- Joined
- Apr 8, 2008
- Messages
- 19,883
- Reaction score
- 5,120
- Location
- 0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Other
Well, not a fair, but there was a movie...oh, and a national liberal radio host on the no longer in business "air America" host.
I think the Obama-mask clown should run for the GOP's nominee for president. He's more qualified than most GOP candidates. And his profession makes him a true conservative.
And if he were a Black clown in Texas wearing a Perry mask, he could now be on death row.
With that woman Davis down there making all that noise, it would be a wonder he would ever be born.
But if a minority was born in Texas, from your post, you would call them a waste on society. Why do you folks only support the fetus until it is born?
No, it was clearly free speech.
How many times was George Bush hanged, burned in effigy, etc., during his Presidency, I wonder? Probably dozens of times at various protests. Nobody interpreted this as a threat against the President, not even Bush's supporters that I know of. But here we have Obama's supporters going crazy, trampling free speech under foot in a desperate attempt to salvage some dignity for the big Zero. The smell of fear and desperation is unmistakable. You guys ought to be ashamed that you are willing to give up our civil rights for that Clown.
This brouhaha over the rodeo clown is a manifestation of Obama's Cult of Personality, and you all ought to SNAP OUT OF IT.
What? You've already forgotten Assassination Chic?
An entire book chapter with numerous examples explored the popular genre of “Kill Bush” literature, talk radio rhetoric, and art on the Left devoted to fantasies about murdering President Bush and Republicans.
Liberals didn't think it was such a big deal at the time.
I think the Obama-mask clown should run for the GOP's nominee for president. He's more qualified than most GOP candidates. And his profession makes him a true conservative.
I don't see how you can make this claim? What exactly do you think the rodeo clown was trying to say other than he dislikes (or dare I say hates) Pres. Obama? Frankly, I find it very cowardice for people to hide behind "free speech" when all they've done was show blatant disrespect for the President of the United States no matter who he is or from whatever political party he affiliates.
To this claim that "liberals" get all butt-hurt whenever anyone from the opposing party challenges a claim of being disrespectful towards "their" President, I think people know bad behavior when they see it. But for the record, I don't consider myself a liberal nor a Democrat although I do identify more with the Democrat Party than I do the Republican Party. I like to think I can see the good and the bad within both parties. I take the better qualities of both and try to shape my ideology around those issues. For example, I don't like the continuous dependency on social programs by some segments of the population, but I can understand how many people would struggle to have their survival needs met without these programs. I think we as a nation can met the needs of those in need without maintaining a revolving door to such benefits. Nevertheless, I call inappropriate behavior what it is no matter what side of the political divide the behavior stems from. For example, when the Iraqi tossed a shoe at GWB during a press conference he held in Iraq, I thought it was disrespectful. Moreover, it was dangerous! What if it had been a knife instead? I may not have liked him much as President, but I certainly didn't want to see him get hurt. And that's where I'm coming from with this clown issue.
He may have been attempting to convey to the crowd his displeasure with President Obama, but he could have shown it in a much more appropriate way. This wasn't a man trying to be funny. This was a man trying to stir the crowd to anger. This wasn't a man making jokes. This was a man attempting to mock the President of the United States. No matter what he may have thought of his policies or the direction he believes the President is taking the country in, there are better more appropriate ways to be funny yet not be disrespectful of the President of the United States.
As an aside, between 1976 and 2004 I really wasn't as into politics during that period as I am now. Of course, I had so many other things taking place in my life back then - finishing high school, serving my country on active duty in the Navy, taking care of my young family, etc. But since 2004, I've paid closer attention to the political wrangling of the day, and I must admit I don't like the hyper-partisanship I see every day. I've often wondered why can't a person simple call out a wrong without being labeled a liberal whinny-ass or a conservative blowhard?
Your scenario didn't happen with at the rodeo, but it did with Bush 43 and it NEVER made front page news. It was a joyous discussion piece among Leftists though.If one of the entertainers in the middle of the state show openly suggested that Bush be essentially murdered, yes it would be national front page news.
ROTFLOL... this coming from the master of lies and deceit? The individual best known on DP for putting words in other folks mouths they never stated. For twisting what people write.Raging partisan like you are leaving that out because you are dishonestly trying to make it seems like they were just making some innocent fun at Obama. I don't expect anything you say these days to be even remotely honest, but it's a new level of dishonesty, even for you.
Find me the story where they suggested Obama be killed.There is a major difference between poking fun at the President and suggesting that the President should be killed.
reality check: Ugh... doh...Homer... that was a man wearing an Obama mask. Nobody was asking to see Obama killed. Find me the story where that was the main thrust.Can you point to a single event between 2000 and 2008, where at a local state sponsored fair, an entertainer in front of a big crowd openly suggested that Bush should be killed to the audience? Try. Use Google.
It was a Missouri state fair who fired a guy for going out on his own to make a highly inappropriate joke. I would have fired him too.
He may have been attempting to convey to the crowd his displeasure with President Obama, but he could have shown it in a much more appropriate way. This wasn't a man trying to be funny. This was a man trying to stir the crowd to anger. This wasn't a man making jokes. This was a man attempting to mock the President of the United States. No matter what he may have thought of his policies or the direction he believes the President is taking the country in, there are better more appropriate ways to be funny yet not be disrespectful of the President of the United States.
I wonder how many people have seen the video from the point where the "Obama dummy" is set out to the point where the bull actually comes out? If you haven't you really don't know the full story here. If you have and you're standing behind the "freedom of speech/it was a joke" defense, then you're really not being honest about what actually took place.
This was not a joke, folks. This was someone who clearly is anti-Obama who thought he was being funny by setting what appeared to be a dummy-figure wearing an Obama mask propped up by a broomstick (conveniently positioned right up his) in the rodeo arena. The announcer introduces the dummy as "Obama" and goes on to ask the crowd if they'd like to see Obama get run down by the bull. What's funny about that?
It would've been "funny" if the rodeo clown wearing the mask had suddenly come to life and started running around the arena flipping his ears because as we all know and can agree on President Obama does have some big ears. He's even made fun of them himself. It would've been "funny" if the Obama rodeo clown wore an "ObamaCare bullseye" on his butt while teasing the bull to chase him. That atleast would have been in keeping with what rodeo clowns do. But instead what you had was the announcer encouraging the crowd to want to see the figurative President Obama hurt by being run down by a bull.
That's not funny. It's not even close to exercising free speech. This act was in very poor taste and it doesn't take a Liberal or Conservative/Democrat or Republican to see that. In any case, for those who haven't seen an extended version of the video, you can view it from this website.
Funny. I see exactly zero examples of what I asked for.
Try again.
I don't see how you can make this claim? What exactly do you think the rodeo clown was trying to say other than he dislikes (or dare I say hates) Pres. Obama? Frankly, I find it very cowardice for people to hide behind "free speech" when all they've done was show blatant disrespect for the President of the United States no matter who he is or from whatever political party he affiliates.
To this claim that "liberals" get all butt-hurt whenever anyone from the opposing party challenges a claim of being disrespectful towards "their" President, I think people know bad behavior when they see it. But for the record, I don't consider myself a liberal nor a Democrat although I do identify more with the Democrat Party than I do the Republican Party. I like to think I can see the good and the bad within both parties. I take the better qualities of both and try to shape my ideology around those issues. For example, I don't like the continuous dependency on social programs by some segments of the population, but I can understand how many people would struggle to have their survival needs met without these programs. I think we as a nation can met the needs of those in need without maintaining a revolving door to such benefits. Nevertheless, I call inappropriate behavior what it is no matter what side of the political divide the behavior stems from. For example, when the Iraqi tossed a shoe at GWB during a press conference he held in Iraq, I thought it was disrespectful. Moreover, it was dangerous! What if it had been a knife instead? I may not have liked him much as President, but I certainly didn't want to see him get hurt. And that's where I'm coming from with this clown issue.
He may have been attempting to convey to the crowd his displeasure with President Obama, but he could have shown it in a much more appropriate way. This wasn't a man trying to be funny. This was a man trying to stir the crowd to anger. This wasn't a man making jokes. This was a man attempting to mock the President of the United States. No matter what he may have thought of his policies or the direction he believes the President is taking the country in, there are better more appropriate ways to be funny yet not be disrespectful of the President of the United States.
As an aside, between 1976 and 2004 I really wasn't as into politics during that period as I am now. Of course, I had so many other things taking place in my life back then - finishing high school, serving my country on active duty in the Navy, taking care of my young family, etc. But since 2004, I've paid closer attention to the political wrangling of the day, and I must admit I don't like the hyper-partisanship I see every day. I've often wondered why can't a person simple call out a wrong without being labeled a liberal whinny-ass or a conservative blowhard?
Your point is well taken. But to say that now that Obama is President, because Obama is so special, we should all be civil and proper when referring to him when his own supporters were so uncivil and mean about the previous president? Sorry, but there's too much to pay for first. If people want civility then they should be civil. Obama supporters have never, never been civil, and it doesn't look like they will start any time soon.
Your point is well taken. But to say that now that Obama is President, because Obama is so special, we should all be civil and proper when referring to him when his own supporters were so uncivil and mean about the previous president? Sorry, but there's too much to pay for first. If people want civility then they should be civil. Obama supporters have never, never been civil, and it doesn't look like they will start any time soon.
I don't know your media habits....but....if you are one of the Limbaugh-ese, or the Beckians, or the Hannitians....perhaps the treatment of Bush was overblown by folks who get paid big bucks to be outraged on the air.
I'm 48 years old and never treated a sitting President with the kind of disrespect that the right shows Obama. I've disagreed with policies and ideology.....even poked some good natured fun(which is what this whole clown thing pretty much is) at them....but I've never seen hatred and vitriol like it is now.
Perhaps with Nixon....but being born in '65, I was too young to experience it.
If you have never seen "hatred and vitriol like it is now" you were wearing blinders when Bush was President. Simple as that.
I don't know your media habits....but....if you are one of the Limbaugh-ese, or the Beckians, or the Hannitians....perhaps the treatment of Bush was overblown by folks who get paid big bucks to be outraged on the air.
I'm 48 years old and never treated a sitting President with the kind of disrespect that the right shows Obama. I've disagreed with policies and ideology.....even poked some good natured fun(which is what this whole clown thing pretty much is) at them....but I've never seen hatred and vitriol like it is now.
Perhaps with Nixon....but being born in '65, I was too young to experience it.
It's a fin example of hypocrisy from both sides though. I remember the left mocking Bush claiming freedom of speech and I remember many on the right claiming that the president should be shown respect regardless of what someone thinks of their politics. Now the roles have been reversed as well as the opinions from both sides. Hypocrisy at its finest.
Me? It's free speech whether I like or or not and therefore what they did to this clown by banning him is completely wrong IMO.
Obama-mask clown gets lifetime Missouri fair ban. Just, or too harsh?
Missouri NAACP calls this act a hate crime.
No, I'm being serious.
Missouri NAACP calls this act a hate crime.
No, I'm being serious.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?