FCC Considers Fining Stephen Colbert Over Controversial Trump Joke (rollingstone.com) 520
FCC chairman Ajit Pai said on Friday his agency will be looking into complaints made against Late Show host Stephen Colbert for what some labeled a homophobic joke about President Donald Trump. From a report: On Monday's Late Show, Colbert quipped that "the only thing [Trump's] mouth is good for is being Vladimir Putin's c**k holster." The joke drew accusations of homophobia, a viral #FireColbert campaign and FCC complaints against Colbert. In an interview Friday, FCC chairman Ajit Pai told a Philadelphia radio station, "I have had a chance to see the clip now and so, as we get complaints -- and we've gotten a number of them -- we are going to take the facts that we find and we are going to apply the law as it's been set out by the Supreme Court and other courts and we'll take the appropriate action." Pai added, "Traditionally, the agency has to decide, if it does find a violation, what the appropriate remedy should be. A fine, of some sort, is typically what we do."
Nice spin (Score:3)
Re:Nice spin (Score:4, Insightful)
Explicit profanity (Score:2, Insightful)
Not over the joke, over the words he used in it.
That's a good description of the issue.
We don't really care that much when people insult the president, and we can think badly of such people or goodly of them. That part doesn't matter.
But Colbert's phrase was particularly rude, it's pretty-much covered in Carlin's seven dirty words [wikipedia.org], and it wasn't a sly, under-the-radar slip or emotional outburst as part of a dramatic scene, for example. It was explicit profanity.
People aren't going after him for the rest of his monologue, which was also very insulting, an
Re:Explicit profanity (Score:4, Informative)
It's the explicit profanity, and Colbert knows better.
It was bleeped, and it was within the Safe Harbor period (10 PM to 6 AM). The FCC knows better.
Re: (Score:3)
Tell that to Oprah when she was talking about getting your asshole eaten out at 4PM on a weekday. The FCC admitted she was too powerful to fine.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Explicit profanity (Score:5, Insightful)
Too bad that's not the test. The FCC only has the ability to regulate "obscenity" during late night (10pm to 6am). To be obscene the material:
"must appeal to an average person's prurient interest; depict or describe sexual conduct in a 'patently offensive' way; and, taken as a whole, lack serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value."
I expect the Pai-led FCC will attempt to levy a fine. I'd also love to be a CBS lawyer handling the case, and expect CBS to ultimately prevail in court, due to the "serious political value" prong and the clear evidence that this was a riff against Trump.
First amendment.... yee-haw.
Re: (Score:3)
Except the FCC doesn't actually have a list of words, they just decide whether something is profane or not on their own. The only guidelines really given are precedent. That said, it would be hard to argue that Colbert wasn't trying to be profane. However it was both censored and on late night TV, so he probably shouldn't be fined.
Re: Nice spin (Score:3, Interesting)
This article is pure bullshit.
The FCC is not considering fining anyone.
They are reviewing the complaints, which is their job. IF they decide a violation happened, THEN they will begin to consider fines.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Eh... it's on par with saying Hillary's a cock-sleeve for the Saudi royal family
It's crude, but not offensive in the least. Especially when you factor in the actual evidence of Clinton-Saudi relationships.
Say hello to my little friend "context" (Score:2, Interesting)
A cock is just another word for a rooster.
And cock is just another word for penis.
When you say one man is using another as a cock holster, and you know neither personally owns livestock, then the meaning is pretty clear.
Re:Say hello to my little friend "context" (Score:5, Funny)
Colbert: "“The only thing [Trump’s] mouth is good for is being Vladimir Putin’s cock holster,”
FCC: Hey, you can't say that on TV. Retract it!
Colbert: "Last night I said that the only thing Trump's mouth was good for is being Vladimir Putin's cock holster. I was wrong. Trump's mouth isn't good enough to be Vladimir Putin's cock holster."
Re: (Score:2)
A cock is just another word for a rooster.
And cock is just another word for penis.
And, you know, a rooster is a type of bird and a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. (Pretty sure the "penis" analogy will track that nicely too.)
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps he was talking about plumbing?
Re: (Score:3)
Disclaimer: I have four hens, but no cock.
You must be married.
Re: (Score:2)
We're not allowed to make homophonic jokes here.
Where is the homophobia? (Score:5, Insightful)
When this story broke out, I searched for the clip to see what the fuss was about. When I did find it I realised that I had seen it before, and while I did think at the time that it was an unusual type of joke for one of those monologues, I didn't see how it could be labelled homophobic. The joke doesn't say that homosexuality is bad, nor did it say anything about anyone who is gay. It merely suggested a closer relationship than has been admitted and a power dynamic that Trump is Putin's bitch. It's strong stuff, but nothing different that calling Hillary Clinton a witch ("jail the witch").
The funny thing is, a lot of the people who are complaining about this would also say that gay marriage should not be allowed. I think that if gays and lesbians had a choice they would rather be able to live their lives as they want to and put up with the odd joke or two than not be allowed to marry the person they love and be told that they are going to hell.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And "family values" right-wingers supporting this vile, immoral, even cruder talking president is somehow not hypocritical?
Pot, kettle black.
Re:Where is the homophobia? (Score:5, Insightful)
But surely it is hypocrisy for conservative pundits to complain when they actually say these sort of outrageous things all the time. The big difference is that they aren't joking.
The hosts of the radio show "Sons of Liberty" once stated that homosexuals committed half of all murders in large cities. That wasn't a joke. And did you know that victims of "legitimate rape" can't get pregnant? I can only wish that this was a joke. State senetor Michele Bachman once said that "If you're involved in the gay and lesbian lifestyle, it's bondage. It is personal bondage, personal despair and personal enslavement."
So I don't think that it is hypocritical to say something in jest that you would deplore if someone else said it seriously. This isn't really about hypocrisy, it is about seeing an opening to feel like they are taking the high moral ground and trash someone they don't like. It's the same as someone who happily calls people latte-sipping leftie warmist alarmists, and yet who also gets offended if you call them a denier.
Re: (Score:2)
+1 Insightful.
Re:Where is the homophobia? (Score:5, Insightful)
The difference is that Trump is the President, and Colbert is a comedian. It's a very important distinction.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Where is the homophobia? (Score:5, Insightful)
So, it depends on who is talking? If it's a liberal saying it, it's OK, while if it's a liberal's enemy saying it, it's wrong. Gotcha. That's really the issue here.
Either homophobic jokes are wrong, or they're not
You have ignored the main point about my post, so once again I have to ask how is this a homophobic joke. Just because you keep saying that it is one doesn't mean that it is true. Just because it mentions an act that gays do, doesn't mean that it is denigrating them. All it says that the relationship between Don and Vlad is closer than they admit, with Trump being subservient to the one who helped win him the election. That's the joke.
And this is also the fundamental difference between when Colbert says it and when those attacking him now say it. When conservatives talk about homosexuals they aren't joking. They mean all the bad things they say about them; that being gay is a sickness that needs to be cured; that gays should not be able to marry; that they are pedophiles who prey on our children; that they will all burn in hell. So which one is homophobic? The one who tells a joke, or the one who viciously hate gays and acts to limit gay rights?
Re:Where is the homophobia? (Score:4, Insightful)
He was saying that Trump is so vile and disgusting that he must suck dicks like a degenerate.
He said nothing of the sort. He didn't even say that he does suck dicks, only that "the only thing [his] mouth is good for is being Vladimir Putin's cock holster".
Now did he say that this is all that gays' mouths are good for? No, just Trump. He didn't say that he was so bad that he must suck cock, but that it was all his mouth was good for - and the cock of the Russian president specifically. This is no way makes any statement about homosexuality in general.
And is it gay people who are attacking Colbert, or just conservatives out for blood? And do these same people also attack Trump for signing an order protecting freedom for opponents of gay marriage [lifesitenews.com], or do their concern for lesbians and gays disappear when it comes to actual homophobic actions? No, they don't... which leads me to this:
There is a saying that it is very hard to be a liberal, because of all the stuff that you have to pretend that you don't know. It has, however, been a hilarious few days watching people like you pretend that you are having a hard time understanding why a group of people would be upset that their very identity itself is as a slur.
No, what is really funny is all the people who suddenly think that being homophobic is wrong, when the rest of the time that is their default position. The side of politics that rants against political correctness can twist themselves in knots to be politically correct about things that they don't believe at all simply because they can smell the blood in the water (or do you think that is offensive to sharks?). It is funny to see people like this random twit [twitter.com] who complain about how Colbert is both homophobic and politically correct. Colbert must be so worried to lose a viewer who didn't like his show anyway!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Where is the homophobia? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Where is the homophobia? (Score:4, Insightful)
The joke is literally using homosexuality as a club. While drooling morons are going, "OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO WOT NOW TRUMP?", they're not fucking doing it because "zomg Putin!", they're fucking doing it because, "LOL COLBERT CALLED TRUMP TEH GAY".
Good grief, you sound like a 12 year old.
You know it, I know it, and disingenuous pieces of shit everywhere know it.
Well obviously I don't know it because otherwise I would not have said that the joke doesn't say that homosexuality is bad. I stand by that claim. In no way did the joke say that gays are cock holsters; it just said that Trump is one. It didn't even say that Trump was performing a sexual act; just that all he is good for is acting in a subservient way to Putin. The joke is crude, but it makes no mention of homosexuals in general.
Fine him into the ground, but don't ... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Whether he should be fined or not is none of my business, but the same rules should apply to everybody. If a tasteless joke aboutTrump is to be punished for being 'homophobic' (which it clearly isn't), then how about the black-hearted hate-preachers, like the socalled evangelicals, who keep spewing homophobia, anti-semitism etc every time they open the mouth? Apart from that, the joke in question was only offensive to Trump and his supporters, who are allergic to criticism; well, possibly to gays - I don't
Gay jokes aren't offensive (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not always homophobic to mockingly refer to someone as a homo, or even a submissive bottom homo. Not every pejorative homosexual joke is homophobic or offensive. Sometime it's just boys being boys.
CowboyNeal enjoys ruggedized USB sticks up his bunghole. See, it's all good.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, it is, and your CowboyNeal example is not a gay reference. Not every pejorative homosexual joke is homophobic or offensive, but ones which are homophobic and offensive are, and that includes mocking someone for being homosexual, your very first example.
Re:Gay jokes aren't offensive (Score:4, Funny)
They're outraged that Trump's been called a fag.
Thanks, I didn't see it under that angle:
"Trump has been called a fag! That's outrageous to fags!"
I can agree with that, seen that way the complaint seems actually legitimate.
Minus one brazillion, Offtopic (Score:5, Insightful)
In what universe is this story news for nerds?
SCOTUS Should Strike Down Profanity Exemption (Score:5, Insightful)
SCOTUS needs to strike down the profanity exemption to free speech. It was always bullshit. This should've been settled with Lenny Bruce.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Overt attack on freedom of speech (Score:5, Insightful)
This whole tempest in a teapot is an attempt to punish criticism of the government in general, and criticism of Trump specifically. Colbert did nothing to apologize for.
Trump sucks Putin's cock. Come at me, FCC!
(captcha: quoted)
This is exactly what the FCC should be doing (Score:5, Insightful)
People complained to the FCC about Colbert's joke, so the FCC is supposed to review the case. This is the FCC's job, and they would be remiss if they didn't investigate. The FCC isn't investigating because they have a problem with Colbert criticizing Trump, but because it's their job to investigate complaints. The FCC regularly gets complaints about SNL, including a sketch last year in which Dave Chappelle used the n-word on the show. They investigate those complaints, just like they have to investigate the complaints against CBS and Colbert. It's their job. There are a number of factors that go into the FCC's decision, including the context of the objectionable content, whether it was live or not, and the time at which the program aired.
I don't think Colbert's comments merit a fine from the FCC, but that would be the typical penalty for objectionable content on broadcast TV. I don't believe Colbert's comments were homophobic, but they do refer to the act of oral sex, and content relating to sexual acts can still draw a fine from the FCC. There wasn't anything graphic about what Colbert said, and there's a long history of sex-related jokes on late night TV going back at least to the days of Johnny Carson. There were far more objectionable things that aired regularly when Conan hosted Late Night, including characters like the masturbating bear. Then there's all the things Sean Connery has claimed to have done with Alex Trebek's mother on SNL Celebrity Jeopardy, which, by the way, is hilariously funny. I think it would be strange if the FCC issued a fine, especially given that this is late night TV where such content is pretty common.
That said, I didn't find Colbert's comments funny. There wasn't anything particularly clever and I just didn't find it amusing. Personally, I think Colbert is the least funny of any late night TV hosts in recent memory. I didn't really like Conan when he was on Late Night, because I felt too much of his humor was toilet humor. He did have some really good sketches, though, like the recurring In The Year 2000. To his credit, he's gotten a lot better since moving to the Tonight Show and now to TBS. Leno didn't quite measure up to Carson, but he was more in the style of Carson than other hosts. I really enjoyed Leno's Tonight Show, though Fallon is also really good. I didn't find Letterman particularly funny, though he was better than Colbert. James Corden has his moments on the Late Late Show, and Craig Ferguson was pretty good at times. That said, I prefer Seth Meyers, who I think is quite amusing and does a great job with interviewing his guests. I really liked Meyers when he did SNL's Weekend Update, and he's gotten a lot better at hosting Late Night.
No, I don't think Colbert's comments were homophobic or merit a fine. As late night TV goes, Colbert's comments weren't particularly pushing the envelope, though the FCC has to investigate these complaints. They should investigate and hopefully decide that no further action is warranted. I don't think Colbert should be fired over this, but I wouldn't mind seeing him replaced because he's just not that funny. My opinion has nothing to do with these comments, but rather my overall opinion of him as a late night TV host.
By the way, the lameness filter shouldn't be preventing me from using the n-word. Dave Chappelle has a long history of using it in his sketches, including the classic Black White Supremacist, and it's on-topic because he used it in the same time slot on SNL. I know, trolls use it on a regular basis, but it's actually on topic here in providing some context for other content that's been aired on late night TV and why I don't think Colbert's comments merit a fine from the FCC.
A ridiculous accusation (Score:5, Funny)
Putin said emphatically: "I did not have sexual relations with that man"
America land of free speech... (Score:4, Interesting)
Buncha Snowflakes (Score:3, Interesting)
Phuck you!
Right wing left wing (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm living in Europe and I bet tomorrow morning in Church, people will be laughing not at the joke but at how America is still arguing left wing and right wing when most of the free world sees it as far right wing and further right wing.
Out of curiosity, what exactly is the definition of right and left in America anymore? Should we start calling it team red and team blue or team elephant and team donkey? This has so little to do with left and right or conservative and liberal that people simply make fools of themselves saying these things.
It's a competition of who can pretend to claim the high ground more than the other by declining into the deepest and darkest pits to do so. Good people don't choose sides. Good people treat everyone with kindness, dignity and respect... even the people they don't like. Good people don't say "it's ok to talk badly about this person because someone on the news does... or because he said something bad first".
Re: (Score:2)
I have decided I'll label them "the religious nutjob wing" and "the liberal douchebag wing" of The Party.
Let's finally stop pretending there are really 2 distinct parties in the US.
Re:Right wing left wing (Score:4, Insightful)
This just in (Score:5, Funny)
The accusation got worse, it was upgraded from slander to betrayal of state secrets.
It's working. (Score:4, Interesting)
Stephen Colbert Hits Best Ratings Since 2015 Premiere [thedailybeast.com]
It would seem the people enjoy this kind of thing.
Colberts' 1st Amendment rights (Score:4, Insightful)
Is THIS the country we're living in now? Where you can't criticize POTUS without being OFFICIALLY censured? If so then we're one step closer to living in a dictatorship. Is this the United States of America, or is it somewhere like Syria, or Turkey, or Malaysia?
Comment removed (Score:3)
Yay authoritarianism (Score:5, Insightful)
For those of you that don't get it, this is what authoritarianism actually looks like.
Colbert's comment was absolutely NOT homophobic, unless you consider associating Trump with gays to be insulting to gays (which, I would grant...).
What this is ACTUALLY about is the Trump administration not being happy that a prominent celebrity made a negative comment about Trump, and so they will do whatever they can to prosecute him, even if it means redefining the english language.
And by the way, THIS is what first amendment is for. Like it or not, Trump IS government. That means he is *required* to suck it up if people criticize him, just like every gov't body has done before him.
It's truely scary how you Americans are not just fucking yourselves over, but you're doing it with eyes wide open and cheers.
Re:Haha (Score:5, Insightful)
It is odd that the joke is being labeled "homophobic." Nothing in it implies that homosexuality is wrong. If Colbert had said the same thing about Hilary Clinton, it would have made just as much sense, had the same meaning, but could not be described as "homophobic."
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Haha (Score:4, Funny)
Hey, not all homosexuals. I bet there's at least a few that don't even like Vladimir Putin, much less want to give him blowjobs every day...
Re:Haha (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you're wrong about this. He wasn't suggesting Trump would give or has given a blowjob to Putin. He was drawing a word picture of Putin pissing in Trump's mouth, which is a) not a common sexual act and b) something that is in keeping with what we know about Trump.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You're meaning is unclear.
Do you mean we know President Trump has praised and complemented President Putin?
I believe we do.
Do you mean we are not unaware that President Putin has ordered the assassination of leaders critical of Mr. Putin?
I believe we do know that.
Do you believe we are unaware of President Trump's financial interest in in the Russian block?
I believe we are aware of it.
I think the discernment here is to observe President Putin's actions, and to measure it against the freedoms our founders tho
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Why are you sharing your porn collection with all of us here? Can't you jack off in privacy?
Re:Haha (Score:5, Insightful)
You're projecting a bit, he never suggested it was a vile act. You can only see it as a homophobic insult if somehow a blow job is a bad thing, which is what that argument hinges on. The joke works because it implies a consensual servitude on the part of Trump towards Putin, as well as the fact that Trump is pretty terrible at talking. Talk of homophobia is a diversion.
Re: Haha (Score:2)
It also works because neither Trump nor Putin are that keen on "the gays".
Re: (Score:3)
Trump is not personally anti-gay, his party is. Trump in office is not good for gay issues, but probably not as bad as Pence assuming his office would be.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
His signing an executive order (the Religious Freedom Restoration Act), allowing people to discriminate against same-sex couples, and their children, says otherwise. Obviously the last person he talked to that day was against same-sex marriage, and he always goes with the last person he talks to, or the latest thing he's seen on Fox News. He's a follower with ADD, not a leader.
His support of ANY rights except for the rich and powerful is certainly not "baked into" his character.
Re:Haha (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Haha (Score:5, Insightful)
I disagree. He was looking for a way to depict Trump as sexual partner for Putin -- a way to paint him as literally "in bed together" with the Russians. If either Putin or Trump had been female, it could have been any other sexual act... or possibly one with a strap on or other phallus.
Just because it was a homo or bi sexual act doesn't place the negative on the act -- the negative is on the improper relationship -- especially Trump's desire to please Putin.
Re:Haha (Score:4, Funny)
He was looking for a way to depict Trump as sexual partner for Putin ...
Or Putin's bitch. No matter, that picture has been painted and no amount of therapy is going to make it go away. #ThanksColbert
Joking aside (Score:5, Informative)
It's worth looking at what's happening while we're distracted with this. Because what's happening is just not funny:
Russian violated the mid range missile treaty. Trump said nothing.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/14/world/europe/russia-cruise-missile-arms-control-treaty.html?_r=0
Russian flaunted the artic military base treaty, Trump said nothing.
http://abcnews.go.com/International/russia-flaunts-arctic-expansion-military-bases/story?id=47091750
When Trump bombed the Syrian airbase, he informed Putin ahead of time, Putin told Assad. Assad removed all his fighters and bombers from the base. US blew up a bit of tarmac as a result. If Trump did that with ground troops, Assad would have ambushed them.
Not funny I know, but that is why we need Colbert.
Re:Joking aside (Score:5, Funny)
Russian flaunted the artic military base treaty, Trump said nothing.
Flouted. The word you want is flouted. It means to defy unashamedly.
To flaunt something is to brandish it about. You could use it in a sentence like this:
Putin flaunted his cock to the world before holstering it triumphantly in Trump's gaping mouth.
Re:Haha (Score:5, Funny)
Well, I heard the reason Melania doesn't sleep in the white house with Donald is because Putin snores.
So there are better and wittier ways of making the same point.
Re:Haha (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Then you should say in "bed together" or in cahooots but NOT "cock holster".
You're trying to make the case for being politically correct?
...grab 'em by the pussy.
rotflmao. That ship sailed a long time ago.
etc.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Haha (Score:4, Informative)
Or he means to imply that Trump and Putin really, really like each other. The terms like 'being in bed with' have existed for a long time to describe ties like the one Trump is accused of having with Russia (e.g. Senator Johnson opposes Bill X because he is in bed with Big Oil!). To me this simply seems like a more crass variant.
That said, even if it was homophobic, a fine for a joke is absolute bullshit. What is this, Germany? Besides that, since when has the Trump administration given a shit about homophobia? Do they realize who the VP is?
Re: (Score:2)
Every day? Wow, that's a lot of action.
Re: (Score:3)
I disagree, it wasn't the worst thing that could be painted about Trump. I'm sure there are many much worse things he could come up with. It was the least appropriate thing he could come up with for describing what Trump's mouth is good for. There's a clear difference here.
He's saying that the only thing Trumps mouth is good for is performing sexual acts. This could be considered highly complimentary.
I
Re: (Score:2)
Not just gay men receive blowjobs. Not just gay men give them. And, regardless of your gender or orientation, it's considered more submissive to give than receive.
The only people who thought this homophobic aren't gay. Trump is a servant to Putin.
Re:Haha (Score:5, Insightful)
What's actually happening is a bunch of alt-right dipshits are pretending to be offended because they can target a liberal by doing so. It's essentially a false flag operation. Moreover, they lack the self-awareness to tell the difference between what Colbert said and actual homophobic slurs, so it's no wonder they're labeling it inaccurately.
Parent basically nails it (Score:4, Interesting)
Trump: "Romney would have dropped to his knees for my endorsement in 2012"
Irony and Hypocrisy are both dead.
The media cleaned up Trump so people didn't realize how much worse he talked in public- they edited out the best they could while retaining a lot of the stupid and inflammatory statements... which mostly served to distract from the lack of any detail on positions (which he is flip flopping at record levels anyway.)
Re: Haha (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Agreed.
This is just a crude way of stating that Trump is essentially "Putin's bitch".
If either one or both of them were female, similar crude statements could have been made without any homosexual connection.
As it stands though, both are male and thus such a crude statement requires describing a sexual act between two males.
Labeling this as homophobic is nothing more than trying to find a justification for wanting to punish Colbert.
There are plenty of statements disdainful of homosexuals uttered on TV that
Re: (Score:3)
The "joke" requires an assumption there is something wrong with being what was said. Many would interpret that differently for a man than a woman while many would not. It's not really odd that many see it as homophobic. It clearly is, though that's not its primary problem.
The real problem is that the joke crossed the line, the entire section of the monologue did. It was not funny, just hateful. Very unlike Colbert and I'm surprised anything like that material ever made it to air.
Re: (Score:3)
and that "wrong" would be the idea of a president bending over backwards (or just over) to please the leader of russia, a man guilty of assassination, violating human rights, and the illegal invasion of other nations (2 out of 3.... no wonder republicans like him so much). pleasing that sort of evil man is not something the "leader of the free world" should be doing.
that's what is wrong.
and thats why Merkel is now the LotFW.
the US has abdicated.
Re: (Score:2)
Ajit Pai was appointed FCC chairman by Trump. The main "liberal vs conservative" issue that the FCC deals with is network neutrality, where Pai is firmly on the conservative side (anti-NN and pro free-market-for-monopolists).
Re:Haha (Score:5, Insightful)
The Libs are eating their own now
Not really, Liberals understand that the joke was inappropriate, but not really homophobic.
The joke was inferring a relationship between two heterosexual men where the weaker one sexually submits to the stronger one for protection, basically a "prison bitch".
All the complaints are just political theatre, Conservatives don't actually care that if it's homophobic or not, they just know it sounds homophobic and that's enough to trigger the faux-outrage.
Ajit Pai is just playing the part of the establishment Republican captured by the Trump administration.
Re:Haha (Score:5, Insightful)
All the complaints are just political theatre, Conservatives don't actually care that if it's homophobic or not, they just know it sounds homophobic and that's enough to trigger the faux-outrage.
Exactly. Someone complained on Twitter that if Rush had said that about Obama, Liberals would have freaked out. Perhaps that's true, but I contend that, had that happened, the guy who tweeted that would have simply checked "Like".
People get bent out of shape (or pretend to) way too easily these days - or do so not really understanding why.
For example, during a preview for the movie, "An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power" when it showed Trump saying he'd shutdown the EPA, I heard my mother say, "Good". I thought to myself, "What the fuck has the EPA every done to her?" (Answer: Nothing. Mom is 75 and watches a LOT of Fox News - sigh.)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
No, this is the leftwing liberal playbook from the last 50 years being turned on a leftist for one of the few times, in only a tenth the strength. Turnabout is *always* fair play. Deal with it.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The "joke" was more than inappropriate. It was obscene and not in keeping with established broadcast standards. The writers wrote it, the actor spoke it, the network censors decided to allow it, it was taped and not scrubbed from the tape. Therefore it was also a conspired effort to defame and denigrate. A big fine is in order and probably some censures.
Re: Haha (Score:2)
Jesus, I though the US prides itself free speech. But apparently making a joke on TV after 2335 is not allowed.
Liberals* want to stop free speech in universities. Conservatives want to stop free speech because it's obscene.
* I loathe to call them liberals, seeing as they're views are fairly authoritarian and I'm pretty sure a authoritarian-liberal is an oxymoron.
Re: (Score:3)
Plenty of Republican homosexuals would disagree with you, you left wing bigot.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Plenty of Republican homosexuals would disagree with you
Well if you vote for a party that blatantly hates you, you're pretty much the poster child for irrationality. So, frankly, who cares?
Re:Fake News (Score:5, Interesting)
LOL you think it's millennial democrats filling these reports?!
Head over to 4chan/pol. They are organising a mass complaint campaign and trying to get him fired. 4chan's pol is far right, by the way. Deeply anti-Semitic and racist, but Trump is their guy.
Re: (Score:3)
He said he had no sympathy, BECAUSE the snowflakes have been filing FCC complaints about all sorts of conservative stuff for years, on grounds much weaker than this.
[citation needed]
Re:Fake News (Score:4, Informative)
The difference is that the FCC is a government agency.
Re: (Score:2)
If he doesn't pay the fine, he could be subject to arrest. A fine is not really morally different than arrest.
Re: (Score:2)
If he doesn't pay the fine, he could be subject to arrest. A fine is not really morally different than arrest.
Yessir, indeed, but on the order of a traffic ticket a poor person (maybe) cannot pay due to the cost of baby formula, oxycontin, or rent.
These fines can typically be sat out in exchange for some form of per diem allowance by the gracious County. Unfortunate and even inconvenient, but not on the order of an impromptu removal after dark from one's bed, with no idea who to call to make bail.
There's a good bet the fine for Colbert probably won't eeven cover the publicity value of his unfortunate choice of wo
Colbert spoke like Trump (Score:4, Funny)
Colbert "Trump's only use is as Putin's cock holster"
Trump: "Romney would have dropped to his knees for my endorsement in 2012"
This is political, Colbert has been nailing Trump on issue after issue.
This was a fucking hilarious attack monologue, on Trump's 100 day interview, where he insulted the man interviewing him, then refused to repeat his "Obama wiretapped me" claim, then sat down behind the deskl and did a sulk.
Trump was a dick, and Colbert used rephrased versions of TRUMP's insults into a sharper attack. TRUMP. Watch it if you haven't already, it's comedy at its finest.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaHwlSTqA7s
Ajit should not be attacking free political speech, he is already in trouble killing Net Neutrality. He needs to apologise.
Re:Colbert spoke like Trump (Score:5, Interesting)
"Trump was a dick, and Colbert used rephrased versions of TRUMP's insults into a sharper attack."
Actually, it's a bit more subtle than that. A "Cock Holster" is US Military Slang, going back as far as the Vietnam War, and probably farther back than that.
A "Cock Holster" is a Raw Recruit, and the only two words that they are allowed to say is "Yes" and "Sir", together, followed by blind obedience and with no other contributions to the conversation.
Of course, President Bone Spurs would have no knowledge of this, and neither would any of his Chicken Hawk followers, as is so evident here in the comments here.
Re: (Score:2)
It is guaranteed that those consequences won't include sanction from the government.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Same people who wanted FCC to "treat the internet like a public utility" are aghast that there's an FCC investigation into Stephen Colbert.
Somewhere on the internet, someone is crowing over their world class wit, not realising even for an instant that they have just made exactly the opposite point from the one they intended.
The best part is, no matter how many times they read this reply, they're still not going to see the problem. But they'll spend the rest of the day vaguely anxious that maybe they really are the idiot that everyone knows them to be.
Deface The Nation (Score:3)
You conveniently forgot to mention that this particular monologue wasn't actually about Trump's policies but rather about him calling the journalist interviewing him 'fake media' and referring to his show as 'deface the nation'.
It was Colbert reciprocating the name-calling Trump is famous for, and while you might find it distasteful Colbert would stoop to that level, one is a television comedian while the other is supposed to be the president.