Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Friday December 30 2016, @09:17AM   Printer-friendly
from the will-provide-tattoos-for-right-applicant dept.

Seems someone got the whole thing seriously wrong, but evidently there was a casting call for actors for a Cadillac commercial that was looking for "alt-right" or "neo-nazi" types.

Cadillac caused a stir this week when a casting service put out a request on behalf of the American luxury brand looking to fill the role of an "alt-right (neo-Nazi)" in a new commercial. Cadillac denied it had ever authorized the notice and condemned it, while the casting company took responsibility, saying that it had been issued by mistake. Regardless of who did what, the idea had to have been hatched somewhere and by someone, which reveals something far more troubling than a mere streak of poor taste and even poorer judgement in corporate America: the marketability and mainstreaming of an alt-right population, or those "identified variously with anti-globalist and anti-immigrant stances, cartoon frogs, white nationalists, pick-up artists, anti-Semites, and a rising tide of right-wing populism," as Tablet contributor Jacob Siegel wrote in a profile of Paul Gottfried, the alt-right's "godfather."

Hmm, maybe now that the "alt-right" has become just another marketing demographic, we do not have to worry about them taking over the country? I mean, who buys Cadillacs as a status symbol anymore? Not like they are your father's Oldsmobile. Except that, really, it was your father's Olds. So that brand no longer exists. Are we at the point where we can say, "Brietbart: it's not your grandpa's fascism!"? Except, really, maybe it is?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 30 2016, @06:16PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 30 2016, @06:16PM (#447525)

    Sure, we can draw tasteful veils over the shenanigans under Carter and Clinton, (Hi there, Iran and Bosnia! And Rwanda!) because it turns out that the democratic vision of pacifism is a very ... what's the word? Nuanced? Triangulated? Contingent? Well, it's complicated...

    But democrats have a long, happy history of continuing wars. I know I'm saying this to the ceiling, but I'm looking at you, Obama.

    The budget is however a red herring with respect to presidents. They can suggest budgets - but Congress writes them. It was because of that sort of thing resulting in long-term problems, that Reagan played games with funding, and ultimately we ended up with the budget deal, and sequestration, and a couple of shutdowns in the new century.

    Congress does budgets, not presidents.

    So what I'm getting from this is:

    If you don't like deficits, throw the bums out.

    If you don't like war, find someone other than the D and R groups for your presidents.