General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsEdited Rude Pundit: Father and Daughter Cheney Can Go Pick Some Flowers
Warning: NSFW, terrible language trigger warning, title altered so that I won't burn in Hell for eternity, excerpt edited so that everything will be ok. You can all thank me for defending your sensitivities.
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2014/06/father-and-daughter-cheney-can-go-suck.html
Let's state this as plainly as possible: The Iraq "war" was a complete and total waste. It was completely and totally worthless. The United States and the rest of the world would be in better shape if Saddam Hussein were still in power. Every life lost was for nothing. Every limb, every scar was for nothing. Every veteran who faces the unending nightmare of PTSD does so for nothing. Let's just stop ****** pretending anything else. Let's grow up a little and face that fact. Let's look the families of the dead in the eyes and tell them the truth.
The invasion of Iraq was the heaving **** of a bloated superpower dragging its gut over to pump away because it could. And most everyone just went along with it, applauding each "victory" like it was the parentloving Battle of Gettysburg. All that's left behind is the giant cosmic fudgy joke that is a United States made weaker by wasting trillions of dollars on the mad ego trip of acid-blinded utopians and an Iraq that is exploding like a bottle of soda shaken by a paint mixer and uncapped by a gun.
And we need to bring former Vice President Dick Cheney before those families and have him tell the truth: "We did it for the dollars. We went to war with Iraq because war profiteering was the easiest gosh darned way to enrich already rich people, like my friends at Halliburton. It was robbery and we named it 'patriotism.' It was extortion and we called it 'honor.'" Then, we should let the families do what they want. Maybe they'd let him go. Maybe they'd tear him limb from hideous limb. Maybe they'd rip out his machine heart and do something so awful that there is really no euphemistic way to rephrase it.
If nothing else, it would stop him from co-signing an editorial from him and his heinous daughter, Liz, like the one that ran in the Wall Street Journal today. In it, Cheney and Cheney pretty much say that President Obama is an America-hating poopy head who wants our enemies to win and who is too stupid to understand anything about the real world, the world that Cheney (Dick) understands is full of threats without understanding that they are threats he created.
GeorgeGist
(25,308 posts)fredamae
(4,458 posts)they should have grabbed a Couple of Pitchforks to round out the pic...
corkhead
(6,119 posts)that this was necessary
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)meegbear
(25,438 posts)bullwinkle428
(20,628 posts)derby378
(30,252 posts)mn9driver
(4,417 posts)There are themes and asterisks in this post. Some of them make me feel bad.
I'm so confused.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)...if the Delicate Flowers of the Perpetually Offended Club learned to use the fucking IGNORE function rather than pounding on the alert button like a lab rat on crack...
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)WELL PLAYED. FUNNY. Thanks for the laugh.
wyldwolf
(43,867 posts)mockmonkey
(2,805 posts)they can plant their tulips.
doxydad
(1,363 posts)I see what you did there...crafty!
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)deutsey
(20,166 posts)They are sentient beings. It's just a good thing they can't scream when you yank them from their life source.
Alerting.
davidthegnome
(2,983 posts)Hell, those bastards can go eat roses!
Iggo
(47,534 posts)sarge43
(28,940 posts)With a nod to TBogg
Erose999
(5,624 posts)truebrit71
(20,805 posts)KamaAina
(78,249 posts)JVS
(61,935 posts)Jeff In Milwaukee
(13,992 posts)Cha
(296,750 posts)FSogol
(45,435 posts)Jeff In Milwaukee
(13,992 posts)Fuddnik
(8,846 posts)But the Venus Cheney Trap does.
Javaman
(62,497 posts)packman
(16,296 posts)now that you got all that vile, disgusting, gutter language out of your system?
[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]
doxydad
(1,363 posts)...there were no kiddies hanging around here. I did not see a problem, and the edited version is censorship. I hate that. But...thanks for reposting!
MADem
(135,425 posts)The only person who should be doing any editing is the Rude Pundit his or her self.
I do think the Rude Pundit would gain a larger audience with a tad less rudeness, but that is the "schtick," to be Quite Rude, with these articles, so I guess the Pundit faces a bit of a conundrum.
Perhaps Pundit could prepare two versions--one PG, suitable for everything from DU to Basic Cable, and another, just linked, with the full Meat and Two Veg, with the rudeness intact...?
Then the Pundit could provide the usual "NSFW" banner warnings and "Don't click if you are offended" directions.
doxydad
(1,363 posts)...and you can catch him on the Stephanie Miller show on Free Speech tv. As far as the copyright, you're right on, but you missed my point. When you come on here or any social babbleville, you get what you get. People here are way too offended by the littlest nothing. Seriously. That was my point. I'm 62, seen damned near everything, and yeah, some of these comments, postings, etc are outrageous, but this one was the article...copyrighted and complete. If a person does not want to see that, maybe they should go elsewhere. i have found that when people bitch to me it is over NOTHING. And that does not promote discussion, but promotes discourse.
MADem
(135,425 posts)NO ONE, save the author, has any business "editing" them.
Just put up the clean(er) bits, warn about raunch, and provide a link. That will satisfy the NSFW crowd here (who insist that those four letters "mean more" than Don't Read If You Don't Like Nasty Talk) as well as the people who don't like the language.
I do think RP would get a larger audience if he were slightly less rude. That's just an opinion, though, and I wouldn't think of "censoring" him. I noted once that I would have loved to have forwarded a piece he wrote but it was too nasty for the person to whom I wanted to send it. RP very nicely obliged, HIMSELF, without being arm-twisted, with a toned down version that I did forward widely.
So, whatever...
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)to censor what the rest of us read. This is intended to be a liberal site.
MADem
(135,425 posts)MY POINT: You don't EDIT the copyrighted words of another person without their permission. It's LOW RENT, at a minimum, illegal in some cases.
Unless done for purposes of satire and that's not happening here.
If a person's work product is edited for any reason, for DU or Reader's Digest or whatever, THEY should be the ones to do it (or they should at the very least give permission) --not others. Liberals don't appropriate the work product of others without permission, after all.
FWIW, Rude Pundit himself did recently edit--of his own accord--a really good essay that was just a bit too rude for the over eighty crowd.
Bottom line--it's not for you to say if it's OK for RP to edit his stuff. It's for Rude Pundit to make that decision. His work, his decision as to how or if he modifies it.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)he was forced to censor because of those here that want to cleanse DU. We can solve that by backing off on the obsessive alerts.
MADem
(135,425 posts)I think people shouldn't go out of their way to be assholes. I think people shouldn't call each other assholes. I think we're probably better off linking to pictures of assholes rather than displaying them within a post, assuming a picture of an asshole is necessary to make the point in the first place.
I think we should consider one another's feelings when we post, and not try to be mean or cruel to individuals. That said, I, too, am getting tired of some of the "Special Snowflake" bullshit. If I hear it on television, if I read it in the paper, IF JON STEWART CAN SAY IT (now, there's a standard!) then it shouldn't be forbidden here, and if someone can't handle it, they should use IGNORE. And AGAIN, notwithstanding those objections, by the same token, if someone is using a word, or a phrase, or a theme/meme, with the express purpose of engaging in bigotry or insult against a group of people, to goad and bait them, to tease and insult them, well, they need to have their ass--if not their asshole--handed to them! We know that shit when we see it--it's pretty easy to spot, because the snarkers are obvious-is-obvious, nine times out of ten. The tenth person will be a jerk who skates close to the line; it might take Skinner years of alerts and bullshit before he finally decides he just "doesn't like" the person and puts a stake through their heart.
As a group we have a few people here who just don't get "context." I'm all for considering people's feelings, but when people use their 'feeeeeeelings' as a cudgel to limit conversations (especially conversations they don't particularly want to join) then my patience is quickly exhausted. Their feeeeeeelings are, to their minds, more important than the comfort and ease of the majority. We need to stop coddling those very few people (and they are very few, they just mouth off a lot) and tell them to put on their Big Kid Shoes and march out with the rest of the group. Or work that IGNORE button like a big dog.
I don't get why people refuse to use judgment, and I don't get why people need to control conversations that they really aren't interested in, in the first place. Makes no sense to me. It's one thing if it's a topic of great interest to the person, but often we see people wandering into groups just to stir and divide, and who needs that.
Too much "looking for trouble" if you ask me....
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)quick to yell "sexism", "bigotry", etc. Granted those things should not be allowed, but we must also recognize that there are some among us that are too anxious to be offended. While some will tell you that something is absolutely "such and such", very few things are absolute. Some expressions mean different things to different people. Some times I think we get so sensitive about some issues that we overreact which IMO is counter-productive. Intent is very important and hard to be certain of. I doubt very much that RP was intending to be homophobic.
We have some among us that seem obsessed with alerting/hiding/locking, etc. Some of them are well meaning but misdirected in thinking that THEY should alert/lock/hide/ban to save the rest of us. And there are others that see the alert/lock/hide system as an opportunity to push their point of view or just plain bully.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Some people are clearly being sarcastic, but they either forget, or are "too hipster" to use a tag for the people who just cannot get the point without an illustration.
The net nannies are probably well meaning, most of 'em, but I wouldn't be surprised if some are disrupting with a "trolling from the left" sense of poutrage--to turn the board into a parody of itself. And yeah, some are just "controlling"--my way or the highway types.
My family is chock-a-block full of lively conversationalists, and some of them would fit into what DU regards as a "protected group" that should be shielded from some of this terrible and offensive speech. Problem is, I couldn't/wouldn't DARE point them to this board because the way some of them talk (snidely, ironically, with intense sarcasm aforethought) they'd be the perpetrators of some of that speech, and banned in short order from the "protected" groups where their interests might lie, and soon banned from the board for simple irreverence and brutal honesty. They're "good progressives" but they aren't sugar-coaters.
I won't hide a post where I think the poster might be speaking ironically or if there's any ambiguity. There are a few people who have button-pushing reputations, but we know them when we see them, pretty much.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)to the mud flinging. I try always to include the sarcasm flag because there is always someone that doesnt get it. Not to say that I dont catch unmarked sarcasm myself. I admit I have a chip on my shoulder and "go off" a little to easily some times.
JVS
(61,935 posts)WWWWWWHHHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHH
MADem
(135,425 posts)and nothing more. A snippy "So THERE!"
So "wooosh" right back atcha. If that passes for satire in your book, your bar is very low indeed.
Satire usually involves some degree of cleverness, not simply eradicating the "objectionable" words and phrases with asterisks.
JVS
(61,935 posts)praise from Caesar over your calumny.
MADem
(135,425 posts)board, his post was silenced by some clueless, context-free scold with a hot alert button, so what is he supposed to do?
Bottom line? It's not cool to edit people's words. This was a one-off. If it became a habit I doubt if he'd be so sanguine about it.
Hassin Bin Sober
(26,308 posts)You can't possibly believe "go pick some flowers" is meant as a serious substitute for "go suck a dick".
You can't possibly think the silly "trigger warning" was a serious attempt to keep the OP from burning in hell for eternity. Could you?
Really?
MADem
(135,425 posts)Ralphie didn't really say "Oh, FUDGE" when he lost those lug nuts in A Christmas Story.
It's a substitution to get around standards; a form of self-censorship.
And snark--mocking and derision, deserved or otherwise--isn't satire, either.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Recced any way.
Since the SMS is broadcast over the public airways, His Rudeness must censor himself there.
It's a sad day when His Rudeness has to be censored here, too.
babylonsister
(171,029 posts)on his FB page!
https://www.facebook.com/rudepundit?fref=nf
He might read DU!
MattSh
(3,714 posts)Dang, I wish I could embed the tweet instead of uploading a screenshot of it...
countryjake
(8,554 posts)(on edit)
Oops, guess that doesn't work either.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)and delicate flowers indeed!
Cha
(296,750 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)KamaAina
(78,249 posts)GoCubsGo
(32,073 posts)It's not often that I get the opportunity to recommend His Rudeness more than once.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)Really? Is this a website for adults or for children?
countryjake
(8,554 posts)is absolutely cringeworthy.
Many thanks for this effort, but that hidden thread is still an outrage.
This is not the type of commentary that our community needs or wants; DU is not Reader's Digest or Good Housekeeping. My sensitivities do just fine when confronted with a righteous rant, no minds are corrupted or feelings burnt.
Removing the expletives from the Rude Pundit is one "giant cosmic fucking joke". DU is better than that.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)aikoaiko
(34,159 posts)NightWatcher
(39,343 posts)Don't go changing
redqueen
(115,101 posts)are disingenuous at best.
What was alerted was a homophobic insult.
Typical that so many are so desperately conflating swear words with homophobic and misogynistic insults.
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)An entire website soon to be PG, ALL JUST BECAUSE WE ARE AFRAID OF YOU.
You should really thank the poster, I bow before your might.
Hekate
(90,526 posts)hueymahl
(2,447 posts)Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)Context doesn't matter you know.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)redqueen
(115,101 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)I mean, talk about some shitty judgment!
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Oh wait, sure I do. The no friction alert button is passive aggressive crack.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Which tells you that when they jerk chains and alert, frivilously, they know they are going against the community standards, but they do it anyway. It's probably not a very "civil" attitude to take.
Oh well. The admins know who they are.
6000eliot
(5,643 posts)"I'm offended by that pundit who writes things deliberately to offend people!"
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)It's easier to be a bully when one is anonymous.
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)that used to scrutinize all the other kids looking for the ones chewing gum, or running, or "horsing around".
There was one in particular that was way over the top and would rat out kids that used bad words to each other, not adult bad words, I am talking kid bad words like "jerk" or "poopyhead". No one liked this kid, I remember getting in trouble once for joking around with a friend of mine that used to like to trade insults. We were friends and neither was trying to offend the other but the sash brat thought we needed discipline.
The teacher rolled her yes when the kid was ratting us out and it became clear to me that even the teacher didn't like this kid, some people just like to be that kid.
We have self proclaimed sash brats here in our little school looking for brownie points with the teacher or whatever it is that fuels these types.
I am not 9 years old anymore, fuck that shit.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Others use self-righteousness to bully. What irks me is that they call themselves liberals.
Bonobo
(29,257 posts)These same people that moan about "privilege" must have been born without an irony detector.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)be allowed in DU. And what does "pundit" really mean? Sounds nasty to me.
6000eliot
(5,643 posts)Hekate
(90,526 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)they need to protect us from the bad world. They believe they know best. They want to cleanse DU into some vision of heaven where never a naughty word is heard. Some are well meaning but misdirected while others are just bullies hiding behind their anonymity. IMO they are authoritarians masquerading as liberals.
DU is a great place and this pesky group cannot make it suck.
I read it, the 19th blog post and loved it. The people who alerted can go suck air, maybe some oxygen will reach their sensitive little offended natures. Rude, I LOL EVERY time I think of your blog post of the 19th. thank you for the truth. The truth always hurts someone.Ohhh, and thank you JVS.