Author Topic: BREAKING MUST CREDIT APF: MCCAIN AD REALLY SAYING OBAMA IS ANTICHRIST (Read 17015 times)

Tauntaun · « **Reply #120 on:** August 07, 2008, 05:05:43 PM »

Quote from: The Iconistrator on August 07, 2008, 05:05:07 PM

This thread took a weird turn

If by weird you mean crazy, then yes. smh

APF · « **Reply #121 on:** August 07, 2008, 05:16:55 PM »

I'm baffled by anyone who took the non-arguments in that article seriously. I'm assuming I'm being trolled, but lol either way.

MrAngryFace · « **Reply #122 on:** August 07, 2008, 05:18:34 PM »

Im not even sure whats going on in this thread. I refuse to read any posts in it.

Howard Alan Treesong · « **Reply #123 on:** August 07, 2008, 05:21:04 PM »

Crushed · « **Reply #124 on:** August 07, 2008, 05:22:18 PM »

Quote from: APF on August 07, 2008, 05:16:55 PM

I'm baffled by anyone who took the non-arguments in that article seriously. I'm assuming I'm being trolled, but lol either way.

no apf everyone is serious

the world hasn't gone mad, you have

APF · « **Reply #125 on:** August 07, 2008, 05:23:11 PM »

Quote from: The Iconistrator on August 07, 2008, 05:18:34 PM

Im not even sure whats going on in this thread. I refuse to read any posts in it.

Patel broke down and started hurling sexualized invective. I was a little turned on, thinking it was a proposal.

APF · « **Reply #126 on:** August 07, 2008, 06:08:23 PM »

I was under the impression they were just web ads, or if not then targeted to very small markets.

As I said in the other thread, I don't see the point in this line of attack ("the other guy is really well-liked"), but the ridiculous, overblown reaction to both this and the other commercial certainly doesn't help McCain's opponents.

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #127 on:** August 07, 2008, 06:26:11 PM »

PROOF

PROOF

apf is the new foc confirmed

Eel O'Brian · « **Reply #128 on:** August 07, 2008, 06:28:59 PM »

what is obama's stance on ritually slaying young damien with the sacred knives

is he pro or con

duckman2000 · « **Reply #129 on:** August 07, 2008, 06:50:40 PM »

Quote from: APF on August 07, 2008, 06:08:23 PM

the ridiculous, overblown reaction

This, from APF.

Fresh Prince · « **Reply #130 on:** August 07, 2008, 06:59:29 PM »

As the son of a hardcore Catholic that ad is pretty much saying Obama is a false prophet/anti-Christ. Pretty much conforms to the Christian view that a man will come to power saying he will bring change, peace, harmony and other false promises. He'll reinforce secular humanism (looking to himself as an example), then crush religion and enslave humanity leading to the end of days. Sort of shortly delt with in wikipedia:

Quote from: wikipedia

Some Futurists hold that sometime prior to the expected return of Jesus, there will be a period of "great tribulation"[40] during which the Antichrist, indwelt and controlled by Satan, will attempt to win supporters with false peace, supernatural signs. He will silence all that defy him by refusing to "receive his mark" on their right hands or forehead. This "mark" will be required to legally partake in the end-time economic system.[41] Some Futurists believe that the Antichrist will be assassinated half way through the Tribulation, being revived and indwelt by Satan. The Antichrist will continue on for three and a half years following this "deadly wound".

I mean blessed, annointed, the gospel music in the background, blessings etc. It's all there.

APF · « **Reply #131 on:** August 07, 2008, 07:20:54 PM »

Or, it could be that all this stuff is literally Obama's campaign message (save the "false profit" part), and this is making fun of the messianic tone that people long before McCain was the presumptive nominee of his party were noting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor

Any rational person would be able to comprehend the reality that saying someone is not the messiah is not the same as saying they're the antichrist, but apparently I've underestimated the degree of literal insanity that has gripped the denizens of this board.

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #132 on:** August 07, 2008, 07:22:10 PM »

occam's razor says that republicans are demonstrably stupid, not that they have developed senses of irony

APF · « **Reply #133 on:** August 07, 2008, 07:24:21 PM »

The New Yorker would argue at the very least it is not just Republicans who suffer a lack of irony.

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #134 on:** August 07, 2008, 07:26:35 PM »

noted conservative h.l. mencken also noted that "no-one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the american people," which, when combined with occam's razor, suggests that mccain's ad probably targets the lowest common conservative denominator: former millenialists and eschatological baptists. but hey: go ahead and suspend your cynicism in the name of defending your wackos-in-arms!

APF · « **Reply #135 on:** August 07, 2008, 07:34:04 PM »

Why is it that in the conspirator's addled mind, it is always the most elaborate and sinister interpretation that is deemed the most simple? A lack of knowledge or understanding of subtlety and nuance would suggest a base interpretation along the lines of, "lol that guy is dumb," not, "omg he's saying something slightly similar to what is possibly a line in the bible while being called something that is remotely similar to someone in a book, and actually there are some similarities I recall both from that book I read and memorized and from selected aspects of Obama's life which I am also fully informed about." If one is dumb, why are we insisting they will progress further than a surface interpretation of this ad, which also will likely not be shown on something they'll be watching.

Howard Alan Treesong · « **Reply #136 on:** August 07, 2008, 07:36:13 PM »

how is this reaching? the anti-Christ and endtimes is front and center in these people's lives. they literally spend almost every day waiting with glee for the Rapture to come and take them away. this isn't some obscure tenet of their faith; this is the cornerstone of their entire worldview.

since when is pointing out what's true a "conspiracy"

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #137 on:** August 07, 2008, 07:40:32 PM »

i don't think apf has ever met a single member of the south's republican constituency in his lifetime

it must be nice to live in a p.j. o'rourke-esque world of sneering northern pseudo-conservatism, never having to leave his lofty seat to smell the pig entrails and snake oil of his downwind fellowship

Howard Alan Treesong · « **Reply #138 on:** August 07, 2008, 07:41:12 PM »

I give up, arguing with APF is just a terrible tar baby

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #139 on:** August 07, 2008, 07:44:57 PM »

Quote from: APF on August 07, 2008, 07:34:04 PM

Why is it that in the conspirator's addled mind, it is always the most elaborate and sinister interpretation that is deemed the most simple? A lack of knowledge or understanding of subtlety and nuance would suggest a base interpretation along the lines of, "lol that guy is dumb," not, "omg he's saying something slightly similar to what is possibly a line in the bible while being called something that is remotely similar to someone in a book, and actually there are some similarities I recall both from that book I read and memorized and from selected aspects of Obama's life which I am also fully informed about." If one is dumb, why are we insisting they will progress further than a surface interpretation of this ad, which also will likely not be shown on something they'll be watching.

because many of these midwest folks are stepped in the lore and arcana of millenialism, and live their lives in hope and anticipation that the lord will walk among them again, driving all the distinguished effete fellows and abortion doctors and liberals and university professors and jews into hell? i can't have a conversation with my mother-in-law, for example, without her offering her hope that "jesus will come back and fix it all," and that such an event will happen in her lifetime. her whole side of the family is steeped in the arcana of revelations as interpreted by lahaye/jenkins and the many, many baptist pastors who have cultivated this reeking garden of righteous fantasy. you should really get to know your political bedfellows a little better; after all, they construct a large portion of the platforms of the folks you prefer to elect!

as to them recognizing the ad's intent: it's loaded with keywords and imagery they ALL recognize. but hey: go ahead and adopt a gleefully disingenuous demeanor. STATE'S RIGHTS!

Fresh Prince · « **Reply #140 on:** August 07, 2008, 07:47:25 PM »

Quote from: APF on August 07, 2008, 07:20:54 PM

Or, it could be that all this stuff is literally Obama's campaign message (save the "false profit" part), and this is making fun of the messianic tone that people long before McCain was the presumptive nominee of his party were noting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor

Any rational person would be able to comprehend the reality that saying someone is not the messiah is not the same as saying they're the antichrist, but apparently I've underestimated the degree of literal insanity that has gripped the denizens of this board.

Since I have nothing better to do: that point is true when you're talking about normal people. The whole anti-christ myth is that initially that people see him as a charming, charismatic figure and some even do call him messianic. He's seen as this great figure that will bring peace to Palestine and Isreal, create a new order in the world etc. The point for Christians is to recognise the 'true' Chirst and that they must not fall for this trap (to be saved), hence it doesn't just become a matter of saying he is not a messiah but he is there to lead the world into damnation and hence is the antichrist.

I mean in a sense some fundies will see this as part of God's overall plan and the eventual return of Christ but really I think he's preaching to the choir.

APF · « **Reply #141 on:** August 07, 2008, 07:49:29 PM »

Is this the, "I'm from Texas" argument again? (my family's from NM) While it is possible one may be convinced from this ad that Obama is the antichrist, it would not be due to a lack of understanding subtlety and nuanced interpretation; as I pointed out in my step-by-step, the actual arguments being put forth are tenuous at best and require one to make connections that are certainly not available to a surface interpretation of this commercial, which again AFAIK was created solely for press purposes and not for air on your conservative boogymen's tvs. Again, it does not take casting someone as the antichrist to spur negative feelings over the messianic coverage Obama sometimes receives; argue if you will that people will take away strange conclusions from this ad--and you yourselves appear to be doing this very thing,--but do not do so under the guise that it is obvious or even rational to believe this was the intention.

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #142 on:** August 07, 2008, 07:51:14 PM »

you mean ads have never been created to send out "WE'RE ON YOUR SIDE" messages to true believers and make sure they cast their hats in the ring?

APF · « **Reply #143 on:** August 07, 2008, 07:51:58 PM »

Come on Prole; your argument is entirely, "these people are crazy they'll think anything I believe they will." That might make you feel better but it's not a counter-argument for anything.

Howard Alan Treesong · « **Reply #144 on:** August 07, 2008, 07:53:26 PM »

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #145 on:** August 07, 2008, 07:53:46 PM »

no, my argument is that the ad CLEARLY says "hey, folks in the Midwest/South who are fuck all crazy, mccain here kinda thinks there might be something to your idea that obama is that kid from the omen, how about you do the safe thing and send a vote his way wink wink tee hee"

you, as someone who has long given up the mantle of true conservatism in favor of histrionic internet contrarianism, are free to support that message as disingenuously as you are able

Howard Alan Treesong · « **Reply #146 on:** August 07, 2008, 07:56:23 PM »

also, the point of the ad isn't to convince people that Obama is the anti-Christ

it's to get people thinking that Obama and the purported anti-Christ have a lot of traits in common

the goal of the CM isn't for people to watch it and go, "that's it! he's Satan on Earth!"

the point is just to develop those ukiuki wakuwaku feelings of suspicion in people's hearts

in that regard, I can't see any sensible argument that there isn't strong anti-Christ imagery in the ad and that is the intended effect

APF: Do you deny that there is anti-Christ/end-times overtones in the images and words of the ad? I'm not talking intent, here, I'm just talking the content of the advertisement.

Eel O'Brian · « **Reply #147 on:** August 07, 2008, 07:57:31 PM »

if only people would scrutinize their guy as much as the other guy

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #148 on:** August 07, 2008, 07:59:09 PM »

i'll deal with the lesser of two evils in its turn, when the greater is out of the picture

Eel O'Brian · « **Reply #149 on:** August 07, 2008, 07:59:52 PM »

no you won't

no one ever does, really

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #150 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:01:48 PM »

i sure as fuck have, but i'm sorry you didn't hang out with me during the clinton years because we probably would have agreed on a lot

Eel O'Brian · « **Reply #151 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:05:25 PM »

i'm pretty apolitical, actually

haven't voted since clinton's last term

i just like watching all the fist-shaking every four years

Fresh Prince · « **Reply #152 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:05:40 PM »

I'm from Australia so I don't know what this Texas thing is about.

'Surface Interpretation' - that is what you are making. If you grew up around fundie religion, you know about the subtle symbolism, the nuanced allusions to the Antichrist that this ad is making. But this ad is not for you it's for those who come from strong Christian based families who are already familiar with the whole Antichrist story, who have retrofited the Antichrist story from a person who is birthed from a dragon or whatever to a person who is elected as the president of the USA or made Head of the U.N and then makes his mark on the world.

And when was anything with religious connotations rational anyway?

APF · « **Reply #153 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:05:59 PM »

If an architect designs a library that happens to be in a "crescent"-like shape, is it rational to exclaim the purpose was to express solidarity with, or acquiescence to, Muslim terrorist organizations? I only have a vague recollection of the incident itself, but I do recall Mandark making fun of the conservative uproar over it.

SP: make your point re: "end times" like an adult, with an actual argument that has disprovable points. I've countered the article I posted and your response was childish and pathetic, much like everything you've been doing here.

Quote from: Professor Prole on August 07, 2008, 07:53:46 PM

no, my argument is that the ad CLEARLY says "hey, folks in the Midwest/South who are fuck all crazy, mccain here kinda thinks there might be something to your idea that obama is that kid from the omen, how about you do the safe thing and send a vote his way wink wink tee hee"

you, as someone who has long given up the mantle of true conservatism in favor of histrionic internet contrarianism, are free to support that message as disingenuously as you are able

When did I ever say I was a conservative?

APF · « **Reply #154 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:07:46 PM »

Quote from: Fresh Prince on August 07, 2008, 08:05:40 PM

'Surface Interpretation' - that is what you are making. If you grew up around fundie religion, you know about the subtle symbolism, the nuanced allusions to the Antichrist that this ad is making. But this ad is not for you it's for those who come from strong Christian based families who are already familiar with the whole Antichrist story

Actually, this ad--like its sister the "celeb" ad--is for the press, to regain coverage after Obama's Europe trip.

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #155 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:10:10 PM »

if the architect has supporters that are rabidly anti-muslim and who's fandom of said architect is falling into recent question, and if the library is filled with books calling for the eradication of islam than yes, suspicion is warranted. note that i have no idea what the real case you are discussing is; i am just correctly applying your analogy.

well, you're clearly neither a liberal nor a free-thinker, and i suppose you aren't much of a conservative either, so i suppose you are right: haphazard teenaged internet contrarian it is!

Howard Alan Treesong · « **Reply #156 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:11:04 PM »

Quote from: APF on August 07, 2008, 08:05:59 PM

SP: make your point re: "end times" like an adult, with an actual argument that has disprovable points. I've countered the article I posted and your response was childish and pathetic, much like everything you've been doing here.

I'm quite happy to let our posting histories establish which of us is being childish and pathetic, thank you!

Howard Alan Treesong · « **Reply #157 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:12:25 PM »

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #158 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:13:56 PM »

PANDERING TO A CONSTITUENCY NEVER HAPPENS

spoiler (click to show/hide)

unless said crazy minority constituency happens to be obama's college brigades

[close]

Fresh Prince · « **Reply #159 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:14:13 PM »

Quote from: APF on August 07, 2008, 08:07:46 PM

Actually, this ad--like its sister the "celeb" ad--is for the press, to regain coverage after Obama's Europe trip.

I'm not familiar with it's history but whatever the origin, the point now is that it is out and can be seen by the public, where some sections will validate the Obama is the AnitChrist message.

laesperanzapaz · « **Reply #160 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:14:56 PM »

........................................__................................. .....................
.................................,-~*`¯lllllll`*~,..................................................
...........................,-~*`lllllllllllllllllllllllllll¯`*-,..........................................
......................,-~*llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll*-,......................................
..................,-*llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll.\.................. ...................
................;*`lllllllllllllllllllllllllll,-~*~-,llllllllllllllllllll\....................................
................\lllllllllllllllllllllllllll/...........\;;;;llllllllllll,-`~-,................................
.................\lllllllllllllllllllll,-*.............`~-~-,...(.(¯`*,`,...............................
...................\llllllllllll,-~*........................)_-\..*`*;..)..............................
.....................\,-*`¯,*`)............,-~*`~................../...............................
.....................|/.../.../~,......-~*,-~*`;.................../.\..............................
.................../.../..../..../..,-,..*~,.`*~*..................*...\.............................
...................|.../.../..../.*`...\................................)....)¯`~,....................
...................|./..../..../........).........)`*~-,............../.....|..)...`~-,..............
.................././.../....,*`-,.....`-,....*`....,---......\...../...../..|..........¯```*~-,,,,
.................(............)`*~-,.....`*`.,-~*.,-*.......|.../..../..../...............\..........
..................*-,.......`*-,...`~,..``.,,,-*.............|.,*...,*....|.................\.........
......................*,.........`-,....)-,..................,-*`...,-*.....(`-,..............\........
........................f`-,........`-,/...*-,___,,-~*.....,-*......|....`-,...............\.......

Eel O'Brian · « **Reply #161 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:15:36 PM »

is that dude in pain because his ear is about to fall off

APF · « **Reply #162 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:15:48 PM »

Quote from: Genghis Cohen on August 07, 2008, 08:10:56 PM

since when has asserting the author's intentions been a critical argument?

Explain.

Fresh Prince: I just don't see any coherent arguments to that point, only assertions from folks here saying it must be the case since someone else made the argument.

APF · « **Reply #163 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:16:19 PM »

EOB: Yeah, I just tried to post three times and was interrupted each time by another post...

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #164 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:16:36 PM »

Quote from: Fresh Prince on August 07, 2008, 08:14:13 PM

Quote from: APF on August 07, 2008, 08:07:46 PM
Actually, this ad--like its sister the "celeb" ad--is for the press, to regain coverage after Obama's Europe trip.
I'm not familiar with it's history but whatever the origin, the point now is that it is out and can be seen by the public, where some sections will validate the Obama is the AnitChrist message.

i'd suggest its purpose was to get the PRESS to recognize it as an anti-christ ad, and then spell it out for the denser viewership, all for a few relative pennies

Howard Alan Treesong · « **Reply #165 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:17:33 PM »

I've made arguments based on the sociological makeup of the Republican base, the visual and grammatical content of the advertisement and its overlap with end times mythology, the modern connection of end times mythology with our misadventure in Iraq and the desire of fundamentalists to conflate the two, the desire of the base to accelerate and bring about these end-times, the use of this terminology and imagery by the multi-million selling Left Behind series of books, and the way that political ads pander to the base using coded imagery that's deniable in public but undeniable to the targets. I've also brought up (as have others) the fact that our upbringing in certain parts of the U.S. makes the "anti-Christ" imagery of this advertisement clear and undeniable.

Apparently, those are inadmissable arguments. If you'd let me know what rhetorical tools are still on the table, I would be happy to try and forumlate an argument that the Auto-Posting Freeperbot parses as acceptable.

Fresh Prince · « **Reply #166 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:19:18 PM »

I think his argument has changed to, 'But that's not what they wanted! It was for the press! Not the religious base!'.

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #167 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:19:58 PM »

Quote from: Synthesizer Patel on August 07, 2008, 08:17:33 PM

Apparently, those are inadmissable arguments. If you'd let me know what rhetorical tools are still on the table, I would be happy to try and forumlate an argument that the Auto-Posting Freeperbot parses as acceptable.

try phrasing your arguments in terms of the bell curve

Howard Alan Treesong · « **Reply #168 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:24:11 PM »

man, we haven't had a pile on like this since the good ol days of Ron Paul

it feels good

APF · « **Reply #169 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:25:44 PM »

Quote from: Genghis Cohen on August 07, 2008, 08:19:22 PM

you keep bringing up the intent of the ad as if you knew exactly what it is, and from that you're dismissing counter arguments based on that. if people see it one way, you can't simply respond that that wasn't the intent of the ad so they are wrong by default. if that was the case i would've slept through most of my undergraduate classes after stating what the author's intentions were.

I'm just saying what's most likely--not what's possible in someone's fevered imagination. To argue the non-surface intent would require some strong evidence, not tenuous arguments that require you to beg the question. So far I haven't seen anything convincing from either the article or from the angry protestations here. Take SP's argument that the commercial uses "end time imagery"--how is The Ten Commandments "end time" imagery? How is this alleged "end time" imagery different than simply creating a pseudo-religious atmosphere to parallel what many critics / commentators have described as a messianic tone to the Obama campaign? This is what I am asking for: the dots that connect the idea past the surface interpretation that the campaign gives, and the histrionic interpretations I'm shocked to see parroted here.

APF · « **Reply #170 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:26:15 PM »

Yeah, I accept the fact that none of you are serious, and you're simply trolling to have fun. Whatever, I do that too.

Howard Alan Treesong · « **Reply #171 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:32:34 PM »

let's hatefuck

spoiler (click to show/hide)

can you wear this Ann Coulter mask for me

[close]

Eric P · « **Reply #172 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:37:26 PM »

why does this thread still live?

We belong dead

Crushed · « **Reply #173 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:45:33 PM »

I think APF might honestly be insane. I'm serious, I'm starting to think he suffers from mental illness.

Eric P · « **Reply #174 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:47:23 PM »

but he's seriously not wrong in this thread.

he's contentious, he's incorrigible, he's disingenuous, but he's not wrong.

APF · « **Reply #175 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:52:54 PM »

If Obama is the antichrist, would not voting for him even do anything? I think it's pretty obvious this is a clear call for Obama's assassination by the McCain camp, arguably even more worrysome than the similar call by Hitlery Killton just a little while ago. Religious nutballs are NOT above killing people to serve their twisted goals.

APF · « **Reply #176 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:53:18 PM »

Eric P: what do you mean, disingenuous?

Crushed · « **Reply #177 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:53:51 PM »

Quote from: APF on August 07, 2008, 08:53:18 PM

Eric P: what do you mean, disingenuous?

i think he means making posts like this

Quote from: APF on August 07, 2008, 08:52:54 PM

If Obama is the antichrist, would not voting for him even do anything? I think it's pretty obvious this is a clear call for Obama's assassination by the McCain camp, arguably even more worrysome than the similar call by Hitlery Killton just a little while ago. Religious nutballs are NOT above killing people to serve their twisted goals.

Eric P · « **Reply #178 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:56:54 PM »

Quote from: APF on August 07, 2008, 08:52:54 PM

Religious nutballs are NOT above killing people to serve their twisted goals.

there's an entire book about it

THE BOOK OF LUKE

maybe you've heard of it.

Tristam · « **Reply #179 on:** August 07, 2008, 08:57:28 PM »

Quote from: Eric P on August 07, 2008, 08:47:23 PM

but he's seriously not wrong in this thread.

he's contentious, he's incorrigible, he's disingenuous, but he's not wrong.

I don't think so. What it really boils down to is the McCain campaign's intent; you pointed out that smaller controversial ads are often picked up by the mainstream press for free airtime, and I'm sure you are right. But if that is the case, I see this little ad saga playing out as Prole predicts:

Quote from: Prole

i'd suggest its purpose was to get the PRESS to recognize it as an anti-christ ad, and then spell it out for the denser viewership, all for a few relative pennies

which doesn't disagree with your suggestion at all but which still recognizes that the ad really could mobilize a part of the Republican base who are still upset that Huckabee didn't win in the primaries.

News:

Author Topic: BREAKING MUST CREDIT APF: MCCAIN AD REALLY SAYING OBAMA IS ANTICHRIST (Read 17015 times)