This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Republican? Just scream and lie.

1267268270272273315

Comments

  • If it was an onion article I would have known it was parody.
    FWIW, I believe Borowitz only writes parody columns for the New Yorker, although given how the entire mag isn't based on parody, I guess it's easy to make that mistake.
  • The sad part is that is actually what some people believe, I bet my dad will be Fwding e-mails saying that's the case.
  • I don't even know who Borowitz is.
  • I don't even know who Borowitz is.
    I only discovered him about a month or two back myself, and even then I didn't know his name. I just knew there was "this dude with a parody column in the New Yorker."
  • edited November 2012
  • Yeah, you kinda have to know what the deal is with the Borowitz Report.
    When the affair happened is irrelevant. When it was discovered is relevant. Borrowitz is just being flip and making a stupid correlation.
    More importantly, Petraeus is testifying anyway...
    Yeah but now we can't trust what he says because he's a philandering jerk who was lead by his privates and obvious bitter about the whole ordeal.
  • I think it's an interesting topic, because I feel we do need two effective parties in this country:

    If the Republican party can no longer depend on tribalism to win national elections, what are they going to do? What kind of party will they become?

    What kind of party should they become?
  • Ideally, I'd like the Democrats to be a center-left party and the Republicans to be a center-right party. Right now, the Democrats are arguably a center-right party (especially when compared to parties in other countries) and the Republicans are a far-right party.
  • Was this the thread where people were trying to figure out what the Left's version of Limbaugh is? I'd argue that it's this:

    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/one-towns-war-on-gay-teens-20120202

    The Left doesn't really tend to value radio talk shows as much as written word because we are fairly nerdy like that. We like long, drawn out accounts that draw us in emotionally. A quick jibe gets less attention than that article did.

    Also, if you haven't read that, please do. It's got 0 to do with economic things, so I don't think anyone here would disagree with it. It's also important to understand what the real, practical implications of policy decisions actually do.
  • The point of the "Left's Limbaugh" concept is that, despite being liberal, they're at least somewhat full of shit. That article is legit.
  • Ah. I thought in the sense of being an emotionally manipulative thing. That article is as manipulative and slanted as Limbaugh is. It just so happens that in this case it is also objectively correct.

    Anyway, to sate the rage read this

    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/10/13/why-a-bible-belt-conservative-spent-a-year-pretending-to-be-gay/
  • I don't think it's manipulative in the way that Limbaugh is manipulative. The author is trying to give the reader a feel for what those kids are feeling, and establish some simpatico. I don't think that's something to disparage.
  • I don't think it's manipulative in the way that Limbaugh is manipulative. The author is trying to give the reader a feel for what those kids are feeling, and establish some simpatico. I don't think that's something to disparage.
    I'm not disparaging it, don't attribute things to me unnecessarily. I'm just saying it's as manipulative to the left as Rush is to the right.

    It's just that the things and strategies used to manipulate the Left are very different than what worsk on the right. We need evidence and drawn out emotional appeals. The Right seems to react more to knee jerk reactions, fear, and anger.

    Does that make sense?
  • Sure, but one is evil propaganda and the other is not.
  • Sure, but one is evil propaganda and the other is not.
    But they're both propaganda in a broad sense of the term. I like the article, but I see it as a launching point for a discussion of the ideas presented rather than simple evidence.
  • There's another distinction. For Liberals, an article like this is a prelude to a discussion and a consensus. For the Right, Limbaugh is a call to action and torches and pitchforks and boycotts and angry declarations.
  • For the Left's version of the Rush Limbaugh crowd, I think you have to look places like /r/SRS and similar.
  • lol muppet, you really hate SRS. maybe because it makes white males like you feel what the rest of us feel all the time.
  • lol muppet, you really hate SRS. maybe because it makes white males like you feel what the rest of us feel all the time.
    SRS is pretty wonderful, actually. It's so utterly fantastic to see so many butt hurt white tech guys.
  • SRS is pretty much the LET'S GO FUCKING FUCK SOME SHIT UP RIGHT NOW contingent of the left. It has nothing to do with what I think about their ideas so much as how they approach them. It's very Limbaugh like. Very emotional, raw, and not a lot of discussion going on except a lot of self reinforcement.
  • edited November 2012
    not a lot of discussion going on except a lot of self reinforcement.
    exactly. what we feel all the time. turning the tables is fun.
    [feminist complaint]
    "y u so sensitive?? [female-related insult]"
    [racist joke]
    "that's offensive"
    "it's just a joke, lighten up."
    Post edited by no fun girl on
  • I didn't make any value judgment except to compare it to Limbaugh's MO. :-)
  • edited November 2012
    I can't speak to Limbaugh's motives, but I'm going to speculate that it's not satirical and critical performance. If you want discussion, you have to go to SRSD or one of the other subreddits.
    Post edited by no fun girl on
  • If you want discussion, why go to Reddit at all? Reddit is where you go for braindead memes and funny cat pictures.
  • edited November 2012
    lol muppet, you really hate SRS. maybe because it makes white males like you feel what the rest of us feel all the time.
    Ah, yeah, about that - They're kinda literally the worthless, wretched, idiotic scum of the social justice movement that drags the whole thing down, and retards the progress of the movement as a whole with their bullshit antics.

    Don't get me wrong - The social justice movement as it stands is great, one of the best movements of recent times, better than Occupy, in my opinion. But SRS is to social justice as Alex Jones and Infowars are to journalism and rational thinking.
    exactly. what we feel all the time. turning the tables is fun.
    As long as it's a group that, for example, still thinks the term "Special snowflake" is acceptable, you're not turning the tables, you're just stroking your own ego.

    Unless you want to explain to me, exactly, why it's an acceptable term, despite being an exact equivalent for calling someone a House Nigger or Uncle tom. Is it that using actual slurs is a little blatant, or is it just the usual cowering behind new words for the same sentiment?
    SRS is pretty wonderful, actually. It's so utterly fantastic to see so many butt hurt white tech guys.
    Truth. While SRS is basically an inflamed boil on the arse of social justice, they're fucking excellent for entertainment.
    Post edited by Churba on
  • edited November 2012
    I've seen some surprisingly supportive and informed discussion on reddit. But I do love cat pictures...
    lol muppet, you really hate SRS. maybe because it makes white males like you feel what the rest of us feel all the time.
    Ah, yeah, about that - They're kinda literally the worthless, wretched, idiotic scum of the social justice movement that drags the whole thing down, and retards the progress of the movement as a whole with their bullshit antics.
    It can be pretty therapeutic. It's annoying as an oppressed/minority to always walk the high road or have your entire pigeonhole be judged by it. Sadly, a lot of people don't get it because they've never experienced that kind of prejudice, stereotyping, ridicule, and hate.
    Post edited by no fun girl on
  • edited November 2012
    I don't make racist or sexist jokes and I'm not responsible for people who do just because they look like me. To assert otherwise is dumb even if your motive is satirical statement

    Social justice good. Fighting fire with fire just burns more stuff.
    Post edited by muppet on
  • I think I'm too old for Reddit. Actually, I'm feeling too old for a lot of internet things. Not out of being old... but out of being out of the loop... *sigh*
  • edited November 2012
    I don't make racist or sexist jokes and I'm not responsible for people who do just because they look like me. To assert otherwise is dumb even if your motive is satirical statement
    Right, but not all black people are criminals and not all women are gold diggers. Do you enjoy being judged as a group of people for someone else's behavior? Seriously, don't be so sensitive. It's just a joke (;
    As long as it's a group that, for example, still thinks the term "Special snowflake" is acceptable, you're not turning the tables, you're just stroking your own ego.

    Unless you want to explain to me, exactly, why it's an acceptable term, despite being an exact equivalent for calling someone a House Nigger or Uncle tom. Is it that using actual slurs is a little blatant, or is it just the usual cowering behind new words for the same sentiment?
    It's not. That's precisely the point. It's an over the top reversal of our daily experience.
    Post edited by no fun girl on
Sign In or Register to comment.