30
   

So Saying That Folks Should Follow Christian Morals is NOW A Firing Offense

 
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Wed 8 Jan, 2014 04:48 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
And you seem to have forgotten that you previously admitted you do share Robertson's negative views of both homosexuals and blacks. And I admired your honesty in saying that.
What Phil said was that he is fed up with the victim story trope, which has ruined black culture, which I agree with. I dont have anything against blacks other than they continue to act stupid and dont pull their weight, but they were not always like this and they can change anytime they want to. I dont have any problem with gays, my problem is with gay rights political pressure groups and I also dont believe in gay marriage.

Quote:
And the pressure groups most active in deciding that were the Christian right
Your authoritarian glasses serve you poorly. It does not matter much who was trying to raise the public opinion armies, it matters who was in those armies and how strong they were. The gay rights pressure groups tried to raise an army and largely failed to do so, and the Christian Right tried to do the same and succeeded, largely filling the ranks with people like me who dont tend to agree with them but did on freedom of opinion . YOu want to discount the entire result with " but but but the Right was doing this, and they suck!" looking completely past where the majority was because you dont like were the majority ended up.
firefly
 
  2  
Wed 8 Jan, 2014 06:01 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
The gay rights pressure groups tried to raise an army and largely failed to do so, and the Christian Right tried to do the same and succeeded, largely filling the ranks with people like me who dont tend to agree with them but did on freedom of opinion . YOu want to discount the entire result with " but but but the Right was doing this, and they suck!" looking completely past where the majority was because you dont like were the majority ended up.

I fail to see how the "gay rights pressure groups tried to raise an army". I can't see where they solicited any public support.

The Christian right was the side seeking public support with an online petition drive, started by Faith Driven Consumers, threatening A & E with a boycott.

And you have no idea how "the majority" felt on this issue, nor where "the majority ended up" nor who constituted "the majority"". Loads of people may not have cared about any of this at all, and they may have been the true majority.

I think A & E wound up doing what they were going to do all along--exactly nothing. They never had any intention of tampering with their most popular network show, so they never had any intention of getting rid of Phil Robertson.

A & E knew all along what was going to come out in the GQ interview--an A & E rep was at the interview. Apparently they were fine with it.

The "suspension" was a total sham--the show was on hiatus. That was a stalling maneuver to give A & E time to do damage control. Among other things, the rancor was not something they wanted to affect or tarnish their Duck Dynasty show, which is light-hearted and comedic in tone. And they didn't want the LGTB groups making too much more noise, so the fake "suspension" was to quiet them for a while until they came up with a better pacifier.

A & E did confer with the offended groups, but not with the Faith Driven Consumers, which left them very ticked off about that--this wasn't the recognition the Christian right wanted from A & E. And about all A & E did for the offended groups was throw them a peace offering in the way of a planned public service campaign to promote tolerance and diversity.

I think A & E basically ignored the pressure groups from both sides, and simply continued with what they were going to do all along--which was to start airing the new episodes of Duck Dynasty this month and to start shooting the next season in the Spring, with the entire Robertson family.

And I'm still not convinced this entire fracas wasn't a publicity stunt.

Rockhead
 
  1  
Wed 8 Jan, 2014 06:07 pm
@firefly,
phil has a book coming out soon....
spendius
 
  1  
Wed 8 Jan, 2014 06:12 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
And I'm still not convinced this entire fracas wasn't a publicity stunt.


Don't you not understand the world you are living in ff?

Does it bother you that it was a publicity stunt? Which it obviously was.

Your brain has been cynically set in motion old girl. And you seem to have enjoyed it. It has afforded you the opportunity to display your fine compostional skills which I must admit are above average.

firefly
 
  1  
Wed 8 Jan, 2014 06:21 pm
@Rockhead,
Phil also has a new line of guns coming out, Rocky.

A & E had the most to gain from all the publicity. They had the whole country talking about Duck Dynasty--it was a PR dream. And it coincided with their DD marathon over Christmas. That may be why they let Robertson do that GQ interview.

If this thread is any indication, however, they may not have picked up many new viewers for Duck Dynasty. Parados is the only one who has said he's a regular viewer of DD and enjoys the show. And I think only one other person, beside me, watched some of the marathon episodes, and, like me, had no interest in watching any more.

But it sure helped A & E sell a lot of DD merchandise over the Christmas season. This brouhaha was like a gift from Santa for them. Smile
firefly
 
  1  
Wed 8 Jan, 2014 06:23 pm
@spendius,
Quote:
Does it bother you that it was a publicity stunt? Which it obviously was.

Doesn't bother me at all.
firefly
 
  1  
Wed 8 Jan, 2014 06:35 pm
A & E seems to be running another Duck Dynasty marathon right now. Laughing
OmSigDAVID
 
  3  
Wed 8 Jan, 2014 07:12 pm
@firefly,
firefly wrote:
A & E seems to be running another Duck Dynasty marathon right now. Laughing
I cudn t take more than a few minutes of it.


OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Wed 8 Jan, 2014 07:14 pm
@firefly,
firefly wrote:
Phil also has a new line of guns coming out, Rocky.
Anything other than shotguns ?
firefly
 
  1  
Wed 8 Jan, 2014 07:20 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
http://money.cnn.com/2014/01/02/news/companies/duck-dynasty-guns/
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Wed 8 Jan, 2014 07:30 pm
@firefly,
Thank u, Firefly. That was helpful.
I don t find that product line to my taste. I wish them good luck.





David
0 Replies
 
wmwcjr
 
  1  
Thu 9 Jan, 2014 01:01 am
@Rockhead,
Rockhead wrote:
phil has a book coming out soon....


I can hardly wait. Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
wmwcjr
 
  0  
Thu 9 Jan, 2014 01:20 am
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:

Re: firefly (Post 5545836)
firefly wrote:
A & E seems to be running another Duck Dynasty marathon right now. Laughing

I cudn t take more than a few minutes of it.


That's because you're a man of taste.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Thu 9 Jan, 2014 01:28 am
@firefly,
firefly wrote:

A & E seems to be running another Duck Dynasty marathon right now. Laughing
they dont have much that people want to watch, which is why OLD PHIL was in the drivers seat from the get go. As someone I linked to pointed out the muckety mucks at A&E never before have found themselves face to face with a breed like OLD PHIL, they had no idea about what they were dealing with.


Now they do.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Thu 9 Jan, 2014 05:40 am
@firefly,
Quote:
Doesn't bother me at all.


Okay--but it is like avidly reading a splash about a starlet falling into the swimming pool and her top coming off and her agent having hired a photographer to be on hand to record the scene for posterity.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Thu 9 Jan, 2014 07:39 am
@firefly,
Quote:
Doesn't bother me at all.


J.G. Ballard wrote--

Quote:
Only one thing is left which can rouse people. . . .
Crime and transgressive behaviour--by which I mean all activities that aren't necessarily illegal, but provoke us and tap our need for strong emotion, quicken the nervous system and jump the synapses deadened by leisure and inaction.


If you have had your synapses jumped by a stunt you are in the position of a kitten chasing a piece of string being drawn past its eyes by someone amusing herself. Your dignity as a sophisticated lady of refinement and erudition is then only maintained by your posts also being stunts.

In the age of near-perfect mechanical contrivances the number of people required for economic production becomes small and the principle task for the rest boils down to amusing each other. The situation is exacerbated ( a buzz word here at the moment on the weather forecasts) by exporting large numbers of jobs overseas.

Mr Robertson has amused a large number of people and deserves our gratitude and our congratulations.

Vaginas and men's anuses are minor matters because their uses take up so little of our time and any extravagant focus upon them might be said to cons--tit--ewte a fetish.



OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Thu 9 Jan, 2014 09:04 am
@spendius,
spendius wrote:
Vaginas and men's anuses are minor matters because their uses
take up so little of our time and any extravagant focus upon them
might be said to cons--tit--ewte a fetish.
It is my understanding that vaginas
are definitionally excluded from being fetishes.
spendius
 
  1  
Thu 9 Jan, 2014 10:18 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Obviously but the focus was the point.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  2  
Thu 9 Jan, 2014 11:32 am
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:
It is my understanding that vaginas
are definitionally excluded from being fetishes.


That's a relief, maybe you'd like to see my collection some time?
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Thu 9 Jan, 2014 11:44 am
@Rockhead,
Quote:
phil has a book coming out soon....

According to the GQ interview, all of Phil's books are ghostwritten, which isn't all that unusual, but, what I found interesting was his saying he's never read any of them. Rolling Eyes

That sounds like he doesn't care what his name is slapped on, as long as it makes money for him.

He's a manufactured product that A & E uses to sell advertising time and, in turn, he uses that manufactured image to peddle even more merchandise that runs the gamut from action figures to wine to doormats to books, for both A & E and his own family business interests.

He's as phony and inauthentic as everything else about Duck Dynasty, a scripted, contrived, alleged "reality" show. So why should it surprise any one that he'd be willing to go along with a publicity stunt to hype interest in the show, or in new merchandise from his own line of Duck Commander products?

The only thing that genuinely mystifies me is the appeal of Duck Dynasty as "entertainment".
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/04/2024 at 04:19:58