Bob and Chez Show

The Bubble Genius Bob & Chez Show 10/02/14

bcs_do_it_live

RELM_buttonHot For Teacher: Bill O’Reilly is Really Angry; Sarah Palin is Gonna Sue Bob; Victimhood and teachers Having Sex with Students; Secret Service Asleep on the Job; Bill O’Reilly’s Ridiculous Mercenary Force; How to do a Bill O’Reilly Impression; and much more. Brought to you by Bubble Genius, the BobCesca.com Amazon Link and The Bowen Law Group.

There’s more political banter in the Bob & Chez Show After Party. If you’re not a member, download individual After Party podcasts for $2 each via our Band Camp page.

Listen and subscribe on iTunes (it’s FREE!)
Download the mp3 (55 minutes, 23mb)
RSS Feed
Bob & Chez Show Archive
Listen on your smartphone via Stitcher.com

Bubble Genius

  • CWL

    Isn’t *Satire* exempt from copywrite laws? Screw the Grifter….She is the Queen of Satire afterall!? BOR https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3aOPMeB7g8 LOL

  • Badgerite

    Billy O’Reilly solving :”complex problems”. Just a minute. I have to stop laughing before I proceed. This may take a while.

  • muselet

    According to Wikipedia, Bill O’Reilly has a Masters in Broadcast Journalism from Boston University. He interned in the WBZ newsroom, reported or anchored at seven TV stations, and worked for CBS News as a correspondent. We can therefore conclude either (a) he didn’t pay very much attention to what people around him were saying at any point during that time, or (b) he really is that dumb (I’m not in the business and even I know what “play us out” means).

    Bob, congratulations! You know you’ve arrived when a bunch of snowbillies threaten you with a frivolous lawsuit. I don’t know whether to fall down laughing, contribute to your legal defense fund, or fly to Hawaii just to shake your hand.

    Chez, as far as the legal system is concerned, the kid is a victim. He was legally unable to consent. Whether or not the state of Louisiana is correct about that (the kid went and ran his mouth about it afterward, which to me shows he didn’t have the emotional maturity to have necessary to deal with that particular sexual encounter) in this specific case can certainly be debated. Regardless, he’s not a hero, he’s not a god, legally he’s a victim regardless of how he feels about it.

    Chez, female selection is hardly unique to humans, and anyone trying to explain the why of sexual preferences is almost certainly hilariously wrong. That doesn’t make that study useless or no-shit obvious, that study is just another data point. (Damn, I wish I remembered the ridiculous pop-culture formula—hah!—for a maximum non-creepy age difference in a relationship. Half the older partner’s age plus seven years? Something like that.)

    The Secret Service screwed up, and the rot set in long ago. However, resignations and howls of outrage from grandstanding congresscritters (who, let us not forget, couldn’t be bothered to vote on whether to approve airstrikes against IS/ISIS/ISIL but scuttled back to DC as soon as an opportunity arose to berate an Obama Administration official), hysterical we’re all going to die! hypotheticals from nincompoops, and utterly batshit insane suggestions for a new director won’t solve the problem.

    There’s a reason Keith Olbermann calls Bill O’Reilly “BillO the Clown.” The fact that O’Reilly is going after Stephen Colbert—never go after a satirist!—for pooh-poohing his ultra super-duper A-Team band of mercenaries idea shows just how unserious he really is. More people should mock O’Reilly because he takes himself so seriously and his reaction is so OTT (I’m willing to put up with the fact that doing so would increase his media profile).

    –alopecia

    EDITED for clarity (I hope).

    • GrafZeppelin127

      I think it bears mentioning when talking about Bill O’Reilly (and others, to use his phrasing, “of his ilk” who think, talk, see things, argue and present themselves the way he does) is not only that he “takes himself so seriously,” but as Stephen pointed out in his bit, that he admires himself so much.

      Whenever I talk about this I use the word “admire” very deliberately. I’m not saying he’s full of himself or that he’s in love with himself; that he’s conceited, arrogant or even narcissistic. To admire oneself is very different from those things. As I’ve observed over the last 13 years or so, much of the “conservative movement” (meaning, the Republican Party’s color-war team), from elected officeholders to candidates to think tanks to commentators to pundits to random Internet comment-thread trolls, has taken its cues from O’Reilly in this regard. This, in my view, is a plague that’s infected that entire team.

      O’Reilly certainly admires himself for being who he is, or what he perceives himself to be: A white, male, Christian, wealthy, successful, popular pundit who is right about everything and knows more than anyone else about everything that matters. More than that, I think, he admires himself for not being any of the various caricatures (viz., of The Far Left™ and their “ilk”) he routinely presents to his audience in to compare them, and himself, to. I find it impossible to listen to O’Reilly, or anyone else on that team for that matter, because the level of self-admiration they project — especially when they start comparing themselves to imaginary caricatures — is physically sickening.

      This is why people on that team are not funny, and why they should never get into a pissing match with a brilliant satirist like Stephen Colbert. It’s rather amazing how people like O’Reilly, Hannity, et al. are always dismissing people like Colbert and Jon Stewart as irrelevant jokesters whose bits are unworthy of serious consideration, yet they take the bait every time they get made fun of. And their taking the bait always has the precise opposite effect they think it will have.

      There was a Seinfeld episode in which Jerry quipped in reference to his intensely altruistic girlfriend, “You can’t have sex with someone you admire!” That may be true, but it’s certainly true that you can’t make fun of someone you admire. “Conservatives” can’t make fun of Reagan, Cheney or Palin (and, to be fair, a lot of “liberals” can’t make fun of Obama or Clinton, but it’s far less of an issue over here than over there), because they admire them too much.

      Which brings us back to O’Reilly, who not only admires Reagan, Cheney and Palin too much to make fun of them — or to tolerate anyone else making fun of them — but admires himself too much to either make fun of himself or tolerate anyone else making fun of him. It’s that self-admiration that makes “conservatives” so unfunny, so thin-skinned, so easily outraged, so prone to bravado, so self-righteous, and so mean.

      Maybe it’s me, or maybe it’s the fact that I watch Stewart and Colbert and listen to the Stephanie Miller Show and don’t watch Fox News or listen to right-wing rado, but it seems to me that “liberals” (the Democrats’ color-war team) are far more comfortable making fun of themselves, their political icons, and their own rhetorical excesses, than “conservatives” are. Seriously, is there a “conservative” counterpart to either Stewart or Colbert? To the Stephanie Miller Show (or its traveling Sexy Liberal Comedy Tour and Meet-and-Grope)? Or even to SNL?

      Hardly.

      Taking oneself seriously is one thing. Admiring oneself is something else entirely.

      • muselet

        Hmm. You’ve clearly given this a lot more thought than I have.

        An exaggerated sense of self-worth—amour propre on steroids, if you will—is certainly deadly for humor, as is excessive admiration for specific others: I can’t imagine any Righty directing a punchline at himself, let alone Ronald Reagan or Sarah Palin or Pope Benedict XVI.

        It’s funny, in all senses of the word, that you mention internet trolls, because two of them have taken shots at me because of my chosen online identity, presumably expecting me either to erupt in fury or to slink away, weeping quietly. It seems not to have occurred to either of them that I’m fully aware of what alopecia is, and that that’s the reason I chose the nym in the first place (I suppose I could have called myself “androgenetic alopecia,” but that would have been hanging a lantern on something that’s not really a joke).

        A variously-attributed quote says something to the effect, “If a rich man slips on a banana peel, that’s comedy. If a poor man slips on a banana peel, that’s tragedy.” I’m pretty sure most Lefties would agree, but I’m not sure if Righties would. That could be an interesting psychology experiment for someone to conduct.

        In short, I agree with you.

        And even though it’s almost perfectly irrelevant to the topic at hand (or is it?), I’d like to present my favorite meta-joke about humor, courtesy of LJK Setright:

        You are doubtless familiar with the definition of a Swede as being like a German but without the sense of humour: I put this proposition to a German and am glad to report that he considered it seriously and agreed that it was correct, adding after reflection that it was also funny.

        –alopecia

        • GrafZeppelin127

          I may diary this on DK, but something tells me I’ve done it before.

  • JohnC80

    Only offensive thing about Chez is he likes the Xbox One. As for the teacher story I remember back in 10th grade I had a Spanish teacher that looked like Bella-Marie Wolf(Google her) and if she wanted to have a fling with me I wouldn’t brag about it. And the only reason I wouldn’t want to brag about it is I wouldn’t want cops interfere with me living my teenage boy porno dream.