That’s nice.
DeAnna Lorraine ran for Congress in Pelosi’s district; she lost the primary in March. She’s a self-employed “life and relationship coach.”
There was this the other day too:
What is wrong with people?
That’s nice.
DeAnna Lorraine ran for Congress in Pelosi’s district; she lost the primary in March. She’s a self-employed “life and relationship coach.”
There was this the other day too:
What is wrong with people?
Comments
6 responses to “Republican “wit””
She’s in her 50s. “Girl.”
That cartoon is very odd and unfunny, unless I’m missing some subtlety. I suppose the artist would claim that he isn’t racist and sexist, he’s just saying that Biden is racist and sexist (which is someone evidenced by him choosing Harris as his running mate??). Just guessing here.
Oooh, can I play?
Why are Lock & Load Ken and Barbie speaking at the Republican National Convention?
Did they offer them a chance to join Trump’s secret police so they could shoot BLM protesters with live rounds?
Because this is the closest they’ll ever get to “America’s Got Talent?”
Because their fifteen minutes of fame is almost up, and they figured they better slip in under the wire?
Because they thought this would be a great first stop on their promotional tour selling statues of themselves as a new, up to date alternative to the more traditional, and problematic Black Lawn Jockey?
Was the cop who murdered George Floyd already booked for another gig?
That is the defence. When Joe Biden announced Harris as his running mate he mentioned little black and brown girls being inspired. The point of the cartoon is that making a big deal Harris’ race and sex is hypocritical if he wants people to move past racism and sexism.
I agree it’s a bit of a tortured point and the cartoon was not clear that that even was the point.
Re the above cartoon: The Biden character is shown as both opposing racism and using it to his own benefit: which I would guess would go over well with Rupert Murdoch’s clientele.
The worst humour is based on egotism. ‘Taking a rise’ out of someone else involves showing oneself to be superior to the ‘butt’ of one’s joke, who of course has to be made to appear, and preferably feel, inferior. The situations the Nazis found amusing were commonly along such lines. (Donald Trump likewise: I would say he is on very cordial terms with his own inner Nazi.)
By contrast the best humour involves people laughing at some aspect of humanity, and its foibles; including themselves. The human condition itself becomes the foundation, or ‘butt’ of the joke.
But all humour rests on the difference between expectation and outcome: the audience is induced to expect one result from some interaction, only to find another unexpected one take place. One very well-worked situation is as follows. A young man goes to visit his lady-love at her home. He knocks on the door, only to have it opened by a jealous rival, who lets him have it with a custard pie straight into his expectant, adoring face.The American comedian Jackie Gleason was very good at this sort of routine. His character ‘Rum Dum’ was commonly getting hoist on petards, mostly his own, in a variety of such ways.
But the greatest comedian to date in my opinion was Charlie Chaplin. He exploited the fact that both the funniest comedy and the deepest tragedy are based on the difference between expectation and outcome. Working on this principle he would have his audience laughing uproariously one minute, and crying the next. Then he would make them all laugh again. This was well illustrated in his masterpiece ‘The Gold Rush’ (1925).
This had to be explained? Like, the cartoon isn’t as impenetrable as Kant.