Look, if the right wants John to stop being right all the time, you're going to need to give him more of a challenge than Biff Tannen ranting about imaginary wiretaps.

Fart.

Now who can argue with that? I think we're all indebted toDairy Queen Latifah Johnson for clearly stating what needed to be said. I'm particulary glad that these lovely children were here today to hear that speech. Not only was it authentic POE gibberish, it expressed a courage little seen in this day and age. The courage to say absolutely nothing, while thinking how smart you are.

I'm not a republican or a trump supporter, but I have to say I think John Oliver is a twat. His schtick, which I quite enjoyed in the first seasons of this show, has grown really boring to me. This is amplified by people hooting and hollering about how important his commentary is, and his grand slam sick burns against trump. But I'm just some dumb asshole on the internet, so what do I know?

His schtick, which I quite enjoyed in the first seasons of this show, has grown really boring to me.

Well, it's not as interesting as when people on POE like to tell us how bored they are with something that has become popular.

>>The more time he spends on Twitter, the more time the public's attention is distracted by that reality show drama fest. The actual policies aren't coming from Trump. He could tweet 90 hours a week as long as he shows up for those retarded executive order signing photo ops.

There are plenty of times when Trump's Twitter feed isn't worth discussing, but the president accused the last president of a crime. It's not a trivial thing, and neither is the the attempt, maybe successful, to shatter any semblance of an agreed-upon reality.

Last week, John Oliver gave a lucid and comprehensive overview of the health care debate. The week before it was Putin. The great thing about John Oliver is that he deals with a subject and gives an overview, and that helps with understanding. I learn a lot. I assume there are others.

But those other times, when he just reminds us, in a way that is as humorous as he can manage, that the Emperor has no clothes? I don't think we can get enough of that-- and I'll tell you why. IT'S BECAUSE THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES.

>>>NYT; 'HRC says Syrian regime committed war crimes.' And as far as I can remember, they didn't even mention in the article that the rebels were also implicated.

Okay, it's time for me to confess that Syria is something I really and truly don't know shit about. I mean, I can barely spell it. I'm probably the only one, right?

I don't know man, if I want to watch the news, I'll watch the news. If I want comedy, I'll watch comedy. I'm sick to death of shows that try and combine the two. I feel like john Oliver, Samantha Bee, The Daily Show, and plenty of others are the left wing equivalent to stuff like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. I think this election cycle may have ruined my ability to enjoy any political humor.

if you think those are the same thing, just on opposite ends of the political spectrum, you are duuuumb.







so dumb.

5 or JHM's Blazing Saddles reference.

Okay, here are some things I think John Olivers show has in common with Rush Limbaugh. Both shows are presented as news programs. Both shows have a presenter who is not a journalist. Both shows have a presenter who is a smug self satisfied douche bag. Both shows have a viewer/listener base which is of a particular political leaning. Both shows provide their viewers with easily repeatable talking points, which they can annoy me with on long car rides.

Soooo dumb!

same same.

You also forgot other generic similarities;

they're both white men

they both eat food

they both require oxygen to survive

they both wear shoes when walking outside






A non-idiot may have noticed that one is a race baiting, woman hating, violence inciting, pill popping amoral jackass that uses conspiracy theories, random internet rumors and intentional disinformation as the basis for his show, and couldn't be intentionally funny if his life depended on it.

The other uses actual facts and corroborated journalism to make funny jokes. He strives to inform his audience, not misinform.

They also both have a fanbase that is as annoying as it is devoted.

>>> Both shows have a presenter who is a smug self satisfied douche bag.

But in different ways. One has pictures of himself with the legend "TRUTH DETECTOR" posted all over his website. The other is consistently self-effacing, but speaks with an English accent.

John Oliver was on one of the talk shows recently, I think it was Colbert. He mentioned Steve Bannon, and the audience booed. In a very offhand manner, Oliver scolded the audience. "Come on, it's not wrestling, he said." I thought that was beautiful.

>>>They also both have a fanbase that is as annoying as it is devoted.

Typical hipster reaction. People who like things are THE WORST!

You're going to get way more bored with him, because he's become indispensable.

Their reaction to Trump's speech before congress proves that the regular news media is desperate for a normal president, so they don't have to stick their necks out while reporting about him. The comedians have risen to the challenge, and John Oliver in particular understands that dispensing information is part of his job. Last week, John Oliver taught me much much much more than I'd ever known about what the Republicans were discussing as a replacement for Obamacare. This week, I learned about the crisis that the Chinese are forcing by establishing their own figures to take the leadership of Tibetan Buddhism. I'd heard about this, but Oliver explained it from beginning to end.

Lately, I've been reading the New York Times. Also a good place to learn about things. I need this because I'm ignorant about a whole lot of stuff, and now I need to study up. John Oliver's job isn't the only one that's become more important all of a sudden. Another is the job of being a US citizen.

I'd steer clear of the NYT, they tend to have this blind global corporatist/America first/almost CIA mouthpiece slant when it comes to international issues, i.e. Syria.

example;

UN HRC puts out a report stating all sides are committing war crimes in the Syrian conflict.

Almost every organization reports it with a headline resembling that.

NYT; 'HRC says Syrian regime committed war crimes.' And as far as I can remember, they didn't even mention in the article that the rebels were also implicated.



After a while it becomes obvious that they're trying to push an agenda at the expense of comprehensive reporting.

This is important specifically because Trump is going to be SO ANGRY because of that last part, and the ore time he spends on Twitter the less time he spends liquidating our entire government and infrastructure into the hands of private, corporate interests, which is what the GOP is allowing him to stay in office for.

Suck my dick Accidie.

No, seriously, suck it.

………………………………………._¸„„„„_
…………………….…………...„--~*'¯…….'\
………….…………………… („-~~--„¸_….,/ì'Ì
…….…………………….¸„-^"¯ : : : : :¸-¯"¯/'
……………………¸„„-^"¯ : : : : : : : '\¸„„,-"
**¯¯¯'^^~-„„„----~^*'"¯ : : : : : : : : : :¸-"
.:.:.:.:.„-^" : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : :„-"
:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.: : : : : : : : : : ¸„-^¯
.::.:.:.:.:.:.:.:. : : : : : : : ¸„„-^¯
:.' : : '\ : : : : : : : ;¸„„-~"
:.:.:: :"-„""***/*'ì¸'¯
:.': : : : :"-„ : : :"\
.:.:.: : : : :" : : : : \,
:.: : : : : : : : : : : : 'Ì
: : : : : : :, : : : : : :/

The more time he spends on Twitter, the more time the public's attention is distracted by that reality show drama fest. The actual policies aren't coming from Trump. He could tweet 90 hours a week as long as he shows up for those retarded executive order signing photo ops.


We really are fucked. Next midterm election has 23 democratic senate seats up and only 9 republican (and of all the 9, only one is a close race). We all know how progressive turnout is during midterms, and the ones that do show up are going to be obsessed with chasing out "soft" democrats rather than ensure that republicans are kept out of office.

Look, I understand JHM that he's filling a role, but it really hasn't worked out well. Also, the fact that with a straight face you can argue that the future of news is comedians is scary, and also true. I feel like my exhaustion s from people cozying themselves up to increasingly partisan sources for their news and then posting dicks and calling names when having it pointed out. Even here on this site as you can see.

>>>Look, I understand JHM that he's filling a role, but it really hasn't worked out well.

There was a thread in here a while ago where a whole bunch of people called John Oliver out for not preventing Trump's election. Is that what you're talking about? Because I think that's really stupid.

I don't know about anyone else, but I NEED to be able to laugh at Trump. If you look at Maslow's hierarchy of needs, it would be right above safety, but safety doesn't feel like a viable option right now. You want to know a secret? I'm scared. It's different when you're sixty years old, and you feel your physical strength ebbing away, and you have emotional ties to people who need healthcare. My best friend and life partner has been working for Legal Services Corporation since the 70s, and that's about to go the way of Planned Parenthood.

I'm sure it only feels like I couldn't survive without John Oliver and Samantha Bee. But maybe, if I couldn't laugh at this mess, there wouldn't be a whole lot left of me.

I can't relate to needing these people to laugh at trump. I also can't relate to anybody who thinks "they didn't do enough to stop him". I'm just saying that they were part of the machine that's led people to believe it's okay to absorb news and opinions in a tossed salad.

You can laugh at trump and stay informed without needing a British man and a monkey who learned photoshop. Then again, maybe that's a problem that does come with being 60.

ALL CONTENT MUST BE CONSUMED!

BE A GOOD CONSUMER!



or are you a communist?!

Well... sure... but one of the main points of this site is to discuss videos. Seems worthwhile to post negative opinions as well as positive ones.

I must admit, though.... the "I am so tired of X" comments *do* confuse me. Wait... those are the comments you were talking about in the first place, weren't they?

I R SMRT

Yes, they were.

Just to be clear, I LOVE negative comments that are actually about something.

Who are you talking about? The talk show hosts that interview shitheads (e.g. Colbert, Noah, Jon Stewart before he retired) generally tried to have a respectful, "fruitful" conversation with said shitheads, which did indeed normalize them to a certain extent. But I don't remember them ever making smarmy comments about the interview after the fact. The press often did (e.g. "Stewart EVISCERATES Republican flunky."), but that's not the fault of the comedians/hosts.

BTW... what do you dislike about Oliver? The only Oliver haters I've seen are either right-wingers who don't like his message, or people with short attention spans who think his reports are too boring. But neither description applies to you, from what I can tell.