The liberals and Michelle Bachmann haters are busy defending Jimmy Fallon by repeating his claim that he had no prior knowledge of the band’s idea to play the song.
Hmmm. Again, they want to have it both ways:
1. It was just a humorous bit of teasing – can’t that white bitch take a joke?
AND
2. Of course Fallon had nothing to do with such a tasteless bit of teasing; what do you think he is, a disgusting misogynist like his bandleader?
Which is it? Should he apologize for his bandleader’s behavior or join the chorus?
Asked another way: If I call Barack Obama a K-word (ok, I’ll type it – a Kenyan) will I be disqualified from polite company? Will any of my friends defend me or will they be ashamed of me. Or both?
And, what if I imply that he’s a Keynesian?
Obama is not really a Keynesian, in the classical sense.
Neither is he a Kenyan, in the national sense. I am of Irish ancestry, complete with a family history of alcoholism, but I could not be called Irish. John McCain was born in Panama, but is not Panamanian. Obama had a father who was British (Kenya did not exist when Obama was born).
So you could accuse him of being an Oompla-Loompla too, but it would be as incorrect.
To be fair, I do not agree with Michelle Bachmann on just about anything, but the song was completely inappropriate. In my younger, more juvenile days, I once told someone that their comment was “Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing”. I was calling them an idiot, since the original quote is “It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing”. I knew they had likely never read Shakespeare, and was reveling in my education, which was extensive, to their lack thereof. It was cruel, juvenile, and I should not have done it. Jimmy Fallon should not have done it either. There is no excuse, and an apology should have been issued. It is not a national issue, but it is an example of a lack of decorum (not that I really expect decorum from late night comedians) that permeates our national politic.
You should also consider that Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck pull similar insults, mostly unveiled.
You have a terrible habit of missing the point. Wasn’t about the K-word(s) nor was it about Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh (two (or three) wrongs don’t make a right).
My piece was an attempt to make a few people think clearly about what had happened to Michelle Bachmann. Try it. It will be a refreshing feeling for you, even if strange and unfamiliar.
You seem to resort to insult when faced with a critique you cannot address. If I am making you uncomfortable, that is not my goal, and I apologize. Please let me know and I will stop posting, but I do not feel that the vitriol is necessary.
No sir, I have not insulted you. I’ve criticized your approach and your tendency to re-direct the discussion with tangential and inaccurate accusations. I only want you to contribute to this blog to the extent that you further the dialogue – you don’t have to agree, but you must refrain from misconstruing my opinions and point of view. There is no vitriol – Re-read what I’ve written in response to your comments and you’ll see that this is the case, including the point about fresh thinking being unfamiliar to you – I say that based on the fact that most of what you’ve written would take me all of 5 minutes to find in virtually the same format and diction on HuffingtonPost or MSNBC.
I disagree with your commentary. Much of what you say is factually incorrect, but you seem disinterested in this. You could not call Obama Kenyan, since he could not be Kenyan by nationality, since it did not exist at his birth, and because his relationship to the country is the same as my relationship with Ireland. He is also not Keynesian, based on a detailed understanding of the economic theory. I would like to see your explanation supporting the accusation.
When faced with this, you have turned to insult. Why not explain the discrepancy.
You keep closing down comments when you are uncomfortable. Again, why?
I didn’t call Obama Kenyan. Look up ‘hypothetical’ and ‘rhetorical’ along with ‘metaphor’ and ‘for the sake of discussion’
My commentary was not about Obama, Kenya or Keynes. It was about the insult that Michelle Bachmann suffered. Why are you blind to that? No need to defend Obama if I’m mererly trying to keep a lady from being insulted, is there?
I am extremely well read and educated, why would you tell me to look up words if your intent were anything other than to insult?
Michelle Bachmann was insulted. I said as much. What are you complaining about. I think insults from all sides should be avoided. Again, I said as much.
I was pointing out the factual errors of your Obama comments, since you seemed unaware of them. You said…
“If I call Barack Obama a K-word (ok, I’ll type it – a Kenyan) will I be disqualified from polite company? Will any of my friends defend me or will they be ashamed of me. Or both?”
I would hope they would be embarrassed you made such a serious factual error.
Again, suggesting you look up some words is not an insult – it’s a way of making a point. Too sensitive or projecting?
I made no factual statements about BHO. I asked hypothetical questions. (“IF I call . . . ” IF is the operative word in that sentence.) Ms. Bachmann is not a lyin ass bitch and he’s not Kenyan. See the parallel? Was calling her a lyin ass bitch a similarly embarrassing factual error or not?
See, Bachmann’s critics are the subject of what I wrote – not BHO. Address that or, again, you’re missing the point.
Arguing that Obama is not Keynesian in his economic choices and theories is like saying that protestants aren’t Christian because they don’t hold to all of Jesus’ teaching perfectly. The combination of public/private secotr involvement in economy, the provision of government jobs/work, those seem to be Keynesian concepts. Plus, I’m sure that the Friedman pun has no chance of getting by the third voice censors.