Comments on: Guardian wins again

By: Will

Will — Mon, 25 Oct 2004 15:41:00 +0000

The lamp-posts thing reminds me of this apocrophal(?) story. At a meeting of international revolutionaries a comrade says in his speech that... "In my country, come the revolution there won't be enough lamposts from which to hang the oligarchy!" To which another of his international comrades replies...
"So either the standard of street lighting in your country is very poor or there's an awful lot of oligarchy".

Boom Boom.

The coat thing I'll do already....

By: Eric

Eric — Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:50:00 +0000

SIAW,

There'll be lamp-posts after your revolution?

How passe, not to mention all that terrible light pollution.

After my revolution John B and Backwards Dave will be composted. ;-)

By: john b

john b — Mon, 25 Oct 2004 04:57:00 +0000

SIAW: Sorry. "Those of the pro-war left who publicly expressed an opinion at the time I wrote my piece". David T of Harry's Place also thought the article was mildly amusing.

BCK: Less sincere apologies. Next time I slate your overreaction to something, I'll give you a larger and more distinctive link.

By: Backword Dave

Backword Dave — Mon, 25 Oct 2004 04:25:00 +0000

John, I told you that being Will’s favourite liberal wouldn’t count for anything after the revolution.

By: BarCodeKing

BarCodeKing — Mon, 25 Oct 2004 04:15:00 +0000

John, under the circumstances, I thought that my letter to Mr. Brooker was quite civil. And yes, I think he's a "wanker" as you folks say across the pond. And if you think that joking about assassinating our president is "jolly good humor," then you're a wanker, too. Thanks for the link, chum. I've gotten all of one hit off it so far.

Cheers!

By: siaw

siaw — Sun, 24 Oct 2004 21:20:00 +0000

"the pro-war British left didn’t exactly react to this in the spirit it was intended": That’s an annoyingly sweeping generalisation, given that, for instance, we thought it was mildly funny (though unoriginal), while both Hak Mao and General Rubbish haven’t even bothered to comment on it.
It suits your purposes to pretend that you and your allies have a monopoly of humour, as of everything else that’s life-enhancing, good-hearted, etc., but you won’t be laughing when you’re hanging from a lamp-post after we’ve seized power …

By: Michael

Michael — Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:18:00 +0000

Well, it looks as though the Brooker scapegoating has started – the Guardian has taken the column off their website (do a search for "Charlie Brooker" and the most recent link is last weekend’s column).

By: jamie

jamie — Sun, 24 Oct 2004 12:19:00 +0000

I haven’t fopund much in the way of condemnation of her statement that she wished Timothy McVeigh had driven a truck bomb into the New York Times, either.

By: Michael

Michael — Sun, 24 Oct 2004 06:58:00 +0000

I wasn't that keen on either the Cook County stunt or yesterday's Charlie Brooker piece (though I'm normally a fan), but I completely agree with you that the hysterical over-reaction needs countering, as I can easily see Brooker getting scapegoated over this.

Wasn't it Ann Coulter who urged the murder of Middle Eastern leaders a couple of years ago (along with the enforced conversion of their populations to Christianity)? Presumably the blogs you linked to were just as outraged over that, though I have to say I can't find much evidence.