--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <noozguru@...> wrote: > > On 07/18/2011 09:20 AM, authfriend wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb<no_reply@> wrote: > >> > >> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray1"<steve.sundur@> wrote: > >>> > >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "johnt"<johnlasher20002000@> > >>> wrote: > >>>> What I'm saying, and I fully understand what satire and irony > >>>> are, is that this is too serious a situation to deal with > >>>> subtly or through sarcasm. The point I was trying to make is > >>>> not a matter of you "doing my homework" asking you (Judy) to > >>>> write a satire on the holocaust, but to demonstrate that with > >>>> such a serious threat to millions neither you nor most people > >>>> would be willing to approach the holocaust in that manner. > >>> > >>> I think what you are saying is that you had a full blown > >> hissy fit. > >> > >> Exactly. With a drama queen tiara on top. > > > > But that applies only to johnt, of course, not to, say, > > Bhairitu: > > > > "The Republicans are pulling a robbery on Americans. And we > > have these fools who probably don't even earn much more than > > $50k a year supporting them!" > > > > That's because Bhairitu is no longer a TMer, but johnt still > > is. So Bhairitu gets a pass, while johnt must be put down and > > piled onto. > > Perhaps if Judy would have just replied to johnt, "I think > the author was being facetious" then there wouldn't be an > issue.
Non sequitur. The above is about Barry's hypocrisy, a different issue entirely. But addressing your comment on its own terms: You weren't following the thread. feste explained to johnt that it was satire before I ever spoke up; then when he didn't get it, I explained it to him again, very politely. He still didn't get it. Only at that point did I tweak him a bit. > Instead Judy had to make johnt look like a fool. But Judy > has this bad habit of doing this a lot the time. As if you didn't! I don't do it unless the person is both wrong *and* arrogant. > So she invites reprisal (which we can assume she is > looking for). What are you, nuts?? There wasn't any "reprisal" here. Go back to the beginning and read through the thread. Once johnt realized the guy who wrote the article wasn't seriously suggesting old people be left to die to save the country money, our only disagreement was about whether cutting Medicare and Medicaid was a suitable topic for satire. > We know that both Judy and Turq probably don't want to > see senior citizens starving on the streets because they > are ones themselves. Judy has already stated that in one > reply. Don't know about Barry, but I wouldn't want to see senior citizens starving on the street even if I were still a teenager. As it happens, I'm fortunate that I'm unlikely to have to worry about my own situation in any case. But unlike Barry, I don't have any problem with folks expressing alarm at the prospect of cutbacks to the safety net. I think we should *all* be alarmed. > I think Judy often misses the point that such articles are > there to wake people up to what *could* actually happen if > we let these selfish thugs run the government. Yeah, that's right, Bhairitu believes I'm a conservative. Tell us, please, what you believe I *do* think such articles are there for. That should be good for even more of a laugh than what you've written so far.
