War of the Words
October 20, 2006 5:19 AM Subscribe
War of the Words: A five-part, Ken Burns-style documentary of the 101st Fighting Keyboarders.
This post was deleted for the following reason: Poster's Request -- Brandon Blatcher
It brought a tear to my eye.
posted by sourwookie at 6:04 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by sourwookie at 6:04 AM on October 20, 2006
This is surprisingly well done.
posted by Armitage Shanks at 6:07 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by Armitage Shanks at 6:07 AM on October 20, 2006
Wonderful. I'm grinning ear-to-ear!
posted by orthogonality at 6:13 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by orthogonality at 6:13 AM on October 20, 2006
Episode Three even features MetaFilter's own Steven C. Den Beste!
posted by briank at 6:16 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by briank at 6:16 AM on October 20, 2006
And the google video link is where?
posted by rough ashlar at 6:23 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by rough ashlar at 6:23 AM on October 20, 2006
I like how they parody Ken Burns as well. I hate how you can't pause the video.
posted by fungible at 6:31 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by fungible at 6:31 AM on October 20, 2006
It's not only well-done style-wise, it's also well-researched. Bravo.
posted by grubi at 6:33 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by grubi at 6:33 AM on October 20, 2006
Yeah, no shock there. A couple weeks ago, Mr. Den Beste was still advocating for the torture of innocent people. Just in case, you know. They *might* be guilty. Let's put them under the knife and find out, hmm?
He's both very literate and completely uncaring about the rights of people he hasn't met... a perfect source!
This really is very good. I'm looking forward to the next two parts. I do wish there was a little more meat in each episode, as they're a bit on the short side. The repeated, one-minute intro is a little awkward on a three-minute piece.
posted by Malor at 6:38 AM on October 20, 2006
He's both very literate and completely uncaring about the rights of people he hasn't met... a perfect source!
This really is very good. I'm looking forward to the next two parts. I do wish there was a little more meat in each episode, as they're a bit on the short side. The repeated, one-minute intro is a little awkward on a three-minute piece.
posted by Malor at 6:38 AM on October 20, 2006
Wonder if the Fallen 101sters will be documented....How with the mere posting of a picture, the most dedicated fall quiet.
posted by rough ashlar at 6:46 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by rough ashlar at 6:46 AM on October 20, 2006
And the google video link is where?
Watchable Youtube version of the first part
posted by queen zixi at 6:46 AM on October 20, 2006
Watchable Youtube version of the first part
posted by queen zixi at 6:46 AM on October 20, 2006
The "Mission x% Accomplished" loading screen is very funny.
posted by sonofsamiam at 6:57 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by sonofsamiam at 6:57 AM on October 20, 2006
I feel funny having to step up and defend those poor, sad fuckers, but it must be done. have they been cheerleading? of course they have. but the Goldbergs (ie, the clueless op-ed writers), the comedians like Coulter and especially the bloggers have done their job (paid or unpaid, it's irrelevant) -- cheerleaders cheerlead, simple and plain
Reynolds? a no-name, two-bit college professor teaching in the academic equivalent of Ulan Bator (no offense to beautiful Ulan Bator) rode Bush's (and 9-11's) coattails to some ad revenue and a contract for a (mostly unread by all) book? just like Malkin -- they're otherwise failed writers who found a little market niche. but they're small fry.
the real target? the big network people, the producers and the other big shots, and the major newspaper people -- they deserve ridicule much more than the cheerleaders, because their job is to inform people. instead they gave America years of blind stenographical coverage of a clearly reality-challenged adminsitration lies and obfuscations, and lots of red-white-blue flags
oh, and lots of panels made of:
a) administration official
b) ex general
c) right-wing think tank "expert"
d) ex Reagan official
ie, nobody to the left of, say, Joe Lieberman. for years.
want to get angry at somebody, get angry at the big networks and the top editors and writers at, say, the Washington Post. you know, the WaPo, that went from eventually bringing down a President with a story nobody else picked up for months to giving a writing gig to that plagiarist boy from redstate.org because, shit, they need to be balanced, they needed rightwing people to explain the WaPo readers how those wmds must really be there, somewhere, if you look hard enough
blame Bob Woodward (and his Bush first book, that became Bush 04 campaign material), not Den Beste, for Chrissakes
posted by matteo at 7:16 AM on October 20, 2006
Reynolds? a no-name, two-bit college professor teaching in the academic equivalent of Ulan Bator (no offense to beautiful Ulan Bator) rode Bush's (and 9-11's) coattails to some ad revenue and a contract for a (mostly unread by all) book? just like Malkin -- they're otherwise failed writers who found a little market niche. but they're small fry.
the real target? the big network people, the producers and the other big shots, and the major newspaper people -- they deserve ridicule much more than the cheerleaders, because their job is to inform people. instead they gave America years of blind stenographical coverage of a clearly reality-challenged adminsitration lies and obfuscations, and lots of red-white-blue flags
oh, and lots of panels made of:
a) administration official
b) ex general
c) right-wing think tank "expert"
d) ex Reagan official
ie, nobody to the left of, say, Joe Lieberman. for years.
want to get angry at somebody, get angry at the big networks and the top editors and writers at, say, the Washington Post. you know, the WaPo, that went from eventually bringing down a President with a story nobody else picked up for months to giving a writing gig to that plagiarist boy from redstate.org because, shit, they need to be balanced, they needed rightwing people to explain the WaPo readers how those wmds must really be there, somewhere, if you look hard enough
blame Bob Woodward (and his Bush first book, that became Bush 04 campaign material), not Den Beste, for Chrissakes
posted by matteo at 7:16 AM on October 20, 2006
I rode an elevator with Ken Burns once. He was only on until the 4th floor. Any longer and I think we all would have turned sepia.
posted by jonmc at 7:23 AM on October 20, 2006 [2 favorites]
posted by jonmc at 7:23 AM on October 20, 2006 [2 favorites]
I agree that the conservabloggers are small fry. And Novak? Well, his position has been clear for years. The MSM that Limbaugh blames for all that is wrong has been complicit in its fawning and mewling acquiescence during all that time. Not that they are the cause of the problem. That stays centered on Bush, Cheney, Rove, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice, and the spineless congress. Hastert and his anti-democratic (small d) "majority of the majority" should get pink slipped. Whether they will remains a crap shoot in the America of the Know-Nothings.
posted by beelzbubba at 7:32 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by beelzbubba at 7:32 AM on October 20, 2006
Loved the cameo by Smilin' Joe Lieberman, too. And I wish I didn't have to sit through the lead-in every time.
posted by beelzbubba at 7:33 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by beelzbubba at 7:33 AM on October 20, 2006
Bush's 'Gosh are those WMD's under my desk' jokes from the 2004 Correspondent's dinner never ceases to send me into a frothing rage, even in this context. That dinner, to me, is one of the lowest points of this administration. Well, until the "ha ha no more rights for enemies of the state" stuff...
posted by cavalier at 7:40 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by cavalier at 7:40 AM on October 20, 2006
cavalier writes "Gosh are those WMD's under my desk'"
Yep I agree, that was possibily 99,9% undiluted upsetting in-your-face arrogance, even more tasty to these psycopaths because they know they reached their audience :)
posted by elpapacito at 7:54 AM on October 20, 2006
Yep I agree, that was possibily 99,9% undiluted upsetting in-your-face arrogance, even more tasty to these psycopaths because they know they reached their audience :)
posted by elpapacito at 7:54 AM on October 20, 2006
Granted, matteo, the bloggers are small fry. But - with all due respect to Mr. Henry - isn't this parody small fry as well? It's not like The Daily Show is providing extensive coverage of Malkin, et al.
And you don't really seem to be defending them. Rather, you seem to be defending your own view of the material, which is far less flameworthy, as the 101st deserve no defense despite their "job". I nitpick out of respect.
posted by dgbellak at 8:42 AM on October 20, 2006
And you don't really seem to be defending them. Rather, you seem to be defending your own view of the material, which is far less flameworthy, as the 101st deserve no defense despite their "job". I nitpick out of respect.
posted by dgbellak at 8:42 AM on October 20, 2006
BTW, the words of our own SCDB can be heard (by those who so desire) in Part 3.
posted by GrammarMoses at 9:52 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by GrammarMoses at 9:52 AM on October 20, 2006
Excellent.
I love the work they did with the voices, like the aforementioned underpants gnome and the person who's voice was cracking like he had just hit puberty.
/gleefully runs off to watch the rest of them.
posted by quin at 11:23 AM on October 20, 2006
I love the work they did with the voices, like the aforementioned underpants gnome and the person who's voice was cracking like he had just hit puberty.
/gleefully runs off to watch the rest of them.
posted by quin at 11:23 AM on October 20, 2006
Funny stuff. It's amazing that these folks don't reread their own blogs for an inkling of how wrong they were, not just about Iraq, but in the ferocious, merciless, gloating attacks against people who didn't share their mistaken opinions.
posted by Astro Zombie at 11:50 AM on October 20, 2006
posted by Astro Zombie at 11:50 AM on October 20, 2006
For some reason whenever the subject of warbloggers and their ideological heroes comes around I can't help but think of this Futurama quote:
Fry: "You can't give up hope just because it's hopeless. You gotta hope even more, and cover your ears and go 'bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla!'"
Funny in an animated show. Not as funny when you're talking about grown men's attitude to a war in which lots of people are dying.
posted by clevershark at 12:36 PM on October 20, 2006 [1 favorite]
Fry: "You can't give up hope just because it's hopeless. You gotta hope even more, and cover your ears and go 'bla bla bla bla bla bla bla bla!'"
Funny in an animated show. Not as funny when you're talking about grown men's attitude to a war in which lots of people are dying.
posted by clevershark at 12:36 PM on October 20, 2006 [1 favorite]
Documenting these idiots isn't as important as actually finding a way out of the mess in Iraq, but it's still important. They were wrong about WMD, they were wrong about how long this would last, they were wrong about how many American kids would die, they were wrong about how much it would cost, they were wrong about how it would cow Iran (it's actually made Iran the second-most powerful country in the region behind Israel), they were wrong about how Iraqi civilians would react to an American occupation, and they were wrong about how much support we had internationally (even the British are going to pull out soon).
In these peoples' sad little chickenhawk lives, I guess five wrongs make a something. I imagine most of them sleep just fine at night though -- they don't seem to have a conscience, nor actual loved ones dying and losing limbs over there.
posted by bardic at 2:48 PM on October 20, 2006
In these peoples' sad little chickenhawk lives, I guess five wrongs make a something. I imagine most of them sleep just fine at night though -- they don't seem to have a conscience, nor actual loved ones dying and losing limbs over there.
posted by bardic at 2:48 PM on October 20, 2006
Oops. Six. Easy mistake to make with these cowardly losers.
posted by bardic at 2:49 PM on October 20, 2006
posted by bardic at 2:49 PM on October 20, 2006
Beautiful. Thanks!
posted by homunculus at 7:41 PM on October 20, 2006
posted by homunculus at 7:41 PM on October 20, 2006
« Older Ask A Man? | Life & Liturgy Artifacts Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by srboisvert at 6:03 AM on October 20, 2006