Although flippant and tasteless, his closing comments were intended as an ironic joke, not as a call to action - an intention he believed regular readers of his humorous column would understand.There are some things about which humor is not possible, and Presidential assassination is one of them.
I suggested yesterday that Brooker would not be allowed into the United States for quite a while. I hope this is the case. This stuff is serious. But there are no secret service agents in the United Kingdom, except for Her Majesty's variety.
As I reported in an earlier post, Joe Biden told This Week host George Stephanopoulos not only that he would not say that he thought Kerry would win, but also that he would serve as President Bush's Secretary of State in the President's second term. (The State Dept. comment, to be fair, was in response to a goofy question from Steph.)
My word: If Bush wins Michigan, put a fork in the Dem.
With some, it would work better than "boo."
Once all the linkage has been established, we can pat ourselves on the back for a job well done.
It looks like it'll be a good system.
And I hated the music at the time.
Excellent taste in music. Too bad you didn't get a Mac. They'd you have excellent taste in computers too. Heh.
At the risk of inviting outraged invective, and while understanding how (even in jest) calling for the assassination of a sitting President is a fairly serious matter, I'd just like to point out that the Charlie Brooker piece in the Guardian has been blown out of all proportion - especially elsewhere online where it has been represented as being The Guardian's editorial policy to advocate political assassination.
He's built his career on being politically incorrect, offensive and (usually) amusing - every week there's something there to outrage someone, some good jokes and some duds. I'm mostly a fan of his stuff, many aren't - no matter what their political beliefs, as he takes the piss out of all and sundry. Please note this old interview. This all doesn't necessarily excuse his final joke in this week's column, but might give some context.
Oh, by the by, although we probably disagree about most stuff, I'm whacking a link up (if you have no objections). Without wanting to sound like I'm having a dig, it seems to be quite rare to find a pro-Bush blogger whose stuff doesn't make me fear for the future of humanity and is reasonably and coherently written.
The Guardian has tried to assert that it has a vested interest in influencing the outcome of this election, so it is only natural that some would take Brooker's position as the serious Guardian position. And for those not familiar with Brooker's writing, it would be even easier to mistake it for a serious advocacy of President Bush's assassination. (Well written satire of that nature often makes one look twice.)
As an American, I'm irritated. I would not be surprised if the Brits were offended by some nyuck-nyuck writer here in the States suggesting that the island needs another John Pym to urge the beading of the Queenie. And Charles I was killed by the state, not by some lunatic assassin.
Thanks for the link! I will reciprocate.