Slate will be contrarian about anything, including, from time to time when they want to rinse out their mouths, contrarianism , so it comes as no surprise that one among them decided to warn us all that the upcoming Jon Stewart / Stephen Colbert political-rally parody event is a bad idea. Writer Timothy Noah is an old who will be having a bunch of youngs staying over at his house to go to this thing, and
"A more legitimate (and probably more successful) political impulse would be to try to persuade the unenlightened that you have a better idea."
Except for the main problem with that &quot;legitimate impulse:&quot; THESE ARE FUCKING IDIOTS. <i>Ideas</i> and <i>idiots</i> are 100% incompatible. Idiots are fact-averse enough to parrot things about &quot;birf certificatez&quot;, what makes you think they&#039;ll recognize anything, let alone a well-formulated political argument?
Yes, let us take Americas Funniest Home Videos, but instead, present alternate scenarios to explain how &quot;this here would be a much better trajectory for the baseball, because it would NOT hit the man square in the ballsack!&quot; Yes, Timmy, it sure would be better for the ballsack. You prefer to murder comedy, to do what? keep ballsacks informed?
I have a better impulse: You don&#039;t actually elevate an idiot&#039;s idiocy to the level of legitimate discourse.Yes, Timmy. You just framed incoherent shouts about Kenyans as if it should be debated.
&quot;they hate, hate, hate anything that smacks of elitism.&quot; Like, say, being able to name a sitting Senator in the other party. Or knowing what the Vice President does. Or being able to name ONE Supreme Court decision with which they disagree. Or being able to spell, use proper grammar and use the caps lock appropriately (which is almost never, right? Am I the only person who uses the caps lock a couple times a week or less?)
They&#039;re more than ignorant and worse than wrong. They are willfully ignorant. Even when presented with cold facts, they will not be moved. We need a name for these folks sort of like how Potter et al called non-wizardy folks &quot;Muggles&quot;. How about Willigs?
I used to think that political commentary was hard work. Now I see that many of these &quot;pundits&quot; have a dartboard in the office with each section given to a different topic. They throw the dart, look at the topic, take a dump in the computer...and viola! We have the day&#039;s article.
I mean, don&#039;t you really just want to give these hand-wringers and pearl-clutchers an atomic wedgie and stuff them in a locker?
If they had their way, we&#039;d fight off the wingnut brown shirts armed only with &quot;Roberts Rules of Order&quot; and verses of <i>Kumbaya</i>.
&quot;A more legitimate (and probably more successful) political impulse would be to try to persuade the unenlightened that you have a better idea.&quot;
Except for the main problem with that &quot;legitimate impulse:&quot; THESE ARE FUCKING IDIOTS. <i>Ideas</i> and <i>idiots</i> are 100% incompatible. Idiots are fact-averse enough to parrot things about &quot;birf certificatez&quot;, what makes you think they&#039;ll recognize anything, let alone a well-formulated political argument?
Yes, let us take Americas Funniest Home Videos, but instead, present alternate scenarios to explain how &quot;this here would be a much better trajectory for the baseball, because it would NOT hit the man square in the ballsack!&quot; Yes, Timmy, it sure would be better for the ballsack. You prefer to murder comedy, to do what? keep ballsacks informed?
I have a better impulse: You don&#039;t actually elevate an idiot&#039;s idiocy to the level of legitimate discourse.Yes, Timmy. You just framed incoherent shouts about Kenyans as if it should be debated.
&quot;they hate, hate, hate anything that smacks of elitism.&quot; Like, say, being able to name a sitting Senator in the other party. Or knowing what the Vice President does. Or being able to name ONE Supreme Court decision with which they disagree. Or being able to spell, use proper grammar and use the caps lock appropriately (which is almost never, right? Am I the only person who uses the caps lock a couple times a week or less?)
They&#039;re more than ignorant and worse than wrong. They are willfully ignorant. Even when presented with cold facts, they will not be moved. We need a name for these folks sort of like how Potter et al called non-wizardy folks &quot;Muggles&quot;. How about Willigs?
&quot;go eat a bowl of fuck&quot; - I like that better than &quot;go eat a bag of dicks&quot;.
I used to think that political commentary was hard work. Now I see that many of these &quot;pundits&quot; have a dartboard in the office with each section given to a different topic. They throw the dart, look at the topic, take a dump in the computer...and viola! We have the day&#039;s article.
I mean, don&#039;t you really just want to give these hand-wringers and pearl-clutchers an atomic wedgie and stuff them in a locker?
If they had their way, we&#039;d fight off the wingnut brown shirts armed only with &quot;Roberts Rules of Order&quot; and verses of <i>Kumbaya</i>.
It&#039;s a wonder we get any votes at all.