# Full Frontal with Samantha Bee



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

begins early next week on TBS. anyone planning on watching?


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I've got a 1Pass set up. Looking forward to checking it out.


----------



## getbak (Oct 8, 2004)

This is only one 1/2 hour show per week? I thought it was going to be every night, but the promo says "Mondays".


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

getbak said:


> This is only one 1/2 hour show per week? I thought it was going to be every night, but the promo says "Mondays".


yes, I am a bit confused as well. I like her a lot, but she didn't always get the best material on TDS, unless she was responsible for the writing.


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

I'll bump this again, because the first show was so biting and entertaining, that Trevor Noah better pull up his pants fast. Sam Bee has arrived and she just may slay him, although it appears to be a weekly show. I had thought it was going to be daily.
First show, and I loved it. Conan should benefit from the lead-in

http://www.tbs.com/shows/full-frontal-with-samantha-bee.html


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

I liked it. Format wise, it's no different than TDS, without the interview at the end, but Sam's delivery is SO much better than Trevor's giggly delivery. Much more passionate.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

Missed it. Darn. And they're not rebroadcasting till Friday.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I was really surprised to see it was only on once last night and then not again for several days. That seems exactly opposite of what they should do when launching a new show. I've only got two tuners on my TiVo and they were busy recording Colbert and Kimmel at that time, so I actually switched to the TV tuner and watched it live, but that's not something I'm going to do every week. They need to run this show multiple times, like they do with Conan, so people with DVR conflicts can watch.


----------



## ct1 (Jun 27, 2003)

Caught it online -- great show, but honestly in an election year (in this crazy election year!) the jokes pretty much write themselves.

Looking forward to more, nice to have a female host, and certainly one such great comedy chops as Samantha Bee..


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

ct1 said:


> Caught it online -- great show, but honestly in an election year (in this crazy election year!) the jokes pretty much write themselves.
> 
> Looking forward to more, nice to have a female host, and certainly one such great comedy chops as Samantha Bee..


good to see she brought her Canadian 'sailor's-mouth' to the party


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

They should have given her TDS. I enjoyed this episode more then any of the TDS episodes with Noah.


----------



## Cainebj (Nov 11, 2006)

DevdogAZ said:


> I was really surprised to see it was only on once last night and then not again for several days.


It actually aired later on Tru TV
I liked it - I do think a 10:30 air time is silly - it's like they are shooting themselves in their own ratings foot.


----------



## ct1 (Jun 27, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> They should have given her TDS. I enjoyed this episode more then any of the TDS episodes with Noah.


Agree!


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Cainebj said:


> It actually aired later on Tru TV
> I liked it - I do think a 10:30 air time is silly - it's like they are shooting themselves in their own ratings foot.


I think my TiVo was set to record that, but I didn't trust the guide data because my TiVo also thought it recorded the episode at 8:30 pm (10:30 ET) on HLN, but instead it was some true crime story.


----------



## jilter (Oct 4, 2002)

Watched it right before I fell asleep for the night.
I am glad I did.
I really liked it, like her.
I laughed out loud more than a few times.


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

good press as well....

http://thinkprogress.org/culture/20...lly-be-a-witch-because-full-frontal-is-magic/


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

I thought the first episode was only OK.

But to be fair, I had already watched Noah, Wilmore, and Colbert. They played some of the same footage so it just isn't as funny the 4th time around.

Next time I'll try and watch this show first.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> They should have given her TDS. I enjoyed this episode more then any of the TDS episodes with Noah.


This. You saw more passion in one episode than you have in the entire time with Noah.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

logic88 said:


> I thought the first episode was only OK.
> 
> But to be fair, I had already watched Noah, Wilmore, and Colbert. They played some of the same footage so it just isn't as funny the 4th time around.
> 
> Next time I'll try and watch this show first.


I thought that was a true test of the show. They essentially had the same footage as Noah, and Wilmore (not to mention the news) and I thought that Bee's take on it was much funnier.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

I ffwd'd through most of Full Frontal's coverage of the primary once I saw it'd be essentially the same as TDS's and TNS's coverage.

One thing I like about this show is that since there will be no guests, they won't waste a third of each episode on someone hawking a new book, movie or tv show.


----------



## JerryLBell (May 3, 2002)

Format-wise and schedule-wise, it's definitely closer to John Oliver's "Last Week Tonight" than it is to The Daily Show. I actually like Noah on TDS but I'll be the first to admit that it might have been somewhat better with Bee and probably WAY better with Oliver. Still, this means that on some weeks I've got 4 episodes of TDS, 4 of The Nightly Show and 1 each of Last Week Tonight and Full Frontal. Nice antidotes to Fox News.


----------



## spartanstew (Feb 24, 2002)

I've never heard of this Bee person.

What is TDS? Who are Noah and Sam and Trevor and Wilmore?


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

spartanstew said:


> I've never heard of this Bee person. What is TDS? Who are Noah and Sam and Trevor and Wilmore?


TDS is The Daily Show.

Samantha (Sam) Bee was on TDS and now has her own shown (Full Frontal).

Noah (and Trevor) is Trevor Noah, the host replacing Jon Stewart on TDS.

Wilmore is Larry Wilmore. He hosts the Nightly Show which replaced the Colbert Report (Steve Colbert). Larry was also on TDS.


----------



## spartanstew (Feb 24, 2002)

Ah, gotcha.

Haven't watched The Daily Show since Stewart left (was Samantha on then?) and have never watched Colbert.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

spartanstew said:


> Ah, gotcha.
> 
> Haven't watched The Daily Show since Stewart left (was Samantha on then?) and have never watched Colbert.


Samantha Bee was on The Daily Show from 2003 to 2015. She was by far the most "seasoned" correspondent on the show. She left the show a few months prior to the end in order to begin preparing for her new show.

She's also married to Jason Jones, who was a correspondent on TDS from 2005-2015.

I'm sure you'd recognize them:


----------



## spartanstew (Feb 24, 2002)

Yep


----------



## jilter (Oct 4, 2002)

Can not wait for tonight.
Very few shows I watch in real time.


----------



## lambertman (Dec 21, 2002)

My dvr is planning to record tonight's ep at 4 pm, with the normal showing listed as a repeat. Can only assume this is a listings glitch.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Enjoyed it.. watched it in QuickMode though..

Though is EVERY ex Daily Show-er now going to get a vaguely sort of kind of Daily Show and/or Weekend Update-like show?

That's mostly a joke, but I'm glad this is a _weekly_ show (just like "Last Week") and not another daily (no pun intended) show.


----------



## jilter (Oct 4, 2002)

lambertman said:


> My dvr is planning to record tonight's ep at 4 pm, with the normal showing listed as a repeat. Can only assume this is a listings glitch.


do not think so.
When I came home, Seas1 Ep 2 was recorded on my DVR at 3 pm CST.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

Wow! I thought episode 2 was a home run. I really enjoyed it. I thought the premier was only so so, but figured they needed a little time to hit their stride. They may have hit it last night. 

I wonder how much of it was the material available. They also reacted quickly to Scalia's death.


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

Holy crap was this ever funny, biting, swift! Her delivery is great, and her writers even better. The Scalia bit was GOLD!


----------



## ct1 (Jun 27, 2003)

Comparing Hillary's PAC to drugs... It's not mine, some black guy gave it to me.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Really, really, should have given her TDS instead of Noah. Seeing people like her and John Oliver do essentially the same show but so much better makes me realize just how bad Noah really is. The writing is still smart on TDS but the delivery is terrible. I wish this show was daily instead of weekly I'd probably stop watching TDS altogether.


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

Dan203 said:


> Really, really, should have given her TDS instead of Noah. Seeing people like her and John Oliver do essentially the same show but so much better makes me realize just how bad Noah really is. The writing is still smart on TDS but the delivery is terrible. I wish this show was daily instead of weekly I'd probably stop watching TDS altogether.


If Noah was a great interviewer, then I could see why they chose him, but that's not his strong suit either, and it was definitely Stewart's strong point, even over his comedy shtick. Very few people could best Jon in an interview.
I wonder what Sam Bee is like in that regard? But yeah, it's looking like either Sam or John O. would have done a little better...


----------



## Hoffer (Jun 1, 2001)

I watched about half of the first episode before deleting the show. I didn't watch The Daily Show after Craig Kilborn. So, I have no idea who Samantha Bee is. I'm not into politics, and maybe I saw too much of it in the first episode. I do like Last Week Tonight with John Oliver. I guess that has just the right amount of politics for me.


----------



## ct1 (Jun 27, 2003)

Hoffer said:


> I do like Last Week Tonight with John Oliver. I guess that has just the right amount of politics for me.


Last Week Tonight is incredible... I want to make every voter watch them! These are some of the real issues politicians should be working on, but both major parties seem to be ignoring most of them..


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Hoffer said:


> I watched about half of the first episode before deleting the show. I didn't watch The Daily Show after Craig Kilborn. So, I have no idea who Samantha Bee is. I'm not into politics, and maybe I saw too much of it in the first episode. I do like Last Week Tonight with John Oliver. I guess that has just the right amount of politics for me.


TDS was mainly politics filtered through comedy. Very similar to this show. Although the new host is not very good so it's not as fun to watch any more.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Hoffer said:


> I didn't watch The Daily Show after Craig Kilburn.
> .... I'm not into politics, and maybe I saw too much of it in the first episode. I do like Last Week Tonight with John Oliver. I guess that has just the right amount of politics for me.


That's funny, because TDS after Kilborn basically became VERY heavily political (almost but not completely all, at least much later in the Stewart years).. and so is Last Week Tonight.

Maybe my memory would be corrected if I re-watched some of the Kilburn Daily Shows, but I always seem to remember it mostly making fun of 20/20 & 60 minutes type shows (longer form, non-political news-y or human interest spoofs), with a TINY bit of Weekend Update kind of humor... Then grew into virtually all political stuff as Stewart went on.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Plus it has the disadvantage of starting up in 2016, when basically the only kind of news there is is politics and the weather.


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Plus it has the disadvantage of starting up in 2016, when basically the only kind of news there is is politics and the weather.


don't forget Kanye....lol


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

tvmaster2 said:


> If Noah was a great interviewer, then I could see why they chose him, but that's not his strong suit either, and it was definitely Stewart's strong point, even over his comedy shtick. Very few people could best Jon in an interview.
> I wonder what Sam Bee is like in that regard? But yeah, it's looking like either


I actually thought interviews were Stewart's weakest point. He would fawn over guests that he liked and not get to any questions of substance. I enjoyed his non-interview comedy bits a lot more.

(Not Noah is any better, of course.)


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

logic88 said:


> I actually thought interviews were Stewart's weakest point. He would fawn over guests that he liked and not get to any questions of substance. I enjoyed his non-interview comedy bits a lot more.
> 
> (Not Noah is any better, of course.)


well, considering his interview skills resulted in one of CNN's highest rated shows being cancelled due to his interview on said show, I'd have to disagree...


----------



## ct1 (Jun 27, 2003)

tvmaster2 said:


> well, considering his interview skills resulted in one of CNN's highest rated shows being cancelled due to his interview on said show, I'd have to disagree...


Was that due to his ability to interview, or his abilities while being interviewed?


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

It really depended on the guest with Jon. If it was someone he actually knew they'd always go off on riffs and weird tangents. But for serious guests he always did a good job. Especially when he could get someone on like a Republican senator or Jim Cramer.


----------



## frombhto323 (Jan 24, 2002)

tvmaster2 said:


> well, considering his interview skills resulted in one of CNN's highest rated shows being cancelled due to his interview on said show, I'd have to disagree...


Actually, I think you are confusing skills. Stewart was interviewed by someone else on the CNN show that resulted in it being canceled.

As much as I love Noah's stand up (seek it out if you haven't seen it, it is hilarious), I haven't watched his Daily Show yet. I really thought Bee would get the chair. I'm guessing that she didn't want it. Otherwise, it makes no sense to me.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

frombhto323 said:


> As much as I love Noah's stand up (seek it out if you haven't seen it, it is hilarious), I haven't watched his Daily Show yet. I really thought Bee would get the chair. I'm guessing that she didn't want it. Otherwise, it makes no sense to me.


She should have. Noah always feels like he's either reading from a prompter (making a lot of mistakes) or just laughing at his own jokes before they even land. The material is still pretty good (good writers) but his delivery isn't very good. Samantha Bee and John Oliver both run circles around him in their delivery of the material.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Dan203 said:


> She should have. Noah always feels like he's either reading from a prompter (making a lot of mistakes) or just laughing at his own jokes before they even land. The material is still pretty good (good writers) but his delivery isn't very good. Samantha Bee and John Oliver both run circles around him in their delivery of the material.


The article referenced earlier in this forum really nailed the problem. Beyond the delivery issue you mention, Noah's jokes have often been blunted. This is all the more apparent when compared to Bee, Oliver, and even Jon Stewart, whose punch lines land with a palpable sting. Their jokes often provoke an "Ooooh, ouch!" response, while Noah's jokes more often than not result in a "Heh... that's amusing" response.

Anyway, we've been over the problems with Noah and TDS time and again in other threads. This thread really is about Samantha Bee's show, and without a doubt, it's a hit. I wasn't sure if Bee would have the chops to hold down an entire show herself, but clearly she does.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Plus it has the disadvantage of starting up in 2016, when basically the only kind of news there is is politics and the weather.


in an election year, that's all you need. and what a year THIS year is!!! It's GOLD.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

jsmeeker said:


> in an election year, that's all you need. and what a year THIS year is!!! It's *comedy *GOLD.


Because with that word left out, I'd say it's kinda the opposite of gold...


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

frombhto323 said:


> Actually, I think you are confusing skills. Stewart was interviewed by someone else on the CNN show that resulted in it being canceled.
> 
> As much as I love Noah's stand up (seek it out if you haven't seen it, it is hilarious), I haven't watched his Daily Show yet. I really thought Bee would get the chair. I'm guessing that she didn't want it. Otherwise, it makes no sense to me.


it doesn't matter which side of an interview you're on, and Stewart could handle either quite well. Johnny Carson and David Letterman were as good on either end of the interview, same with Stewart. Sorry, thought that may have been more obvious in my statement. I'll never forget his post-financial meltdown slaughter of that CNBC cheerleader...


----------



## mrizzo80 (Apr 17, 2012)

I've always been a big fan of Samantha Bee. This show is fantastic - and I'm fine with it only being on once a week.

I also agree that these types of shows are dependent upon current events, so I'll be interested to see if she can keep it up on slower news weeks.

I can only imagine how funny the TDS with Stewart would be this year with Trump as the likely nominee.


----------



## jsmeeker (Apr 2, 2001)

mrizzo80 said:


> I've always been a big fan of Samantha Bee. This show is fantastic - and I'm fine with it only being on once a week.
> 
> I also agree that these types of shows are dependent upon current events, so I'll be interested to see if she can keep it up on slower news weeks.
> 
> I can only imagine how funny the TDS with Stewart would be this year with Trump as the likely nominee.


ain't nothing slow in a an election year.


----------



## jilter (Oct 4, 2002)

I also love it still 2 shows in.
I am additionally ok with the once a week format if the quality is as tight as it has been.
When you consider 4 shows a week, for what?...18 years....Jon Stewart is a G_d.
Sam Bee is iff to a great start. I hope she can sustain it.


----------



## amybang (May 27, 2015)

Why the hell is my Tivo decidely *not* recording this? I've got a Tivo Premiere, 6 tuners, and a "get everything" OnePass set up for this show. Yet this is the third Tuesday I've checked that I now have to go find this somewhere else. Only this show isn't recording. What gives? Any ideas?

thanks!


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

Check the History on your TiVo. There should be a reason listed for why it didn't record.

If there's not, I'd delete the OnePass and recreate it, then check the To Do list to make sure next week's is on the list to be recorded.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

amybang said:


> Why the hell is my Tivo decidely *not* recording this? I've got a Tivo Premiere, 6 tuners, and a "get everything" OnePass set up for this show. Yet this is the third Tuesday I've checked that I now have to go find this somewhere else. Only this show isn't recording. What gives? Any ideas?
> 
> thanks!


How do you have a Premiere with 6 tuners? TiVo never made one of those.

For me, the show doesn't record on Monday nights due to recording conflicts with Kimmel and Colbert. It's bizarre to me that TBS chooses to only run this once, rather than multiple times like they do with Conan.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Wait what? They run it several times during the week... 

Yeah, I have a Sat 11pm showing scheduled.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

mattack said:


> Wait what? They run it several times during the week...
> 
> Yeah, I have a Sat 11pm showing scheduled.


Right, several days later in the week, but not a couple times on the same night like most cable networks do with their originals.


----------



## mooseAndSquirrel (Aug 31, 2001)

The bus terminal bathroom that is the republican primaries.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

amybang said:


> Why the hell is my Tivo decidely *not* recording this? I've got a Tivo Premiere, 6 tuners, and a "get everything" OnePass set up for this show. Yet this is the third Tuesday I've checked that I now have to go find this somewhere else. Only this show isn't recording. What gives? Any ideas?
> 
> thanks!


Is it set to record on the specific channel? I've had issues with Onepasses that were set up for any channel.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

jsmeeker said:


> in an election year, that's all you need. and what a year THIS year is!!! It's GOLD.


Didn't she reference this during the first episode? Something like thank god I'm starting the show in an election year or how could I not?


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

It's also repeated on various networks which causes more confusion. I got the first episode from TruTV rather then TBS for some reason. I set the 1P to be specific to TBS after that and all has been good.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> It's also repeated on various networks which causes more confusion. I got the first episode from TruTV rather then TBS for some reason. I set the 1P to be specific to TBS after that and all has been good.


That was just a stunt they did for the premiere episode, simulcasting it on all Turner cable properties. But they haven't done that for subsequent episodes.


----------



## amybang (May 27, 2015)

DevdogAZ said:


> How do you have a Premiere with 6 tuners? TiVo never made one of those.
> 
> For me, the show doesn't record on Monday nights due to recording conflicts with Kimmel and Colbert. It's bizarre to me that TBS chooses to only run this once, rather than multiple times like they do with Conan.


Sorry, I meant Roamio. I have 6 tuners was the main point. There should never be a conflict with what I want to record at once.

Anyway, it turns out it was a channel thing. The first ep was also aired on TNT in addition to TBS and so somehow my OnePass was for that. I've updated the channel in the OnePass and we'll see how it works tomorrow.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

I think the OnePass by default chooses the first channel it finds it on, not "All Channels".

(Also, I know this has been mentioned somewhere else in the past, but "If Possible" for HDTV seems to NEVER work anymore.. I have to choose Always.. I'm a person who DOES have many shows as 'NEVER', but thought "If Possible" would be a good choice for main network shows.. used to work.. doesn't anymore.)


----------



## realityboy (Jun 13, 2003)

mattack said:


> I think the OnePass by default chooses the first channel it finds it on, not "All Channels".
> 
> (Also, I know this has been mentioned somewhere else in the past, but "If Possible" for HDTV seems to NEVER work anymore.. I have to choose Always.. I'm a person who DOES have many shows as 'NEVER', but thought "If Possible" would be a good choice for main network shows.. used to work.. doesn't anymore.)


Probably depends on your cable system/guide info for the HD choice. Last time that I tried, my OnePasses broke if I chose "Always" since the HD flag wasn't in the guide. I had to choose "If Possible" then delete the SD channels from my guide.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

I didn't think this past episode was as strong at the others. I am getting the feeling though that this show is going to be aimed more at women than men. Most of her stories seem to be about women's issues. 

Maybe it didn't seem as good this week because John Oliver's show was such a classic and this just didn't seem as funny compared to it.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

I think in general Oliver blows Bee out of the water.

That said, I still enjoy her show.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

Rhino poop. Can't wait until that visual fades off into the sunset of my mind.

While this week's episode wasn't as great as John Oliver's, it was totally on point about the cataclysmic results of the 2010 elections.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

This was the best episode yet. I love it when she picks on someone in persin during an interview like that Texas legislator. Colbert use to be great at that too. 

I really like this show. I wish TDS was still this funny.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Dan203 said:


> This was the best episode yet. I love it when she picks on someone in persin during an interview like that Texas legislator.


Although I'm almost positive she wasn't there.

You never clearly saw them both at the same time; most of the shots of her talking showed him from behind in freeze-frame; she was obviously FX'd into the shots. I have a hunch the way they portrayed him was pretty dishonest...sure, he said what he said, but I bet not in that order, nor in response to those questions.

Alternately, she was there, but then they edited in new questions after the interview.


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Although I'm almost positive she wasn't there.
> 
> You never clearly saw them both at the same time; most of the shots of her talking showed him from behind in freeze-frame; she was obviously FX'd into the shots. I have a hunch the way they portrayed him was pretty dishonest...sure, he said what he said, but I bet not in that order, nor in response to those questions.
> 
> Alternately, she was there, but then they edited in new questions after the interview.


Is that really a thing they do? It seems like his staff would be losing their **** today if that were the case.



Steveknj said:


> I didn't think this past episode was as strong at the others. I am getting the feeling though that this show is going to be aimed more at women than men. Most of her stories seem to be about women's issues.


:facepalm:

I thought this episode was terrific.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Robin said:


> Is that really a thing they do? It seems like his staff would be losing their **** today if that were the case.


It must be. If you watch the segment closely, it's obvious that her asking the questions and him answering them are completely separate events. Most of the time she's talking, it's against the same freeze-frame image of him, and the lighting looks off.

And I'm not convinced the woman who really was interviewing him was Bee...it looked to me like a smaller person with the same hair (wig?) and blazer.


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

Robin said:


> :facepalm:
> 
> I thought this episode was terrific.


See, that's because you're a woman!


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> It must be. If you watch the segment closely, it's obvious that her asking the questions and him answering them are completely separate events. Most of the time she's talking, it's against the same freeze-frame image of him, and the lighting looks off.
> 
> And I'm not convinced the woman who really was interviewing him was Bee...it looked to me like a smaller person with the same hair (wig?) and blazer.


I think if they really did that kind of stuff they'd never get an interview with anyone ever again. They may do cleaver editing, to remove some context, but I think if they actually faked the interview completely to make the guy/gal look like a moron then there would be backlash. I think they're just good and tricking people into saying stupid stuff.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Well, they clearly faked some of it. Because Samantha Bee was talking to a freeze-framed image of the back of Dan Flynn's head.

Of course there's no way of knowing how accurately the interview reflects what Flynn actually said and how he said it. I strongly suspect if she had been as rude and disrespectful as she appeared in the segment, the interview would have been over very quickly. What they probably did was send somebody in to get raw footage (perhaps without him realizing who they represented), then spliced in Bee's questions. At the very least, they did something hinky (again, at least some of the bits with Bee talking were apparently not done in Flynn's presence). Which is too bad...he is no doubt as clueless as he seems. But why not have an honest interview to show how clueless he is instead of fabricating something that leaves everything in question?


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I just rewatched the interview and I don't see the freeze frames you're referring to. When she's talking and they're showing the back of his head you can clearly see his shoulders move from breathing and you can see him on multiple occasions start to shake his head in response to her question before the cut back to him. There doesn't appear to be anything off about the lighting or the sound that makes me think they used any sort of CGI to cut these together. He even got in on the "wrongiest" thing.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Well, I may be wrong, but it looked and felt blatantly fake to me...


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

There may be some creative editing there, but I doubt it. Colbert use to get away with this sh*t all the time. At least early on. Then it became harder and harder for him to book politicians, especially Republicans, on the show. He never could complete his "better know a district" bit.


----------



## DaveMN (Nov 14, 2001)

Please give Samantha Bee The Daily Show


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

From an article linked within:



> Of course, she said, she thought about being offered Mr. Stewarts former seat. Its not like it wasnt in my brain, but it didnt stay there for long, she said.
> 
> I loved The Daily Show, she added. But it is a machine thats already running. And it could run with me  it could run without me. This is a much better experience and a much better fit.
> 
> Mr. Jones was blunter. The fact that she wasnt approached was a little shocking, to say the least, he said. But I think she is much happier where she ended up.


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/10/a...o-break-up-late-night-tvs-boys-club.html?_r=1

Comedy Central's loss is TBS's gain.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Comedy Central screwed up big time here. Noah has lost almost 40% of the viewers of TDS at this point, and I'm betting that after the election season is over that drops even more. Had Bee taken over I think it would have been more of a speed bump then the fall off a cliff it's been with Noah. She is by far better at the format and would have been a much, much, better choice then Noah. I can't believe they didn't even ask her. Given all the names that were apparently thrown around you'd think they would have tapped her before an unknown comedian from South Africa that had only been on the show 3 freaking times. Stupid move Comedy Central, stupid move.


----------



## cmaas (Dec 7, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Well, I may be wrong, but it looked and felt blatantly fake to me...


It's not unheard of for 'real' news to shoot the interviewee during the questions and record the interviewer asking the questions and anyy reaction shots separately. Less common now with even local stations having giant budgets, but one camera interviews used to be very common.

Doesn't address the editing question, but the technique doesn't prove anything.

Usually when theses shows are playing around the q/a sequence they make it much more obvious. I think they would here too.


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

cheesesteak said:


> Rhino poop. Can't wait until that visual fades off into the sunset of my mind.
> 
> While this week's episode wasn't as great as John Oliver's, it was totally on point about the cataclysmic results of the 2010 elections.


I actually thought this week's episode was much better than Oliver's. Going after Trump is about as easy as it gets. Talk about low hanging fruit.


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

Robin said:


> Is that really a thing they do? It seems like his staff would be losing their **** today if that were the case.
> 
> :facepalm:
> 
> I thought this episode was terrific.


agreed - laughed more at this episode than anything on TV this week. That guy from Texas was destroyed! And to think the country who bathes in Democracy-talk, it was great to hear that 12% of our future rulers bothered to vote at all.
It's about time Furiosa arrived to save late night.
Love this woman!


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

eddyj said:


> See, that's because you're a woman!


or, maybe because you're a 'man'?


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

Robin said:


> From an article linked within:
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/10/a...o-break-up-late-night-tvs-boys-club.html?_r=1
> 
> Comedy Central's loss is TBS's gain.


and, like her former boss, maybe she wants to spend more time with her family - something a daily show would make a grind...


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

tvmaster2 said:


> and, like her former boss, maybe she wants to spend more time with her family - something a daily show would make a grind...


That had been my original hope/assumption: that they'd offered it to her but she turned it down in favor of a weekly show because she has young kids.

I was surprised and disappointed to learn it wasn't offered.


----------



## frombhto323 (Jan 24, 2002)

I'm also surprised she wasn't offered TDS. I'd love to hear the rationale for that.


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

Robin said:


> That had been my original hope/assumption: that they'd offered it to her but she turned it down in favor of a weekly show because she has young kids.
> 
> I was surprised and disappointed to learn it wasn't offered.


Is she still married to Jason Jones? His show fires up pretty soon I believe:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Detour_(TV_series)






Since it was green-lit before Jon Stewart announced his retirement, it's likely why she wasn't offered the show - she was too busy planning her next life


----------



## lambertman (Dec 21, 2002)

They are still married, and Sam is listed as an EP of his sitcom.


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

tvmaster2 said:


> Is she still married to Jason Jones? His show fires up pretty soon I believe:
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Detour_(TV_series)
> 
> ...


Did you read my post above? Or the article I linked? Jones was shocked she wasn't approached.

If TDS wanted her they would have asked, not assumed she was happy with the trajectory of her new show.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Didn't she leave TDS after Jon announced his retirement? She may not have even been offered her new show at that point. They missed the boat. Perhaps they wanted a bigger name up front (we've heard they've asked a few A list comedians) and by the time they got down the list to her she was already planning on leaving for TBS?


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

I thought she had left TDS quite a while ago, but made one or two appearances after that.. but not as a regular member/writer.


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

catching up on dvr material.. wow, did Sam Bee knock it outta the park this week. wow. amazing


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

and she gets better every week...


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

:up:

It's become my top priority for Tuesday TV.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I've watched a couple times while it was still recording, foregoing SkipMode, so that says something about how much I'm enjoying the show.


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

mini Gloria Steinham? lol. Sam does it yet again....


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

tvmaster2 said:


> mini Gloria Steinham? lol. Sam does it yet again....


I didn't think this was one of the better episodes. Mostly because she rehashed a lot of what I've already seen on the other political satire shows (mainly the SCOTUS nominating issue). The jokes by that time are the same (Biden Rule!) and have gotten old.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

But the platypus metaphor was kinda awesome...


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

That rape kit segment was completely new to me. I had no idea that was a thing.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Dan203 said:


> That rape kit segment was completely new to me. I had no idea that was a thing.


That was an issue here not too long ago. I had no idea how widespread it was!


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> But the platypus metaphor was kinda awesome...


I thought it was one of her most biting episodes yet


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> That rape kit segment was completely new to me. I had no idea that was a thing.


That's true, it was new to me too. For some reason it didn't really resonate with me. At least not as something to laugh about.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Steveknj said:


> That's true, it was new to me too. For some reason it didn't really resonate with me. At least not as something to laugh about.


I think it was less about laughing and more about pointing out the hypocrisy and stupidity of the law makers involved. Jon Stewart use to do the same thing with serious subjects, and John Oliver does it all the time as well.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> I think it was less about laughing and more about pointing out the hypocrisy and stupidity of the law makers involved. Jon Stewart use to do the same thing with serious subjects, and John Oliver does it all the time as well.


That's also true.


----------



## jilter (Oct 4, 2002)

I have a (bad) habit of saving up shows I really like. I think it is the hoarder in me.
But my 18-year old son pointed out to me that this does not make sense with Sam Bee as it is so topical. 
I dont know...I watch John Oliver and am fine with older episodes.


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

jilter said:


> I have a (bad) habit of saving up shows I really like. I think it is the hoarder in me.
> But my 18-year old son pointed out to me that this does not make sense with Sam Bee as it is so topical.
> I dont know...I watch John Oliver and am fine with older episodes.


I watch saved-up, topical humor all the time. In some ways, it makes more sense with regards to whose material stands up better over time. Comics who resist using unproven, or made-up facts (like certain news networks use) end up seeming even smarter and funnier a week later when their angle is proven more accurate. Sam Bee seems to do pretty good fact checking.


----------



## mattack (Apr 9, 2001)

Heh, I just finally caught up with @midnight, which does topical stuff all the time, now I'm going back to Nightly, then TDS, then will go back to @midnight.. Usually I watch more than a week's worth in one day (since I watch between 1.5-2x in VLC while at the gym).

and I'll watch old SNLs too (I mean ones I recorded when they were new, usually, except for the rerun on Sat nights on NBC, not the Comedy Central ones). I haven't been watching the monologues from Johnny Carson (aka rebranded The Tonight Shows), but those are from the 70s and 80s!


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

Tonight's show may have been her most biting satire yet. Absurd and sadly real...brilliant


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

It's funny the NRA is so protective over the eagle costumes. Although I'm sure if she wanted she could have just had one made. Jon Oliver makes crazy mascot style costumes on his show all the time.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

She did make one. With guns.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I realize the bit was about pointing out the hypocrisy and not actually getting one of the costumes. But it is still funny that they are so protective of it.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Dan203 said:


> I realize the bit was about pointing out the hypocrisy and not actually getting one of the costumes. But it is still funny that they are so protective of it.


And protective of it in exactly the ways they DON'T want to be protective about guns.


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

That Eagle bit was pretty funny.

Oddly, I didn't really like her a lot back when she was on TDS. I didn't dislike her, but I just didn't really like her.  

I find that I REALLY like her a lot more now, with her show. I gave it a try at first and was hooked immediately.


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

Dan203 said:


> It's funny the NRA is so protective over the eagle costumes. Although I'm sure if she wanted she could have just had one made. Jon Oliver makes crazy mascot style costumes on his show all the time.


I said the same thing: she should have had John Oliver's team whip one up!



Rob Helmerichs said:


> And protective of it in exactly the ways they DON'T want to be protective about guns.


Exactly. My favorite was her trying to buy it off the one she guy. Well that and all the guns she collected along the way.



sharkster said:


> That Eagle bit was pretty funny.
> 
> Oddly, I didn't really like her a lot back when she was on TDS. I didn't dislike her, but I just didn't really like her.
> 
> I find that I REALLY like her a lot more now, with her show. I gave it a try at first and was hooked immediately.


I totally agree. I was fairly meh about her on TDS. Now I'm ready to vote for her for president. Her show has been amazing.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

BTW, Jason Jones' new show (Sam's hubby) debuted on TBS this past week before this. I watched the first episode and thought it was pretty funny. Sort of like the Vacation movies, only I think Jones' character is going to wind up being pretty messed up.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I watched both new episodes of The Detour on Monday and really liked it. Looking forward to episode 3 on Monday.


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

DevdogAZ said:


> I watched both new episodes of The Detour on Monday and really liked it. Looking forward to episode 3 on Monday.


thanks for the reminder. someone start a detour thread. lol


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

Robin said:


> I totally agree. I was fairly meh about her on TDS. Now I'm ready to vote for her for president. Her show has been amazing.


But wouldn't she have the same problem running for prez that Ted Cruz doesn't seem to? 😜


----------



## Grasshopper AZ (Apr 29, 2005)

Dan203 said:


> I realize the bit was about pointing out the hypocrisy and not actually getting one of the costumes. But it is still funny that they are so protective of it.


Thats not hypocrisy at all. Eddie the Eagle is the NRA's intellectual property and they have a right to make sure it only gets used in the way that it is intended (teaching children gun safety). Why is it funny that they want to protect their property and keep it from being disparaged or used to ridicule the NRA and the program. The Eddie the Eagle program is responsible for teaching thousands of kids a year gun safety. It is used in schools, churches, by community groups and by law enforcement. The NRA does not mix the Eddie the Eagle program with their other lobbying and their protection of gun rights. It is only used to teach gun safety. This should be a program that everyone supports as it is the only large scale, wide spread program we have. Regardless of your feelings about the NRA itself. This is a great program and should be supported by all (Especially since nobody else has put in the effort to create a program like this)


----------



## tvmaster2 (Sep 9, 2006)

Grasshopper AZ said:


> Thats not hypocrisy at all. Eddie the Eagle is the NRA's intellectual property and they have a right to make sure it only gets used in the way that it is intended (teaching children gun safety). Why is it funny that they want to protect their property and keep it from being disparaged or used to ridicule the NRA and the program. The Eddie the Eagle program is responsible for teaching thousands of kids a year gun safety. It is used in schools, churches, by community groups and by law enforcement. The NRA does not mix the Eddie the Eagle program with their other lobbying and their protection of gun rights. It is only used to teach gun safety. This should be a program that everyone supports as it is the only large scale, wide spread program we have. Regardless of your feelings about the NRA itself. This is a great program and should be supported by all (Especially since nobody else has put in the effort to create a program like this)


Well, considering more Americans have died in the last year at the hands of toddlers than terrorists, I'd say Eddie's message isn't getting across.


----------



## ct1 (Jun 27, 2003)

Grasshopper AZ said:


> Thats not hypocrisy at all. Eddie the Eagle is the NRA's intellectual property and they have a right to make sure it only gets used in the way that it is intended (teaching children gun safety).


I'm sure the NRA fully supports efforts to maintain legal rights while ensuring strong enforcement of regulations to make sure that they only get used in the ways they are intended.


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

There is only one true Eddie the Eagle!

I wonder which came first, I could not find when the NRA started using it.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

Grasshopper AZ said:


> Thats not hypocrisy at all. Eddie the Eagle is the NRA's intellectual property and they have a right to make sure it only gets used in the way that it is intended (teaching children gun safety). Why is it funny that they want to protect their property and keep it from being disparaged or used to ridicule the NRA and the program. The Eddie the Eagle program is responsible for teaching thousands of kids a year gun safety. It is used in schools, churches, by community groups and by law enforcement. The NRA does not mix the Eddie the Eagle program with their other lobbying and their protection of gun rights. It is only used to teach gun safety. This should be a program that everyone supports as it is the only large scale, wide spread program we have. Regardless of your feelings about the NRA itself. This is a great program and should be supported by all (Especially since nobody else has put in the effort to create a program like this)


Do you at least see the irony?


----------



## sharkster (Jul 3, 2004)

Looks like I'm the odd woman out with Jason's new sitcom. I watched both of the first episodes, while there were a couple of laughs, I mostly found it not so good (like in really bad, actually). I haven't killed my SP yet, but we'll see...

Maybe it was my mood. Sometimes I'll revisit something and see it totally differently, so that's why I haven't killed it yet. Heck, I gave 'The Dome' (dumbest show of all time) just shy of the whole first season.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

It was fun watching a Presidential candidate participate so enthusiastically in a comedian's attempt to make fun of him....


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

sharkster said:


> Looks like I'm the odd woman out with Jason's new sitcom. I watched both of the first episodes, while there were a couple of laughs, I mostly found it not so good (like in really bad, actually). I haven't killed my SP yet, but we'll see...
> 
> Maybe it was my mood. Sometimes I'll revisit something and see it totally differently, so that's why I haven't killed it yet. Heck, I gave 'The Dome' (dumbest show of all time) just shy of the whole first season.


Different strokes. I loved The Detour from the first episode on. I didn't think there was a weak episode.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> It was fun watching a Presidential candidate participate so enthusiastically in a comedian's attempt to make fun of him....


I had to think about who you were talking about for a minute. Presidential candidate? Oh! "Who is Gary Johnson?" 

He does step to a different beat.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

I'd be curious to see the unedited footage of her interview with Gary Johnson. It seems like she used responses from him that were just normal enough to pass muster, but just weird enough to raise questions. I wonder if he gave any answers that would make him look serious and presidential, or if that's just not his style.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> I'd be curious to see the unedited footage of her interview with Gary Johnson. It seems like she used responses from him that were just normal enough to pass muster, but just weird enough to raise questions. I wonder if he gave any answers that would make him look serious and presidential, or if that's just not his style.


I was wondering the same thing (as I often do during interviews on this show), but there were times when he was clearly playing along with her...


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

I have always wondered these style interviews be it the daily show or here. Sometimes it feels like they retake the questions after the fact once they have a handle on how to make it funnier. It often seems the sillier moments are in a single camera shot and not a two shot at least on the original daily show. Haven't watched Trevor and when Sam was there it seemed she did thing similar.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> I was wondering the same thing (as I often do during interviews on this show), but there were times when he was clearly playing along with her...


Yes, he was much more game to play along than some interviewees are. But given the position he's trying to get, I wonder if that was a good move. It just made him seem like he wasn't taking the election seriously (which may actually be his approach to it, since his chances of winning are slim to none).


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

waynomo said:


> I had to think about who you were talking about for a minute. Presidential candidate? Oh! "Who is Gary Johnson?"


Google him.

Just turn safesearch on first.


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

Huh. I haven't watched the episode yet but Sam Bee's penchant for personal insults is one of the things that I like least about her show.

But I am curious what she called Ivanka though.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

She called her a "feckless c--t". 

I watched the episode last night and thought that was over the line. I'm not surprised at the backlash and her apology.

But I am surprised at the people that are equating her with Roseanne and thinking that what SB said is on the same level as what RB said. Personal insults are very different than racist statements. And if people calling for Sam's head can't see that, then I'm a little baffled.


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> And if people calling for Sam's head can't see that, then I'm a little baffled.


No you're not. You know exactly what is going on.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

eddyj said:


> No you're not. You know exactly what is going on.


Well, I understand the politics involved and that people are just adopting arguments to support their side.

But if any of them truly believe the arguments they're making, then I don't know what to say to that.


----------



## GoPackGo (Dec 29, 2012)

Yeah. Nothing to see here. Absolutely not on the same level as Roseanne's comment.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

Her statement was bad in many different ways, the least being the actual insult.

-smak-


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

smak said:


> Her statement was bad in many different ways, the least being the actual insult.
> 
> -smak-


Oh? What part of her statement was worse than calling Ivanka a "feckless c--t"?


----------



## vman41 (Jun 18, 2002)

From Ivanka's point of view, was the insult being called a c--t or being called feckless?


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> Oh? What part of her statement was worse than calling Ivanka a "feckless c--t"?


For 18 months, people have looked to Ivanka to somehow right the wrongs they perceive from her father's administration, because she's supposedly some super liberal, but there's zero evidence of that, or that she will ever speak up about things she's supposedly against.

It's dumb to keep thinking she'll say or do anything all this time later.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> She called her a "feckless c--t".
> 
> I watched the episode last night and thought that was over the line. I'm not surprised at the backlash and her apology.
> 
> But I am surprised at the people that are equating her with Roseanne and thinking that what SB said is on the same level as what RB said. Personal insults are very different than racist statements. And if people calling for Sam's head can't see that, then I'm a little baffled.


And her apology wasn't on the same level as Roseann's (who gave a vague, generic apology then launched into a lengthy, very unapologetic Twitter rant)...Bee almost immediately apologized very thoroughly, and with no indication that she doesn't mean it. I suspect we'll also be hearing about it on her next show. For somebody who can be so crass (and boy did that bite her this time!), she can also be pretty classy.

Roseanne? Pure, unadulterated crass.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

smak said:


> For 18 months, people have looked to Ivanka to somehow right the wrongs they perceive from her father's administration, because she's supposedly some super liberal, but there's zero evidence of that, or that she will ever speak up about things she's supposedly against.
> 
> It's dumb to keep thinking she'll say or do anything all this time later.


I don't think that's the point Sam was trying to make. I think she was simply making the points that (a) Ivanka is viewed as more reasonable than her father, and (b) Ivanka has a fairly high level of influence with her father. Hence, it was an appeal to Ivanka to try and influence her father to do something that we all know her father would never do on his own.

She couched that request in humor and an over-the-line personal insult. But other than the insult, I don't think any of the other portions of that appeal would be viewed negatively by Ivanka.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> I don't think that's the point Sam was trying to make. I think she was simply making the points that (a) Ivanka is viewed as more reasonable than her father, and (b) Ivanka has a fairly high level of influence with her father. Hence, it was an appeal to Ivanka to try and influence her father to do something that we all know her father would never do on his own.


It's the point I'm making. I'm not going to name them all, but seemingly every other week somebody is pleading with her to talk to him about some new policy, and you would think after all this time, people would understand that nothing is going to happen..

Even Samantha Bee understands it by calling her feckless, but than she seems to think that THIS ONE TIME something will become of it.

-smak-


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> She called her a "feckless c--t".
> 
> I watched the episode last night and thought that was over the line. I'm not surprised at the backlash and her apology.
> 
> But I am surprised at the people that are equating her with Roseanne and thinking that what SB said is on the same level as what RB said. Personal insults are very different than racist statements. And if people calling for Sam's head can't see that, then I'm a little baffled.


This is the 2nd time that the show has had to apologize for something, right? I seem to recall something that went over the line during the 2016 campaign.

I know SB wants the show to be the edgiest to stand out from the crowd but perhaps they'll be a bit more careful in the future.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

smak said:


> It's the point I'm making. I'm not going to name them all, but seemingly every other week somebody is pleading with her to talk to him about some new policy, and you would think after all this time, people would understand that nothing is going to happen..
> 
> Even Samantha Bee understands it by calling her feckless, but than she seems to think that THIS ONE TIME something will become of it.
> 
> -smak-


I can understand if you're saying that making an appeal for Ivanka to do something about her father is pointless. As you said, it's obvious that's never going to happen. But I don't think that means Samantha Bee's "statement was bad in many different ways, the least being the actual insult." It simply means that SB is using Ivanka as a couching device for the joke.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

To put this "controversy" in perspective, you could very easily find, at one of the parties political conventions or rallies in 2016, paraphernalia (t-shirts, bumper stickers, etc..) that pictured the female that headed the Presidential ticket of the other major political party with this exact offensive word written under a picture of said female candidate.

-smak-


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

well, i for one was shocked she used a word as strong as feckless when describing ivanka - glad she apologized.


----------



## eddyj (Jun 20, 2002)

And in Sam's case, she was undoubtedly in the middle of a comedy routine...and she still apologized.


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

The episode was pulled from YouTube before I could watch it. :-\

I've seen the offending clip but I'd like to watch the rest of the ep. (I don't get TBS so I watch on YouTube every week.)

Edit: the season is available for purchase on Google play


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

Robin said:


> *The episode was pulled *from YouTube before I could watch it. :-\
> 
> *I've seen the offending clip* but I'd like to watch the rest of the ep. (I don't get TBS so I watch on YouTube every week.)


Ah, the irony.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

I'm going to make an argument that goes against my personal bias, but I could definitely see the argument that the actual statement was as bad as Rosanne's (but the apology was much better). Isn't calling a woman the C* word in the same league as making a racist comment about someone? I thought for women the C* word is just not something you call a woman is may be equal to using the N* word (I suppose one could argue that if a woman says it, that's ok). I have no issue with feckless. Ivanka wouldn't be the first person in politics to be called that and won't be the last. That said, she apologized, unlike Rosanne who's apology was lukewarm at best and then pretty much rescinded.

I'm not a woman, so maybe a woman can respond and tell me what they'd think of being called that.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

one is a women using a sexist slur to describe another woman in a comedy routine. the other is a white woman using a racial slur towards a black woman on twitter. if rosanne was black, there _might_ be a comparison, but since she isn't, no.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

NorthAlabama said:


> one is a women using a sexist slur to describe another woman in a comedy routine. the other is a white woman using a racial slur towards a black woman on twitter. if rosanne was black, there _might_ be a comparison, but since she isn't, no.


I did make that point (and I guess this is sort of like one black person calling another black person the N word). But, this was a public rant, so I think it's a little different. All I'm saying is I can see where women could get offended by it. (Not Trump supporters though). The feckless part? No. Not at all. I notice that we haven't heard much about Ivanka's influence on her dad in a long time. I guess that hope has faded.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Steveknj said:


> I'm going to make an argument that goes against my personal bias, but I could definitely see the argument that the actual statement was as bad as Rosanne's (but the apology was much better). Isn't calling a woman the C* word in the same league as making a racist comment about someone?


I would say no. Bee was calling out Trump for specific behavior (although in a completely unacceptable way). Barr was calling out Jarrett for being black.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

What north Alabama said. The C word is the highest offense but it doesn’t rise as high when another woman says it. Nor does it rise to the level or racism even though it is pretty bad. It was over the top and an apology is necessary. I am not a fan of Samantha at all. I think she is over the top but she is not Roseanne. There are people on the left who should shut up. Sam isn’t necessarily one of them.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

having listened to certain words in comedy routines since the 70's, i'm not convinced it was unacceptable. distasteful and offensive to others? yes. unacceptable? why? because she's a woman?


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

TonyD79 said:


> What north Alabama said. The C word is the highest offense but it doesn't rise as high when another woman says it. Nor does it rise to the level or racism even though it is pretty bad. It was over the top and an apology is necessary. I am not a fan of Samantha at all. I think she is over the top but she is not Roseanne. There are people on the left who should shut up. Sam isn't necessarily one of them.


I see this side of it too. And again, I'm not saying she's just as wrong as Rosanne (and you could argue that it was just part of her schtick for her routine), just that I could see the argument and it's not completely wrong. I also agree that when you are a very public person, that it opens you up to this type of thing as well.

I think Bill Maher will be interesting tonight, because he's friends with Rosanne, but also liberal. He's also a free speech advocate and has gone off on all of this PC stuff before.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

NorthAlabama said:


> having listened to certain words in comedy routines since the 70's, i'm not convinced it was unacceptable. distasteful and offensive to others? yes. unacceptable? why? because she's a woman?


In another time and place, I'd agree. And if the Roseanne thing didn't happen a couple of days before, this would have not even have made me blink. It's just more fodder for the trolls.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

Steveknj said:


> I think Bill Maher will be interesting tonight, because he's friends with Rosanne, but also liberal. He's also a free speech advocate and has gone off on all of this PC stuff before.


this, 100%, can't wait for bill's monologue, and the panel discussion.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

Steveknj said:


> In another time and place, I'd agree. And if the Roseanne thing didn't happen a couple of days before, this would have not even have made me blink. It's just more fodder for the trolls.


joan rivers was another boundary breaker for women in comedy, she used the "b" word in her routine to describe other women frequently, and somehow escaped the outrage. hmm...


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Steveknj said:


> I see this side of it too. And again, I'm not saying she's just as wrong as Rosanne (and you could argue that it was just part of her schtick for her routine), just that I could see the argument and it's not completely wrong. I also agree that when you are a very public person, that it opens you up to this type of thing as well.
> 
> I think Bill Maher will be interesting tonight, because he's friends with Rosanne, but also liberal. He's also a free speech advocate and has gone off on all of this PC stuff before.


Bill Maher is on the top of my just shut up list.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

TonyD79 said:


> Bill Maher is on the top of my just shut up list.


lol! 

eta: i'm a huge bill maher fan, have seen him live 3 times, and have a personally autographed copy of one of his books - and i still loved your comment. 

i've been watching bill's panel discussions since they aired on comedy central in the 90's during the local late night news, and really enjoy the dialogue it brings to current hot topics. he tends to invite different viewpoints to contribute to the discussion, and it provokes a conversation rarely heard anywhere else. while i understand your dislike for bill, i value the platform he provides, but it doesn't mean i always agree - it's definitely a thinking type of show.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

I think he actually hurts the causes he champions. You can have discussions without being as obnoxious as he is.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

TonyD79 said:


> I think he actually hurts the causes he champions. You can have discussions without being as obnoxious as he is.


Yeah, and sometimes he takes (or at least accepts) positions that are completely unacceptable to me (e.g., his anti-Muslim fear-mongering, his vaccination denialism, his general embracing of medical woo-woo). And his willingness to suck up to purely evil people (e.g., Ann Coulter) sickens me.

I used to like his show, but I got turned off after 9/11. I don't know if he got worse, if I just realized who he really was, or a combination.


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

what a boring world we'd live in if all the obnoxious people were not around - i like a little diversity in my life.


----------



## Steveknj (Mar 10, 2003)

NorthAlabama said:


> lol!
> 
> eta: i'm a huge bill maher fan, have seen him live 3 times, and have a personally autographed copy of one of his books - and i still loved your comment.
> 
> i've been watching bill's panel discussions since they aired on comedy central in the 90's during the local late night news, and really enjoy the dialogue it brings to current hot topics. he tends to invite different viewpoints to contribute to the discussion, and it provokes a conversation rarely heard anywhere else. while i understand your dislike for bill, i value the platform he provides, but it doesn't mean i always agree - it's definitely a thinking type of show.





Rob Helmerichs said:


> Yeah, and sometimes he takes (or at least accepts) positions that are completely unacceptable to me (e.g., his anti-Muslim fear-mongering, his vaccination denialism, his general embracing of medical woo-woo). And his willingness to suck up to purely evil people (e.g., Ann Coulter) sickens me.
> 
> I used to like his show, but I got turned off after 9/11. I don't know if he got worse, if I just realized who he really was, or a combination.


I enjoy his show, despite the fact that there's a lot I don't agree with him about (as Rob mentioned). You can't go through life not agreeing with people and completely turning them off. Even though i don't agree with him on this stuff, his thoughts on those subjects are mostly well thought out and researched, and I can respect that. And he's usually pretty funny. I have noticed though, that his panels are getting smaller and much less well known, because i DO think a lot of guests don't' want to do his show, on both sides. So his pool of people is to pull from has gotten much smaller. He used to have some A-List celebs do his last segment of the panel but they are few and far between now. Still, I am more in agreement with him than not and enjoy his show.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Steveknj said:


> I enjoy his show, despite the fact that there's a lot I don't agree with him about (as Rob mentioned). You can't go through life not agreeing with people and completely turning them off. Even though i don't agree with him on this stuff, his thoughts on those subjects are mostly well thought out and researched, and I can respect that.


That wasn't my experience...it seemed to me that his positions were more knee-jerk reactions, either genuine or designed to provoke. Then again, it's been over a decade since I've paid much attention to him, so maybe he's changed. I can just remember him making stupid, provocative remarks with that smug look of anticipation on his face, knowing the reaction he was going to get. Drove me crazy. And it was worse when he neutered himself after 9/11 (he made a completely true remark that suicide bombers almost by definition aren't cowards, and totally caved in to the massive but thoughtless criticism he received). I lost a lot of respect for him then, and when his show came back I realized he was nowhere near as smart as he thought he was, and that a lot of his seeming even-handedness was often just pandering to people that he may or may not have agreed with, and who sometimes may have been genuinely evil.


----------



## BrettStah (Nov 12, 2000)

Sometimes he's funny, sometimes I agree with him, but he's almost always a cocky a-hole.


----------



## Barnstormer (Sep 23, 2015)

Miss Bee is just another media personality who is working hard to divide us, pit us against each other, and kill useful public discussion. I have no respect for such people regardless of their political viewpoints.

She models that exact behavior and an attitude towards women that she would deplore in men of a different political view. I don't care if one is a powerful politician or a media celebrity - enough is enough. I don't want the women in my life to be subjected to attitudes and behaviors like Ms. Bee's.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

BrettStah said:


> Sometimes he's funny, sometimes I agree with him, but he's almost always a cocky a-hole.


That's the wording I was searching for.


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

Steveknj said:


> I'm not a woman, so maybe a woman can respond and tell me what they'd think of being called that.


IMO name calling is nowhere near the same level of wrong as racism.

It's a nasty name, sure. But they're not even remotely comparable.


----------



## cheesesteak (Jul 24, 2003)

It's probably a poor reflection on me but if John Oliver did that same exact bit on his show, I'd probably think it was kinda funny but harmless but my thoughts on this and a number of Samantha Bee's comedy bits are "Wow, she's mean."

It's not like Full Frontal is broadcast live. The suits at TBS had to have known that Samantha called Ivanka the c-word before the show went on air and they probably knew before it was taped.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Yeah, to me Bee is a low-rent John Oliver. Enjoyable enough, but not really in the same league.


----------



## vman41 (Jun 18, 2002)

I gradually came to the realization some time ago that a lot of comedians are at heart very mean-spirited people. It crystalized for me back when Wanda Sykes publically wished for Rush Limbaugh to get liver cancer. Liver cancer would be a pretty cruel punishment to inflict on someone.


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

NorthAlabama said:


> one is a women using a sexist slur to describe another woman in a comedy routine. the other is a white woman using a racial slur towards a black woman on twitter. if rosanne was black, there _might_ be a comparison, but since she isn't, no.


I'm curious. Is it like when black comedians use the n-word to refer to other black folks? Does Bee get more of a pass?

Also, which segment was this? When I watched my copy of the show, I didn't notice any references to Ivanka.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

cheesesteak said:


> It's probably a poor reflection on me but if John Oliver did that same exact bit on his show, I'd probably think it was kinda funny but harmless but my thoughts on this and a number of Samantha Bee's comedy bits are "Wow, she's mean."
> 
> It's not like Full Frontal is broadcast live. *The suits at TBS had to have known* that Samantha called Ivanka the c-word before the show went on air and they probably knew before it was taped.


And I read today that as being an explanation why she shouldn't be fired: the network was complicit.


logic88 said:


> I'm curious. Is it like when black comedians use the n-word to refer to other black folks? Does Bee get more of a pass?


I don't know that I would give a pass--it was too crude and mean for that--but, yes.


----------



## BrettStah (Nov 12, 2000)

Donald Trump has said grosser things about Ivanka than what Samantha Bee said about her.


----------



## DevdogAZ (Apr 16, 2003)

Steveknj said:


> I'm going to make an argument that goes against my personal bias, but I could definitely see the argument that the actual statement was as bad as Rosanne's (but the apology was much better). Isn't calling a woman the C* word in the same league as making a racist comment about someone? I thought for women the C* word is just not something you call a woman is may be equal to using the N* word (I suppose one could argue that if a woman says it, that's ok). I have no issue with feckless. Ivanka wouldn't be the first person in politics to be called that and won't be the last. That said, she apologized, unlike Rosanne who's apology was lukewarm at best and then pretty much rescinded.
> 
> I'm not a woman, so maybe a woman can respond and tell me what they'd think of being called that.


Here's my take. Being labeled as a racist in our current climate is career poison. It's unacceptable in pretty much all levels of society. It shows a hatred not for an individual person, but for an entire population of people that the racist views as inferior. Being a racist is not going to fly.

Calling an individual person a name, even if it's a very vulgar name, does not have the same societal weight as using a racial slur. I don't think it mattered that it was the c-word, or that it was a woman using that word against another woman. I think it's all about the scope of the words used. One is directed at an individual, the other is directed at millions of people. One shows a dislike of a single person (something we can all relate to) while the other shows a disdain for an entire race (something hopefully very few of us can relate to). They're just not on the same level at all.


logic88 said:


> Also, which segment was this? When I watched my copy of the show, I didn't notice any references to Ivanka.


It's at the very end of the first segment. Like literally the last 30 seconds before the first commercial break.


----------



## BrettStah (Nov 12, 2000)

DevdogAZ said:


> Here's my take. Being labeled as a racist in our current climate is career poison. It's unacceptable in pretty much all levels of society. It shows a hatred not for an individual person, but for an entire population of people that the racist views as inferior. Being a racist is not going to fly.
> 
> Calling an individual person a name, even if it's a very vulgar name, does not have the same societal weight as using a racial slur. I don't think it mattered that it was the c-word, or that it was a woman using that word against another woman. I think it's all about the scope of the words used. One is directed at an individual, the other is directed at millions of people. One shows a dislike of a single person (something we can all relate to) while the other shows a disdain for an entire race (something hopefully very few of us can relate to). They're just not on the same level at all.


It may be the fact that I'm on my second adult beverage, but that is maybe the best explanation of the difference between the two incidents I've seen.


----------



## BrettStah (Nov 12, 2000)

Samantha Bee Talks Fallout From Ivanka Trump Slur Controversy At TV Academy Honors


> Bee at the podium said, "Every week I strive to show the world as I see it unfiltered. Sometimes I should probably have a filter. I accept that. I take it seriously when I get it right and I do take responsibility when I get it wrong."
> 
> IndieWire reports that Bee explained that she was trying to do right last night in her segment "on the atrocious treatment of migrant children by this administration and past administrations&#8230; Our piece attracted controversy of the worst kind."
> 
> "We spent the day wrestling with the repercussions of one bad word, when we all should have spent the day incensed that as a nation we are wrenching children from their parents and treating people legally seeking asylum as criminals," Bee reportedly said in her speech. "If we are OK with that then really, who are we?" She ended by thanking Turner network for having her back.


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

Yeah, all of the news outlets go for click-bait these days.

Look at how much coverage the Roseanne Barr cancellation got compared to the Hurricane Maria death toll analysis.

Of course, this has always been the case but I think it's just been hyper-accelerated in this day and age.


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

DevdogAZ said:


> It's at the very end of the first segment. Like literally the last 30 seconds before the first commercial break.


Ah, I was 2 weeks behind. No wonder I didn't notice it! Whoops.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

cheesesteak said:


> It's probably a poor reflection on me but if John Oliver did that same exact bit on his show, I'd probably think it was kinda funny but harmless but my thoughts on this and a number of Samantha Bee's comedy bits are "Wow, she's mean."
> 
> It's not like Full Frontal is broadcast live. The suits at TBS had to have known that Samantha called Ivanka the c-word before the show went on air and they probably knew before it was taped.


John Oliver knows his show is a comedy show first, even though he's very good at tackling important issues.

If he did the same bit on his show, he could skip the one word for something funnier, and make it all that much better.

He's called plenty of people names before, but he's couched the insulting name with humor.

Like calling that coal exec a "geriatric Dr Evil"

-smak-


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

smak said:


> John Oliver knows his show is a comedy show first, even though he's very good at tackling important issues.


Yeah, he's both funnier than Bee, and more serious. It's amazing that he can pull that off.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

DevdogAZ said:


> Here's my take. Being labeled as a racist in our current climate is career poison. It's unacceptable in pretty much all levels of society. It shows a hatred not for an individual person, but for an entire population of people that the racist views as inferior. Being a racist is not going to fly.
> 
> Calling an individual person a name, even if it's a very vulgar name, does not have the same societal weight as using a racial slur. I don't think it mattered that it was the c-word, or that it was a woman using that word against another woman. I think it's all about the scope of the words used. One is directed at an individual, the other is directed at millions of people. One shows a dislike of a single person (something we can all relate to) while the other shows a disdain for an entire race (something hopefully very few of us can relate to). They're just not on the same level at all.
> 
> It's at the very end of the first segment. Like literally the last 30 seconds before the first commercial break.


I think you are close but the choice of word does matter. The C word is very derogatory to women and if a man called her that, the outrage would've been higher.


----------



## mrizzo80 (Apr 17, 2012)

I don't understand why there is so much discussion on what Samantha Bee said relative to what Roseanne said. What does one have to do with the other? What Samantha Bee said was gross and has no business in a civilized society.

I used to watch Sam's show when it first came out, and I loved it. I grew tired of it after about 6 months because I started to view it as repetitive and (for lack of a better word) angry and/or mean-spirited. It doesn't surprise me at all that she is in some hot water for something she said on her show.


----------



## smbaker (May 24, 2003)

mrizzo80 said:


> I don't understand why there is so much discussion on what Samantha Bee said relative to what Roseanne said. What does one have to do with the other?.


People are trying to compare the two, and contrast the punishment. However, the two incidents are not the same. It's a silly road to go down.

It suffices to look at Bee in isolation. It seems to me she's made a career out of meanness as comedy and there's a segment of the population that loves that. I tuned her out to back when she called some guy a Neo-Nazi due to his haircut and it turned out the guy was suffering from brain cancer and his hair was due to treatment. She apologized in that case as she did in the Ivanka case, but I do not find her apologies sincere. If she was sincere, the mean behavior would stop. It's not going to stop, because people like it, and she's generally rewarded for it.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

smbaker said:


> People are trying to compare the two, and contrast the punishment. However, the two incidents are not the same. It's a silly road to go down.
> 
> It suffices to look at Bee in isolation. It seems to me she's made a career out of meanness as comedy and there's a segment of the population that loves that. I tuned her out to back when she called some guy a Neo-Nazi due to his haircut and it turned out the guy was suffering from brain cancer and his hair was due to treatment. She apologized in that case as she did in the Ivanka case, but I do not find her apologies sincere. If she was sincere, the mean behavior would stop. It's not going to stop, because people like it, and she's generally rewarded for it.


But there's always been "meaness" (or at least an element of it) in comedy, going back to the Three Stooges (and they are widely considered to be a classic).

Do you think that Larry and Curly would have enjoyed being constantly insulted, poked, punched, kicked, and slapped by Moe in real life?


----------



## smbaker (May 24, 2003)

JYoung said:


> Do you think that Larry and Curly would have enjoyed being constantly insulted, poked, punched, kicked, and slapped by Moe in real life?


There's a difference between characters being mean to _each other_ in a scripted performance, and characters being mean to people who are not in the joke. That's just bullying. Bullies often think they're funny, and bullies are often enabled by a willing audience. So in that respect, you're right there's nothing new here.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Except that public figures have historically been targets of comedy send ups, especially political figures.
Political cartoons lampooning our political figures date back to the beginning of this country.
(And some of the early ones are quite "mean".)

The cancer ill man in your example is not "fair game" and Bee was wrong for that.
But public/political figures are often considered "fair game".


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

And let's face it, when it's Samantha Bee vs the Trumps, she's punching up.

Not that that excuses her choice of words. But she's picking on people who have chosen to sit in the highest seat of power on Earth. If they can't take a little meanness, maybe they should reconsider their life choices...


----------



## smbaker (May 24, 2003)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Not that that excuses her choice of words. But she's picking on people who have chosen to sit in the highest seat of power on Earth. If they can't take a little meanness, maybe they should reconsider their life choices...


There's also the brain cancer survivor she called a Nazi, and I'm sure we could dig up other examples. It's just mean for meanness sake, mixed with prejudice based on appearance.

This is 2018. We can criticize people based on their ideas, not their appearance. We can come up with better ways to express ourselves and make funnier jokes that calling someone a "feckless ****".


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

To be clear she called him that without knowing he was a cancer patient and has since apologized and donated to his gofundme.

It's also different to criticize the choices people make about their appearance. i.e. a nazi haircut vs being overweight.


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

smbaker said:


> There's also the brain cancer survivor she called a Nazi, and I'm sure we could dig up other examples. It's just mean for meanness sake, mixed with prejudice based on appearance.


To be fair, making fun of a person's appearance is a staple in comedy. Some public figures just make it easier (like Mitch McConnell).


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

logic88 said:


> To be fair, making fun of a person's appearance is a staple in comedy. Some public figures just make it easier (like Mitch McConnell).


But, apart from someone like Don Rickles, when it's an appearance personal choice, right (and not, e.g., when one has a disability, despite some unfortunate occurrences)? Although for some odd (to me) reason, the fact that one is a public official or celebrity, or otherwise is in the public eye (even if not by choice), seems to mean to some comedians that it's ok to berate their appearance at the level of sadistic hen-pecking, even if it's not a real personal decision.


----------



## smbaker (May 24, 2003)

There's also making fun of a person's weight, which seems to come up again and again. It just seems mean to me, and not very funny.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

smbaker said:


> There's also making fun of a person's weight, which seems to come up again and again. It just seems mean to me, and not very funny.


Weight often seems to be fair game, at least with public officials (Letterman seemed to be sickly obsessed with Chris Christie's weight).


----------



## NorthAlabama (Apr 19, 2012)

Mikeguy said:


> Weight often seems to be fair game, at least with public officials (Letterman seemed to be sickly obsessed with Chris Christie's weight).


i think a good bit of that humor was a direct response to the behavior of said public official.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

NorthAlabama said:


> i think a good bit of that humor was a direct response to the behavior of said public official.


Absolutely--and it's a way to attack people in power. But I still wonder, why go to the person's weight or neck flesh or other non-choice appearance matter? Isn't that really just racism on another front? Go after the person for what the person actually is doing, not sink down to what we tell our children not to do. (It seems to me.)

Of course, if Chris Christie is wearing plaid pants, he's fair game.  (Likewise, when the former mayor of Toronto was acting like a sumo wrestler.)


----------



## logic88 (Jun 7, 2001)

Mikeguy said:


> Absolutely--and it's a way to attack people in power. But I still wonder, why go to the person's weight or neck flesh or other non-choice appearance matter? Isn't that really just racism on another front? Go after the person for what the person actually is doing, not sink down to what we tell our children not to do. (It seems to me.)


I agree. I never liked those jokes but everyone does them. Even the self-deprecating ones like Jon Oliver.


----------



## JYoung (Jan 16, 2002)

Mikeguy said:


> Of course, if Chris Christie is wearing plaid pants, he's fair game.


Just had the mental image of Chris Christie in jorts.
(Shudder.)

Damn you.
Damn you all to Hell.


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

Heh. I was wondering if John Oliver was going to do something with this.

And yes. He went there. Turns out he thinks Neil DeGrasse Tyson is a feckless...never mind.


----------



## RGM1138 (Oct 6, 1999)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> Heh. I was wondering if John Oliver was going to do something with this.
> 
> And yes. He went there. Turns out he thinks Neil DeGrasse Tyson is a feckless...never mind.


For a pasty Euro-American, that seems racist and sexist.

Ouster the blighter!


----------



## Rob Helmerichs (Oct 17, 2000)

RGM1138 said:


> For a pasty Euro-American, that seems racist and sexist.
> 
> Ouster the blighter!


He might be from Brooklyn...


----------



## RGM1138 (Oct 6, 1999)

Rob Helmerichs said:


> He might be from Brooklyn...


No, quite sure Ollie is by way of Erdington, England.


----------



## BrettStah (Nov 12, 2000)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1004558566173310976


----------

