Would conservatives hate a white Democratic President as much as they hate Obama?
How much of a role do you think Obama’s race plays in the hatred he receives from conservative whack jobs? Or, for that matter, the conservatives who aren’t loonies? Would a white Democratic President get more respect and less vitriol than Obama has?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
79 Answers
Frankly, they would hate him/her less. The popularity of the birther nonsense among the far right is a crystal clear indicator of their internal racism.
Seems like statistically, Obama’s bound to get more hatred. First, you’ve got all those who just plain hate Democrats. But then on top of that, you’re bound to have an extra measure of hatred from the racists. I don’t think this last group would be counter-balanced by the few conservatives who might hate Democratic policies, but give Obama a pass just because he’s black.
Clinton had quite a few enemies among conservatives. Almost to the level of what you see against Obama now. I think it’s fair to say that some (definitely not all) conservatives hate Obama more simply because of his race. I would hope that that percentage is low.
I think his color has very little to do with the hate. Maybe for a few racist loons, but for most I don’t think his color matters at all.
I think the “hate” is blown way out of proportion. Because of the way the US government is set up with the House and the Senate and because Americans elect (sort of through the electoral college), there isn’t a whole lot of difference between the most left Democrat and the most right Republican – they are “only” the president. Most of the rhetoric is amplfied about 20 db and people take it too seriously
They’d still hate him, but not as much. Whether they admit it or not, a lot of people hate that our president is Black.
@Facade Why do you think it is a lot? .
It’s hard to say. Would Conservatives have hated Nancy Pelosi less, had she been a man? Would liberals have hated Sarah Palin less, had she been a man? Would they have hated Herman Cain any less, had he been Caucasian?
I think any amount of “hatred” for any person because they hold opposing political views is unacceptable for any reason. But mocking people because they don’t have any reasonable views to oppose is perfectly acceptable, tee hee hee!
They’d hate any Democratic president, but I think that he’s black intensifies the hatred and makes them feel more comfortable expressing it openly.
The birther phenomenon strikes me as almost entirely based on racism.
It is true that overall Republican antipathy towards Clinton was pretty much just as crazy as it is towards Obama, though.
It would seem Obama is still above water on his favorability numbers. It’s his policies that are the problem. The whole “hate him cause he’s black” is a red herring made up by the left. They think if they can convince anyone, it’s only his color, they can score political points. It’s not the color of his skin that is killing jobs, it’s his moronic policies.. It’s not the color of his skin that’s amassed $5 trillion in debt in 3 years, it’s his spending.
Wake up and smell the coffee. He’s leading us down a stinkhole, that is destroying our freedoms.
@GoldieAV16 makes a good point. Lots of people have been the target of hate and ridicule. No one more so than Darah Palin.
The hatred of the Right for President Clinton was totally off the wall. Billions were spent trying to frame him on Whitewater. The Right is so very rabid as they are funded by corporations that want ever more power.
I suppose it would be a waste of time to ask Jaxk for something other than talking points to back up his assertions.
@Jaxk Can you provide any neutral reporting to back up your allegations?
@Jaxk Seriously:
1. “The whole “hate him cause he’s black” is a red herring made up by the left.”
2. “They think if they can convince anyone, it’s only his color, they can score political points.”
3. “It’s not the color of his skin that is killing jobs, it’s his moronic policies.. ”
4. “It’s not the color of his skin that’s amassed $5 trillion in debt in 3 years, it’s his spending.”
I think that’s a good start. Again, neutral news stories. Fox News is not acceptable (see my other post on the Death of Facts today as to why).
I’m relatively conservative overall. I actually like the president. He presents himself as a president. That’s already more than you could have said for W…
If anything, what is more despicable is the people who voted for him only because of the color of his skin.
It depends how democratic… And, yeah, I believe race can easily come into play.
@ro_in_motion I detest Fox News. It is forever blocked on our TV.
@Aethelflaed I think the opposite. I think since he is black, people would worry about being accused of being racist when they aren’t. In the south where I live there is a bazaar absence of open, public, conversation of stereotypes about any group, race, ethnicity, the onlyone they openly criticise is democrats and yankees.
@digitalimpression How is voting for Obama because he’s Black worse than hating him because he’s Black?
@digitalimpression, I agree with Fascade. At most they are equal. And I’d argue that liking someone for a stupid reason (their race) is better than hating them for the same stupid reason.
Most of the people I know Obama’s race is a complete nonissue. Republican and Democrats.
@Jaxk Christians want to vote for Christians, at least a percentage of them do. It isn’t much different that some black people might be more likely to vote for a black candidate. I am not saying right, wrong or indifferent, just saying some of the people accusing black people of wanting Obama because he is black, are the same ones who hated Kennedy for being a Catholic and would never vote for an atheist.
@JLeslie, I think it’s completely different. Christianity is a choice. It’s a belief system that encompasses virtually everything you think about morality and the nature of reality.
Race is not a choice, and it encompasses the relative amount of melanin compounds in one’s skin.
I think it’s perfectly reasonable to vote for someone based on their beliefs—and it’s completely unreasonable to vote for someone based on their skin color.
@Jaxk I for one can confidently point out that the president did not add 5 trillion dollars in debt to our national debt. But I’ve found arguing with you is like arguing with a child, so I’m going to stop following this thread and let you enjoy your ignorance.
I like to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they’re not racist at all. Democrats and liberals already have enough to piss off republicans without race.
@Qingu Well, if a minority feels like only someone like them can really understand their perspective on the world, then they might want to vote for someone based on that. Religion is kind of the prism the Christian (some Christians) see the world through. For black people their prism is based on their experiences. I am not ok with it. I would not vote for someone based on religion or color. But, let’s say there are two candidates, fairly similar, and one you identify with most, because he understand a shared experience of living in America, it is not too unreasonable that would be enough to pull the lever for him. I am not saying that was the case though. I think there were definite differences between Hillary and Obama. I would say a lot of people liked the historical significance, all races, not just black people, that really bothers me, voting for him just because we will finally have a black president. That is no reason to vote for someone. I would not vote for a woman or a Jewish person because they would be a first, I find it ridiculous, but some people would probably.
@JLeslie Yeah, if it’s not due to race, it’ll be because they’re a wholesome christian man or something. Most people will vote because they have something in common with the person. Even an atheist would get votes by atheists simply for being an outspoken atheist in America.
Okay, I think that’s fair to some extent. It’s not just “I’m voting for X because he looks like me,” it’s “I’m voting for X because he’s been through similar stuff that I have been through.” You can view race as a kind of shibboleth that can signify something more meaningful.
But:
1. I still don’t think this is a good reason to vote for someone. The best you can spin it is a kind of empathy; while I agree that it’s important for our elected officials to have empathy, I think it’s important to not limit or prioritize your own group’s specific experience.
2. This doesn’t even really apply to Obama! Despite being black, his experience in America was very different than most black people’s. Obama probably has as much or more in common with children of immigrants. Culturally speaking, in his education and religious beliefs (as an apparently very secular Christian) he has a lot in common with middle class urban white people like me. I mean Obama is basically a walking example of why you shouldn’t presume that someone shares your experiences based on their skin color.
I mean, the basic reason why “racism is bad” is “don’t judge a book by its cover.” While it’s statistically true that black people tend to share common experiences—experiences that you might favor in a candidate—just because someone is black doesn’t mean they do.
@ro_in_motion
I lost the entire answer I had written so I’ll have to recreate it. While I’m doing that let me put the simplest one on here for you. Debt as of Jan 20, 2009 was 10,626,877,048,913.08. Debt as of now stands at 15,660,736,663,887.96. Looks like $5 trillion to me.
How much of that was discretionary spending?
@Blackberry Yeah, but for me, what is most important is the issues, not identifying with them by color, religion, marital status, etc. I guess the issues can be intertwined with religion and race though, that’s the tricky part. I identify with Hillary and she is a theist, a Christian, and if I remember correctly had a psychic come to the whitehouse. None of those things match up with me.
@JLeslie
I’m not sure your response was for me. I already understand why someone might prefer to vote for a person of thier own group. Whatever group that might be.
@Qingu @JLeslie Yeah, we should vote on issues only (like that even matters, anyway) but some people definitely don’t do that, although it’s understandable.
@Qingu True. Obama is basically more like a first generation kid, son of parents who valued education, who got his act together eventually, went to an IVY league, and is a middle class, now rich, guy. I think this is why none of my middle class friends talk about or see his color. Everyone around me who does say racist things, never cares about the persons skin color, they care about how the person is behaving and how that person might fit into a negative stereotype. Obama isn’t fitting into any of those stereotypes. We could say the same about Oprah.
What I wrote probably sounds racist and xenophobic, but I am just relaying what I hear and how I perceive the comments.
@Qingu I wanted to add, but Obama being black does mean, or does have people hope, he will care about black issues. Because he would identify with them to some extent more than someone who is not black. Kind of like Jewish people caring about Israelis, even if they have lived in America 5 generations and barely practice their religion.
@JLeslie, you mean, kind of like some Jewish people caring about Israelis. I would be a counterexample. I don’t really give a shit about the Israelis, and would be annoyed if someone assumed I did solely because my parents are Jewish. :)
@Qingu Right some. Everything I wrote about above, Jews, women, blacks, Christians, all some.
@ro_in_motion
First let me say, I don’t give a shit about your rules. I’ll use any source I deem fit for my support. If you don’t like it, use any source you deem fit to refute.
Obama started his presidency with an 83% approval rating. If I recall he was black at that time. Feel free to correct me if you think he wasn’t. He is now sitting at about 45%. The man didn’t change but his policies became well known. And apparently people didn’t like them. If your interpretation is different, have at it.
Obama has created a significant regulatory burden on business. The cost of the new regulations is estimated to be $46 billion. That’s 10 times more than his buffet rule would generate. To make matters worse, small business carries a disproportionate burden for these regulations. Remember that small business is the job creation engine. You simply can’t extract that much money from business and not affect job creation.
I have no idea what you believe or don’t believe but if there are questions you need to let me know what it is you’re questioning. There are volumes of data out there to support what I’m asserting but I’m not going to spend the time to try and figure out what you think.
@Jaxk Your tone precludes rational discussion. It’s a shame that instead of sharing your viewpoint you choose, instead, to attack. That is certainly not polite and, I think, flies in the face of what Fluther is about (according to my very recent introduction to the collective).
However, I will assume you might like to have a public discourse without invective. Hence the following.
The Washington Examiner link you provided is a biased media. I cite this link and the citations on that page as to why I will not accept the figures you quoted for the cost of new regulations.
The budget issue is incredibly complex and neither side is blameless in their views. This link brings up many shortcomings on both sides.
I am going to stop there to see if there is any point in continuing or not.
Peace
He is a politician, which means that he has already mastered the art of appearing to be personable, likable and agreeable to many people regardless of how he really feels about them, and also regardless of their overt feelings toward him. Most non-politicians (and non-actors) don’t manage to pull that off so well. So I believe that most people who don’t like this president don’t do it on a personal level. I’m sure that some do dislike him – maybe hate him – on a racial level. But I’m also sure that that distaste is pretty well overcome by the large number of people who like him mostly because of his race. And we have to admit that those people exist, too.
I don’t think that America is the racist country that it once was, although I acknowledge that we have far to go in this regard.
I dislike this President at least as much as I disliked the previous one, based primarily on his policies, as I disliked the previous President’s policies. And I dislike both of their policies very much. But I also think that they are both pretty personable people whom I could spend some time with – as long as we avoid policy discussions (and basketball) – and just chat about, oh, the weather, maybe.
I don’t think it’s that easy to fake being likeable. I also think people who dislike Obama might dislike him for a genuine reason—that he is an “elitist.” He is, though I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that.
I think people respect that he is honest (he has the best record out of any major politician on Politifact), he gets along with his family, and he empathizes with people less fortunate than him.
@Facade
“How is voting for Obama because he’s Black worse than hating him because he’s Black?”
I never compared the two. They are both despicable if you ask me.
@Qingu
“I agree with Fascade. At most they are equal. And I’d argue that liking someone for a stupid reason (their race) is better than hating them for the same stupid reason.”
Both are horrible. We should be above making political choices based on race (regardless of your motivation.. hate or “like”). All I said was that it was despicable to choose someone solely based on race. Do you find fault in that?
@digitalimpression, you said:
“If anything, what is more despicable is the people who voted for him only because of the color of his skin.”
I disagree that it’s more despicable. I think it’s clearly less or equally despicable. But yes, both are despicable. Racism is dumb.
This question is bound to bring out very polarized views. Personally, I don’t hate Obama for his race, or for his politic, or his place or birth etc.. I dislike him as a person: but only from things I have read or observed. If I had a chance to go on a camping trip with him, and get to know him, my views may be radically different.
I think the only way we can really assert they only voted for him because he is black is if they would vote for a black right winger if he/she was running against a white democrat. Otherwise, for those inclined to vote for Obama because he was a black, it was just a bonus he was black.
Here in the memphis area when there are conservative black people running for office most black people who have loud moths are on facebook saying how the politician is a “white” person. Because all the right wingers are white, right?
@ro_in_motion
I respond in the same way that I’m addressed. If you want me to use nothing but liberal sources, I won’t do that. Whether a publication is liberal or conservative will generally affect the opinions rather than the facts. It is unlikely that a liberal web site will even talk about the cost of regulation. If you want to try and limit my answers to only those that can be confirmed on a liberal site, then it’s pretty clear you’re not open to debate. The whole idea is to discount any site that has data you don’t like, without having to address the issue.
For instance according to the SBA the cost of regulation has increased by $1.75 trillion since 2005. That’s a staggering figure. One that most liberal sites don’t want to address. And as with the previous site they lay a disproportionate amount of the burden on small business. I will also add that according to factcheck (I see you love them) “The Obama administration, meanwhile, has imposed new major regulations with reported costs of about $40 billion in just over two years”. That seems to line up fairly close.
I have no problem sticking to the facts but if you start out by arbitrarily attacking, I will respond in kind. I have no problem with where you want to get your data. If I disagree, I will state why and give conflicting data. What I don’t do is simply dismiss you point by saying that’s liberal so it’s wrong.
@Qingu
I’m not quite sure why you even bothered to quote me. We agree that racism is stupid. There is no more, less, slightly better… no.. it is all stupid.. in every fashion. Making the distinction of one being worse than the other is unnecessary and actually a bit racist in itself…
My use of the word “more” was not intended to provide distinction of one thing being more important than another.. nor was it intended to be insanely over-analysed. That’s just how I talk/type….
@wundayatta
“How much of a role do you think Obama’s race plays in the hatred he receives from conservative whack jobs?”
I think there was racism on both sides. There were racist people who voted for him simply because he is black. There were racist people who voted against him because he is black. How much his race played a role is difficult to measure (at least for me). I don’t know any “whack jobs” personally. If you meant racist people then it obviously played a big role for them.
“Or, for that matter, the conservatives who aren’t loonies?”
I suppose this is my category for which I can answer. None. I’m with Morgan Freeman on this one. Who gives a $41T what color someone’s skin is? Irrelevant…
“Would a white Democratic President get more respect and less vitriol than Obama has?”
I assume you mean from conservative whack jobs (racists). In that case, the answer is obvious.
The overall tone of the question suggests that conservatives are both racist and whack jobs (except a handful of them).. which is silly.
@JLeslie You want me to provide a re-write? Sorry, I finished doing homework years ago. =)
@JLeslie
Just a note. The question implies that Obama gets more hatred than other presidents. That’s not how I recall the Bush years.
@JLeslie
I didn’t mean to sound stand-offish or anything. It’s just that the question uses “whack job” and “loonies” in conjunction with “conservative”. To me there is a glaringly blatant implication there coming from an obviously non-conservative person. You clearly don’t see it that way. Trying to convince you otherwise seems fruitless.
@Qingu I don’t think we disagree, but to make sure …
When you say that some people might think he’s ‘elitist’ do you actually mean well-educated? I found the two Bush Presidents incredibly elitist in that their worldview seemed to be that they were entitled to more than the common man.
Just checking. :)
@Jaxk Secret Service reports a 400% increase in death threats on the President, under Obama. I think that’s a more quantifiable measure of the vitriol than any of our recollections of how bad it was for President Bush.
@Jaxk Perhaps we are not meant to work together. I have trouble with what I see as your tone. I am here for the fun of it and to share ideas and fellowship. I am truly sorry if you thought I was being mean or nasty. That was the opposite of my intention. I was simply hoping we could focus on facts without the spin.
Specifically, I excluded both liberal and conservative sources when I discussed using only ‘neutral news stories’ in an earlier reply. This is why I used FactCheck.org in my link to you. Wikipedia is another great repository of neutral information.
If you were upset that I mentioned Fox News as not being unbiased then there’s a gap between us too large to cross.
@ro_in_motion
That is where you will run into problems. To right wingers, both factcheck and wikipedia are leftwing sites.
@JLeslie
Not according to the Director of the Secret Service. “Mark Hosenball of Newsweek writes that the reports of a 400 percent increase in threats can be traced back to a book about the Secret Service published earlier this year by author Ronald Kessler”.
So, 9/11 was the result of Tom Clancy’s novel? The one where a fully loaded 747 crashes into White House?
@ro_in_motion
Yes this may be a bridge too far. If you looking to share ideas but you can only use ideas supplied by Wikipedia or Factcheck, your not really looking for different points of view or alternative ideas.
Just for a test, try supporting your claim “I found the two Bush Presidents incredibly elitist in that their worldview seemed to be that they were entitled to more than the common man.”
@ro_in_motion
Let me guess, you didn’t read the link which says “At a congressional hearing into the White House security breach that took place last week, when Tareq and Michaele Salahi “crashed” the White House state dinner, Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan said the current threat level against the president is normal.” It then goes on to say where the rumor about a 400% increase, started. And if you’re interested in verification, why are you accepting the 400% to begin with. I can only assume you’re just not interested in a conservative view. You seem willing to accept a liberal point at face value, even if it’s wrong.
@digitalimpression There are some whack jobs and loonies in both parties, so? He is not saying all conservatives are whack jobs or loonies. But, the ones who hate Obama because of his race are pretty whacked, even if they are the minority. It’s just that when people get all upset or offended with how something is asked I take issue with it. Everyone is free to answer however they want, who cares if the asker has a bias anyway? Maybe you will change the OP’s mind if they do. @wundayatta would willingly admit he is a liberal.
Pretty much. In these times there is no excuse for not being a republican, in their view.
Maybe a bit less but the race stuff seems pretty much invisible now that everyone is used to it. In the beginning, even the secret service were worried that he would need a lot more protecting. Now, for republicans, he;s just the devil you know. And dems want him back!
Both parties have lost their moral center but the right had doubled down on the lack of sanity and disdain for compromise. The Teabagger addition to the Republican party has sent them way over the deep end enough to make Ted Nugent and Allen West’s pronouncements seem normal (for the right).
I am pretty sure that the Republican wacko faction is fully prepared to hate anyone to the left of Mussolini. The fact that Obama is part black makes it even easier to hate him. Notice I said hate, that seems to be the common reaction from the right these days. I really disliked, Johnson, and both Bush’s as president but didn’t HATE them. I am worried for the future of America. The right has become a hate group, they hate immigrants, Muslims, women’s rights, and everybody on the left, and poor people. What will happen if they actually win the White House and the Senate? We may be witnessing the end of a Democratic America.
@JLeslie I would agree with you that there’s a lack of open and honest conversation about race and racism. I wouldn’t, though, say that that somehow means that people have stopped saying or doing racist things. I know several people who will totally lose it if you suggest that they might have been saying something even a little bit privileged, and also make racist statements on a regular basis.
I would like to believe that a conservative, right-wing, Republican’s dislike of President Obama has nothing to do with race and everything to do with the issues.
But then, my cousin, a conservative, right-wing, Republican, posts a cartoon on Facebook of a red, white & blue canon shooting Obama back to Kenya.
So I have to wonder.
@Aethelflaed I agree there is still racism, and I am not saying open conversation. You commented about people openly expressing their racism. I really almost never see that in “mixed company.” it is all behind closed doors, among friends, among people who all look alike. White people here, and this is the most racist place I have ever lived, only say their racist comments to the people they think are safe to say those things, they don’t openly discuss it with the other race. The only exception is some discussion on facebook, usually people who are extremely interested in the conversation, it is almots always started by a black person.
@JLeslie In my travels around the US, I stopped in a number of places where racism, sadly, was openly discussed. Likewise, here in the UK.
I listened as hard and as objectively to Santorum’s ‘misspeaks’ as I could and I came to the conclusion that the ‘n’ word was what he was going for. You can’t get any more ‘mixed’ than being broadcast during a speech.
@ro_in_motion Were black people around? Or, just a bunch of white people talking among themselves? To me open would be including black people themselves. Or, saying something for anyone to hear.
I don’t think Santorum almost said the n word. But I heard recently Michele Bachmann just said some sort of racial slur, but she has been an idiot all along. I have not see the tape of her though, so I don’t know if that is correct.
@ro_in_motion if you think Santorum’s speech is bad you should check out the entire state of Oklahoma. They actually use the “n” word to describe the president. I overheard an old redneck and clerk talking at a gas station convenience store. Some places in the U.S. are very regressive.
That being said, I’ve red articles about the quality of life in the U.K. dropping because of multiculturalism. They say that people use rude language and all the hedgerows are full of plastic trash thrown by people that no longer respect their country. They also said that 50% of the citizens want to move out of the country, mostly to southern France.
@Ron_C Funny you bring up Oklahoma, that is where that guy was from who said my husband was South American. LOL. I never hear anyone say nigger ever, except for one long time friend of the family who uses every type of slang derogatory word of every group ever invented. It’s part of his schtick. Not that it is ok, but that is what he does. I have never heard him call a black person a nigger, only Arabs sand niggers, blacks he uses other words. I remember the terms because it shocks me every time he says things like that because I do not know anyone else who says anything like that. Not while I was growing up, not as an adult. No one. The closest is a friend of ours who is Irish, when my husband and he get together there sometimes a joke of the mick and the spic, but it is all in good fun, and everyone around is in on the joke.
We had lots of stereotypes about groups growing up, and everywhere I lived, which we almost never hear here either. It is oddly quiet. The only time something comes up is if for some political reason white people feel like money will be taken from their pocket to help black people, or recently now there is an education/school issue where the white people are worried about dealing with black people messing up the school system. It has to do with Memphis having mich lower tests scores, and much higher drop out rates, and now school systems from Memphis ajd the rest of the county will be combined. If all those kids were white in Memphis, I think people would still be just as upset in the rest of the county. Since race and poverty go hand and hand here, it all sounds very racist.
Even the people who say racist things around me I have never heard them us the n word, or other derogatory terms about other groups, except they do say Memfrika for Memphis, which always shock me when it is said, I find it so horrific. But that is never said around black people. Are you saying in Oklahoma they us the term around black people? Don’t get me wrong, I am shocked they say it at all, but just curious, how openly racist they really are.
@JLeslie I was a little kid and got into a fight with a neighbor kid who happened to be black. I called him a nigger, my father washed my mouth out with soap and took me to the kids house so I could apologize to the kid and his parents. You wouldn’t catch me using that word again.
The old redneck said it loud enough that some of the black customers in the store must have heard too.
@Ron_C I didn’t even know the word until Jr high I think. Studying in school is how I leanred it. In a book from that time or something.
@JLeslie Certainly, they used it for anyone to hear. The one time I felt grievously in danger in my travels was in South Carolina. After stopping at a gas station, I drove through the state without stopping. I was that afraid from being in that gas station.
@Ron_C Multi-culturalism is only a factor in London. I don’t live there. When I studied for my citizenship test, I had to learn percentages. Taken as a whole, it’s nothing. I had a racist friend who I had take the test: he only got 25% right and was stunned to find out the real numbers. He stopped talking about the ‘others’ as a result.
You know who the ‘thugs’ are in this country that is ruining for everyone? The youth. British youth. It’s a whole different world when you go out on a weekend night here. Binge drinking – past the point of throwing up – is encouraged. Many bars have vomit buckets. When used, the person will be served another drink. Pissing on the front side of buildings. Violence. People sitting in their own sick on the sidewalks of main street. It’s very serious and a lot of legislation is working to end the binge drinking culture.
Ride on a train that is coming from a football game and there will be coaches full of loud, obnoxious drunks still drinking.
I have never seen anyone other than a white British male being a dick so far.
When I’ve been in London, the same thing applies – but that’s anecdotal as I’ve only been there a few times.
@ro_in_motion Have you ever seen the Top Gear episode when they drive through the American south?
@JLeslie No. Should I? I find their humour puerile.
@ro_in_motion Well, if you don’t like their humor, you probably won’t enjoy it. We get a big kick out of how they make fun of Americans, and that episode is a little over the top. There is another episode they are in North Carolina checking out the Nascar tracks or something, and that had a lot of funny parts also, but again, you would have to enjoy their show in general.
@JLeslie Exactly so. As I learned first hand, comedy is a tough town.
Answer this question 
Composing members:
0
