The Nightly Show With Larry Wilmore - General Discussion

[ganesh]

Kansas unequivocally disproves the "trickle down" theory and thoroughly repudiates the "job creators" canard. 

[ms.o]

"Obama" calling Larry so excited about playing Mary had a little lamb on the phone made me laugh hysterically. So stupid, but so random that jt was great.

[attica]

The discussion about the Florida dude possibly getting 20 years for his chocoholism made me think of the coal company owner that killed 29 people and got sentenced yesterday -- to 1 year. But you know, it's his first conviction, right?

[KerleyQ]

Kansas unequivocally disproves the "trickle down" theory and thoroughly repudiates the "job creators" canard. 

 

All anyone has to do is look at the economic policies in Kansas vs. Minnesota and compare the results.  I don't get why the Dems aren't regularly doing that.  Those two states make it pretty clear what does and does not work. 

[attica]

Not that the Dems shouldn't do what you suggest, KerleyQ, but I think it wouldn't change hearts and minds of R voters, who view their conservatism as a tribal identity rather than a set of rational policy objectives. Us v Them and magical thinking and all that.

[ganesh]

No, but nationally, it gives democratic policies clear results and allows them to control the narrative. As we've all said around this site, they totally dropped the ball in 2014.

[KerleyQ]

I agree that it wouldn't change the minds of the base that supports someone like Cruz, because they are far more married to their "religious convictions" to be concerned with those results.  But elections are typically won or lost on the moderates.  They're the voters who need to have this information laid bare, loudly and often. Like ganesh said, the Dems absolutely dropped the ball and let the right control the narrative in 2014, and we're living with the results.  

[stillshimpy]

I've said before that Mike is very hit and miss on panel. I always thought it was mostly not being willing to take it seriously and always looking for the laugh. The same problem Ricky used to have although Mike is a lot more entertaining.

 

Ricky has really improved for me, so I guess Mike Yard felt the need to pick up the slack on being unimpressive for panels.  I like Mike Yard a lot, but occasionally on panels, particularly for any issue relating to women, I end up hoping that he's just trying to be funny and failing, rather than believing some of that stuff.  He doesn't see the problem with being told to smile?  Now, I smile a lot, but jeez, how can you not see the problem with women being told they have to appear pleasant at all times?  

 

In other news, his Ocean 7 skit made me laugh hard enough that I had to slow down on the elliptical while it was on.  "I can fit through keyhole" and "I own a computer" both nearly did me in. 

 

Also, I randomly found myself telling one of my home-projects, "That's right, motherfucker, I haven't forgotten about you!"  so clearly this show has worn a groove in my brain.  

[AmandaPanda]

Getting caught up on this week's episodes.

 

Dear Larry,

 

Most of Kansas City is actually in Missouri. Most of the good things about Kansas City are actually in Missouri and Kansas City, Missouri predates the state of Kansas.

 

Sincerely,

A Kansas Citian who wants to be very clear that she is not now and has never been a resident of the state of Kansas 

[KerleyQ]

Getting caught up on this week's episodes.

 

Dear Larry,

 

Most of Kansas City is actually in Missouri. Most of the good things about Kansas City are actually in Missouri and Kansas City, Missouri predates the state of Kansas.

 

Sincerely,

A Kansas Citian who wants to be very clear that she is not now and has never been a resident of the state of Kansas 

 

Didn't Brownback actually make that same mistake recently?  

[AmandaPanda]

He probably did. There is a Kansas City, Kansas, but it's terrible. 

[KerleyQ]

He probably did. There is a Kansas City, Kansas, but it's terrible. 

 

A player signed with the Royals (who, unless something has changed, are in the MO Kansas City), and he put out a statement welcoming the player to Kansas. 

[ganesh]

1970s Rory was rocking that look. I want that jacket.

[trow125]

I loved the Soul Daddy episode! Larry was great. Loved his reaction to Obama being president. Jake Tapper, on the other hand, seemed a little weirded-out by the whole SD concept. (I'm sure he was booked weeks ago and had no idea what he'd be in for!)

[possibilities]

I expected to hate the "Soul Daddy" episode, but it turned out pretty well.

 

RE the previous episode, I love Francesca Ramsay.

 

I wonder how they decided that Mike would always be the loser in the "debates"? At this point, watching him lose is as much the joke as anything else about that segment.

[ganesh]

I liked when Larry just handed Holly an actual hotel room key and she just slipped it into her bra. 

[Arcadiasw]

I was expecting them to fool us and have 70s Mike Yard win the debate. Still it was funny. Love Daddy.

[KerleyQ]

I wonder how they decided that Mike would always be the loser in the "debates"? At this point, watching him lose is as much the joke as anything else about that segment.

 

That and "I haven't forgotten about you, motherfucker," are my two favorite recurring bits on TNS.  

[attica]

It broke my heart a little to realize that all the boys in my high school yearbook looked like Rory, Larry, and Mike. I iz old.

[Kromm]

Getting caught up on this week's episodes.

 

Dear Larry,

 

Most of Kansas City is actually in Missouri. Most of the good things about Kansas City are actually in Missouri and Kansas City, Missouri predates the state of Kansas.

 

Sincerely,

A Kansas Citian who wants to be very clear that she is not now and has never been a resident of the state of Kansas 

I have connections, friends and relatives in the area, so I understand the frustration. That said, it's also been a bit tricky I know to loudly be a Missourian to out of staters since... well... Ferguson (although admittedly that's clear at the other end of the state). 

[Muffyn]

Larry, American Indians.  We exist.  Look us up.  Thanks, Muffyn  #NativeLivesMatter  (In response to Larry's three races comment)

 

Nightly, Nightly is an immediate fast forward for me now.  I don't care what topic they are covering.  It is not funny. 

 

Okay, I'll go back to grumbling to myself and yelling at kids on my lawn now.

[ganesh]

This Nightly segment flipped the format a little and gave Grace more of a platform to comment on the sensationalism in the news. I think she was correct in her commentary too. Larry getting the "sad one" was funny too.  

[possibilities]

Huh. I FF'd the "Nightly" segment the second I saw it was coming. It seems like something they do whenever they need filler or don't want to actually write anything. And it always goes on for waaaaaay too long. I'm tired at night. I don't need to sit through an extended bit with no substance and a lot of noise that has nothing to say that hasn't already been said a thousand times already in the exact same format and wasted my time several times before. I think they should retire it, and come up with a new format if they want to give Grace an outlet to say something.

[attica]

I like Nightly. I find it a fairly caustic indictment of regular network/local news shows, as opposed to a parody of entertainment news. Every time I surf past the evening news, either local or network, I feel like I'm seeing more fluff and personality pimping than actual information. (My local-local basically runs commercials for electronics gadgets and calls it 'tech news.') Plus, Grace Parra just commits to the bit, and I can't be mad at her.

 

Muffyn, in DNA testing, Native American haplogroups get tagged as 'Asian.' Maybe Larry watches Finding Your Roots too!  

[ganesh]

You and me must be the only people who watch it then. 

[attica]

Another great Hash it Out! #Twochecks made me laugh.

[ganesh]

Oh, the false equivalency, or the gop platform of the last 8 years. 

 

I liked this discussion of CP time versus TDS take on it.

Edited April 13, 2016 by ganesh

[ganesh]

I'm rather surprised. That was one of the most informative interviews with Sanders I've seen. 

Edited April 14, 2016 by ganesh

[DXD526]

I love Nightly! and Grace Parra. She's one of the funniest people on TV, IMO. Her hammy enthusiasm kills me every time. She's the main reason I watch this show nearly *nightly* now. Between her, Jessica Williams and Samantha Bee, the ladies are ruling late night! I wish more people would notice...

[Hanahope]

I certainly agree with a lot of Sanders' platforms.  But the question I have is how does he think he's going to be able to move his platform into law when there is a decent sized number of this country voting in their representatives, that are drastically opposed to it?   What if he doesn't have a fillibuster proof majority?  Obama had a hard enough time getting things passed and he's a centrist.

[possibilities]

What Sanders says is that he can't enact his policies unless people vote for representatives in Congress who will also support them, and pressure those who are already in there to come around. He says that until we get Citizen's united overturned and enact campaign finance reform, doing this will be very difficult. However, he also says that people who support his ideas are actually registering and voting in record numbers, people who previously had not voted at all because they were disgusted and discouraged, so that there is a chance of winning with people getting involved who previously were not, and thus changing the composition of people in office. Plus, the next president will probably appoint 3 Supreme Court justices, so that will help with the Citizen's United business.

 

Frankly, I don't think Clinton has any better chance of getting things done because if Congress obstructed Obama, they will certainly obstruct Clinton. The Republicans HATE her. The only way ANYONE is getting anything done is if they get Congress on their side, and the only way to do that is by electing people downticket. Sanders is counting on having coattails that will help elect people to Congress who will support his proposals, but Clinton is too-- even though she doesn't admit it and is pretending that she will somehow magically be able to win votes in Congress that Obama couldn't.

 

Also, there are things the President can do, even without Congress. Foreign policy is one area that the President is very powerful (diplomacy vs military action, for example). Clinton vs Sanders are very different foreign policy approaches. A President can also set administrative priorities within domestic agencies-- like decide which types of cases to have the Justice Dept or INS pursue most aggressively, whether to have the EPA or the FDA or the CDC or the FBI focus on particular areas, what percentage of science vs politics/industry to weigh on various issues. I remember when the Bush 1 admin took over from Clinton 1, and HUD policies for subsidized housing changed dramatically overnight. It made a tremendous difference in terms of how many people got housed in the Section 8 program vs how many were cut off, or wound up on decade-long waiting lists that never got any shorter. There are lots of things like that, in a lot of different places, where with or without Congressional approval, various departments can emphasize one vs another approach. Equally dramatic changes often happen in illegal drug policies when administrations shift, and I'm sure that's true in lots of other places, too.

 

But for the really revolutionary stuff, Bernie himself says it will only happen if people who vote for him also vote for other officeholders who will go along. It might not happen this year, but the House theoretically could turn over every 2 to 4 years, and the Senate is closer to turning now. We have historically had very low voter turnout, so if he does get more people to vote, it could maybe happen. I do think Sanders is more likely to continue to use his network of supporters to try to mobilize people to pressure Congress for things he wants, where Clinton will be more likely to try to focus on things she can get done without that. I just don't see her being the sort of leader who likes to whip up the asses with her persuasive charm. She has come a long way in terms of being comfortable in front of a microphone, but she's still more of a lobbyist type than a community organizer, in persona.

 

I was also really surprised to see how many things Sanders actually got through the Senate during his time there. Apparently he has a very long list of amendments and other initiatives that he doesn't talk about a lot, but which he spearheaded and got passed. He comes across as a dreamer, but he's actually a fairly savvy politician.

 

I think the reason he came across more serious in the TNS interview is that they actually treated him more seriously and gave him space to answer, instead of editing for the soundbite. I've watched a few long (30+ minute) interviews elsewhere, and he always has a lot to say when he's not cut off after the first 10 seconds. Jane (Bernie's wife) did an interview last week that lasted over an hour, mostly about Native American issues-- I was astounded that she could answer questions for that long on mostly topics not talked about elsewhere, and mostly not get stumped.

 

I don't want to get too off topic, but I think that the way the media covers the candidates has a lot to do with how they are perceived, and whether our very reasonable questions ever get addressed. I was glad to see TNS at least try to not overwhelm the interview with rapid-fire jokes, and to try to make it at least marginally more serious than their usual panels.

[formerlyfreedom]

Just putting a reminder out there - this is to discuss the episodes, and not politics in general. So - Bernie Saunders appearing on the show and what he discusses while on it is fine. Discussing the election in general? Not fine. Your post should be mostly about the episode.

 

Nothing has been edited or removed, but going forward, posts that veer off topic may be either edited or deleted. Thanks.

[marceline]

I can't wait to see Lin-Manuel Miranda's response to Larry's piece. I can't believe that he won't have one. That said...

 

I have Hamilton tickets for this Saturday!! Woo-hoo!

[ganesh]

Yard's conspiracy rants are hilarious. The whole board with just Denzel killed me. 

[BookThief]

I can't wait to see Lin-Manuel Miranda's response to Larry's piece. I can't believe that he won't have one. That said...

 

I have Hamilton tickets for this Saturday!! Woo-hoo!

I wanna be in the room where it happens.

[AmandaPanda]

I have Hamilton tickets for this Saturday!! Woo-hoo!

 

What vital organ did you sell to get those?!?!? Super jealous.

[trow125]

The panel with Susan Sarandon and Mike Yard made me stabby. The fact that they seem to believe that it would be better to have Trump than Hillary in the WH because it would "blow the whole thing up" seems incredibly naive. Sarandon is rich enough to weather whatever might occur (heck, she could afford to move to Canada, France, wherever), but Yard I'm sure has many fewer options.

 

Ideally, the Bernie supporters would learn the lessons of the Tea Party and work really, really hard to get people elected to stage legislatures (where all that fun gerrymandering takes place!) and Congress. I'm not waiting with baited breath for that to happen. More likely it'll be an Occupy-type situation where it fizzles out.

 

"TNS" has been totally in the tank for Bernie and I can understand why, since he's obviously willing to keep making appearances on the show. But I hope that if Hillary gets the nomination that she'll start to get some support from Larry and the correspondents.

[ganesh]

The panel with Susan Sarandon and Mike Yard made me stabby. The fact that they seem to believe that it would be better to have Trump than Hillary in the WH because it would "blow the whole thing up" seems incredibly naive.

 

SS was on Real Time on Friday, and we largely panned her attitude as well. She's been coming across as woefully uninformed to me, and as you say, she's rich enough that she's not really going to be affected much. 

 

I don't have a problem with Larry supporting Sanders. I don't get the impression he's Bernie or nothing though. I wouldn't be surprised if he had him on the show after (if) Clinton gets the nomination to talk about supporting her. 

[iMonrey]

I'm not sure Mike Yard was actually saying he himself preferred to see it all "get blown up" or whether he was just expressing what the Sanders supporters preferred. But Sarandon was on Bill Maher's show last week and she's got a real bug up her ass about Clinton. Which is fine, but I agree she's willfully nihilistic when it comes to the subject of Hillary winning the nomination. And it was spelled out here much better than on Maher's show. Some of these supporters would rather see Trump or Cruz win than Hillary because they think that, at last,  will bring about the revolution they crave. Don't they consider the idea that after four years of either Cruz or Trump there may be nothing left of the USA to save?

 

And you're right - millionaires like Sarandon can go back to their ivory towers in Hollywood and weather whatever shitstorm a Trump or Cruz presidency would rain down on America. Ordinary working class folk cannot - especially those of color. So she can shove it as far as I'm concerned. I've never disliked her before this but I really do now.

 

(e.t.a. ganesh - jinx!)

Edited April 21, 2016 by iMonrey

[ganesh]

I'm ALL for medical marijuana for cramps. You can get a card for "insomnia", and my friend does have a legit problem with knee joint pain, which, you'd be taking a lot of aspirin for, which could lead to stomach irritation. I would support

 

Wow, was Sarandon condescending or what? Sure, it's not fair for Clinton to just assume everyone voting for Sanders will vote for her, and I think she knows that. Candidates aren't really heavy on specifics at this point, so that's a little unfair to say "what has she specifically said?" At least Larry was like "you don't think Clinton knows what to do?" It's also not fair to say she "was against the $15 minimum wage." She was for a $12, so both of them support an increase in the minimum wage. They're arguing over $3, not whether it should be increased. Isn't that an actual good policy debate? So, either in office will raise it. That's great!

 

A president can't unilaterally "get rid of citizen's united" either. Honestly, I don't think a "third Obama" term is a bad thing. You'd think Obama was a complete disaster, and that's from these "liberals". 

 

Okaaay. Yeah, LBJ wasn't progressive. 

 

The root of the problem is that the gop will say, 'suck it up and hold your nose and vote for Trump (or Cruz) because Clinton is a criminal who will steal everything you own/Sanders is a COMMIE!" And they will and their voter turnout will be the same or even more with new Trump voters. While it's not the same on the other side with everyone whining "Bernie or no vote!" If all those people cheering for Bernie + the usual democrat voters got out and voted, they'd be comparing 2016 to 1820. 

 

Did Holly stay in the bath for the whole show?

Edited April 21, 2016 by ganesh

[LADreamr]

I'm glad you all articulated so well the issues with SS. Even in summary, I can't seem to get my words together. It bothered me that much. The blowing it all up thing was the worst. I couldn't help thinking how short their memories are. We haven't fully recovered from the effects of the Bush administration. Exactly how blown up do we need to be?

Everyone is entitled to support whomever they want and I would never disparage that. But choosing Trump over Clinton, if you're a Bernie supporter? I don't get the logic. It's not about party, it's about ideology, and she is much closer to his than Trump ever will be. And I would hazard a guess that most people who are stomping all over her can't factually point to any one reason why. It just sounds/feels good to them.

Bringing this back more pointedly to the show, I don't think SS made any great case for her vitriol, either.

[ganesh]

That's because we had to put up with her BS on Real Time last Friday too. 

 

I don't care who celebs vote for. But when they're acting all "I'm a celeb and I'm political and I have something to say." Here's the thing: you're opinion isn't fact. And you now what else? A $15 minimum wage versus a $12 dollar minimum wage means literally zero to you. Not only that iirc Clinton may have said $12 across the board but higher in places that need it. So, factually incorrect as well. 

 

It kind of lies on the host not to let them get away with it. Maher did a decent job with her, but Larry didn't really do as well as he should have.

 

I do think it's unfair to ask if they'd vote for Clinton if she's the nominee since it's not over yet. However, it's totally legit to ask: Would you actually see a scenario where you would vote for Trump? What is a Trump presidency like for you?

 

If you're going to be political publicly, anyone, then you need to have some knowledge of the political process, and if you're on a comedy show where you use politics as a medium, then you should be factually aware. 

[Kromm]

Just saw the episode from last week with Bassem Youssef.  I immediately smelled asshole the moment he took Larry's joke about Bono saying comedians like "Amy Schumer, and Chris Rock, and Sacha Baron Cohen", magically forgot Chris Rock had been mentioned about 10 times during the segment, and made a "so white" joke about it.  Asshole. 

Calling people out for racism is fine. Inventing it for a punchline?  Asshole.

[wknt3]

The panel with Susan Sarandon and Mike Yard made me stabby. The fact that they seem to believe that it would be better to have Trump than Hillary in the WH because it would "blow the whole thing up" seems incredibly naive. Sarandon is rich enough to weather whatever might occur (heck, she could afford to move to Canada, France, wherever), but Yard I'm sure has many fewer options.

 

Ideally, the Bernie supporters would learn the lessons of the Tea Party and work really, really hard to get people elected to stage legislatures (where all that fun gerrymandering takes place!) and Congress. I'm not waiting with baited breath for that to happen. More likely it'll be an Occupy-type situation where it fizzles out.

 

"TNS" has been totally in the tank for Bernie and I can understand why, since he's obviously willing to keep making appearances on the show. But I hope that if Hillary gets the nomination that she'll start to get some support from Larry and the correspondents.

 

To me it was yet another illustration of Mike Yard's biggest weakness - his inability to see beyond his own experiences and preferences/desires. I think it was obvious that Larry and Rory both grasped the complexities and the potential consequences, but Larry didn't really want to push it since it might be seen as supporting Hillary. I didn't get that vibe at all from Mike. On the larger issue it's too bad that Larry doesn't seem to want to criticize Bernie as there are some real opportunities for TNS to be presenting some alternate POVs largely ignored by the mainstream. I'd love to see Larry pointing out that not only was Obama more progressive than Hillary, he was a better politician too and it was largely ignored by both the mainstream media and the alternative media for different reasons. Or how progressive change has always required both an inside game and an outside game (good chance for a Lakers joke!) and how this isn't really anything new and that if you are effective you will always end up being dismissed as a sellout unless you get yourself killed.

[GHScorpiosRule]

Susan Sarandon is really making all the rounds, isn't she? First on Real Time last week, The View on Tuesday (though that was taped, so it could have been last week as well), and here on this show, this week?

 

Her smugness and coyness really make me stabby and I wonder why I never noticed that about her before. Or is it something new?

Edited April 22, 2016 by GHScorpiosRule

[gesundheit]

Ugh. I'm with all of you who found Sarandon unbearably sanctimonious. She can take whatever position she wants to, but don't come on the damn Nightly Show being so utterly, utterly humorless. 

 

Ideological purity is a great thing if you can afford it. Most Americans cannot.

[ms.o]

Loved Larry focusing on Prince. Purple notecards and saying screw it to planned panel discussion in order to discuss him. Nice tribute

[ganesh]

I'd love to see Larry pointing out that not only was Obama more progressive than Hillary, he was a better politician too and it was largely ignored by both the mainstream media and the alternative media for different reasons.

 

Given the monumental roadblocks thrown at him within the first week of the presidency, not to mention having the worst financial crisis since the depression, it's effectively miraculous what he's got done. 

[iMonrey]

 

And I would hazard a guess that most people who are stomping all over her can't factually point to any one reason why. It just sounds/feels good to them.

 

It's because she took money from Goldman Sachs for speaking engagements. That's what they keep harping on. And it's why they keep saying "She's no better than Republicans" - because of that one thing. And I think it speaks to the criticism that Bernie is a one-issue candidate. If all you're focused on is Wall Street reform then you can paint Clinton as an "establishment" politician who is part of that problem. 

 

Where supporters like Sarandon seem to lose focus is that the presidency isn't about a single issue. Maybe Clinton's not much better on Wall Street reform than Republicans, but what about all the other issues? Climate change. Immigration. Taxes. Reproductive rights. Planned Parenthood. Supreme Court appointees. Is she "just like Republicans" when it comes to those issues? Hell no. So when Sanders supporters say it might as well be Trump if it's not Sanders I think they've lost their minds.

[ganesh]

This is where we usually say "perfect is the enemy of good." You could conceivably have two scotus appointments to make in the upcoming term. In addition to all of the above listed issues, who do you want developing foreign policy? The people who say, "let's kill their families," and "bomb them so hard that the sand turns to glass?"

 

Russell Simmons is a great guy and his contribution to modern pop music is great, but he just wasn't the right person to talk about Prince. I hope they do another panel with someone who knew him. Robin's story was super great though. 

Edited April 22, 2016 by ganesh