This is the thread for the Fox News "Daily Show for conservatives" thing

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (369 of them)
Life or Parade? The reference I found made it seem like the latter. Not that the Parade site was any help, instead there's stuff like this:

http://www.parade.com/images/2007/0211/Main021107.jpg

Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 16 February 2007 19:07 (seventeen years ago) link

HA ha. Khaddafi's on that list, and doesn't stand a chance.

The Uzbeck leader is on there, but isn't the guy from Turkmenistan also a real good candidate?

they be stealin' kingfish's bucket (kingfish), Friday, 16 February 2007 19:10 (seventeen years ago) link

WHO WILL WIN THE COVETED DICKY THIS YEAR?

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Friday, 16 February 2007 19:10 (seventeen years ago) link

Kim Jung Il is the best

jw (ex machina), Friday, 16 February 2007 19:12 (seventeen years ago) link

He really hurt himself though by making some concessions in the last couple of months. I think this could be Putin's year.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Friday, 16 February 2007 19:13 (seventeen years ago) link

what no Hugo??!?

Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 16 February 2007 19:21 (seventeen years ago) link

what no Hugo??!?

Uh, check the dude on the left.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 16 February 2007 19:26 (seventeen years ago) link

That's not Chavez. (I originally thought it was, too)

After two days in hospital I took a turn for the nurse. (Fluffy Bear Hearts Rain, Friday, 16 February 2007 19:28 (seventeen years ago) link

Isayas Afewerki currently has 76% of the vote.

After two days in hospital I took a turn for the nurse. (Fluffy Bear Hearts Rain, Friday, 16 February 2007 19:29 (seventeen years ago) link

Tina Fey is a godless, glassy-eyed Clintonista, and I don't want to hear any different.

Dethrone the dictaphone, hit it in it's funny bone (kenan), Friday, 16 February 2007 19:29 (seventeen years ago) link

Wow.

Those books.

Weept.

Øystein (Øystein), Friday, 16 February 2007 19:37 (seventeen years ago) link

many of the high priests of science have something to hide

isn't it distintly odd that they use this terminology. i can't fathom it.

Frogm@n henry (Frogm@n henry), Friday, 16 February 2007 20:15 (seventeen years ago) link

Certainly odd, but not unusual, unfortunately. The whole "science is just another religion" argument is used quite a bit. Search the web for phrases like "science is a religion" and "evolution is a religion" and you will find some of the saddest non-pornographic content it has to offer.

Øystein (Øystein), Friday, 16 February 2007 20:22 (seventeen years ago) link

projection, i think. Works the same way they term anybody who believes in any form of evolution(micro/macro) or natural selection as a "Darwinist." These scientists are just another partisian political party who are nothing but blind adherents to an ideology, a worship of a dead Victorian biologist. Research and evidence and peer-review don't mean jack shit. These scientists fall in line just as easily and as dogmatically as the rightwing authoritians do, and when these claims of "objective science" are challenge, they just "trot out scientists with white coats," so that "debate is supposed to be silenced."

It's like they finally grabbed onto the postmordernism/relativism that they decried for decades when they figured out they could use it as a club. There are no objective truths or facts, only a battle of opinions. Empiric reality doesn't matter, since facts & opinions are the same.

xp exactly

they be stealin' kingfish's bucket (kingfish), Friday, 16 February 2007 20:25 (seventeen years ago) link

It's like they finally grabbed onto the postmordernism/relativism that they decried for decades when they figured out they could use it as a club.

OTM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

These guys are the ULTIMATE relativists, they're not even aware of it most of the time.

After two days in hospital I took a turn for the nurse. (Fluffy Bear Hearts Rain, Friday, 16 February 2007 20:28 (seventeen years ago) link

yknow, the tactical polyvalence of discourse

max (maxreax), Friday, 16 February 2007 20:49 (seventeen years ago) link

http://www.slate.com/id/2159920?nav=tap3

and what (ooo), Friday, 16 February 2007 20:52 (seventeen years ago) link

Didn't the Turkmenistan guy die?

Chris H. (chrisherbert), Friday, 16 February 2007 21:00 (seventeen years ago) link

Yup, couple of months ago.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 16 February 2007 21:02 (seventeen years ago) link

No way, Tina Fey is not a Republican. It can't be true. Is Alec Baldwin the one who wrote the "Anne Coulter's 60th birthday" joke on 30 Rock?

Chris H. (chrisherbert), Friday, 16 February 2007 21:08 (seventeen years ago) link

Ok, sorry to bring the stupid, but I can't tell if I'm parsing that Limbaugh/ Coulter gag correctly. In his setup, RL is clearly addressing "[his] fellow Americans," so AC's punchline implies that they'd invade the U.S., kill themselves ("your leaders"), and then convert the U.S. to Christianity. Which is hi-larious since she's satarizing her own image as a vituperative and vindictive harpy AND the lefty notion (or at least their impression of it) that the right wants to set up a theocratic fascist police state or something.

But. That's a lot of layers of irony/ self-awareness that aren't evident elsewhere in that sketch; more than one layer anyway, which is as deep as the other jokes go at best. Specifically that RL line about the U.S.'s international reputation being a shambles after two years of a Democratic congress, cough cough. I almost think that the intent of the AC punchline was nothing more than "tweaking the left again with that great un-pc line about invading others people's countries,"
without the understanding of what they were actually suggesting. Could be wrong, but she says "invade your countries" instead of "invade your country," so it kinda looks like the latter case.

slugbuggy (slugbuggy), Friday, 16 February 2007 21:12 (seventeen years ago) link

it's that mix of self-perceived persecution, lazy anti-intellectualism/ahistoricism, and formless, undirected bile

Very strange with this book -- Slate and the NY Times attack it for being too conservative and go on about how it's indicative of this and that and Hannity and so forth. But the conservatives who are attacking it seem to have a better point: the guy is not a conservative thinker, he's a bleedin' Confederate thinker. Total wack job. Didn't Slate of the Times read the book? There's your lead right there.

Dethrone the dictaphone, hit it in it's funny bone (kenan), Friday, 16 February 2007 21:17 (seventeen years ago) link

I almost think that the intent of the AC punchline was nothing more than "tweaking the left again with that great un-pc line about invading others people's countries,"

That's right. A lot of conservative humor is based on the idea of offending liberal pc sensibilities, "throwing down the gauntlet."

"I just raped a bunch of baby seals"
"Har. Har. That'll really get 'em going."

All they need is like one disproving review, and it's "OMG, the liberal MSM went batshit crazy! Har har!"

That is, like, 80% of conservative humor.

After two days in hospital I took a turn for the nurse. (Fluffy Bear Hearts Rain, Friday, 16 February 2007 21:28 (seventeen years ago) link

he's a bleedin' Confederate thinker

To be fair, this distinction has been deliberately blurred for decades, from the segregation folks to the southern strategy to the "red state" thing.

Dude does tip his hand a bit much w/ the johnny reb officer on the cover.

they be stealin' kingfish's bucket (kingfish), Friday, 16 February 2007 21:29 (seventeen years ago) link

disapproving

After two days in hospital I took a turn for the nurse. (Fluffy Bear Hearts Rain, Friday, 16 February 2007 21:31 (seventeen years ago) link

The book went too far for mainstream conservative reviewers. Read the reviews of Dinesh D'Souza's new book for a similar response.

Chris H. (chrisherbert), Friday, 16 February 2007 21:46 (seventeen years ago) link

http://ec2.images-amazon.com/images/P/1596980036.01._SS500_SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg

They released "Female Chauvinist Pigs" with a different cover in America, then.

White Collar Boxer (DomPassantino), Friday, 16 February 2007 22:21 (seventeen years ago) link

All I know is that's a great apron.

Laurel (Laurel), Friday, 16 February 2007 22:24 (seventeen years ago) link

wtf with that outfit!

Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 16 February 2007 22:25 (seventeen years ago) link

WOULD SMASH

jw (ex machina), Friday, 16 February 2007 22:27 (seventeen years ago) link

I'm realizing that I don't know as much about what conservatives believe as I thought I did. How many conservatives, apart from Mr. South Will Rise Again, still believe that nullification is a valid political tenet?

Dethrone the dictaphone, hit it in it's funny bone (kenan), Friday, 16 February 2007 22:28 (seventeen years ago) link

We’ve been duped.

We were raised to think we could have it all. In college we were told that men weren’t necessary. Pop culture told us that career—not family—came first. The idea of being a stay-at-home mom was for losers. And yet are we happier than our mothers or grandmothers, who grew up before women were “liberated” by the sexual revolution? For many women, the answer is no. In The Politically Incorrect Guide™ to Women, Sex, and Feminism, Carrie Lukas, a young career woman and new mother, sets the record straight: correcting the lies women have been told and slamming the door on the screaming harpies of NOW, feminist professors, and the rest of the bra-burners who have done so much to wreck women’s lives.

Bet your feminist teacher never told you:

* Women’s lib has “liberated” men from having to commit, “freed” women from marriage, and often “unshackled” women from having a family.
* More than ever, women in their twenties and thirties live alone, are discarded by boyfriends after “living together,” and are watching their biological clocks tick past the point of no return.
* Women still prefer men who are breadwinners and can protect them physically.

TICK TICK TICK.

Silly 21st-Century feminists, burning their expensive bras & all that.

they be stealin' kingfish's bucket (kingfish), Friday, 16 February 2007 22:34 (seventeen years ago) link

xxpost I never cease to be amused/horrified at how these people seem to think that Feminism is all written out in some Bible that Feminists refer back to, and no further thought or discussion has happened since 1972.

Dethrone the dictaphone, hit it in it's funny bone (kenan), Friday, 16 February 2007 22:34 (seventeen years ago) link

xpost EXACTLY

Dethrone the dictaphone, hit it in it's funny bone (kenan), Friday, 16 February 2007 22:35 (seventeen years ago) link

conservatives railing against straw(wo)man shockah

Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Friday, 16 February 2007 22:37 (seventeen years ago) link

actually, are there _any_ of those books that aren't just disingeniousness and bilious railing against strawmen?

they be stealin' kingfish's bucket (kingfish), Friday, 16 February 2007 22:51 (seventeen years ago) link

. In college we were told that men weren’t necessary.

See what LUGs and vibrators hath wrought?

milo (milo), Friday, 16 February 2007 22:54 (seventeen years ago) link

x-post to Fluffy Bear:

In that case that's gotta be the most OMGWTF-cosmically-insane thing ever, that Coulter and writers didn't get that she inadvertantly threatened to invade the U.S., kill U.S. leaders, convert U.S. citizens to Christianity, and so on. Mind blown, etc..

slugbuggy (slugbuggy), Friday, 16 February 2007 23:59 (seventeen years ago) link

I would attribute it more to good ol' fashioned sloppy writing than anything else.

Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Saturday, 17 February 2007 00:02 (seventeen years ago) link

You are surprised that Joel Doofusmonger and Anne Coulter and etc, missed a nuance?

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Saturday, 17 February 2007 00:04 (seventeen years ago) link

i would attribute it to being a joke

a mediocre black-and-white cookie in a cellophane wrapper (hanks1ockli), Saturday, 17 February 2007 00:05 (seventeen years ago) link

They released "Female Chauvinist Pigs" with a different cover in America, then.

Uh, wtf, Dom, that book is nothing like what Ariel Levy is arguing.

jaymc (jaymc), Saturday, 17 February 2007 00:08 (seventeen years ago) link

lookout, here comes Michael Medved, who opines that the horrible show will be "good for the cause", and that the problem w/ a particularly bad sketch is that "the humor's too subtle by half". He also argues that they should have more "people of color" on there to do the really racial jokes.

But rightwingers on TV have a higher calling, you see, rather just really lazy and half-assed swipes at funnier people. They should get "get another shot at entertaining our own troops via TV and demonstrating that conservatives do, after all, possess a sense of humor."

Unfortunately, his tips for improving the show don't actually include "TAKE OUT THE RETARDED LAFFTRACK".

they be stealin' kingfish's bucket (kingfish), Saturday, 17 February 2007 00:26 (seventeen years ago) link

To go along with that "conservatives attacking science" thing mentioned about, we have this.

they be stealin' kingfish's bucket (kingfish), Saturday, 17 February 2007 00:42 (seventeen years ago) link

Backtracking a bit, googling "Tina Fey Is a Republican" turned up this:

Tina Fey was a Republican.

She admited it in Life in October 15, 2004 -- the free Life magazine that is stuck into most Sunday newspapers.

She isn't a leftist wacko. Maybe she is now. But back then she wasn't. Guess she is more an Indepedent.
posted by: on 10.17.04 at 07:22 PM [permalink]

And, uh, this...

what's up with the scar...if Tina is so gosh darn funny why doesn't she write a skit about that ax wound on her left cheek?
posted by: chris on 04.25.04 at 11:20 PM [permalink]

_____________________________________________________

Tina Fey is waiting for her Barbara Walter's special to tell us about her rape scar. This will cement a reverential and protective attitude towards her to the american public, allowing her to bombard us with further mediocrity for years to come.

In her crazy biz, even a knife rape is used for marketing leverage.

Tina, why are you in a business like that? Look what you've turned into.

Pimping your own rape scar!
posted by: Caterwall on 06.04.04 at 06:35 PM [permalink]

Marmot (marmotwolof), Saturday, 17 February 2007 00:45 (seventeen years ago) link

That's right. A lot of conservative humor is based on the idea of offending liberal pc sensibilities, "throwing down the gauntlet."

"I just raped a bunch of baby seals"
"Har. Har. That'll really get 'em going."

All they need is like one disproving review, and it's "OMG, the liberal MSM went batshit crazy! Har har!"

That is, like, 80% of conservative humor.

This mentality always reminded me of the stuff internet trolls say to convince themselves that they're funny.

31g (31g), Saturday, 17 February 2007 00:56 (seventeen years ago) link

Tonight! Sunday night at 10 oclock!

Also, I'm pasting this here, since it fits in with the rest of what we've been talking about:

It takes a lot more integrity, character, and courage to be a conservative than it does to be a liberal. That's because at its most basic level, liberalism is nothing more than childlike emotionalism applied to adult issues...

they be stealin' kingfish's bucket (kingfish), Sunday, 18 February 2007 08:11 (seventeen years ago) link

more hype:

JEd Babbin, who hasn't actually seen anything yet:

But the best part is that Ann Coulter -- yes, our Ann, HUMAN EVENTS legislative correspondent -- is in it. Is it funny? One gent e-mailed me to say that, "Critics are already calling it 'the funniest show ever produced by the FOX News Channel, not counting Geraldo.'"

Pop the corn, pour the wine, sit back and watch. Step aside, libs. It’s our turn.

they be stealin' kingfish's bucket (kingfish), Sunday, 18 February 2007 08:16 (seventeen years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.