Moderator: Community Team
Lootifer wrote:/facepalm
You neocons dont exactly make it easy for us to think highly of you guys when you put out crap like this...
exception: If the main point of the clip is satire then I retract my statement; if there is no political agenda then I have no issue with the clip. However Scottys reply of "Sad but true" says otherwise.
Lootifer wrote: If the main point of the clip is satire then I retract my statement; if there is no political agenda then I have no issue with the clip.
Phatscotty wrote:It is sad and true. But I thought it was more 1984'ish
Dukasaur wrote:Lootifer wrote: If the main point of the clip is satire then I retract my statement; if there is no political agenda then I have no issue with the clip.
Why would that be an either/or proposition? Why can's something be both satire and have a political agenda?
Lootifer wrote:/facepalm
You neocons dont exactly make it easy for us to think highly of you guys when you put out crap like this...
exception: If the main point of the clip is satire then I retract my statement; if there is no political agenda then I have no issue with the clip. However Scottys reply of "Sad but true" says otherwise.
Doc_Brown wrote:/facepalm
And here the libs keep claiming conservatives don't get satire...
Of course it's satire, which doesn't prevent it from saying anything political. It's not unlike the Colbert Report in that respect. Yes it's way over the top, and no, Obama supporters don't think everyone voting against Obama is a racist, though to hear some of them talk sometimes, it's not surprising to understand why the point is in need of satire.
As a side point, I absolutely disclaim the neocon label and would object to that being applied to myself much more strongly than being called a liberal (though neither applies). Conservative or libertarian are fine. Crunchy conservative might be a bit closer, and Paulite wouldn't be too far from the truth either. FWIW, I'm planning to vote third party in this presidential election.
Lootifer wrote:Doc_Brown wrote:/facepalm
And here the libs keep claiming conservatives don't get satire...
Of course it's satire, which doesn't prevent it from saying anything political. It's not unlike the Colbert Report in that respect. Yes it's way over the top, and no, Obama supporters don't think everyone voting against Obama is a racist, though to hear some of them talk sometimes, it's not surprising to understand why the point is in need of satire.
As a side point, I absolutely disclaim the neocon label and would object to that being applied to myself much more strongly than being called a liberal (though neither applies). Conservative or libertarian are fine. Crunchy conservative might be a bit closer, and Paulite wouldn't be too far from the truth either. FWIW, I'm planning to vote third party in this presidential election.
Firstly apologies for the label, i just get annoyed at this crap; secondly theres political satire and theres political satire.
Personally I think satire in the political spectrum is only funny when it dwells on the meaningless or superficial; as soon as you get involved with actual ideals it becomes unfunny (for me) - you just come across as though you have an axe to grind or are having a whinge which renders all humor moot (again, for me - maybe a cultural thing?).
That swings both ways - I find much of Juan Bottoms content unfunny as well even though I share many of his views.
Dukasaur wrote:I'm the exact opposite. I find the only humour worth anything is humour which tries to illustrate a serious point. Humour which doesn't I find totally unfunny. I have no use for lowest-common-denominator catastrophic moronism like Seinfeld.
Dukasaur wrote:I'm the exact opposite. I find the only humour worth anything is humour which tries to illustrate a serious point. Humour which doesn't I find totally unfunny. I have no use for lowest-common-denominator catastrophic moronism like Seinfeld.
BigBallinStalin wrote:I take it you're not a populist, amirite, Lootie?
Lootifer wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:I take it you're not a populist, amirite, Lootie?
Im the yin-punk to your yan-punk.
Dukasaur wrote:Lootifer wrote: If the main point of the clip is satire then I retract my statement; if there is no political agenda then I have no issue with the clip.
Why would that be an either/or proposition? Why can's something be both satire and have a political agenda?
Symmetry wrote:Dukasaur wrote:Lootifer wrote: If the main point of the clip is satire then I retract my statement; if there is no political agenda then I have no issue with the clip.
Why would that be an either/or proposition? Why can's something be both satire and have a political agenda?
It can, but I do think people should be honest about their political agenda if they're promoting partisan propaganda from a campaign group.
I'm with Lootifer on this. Posting political ads as if they're everyman satire is always gonna be irritating.
thegreekdog wrote:Symmetry wrote:Dukasaur wrote:Lootifer wrote: If the main point of the clip is satire then I retract my statement; if there is no political agenda then I have no issue with the clip.
Why would that be an either/or proposition? Why can's something be both satire and have a political agenda?
It can, but I do think people should be honest about their political agenda if they're promoting partisan propaganda from a campaign group.
I'm with Lootifer on this. Posting political ads as if they're everyman satire is always gonna be irritating.
I find it's more irritating to be labelled a racist for political views.
Symmetry wrote:thegreekdog wrote:Symmetry wrote:Dukasaur wrote:Lootifer wrote: If the main point of the clip is satire then I retract my statement; if there is no political agenda then I have no issue with the clip.
Why would that be an either/or proposition? Why can's something be both satire and have a political agenda?
It can, but I do think people should be honest about their political agenda if they're promoting partisan propaganda from a campaign group.
I'm with Lootifer on this. Posting political ads as if they're everyman satire is always gonna be irritating.
I find it's more irritating to be labelled a racist for political views.
Kind of a non-sequitur there, if you'll forgive me TGD. As the video is pretty much an argument that Racists vote for Obama from a Republican part campaign group, shouldn't it be made clear that there's a political agenda and this is a propaganda piece?
thegreekdog wrote:Symmetry wrote:thegreekdog wrote:Symmetry wrote:Dukasaur wrote:Lootifer wrote: If the main point of the clip is satire then I retract my statement; if there is no political agenda then I have no issue with the clip.
Why would that be an either/or proposition? Why can's something be both satire and have a political agenda?
It can, but I do think people should be honest about their political agenda if they're promoting partisan propaganda from a campaign group.
I'm with Lootifer on this. Posting political ads as if they're everyman satire is always gonna be irritating.
I find it's more irritating to be labelled a racist for political views.
Kind of a non-sequitur there, if you'll forgive me TGD. As the video is pretty much an argument that Racists vote for Obama from a Republican part campaign group, shouldn't it be made clear that there's a political agenda and this is a propaganda piece?
I direct your attention to the 2008 Democratic primary; but I digress. Who would you like to make clear that there's a political agenda and that this video is a propaganda piece? The creater of the video? Doc_Brown? Me? The Republican Party? I think it's pretty clear the video holds a political message.
thegreekdog wrote:Dan Joseph whose handle (at least on Youtube) is BlackandRight.
Symmetry wrote:thegreekdog wrote:Dan Joseph whose handle (at least on Youtube) is BlackandRight.
Nope. Try again.
Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,
Users browsing this forum: No registered users