finn wrote:
Quote:It need not be celebrated. It is funny. Whether or not it is concerned in any manner with the truth is something only Bill, Al, and Hilary can confirm. It is not substantive public discourse, but it may be admirable.
You find it funny. OK. And, as I suggested elsewhere, how about something like a cartoon of Laura Bush being sodomized by a St. Bernard? That funny too? And equally
admirable?
Quote:Ann Coulter is the Conservative equivalent of National Lampoon.
That she drives you Libs nuts makes it only that much funnier.
Blatham, you may not have been a fan of National Lampoon in which case your inability to see the humor in Coulter's remarks is understandable, but if you were, then there is something slightly (or more) hypocritical about taking Coulter's outrageous comments so seriously.
Let's face it, one of the reasons those of us with roots in the American Counter-Culture (and I include Canadians here as they have religiously mimicked American trends) enjoyed National Lampoon, Cheech & Chong, and Firesign Theater et al, is that their humor either baffled or repulsed our elders.
It is the same with Ann Coulter.
So, the equation is...if someone is baffled or repulsed, then whatever has produced that reaction must be funny, witty, admirable, a good time had by all? Perhaps that's why torture, war, child-molesting and the Holocaust provide such rich veins of classic humor.
Your comparison of Coulter with NL or C and C or Firesign is...well, it's a bit baffling and repulsive, actually. Not least because of how indiscriminating the analogy is.
Quote:Perhaps if she was a Cabinet level Secretary, a Senator, or even a mayor, I might find Coulter's comments a bit much, but she is an entertainer.
That's just lazy and disingenous. finn. Ann is merely the same sort of creature as Cirque d'Soleil?
Quote:For Lefties, figures like Lennie Bruce and Mort Sahl were brilliant satirists. Coulter is not only in their league but she takes them one step further by blurring the line between satire and pompous political commentary.
You Lefties that find her the virago from hell, and you righties that find her the Voice of Truth...you've all been had.
I find her simply vile and destructive, on par with Joe McCarthy or the Klan or Pravda. In style and in content, she moves your social discourse towards the very worst of tabloid fare and authoritarianism.
All of the examples of satirists you've given above (add Will Rogers, Twain, Mencken, Monty Python, Trudeau, and SNL or Jon Stewart) could and did laugh at themselves too - and at whomever was in the position of power or priviledge. Think of the skits SNL did on American presidents...party affiliation was not important. Take Stewart's show where guests Mehlman or McCain are treated with the same respect as anyone else and where no one escapes jabs, regardless of party. Saul and Bruce set out to violate taboos and to put fixed and unreflected social ideas and values up to investigation and, often, to ridicule. But their own families and social strata and political affiliates were targets as well.
None of those characteristics holds true with Coulter. You ought to get clear on why that is so.
Can you imagine Will Rogers, Twain, Sahl, Monty Python, Jon Stewart or Swift or C and C or Carlin or anyone else in our list who would ever have suggested that criticism of a President or of one Party was treasonous?