I think you do.
Breaking News
Oprah Quitting TV Show In 2011
Oliver Willis
Like Kryptonite To Stupid
-
-
Breaking News
- Misty Stone Is Green
- Devin Hester Pantsed On Sunday Night Football
- Video: Adam Lambert Falls At 2009 AMA
- Taylor Swift Wins Favorite Artist @ 2009 American Music Awards
- Oprah Producing Sexy Series For HBO
- Mall Cops: Mall Of America Series Coming To TLC
- 2009 WWE Survivor Series Results
- Video: Jennifer Lopez Falls On Stage At 2009 American Music Awards
- Dashawn Vasconcellos: NYPD Shot Teen 11 Times
- Disney Adapting High School Musical For China
Live News
I know this guy! Small world…
Thank God he votes!
There’s a few million of them
Hey, I do know this guy!
Here’s a perfect representation of a major problem with the liberal movement: They make fun of the “common” American and find it funny. (Then they get frustrated when they can’t get enough people to vote for their candidates.)
You’ve done it, Oliver. You’ve found a way to make Gaggle look side-splittingly funny by comparison.
Funny? It’s tragic.
Proving once more, conservatives couldn’t possibly have a
sense of humor.
It’s funny because it’s true.
This is exactly my point. Conservatives make jokes specifically about liberals (funny or not). Liberals make jokes about the “common man” (funny or not). Liberals continually demonstrate (to their disadvantage) that they think regular citizens are a joke. As I’ve said before, instead of crying “voter fraud” when liberals lose elections, try looking in the mirror.
The idea that the common man is an unthinking Bushbot is as laughable as the idea that he’s a wild eyed Bush hater, but whatever lets you guys sleep at night.
1) I don’t think it’s satire it’s
2) A realistic representation of views of a great many people
- that said
3) How is pointing out obvious hypocracy and inconsisty “Making fun”? (Yes it’s funny – but maybe that is what is making JWG uncomfortable?)
4) I don’t buy that this is “the common man” – but a certain demographic
Yes this describes a great many peopel – but hardly “the common man”. I’m sur Joe Smith CONSIDERS himself “the common man”, but I don’t buy it…
The fact that the left certainly has done a poor job communicating to certain constituencies doesn’t change the fact that some idiots have pre-conceived notions and there is no point trying convince them.
Anyone who is a fan of Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, etc isn’t a Democrat except that liberals make fun of them…
JWG – It’s a satire and it’s pretty unbelievable that you can’t see it. Joe Smith is no more the common man you believe him to be (unless you really think those attributes are those of the common man) than is President Bush . What Joe Smith depicts is a composite conservative who likes to believe he is the common man, or more likely, the right likes to believe is the common man. The fact of the matter is that the conservative movement has been very successful is making this type of cartoon character seem like the “common man” when in fact he is far from it.
Wow. I actually agree with factcheck. I’m glad I was sitting down.
I see it. I made no comment as to how funny or accurate it is.
Oh, please. The cartoon would’ve been just as effective if it had been labeled “Common Republican.” The fact that it is directed at the “regular guy” is typical of the type of comments I read from the left all the time. Too many people on the left view the majority of Americans as “sheeple” unable to comprehend the obvious truths of liberalism. My point is that liberals often portray the “common man” as a negative caricature (Dean’s comment about “guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks” comes to mind) , and it hurts the liberal movement.
JWG, that’s priceless.
Conservatives make jokes about “liberals.”
When liberals do the opposite, they’re making fun of “the common man.”
I’m drowning in a flood of irony.
Now that I look at it, “the common man” as depicted here is a dying breed: A racist, homophobic white man.
There are lots of them around now, but their numbers are dwindling. The new “common man” is most likely a person of color or Hispanic, somewhat liberal socially but somewhat conservative economically, is patriotic towards the US but doesn’t have blind loyalty towards the party in charge.
The ‘Common Man’ drone is as oxymoronic as “common sense”.
But they are common enough in numbers to swing an election based
upon half-truths and out-and-out lies that pander to their perceived
interests.
Um…what’s the title of the piece?
See, I knew sometime you would see the light
JWG still doesn’t get it. There is no “common man” and the “common man” depicted isn’t meant to make fun of that mythical person, but rather the right’s definition of him.
Point by point analysis:
1) Global Warming – Many on Left and Right that question the science that says that HUMANS are causing it. Others question the ability of humans to reverse it or the economic costs of such (ie it’d be better to spend the money on eradicating poverty – Bjorn Lomborg)
2) Government Handouts vs. Charity – Statistical proof that Red States donate more to charity than blue states. There is a direct correlation between high tax states and lower charitable contributions. Highest charitable donations? The South. Lowest contributions? Northeast/West Coast.
3) Organic Food: No nutritional difference between organically grown tomato and one grown with pesticides protecting it. But, hey… it sounds good. People that wish to feel healthier should put down the Twinkies. (Oliver – Do you eat organic foods?)
4) Traffic – Yes, the greatest example of this phenomenon (traffic congestion and lack of public transport) is that right-wing bastion of Los Angeles…
5) Overdevelopment – See Traffic item above… Right-wing bastion of Los Angeles again
6) High School Education / Affirmative Action – Actually, the Dems core base in 2000 was those with High School diplomas or no H.S. diploma (>80% voting for dems) and PHDs. Those with only undergrads trended significantly to Bush. Those with Masters trended just slightly to Bush. See Stan Greenberg, Dem Pollster.
7) Attack on Christmas – Actually, it’s primarily Church-goers that are dissapointed that Merry Christmas isn’t a common phrase during December. Yes, they’re over-reacting, but they have a right to their opinion, no?
Wealthy Conservatives vs Wealthy Liberals – Yes, there’s something wrong with someone like Ted Kennedy (who’s already wealthy) wanting to take more money out of my paycheck – making it more difficult for me to ever become wealthy. Why doesn’t Ted propose a tax on wealth (instead of income)? Why don’t wealthy liberals donate more of their money to charity (See item 2 above and John Kerry’s 2003 tax returns)
9) Discontent with work isn’t a partisan issue… nor is displeasure with traffic. This is a non-issue. It’d be nice if we all could live in a city, within walking distance from our work. Unfortunately, some people like to have yards, trees, pets, etc. They also like owning assets instead of renting.
10) Most of those against gay marriage would support civil unions (which received the same benefits from the government that married heterosexuals receive). Since marriage has traditionally been in the realm of religion, those with strongly held religious views are concerned that government recognition of same sex marriage would impact their religion. Conservative and “Disadvantaged” Dems also disapprove of same sex marriage and whenever the issues is up for a vote, it’s defeated.
11) 75% of Republicans say they display the flag. 72% of conservative democrats (people that probably agree with Joe Lieberman on a lot of things?) display the flag. In fact, some “progressives” get really ticked when they see a flag planted in their yard for them. Less than half of liberals display the flag. Presumably, GOPers and conservative dems (ala Joe) support Bush’s War On Terror.
If that was accurate, then why do so many liberals think this caricature reflects people they know? The answer is because it matches the way the left defines the uneducated masses. Ward Sutton wouldn’t characterize a “common man” this way if people were voting for democrats. He regularly depicts Americans as shallow, selfish, and ignorant because they don’t support his views. Obviously, they are blind to what is really going on, or they wouldn’t support the wrong policies.
I get satire. I’m pointing out that this type of satire is common on the left (criticizing the “sheeple”) and ultimately turns off most people.
Funny. I first saw that term used (and not ironically) on Free Republic.
stwendeler, we were discussing satire, not lunacy.
Funny. I first saw that term used (and not ironically) on Free Republic. I also first saw references to Black Helicopters on Free Republic… But at least the outlandish conspiracy theories on Free Republic were laughed at… they’re celebrated on DU today.
interesting how times change…
JWG, I might agree with you (amazing!), if I didn’t see my people (New Yorkers) stereotyped by the right as out-of-touch, limousine liberals who abort babies by morning, drink latte by noon, and throw paint on fur coats at night.
Got to go, my limo is waiting for me. Got to go to Lowe’s and pick up paint for our big shindig tonight. Hope there is a Starbucks on the way!
BTW, Wendeler, if you plant a flag or anything else in my front yard without my permission, you’re going to have a serious problem.
Geesh, so much straw, so little time. Does someone have a match?
Ladies and Gentlemen, we have found “Joe Smith”- and his handle is St. Wendeler.
Never made a comment about New Yorkers… but hey, I’m making another trip to Manhattan next week, so I’ll keep my eyes peeled.
And I totally understand how getting a little flag planted along your property would drive you nuts. (You fit the polling nicely.) ‘Course, those that put them there offered to remove them if anyone objected, but it seems that the courageous lefty of the post didn’t think it’d be a good idea – apparently even he feels guilty about being ashamed of the American flag.
talk about stereotypes… the cartoon that Oliver thought was so har-dee-har funny was all about stereotypes. Unfortunately, they were incorrect. The actual polling data refutes it.
So, we can go with your incorrect perceptions of Joe Smith, or we can listen to what the actual exit polls said. I recommend that you do the former, as it will result in yet another electoral loss that you can explain away as some nefarious Rovian trick.
>”Statistical proof that Red States donate more to charity than blue states.
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/000839.htm ”
As with most Things Malkin, this is just misleading crap. This “charity” is just income tax deductable reports, which includes giving to religious groups, churches, etc. I don’t consider pastor’s salaries, Gideon Bibles, missionary trips, religious retreats, Ken Ham’s creationist theme park, Billy Graham crusades, and the host of religious right political action groups disguised as “religious”, etc. to be “charity.” That, and the fact that the study does not take into account cost of living but just raw wealth, is the reason the South looks so great.
stwendeler,
A number of your points are inaccurate or at best a matter of opinion.
The so-called “generosity index” that you link to on Michelle “What’s Not to Like about Internment” Malkin’s site has been roundly criticised for having severely flawed methodology. For example, it doesn’t take into account the cost of living for each state (i.e. taxes, real estate, gasoline, food, etc.), ignores non-monetary contributions (gifts and volunteer work), and makes no distinction between charities (i.e. donations to local churches vs the International Red Cross). Using such methodolgy, Massachusettes residents could donate 100,000 times their current level and not move any higher on the list than #21. Mississippi, on the other hand (the #1 spot holder on the index) could stop donating altogether and not fall below #26. The Catalogue For Philanthropy spokesman Martin Cohn actually said that the Generosity Index was never supposed to be scientific, leaving me to wonder what, besides a lot of media attention, was the point. Oh wait…
Only on the among staunch conservatives do you have “many” who still dispute human imvolvement with Global Warming. Increasingly, people seem to, for the most part, realize that gambling with the stability of the planet is pretty much the dumbest thing ever conceived by mortal men and aren’t keen on “waiting for more conclusive research” before trying to avert disaster. It is funny, though, that the Bushco. once bent itself in knots arguing that climate change didn’t even exist and now is arguing that it’s only natural, and not man made (or assisted, if you prefer). It’s like being trapped in a speeding car heading for a retaining wall with someone who wants to argue about whose fault it will be when you crash.
People don’t generally buy organic because they want more vitamins in their tomatoes. I’d wager most want less toxic pesticides on their food, running into their water supply, wiping out beneficial insects and animals, and so on. It’s a lot like wanting less mercury in my air and tuna.
Anyone who, with a straight face, can accuse Ted Kennedy of taking money out of their paycheck with the current administration in power has got to be either rich or daft.
-Median household income has now fallen for five years in a row. It was 4 percent, or $2,000, lower in 2004 than it was in 1999.
-Health care costs rose over 40 percent
-The number of people living in poverty has increased by 5.4 million since 2000.
That’s just a taste. If you like, I can go into cuts in Medicaire, student loans, education, worker health and safety (dead miners, anyone), and so on.
The gay marriage issue is one of social standing and discrimination. Civil unions are better than nothing, but they still carry the stench of “separate but equal,” and all that that implies (movie reference, if anyone gets it). It is also not true that civil unions guarantee benefits. That is up to the state in question. Thanks to the federal Defense of Marriage Act, however, civil unions will not have access to any federal protections of marriage, i.e Social Security survivor benefits. Civil unions might not be recognized by other states or the federal government, either, so moving becomes a major issue. As for the issue of religion and its place in marriage, that’s another can of worms. Perhaps gays are simply struck by the irony of, say, the Catholic church banning gay marriage while sweeping pedophila under the rug. Maybe its the fact that fundamentalists suffer the highest divorce rate in the country. Then again, it could be resentment over being told that an all powerful deity would actually waste His/Her/Its time getting hung up on whether the flock was bumping uglies in some unacceptable manner.
The war on Christmas…Okay, too silly to merit discussion, but it rises beyond just personal opinion when you have nutcases like O’Reilly and Gibson along with clowns like James Dobson calling for boycotts and such. The point of the whole charade is clearly to paint liberals and other secularists as anti-American and anti-Christian (while painting the Right as heroes, naturally). Yet another fantasy to bolster the laughable hard right Christian persecution complex (as is the whole Intelligent Design debate).
That’s enough for now
But that is my point. The right harshly critisizes “liberals” rather than the larger public. Most people don’t label themselves as “liberal” so the right’s use of stereotyping humor doesn’t alienate potential voters. OTOH, liberals often use humor to disparage more than just conservatives (like in this cartoon) and end up alienating potential voters.
time spent volunteering is tax deductible, so it would appear in the generosity index as well. Charitable donations as a percentage of wealth is a useful index. Perhaps modifying the calculation to look at disposable income would be better – but I’m doubtful that Mass would all of the sudden jump up to the top of the chart. Donations to religious institutions and causes is considered to be tax deductible by the goverment, just like donations to non-religious organizations. While it might be nice for you to get to pick which causes are worthy enough to be described as charitable donations, I don’t see the title of King in front of your name.
Actually, there are serious questions about global warming and the leading scientists manipulating data to skew the degree of warming that is currently taking place. Please don’t read that post or visit the Copenhagen Consensus report that says we’d have a better chance of making life better by spending the $$ on reducing poverty, providing potable water for the developed world, etc than trying to reduce increase the temp of the earth by 1/4 of a degree.
When Ted Kennedy calls for higher taxes, he’s saying that the government needs more of my money. Presumably he has ideas on what to do with that money – although I likely disagree. Kennedy has not proposed a higher tax on wealth, which would hurt him more than an income tax would. Nor do you see Buffett calling for a tax on wealth. Instead of having income redistribution, let’s have wealth redistribution…. Let’s take the billions from Gates, Buffett, Kennedy, et al and redistribute. Why focus on the income of people?
Yes, the per capita income per person is only slightly up. While certain commodities in the economy are increasing (energy), others are decreasing (consumer goods). However, the fundamentals of the economy are strong and getting stronger and implementing leftist policies will reverse this trend. New stats will come out from BEA on 1/27, so we’ll have a better idea on 2005 shortly.
Defense of Marriage Act? Wasn’t that the one signed by President Clinton? If you poll the matter, people have a problem not with extending protective rights (such as hospital visitation, inheritance, etc, etc) to gays – it’s the usage of the term “marriage” to describe the union of same sex couples. Another concern is that the Federal government mandating acceptance of same sex marriage will force religious organizations to similarly recognize them – something that you hint at.
“time spent volunteering is tax deductible”
Untrue. Volunteer time cannot be deducted. I gogled this one pretty extensively and the basic reason is a massive loss of revenue to the Fed (and difficulty tracking the veracity of such claims).
Massachusettes is significantly more expensive to live in than Mississippi, which leaves less for charitable donation, obviously. As I pointed out, Mass residents could massively raise their charitable donations and struggle to move up the list while Mississippi residents could literally stop giving and slide only down to about the middle. That’s because the table heavily weights the results in favor of per capita income vs charitable donations while ignoring cost of living and other related factors effecting disposable income. The failure to distinguish between charitable organizations means that I can give a ton of money to a local church to do bake sales so they can send Bibles to Africa and get more credit for charitable giving then a Mass resident who chooses to give less but instead donates everything to the International Red Cross. In other words, the concept of “charity” can be pretty broad. The government can and does routinely determine which organizations merit charity status all the time, and all without a “King.”
I never argued against reducing poverty or improving third world living conditions. In fact, actively working to reduce poverty in South America might help slow deforestation (assuming you can also deal with corrupt cattle and timber interests) and help control emissions and save millions of plant and animal species. I maintain, however, that it does not preclude actively working to reduce emissions and curb greenhouse gases in an effort to combat what may be unavoidable but is certainly worth fighting. The point to be cognizant of is that it may only take a tiny push from human activity to tip the Earth’s environment over the edge via a positive feedback loop. The air gets warmer, more surface ice melts, leaving less to reflect back sunlight, which leads to greater absorbtion of heat, which melts more ice, and so on. This may lead to the collapse of the North Atlantic Conveyor (warm water currents from warmer southern waters up to Northern Europe) which is largley responsible for keeping Northern Europe from turning into Siberia Deux. Then there are all the related weather conditions, more severe periods of drought and rain, massive disruption of normal growing cycles and regions, a collapse in the supply of potable water, and so on. Reducing emissions via whatever mean to at least attempt to avert such a disaster seems like smart policy.
For a more detailed climate change debate, try timlambert.org or realclimate.org.
I’m too tired to get into the tax thing, though I don’t see taxes as occuring in a vacuum. Cuts to taxs frequently mean cuts to services which translates to increases in state or local taxes and costs for other services, not to mention things like education and healthcare (i.e. the recent cuts to Medicaide and student loans). When 80 of the 200 richest corporations pay no taxes, something is broken (that goes for numerous billionaires, as well).
I wasn’t debating the Defense of Marriage Act and who initiated it. I was pointing out that civil unions are not equivalent to marriage. As for religious concerns over same sex marriage, the government can’t force any religious organization to accept such unions thanks to the struggling ideal of separation of church and state. However, that doesn’t mean that the government has to grant tax exempt status or provide any federal funding to organizations that adopt such a policy either. I haven’t heard of (or don’t recall, anyway) any cases being filed nor am I sure if there is even any legal grounds for one. I do know that several churches critical of the war in Iraq had their tax exempt status threatened, but that’s another debate.
Jesus Christ, meet my dad! And my mom…and all their friends. wtf?!
For an interesting view on Global Warming, read Michael Crichton’s speech, Aliens Cause Global Warming
Bill – you’re correct about volunteer time. Just out-of-pocket expenses related to that time spent volunteering. My point was that contributions made to charitable organizations (as determined by the taxing authority) should be considered charity, regardless of YOUR opinions of those organizations.
Regarding the Charitable Contribution index, I agree that as a % of disposable income would be a better measure – although I would remove taxes paid as one of the items that is removed. However, I still doubt that as a percentage of disposable income, the N’easters contribute more than those in the South. But, hey – why don’t you & I get a grant and study it?
RE Global Warming – There is evidence that the earth was much warmer in the past and this scientific data was withheld from analysis on global warming sponsored by the UNFCCC. If we truly want to stop greenhouse gas emissions, we should be looking to China, India, etc – countries that are exempt from Kyoto. My question is why these countries are allowed (or better put, not encouraged) to use 19th century energy production… Why aren’t we targeting these countries with their rapidly expanding economies to implement green technologies from the start, instead of waiting for them to pollute their way to prosperity, only to turn green after several decades (or a century)? Even proponents of Kyoto recognize that it would only decrease the rate of increase by 0.25* Celsius – at that measurement is under debate. If you tally up the costs associated with such a decrease, we could have a better effect on humanity by providing potable water, economic development, infrastructure improvements that lead to a better environment.
Yes, requiring gay marriage policies in religious institutions in order for them to retain tax exempt status is one of the main concerns. I submit that federally recognized civil unions (not imposed through private, religious institutions) that extended benefits to same sex partners would be acceptable to most Americans. However, let’s let the people or their elected representatives decide on that one, shall we?
Nice chatting with you, btw… .even if it was on OW’s page.
gypb ohagtckmq sezpjwmkb nzeboj fnzsa rnkz mpgi