Talk:Colbert Report, The: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 16:39, 9 October 2010

(removed political BS - it was well nigh a Mod removed it)

New point: (a) So, did Colbert make a jackass out of himself or what when he was 'testifying' on Capital Hill? ;) MoviePropMaster2008

I honestly don't think so. I mean, honestly, when the man was called into the session what in god's name did they think would happen? He holds both parties up to ridicule so he was given a golden opportunity to do it live and in person. Who could blame the man? --Charon68 01:27, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

No, it was the Democrats who invited him, hoping that a celeb would testify as to the 'plight' of farm workers, etc. etc. etc. It was idiotic and an embarrassment to the entire Congress. Sure we have people who we deem idiotic who are elected to office, but I still hold the institution of Congress in high regard, even though the current crop have the lowest approval ratings in history. Just like the Presidency, we elect a new person every 4 to 8 years, the institution is not bad, but we have a mixed bag with whomever we elect into the office. I was more angry NOW at Colbert for making a mockery of the 'institution' of Congress, even though I have lost respect for many current members of Congress. MoviePropMaster2008

I don't disagree with you about that point but when I look at the "celebs" who have testified before Congress over the years I question the very nature of having them before Congress in the first place. Case in point was when Jessica Lange and Sissy Spacek testified during the farm crisis in the 80s. Their only qualification was that they both had been in films about failing farms. Colbert is/was no different. Aside from his biting commentaries he has NO qualifications or expertise in order to testify in regards to the plight of farm workers. He must have realized that and run with it. To be sure disrespectful but he was doing what he was qualified to do and make those he holds in contempt squirm. --Charon68 01:39, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't mean to be confrontational MPM, but I don't see how anyone can have respect for congress anymore whether it be the people or the institution. In fact, while I respect many government agencies, the institutions of Congress, the Presidency, and even the Supreme Court to an extent are nothing but wretched shells of what they once were decades ago. Politicians are naturally one of the lowest forms of human beings around (Proof!!![1]) and any institution they frequent in my opinion is similarly corrupted. And with Judges getting more and more of the politician stink on them there is not a branch of government left that deserves any respect. -Anonymous

I respect the institution as created by the founding fathers. You are entitled to your opinion, however, shallow it may be ;) MoviePropMaster2008

It's okay to respect the institution of Congress without respecting the cretins who are in it. And ultimately, it's the fault of the people as they're the ones putting/keeping them in office. --funkychinaman 16:39, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-==Delete this stuff, please.==
+(removed political BS - it was well nigh a Mod removed it)
-- Seriously. As if the anonymously posted crap wasn't enough. Look, we really didn't need to delve into a bunch of political bullshit. That never goes well. '''Never.''' A Liberal Vs Conservative fight I don't really care to see, and I bet I'm not the only one. It won't end here, and nothing good can come of it.
+New point:
+(a) So, did Colbert make a jackass out of himself or what when he was 'testifying' on Capital Hill? ;)  [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]]
-I'd go ahead and edit all this shit back blank myself if I wasn't afraid of being banned for doing so. Maybe an admin or someone will get rid of it. All MPM did was make a throw-away sarcastic comment. The anonymous shit could easily have been deleted rather than been responded to, much less even given one second worth of thought. But now.. Bah, I'd just like to see the head of this snake cut off before it grows sixty feet long here. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 03:35, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
+:I honestly don't think so.  I mean, honestly, when the man was called into the session what in god's name did they think would happen?  He holds both parties up to ridicule so he was given a golden opportunity to do it live and in person.  Who could blame the man?  --[[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 01:27, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
+::No, it was the Democrats who invited him, hoping that a celeb would testify as to the 'plight' of farm workers, etc. etc. etc.  It was idiotic and an embarrassment to the entire Congress.  Sure we have people who we deem idiotic who are elected to office, but I still hold the institution of Congress in high regard, even though the current crop have the lowest approval ratings in history.  Just like the Presidency, we elect a new person every 4 to 8 years, the institution is not bad, but we have a mixed bag with whomever we elect into the office.  I was more angry NOW at Colbert for making a mockery of the 'institution' of Congress, even though I have lost respect for many current members of Congress. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]]
+:::I don't disagree with you about that point but when I look at the "celebs" who have testified before Congress over the years I question the very nature of having them before Congress in the first place.  Case in point was when Jessica Lange and Sissy Spacek testified during the farm crisis in the 80s.  Their only qualification was that they both had been in films about failing farms.  Colbert is/was no different.  Aside from his biting commentaries he has NO qualifications or expertise in order to testify in regards to the plight of farm workers.  He must have realized that and run with it.  To be sure disrespectful but he was doing what he was qualified to do and make those he holds in contempt squirm. --[[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 01:39, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
+::::I don't mean to be confrontational MPM, but I don't see how anyone can have respect for congress anymore whether it be the people or the institution.  In fact, while I respect many government agencies, the institutions of Congress, the Presidency, and even the Supreme Court to an extent are nothing but wretched shells of what they once were decades ago. Politicians are naturally one of the lowest forms of human beings around (Proof!!![http://www.cracked.com/article_18777_5-scientific-reasons-powerful-people-will-always-suck.html]) and any institution they frequent in my opinion is similarly corrupted. And with Judges getting more and more of the politician stink on them there is not a branch of government left that deserves any respect. -[[User:Anonymous|Anonymous]]
+:::::I respect the institution as created by the founding fathers.  You are entitled to your opinion, however, shallow it may be ;) [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]]
-How ironic we have a page for a left wing antigun jerk like Colbert on IMFDB   :)
+::::::It's okay to respect the institution of Congress without respecting the cretins who are in it. And ultimately, it's the fault of the people as they're the ones putting/keeping them in office. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:39, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
-what exactly makes him a jerk? Just because he's not a conservative gun nut?
-We better put some kind of disclaimer on the page, since we're all humorless right wing gun nuts and any illusion of this being any kind of impartial catalog of weapons in film and television went out the fucking window a long time ago.
-- Yeah, sure. Why not? :b [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 00:37, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
-::Yeah, ironic that a couple of anonymous douchbags [[User:69.152.170.239]] and [[User:70.111.177.84]] spout anti gun left wing sarcasm.  Nice to know that the rest of us are "fascists" in your eyes.  I wonder why those gun hating folks even POST HERE! [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 01:37, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
-Actually, I love guns. I'm a firm supporter of the second ammendment. The only catch is that I'm also a proud liberal, atheist, pro gay marriage and all of the other stuff. Just because I don't preach from the bible of Beck and Limbaugh doesn't mean I'm a communist-socialist-facsist-or any other scary sounding word ending in "ist". I am liberal and love guns, and I also despise the constant right-wing rhetoric that surrounds the whole "gun-culture". I think it hurts the us all because a lot of people have this stereo-typical view of gun-owners as ignorant rednecks and it alienates the shooters who think differently and it scares away the non-shooters. I don't hate conservatives, just the extreme ones who spout non-sense at anyone who disagrees with them. This ain't directed at anyone in particular,just a general statement/ ShootingLiberal
-::Uh, no.  The gun owning crowd are NOT far right rednecks, but the damned LIBERALS sure like to make sure that this shallow stereotype is all that people recognize.  Sorry, but being a proud card carrying Liberal and supporting guns is a contradiction, since Liberals by their philosophy see government as the best caretaker of the population, whereas the conservative sees the individual as the best caretaker of himself.  Gun ownership is contradictory to the power of the state if the state wants all the power.  Your quote was incredibly stupid and douchebaggy.  Criticizing US as being humorless right wing gun nuts?  The LEFT has no sense of humor (and your post proves it).  Also quit being a douchebag and stop posting anonymously.  All of our worst contributors pop in anonymously, type ridiculous posts and then either leave or are banned.  Thanks for listening. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 03:10, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
-:::^This.  Seriously, I love how liberals like to pretend that gun owners are knuckle dragging idiots.  Except, of course, when they're a gun owner; then they're responsible but everyone else can't be trusted.  I absolutely agree, as well, that liberalism (much like socialism, communism, and marxism) views the government as the group best equipped to act as caretaker for the whole populace.  Let's look at Obama's policies for a quick case in point; they're better equipped to determine prices of private goods, they're better equipped to determine what's best for you (you gotta buy that health insurance or pay a fine), they're best equipped to run private car manufacturers, they're best equipped to give out student loans, they're best equipped to run banks, etc.  By the way, I especially enjoy how, when something occurs that actually lies in the purview of what the government is supposedly best equipped to handle, they botch it ridiculously (oil spill).  Gun ownership goes against the liberal belief that the people best equipped to use firearms are, of course, chosen by the government.  And the fact that you live such a contradictory lifestyle raises questions about your own willful ignorance.--[[User:Asmkillr323|Asmkillr323]] 03:30, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
-^ Me and him are in the same boat, 'cept I'm a agnostic [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 03:07, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
-::I knew there was something I didn't like about you! ;) LOL [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 03:10, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
-Oh crap, the guy with the warehouse full of guns doesn't like me [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 03:20, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Colbert Report, The: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 16:39, 9 October 2010

Navigation menu

Search