[cite]Posted By: Ormiston Addick[/cite]Read the first paragraph and realised it was exactly the same dog shit that Clarkson has written in every one of his columns for the last decade......how he gets away with it I will never know.
What's he going to do next year when the Tories get in?
Ormiston...it's called political satire...........you never heard of it?
[cite]Posted By: Ormiston Addick[/cite]Read the first paragraph and realised it was exactly the same dog shit that Clarkson has written in every one of his columns for the last decade......how he gets away with it I will never know.
What's he going to do next year when the Tories get in?
Ormiston...it's called political satire...........you never heard of it?
It's generally topical and varies according to things that happen. What Ormiston is pointing out is that Clarky trots out the same old dogshit regardless of what policies are in place - and if what's going on doesn't suit his article then he just makes it up (e.g. Mandleson is scheming to stop middle class kids to university) - on the grounds that he has so little respect for his audience he reckons that they'll probably not know any better. If he dislikes the country so much I don't really understand why he doesn't simply fk off somewhere that suits him better (unless you actually believe you're not allowed into Spain if you're not called Del or that everyone in Canada is trying to be French), which is what I'd do if I didn't like where I was living, to the point that I had to make up stupid lies about it to print in a national newspaper to amuse the hard of thinking. Pointless whining fatty with jack shit to say, and no courage in his convictions.
[cite]Posted By: Ormiston Addick[/cite]Read the first paragraph and realised it was exactly the same dog shit that Clarkson has written in every one of his columns for the last decade......how he gets away with it I will never know.
What's he going to do next year when the Tories get in?
Ormiston...it's called political satire...........you never heard of it?
It's generally topical and varies according to things that happen. What Ormiston is pointing out is that Clarky trots out the same old dogshit regardless of what policies are in place - and if what's going on doesn't suit his article then he just makes it up (e.g. Mandleson is scheming to stop middle class kids to university) - on the grounds that he has so little respect for his audience he reckons that they'll probably not know any better. If he dislikes the country so much I don't really understand why he doesn't simply fk off somewhere that suits him better (unless you actually believe you're not allowed into Spain if you're not called Del or that everyone in Canada is trying to be French), which is what I'd do if I didn't like where I was living, to the point that I had to make up stupid lies about it to print in a national newspaper to amuse the hard of thinking. Pointless whining fatty with jack shit to say, and no courage in his convictions.
I repeat it's called satire...no one takes it seriously fer crying out loud....and certainly not Clarkson you can bet....it just goes in one ear and out the other as far as I'm concerned and IMHO a few of you should simply let it do the same.
Funny rant! Look forward to something similar in two years time on 'Dave.' FTR I also enjoy mandleson outmanoevring John Humphries on Today...one of the few who manage to do so.
[quote][cite]Posted By: SoundAsa£[/cite][quote][cite]Posted By: Ormiston Addick[/cite]Read the first paragraph and realised it was exactly the same dog shit that Clarkson has written in every one of his columns for the last decade......how he gets away with it I will never know.
What's he going to do next year when the Tories get in?[/quote]
Ormiston...it's called political satire...........you never heard of it?[/quote]
Yes, I have thanks.
You can read some very amusing conservative commentators satirising the New Labour mob in publications like the Spectator and much of the mainstream press.
I find that the better political satirists tend have three main strengths, a) Actually be funny, b) Make you re-consider your own opinions by introducing you to new ideas, and c) Be able to write about more than the single same issue each week.
On these grounds Clarkson is as much a "Satirist" as Alan Pardew is a "Charlton Legend."
That's probably why this lazy piece got pulled by the editors, not because of its political content but because it was pure crap.
[cite]Posted By: Ormiston Addick[/cite]Read the first paragraph and realised it was exactly the same dog shit that Clarkson has written in every one of his columns for the last decade......how he gets away with it I will never know.
What's he going to do next year when the Tories get in?
Ormiston...it's called political satire...........you never heard of it?
Yes, I have thanks.
You can read some very amusing conservative commentators satirising the New Labour mob in publications like the Spectator and much of the mainstream press.
I find that the better political satirists tend have three main strengths, a) Actually be funny, b) Make you re-consider your own opinions by introducing you to new ideas, and c) Be able to write about more than the single same issue each week.
On these grounds Clarkson is as much a "Satirist" as Alan Pardew is a "Charlton Legend."
That's probably why this lazy piece got pulled by the editors, not because of its political content but because it was pure crap.
I repeat it's called satire...no one takes it seriously fer crying out loud....and certainly not Clarkson you can bet....it just goes in one ear and out the other as far as I'm concerned and IMHO a few of you should simply let it do the same.
Do you know what satire is? Yes it's using hyperbole and sarcasm, but to make a point.
Let's take David Mitchell as his political opposite in the Guardian. Mitchell frequently uses purposeful exaggeration or humour in his pieces, but there's still a point being made, and I wouldn't say no one could disagree with Mitchell just because he's a comedian by trade. Satirists opinions aren't beyond criticism because they're delivered through satire. The point is still there, and still there to be disagreed with.
When Clarkson says his daughter won't be going to university because "she doesn’t have a beak or flippers or a qualification in washing windscreens at the lights" I don't literally think he's saying she needs a beak and flippers, but it's not exactly a great act of deduction to see he's arguing that there's positive discrimination in society towards the ethnic minorities or the working class.
I'm not going 'thats silly! No human has a beak or flippers!' but I am allowed to go 'the idea that the rich and white are disadvantaged is ridiculous'
SoundAs - If you don't want to hear people's opinions then maybe you should not bait them with gems like, "Ever heard of satire?"
As this is a discussion board for people of all political stripes to try and discuss differing opinions in a mature manner, I did not respond aggressively to your provocation but instead explained the difference between proper satire and your mate Jeremy.
At the time I thought I was probably wasting my time, thanks for confirming it.
If you don't want to hear views that differ from your own maybe you are not quite grown up enough yet for talking with the grown ups.
Don't bother with another of your brief and witty responses, it will only make you look more of a dick.
[cite]Posted By: Ormiston Addick[/cite]SoundAs - If you don't want to hear people's opinions then maybe you should not bait them with gems like, "Ever heard of satire?"
As this is a discussion board for people of all political stripes to try and discuss differing opinions in a mature manner, I did not respond aggressively to
your provocation but instead explained the difference between proper satire and your mate Jeremy.
At the time I thought I was probably wasting my time, thanks for confirming it.
If you don't want to hear views that differ from your own maybe you are not quite grown up enough yet for talking with the grown ups.
Don't bother with another of your brief and witty responses, it will only make you look more of a dick.
My mate Clarkson??.....I don't give a rats arse about Clarkson and find it very amusing that you, as a supposedly educated adult, can get so worked up over what is quite intentionaly a load of nonsense(albeit that it's in such an august organ as The Sunday Times)....grow up man for gods sake and stop being such a knob by allowing it to upset you so much!
Clarkson 1 Ormiston 0 I'd say......he's trying to get a rise out of folk such as yourself and is winning hands down by the looks of things and making a tidy sum in doing so into the bargain.
I don't take him seriously at all( indeed is one supposed to?) and as a consequence I would appear, at least on the face of it, to be lot happier than your good self.
Still, that comes with my age and experience in life, you'll find that out yourself soon enough, though I suspect you're not far off being my age...............amazing what those few extra years can do aint it Ormiston!
Comments
Ormiston...it's called political satire...........you never heard of it?
I repeat it's called satire...no one takes it seriously fer crying out loud....and certainly not Clarkson you can bet....it just goes in one ear and out the other as far as I'm concerned and IMHO a few of you should simply let it do the same.
Anyway i never did get my question answered. So the team answered it. Well done you rip snorting goal scoring Addicks!!!!!!
What's he going to do next year when the Tories get in?[/quote]
Ormiston...it's called political satire...........you never heard of it?[/quote]
Yes, I have thanks.
You can read some very amusing conservative commentators satirising the New Labour mob in publications like the Spectator and much of the mainstream press.
I find that the better political satirists tend have three main strengths, a) Actually be funny, b) Make you re-consider your own opinions by introducing you to new ideas, and c) Be able to write about more than the single same issue each week.
On these grounds Clarkson is as much a "Satirist" as Alan Pardew is a "Charlton Legend."
That's probably why this lazy piece got pulled by the editors, not because of its political content but because it was pure crap.
You seem very sure of that FM. How do you know?
Oh dear oh dear...who cares.
Do you know what satire is? Yes it's using hyperbole and sarcasm, but to make a point.
Let's take David Mitchell as his political opposite in the Guardian. Mitchell frequently uses purposeful exaggeration or humour in his pieces, but there's still a point being made, and I wouldn't say no one could disagree with Mitchell just because he's a comedian by trade. Satirists opinions aren't beyond criticism because they're delivered through satire. The point is still there, and still there to be disagreed with.
When Clarkson says his daughter won't be going to university because "she doesn’t have a beak or flippers or a qualification in washing windscreens at the lights" I don't literally think he's saying she needs a beak and flippers, but it's not exactly a great act of deduction to see he's arguing that there's positive discrimination in society towards the ethnic minorities or the working class.
I'm not going 'thats silly! No human has a beak or flippers!' but I am allowed to go 'the idea that the rich and white are disadvantaged is ridiculous'
As this is a discussion board for people of all political stripes to try and discuss differing opinions in a mature manner, I did not respond aggressively to
your provocation but instead explained the difference between proper satire and your mate Jeremy.
At the time I thought I was probably wasting my time, thanks for confirming it.
If you don't want to hear views that differ from your own maybe you are not quite grown up enough yet for talking with the grown ups.
Don't bother with another of your brief and witty responses, it will only make you look more of a dick.
My mate Clarkson??.....I don't give a rats arse about Clarkson and find it very amusing that you, as a supposedly educated adult, can get so worked up over what is quite intentionaly a load of nonsense(albeit that it's in such an august organ as The Sunday Times)....grow up man for gods sake and stop being such a knob by allowing it to upset you so much!
Clarkson 1 Ormiston 0 I'd say......he's trying to get a rise out of folk such as yourself and is winning hands down by the looks of things and making a tidy sum in doing so into the bargain.
I don't take him seriously at all( indeed is one supposed to?) and as a consequence I would appear, at least on the face of it, to be lot happier than your good self.
Still, that comes with my age and experience in life, you'll find that out yourself soon enough, though I suspect you're not far off being my age...............amazing what those few extra years can do aint it Ormiston!