Who Finds This So Called "funny Man" In The Least But Funny?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2488128/Russell-Brand-joins-Anonymous-protesters-fireworks-fired-Buckingham-Palace.html

Regarding all those other protesters, I wonder how many of them are tax payers?

[anotheoldgit]

Ups that should have been "in the least bit funny".

[jno]

taxpayers or not, they look like voters. Brand says the political class have proved themselves a complete shower, unworthy of our trust or respect.

Do you actually disagree with him? I'm not sure I do.

[237SJ]

I expect half of them have absolutely no idea what they are protesting against. I can`t stand Russel Brand. I don`t know why anyone ever gave him a platform to spout his infantile "humour" and I don`t know why anyone (the media) is giving him a platform to spout his political views.

[Gromit]

I don't find him funny.

Most of them are taxpayers.

Don't mean to criticise AOG, but a bit of a boring and pointless thread.

[bednobs]

why is this in news? I don't find Mrs brown's boys funny, but that's hardly newsworthy

[sp1814]

His books, tours and DVDs sell well, and he seems have done well in the comedy films he's made.

Personally, he's a little too erudite for my liking.

[FredPuli43]

Why? Was he trying to be funny on this occasion ?

When he is performing, I find him quite amusing.

Taxpayers? They might all be; Brand certainly is; and you must have heard of 'champagne socialists'. Never heard of champagne anarchists, but these may not be anarchists as such. But taxpayers or not, we all have the rights of citizens; I was not aware that it was a qualification for being a citizen that you proved you were a taxpayer. And it would be hard to find someone who didn't pay tax at all, even if it is only VAT.

[jno]

Mrs Brown isn't marching on Buckingham Palace, I suppose.

[andy-hughes]

I don't find RB funny in person, although his writing has made me laugh out loud.

Regardless of his appeal as a humourist, I find his willingness to use his considerable intelligence and erudition to engage in debate about important issues to be entirely valid.

As for the requirement to be a tax payer in order to be involved in a demonstration - I am not sure that is valid at all.

[Gromit]

Is it assumed that you have to pay tax before you have a right for your opinions to be heard? Someone should tell the tax exile and Conservative Blogger Lord Ashcroft.

Russell Brand has career earnings of about £15million, so I am guessing he has paid a lot more tax than you have ever done AOG.

[FredPuli43]

jno, Mrs Brown marching on Buckingham Palace would be a sight! But is not the man who plays her an Irish citizen? She/he might be disqualified for lack of status in processing up the Mall.

[bednobs]

right back atcha AOG - you finding something unfunny, might well be a recommendation to others!

[sp1814]

AOG

Have you watched any of his stand up DVDs, or read his books?

I ask because you seem to be questioning his qualification as a 'funny man'.

Anyway - isn't comedy the most subjective thing in the world?

[trt]

He might not be that funny but, what he said in his interview with Paxman made you wonder what the actual politicians do for us?

Paxman even agreed on his comments on the Graham Norton Show last Friday, and he dosent usually agree with many people.

[mikey4444]

Funny and Russell Brand don't really belong together in the same sentence as far as I am concerned. Scruffy and RB, or perhaps shouty and RB perhaps but never funny.

[youngmafbog]

Brand is an odious ponce of a man, the sort you would punch in the face outside the pub.

//Russell Brand has career earnings of about £15million, so I am guessing he has paid a lot more tax than you have ever done AOG. //

You would hope so Gromit, but whats the betting he has a few 'legal scams' going on ?

[LazyGun]

I do not find him funny at all.No denying his intelligence though, even though he might be self obsessed. Not really the point though, is it? Are you saying he does not have the right to protest/demonstrate, AoG?.

The reason he is especially in the news right now is because of his interview with Paxman, and the subsequent open letter exchanges with another comedian whose name I forget.

Brands point is that he does not vote;that the electorate have become apathetic about voting ( and voter numbers support that notion); that all MPs from all parties form an elite completely out of touch with the electorate; and that regardless of which party you are voting for, very little changes for your average man in the street. And I can see his point. Personally, I do not think the answer is to simply not vote, but it could be quite convincingly argued that the existing system requires some reform.

An option on the voting form to vote for "none of the above", for a start. Mandatory voting. A quorum of votes required to elect a representative, to encourage the democratic process.

And some more radical and a wider spectrum of political parties, with MPs who better represent the electorate ( although to be fair, UKip have tried that, with some rather mixed results)