disqusnmnhhp5mzp--disqus
Jeremy
disqusnmnhhp5mzp--disqus

He was also in Muppets Take Manhattan quite a bit, which of course was when Jim Henson was still alive. Doesn't really seem like it was Whitmire's doing that the character was so prolific.

That's true but I think it's because nothing major Muppets-related has actually been done over that time (since the cancellation of the ABC series). Apparently some eagle-eared viewers did notice that one of the online sketches had used a different voice actor for one of the side characters (one of the two old guys),

The "Muppets XXX Parody" definitely left some stains. You can't wash that felt!

Yeah I mean, it's been pretty beyond petty. It's kind of remarkable that everyone involved couldn't stay a little more quiet about it.

I'm aware actually, but my understanding at least was that he basically just wanted Disney to handle all the licensing and corporate stuff but allow him to keep doing whatever work he wanted to do on it. Regardless, it's possible it would have been just as much as a mistake, but ultimately it was Brian who pulled the

It makes sense in a weird way. Any actor who plays a character, especially for a long time, is going to start to have really strong opinions about how that character would behave in any given situation. I don't pretend to know all the nuances of the Muppets, but stories abound of the Simpsons voice actors complaining

No worries, it happens.

I will say I rather enjoyed the 2011 movie overall, but everything about that ABC series sounded so poorly-thought out. I didn't really understand why traditional sitcom people were writing it instead of people who performed or otherwise really knew those characters. And I say that as a pretty casual fan of the

He said he regrets not firing Whitmire beforehand and feels guilty for "burdening" Disney. He doesn't regret selling it to Disney in the first place.

Okay, but isn't Brian Henson the guy who sold it to Disney and let them ruin the series in the first place?

I don't think anyone (including Oliver) would say that Gitmo isn't a complicated issue or that he didn't have a lot of legitimate obstacles. I'd even include the Republicans in that, to a degree. But the point is that those obstacles were surmountable. The issue was not a matter of feasibility but political will.

Progressives criticize drone strikes because, well, first of all because they are worth criticizing. I doubt there are many that are fans of cruise missiles - I personally think Obama should be held accountable for several war crimes he committed with cruise missiles. However, drone strikes happen to be his most

The Slate piece (and I have problems with Slate) is a well-researched and argued piece by an actual journalist who knows their stuff.

I'm…..not sure when it is that you think I suggested that I like Bush or think he was less bad than Trump. I agree, he's a war criminal and I think he should have been hung by the neck. (Granted, I'm not sure you want to hear my opinion on Obama and his drone strikes….)

I'm not a liberal, I'm a leftist, and while I always vote I also happened to be voting in a state that Hillary was inevitably going to win easily, so it really doesn't matter a lick who I voted for. If you want to complain about people voting for Stein in Michigan, be my guest I suppose, but if you're complaining

First of all, I can't really take anyone seriously that uses the term "brogressives" with a straight face.

Haha seriously, and you guessed right. For fuck's sake, I'm a dues-paying member of a socialist organization. Of course I hate the Clintons. (I would hate Bill even if he was an actual leftist, cause you know, the rape thing.) That literally any criticism of the Clintons is still construed as right-wing is really kind

I think Nixon should have been hung by the neck for his war crimes. Him and Kissinger. With that said, "Nixon was relatively liberal compared to the state of both parties right now on domestic issues" is not a defense of him. It's merely a statement. I think you're somehow assuming that people are out to defend

You're oversimplifying a great deal. But in any case, a lot of those issues you cited would in fact not be as big issues as they are if not for the fact that the Dems have just lied down and let the GOP do whatever it wants for so long. Gerrymandering for instance is a result of Democrats persistently failing in

I'm not defending them. But I think you may have missed my point. Regardless, that's an oversimplification. They stand for defending the interests of corporations and capital and the military industrial complex. They stand for reducing taxes for rich people as much as possible. And so forth. I don't think those things