberals get together and brainstorm the appeal of conservatives? I thought MSNBC had that concept locked:

Many things we could talk about here, such as reality TV, anybody here watch reality TV? Anybody here think reality TV is real? I’m probably not a great judge in this area since I never watch reality TV. I assume this is stuff like “housewives of-pick your city” or “Dancing with Eddie Haskell”.

I had to chuckle at Maher laughing about Palin being authentic. The path she charted, modest school, city council, governor, a reputation for fighting the status quo, sky high approval ratings, I’d say she is the very definition of “authentic”.

Whether anybody could be president of this dumb f-cking country, I think the guy in there now validates some of that. A stellar resume, an exposed and public background, experience as an executive (running anything), all of this was lacking with Obama, yet did not prove debilitating.

And who votes for the guy they least like? Maybe people in those 57 states.

Comments are closed.

  1. Seattle Outcast

    Maher is easy to understand; he’s a mean-spirited douchebag that thinks he’s better than everyone else. His audience is people that think he’s being witty instead of just being a condescending prick that laughs at his audience, not with them.

    What he needs, more than anything else, is a good beating by someone he got too mouthy with…

    Thumb up 3

  2. Kimpost

    They are friends, so such a debate would not necessarily be as heated as one might think. And Maher handles himself pretty well in debates,as far as I’ve been able to see. He’s a comedian. I think he’s funny as hell sometimes, just lame and/or crude other times. His Religulous movie was funny.

    Stewart is brilliant, and I like almost everything he’s doing. His common sense, middle of the road type of liberalism feels fresh. Particularly in US today, where (over-)polarization seems to be the norm.

    Thumb up 0

  3. InsipiD

    I think everybody’s giving Jon Stewart too much credit. He makes fun of both sides, but his side is all too clearly shown by how he makes fun of each side. He’ll make witty comments about Democrats, but his digs at conservatives are all strictly bottom-feeding. It’s just what he and his crew are capable of writing. When you’re a true believer like Stewart, there’s no relaxing that when it comes to the jokes. It wasn’t quite always that way, but 8 years of Bush/Cheney knocked any possibility of smart conservative jokes out of him when he so clearly preferred going low with them.

    Thumb up 1

  4. Kimpost

    I don’t think anyone’s suggesting that he’s neutral, including himself. He’s a liberal, but that doesn’t change that he’s good at what he’s doing, which is comedy. It’s a matter of taste, though. If you don’t think he’s funny, then nothing is going to change that.

    Thumb up 0

  5. richtaylor365 *

    Of course Stewart is a liberal, Duh, but that does not mean that he isn’t funny. I go to him strictly for comedic relief, not for political commentary, and not for anything remotely astute into the insight of a candidate or the process. You have to remember his target audience, it’s not the Tea Party Channel, hey, what a good idea. I gotta shoot something off to Roger Ailes.

    Thumb up 0

  6. Dave D

    The saddest part of the whole Stewart/Maher thing is that people (mostly 20 somethings) take them as their primary source for politics and world view.

    Interesting that Kimpost states that “Maher is a comedian”, but he likes Stewarts “middle-of-the-road liberalism.” Can’t have it both ways, imo. They are both either (biased) comedians or pundits. If they influence your world view or you admire thier views, then they are most definitely NOT the former.

    Thumb up 1

  7. Kimpost

    Both are comedians foremost. In fact, they are pretty much nothing but comedians to me. They do however use the political arena for their comedy. In that regard I find Stewart more appealing. Not only because I think he’s funnier, but he also strikes me as a more reasonable guy.

    Maher is much more of a bomb thrower. I think he goes overboard quite often, while I rarely see that happening with Stewart.

    Much like rich, I don’t use comedy shows for political insight.

    Thumb up 0

  8. AlexInCT

    Many things we could talk about here, such as reality TV, anybody here watch reality TV?

    No way. It’s classified as tortrue unde rthe Geneva Convention. I would much rather be water boarded than be made to watch stupid people do stupid things that are staged for effect.

    Anybody here think reality TV is real? I’m probably not a great judge in this area since I never watch reality TV.

    Not a chance in hell. When the first reality show hit the air, Survivor, my wife asked me to watch it with her. About 15 mins into the show I told her I had had enough. I was expecting these people to be dropped on an island, and that they would then actually have to survive. I am going to wait to watch reality TV when they bring back real gladiatorial fights.

    I assume this is stuff like “housewives of-pick your city” or “Dancing with Eddie Haskell”.

    Kill me now!

    Thumb up 0

  9. AlexInCT

    What scares me profuesly is that some of the younger people I work with and that are big fans of his consider Steward to be their source for news. They aren’t even bright enough to realize the guy is a comedian, and then, a piss poor one at best. There is a lot of stupid in the Simpsons/Family Guy generation.A lot.

    Thumb up 1

  10. Dave D

    Didn’t say you were, Kimpost. Just noting my perceived incongruency in your views. This is something that the references “20 somethings” I noted do not think very deeply on, again imo.

    Thumb up 0

  11. Dave D

    Reality TV has basically made watching TV with my wife and daughters an impossibility. I used to be able sit through “Wizards of Waverly Place”, or “That’s so Raven” with my youngest. I could even actually ENJOY Chelsea Lately or Friday Night Lights with my middle spawn. But I can’t sit through 5 SECONDS of the Kardashians, The Whores of Orange County, Dancing with the Has-Beens or even American Idol with them. It makes my soul die……..

    I now retreat to my tube TV in the man cave nightly to watch Gilligan’s Island reruns. It kills less of my brain!

    Thumb up 1

  12. JimK

    There is one reality show that is mostly un-manipulated, is very much based on skill and talent and is surprisingly entertaining. So You Think You Can Dance. It’s just kids with skill working their asses off week in and week out. It’s quite literally the only reality show I can tolerate anymore, although we do watch The Voice since it’s been really about skill so far. I dread what happens when voting starts getting involved, but we’ll see.

    SYTYCD is consistently good though. You can’t watch it and do anything but admire the intense physical pain these kids go through just to dance for three minutes and hope that the viewers like it.

    Thumb up 0

  13. Dave D

    My son is a dedicated percussionist and the emphasis on vocalists who sing only other peoples covers being “America’s Idol” KILLS him. I realize this is what Americans “want” to hear, but his level of dedication and hard work dwarfs what these pampered vocal stylists go through to get on AI. Reminds me of that line from Christmas Vacation: “Ditch diggers work hard, too!”

    Thumb up 0

  14. Rann

    I like some of History Channel’s reality TV stuff… but it’s only reality TV because that’s become such a ridiculously broad umbrella under which stuff falls.

    Pawn Stars and American Restoration are both highly entertaining and highly informative. You have the goofy personalities that make reality TV an often guilty pleasure, but you’ll also learn your ass some history.

    Food Network used to have some good “reality shows”, but they’ve gradually fitted themselves more towards the reality show formula and become less appealing. Dinner: Impossible is still pretty good, and Restaurant: Impossible is a kinda lowkey version of Kitchen Nightmares… Robert Irvine’s usually just fun to watch whatever they have him doing. (I feel the same way about Gordon Ramsay. What is it about British chefs? Their food is supposed to suck over there!)

    Thumb up 0

  15. CM

    Their food is supposed to suck over there!

    That’s what I was told before I lived there. I think that’s something from the past which some people still believe (because that’s what they’ve been told). You can eat as well or as badly as you like. Had some of the best meals of my life there.

    Thumb up 0

  16. Santino

    “Reality” TV sends shivers up my spine. Remember when you could actually watch something on TLC and, you know, learn something? When did it turn into reality TV central (although I don’t mind cake boss, I just gloss over the bad acting and enjoy the cake artistry).

    The only reality TV I truly enjoy is sports.

    I used to be able sit through “Wizards of Waverly Place”, or “That’s so Raven” with my youngest.

    My daughter (now 3 and a half) went through an iCarly stage. Fortunately she loves retro toons, and she shares my fondness for Looney Tunes (yeah, I know great parenting!). My wife can’t tell who enjoys Looney Toons more.

    Thumb up 0

  17. Dave D

    What a brilliant show! Football, chickfest love interests and other sensitivity shit and hot girls. It’s a great show. A bit overdone, but, did I say it had football? That brunette (laila? buddys daughter) is one of the most beautiful women I’ve ever seen.

    Thumb up 0

  18. Miguelito

    I can’t stand “reality TV” yet I know that Survivor is far from the first one. Long before that I know that MTV was doing those stupid Real World shows (and I doubt they were the first either). Maybe Survivor was the first “reality” game show, but I wouldn’t even bet on that. There were probably other shows done outside the US before that.

    The only shows that come close to “reality” stuff I can watch once in awhile are things like Gordon Ramsey’s cooking contest shows.. only because I find the cooking stuff interesting and seeing how people do with it. I could care less about the “reality” crap in between the actual cooking parts.

    Thumb up 0

  19. CM

    MInka Kelly is the actress you’re talking about. And you’re right – she’s stunning. I think Adrianne Palicki is as well. But the show was pitch-perfect. Kyle Chandler and Connie Britton were perfectly cast and had a wonderfully written relationship.

    Thumb up 0