I think Dennis Miller is hilarious. I agree that giving a free pass to the President hurts his credibility, but no more so than Margaret Cho, who seems serially incapable of agreeing with the President on anything, but is still funny. But I don’t think a person needs to be credible about politics to be funny about politics. That’s what’s good about comedians: they’re not supposed to be taken seriously.
Still, taking Dubya off the board seems like not plowing America’s most fertile ground, doesn’t it?
Can I have a cite for this please? I see this attributed to Ben Franklin all the time, but no one seems to say where it came from.
I’m pretty sure the actual quote is “Those that would give up Essential Liberty for a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” And I’m pretty sure the quote comes from the title page of Franklin’s An Historical Review of the Constitution and Government of Pennsylvania, from its Origin; so far as regards the several Points of Controversy, which have, from Time to Time, arisen Between the several Governors of that Province and Their several Assemblies, Founded on authentic Documents.
My point is that I believe you’re misrepresenting the substance of the quote, and you’re misusing it. Franklin knew that people and societies necessarily give up liberty for safety. That’s the essence of government – the people cede some of their liberties to the government in exchange for safety. The question is how much liberty to give up in exchange for how much safety, and to whom you’re giving it.
So in response to your “quote,” I’d merely quote Franklin accurately. And, I guess, I’d quote the Constitution, which sets forth the amount of liberty that we as a nation have agreed the government may restrict in order to secure our safety. And I’m pretty sure that Ben Franklin was one of the people that agreed to the limits set forth in the Constitution.
Or maybe he’s just making the popular connection between Saddam Hussein and bad guys.
This is my problem with him now. Remember on his HBO show when he would have some guest on that you KNOW any other week he would fry in his rant, but as soon as they are in the chair, he kisses their ass? By not including GWB in his rants, he’s doing the same thing.
Just from reading this thread, it seems Miller is fairly hard to pin down.
I’ve always though of him as a bit conservative, but never heard any right-wing stuff (I used to be a big fan of his short-lived late-night talk show). But I haven’t heard much out of him post-9/11 except for the football gig and I haven’t seen the MSNBC show.
Perhaps it’s a common cycle: comedian says funny/shocking things, gets recognition/money/jobs, then tones it down so as not to rock the money boat.
Is this the cycle Chris Rock is in? He was quite controversial and damn funny, and now he’s doing lame movies?
BEST comedic line I’ve heard all week, from Dave Chappelle:
“Why is George Bush so sure Saddam has Weapons of Mass Destruction? Because he’s got the receipt!”
Yeah, but wasn’t his oldest born five years before September 11? It’s not like he was that new to fatherhood.
I agree, it’s the “no more jokes about the president” that sucks. Look guys, I admit it-I’m a liberal. I don’t hide it. I’m a lefty, a pinko commie bastard socialist whatever you wanna call me.
But…Miller is a comedian who has made a name mostly commenting on current events. Nothing was sacred. And now, when there’s a lot of damn good material from teh current administration, he won’t take a shot?
It makes him look weak and cowardly. Just like it would have been weak and cowardly for a leftist comedian not to have made at least one blow job crack during the whole Clinton/Monica thing.
Definitely.
It wasn’t like he wasn’t always somewhat to the right-but he seemed more of a libertarian. He originally supported McCain, remember?
That’s it! That’s it exactly!
He can support Bush, but being such a blatant suck up, well, sucks. Miller always struck me as a cynic. Not anymore.
Regarding whether Miller is selling out by acknowledging that he’s conservative, there another angle to consider:
A comic can hold strong political views without expressing them in his act.
However, he may find that he draws bigger, more dedicated audiences by emphasizing his political views, because it can be easier to sell ‘that conservative comic’ (or ‘that liberal comic’) than simply ‘that comic’.
(I play music on the side, and it’s my experience that if you have a demo with 10 songs, all of different genres from Bach to Merle Haggard to Bob Marley to Beatles to Nirvana, you will be harder to sell than if it has 10 songs of one single genre).
A decision to emphasize one’s politics in this way is not the same as adopting views one doesn’t hold (which is what I first think of when I hear a performer accused of ‘selling out’.)
Bit off the track BUT: was Dennis Miller one of the voices the Simpsons could choose from when they had the futuristic house where Marge didn’t have to do any housework? The other voices to choose from were Matthew Perry and Pierce Brosnan. Marge mentioned something about him making lots of people commit suicide or something … what’s that about?
I don’t find comedians funny unless they are willing to take pot shots at everyone in public life. His book of rants made for great reading. I can’t believe it’s the same man.
And why in the world did he begin a new series of shows with an interview rehashing California’s financial crisis? Oh wow. I know I’ve been dying to get the latest update. :rolleyes:
I think I heard him comment that watching President Bush talking with the rescue and recovery workers at Ground Zero was what changed his mind. Was he being serious?
Yes, I believe that he is a sellout and knows it and is even a little inhibited by it. That’s one of the reasons he isn’t funny anymore.
BTW, Bill Maher is a Libertarian and not a member of the “Left.” (He voted for Bush the Elder against Clinton, for example.)
Now, if and when he truly answers the main focal question of this whole thing (will he refuse to slam Bush at the next opportunity) will I think he’s a sellout or not.
The difference between Miller and Cho is that Miller hosts a political talk show. It’s on a cable news channel and is supposed to be a semi-serious attempt to analyze current events. If he automatically takes Bush off the table for any criticism, he is seriously undermining his own credibility. He’s essentially confessing that he is hosting a propaganda show and that he will not examine issues honestly.
Bill Maher likes to claim he’s a libertarian, and once upon a time he might have been. But he is firmly ensconced in the left these days. He’s a libertarian when it comes to wanting to screw whoever or whatever he wants or do drugs, but he’s strongly for gun control, affirmative action, public education (he’s against vouchers and home schooling - two favorite programs of libertarians), raising the minimum wage, more environmental regulation, and he campaigned for Ralph Nader in the last election. Nader is in favor of a huge government. He’s essentially a socialist, which is almost the antithesis of libertarianism.