Dennis Miller started to lose his funny even when he was still on Saturday Night Live. The only good “Weekend Update” segment he ever did was the first time he did Point/Counterpoint with himself (actually Dana Carvey dressed up as Dennis Miller).
I didn’t criticize Leno because I don’t watch him, I was surfing and caught Dennis Millers appearance. As for the other examples that you mention, are you saying that I can’t express an opinion about Dennis Miller without also addressing every other performer as well?
I’m commenting on Dennis Miller. I saw the routine that I quoted, and it made an impression on me. I explained what that impression was, and stated my opinion of him.
I didn’t say that I thought that anyone should “go off the air”, because I’m not very interested in calling for that kind of thing. I don’t agree with what he did, I won’t buy his CDs or DVDs, and I will speak to others about what I consider to be his hate mongering actions.
He is obviously free to continue his schtick, and I have no intention of suddenly becoming an advocate of forcible censorship. That doesn’t change my opinion of what I saw.
O.K. I see your position and no slight intended. I guess I just don’t understand this thread. I see so many comedians slam-dunking everyone and everthing under the son that I find it curious this Dennis Miller fixation.
Personally, I find him funny about 60-40. Mainly because he references people/instances I am not familiar with. How he can memorize that schtick impresses me.
I read Miller’s comments about how war protestors = Neville Chamberlain and wonder how he got this reputation as intelligent. Knowing big words and being well read isn’t enough to make someone smart. And if this is what passes for wit…
There are many different kinds of conservatives, wolf_meister. Your Wall Street conservative and your Bible Belt conservative are going to have differences on many topics.
Thanks for providing such a great example of the “modus operandi” of the right. Which is to turn a valid criticism into a cartoonish generalisation. The fact that we dare criticize Miller for shedding all of his objectivity means we HATE him! I love it! What a typical right-wing debating style. It’s just like Ann Coultier charging Democrats with “Treason” because they stepped out of line & disagreed with Bush’s Iraq policy! (This is, of course, from the woman who devotes a chapter in her new book to holding Senator Joe Mcarthy up as a “great patriot”!)
Dennis Miller has completely shredded his credibility by openly appearing as a Bush lackey. He’s suddenly become this generation’s version of Bob Hope. I’m sure that the grandparents will love him, but he’s completely lost an entire generation of fans. As a comedian who built his reputation on taking shots at the “establishment”, he’s now become the “official” comedian of the Republican Party. I can’t see how this will help his career at all–unless he’s shooting for a “court jester” position…
Think again. Even among the 18-30 set, at least 40% call themselves “conservative” in politlcal outlook.
No, if you ask me,the modus operandi of the left, at least lately, is to not take seriously anyone who disagrees with them. This is why the Democratic Party is no longer in charge of either Congress or the White House, IMHO. Its most vociferous champions have somehow confused mocking the Religious Right with having a meaningful position of their own.
But did anyone see this in the story linked to in the OP? This is a quote from Prez Bush:
Now, that’s funnier than any of Miller’s jokes quoted in the article! 
Well said, I’m in the same boat. Except…did you ever see Bill Maher’s new show when Miller was a guest? I was disappointed – all Dennis did was sit back and make snide remarks, and an occasional “inside” remark about show biz. No real debate.
Actually, I like Miller because of the way he always bitches at the audience when a joke of his bombs. And since he’s such a BAD comic, he’s always bitching at the audience!
I always viewed Miller more as a libertarian, which isn’t really that far off from being a conservative, on a lot of issues. I liked his HBO show because he made fun of anyone who deseved it. Much the same reason that I love Howard Stern. He’s not afraid to knock someone for their actions, irregardless of party affliation. I will be disappointed in Miller, though, if he only attacks one side now. That is why I have no respect for the limbaughs, coulters, etc…
I always viewed Miller more as a libertarian, which isn’t really that far off from being a conservative, on a lot of issues. I liked his HBO show because he made fun of anyone who deseved it. Much the same reason that I love Howard Stern. He’s not afraid to knock someone for their actions, irregardless of party affiliation. I will be disappointed in Miller, though, if he only attacks one side now. That is why I have no respect for the limbaughs, coulters, etc…
Even the old hipsters with decidedly liberal points of view? You just stereotyped a couple of generations.
WALOON:
"irregardless of party affiliation"
You seem to have a problem with this term. Let me break it down for you, so that you know where I’m coming from.
“Irregardless” - same as the word ‘regardless’, which means, “in spite of everything”
“Of” - belonging or connected to.
“Party” - Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, etc…
“Affiliation” - to associate with.
So what it comes down to is: He will knock anyone, despite who they are connected with.
I’m not sure if you thought that I misspelled a word or you truly didn’t know what I was trying to say.
:dubious:
Sorry, but “irregardless” is the opposite of “regardless”.
When the hell did “French” become a “race”?
Nope. “Irregardless” isn’t even a word. But those who seem to think it is, believe that it’s synonymous with “regardless” instead of being opposite, which the prefix “ir-” typically indicates.
Or am I confusing it with “inflammable”?
My American Heritage Dictionary lists “irregardless” as a synonym for “regardless”, but suggests that it is a nonstandard variant whose use should be confined to deliberate attempts at humor…
[Looking around.] Um. Off topic, sorry. I’ll get out of the way and let you guys get back to it.
The prefix “Ir-” and the suffix “-less” both mean “without”. This makes “irregardless” a double-negative, or essentially meaningless, except perhaps as a barometer of the intelligence of the person who uses it.
A sarcastic Miller from California . . . Say, your first name isn’t. . .