Comments on: Kung Fu: The Legend Continues

Kung Fu: The Legend Continues

Krrrlson — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 14:45:18 -0800

That frog-eating bastard should have that S.O.B. Rumsfeld shot! Respectful, informative campaigning continues on both sides. Wouldn't it be great if both propaganda machines sufficiently alienated the majority of the population so that it could make up its own mind?

By: Krrrlson

Krrrlson — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 14:57:52 -0800

AgendaFilter!!! AGENDAFILTER!!!!! He said Kerry was a frog-eating bastard. But really, I just thought it was all worth a smirk. Drudge report takes it all too seriously... "Democrats call for assassination!" And anybody up for Freedom Fries with John "he might as well be Freedom" Kerry?

By: Witty

Witty — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 14:59:11 -0800

The publisher of the GABBER says running the ad with the passage "pull the trigger" was a mistake that "slipped through" during the editing of this week's edition. Riiiiight.

By: NewBornHippy

NewBornHippy — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 15:08:17 -0800

> "Did you know that April Fools' Day was started by the French > back in the 16th century? I think today, their gas prices are about > $4.57 a gallon," Yes, and it's mostly *gasp* tax. And guess what, out of that they got more efficient cars and reduced pollution. And the last time I heard, it didn't prevent people from traveling. > with an accordion playing in the background and an oil painting > shown hanging on a wall to evoke the mood of Paris. Old cliché. Just like saying a American president from Texas would be a gun slinging, cow-bow boots wearing idiot. Oh wait.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 15:09:51 -0800

we've learnt from Rush, and Ann Coulter, and the freepers, and LGF, and Grover Norquist, and Murdoch, and Fox, and the Wash. Times... Why should we be any different? As for smearing Kerry with French-ness (idiotic, btw), see the above, plus most if not all regular media, for propagating the smear of the day coming from the Bush re-election folks. Maybe we could talk issues? and it's not being evenhanded--or bipartisan, or better than any other electionfilter post here--to post a local democratic club's inflammatory newspaper ad along with an article detailing all the smears against Kerry

By: specialk420

specialk420 — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 15:15:48 -0800

tick tick tick ... krrrlson takes another shot at a fpp

By: chaz

chaz — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 15:21:49 -0800

I guess the difference is that the "Hit Kerry on French stuff" is official GOP policy, whereas the Rumsfeld thing is coming from a local group which has 3 people on its board. Nice ad, too, complete with spelling mistakes and awful grammar.

By: salmacis

salmacis — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 15:37:04 -0800

Do American conservatives realise just how stupid they appear to the rest of the world with this anti-French stuff? Do they even care? I come from a country which is supposed to be one of France's greatest historical rivals, yet I find the anti-French sentiment not just stupid, but laughable.

By: Space Coyote

Space Coyote — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 15:50:18 -0800

So printing a frigging Drudge article and then pointing to the obect of Matt Drudge's hyusteria counts as fair and balanced now? Right...

By: crank

crank — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 15:57:03 -0800

So now it's French? A year ago idiots in the press were spreading the word that Kerry might really not be Irish, but instead... *gasp* a JEW! From the Feb. 7, 2003 Boston Globe: Never in his 21-year career in public life has Kerry gone out of his way to explain his complex roots—even though he discovered some 15 years ago that his paternal grandmother was Jewish, a point he has mentioned only occasionally in public. Even after a story about his Jewish ancestry appeared in the Globe on Sunday, Kerry stuck to policy issues in two appearances in South Carolina that afternoon. Troubling indeed...

By: matteo

matteo — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 16:23:15 -0800

if you criticize Kerry, you're all anti-semites

By: Krrrlson

Krrrlson — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 16:34:31 -0800

and it's not being evenhanded--or bipartisan, or better than any other electionfilter post here--to post a local democratic club's inflammatory newspaper ad along with an article detailing all the smears against Kerry What do you suggest then? Note: "Don't post at all and get your filthy ass out of here!" doesn't qualify, but earns you 5 special points and a gold star. so matteo -- I sent you an email. If you've received and read it, should I take your lack of response as my answer?

By: Krrrlson

Krrrlson — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 16:37:05 -0800

tick tick tick ... krrrlson takes another shot at a fpp zzz...

By: amberglow

amberglow — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 16:58:41 -0800

What's your point, Krrrlson, with this post? You're equating a local ad highlighted by Drudge with the entire Republican attack and smear machine in action, and stating that they're both propaganda machines, alienating the public. That's not true, or evenhanded. I suggest official sources, and/or an equality of scope. How about this place, and this place? Or democraticunderground vs. Lucianne.com? If your point was to show how much larger and well-organized, with friendly ears in the media the Republicans have it, well, you succeeded in showing that. Was that your point?

By: amberglow

amberglow — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 17:01:55 -0800

Furthermore, you reinforce that point by linking to Drudge, a member of that same Republican attack and smear machine.

By: Krrrlson

Krrrlson — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 17:08:41 -0800

amberglow -- Equating? Where do you see that? As for propaganda machines -- of Kerry's Frenchiness and shooting S.O.B. Rumsfeld, which is NOT propaganda? And are you saying neither alienates some reasonable members of the public by sounding so stupid or extreme? My "point" was to point out some amusing rhetoric, so that hopefully someone would find it funny, or [gasp] have something insightful/interesting to say (e.g. see part one of NewBornHippy's post). You accuse me of something vague and point me to some blogs. What's *your* point?

By: The God Complex

The God Complex — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 17:35:07 -0800

His point is that you're weighting the two equally, claiming that both "propaganda machines" are acting similarly. Clearly, one is actually the GOP and affiliated with the party on one side, while the other is some small strange group of people who apparently hold an extreme position (or a questionable sense of humour).

By: Krrrlson

Krrrlson — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 17:56:11 -0800

I am fully aware of the distinction yet fail to see where I assign any weight to either, much less "equate" them in significance. From the nutcases with the "Bush/Kerry is Hitler/Stalin" posters on the corner, to Bush and Kerry themselves, the generated propaganda influences how people view a given political entity. How is pointing out idiocy at any point of the spectrum inappropriate? Do I have to wait for next week, when Kerry launches some new ads while a hick Republican basement club decides it'd be a good idea to string up a socialist? I think the fart blows both ways.

By: Space Coyote

Space Coyote — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 18:08:47 -0800

Evidently I'm going to have to spell this out. Respectful, informative campaigning continues on both sides. You call them both campaigning. One is campaigning, as it's from teh RNC, one is clearly not.

By: scarabic

scarabic — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 18:14:07 -0800

fail to see where I assign any weight to either, much less "equate" them in significance If by "on both sides" you meant "somewhere in the regions to either side of the center," then I suppose you didn't explicitly assign an equal significance. Somewhere on the left, bad stuff is happening. And somewhere on the right, a foul is committed. However, you are implying that both major political franchises are teetering on the edge of credibility when you speak of people breaking free of them and making up their own minds. Your examples of why this would be a good thing were not comparable to one another in their scale or significance. If there were more to your post than those two mismatched links, and a vague implication that together they prove something, you might have achieved humor or enlightenment, but you've got nothing here. As it is, you're coming dangerously close to a mistake you've made before: presenting two disparate things together and insinuating a connection where none really exists. And, as before, you accuse those who rightly question this of having no humor, taking themselves too seriously, and how far behind can accusations of intolerant liberalism be?

By: soulhuntre

soulhuntre — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 18:22:05 -0800

Don't forget this little gem from the left.

By: aeschenkarnos

aeschenkarnos — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 18:33:58 -0800

Do American conservatives realise just how stupid they appear to the rest of the world Hmm. I think yes, but they interpret criticism as damage, and route around it.

By: Space Coyote

Space Coyote — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 18:40:18 -0800

Don't forget this little gem from the left. What exactly is "the left" again? Is it official DNC talking points or is it some guy with a parody website?

By: Krrrlson

Krrrlson — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 18:45:56 -0800

Space Coyote -- Have you ever heard of the phrase "to campaign *for* ____"? I guess when that ad asks people to vote for Kerry, it's just being nice. On second thought, you win. I cannot stand against your semantically founded argument. You know better than me what I mean when I use a general term. I'll be quiet now until such time as you see fit to insult me again, kind man. On preview -- your allusion to an earlier post of mine is a poor analogy scarabic, since the "connections" here and there are of a very different kind. Moreover, I have been defending my right to post this, not accusing anyone. Till now, that is. I do believe that both political franchises are close to losing credibility. What I present is a couple of examples, food for thought, if you will, not a balanced essay fit for the Encyclopaedia Britannica. I don't believe you've accused people who have posted far more charged and single-sided material of bias, so take your double standard elsewhere. And, as before, you accuse those who rightly question this of having no humor, taking themselves too seriously, and how far behind can accusations of intolerant liberalism be? And another well-founded premise to end on! Cheerio and pip pip. This, ladies and gentlemen, wraps up my defense of my relatively neutral words from people who painstakingly scrutinize every post unless they hear what they want to hear, finding invisible arguments and undertones, and wasting mine and their time with pointless dialogue about some hidden agenda I never had. Speaking of old posts, is this so different from me allegedly seeing anti-Semitism everywhere?

By: The God Complex

The God Complex — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 19:07:09 -0800

I agree that this sort of propaganda is not a good thing. I just think it seems you were equating the two. That was my only point.

By: cell divide

cell divide — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 19:08:37 -0800

Look, Krrlson says "On both Sides". That's it. It's on both sides, that is the truth... I think people are just bashing the post because he's been vocal in the past few days on one of the two sides... the point he's making is that both sides are engaging in over the top rhetoric, which is true. Although he doesn't help his case by arguing every post against him.

By: scarabic

scarabic — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 19:25:36 -0800

Krrrlson, if you would work as hard on composing your posts as you do defending your bias and laziness afterward, you might amount to something. You clearly enjoy the shrill argument more than anything else, and I fear that's all you're ever going to inspire here. Forgive me if I haven't done a thorough investigation into every single member's behavior on the site before noticing some ill-favored patterns in yours. But there's no one who's been on the site a shorter time, copped a more presumptuous tone, posted such loaded crap and defended it so snarkily as you.

By: Krrrlson

Krrrlson — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 19:29:44 -0800

I'll take cell divide's advice here.

By: Witty

Witty — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 20:00:31 -0800

Krrrlson, I would suggest you make your next post about something made with flash or whatever. scarabic is right. Making an acceptable FPP ain't easy and you could use a little more practice is all. Relax.

By: scarabic

scarabic — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 20:24:43 -0800

I'll take cell divide's advice here. Well, there's respect in the mail already.

By: rough ashlar

rough ashlar — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 20:47:47 -0800

wasting mine and their time Perhaps you need to not post, or your posts need to be of better quality?

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 21:42:42 -0800

This thread is funny.

By: mcsweetie

mcsweetie — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 22:00:51 -0800

I think both candidates are pretty bad. but it's worth it to back kerry if it will exorcise bush's cabinet.

By: matteo

matteo — Wed, 14 Apr 2004 02:29:26 -0800

so matteo -- I sent you an email. If you've received and read it, should I take your lack of response as my answer? let's see, right now in my inbox I have: -- "Get 50% off Viagra" -- "Valium Overnight -- No prescription!" -- "Multiple lenders for best home" -- "Save Money On Levitra" -- "See Horses Cum on Randy Women" please don't make me open all 5 messages -- which one is yours?

By: Onanist

Onanist — Wed, 14 Apr 2004 07:00:16 -0800

Go with the last one man, it's a win-win bet...

By: Krrrlson

Krrrlson — Wed, 14 Apr 2004 20:02:43 -0800

It's matteo1970 at katamail.com, right? The email is from krrrlson at hotmail.com, and is a few days old.

By: firestorm

firestorm — Wed, 14 Apr 2004 21:17:42 -0800

" Wouldn't it be great if both propaganda machines sufficiently alienated the majority of the population so that it could make up its own mind?" intriguing way of putting it