All the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players.
“All the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players.”
If the only quote there is the third line, what do you call the first two?
Nonsense. Just tell everyone that you’ve seen the future. That ought to cover it.
I’m in general agreement with the point of the writing, but in my view, it wasn’t particularly obvious that the work was not the OP’s, and I believe the failure to offer credit by reference of some sort was a mistake.
Either way, it demonstrates his ineffable dishonesty and stupidity.
It’s a win-win.
$20, same as in town.
Incidentally, I have seen the future, and it consists of thousands of moaning oldsters, pining for the world that existed before they were born and before the liberals pulled the country down into the depths of hell.
Why would anybody with half a brain and who’s been hanging around on the internet for more than a week assume any unattributed story longer than two sentences that gets passed around in an email wasn’t stolen from somewhere else?
If you’re talking about Biden, I agree (though it’s funny when plagiarizing is excused . . . and when it’s not).
If you’re talking about SA, I agree (though it’s funny when plagiarizing is excused . . . and when it’s not).
- I know this; Republicans and conservatives seem not to.
Wait…I though you wrote that! Without an attribution, it’s completely unclear!
It’s easy.
By grouping the three together and then asking a leading rhetorical question, he’s implying that someone who doesn’t use quotes to indicate attribution is exactly the same as a murderer or rapist.
#5 Today, 01:27 AM
ShibbOleth
Guest Join Date: Jul 2001
The Onion Beat you to it by 11 years
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congress Passes Americans With No Abilities Act
Thank you very very very much for this. I’ve had so much fun with it today! It sounds so authentic that I’ve reeled in several folks, who are now pissed off at me. Haven’t had so much fun in days!
Actually, you are the one who annointed me with that appellation. I’ve just repeated it back to you from time to time.
That’s correct. I thought it was hilariously funny; I also thought certain posters around here, the kind who can laugh at themselves – even if they disagreed with the overall thrust of it – would find it hilariously funny as well; and I thought it illuminated certain elements of the liberal mindset that could use some illumination, such as an eager willingness to create victims where none exist; to regard American taxpayers as The Goose Who Lays Neverending Golden Eggs; and to turn a blind eye to human nature and ignore the fact that encouraging/rewarding slackardly behavior not only kills productivity but encourages slackardliness in everyone else. Why work hard when the guy next to you is getting just as much as you and barely coasting?
The CETA program of the 1970s is a prime example of what happens when government is in charge of do-gooding employment programs. At the time that program was in effect I was married and the woman I was married to worked as a police dispatcher in the large midwestern city we lived in. Everyone worked hard and did their job and got paid an adequate wage. Then the city had to hire disadvanaged, underemployed and unemployed people under the federal CETA program, and some of these people were assigned to the dispatchers’ office. They were federal employees who became virtually untouchable. They couldn’t be disciplined or fired and they were paid more than the regular dispatchers. They sat around in cliques laughing and shooting the shit, reading paperback novels and listening to music while the regular dispatchers had to carry the entire load with a workforce that had been reduced in anticipation of work to be done by the CETA employees.
And then guess what happened when new CETA hires came in and tried to work and do a good job?
The got abruptly pulled aside and told in no uncertain terms that they were not to screw up a good thing by actually doing some work, and that their time there was going to be very unpleasant if they didn’t back off and go along to get along.
These people knew they were untouchable; they had higher pay and greater benefits than the city employees who were doing all the work; and they were scamming the system and laughing at the very government efforts being made to provide for them. And over time they got so bored they left anyway, only to be replace by new hires who were similarly indoctrinated too.
This is the kind of thing that goes on when you have government make-work programs. The government doesn’t care if you work or not, or if the money it’s paying you is going down the drain. (Hey, it’s taxpayer money anyway and therefore inexhaustible. :rolleyes:) And it can slap itself on the back and congratulate itself for reducing unemployment and taking care of its ‘disadvantaged’ (i.e., lazy) citizens.
It mocks foolish compassion that creates victims where none exist and casts aspersions on those who are productive and portrays them as though they were being mean. It’s also a good way to buy votes with money generated by someone else’s efforts.
I have no problem with providing help for people who truly need it, but I would imagine they are a very small percentage indeed. The OP was obviously making fun of people who aren’t really stupid or disadvantaged, but lazy and perfectly happy to coast on the government’s dime.
People (and government) like that ain’t my brother, they just heavy.
And besides, Cain didn’t ask “Is goverment my brother’s keeper?”, or “Is it incumbent upon me to be everyone else’s keeper through wasteful, profligate goverment spending?”, now did he?
I know you mean everything you said, luci. And yours is an admirable attitude. The trouble is that that high-mindedness and desire to help the truly disadvantaged, when taken over by government, gets transmogrified into wildly wasteful and counterproductive programs that do little to help the truly disadvantaged (indeed, the people who truly need it almost invariably find that there’s nowhere near enough provided for them so as to provide needlessly for others who don’t really need it…such is the way government works in this country) and serve mainly to waste taxpayer dollars and encourage more people to be lazy and nonproductive and to expect the government to provide for them.
Yes, I could have. It just didn’t occur to me to do so. I’ve said this numerous times upthread.
When rock critic Jon Landau wrote, “I have seen the future of rock and roll and his name is Bruce Springsteen”, did that imply that he created Bruce Springsteen? If I say that I’ve seen the future of automobile and it’s name is the 2010 Whizzmobile, does that mean I’m implying I created that car?
Of course not. You know as well as I do that in normal discourse when someone says they’ve seen the future of something it means that they have come upon it and been impressed with its promise.
Such is the case with the OP. I came upon it in my email and thought it was a brilliant parody of liberal goverment, and that it served as advance notice of where we may well be heading if that government is allowed to proceed unabated.
Give us a break. We’ve had years of tearing apart Starving Artist’s political views. But plagiarism is something new.
That’s easy enough. You start your post by saying “I got this email…” or some such equivalent. Four words and it’s done.
Well, babe, you know that we all know this is bullshit. You say what you say about liberals because you want to say it. It’s not a response to anyone who said you were evil for being a Republican, because you say to everyone and anyone who will listen, regardless of what they may or may not have said about you, Republicans, or conservatives. Your OP is my cite.
Get off the cross. If you want to say mean things about liberals, feel free (as you do, of course). Stop making excuses and blaming other people for your urge to spew vitriol. No one is forcing you to do it, and no, “retaliation” is not mandatory. You have free will, it’s your choice, and if people dislike you for it, well, the wages of sin and all that. You’re not the victim here, you’re an active, willing participant in the give and take. So please, just drop the pretense that everything you’re saying is in self-defense. It ain’t. It’s because you like to say it. Move on.
That said, your OP was lame and I don’t care if it was plagiarism. I know, you were just dying to hear what I thought of it.
No, but I bet what follows wasn’t written by Lester Bangs.
Thanks for your input. The fact that even you, a skilled wordsmith, found it unclear that I hadn’t written the OP myself is enough to convince me that my supposition was wrong. Certainly if I had it to do over again I’d mention that I received it by email.
Glad to see your last post. That’s exactly the kind of statement that I think you should’ve made originally. (Well, a “sorry, guys” would be appropriate, especially given the sneering contempt you’ve shown those who took umbrage at your failure). Had you made it, I would’ve had no problem with you. As it is, excepting only the lack of an apology, I think you’ve made right. “Go and sin no more.”–some hippie peacenik dude
Lazy? The dreadful sin of Sloth! Well, why didn’t you say so, my Calvinist catechism is quite stern on the subject of laziness. But where does this theme come in? Most of the referenced screed, both the original and the updated Ver. 2.0, is about persons with no particular talent or ability. Perhaps it is implied? Yes, that must be why the file clerk is updated to an auto worker. They are largely unionized, and everybody knows about union workers, don’t they?
I don’t see any focus on laziness, I see a focus on dull normality, the vast ocean of us with no particular skills or talents. (Personally, I think quite the opposite, that many of us have talents and capacities we haven’t the opportunity to explore, but my opinion on that is as entirely unsupportable as your own…)
At any rate, before we examine your thesis further, could you point out for us where “laziness” is the primary theme here? Not seeing it.
Gosh, that Patricia Heaton is a cunt.