Al Franken?

CRAP
Total votes: 5 (24%)
NOT CRAP
Total votes: 16 (76%)
Total votes: 21

Writer: Al Franken

11
Al Franken. Not Crap. He was a great satirist. It makes his cause enjoyable. But his satire has become punditry supporting the democratic cause. He is still a great humorist, but has become a monomaniac. Which to some is enthralling and empowering. He's the witty crusader exposing every inconsistency in the republican party. His tactics are little more respectable than those he vilifies. I prefer comedians to be objective. Esoteric comedy can only entertain those that seek it. He's got money on his mongrel dog, and anticipates the time when it will rip at the throat of the other mongrel dog. He's merely doing what he can to sharpen his dog's teeth. I am in dubious support of anyone that aides the disservice with such fervor.

Writer: Al Franken

12
That said, I know of no instance in the United States where the Left Wing has punished great numbers of the innocent to the point of death or prison, and the Right Wing does it all the time.


Examples please.
"I may be asking a lot from a bunch of internet retards, but can you please quit acting like retards?" -- Steve Albini

Writer: Al Franken

13
angry planet wrote:
That said, I know of no instance in the United States where the Left Wing has punished great numbers of the innocent to the point of death or prison, and the Right Wing does it all the time.


Examples please.

Remember, I said the Right, not Republicans:

Slavery
House Committee on Un-American Activities
Jim Crow
The War on Drugs
Minors tried as Adults
Three Strikes laws
the USA Patriot Act
Ghost Detainees
The goddamn existence of the Death Penalty in 2004
...
steve albini
Electrical Audio
sa at electrical dot com
Quicumque quattuor feles possidet insanus est.

Writer: Al Franken

14
House Committee on Un-American Activities: Not my area of expertise, but I don't see this as a consistent policy of the right because McCarthy was a Republican any more than censorship is a 'policy' of the left because Tipper and Al Gone and the rest of the PMRC were democrats. Assholes are assholes, not policy.

Slavery and Jim Crow: Again, I am certainly not an expert on the civil war, but I can not for the life of me see how slavery was a policy of the right. From what I have read about the pre-civil-war south, both republicans and democrats were active in those policies. I know you attached the "right... not republicans" clause to the argument, but I don't know how else to argue this. And let's not forget that it was the right (the republicans) that ended this practice at the cost of a bloody civil war. I am not sure you can assign the policies to the right, but if you must, you must also give them the credit for creating one of the first movements to eliminate it.

Beyond that, I suppose it is indicative of the current state of left in our society that they would define criminals, repeat offenders and terrorists as "innocents".

[/quote]
"I may be asking a lot from a bunch of internet retards, but can you please quit acting like retards?" -- Steve Albini

Writer: Al Franken

15
angry planet wrote:And let's not forget that it was the right (the republicans) that ended this practice at the cost of a bloody civil war.


WHUH? actually, slavery was officially ended by lincoln, wasn't it? and he was neither a democrat nor a republican. also, he outlawed slavery in the South only, in an effort to financially destroy them. i dunno, i just leanred that stuff on the history channel or some shit, so it may well not be right. except for the part about lincoln not being a republican, i know that for sure cause it's a matter of historical record, the name of the party.

i think you could argue that slavery belonged to the Right, because Right just means old-school, change-resisting, aka "conservative". and slavery, being an ancient practice, was something that the Righties wanted to "conserve".

and WHERE THE HELL IS AL FRANKEN ANYMORE?!?!?

i never really got him so much. i mean, sure, he was stuart smalley, right? heh. but in general, i never really found him to be so funny. meh. as far as political funny guys go, i'll take chris matthews or charlie rose. they know politics alright. and they say funny stuff, too.
LVP wrote:If, say, 10% of lions tried to kill gazelles, compared with 10% of savannah animals in general, I think that gazelle would be a lousy racist jerk.

Writer: Al Franken

16
angry planet wrote:Beyond that, I suppose it is indicative of the current state of left in our society that they would define criminals, repeat offenders and terrorists as "innocents".

I suppose it is indicative of the current state of the right in our society that they would willfully throw away the rights of citizens in the perceived pursuit of "criminals," "repeat offenders," and "terrorists."
"You get a kink in your neck looking up at people or down at people. But when you look straight across, there's no kinks."
--Mike Watt

Writer: Al Franken

17
angry planet wrote:House Committee on Un-American Activities: Not my area of expertise, but I don't see this as a consistent policy of the right because McCarthy was a Republican any more than censorship is a 'policy' of the left because Tipper and Al Gone and the rest of the PMRC were democrats. Assholes are assholes, not policy.

The only people to object to the HUAC were from the Left. Its target was the Left. People lost their livelyhood for it. Of course it was a policy position of the right to continue. It is currently defended by brain-dead lying whore Ann Coulter.
Slavery and Jim Crow: Again, I am certainly not an expert on the civil war, but I can not for the life of me see how slavery was a policy of the right.

Because it protected a status quo that held entitlements for the rich, the land owners and the industrial base. Abolitionists were the equivalent of peaceniks in the 1960s and communists in the 1920s.
And let's not forget that it was the right (the republicans) that ended this practice at the cost of a bloody civil war. I am not sure you can assign the policies to the right, but if you must, you must also give them the credit for creating one of the first movements to eliminate it.

The Republican party was not the Right at the time. The Democrats were the "State's Rights" advocates, the equivalent of the anti-evolution, abstinence-education crowd, except for worse, for taking as their cause the buying and selling and then owning human beings like farm animals.
Beyond that, I suppose it is indicative of the current state of left in our society that they would define criminals, repeat offenders and terrorists as "innocents".

Punishing criminals makes sense. Punishing them (and by extension everyone in their circle) to ridiculous, arbitrary extremes for the sake of appearances is socially destructive. It creates a hateful caste of people who have literally been told by the system that they are less than any other man, and deserve to be punished more. Unreasonable leverage provides avenues for corruption among police men, prosecutors and the politically-connected. The death penalty creates the potential for irreversable error, and if our government owes us one thing, it is not to kill us intentionally.

Terrorists? No, no, no. I think they're probably assholes. But the rest of us who are pre-emptively put at risk in the hopes that one of us will turn out to be a terrorist, we're not. We're Americans. We Deserve Better.

And what makes Americans better than other people is that we don't abuse people. We don't lie to people. We allow everyone a fair trial and a presumption of innocence. That's why we're worth being defended. When we stop behaving like that, and excuse ourselves by saying we're "defending" ouselves, then we are no longer worthy of defense, as we are no better than any other bunch of assholes.

We are only better than other countries when we stick to our most noble principles, which is easy, until the pressure is put on us. How we act under that pressure is what we are as a nation, not how we act when everything is rosy.
steve albini
Electrical Audio
sa at electrical dot com
Quicumque quattuor feles possidet insanus est.

Writer: Al Franken

18
toomanyhelicopters wrote:actually, slavery was officially ended by lincoln, wasn't it? and he was neither a democrat nor a republican.


Eh? Lincoln was most certainly a Republican:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/al16.html

I'm led to believe that the Republican party of the 1860's was a very different beast than the current GOP, but don't quote me on that.

All of this reminds me...my wife has a first-edition six-volume copy of Carl Sandburg's award winning Lincoln biography which I've been meaning to read. I'll have to set aside a month or two to get through it...

Writer: Al Franken

19
interesting that the bush admin (i.e. shitehouse.gov) claims him as a republican. maybe he used to be. but says here he was a "Unionist" when he won his second term. read 'em and weep, bub.

http://www.search.eb.com/elections/etable2.html

reading a little more, it seems he only became a republican for a short while, as a reaction to the possibility of slavery being allowed in the louisiana purchase territory? hrm. which brought on the downfall of the whig party...

"Along with many thousands of other homeless Whigs, Lincoln soon became a Republican (1856)."

so yeah, a couple years he was a republican maybe.
LVP wrote:If, say, 10% of lions tried to kill gazelles, compared with 10% of savannah animals in general, I think that gazelle would be a lousy racist jerk.

Writer: Al Franken

20
i like al franken. i think he is intelligent and funny though he is not both all the time.

i don't dislike republicans; i dislike the republican party. this is possible because there are some people who hold the belief that government should stay out of people's lives. they are conservatives that believe we should not be involved in foreign wars, or homosexual's bedrooms, or women's uteruses(i'm not sure if that's the plural but i like typing and saying it.)

just like i'm a liberal but not a communist and a football fan but not a lunkhead jock.

i understand that the level-headed republicans i know are in the minority as i am as a non-jock football fan but that should not invalidate our positions. i suppose all i'm hoping for is an end to helpful generalizing, making discussion or debate impossible.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests