Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard
Posted by Dirty Harry on Wednesday, August 13th, 2008
Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard … oh, and Retard:
Protesters, led by Special Olympics chairman and CEO Timothy Shriver, marched outside the Westwood premiere of DreamWorks’ “Tropic Thunder” on Monday night.
Chanting and waving placards that read “Ban the movie, ban the word” and “Call me by my name, not my label,” several dozen people tried to get the message across that the word “retard” and making fun of the mentally challenged is not comedy material.
“Ban the word?” Ban? Now that’s retarded. And in ten years they’ll be out there asking for the word “Challenged” to be banned. After that it will be “Disabled.”
And don’t the Easily Offended know that Robert Downey Jr. is a white man playing a black man in the film? Don’t they have the wrong group out there?
Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard
Retard.
Filed in General |
JohnFNWayneon 13 Aug 2008 at 6:43 am 1Geesh, “Zeus” Lister has really let himself go since TDK ….
Moon 13 Aug 2008 at 6:44 am 2I haven’t seen the movie but if it does make fun of disabled people, I have no interest. Why should that be funny?
And the fact that Robert Downey Jr. is playing a black man is of even less interest! Why would anyone think that’s something you should do?
The whole thing sounds disgusting to me.
Bruce Gottfredon 13 Aug 2008 at 6:45 am 3Canada’s ‘right-wing’ paper had a good editorial today on this manufactured ‘controversy’. Choice quote:
But it’ll all backfire on the protesters. I’m betting the picketing will make this movie a bigger hit than it would have been without them.
Kenn Christensonon 13 Aug 2008 at 6:46 am 4All work and no play makes Harry a dull boy - but seriously… this is close to one of the most retarded things I’ve heard this year.
Bubbaon 13 Aug 2008 at 6:50 am 5Mo, the movie doesn’t make fun of the handicapped: it makes fun of vain Hollywood actors who try to get Oscar’s by playing the handicapped.
E.g., Forrest Gump, Rain Man, and I Am Sam. If you’ve ever tried to see even a brief portion of the latter, you would know that this sort of behavior on the part of the actors should be satirized… as Bowfinger did, nearly a decade ago.
Black Hollywood superstar Kit Ramsey — a paranoid nutcase who’s essentially a Scientologist — talked about this very thing.
“White boys always get the Oscar. It’s a known fact. Did I ever get a nomination? No! You know why? Cause I hadn’t played any of them slave roles, and get my ass whipped. That’s how you get the nomination. A black dude who plays a slave that gets his ass whipped gets the nomination, a white guy who plays an idiot gets the Oscar. That’s what I need, I need to play a retarded slave, then I’ll get the Oscar. ”
Does this make fun of mental retardation and/or slavery? Of course not; it makes fun of Hollywood, which deserves to be mocked.
I’m guessing the same thing about Downey’s role.
And the fact that Robert Downey Jr. is playing a black man is of even less interest! Why would anyone think that’s something you should do?
He’s not playing a black man. He’s playing a white man who’s playing a black man, and that makes a world of difference.
Wilson the Volleyballon 13 Aug 2008 at 6:51 am 6That’s not “Zeus” Lister you retard. That’s Kimbo Slice.
And yes he has let himself go…
Fiftyfooton 13 Aug 2008 at 6:53 am 7The right thing to do would be to put Harry on trial for his life. Make him sell everything he owns to pay lawyers at the very least. Let’s sick John Edwards on him!
Addison DeWitton 13 Aug 2008 at 7:04 am 8I’m as devoted to a culture of civility as the next person, but there really is a distinction between people who protest the use of “hurtfull” language for moral reasons, and those who protest for political gain.
There is much power to be gained by portraying onesself as a victim. Or as in this case, inviting a group to assume the victim status. The disability lobby is a political force by nature where money, prestige, and influence can be seized by anyone willing to demagogue the issue. Do you really think the Special Olymics people are moraly outraged by the use of a word? Believe me, they aren’t. This is (or has potential to be) a PR and fund rasing bonanza that is too good to resist.
Carolynon 13 Aug 2008 at 7:04 am 9Ohmigod, Bruce! A ‘right-wing’ CANADIAN paper? That’s like saying erudite Ebonics or intelligent Pelosi.
What’s the name of the paper, please, please, please?
If you don’t tell me, I’ll tell everyone you’re a retard.
pageivon 13 Aug 2008 at 7:07 am 10Harry, “you’ve gone full retard.”
Troyon 13 Aug 2008 at 7:10 am 11Bubba: “He’s not playing a black man. He’s playing a white man who’s playing a black man, and that makes a world of difference.”
finish that with “playing a white man” and that sounds like a good update for Victor/Victoria…
Ty/Tyrone or Theo/Theodore — now THAT would be boycotted.
nightflyon 13 Aug 2008 at 7:10 am 12Funny thing is, “retarded” was originally a euphamism for “idiot.” Now we’re on our fourth or fifth (at least) euphamism…
…but people still call each other “idiot” all the time.
trzupron 13 Aug 2008 at 7:12 am 13Re: ‘Chanting and waving placards that read “Ban the movie, ban the word” …’
Really? I thought their slogan was “Change you can believe in”…
Danielon 13 Aug 2008 at 7:16 am 14“Disabled” is heavily frowned upon among this
Retard Rightssegment of society. The “proper” phrase is “Differently Abled.”And before anyone jumps down my throat, I have a sister who is a head injury victim and cannot care for herself. Would I call her “retarded?” No. But she ain’t like you and me. My parents care for her now, but when they shuffle off this mortal coil, her care will likely fall to me and my wife.
As someone who has to deal with this in real life, not in the “let’s give hugs at the Special Olympics then go back to the Hollywood Hills mansion and forget about it till the next time” way, I wish the earth would open up and swallow these idiot protesters. They do absolutely nothing to help someone like my sister.
beartoothon 13 Aug 2008 at 7:20 am 15A genuine question, not intended to rile anyone. Who is making the free speech argument, and who the context argument ? Choose one option from:
A) Life’s tough and people are cruel. Get used to it.
B) Obviously it would be reasonable to ban a film that did in fact mock the mentally handicapped, but that’s not what we’re talking about here.
As I said, I’m genuinely curious.
Seanon 13 Aug 2008 at 7:26 am 16I mentioned this in another forum- I’m beginning to think these protests aren’t really about “retard” but rather the fact Tropic Thunder is mocking movies that are supremely beneficial to these organizations.
They need Hollywood to keep making the kind of phony fawning “retard” movies to keep up the attention and funding that could now be the target of well deserved derision because of this film.
David Marcoeon 13 Aug 2008 at 7:37 am 17As I said, I’m genuinely curious.
Did you consider an option “C”?: “Obviously it would be reasonable not to patronize/boycott a film that did in fact mock the mentally handicapped, but that’s not what we’re talking about here.”
At the end of the day, outside of truly horrendous examples of obscenity (which, believe it or not, are still covered by obscenity laws, which has a coin flip’s chance of passing the courts, even if they are enforced), you can’t truly “ban” anything. Even the FCC’s ability to set standards is limited to TV. It doesn’t cover theaters, print, or the internet. In a free market, the only thing you can do is refuse to give them your money.
Tar Heel Momon 13 Aug 2008 at 7:39 am 18First the kerfuffle over the New Yorker cover with the Obamas, and now this manufactured outrage.
What part of PARODY does the left not get?
Outlaw 13on 13 Aug 2008 at 7:41 am 19Ever read a story called, “A Modest Proposal”?
Is our educational system is so lacking that people can’t recognize satire anymore? I really wonder about the future of this country.
Furious Don 13 Aug 2008 at 7:49 am 20I’ve never had that Hollywood attitude that the mentally handicapped are magical holy fools wise beyond their IQs. My attitude may have been formed when I was 9 years old, and a TMH student shoved his thumb into my left eye because he thought it was funny.
I used to respect the Special Olympics, but all this grand-standing and exploiting the handicapped just strikes me as Timothy Shriver’s scheme to suck up some money, free speech be damned.
Johnon 13 Aug 2008 at 7:57 am 21(retard)
beartoothon 13 Aug 2008 at 7:58 am 22“Did you consider an option “C”?: ”
For the purposes of the question, no I didn’t. I don’t have any particular axe to grind as far as this movie goes, and I wonder where other people are coming from. So I opted for a clear distinction at the expense of including the reasonable compromise that everyone could support.
For the purposes of the real world, I would subscribe to option C myself. If the pic at the head of this item was of folks waving a snappier variation on ‘I choose not to patronise a film that deeply offends me, and urge you to do the same’ I’d be very happy for them. The fact that they choose to use the word ‘ban’ tends to forfeit my sympathy, possibly because I’m in UK and we seem to have acquired a lot more limitations on speech recently than you folks.
Regards
Kit Oon 13 Aug 2008 at 7:58 am 23As the niece of a woman with Down’s Syndrome, I have a great deal of respect for Patricia Bauer, one of the advocates behind this protest. As the mother of a woman with down’s, she has written some very thoughtful and thought-provoking pieces about the inhumane way people with Down’s syndrome are treated. That being said, I do think this protest is half-baked and lacking in any substance. But I also found it troubling to open my favorite web page to find every other word, literally, to be RETARD.
The response of Harry and many of you otherwise intelligent and witty bloggers is beneath you. You are also acting like lefties….but you do have some humor in your reply, not just invective. But the level of discourse is really depressing.
Post the Bowfinger analogy under the Dirty Harry banner, and then a brief definition of what parody is, and let it be done, please!
blackhawk12151on 13 Aug 2008 at 8:10 am 24beartooth
Regarding option B)…would it? Would it really?
You think it would be reasonable to ban this film if in fact it was making fun of mentally handicapped people? What about free speech? I may not go to a film that openly and viciously attacks mentally handicapped people but if there are people out there who like that and are entertained by that then go for it. I have no right to tell people what is and is not funny and what they can and can’t laugh at. I may criticize their taste and even question their character but I would never advocate a ban.
This is just more smiley-faced fascism brought to us by the PC thought police
David McKinnison 13 Aug 2008 at 8:23 am 25I’m just commenting nothing to insure the “Recent Comments” bar keeps saying Retard.
J Pon 13 Aug 2008 at 8:32 am 26Blackhawk you hit the nail on the head with “This is just more smiley-faced fascism brought to us by the PC thought police”
I do have to wonder if calling for a boycott of the film is almost as retarded as calling for an outright ban. “Tropic Thunder” has now piqued my interest and I may go see it (normally I detest Ben Stiller movied for the most part… too much whining and too much mugging of the camera)… so much for boycotting. Which leads me to wonder a couple of things. Do boycotts boost the box office of films? Will the words “spedly” (special education), “helmet head”, “mongoloid” and “short bus” soon be place in the list of words that must not be said lest ye be seen as insensitive and or racist?
David Marcoeon 13 Aug 2008 at 8:34 am 27For the purposes of the question, no I didn’t. I don’t have any particular axe to grind as far as this movie goes, and I wonder where other people are coming from. So I opted for a clear distinction at the expense of including the reasonable compromise that everyone could support.
The problem is that you are also excluding a realistic answer that might be given. That is, “Offended or not, I’m not going to use that as a pretense to suppress another person’s right to speak.” That’s certainly what you’ll find around here. And the typical American attitude is that everyone is entitled to their opinion, but if you open your mouth to speak, prepare for the consequences. People who expect everyone to conform to their whims over imagined emotional trauma are usually subjects of derision.
“The fact that they choose to use the word ‘ban’ tends to forfeit my sympathy, possibly because I’m in UK and we seem to have acquired a lot more limitations on speech recently than you folks.”
I think we can see eye to eye on that one. With very few limitations, our First Amendment protects all forms of “speech,” or expression, not that various jurisdictions–municipal, state, and even federal–haven’t tried to pass laws, but they usually get struck down in the courts. In fact, sometimes it’s interpreted too broadly, such that certain parties attempt to pass off certain activities as “speech” (strip clubs, for instance) and find a sympathetic judge to sign off on it. The ACLU seems to be the perpetual source of this tactic.
pageivon 13 Aug 2008 at 8:39 am 28Remember this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let%27s_Get_It_Started
David Marcoeon 13 Aug 2008 at 8:44 am 29The response of Harry and many of you otherwise intelligent and witty bloggers is beneath you. You are also acting like lefties….but you do have some humor in your reply, not just invective. But the level of discourse is really depressing.
Kit, I would call it over-correction. Certainly, no one around here would do anything but treat the handicapped with kindness on a person-to-person basis. But the iconography of the exploitative Left i such that it twists the ideal of basic humaneness and turns it into a perverse sect of political correctness that one can not help chafe against. It’s the same impulse of frustration that may cause a person to let out a long string of obscenities.
Monkeyon 13 Aug 2008 at 8:52 am 30retard is not the cool word anymore, we who are down with it say “tard”.
you get my drift? Its quick and easy. ya tard!
Ken Bendoron 13 Aug 2008 at 9:09 am 31Fine, you fascists, ban THAT word if you must; I’d rather call you humorless putzes “mingers”, anyway (this goes for the Easily Offended misguided trolls, and NOT the afflicted people they’re pretending to “stand up” for, of course)…give them enough time and they’ll ban all those other words (which will accomplish NOTHING) I used to the point where we’ll no longer need a dictionary or a thesaurus…
Bubbaon 13 Aug 2008 at 9:15 am 32The “proper” phrase is “Differently Abled.”
That phrase annoys me more than most other PC garbage, because it’s not as if, say, being blind gives you super-hearing (lawyers from Marvel’s Hell’s Kitchen notwithstanding), or mental retardation results in heat vision.
Kit Oon 13 Aug 2008 at 9:46 am 33David—great reply–thanks. I agree completely.
maatkareon 13 Aug 2008 at 11:13 am 34I think the overuse of the word above is childish and mean. I understand the witty point you guys are making, and I get that the protesters aren’t coming from the right place and likely haven’t even seen the film (the filmakers could have avoided all this with a screening or two) but stop beating the dead horse. I think it’s tacky, and it makes you look dickish.
JamesTon 13 Aug 2008 at 11:53 am 35I find this blog post immature and unnecessary. It used to be conservatives took a higher path. The point could have been made differently with a little more consideration. It makes me want to rethink placing this blog on my favorites list.
The Ugly Americanon 13 Aug 2008 at 12:27 pm 36I love how the reporters on KCAL9 wouldn’t say the word retard but instead referred to it as the “R” word.
Uchuck the Tuchuckon 13 Aug 2008 at 1:09 pm 37I tipped the scales this morning at 409 lbs. I stand 6′ tall. There are no two ways about it: I am fat. There are diplomatic ways of noting this fact, terms like “Obese,” “Portly,” “Big-Boned,” or the ever popular “He has a great personality.” None of these terms change my weight, appearance, or abilities in track and field events. But then again, neither do terms like “Fatass,” “Lardass” (or for that matter, the whole “-ass” family of sobriquets), “Fatboy,” or the slightly more creative film-themed variations such as “Jabba the Butt.”
None of these descriptions change who I am. Words only have the power to injure if I let them do so. Whatever happened to the wisdom summed up in “Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never harm me?”
Is it polite to refer to someone as a Retard? No. Should Congress then legislate mandatory politeness? No, again.
Growing up, I came to despise John Candy. I thought he was quite funny on SCTV, but as he developed his film career he repeatedly took on roles of the two-dimensional happy, dumb, incapable-of-self-control fat guy. It bothered me that he was banking on his bulk. So I stopped paying money to see his films. I didn’t write letters to his studio, lobby a Congress Critter, or march up and down outside the theater. I just didn’t pay him to do it.
Now I’ll admit that had I been part of the blogoshpere at the time I probably would have written some scathing comments about Candy’s roles and acting. I am not in the slightest complaining about any of the posts posted here criticising this movie, Ben Stiller (who I can pretty much take or leave as an actor), or voicing an opinion against the use of the word “retard.” What I do think rather silly–and for that matter, pathetic–are these folks who are throwing a fit on the steps of Congress because they got their feelings hurt.
Tar Heel Momon 13 Aug 2008 at 1:13 pm 38Seeing the phrase “differently abled” reminds me of that routine by the late George Carlin on how, as language evolves, words get more and more distanced from what it is they’re supposed to represent. They take the life out of life.
IIRC, Carlin mocked that phrase, along with “handi-capable.” Here’s a link - remember, it’s Carlin, so language and political-asides warnings apply:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h67k9eEw9AY&feature=related
Audietooon 13 Aug 2008 at 1:30 pm 39Daniel your have all my sympathy in your and your family’s ordeal. The really sad thing is that the retards who get up with the tee shirts and the placards will get all the “public assistance” that your family needs and yes I am talking about spedly and short buses and all that other paraphenalia which costs a fortune and provides a few hours of care- giving at roughly, oh, let me think say $500,000 an hour. This is where the “If it helps even one child it is worth it comes in.”
Having been in the mental health business since 1960, I am so glad that some of the preposterous nature of our political solutions is FINALLY being subjected to some of the ridicule it so deserves.
David Marcoeon 13 Aug 2008 at 2:51 pm 40IIRC, Carlin mocked that phrase, along with “handi-capable.” Here’s a link - remember, it’s Carlin, so language and political-asides warnings apply:
Carlin starts off with a very intelligent observation and then gets dumb.
00smoothieon 13 Aug 2008 at 5:40 pm 41“And in ten years they’ll be out there asking for the word “Challenged” to be banned. After that it will be “Disabled.””
Dude, you need to get with the times…”disabled” has been banned since at least 1993!! Back in 1993 I was told in no uncertain terms that “disabled” is offensive because it labels the whole person. Instead, you have to refer to them as “people with disabilities”. I kid you not…
Jim E. Popcornon 13 Aug 2008 at 10:38 pm 42I think you conservatives should be more compassionate toward the mentally retarded. After all, the “Right-to-Lifers” make up a huge part of your ranks. If abortion was seen as acceptable, there wouldn’t be any retards for you to make fun of — or vote for, for that matter.
David Marcoeon 13 Aug 2008 at 11:51 pm 43I think you conservatives should be more compassionate toward the mentally retarded.
You paid absolutely no attention to what anyone has said on this thread while you were typing that, did you? Just to be clear, the criticism has nothing to do with the handicapped, in any way, shape, or form. Rather, it has to do with the Pharisaical exploitation by the Left for their pet causes. In other words, we’re criticizing the fact that they want to appear to actually, while not actually caring, and using it as a screen to promote Political Correctness.
After all, the “Right-to-Lifers” make up a huge part of your ranks.
So you’re admitting, prima facie, that the Pro-Life movement is about showing compassion? Why, thank you. I guess that means that your willing to admit that the Pro-Choice side is not about compassion, but the narcissistic disregard for life?
If abortion was seen as acceptable, there wouldn’t be any retards for you to make fun of…
Except for mental retardation caused by disease, brain trauma, poisoning, seizure disorders, etc. I guess we’ll implement euthanasia for anyone whose IQ is below average. Or maybe we’ll just adopt China’s policy and start aborting based on gender and population, since we obviously need to decrease the surplus population (read Dickens for the reference).
We’re making of you, in the collective sense, when you exploit the handicapped, the same way you exploit racial minorities, combat veterans, and the environment. You’re a bunch of moral idiots and sanctimonious hypocrites who use the downtrodden for your own crypto-fascist ends.
Now, quit wasting our time with this mental excrement.
Jim E. Popcornon 14 Aug 2008 at 1:58 am 44Dear David,
Thank you for amusing me (read the first syllable of Dickens for the reference) and for proving that at least one person in the world still owns a thesaurus.
I notice that you addressed all of my words except, “or vote for, for that matter.” Just a coincidence? But you’re right, I did waste your time. The question is, “Did you let me?” If you’ve read this far, you’ve let me again.
Anyway, please post the web address for the Carlin bit you mentioned in an earlier post. I’d like to check it out, but it was not included. Until then, I’ll be using clown fodder for my flown Crisco fattened hens.
Excrementally yours,
Jimmy
Buck Turgidsonon 14 Aug 2008 at 5:13 am 45Only a retard wouldn’t be able to find the web address that Tar Heel Mom posted at #38, since it is right there. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h67k9eEw9AY&feature=related
Buck Turgidsonon 14 Aug 2008 at 5:17 am 46By the way, as the brother of a Retard-American, I’m not offended by any of Harry’s posts because I can tell when someone is making a joke and when someone is being mean.
But I’m not sure why the word “fag” is taboo.
Reach in your bag
Light up a fag
Think its a drag
But you’re so glad
To be alive, honey
Jim E. Popcornon 14 Aug 2008 at 12:23 pm 47Dear Buck,
“If abortion was seen as acceptable, there wouldn’t be any retards for you to make fun of — or vote for, for that matter.”
“Thank you for amusing me (read the first syllable of Dickens for the reference) and for proving that at least one person in the world still owns a thesaurus.”
Obviously I’m one of the retards (the reason I don’t have an attention span long enough to look for Tar Heel Mom’s link) I’m talking about — “potty” humor, participating in this hilarious thread, etc.
I’m making macaroni art right now. In honor of you, it will be called “Me luv!! Buk : 0 : )”
Pretty soon we won’t be allowed to wear red, white and blue in our schools. Pretty soon they’ll take away our right to watch Fox News. Pretty soon they’ll take away our right to listen to Country music. Does anybody remember when it was Country & Western? They already took the “& Western”. Pretty soon it’ll just be . Pretty soon they’ll take away our right to be paranoid.
“Reach in your bag
Light up a fag
Think its a drag
But you’re so glad
To be alive, honey”
Catchy tune. Is that Haiku, high art, “Hi honey, I’m home.”, “The dude that wrote that was so high.”? He obviously wasn’t retarded — it’s way too groovie, deep and clever.
Anyone who comments on a subject line that begins “Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard Retard … oh, and Retard:” should expect to be @#&$ed with — myself included.
Just so you and David know, I’m not a liberal. I plan to see Tropic Thunder and enjoy it. Please don’t ruin it for us dummies who aren’t smart enough to see what an important satire it is.
Love,
Me luv Buk
Buck Turgidsonon 14 Aug 2008 at 5:44 pm 48Jim E. Popcorn:
It’s Van Morrison. “Blue Money.”
http://www.amazon.com/His-Band-Street-Choir-Morrison/dp/B000002KBD/ref=sr_1_26?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1218760889&sr=1-26