I no longer spend hours clicking back and forth between combatants like these guys, trying to figure out who said what to whom first in the never-ending left/right blogosphere game of one upmanship. In the past, I’d spent whole days reading everybody’s posts on the latest fray–partly because if you fall into one of these things in medias res it’s really hard to figure out what’s going on and partly because it’s kind of like watching a trainwreck. I seldom got into the fray myself. The big boys seemed to have it covered, plus by the time I’d read what everybody else had to say I’d find that everything had already been said. Or I’d become bored with the whole thing.
And that’s what it is: Boring. It’s also petty and stupid. And it generally goes something like this:
Right-wing bigshot says A.
Left-wing blogosphere gets all up in arms, parsing every syllable of the bigshot’s remarks.
Right-wing blogosphere makes fun of left-wing bloggers, adding that blogger so-and-so had no problem with the much more vile statement three months ago made by left-wing bigshot.
Left-wing blogosphere retorts that right-wing blogger is homophobic and hates brown people.
Right-wing blogosphere takes umbrage, occasionally flashes his civil rights credentials.
Left-wing blogosphere calls original bigshot a faggot and implies that right-wing blogger Mr. X is probably a latent homosexual.
Right-wing blogosphere muses that the left-wing blogosphere is supposed to really like faggots.
Left-wing blogosphere brings up incident several years ago when a certain right-wing blogger was mean to a faggot.
Right-wing blogger brings up old incident in which left-wing blogosphere verbally attacked attacked a black person because he happened not to agree with them.
And on and on and on.
Okay. So, what’s your point?
Comment by dicentra on 10/4 @ 5:33 pm #
Yup, that about sums it up.
Perhaps we can just post this template next
weektime the issue arises and save a lot of bandwidth.But then, where’s the fun in that? And why wasn’t there more pie?
Comment by Semanticleo on 10/4 @ 5:34 pm #
Faggot? Which one?
Faggot
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
• Learn more about citing Wikipedia •
Jump to: navigation, search
Look up faggot in
Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Faggot or fagot may refer to:
* Faggot (epithet), a pejorative term for a gay or effeminate man
* Faggot (food), a British meatball commonly made of pork offal
* Faggot (unit of measurement), an archaic unit of measurement for bundles of sticks
* Faggot (wood) (or fagot), bundle of sticks or branches
* Faggots (novel), a novel by Larry Kramer
* Faggoting (metalworking), a metalworking technique
* Faggoting (knitting), a knitting term
* Ashen faggot (or ashton fagot), a British Christmas tradition
* Fire and Faggot Parliament, an English Parliament of 1414.
Comment by dicentra on 10/4 @ 5:43 pm #
Those who are haters are using the “pork offal” definition, obviously. All else used the knitting term.
Comment by ThomasD on 10/4 @ 5:47 pm #
Except, in this case, they didn’t. Neither Wolcott nor Perrin quoted or even linked to Dan’s piece. Had they actually parsed the posting, or the subsequent discussion they might have actually exposed their readers to some of the reasoning behind the use of the struck through term. Maybe allowed them the opportunity to actually make an informed judgement.
But they wouldn’t chance that in a million years.
So if Tinkery tonk wants to believe he/she’s got a grasp on the issue, by all means continue to mislead yourself, but you are fooling no one else.
Comment by happyfeet on 10/4 @ 6:25 pm #
I love her picture.
Comment by mgroves on 10/4 @ 6:25 pm #
If you are bored of it then you are BORED OF LIFE!
Comment by happyfeet on 10/4 @ 6:26 pm #
And she makes pastries. Bookmarking.
Comment by Dan Collins on 10/4 @ 6:28 pm #
Thomas–Let’s leave Tinkerty-Tonk out of this ;-P
Comment by tanstaafl on 10/4 @ 6:35 pm #
We used to call cigarettes “fags”.
We also used to say stuff like “He’s in such a gay mood !” and it had nothing to do with sex stuff.
(àpropos of something…)
For the record, that litany of the blogosphere doesn’t relate to the current Limbaugh dustup at all. “The Left” and all of it’s sundry hangers on and self-righteous complainers are intentionally (once again) distorting the meaning and content of an observation and whipping up the (apparently) really stupid base (RSB)
The intent being that the RSB should vote them into the Presidency at which point the members of the RSB are turned into total slaves.
Also, WEASEL(Y) CLARK, aka “the nitwit” has called for ratings of radio speech by free and independent citizens, like movie ratings.
Recollect, it’s perfectly OK for A’jad to ramble at a US University in the name of “free speech” and it’s OK for Oogoe to call the president of the US “el diablo” at the UN.
And, as has been noted here and elsewhere, A’jad gets a big fat pass from these kinds of people, just on the basis of dissing GW Bush alone.
Comment by Rachel on 10/4 @ 7:02 pm #
I’m supposed to have a point?
Comment by Dan Collins on 10/4 @ 7:06 pm #
You started it, Rachel.
Comment by Dan Collins on 10/4 @ 7:07 pm #
R: Did not.
D: Did too.
R: Did not.
D: Did too.
Comment by Rachel on 10/4 @ 7:25 pm #
R: Nyah, nyah, nyah.
D: Faggot.
Comment by Drumwaster on 10/4 @ 7:34 pm #
And around and around and around.
I’m going to just sit this particular rotation out – you can pick me up the next time around.
Oh, and Rach? You forgot the strike-though on
faggot. Otherwise you’re missing – or misrepresenting – the original point. (The jury’s still out on which of those would be worse.)Comment by Good Lt. on 10/4 @ 8:25 pm #
R: Nyah, nyah, nyah.
D: Faggot.
LOL
Comment by Good Lt. on 10/4 @ 8:26 pm #
Nice work, you two.
Comment by RiverC on 10/4 @ 8:38 pm #
Its like whack-a-mole where you’re a mole.
Was that the right analogy?
Comment by Shawn on 10/4 @ 8:41 pm #
In this game of whack-a-mole, the moles whack back.
So, spill the beans…was this a ploy to flush out timmah?
Comment by Spiny Norman on 10/4 @ 8:44 pm #
Teh intarwebs, where comedy ups and graps you by the ass.
Comment by Spiny Norman on 10/4 @ 8:44 pm #
*grabs*
Also, where your flubs are preserved for all time…
Comment by maggie katzen on 10/4 @ 8:59 pm #
DINSDALE!
Comment by Rob B on 10/4 @ 10:03 pm #
It’s not really a good one until we get the sock puppeting and the screenshots going. Still, we have to remember that to the dems the “R” after the name means “racist” and to Republicans the “D” after the name means “Dumbass.” You’d think that the “I” in independants meant “idiot” or something like that but it really just means “ignore until after the primary.”
Comment by Josh on 10/4 @ 10:18 pm #
WOAH! Wodehouse reference!
You, sir, win the prize. Toodle pip.
Comment by Paul Zrimsek on 10/4 @ 11:41 pm #
Is this one of those intentionalist thingummies? Jeeves would know.
Comment by psychologizer on 10/5 @ 12:10 am #
And now it’s all he said this, no he di’n't, I’m so bored, what’s your stupid point, blah blah blah.
What happened to us, man? Remember when we started out, and it was all about the ass-rape?
We sold out, man. We lost it.
Comment by Josh on 10/5 @ 4:02 am #
@ Paul
Indeed he would. The man eats plenty of fish, wears a size 14 hat, and works in mysterious ways his wonders to perform.
Comment by Mikey NTH on 10/5 @ 5:42 am #
“I no longer spend hours clicking back and forth between combatants like these guys, trying to figure out who said what to whom first in the never-ending left/right blogosphere game of one upmanship.” Instead i will spend many minutes thinking of something biting to say to these people who are utterly unimportant to me and whose squabble is even less important. This establishes my credentials for having no life whatsoever.
:)
Comment by ducktrapper on 10/5 @ 5:46 am #
Tinkerty-tonk? Is that an onomatopoeia?
Comment by Dan Collins on 10/5 @ 5:47 am #
Not unless fiddle-dee-dee is, ducktrapper.
Trackback by Plenty Of Fish on 11/4 @ 11:51 am #
Plenty Of Fish
To contribute to this page, include this code in your blog post: tag p