Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

mugtang

I bet this person is a blast at parties

Recommended Posts

thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we’ve reached peak snark. Like, I can’t even tell how seriously I’m supposed to take this piece. I think everyone who can read understood that the dog was a service dog. I didn’t need this explained to me. But maybe that was the point. Explain the obvious and then laugh at how stupid your readers are? I’m at a loss. 

In the future, am I going to see 60-year-olds on unicycles with golden girls tattoos on their necks going, “I don’t even know what I really like. I can’t be anything other than snarky. Help me!” Future legislation will be written sarcastically and mean the opposite of what it actually says, and then future archeologists will discover it and lecture their students about how backwards we were. But that will have been the point: a thousand-year cosmic prank, the punchline of which no one will ever laugh at, all because we were too dead inside to care about an old mans service dog.

I need a drink.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SJSUMFA2013 said:

I think we’ve reached peak snark. Like, I can’t even tell how seriously I’m supposed to take this piece. I think everyone who can read understood that the dog was a service dog. I didn’t need this explained to me. But maybe that was the point. Explain the obvious and then laugh at how stupid your readers are? I’m at a loss. 

In the future, am I going to see 60-year-olds on unicycles with golden girls tattoos on their necks going, “I don’t even know what I really like. I can’t be anything other than snarky. Help me!” Future legislation will be written sarcastically and mean the opposite of what it actually says, and then future archeologists will discover it and lecture their students about how backwards we were. But that will have been the point: a thousand-year cosmic prank, the punchline of which no one will ever laugh at, all because we were too dead inside to care about an old mans service dog.

I need a drink.

If you read the comments attacking her on twitter about her piece, you'd quickly realize a shit ton of people bought into the "special relationship" of the dog and Bush. 

Why wouldn't they?  There are tons of stories that highlight human like emotions with animals, particularly dogs.  And there is some evidence to suggest that animals do feel emotion, and some even loss.  Humans treat their pets as extensions of their own families.

But this was a picture that couldn't have been staged any better.  Personally I have no idea why the dog was put there in the first place. Except for a Kodak moment.

Her article eye roll at the bleeding heart outpouring of sentiment of imagined bonding isn't wrong.  It's just not popular.  She had to have known she'd get attacked by the fragile out there.  Looking at her twitter feed, she seems to have a penchant for calling out things she sees as bullshit. That will always get flack from a lot of people in America.

But apparently only the President can do it without any real consequence.

51t4uwlffaL._SL160_SS150_.jpg324804241_0b7c67b2af_m.jpg

BCS is to Football what Fox News is to Journalism

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Boise fan said:

If you read the comments attacking her on twitter about her piece, you'd quickly realize a shit ton of people bought into the "special relationship" of the dog and Bush. 

Why wouldn't they?  There are tons of stories that highlight human like emotions with animals, particularly dogs.  And there is some evidence to suggest that animals do feel emotion, and some even loss.  Humans treat their pets as extensions of their own families.

But this was a picture that couldn't have been staged any better.  Personally I have no idea why the dog was put there in the first place. Except for a Kodak moment.

Her article eye roll at the bleeding heart outpouring of sentiment of imagined bonding isn't wrong.  It's just not popular.  She had to have known she'd get attacked by the fragile out there.  Looking at her twitter feed, she seems to have a penchant for calling out things she sees as bullshit. That will always get flack from a lot of people in America.

But apparently only the President can do it without any real consequence.

calling out bullshit is only useful when the bullshit is harmful.

this article is a waste of energy for everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, AndroidAggie said:

calling out bullshit is only useful when the bullshit is harmful.

this article is a waste of energy for everyone.

If only that were reality.  

Unfortunately the internet disagrees with what somebody like yourself might view as "useful" and "harmful".  Plenty of websites make good bank dispensing bullshit.

And in the end, everyone is entitled to their opinion. 

51t4uwlffaL._SL160_SS150_.jpg324804241_0b7c67b2af_m.jpg

BCS is to Football what Fox News is to Journalism

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Boise fan said:

If only that were reality.  

Unfortunately the internet disagrees with what somebody like yourself might view as "useful" and "harmful".  Plenty of websites make good bank dispensing bullshit.

And in the end, everyone is entitled to their opinion. 

i maintain that it is reality

and of course she's entitled to her opinion, no one said she wasn't.  i question the utility in sharing it.  not every opinion is worth sharing.

do you see the harm in having an "awwww" moment over the dog?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AndroidAggie said:

i maintain that it is reality

and of course she's entitled to her opinion, no one said she wasn't.  i question the utility in sharing it.  not every opinion is worth sharing.

do you see the harm in having an "awwww" moment over the dog?

Natural aww moments are wonderful.  Staged ones, especially using a world leader in this way?  Just comes off wrong.  Which is probably what motivated the response of that writer.

And to the contrary: as you may imagine quite a number of people wrote that they didn't think she was entitled to share her opinion.  The court of public opinion is quite a fickle thing.  Twitter is replete with examples of opinions people question the utility of.  Nature of the beast.

TBH I really question the photograph to begin with - who staged it and why?  I wish they had just left well enough alone.  It's enough that the President was lying in state.  There was no need to stage a photograph to obtain "aww's".   It's like they were trying to get that moment where JFK Jr. saluted his father's casket.  Except they staged this. That seems to me a disservice to the President and his memorial.  But I don't know the details of how this photograph came to be. On the surface,  it certainly seems to be in the realm of "not every opinion is worth sharing".  People were in mourning and paying tribute in their own way.  This just seemed like an artificial unnecessary attention grab.  Just like many claim the writer's response was. 

I found the very human response of Dubya, in his speech and how he tapped his father's casket both approaching the podium and returning to his seat after his speech to be far more moving than that picture.  The fact that it was natural is what made it so moving.  So human.  So emotional.  We could see the anguish and feel the loss.  The dog picture just seemed like a cheap gimmick.

 

 

51t4uwlffaL._SL160_SS150_.jpg324804241_0b7c67b2af_m.jpg

BCS is to Football what Fox News is to Journalism

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/6/2018 at 12:42 AM, Boise fan said:

If you read the comments attacking her on twitter about her piece, you'd quickly realize a shit ton of people bought into the "special relationship" of the dog and Bush. 

Why wouldn't they?  There are tons of stories that highlight human like emotions with animals, particularly dogs.  And there is some evidence to suggest that animals do feel emotion, and some even loss.  Humans treat their pets as extensions of their own families.

But this was a picture that couldn't have been staged any better.  Personally I have no idea why the dog was put there in the first place. Except for a Kodak moment.

Her article eye roll at the bleeding heart outpouring of sentiment of imagined bonding isn't wrong.  It's just not popular.  She had to have known she'd get attacked by the fragile out there.  Looking at her twitter feed, she seems to have a penchant for calling out things she sees as bullshit. That will always get flack from a lot of people in America.

But apparently only the President can do it without any real consequence.

I bet you're a blast at parties. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, AndroidAggie said:

Never ascribe to malice that which can be attributed to stupidity or ignorance

Hanlon's razor.  To whom are you quoting it for, and why?

51t4uwlffaL._SL160_SS150_.jpg324804241_0b7c67b2af_m.jpg

BCS is to Football what Fox News is to Journalism

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Boise fan said:

Hanlon's razor.  To whom are you quoting it for, and why?

to you, because i don't think we need to ascribe to, well, not malice...  but bad intentions on the part of the people who made the photo of the dog.  for the record i don't think you're stupid or that you didn't know hanlon's razor, i was just being a pedantic twat

it seems more likely to me that it was a 2 minute thing, like "hey let's get a shot of the dog" rather than an elaborate show.  the bushes aren't in power, and they're not associated with the current gop in any real meaningful way.  i can't see how this would've been a ploy or a stunt.  it didn't buy anyone anything.

we may just have to agree to disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, AndroidAggie said:

to you, because i don't think we need to ascribe to, well, not malice...  but bad intentions on the part of the people who made the photo of the dog.  for the record i don't think you're stupid or that you didn't know hanlon's razor, i was just being a pedantic twat

it seems more likely to me that it was a 2 minute thing, like "hey let's get a shot of the dog" rather than an elaborate show.  the bushes aren't in power, and they're not associated with the current gop in any real meaningful way.  i can't see how this would've been a ploy or a stunt.  it didn't buy anyone anything.

we may just have to agree to disagree.

I never said it was bad intentions.  But no matter what your opinion it was a stunt.

Look at the coverage of how "Sully H. W. Bush" (the patriot!) came to visit the President one more time after that picture was taken. Parting is such sweet sorrow...

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2018/12/04/sully-service-dog-george-hw-bush-lie-in-state-capitol-rotunda-ath-vpx.cnn

 

Fox News reports you "can sense the devotion of this dog" to the president he served for six months. Really?  Someone point it out to me in the footage, please.

And "breaking hearts everywhere".

  Hey, I like sentimentality as much as the next man.   But this isn't sentimental.  It's a PR stunt.  Why?  Who the phuck knows.  But it's simply gagtastic. 

Excuse me if I see it for what it is. 

 

51t4uwlffaL._SL160_SS150_.jpg324804241_0b7c67b2af_m.jpg

BCS is to Football what Fox News is to Journalism

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Boise fan said:

I never said it was bad intentions.  But no matter what your opinion it was a stunt.

Look at the coverage of how "Sully H. W. Bush" (the patriot!) came to visit the President one more time after that picture was taken. Parting is such sweet sorrow...

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2018/12/04/sully-service-dog-george-hw-bush-lie-in-state-capitol-rotunda-ath-vpx.cnn

 

Fox News reports you "can sense the devotion of this dog" to the president he served for six months. Really?  Someone point it out to me in the footage, please.

And "breaking hearts everywhere".

  Hey, I like sentimentality as much as the next man.   But this isn't sentimental.  It's a PR stunt.  Why?  Who the phuck knows.  But it's simply gagtastic. 

Excuse me if I see it for what it is. 

 

I'm not mad at you man I just disagree 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...