Skip to main content

"The Nightly Show" with Larry Wilmore and Tara "WTF" Setmayer

CNN contributor Tara Setmayer introduced herself to me last night courtesy of The Nightly Show with Larry Wilmore, and even though I haven't researched the matter, I have a feeling her middle name might be WTF. Setmayer is a Republican commentator, an African-American, and yes, a woman. That information will be relevant later in this post.

For those whom haven't tuned in yet to The Nightly Show, host Larry Wilmore starts each show much like The Daily Show's Jon Stewart, as he pokes fun at politicians to induce laughter. This is Comedy Central after all. However, unlike Stewart, Wilmore's show tends to focus on one central topic each and every episode, and following Wilmore's 5-10 minute opening monologue and a commercial break, he's joined by four guests at a round table where they all discuss that very topic. After a second commercial break, Wilmore then asks each guest a rather awkward-and-difficult-to-answer question in a segment called "Keep It 100" (100% true, real, or honest), before himself answering such a question posed by a Twitter follower after the third and final commercial break.

Last night, the central topic was with regard to former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani's comments about President Obama not loving this country, being "different" from presidents of the past (in other words, being a tad more tan...), and why it seems that the Republican Party feels the need to mythologize him.

Ms. Setmayer first decided to go with the false equivalence strategy, saying something like, "Well, Obama called Bush unpatriotic. What about that? I'm just trying to be fair here."

Wilmore quickly corrected her, saying, "Obama said how President Bush was treating poor people was unpatriotic. Giuliani just up and said President Obama doesn't love this country. Those are completely different things - apples and oranges."

Then, when asked why it seems that the Republican Party feels the need to mythologize President Obama, Setmayer said something along the lines of, "Well, look at it this way. He used to live in Indonesia, he was surrounded by Muslims for a time when he was growing up, he was friends with a communist, so, I mean, when you put all of that together, you have to start to wonder a few things..."

She added that a president, like Obama, whom seeks transformative changes, doesn't appear to genuinely love the country.

Wilmore then butted in again, basically saying, "Uh, the civil rights movement was a transformative change. The women's rights movement was a transformative change..."

The most troubling aspect of her guest appearance was her response in the "Keep It 100" segment. Wilmore asked her, "Okay, in the 2016 presidential election, you have to choose one of these two candidates: A racist Republican who's tough on terror or a Democrat who's an African-American woman, your best friend, but soft on terror. Who do you vote for?"

Her response? Take a wild guess... Yes, the racist Republican.

Tara Setmayer's guest appearance was probably the most cringe- and facepalm-inducing performance I've seen by a guest on The Nightly Show to this point in the show's early history.

After the CNN contributor kept it "100" by saying she'd rather vote for a racist Republican candidate for president than an African-American woman who was her best friend, Wilmore responded by saying, "Wow, I have so many jokes for that, but will hold off tonight."

In all honesty, there is no punchline that could depict the sad and ironic humor of Ms. Setmayer's comments more than her comments themselves. Here's an African-American woman who's standing by the party that's been trying to diminish women's reproductive rights, prevent them from attaining equal pay, limit the number of votes by minorities, and have attempted to demonize blacks (black males in particular) as "thugs" - including the first African-American president, Barack Obama. It's incredibly ironic that she seems fearful of transformative changes of the present, for where would she be without transformative changes of the past?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"