Brother Trump's Traveling Damnation Show: The Late Night Edition

[Horatio Parker]

I agree that most of these complaints are likely either the work of alt-right internet trolls or putin payroll internet trolls, or both. The fact that they are objecting to this "homophobia" is an attempt to make it sound like it's coming from the left.

"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever."

 

[abaddon]

I've joked to a friend about prison and how, if he went there, he'd never walk the same after sharing a cell with "Bubba" and would have to wear diapers from his stretched-out butthole.

It was just off-color body humor. Had absolutely nothing to being negative to homosexuality. Really there's no relation at all. Heteros do these things too.

And this is all too literal anyway. This kind of language isn't about sex. Phrases like "cocksucker" and "fuck you" (which is short for "I fuck you") and "bitch" (which implies "you're on the receiving end of penises") all are assertions that one person dominates (is superior) and the other is submissive (is inferior).

Not really seeing a specific reference to homosexuality here. The only brutal thing in it is the general tendency of associating sex positions with superiority/inferiority. Which is more "masculinist" than it is "homophobic". But that is about as primal, and therefore unchangeable, as wolves making dominance displays to establish their placement in the pack's hierarchy.

 

[blastula]

I wonder how they would react to a cartoon drawing of Trump with Putin.

 

[LordKiran]

I've joked to a friend about prison and how, if he went there, he'd never walk the same after sharing a cell with "Bubba" and would have to wear diapers from his stretched-out butthole.

It was just off-color body humor. Had absolutely nothing to being negative to homosexuality. Really there's no relation at all. Heteros do these things too.

And this is all too literal anyway. This kind of language isn't about sex. Phrases like "cocksucker" and "fuck you" (which is short for "I fuck you") and "bitch" (which implies "you're on the receiving end of penises") all are assertions that one person dominates (is superior) and the other is submissive (is inferior).

Not really seeing a specific reference to homosexuality here. The only brutal thing in it is the general tendency of associating sex positions with superiority/inferiority. Which is more "masculinist" than it is "homophobic". But that is about as primal, and therefore unchangeable, as wolves making dominance displays to establish their placement in the pack's hierarchy.

That's different. In this case the comedy comes from him being buttraped by bubba. It's dark humor wherein the humor is derived from his suffering, not from him committing an act which is considered worth ridicule.

 

[abaddon]

Nah, the whole "cocksucking" thing (it's a bit old and all over the Net, so there's nothing new) is asserting he wants to be Putin's pet. It's a reversal and jab at his image as a "winner":



As well as a denial that he deserves any respect at all.

 

[RavenSky]

No, the FCC should not investigate or anything else. Colbert did nothing wrong. These same asswipes through an absolute fit when Muslims complain about drawings of Muhammad and yet they are ready to have Colbert taken off the air for essentially calling Trump a name? Fucking hypocrites. I fucking hate the whole lot of them.....NEVER in my life have I despised an administration (and congress) so much. I don't like the feeling.

It was somewhat daring for Colbert to say what he did. That's what we need in times like these where a person can be prosecuted for laughing and where a frightening percentage of Americans would have Colbert removed (and even worse) for what he said along with a severely incompetent President who despises the First Amendment.

Silencing dissent doesn't have to come at the point of a gun. It can come through legislation and fines as well. I never thought this nation was as fragile as its been shown to be, and it scares the hell out of me.

All of the above.

What worries me as well is that all of the news programs (even the "liberal" ones) are *discussing* whether Colbert went "too far" in his criticism of Trump. MSNBC even had a chart showing how many times the various late show hosts have criticized presidents going back to Bill Clinton to show that Trump is being criticized many times more frequently. There was no discussion of whether the comment was "homophobic" - the focus was criticizing the man-baby at all. I do not like the direction these "reports" are taking. They are normalizing the dicktator's calls to silence unfavorable commentary.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The FCC is responding to an alt-right snowflake hysteria.

Not since nipplegate...

 

[J842P]

Well for starters I don't know that I'd call the joke "homophobic" at all.

Homophobia is an irrational fear of homosexuals. Neither Trump nor Putin are (as far as we know) homosexual, so Colbert wasn't verbally assaulting either of them for being gay. He was just making the observation that Trump is for all intents and purposes Putin's bitch, which is a fair assessment.

As far as the FCC goes, they should probably stick to measuring the directional patterns of broadcast antennae instead of trying to figure out what's offensive.

So I suppose it was misogynist instead of homophobic.

 

[J842P]

Pai’s comments on Colbert are surprising as “The Late Show” airs outside the FCC’s long-established “safe harbor” time frame of 6 am to 10 pm in which the commission has the authority to police allegations of indecent and obscene material on the airwaves. They would also seem to clash with Pai’s vow to maintain a lighter regulatory environment for media overall.

Colbert faced backlash following the Monday night airing of “The Late Show,” during which he made numerous jokes about Trump during his opening monologue. Among them, he said, “The only thing [Trump’s] mouth is good for is being Vladimir Putin’s c–k holster.” Colbert’s mouth was blurred and the term was bleepded out for the broadcast, however.

Viewers took to social media to declare Colbert’s joke homophobic.The hashtag #FireColbert began spreading around Twitter, along with calls for people to boycott sponsors of the late-night show.

http://variety.com/2017/tv/news/fcc-stephen-colbert-donald-trump-1202410837/

So, what do you think?
should jokes spark federal investigation, even when they don't fall in the safe zone?

1) I disagree with the policing of language in general, and I am wary of any "decency" regulations. The government should not have the power to police language, it is a double-edged sword with little benefit unless you want to use it for authoritarian means. And giving the government the means to be authoritarian are not good public policy, IMHO.

2) This is a transparent attempt to use "the left's tactics against them." I don't think it will stick, because no one believes the Trumpites give two-fucks about homophobia.

 

[laughing dog]

Well for starters I don't know that I'd call the joke "homophobic" at all.

Homophobia is an irrational fear of homosexuals. Neither Trump nor Putin are (as far as we know) homosexual, so Colbert wasn't verbally assaulting either of them for being gay. He was just making the observation that Trump is for all intents and purposes Putin's bitch, which is a fair assessment.

As far as the FCC goes, they should probably stick to measuring the directional patterns of broadcast antennae instead of trying to figure out what's offensive.

So I suppose it was misogynist instead of homophobic.

Why would it be either?

 

[untermensche]

It is not one of Colbert's best.

Yes we get it.

The mean Donald is a sexual servant to a despot and murderer.

I'm sure the Donald is writhing in pain.

The way to deal with the Donald is not to sink to his level. He wins that game every time.

The way to deal with him is to rise above him and appeal to the good in people. Appeal to the intellect, not the emotion.

Colbert needs to get out of the gutter and get on the high road.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Intellect alone does not win. Diversity is good and so is comedy.

 

[untermensche]

Intellect alone does not win. Diversity is good and so is comedy.

Sure, to each his own.

But jokes about Trump like this are cheap and lazy.

Colbert is much better than this.

It was something hastily put together in anger.

 

[Rayschism]

No. Except for when jokes seem to threaten the President, not for being vulgar.

 

[repoman]

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Intellect alone does not win. Diversity is good and so is comedy.

Sure, to each his own.

But jokes about Trump like this are cheap and lazy.

Colbert is much better than this.

It was something hastily put together in anger.

I think you need a reminder who beat the intellectual candidate in the General Election.

 

[Playball40]

That has not worked out so well for us in the past, has it?

It is not one of Colbert's best.

Yes we get it.

The mean Donald is a sexual servant to a despot and murderer.

I'm sure the Donald is writhing in pain.

The way to deal with the Donald is not to sink to his level. He wins that game every time.

The way to deal with him is to rise above him and appeal to the good in people. Appeal to the intellect, not the emotion.

Colbert needs to get out of the gutter and get on the high road.

 

[untermensche]

That has not worked out so well for us in the past, has it?

It is not one of Colbert's best.

Yes we get it.

The mean Donald is a sexual servant to a despot and murderer.

I'm sure the Donald is writhing in pain.

The way to deal with the Donald is not to sink to his level. He wins that game every time.

The way to deal with him is to rise above him and appeal to the good in people. Appeal to the intellect, not the emotion.

Colbert needs to get out of the gutter and get on the high road.

Living and operating at the level of Trump will merely give us more Trumps.

It is not a good idea.

 

[Elixir]

That has not worked out so well for us in the past, has it?

Living and operating at the level of Trump will merely give us more Trumps.

It is not a good idea.

Depends how one defines "good idea". If you're a comedian, it is apparently a very good idea. If you're someone wishing that comedians were more effective agents of social change, then not so much.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

That has not worked out so well for us in the past, has it?

Living and operating at the level of Trump will merely give us more Trumps.

It is not a good idea.

In another thread you seem to underplay vandalism in a protest. Now you are saying we should take the high road.