.. you did but mis-heard.
He was not comparing Jo Brand to members of the "outer party" - he said that Jo Brand was participating in "two-minute hating" because she lives in the same media sea as the general party.
Not in the first three and a half minutes he didn't. I've just listened to them again and from that portion it stills sounds like he is comparing Brand to an "outer-party member".
He may have clarified later, in which case I have mis-interpreted his eventual meaning but I didn't mis-hear and stand by my initial impression of the opening few minutes; irony overload.
On the subject of the substance of the joke itself, Karl and Farage and others have had milkshake (and other things) thrown at them partly because of what they feel is tacit media incitement to do so based on the fact that it seems to be held to be laudable or even heroic to do so.
I'm aware of this idiotic and potentially dangerous fad.
Nothing laudable or heroic about it and it's completely counter-productive anyway.
Does anyone really think throwing milkshake over someone they disagree with will bring a single person around to their point of view?
If they do, they're even more idiotic than they appear.
It's beyond stupid and, indeed, some nutter might hear Jo Brand's bad joke and decide to use battery acid or something worse.
So I can see why it's problematic.
Nonetheless, the hyperbole around it is ridiculous in my opinion.
-EDIT-
The Farage incident is in the news
today:
Appearing at North Shields magistrates court, Crowther pleaded guilty to common assault and causing criminal damage to a £239 lapel microphone on Farage’s suit.
The district judge Bernard Begley ordered him to carry out 150 hours of unpaid work and pay £350 in compensation to Farage.
Crowther was dismissed from his job and threats were made to a dog charity where he volunteered, the court heard.
His lawyer added that there was a tradition dating back “hundreds if not thousands of years” of throwing food aimed at embarrassing politicians, although the items may have changed from fish, to fruit, to eggs and on to milkshakes.
As an aside, something I find curious about the whole situation is that the original victim, Tommy Robinson, seems to be able to go around also throwing drinks over people before violently punching them to the ground with not much more fuss made than over the comparatively benign milkshake throwing.
On the contrary, many of his supporters who are getting so hysterical about milkshake throwing seem to have no problem whatsoever with their hero perpetrating actual violence.
Is it because Tommy is attacking the "approved targets"? (In the latest incident, an England football fan who apparently called him a fascist.)
Would it have been a good joke to say something like - why just shout and wave signs at pro-EU politicians when you could just shoot them - not that I would, but yelling is pathetic?
It is interesting to consider in what sort of state of indoctrination you would need to be to think that would be funny.
It is the same sort of joke but, I propose, you would have to dehumanise and hate pro-EU politicians before it could be chuckle-worthy.
Not to my comedic taste but then neither is Jo Brand (nor Danny Baker for that matter).
And we've already seen a pro-EU politician shot dead in the UK.
At the time, you didn't seem to think it had anything to do with indoctrination or dehumanisation and were instead peddling the somewhat predictable "very convenient for the anti-Brexit side," false-flag angle.
Karl, as you probably know, tweeted that he would not rape Jess Philips at a time when she was saying she was facing rape threats.
No, I didn't. I don't know who Karl is.
The story itself rings a vague bell but I had no idea that was who the presenter of the video was.
If he lost his job because of said joke, that's also ridiculous.
But he's not someone I've watched before, nor likely to again.
As one of many people who have been harassed and investigated over a joke, he says outright that he doesn't think Jo should be under investigation for a joke, nor should anybody.
Good on him.
However, she
was investigated, has been harassed, has had to issue an apology and may yet lose her job.
Perhaps those targets weren't quite as "correct" as is being made out.
As far as I am concerned it seems to be a real phenomenon that the comedians are being stomped on and this has happened before -
Indeed, it has been going on for as long as I can remember but seems to have been ramped up in the last few years with almost everyone seemingly offended by almost everything.
Karl doesn't think Jo should lose her job and he didn't think Danny should have lost his job. He just thinks that the comedians who think they are safe because they toe the line shouldn't feel so safe - but should take a position to defend the telling of jokes for all.
Well, there's something I hope we can all agree on.
