Ah, the Trumpian free form poem. I look forward to its canonization in Harold Bloom's next anthology, White Men and Why They Should Come First.

If you can laugh while feeling guilty, you must be a conservative or something.

Jjimjilbangs are commonplace in Korea. The vast majority of them aren't gay cruising spots.

Coaching is for sports or the workplace. In my personal life, it is 100% not my job to mentor idiots who want to be able to use the racist language that was okay 50 years ago because they're too lazy to change.

I hope I never get rich enough that my hanger-on family is terrified of telling me that I'm over the hill and probably should not give public interviews anymore.

All we need now is Kiefer Sutherland to put in an appearance and watch their 24-related jerkoff fantasies go spiraling into the atmosphere like a deflated balloon.

So to put a finer point on it, how does this make celebrities different from 90% of political pundits and talking heads?

>>None of these people are experts or even moderately informed about politics.

Judging by the comments, it looks like someone posted a link to this article on Reddit…

It doesn't help that media outlets in search of ginned up conflict give them disproportionate airtime, either. Those horrible Bernie supporters on MSNBC last night, it was like someone went out of their way to find people in the lower tail of the "What grade did you get in civics class?" curve…

That's a lot of words to say, "I am projecting my dislike of RL aggressive women onto a movie."

If it was an actual feminist, it would be thirty paragraphs long, each of which would contain twenty-six multi-clause sentences, followed by her twitter feed being inundated with Harambe memes and rape threats.

So what? Interpersonal niceness doesn't mean shit if he supports broad national policies that specifically make the lives of entire classes of women, the poor, and law-abiding citizens and immigrants more difficult.

Every now and then when I need a pick-me-up, I go back and rewatch a video on YT where Christopher Hitchens calls Sean Hannity "unlettered." The way Hannity's face screws up like some disgruntled schoolkid on the playground says it all; he *is* unlettered and can't think of a decent response.

Then you're looking at the wrong hero, because Colbert and Stewart's schtick was always to edge just up against full-throated seriousness and then pull back at the last second with juvenile antics.

They grow 'em cold in Philly.

I too miss the days when Colbert was a man's man's man's man's show host who deepthroated bananas and dgaf.

Call me callous, but the disrespect of an actual human being probably counts more to JJ than disrespect of a fictional space dood.

In what way is a non-stereotypical depiction of an gay Asian guy not boundary-pushing?

So because the perception is wrong, John Cho shouldn't think about the possibility the reaction might occur? "Having a concern" is not the same thing as "letting the homophobes win," especially in the context of trying to get the needle to move in Asian America re: acceptance of gay people.