^ which is in direct contradiction to his other point - that the other side agrees that we should keep RPGs and tanks off the market.

He's saying "obviously you agree that these shouldn't be legal", and they he's screaming "they're unwilling to ban anything at all!"

These two positions are mutually exclusive. You accept one, and you have to deny the other. Yet, these are exactly the positions voiced in the segment.

1/12/2013 2:20:30 PM

Not if you insert the obviously implied "new" into that

1/12/2013 3:47:03 PM

+1000 for Stewart highlighting HSBC being labeled "too big to prosecute" despite aiding drug cartels and terrorists.

1/13/2013 6:35:40 PM

^ Honestly, I find many of the "know your customer" regarding our banking system terrifying and draconian.

The outrage of banks hosting customers involved in illegal activities leads to some very bad consequences, which should be entirely obvious. This is why you are likely subjected to a background investigation when you try to make a new bank account. Does that sound reasonable to you, because that's what you're advocating for.

This stuff is how they almost shut down Wikileaks. The Western governments have worked tirelessly to assure that they have enough control to shut down any movement of money they need. Do you want that? Why? It's also not a progressive cause. Nothing about that seems to be leftist. In my ideal picture of the left, they would be champions of personal liberty.

1/14/2013 12:26:41 PM

We have laws that state it is illegal for banks to do business with terrorists. Are you arguing that those laws shouldn't exist or are you arguing that large banks shouldn't have to play by those rules?

I'm just trying to clarify, I'm slightly confused by your post, if I misinterpreted I apologize

[Edited on January 14, 2013 at 1:04 PM. Reason : a]

1/14/2013 1:03:57 PM

Quote :

"The outrage of banks hosting customers involved in illegal activities leads to some very bad consequences, which should be entirely obvious. This is why you are likely subjected to a background investigation when you try to make a new bank account. Does that sound reasonable to you, because that's what you're advocating for."

In fairness this scenario with HSBC is a lot different, HSBC employes knowing assisted these individuals break US laws. If they hadn't done that then there would be nothing to see here.

1/14/2013 1:14:47 PM

Quote :

"We have laws that state it is illegal for banks to do business with terrorists. Are you arguing that those laws shouldn't exist or are you arguing that large banks shouldn't have to play by those rules?"

Well, yes to "those laws shouldn't exist". I'm in favor of banks not having the responsibility to determine if a customer is a terrorist. If there's an investigation obviously they must cooperate, but what on Earth is this scenario where the bank is looking at a prospective customer and knows they are a terrorist? I don't think that happens. Should a bank's customer list be constantly cross-checked against agency lists, like the no-fly list, and feed into their investigations? That's a more difficult question, although it is already the status quo. Saying it should be illegal to do business with a terrorist is way way more extreme than that.

I'm in favor of maintaining the ability to buy a Visa gift card at the grocery store with cash. Do you want to do away with that? Do you really think that would be for the better?

1/14/2013 2:46:51 PM

Visa cards in grocery stores don't really have to worry about international money transfers, which is where the government gets way more involved. There is already a great deal of red tape when figuring out backup withholding rates, they have to know enough info about their customer that it should be obvious if they should or shouldn't be doing what they are doing. HSBC knew what it was doing at the time, that has been proven, so I think the issue you are bringing up is not relevant.

1/14/2013 3:12:47 PM

^^ Did you even watch the clip or are you just trying to be an asshole?

1/14/2013 6:06:02 PM

^ My comments were actually prompted by watch the last Friday show. I'm not actually sure if it's been directly linked in this thread.

1/14/2013 8:04:01 PM

Quote :

"Honestly, I find many of the "know your customer" regarding our banking system terrifying and draconian."

join a credit union. they're non-profits, so they don't go doing shady shit to make the bottom line look better.

1/14/2013 8:40:24 PM

Unless something's changed, SECU does an inquiry if you deposit over a certain amount of cash into an account.

1/15/2013 4:22:06 PM

right...well every financial institute has to do that. my comment was more of "credit unions aren't profit driven so there is no motive to launder money for terrorists"

1/15/2013 10:36:05 PM

Sorry, I must've misunderstood the discussion.

1/16/2013 4:30:56 PM

So after watching the most recent stuff from Glenn Beck, I've realized he's probably one of the more relatable dudes to be on TV: desperately wants to be informed, cares so so much, but he has little to no attention span or intellectual discipline.

I don't suffer from the extreme self-importance, but otherwise, Glenn Beck and I are two peas in a pod.

1/30/2013 3:57:52 PM

http://screenrant.com/daily-show-jon-stewart-break-replacement-director-rosewater/

Quote :

"... Jon Stewart plans to take a hiatus from hosting The Daily Show over the summer of 2013. He will use this time to direct his first feature film, titled Rosewater... ... Rosewater is based off the best-selling nonfiction book Then They Came for Me: A Family’s Story of Love, Captivity, and Survival. The book tells the story of Maziar Bahari, an Iranian-British journalist who was imprisoned and tortured in Iran’s most infamous prison in 2009. Bound and blindfolded during his interrogation sessions, Bahari could only identify his main tormentor by the scent of the cologne he wore..."

3/5/2013 10:02:24 PM

Wasn't that the guy who was tortured because he gave an interview to The Daily Show?

3/6/2013 12:07:22 AM

Yes it was

3/6/2013 10:02:53 AM

Jon Stewart will be missed (although, I'm sure John Oliver won't disappoint).

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/stewart-savages-gop-ct-punters-for-rejecting-gun-control-cynical-exercise-in-disingenuous-debate/

Quote :

"Here's what's so crazy about this. The people in our country who spend millions of dollars to get elected to a legislative body known as the Senate are making the argument: There's no point in making laws, because criminals are going to end up breaking them."

4/19/2013 1:00:06 AM

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-may-13-2013/barack-trek--into-darkness

Credible.

5/15/2013 1:35:13 AM

It's funny to me that in multiple threads here Conservatives are accused of having no sense of humor, however when satire turns on the left threads like this go cold.

Nobody here watching Stewart, SNL, or even Chris Matthews trying to be funny lately?



You really need to lighten up.

5/19/2013 3:10:39 PM

They have to strike a balance of their self-awareness that all these scandals are pretty bullshit and that they don't want to give up the game that they're impartial journalists. Everybody knows they're more friendly to the Democrats (I think, justifiably because the Republicans are asshats) but they can't outright call these "scandals" bullshit because the public opinion hasn't shifted there yet. I'm not outraged about this because I don't care about the GOP manufactured scandals.

5/19/2013 9:00:42 PM

^^ This thread has averaged a post per month since the end of January and before these "scandals" broke, and now your point is that the thread has gone "cold" because nobody is responding to Stewart making fun of Obama?

Maybe I'm missing your point

5/20/2013 9:39:14 AM

I too am missing his point.

The Stewart jokes on Obama have been cracking me up. I retweeted them.

5/20/2013 10:06:03 AM

y0willy thinks that every liberal, progressive, and democrat supports Obama without question and can not criticize or satire him. Basically, he's never met a liberal, progressive, or democrat.

5/20/2013 10:07:59 AM

Perhaps my confusion is partly due to me assuming he read the post above his, which is satire of Obama. But we all know what happens when you assume...

5/20/2013 10:53:26 AM

Well at least IMStoned420 gets it.

dtownral never fails to disappoint either (although that's not a compliment).

Good to see the world is as it should be.

5/20/2013 1:53:23 PM

How about you explain it to me as if I'm someone stupid enough to predict that Obama was going to lose the election in a landslide, you know, like I'm a 3rd grader

5/20/2013 2:15:57 PM

Because I don't have time for 3rd graders?

Clinging to whatever feeling in your pants Obama's reelection gives you is fine. Pretending that we're any better off now because of it is pathetic.

5/20/2013 3:18:13 PM

You can just admit that you either failed to read the post above yours or failed to accurately comprehend what's going on in this thread in general, it won't hurt that much, I promise

And while you're at it, please feel free to point out where I said anything about being better off due to Obama in this current thread. Or were you just trying to create a separate argument so people might forget how retarded you look after your first post here?

5/20/2013 3:21:23 PM

My post had nothing to do with the satirical piece posted earlier.

If anything it reminded me how rare such posts are.

You said it yourself regarding assumptions; maybe you should follow your own advice?

5/20/2013 3:25:11 PM

Did I miss something, or wasn't this thread specifically bumped to call attention to the funny regarding Obama's past few weeks.

Consider me confused by Willy's recent posts as well.

5/20/2013 3:25:39 PM

It's pretty simple really-

The reactions to conservative "funnies" on this board are exaggerated and overplayed.

Concerning Obama they are nearly non-existent.

5/20/2013 3:29:29 PM

So is your point that someone posted Stewart making fun of Obama and then no one chimed in with "LOLZ", meaning that no one thinks its funny when he goes after the other side?

5/20/2013 3:33:16 PM

if y0willy doesn't think there is a big enough reaction to Obama's "funnies", shouldn't his complaint be primarily with Republicans or conservatives? Is it the left's fault that the right has never been able to do satire?

5/20/2013 3:36:35 PM

^^You've got to be kidding me.

^A valid point I hadn't considered.



[Edited on May 20, 2013 at 3:38 PM. Reason : -]

5/20/2013 3:37:32 PM

(in case you missed Smath's recent attempt at satire: /message_topic.aspx?topic=636914)

[Edited on May 20, 2013 at 3:42 PM. Reason : .]

5/20/2013 3:39:02 PM

I tend to ignore Smath because he is a disgusting human being.

He also happens to be a teacher which should scare the shit out of everyone here.

Thank God for internet anonymity right?

5/20/2013 3:43:10 PM

OK sorry to try and get clarification, I mean I just felt I might need it considering the post right in front of the one you're referencing is one where Stewart makes fun of conservatives and no one responded for a month

5/20/2013 3:45:47 PM

The right has plenty of reaction to "funnies", except that are usually ridiculous in themselves. That's really where they fail at being funny. Instead of embroidering a funny quote on accent pillows, or posting funny gif, or having a sarcastic comedian prod at something; they spend 2 weeks on Fox News fabricating it into a scandal that is THREATENING YOUR FREEDOM!!!!. Everything is the worst thing ever to them, its all over-the-top ridiculous fear mongering. There is never any subtlety, just ham-fisted over reaction to every little thing.

5/20/2013 3:48:51 PM

Well I for one agree with that completely.

It doesn't change my opinion that *many* "supposedly satire enjoying" liberals aren't quite as amused when it's leveled at them.

I also wasn't considering the length of time between posts ITT when I made my initial statement, although I suppose I can appreciate that observation. I was only considering other threads where satire is used (or abused, smath), and read this thread for beginning to end.

I was simply trying to highlight a disparity, and although it might be silly to suggest on a messageboard such as this, my complaint also concerns interactions I have with friends and coworkers.

That complaint is basically the only night they think Jon Stewart (for example) isn't funny is when he focuses on Obama or these non-scandals.

Usually they assume I think he isn't funny because I'm the only conservative they hang out with on a regular basis, so they assume I'm being a jackass when I (of all people) bring up his segment on an anti-Obama night. Completely ludicrous.

[Edited on May 20, 2013 at 3:59 PM. Reason : -]

5/20/2013 3:56:18 PM

So this whole last half of a page has been you venting about your IRL friends?

5/20/2013 3:59:05 PM

https://www.facebook.com/beingconservative?fref=ts

They're pretty funny bunch, probably not in the way they intend...

5/20/2013 4:00:19 PM

Simply an attitude that I observe here and IRL.

Not saying it's *every* liberal or *every* user I disagree with here.

I like to think I enjoy most humor on both sides assuming it's funny in the first place. I would like your opinions concerning people who only think it's funny when it's at the other side's expense, and I would like an explanation why recent jokes concerning Obama aren't getting a lot of attention here?

Maybe it sounds like I'm being a baby, and I guess I can appreciate moron's retweets, but it's pretty obvious this board has been largely mum while similar conservative funnies are panned as the funniest things ever.

Now I'm wide open to explanations:

1) this thread isnt very popular?
2) liberal targeted satire is less natural (therefore less funny)?
3) conservatives are simply the root of more humorous things?
4) obviously there is a lack of organized conservative comedy
5) dumbasses like smath

6) your ideas?

I'm not really trying to pick a fight, just generate a discussion. I tend to chime in on old threads when I notice a trend that maybe nobody else has considered. I can appreciate that liberals certainly hold the high ground when it comes to political humor, but I don't appreciate hypocrisy on any level, so I want to make sure you think liberal/Obama/democrat satire is equally as funny.

Seems like many people I interact with do not.

Laugh, god damn it.

5/20/2013 4:12:00 PM

http://redbirdacres.blogspot.com/2013/05/presidential-mothers-of-5-living.html

This was posted on mother's day (popped up in Facebook).

it's pretty funny, right...?

5/20/2013 4:48:47 PM

Quote :

"Here's what's so crazy about this. The people in our country who spend millions of dollars to get elected to a legislative body known as the Senate are making the argument: There's no point in making laws, because criminals are going to end up breaking them."

too bad that's not the argument they are making, and such a claim is easily eviscerated anyway

[Edited on May 20, 2013 at 9:33 PM. Reason : ]

5/20/2013 9:32:44 PM

youre wrong

5/20/2013 9:45:12 PM

He has been hitting Obama hard on the VA benefits issue, especially tonight. It's not terribly funny because its fucking terrible how bad Obama has failed on the issue.

5/20/2013 11:28:12 PM

It wasn't Jon Stewart last night but I thought the show was really good. Apparently Canada has had zero banking crises in its entire history. Jason jones did a really good contrast between bankers in Canada and the us.

6/25/2013 3:19:29 PM

i loved that segment too.

although i do wonder if some of them were actors when they were showing citizen reactions to the word bankers

6/25/2013 4:29:05 PM