Comments by "Hugh Jorgan" (@HughJorgan1) on "Joe Rogan on the Roseanne Controversy" video.

  1. I was curious why ABC/Disney would piss away hundreds of $millions. Within hours of a one-sentence joke. From only one of many stars/cast members in a top rated show. Rogen's take on the situation makes a lot of sense.
    5
  2. a2zme...Please refer to the specific section of this 16 minute video where you concluded Joe is "naive"? Specific comments/quotes (with context to those before and after)...are required for the assertion in your first sentence. Otherwise it's bullshit. (and btw, I've watched the full 16 minutes)
    4
  3. Well said. Roseanne is fighting back at the perplexing over-reaction to her joke/mistake. Let's hope there's another network who'll take the show. Especially for the rest of the cast.
    2
  4. W. Dearth...agree. But that'll happen when an athlete caught doping owns up and says they knew what they were taking. In other words, never.
    2
  5. Big picture...and not related to any specific comment. The discussions in this section almost bring a tear to my eye. Not a single person claiming one of the various "Gods" created our species and all the races/ethnicitys. That's progress people.
    1
  6. Jason Epelle...your original comment is very-well stated. And great job being the bigger person in the subsequent discussions...and sticking to your central point. You provided great perspective and rationale on your opinion. (The fact I agree 100% with your original comment is irrelevant)
    1
  7. We need to replace term "devils advocate" with the updated term made famous by the late, great Christopher Hitchens.....Contrarian. Contrarians are critical to society. Especially in our internet, social-media driven world of damaging group-think and brainwashing. Always asking questions is critical.
    1
  8. Simone, I respect your opinion. But my question is for "Vijay K" in relation to the original comment. Let's wait.
    1
  9. Sean Green...please cite examples of your claims: 1. Politicians "praising Hitler". 2. Politicians talking about "euthanizing the poor". 3 The people who are "open about being pedos and saying women are property". Examples of who's saying this stuff are critical to the context to your overall point.
    1
  10. Jon Todd...thank you. Here's what I learned: 1. The delusional, extremist idiot who praised Hitler is just a candidate. Not a true "politician" by my definition. 2. The linked article points out the "euthanizing" claim was a hoax and/or the result of a hacker. 3. Nathan Larson is also just a candidate. And clearly another nutjob with zero chance of winning and becoming a politician (by my definition). Bottom line, I think it's illogical to refer to delusional nutjob candidates as 'politicians', even if they fit the official definition. By that logic, we could say every single person who's ever ran for a government seat (for either party) is a politician.
    1
  11. mtman1984...You say Rogen "Disregards her entire social media past"?! Early in the vid Rogen brought up her previous racist tweet to bring context to the recent issue! In fact, he pointed out how damaging it was to her current explanation. We agree she shouldn't have been fired. And I'm still waiting for the original poster "a2zme" to answer my question and defend his "naive" comment.
    1