HAHAHA! Seems old Warren the Conscience Kinsella has gone and joined the ranks of us uncivilians. Let the wringing of hands commence.
" A battle of the sexes erupted at the Ontario legislature Tuesday after an editorial photo illustration, deemed by many to be derogatory to women, was discovered on the website of Liberal strategist Warren Kinsella."
I repeat HAHAHA!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
19 comments:
http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:z6-LvN0fJjYJ:www.warrenkinsella.com/musings.htm+warren+kinsella&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=ca&client=firefox-a
whoops, I didn't mean to post just the link to the offending photo, which commits the horrible offense mostly of not being funny enough to be forgivable. Very funny sexist jokes can be excused. If the joke isn't funny, you're left with just the sexist part.
Also, why won't a major media outlet actually publish a link to the photo? I hate going to a news site, seeing a story about a website, and then having to track down the website myself. At least put a picture of the photo on your own server or something, if you don't want to send a lot of traffic their way. Pet peeve of mine.
Wow. "Baking cookies." Just when you think the blogosphere can’t get any more hateful, someone comes along to surprise you. Amazing.
Sure but unlike you CC, Kinsella shows a little class and makes a real apology:
July 24, 2007 - An NDP politician is trying to make hay out of yesterday's Randy Hillier photo, I am told.
I took it down earlier today because my wife - who is a lot smarter than I am - thought it wasn't funny. She's right. So that's what happened, for those of you who are asking. I unreservedly apologize to anyone who was genuinely offended.
and
July 24, 2007 – This is my “delete all cookies” entry, you might say.
[...]
Or, you know, I could give some other excuse. But I won’t. As I have myself advised others before: when you make a dumb mistake, admit it, apologize, and learn from it.
So: I made a dumb, sexist mistake. DiNovo and MacLeod are right to be critical. And I should know better. Full stop.
Anony...I'm sure he was forced to apologise, but I could be wrong...
Very funny sexist jokes can be excused. If the joke isn't funny, you're left with just the sexist part.
Didn't I say, on this very blog, that WK doesn't have much of a sense of humour? He hit the high-water mark with the Stockwell Day/Barney escapade.
I do think the bigger crime here was the fact that this attempt at political satire was more witless than sexist, altough sexism is almost always witless anyway.
Hi Anonymous! Not that I mind you failing basic reading comprehension and all but CC didn't post this little thang, I did. In fact, CC hasn't posted so far today. So are you going to apologize for being dim?
Hi Anonymous! Not that I mind you failing basic reading comprehension and all but CC didn't post this little thang, I did. In fact, CC hasn't posted so far today. So are you going to apologize for being dim?
Ummm.... Nope! I think of you as a single entity...
How very small of you anonymous.
How very small of you anonymous.
Not small at all amigo! I'm merely addressing you as the collective you wish to project. Had you denounced or disagreed with CC after his/hers/it's "Fuck You" comment, I would have thought differently. Unfortunately you didn't and I can't.
I run a group blog as well and one of the main points I get through to my authors is that if they don't agree with what I've posted that they let me know, preferably privately but publicly if required. You voiced complete synthesis with CC's points PSA... You are one. You are borg..
"anonymous"
Why don't you go and find out that what you said is false?
Here is my response to that kerfuffle anon. It seems to me that you are being dishonest. Do my words somehow echo agreement or approval of the famous 'fuck off'? I think not. I think you've got your tarring brush out and you're not about to let the truth get in the way of your attempt to diminish, reduce and revise. And since none of your co-bloggers have leapt forth to dispute your selective reading, shall we just assume that they are equally as unfamiliar with basic honesty? So you're saying that Kinsella gets a pass because I didn't apologize for something someone else wrote on a blog that is devoted to snark and sarcasm. Precious.
Here's me failing to disagree:
"So. I'm not telling Wanda Watkins to fuck off. She lost a child to the grinding wheels of conflict. For her loss, she has my sympathies and condolences. Right or wrong, the soldier does not choose the mission. In the wake of her family's loss, I can understand why she would need to think that we must all support the mission that took her child's life."
Is this the famous group blog to which you refer anonymous? Or are you just a transparent liar? Perhaps you'd like to leave us a link to your blog, if this is not it, so that we might go and learn from the very high standards you claim to keep. In the mean time I guess you'll have to forgive CC for not disagreeing or denouncing me for telling you to fuck off.
"I run a group blog as well and one of the main points I get through to my authors is that if they don't agree with what I've posted that they let me know, preferably privately but publicly if required."
And while I'm kicking your stupid arse, how would you know what I have or have not said to CC in private? Yet you are eager to cast me as a borg in your little fantasy scenario. Seems you keep a different standard for yourself. Not only is it acceptable, it is preferred if your bloggers disagree off the front page. How many layers of dishonesty can you expose in a few brief comments anoymous? I'm sure CC will be sending me a private missive that tut-tuts me for being so vulgar to your delicate sensibilities when I remind you to get fucked, liar.
"I run a group blog..."
Why didn't he link to it? Unless it's you know who...
Gah...before the Web, I was quite happy believing society didn't include quite so many dull psychos.
Thanks a lot, Tim Berners-Lee.
Is this the famous group blog to which you refer anonymous?
Nope, that's not it. That one was set up because I needed a blogger account in order to post comments here.
Or are you just a transparent liar? Perhaps you'd like to leave us a link to your blog, if this is not it, so that we might go and learn from the very high standards you claim to keep.
Nope and nope. I'd prefer to remain anonymous for now thanks...
In the mean time I guess you'll have to forgive CC for not disagreeing or denouncing me for telling you to fuck off.
Oh, Ok... I think I get it now... You simpletons consider Olaf and Evans to be the same because of their association but if someone considers you and CC the same because of your association, well then, that's different...
Hypocrite much?
Oh, quiet, you big ol' liar.
Oh, quiet, you big ol' liar.
Thai-guy, ever complicit with the incitement of the simpleminded, comes up with another zinger intended to deflect from the hypocrisy of his comrades...
Thai-guy; Shouldn't you be busy trolling myspace for 14 year-old boys? Oh wait... They just did a purge didn't they? My mistake... As that venue is now closed to you, you've probably got some free time...
"You simpletons consider Olaf and Evans to be the same because of their association"
Again with the lies. I don't know enough about Olaf to be interested in where he posts. All I know is that he is considered a voice from the right that isn't propelled by methane. We need more of those. I didn't partake of the whole Olaf/Evans thread and if I had, I would have sided with Olaf. Reprehensible dullard, smear merchant and bigot Dickie Evans might be a pustule on the rump of the blogosphere but that isn't Olaf's fault.
So far notnonny, you're two for two in trying to ascribe CC's opinions and statements to me. You've lied, dissembled and still you can't find the mark. I didn't curse Wanda Watkins, I don't consider Olaf and Evans the same and I am quite demonstrably not the same as CC. The only hypocrite in the thread is you notnonny, a liar, a hypocrite and a fool. You're every claim has been demolished and still you preen, the comic prig in distress.
I shall await your next prevarication, false equivalence and accusation with bated breath.
See, Notnonny? It's clear you're a liar. You know it, we know, everyone knows it.
Now, if you were amusing, that'd be something, but since you're obsessed with child-rape, you're really not funny at all.
Post a Comment