@@tomblah If its Toby then he's also the Scientist that questions superman when Supes pretends to get arrested, if its the other guy he is in young sheldon as one of the physcis professors and in the female Ghostbusters movie. I really don't know why neither of these guys are hired for comedy, think Robin Williams serious to comedy and back movies but with more weight and less comedic genius...Nanu nanu.
Great delivery there when he says; 'Go to BED....would you PLEASE.' I wonder if it's a subtle reference to Kevin Spacey's "Would you GO to LUNCH? Would you?" line in Glengarry Glen Ross,
I knew odin from god of war seemed familiar. Had to look this up and no wonder. Haven’t seen this show in 13 years and I remember this actor from a videogame character which is wild
Are there actors that are better at playing complete d-bags than Ed Begley, Jr.? If there are, I'm not aware of them. He's so good at it, it makes one question where the line between acting and reality lies. Richard Schiff, as always, is an absolute beast. Any scene he's in, I'm just waiting for him to eat the other actors' lunches for them.
And I loved how they used the same actor for the same role, even if they only appeared in episodes that were seasons apart. Like Harry Groener who played the Secretary of Agriculture Roger Tribbey. He was in S1E12 ("He Shall, from Time to Time") and then again in the same role in S4E23 ("Twenty Five").
@@DavidHeffron78 The persistent insistence on gutting social security was insane, but so was the rest of this schmaltzy yet condescending alternate present that liberals, to this day, substitute for reality. Naturally, every country that we gave West Wing box sets to had its government engage in genocidal war against their public, and government by West Wing fans will see death camps opened on American soil because these morons hate the public and love Republicans.
Dinner Meetings: One thing I've never understood is, how can you eat with someone you disagree with or see as an adversary? Do you eat first and then start a discussion? So you're eating a meal with someone you know you're going to get into an argument with - are you like jovial and social while you eat, and then segue to the important matters?
This is the answer for the Kucinich wing of the Democratic Party. This is also why we liberals are so frustrated with the present administration. It seems at times that the Democratic (Not Democrat Party, thankyouverymuch) is at odds with the wing of the party that wants to hold to the principles that made it popular in the first place; the administration seems to want to retreat to the center and gets beat up by the right anyway.
Now, 7 years later the republican party wants to retreat to the right, into the safe hands of the Ku Klux Klan. Please protest but don't let your protest become a riot.
@@grogery1570 have you seen Biden's record? Segregation, racist crime bill, bill of rights for the cops who beat Rodney King. Trump's a racist, but the problems we're protesting now are Biden's fault.
Lol, "segregation is Biden's fault" that's a hot take. Bussing was opposed by black leaders at the time, and the crime bill was endorsed by the CBC (and supported by Bernie, even before VAWA). Did the crime bill have negative effects, absolutely, but you have no idea how bad things were in cities like NY at the time, people were demanding action and if Dems didn't do anything they would have all been voted out.
It is interesting (and sad) that 25 years later liberal issues discussed in The West Wing, are still only being discussed - such as the future of social security, the cost of college education, the cost of drugs and healthcare. Even the risks of pandemics were touched on in the series.
First, no Republican would sign on to that bill. Second, I would guess the other 17 senators would soon change their mind once Josh Lyman got done with them. But Toby did even better by putting Gillette on the blue ribbon task force without even asking.
@@larrysmith2638 Maybe, though I do remember one episode where Josh overplayed his hand while pressuring a blue Senator from a red state. IIRC he very nearly had to resign.
@@larrysmith2638 Yep, that does seem to be a theme of TWW, young, enthusiastic party members battling the other side while the older ones tend to move quietly toward the center. I don't know if it's art imitating life, or just art.
While I like the show in some aspect and Toby is one of my fav, his arrogance ESPECIALLY toward all that are on his left is beyond infuriating and quite misplaced. In a way he represent all those liberal from the democrat party that have been in control since the last century, and what is their result ? Trump. Trump is their result.
Toby didnt "own" the senator. This episode is part of an arc where Bartlette is running against his own principles because he thinks it will win over "moderates". Toby is angry because he agrees with the seantor. He saying Bartlette is the leader of the party as much to justify his own actions as to tell off the Senator. Eventually we see Bartlette reverse this and embrace himself fully. Its a brilliant writting that ties the season together.
130 degrees in Death Valley today. Would have been nice if we listened to some of those "crazy environmentalists" 20 years ago. And it would be nice if my retirement age was the old 65 instead of 67. But at least Toby got the "cops beating a black guy" problem solved through his bipartisan work.
How so? It seemed to me like very little of what Toby was saying was actual policy positions so much as pointing out the problems with the Senator's arguments
@@gcharlton7895 I remember in the 1970's watching a debate about gun control where one person was advocating for the complete elimination of private ownership of handguns, and the other person dismissed it as an impossible, unworkable pipedream, saying it would take fifty years to get all the private handguns out of circulation. Well, that was fifty years ago. What would things be like today if they'd tried?
@@gcharlton7895 The president of the United States just turned 80. The average age of Congress is 60. It's not surprising that Washington would think 67 instead of 65 is a reasonable increase in the retirement age. As for the "crazy environmentalists" Toby was worried about, he was specifically talking about people who'd blown up a ski resort. TWW is a show that's very much in favor of listening to environmentalists. They did a whole episode about a glacier melting, for pity's sake. It's definitely troublesome that they created a storyline where a cop was found innocent of beating up a black kid (apparently, the kid broke his leg *before* the cop found him). But, in the same episode where they admonish environmental terrorism, they also have a black comedian call them out for not having his back when he told a joke about white cops. It's not like they get away clean with everything. The show takes more shots at the Democratic Party from the Left than it does from the Right.
I will never stop finding it utterly odd that Peter Schiff is involved with the ADL after playing Judah P. Benjamin/Kissinger to Josiah "Thinks he won an argument with God." Bartlett
I hate to say that Toby is wrong but he is. He never even suggest what Seth. who is a an of principle, says as being inaccurate. but still sees him as the enemy and wants to destroy him. The President is the head of his party but that party doesn't control the people who are part of that party. We don't have a parliamentary system of government where people vote for the party We vote for the person. Toby should speak with respect to Seth because Seth was voted in and disrespecting Seth you are disrespecting the people who elected him especially when they agree on the issue. If they disagree based on the issue then what ever fight they have is issue based not one based on political power.. The issue Toby had is that Seth wasn't loyal to the party.because he wanted to run against the President. Toby thought he had the right to destroy him politically. He didn't have that right.
bornbillsmith The point is that Seth needs the Democratic party to get re-elected, he could never win independently. Thus he needs to vote with the Democratic party or they'll drop him. It sucks, but that's what politics has come to.
Thomas Eshuis We have a representative type of government. This means Seth represents the people who live in the district he represents. Not all of these people will be from the political party who put him on the ballot. He therefore should not follow his party blindly and Toby should not think he can tell him what to do. I'm sure Toby would encourage the Republican to distance themselves from their political party.
bornbillsmith "We have a representative type of government." As does every other country in the Western world. "This means Seth represents the people who live in the district he represents. Not all of these people will be from the political party who put him on the ballot. He therefore should not follow his party blindly and Toby should not think he can tell him what to do." You're confusing the ideal of how politics should work with how it works in the practice of the American political structures and electoral systems. I agree Toby should not be doing what he's doing, but he's just making the most of the corrupt loopholes in the American electoral and party systems.
pedonbio You are wrong. If Bernie want to reject the DMC he should run as a independent. Once he is in office that changes as he has to take into consideration all of the people he represents, In Bernie's case this would mean he would have to listen to the rich as well because the rich also have rights. Bernie would not agree because he wants to be a benevolent dictator .en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benevolent_dictatorship This is why I believe (even if you think he is right) he is worse than Trump and I hate Trump.
The cop thing pissed me off, shouldn't have celebrated hero cop, cause he didn't do something bad but was accused of it. Even in the shows day it still had groups over individuals.
It's funny to see young people on RU-vid thinking Toby Ziegler owned some far left Senator when this sort of thing will bite you all in the ass when you're at retirement age.
I wish Ed had been cast in more episodes; his character was the 'truest' liberal in the show. Not to say Toby wasn't. Hell, Toby was the heartiest liberal by far. But his character's attempts to compromise (govern) always was half-hearted and met with stiff resistance that he never really tried to fight. Leo and the President were 1st generation Neo-Liberals, with Josh being an up-and-coming 2nd generation Neo-Liberal and Sam being a liberal in social issues and tepidly at best. This is my opinion after watching the show repeatedly for two decades. That said, I've deciphered the characterization of each character in the show and each other. The President is the father. Leo is the President's best friend. Josh, the President's oldest son. Charlie, his adopted youngest son. Toby, his little brother. C.J. is Leo's adopted daughter and the President's god-daughter. Donna, his daughter-in-law. The Surgeon General is the President's ex-girlfriend. Leo's sister, the "hippie aunt." Lord John, the "creepy uncle." Miss Fiderer, the President's crazy cousin. Mrs. Langingham, the President's big sister. Adm. Fitzwallace, the President's old high school coach. Ron Butterfield, the local mailman. Margaret, the neighborhood "cat lady." The Speaker of the House, a former 'snoty boyfriend" of the President's daughter. Dr. Bartlet is "Lady Macbeth". Mallory is a shiny reflection of Lady Macbeth. Ellie, the shiny reflection of the President. And Zoey is just Zoey. Thankfully there were no dogs.
"Go to bed, would you PLEASE" is basically another way of saying "Stop being a stubborn, selfish little toddler and either shut up or help solve the problem"
Schiff was cast horribly on Once Upon a Time because of this character. He can't play a sweet, optimistic man. I kept waiting for him to go on a cynical rant.
Probably no-one will read this, but I find it interesting how the comments on these videos over the last year (i.e late 2016 onwards) have become so vicious and polarised. This show was made nearly two decades ago and suddenly everyones transformed into psychopaths. Not taking a side, just curious and a little lost.
yea, this neoliberal as fuck scene lmao . liberals choose fascism over socialism. historical precedent. eat shit liberals. republicans without the heavy racism but all of the empire building soundcloud.com/citationsneeded/episode-51-how-the-west-wing-poisoned-a-generation-of-liberal-minds
Huh. Watching this clip help crystallize what's always bothered me about the WW. There's plenty of smart and snappy dialogue and the President is likeable and says the right things. But, in the end, they are just middle of the road corporate democrats. Right here - Toby doesn't even deny that they are moving to the right on the environment, they are considering options to "reform" (meaning privatize or reduce benefits on) Social Security and they are on the wrong side of police brutality. They can have all of the smart dialogue and interesting characters they want, but the are middle of the road on so many issues. Another great example is the Ainsley character. Very likeable, but they go out of their way to support her conservative ideas in so many scenes, it's hard to really understand what the Bartlet administration really stands for beyond the president being a "good man". I mean there's also the entire thing where Josh pushes for allowing the republicans in Congress to get a supreme court nominee so they can have theirs and have a balanced court. In some kind of theoretical world that might be a good idea, but in the real world where the next conservative president is going to nominate all conservative judges, how is that a good idea?
On some levels, this scene always tells me what is wrong with our system of government. That an elected official, representative of the people, gets talked to like this by a guy the President just happened to pick to be one of his advisors..... not one that was elected by the people. It just rubs me the wrong way this scene.
A lot of times, the people elect idiotic representatives who don't even belong in the room with highly educated and deeply experienced policy operatives. He got what he deserved.
@@CMFinB I was speaking generally. Forget TWW. Flip it a little bit. Can you imagine an ass like Stephen Miller talking to your district's rep like this?
TheAudioman15 - If you are the hand picked trusted friend of the President and a political genius... you (Toby) can talk to any elected official this way once the elected official has crossed the line. Threatening power plays and abandoning the party that got you there and ignoring all loyalties that deserve his support... I’m surprised Toby didn’t pour water over his head and say you needed a cold shower.
Erin Thor like I previously mentioned, imagine an ass like Stephen Miller doing this to your congressman. I’d be over the moon if my congressman told Miller to go F off.
As much as I loved this show, Toby was not my favorite character. He was patronizing at times and could be a sanctimonious prick at times as well. Great acting job but the character tended to be an extremely miserable human being.
Some of the early seasons of "The West Wing" was very good writing. This was back when Sorkin did not go full Hollywood libtard and had the confidence to show that sometimes being intelligent responsible adults means you have to have disagreements with people on "your own side" of the political spectrum. This is what made the scenes compelling, you really had to keep thinking about what you just saw and have ongoing debates about who was right and wrong and there was a lot of nuance. Fast forward to "The Newsroom" and Sorkin lost that ability or desire to have nuanced debate and dialogue. The "bad" people were clearly delineated as blond hair, blue-suited middled aged men with essentially a "hi! I'm a Republlican" name tag coming off the screen. These "bad" conservatives would spout off very clear bigotry or hate for the hero liberal to smack down. These later Sorkin scenes had all the nuance, intelligence, and suspense as a STeven Seagal bar room fight. Just set up the dumb bad guys for the hero to knock down.
Sad because I, as a lifelong Republican and even as one of those dreaded Trump voters, think one of the smartest TV lines I ever heard was from Sorkin, a lifelong democrat. From Sports Night, Isaac told Jeremy "If you're dumb, surround yourself with smart people. And if you're smart, surround yourself with smart people who disagree with you." Raising the level of debate, and pushing each other to do better makes us all better. Sitting in an echo chamber makes us all drones.
Man, these pro-Sanders takes from February 2020 did not age well. The show looks oddly prescient now, doesn’t it? Sanders came at Biden from the left...and Biden owned his ass.
Biden didn't do anything. It was Obama and fearmongering of Trump. But congratulations - you got the senile racist nominated. And you'll lose again. Because the Democratic party has abandoned all their principles to embrace corporate conservitism.
The Establishment owned his ass. Biden himself didn't do a f****** thing. in fact... I would say that if Biden does win... He didn't actually win... It's Trump that lost. right now, a moldy potato would win against Trump.
@@ReleaseMyKrakken You're kind-of right that Biden won because people voted against Trump, but that doesn't mean that any candidate would have beaten him. There was a wide coalition of people who disapproved of Trump's presidency, a fairly large majority of the electorate. This coalition is ideologically diverse, encompassing many different types of voters. The Democrats wisely decided to choose a candidate who is acceptable to almost all of this coalition, even if he's not exciting to many of them, and this strategy turns out to have worked. Someone like Sanders would not have been able to pull that off. Those college-educated middle-class suburban whites who were the decisive voters in Trump's defeat would not have voted for Sanders, most of them would have held their noses and voted Trump, even though they dislike him. Biden wasn't my first choice either, and he wasn't the only one who has that sort of appeal. The same role could have been played by someone like Cory Booker or Pete Buttigieg. But it certainly could not have been played by Sanders, and probably not by Warren either, as much as I like her.
@@sidarthurgortimer355 Bernie did better against Hillary.... So I've actually come around to that thinking. A Sanders type candidate works best against neo liberal corporate policies. When it's the status quo vs his progressive policies. Against somebody like Trump... A far right extremist... Voters needed somebody more grounded and realistic to where they were. Progressive, bold ideas were too much of a gamble. They just wanted back to normal. So we need another 4 years of shitty Democrats to be ready to try a Bernie type candidate again. We are getting closer to it though.
@@mja91352 People in the White House behave and speak like people everywhere behave and speak, and nobody behaves or speaks like TV characters. As for entertainment, I said the show was cute, so it was entertaining on an elementary level. But it was pure fantasy, especially now that a doddering old Alzheimers patient is in the Offal Office. surrounded by those dweebs in his administration. I wonder if it's Kumzwala or somebody else who's telling mumblin' Joe what he can and can't do. Somebody else is definitely running things there, because Joe ain't doin' it. I can just imagine what would have happened if anybody had dared to tell Trump he couldn't take questions from reporters, or anything else like that. Our current President absolutely has a boss.
“Come at us from the Left, and I’m going to own your ass.” Why is there a flaw in your Left flank for someone to breach? You should’ve been there already, Toby. I thought you were supposed to be the most Leftwing member of the President’s groupies. And, also, if the leader of a party betrays that party, then the other members should call him out.
The fact that toby is presented here as if he is right and the other guy is presented as some sort of a bad person is everything that is wrong with the modern democratic party and how awful of an impact this show has had on the politics overall.
If you value the smug sense of self-righteousness you get from maintaining "ideological purity" over making a practical positive impact on the country and improving the lives of your constituents in measurable ways, then sure. If you actually want to get your bills passed and move the country in the right direction you have to be realistic about what you try to do and spend political capital wisely, even if it means not being able to do everything you'd want to do. The biggest problem with the modern Democratic party are people who don't understand that, people who value the aesthetics and publicity of being a "revolutionary" above the quality of life of the people, people who refuse to compromise because they'd rather just complain and bash the politicians who are actually trying to get something done. What this character was threatening to do was split the Democratic vote and 100% ensure a Republican administration, replacing a president whose policies are taking the country in the right direction (though it might not be far enough in that direction for you) with a president whose policies would move it in the other direction, and make the lives of millions of people worse. Toby was right to be angry with him.
@@sidarthurgortimer355 ya let's just give in on every issue within the democratic party for the sake of unity. at least revolutionaries have a dream and don't just swallow corporate dollars while becoming the republican party minus the bigotry.
Conservatives don't exist anymore, none of you even know what that word means, you're right wing radical nutcases who have to cheat to win, so talk about fairytales, look in the mirror.
