Donald Trump

Louis CK Compares Donald Trump to Hitler in Inane, Rambling Email to Fans

Sample quote: "I'm not saying he's evil or a monster. In fact I don't think Hitler was."

|

The internet is abuzz over an email sent by comedian/actor/director Louis CK

Louis CK and Donald Trump
Youtube

to his fans in which he begs everyone not to vote for Donald Trump because Trump is Adolf Hitler. Even though CK says he doesn't think Trump is evil or a monster and doesn't think Hitler was either. But Trump is a "shocking cunt billionaire liar" and even though he's not a conservative, CK thinks a conservative should be president after Obama because we need "balance," and that John Kasich "seems okay." 

Apologies for the previous paragraph, but I decided that aping CK's blatantly contradictory and unserious stream-of-consciousness style was the best method of effectively conveying how truly disposable CK's stab at a political rant is.

But America does love it some Louis CK (I'm a fan myself) and also loves it some Hitler namedrops, too, which is why CK's email has caught internet lightning in a bottle today.

CK's screed came at the end of his weekly e-newsletter to fans, which primarily plugged his new web series, Horace and Pete. CK tacked on around 1,400 more words, in which he began:

P.S. Please stop it with voting for Trump. It was funny for a little while. But the guy is Hitler. And by that I mean that we are being Germany in the 30s. Do you think they saw the shit coming? Hitler was just some hilarious and refreshing dude with a weird comb over who would say anything at all.

That's a rather glib interpretation of early 1930s German politics, which he would expand upon later in the email with this:

American democracy is broken enough that a guy like that could really fuck things up. That's how Hitler got there. He was voted into power by a fatigued nation and when he got inside, he did all his Hitler things and no one could stop him.

Factually, Hitler's Nazi Party lost seats in the Reichstag and only won about 33% of the popular vote in the last election before the Nazis took power, but reading is hard and loose analogies are easy, so let's move on. 

CK writes that he likes Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton but isn't advocating for them and that "frankly I wish the next president was a conservative only because we had Obama for eight years and we need balance." Unfortunately, he writes, "it only works if the conservatives put up a good candidate."

Though he correctly warns of Trump's dangerous aversion to the First Amendment, CK suggests John Kasich as an acceptable Republican alternative for the presidential nomination because he's a "healthier choice."

Apparently, CK is unaware of Kasich's inclination to strong-arm video stores into pulling Oscar-winning movies featuring woodchippers off their shelves because, the "grown-up" Ohio governor once said, "It was billed as a comedy, but it wasn't funny."

CK's rant then goes on and on on, liberally peppered with words like "cancer," "suicide," and "crack pipe."

In the familiar style of former Daily Show host Jon Stewart, who whenever he was cornered after fudging facts or being flat out wrong would throw up his hands and say, "I'm just a comedian," CK goes generously further with the disclaimer:

I'm an idiot and I'm sure a bunch of you are very annoyed by this. Fucking celebrity with an opinion.

Then, this epic wrap-up to convince his fans not to vote Trump:

I'm not saying he's evil or a monster. In fact I don't think Hitler was. The problem with saying that guys like that are monsters is that we don't see them coming when they turn out to be human, which they all are. Everyone is. Trump is a messed up guy with a hole in his heart that he tries to fill with money and attention. He can never ever have enough of either and he'll never stop trying. He's sick. Which makes him really really interesting. And he pulls you towards him which somehow feels good or fascinatingly bad. He's not a monster. He's a sad man. But all this makes him horribly dangerous if he becomes president.

CK's "epic" political activism concludes with this cheeky addendum plugging his show, "And please watch Horace and Pete."

You can read the full transcript of CK's email here

NEXT: Did Trump truly repudiate torture and the murder of civilians?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “”Trump is a “shocking cunt billionaire liar” “”

    So, Clinton with more money?

    1. Trump is a messed up guy with a hole in his heart that he tries to fill with money and attention.

      The male version of Hillary.

      1. Also, how is that not a pretty accurate description of Louis CK?

        1. I was about to say; ” funny a celebrity saying someone else has a problem with needing attention and money. ” Especially when he puts in a plug for himself while he’s at it.

  2. Unfortunately, he writes, “it only works if the conservatives put up a good candidate.”

    “I’m so reasonable! I advocate Balance! JUST NOT RIGHT NOW”

    1. A right-thinking prog’s idea of balance: A solidly left ideologue like Obama followed by a rock-solid principled medicaid expanding conservative like John Kasich.

    2. And for a comedian, adopting this standard concern-trolling trope is distinctly unfunny.

      Unless he’s not *trying* to be funny.

      Is he?

      1. “If only the conservatives supported…who’s that guy who’s doing badly in the polls?”

        “Kasich, boss.”

        “Thank you – if only the conservatives supported Kasich I’d totally be with the conservatives!

        “You’re sure Kasich isn’t going to have some last-minute surge? I don’t want to endorse a *viable* conservative.”

    3. Leftists like Louis think elections should be like the last season of The West Wing–the Republicans put forth a “moderate” candidate that they like but won’t vote for regardless, and the Republican “loses with honor.”

      Not surprising the GOP rank and file are lining up behind Trump and Cruz–John made the point that these people are realizing that lefties won’t vote for the R candidate and will slime them anyway. Might as well pick someone that will really make the left chimp out.

  3. Don’t care.

  4. He must be a Stalin man.Notice none of these progs ever say someone is like Stalin? Or Mao for that matter.

    1. Plus, a Stalin could really wreak some terror on USA, while it would be kind of hard for a Hitler do to much harm. For one thing, Stalin was a genius at controlling authoritarian terrorism and almost as good at handling a reactionary populace as Lenin was. Stalin was also firmly grounded in reality, which means his capacity for terror wasn’t hampered by unrealistic visions of how things work, like Hitler’s was. Hitler also wasn’t aiming for terror, whilst that was Stalin’s only purpose: he had no ideology but raw authoritarianism and recognised that constant terror and brutality was the most reliable method of execution, pretty much unfallible with an even halfway servil population. He didn’t suffer the delusion of ends and means that afflicted the other great dictators of socialism. The only guy who seemed to come close to his capacity for cornholing the human race was G?bbels, who thankfully never got off the leash.

      1. Bill – Lenin.
        Hillary – Stalin

  5. Yeah, I got the email and saw, “P.S. Please stop it with voting for Trump.” at the bottom of the email. I thought that was pretty much it. Then I scrolled down and saw it went on and on and on.

    Factually, Hitler’s Nazi Party lost seats in Reichstag and only won about 33% of the popular vote

    Well, you know who else is only winning about 33% of the vote?

    1. Voldemort?

    2. Bernie Samders?

    3. Donald Trump

  6. And then there is John Keisich. Reason won’t take the link. Apparently he was fired from the 1976 Reagan campaign for selling weed to the other campaign workers.

    It is funny to think that in 1976 even the Reagan campaign had a weed connection.

    1. “”Keisich”””

      Its like you have a special spelling-app

      1. …a special spilling ape.

        1. …a spatial spalling Apu.

      2. It turns out the current governor of Ohio was the 1976 Reagan campaign’s weed dealer and all you dumb asses can talk about is a name being misspelled. Really?

        1. the source was Roger Stone. I’m not sure anyone cares.

    2. When there was the vote for allowing recreational cannabism in Oregon, most people I knew were voting against it. Most of them smoked weed recreationally. But they tended to think they wouldn’t be the target of laws about it and that if it were legal, then we’d have the Negro and Mexican out there smoking dope in the streets and raping their daughters. In fact, there was probably a higher proportion of non-potheads voting to allow recreational cannabis than among those voting against it, amongst folks I knew that talked about it.

      1. “recreational cannibalism”

        1. I had dinner in Oregon recently.

          It was delicious.

          1. Fava beans……Chianti?

    3. sounds like an endorsement of kasich to me

  7. “Spend one hour on google and just read it all.”

    Right.

  8. There’s five minutes I won’t get back.

    1. Rywun

      You are just another Gary Wayne Gacy. I am not saying you are evil or a monster. I just think you are a lot like a guy who lured young boys into his home and rapes and murders them. But I am not saying you are evil and neither was he.

      1. “You are just another Gary Wayne Gacy.”

        Sad clown is sad

      2. JOhn, you have Gacy’s first name wrong. I’ll give you a hint, its a name you know quite well.

        1. Mortimer?

        2. Hitler Wayne Gacy?

        3. Chip?

        4. Sheldon Richman?

        5. I heard a number of folks fuck up Gacy’s forename, either replacing “John” with something else or replacing “Wayne” with something else. It’s kind of astonishing, since “John Wayne” is kind of a well known combo.

        6. http://www.newsoftheweird.com/wayne.html

          Lotsa killers with Wayne as a middle name.

      3. Trump is another Richard Wayne Gary Wayne.

        1. He is another John David Stutts only instead of assassinating Buckwheat he is going to assimilate Megyn Kelly.

        2. not anywhere near as handsome (Im very excited for season 2 next month)

  9. Banality of Trump.

  10. Don’t listen to Louis CK. He’s a Hitler.

    You never see it coming, but, then, boom: Hitler.

    Christ, I’ve seen it a thousand times.

      1. Why can’t I find Kaz’s character Fleaby Hitler anywhere online? “They hate him in the country, they hate him in the city. With a name like Fleaby Hitler…they hate him in the city.”

  11. Was Hitler the alternative to the two party system?

    1. he was the solution to a do-nothing, dysfunctional Reichstag.

      1. That was funny.

  12. its hard to imagine what the media shit-spewing is going to resort to once he wins the nom.

    I mean, they’ve burned out “Racist'” and have advanced to “Hitler”… what’s phase 3 of that trend? CTHULU?

    It all seems just like, “say something, anything!! just don’t talk about Hillary! It makes people think about her.”

    1. even googl’s getting in on it. I did a search yesterday for the Wiener Dioskurides and in the top five hits was some page on stormfront and a Spanish page about los protocolos de los sabios de sion. I went through the first fifty hits and nothing had anything to do with Dioskurides. I’ve had a number of cases like that lately, where it’s like the search results are totally random and unrelated to the item entered. I remember searching for the hobbit an unexpected journey one time and the first hit was bisexual dwarf orgies. Someone said it’s because I have the scripting turned off and no cookies and so it can’t personalise my results. So this is apparently the “vanilla” version of the Internet.

      1. Adding an element restricting results to European countries, by the way, turned up a totally different set of results, many of which actually had something to do with Dioskurides, about a quarter actually pages selling facsimilia of the Wiener Dioskurides.

      2. (epigraphy has been my avocation since childhood)

      3. I remember searching for the hobbit an unexpected journey one time and the first hit was bisexual dwarf orgies.

        Like finding a winning lottery ticket then?

    2. its hard to imagine what the media shit-spewing is going to resort to once he wins the nom.

      That’s one reason I’d like to see it. The MSM and the left have over-used and devalued their ultimate weapons, the charges of racism/sexism/homophobia/fascism/xenophobia. (With libertarians also helping to over-use and devalue those last two…. *COUGH*) Trump is someone standing up against PC bullshit. If he became president and did nothing but decisively defeat and discredit SJW culture, would that not be a huge positive?

      Yeah, I can imagine scenarios in which it all goes wrong, but I think it might be worth a try. PC cry-bullies are on the verge of taking over. Everyone understands that they’ll have an even bigger place in the Hillary administration, right?

  13. Okay I’ll bite. Why in the fuck would Reason cover this? Isn’t there a libertarian leaning candidate somewhere in America, maybe running for dog catcher or something, that Reason could cover constructively? I come here and hear about Louis CK calling Trump Hitler?

    1. It’s so edgy and cool!

    2. It’s just how magazines work. Writers follow the general editorial guidelines as to topics, then write what they want. This isn’t the story of the year, true, but folks, it’s just a blog post.

  14. Jesus cut the guy some slack. At least he has the self-awareness to say he’s full of shit and recognizes how celebrities on soapbox irritates the shit out of people.

    And he isn’t completely off the mark on Germany in 20s/Early 30s. They were fatigued and still recovering from WWI plus they were still in the early years of this type of government. Up until after WWI they were still something of a monarchy under the Kaiser.

    1. In all of life, a little rain must fall.

      Let’s not bicker and argue about who tried to take over Europe, and who threw who in a concentration camp.

    2. At least he has the self-awareness to say he’s full of shit and recognizes how celebrities on soapbox irritates the shit out of people

      The second step in that “Self-Awareness” process is to stop being so full of shit and stop annoying people

    3. “And he isn’t completely off the mark on Germany in 20s/Early 30s. They were fatigued and still recovering from WWI plus they were still in the early years of this type of government. Up until after WWI they were still something of a monarchy under the Kaiser.”

      And most of the nazi platform was a revisitation of what the Kaiser’d been doing. If anything, the prussian empire was less monarchical than Hitler’s germany. Nazi germany was a continued amplification of a process that well predated Hitler. The comparison is also invalid for other things you’ve mentioned. The USA is not fatigued recovering from a war, is not in a state of political destabilisation, the ?conomic system is not inherently shite, and there is no real class struggle. It’s true Hitler was a conservative, but that just shows what a useless way of describing political orientations it is. He was conservative, but he was also socialist as fuck, and progressiver than the progressivest fuck. It’s even uselesser in USA the now, as almost no major politician is actually conservative yet the word is used all the fucking time like it means something, so it’s turning to be about as meaningless as “Christian”. Sometimes I think the conservative/progressive dichotomy is just a way of boxing people’s thoughts in so as to head off any revolutionary thinking, which is always the way liberty leads.

      1. For me, it helps to think of Hitler as an anti-globalist. He was resisting the expanding liberalism of the Brits and other continentals by trying to reintroduce Prussian empire/Kaiser-like state. He was a reactionary. The failure of Weimar is to a certain extent the failure of liberal/democracy in Germany. Hitler was trying to restore the prior regime with a new “modern” configuration.

        We can’t become reactionaries in the US because we have no prior form/structure to return to. We could fall into chaos and effectively if not actually dissolve or devolve.

      2. Hitler was not a “conservative.” He was a revolutionary nationalist and socialist. He was, in many ways, a modernist and progressive. He was not religious but tried to harness religion to his goals. Of course a nationalist will adopt some traditional national symbols and goals, but that’s not really “conservativism.”

  15. “This guy makes Hillary look good.”

  16. Trump is the president America deserves.

    1. It is so true isn’t it?

    2. About fucking time.

    3. I wish Mencken were alive to comment on this.

  17. If Trump is Hitler, then Clinton is Stalin, and that’s kind of an easy choice. Plus, with the US military complex and existing legal structure and the USA ?conomy, generally, Hitler wouldn’t actually be so bad. He’d probably do better for the country than Trump would. The problem is that for whatever reason Hitler’s mass killings are viewed as so much worser than Stalin’s (plus, the numbers for Stalin are regularly depreciated, whilst those for Hitler are occasionally amplified) and that Hitler is viewed as the causative agent for all the killing, as though it would not have happened if somebody else (like Himmler, for instance) were in charge and it would have happened if he were in charge even if the popular genius and the administration were totally different, which is just an exhibition of how poor many folk’s grasp of European history is. The Euros are always looking for an excuse to start slaughtering everyone. The weapons restrictions and thought control common in European countries today is only a beacon of the violence of the cultures.

    1. Based on my status as a non-Jew Kulak – TRUMP 2016

      1. FYI: I’m at the feeding the other guy to the crocodile first stage.

    2. The Euros are always looking for an excuse to start slaughtering everyone. Fifty years of cushy welfare statism has sucked that right out, far as I can tell.

      But then again, put a pig in the wild, and assuming it survives, two generations later they have tusks again.

      1. But then again, put a pig in the wild, and assuming it survives, two generations later they have tusks again.

        lol

        We might find out if this is true or not.

      2. So you’re saying Europeans are swine. Racist.

    3. “as though it would not have happened if somebody else (like Himmler, for instance) were in charge”

      How could Himmler have taken over without Hitler?

      1. He certainly couldn’t’ve. He was a fucking pencil pusher and half nuts. The point I was making that if someone else were in power, it could have happened also. If Himmler had got in charge some other way (and he certainly would’ve been sucking up to whomever was), he would have gone for it full force, even if he’d never heard of little Adolf.

        1. Hmmm…this is one of those things I can’t disprove – it’s hard enough to figure out what actually happened in history, much less what may have happened.

          But it feels wrong – Hitler seems like a key causative factor in the evil-ification of Germany.

          1. “A key”? Sure. An irreplaceable one? I don’t think so. The early Nazis had lots of leaders. Would a Third Reich headed by Ernst R?hm have been very different?

    4. The reason Hitler is worse than Stalin is because he was a nationalist. To modern thinking, nationalism is the very worst sin, the unforgivable sin. Nationalism is diametrically opposed to – the opposite of – universal liberalism. Both parties, Republican and Democrat, favor universal liberalism. That’s why Hitler is worse than Stalin.

      1. Stalin was just as much of a nationalist as Hitler. I think you are right about what people think. But people don’t know much.

        1. No. Stalin was an international communist. He created a communist empire with the Eastern block. He had so many useful idiots in the West because he claimed an international common man mantel. He voiced an expansive universal ideology – like universal liberalism. That’s not nationalism; its universalism. He changed the historic name of Russia to The Soviet Union.

          1. Nationalism = Tribalism. It is racist and sexist. It embraces hierarchy.

          2. No Lenin was that. Stalin,especially after world war 2 started was a nationalist.

            1. When you are in an existential total war scenario, nationalism can be a useful motivational tool. I am not sure Stalin was much for ideology except as a tool for keeping himself in power.

          3. Learn some fucking history. The Great Struggle in the communist party after Stalin was because he turned his back on Trockian universalism and rejected the need for permanent revolution in favour of russocentric nationalism and imperialist hegemony of the Soviet Union. Maybe he used catchphrases now and then to rile folks up that sounded like that’s not what was going on, but it was sure as the surest fuck. There is plenty of intra-Marxist debate from the period where it’s quite explicit.

            1. You need to calm the fuck down.

              Communist ideology was universal. Lenin articulated this and Stalin betrayed it. But, importantly, that’s not how it was interpreted by the West at the time. Long after Stalin “betrayed” international communism Westerners were embracing him and the origins.

              And, we were talking about the place Hitler and Stalin occupied in the minds of Westerners, not the historic context.

        2. Stalin won.

          Hitler lost.

          So Stalin is awesome.

          And Hitler sucks.

          You’re better off with a Stalin than a Hitler.

          WINNING.

          1. So are you saying? HILLARY 2016!

      2. Stalinism was originally defined by its nationalist quality, which was a huge departure from the universalism of the bol?eviks. The difference between Stalin and Hitler’s nationalism was that Hitler’s nationalism was a devotion to the apotheosis of the German people, even if he had to burn out their impurities in a lake of fire, whilst Stalin’s was a devotion to the authority of the communist party of the soviet union, which was simply an instrument of the Will of the Man of Steel. So, basicly, Stalin defended the interests of the soviet union because it existed chiefly to manifest a giant phallus of vexation for him to shove in people’s faces; Hitler fought for what he delusionally perceived as the interests of Germany as the interests of the German people and by extension also the best interests of European people more broadly, and even more broadly the bests interests of all people of the world, and he even went so far as imagining that he worked as an instrument of God for the perfection of Nature. The guy was kind of crasy sometimes, but you can’t fault his intentions. Of course, there is something a bit more chilling and awful about somebody that can lead the race to hell while trying to do the opposite than there is about a jerk who intentionally inflicts immeasurable suffering on his fellow man.

        1. Yes, Stalin perverted Leninism into Stalinism. The idiots in the West still apologized for him and tolerated him because of the universal appeal of communism.

          Hitler ruined nationalism for everyone. What a shit. But both lead to excesses, to say the least.

      3. Hollywood has had a big impact as well.

        1. And academics.

      4. The reason Hitler was worse than is is that no one knows what the fuck a fascist is except that is right wingy and much closer to republicans. Communists mean well.

  18. Absurdly, people frequently fail to take a culture that forcibly disarms the workers as violent, but treat a culture where the workers are openly armed as though it is violent, when it’s a sign of the opposite. At its bloodthirstiest, I don’t think the USA has ever got as far into the violent, murderous mindset which seems to underly some of the most peaceably peoples of Europe. For a Hitler to do like he did in Germany in modern USA, he’d also have to first foment a class struggle, which would be very difficult, since it would all have to be hallucinatory.

    1. The US was far too well armed and violent for fascism to ever take hold. Fascism relied on the use of mob violence and political terror. That worked in Germany because its victims were largely unarmed. There were brown shirts and fascist groups in America. You just never hear about them because the never did anything. If they had tried something like Krystalnacht in the US they would have ended up dead or in the hospital

      A good example of an American fascist is Bill Ayers. Before he went underground and started building bombs, his group tried to have a day of rage in Chicago where they terorized the evil bourgeois. They got their asses kicked badly.

      1. Unwillingness to allow the individual the use of force in lawful defense of his liberties is always consonant with a willingness to do violence, or have some armed thugs do it for you, to others.

        Whilst Euros tend to be servil and pathetic they are much readier than Americans, generally, to support collective violence, often in ways for which the USA character could never do. Not killing convicted murderers does not make a culture unviolent; it just makes it stupid. That sort of pandering to “nonviolence” rhetoric means nothing when you are quite willing to have the police go around enforcing right thoughts with beatings and, as necessary, killings. Things that USA does that Euros call “violent” often have nothing violent about them, since they are simply a judicious application of lawful force.

        Fascism is entirely possible in USA. In fact, I’d say it’s well on its way. It just won’t ever be Euro-style fascism, but rather something much less horrific.

      2. Fascism relied on the use of mob violence

        Which doesn’t work out so well for the mob when the citizens are armed.

      3. Where do people get the crazy idea that Hitler’s opponents were unarmed? The Weimar Republic was swimming in guns, particularly since WWI had just ended. The Nazis did not take power through mob violence, nor did the Communists (who were just as violent, and also armed). The Nazis achieved power mostly because the elites thought the Nazis were the best bulwark against the Communists and so Hindenburg handed power over to Hitler. By the time the Nazis started committing real violence they had the full power of the state behind them and armed resistance failed pretty dramatically.

      4. Where do people get the crazy idea that Hitler’s opponents were unarmed? The Weimar Republic was swimming in guns, particularly since WWI had just ended. The Nazis did not take power through mob violence, nor did the Communists (who were just as violent, and also armed). The Nazis achieved power mostly because the elites thought the Nazis were the best bulwark against the Communists and so Hindenburg handed power over to Hitler. By the time the Nazis started committing real violence they had the full power of the state behind them and armed resistance failed pretty dramatically.

  19. When a celeb tries to tell me who to vote for, my respect for that celeb takes a nose-dive. Even if they’re supporting someone I like.

    -jcr

  20. You know who else was said to be Hitler?

    1. Everyone to the right of Karl Marx?

    2. You know who scared Hitler?

      Peter Lorre.

      Is that what you want? A President Lorre?!?!??????

      WORSE. THAN. HITLER!!!!!?!!????1111!!!

      1. The Peter Lorre of “Casablanca”, or the Peter Lorre of “Arsenic and Old Lace”?

        1. The Peter Lorre from M.

          Just say no to presidents who kill little girls!!!!!!11111!!!

        2. The Peter Lorre of Maurice LaMarche, of course.

    3. Psst…the answer is “Hitler”.

  21. “Apparently, CK is unaware of Kasich’s inclination to strong-arm video stores into pulling Oscar-winning movies featuring woodchippers off their shelves…” You make it sound like Kasich pushed for legislation when he merely expressed himself to a private business (this is the way the free market works).

    I also find Fargo, both the movie and TV series objectionable but, not so much for the violence. They both are adamant that they are true stories when, in fact, they are not. I read the Cohen boys use the “true story” claim as a “device.” News flash. A lie is always a device.

    Your less-than-honest representation of Kasich’s “inclination to strong-arm” is just that sort of device.

    1. News Flash – movies are fictional.

  22. How about we refer to Trump as Richard III just for variety’s sake?

    1. Obama is Richard II and his body guard is Piers Graveson.

    2. This has legs, let’s go with this.

      1. The media is Shakespeare.

        Not as good as Shakespeare, but as hostile.

  23. You know what you get if you rearrange the letters in “Donald Trump”?

    Rot Dump Land.

    Is that what you want? For America?!?!??!?1111!!!!!

    1. Or “Dump Rot Land”.

      A lotta guys want *that*.

    2. His middle name is John.

      Rearrange the letters, and you get:

      “jolt hand porn mud” – shameful!

      “jump hold nod rant” – his speech notes

      “jump northland do” – if he’s elected, will liberals finally go to Canada?

      1. +1 MR Mojo Risen.

    3. Land Turd Mop
      Lard Mod Punt
      Lard Dump Ton
      Lard Dump Not
      Dam Plod Turn
      Dam Plod Runt
      Dam Lord Punt
      Mad Plod Turn
      Mad Plod Runt
      Mad Lord Punt
      Damn Plod Rut
      Damn Lord Put
      Damn Turd Pol

      http://wordsmith.org/anagram/a…..t=1000&a=n

  24. “You can read the full transcript of CK’s email here.”

    I could. But I won’t.

  25. Trump is a messed up guy with a hole in his heart that he tries to fill with money and attention. He can never ever have enough of either and he’ll never stop trying.

    This line was originally way better in Tombstone.

  26. Kasich’s inclination to strong-arm video stores into pulling Oscar-winning movies featuring woodchippers

    Never Kasich! Vote Woodchipper 2016!

  27. I’m not saying he’s evil or a monster. In fact I don’t think Hitler was. The problem with saying that guys like that are monsters is that we don’t see them coming when they turn out to be human, which they all are. Everyone is.

    I’ve been saying that for years. Thinking Hitler was inhuman makes it easier to think we’ll know evil when we see it and we’re nothing like that so we’ll know Hitler when we see him. That’s what makes evil so dangerous. Hitler was a human and that’s the way humans act. We won’t recognize Hitler when we see him because he looks just like us.

    It’s really not that hard to see the parallels between 1930 Germany and Hitler and present-day USA and Trump – a down-trodden and discouraged people with problems yearning for the good old days of greatness and a man pointing out that it’s the dastardly Them responsible for the problems and the lack of greatness and the simple solution is just go out there and whack the Them and take our greatness back again. Who doesn’t want to believe all your problems are somebody else’s fault and there’s an easy fix for them? Isn’t that what all politicians are saying one way or another?

    1. When governments do good, it’s the movement of The People.

      When governments do bad, it’s just some individual with too much power’s fault.

      Funny how that works.

  28. Trump will never be as cool as President Comacho. Ya think Trump will shoot a gun during a State of the Union?
    http://flavorwire.com/537887/w…..nt-camacho

  29. Rambling or not, Louis CK may be right. Donald Trump has captured the national mood, which is apparently that of a shell-shocked, pissed-off blowhard who is tired of his manhood being questioned by his nagging wife. He’s the latest and most opportunistic symptom of this zeitgeist, and the tip of a big, ugly iceberg that has been amassing under the radar for some time. A guy like this happens historically at times when a once great and powerful nation is on the ropes. Hence all the Hitler name-dropping. My faint hope is that, as Louie and poor old Mitt Romney say, Mr. Trump is smarter than he’s letting on, has been lying through his teeth and is playing the coalition of red meat patsies he’s assembled. In my case I hope that he’s really diametrically opposite of his BS public persona, like a high-stakes Andy Kaufman. Probably not, in which case we’re truly in danger of stumbling into an authoritarian swamp. Anyway, here’s a song about that zeitgeist, and why a tough-talking richie rich like this is so popular. They used to call it “evil” … https://soundcloud.com/biff-thuringer/devils-cry

  30. Louis CK is the George Carlin of our time– honest and unflinching in any analysis. you can disagree with him all you want, but this article is inaccurate. he didn’t “conclude… with this cheeky addendum plugging his show, ‘And please watch Horace and Pete.'” that was the purpose of his email, to those who follow his online series. the rest of the email is opinion, and for a liberty-loving crowd, the commenters here seem to think he’s not just wrong in their opinion, but not entitled to it. the parallels with nazi germany are accurate, but only to a degree.trump has said he would limit the press by suing them on the campaign trail– sort of antithetical to our constitution and historical practice. trump has repeatedly said he wants to go to war, not the best portent. trump has blatantly gone where most republicans deal in dog whistles, and this has been what people account his success to, NOT the surging populism that has an obscure democratic socialist successfully competing against the establishment candidate on the other side of the aisle. sure, trump is purposely obnoxious and crass, but that same shtick didn’t work for chris christie.

  31. but reason did nothing but show its bias in analyzing this. the email is going viral, and lending an opinion to it, good or bad, does nothing but legitimize it. why is reason so concerned with one entertainer’s opinion of another? trump has a whole history of not being a “true conservative.” perhaps that is what people on the right are looking for. and that is likely how he would be in office– people like it that he in essence cannot be bought. they forget he is already in the crowd that has been buying our government for decades now.

  32. The number of celebrities that are politically aware enough to make salient points is truly minuscule. And can you blame them. Being politically thoughtful requires reading comprehension and meditation on reality.

  33. Drumpf prolly hired all these losers to attack him. Thank Bob for the LP.

  34. Gary Johnson – he’ll end Obama’s racist war on drugs.

  35. CK is inane anyway – vapid inanity is his bread and butter, after all.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.