Skip to main content

View Diary: Out-of-context joke sparks Twitter campaign to cancel Colbert (713 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It's called satire (20+ / 0-)

    If you can't handle satire, stay away from the Colbert show.

    I do wonder if he's lost any writers though, since lately his satire seems a bit less sharp.

    "When I was an alien, cultures weren't opinions" ~ Kurt Cobain, Territorial Pissings

    by Subterranean on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 09:37:13 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Yeah we all get satire (5+ / 0-)

      I get what he was doing.  I get it.

      But sometimes, POC get a little fatigued of the satire, jokes, non jokes, almost jokes...

      Sometimes it's just too damn much, really.

      •  I don't know what a POC is (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ruellia, dackmont, friendjudy, Damaged262

        but I suggest you staw away from any of Swift's writing, especially the bit about eating Irish babies.

        "When I was an alien, cultures weren't opinions" ~ Kurt Cobain, Territorial Pissings

        by Subterranean on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 11:34:46 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Suggesting the Irish eat THEIR OWN babies (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          LNK, dackmont, Damaged262

          as a solution to all their problems.  

          The dossier on my DKos activities during the Bush administration will be presented on February 3, 2014, with an appendix consisting an adjudication, dated "a long time ago", that I am Wrong.

          by Inland on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 11:42:15 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  "A Modest Proposal".... (11+ / 0-)

            Title of Swift's absolutely brilliant essay.

            Among the educated it is a good 'code word'...Anybody who announces the desire to make a modest proposal is signaling that what comes next is satire.

            Highly recommended:
            http://en.wikipedia.org/...

            SNIPPET:

            . . . . This essay is widely held to be one of the greatest examples of sustained irony in the history of the English language. Much of its shock value derives from the fact that the first portion of the essay describes the plight of starving beggars in Ireland, so that the reader is unprepared for the surprise of Swift's solution when he states, "A young healthy child well nursed, is, at a year old, a most delicious nourishing and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricassee, or a ragout."
        •  Person of Color (0+ / 0-)

          Got it.  

          "When I was an alien, cultures weren't opinions" ~ Kurt Cobain, Territorial Pissings

          by Subterranean on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 12:07:38 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  but swift din't call them "micks" (0+ / 0-)

          the asian people angry w/colbert don't think using a racial slur for asian people as a punchline when talking about bigotry towards native americans.

          i know everyone says "it's satire" but maybe asians are tired of white folks think "hey a minority is a minority amirite it's all a joke anyway"

          ask yourselves, would you have laughed if the punchline was "colbert's halfway house for lazy ass n*ggers"?

          hey it's satire!

          or "colbert's home for whiny feminist c*nts"?

          my point is, there are some words nobody uses, even in satire, because they are hateful.  these people on twitter* have said "ding ding ching ching orientals" are words that offend them, as asian americans.  really, what's so wrong with that?  who gets to tell people of other races what words are offensive to describe them?

          *i am not including the obvious rwnj (cough michelle malkin cough) who are jumping on this band wagon to cause trouble.

          skippy the bush kangaroo: aware of all internet traditions since 2002!

          by skippy on Sat Mar 29, 2014 at 08:55:34 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  There are some words nobody uses, even in satire, (0+ / 0-)

            because they are hateful??  Really?  You think George Carlin wouldn't have used them?  That he DIDN'T use them?  Or how about Lewis Black?  D.L. Hughley?  Lewis C.K.?  Janeane Garofalo?  The list goes on.  (Perhaps you're too young to remember Lenny Bruce?)

            It's called political SATIRE, not political correctness.  And sometimes it has to be brutally honest because pretending that people don't say these words in real life is naive.  And change doesn't occur by hiding your head in the sand.

      •  Yes, and Native Americans (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        valmont

        Are getting sick of an NFL team with a very offensive mascot/team name, The "Redskins".  THAT was the context of this bit. THAT was the point.

    •  I agree (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Subterranean, m00finsan

      I feel like his stuff is not really all that funny anymore. I like the daily show better. I think Jessica Williams has been getting better writers on there.

      •  Yeah, a few years ago (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        m00finsan

        I considered TDS to be Colbert's warmup act.  Not now.  

        It was a good run, at least.  We can't really expect any show to sustain the level of humor Colbert had at its peak.  

        "When I was an alien, cultures weren't opinions" ~ Kurt Cobain, Territorial Pissings

        by Subterranean on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 11:38:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  The Colbert Report (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Damaged262

        I really prefer The Colbert Report because I know that Stephen is making fun of the republicans who need to be made fun of.  He is very good at what he does and I will always be a supporter of his show.

    •  This was satire too: (8+ / 0-)

      http://www.dailykos.com/...

      But I don't see anyone thought it defensible.

      "Satire" is not a blanket mulligan from any blowback for what you say.

      "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

      by raptavio on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 11:48:42 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Damn right. We don't want to be hypocrites... (5+ / 0-)

        ...on this subject and cede the high ground by trying to twist racism into "satire". Some things are unacceptable...regardless of the messenger.

        BTW, I said this when Maher called Sarah Palin a c**t. That is a deplorable word that should NEVER be directed at a woman...PERIOD.

        Adequate health care should be a LEGAL RIGHT in the U.S without begging or bankruptcy. Until it is, we should not dare call our society civilized.

        by Love Me Slender on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 03:01:14 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Nicely said. (8+ / 0-)

          Oh, and here's another one:

          We can disagree that Colbert deserves to be fired/his show cancelled over this, and still think what he said was poor satire that used racist language.

          Imagine that.

          "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

          by raptavio on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 03:06:38 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You're making so much sense... (5+ / 0-)

            ...my brain hurts a bit :)

            Here's the thing: I'm sure Colbert and his people are genuinely sorry for that bit. His apology, unlike fellow satirist Limbaugh, would strike me as genuine. It is a boner that goes away...no firing, just a learning experience.

            What is NOT acceptable is all the "Duh...it's just satire" bullshit floating around this thread. We either decry racism or we don't. We don't dress up racism as "satire" just because we like the messenger.

            Adequate health care should be a LEGAL RIGHT in the U.S without begging or bankruptcy. Until it is, we should not dare call our society civilized.

            by Love Me Slender on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 03:26:48 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  "Racist language" not same as "racial epithets" (5+ / 0-)

            There's a difference between "racial epithets" and racist language, and that's what's being missed by the comments here arguing that "racism isn't justified by saying it's satire".  Racism isn't justified by anything.  But using racial epithets isn't always racist.  Does anyone truly believe Colbert was intending to be anything other than satirical?

            That said:

            (a) Satire is a fine art, and I agree that Colbert's attempt here was somewhat lame, and that that fact blunted the irony.

            (b) There is such a thing as using satire an an excuse to be offensive -- we've seen it all the time from Limbaugh et. al. ever since Obama ran in 08.  But again, does anyone really believe Colbert was doing that?  I doubt anyone other than the disingenuous or irony-impaired would so argue.

            "Happiness is the only good. The place to be happy is here. The time to be happy is now. The way to be happy is to make others so." - Robert Ingersoll

            by dackmont on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 06:54:34 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I think everyone agrees -- (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              m00finsan, Damaged262, tryhardyes

              or at least, everyone reasonable agrees -- Colbert's intent was satire. Even Suey Park has said there.

              But satirical intent is not, as I have said already, a blanket mulligan.

              "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

              by raptavio on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 08:25:41 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Mulligan for what? Bad taste or racism? (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                jqb

                What, if anything, should Colbert not be excused for here?

                Was it "using racist language"?  Do we call it "racist language" every time someone uses a racial epithet?  Depends on what you mean by "racist language", obviously.  To me, it sounds bad, like something a (borderline) racist might do.

                I'd suggest that Colbert could fairly be accused of something more like:  "using racial epithets to not-very-funny effect".  Obviously not the same thing as racism, and not even really in the same ballpark, in every case -- as when a satirist's sympathies are well-known.

                Racism is a big deal.  We should be rigorous about it, and not imply (with, e.g., vague terms like "racist language") that Colbert might be kinda racist, maybe.

                Is it racist (or anywhere in the ballpark of racist) to use racial epithets in dumb satire but not in brilliant satire?  No, that makes no sense.  Rather, I'd say it's a matter of poor taste.  If one is going to use racial epithets, one had better have a good reason to do so, e.g. really, really good satire.  Otherwise, using those terms is in bad taste; they're poisonous, and only rarely can poisons be used in a healing way.

                "Happiness is the only good. The place to be happy is here. The time to be happy is now. The way to be happy is to make others so." - Robert Ingersoll

                by dackmont on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 11:37:37 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I'm not one of those (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  m00finsan, poco, tryhardyes

                  who think that the word "racist" is an accusation of some unforgivable sin and should therefore only be used for the guys in hoods.

                  Some terms are racist. Some actions are racist, even if the intent behind them isn't necessarily racist. That's just the way it is.

                  This can lead to a much longer conversation on "What is racism" that I honestly don't have the stamina for right now.

                  "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

                  by raptavio on Sat Mar 29, 2014 at 08:04:53 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  "I'm not one of those" (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    tryhardyes

                    All the worse for you -- racism is an unforgivable sin.

                    Some terms are racist. Some actions are racist, even if the intent behind them isn't necessarily racist. That's just the way it is.
                    No, that's the way it isn't. People who oppose real racism understand that it doesn't dwell just in words. As for Colbert's actions, they were anti-racist.
                    •  You say that (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      costello7, amoverton

                      because you define racism in a self-serving manner, rather than the pervasive, systemic manifestation of power, privilege and oppression that has both major and minor, overt and subtle, manifestations.

                      Because you define the word according to your preconceptions and privilege, not according to the real world.

                      "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

                      by raptavio on Sat Mar 29, 2014 at 12:46:13 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Wow raptivo, that's a lot of extremism (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        tryhardyes, 420 forever, dackmont

                        in just 2 small paragraphs.  I'm not discounting the way you feel, but those are some harsh glasses you're viewing something that was meant to draw light on and embarrass the shit out of racists, like those that love the name Redskins.  They may not even realize, even this far into the game that it's racism and that is the point of the Colbert Report skit in question.  The f*cking guy was trying to equate the racist use of the name Redskin with the racist use of the asian insults.  How do you not get that?

                        I'm damaged and I like it, it made me what I am! BTW, my avatar is as stollen as my father's retirement fund, the old man died almost penniless. Bankers don't go to prison for breaking our laws, they buy bigger yachts.

                        by Damaged262 on Sat Mar 29, 2014 at 08:04:53 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Beyond that, Raptavio's charges are completely (0+ / 0-)

                          irrational, ad hominem swill that don't at all follow from what I wrote. If Raptavio believes, as I do, that racism is

                          the pervasive, systemic manifestation of power, privilege and oppression that has both major and minor, overt and subtle, manifestations
                          then how in the word can it be "just the way it is" that "some actions are racist", independent of intent? Raptavio seems to have no understanding of hsr own words describing racism. And how in the world can my claiming that racism doesn't just dwell in words and that Colbert's actions were anti-racist possibly be construed as my defining racism in a "self-serving manner",  according to my "preconceptions and privilege"? What sort of person employs such grossly ad hominem well-poisoning charges, based on no evidence at all?
                      •  All ad hominem. (0+ / 0-)
                        the pervasive, systemic manifestation of power, privilege and oppression that has both major and minor, overt and subtle, manifestations.
                        That is quite how I define it, and informs my comments in this thread that seem to be beyond your comprehension.
                        Because you define the word according to your preconceptions and privilege, not according to the real world.
                        You are full of rank shit. The whole point is about the racism of  ball teams called "Redskins" and of the conceit of buying people off by forming some bogus organization for Amerind concerns but not changing the name. Your accusations against me here are false, blind, and grossly dishonest.
                        •  If that was how you defined racism (0+ / 0-)

                          then you and I would have no quibble that specific actions can be racist (i.e. one of those major or minor, overt or subtle manifestations) without the person committing them being defined by the word.

                          Since you reject that with venom and vitriol, however, well, I leave it as an exercise to the reader as to who's full of shit.

                          "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

                          by raptavio on Tue Apr 01, 2014 at 08:27:52 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                •  you can be racist just fine (4+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Damaged262, jqb, costello7, tryhardyes

                  without using any overt "racist" words. I am really getting tired of all this PC stuff. It's getting to the point where you can't talk without someone having a hissy fit over what kind of word you use. WHAT MATTERS IS THE CONTEXT!!

                  •  Nobody who uses the term "PC" unironically (3+ / 0-)

                    should be trusted as an honest broker.

                    "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

                    by raptavio on Sat Mar 29, 2014 at 12:47:07 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Irony=ignoring the context, as U did just now [nt] (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      acornweb

                      "Happiness is the only good. The place to be happy is here. The time to be happy is now. The way to be happy is to make others so." - Robert Ingersoll

                      by dackmont on Sun Mar 30, 2014 at 06:20:16 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Nope. (0+ / 0-)

                        In context, you used a pejorative to make an emotional, rather than rational, argument.

                        "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

                        by raptavio on Sun Mar 30, 2014 at 06:47:29 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  It's actually quite rational to say that context (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          acornweb

                          matters and that one shouldn't over-focus on words at the expense of context.

                          As for the term "PC", I agree that it is often used by the right wing to demonize the left's commitment to equality.  In fact, that's where it originated, didn't it?  But I don't think it follows that zootwoman -- who, btw, made the comment, and not me -- was necessarily coming from that stance just because she used the term.  I agree with her point and I don't think it was "emotional" at all.  In fact, I could take you to task for accusing a woman of being emotional, but I'm not going to, because I know that context matters.

                          As I just mentioned below, I think I can see where you're coming from.  Satire is not a blanket mulligan, and that "Washington N***ers" diary is a good example of that fact.  I don't think Colbert was inappropriate, but I can see how some might.  And I understand that you're not calling him a racist.  I do think Park overreacted considerably, no matter how fine a human being she is otherwise.

                          "Happiness is the only good. The place to be happy is here. The time to be happy is now. The way to be happy is to make others so." - Robert Ingersoll

                          by dackmont on Sun Mar 30, 2014 at 07:23:01 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  There are a few things (0+ / 0-)

                            which are red flags to me.

                            "Race card" is one. "Politically correct" is another.

                            Both mean "I want to say offensive things to or about minorities without consequence."

                            As such, the context that matters is whether the usage is earnest or ironic.

                            No sentiment expressed by unironic use of that phrase is worth defending.

                            As to Ms. Park, she may or may not have overreacted. However, it's the fact that the blowback on her was racist, sexist, and utterly indefensible, and that this blowback includes Colbert's fans as well as Kossacks who we' like to have assumed are against such things as racism and sexism even when they're employed in defense of liberal heroes is particularly galling.

                            Park's supposed overreaction is getting all the blame from some sectors, and there seems to be little acknowledgment that Colbert gave her something to which to react, and that her reaction would have barely made a blip had that sheer volume of mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging vitriol not been fired back at her by all manner of bad actors.

                            And that includes every asshole who condescendingly asserts that the silly girl doesn't understand satire.

                            "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

                            by raptavio on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 05:59:52 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I don't think your generalizations hold up (0+ / 0-)

                            Thanks for the reply.  Here's where I differ.  You wrote:

                            "Race card" is one. "Politically correct" is another.

                            Both mean "I want to say offensive things to or about minorities without consequence."

                            Yeah, they can mean that, but they don't always.  Which you should be able to surmise from the lefties here, like me, who are disagreeing with your generalization and sometimes use the terms unironically.  Deny this if you want, but look up the "no true Scotsman" fallacy first.

                            As for vile criticisms of Park, what are you talking about?  Which comments specifically in this thread are "racist, sexist, and utterly indefensible"?  Because you should have HR'd them if they really were.  Or are they "racist, sexist, and utterly indefensible" only according to some rigid metric like "no sentiment is defensible if expressed via unironic usage of terms X or Y"?  Because then I can see why you didn't HR them, because you know that they're not really, uncontroversially perceived as horrific among the Left, and therefore you know that you'd get dinged for abusing HR privileges.  Worth thinking about.

                            Finally, saying Park doesn't understand satire isn't the same as demeaning her in a sexist or ageist way.  If it is, then your calling a female Kossack's argument "emotional", above, was on its face sexist.

                            I know we agree on a lot of stuff because we're Lefties, but IMHO your criteria for appropriate discourse are too rigid, and to be honest, self-serving, because if you really practiced what you preached you'd be HR-ing stuff left and right (so to speak), and would refrain from repeating a classically sexist trope like "woman, your argument is emotional".  Like I said -- worth thinking about.  I don't mean any of this in a hostile way.  I mean it in the Carl Sagan sense of offering reasoned criticism in a friendly way. Take care.

                            "Happiness is the only good. The place to be happy is here. The time to be happy is now. The way to be happy is to make others so." - Robert Ingersoll

                            by dackmont on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 01:13:02 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  quoth: (0+ / 0-)
                            Yeah, they can mean that, but they don't always.  Which you should be able to surmise from the lefties here, like me, who are disagreeing with your generalization and sometimes use the terms unironically.  Deny this if you want, but look up the "no true Scotsman" fallacy first.
                            There's no "no true Scotsman" fallacy to concern about. I labor under no illusions that the left is free of those who wish to defend privilege. I simply assert that though one may believe one is not defending privilege by calling things politically correct or playing the race card, one is wrong. The term is a pejorative, and by definition pejoratives are an attempt to make an emotional argument rather than a rational one. And the emotional argument is to accuse someone of adhering to an arbitrary orthodoxy rather than having a legitimate basis for one's offense at a behavior. No.

                            Also, there's a difference between "You're making an emotional argument" -- which I should better phrase as "You're making an argument that appeals to the emotion of the listener" -- and "You're being emotional." That said, I should be careful what landmines I step upon, too. But that doesn't make me wrong about the inherent invalidity of any argument that rests upon the pejoratives "politically correct" or "the race card." Because tu quoque arguments are fallacious, too.

                            "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

                            by raptavio on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 01:23:40 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Pejoratives and semantics (0+ / 0-)

                            I get that "PC" and "race card" originated as pejoratives from the Right, and even today when I hear them I generally go "uh-oh" and brace for a stream of bigotry.  But I at least listen to what's being said, especially on DK, where most people are OK.  I couldn't tell you how many people accept unironic use of those terms as being OK; to me, they're red flags, but not absolute barriers.

                            My primary focus in activism is disability rights, and one of the things we're into is getting people to stop using the R-word.  ("R**ard[ed]".)  It takes time.  A lot of people who use it don't realize how hurtful it is, and the longer form of the word even now is somewhat accepted as a non-pejorative, just as "moron" and "imbecile" and "idiot" used to be.

                            But language changes.  If someone uses the R-word, I'll point it out (tsk, tsk) ;-).  But I'll listen to their overall point, too.  There is a difference between rejecting an argument that is based on a flawed assumption and rejecting an argument just because of choice of words, even if you do believe that use of a word necessarily implies a flawed stance.

                            But you're right of course, in that choice of words certainly matters.  It's just not a matter of black and white, to use a potentially loaded expression.  Yep, I'm careful with that one, and never use the word "niggardly" or the expression "call a spade a spade" anymore, and I think it's pretty obviously time to lay them to rest.  While most people who use the terms unironically harbor no ill intent -- it's the ironic usage that's bad -- I know that these words can have an impact comparable to the way a person with PTSD experiences triggering phenomena. Some will say, hey, it's a hard world, I can't go worrying about offending everyone, but why on earth make the world any more hard, voluntarily?  I think some people just wall off their own suffering and are thus unempathetic with others.  Hey, nice exchange; we actually got nicer as it went on, which is... nice, given how things often go.

                            "Happiness is the only good. The place to be happy is here. The time to be happy is now. The way to be happy is to make others so." - Robert Ingersoll

                            by dackmont on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 02:24:44 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  On the "tsk, tsk", no. (0+ / 0-)

                            That R-word was "racist", not "retarded." I endeavor to not use the latter word as a pejorative, though I have, in the past, failed to do so.

                            It's not cool to simultaneously appear to want to keep the conversation above-board and try to set me back on my heels by dragging up an old thread -- particularly with a false accusation. Can we keep this above board, please?

                            "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

                            by raptavio on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 03:08:42 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Hey, sorry about that (0+ / 0-)

                            No malice intended, but even with a minute amount of distance, it's hard to see that as anything less than dickish on my part (not to mention that I was factually wrong), and I apologize fully for that.  Truly.  Haven't slept in a long while, and I'm kind of wired and chatty, so -- not my best moment.  I'm sorry.  I really wasn't trying to make you loose face... I just googled for the hell of it, and saw that someone twittered about your post, and made the same wrong assumption they did.  Almost didn't even mention it (but, guess I just had to "make the point").  Now I see why I hesitated.

                            Can you imagine the discipline it must take not to commit gaffes in a long campaign?  I'm pretty "gaffe-prone" so I can't even conceive of it.  But people come in all different wirings.

                            Not making an excuse, though -- I apologize for that.

                            "Happiness is the only good. The place to be happy is here. The time to be happy is now. The way to be happy is to make others so." - Robert Ingersoll

                            by dackmont on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 03:40:08 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  P.S. - btw, that D.O.V. diary kicked ass (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            raptavio

                            This one.  "Eye on the prize -- SCOTUS" -- that's it.

                            "Happiness is the only good. The place to be happy is here. The time to be happy is now. The way to be happy is to make others so." - Robert Ingersoll

                            by dackmont on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 03:46:08 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Yes it did (0+ / 0-)

                            but wait a tick - who the eff tweeted about my DKos comment?

                            "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

                            by raptavio on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 04:11:55 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  oh, the zombie. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            dackmont

                            I might have known. How pathetic.

                            Anyway, forgiven, forgotten, and respect earned for being the bigger person.

                            "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

                            by raptavio on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 04:13:52 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Thanks (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            raptavio

                            And I just discovered that Google targeted my search results to push DailyKos stuff to the top, since doing the search with Startpage (which uses Google's database but anonymizes you) didn't return the same hit.  (F*ck, I can't believe I even googled over this at all, but anyway.)  Startpage lacks that convenient "completes words & phrases for you" feature but otherwise, pretty cool.

                            Sorry you have a "fan"; these things happen the more you say what you mean in public.  For which... rock on.  I'll look out for your diaries.  (Don't look for mine -- I don't have the time or skill set to do them well)

                            "Happiness is the only good. The place to be happy is here. The time to be happy is now. The way to be happy is to make others so." - Robert Ingersoll

                            by dackmont on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 04:25:56 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Nice talking with you. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            dackmont

                            It's nice to be able to discuss these things with a minimum of acrimony.

                            These issues about race and privilege are so often acrimonious that it stands out when it's not.

                            "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

                            by raptavio on Mon Mar 31, 2014 at 04:27:16 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                •  I find you overall statement to be unclear. (0+ / 0-)

                  Are you supportive or against what happened on the Colbert Report?  You start out as if you feel what he said was purposeful but the tone at the end sounds as if you take offense to what was said.  Maybe I'm not reading it right.  You're not being satirical are you?  ;-)

                  I'm damaged and I like it, it made me what I am! BTW, my avatar is as stollen as my father's retirement fund, the old man died almost penniless. Bankers don't go to prison for breaking our laws, they buy bigger yachts.

                  by Damaged262 on Sat Mar 29, 2014 at 07:56:35 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I meant that statement towards: (0+ / 0-)

                    Dagmont's "Mulligan for what?" statement, when the hell is D. Kos gonna add an edit option?

                    I'm damaged and I like it, it made me what I am! BTW, my avatar is as stollen as my father's retirement fund, the old man died almost penniless. Bankers don't go to prison for breaking our laws, they buy bigger yachts.

                    by Damaged262 on Sat Mar 29, 2014 at 08:38:19 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Don't worry -- it was clear enough that you were (0+ / 0-)

                      responding to my  "Mulligan for what?" statement.  Even if the indentation in the thread didn't make it obvious, one could tell by clicking on "parent" in your reply.

                      "Happiness is the only good. The place to be happy is here. The time to be happy is now. The way to be happy is to make others so." - Robert Ingersoll

                      by dackmont on Sun Mar 30, 2014 at 07:02:55 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  I mean that Park was wrong, and that Colbert (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    acornweb

                    was fine, and that -- at worst -- Colbert might be fairly accused of using satire that wasn't funny or sharp enough to justify use of a racial epithet.

                    It is, certainly, possible to use racial epithets gratuitously even when satire is intended.  In a comment above, raptavio linked to an example of satire that inappropriately used a racial epithet.  The latter was essentially saying, "hey, Snyder wouldn't call the team the 'Washington N***ers', so it's also inappropriate to call them the Redskins," but then went on to use the N-word so many times that it was just over the top (even if the diarist meant well).  So what I was trying to say is this:  that diary was a 10 on a 10 scale of "satire misusing a racial epithet", then maybe Colbert was a 1 or 2 or so, depending on how unfunny one thinks he was.

                    Does that make sense?

                    Personally, I think Colbert was fine.  It wasn't the funniest satire I've ever seen, but it didn't rise to the level of even a 1 on the "satire misusing a racial epithet" scale.  Park overreacted.

                    So, no, I wasn't being satirical, but I agree it can be hard to tell sometimes, especially in written communication online ... the internt kinda needs an emoticon that specifically and unambigously says "just in case it wasn't clear, I was being ironic!"  :-) (<== non-ironic smiley)

                    "Happiness is the only good. The place to be happy is here. The time to be happy is now. The way to be happy is to make others so." - Robert Ingersoll

                    by dackmont on Sun Mar 30, 2014 at 07:00:38 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

              •  You're missing the point. (6+ / 0-)

                Numerous people are claiming that Colbert was racist -- mostly right wing idiots on twitter, but a number of people here too. They are flatly, obviously, wrong. And it's quite notable that you completely ignored dackmont's argument. You say "a blanket mulligan" -- for what? Are you seriously saying that Colbert is a racist or was being racist? This being DK, I know that you will not budge an inch, but maybe somewhere in your head a neuron or two of intellectual honesty will stir.

            •  While I agree with your points in the main, (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Damaged262
              There is such a thing as using satire an an excuse to be offensive -- we've seen it all the time from Limbaugh et. al. ever since Obama ran in 08.
              I believe you are confusing 'satire' with 'sarcasm'.
        •  There's a huge difference (4+ / 0-)

          between calling Palin a "cunt" and Colbert's skit.  Of course Maher was out of line.  He also did not try to excuse it by calling it "satire".

          "When I was an alien, cultures weren't opinions" ~ Kurt Cobain, Territorial Pissings

          by Subterranean on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 03:41:56 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  There is, yes. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            m00finsan, moviemeister76

            But it's a matter of severity, not applicability.

            And some people were perfectly happy to defend Maher too.

            "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

            by raptavio on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 04:30:43 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  So as I understand (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Damaged262, Luv2luvU

            your logic implies it's OK for a satirist like Maher to call a man a dick head but not cool at all to call a woman a c**t? They are both vulgar terms describing people of a different gender but to suggest one is OK and the other is not is the epitome of a double standard and hipprocracy in it's nakedness.      The very fact that I had to disguise the word on this thread for fear of being censored speaks volumes.
            The fact is, all Maher was doing was calling a Skunk a Skunk. I'd be more irritated with him for standing up for Rumsfeld. Now there is a true c*nt!

            "The Liberty of Democracy is not safe if the People tolerate the growth of Private Power to a point where it becomes stronger than their Democratic State itself. That, in it's essence, is Fascism, ownership of Government by an individual or a Group" FDR

            by Kirk Welch on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 05:49:38 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I don't speak for the commenter (0+ / 0-)

              toward which your own question was aimed.  I will say that, as a feminist, I take exception to anyone using gender insults.  It's not okay to use language referring to genitals as slurs.  End stop.

              I don't mind using vulgar terms for genitals when referring to the body parts themselves (though I do have preferences).  That's just slang.  That's categorically different from demeaning persons by way of genital terminology.

        •  I'm curious, do you have a problem ... (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          jqb, Damaged262, Luv2luvU, tryhardyes

          ... with a man being called a cunt?

          I have zero problem with that word, in any context. And I genuinely don't get why people do. How is the word so very worse, than bitch or whore, when being used specifically as an insult? If a man called me any slur-type word, with the intention of denigrating me, which word he used would be of no real consequence at all.

          I watch a lot of UK TV, and I see people use the word constantly, and have never cringed once - regardless of which gender is taking it. In fact, I get madder when some random person presumes to say, "God bless you," to me, assuming I both believe in his/her god and that I want "His" blessing.

          And for that matter, how is the word cunt an unacceptable thing to call a woman, but few people think there's anything wrong with calling a man a dick? And at what point, does the word asshole become off limits, just because we all have one of those pieces of anatomy?

          There are a thousand things that Maher has said, that I found more reductive, obtuse and offensive, than him ever calling a single woman a cunt - especially since Palin is the epitome of the slang meaning of the word cunt, which is a despicable and vulgar person. And I genuinely do not grasp the concept, of people treating that word as if it were equal to the N-word (that even the most liberal of us won't use without a VERY good reason).

        •  About the c-word... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Luv2luvU

          I don't know if you're aware of this, but in the UK, it's an insult used without regard to gender.  Men will call each other c**ts (in deference to your self-censorship) with equal abandon over there, possibly even more than they do women.

          But NEVER directed at a woman?  Sorry, but when we're talking about such (to us) morally reprehensible types as Sarah Palin, I daresay exception can be made.  

      •  Jim Hill gave a defense. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Luv2luvU, Damaged262

        It's remarkable how often, when people say "anyone", they mean "anyone who agrees with me".

        •  Or maybe I just missed that one (0+ / 0-)

          and you're trying to score rhetorical points. You're not seriously claiming THAT piece of shit diary was OK, are you?

          "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

          by raptavio on Sat Mar 29, 2014 at 12:48:42 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  This may shock you, but not everyone who (0+ / 0-)

            disagrees with you is evil (or "privileged" or "self-serving" or whatever assholish ad hom you like to attach to them).

            •  Nice. (0+ / 0-)

              You showed your ignorance again while you're busy casting insults.

              If you're white in America, you're privileged. If you're male, you're privileged. If you're heterosexual, you're privileged. If you're wealthy. If you're Christian. Etc. It is part and parcel of being in a society that grants privilege to certain classes that it does not grant to other classes.

              And that's not your fault. Nor is it mine. We can no more be responsible for being the beneficiaries of privilege than a lawn can for being watered. It is not something to feel responsible for, it is not something to feel guilty about. It just is.

              And that means that those without privilege are going to see things in our society that those of us with privilege do not; things we take for granted they cannot; they will face challenges we never even imagine having to face. That is the way of things.

              Where you or I take responsibility is in whether our actions intend to protect that privilege (often, by denying its existence).

              So I ask you again: Are you seriously claiming THAT piece of shit diary was OK?

              "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

              by raptavio on Tue Apr 01, 2014 at 08:35:03 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  Bullshit...and here's the unavoidable truth: (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Matt Z, m00finsan, costello7, Luv2luvU

      If Colbert spewed Limbaugh's brand of "satire", this site would be calling for his head. That is a FACT.

      Racism is racism...regardless of what else we find acceptable from his or her mouth.

      Adequate health care should be a LEGAL RIGHT in the U.S without begging or bankruptcy. Until it is, we should not dare call our society civilized.

      by Love Me Slender on Fri Mar 28, 2014 at 02:59:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site