"The Daily Show": Week of 1/5/15

[trow125]

1/5: Steven Brill (author – promoting book “America's Bitter Pill: Money, Politics, Back-Room Deals, and the Fight to Fix Our Broken Healthcare System”)
1/6: Cass Sunstein (author – promoting book “Wiser: Getting Beyond Groupthink to Make Groups Smarter”)
1/7: Ava DuVernay (director – promoting movie “Selma”)
1/8: Allison Williams (actress – promoting “Girls”)

[6 MeowMeowBeenz]

I'm happy to see Steven Brill, he's very articulate about how messed up our healthcare "system" is. My own experience is that it ain't getting any better for those of us who actually have to pay for insurance. Higher premiums, WAY higher deductibles and copays. Obamacare was predicated on the fact that we already paid more pre capita than anyone else, for worse health care. Now we pay even more...woo hoo!

[Victor the Crab]

So the first show back, after two weeks off, to kick off the year 2015...is who going to run for President in 2016? Plus a follow up on North Korea's shit fit over Seth Rogan and James Franco's lame ass film? Yawn Jon!

 

I miss Stephen already. It hurts.

[attica]

I watched the Brill interview feeling kind of smug. I recently diagnosed myself and embarked on a successful treatment of a foot injury, with only the internet and Amazon for assistance. I reckon I saved myself copays and coinsurances on dr visits and referrals, x-rays (to rule out a fracture that it certainly is not), CT or MRI (to identify the soft tissue damage which can be construed/deduced from my symptoms), physical therapy (that I can do unsupervised) and orthotics (that I can do without by using plain ol' metatarsal pads). And seeing as it's the new year, I would have been bumped into a new Deductible Year, so all that would have been out of pocket. I'm now limp-free! 

 

Screw the medical-industrial complex, is my point. I still am rooting for Single Payer.

[Brandi Maxxxx]

The lesson here is everyone should act as their own doctor and everything will work out fine.

[attica]

No, that's not my point at all. I'm speaking only for myself in this one specific instance. (The website for the Podiatrist's Association is built for podiatrists, but it's accessible to non-docs too. Why shouldn't I look over their shoulders if I am able? I know what my symptoms are, after all.) If my injury worsens, I can still access the med-indust complex, after all.

 

But I bet I'm not alone in being sent on an ever-increasingly complex round of diagnostic tests that result in a doctor's saying, "Oh, stay off your foot, do some stretches, and take some N-SAIDs if it's painful." It's the churn I object to. Not to mention the helplessness, even with insurance, of being unable to budget for health care costs. I don't know what my insurer pays for an x-ray, nor do I know how much of the bill will be left over for me to pay when they're done. And I don't get to know those things until they are done, and I don't know when 'done' actually will be, because it's. Never.The.Same.

[Brandi Maxxxx]

I was just being a smartass by drawing the wrong conclusion from your post. You don't have to defend yourself against my dumb remarks.

[seek22]

This year I would like to hear more about the Federal Reserve system.

[ganesh]

I actually wouldn't have health insurance if the medicare extension didn't cover me. So I like Obamacare. I know some people have to pay more, but is it a better alternative? I think big picture it is. It's not the best thing ever, but I don't think it was intended to be.

 

I've said a million times the White House completely lost the narrative on the ACA. They needed a health care czar whose only job would be to talk about this every minute of the day. The republicans captured the national dialogue by screaming about things that really haven't come true overall, and any bump in the road in executing the law was going to be trumpeted as a total disaster, which it was. I'm mystified how the WH failed to see this and not get ahead of it. 

 

I mean, how could you say "if you like your doctor you can keep them?" They're going to find the one person who couldn't. 

[dubbel zout]

They needed a health care czar whose only job would be to talk about this every minute of the day.

 

That was supposed to be Kathleen Sibelius, but she was terrible.

 

I lost my job in November and am now paying for COBRA, which turned out to be less expensive than a comparable plan on the NYS marketplace. But once COBRA expires, I expect I'll have to go to a market plan, which will be terrible for me because very few of my doctors accept those plans (I'm hoping that will change in the future). And if I go outside the market, I won't be eligible for a tax credit.

 

I'm glad the ACA has made it possible for more people to get health care—I think it's a basic right, not a luxury—but it doesn't do much good if your doctors don't accept the plans. (I have some health issues that make it difficult for me to change doctors midstream, as it were.)

Edited January 6, 2015 by dubbel zout

[ganesh]

She was also a cabinet secretary. I meant one person whose only existence for living was to explain the law, and go point by point each day when the detractors would scream absurdities. 

[Victor the Crab]

It's going to be a long, bumpy two years to get off of the ride Republicans have in store for America. Expect President Obama's pen to run dry with all the vetos he'll be writing off. But at least Staten Island will be well represented, from one douchebag to another. Fuuuuuuuck.

 

The internet is why we'll never be able to break away from our groups and come together the way Cass Sunstein would hope.

[ABay]

Being killed 4 months in is a pretty good reason for not using the veto much, but Congress never passing any bills should rank right up there.

[UnderCover]

Victor, I agree that Monday's show was a little tepid, but I was so glad to have Jon back after that long break. When I saw the news reports about the new Congress and saw Boehner's latest shade of tan, I knew the only one for the job was Jon. Tuesday's show was funny.

 

As to missing Stephen, well, YES. But I just want to relish every moment of TDS, as I noted that during all the hullabaloo about Rosewater, that Jon would not rule out retiring when his contract ends next September.  A double whammy like that would be a soul crushing blow.

[ganesh]

Ugh with the climate change is the 'biggest hoax perpetrated'. Enough. If you seriously believe this, then you lack the mental capacity to govern. If you don't believe this and are saying this, which I think it more likely, then you are lying and deceiving the public, and you have failed to protect the general welfare. You are unfit to govern, violated your oath of office, and should be impeached. 

 

Yes, CS, we should listen to different povs; however, when one is completely wrong, your thesis is invalid. That's like when they say let's hear from both sides of the debate on evolution. No, there's no other side. The worst worst worst thing was when Bill Nye "debated" that religion guy. It set back science communication decades if not a century. Terrible idea.

 

There's no other side to climate change either. We should be debating different povs on what to *do* about it. Carbon tax, cap and trade, etc. That's legit debate. 

 

The problem is people don't have basic science knowledge and as a result dogma takes over, and scientists and engineers don't think public communication is part of their job. Giving people data isn't going to work. Talking at people doesn't work. I've been part of it first hand. This is the whole purpose of the field on emotion, ethics, and risk. 

 

CS had some good points, but really missed it imo.

Edited January 7, 2015 by ganesh

[ABay]

The massacre in Paris this morning is probably going to show up on TDS tonight or tomorrow. I hope that the show addresses the difference in the reactions along party lines. The President's message was about France being our oldest ally, that we stand together, etc and Boehner is "we have to be vigilant" (because it's all about us) and one of the idiot republican senator I just heard interviewed used the killing to attack immigration reform.

[The Luvly Junkie]

The problem is people don't have basic science knowledge and as a result dogma takes over, and scientists and engineers don't think public communication is part of their job. Giving people data isn't going to work. Talking at people doesn't work. I've been part of it first hand. This is the whole purpose of the field on emotion, ethics, and risk. 

       As a college student taking a major within engineering, it finally makes sense why communication is a necessary class. Such a shame there seems to be no one who wants to directly take initiative to climate change. Nothing against Bill Nye (he's my fave since elementary school).

 

The massacre in Paris this morning is probably going to show up on TDS tonight or tomorrow. I hope that the show addresses the difference in the reactions along party lines. The President's message was about France being our oldest ally, that we stand together, etc and Boehner is "we have to be vigilant" (because it's all about us) and one of the idiot republican senator I just heard interviewed used the killing to attack immigration reform.

         Huh, after watching last night's show, I think Boehner would be better off saying "I AM GROOT" instead of directing all the attention to America's 'vigilance'. (Sigh) 

[solotrek]

The massacre in Paris this morning is probably going to show up on TDS tonight or tomorrow. I hope that the show addresses the difference in the reactions along party lines. The President's message was about France being our oldest ally, that we stand together, etc and Boehner is "we have to be vigilant" (because it's all about us) and one of the idiot republican senator I just heard interviewed used the killing to attack immigration reform.

I made the poor decision of watching the videos from the attack. It's not what I expected. Shit. Guys, stay away from it if you want to be a functional human being for the rest of the day.These assholes were reportedly armed with Kalashnikovs and a rocket launcher for fucks sake.

 

I don't know if TDS would even bother with dealing with the party lines reaction first, it will come up probably. The political reactions from the left and right from many countries (Germany, France and the UK) are pretty much as bad as the US. But these satirist (other office workers at the magazine and also a few cops) were murdered in cold blood because these insane extremists didn't like what they were saying. I think we'll see something similar as when the guys at South Park were threatened. It's what happened to The Interview to a whole new and dangerous level, and I can't see TDS ignoring the free speech aspect. Especially since these people were satirists in a free Western country like TDS is.

Edited January 7, 2015 by maculae

[ganesh]

The guys at South Park weren't shot though, and they had an episode that actually depicted Mohammad and nothing happened. 

 

This whole "don't depict Mohammad" is patently ridiculous. Dangerous, but ridiculous. 

[iMonrey]

 

Cass Sunstein (author – promoting book “Wiser: Getting Beyond Groupthink to Make Groups Smarter”)

 

I'm not sure I'm buying what Sunstein was selling. I don't think people are more diverse if they're in a more diverse group. I just think they're more honest when they're with like-minded people. There's a big difference.

[solotrek]

The guys at South Park weren't shot though, and they had an episode that actually depicted Mohammad and nothing happened. 

 

This whole "don't depict Mohammad" is patently ridiculous. Dangerous, but ridiculous. 

But they heavily censored the episode so everything in regards to Mohammed was obscured with beeps (dialogue) and black boxes (images). And then it was Santa in a bear suit IIRC. And still, they were threatened and sent pictures of Theo Van Gogh. It's one thing to send threatening pictures, letters and email; another to hack a network and release private emails; but it's a whole new level of THE F IS WRONG WITH YOU to shoot up a bunch of people. TDS was pretty vehement in defending free speech in both instances, I can't see them not covering it for this either.

 

Anyways, back on topic.

 

Speaking of The Interview, I did find their segment on that from Monday to be pretty lackluster.  It seemed to be meandering and unfocused. And I'd like to avoid the incessant "who is running for 2016" for now so the first segment didn't really grab me.

 

I can't believe Grimm was re-elected with his controversies beforehand.  And now he's gone. Though, was there something wrong with the green screen that Jason was in front of? There seemed to be a distracting glitch every time he waved his arms.

[ChelseaNH]

I was interested in the interview segment because I was wondering how the book differed from "The Wisdom of Crowds" by James Surowiecki(?).  That book was more about decision making, while this book seemed to be more about opinions/politics.

 

The basic rules to avoid groupthink: 

1. People with different perspectives (philosopy, background, experience)
2. Everyone feels free to speak
3. No predetermined outcome

 

Given that he was a legal scholar, it would have been interesting to look at the groupthink implications in jury deliberations.

[ABay]

I'd be shocked if TDS did not address the freedom of speech issue underlying the attack. Based on previous controversies, it seems likely they'll also cover the way the media covered the story and the political reactions.

[Hooper]

 

The massacre in Paris this morning is probably going to show up on TDS tonight or tomorrow. .....and one of the idiot republican senator I just heard interviewed used the killing to attack immigration reform.

 

And wait for it - Benghazi will be linked to the Paris attack before the day is out.  

 

I loved how Jason's piece on Staten Island cracked Jon up.  The rest of that bit was ok, but nothing memorable, but Jon was either genuinely tickled by all the Joey's, or he's a much better actor than he lets on.

[Hanahope]

I read a review of Brill's book on NPR, which compared to what he said on the Daily Show, was like night and day.  His idea of having people pay the hospitals as "insurance" sounds very interesting.  It definitely would make the hospitals less likely to run extra tests that weren't needed.  But again, my concern is would said hospital fail to run some other tests so as it wouldn't then have to do some expensive procedure the test indicated was necessary.  As Brill put it, it would need to be heavily regulated, which the Republicans are against in toto (as to any and all regulations for pretty much anything and everything).  So I'm not sure our country will ever have good healthcare because its expensive and someone has to pay and no one wants to pay for someone else when its expensive, so it will always require regulation which half the country appears to dislike (really its only about 5%, but those 5% somehow convince another 45% to vote for them against regulations).

[attica]

I don't think people are more diverse if they're in a more diverse group. I just think they're more honest when they're with like-minded people. There's a big difference.

 

I don't know if 1) I agree with you; 2) being honest matters much anyway. 

 

For the first, a good example is that one of the things that has catapulted the marriage equality movement so far forward so fast is the growing number of gay people living out. Used to be you didn't know any gay people (you did but they were closeted). Now you know some, and you know they're just like you. So by dint of a more openly diverse community, opposition to gay rights has plummeted.  Opinions on the matter have changed due to contact with others of that group.

 

For the second, if you're less honest about your ideologies when in mixed company, this suggests you're monitoring your statements/behavior to align with the diversity of the group. Having that as a habit would, I think, make you less likely to act upon your more ideological notions. And by act, I mean vote, organize, harass members of an out group, call your senator to scream about climate change being a hoax, etc. And it's the action that brings about cultural shift, not honesty. (I know of no actual science that backs me up on this point, but it feels true in my gut.  Stephen would know what I mean.)

[Victor the Crab]

And wait for it - Benghazi will be linked to the Paris attack before the day is out.

 

Rush Limbaugh heeded your call and responded, the fat bastard.

 

Whenever satirists come under attack of any kind, Jon comes out full throttle to defend them and attack the people who don't like them and want to do them in bad. So I expect Jon to do likewise tonight.

 

Nice to hear from you again, UnderCover. :)

[ganesh]

But they heavily censored the episode so everything in regards to Mohammed was obscured with beeps (dialogue) and black boxes (images).

 

I meant, several years prior to that, part of an episode aired with religious figures as part of a Superfriends type group and Mohammed was depicted. The the censored episode, the network beeped out all the "I learned something today" monologue and it was pretty tame material.

[Victor the Crab]

Didn't see Nazi cows coming. But, for all intents and purposes, it was a welcoming story to watch after trying to come to grips with what happened in Paris today. Jon looked definitely shocked by the entire events. It was also great to see Aasif there as a correspondent. Did anyone else get any subtle messages Jon and Aasif were discussing about the cows and the Muslim people?

[peeayebee]

I didn't get any subtle messages.

 

Very good show. Jon's opening remarks were heartfelt and well-chosen. The segment with the Nazi cows was a great refresher. I hadn't heard a thing about this, and it was hilarious. Loved all the graphics too -- Channing Tatum's Cowcatcher poster, Mutant Teenage Nazi Cattle, Moooos-lum correspondent -- and Aasif was great. And then the segment about the homeless in Utah was fantastic. That is not what I expected. I thought Utah was putting homeless on buses and sending them to LA. Just an absolutely terrific story. And finally the interview with the Selma director was enjoyable. I very much want to see that film, though I'll probably have to wait for the DVD.

[FartyPants]

while I am not defending killing people, I fail to understand what good is being achieved by doing something that hurts a billion people to their core of beliefs. Every group of people is at a different point of evolution in their idea of what is acceptable irreverence and using the same standards for all different groups is wrong.

[attica]

Moooos-lum correspondent

 

I enjoyed 'Mooosolini's Revenge' as the subtitle of the movie. Way to tie the Axis together, TDS!

 

Of course it's a cost effective and simple thing to just give homes to the homeless. But I suspect it's not a thing that will catch on, seeing as how the politics of resentment fuel so much of our discourse. By that I mean the undercurrent of 'I work hard for next to no money, and nobody's giving me free housing, why should we give it to freeloaders?' that runs though every town hall meeting, real, media outlet, and virtual.

[solotrek]

while I am not defending killing people, I fail to understand what good is being achieved by doing something that hurts a billion people to their core of beliefs. Every group of people is at a different point of evolution in their idea of what is acceptable irreverence and using the same standards for all different groups is wrong.

No free speech should be censored due to the ignorance of others.  Every group is different, but if you're living in a country with free speech then it is assumed that you be living by the "same standards" as everyone else. This isn't Saudi Arabia or Iran and there should be no bowing down to any religion. If we're speaking of Charlie Hebdo specifically, they made fun of every religion. Pretty brutally at that.

 

Satire isn't used to hurt people, instead it is another way of looking at a situation. It uses humor or exaggeration to help prove a point or expose the hypocrisy and or stupidity of things. There are Christians and Jews who were/are often butthurt after reports from TDS or episodes of South Park or cartoons from things like Charlie Hebdo. It also "hurts them to their core beliefs" as well. No one is specifically targeting Muslims with these things.

Edited January 8, 2015 by maculae

[futurechemist]

Didn't see Nazi cows coming. But, for all intents and purposes, it was a welcoming story to watch after trying to come to grips with what happened in Paris today. Jon looked definitely shocked by the entire events. It was also great to see Aasif there as a correspondent. Did anyone else get any subtle messages Jon and Aasif were discussing about the cows and the Muslim people?

I thought it was a brilliant message, albeit subtle.  When Aasif was saying that he was tired of standing up for normal cows in the face of evil Nazi cows, he was saying he's tired of being the token Muslim to have to defend Islam after terrorists do something like this.  Because after an event as horrific as the shooting, there will be plenty of people tarring all Muslims with the same brush.  And there were other lines, like needing to worry if showing the cows would offend some of the Nazi cows - worrying about how some Muslims might react to seeing an image of Mohammed.

 

I wonder if tonight Jon will discuss the media's reaction.  Specifically how some news outlets showed some of Charlie Hebdo's more controversial cartoons, others didn't show them but described them verbally, and others didn't discuss them at all.  I wonder if Comedy Central would even let Jon show the cartoons if he wanted to, considering what they did with South Park.  I personally don't understand how some religious folk can consider their "right to not be insulted" to trump other people's right to free speech, but I'm biased because I've been personally hurt by religion before and have no love for it.

Edited January 8, 2015 by futurechemist

[The Luvly Junkie]

    Good to see TDS pushing forward after the Charlie Hebdo shooting. I can see the subtlety in Aasif's point as "Moo-slim" correspondent. Kinda reminds me of that interview on Hannity with a British Imam. HE DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH NAZI COWS!!! Also, good to see Hasan doing his first field piece. He did a pretty good job on homelessness. Now if that can only catch on in other US states.

 

   After that "Selma" interview, I have now claimed Ava Duvernay as my hero. I smells an Oscar!!!

[ABay]

I didn't see Aasif's message as either subtle or subtext, but rather the point of the bit.

[trow125]

Here's an interesting article about the homeless program in Salt Lake City, in case anyone's curious about learning more. It looks like the field piece represented it pretty accurately, which hasn't always been the case with TDS' field pieces.

 

The writer who came up with the Nazi Cow story deserves a raise.

[alexvillage]

 

 

No free speech should be censored due to the ignorance of others.  Every group is different, but if you're living in a country with free speech then it is assumed that you be living by the "same standards" as everyone else. This isn't Saudi Arabia or Iran and there should be no bowing down to any religion. If we're speaking of Charlie Hebdo specifically, they made fun of every religion. Pretty brutally at that.

Satire isn't used to hurt people, instead it is another way of looking at a situation. It uses humor or exaggeration to help prove a point or expose the hypocrisy and or stupidity of things. There are Christians and Jews who were/are often butthurt after reports from TDS or episodes of South Park or cartoons from things like Charlie Hebdo. It also "hurts them to their core beliefs" as well. No one is specifically targeting Muslims with these things.

I am not sure if I am agreeing 100% or not, or if I just wanted to add my two cents. I had never heard of Charlie Hebdo. I have seen some of the things they published and initially I thought they were "fair" to all religions, all segments of society. I thought they were not singling out muslims. As far as I am concerned, religion is good to make fun of. Every single one. But as I read some of the things that are happening in France today, it seems that the magazine was being biased and that they were attacking muslims more viciously. I have not, or will, do any research on this. I have a feeling that I would find most of their stuff simply of bad taste.

I don't subscribe to the sudden demonstrations of support *FOR THEIR WORK* because of what happened. It was a tragedy and should not have happened, but the overwhelming support seems misplaced. I read someone saying that the support should be for the victims, individuals, and this person cited the officer who died, a muslim defending the organization who many times made fun of his faith. I agree with that. This man should be the symbol of respect for the freedom of speech, not the magazine (specially if they were, indeed, biased)

[FartyPants]

maculae, for most part I agree with you. but satire hurts people whether intended or not. (ask any middle schooler). The nazi cows should be caught and hanged. However, my argument is that such satire is not causing any good .. but may be it is and forcing some people to change their views .. at the cost of 12 lives.

 

alexvillage .. like you, I am not going to figure out if Charlie Hedbo was an inspired cartoonist/editor who was trying to change the system for his beliefs or was more of a shock jock. (dont have time for that). Whichever it was, this senseless murder should not have happened and my sympathies and prayers are with the families of the dead.

Edited January 8, 2015 by FartyPants

[biakbiak]

Charlie Hedbo was an inspired cartoonist/editor who was trying to change the system for his beliefs or was more of a shock jock.

Charlie Hedbo isn't a person it's the name of the magazine, it means Weekly Charlie.

[Brandi Maxxxx]

I didn't see Aasif's message as either subtle or subtext, but rather the point of the bit.

Yeah that wasn't subtle and it wasn't supposed to be (and I say that as someone who thought the final scene of The Legend of Korra was too ambiguous). I think Victor the Crab was kidding though.

[ABay]

That's what I thought, too, Brandi Maxxxx, but I thought it got lost in the discussion.

 

Last night, NBC reported one of the gunmen killed, but they were wrong and apologized. Another casualty of the 24 hour news cycle.

[FartyPants]

Charlie Hedbo isn't a person it's the name of the magazine, it means Weekly Charlie.

 

:) Thanks. Shows my level of knowledge of them. Still my sympathy for them is real

Edited January 8, 2015 by FartyPants

[ABay]

I read somewhere the Charlie of the title is Charles deGaulle. The magazine had a different title and changed it after a joke about deGaulle's death caused a furor.

[Victor the Crab]

Here's the story behind the name Charlie Hebdo.

 

I had never heard of this weekly publication until this week's terrorist attack. And I believe that's why these terrorists have failed. When you try to silence something you don't like, you just make it louder for everyone to hear. Instead of the French speaking population familiar with their work, now the entire world knows about Charlie Hebdo and their raison d'etre. Mission accomplished, terrorist dumbfucks.

Edited January 9, 2015 by Victor the Crab

[ganesh]

while I am not defending killing people, I fail to understand what good is being achieved by doing something that hurts a billion people to their core of beliefs.

 

If one's faith is so shaken because some douche is making fun of your religion, then I question the strength of one's faith to begin with. 

 

Honestly, I find this whole "don't draw a picture of Mohammed" ridiculous. Who knows what he looks like anyway?

[Brandi Maxxxx]

If one's faith is so shaken because some douche is making fun of your religion, then I question the strength of one's faith to begin with. 

 

Honestly, I find this whole "don't draw a picture of Mohammed" ridiculous. Who knows what he looks like anyway?

The thing about extremists is they rarely see reason.

 

People may have an idea what Muhammad looks like because he's been depicted in art for centuries. A small amount of Googling tells me that the Quran doesn't forbid depictions of Muhammad, nor does it call for violence against blasphemers. However according to the Hadith, God will punish people who make images of any living thing.

Edited January 9, 2015 by Brandi Maxxxx

[peeayebee]

I was reading about it, and not all Muslims are offended by images of Muhammad. It's mostly Sunni Muslims who don't want him depicted. This is an informative little article about the belief.

[Victor the Crab]

Rubbing Mitch McConnell's turtle shell will improve the economy, eh? More like a cynical opportunistic sociopath will take credit for the country's economic turnaround on his political party's behalf because he believes that the citizens of the USA are really that stupid and gullible.

 

So is it considered nepotism for someone like Allison Williams to become a guest on TDS because her father is Jon's man crush, Brian Williams?

[nicolin]

I liked Jason Jones, but now I will never not see him with that dog.  ~sad~