I’ve been cleaning out my bin of “things Bill Schmalfeldt has said that need to be analyzed” and came across this little bit that I had missed posting. I don’t remember precisely where I was going with it, but I think it works as is. See if you agree. Or not. It’s all good. Everybody has their own opinion about things, right?
Well, apparently not if you are Bill Schmalfeldt. It’s either the truth or a LIE. Oh please!
If the intent of art, as Bill says, is to let the viewer/listener/reader come away with his or her own impressions, then why, oh why, does he have an issue when people actually DO come up with their own impressions about it?
Stating those impressions, whether it be in a legal document or on the interwebz or in a face-to-face conversation doesn’t change that it is an impression, and not – as our fabulous lying liar who loves to lie a lie and will call you nasty sexual names when you catch him in said lie – a (gasp!) lie.
It seems to be that Bill wants people to state every single time they say something whether they are stating objective fact or their opinion. Life doesn’t work that way. If people had to do that every single sentence (because really, that’s what they would have to do) no one would want to talk anymore because who wants to hear “In my opinion” every five words?
But fine. I’ll play that game. Here it goes:
In my protected, constitutional opinion, Bill Schmalfeldt has produced skits that can be classified as child pornography based on my opinions that I formed reading the transcripts of the three radio skits that he so helpfully submitted to the court as “evidence” attached to his FAC in the case that HE JUST LOST against me. So that you can form your own opinion, they can be read HERE, HERE and HERE. Those skits describe situations that can be characterized in my opinion as being sexually charged, which any modern-day feminist will tell you crosses the line into pornography in her opinion. They involve children in these sexually charged situations. Hence my personal opinion that they can be classified as child pornography.
Also in my opinion, even if it’s not something that can be classified as child pornography, these examples of his “art” are some of the most vile, puerile pieces of filth I have ever read and/or heard. If he thinks he is actually funny, in my opinion he really needs to get a grip and find a different hobby because in my opinion he is the furthest thing from funny. Parodies are supposed to be funny. These are not funny in my opinion.
Now, as to whether or not he should be criminally charged with creating/recording/broadcasting child pornography criminally? If indeed it falls into the purview of being a crime, I leave that to the appropriate authorities to determine. That is a fact, not an opinion.
Morally and ethically speaking? Yeah. Child porn. My opinion. Deal with it.