That incisive right-wing wit again
I love this kind of stuff (via Eugenides) - I’m something of a collector of empty, witless hyperbole masquerading as political commentary. This one sits next to the tosser-pretending-to-be-intellectual wankerdom that can’t talk about socialism without mentioning the Nazis in the same breath and calls people who are pro-EU ‘federasts‘:
“The Guardian is far to the Left of not just the Tories but also of New Labour, the paper’s constituency seemingly that of the “Londonistan” of mullahs and minarets. The Guardian used to be called the Manchester Guardian; today it might well be called, by fans and foes alike, the Madrassa Guardian.”
The Spectator are no doubt highlighting it to try and get a rise out of ‘lefties’ but just come across as crass, sniggering playground dicks. Is there really a serious point being made here?
Granted it’s the method by which most of the popular right-wing blogs made their ‘reputations’ and why most of them are the most awful, repetitive bumwater. But really, it’s the equivalent of pointing at a cock and balls drawn on a toilet wall and expecting everyone to agree it’s the funniest thing since Oscar Wilde turned up his toes. It’s dire stuff.
Anyway, I must get back to my project for when Margaret Thatcher dies. It’s a photoshopped picture of her being graphically sexually violated by Augusto Pinochet and Milton Friedman. In Auschwitz. No doubt everyone will laugh like hyenas when they see it. If not, I’ll want to know why not.
Posted on June 1st, 2008 at 11:53 am
| See also • Excuse me while I puke • Satire: dead but it won’t lie down • There’s a difference between living and surviving, Ed |
• Permalink • Trackback • Subscribe |
|
• Filed under Miscellaneous misanthropy, UK politics |
• |
With a teaser like that, I might just have to go and drop the bitch myself next week (my next day off).
Sim-O’s latest blog post… Basic terrorism…
It’s the difference between being a conservative and a reactionary, to a degree. Whether you think it matters whether what you say is true or false, whether you think a sense of proportion is important, whether you think it is clever to be say the most exaggerated thing you think you can justify with the most tortuous of logic, whether you think it is funny and original to say things for provocative effect.
Silly little boys have no idea why any of this is important: most rightwing bloggers are silly little boys.
ejh’s latest blog post… Aspirations
That was a quote from an Indian newspaper. I’m sure the Spectator was delighted by it, but your post reads as though it was the Speccie itself that ran the piece, whereas in fact they just quoted it.
Not a very honest point to try to score.
A lecture in rhetorical honesty from you, Peter, is like being told by Pete Doherty to lay off the skag.
Example?
I really can’t be bothered to drag one up. I don’t blog to get into tedious whatever you call this with joy-sappers like you, at least not any more. Why don’t you go and bother somebody else?
QED on both fronts. Bye.