monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

I think he's doing this on purpose.

I didn't say that. I suggested that the administration's defenders in general seem to court animosity. No, they shouldn't do things to make opponents "like" them — that'd be naïve. But when you have a job to do which requires a certain amount of cooperation between sides, like governing a country, going out of your way to be disliked is counter-productive.

Why are you obsessed with us cheese eaters and/or snowflakes? So you don't like us, noted. Frankly I don't care if they get rid of Colbert or not (or move him to HBO) and I found the remark distasteful. Anything else you want to talk about besides cheese eaters? What do you believe in? Do you support the House health care bill? Why not talk about something a little relevant?

I don't think I'd walk out of a Lovett show if he peed on a photograph of my mother.

Five or six years ago, wife and I had a booth at the Dallas International Guitar Festival. Nugent's regular bass player was in a pickup band. Accomplished player.

On the contrary. He is extremely bright and courageous and very funny. In the case discussed, the jokes weren't funny.
Batting 1000 on jokes doesn't happen and sex jokes are tough - and usually something of a pander to the low-brow elements of an audience (which was how Shakespeare used them).

A fairly large concentration of sweeping characterizations here of large numbers of individual people based only on their political views. Conservatives don't think at all; they mindlessly parrot phrases the origins of which they don't know and have a "group mind"; they have been "trained not to think" etc.

Doesn't appear thoughtful, reasoned or well informed to me at all.. Merely prejudice and close mindedness on the part of one who repeatedly claims th be uniquely above all that.

Find me a right wing individual who acknowledges that this is a phenomenon that has nothing to do with partisan leaning and that they themselves are as susceptible to the thing as anyone. If they cannot do so, then they quite misunderstand what the term actually means, rather than how it has been redefined for political purposes.

Apparently there's a #FireColbert hastag thing. That's interesting. As I explained above, there's no reasonable grounds for claiming Colbert's monologue was unique.

I suggested above that this is all about 1) the authoritarian urge to suppress satire directed at the authoritarian figure and 2) that Colbert's ratings and success, particularly with a younger demographic is entirely relevant as regards making him a target.

But here's another notion. Might it not be generating such a strong response on the right if O'Reilly hadn't just been booted off the air? We ought to note the differences here as well: Colbert suggested (obviously as a joke) that Trump performed oral sex on Putin, whereas O'Reilly actually interacted with real women in a manner that clearly was sexual harrassment (assuming claims true, which Fox management obviously found grounds to believe).

OK, he [Colbert] is an asshole.

Again, everyone know what it currently means.

Tortured connection

This gentleman with Paul Ryan has just been inducted into the trolling hall of fame

Then it has no intellectual use or value, rather the opposite. It becomes merely a propaganda device.

https://broadly.vice.com/en_us/article/is-it-ok-to-hex-a-nazi-how-anti-fascist-witches-are-mobilizing-under-trump

Perfect

How did that come to your attention?

I think the internet has reached the pinnacle of ludicrousness . Its a fuckin comic book of ideas. Isnt there something for adults???

I know, right? I think they have certain words running continuously on a scan type search or something.

Nonsense.

Jonathan Chait's - Not a Very P.C. Thing to Say

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/01/not-a-very-pc-thing-to-say.html

A must read

My nephew

No "they" don't.

It's funny.