Buffalo Beast's "The 50 Most Loathsome Americans of 2010"

Discuss.

I won't deny the writer is biased. I do think the "he's hating on everyone" defense applies for an article willing to put its very reader in the #1 spot.

But more than anything, I found the Christine O'Donnell and Lebron James burns to be hysterical.

I'd like to read it, but I get Error establishing a database connection

Unreadable...

That was pretty funny. I'm not sure I agree with all of it, but I was impressed.

edited 19th Jan '11 6:15:43 PM by Ultrayellow

#1 was almost mind-numbingly predictable, but the rest was great.

edited 19th Jan '11 5:38:41 PM by Wicked223

I am proud to be #1 on this list, as it has many great people on it.

Meh, why is it so impressive to make a list of negative and/or controversial public figures and reasons why they suck? Mindlessly hating on stuff is a weak way to popularity.

I agree. This list was neither funny nor informative.

I didn't think it was mindless.

Hell, every American should read that. Be a big eye opener for them.

Mostly pretty lame, but there was a wtf, Obama's sentence was pretty good for working in the rent is too damn high guy, and I had to laugh at calling Jan Brewer a Gila Monster.

edited 19th Jan '11 8:27:57 PM by Pykrete

I just don't find the I HATE EVERTHING style of satire all that funny, and most of the targets are either people we already know are idiots (Sarah Palin) or people who don't really deserve that level of vitriol (Obama is #13 for not completely embracing the hard left's agenda).

That one I didn't agree with.

Basically, it's easy to be a critic, but people who sit back and wank about what everyone else is doing while not themselves attempting to do anything constructive don't deserve to get any attention.

I'd say this article is attempting to take action by calling attention to hypocritical and downright stupid behaviors of people who enjoy a spot in the public eye. Playing the "why don't you go do something instead of complaining about it" card ignores the power of journalism.

That said, the guy does have a bit of a liberal bias.

But he has no focus and no real ideas. He's just made a list of 50 prominent people and then found bad things to say about them.

I'm almost sure that this was intended purely as a joke.

Probably.

That said, the guy does have a bit of a liberal bias.

Well, obviously. What's the problem? It's an opinion piece. The point of an opinion piece is to give someone the writer's opinions. The writer gave you his opinions. He's not under any obligation to have the same opinions that you do.

Although, when it comes down to it, everyone has a "bias" and an agenda, no matter how objective they tell themselves they might be. But this is an opinion piece with no pretense of objectivity so the point is irrelevant.

edited 20th Jan '11 4:37:50 PM by WoolieWool

About Jim Bob, various sources have backed up them doing the side hug thing... didn't that originate as a parody? And do they really think a mother hugging her child has sexual implications? Reminds me of that bit in Brave New World where Lenia says the same thing about breastfeeding?