I am sometimes amazed at the stupidity of people. I really shouldn't be. I should know better. But every so often I kinda forget about how intolerable a lot of people are in this world, until I stumble upon something like this.
Let me break it down for you.
President Barack Obama went to a basketball game and, while watching the game, drank a beer. This is apparently enough to spark outrage amongst some Americans who feel that he shouldn't be acting in such a way. Yes, people are pissed off that the President of the United States of America drank a fucking beer at a basketball game.
Let's forget that Churchill drank like he needed alcohol to live. But to say that just because Obama is the President that he shouldn't be allowed to drink a beer is absurd. Some woman actually called into the radio show hosting the discussion about this "scandal" and claimed that since being President is a 24/7 job, he shouldn't drink because he is drinking on the job. This means that he should never accept any wine, champagne or anything of the sort when having dinner, even with other leaders or dignitaries. This also means that Obama shouldn't sleep on the job, does it not? How psychotic are the people in this country?!
Another woman was angry because Obama was enjoying himself during a crisis. What crisis was happening at that very moment? Oh, just the economic crisis that is pervasive throughout our every waking moments. So, until this is fixed, Obama is not allowed to enjoy himself AT ALL, EVER, because it's just unfair. Brilliant logic. I mean, I know that being President is a 24/7 job and all, but he's a goddamn human being, people! Get over yourselves and let him do something like support the local NBA team! Besides, Obama's endorsement of beer might up beer sales! And then he's HELPING the economy!
This is a short rant because, thankfully, it seems like a small story and I'm not finding huge amounts of people fuming about Obama's beer-drinking scandal. I also don't know if I can actually conjure up anything else to say about this because it is so disgustingly stupid and obnoxious that I almost want to drink away the pain of ever having read it.
And this is another reason why I lose faith in people.
Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Friday, February 27, 2009
Ridiculous Comparisons and Giving Them Credence
This is what Godwin's Law is all about. Obscenely disproportionate comparisons that people think, for some reason, totally make sense, and they do everything in their power to prove that the comparison is golden even though no one in their right mind agrees.
Allow me to direct you to this ridic little gem that the geniuses at The Daily Show put together:
If you cannot view that video, let me break it down for you: Reverend Daniel W. Blair and Pastor James David Manning are both afraid of Barack Obama. Why? Well, for starters, Blair thinks Obama is clearly "exhibiting signs of the Anti-Christ". Pastor Manning thinks this is absurd, because clearly Obama is not the Anti-Christ; he's the next Hitler. I shit you not, folks. This is really what these two men believe, and they are spreading word about their theories. First of all, I think it's somewhat hilarious that both men have some sort of clergy title. As if religion needs more nut jobs out there. But, what angers me is their "logic", or lack thereof.
The Daily KOS breaks down the main points of each argument rather well, so I am going to steal that bit from there (my paraphrasing would probably be about the same).
Why Obama is the Anti-Christ
Let's examine these points. I agree that there is a certain amount of Obama-worship that has been going on since the man popped up in the Senate, and it makes me kinda uncomfortable. But hell, look at The Beatles. Even John Lennon said they were bigger than Jesus, and that's because they were to a lot of people. Honestly, I think Jesus needs to have his ego deflated just a tad. He can't always be number one. OK, so there's that, the fact that people follow his message, which is seriously a dumb thing to say when you're talking about policy and change. What, we're not supposed to support people in politics?? Then there's the "came from the sea" thing, which, again, makes no sense. Perhaps he doesn't understand where Obama was born, or what Hawaii is. Someone should buy the man a plane ticket. And lastly, my favourite of all his points, is the whole physical description of what the Anti-Christ looks like. Let's say I bought into all of the other points, for the argument's sake. HOW does that last point make any amount of sense? Someone also buy the man some glasses... or perhaps a straightjacket, as he is clearly out of his fucking mind. Also, he's calling Obama a leopard-bear-lion. Is that supposed to be racist?
Why Obama is the next Hitler (Godwin, it's time to weep)
I didn't really know to laugh or cry at this point in the segment, because I didn't think I would hear anything that was more retarded than Blair's crazy religious rhetoric. I was so very wrong. Again, let's cover each point. Yes, America is in dire economic straits. Sure, Germany was having it's fair share of issues in the 1930's, too. That hardly makes us EXACTLY alike, or even alike enough to be the basis of a comparison. Next, Obama as a speaker. Again, this is where I kinda side with the guy for a brief moment (with the very edge of my pinkie toe, and that's it. Then I run away, screaming, and collapse in a sobbing heap on the floor of my shower while scrubbing at my toe, my intermittent cried of "IT WILL NEVER BE CLEAN" echoing against the shower walls.). It's the whole Obama-worship thing that creeps me out, still. It's like people will practically crush each other to death in order to be within a mile of him when he's speaking. It's a bit terrifying, I admit, but it's Obama-mania, and I believe The Beatles did it first. And now, onto my favourite point: Obama is a bisexual. Bisexual, like bicycle, but "rolling on both ends, of the sexual spectrum". Oh yes, kiddies, that feeling you're feeling is that of horror mixed with the joy of a thousand unicorns jumping over rainbows. It is so deliciously absurd that there's almost no way to comment about it. I want to make a joke about it, but I can't because it is already so fucking funny. Alright, so now that I've laughed until I have vomited, let's examine this assessment. Obama is bisexual, just like Hitler. Oh wait, I almost forgot. Obama is also a PIMP. So, Obama is a bisexual pimp, just like Hitler. Now, a quick google search indicates that there might be a smidge of truth to the assertion that Hitler was bisexual (though I see nothing that indicates he was a pimp). However, I haven't seen anything that is conclusive. Please do correct me if I am wrong about that. I admit that I don't do a lot of Hitler research because, as mentioned in my first blog entry, I am a Jew and that shit kinda creeps me the fuck out. Anyway, so maybe Hitler was bisexual. But Obama? The fact that this Manning character admits to having no proof already indicates how crazy he really is. What the hell is he basing this assertion off of? His stellar gaydar? Does that even work with bisexuals? I don't really know, my Jewdar has never really worked and my gaydar has been on the fritz. I'm afraid of adding more -dars.
It's fair enough if these guys don't like Obama's policies, or just hate the guy because it makes them feel pretty. But making these obscenely outrageous comparisons to not only instill fear in the people idiotic enough to believe them but also cast Obama in this supreme evil light is offensive and intolerable. I'm especially disgusted with the Obama/Hitler comparison. Those three points are the basis of the comparison? I think that Obama's policies are incredibly different from Hitler's in the way that they do not involve racial extermination, genocide, concentration camps, saving the "pure race", or invading and taking over our neighbouring countries. Those are big fucking differences. I just read a transcript of his interview on Hannity and Colmes (which, by the way, is the biggest joke in editorial television. Colmes is a puppet, and Hannity is the one running things. It is in no way balanced, which is what the show, as well as all of Fox News, claims to be), and it was appalling what the man said about Obama, and even about the black community. These people bring such ire into my heart that I can barely even rant about all the things that are wrong with the statements made. But, I digress, yet again.
The next part of this is might seem hypocritical in a lot of ways, but it is also something that The Daily Show touched upon in their video: the notion of giving these people credence. I know that it makes for excellent television, to have such reactionary and blatantly insane people spewing their bullshit all over the place, but to host these people on shows that reach millions of viewers is irresponsible and absurd. Regardless of how much the hosts argue with these guys, there will be no swaying them. They are maniacal. They are too far gone. And all these news shows are doing is helping to spread their spiked Kool-Aid throughout the land.
I refused to link to Blain's blog, or any site that either of these men directly contribute to because I don't want to help them in any way. Yes, talking about them might cause some of you to google them and read more about their views, but people are lazy and I am hoping most of you won't care enough to give them those extra hits on their webpages. Additionally, I am a newcomer on the blogging scene and I have very few readers, so my sins of writing about this are not so great. The Daily Show gets a pass because they make fun of these guys so well, and also make fun of the real news shows for letting these guys have airtime. The Daily Show is comedy first, news second, so using these guys on the show is brilliant because, let's face it, they are comedy GOLD. But sensationalism in news always attracts a crowd, and these people will always get airtime because of it. The sad thing is that they think it empowers them, and in some ways it does. We need more people to strip them of their self-righteousness if they are going to be allowed on these shows. The Daily Show is pretty merciless in portraying these guys as outright whackjobs. Because that is what these guys are, and they should be treated as such, not as distinguished guests on a show that is meant to encourage (or at least pretend to encourage) serious political discourse.
Allow me to direct you to this ridic little gem that the geniuses at The Daily Show put together:
If you cannot view that video, let me break it down for you: Reverend Daniel W. Blair and Pastor James David Manning are both afraid of Barack Obama. Why? Well, for starters, Blair thinks Obama is clearly "exhibiting signs of the Anti-Christ". Pastor Manning thinks this is absurd, because clearly Obama is not the Anti-Christ; he's the next Hitler. I shit you not, folks. This is really what these two men believe, and they are spreading word about their theories. First of all, I think it's somewhat hilarious that both men have some sort of clergy title. As if religion needs more nut jobs out there. But, what angers me is their "logic", or lack thereof.
The Daily KOS breaks down the main points of each argument rather well, so I am going to steal that bit from there (my paraphrasing would probably be about the same).
Why Obama is the Anti-Christ
- People "worship" him.
- People agree his message.
- He "came from the sea" (code for Hawaii, apparently)
- He is swift like a leopard, has the feet of a bear, and has the mouth of a lion
Let's examine these points. I agree that there is a certain amount of Obama-worship that has been going on since the man popped up in the Senate, and it makes me kinda uncomfortable. But hell, look at The Beatles. Even John Lennon said they were bigger than Jesus, and that's because they were to a lot of people. Honestly, I think Jesus needs to have his ego deflated just a tad. He can't always be number one. OK, so there's that, the fact that people follow his message, which is seriously a dumb thing to say when you're talking about policy and change. What, we're not supposed to support people in politics?? Then there's the "came from the sea" thing, which, again, makes no sense. Perhaps he doesn't understand where Obama was born, or what Hawaii is. Someone should buy the man a plane ticket. And lastly, my favourite of all his points, is the whole physical description of what the Anti-Christ looks like. Let's say I bought into all of the other points, for the argument's sake. HOW does that last point make any amount of sense? Someone also buy the man some glasses... or perhaps a straightjacket, as he is clearly out of his fucking mind. Also, he's calling Obama a leopard-bear-lion. Is that supposed to be racist?
Why Obama is the next Hitler (Godwin, it's time to weep)
- America is in dire economic straits, just like Germany was in the 1930's.
- Obama is an effective speaker.
- Obama is a bisexual. When pressed for comment, Manning said he had "no empirical proof" of this.
I didn't really know to laugh or cry at this point in the segment, because I didn't think I would hear anything that was more retarded than Blair's crazy religious rhetoric. I was so very wrong. Again, let's cover each point. Yes, America is in dire economic straits. Sure, Germany was having it's fair share of issues in the 1930's, too. That hardly makes us EXACTLY alike, or even alike enough to be the basis of a comparison. Next, Obama as a speaker. Again, this is where I kinda side with the guy for a brief moment (with the very edge of my pinkie toe, and that's it. Then I run away, screaming, and collapse in a sobbing heap on the floor of my shower while scrubbing at my toe, my intermittent cried of "IT WILL NEVER BE CLEAN" echoing against the shower walls.). It's the whole Obama-worship thing that creeps me out, still. It's like people will practically crush each other to death in order to be within a mile of him when he's speaking. It's a bit terrifying, I admit, but it's Obama-mania, and I believe The Beatles did it first. And now, onto my favourite point: Obama is a bisexual. Bisexual, like bicycle, but "rolling on both ends, of the sexual spectrum". Oh yes, kiddies, that feeling you're feeling is that of horror mixed with the joy of a thousand unicorns jumping over rainbows. It is so deliciously absurd that there's almost no way to comment about it. I want to make a joke about it, but I can't because it is already so fucking funny. Alright, so now that I've laughed until I have vomited, let's examine this assessment. Obama is bisexual, just like Hitler. Oh wait, I almost forgot. Obama is also a PIMP. So, Obama is a bisexual pimp, just like Hitler. Now, a quick google search indicates that there might be a smidge of truth to the assertion that Hitler was bisexual (though I see nothing that indicates he was a pimp). However, I haven't seen anything that is conclusive. Please do correct me if I am wrong about that. I admit that I don't do a lot of Hitler research because, as mentioned in my first blog entry, I am a Jew and that shit kinda creeps me the fuck out. Anyway, so maybe Hitler was bisexual. But Obama? The fact that this Manning character admits to having no proof already indicates how crazy he really is. What the hell is he basing this assertion off of? His stellar gaydar? Does that even work with bisexuals? I don't really know, my Jewdar has never really worked and my gaydar has been on the fritz. I'm afraid of adding more -dars.
It's fair enough if these guys don't like Obama's policies, or just hate the guy because it makes them feel pretty. But making these obscenely outrageous comparisons to not only instill fear in the people idiotic enough to believe them but also cast Obama in this supreme evil light is offensive and intolerable. I'm especially disgusted with the Obama/Hitler comparison. Those three points are the basis of the comparison? I think that Obama's policies are incredibly different from Hitler's in the way that they do not involve racial extermination, genocide, concentration camps, saving the "pure race", or invading and taking over our neighbouring countries. Those are big fucking differences. I just read a transcript of his interview on Hannity and Colmes (which, by the way, is the biggest joke in editorial television. Colmes is a puppet, and Hannity is the one running things. It is in no way balanced, which is what the show, as well as all of Fox News, claims to be), and it was appalling what the man said about Obama, and even about the black community. These people bring such ire into my heart that I can barely even rant about all the things that are wrong with the statements made. But, I digress, yet again.
The next part of this is might seem hypocritical in a lot of ways, but it is also something that The Daily Show touched upon in their video: the notion of giving these people credence. I know that it makes for excellent television, to have such reactionary and blatantly insane people spewing their bullshit all over the place, but to host these people on shows that reach millions of viewers is irresponsible and absurd. Regardless of how much the hosts argue with these guys, there will be no swaying them. They are maniacal. They are too far gone. And all these news shows are doing is helping to spread their spiked Kool-Aid throughout the land.
I refused to link to Blain's blog, or any site that either of these men directly contribute to because I don't want to help them in any way. Yes, talking about them might cause some of you to google them and read more about their views, but people are lazy and I am hoping most of you won't care enough to give them those extra hits on their webpages. Additionally, I am a newcomer on the blogging scene and I have very few readers, so my sins of writing about this are not so great. The Daily Show gets a pass because they make fun of these guys so well, and also make fun of the real news shows for letting these guys have airtime. The Daily Show is comedy first, news second, so using these guys on the show is brilliant because, let's face it, they are comedy GOLD. But sensationalism in news always attracts a crowd, and these people will always get airtime because of it. The sad thing is that they think it empowers them, and in some ways it does. We need more people to strip them of their self-righteousness if they are going to be allowed on these shows. The Daily Show is pretty merciless in portraying these guys as outright whackjobs. Because that is what these guys are, and they should be treated as such, not as distinguished guests on a show that is meant to encourage (or at least pretend to encourage) serious political discourse.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
