?

Log in

No account? Create an account
i will go to hell for this - The Villages

hutch0
Date: 2008-10-18 01:10
Subject: i will go to hell for this
Security: Public
Location:home
Mood:calmcalm
Music:joni mitchell
Notwithstanding my withdrawal from commenting on the Presidential Election because of the general standard of debate (giving Sid a Pinocchio nose - mighty sophisticated, Cronkite would be proud of you all) Bumpy has provided a hostage to fortune I find myself unable to ignore, so please allow me to climb down, briefly, from my high horse and paint myself hypocritical and offer you...
...LOLBumpy.




'Nuff said.
Post A Comment | 21 Comments | | Link






RealThog
User: realthog
Date: 2008-10-18 00:29 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)

"(giving Sid a Pinocchio nose - mighty sophisticated, Cronkite would be proud of you all)"

I know, it was sinking so low it could almost have been devised by a Repugnican . . .
Reply | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2008-10-18 00:49 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
That's part of my objection to this - if the Right had done something like that to Binky or Rosebud, there would have been cries of `no fair' and other stuff. But because it came from the Left it's all happy trails, all good knockabout stuff and `what, you can't take a joke?' And as I said it offended me because I think of the liberal Left as my people, and I had hoped we were better than that. If that's the level of political discourse over there right now, you guys really are going to get the President you deserve.
For the sake of balance, I'm looking at pics of Binky or Rosebud that I can LOL.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



RealThog
User: realthog
Date: 2008-10-18 01:42 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)

You might want to take a look at this: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics/AP/story/730636.html

That's the kind of stuff people are trying to defuse with cartoons.

Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



RealThog
User: realthog
Date: 2008-10-18 02:27 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)

"If that's the level of political discourse over there right now, you guys really are going to get the President you deserve."

The level of political discourse on the Right over here is approximately that of the lynch mob -- and I'm neither joking nor hyperbolizing when I say that. McCain and Palin are quite deliberately fomenting the worst and most racist elements of society, and then pretending the occasional violence that erupts is nothing to do with them, oh heavens-to-betsy their hands are unsullied. As was accurately said the other day by ex-civil rights leader John Lewis, they're consciously creating an atmosphere of fear and hatred among the most brute-ignorant, violence-tending elemts of society in the same way that George Wallace did way back in his presidential run. One of the consequences of Wallace's hatemongering was the church bombing that killed four young girls. It is far from beyond credibility that the McCain campaign's antics will produce a similar crime, or perhaps an assassination attempt on Obama.

That's how it looks from here, where we're a lot bloody closer to it. We're expecting, each new day, something pretty abhorrent to happen.

Already, precisely thanks to McCain's and Palin's dishonest slanders, the minorities-voter-registration group ACORN has been receiving death threats (at least one) and has at least two of its offices trashed. Oh, yes, and these nutcase creeps have firearms, don't you forget.

In this context, I think it's fucking creditable of those in the middle and on the left that they can still hold themselves back to such things as photoshopping a Pinocchio nose onto that compulsive liar Palin.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2008-10-20 21:44 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
I get it, I really do; I read this stuff too and I know what these people are doing. But you expect abhorrent from the Right. I don't remember ever encountering such gleeful meanspiritedness from the middle before, though - and we saw it in the Democratic primaries too, when there was a point where I thought the party was just going to rip itself to bits before they managed to get as far as electing a candidate.
You're right, I'm not in the middle of it all and the stakes are not so high for me as they are for all of you, but for Christ's sake is it too late to ask for a sense of decency in this process? Or have the liberal-left decided the best way to win is to be as bad as the right? Because if they have, that's not a genie anyone will be able to get back into the bottle, and one day the nutcase creeps with the firearms will be Democrats.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



RealThog
User: realthog
Date: 2008-10-20 21:59 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)

"Or have the liberal-left decided the best way to win is to be as bad as the right?"

But I don't think they are being nearly as bad as the Right. In the third presidential debate, when the two candidates were asked about their negative advertising, McCain tried to equate all the personal abuse his campaign has hurled at Obama with the Obama campaign's ads criticizing McCain's healthcare policy. The comparison was absolutely pathetic, but the best he could do.

And Obama/Biden have done nothing like the near-racist rabble-rousing that Palin's been doing at her rallies. There are, I'd guarantee, precisely no Americans who're as confused about McCain and Palin as those who think Obama is a Muslim, or that he's Arab, or that he pals around with terrorists, or . . .

The McCain campaign has quite the most disgusting and dangerous political display I have seen in my life, and I've seen things like the National Front at work. It is the most shameful reflection on the US you could imagine.

So freebooters on the left get pretty vile about McCain and Palin too? Yep, but that's not the institutionalized line and in truth there's nothing the Obama campaign could do to stop it. (And it still ranks nowhere for vileness beside the right's stuff!)

And if the left/centre restrict themselves to merely having fun with cartoons and the like, well I say bully for them that they can still have a sense of humour about it all.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2008-10-20 22:43 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
I know all this stuff, Paul. I know Binky has an uphill struggle and I know he's going to be in danger every day of his Presidency, and you know I would vote for him in the blink of an eye; you're speaking to the converted here.
But. Would it be quite so amusing if someone photoshopped Binky to look like bin Laden, the way Sid has been photoshopped to look like a porn model? One's an evil slur, the other's just good political fun. But which is which?
They're not really restricting themselves to cartoons and having fun, though. I've found the attacks on Sid rather startling, particularly the ones which have focused on her children - her pregnant daughter, whether she really is the mother of her youngest child. Yes, if she abused her post and got Trooper Beasley fired then go after her with a chainsaw. But not her children, for heaven's sake.
You're right, it's not the institutionalised line, which is I guess why I've found it so shocking, and you know I have a fairly broad, and indeed dark, sense of humour. My worry is that when Binky wins, it will be considered an effective strategy and it will become institutionalised.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



RealThog
User: realthog
Date: 2008-10-22 12:51 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)

"Would it be quite so amusing if someone photoshopped Binky to look like bin Laden, the way Sid has been photoshopped to look like a porn model? One's an evil slur, the other's just good political fun."

The McCain campaign has made much (in informal, off-the-record contexts) of Palin's "hotness". The Obama campaign has not promoted Obama as an international terrorist.

So you're not actually comparing like with like.

For a more realistic comparison, compare the parodies Saturday Night Live has been doing of all four candidates. There the four hve been satirized according to their perceived weaknesses, and Obama and has been a target as much as anyone else. I can't hear the thunder of complaints -- can you?
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2008-10-22 22:45 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
I actually know a number of people over here who think Sid's hot.
It's interesting. I saw a statistic somewhere quite recently - can't remember where - that said a healthy percentage of Americans now feel they're getting more informed political comment from The Daily Show and SNL than the media.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



RealThog
User: realthog
Date: 2008-10-22 22:49 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)

"I saw a statistic somewhere quite recently - can't remember where - that said a healthy percentage of Americans now feel they're getting more informed political comment from The Daily Show and SNL than the [news] media."

That's so. And the only mainstream media questioning of McCain on the "Gordon Liddy connection" has come from . . . David Letterman. It's pathetic that the mainstream news media are so bloody useless here.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2008-10-22 22:54 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
I don't think it's that the media are necessarily so useless over there, I think it's the nature of shows like Jon Stewart's that makes the difference. They're entertaining, they seize on big issues rather than minutiae, and they're irreverent. Mostly I think the irreverence is the thing, although I saw Blair on The Daily Show a short while ago and, while Stewart certainly didn't give him an easy ride, I thought he was genuinely pleased to meet Blair.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



RealThog
User: realthog
Date: 2008-10-22 23:01 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)

"I don't think it's that the media are necessarily so useless over there"

Oh, but they are. You'd be appalled by how dire the TV news media are in general. CNN's atrocious, the network newses are parochial, and Fox is Fox. PBS is good on analysis but has no money for international reporting; some of its investigative reporting, however, even though done on a shoestring, puts the other channels to shame.

It's no wonder a lot of people here tune in to the BBC World Service.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2008-10-22 23:13 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
I was vaguely horrified when I was in the States back in '81, and that was before the big rolling news combines came onto the scene.
Fox is Fox. Just so.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



RealThog
User: realthog
Date: 2008-10-22 23:18 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)

"I was vaguely horrified when I was in the States back in '81"

Matters are significntly worse now, I think. The bean counters reckoned the way to be profitable was to save money on boring, unnecessary stuff like journalism and persuaded themselves that what people wanted was infotainment.

What people actually want, of course, is beer. I'm surprised the bosses at CNN or MSNBC haven't yet realized this, and persuaded themselves that the true purpose of a TV news channel is to hand out booze. It can only be a matter of time.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2008-10-23 21:45 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
That's the logical endpoint of rolling news. If there's a story developing it works really well, if usually a bit hysterically. On a slow news day, it's just repetitive pap. Eventually the repetitive pap becomes the norm, and all the proper journalists decide to go somewhere else.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



RealThog
User: realthog
Date: 2008-10-23 21:48 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)

"all the proper journalists decide to go somewhere else"

Except that, in the modern US mainstream media, there's just about nowhere left for them to go.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2008-10-23 21:58 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
I'm sure there's some connection here with corporatisation and broadcasting licences. Or possibly the media - like some of the papers over here - fancy themselves as kingmakers.

Edited at 2008-10-23 09:59 pm (UTC)
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



RealThog
User: realthog
Date: 2008-10-22 12:53 (UTC)
Subject: PS

Incidentally, none of the nicknames you use for the candidates are current over here, and it's difficult for me to work out who you mean by the various monickers. Are they in wide use in the UK?
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2008-10-22 22:47 (UTC)
Subject: Re: PS
I doubt very much they're in wide use over here. A month or so ago I got so sick and tired of hearing about the elections and the various slurs and accusations that were flying back and forth that I decided, if I referred to them at all, that I was going to refer to the candidates as Binky and Bumpy, and their running-mates as Sid and Rosebud. It was an attempt at satire. I don't know why I bothered.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



User: sarcobatus
Date: 2008-10-18 03:41 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
LOL!
Reply | Thread | Link



calcinations
User: calcinations
Date: 2008-10-18 10:33 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Eh? I thought presidential candidate lolcats would be fine. Fairly harmless compared to what is actually being said and done. Even amusing. Dig up one on obama and see what its like. (Ok, ok, I know some of them will be racist, but surely theres an amusing one out there somewhere?)
Reply | Thread | Link



browse
the villages
the links
December 2013
the promo