Letters to the Editor
-
Laughed
I did.
-
Oh, it was funny...
Like all good burlesque, it takes the words or image of a popular character and blows it up to enormous proportions.
It is, in that sense as much a jab at Clinton's detractors as it is at Clinton herself.
It jabs at Clinton herself in that she has left herself open to such criticism.
But more importantly it jabs at Clinton's detractors through their wish fullfillment fantasy of the Senator.
I would wager, some time in December, the Secret Musilim Obama jokes will start at SNL. If they are daring they may do them before he actually wins, but I wager they'll wait till December to mine that particular field.
Since such wish fullfillment Satire is unlikely to truly effect Senator Clinton's overall chances, they probably felt it was safe and topical to explore this particular Burlesque.
-
It's not "Hilarious" Funny, But it was Definitely Rubber-Necking a Disaster Funny
but that was because, Poehler played it too straight.
She said what a fair number of people actually think goes on in Hillary Clinton's head, or the arguments Hillary would make at this point.
They played it too close to "reality" to be satire, not wacky enough to be broad humor.
-
SNL
I remember the days when "SNL" was offensive and made me laugh.
You remember 1976 that well?
-
Ox meet Gore
Sigh. I remember the days when "SNL" was offensive and made me laugh.
You do realize that, hey?
-
It was too funny!
I thought this was high no-holds-barred comedy and the fact that they poked some nasty humor at the very person they lionized in their previous routine, shows that what they care most about is getting a laugh.
-
Ouch-funny
It was just a shade too close to the truth. It would have been funnier if they had dared to be outrageous (e.g., "if I don't win I will revert to my original form, a giant snake monster with eyes that shoot laser beams")
-
Saturday Night Live?
Wow, that show is still on? Who knew?
-
Why the Sour Face, Pussycat?
I dunno.
With the Reign of the Bush/Clinton duocracy maintaining its steel death grip on this nation since 1988, starting with Bush the First, I am marginally happy to finally see some break in the weather.
I say 'marginally' because there is little sense in pretending that either of the new clowns, McCain or Obama, will be any good at turning the country away from its current slide towards a mega-Argentina, a socialist/fascist third world ghoulish super police state with endless rights and privileges for the few super-wealthy and endless face stomping punishment for the rest of humanity.
the GOOD PEOPLE lose yet again to the evil forces that saturate this planet.
Maybe, just maybe, I can click my heels together and hope that the good people wake up and realize that none of the forces arrayed against this country currently is any good. Maybe people are smarter than me and think they can bail if things get really bad. Maybe people think, "as long as I am doing better than my neighbor, even if we all live in a hellhole"...
MISANTHROPY RULEZ!
-
Yeah, I laughed
at a few little places. But the schtick is supposed to be juxtaposing Hillary's usual rhetorical machinations with straight talk. It would have worked a LOT better if Poehler could actually do a passable impression, which she can't.
-
It's Funny
Time to move on and beat Bush in the fall.
-
I really tried to dislike the spoof, but it snuck up on me
To be fair, I really, really tried to dislike this spoof of HRC and her campaign b/c I so hated their spoof of Obama a few months ago, the humor of the bit snuck up on me and overwhelmed my rational desires. I will explain why:
I hated SNL's last spoof of BO b/c in depicting him as an inarticulate and slow-witted dolt, it offered not an exaggeration of BO or his positions, rather it struck me as patently false and a pander to a Clintonian agenda. (Come on? Does anyone, even his grestest foes really believe Obama is inarticulate or slow-witted?) It was a poor satire b/c I could not recognize anything of BO in the depiction. It struck me as completely untrue, regardless of the viewers political allegiances.
Understanding my irritation w/ SNL for such a piss-poor impersonation, I wanted to be consistant and hate this recent spoof on Clinton. I noted with disdain the bit's overcharacterization of all Clinton supporters as racists. I noticed that Poelher did quite capture all of Hillary's verbal or body-moment ticks.
But even when I was trying to hate the bit, in the end I found myself smiling when she outlined why she was the better candidate. "I will do anything to become President. There are things that Obama just won't do." I chuckle even now as I write it.
The difference btw the two impersonations is that Poelher captures not Hillary herself necessarily, but that she captures well (and exaggerates) what we think of her: her doggedness, her problems with principles, her appeal to our most nefarious sentiments.
This is why, despite my intellectual desire not to like this spoof, I liked it anyway.
Just my thoughts on the subject.
-
Offensive?
When was SNL ever offensive? Please be specific.
-
Clinton
Parts were harsh, but ever since Ohio and Texas, we've been calling Clinton the candidate for racists and people who can't count, so it was kind of funny to see someone acknowledge it.
-
had a hard time laughing?
Maybe it has to do with the fact that a lot of people can't laugh at themselves. Issac Hayes didn't have a hard time poking fun at religions on South Park until they started poking fun at his religion. Then it wasn't funny anymore.
I'm sure you had great fun when SNL was poking fun at Obama and McCain and Wright, but all of a sudden they're taking shots at your candidate, and suddenly it isn't so funny anymore.
Or maybe it's because the portrait is a little too accurate for comfort. Hillary is a ruthless political animal who has played the gender card for all it is worth, with a big assist from Joan Walsh in these pages. She has more than implied that Obama will never gain the support of white, working class, uneducated voters (read: "racists"). And she has proven over and over again with her moving targets of what constitutes a valid 'win' by her definition that she has no ethical bottom.