The Humorless Left Can't Take Jokes or Creativity in Conservatives' Criticism
A scene from "Goodfellas," the greatest mafia movie of all time. (Yes, it's better than "The Godfather.")
Â
So Terry Krepel over at ConWebBlog is mad at me for trying to explain why it might not be too outlandish to connect Obama administration tactics to those employed by Mafia Gangsters:
What seems to be happening here is that Swindle is justifying the gangster reference as an Alinsky-esque tactic, but failing to acknowledge his own embrace of it.
Here’s a question for Swindle: Obama is clearly in your way of wanting to “liberate” Americans from the evil of liberalism. How far would he go to embarrass and discredit him? Would you smear him by calling him a gangster, then justify the smear by playing guilt-by-association? After all, what’s one man’s reputation in the pursuit of the “perfect world” of conservatism, right?
First of all there’ s nothing “evil” about liberalism, nor do I oppose it. Properly defined it’s a political philosophy I very much embrace. It’s leftism (and its various denominations such as socialism and “progressivism”) which I oppose.
Terry: seek first to understand before you criticize. This isn’t “guilt by association.” Read David Horowitz’s ongoing “Alinsky, Beck, Satan, and Me” series to understand better the connections between Saul Alinsky, his gangster influences, and the tactics employed by the modern Left. Deal with the argument, don’t just dismiss it as a malicious smear. Here are links to all the parts of the series:
Alinsky, Beck, Satan and Me: Part I
Hell on Earth: Alinsky, Beck, Satan and Me, Part II
Boring From Within: Alinsky, Beck, Satan and Me, Part III
To Have And Have Not: Alinsky, Beck, Satan and Me, Part IV
Post-modern leftism: Alinsky, Beck, Satan and Me, Part V
Means and Ends One: Alinsky, Beck, Satan and Me, Part VI
Means and Ends Two: Alinsky, Beck, Satan and Me, Part VI Continued
The Nazi Option: Alinsky, Beck, Satan and Me, Part IV Continued 2
Terry is also mad at me for having a sense of humor. (He took issue with my post admitting that I laughed at Rush Limbaugh’s uranus joke about gay Congressman Barney Frank.) However, I can understand his jealousy here. It’s quite clear by the uptight, overly serious tone of his painfully boring blog that he was born without a funny bone. His posts are almost as bland and dull as a Nation editorial or a Noam Chomsky speech:
In an Aug. 19 post — more accurately, the post immediately previous to Laksin’s — David Swindle responded to Limbaugh’s statement that gay congressman Barney Frank “spends most of his time living around Uranus”:
Confession: I laughed when I heard it. Sure, it’s a cheap shot. Yeah, it’s the kind of thing we learned in third grade. And yes, it’s slightly homophobic. But funny is funny. When it comes to humor I don’t care from which ideology a joke emerges. If it makes me laugh then it’s acceptable.
So an anti-gay slur is OK as long as it makes a conservative laugh?
Yes, homophobic jokes are acceptable as long as they’re funny. And so are the racist jokes of comedians like Lisa Lampanelli, the anti-white racist jokes of the comedians on Martin Lawrence’s First Amendment Stand-Up, the gay stereotype jokes of Margaret Cho, and the anti-Semitic satires of Sacha Baran Cohen. Dark humor about the Holocaust, child molestation (Michael Jackson joke anyone?,) and dead babies is acceptable too — as long as the jokes are funny and not made at inappropriate times and places. Surely this isn’t a very controversial point that I’m making. And there’s no ideological component to it either. This is something leftists, conservatives, and the apolitical should all agree on. Laughter is a unifying force after all.
Comedian Lisa Lampanelli's stand-up routines regularly feature offensive jokes that ultimately demonstrate the absurdity of racial stereotypes.
That was one of the points of my post in which I was supportive of the anti-Limbaugh and anti-conservatism jokes of Keith Olbermann and Bill Hicks — something that Terry chooses not to mention in his post because it basically destroys his argument once you put my remarks in context. His cherry-picking of quotes like this is only further evidence of the intellectual dishonesty at the core of his “ConWebWatch” enterprise. If he’s going to do this with my arguments you know he’s doing it with all the other conservative journalists and bloggers he criticizes.
And Terry, of all the things to attack me on — and I open myself up for plenty — my commitment to gay rights really isn’t your best target. I’ve continually pushed against anti-gay Christian conservatives to look more deeply at the scriptures they use to condemn homosexuality. I strongly support the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” and the passage of laws legalizing civil unions. And tell my gay friends that I’m in any way homophobic or anti-gay and they’ll have a good laugh at your expense.
To end on a positive note, though, gay rights isn’t the only thing that Terry and I can probably agree on. Regarding our previous argument about racial profiling, with Terry’s most recent post we have reached a consensus:
I believe that the vast majority of police are doing the best job they can. I suspect that overt racism does not exist and is frowned upon within the ranks, and that any racism that does exist is by and large not consciously done and limited to situations such as what could be described as racial profiling.
I do, however, reserve the right to question the authority of anyone, law enforcement included, who hasn’t earned it. And I don’t have to resort to political ideology in the process.
I’m glad to see that Terry parts ways with his comrades on the Left when it comes to acknowledging that most cops aren’t racists. Now if he could only apply that observation’s implications to the political culture at large…
Thank God for you, David Swindle.
The Godfather is hugely overrated. The idea that the past is sepia-toned is so juvenile I can’t believe that silly conceit made it into such a “great” film without comment.
Pacino’s character arc is absurd. One minute he’s an educated, sophisticated veteran who loathes the family business, and suddenly he’s the new Don. Huh?
Yes, that hospital sequence is something. But for every bit like that, we endure long stretches of boredom.
And frankly, I find “leave the gun, take the cannoli” neither funny nor sensible; it’s explained why they “leave the gun” in the novel (it is untraceable) but in the movie it just seems like inscrutable idiocy. Same with “keep your enemies closer.” What idiotic advice!
Maybe because I grew up in a heavily Italian ‘hood, but seriously: I can live the rest of my life without seeing The Godfather or the Sopranos or whathaveyou.
Goodfellas is indeed great, however. It expertly seduces you with the “glamor” then pulls the rug out from under you. Far superior, except for the casting of DeNiro as an Irishman. Everything by Scorcese was downhill from there. It’s like he’s been replaced by a podperson.
I’ve always loved the fact that Puzzo made up half of the mafia “lore” in his book, and then the real mafia borrowed it as there own.
David, I agree with all your picks except “Gangs of New Yorkâ€. I didn’t like it. I would add Taxi Driver to your list, though. I may see Gangs again to either cement my original opinion or, perhaps, change my mind. As for Cathy and The Godfather, I see the film, or more accurately the three films–the last being the weakest, as an allegory that plots Evil’s unrelenting overtaking of innocence. The whole point of the Pacino character is to focus the audience’s attention on good man’s fall into the abyss that is organized crime. In my view Michael doesn’t play as a “sudden†change, but as a dismally inevitable transition. He goes from defending his father to protecting the “family.†What is important is the he is half drawn and half pushed into the criminal life. Michael is drawn into the criminal fold because power is very hard to resist and pushed by the murders that surround him: his father, his brother, and his Sicilian wife, Appollonia. The audience must see this transition as not only tragic, but as ambiguous in order to feel the full weight of the passage from hope to darkness. In short the audience must see this movie through Kay’s eyes, for she is the horrified observer.
As for Goodfellas, it’s an outstanding movie, much grittier than The Godfather. But that tragedy of Goodfellas and, I might add, Casino is that the “good life†comes apart. The tragedy in the Godfather is much more profound. Lastly, yes, Puzo’s book was better than the movie, but The Godfather is still among the top five films ever to come out of Hollywood.
Sorry that should have read as the attempted murder of his father.
Is Terry a fargen icehole? Loved Goodfellas.
Actually I was spoiled by watching a PBS (I think) documentary about Five Points before I saw Gangs. The doc was SO outstanding that Scorcese’s film looked stupid in comparison.
I thought Casino had far too much expository dialogue/narration, which is one of my pet peeves. “And then there was the time the plane landed on the gold course…” Yeah, I kinda picked up on that by the shot of… the plane landing on the golf course. Thanks.
Scorcese should let the story tell itself. Show don’t tell etc. And his obsession with deCaprio is a puzzlement. The boy has no gravitas or stature, certainly not enough to play a titan like H. Hughes. I first saw the boy in Gilbert Grape and was bowled over. He should have quit the biz right after that.
Thanks Kathy.
While I agree with you that Scorsese probably hasn’t done anything equaling “Goodfellas” I’m still a huge fan of “Kundun” (a strangely meditative picture,) “Casino” (lots of fun to watch,) “Bringing Out the Dead,” “Gangs of New York” (vastly underrated,) “The Aviator,” “No Direction Home,” and “The Departed.”
Cas,
1. I didn’t include “Taxi Driver” on my list because I was only listing the Scorsese films that I enjoyed since “Goodfellas” came out. If we’re to include work prior to that then “Mean Streets,” “Taxi Driver,” “Raging Bull,” “The King of Comedy,” “After Hours,” “The Last Waltz,” and especially “The Last Temptation of Christ” (one of my top 5 favorite films) would be singled out for praise. Also make a point to dig up his short film “American Boy: A Portrait of Steven Prince” which is a must-see. It’s about 45 minutes long and features Prince (he played the gun salesman in Taxi Driver) telling stories from his life. He’s quite a gifted raconteur. The film can be purchased from various bootleg sites, I don’t think it’s ever had an official DVD release.
2. Your analysis of the themes of “The Godfather” is excellent.
3. There’s a lot to like in “Gangs of New York.” I think the picture is very visually interesting. The period and setting is also practically unique. This kind of “urban Western” set during the Civil War in New York City hasn’t been done before or since. I also have plenty of fondness for Day-Lewis’s extraordinary Bill the Butcher performance.
You didn’t care for DiCaprio in “The Departed”?