And the award for most embarrassing post ever goes to...
Some pro-life idiot named Pete. I almost feel bad for laughing at him, since he's obviously a little slow.
Link via The Disgruntled Chemist.
Monday, July 10, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
That's great. I think he may actually believe it's true. So now the question is - did he not read any of the 85 comments? Is he revelling in the attention his blog it getting, and doesn't care how he gets it? Maybe he's on vacation and hasn't checked his blog since last week. I can't imagine why he would leave the post up if it's not actually a satire of a satire.
Ok, did you read his latest post? He's just ignored the whole thing. The only 6 comments on that post are all about the Onion post.
Storm, you're insane. Either the guy set up the whole blog as satire just to make that one post, or he doesn't get it.
There's no way he's actually got a serious pro-life blog and posted that as satire. And if that had been the case, I would imagine the guy would have posted some response to all the commentors.
Responding seriously to satire is not satire. And read the comments, you're the only one who sees it that way.
The whole blog clearly is not satire therefore your point is missed on me.
That is my point. The only way you could possibly think this is satire is if you thought he set up the whole blog as a joke, which is fairly clear he didn't do.
Actually he did post a response but it was a new thread. He admits to believing the general feelings attributed to a fictional character are true based on his own observations.
I haven't yet seen the response, because I can't get to it from work, but if he says he believes the stuff attributed to the fictional character are true, then he is an idiot, which is exactly what he is being made fun of for.
Do you seriously mean to suggest you form your idea of something based on the opinions of others?
No, I was just pointing out that you're wrong about it. And since so many more people seem to see it the opposite of how you do, I would think you might reconsider how wrongly you read it. But, whatever.
Perhaps, the most disturbing thing was the repeated calls for violence against this guy.
I don't remember seeing anything like this. Got any examples. I bet they were in jest, but since I don't remember any specifically, I can't say for sure.
I thought liberals were the sensitive understanding types????????
So we're not allowed to have a sense of humor? Jesus. Anyway, I said I almost feel bad for laughing at him.
Ok, storm you seriously have to be kidding. I read the guy's response and he still doesn't get it. Now he seems to think that some woman wrote a satirical piece about her abortion. He completely misses the point that he is arguing with a fictional woman who exists only in the mind of a writer at The Onion. Either you don't get that either, or your comments are also (very poor) satire.
Won't somebody PLEASE think of all the innocent children!!!!!
There were far less comments the first time I read it, so I didn't see so many of those. so I concede that some commentors said some nasty and uncalled for things to the guy, which is pretty disturbing. Especially when it's so easy to mock him for being stupid.
As for the point of your last comment, I'm really not sure what you're saying. Do you now recognize that the guy didn't know what he was talking about? Do you think that that isn't important when reading his post? Because it absolutely does. He is debating the choices of someone who does not exist, and I think that's pretty relevant.
As for debating Murphy Brown, that may have even been stupider than this. Thanks, Dan Quayle. I don't see how bringing up how other people were stupid in the past is a good defense for being stupid in the present. If anything, the past should have taught us something.
Anyway, regardless of one's views on abortion, the guy's post (and the comments and the follow-up) was hilarious, and that's my only point in posting it. And if I ever do anything that stupid, I would expect to be mocked just as mercilessly.
I agree mocking Pete and reminding him to do better research was well warranted.
However threantening him and suggesting his mother should have aborted him is not.
So, we agree after all. Wouldn't it have just been easier to say I was right in the first place?
John
That was an attempt at very bad satire. You should be an expert in this area.
beakerkin, are you talking about the guy's post or the original article? If you're talking about the post, you're crazy, it was clear he thought it was real. If you're talking about the original article, it was very good satire.
[url=http://sopriventontes.net/][img]http://sopriventontes.net/img-add/euro2.jpg[/img][/url]
[b]place to buy adobe photoshop, [url=http://tonoviergates.net/]microsoft project management software[/url]
[url=http://sopriventontes.net/]software ottawa canada[/url] download windows vista discount microsoft office pro
software developers canada [url=http://tonoviergates.net/]to sell my software[/url] quarkxpress templates for comics and cartoonists
[url=http://tonoviergates.net/]can i get photoshop cs3 for a non intel mac[/url] windows xp software to buy
[url=http://sopriventontes.net/]budget software canada[/url] discount software review
marketing software canada [url=http://sopriventontes.net/]bookstore academic software[/url][/b]
buy valium valium 10mg white - valium effects bluelight
Post a Comment