January 19, 2006
sat·ire

From the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary:

Main Entry: sat·ire
Pronunciation: 'sa-"tIr
Function: noun
1 : a literary work holding up human vices and follies to ridicule or scorn
2 : trenchant wit, irony, or sarcasm used to expose and discredit vice or folly
3: this blog entry
A few people posted comments or sent private e-mails expressing confusion or offense at my Tuesday night post "Seattle's Judenrein City Council". It was satire. To those who were offended by my post, let me ask what offended you more -- that Seattle's City Council is using race as the primary criteria for filling a vacancy; or that a private citizen is using over-the-top satire to call them on it? If it's the latter, then I doubt you'll ever agree with very much of what I write here. If it's the former, did you also e-mail the City Council to express your offense at their race-based politics? If not, you may contact them here.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at January 19, 2006 01:07 AM | Email This
Comments
1. STEFAN:YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE TO EXPLAIN GOOD SATIRE NOR DOES A REAL SATIRIST CARE WHO DOES OR DOESN'T GET IT. PLEASE GO BACK TO "REPORTING."

Posted by: Lon Schmenge on January 19, 2006 01:43 AM
2. Stefan,

I think we all understand what satire is. I also think you were creative with this piece. There was obvious effort on your part to tell a story you thought was important.

My problem is the use of anti-Semitism as your vehicle. For generations this has beed a problem. It has been drilled into us, over and over, NEVER AGAIN! To suggest, even jestfully that City Council is Nazi or anti-Semitic is simply uncalled for.

When I see a piece written by a Jew, making light of the horrors of Germany and World WarII, I cringe.

The piece was in poor taste. You meant to evoke thought about an issue, but your piece has overshadowed your subject matter and become the story. Thats how you should judge the piece.

I signed my real name. I feel strongly enough not to hide behind a screen name.

Posted by: Howard Grossman on January 19, 2006 01:56 AM
3. Undoubtedly the above poster has also contacted Mel Brooks to express his disapproval of the musical, THE PRODUCERS. Yes?

Selective outrage bores me.

Posted by: South County on January 19, 2006 04:36 AM
4. Howard G,

Anti-Semitism is dead and gone? On what planet have you resided the past two generations? The so called "Palistinians" (most of whose ancestry resided in other parts of the Mediterranean), as well as the majority of the Arab world, has sworn to drive Israel into the sea! Old Europe reviles the Jews and would rather they be anywhere but in their respective countries. In America, liberals openly support the "Palistinian" cause and questions Israel's right to exist on their God-given postage stamp of a nation.

Throughout the centuries Jewish people have exibited the resourcefulness and work ethic to lift themselves above their lazy and backward middle-eastern brethern. They purchased much of the land they possess from absentee Eqyptian and Ottoman Turkish owners during the 19th century and have worked to make it bloom and prosper, all without the wealth of oil. They have repeatedly defended their land from envious and corrupt neighbors. Yet much of Europe and many in this country resent the only true middle-eastern democracy and demand Israel give their land to the corrupt and violent despots who already own in excess of 99% of the region.

Only fools and those educated and indoctrinated by the like of Evergreen State College could possibly believe that anit-Semitism is dead and gone.

Posted by: Saltherring on January 19, 2006 05:37 AM
5. "Anti-Semitism is dead and gone?"

I really don't see where Howard Grossman said that. "Never Again" is a vow of eternal vigilance, not an observation of fact.

Posted by: rmc on January 19, 2006 06:36 AM
6. rmc,

Howard appeared to be insinuating that because it has "been drilled into us, over and over, NEVER AGAIN", that anti-Semitism doesn not exist. Perhaps I read Howard, wrong, but Stefan has every right to, even in satire, make his case that the Seattle City Council's "racial diversity" campaign is, in itself, racist and exclusive.

Posted by: Saltherring on January 19, 2006 06:48 AM
7. Can the City Council do anything that would not lend itself to satire?

They're more concerned with Sister Cities in Cuba, North Korea, and Venezuela (notice a trend?), making statements on nuclear weapons, skin color, and bedroom habits than actual governance.

What's not to laugh at.

Posted by: JCM on January 19, 2006 07:24 AM
8. The column was an OBVIOUS satire, and I agree that anyone who didn't get it is a dolt. I also agree that ani-semitism is alive and well worldwide, including the Puget Sound, and we need to be reminded of that every once in a while.
The Seattle City Council's greatest sin is that they are silly and stupid.

Posted by: katomar on January 19, 2006 07:38 AM
9. The Democrats do it; the conservative Cox and Forkum does it; Horsey does it.

We just haven't seen that side of it with "the shark". I always have thought the shark was a serious (too serious) writer. The hammering (pun intended) he takes would leave most of us a mess.

Poking a little fun at the Democrats- Bush is Hitler- which I despised, is a little payback.

So, while I like "the shark" venturing into humor/satire, I couldn't help but notice the Bush is Hitler analogy of the Democrats, so I was a little taken aback.

It wasn't like he was ridiculing a Democrat who just had a heart attack or some serious injury, which I still feels crosses the line.

Posted by: swatter on January 19, 2006 07:47 AM
10. It's always mazing to me that so many people fail to recognize satire when they see it. Do you suppose many of these readers are graduates of the Washington State public school system?

Posted by: maggie on January 19, 2006 07:57 AM
11. Being Jewish and a regular reader of Sound Politics, I hope Stefan does one of these a week.

Posted by: Ivan on January 19, 2006 08:08 AM
12. Agreed, Stefan! And yes, you'd think that at least after MLK holiday that the council would try to judge candidates on the content of their character, not the color of their skin!

Posted by: Michele on January 19, 2006 08:19 AM
13. Actually it seemed as if the poke was at the council for using birth attributes (race) as the bases for selecting candidates. Not only was it said that no Jew was on the short list, but also white males of any religious persuasion.

With such an emphasis placed on state classified minority status as a selection criteria, the comparison to the Germans is accurate, at the same time pointing out the absurdity of it all.

When state-classifications of people becomes the criteria for selecting candidates for anything we are in big trouble.

What ever happened to competence or "being judged on ones character"?

Posted by: fred on January 19, 2006 09:37 AM
14. While bad satire can explain away much of this site, it doesn't excuse what was a very bad post. If you really want to write Satire, I would recomend reading Swift or Orwell, or any of the posts on this blog related to the election of Govenor Gregoire.

Posted by: JDB on January 19, 2006 09:45 AM
15. As I Emailed to the council. If they truly wanted diversity they would be looking for the one thing they don't have. A conservative.

Posted by: JA on January 19, 2006 10:11 AM
16. Satire? In Seattle? The Borg can't comprehend satire.

Like your post above, Seattle elitists don't want anyone's feelings to get hurt. At least that is on the surface of what people like Kohl-Welles want to prevent.

Dig a little deeper though.

Posted by: BananaLand (aka Iguana) on January 19, 2006 10:18 AM
17. I'm sure that Stefan stays up at night, trying to find ways to please you biteme\dogbreath\jdb. You wouldn't know satire if it, well, bit you!

Posted by: alphabet soup on January 19, 2006 10:25 AM
18. Saltherring,

My point, perhaps misunderstood, is that anti-Semitism is alive and well, much to our disgrace. RMC is correct about my use of "Never Again". I meant it as eternal vigilance. A vow that never again will Jews die a docile death in the face of annihilation.

My outrage is not selective. Mel Brooks comedy made absolute fun of the German dictator, it did not characterize a living person or group as being like Nazi's, even in satire. I suggest you watch the movie again.

Posted by: Howard Grossman on January 19, 2006 10:30 AM
19. Stefan, you are too concerned about how your satire was received by your readers. Some loved it, some hated it. I thought your point was well made by the facts and reasonable interpretation that comprised the first half of the posting. Given the headline, I should have been prepared for the Nazi rant at the end.

I am suggesting that you cheapened an otherwise compelling piece of reporting by bringing in the Nazi twist. I am not shocked or apalled that you did so, but I think you did not help your cause by doing it.

Feel free to disagree with me. But please do move on. If you are concerned about it enough to keep bringing it up, perhaps it would be simpler to just admit that, all things considered, it wasn't the brightest post you have made. But please do move on.

Keep up the almost uniformly good work!

Posted by: huckleberry on January 19, 2006 10:46 AM
20. Shark. Keep the light burning! The PC crowd can stay in their 'handbasket'. We know where they will wind up.

Posted by: Silkworm on January 19, 2006 11:21 AM
21. Howard G - "Talk, talk is better than fight, fight" (source = ?)

I submit that pieces like the one that Stefan wrote are part of the process of eternal vigilance.

Problems begin when we make certain subjects off-limits, or only allowed when the author is the "correct" gender or ethnicity.

Free speech is, and must be, speech that is free of limits. When limits are applied, dark thoughts that would otherwise have been dispelled in the sunlight of free and vigorous discourse are left to fester and multiply like mold in a cellar.

Nor do I believe that Stefan's ethnicity should bear on the acceptability of the piece. If he were a goy, as am I, would that change anything?

Posted by: ewaggin on January 19, 2006 12:37 PM
22. Well if this has turned into a Satire site I'm not hanging around.

It's sad that a reliable blog with great information is turning into a satire site. There are enough satire sites and not enough sites actually to get stuff done.

SoundPolitics has political power. Really, it does. And if you want to become a stupid satire site then I guess I'm out of here.

Faithful Reader

Posted by: Jeremy on January 19, 2006 01:21 PM
23. Well if this has turned into a Satire site I'm not hanging around.

It's sad that a reliable blog with great information is turning into a satire site. There are enough satire sites and not enough sites actually to get stuff done.

SoundPolitics has political power. Really, it does. And if you want to become a stupid satire site then I guess I'm out of here.

Faithful Reader

Posted by: Jeremy on January 19, 2006 01:21 PM
24. if you want to become a stupid satire site then I guess I'm out of here.


"Jeremy" -- If you haven't noticed, or maybe you have, I've always included a bit of satire with my other commentary. (Newspapers do that too, see: Horsey, David. I can't draw, so I occasionally write satire)

I don't expect every reader to like every piece that I write. You're free to stop reading at any time.

BTW, Did you complain to the Seattle City Council about their racist policy for filling the vacancy, or is my satire that you didn't like the one thing you're most outraged about this week?

Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on January 19, 2006 01:45 PM
25. Jeremy,

Bye bye!!

Posted by: Amused by self rightous liberals on January 19, 2006 01:49 PM
26. Hey, Jeremy! Wait up, man...

Posted by: huckleberry on January 19, 2006 02:18 PM
27. No Jeremy . . . go . . . just go.

Bye bye.

Posted by: Amused by liberals on January 19, 2006 02:40 PM
28. Jeremy

I would like to think that Conservatives, or at least those who post regularly on Conservative web sites, unlike Liberals, have a sense of humor. But alas, in your case I guess I'm wrong. Direct your anger at the racists in Seattle city government as there are plenty of examples to point at. Remember Cindi Laws accused the "Jews" of torpedoing the Green Line. I must have missed your anger back then.

Posted by: swassociates on January 19, 2006 04:09 PM
29. Oh, come on now swassociates, you remember how hilarious those guys are that call him "Chimpy Bushitler" and you & me "reTHUGlicans"?

That's FUNNY stuff!

But the best of them are the situational comics....like algore, and howeird scream. You know what I mean....everybody loves a KLOWN!

Posted by: alphabet soup on January 19, 2006 06:29 PM
30. All you need to know about Dubbya. This is scream and yes, Soup, everyone love a KLOWN

"As you can possibly see, I have an injury myself — not here at the hospital, but in combat with a cedar. I eventually won. The cedar gave me a little scratch. As a matter of fact, the Colonel asked if I needed first aid when she first saw me. I was able to avoid any major surgical operations here, but thanks for your compassion, Colonel." —George W. Bush, after visiting with wounded veterans from the Amputee Care Center of Brooke Army Medical Center, San Antonio, Texas, Jan. 1, 2006

Posted by: My Left Foot on January 19, 2006 10:25 PM
31. Hiya lefty no-nutz!

Didja find yourself some clean panties to wear?

Glad to see you back. Thank you for the quote. It is more human and more ingratiating than anything you have ever offered.

You keep your raving nutters like algore and screamer, I'll take Dubya any day!

Posted by: alphabet soup on January 20, 2006 10:09 AM
32. Soup,

Check out the desperation. Bush made a light hearted and self deprecating joke to lighten the mood of a tragic circumstance. Even if this rendering is verbatim (doubtful), only a hate filled partisan hack could insinuate something invidious or dishonest to this anecdote. The only offensive thing that stands out in this is the lame attempt to suggest offensiveness. This half assed nonsense is exemplary of a frightened dim-witted hysterical liberal grasping for anything he can find to cast aspersions on his superiors.

Hoof . . . nice job as always.

Posted by: Amused by liberal pathology on January 20, 2006 11:31 AM
33. Makes me suspect that he's still waddling around in his soiled undies ;'}

No wonder he's so outta sorts.....

Posted by: alphabet soup on January 20, 2006 12:47 PM
34. Here is another from your leader. Self-deprecating? Should read self-defecating.

"[I]t's a myth to think I don't know what's going on. It's a myth to think that I'm not aware that there's opinions that don't agree with mine, because I'm fully aware of that." —George W. Bush, Philadelphia, Pa., Dec. 12, 2005.

and one more for fun:

"Wow! Brazil is big." —George W. Bush, after being shown a map of Brazil by Brazilian president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, Brasilia, Brazil, Nov. 6, 2005.

Posted by: My Left Foot on January 20, 2006 03:27 PM
35. Still smarter (by leaps and bounds) than anything you've ever said, no-nutz.

Are you going out of your way to show yourself to be a putz?!

Posted by: alphabet soup on January 20, 2006 08:26 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?