Daily Show's Kristen Schaal on GOP attack on women's reproductive rights

Discuss

58 Responses to “Daily Show's Kristen Schaal on GOP attack on women's reproductive rights”

  1. robdobbs says:

    I actually tivo’d through this. It wasn’t funny.

  2. Stefan Jones says:

    Legislators who come up with laws like those Schaal is mocking should get a wand up their arses, to make sure their brains are getting a proper oxygen supply.

  3. Warren_Terra says:

    An Andrew Dice Clay impression? What is this, 1990? How many Daily Show viewers are even aware of that schmuck?

    The part in the transcript excerpt is the best part, but even there the writing is stronger than the delivery. I’ve liked Ms. Schaal on The Daily Show before, but this clip was dreadful.

  4. Leanne Palmer says:

    I agree, pretty sure the point is that it’s NOT funny.

  5. raincoaster says:

    barred at the border in Canada

  6. DrunkenOrangetree says:

    Yea, I don’t know that  “A Modest Proposal” is funny either. I guess some crimes are so outrageous that we can’t laugh at them.

  7. AwesomeRobot says:

    Since when does Kristen Schaal belong to the Daily Show?

  8. Amelia_G says:

    she’s got the pleaze-u hair curl. she’s got the… kansas boobies? (don’t even know what to call that, but well done!) She’s leaning forward to HELP, anyhow! She’s sorry, for whatever it was she did to be considered less than human. I don’t know–how *should* you make fun of stuff that pisses me off this much?

  9. void_ptr says:

    This woman is way funnier and cleverer than some of you give her credit for, and her delivery was spot fucking on. 

  10. Halloween Jack says:

    I’d like to start a Kickstarter for a charity that trains service dogs that will do nothing but lead otherwise-smart commenters to the point of this sketch. 

  11. “It’s funny because the squirrel gets dead.”

  12. hardwarejunkie9 says:

    While this law was written with the typical “enlightened” view of women’s health, the actual results are not quite as dreadful as you would expect. I hope that, after considering this, you might at least temper the more outrageous protests against this law with a bit of understanding.

    If you are potentially pregnant and wish to have an abortion, you *should* get an ultrasound. Not for any moral reason, but rather to ensure your health. There are other conditions that mimic pregnancy and need to be identified lest they go unaddressed.

    Also, if you are pregnant, it is important to see if it has become lodged in the fallopian tubes, because that may affect the results of any intended abortion.

    To ensure that you are pregnant at an early stage, where the embryo is incredibly small and hard to locate, you should get a *transvaginal* ultrasound because it is the only one that can detect on the level necessary.

    I’m not going to try and defend the mindset of the people writing this bill, but to mandate what should be standard best medical practice for women’s health is not exactly something to become so incensed about.

    One might also get up in arms over mandatory pap smears for health insurance eligibility. It still involves up-close-and-personal attention from a doctor, but it is FAR from rape.

    When we blow such things out of frame without regard to the reality involved, we hurt our credibility.

    • blueelm says:

      “You” as a pregnant woman probably *have* had one, no several. Do you think you just go whirl around in the abortion salon while you get your nails done? Go figure. This law has left women who already know they’re losing their baby having to have an abusive procedure done to make it all the more horrible for them. Another case of idiots doing the following :

      “When we blow such things out of frame without regard to the reality involved, we hurt our credibility.”

      Yep. That’s you right now. Guess what, the state has no business getting in this. And yes, it is much closer to rape than you are aware. Take it from some one who has had the procedure for non-baby reasons and who has also been raped. Having something like that going on when it is CLEAR that it is intended to hurt and humiliate you “go think about it for a day you dumb slut… as if you haven’t already” is abusive… and guess what women can pick up on that. Having things done to you body that you don’t want and can’t control on top of whatever procedures you’re already going through is not anything else. There is no argument here.

      Yes, it is meant to be abusive. It is meant to hurt people. Hurt them and make them ashamed. That is the ONLY purpose.

      Did it occur to you, while typing all that, how many women might have been seeing a doctor all a long? How many women don’t want to be getting an abortion? How many women don’t want to BE in this situation or have this happening? How many women are not the dumb vapid sluts you’re making them out to be who can’t think for themselves? Or how even if they were, it would be none of the state’s damned business?

      Oh no… guess not.

      If the state is going to mandate something I wish it would mandate some fucking empathy.

    • Jane Doe says:

      Thank you, Dr. hardwarejunkie9 for explaining what might or might not be medically required.  I usually consult with my doctor or nurse practitioner about these issues, but I see that random internet commentators and Republican legislators are much more qualified to issue mandates about what procedures are necessary.

    • chenille says:

      If you want to talk about the actual results of this law, here is an account from the Texas Observer for you to read. As it turns out, it does not make me feel better about this.

    • Christhegirl says:

      If there were a medical need for ultrasound in abortion, then surely we’d have doctors coming forward in this discussion to say it’s a best practice and would save women’s lives. Got some of them for me? One, maybe? As my daughter says, *crickets*. Because it’s not a “standard best medical practice for women’s health,” and no doctor is recommending it as one. In case you hadn’t noticed, it’s being mandated by politicians, not doctors.

      I’d love to see a list of conditions that mimic pregnancy, including producing false positive test results, that are common enough to justify performing this procedure on every woman seeking an abortion. But again, I’m thinking crickets. Even ectopic pregnancy, probably your best bet, occurs in no more than 2% of all pregnancies, and would frequently be symptomatic by the time a woman sought an abortion. That might be an indication for the ultrasound, but a routine presentation would offer no such cause.

      I’ve actually had a thoroughly unpleasant transvaginal ultrasound to confirm an ectopic pregnancy. Have you? Is that the root of your confident defense of this procedure? Because otherwise, when we blow such things out of frame without regard to the reality involved, we hurt our credibility.

      • TrollyMcTrollington says:

         I have a relative who is a sono tech and discussed this.  The bar to do transvaginal ultrasound is really, really low.
        ‘Doc, I missed my period and I think I’m pregnant’…..TV
        ‘Doc, I’m pregnant and here for follow up for dates’….TV
        ‘Doc, I’m pregnant and spotting’….TV (especially in the ER, probably before being seen by a doc)
        ‘Doc, I’m not pregnant but something hurts’…..TV
        ‘Doc, I’m here for my routine gyno exam and PAP’…..yup, CYA TV

        Also, the TV probe is significantly narrower than a typical speculum.   Not having direct experience, I’d hazard to guess it’s also much less unpleasant than the abortion itself.

        I’m against government mandates as much as anyone, and the spirit of these laws is way, way off base,  but the ‘rape’ thing is a tad overblown for a procedure which is in real world practice thrown around like a fancy stethoscope.

        • Antinous / Moderator says:

          Does your relative work at Frankenstein/Visaria Regional Medical Center? An ultrasound as a first-line pregnancy test?

        • Tess says:

          Anyone who does a TV ultrasound instead of a blood test to confirm a pregnancy is in the business of charging people money for unnecessary tests.  And then some.

          • TrollyMcTrollington says:

             Please.  This is after the pregnancy test, of course.  
            State of CYA medicine in the US, unfortunately.

        • Arys says:

          Hooray! Because you say it’s not like rape (because you have a friend familiar with the procedure) totally makes it okay for someone to shove foreign into women, provided they are “significantly narrower than a typical speculum.”

          I’m glad you cleared that up for me. I wouldn’t want to have to figure out my emotions on my own – after all, I’m just a girl.

      • NI MEN HAO-DY TRAMPOLINA says:

        THANK YOU.

    • NI MEN HAO-DY TRAMPOLINA says:

      We sound like a mansplaining d00d who has never had to be shamed or violated when going in for what SHOULD be a routine medical procedure.

      Seriously, you have NO IDEA what you’re talking about. NONE.

  13. Velocirapt42 says:

     I’m a little confused. It’s not like this bill in Virginia finally gives health care providers the freedom to perform the life-saving transvaginal ultrasounds that they have been so desperate to provide. Transvaginal ultrasounds are needed to detect a pregnancy of less than 6 weeks- which is before most women have time to discover they’re pregnant and arrange a termination. In the case that you’re less than 6 weeks along and your health care provider needs to confirm a uterine pregnancy, they’ll talk to you about a transvaginal ultrasound. All this bill does is mandate a procedure that is often not medically necessary, instead of leaving it up to the health care provider and the woman. So please don’t pretend it improves the state of modern medicine.

  14. I, traditionally, love The Daily Show.  I’m 100% for women’s rights on reproductive issues.  I am totally opposed to all of the things the GOP is currently trying to do to women’s reproductive rights.  

    That doesn’t excuse the fact that the comedy bit wasn’t funny.  The crowd’s lack of laughter demonstrates it.  

    Just because your issue is right it doesn’t mean that your comedy will be funny.  

    Let’s keep up the pressure on the GOP to knock off the attacks on the uterus.  But let’s stop pretending that all protections of the uterus are humorous.

    IUD.   HAHAHAHAH.  

    No, it doesn’t work like that.  

    Triphasic Hormone Therapy.   BAHAHAHAHAHAH.  That is so funny.

    Again, it doesn’t work like that.  

    I totally support the issue, but it does not make the messenger or the message funny. 

    • Gideon Jones says:

      It was funny if you know the comedians and bits that she’s aping.

    • Antinous / Moderator says:

      Who promised you that it would be funny?  Do you have a receipt?  No refund without a receipt.

    • SamSam says:

      I think someone is saying that he needs Halloween Jack’s charity dog service mentioned above.

      Anyway, you’re missing the “BOOMs,” which is why your versions weren’t funny.

    • Mark A says:

      Absurdity can be extremely funny, and Kristin Schaal excels at absurdity. Rush Limbaugh claimed to be using absurdity, but he wasn’t, he was just being mean. Schaal gets it, Limbaugh doesn’t.

  15. r kelly says:

    I can’t watch the video right now.  I don’t care whether it’s funny.  I just want to point out, for no good reason, that I have an enormous crush on Kristen Schaal.

  16. PinkWithIndignation says:

    Omg I love Louise! I mean Kristen Schaal. Lol.

  17. kk says:

    She’s frickin’ hilarious!  This joke, however, was not.

Leave a Reply