September 10, 2016

"'In a series of swing-state appearances this week, Mr. Clinton unleashed an impassioned self-defense, by turns sarcastic and almost pleading.'"

"Sarcasm and pleading: The twin keys to electoral success!"

ADDED: The quote in the headline is from the NYT, and the line below that is Instapundit. And now, let's think about sarcasm — who uses it and who gets credit for it and from whom. Let's remember that just a few weeks ago Donald Trump not only used sarcasm, he got treated as if he'd just said something incorrect, and then when he was criticized for that, he came out and explained it, saying it was "sarcasm," and even after that his critics couldn't accept it. So it's very funny to see Bill Clinton's speech puffed and promoted by the NYT calling it sarcasm.

To refresh your recollection: Trump had called Hillary and Obama the "founders" of ISIS. When some people purported to think he was just wrong, he tweeted: "Ratings challenged @CNN reports so seriously that I call President Obama (and Clinton) 'the founder' of ISIS, & MVP. THEY DON'T GET SARCASM?" And his critics acted like they couldn't understand the explanation. For example, Josh Marshall said: "This is not the first time Trump backers have tried to write off one of the candidate's inflammatory comments as a joke."

65 comments:

Mr. D said...

If Bill's not careful, he might find himself in the basket of deplorables.

Levi Starks said...

Sarcasm is a double edged sword.

MadisonMan said...

The question remains: Does Bill really want Hillary to be President? I'm not convinced.

Mick said...

Of course the Usurper Hussein Obama and the crooked Old Lady founded ISIS. Where do you think all the weapons and Toyota Tundras came from?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/world/africa/weapons-sent-to-libyan-rebels-with-us-approval-fell-into-islamist-hands.html

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/driveon/2015/10/09/toyota-isis/73621844/

Why do you think they allowed Ambassador Stevens to be killed-- because he knew all about the weapons transfers, they were routed through the CIA outpost in Benghazi. TREASON.

America's Politico said...

Prof:

Please remember - I had stated this first - the next POTUS is Queen "Hillary!" (i.e., Hillary with a bang - her Senate 2000 campaign slogan).

Why did I say this before and why the illegal and unlawful email-server does not change this?

One word: Media.

Media folks (elite ones that is, like Judy Woodruff, Chris Matthews, etc.) want to get rich. Everyone gets rich via the Clintons, as they are the biggest takers/free-riders in the US.

More time on TV, more new shows, more articles, more board memberships, more travel, MORE EVERYTHING.

Just thinking of the Clintons in the White House, makes many in the media see: $ and Fame.

Ergo: Next POTUS is Hillary!

Tommy Duncan said...

None so deaf as those that will not hear. None so blind as those that will not see.

SGT Ted said...

The majority of the press defend Obama as if he were there boyfriend. They aren't credible.

Tommy Duncan said...

Meanwhile, Hillary has tossed me in the basket filled with deplorable people.

You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic — you name it. --Hillary Clinton 9/9/2016

traditionalguy said...

What the NYT and Media have to face is the slow exposure of an Arkansas sex pervert who got his start as the hand picked disciple of the biggest Jim Crow Racist in Southern History. A man who has always played a race card, whether the White Race Card or the Black Race Card, as the situation demands.

If we elect the Clintons that is what we will get: Bill Clinton and what remains of Hillary's waking brain after she has been used up by Bill over a lifetime of criminal politics.

AprilApple said...

DNC hack media in over-drive to protect her, cover for her, and remain firmly in her camp. They are as desperate as she is.

No questions about her private server or her pay-to-play schemes.

exiledonmainstreet said...

If Bill's not careful, he might find himself in the basket of deplorables.

9/10/16, 8:37 AM

If Bill's not careful, he might find himself in a coffin in late October.

The sympathy vote goes to the grieving widow and the question of how the First Gentleman might entertain himself once he has access to the Oval Office and plump interns is rendered moot.

Mary Beth said...

MadisonMan said...

The question remains: Does Bill really want Hillary to be President? I'm not convinced.

9/10/16, 8:40 AM


Why would he want the scrutiny of living in the White House again? No more jetting off to Pedo Island. No more multi-million gifts from the Saudis.

Freder Frederson said...

But Trump's statement wasn't sarcasm. It may have been hyperbole, but it certainly wasn't sarcasm. You and Trump apparently don't know what sarcasm is.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Plus, Bill's timely death would mean days and days of nonstop media coverage of the Golden Era of the '90's - Bill playing the sax, booming economy and all that. Lots of pictures of Hillary from 25 years ago instead of the bloated, coughing monstrosity she is now. Want that Clinton economy back, America? Good times will return with Hill. Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you.

Funeral at the National Cathedral with Obama delivering a passionate eulogy about his saintly predecessor - you know, the guy who thought Barry should be serving the Clintons coffee.

Bill's death would have only upsides as far as the Dems go. There's all this talk about a doctor with the Epi-pen following Hill around. Maybe there's a guy with a syringe following Bill around too, just waiting for the opportune moment.

"Former President William Clinton collapsed suddenly while delivering a campaign speech for his wife at...."

I'm only half joking.


AReasonableMan said...

Mick said...
Where do you think all the weapons and Toyota Tundras came from?


The Iraq 'army' and Toyota.

Quaestor said...

Frederson doesn't know what sarcasm is, unless his 9:06 AM post is so intended. Sarcasm is a use of irony. Trump sarcastically labelled Obama and HRC as founders of ISIS, which points to the irony that in trying to ignite an "Arab Spring" in Syria, the Obama foreign policy created the situation which gave rise to ISIS.

Quaestor said...

Sarcasm example: Freder Frederson always uses his dictionary.

Quaestor said...

Hillary says a quarter of the population are "irredeemable" and "not American". Is that sarcasm, or a plan for Konzentrationslagers?

Big Mike said...

Islamaphobic? That means afraid of Muslims, right? Damned right I'm afraid of a religion whose followers slowly cut the heads off unbelievers! Christians don't do that. Jews don't do that. Buddhists don't do that. Not Hindus. Just Muslims. I don't care that not all of them do it -- the ones that don't need to square around the ones that do. Not MY problem to figure out which is which, bro.

Quaestor said...

Hillary sez, Der Trumps sind unser Ungl├╝ck!

exiledonmainstreet said...

Quaestor said...
Hillary says a quarter of the population are "irredeemable" and "not American". Is that sarcasm, or a plan for Konzentrationslagers?"

Now, now, none of that Nazi talk! They'll be happy, fun camps!

"In a paid speech before the New Jersey chapter of the American Camp Association, former Secretary of State Hillary Cinton told the audience that America really needed to implement camps that adults could attend.

As I have gotten older, I have decided we really need camps for adults,” she said to laughter. “And we need the kind of camps you all run.”


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/19/hillary-clinton-lets-put-adults-in-camps-to-fix-americas-fun-deficit-video/#ixzz4JrgesS4d

exiledonmainstreet said...

"The American Camp Association" sounds like it should be run by RuPaul.

Quaestor said...

They'll be happy, fun camps!

Particularly the showers.

Quaestor said...

I made a mistake. Konzentrationslager is one of those German words that rely on the grammatical context to indicate number.

Curious George said...

"MadisonMan said...
The question remains: Does Bill really want Hillary to be President? I'm not convinced."

I never thought so and still don't. Bill Clinton does not want to take a back seat to her "historic" election. He is that petty.

damikesc said...

But Trump's statement wasn't sarcasm. It may have been hyperbole, but it certainly wasn't sarcasm. You and Trump apparently don't know what sarcasm is.

Didn't the Dems accuse the Republicans, for years, of killing the economy?

The press didn't seem too upset about that.

Owen said...

Speaking of sarcasm (or at least irony) did nobody else notice the NY Times writers' amazing choice of metaphor in describing the scrutiny now being directed to Bill Clinton's "legacy"?

It is likened to "black light."

Which summons "blue dress."

This had to be deliberate.

Humperdink said...

I specialize in sarcasm. My spouse gets it, but she reminds me there is a cast of thousands who do not. Mostly libs.

Sebastian said...

"let's think about sarcasm — who uses it and who gets credit for it and from whom" You mean, figuring out the utterly predictable, irony-crushing, who-whom rhetorical manipulation requires actual "thinking"?

Hagar said...

The cracks about "Let's make America great again!" and "those coal folks in West Virginia" and their ungratefulness do smack of something, and it makes me uncomfortable even coming from Bill Clinton for whom I do not have high expectations.

Mary Beth said...

“It’s so much easier,” he said, “just to discredit people and call them names.”

Like saying they belong in a basket of deplorables.

n.n said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
n.n said...

The war in Iraq began with a response to the invasion of Kuwait. It was sustained under Clinton. It was concluded with Bush. It progressed under Obama's decision to withdraw honest brokers from a reformed authoritarian state and the Libya-ISIS Affair. Obama, along with Hillary Clinton, were first-order anthropogenic causes of the Islamic State, the local refugee crises, and subsequent global humanitarian disasters. Their choice to visit social justice on a reformed dictator (and American ambassador) through sodomy and abortion were triggers of progressive wars. Their impulsive regime changes from Cairo to Kiev, and armed belligerence there and everywhere, may well reset the cold war with Russia, China, etc. and others who observe the victims of their social justice adventurism.

We are on a progressive slope. Choose life, not abortion.

David said...

The revolt of the Deplorables is panicking them.

Eustace Chilke said...

I'm resisting the anticipation of Clinton's defeat and finally, at long last, passing the whole noxious clan out of the national gut. For one thing, I recognize that the passage is largely illusory. The nation has ingested a large quantity of corruption and the Clintons are just the ones at the end of the descending colon at the moment. Also, I've been here many times before - anticipating the rejection of one or another excrescence if favor of another not obviously less vile. It's easy to exaggerate the difference between them and magnify the relief or disappointment at the changeover as a result. If she loses I'm taking a day off work just to enjoy it nonetheless. Even Obama's defeat would not surpass it.

buwaya puti said...

Too much parsing of propaganda messages.
They just arent to be argued with, because these arent honest if mistaken statements made by honest people. They are tools, ammunition, used by paid agents.

Yancey Ward said...

Freder,

If I were to say you were smart and perceptive, that would be an example of hyperbole. Oh, wait, it would also be sarcastic.

mockturtle said...

Speaking of the NYT: I don't read it but, according to this article, the NYT, after blasting Gary Johnson for asking 'What's Aleppo?' misidentified Aleppo as the capital of ISIS [is is Raqqa] and then as the capital of SYRIA! [Damascus is, of course, the capital]. Can you verify this?

http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/08/new-york-times-mislabels-aleppo-twice-while-chastising-gary-johnsons-gaff/#ixzz4JjDY2i29

Mark said...

Freder,
If I were to say you were smart and perceptive, that would be an example of hyperbole. Oh, wait, it would also be sarcastic.


Knowing that you think FF is a fool, if you were to say FF was super smart and perceptive, THAT would be sarcasm. If you were to say FF was the biggest idiot in the universe, that would be hyperbole.

If Hillary were to say, "Yeah, right, I'm the founder of ISIS," that would be sarcasm. When Trump said it, it was -- as FF rightly notes -- it was hyperbole.

mockturtle said...

Sarcasm was the linga franca of my upbringing.

Gahrie said...

Well....deplorable is better than untouchable...isn't it?

Gahrie said...

Man...imagine Bill drops some bombshell in October by "mistake" that kills Hillary's chances.....can you imagine the dueling books we'd get out of those two?

Birkel said...

Both Mark and Freder Frederson believe the Venn Diagram of hyperbole and sarcasm shows no overlap. They are wrong.

cubanbob said...

What is deplorable is the parade of horribles that is the entire Democrat Party, it's standard bearer and it's shills, apologists and useful deluded idiot supporters.

Drago said...

Mark: " If you were to say FF was the biggest idiot in the universe, that would be hyperbole."

Only if it were not true.

Given that leftists of all stripes still love what is happening in Venezuela under the Chavez/Maduro cabal, you might have an argument that FF is not the biggest idiot in the universe.

But then again, maybe freedom, food, water, medicine and energy are superfluous items and should not be afforded much thought.

mockturtle said...

I meant lingua franca, not linga.

jdniner said...

Nothing is sarcastic on the internet unless it is suffixed by /s

tim in vermont said...

Look up joycamp in the Newspeak dictionary for a take on Hillary's fun camps. Had Trump said it ...

tim in vermont said...

Deplorable people should not enjoy free speech or a political voice.

BN said...

Wow, look. A whole blog full of sarcasm experts.

tim in vermont said...

Trump said that Hillary was a bigot and people were shocked at Trump. Now the evidence comes in from Hillary's own mouth.

Wow, look. A whole blog full of sarcasm experts

If you don't like the discussion of ideas and the meanings of things, or if you feel you aren't qualified to opine on matters involving the expression of ideas, maybe there is some other blog you might like better.

Hagar said...

Perhaps the Trump campaign can sell membership in "The Deplorables" with bumperstickers for your car.

tim in vermont said...

But Trump's statement wasn't sarcasm. It may have been hyperbole, but it certainly wasn't sarcasm. You and Trump apparently don't know what sarcasm is.

LO FUCKING L! You refuse to hear his meaning because it reflects badly on the bungling authors of the current mess in the Middle East and North Africa and the refugee crisis and summer of terror in Europe, that would be Hillary and Barack, but you claim to be an expert on what he meant to say.

mockturtle said...

@Hagar Perhaps the Trump campaign can sell membership in "The Deplorables" with bumperstickers for your car.

I like it! Or even 'Deplorables for Trump'.

Hagar said...

There is definitely some merchandizing opportunities here for either the campaign or just enterprizing individuals.

khesanh0802 said...

@Hagar I figure the T shirts will be on sale Monday.

SukieTawdry said...

Fuck Bill Clinton and the hag he rode in on. You'll have to excuse me, I'm watching Flight 93 at the moment. I wish our presidential candidates, and entire political class, were worthy of the people on that plane. I wish we all were. Never forget.

BN said...

Tim, clearly you don't know sarcasm when you hear it.

BN said...

And Freder is right, Trump is not being sarcastic, i.e., saying the opposite of what he means. He is saying "in essence" O/H created ISIS.

Guildofcannonballs said...

http://snltranscripts.jt.org/90/90lclapping.phtml

BN said...

What's odd here is that, when called on it, Trump tried to wiggle out by calling it sarcasm, that is, a biting joke--which it wasn't, and it would be worse if he intended it that way. Instead, he could have used it as an opening to provide a detailed, knowledgeable, irrefutable explanation of how the fecklessness of Obama/Hillary's Middle East foreign policy led directly and/or indirectly to the creation and success of ISIS. It could have/would have been politically devastating.

The odd part is that the opening played right into Trump's strongest attribute: his ability to provide long, detailed, deeply insightful, profound explanations of world affairs (and any other political or economic matter) drawing on history, foreign policy analysis, game theory, and various other forms of esoteric statecraft.

Why he didn't use this opportunity to play to his own strength and explain it in detail is a total mystery. He's normally so good--and so articulate--at explaining deep policy matters.

Terry said...

BN wrote:
"Instead, he could have used it as an opening to provide a detailed, knowledgeable, irrefutable explanation of how the fecklessness of Obama/Hillary's Middle East foreign policy led directly and/or indirectly to the creation and success of ISIS. It could have/would have been politically devastating."
Oh, anyone can do that, BN. It would have been a waste of the Trumpster's talent.

Terry said...

You only see bits & pieces of gaga at one time. Her songs are the same. In real life, isn't gaga some private school educated NY West side kid? Dad is a dentist or a stock broker?

Bruce Hayden said...

I agree with Terry here. Most people don't have the attention span to appreciate the nuances of why Obama and Crooked Hillary were responsible for ISIS and the refugee situation today in the Levant. Trump came up with a somewhat brief, catchy way to make this point. This is much better for him than boring everyone with the details.

The response is faux outrage, trying to kill the message by attacking it obliquely. Most everyone of any intelligent fence understood what he meant - that their policies were some of the major factors in the rise of ISIS. Hard to refute, so his critics first played dumb, and now are trying to put the emphasis on it not being quite sarcasm, but maybe a bit of hyperbole, and Trump then lied by calling it sarcasm. Which is plain silly - as I pointed out, most everyone of any intelligence knew precisely what he meant. They just didn't like him saying it, because it is most likely true, and it hurts Crooked Hillary's chance to return to the White House. (In her defense, while I think that she probably led in Lybia and Egypt, I think it was mostly Obama who wanted our troops out of Iraq so badly, creating the vacuum that allowed ISIS to flourish).

jr565 said...

There is no reasonable reason to assume that Clinton's statement was "sarcastic" or they we should view it that way. The very idea is laughable on its face. Does the NYT not know what being sarcastic means?