Re:Thank You (NOT) (Score 1)

I can only pity you for your inability to percieve and understand the concepts of sarcasm and humor. Let me respond to your questions in order. >If it is a not an attack to a particular country, then why 'Blame Canada' at the first place? While sometimes it may not seem like it, South Park is set in the "Real World." Therefore it would be ludicrous to use an imaginary country in this context. However as you apparently failed to read in my original post, they could just have easily used any country name instead of Canada and been just as effective in getting there message accross, as well as just as humorous. Canada or Mexico were the obvious choices because they are neighbors to the U.S. and as such are obvious targets for the idiocys of the fictional adults. >With only lyrics as a mean of communication, how can YOU be so sure what's behind the song writer's hideous mind? BECAUSE the lyrics make it clear to anyone with half a brain or more. Listen to the last line of the song. Or read it in the above post. Look at the overall context of the song, and the voices within it. Grow a little bit thicker skin and actually examine the evidence before pronouncing judgement. >Did the song tell you the writer does not mean to attack the country? I must admin you are right on this one. Perhaps he meant both to make sarcastic fun of those who choose to find a boogie man instead of taking responsibility and working towards solutions AND attack Canada.... I doubt it, but maybe. >If it does, then does it tell you why choose Canada? As I said before, the song works just as well with any US Neighbor. Why in the world would you expect the song to tell you why Canada was arbitrarily chosen? Perhaps you would like lyrics that say: Who are we going to blame? We've got to find a stooge. Let's play the country game. And put some names in a hat. The one we pull out is the one that we'll blame. Well! It's Canada today though they're really all the same. >You give the writer too much credit for something the writer simply does not deserve. Actually I just gave you too much credit for believing that you would be able to comprehend my post if you couldn't comprehend the song. >If the writer is screwed because it is incapable of deliver message correctly and unimbiguously, then it is the person's fault. If the listener is screwed up because he or she is incapable of comprehending the message correctly simply because it is not delivered plainly, it is the listener's fault. ~I don't know why I bother... You'll never figure it out -- Me.