Notices


Worldly Talk

Civil discussion and debate on real world events and issues.


Candidate slammed for being a Gamer

   
I admit, the advise is more for Ben's benefit than yours. Go read the comment threads where it's a news story. The cup of conservative rage runnith over.

Oh, I say it with a jovial atmosphere. Anytime a Republican so much as says she's "targeting" a race or "aiming" for victory people say she's being militant or whatever. So I quite enjoy a bit of turnabout when a Democrat says she'd like to murder someone. I'm quite gleeful at the chance to hold Democrats to their own standards even if I know they weren't seriously advocating murder, it's what Alinsky suggests in his Rules for Radicals. We get nailed with it all the time but when a Dem gets hit it's all "wahhh... she was joking idiots!"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Savayan View Post
So apparently satire is verboten when you go into politics. I guess that's because the average pundit is a lot like a primordial slug and can't process more than a sentence at a time.

And for you, Ted: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/qu...orq182534.html
Yeah, that gives the thing an entirely different context. Nice find.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Ben View Post
So I quite enjoy a bit of turnabout when a Democrat says she'd like to murder someone.
So you're sticking by this polemic, even with new context?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Savayan View Post
I admit, the advise is more for Ben's benefit than yours. Go read the comment threads where it's a news story. The cup of conservative rage runnith over.
No point to it. I know very well there are some conservatives foaming at the mouth about it, dumb as this 'controversy' is. I see stuff like this from both sides when its their turn in the hot seat. But that doesn't mean there is no humor in watching a Democrat get skewered by their own rhetorical swords!

It's weird how what one person finds funny, another doesn't. It's almost like we aren't identical clones of each other.

So... people are only able to say things with absolute impunity when they're slamming a religion you're not fond of, as opposed to speaking against a politician you don't like?

Apples and oranges. Censorship is a different than openly mocking dumb comments. Publicly joking about someone's murder reveals a lack of maturity I would find troubling in a candidate who wants a great deal of political power handed to her and thus I don't mind ridiculing her. But I've never suggested bad jokes should be illegal.

If she'd just said that randomly out of the blue, sure, but it's a specific response to what Norquist said himself. Of course, it's wrong to mock Norquist for following the whole "Government is EVIL and we must destroy it" line of "reasoning". Because of course nobody could possibly be threatened by destroying the government. Well, nobody who matters anyhow...

There is also a world of difference between saying "I'm off to strangle Grover Norquist" (note: she did not say to death) and telling your followers to "reload". Of teh two i would say that the strangulation comment is less offensive because even if misconstrued the action is taking place on the part of the speaker, and it cannot be taken as instruction to do harm to someone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Savayan View Post
So... people are only able to say things with absolute impunity when they're slamming a religion you're not fond of, as opposed to speaking against a politician you don't like?
Do what with the who now? How did you even get that? That's rather the opposite of what I was saying.




 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Blog   Myth-Weavers Status