What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Best Late-night Monologue Ever? (1 Viewer)

Seth Myers is pretty bad
he's one of the few comedy writers i am literally in awe of - some of his Documentary Now scripts, i simply dont know how he do dat, and i know most everything about words -but that Trump-pushoff limp outrage almost entirely captures what i've hated about being a leftist for 50some years. if the President is the schoolyard bully, Myers is the scabbed-up, pinked-out face in the lunchroom tellin' what wrath he'll bring next time.

 
I am a big fan of Colbert. However, I strongly believe that people in power -- whether they're comedians, journalists, or elected leaders -- are most effective when they reveal ugliness without insult or blatancy.

In other words: you can make your point without resorting to inflammatory rhetoric such as "extrajudicial execution".

Also, I'm not a fan of publicizing the names of people who did not seek the spotlight and have not been charged with a crime (e.g., the Central Park dog lady).

Colbert's monologue may have been comfort food for people who feel the same as he does. But he's not changing anyone's mind. And ultimately these types of monologues are just going to make Trump supporters rally around the President.

 
I am a big fan of Colbert. However, I strongly believe that people in power -- whether they're comedians, journalists, or elected leaders -- are most effective when they reveal ugliness without insult or blatancy.

In other words: you can make your point without resorting to inflammatory rhetoric such as "extrajudicial execution".

Also, I'm not a fan of publicizing the names of people who did not seek the spotlight and have not been charged with a crime (e.g., the Central Park dog lady).

Colbert's monologue may have been comfort food for people who feel the same as he does. But he's not changing anyone's mind. And ultimately these types of monologues are just going to make Trump supporters rally around the President.
i promised myself not to rewatch the monologue until i received the first sensible counter/caution in this thread

comedy is inflammatory rhetoric. without overstatement, there is no setup. if Colbert hadnt followed with a joke, i'd agree.

however, i am firmly convinced that the license we give to bad actors who seek hero professions as an outlet for personality compensation ONLY gets discussed when it blows things up and should, therefore, be dense with condemnation. not letting them skate thru their scandalous stats in social & domestic categories, never mind their part in the systemic rot within our institutions, would be better but is rarely possible

your point about shaming private citizens is valid as concerns those who shame only when it serves their purposes, but i dont believe Colbert fits the charge. as a lapsed Catholic, shame is a food group for me

the President's supporters will rally around him because they have to - he has already seceded from the Union and America will be unlikely to follow. i like that Colbert challenged the comfortable as much as the powerful and hope audiences will hear more of that until we stop rehearsing tyranny. peace be with you -

 
I am a big fan of Colbert. However, I strongly believe that people in power -- whether they're comedians, journalists, or elected leaders -- are most effective when they reveal ugliness without insult or blatancy.

In other words: you can make your point without resorting to inflammatory rhetoric such as "extrajudicial execution".

Also, I'm not a fan of publicizing the names of people who did not seek the spotlight and have not been charged with a crime (e.g., the Central Park dog lady).

Colbert's monologue may have been comfort food for people who feel the same as he does. But he's not changing anyone's mind. And ultimately these types of monologues are just going to make Trump supporters rally around the President.
Sorry, but I'm all for public shaming of people who act like complete racist ######s. 

Calling the cops, falsely accusing a black man of threatening you, should be charged as a hate crime. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am a big fan of Colbert. However, I strongly believe that people in power -- whether they're comedians, journalists, or elected leaders -- are most effective when they reveal ugliness without insult or blatancy.

In other words: you can make your point without resorting to inflammatory rhetoric such as "extrajudicial execution".

Also, I'm not a fan of publicizing the names of people who did not seek the spotlight and have not been charged with a crime (e.g., the Central Park dog lady).

Colbert's monologue may have been comfort food for people who feel the same as he does. But he's not changing anyone's mind. And ultimately these types of monologues are just going to make Trump supporters rally around the President.
Sorry, but I'm all for public shaming of people who act like complete racist ######s. 

Calling the cops, falsely accusing a black man of threatening you, should be charged as a hate crime. 
I don't have a problem with her being shamed. I have a problem with the media being the ones doing the shaming -- especially when that person has not made themselves a public figure or been charged with a crime.

 
i promised myself not to rewatch the monologue until i received the first sensible counter/caution in this thread

comedy is inflammatory rhetoric. without overstatement, there is no setup. if Colbert hadnt followed with a joke, i'd agree.

however, i am firmly convinced that the license we give to bad actors who seek hero professions as an outlet for personality compensation ONLY gets discussed when it blows things up and should, therefore, be dense with condemnation. not letting them skate thru their scandalous stats in social & domestic categories, never mind their part in the systemic rot within our institutions, would be better but is rarely possible

your point about shaming private citizens is valid as concerns those who shame only when it serves their purposes, but i dont believe Colbert fits the charge. as a lapsed Catholic, shame is a food group for me

the President's supporters will rally around him because they have to - he has already seceded from the Union and America will be unlikely to follow. i like that Colbert challenged the comfortable as much as the powerful and hope audiences will hear more of that until we stop rehearsing tyranny. peace be with you -
The fetishizing of the military and law enforcement has been getting worse and worse and now we have our own Bone Spur General doing it from the Oval Office. Pathetic.

 
The fetishizing of the military and law enforcement has been getting worse and worse and now we have our own Bone Spur General doing it from the Oval Office. Pathetic.
yes, i've seen you write to this before to mostly horror and outrage. i dont think the President has added to it, merely fetishized it, as he has all symbols of power.

i'm a Boston Irishman - i know of what a cop is made. It is a sentiment both haughty and honorable, that there is power to be had, to be used that would not be conferred upon an individual by other means and thereby becomes a calling which makes the "man". it always had that kind of heft, was given a kneejerk halo grandfathered in by the needs of a volunteer military and consecrated by the actual heroisms of 9-11. it is necessary because, in many other ways, it is thankless work. perhaps it became less honorable precisely because it was not conferred as a fulcrum to personal authority for rising classes once those groups were no longer Caucasian. nonetheless, it is even more difficult to reform than it is to discuss, leaving the institutions to do it themselves. alas, there are no ready answers within current perceptions

 
Sorry, but I'm all for public shaming of people who act like complete racist ######s. 

Calling the cops, falsely accusing a black man of threatening you, should be charged as a hate crime. 
I had seen the video and already commented on what a horrible thing she did and that hasn't changed.  What has changed for me a little is my thoughts on it and how horrible in hindsight what she did was.  After watching what has happened in the country since that happened it was even more sobering re-watching the video.  She should be terrified by her actions and we should all be completely disgusted.  I would have no problem with your idea of charging her with a hate crime.

 
fetishizing?  You mean chicks that dig guys in uniform?
Well, that and dudes that dig guys in uniform. But there is more than one meaning to the word fetishize: 

make (something) the object of a sexual fetish.

"women's bodies are so intensely fetishized"

have an excessive and irrational commitment to or obsession with (something).

"an author who fetishizes privacy"

 
Well, that and dudes that dig guys in uniform. But there is more than one meaning to the word fetishize: 

make (something) the object of a sexual fetish.

"women's bodies are so intensely fetishized"

have an excessive and irrational commitment to or obsession with (something).

"an author who fetishizes privacy"
So NOT what I suggested then?

 
The fetishizing of the military and law enforcement has been getting worse and worse and now we have our own Bone Spur General doing it from the Oval Office. Pathetic.
We've been dealing with this in the military for a long time, I think it's getting better but only because people including victims speak out. 

To the uninformed, it can be hard to describe the power a drill sergeant has over trainees. So, as one might expect, bad actors, people seeking power, gravitate towards these positions. I assume the same is true for police officers. That definitely is not saying all who hold the positions are bad people by any stretch, but the risk is severe. 

Accountability is key.  Obviously due process is still provided, but people who abuse these positions presumptively deserve the maximum penalty. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Colbert fan from before his show, and this is of course terrific, but one thing to keep in mind is that being political all the time means that a good part of middle America tunes out the show up front. "Late Night" used to mean general interest, wide swaths of viewers, but unfortunately this will be received almost entirely by the choir here. I don't really know who is left in the middle anymore. Maybe something like this from Fallon (who just jokes) would have been more effective but it's almost impossible to imagine him doing that kind of piece.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Colbert fan from before his show, and this is of course terrific, but one thing to keep in mind is that being political all the time means that a good part of middle America tunes out the show up front. "Late Night" used to mean general interest, wide swaths of viewers, but unfortunately this will be received almost entirely by the choir here. I don't really know who is left in the middle anymore. Maybe something like this from Fallon (who just jokes) would have been more effective but it's almost impossible to imagine him doing that kind of piece.
I like Jimmy enough but his Trump jokes are getting really stale.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top