View Full Version : Friday night's Real Time...
01-18-2004, 03:29 AM
Last night Bill and Al Sharpton took on Darryl Issa and that moron Ron Silver. Sharpton kept trapping Ron Silver in his conservative rhetoric and eventually Silver stopped talking and just sat there, looking like the ass he is. As if that low-rent Al Pacino could ever hold up in a debate on any network other than FOX News. Issa was actually holding his own until he tried to say that the Bush administration has been working hard to preserve our natural resources and protect our environment. He was practically booed off the panel. It was great.
01-28-2004, 11:40 PM
Al Sharpton is a blatant anti-semite that stands by his decision to fan flames of racial hatred by and defending a girl that lied about being raped. A choice incident:
When I was an undergraduate at Columbia University in 1994, Al Sharpton came to our school to have an "open dialogue" about the Crown Heights racial clash which had just occurred. A Chassidic Jew driving a car accidentally hit and killed a black youth in Brooklyn, and in response, a black lynch mob formed and killed the first Jew they could find in retaliation.
I attended this forum, hoping that some discussion might bring peace and understanding to this tragic situation. The "open dialogue" which followed was an hour-long, antisemitic diatribe from Sharpton and his followers, accusing the Jews of financing black slavery in America, and spending every moment since the slaves emancipation conspiring to oppress blacks in any way they could. The evening ended in a near riot, with nothing achieved other than making my blood boil.
He also went to Palestine and defended Yasser Arafat. Even if you hate Bush, I don't understand how anyone can love Sharpton.
01-29-2004, 11:19 AM
I am not going to touch this one with a ten foot pole but I would say that by wasting your words bashing Sharpton, who is an amazing orator but completely unelectible, Bush wins. If Bush wins, you lose. Unless you are in the top 1% of wealthy Americans... then I can understand. Maybe you ought to complain about the national debt or why Bush let the Saudi royals and Bin Laden family out of the US during the flight ban immediately after 9/11. Lies about weapons of mass destruction are killing American soldiers, innocent Iraqui women and children and all you can find to bitch about is Al Sharpton.
01-30-2004, 11:38 AM
Yeah, it is pretty sad, Buttfor.
But you know what's even sadder? Enough to bring a tear to the Indian's eye? Is that it sounds a lot like you've taken some cues from Michael Moore there (or is that just coincidence?). if you want to believe Michael Moore or the things he claims, that is your right as an American, dude. (Hooray for America, indeed!) Just remember that he's a member of the media (maybe not mainstream, but still) and that every medium has an agenda -- it's the nature of the beast, my friend.
And as for Al Sharpton, well....I've heard reports that he has trouble paying the people who have worked for him. What would the budget look like with him as president?? Yikes.
I'm glad that we can all get together and have a friendly political debate like this. Good times, y'all.
01-30-2004, 12:13 PM
Spatual City, man that is a great reference. I love UHF. In response to your post however I have to agree and disagree.
Agree: Michael Moore is a member of the media and also totally biased to the left. I also think we could use a few more media folks with a left-wing bias to counter the Limbaughs and Hannity of the media world.
Disagree: I work in Democratic politics so I have some understanding of the media and bias. I am just trying to show the extremes Bush goes to with extreme examples. I mean how convincing is an argument on Medicare reimbursement or childcare tax credits. I can tell you all about those vital but uninteresting things but what interests people is blood and conspiracy and the Bush White House is chock full of that shit.
So in conclusion, don't try to shampoo and shampooer. (And you use too many parenthesis). (Also if you look I said Sharpton was unelectable. One good reason for that would be his inability to raise money and in turn pay his staff).
01-30-2004, 01:20 PM
Thanks for the speedy reply, buttfor. Thanks for the nod to my name and one of the most underrated comedy movies in recent time.
And I love the idea of agreeing to disagree. I think more people should do it.
As for parentheses, I wish I had known the exact limit. Being new to the BUTM community, I'm not quite aware of all the rules. Also, if you know any other rules regarding punctuation, grammar, spelling, syntax, semantics, linguistics and the like, please let me know. Thanks for the heads up!
Hey, look at that. I managed to write a post without using one parenthetical expression. Looks like I'm making progress!
01-30-2004, 02:01 PM
In my attempt to reply to your e-mail in a snappy way I went too far in criticizing your excessive use of parenthesis. But seriously dude you mentioned the crying Indian. How was I supposed to respond?
01-30-2004, 05:16 PM
I know, I know...
I was totally showing off...or being a jackass, whichever one you prefer.
I've been watching so much of Mr. Show lately (I just rented the 3rd season) that I've inadvertently started injecting referrences to it just about everywhere. Does this condition sound familiar to anyone else? Or am I King Loser? There, I did it again!
Actually, in my case, I guess it would be Queen Loser...
01-31-2004, 12:12 PM
Trust me, I understand your pain. It is really hard to find people who want to talk about megaphone crooning, the altered state of Druggachusetts or how a slothful child shall lead them.
01-31-2004, 10:39 PM
Originally posted by buttfor
I am not going to touch this one with a ten foot pole but I would say that by wasting your words bashing Sharpton, who is an amazing orator but completely unelectible, Bush wins.
That almost word for word the right wing diatribe used to say, "If you criticize America, if you stop spending on as much as possible, if you act more carefully, the terrorists win," just applied to a left-wing position. I find it no more valid there.
As for the rest, fine, if that's your opinion on the tax cuts (the deficit of which could damage the economy, in which case it would hurt rich people anyway), then there's no point in getting into an ideological debate on a Mr. Show webforum, because, among all the places I would go looking for a political debate, a comedy webforum is probably the last one. I will, however, say that I do not find it "Pretty sad" that I respond to a statement you make by making a post that took about three seconds, because yours was the statement I saw in front of me. I am sorry if I misuse my time. I'll go sign up for the Howard Dean campaign tomorrow and firebomb the White House. After that, I will never get on the internet, I will only read books about science and Marxism. That way, no time will be wasted, because I know that my big problem is that I waste all of my time, whereas all of your time on the internet posting on webforums is completely meritorious.
Personally, if I were you, I would focus more on Bush's backwards stance on gay marriage, which I really do find evil, rather than a war which, according to the Kay Report, he was misled into just as much as anyone else. And when you say that the lies about weapons of mass destruction are killing soldiers and Iraqis, I'd respond that, at the very least, it's not throwing them in torture chambers, and these are days that will pass into a new government (though that may, admittedly, take longer than it ought to), whereas there was no such chance under Saddam's rule. Times will change, but they never would have without the war. I would also suggest this article: http://salon.com/opinion/feature/2003/03/19/left/index.html to anybody that thinks that those in favor of the war are monsters. Both sides have valid positions, and there are many reasons against war, but I think that saying that those in favor of the war are in favor of the slaughter of innocents is a completely unfounded statement.
Also, for big fans of Michael Moore, I would suggest the following link: http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html . It's not that Moore has a bias, since almost every persuasive film has a bias. It's just that he is intentionally deceptive. Although, to be fair, as Moore says, "Every fact in my movie is true!" Indeed, every FACT is true. So, when Moore says something true, it's true.
Highlights on the things that are not facts include that he could not legally buy bullets at a Canadian store as a man from another country, and the bank that he got the gun from so quickly was a licensed arms dealer, he had to take out a twenty-year CD, he had to get an FBI background check and clearance, etc. Bias is one thing, while lies are another.
Also, sorry for wasting more time by doing anything other than bashing Bush.
02-01-2004, 02:37 AM
Mystik, it's funny that you brought up that Michael Moore website. I was going to mention it, but I didn't.
Speaking of comedy and politics, remember when Michael Moore was actually funny, around the time he did TV Nation? Whatever happened to that, I wonder....
02-02-2004, 11:50 AM
Comparing the large-scale limiting of free speech to an opinionated comment I made seems a bit extreme. I said you wasted your words. I didn't accuse you of being unpatriotic or anti-American. I just feel that in a time when we are being so misled by our government we shouldn't sweat the small stuff aka Al Sharpton. I would never tell you that couldn't bitch about him but I will tell you I think there are bigger fish to fry.
Time. You seem obsessed about time. Again I said you wasted your words, not your time. Maybe you spend your time out there fighting for gay marriage. Maybe you spend your time making sure Michael Moore starts telling the truth. Maybe you spend your time supporting the troops. I don't know how you spend your time. I only know your words. In response to your words, I think Howard Dean sucks and I would never tell you to support him. Marxism is a nice philosophy but put into practice it is a twisted horrible thing. Also, considering the time I spend looking at porn or reading Pitchfork on the internet I would have to say that I am guilty of wasting my time too.
I think that the war and the innocent people dying is more important than gay marriage right now. The next step for that movement is the civil union anyway. I have never and will never imply that people who support the war are supporting the "slaughter of innocents" but I will say that innocent people are dying and I don't know why. The government says its not for oil and now its not for WMD. So please, tell me why. Why, out of the thousands of the tyranical regimes to overthrow, did we pick this one?
Also, I have been to that anti-Michael Moore website before. You are right, he needs to stop lying to his audience. "Roger and Me" is filled with the same types of inaccuracies and misleading editing.
Lastly, here is a quote from your last message: "there's no point in getting into an ideological debate on a Mr. Show webforum, because, among all the places I would go looking for a political debate, a comedy webforum is probably the last one."
Here is a quote from your first message: "Al Sharpton is a blatant anti-semite that stands by his decision to fan flames of racial hatred by and defending a girl that lied about being raped... He also went to Palestine and defended Yasser Arafat. Even if you hate Bush, I don't understand how anyone can love Sharpton."
I was talking about Bill Mahr's political/comedy show on a Bill Mahr forum. The later was your response to my comment about a specific show.
Now who is guilty of getting into ideological debates on a comedy website?
vBulletin v3.6.2, Copyright ©2000-2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.