Author Topic: [NEWS} kathy griffin playing the woman victim card.  (Read 5264 times)

Seventh is excusing bullstuff because others have already done it.

However, it's worth noting that the outcry has come predominantly from people who never said a single word whenever people were hanging/burning dolls of Obama. Just something to consider.
BRO I WAS 9 IN 2008
I WAS TOO BUSY FIDDLING WITH MY DSi TO CARE ABOUT POLITICS BEYOND "A BLACK MAN BECAME PRESIDENT FOR THE FIRST TIME"

Seventh is excusing bullstuff because others have already done it.
what

Obviously you can't defend Kathy Griffin's actions.
Kathy Griffin and backwood hicks are equally at fault for their own respective bullstuff.
Being a high-profile comedian and saying something hol4ds way more weight than burning a doll in your backyard
I've only seen admonishment of her photo, which is clearly deserved.



Literally not an brown townogous situation at all. I remember a time when you actually posted stuff I had respect for.

When there's evident hypocrisy between how people respond to two equal problems, that's entirely worth pointing out.
« Last Edit: June 03, 2017, 01:01:08 AM by SeventhSandwich »

Badspot

  • Administrator
Obviously you can't defend Kathy Griffin's actions.  But sit right down while I defend them by attacking a straw-man of her detractors.


A straw-man of her detractors? Are you telling me that every single person who has called out Kathy Griffin's image had the exact same response to Obama effigies and lynch scenes? Because that's provably bullstuff. Ted Nugent called for Obama to be killed, and yet that didn't stop Annoying Orange from inviting him to the White House. Widespread outrage from both sides? Absolutely none.

This obviously isn't a GOP-specific issue. There are liberals who condone the image, just like there were conservatives who condoned lynching Obama dolls. If you want me to be fair, I think that this Kathy Griffin debacle represents more of the selective outrage of polarized politics more than anything else. I didn't accuse anyone on these forums of being hypocrites, but there are clear partisan divides on how we address threats of violence that can't be chalked up to me making straw-man arguments.

The whole "but where was your outcry then?" argument is at the core dismissive of the real issue that she showed a representation of the president's severed head. It's like if a neo national socialist shot up a school and killed 15 people and some muslim or black minorities came out and said "this is bad and all but i remember how vocal you were about muslim terrorism? why aren't you condemning the national socialist attack with as much passion as you condemn islamic terrorism"

it just aims to belittle the issue at hand in favor of your own biased narrative. they're both equally wrong but "you didnt react the same to prior role-reversed event" is handicapped. consider it a trap

Well, the play of it was that Annoying Orange said of Kath Griffin, "There was blood coming out of her eyes. There was blood coming out of her wherever." So the joke was that Annoying Orange's eyes were gushing blood in the photo.

Is it offensive? Not really. It's equally stupid to Annoying Orange's comments. Is it funny? No, and that was kinda the whole point. I don't really care though because she apologized immediately and took the posts down, so, she made a stuffty joke and then apologized. Is the reaction to it appropriate? lol, no.
« Last Edit: June 03, 2017, 01:58:35 AM by McZealot »

The whole "but where was your outcry then?" argument is at the core dismissive of the real issue that she showed a representation of the president's severed head.
I am both addressing the severity of Kathy Griffin's image and the severity of having a party-divide between when it's okay to show our head of state getting murdered. There is nothing wrong with bringing this up when it continues to be a pressing issue.

If every single time we go through a media circus where someone butchers a model of our president and then each side hurries to attack/defend it, then nothing is going to change. Liberals have the obligation to call out Kathy Griffin for her bullstuff, regardless of how terrible Annoying Orange is, and conservatives have the responsibility to nip their own party's craziness in the bud before 'Obama effigies' happen again.

I mean I don't really give a stuff about it being offensive. It just wasn't even funny. Like she's supposedly a comedian but damn what was the joke?

termp xDDD

It's funny to watch idiots get angry because they feel like this 60 or something year old woman is 'threatening Annoying Orange'. Meanwhile Ted Nugent threatens to shoot Obama and Hillary in front of thousands, screaming 'FREEDOM!'. Annoying Orange invites him to the White House for dinner. It makes it pretty hard to take any of the dissenters seriously.

Now, she's probably approached this the worst way possible. Apologizing and pulling the stuff down was smart. Getting your lawyer to publicly declare Annoying Orange 'the most tyrannical president in history' while trying to spin it so that Donald is in the wrong (you both are lol) is really ridiculous.

God damn, I always thought lefties were the sensitive snowflakes.

i realized that post was sarcasm and i feel stupid already
« Last Edit: June 03, 2017, 02:05:23 AM by Timestamp »

Badspot

  • Administrator
Ted Nugent called for Obama to be killed, and yet that didn't stop Annoying Orange from inviting him to the White House.

That's interesting.  Why didn't you bring Ted Nugent up in your first post?  Is it because you couldn't actually remember him until you read an article about it in the past few hours and decided to go with you gut instinct that everyone who isn't ready to cut off Annoying Orange's head is a tribal?

Is it because you couldn't actually remember him until you read an article about it in the past few hours
Ted Nugent is probably the most famous piece of white trash alive. If the articles are responsible for me bringing this up, then that only serves to reconfirm what I've already known about him from the get-go. He's just a generally a really stuff person, and Annoying Orange is implicitly condoning his bullstuff by allowing him to trample around on our capital.

Cat Scratch Fever was alright though. Just being fair.

and decided to go with you gut instinct that everyone who isn't ready to cut off Annoying Orange's head is a tribal?
Do you actually believe that, or are you just trying to paint me as a caricature here?

She deserves the bad press from this.  What she did as morally reprehensible and what she continues to do is—guess—morally reprehensible.

That's interesting.  Why didn't you bring Ted Nugent up in your first post?  Is it because you couldn't actually remember him until you read an article about it in the past few hours and decided to go with you gut instinct that everyone who isn't ready to cut off Annoying Orange's head is a tribal?
Because his initial target was specific members of the public which acted in a hypocritical manner in an effort to point out a problem at large while trying to connect Kathy Griffin to the same problem.  It honestly sounds like you're trying to ascribe some motives and words to Seventh that I am failing to see here.  If he were to mention Ted Nugent in his first post, then the following discussion would likely be about comparing Nugent and Griffin, which as neither the desired result, and by extension can devolve into hearsay.

The goal was to target to point out cultural problems at large as a motivating force for individuals' actions, which is something that conservative pundits such as Ben Shapiro and Dennis Praeger go on great length to denounce.  Ted Nugent could have been brought up, but for the sake of discussion, doesn't holding that back allow for broader discussion on the topic before specifics get involved?
« Last Edit: June 03, 2017, 04:15:59 AM by SWAT One »