Political Argument Arena!!!

[ToonUSA]

Firstly, in an ironic Steven Col-bear Re-por way its a pretty funny illustration of mocking a stereotypically Republican mindset. But it does nothing to stimulate me to discuss your points what ever they may be...

By that I mean what was your point of posting it? That you must vote Republican because a black man and/or a white woman are unqualified to be president? That choosing someone for president other than a white male will lead to Gotterdammerung for America? That the Republican destiny is to save the world from Librulism? Or are you mocking the Republican steroetypes that you have defended here?

Taken by itself, without some kind of context to ground it to a particular meaning, the immediate meaning one can construe from that image is racist and sexist: "That the choice is clear, we will go to hell in a hand basket if we elect a woman or an African American as president." And the more I think about it and dissect it in an analytical attempt to derive your reason for posting it, the more I tend to believe it to a be a pretty damning image that does not reflect well upon you. In short, IMO and I'm sorry but I don't want to go there and discuss racial and political issues with you.

Secondly you missed my point when I said that I dislike that specific type of commentary being disguised as a "discourse" or discussion. Its not. Its the equivalent of Michael Moore leaving a picture of a Colombine victim on the doorstep of Charlton Heston's House, when he was the mouthpiece of the NRA; or Hilary Clinton "tearing up" before the Dem primaries in New Hampshire. Its agitprop whose point is to generate a reaction and not a discussion. Its Dramatic propaganda. Its "shitting on the floor and walking away with a smirk."

Thirdly, by finishing with "unless you agree then kudos for having a brain." and attempting to declare your ironic intent with a ":D" is "Shitting" on the floor. You are not looking for a discussion you are looking for a reaction.

This is the level of discourse I dislike and since this is what passes for acceptable discussion I prefer to bow out, walk away and not piss myself off and blow and O-Ring about it. My outrage meter pegged somewhere back in 2003....

I am finding more and more that the old adage: "Two things never discussed in good company is politics and religion; because both are understood to be the others best company."

The exact definition of bloaviating.

Might I ask, what was the point of you overanalyzing a simple shirt design? It's semi-amusing and it does it's part at taking a light hearted shot at the Democratic candidates. How is that shirt any different than those that portray President Bush as a monkey or some sort of a bafoon? Do you show the same amount of outrage to those shirts?

It's clear you don't wish to be a part of the general discourse about the Presidential election and that's perfectly ok. However, I find it highly insulting that you have chosen to ignore my earlier post (that awaits response from Colin) and claim that I'm simply "shitting on the floor." If you don't want to be a part of the discussion that's all fine and dandy, however it's slightly inappropriate for you to offer commentary from the point you've entered, simply ignoring what's already taken place. It's like walking in during the 2nd half and giving your analysis of the game from then on as if the first half was never played.

[ToonUSA]

Anyway...

I think I missed the picture that started this storm. Can I get a link or something?

Apparently it makes me a sexist/racist. (http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showpost.php?p=14453697&postcount=253)

[BayernWake]

Gotterdammerung

One of my favorite words (technically Götterdämmerung), along with Vergangenheitsbewältigung.

The exact definition of bloaviating.

Might I ask, what was the point of you overanalyzing a simple shirt design? It's semi-amusing and it does it's part at taking a light hearted shot at the Democratic candidates. How is that shirt any different than those that portray President Bush as a monkey or some sort of a bafoon? Do you show the same amount of outrage to those shirts?
It's clear you don't wish to be a part of the general discourse about the Presidential election and that's perfectly ok. However, I find it highly insulting that you have chosen to ignore my earlier post (that awaits response from Colin) and claim that I'm simply "shitting on the floor." If you don't want to be a part of the discussion that's all fine and dandy, however it's slightly inappropriate for you to offer commentary from the point you've entered, simply ignoring what's already taken place. It's like walking in during the 2nd half and giving your analysis of the game from then on as if the first half was never played.

I agree with mplsTOON's analysis of the communicative capabilties of that shirt...on a general level. If I saw someone wearing that shirt on the street I'd be peeved at the Crossfire-level argument it presents. But ToonUSA posted it as a picture to lightheartedly, humorously, and/or tongue-in-cheek-ly "support" his argument. So in this regard I think mplsTOON overreacted, esp. since ToonUSA supports the GOP not because Obama's black and Hillary's a woman, but because he thinks they're actually bad candidates.

Points:

1) mplsTOON: to me it's obvious that ToonUSA did not intend to use that picture as a legitimate form of discourse
2) ToonUSA: it's important to realize that everything you post is fair game for analysis and that it can sometimes be very hard to be tongue-in-cheek in a politics thread


this post brought to you by your friendly neighborhood moderator

[mplsTOON]

One of my favorite words (technically Götterdämmerung), along with Vergangenheitsbewältigung.

Gesundheit, my other favorite is Sommerschlussverkauf.

Points:

1) mplsTOON: to me it's obvious that ToonUSA did not intend to use that picture as a legitimate form of discourse
2) ToonUSA: it's important to realize that everything you post is fair game for analysis and that it can sometimes be very hard to be tongue-in-cheek in a politics thread


this post brought to you by your friendly neighborhood moderator

1) totally known and agreed that it was not ToonUSA's intent at all. My point of it was merely an illustration that without context, regulation or "rules" a hyperbole is not a discussion.

2) tongue is cheek is fine and dandy, and wholeheartedly welcome, but context is needed to be provided for it. Its the difference between Sarcasm and parody. one has context to go with teh content the other just hangs there...

[mplsTOON]

The exact definition of bloaviating.

Might I ask, what was the point of you overanalyzing a simple shirt design? It's semi-amusing and it does it's part at taking a light hearted shot at the Democratic candidates.

IMO its hardly lighthearted to show a black man and a white woman and insinute that the world will end if you vote for them.

How is that shirt any different than those that portray President Bush as a monkey or some sort of a bafoon? Do you show the same amount of outrage to those shirts?

Depends. the shirts that equate him to a Chimp I do. But the ones about for example: "the Villiage missing its Idiot", I do not because they are reflective of his intellect and not his physical characteristics. They exemplify his "misunderestimates;" those verbal, political and social gaffes that he has pulled without thinking that have made me wince whenever they happen.


It's clear you don't wish to be a part of the general discourse about the Presidential election and that's perfectly ok. However, I find it highly insulting that you have chosen to ignore my earlier post (that awaits response from Colin) and claim that I'm simply "shitting on the floor." If you don't want to be a part of the discussion that's all fine and dandy, however it's slightly inappropriate for you to offer commentary from the point you've entered, simply ignoring what's already taken place. It's like walking in during the 2nd half and giving your analysis of the game from then on as if the first half was never played.

My "shitting on the floor" meta-comment was with regard to the T shirt design you posted without a context. If it was posted specifically for the discussion with Colin, I apologize, because there was nothing to tie it back to the that discussion.



Apparently it makes me a sexist/racist. (http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showpost.php?p=14453697&postcount=253)

Please don't play the victim card with this.

simply put: You posted an image that I found offensive and I let you know I found it offensive and why I found it offensive. I am not trying to bludgeon you over the head with it to make a point other than it was illustrative of why I despise the whole sensationalist "Politics as a Team Sport" schadenfreude practiced today.

I don't believe you are a racist by any means, and I know for a fact that you are not a racist/sexist. But your posting it made me wince and wonder WTF, why would you would post that without some kind of context?!

[JaredSS07]

IMO its hardly lighthearted to show a black man and a white woman and insinute that the world will end if you vote for them.


Why do you see it as a black man and a white woman, not just two Democrats?

Are you saying that no matter which one makes it to the general, I cannot attack them because they are not white males?

[ToonUSA]

[QUOTE=mplsTOON;14469569]IMO its hardly lighthearted to show a black man and a white woman and insinute that the world will end if you vote for them.
Funny, I saw them as the 2 morons the Democratic party has to choose from. If it were Edwards and Al Gore I still would have posted it.

Depends. the shirts that equate him to a Chimp I do. But the ones about for example: "the Villiage missing its Idiot", I do not because they are reflective of his intellect and not his physical characteristics. They exemplify his "misunderestimates;" those verbal, political and social gaffes that he has pulled without thinking that have made me wince whenever they happen.
Ah I see, only when they fit your agenda they aren't offensive. You'll show outrage at what you perceive wrongly as racism/sexism but you'll giggle along with the rest of the funny little girls when they just make fun of a WASP male. Quality. Do you work for CNN during the day?

[BayernWake]

Ah I see, only when they fit your agenda they aren't offensive.

That's not what he's saying.

You'll show outrage at what you perceive wrongly as racism/sexism

How can someone perceive that "wrongly"? It's his perception. That's like when white people determine what are and are not offensive anti-black racial slurs. It doesn't make sense. It's not objective.

[tigerdave]

That's like when white people determine what are and are not offensive anti-black racial slurs. It doesn't make sense. It's not objective.

Um...as long as it's not a white person spewing said questionable statements that could be construed as racial slurs, there's actually not much more objective than that.

And I love how this, like pretty much every other political thread I've read not dedicated to Iraq, has devolved into a discussion on race.

[BayernWake]

Um...as long as it's not a white person spewing said questionable statements that could be construed as racial slurs, there's actually not much more objective than that.

Huh?

And I love how this, like pretty much every other political thread I've read not dedicated to Iraq, has devolved into a discussion on race.

That's called reality. A black man is running for president. Race will be discussed eventually.

[tigerdave]

Huh?

You can't seriously think that a white man is incapable of understanding what is and isn't racism and that it takes a person of color to objectively delineate between what is and isn't. It doesn't get any less objective than having someone involved in the situation determining what is what.

[penubly]

I don't think we're anywhere close to what ELF, Al Gore and Greenpeace would have you believe.

Has absolutely no bearing on the toughest question we have ever tried to understand. I don't buy what Fox News, CNN or any other media outlet says; they are all tainted with bias of one sort or another.

How much are we affecting the natural cycle of the planet?

Remember, Earth will go on for several billion more years; the key is will it continue to sustain our existence?

Do we have the ability to change our local environment? You bet. Read about the Cuyahoga river, and you can see both our ability to damage and repair. Smog doesn't just break down and go away.

After much reading and investigation, I think the best our science can determine at this time is that it is possible that we are altering the natural cycle; I think we need to continue exploring, testing our results and methodology, and gaining a better understanding of our environment.

The honest truth is that this is completely uncharted waters, so we should proceed with caution. The Earth has never seen such industrialized populations, so who can speak with authority?

Most arguments against the science come down to money. I'm not sure that's a better position than the "Chicken Little" environmentalists, but I don't trust that position.

[BayernWake]

You can't seriously think that a white man is incapable of understanding what is and isn't racism and that it takes a person of color to objectively delineate between what is and isn't. It doesn't get any less objective than having someone involved in the situation determining what is what.

That's not what I'm saying. At all.

I'm saying black people determine what is offensive to black people. White people cannot determine what is offensive to black people.

[tigerdave]

That's not what I'm saying. At all.

I'm saying black people determine what is offensive to black people. White people cannot determine what is offensive to black people.

Which makes it the exact opposite of objective, for the record. But point noted, if I'm actually on the same page as you.

Though I would argue that the standards are part of the problem to an extent. What one black man can say to another that would be unacceptable if a white man said it to a black man, etc.

[BayernWake]

How can someone perceive that "wrongly"? It's his perception. That's like when white people determine what are and are not offensive anti-black racial slurs. It doesn't make sense. It's not objective.

Which makes it the exact opposite of objective, for the record. But point noted, if I'm actually on the same page as you.

Which is why I said it's not objective.

[Russell1892]

Woo mod fight... start carding each other.

Not exactly politics but very weird news story from your neck of the woods today BayernWake.

[BayernWake]

Woo mod fight... start carding each other.

I want a steel-cage match!

Not exactly politics but very weird news story from your neck of the woods today BayernWake.

Yeah, it's pretty grotesque...ugh. Part of me doesn't even want to post it.

[ToonUSA]

Yeah, it's pretty grotesque...ugh. Part of me doesn't even want to post it.

The public has a right to know.

Out with it.

[BayernWake]

The public has a right to know.

Out with it.

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/04/28/austria.cellar/index.html

[tigerdave]

Which is why I said it's not objective.

Right. Well, make your posts easier to understand for us ex-jocks! :P