Via Jonathan Kulick, striking new evidence that the pie-toss is an effective means of bringing about social change.
« I'll Be Back | Main | Prince's "Creep" »
Pies Work
28 Apr 2008 08:42 am
Comments (12)
Ever heard of the Onion, dude?
A pie-in-the-face isn't a tool for dissent. It's a tool to mock the pompous.
So, a pie-in-the-face for Al Sharpton or Thomas Friedman? Funny stuff.
A pie-in-the-face of Justice Ginsberg? Not so much.
I have no idea who Nadine Stross is.
I think he's referring to Nadine StrossEN, who is President of the ACLU.
A pie-in-the-face isn't a tool for dissent. It's a tool to mock the pompous.
It is really a losing proposition to attempt to explain humor to the humorless.
Also, since conservatism is essentially about the veneration of power, the pie-in-the-face to the pompous will make absolutely no sense to them. There's a reason that conservatives find the president's use of degrading nicknames on his underlings to be the height of humor while mockery or a pie in the face at that president is considered a grave offense to public sensibilities and the product of a deranged mind.
If you read Yglesias' attempts to think regularly, you'll know that he found the pie tossing at Friedman funny at the time. The fact that he made this post indicates that he still does - and I say that demonstrates a lack of character on his part.
If you read Yglesias' attempts to think regularly, you'll know that he found the pie tossing at Friedman funny at the time. The fact that he made this post indicates that he still does - and I say that demonstrates a lack of character on his part.
I'd like to think your post, coming so close after Tyro's, was intentionally funny .
I don't know that I've given the President's use of nicknames much thought recently (I had forgotten about it), but - were I in the room when he did it - I'd ask him the same question I ask Matt: "What makes you think that's funny?"
At least with a nickname, the person being given one has some opportunity to object. No such opportunity exists with a pie in the face.
At least with a nickname, the person being given one has some opportunity to object. No such opportunity exists with a pie in the face.
-(amazed bystander) Wow. Look at that!
-(Jack Webb voice) Shaving cream pie. Instantly lethal. He never knew what hit him. (pause) You never get a chance to object.
-(bystander reconsiders) Still. You gotta admit. It's pretty funny.
Here's the reality: a pie in the face beats a bullet in the head.
And the point of the pie is that it COULD have been a bullet in the head - so the person receiving the pie should rethink his position.
Yes, it's funny - but it's also coercive. But it's a lot less coercive than a bullet.
And of course you can also do it just to be funny. I mean, comedians did that all the time. Or is everybody here - particularly Matt - too young to remember - or even heard of - "The Three Stooges"?
wingnuts think the "Onion" is for real. my FIL calls it that "liberal rag". hahaha
Comments closed May 12, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
So Matt - since you think pie tossing is a perfectly acceptable way to show dissent:
-- how would you judge one being tossed at Jeremiah Wright?
-- How about Al Sharpton?
-- How about Nadine Stross?
-- How about Justice Ginsberg?
Would those be examples of humorous dissent, or would they be acts of hate?
If your answer differs from how you judged the same thing happening to Friedman, then you have a rather large problem with your personal ethics.
Posted by James Robertson | April 28, 2008 10:05 AM