Find this brilliant comment.

March 7, 2006 7:51 AM

I'm looking for a comment because it was just brilliant. It was trying to explain why Clinton got flack for his blow job, while Bush can fuck an entire country and get away with it. It had two locked rooms of people and envelopes dropped in for them to read. I should have bookmarked it, but didn't. I'd love to go back and read it again. Ring a bell for anyone?
posted by FunkyHelix to MetaFilter-Related at 7:51 AM (32 comments total)

Here.
posted by cillit bang at 7:54 AM on March 7, 2006

Thank you so much.
posted by FunkyHelix at 7:55 AM on March 7, 2006

Yeah, thanks. That's a good comment.
posted by Plutor at 8:04 AM on March 7, 2006

My favorite quote is, "We're all wearing the blue dress now."
posted by Saucy Intruder at 8:07 AM on March 7, 2006

Wow. I missed that post the first time through. Thanks for bringing it up. Quality stuff, folks.
posted by arcticwoman at 8:43 AM on March 7, 2006

Its a great comment, indeed, but there's one thing missing: Clinton was impeached by a Congress controlled by the radical wing of the opposition party. Bush is supported by a Congress controlled by the radical wing of his own party.
posted by googly at 8:49 AM on March 7, 2006

It was trying to explain why Clinton got flack for his blow job, while Bush can fuck an entire country and get away with it.

Actually, that isn't what the comment said at all. It was addressing the difference in perspectives regarding lying under oath about an extramarital affair vs. a discussion about who should have been responsible for things done in a response to a federal disaster.

Now we even got editorializing in our Metatalk posts.
posted by dios at 9:39 AM on March 7, 2006

Yeah, FunkyHelix, next time remember better!
posted by fleacircus at 9:47 AM on March 7, 2006

dios, man, Metatalk is editorializing.
posted by cortex at 9:50 AM on March 7, 2006

Oh dios, thanks for reminding me. I need to find that killfile script again.
posted by FunkyHelix at 10:08 AM on March 7, 2006

editorializing is the next political correctness
posted by edgeways at 10:56 AM on March 7, 2006

Dios, I thought the exact same thing.
posted by geoff. at 11:11 AM on March 7, 2006

Now we even got editorializing in our Metatalk posts.

Is that kind of like even having the internet on computers, now?
posted by lodurr at 11:22 AM on March 7, 2006

dios:

actually you're wrong. You say that "isn't what the comment said at all. It was addressing the difference in perspectives regarding lying under oath about an extramarital affair vs. a discussion about who should have been responsible for things done in a response to a federal disaster."

The who is stated upfront: the questioner has already decided it was the Presidents responsibility:

The first room gets an envelope that says "The president failed to secure adequate provisions for an weather disaster despite being warned beforehand, and thousands died or went missing. He then lied on national television about being warned about the disaster beforehand." The envelope dropped in the second room says "The president got an extra-marital blow job, then lied about the affair under oath."

The members in each room are asked to make a judgement - on a predetermined individual: The president.

You could have said: "it was addressing the difference in perspectives regarding a discussion (a)bout the president lying under oath about an extramarital affair vs. a discussion about the president's responsibility for things done in a response to a federal disaster."
posted by dash_slot- at 12:20 PM on March 7, 2006

Thanks dash slot. Could you also highlight the part where the comment discusses the fact that "Bush can fuck an entire country and get away with it?" I must have missed that, as well.
posted by dios at 12:29 PM on March 7, 2006

Also could you please highlight were the comment was suggesting that the discussion in the one room was just about "why Clinton got flack for his blow job?"

(Or maybe you do agree with me that this abrasively phrased Metatalk post editorialized a bit?)
posted by dios at 12:30 PM on March 7, 2006

abrasively phrased
posted by matteo at 12:41 PM on March 7, 2006

Thanks dash slot.

Yes it did editorialise. It's an opinion, and I don't see fit to correct the poster's opinion. His interpretation of the comment is poorly remembered - true.

I was correcting your assertion about the fact of what was in the comment I quoted at length. I'm glad we agree that you got it wrong.
posted by dash_slot- at 12:45 PM on March 7, 2006

Now we even got editorializing in our Metatalk posts
posted by Hat Maui at 12:55 PM on March 7, 2006

His interpretation

...her.
posted by FunkyHelix at 1:36 PM on March 7, 2006

making citations is fun and easy
posted by cortex at 1:42 PM on March 7, 2006

what's your point, there, cortex?
posted by Hat Maui at 5:24 PM on March 7, 2006

Is matteo a Rothko sockpuppet? The reason I ask is that it seems that he shows up in every thread in which dios posts, for the sole purpose of leveling off-topic ad hominem attacks against him.

Matteo, seriously, take the grudge somewhere else. It's getting tiresome.
posted by aberrant at 6:22 PM on March 7, 2006

i think you're misapprehending the spirit of my comment, Hat Maui
posted by cortex at 6:41 PM on March 7, 2006

you're right, cortex, i am as nonplussed as someone asking, "what's the single dot for?"
posted by Hat Maui at 9:32 PM on March 7, 2006

Metafilter: Now with Dots....
posted by Balisong at 10:22 PM on March 7, 2006

did you know that mathowie himself had (at least until just now) held rights to the metatalkian (and likely the broader metafiltrian) hapax legomenon "a$$croft"?
posted by cortex at 11:14 PM on March 7, 2006

isn't it a dis legomenon now?
posted by Hat Maui at 12:16 AM on March 8, 2006

Thanks dash slot. Could you also highlight the part where the comment discusses the fact that "Bush can fuck an entire country and get away with it?" I must have missed that, as well.
posted by dios at 12:29 PM PST on March 7 [!]

The poster has a pass for misstating the comment because she couldn't remember it and couldn't find it. Presumably if FunkyHelix did remember it perfectly well she wouldn't have needed to ask about it. Yeah, she thought it was more anti-Bush than it was. So what?

You, on the other hand, read the comment after it was found and came up with your own editorialized version of it that was inaccurate. In the same breath you bemoaned bias on MetaTalk. Well done.
posted by fleacircus at 1:00 AM on March 8, 2006

well, yeah, that's why I used the past tense, man
posted by cortex at 7:42 AM on March 8, 2006

this is something of a LEGO-menon.
posted by Hat Maui at 11:37 AM on March 8, 2006

i miss Rothko
posted by cortex at 3:50 PM on March 8, 2006