> This is precisely why I never read the Onion. While undoubtedly if I
bothered
> to read it more often I would think some of it funny (alas life is too
short
> and humor is more economically delivered in different sources), but the
little
> I read of it is not particularly funny and worst of all gets the details
> wrong.
>
> Besides the way-too-obvious and not particularly funny references to
"double-
> wides" and "riding lawn mowers" (hyuck! yuck! yuck!) this parody is about
> Hitchens AS-A-LEFTIST and is making fun of him for being a leftist. Very
> little is specific or shows knowledge of Hitchens work (I will grant a bit
of
> credit for linking his pro-war stance with popular pro-war fervor but even
that
> was not very sharp or clear).
>
> The only thing funny about that is they don't appear to know much about
> Hitchens. Now lazy satirists getting street cred while serving ye olde
tropes
> about irrelevant alleged leftists. That's funny.
>
> I think getting the details right is what satire is all about. The closer
you
> can come to the source material and still manage to turn it on its head
the
> better.
>
> Jim
Material in the Onion is usually better than the Hitchens piece.
-- Luke