Lewis Black: I Don’t Understand the Tea Partiers
Comedian Lewis Black, of “The Daily Show,” speaks with WSJ/MarketWatch columnist David Weidner about the Tea-Party movement, taxes, bank bailouts and the iPad.
4/19/2010 12:20:04 PM
Comedian Lewis Black, of “The Daily Show,” speaks with WSJ/MarketWatch columnist David Weidner about the Tea-Party movement, taxes, bank bailouts and the iPad.
4/19/2010 12:20:04 PM
Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data, ability to repeat discredited memes, and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Also, be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor even implied. Any irrelevancies you can mention will also be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.
April 19th, 2010 at 5:50 pm
Funny. I never thought about my water bill being less than my cable… only a comedian can point out the absurdities, make you laugh, and make you think.
April 19th, 2010 at 5:52 pm
Come to think of it, I’d gladly pay more in gasoline tax if they fix our f*C$in’ roads. It would cost less than the damage our crappy roads in Indiana do to my vehicles!
April 19th, 2010 at 5:58 pm
He always makes me laugh, and is uncharacteristically composed here.
He has a deep drano voice that whips himself into a frenzy, and then he recomposes himself, which is not easy to do.
I like to see him as a guest on The Daily Show.
He doesn’t hate himself, almost all comedians vent by exposing societal morays.
April 19th, 2010 at 6:59 pm
Lewis has a great way of giving his opinion while taking into consideration others perspectives. His erratic conveyance of this is somewhat disturbing, giving him a title of a comedian. However the wisdom contained in his opinion can’t be denied.
Thanks for posting this,
Gene Goetting
April 19th, 2010 at 7:31 pm
Lewis is still carrying around an original iPhone in 2010, classic!
April 19th, 2010 at 8:24 pm
This is the first time that I have heard Lewis Black and his elocution is annoying. He is clueless. Less government means things like ending the death grip that unions have on state/local budgets and ending our role as the world’s policeman. I could go on and on. P.S. I’m a libertarian with no interest in the Tea Party movement.
April 20th, 2010 at 6:50 am
@jdjed- less government to you means what you wrote, but not to everyone. His point is that the Tea Party has a poorly formed message–even a walking contradiction of itself in many cases…they hold sacred social security and medicare because they themselves are mostly the age that entitles them to those benefits. They don’t mind our world policing efforts despite defense being one of the larger pieces of the budget pie.
I listen to a lot of Penn J. so I know where you are coming from as a libertarian. A lot of which I agree with on paper. There is very little that the government does that can’t be done more efficiently/effectively in private hands. The hard part of some things being in private hands is relying on people being good humans and not pleasuring themselves first. That is the fallacy of much of the Ayn Rand cultists. We tried “less is more” on Wall Street and ultimately what rises to the top isn’t human good behavior, but all the bad behavior–not even true capitalism. So, some entity has to take the role of “parent” to keep the unruly children in line. That is the government. What type of “parent” is determined by what kind of crap the kid has gotten into… and right now we are in butt kickin’, you’re grounded until you’re 21 mode…
April 20th, 2010 at 11:36 am
Social Security, Medicare, Defense
Those three make up something like 77% of our federal government’s spending.
As soon as the Tea Partiers come out and tell me which one of those three they want to cut, then I will give them some respect.
Until then, they are winy brats who want to keep government spending that benefits them and want to cut spending that benefits the poor.
April 20th, 2010 at 5:58 pm
amen