Roseanne return smashes 4 year primetime sitcom records
- Thread starter UCFKnight85
- Start date
Where is the thread about all the celebrities posting over the weekend about immigration separating parents and children .... Jim Carey blasting Ivanka Trump and her kids .... and then we find out that the New York Times blew it and posted something from back when Obama was President? I was hoping to have a 10 page argument about that. Since it happened under Obama's watch, everybody deleted their tweets and pretends it never happened now.
Celebrities are stupid people. They are some of the dumbest people you will ever meet. Let them destroy each other. Get some popcorn.
Celebrities are stupid people. They are some of the dumbest people you will ever meet. Let them destroy each other. Get some popcorn.
Oh my God you're all back comparing people being mean to republicans to racist comments against blacks. Jesus Christ there is no hope for America.
The media wanted trump because they thought it would be an easy win for Clinton. They are part of the statist establishment who know better than the average person and didn't realize the power of populism. That's why the DNC couldn't stand Sanders, not because he has different positions than them but because he wants the authority to come from the people.
Valerie Jarett is essentially Obama, and that's what made Roseannes comment lead to her getting canned. She insulted one of the elites so she must be silenced. It isn't because of racism, that's just the easiest justification.
And Nugent admitted he was wrong, and saw the error of his ways. Griffin retracted hers, and went full-on, despite a visit from the Secret Service (that had nothing to do with Trump).
Agreed.
But I still think the US media indirectly wanted Trump, at least the executives and stock holders.
I still think Barr should have been canned. But they might have been able to keep the series going without her.
But many wanted it off-the-air. Jarett's response has told me a bit about her too.
You're so off the rails on this point it's hilarious.
Every time I see a response like his, ignoring 90% of the context and reality, I just tell myself ... "This is how an imbecile polling at only 4% becomes President. People are so alienated, so demonized, they feel like they have no other option."
At times, yes. But Trump is pretty much full-on that way a good 20% of the time, more than all the others ... combined.
Yes, the US media ignores the other 80%. They totally don't broadcast when he's being Presidential, except when live, and they cannot avoid it -- although if he acts Presidential for too long, they'll cut the feed and return to normally scheduled programming.
But Trump is the worst of the lot to date.
I don't know that I would say that about GWB.
Edit: that was in reference to the narcissism comment, not the embarrassment one.
I'd say GWB and JFK were the most similar of Presidents. They both thought they were doing good, pressing their values and views on others. And they both screwed up entire countries as a result, GWB in Iraq, JFK in Vietnam. Two countries that had issues before, but they both directly broke. Both of them also ignored public opinion polls.
Both Obama and Trump are ruled by them ... and they were/are selective about their polls they listen[ed] to as well.
Coincidentally, I think that is the greater point President Trump was trying to make about Bob Iger. Because right now, Iger is going to have the ire of Conservatives, if they don't start applying everything evenly.
Is it really the President's job to make that point? No, far from it. But Progressives are going to find themselves hurting in 2018 and 2020 if they don't heed the point at some point.
Their same attitude is why @NinjaKnight and @fried-chicken are totally out-of-touch with not just a lot of Conservatives, but a lot of moderates, Libertarians and a growing number of Liberals. The Atlantic has repeatedly tried to point this out to Progressives and the rest of the US media as well.
You voted for a woman who has enabled her husband's most vile impulses his entire life, to include raping a woman (and having her blame the victim), and coercing an intern to blow him in the Oval Office, only to then lie about it and suffer impeachment.
Higher standards, and stuff.
Indeed. It held back #metoo for a couple of decades. Only after she lost did #metoo finally get really rolling.
When the Progressives stop supporting their imbeciles, Libertarians like I can start focusing on the current Conservative imbecile. Until then, it's like watching two parties argue over imbeciles ... with one exception.
Conservatives admit what Trump does and own up to it.
Progressives are so fixated on never admitting anything.
That said, I still think the Republican party made a huge mistake with Johnson.
He could have made for one of the greatest Republican Presidents of all time.
He wasn't an imbecile, just a self-deprecating goofball.
As a Libertarian, he wasn't really a classic one, but still a very good man.
Johnson's message was off-point and he was only focused on the fringe of the Democrat party and the dyed in the wool libertarians. The media played him and he let them. In fairness, Trump couldn't have answered the question about Aleppo either but he would have diverted the conversation so he didn't come across as inept. We both know he was/is, but he didn't let the media take him down.
Peterson wouldn't have had the same problem. Still not sure how he didn't win the nomination.
Nothing. Progressives on the left like to dismiss the factual allegations against Hillary as being hyperbole.
Again, I am talking in the context of the 2012 Republican primary!
I am not talking about the 2012 General Election, much less 2016!
Thank you. The GOP would have no part of him 'overtaking the party,' like he did in New Mexico prior.
The irony is that the average, silent majority Republican, wants a Johnson -- isolationist, privacy, freedom and to stop mortgaging their kids' futures, as well as self-deprecating with no ego. He wasn't a pure Libertartian, his fiscal conservatism stopped at the government, but damn if he was not a total, original Tea Party goers wet dream on vetoing anything and everything until the pork got addressed once and for all.
He was so bad that even the Republican party in New Mexico still bitches about him, and that's a good thing. He pissed of big GOP doners, like cutting off the annual state rodeo, telling them to raise their own, damn funds, instead of taking $1M of the taxpayers money. And the funny thing about that? The head of the rodeo, originally his biggest critic, became his biggest fan, because Johnson not only forced him to do such, but helped out on his own time.
Volunteerism is a lost art in Washington, but alive'n well in 'flyover territory' of the US. Johnson was one of the biggest volunteerism-first governors ever. That and he forced the state legislature to not waste his time. He was looked at being 'lazy,' but he got a lot done in a 6-7 hour day. Total work smarter, not harder, not for special interest. He'd organize waste cleanups and countless other, volunteer efforts that'd save 7-8 figures too.
As someone that has been in living in Florida my entire life, I can say New Yorkers / New Englanders / New Jersyites suck.
I would love to agree, but if that really is what the average Republican wants then they had a pretty good option in 2016 with Rand. I think he probably had as good a chance as anybody in the primary if Trump hadn't gotten in, but it still could have just as easily been Jeb or Marco or even Kasich.
I still wish the general election would have been between Paul and Webb. That would have made for some good debates and really shaken up the electorate
Meanwhile, some may have not noticed but Disney/ESPN had just brought back Keith Olbermann to host SportsCenter and other shows.
Double standard?
After all, Olbermann called Trump: "a Nazi,
white supremacist psychopath".
https://www.outkickthecoverage.com/white-house-rips-disney-ceo-bob-iger-espn-hiring-keith-olbermann/
Double standard?
After all, Olbermann called Trump: "a Nazi,
white supremacist psychopath".
https://www.outkickthecoverage.com/white-house-rips-disney-ceo-bob-iger-espn-hiring-keith-olbermann/
Let's see what happens to Samantha Bee after her horrible comment towards Ivanka.
I'm sorry .... but when did using a racial slur become 1000 times worse than calling people "Nazi", "C$nt", abusing women, asking people to kill the president, etc. etc. etc.???
And before you go all fried-chicken on me, I'm not defending racial slurs ... i'm just wondering when that got promoted to "all important" and everything else got demoted to "who cares".
Because America has a history of racism and as soon as we put calling someone a c*nt in the same category as calling someone a n*gger it creeps back. It's why we need laws to make people behave correctly in selling real estate, in hiring, in firing, in education. At the same time we don't have laws preventing a Republican from hiring a Democrat because political views aren't protected.
Could you imagine what would happen if some called Chelsea or Obama's daughters ***** on national TV?
or suggesting that they put on something skimpy because their dad was sexually into them
Laughed audibly at "before you go all fried-chicken on me".
Also big bad meanie Drumpf born & raised in Queens, not Manhattan boom roasted* @rediceknight @bqknight
I never said the silent majority of Republicans would eventually go for Johnson, but he would have had a really good chance in 2012.
Now in 2016, again, Trump is like the rich kid on the school grounds that can talk back to teachers and administrators. It's fun to root for him, but in the end, he's still a pompous @$$ that is self-serving.
From a Progressive magazine no less (and there were many others).
Trump was the 4% imbecile who got 85% of airtime because of the US media hating on him. As even Bernie Sanders pointed out, that was everything. Rand had no chance with that amount of 'furry' against the US media.
If the US media's ratings weren't hovering around 20% approval ratings, it would have been very different.
You can tell the difference between Millennials and Boomers/X'ers with how they interpret this statement from Webb:
"I killed for my country"
Millennials: "My God he's everything that is wrong with people who served in Vietnam! He killed innocent civilians!" (replay of late '60s and 70s "Baby Killer!" etc...)
Boomers/X'ers: "My God he's a man that actually understands none of us should ever have to be asked to take another life in the servitude of our leaders, let alone came home only to be spat on by those who didn't serve and don't understand how horrible it is to be put in that position." (counter that developed in the '80s ... now gone with the new generation)
I once took a colleague to task on this, and in the end, I didn't realize how grossly ignorant they were. E.g.,
- They did not know there was 'mandatory service' and a 'draft' during Vietnam
Grew up in the post-Nixon 'voluntary service' era - They did not know it was a crime to not serve [when draft notice was called]
They literally thought "going to Canada" was just a "political statement"
Your comments would be funny, if you weren't actually outcasting everyone who disagrees with you as 'deplorables' and 'racists' (the reason Trump was elected).
This thread aged well.
You guys and your "RACIST!" screams would be funny, if you weren't actually a bunch of racists.
![[roll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/roll.r191677.gif "roll [roll]")
See how that happens?
Well the people abusing women are all losing their jobs but anyway, do you all really not think there is a difference between calling someone a bad word and calling someone a racial slur? Bad words...aren’t really “bad words”. Everyone uses them and it’s fine, the only reason it’s not okay on TV is because kids may be watching.
A racial slur is NEVER okay.
Is it that hard to understand?
How is it sexism? Because she used the word c*nt? It had nothing to do with sexism.
Latest posts
-
OT: War in Israel 🇮🇱, Iran launches attack on Israel- Latest: San Diego Knight
-
-
-
