Re: ! Washington Post Rips Socialist Al Franken New Butthole!
  Home FAQ Contact Sign in
mn.politics only
 
Advanced search
POPULAR GROUPS

more...

 Up
Re: ! Washington Post Rips Socialist Al Franken New Butthole!         

Group: mn.politics · Group Profile
Author: Patriot Games
Date: Jul 19, 2008 07:53

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 23:51:29 -0700 (PDT), Eat the rich
gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jul 18, 11:33 pm, Billy get_the.net> wrote:
>> In article <38vq54phu6jjhbqke003r6pluu2dajg...@4ax.com>,
>> AnAmericanCitizen earthlink.net> wrote:
>>> In his article, Franken wrote that it is an "exciting time for
>>> pornographers and for us, the consumers of pornography."
>>> The idea that this man could be elected to the U.S. Senate boggles the
>>> mind.....AAC
>>> On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 07:15:24 -0400, Patriot Games America.Com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Washington_Post_franken/2008/06/18....
>>>>html
>>>>Washington Post Shreds Al FrankenÂ’s Porn
>>>>Wednesday, June 18, 2008
>>>>A Washington Post columnist has ripped Democratic Senatorial candidate
>>>>and comedian Al Franken for his “Porn-O-Rama!” article in Playboy
>>>>magazine, calling him a “vulgarian at the gate.”
>>>>Michael Gerson, George BushÂ’s former chief speechwriter, declares in
>>>>his Post column that “Porn-O-Rama!” is “a modern campaign document
>>>>every voter should read — the Federalist Papers of lifestyle
>>>>liberalism.
>>>>“It has the literary sensibilities and moral seriousness of an awkward
>>>>adolescent nerd publishing an underground newspaper to shock his way
>>>>into campus popularity. But, in this case, the article was written in
>>>>2000 by a 48-year-old man.”
>>>>In his article, Franken wrote that it is an "exciting time for
>>>>pornographers and for us, the consumers of pornography."
>>>>The Internet, he stated, is a "terrific learning tool. For example, a
>>>>couple of years ago, when he was 12, my son used the Internet for a
>>>>sixth-grade report on bestiality. Joe was able to download some
>>>>effective visual aids, which the other students in his class just
>>>>loved."
>>>>Franken also used several crude or X-rated words in his Playboy piece.
>>>>But the article is far from the only instance in which Franken
>>>>resorted to vulgarity or bad taste. He once proposed a television
>>>>sketch about a female CBS reporter being drugged and raped, Gerson
>>>>noted.
>>>>At an event hosted by the Feminist Majority Foundation in 1999,
>>>>Franken said: "Why don't we focus on what Afghan women can do? They
>>>>can cook, bear children and pray. As I recall, that was fine for our
>>>>grandmothers."
>>>>Gerson equates Franken’s political “satire” with the “vulgarity” of
>>>>“The Jerry Springer Show” or misogynous rap music, saying it
>>>>“generally expresses contempt and cruelty.”
>>>>And he observes: “Franken is not content to disagree with Karl Rove;
>>>>he calls him ‘human filth.’ He is not satisfied to criticize Ari
>>>>Fleischer; Franken terms him a ‘chimp.’ The objects of Franken's humor
>>>>— including political opponents and women — are not merely mocked but
>>>>dehumanized. His trashiness is also nastiness.
>>>>“Rather than lampooning the emptiness and viciousness of our political
>>>>discourse — a proper role for satire — Franken has powerfully
>>>>reinforced those failures.”
>>>>The flap over FrankenÂ’s Playboy article and other disclosures
>>>>evidently does not sit well with voters in Minnesota, where Franken is
>>>>matched up against incumbent Republican Sen. Norm Coleman.
>>>>A SurveyUSA poll taken last week after press reports about the Playboy
>>>>article found Coleman leading Franken by a margin of 52 percent to 40
>>>>percent — the largest lead Coleman has held in any recent poll.
>> And all this before the Time's cover with the Jihadi Obama.
>> Suddenly, Franken looks tame by comparison.
>> Bush and Pelosi Behind Barshttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KVTfcAyYGg&ref=patrick.nethttp://www.youtube...
>It's pretty obvious that Franken was being satirical.

No, it isn't. Its in fact pretty obvious from is long history of
violence-based vulgarity that he's beyond the fringe of what most
people consider normal.

In case you didn't know, its NOT enough for him to consider himself
being satirical. The majority needs to agree with his assessment of
himself and clearly it does NOT.
>Are you
>Republicans so wrapped up in partisan politics to think he was
>serious? You can't be that simple.

Are you anti-Christian ultra-left Socialist Democrats so wrapped up in
yourselves and each other to think Franken can say anything he wants
with total impunity merely by claiming it was satire? You can't be
that simple.
no comments
diggit! del.icio.us! reddit!