the wise and irreproachable sage, ward churchill, recently dispensed his unique and valuable Speech to bill maher and his audience on HBO. watch the video here or here. i am inclined to think churchill really believes the things he said in the interview--BUT!--i have recently learned an important lesson: the channel on which a person's comments are made may affect the meaning of those comments.
for example, nancy soderberg was on COMEDY CENTRAL when she expressed her hope that the newly emerging democracies in the middle east will collapse, so it was a JOKE! get it? speech on comedy channel = jokes, ok? likewise, since bill maher and ward churchill were on HBO (a movie channel) when maher told us that it was wrong for us to bomb nazi germany at the end of world war II, and churchill promised us that many of the world trade center victims were evil, they must have just been acting--merely reciting their lines.
i mean, come on! its just entertainment! if we are to see who these people really are, we'll need to see them on an actual news channel! perhaps this video of ward churchill would be useful. [video & transcript]
see also our previous coverage of ward churchill, as well as some informative blogs: pirateballerina and wardchurchill.blogspot. and finally, i don't agree with the characterization of the family member that jeff jarvis makes in his post, but his comments are worth the read.
Posted by travis at March 5, 2005 05:14 AM | TrackBackLOL.
I have been quietly lurking here for a couple of months, but I can now see that I am badly needed. Heck, I'm already the subject of a post!
(I can't help observing that its pretty pathetic when a blog is so far out on the right-wing fringe it needs a Moderate-Conservative to balance it out.)
On the subject of Ward Churchill:
Churchill is obviously wrong on many of the things he says.
On the subject of the right-wing obsession with Ward Churchill:
Don't you guys ever get tired of being offended? Do you really enjoy it so much that you need to search out some podunk professor at some university somewhere? Do you ever stop and consider how many of your political posts have to do with nothing more than outrage against some particular left-leaning person or group? How productive is that? Does it elevate the level of political discourse? Or does it just fuel your anger?
LaurenceB,
You raise a valid point in saying that we can find better ways to stimulate political discussion that to troll the news looking to bash the latest left-leaner. However, I think The last few posts have been valuable for the following reasons.
First, in the mainstream, the "right-wing" fringe is a constant subject of ridicule. Did you channel surf the days following the election? According to nearly every news channel, the country had be galvanized into the intellectual, rational, and moral blues, and the gunrack owning, bible thumping, warmongering, evangelizing reds. Being a moderate conservative, you most likely disagree that this portrayal is highly inaccurate. So these posts, taken not from fringe sources (Like Naum Chomsky's blog), but from highly visible sources (HBO, The Daily Show)serve to point out that among the liberals there are some real freaks too. If we won't point them out, who will?
Second, this blog in itself serves as a balance by pointing out the wierd stuff and the inconsistency that liberals are defending and throwing at us.
Posted by: abuzachary at March 5, 2005 11:08 AMby the way, I occassionaly post here as marshall.
Posted by: abuzachary at March 5, 2005 11:09 AMDon't you guys ever get tired of being offended?
How deliciously ironic, considering your lengthy responses to the last two posts.
Posted by: doug at March 5, 2005 12:30 PMDoug,
I have no idea what you meant by that.
By the way, I thought your recent post on the Supreme Court decision concerning juvenile death sentences was very good.
I'm already the subject of a post
you're idiotic comments were the subject of this post. get it right.
Don't you guys ever get tired of being offended? Do you really enjoy it so much that you need to search out some podunk professor at some university somewhere? Do you ever stop and consider how many of your political posts have to do with nothing more than outrage against some particular left-leaning person or group? How productive is that? Does it elevate the level of political discourse? Or does it just fuel your anger?
if you are offended by the subject matter on this blog, you can go start your own blog where you just talk about flowers or other non-aggressive organisms, discuss your favorite cartoon characters, or perhaps publish the results of those fun online quizzes that determine things like "which seinfeld character are you?"--anything! the sky's the limit, laurence!
you claim you do not understand what doug means when he points out the irony of your characterization of us as people who love to be offended. you must be pretty dense; the tone of the comments you have made in response to our posts is no different from the tone of the posts themselves. so please excuse us when we have trouble taking your criticisms at all seriously.
Posted by: travis at March 5, 2005 06:03 PMI'm not at all offended by this blog - I frankly don't know what I said that might have made you believe that I was. I would describe myself as amused, and a bit appalled, but certainly not offended.
Travis, I find your personal attacks particularly appalling. But I'm not at all surprised by them. It's pretty clear that dissent from the (Republican) party line is not allowed around here, isn't it?
It's pretty clear that dissent from the (Republican) party line is not allowed around here, isn't it?
double negatives aside, i have no problem considering coherent, logical arguments. my response to your comment a few posts back [CLICK] is an example of a polite, non-appalling response to a civil comment from you.
on the other hand, when you come here acting like a little prick telling us how to run our blog, i may get a little hostile. please take note of how this works--its not that hard!
in your last comment, you feign astonishment at being treated rudely. its like you think you have submitted a letter to the local newspaper telling them their service stinks and they write back telling you to shove it. NEWSFLASH: you are a non-paying reader to a private, non-profit entity with independent, volunteer employees, laurence. "the customer is always right" is not a mantra we accept. the "customer" must prove he is right and be respectful about it. see the rules [CLICK].
in your last comment, you remind me of the kid on the playground who slaps another kid, and when the second kid hits him back, kid 1 goes crying to his teacher that he got hit. the moral here is: don't act like a jerk then complain when you are treated discourteously. it makes you look like a sissy.
Posted by: travis at March 6, 2005 04:11 AMDerogatives used by Travis to describe LaurenceB:
1. idiotic
2. prick
3. jerk
4. sissy
Derogatives used by LaurenceB to describe Travis or anyone else on this board:
(None)
Travis,
I will continue to criticize the posts on this blog as I see fit. I believe that's what comments are for. If you don't like that, feel free to turn off comments or prohibit my posting. It's your blog.
Also, feel free to continue the personal attacks. As I said before, I find it amusing and appalling, but I have a pretty thick skin about this kind of stuff.
words laurence, self-proclaimed prince of piety, has called travis or the blog, and just neglected to mention:
1. appalling
2. fringe
3. pathetic
4. unproductive
5. panties in a bunch
i mean, who would get upset about that stuff, right?
It's your blog.
YES! that's what i've been saying all this time.
I will continue to criticize the posts on this blog as I see fit.
please do. a lot of people seem to be quite entertained by you.
Posted by: travis at March 6, 2005 01:06 PMDerogatives used by Travis to describe LaurenceB:
1. idiotic
2. prick
3. jerk
4. sissy
5. Self-proclaimed prince of piety.
6. Many more to come I expect.
Derogatives used by LaurenceB to describe Travis or anyone else on this blog:
(Still none)
Derogatives used by LaurenceB to describe this blog or posts on this blog:
1. appalling
2. fringe
3. pathetic
4. unproductive
5. Many more to come I expect.
Derogatives used by LaurenceB to describe the collective behavior of contributors to the blog, and for which he hereby apologizes because they were juvenile and a bit too personal. (Sorry about that.)
1. panties in a bunch