You have to understanding something -
As a conservative, I'm admitting to watching Bill Maher. Yes, I have the decency to hear both sides of arguments instead of hearing just one-sided views.
Regardless of how numbskulled Bill Maher is, and regardless of how much they often have a circle jerk (literally, I imagine they go back-stage and have a circle jerk) when he invites people as retarded as Michael Moore and another liberal and have a 3v1 the whole time, I still don't mind seeing other people's point of view from time to time. I prefer it when he has a more even guest list, but I digress. Unlike Daily and Colbert, where 90% of the time it is just completely liberal sided with no conservative to give a counter-view.
And let's be honest, Colbert is political sarcasm for the mentally handicapped. Yes, I can tell you're being sarcastic 10 years ago, it wasn't funny then, it still isn't. But to 15 year old college kids who think they know what is going on in the world apparently it is :awe: (I much prefer Daily)
This is kind of funny and sad.
Some credit is due for watching these shows, but most is lost for not understanding them.
First Maher. I'm not the biggest fan. He doesn't usually have that much to offer IMO, and he's pretty intolerant of different views, and seems to attack his audience for being liberal.
He's too soft, usually, on right-wing guests, seeming to want to make up for the reaction of his audience to give them a nice friendly place to spread their message.
But he has decent guests, and he has dome some great pieces, such as his 'in the bubble' segments which sadly, seem to have been lost on you.
The whole point of those was how a lot of people on the right have a big blind spot and seem immune to facts - and you seem to be demonstrating that.
The funny thing is, for all your protestations of these shows, you don't seem able to actually argue against the points they're making. Just to complain you don't agree.
You think you have made some point against Colbert by saying you think no one is fooled by his character being satire - rather missing the entire point. It's not intended to 'fool you'.
The fact you can watch Colbert and think it's bad because you can tell it's satire says a lot about your understanding of the show. It's frequently very good satire, lost on you.
Admittedly, some of it isn't as good - some is obvious and self-indulgent and not that pointed, but a lot is very good. Your criticism has more to do with you not being able to question your positions in light of the points he's making, and therefore not getting much out of the show.
You should try to pick a few issues Stewart or Colbert do and try to argue against their position and see how you do.
There's a reason your side hasn't been able to sustain any sort of decent show like these, despite trying. Comedy is funnier when there's some truth in it.
That's a difference. What will some right-wingers find funny? Things supporting hate. The racist ones can laugh a lot at things making fun of minorities. (Just today in this forum, I saw a poster defending his claim that an African-American name was 'funny', which had gotten him a ban). Things ridiculing their enemies - even if they're lies.
For example, Al Gore was the political leader who did the most to get the internet created - the greatest advancement for our country in decades I'd say. A rational response would be to give him credit. But not the right. By torturing a quote he gave to make it sound like he was exaggerating his role - that he'd 'invented the internet' - something he clearly did not say, the right found no end to laughing at jokes based on that lie. I saw members of Congress parroting the joke "he invented the paper clip too! HA HA!" They find it hilarious simply for supporting their political view, despite being a lie. That's not a great basis for much comedy, other than to fellow cult members 'in the bubble'.
Facebook
Twitter