Clarkson

[SeanMacGabhann]

not quoting - homaging. Badly

[Moos]

Morgan is the mould on dog turd. I can't believe he's got that big job in the US. Bastard.

[Loz]

I don't find Stewart Lee funny in the slightest, just a bit worthy angry young (well, not now) manish. At least Mark Thomas made me laugh.

In fact, Stewart Lee is really just a left wing Jeremy Clarkson. Minus the humour.

[RosieH]

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> In truth - he is a little bit sexist - so Rosie

> does not like him.

Mick, come here while I kiss you, you big chauvinist stud muffin you.

[*Bob*]

If Mark Thomas makes you laugh, I'd see a doctor. And you say you think Lee is worthy?!

Thomas is like a TUC conference, minus the sandwiches.

[SeanMacGabhann]

This, literally, makes no sense

[Loz]

Lee plays completely to the left wing audience, saying political things that they want to hear in a satirical/humorous way. He knows just what to say to wind up his targets and the more offence caused in delivering this message, the better. His detractors think his is crude, insensitive and politically naive and his general approach far to the wrong side of 'smug'. But the Guardian readership laps up his every word and wish he was leading the country.

For the computer spoddies:

s/left/right/g

s/Lee/Clarkson/g

s/Guardian/Times/g

[mockney piers]

I believe the word is touch?.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Well Loz, that?s in interpretation

Both have to make a living, that?s true ? and both express, pretty much, their beliefs to do it

I don?t know you can say either plays to either left or right wing audiences ? plenty of my left-leaning friends love Top Gear and Clarkson.

If they both have ?targets? then it?s probably worth listing who those targets are

Clarkson: people with disabilities, women, the poor etc

Lee: The lunatic fringes of religion, Richard Littlejohn, jeremy Clarkson

And we can see a theme there can?t we? One picks on the defenseless or easy targets and one picks on those who pick or prey on the defenseless and easily targeted

So yes they are the same. You know? just like burglars yeah? They are the SAME as the police!! They are! They just work different hours?

[mockney piers]

Wow women are defenceless or easy, are you trying to make friends? Atually I've met a couple of easy ones in my time but that's another story, my name is Jeremy Clarkson I'm here all night.

But seriously he does have a point. They do both play up, I don't for a minute think Jeremy believes half of what he says, and seen hi. Pretty much admit it once. I do find both very funny truth be told but only Clarkson and his coterie, however idiotic, chummy and a bit irritating, have genuinely made me belly laugh.

[Loz]

Or you could argue that Lee picks on the popularist target - those to whom no one will stick up for, except the targets themselves. Clarkson, on the other hand, goes for those targets for whom he knows will cause the greatest outcry, as they have a hoard of people that will take offence on their behalf.

Both are simultaneously brave and cowardly in different ways.

[SeanMacGabhann]

That'll be where I differ - I genuinely do believe he means what he says and would say more if he didn't work for the BBC.

And Piers don't be silly - I never suggested women were "easy" - I said easy targets and his tired old sexist crap is the easiest of targets

and Lee picks on "those to whom no one will stick up for, except the targets themselves"??

Well if you think Littlejohn, Clarkson et al have no-one to stick up for them, I must be living in a different world. Those guys have audiences of millions upon millions. With several people on thsi very thread sticking up for them

[Brendan]

I couldn?t really give a dam about the political pantomime-villain arsery, suffice to say that it shouldn?t always be written off because for every one person who thinks they?re in on a let?s-wind-up-the-liberals-joke there are ten fukwits blowing their loads to the vindication of their narrow-mindedness.

This is all and old game though and I would be lying if I said I didn?t find the intentional antagonism just as entertaining as I do Stan Lee winding up the right by pointing out just how foul some of them actually are as human beings.

No the reason I think he?s an arse is because I?m a motorcar enthusiast and he has shit taste in cars.

The man has no clue about taste and styling and the ridiculous (not to mention downright dangerous) belief that how fast a car goes is a valid measure of how good it is.

By way of example we?re talking about someone who only started to like jaguars when they sold out to the boy racer with money market and is unable to recognise the style in a Morgan. This is just a scratch on the surface of his tastelessness but says enough about his personality to earn him a place in the stocks in my, not inconsiderably laudable, opinion.

The Reliant programme was brilliant though. I?ll give him that.

And Snorky started this thread just a start a barney. If I remember correctly he has lambasted the arse himself before.

[SeanMacGabhann]

an outrageous slur!!!!

As if

[Narnia]

Deleted on the grounds I have no right to be on this thread due to complete ignorance of the subject matter

[Loz]

And Snorky started this thread just a start a barney.

Well, of course. And for a while there it wasn't working. So...

[Moos]

But a barney between Mockers and the MacGabhann!

Surely riches beyond the dreams of avarice.

[mockney piers]

merely gentle ribbing, and that's NOT a euphemism!!!!

[*Bob*]

Ribbed.. for our pleasure.

[Moos]

It's doing it for me, I must say.

[SeanMacGabhann]

My first with piers was neither gentle nor ribbed. But it was goooooood

[*Bob*]

Who came out on top?

[Loz]

Ew.

[Keef]

Lee plays completely to the left wing audience, saying political things that they want to hear in a satirical/humorous way. He knows just what to say to wind up his targets and the more offence caused in delivering this message, the better. His detractors think his is crude, insensitive and politically naive and his general approach far to the wrong side of 'smug'. But the Guardian readership laps up his every word and wish he was leading the country.

Just going back to the Lee / Clarkson thing, wouldn't it be more Jim Davidson instead of Clarkson?

Aaanyway, I personally don't feel that stronly either way. I was never in to cars, so never watched Top Gear as a kid, ow it's more of an entertainment programme, I still don't watch it.

I don't think he believes everything he says to the extent he says it, but, there is no smoke without fire, and I think his personality is a bit like that, it's just magnified on telly.

I'm certainly not a fan, but I confess to having chuckled at him a few times.

Then again, I got dragged to a Roy Chubby Brown tribute when on holiday a few years ago, and I ended up laughing my arse off, so what do I know!

[Jeremy]

Clarkson - like the other 2 guys on Top Gear - plays a character. What you see on TV is an exaggerated, overtly un-PC, pantomime villian character. If you take a word he says seriously, you are a fool! Of course almost everything he says is complete nonsense and designed to antagonise, but he does it with effortless comic timing and a biting sense of sarcasm.

The cries of outrage from the EDF are every bit as predictable as his schoolboy-ish praise for the latest gaudy Ferrari or Lamborghini.