Not Funny
Dean
Look. I'm not going to vote for the guy. And I really hate to be a wet blanket. But there's this graphic floating around that's supposed to be funny, and honestly I don't think it's funny.
At all.
About
A note on our important Editorial Policy.
Your donations help make Dean's World possible.
Or you could buy something for Dean from his WISH LIST!
Dean Esmay
Editor-In-Chief
Freedomist Network
Individual postings by contributors copyright by their respective authors.
Editor-In-Chief
Contributing Editors
Celia Farber
Categories
Music, Movies, Books, and Etc.
Questioning the HIV/AIDS establishment
Subscribe
Archives
Old Archives
We Support
|
Dean's World uses and recommends:
Which at the very least makes it a bit eyebrow-raising.
Then again, I could be a little jaundiced about the whole thing.
Seriously though, the man's strong opposition to stem -cell research should be an indicator that the man is not taking this country forward. Mars?!? That's just crazy talk, but we need a President that is progressive and not longing for the so called "good old days."
Let private researchers invest the money, take the risks, reap the rewards, etc.
That's one thing that gets me though: how many people think Bush banned stem cell research. That didn't happen. All he did was end government spending on new stem cell lines.
I feel the same way about government funding of the arts by the way. I think that if enough taxpayers feel uncomfortable with something, then tax dollars shouldn't pay for it. Do whatever art you want on your own dime and your own time and I'll back you 110% on your first amendment rights. But government money? Taxpayers have a right to say "I don't want to pay for that." And I'd even rather the government err on the side of caution, so even if only 30 or 40% strongly object to something, that's reason enough to consider not using tax dollars on it (unless you can prove an overriding national interest of course).
It isn't really, it is veering off from the issues and mudslinging. I don't know who I'm voting for to tell you the truth; but all the jibberish does is annoy me.
Hmmm.... Doesn't sound like I want to vote for four years of having to look at and hear about Kerry, does it? As for Bush... FMA. That stands for an expletive.
"I feel the same way about government funding of the arts by the way. I think that if enough taxpayers feel uncomfortable with something, then tax dollars shouldn't pay for it. Do whatever art you want on your own dime and your own time and I'll back you 110% on your first amendment rights."
That's where I am also. I'm against government subsidies for art because what the government, especially the federal government, subsidizes, it controls or wants to (well, actually, it wants to control everything anyway, but anyway...).
And, so, you get political tugs-of-war between the Jesse Helms types who want to ban everything they consider "immoral" on the one side, and on the other side "artistes" like Andres Serrano who demand that the government subsidize their "Piss Christ". They want to shock and outrage everybody (mostly they only bore us) while demanding a subsidy from Big Daddy in order to do so.
And, while insisting that federal funding for "Piss Christ" or the Virgin Mary covered with excrement is essential to freedom of expression, they ban Christmas nativity scenes, the Pledge of Allegiance, and every other religious symbol or expression that comes to their attention in the name of "separation of church and state".
I just don't like it. That could very well be the next President of the United States, and to me that demands a certain seriousness that I can't just laugh at.
You KNOW -- repeat KNOW -- that there would be a SCREECHING HEADLINE on Drudge if this had been George Bush, Dick Cheney or even Rush Limbaugh in that photo. Rush would devote days to it. Sean Hannity would be talking about it on his radio show and TV show. Bill O'Reilly would throw a fit. But it's OK if it's aimed at one side. There is a real meanness in American humor right now. I've noticed on my blog if I DARE poke fun at someone on one side I get a slew of angry emails and some folks who take it very personally if I dare poke fun at their side.
But this crosses the line. Unless I am imagining things I thought I JUST read and heard about a fiction book that deals with someone trying to kill Bush and it was a huge issue...which it SHOULD BE. I think it's inappropriate. But show a photo with a gun pointed at Kerry's head, and that's a riot.
The sign of what's going on is that you really can't listen to a right or left radio show with them daring to make fun of both sides. That's why I love the Capitol Steps, for all their flaws..since they blast everyone. Humor has traditionally in America been used as partisan propaganda on both sides. That's not new. What's new is the double standard on this and other issues. To someone who is not a member of either party it's dismaying.
You would think by now that we would not be doing anything remotely encouraging the sick minds out there to go after ANYONE on the right or on the left. I don't see the humor in this kind of photo with Kerry in it, Bush in it, or Nader in it. Sorry. On this I am PC.
Of course we all lose our tempers now and then. Dean freely admits to being imperfect in this regard, which is why regulars to this establishment will generally be cut more slack than people who we don't know very well.
Still: behave like an adult, or go find somewhere else to play. Thanks.