Notices


Worldly Talk

Civil discussion and debate on real world events and issues.


Candidate slammed for being a Gamer

   
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Ben View Post
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.
So you totally ignored the part where it was a direct reference to a quote by Grover Norquist?

I'm usually first to argue against the democrat 'party line' but really? If you're honestly that entrenched in defending 'your' party I can see why nothing ever gets done in this country. That's the very same attitude that prevents any actual compromise or effective legislation. It's not supposed to be 'us vs them'.

All "party lines" are bunkum.
When a person is elected to office, they are supposed to represent their constituents. Period.
When someone is elected by a majority of their constituents, but rather than representing them, they follow only a narrow set of policies which are dictated to them from above, rather than representing the people from below, they have betrayed their constituents, in my opinion. I know, that's the way the real world works, but it's a bad model.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Madadh View Post
So you totally ignored the part where it was a direct reference to a quote by Grover Norquist?

I'm usually first to argue against the democrat 'party line' but really? If you're honestly that entrenched in defending 'your' party I can see why nothing ever gets done in this country. That's the very same attitude that prevents any actual compromise or effective legislation. It's not supposed to be 'us vs them'.
Do you not see the difference in drowning an idea compared to drowning a person? I don't know the kind of crowd you run with but most responsible adults don't joke about killing someone in public. It's fair to bring up and it's also fair to think you don't care.

What does party line have to do with it? I've come down hard on Republicans who say things far less stupid than that and say they should drop out. Trent Lott just made a stupid birthday comment to a guy who had his 100th and it turned into a dumb issue and I went against him. The difference is Republicans police their own members and in this case he left the leadership after public outcry from both parties, when a Democrat says something stupid people make excuses for her and keep her around. William Jefferson was videotaped accepting $100,000 in bribes and remained in the Ways and Means Committee for nearly a year afterwards. The only reason he was removed was because the issue didn't go away and it was getting closer to election and they didn't want it sticking around, not any inner scruples.

If a Republican joked about murdering someone you guys (Democrats in general) would be all over them for it, I enjoy pointing out this double standard so yes, I think her comments are fair game.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Ben View Post

If a Republican joked about murdering someone you guys (Democrats in general) would be all over them for it, I enjoy pointing out this double standard so yes, I think her comments are fair game.
I'm not a democrat, first off, and the comment that is being obsessed over is a direct satire of the same quote by the guy she's referring to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Norquist
"I'm not in favor of abolishing the government. I just want to shrink it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub."
That fact that you actually seem to think she was literally referring to her desire to commit murder is... mind blowing.

Except he's drowning an idea and her a person. There is a difference. And I've never said I thought she was serious about doing it. Quit making stuff up. I just think it's something you don't joke about in public if you want to be thought of as being able to responsibly manage the government.

Because it's satire, the thing she's actually drowning is the idea of Grover Nordquist's to drown the government. Until the context was revealed to us, I also thought it a highly off-color remark.

If you deconstruct it, the violent imagery comes home to roost with Grover Nordquist. He's the one who conjures the imagery of drowning something in a bathtub. That's a pretty sick image to be constructing. Lachowicz is taking that and turning it on its head and saying that she values government and thinks his idea doesn't deserve the light of day.

I think it bizarre that you find the conjured image of "drowning the government in a bathtub" to be acceptable, but not the idea of twisting that imagery to reference the originator of the image. Government is being anthropomorphized into a human, for the purposes of drowning it in a bathtub. The reference to Grover Nordquist is wordplay, taken contextually, and conjures the imagery of violence far less because of that. And I'd be saying the same thing even if their party affiliations were reversed.

For further context, even the Maine GOP is somewhat aware of the fallacy of the argument. The bathtub comment isn't featured on their direct-mail flier. It's on their dedicated webpage, but it's not a lead section. It's further down on their page.

And here's the full context for the comment, as provided by the GOP's webpage:



Their flier highlights other things instead. Many of those comments are not appropriate for someone who intends to go into public office, but they are consistent with things a gamer would say. They also mistranslated 'dps' to mean 'deaths per second'.

It's a pretty interesting case study, really. Can a gamer run for public office? Can they do so if they've posted in public forums about their hobby? What if they use gamer aphorisms and language whilst on the campaign trail?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Ben View Post
Do you not see the difference in drowning an idea compared to drowning a person? I don't know the kind of crowd you run with but most responsible adults don't joke about killing someone in public. It's fair to bring up and it's also fair to think you don't care.

What does party line have to do with it? I've come down hard on Republicans who say things far less stupid than that and say they should drop out. Trent Lott just made a stupid birthday comment to a guy who had his 100th and it turned into a dumb issue and I went against him. The difference is Republicans police their own members and in this case he left the leadership after public outcry from both parties, when a Democrat says something stupid people make excuses for her and keep her around. William Jefferson was videotaped accepting $100,000 in bribes and remained in the Ways and Means Committee for nearly a year afterwards. The only reason he was removed was because the issue didn't go away and it was getting closer to election and they didn't want it sticking around, not any inner scruples.

If a Republican joked about murdering someone you guys (Democrats in general) would be all over them for it, I enjoy pointing out this double standard so yes, I think her comments are fair game.
*cough*MichelleBachmann*cough*

Even though it's satire I fail to care she's being attacked. I hold her to the same standards Dem's try to hold Republicans. It's fair game to attack her over saying stupid stuff.

Democrats do the same stupid stuff as Republicans? I would never have guessed. Which one is which again?




 

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