29 March 2007

What Do You Get . . .

. . . if you take an entire season's worth of 24 style plot holes, contrivinces, absurdities, and overused tropes, combine them with the judicious use of fart jokes and "snukes"?

You get another fantastic episode of South Park.

Just watch it for yourself, Comedy Central repeats it often enough.

(oh, and Hil-Dog is featured prominently)


Icepick said...

The worst thing is that the Republicans actually got skewered much worse than Hillary did, if one were paying attention. The scene where all of the agencies show up claiming to now be in charge of the situation was too realistic to be funny. What's worse: jokes about one's genitalia, or biting satire pointing out five and a half years of bureaucratic bungling of the nation's intelligence and security issues?

Oh, and (to use a construction hated by Althouse) Matt and Trey had better never set foot on any part of the British Empire, and they should probably flee the country if Hillary gets elected.

Ruth Anne Adams said...

Icepick: That was skewering a long-used device of "24" more than it was skewering Republicans. Don't you think that baaaaad Southern accent on Hilary was bad, too? And just making her useful for her [long-neglected] lady parts? Don't you think that cuts her to the core?

I especially laughed when Cartman injected chicken [like Kiefer/drugs in day 2 or 3] to make his poots really stinky. Hilarious.

Snuke? Snazzy. These guys offend the crap out of my, but I laugh a lot, too.

XWL said...

It really was an apolitical episode, as strange as that sounds, given the players.

In a lot of ways, by putting actual political figures in a "24" style plotline, they were exposing the patently absurd twists and turns that show takes.

But what this episode really demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt, Simpsons, Family Guy, and American Dad really suck in comparison.

Bureaucratic bumbling would happen regardless of whether the Whitehouse and Congress have a D or an R in front of their description, all large organizations are plagued by inertia and turf wars.

In some ways, that inertia innoculates us from the vagaries of current events as by the time the government gets around to acting, the moment will have already passed.

On the other hand, that inertia does make us more vulnerable to a quick developing, but small in number of main players, terror attack.

That one hasn't happened on our soil should be applauded much more loudly than it has, it's hard not to reason that the withheld applause is an aspect of BDS in the MSM.

But I'm still wondering how Chelsea was conceived if Hil-Dog's 'lady flower' had been neglected for 30 years, and Chelsea is still in her 20s?

Icepick said...

But I'm still wondering how Chelsea was conceived if Hil-Dog's 'lady flower' had been neglected for 30 years, and Chelsea is still in her 20s?

Perhaps Hillary sprouted Chelsea from her elbow?

As for the 24 plot device, I plead ignorance. I watched the first two episodes of season one and decided that I couldn't suspend my disbelief any longer than that.

Also, it's not a matter of bureaucratic bumbling and turf wars: It's that Bush has rushed to exponentially increase said bungling and turf wars by adding new layers of bureaucracy, management and oversight to those areas while simultaneously undercutting everyone's organizational authority by frequently having the main decisions get made by people outside the command structure. That is a sure way to breed apathy and incompetence in an organization. Bush should know that from life experience, if not from having a fancy MBA.

Note I say this as a Republican that voted for Bush twice, and if I had do-overs for those two elections, I'd have still vote for him as I considered the alternatives to be worse. But Bush has done a piss-poor job of managing the Executive Branch of the government, dis-ably assisted for most of that time by a horrible Republican Congress.

Ruth Anne Adams said...

XWL: The insperminator of choice for those Wellesly gals: turkey baster.

Pick: Point made.