Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121Where I'm from, lynching is not something to kid around about. b, 21b, 21But why do you qualify "political figure"? What is that exactly? b, 21b, 21h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121I think there is a deep history around the world of burning political leaders/candidates in effigy as a means of protest. b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121So you get extra time if your effigy is of the former county comptroller vs some dude? b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121I have no idea......If I hang an effigy of my neighbor in my front yard is it a crime?? b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121Is your neighbor black? b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121One is, one isn't......can I hang one in effigy but not the other??b,121b,121I'm not asking what's morally right, just legally. b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121You're in Texas. So I'm sure it's not illegal. Just a really bad look that deserves a punch out; however, with one neighbor, you should also expect Al Sharpton's entourage to visit for a couple of days. b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121Texas may not be what your stereotype assumes it is...b,121b,121We had one Barack supporter down here make a yard display of McCain in a KKK outfit chasing Barack with a baseball bat.....he wasn't fined or arrested.
Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121can I hang one in effigy but not the other?? I'm not asking what's morally right, just legally. b, 21b, 21h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121it all depends on if the effigy incites violence and disorder or is defamatory. b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121b, 21please to explain how hanging someone in effigy would be defamatory. b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121you've missed the point. defamation is simply one of the limits on free speech.
Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121can I hang one in effigy but not the other?? I'm not asking what's morally right, just legally. b, 21b, 21h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121it all depends on if the effigy incites violence and disorder or is defamatory. b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121b, 21please to explain how hanging someone in effigy would be defamatory. b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121you've missed the point. defamation is simply one of the limits on free speech. b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121b, 21okayyyy, so is yelling fire in a crowded theater. you said there was a legal issue over whether hanging someone in effigy can be considered defamatory. i'm asking you to give an example of how that could occur.
Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121a yard display of McCain in a KKK outfit chasing Barack with a baseball batb, 21b, 21h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121Please say you have a picture. b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121Indeed I do................b, 21b, 21img src="http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c218/Rockadelic1234/obamamccainhalloween.jpg"1b,121b,121b,121I stand corrected....this was originally reported as being in Odessa, Tx. but now I see some sites have corrected that and it's actually in Odessa, NY.b, 21
Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121can I hang one in effigy but not the other?? I'm not asking what's morally right, just legally. b, 21b, 21h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121it all depends on if the effigy incites violence and disorder or is defamatory. b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121b, 21please to explain how hanging someone in effigy would be defamatory. b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121you've missed the point. defamation is simply one of the limits on free speech. b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121b, 21okayyyy, so is yelling fire in a crowded theater. you said there was a legal issue over whether hanging someone in effigy can be considered defamatory. i'm asking you to give an example of how that could occur. b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121you missed the point yet again. i do not think it is defamatory (although in the british case of monson v tussaud's a wax replica/effigy of a man who was acquitted of murder holding a gun was held to be libel). i am simply stating that it is one of the limits on free speech along with creating public disorder (yelling fire in a crowded theatre). other than those two possibilities i am not sure there are any other legal limits on freedom of expression or speech in us law (maybe obscenity laws) but perhaps you could clarify that...
yes, there are obscenity laws that would probably prohibit a naked sarah palin hung in effigy, but i don't see how her situation is illegal. the obama effigy is a different story because of the noose, and the obvious racism.b,121b,121doesn't that sound fair though? if the laws did not allow us to hang sarah palin in effigy, we would need to change them.
Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121a yard display of McCain in a KKK outfit chasing Barack with a baseball batb, 21b, 21h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121Please say you have a picture. b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121Indeed I do................b, 21b, 21img src="http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c218/Rockadelic1234/obamamccainhalloween.jpg"1b,121b,121 b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121b, 21that's a pretty sorry Klan outfit. Most people probably thought that McCain was a ghost. like "Oooh scary! the spectre of Bush!"
this is sarah palin's ass-backwards take on the first amendment:b, 21b, 21a href="http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/10/31/palin/index.html" target="_blank"1http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/10/31/palin/index.html/a1b, 21b, 21b,121Somehow, in Sarah Palin's brain, it's a threat to the First Amendment when newspapers criticize her negative attacks on Barack Obama. This is actually so dumb that it hurts:b, 21b, 21 In a conservative radio interview that aired in Washington, D.C. Friday morning, Republican vice presidential nominee Gov. Sarah Palin said she fears her First Amendment rights may be threatened by "attacks" from reporters who suggest she is engaging in a negative campaign against Barack Obama.b, 21b, 21 Palin told WMAL-AM that her criticism of Obama's associations, like those with 1960s radical Bill Ayers and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, should not be considered negative attacks. Rather, for reporters or columnists to suggest that it is going negative may constitute an attack that threatens a candidate's free speech rights under the Constitution, Palin said.b, 21b, 21 "If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations," Palin told host Chris Plante, "then I don't know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media."b, 21b, 21Maureen Dowd recently made an equally stupid comment when she complained that her First Amendment rights were being violated by the McCain campaign's refusal to allow her on their campaign plane.b,121b,121The First Amendment is actually not that complicated. It can be read from start to finish in about 10 seconds. It bars the Government from abridging free speech rights. It doesn't have anything to do with whether you're free to say things without being criticized, or whether you can comment on blogs without being edited, or whether people can bar you from their private planes because they don't like what you've said. b, 21b, 21If anything, Palin has this exactly backwards, since one thing that the First Amendment does actually guarantee is a free press. Thus, when the press criticizes a political candidate and a Governor such as Palin, that is a classic example of First Amendment rights being exercised, not abridged.b,121b,121This isn't only about profound ignorance regarding our basic liberties, though it is obviously that. Palin here is also giving voice to the standard right-wing grievance instinct: that it's inherently unfair when they're criticized. And now, apparently, it's even unconstitutional. b, 21b, 21According to Palin, what the Founders intended with the First Amendment was that political candidates for the most powerful offices in the country and Governors of states would be free to say whatever they want without being criticized in the newspapers. In the Palin worldview, the First Amendment was meant to ensure that powerful political officials such as herself would not be "attacked" in the papers. Is it even possible to imagine more breathaking ignorance from someone holding high office and running for even higher office?b, 21b, 21UPDATE: The Constitution also guarantees freedom of association. Thus, by Palin's "reasoning," when newspapers -- or Palin herself -- criticize Obama for his associations, they're threatening his constitutional rights.b, 21
Quote:/font1h,121b,121this is sarah palin's ass-backwards take on the first amendment:b, 21b, 21a href="http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/10/31/palin/index.html" target="_blank"1http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/10/31/palin/index.html/a1b, 21b, 21b,121Somehow, in Sarah Palin's brain, it's a threat to the First Amendment when newspapers criticize her negative attacks on Barack Obama. This is actually so dumb that it hurts:b, 21b, 21 In a conservative radio interview that aired in Washington, D.C. Friday morning, Republican vice presidential nominee Gov. Sarah Palin said she fears her First Amendment rights may be threatened by "attacks" from reporters who suggest she is engaging in a negative campaign against Barack Obama.b, 21b, 21 Palin told WMAL-AM that her criticism of Obama's associations, like those with 1960s radical Bill Ayers and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, should not be considered negative attacks. Rather, for reporters or columnists to suggest that it is going negative may constitute an attack that threatens a candidate's free speech rights under the Constitution, Palin said.b, 21b, 21 "If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations," Palin told host Chris Plante, "then I don't know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media."b, 21b, 21Maureen Dowd recently made an equally stupid comment when she complained that her First Amendment rights were being violated by the McCain campaign's refusal to allow her on their campaign plane.b,121b,121The First Amendment is actually not that complicated. It can be read from start to finish in about 10 seconds. It bars the Government from abridging free speech rights. It doesn't have anything to do with whether you're free to say things without being criticized, or whether you can comment on blogs without being edited, or whether people can bar you from their private planes because they don't like what you've said. b, 21b, 21If anything, Palin has this exactly backwards, since one thing that the First Amendment does actually guarantee is a free press. Thus, when the press criticizes a political candidate and a Governor such as Palin, that is a classic example of First Amendment rights being exercised, not abridged.b,121b,121This isn't only about profound ignorance regarding our basic liberties, though it is obviously that. Palin here is also giving voice to the standard right-wing grievance instinct: that it's inherently unfair when they're criticized. And now, apparently, it's even unconstitutional. b, 21b, 21According to Palin, what the Founders intended with the First Amendment was that political candidates for the most powerful offices in the country and Governors of states would be free to say whatever they want without being criticized in the newspapers. In the Palin worldview, the First Amendment was meant to ensure that powerful political officials such as herself would not be "attacked" in the papers. Is it even possible to imagine more breathaking ignorance from someone holding high office and running for even higher office?b, 21b, 21UPDATE: The Constitution also guarantees freedom of association. Thus, by Palin's "reasoning," when newspapers -- or Palin herself -- criticize Obama for his associations, they're threatening his constitutional rights.b,1/1 b, 21b, 21h,121
Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121a yard display of McCain in a KKK outfit chasing Barack with a baseball batb, 21b, 21h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121Please say you have a picture. b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121Indeed I do................b, 21b, 21img src="http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c218/Rockadelic1234/obamamccainhalloween.jpg"1b, 21b, 21 b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121b,121that's a pretty sorry Klan outfit. Most people probably thought that McCain was a ghost. like "Oooh scary! the spectre of Bush!" b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121I think this is McCain chasing a gloved OJ.
Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121a yard display of McCain in a KKK outfit chasing Barack with a baseball batb, 21b, 21h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121Please say you have a picture. b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121Indeed I do................b, 21b, 21img src="http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c218/Rockadelic1234/obamamccainhalloween.jpg"1b, 21b, 21 b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121b,121that's a pretty sorry Klan outfit. Most people probably thought that McCain was a ghost. like "Oooh scary! the spectre of Bush!" b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121I think this is McCain chasing a gloved OJ. b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121McCain appears to have a boner for Obama.
I ride my bike to work, and all my Dockers look like Obama's there... Insides of my right pant legs are all tore up, grease on them. b, 21b, 21Overall, it's very unimpressive: from the unclear characters to the micropumpkin. Definitely getting more airplay than it deserves.
Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121this is sarah palin's ass-backwards take on the first amendment:b, 21b, 21a href="http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/10/31/palin/index.html" target="_blank"1http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/10/31/palin/index.html/a1b,121b,121b,121Somehow, in Sarah Palin's brain, it's a threat to the First Amendment when newspapers criticize her negative attacks on Barack Obama. This is actually so dumb that it hurts:b, 21b, 21 In a conservative radio interview that aired in Washington, D.C. Friday morning, Republican vice presidential nominee Gov. Sarah Palin said she fears her First Amendment rights may be threatened by "attacks" from reporters who suggest she is engaging in a negative campaign against Barack Obama.b, 21b, 21 Palin told WMAL-AM that her criticism of Obama's associations, like those with 1960s radical Bill Ayers and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, should not be considered negative attacks. Rather, for reporters or columnists to suggest that it is going negative may constitute an attack that threatens a candidate's free speech rights under the Constitution, Palin said.b, 21b, 21 "If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations," Palin told host Chris Plante, "then I don't know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media."b,121b,121Maureen Dowd recently made an equally stupid comment when she complained that her First Amendment rights were being violated by the McCain campaign's refusal to allow her on their campaign plane.b,121b,121The First Amendment is actually not that complicated. It can be read from start to finish in about 10 seconds. It bars the Government from abridging free speech rights. It doesn't have anything to do with whether you're free to say things without being criticized, or whether you can comment on blogs without being edited, or whether people can bar you from their private planes because they don't like what you've said. b,121b,121If anything, Palin has this exactly backwards, since one thing that the First Amendment does actually guarantee is a free press. Thus, when the press criticizes a political candidate and a Governor such as Palin, that is a classic example of First Amendment rights being exercised, not abridged.b,121b,121This isn't only about profound ignorance regarding our basic liberties, though it is obviously that. Palin here is also giving voice to the standard right-wing grievance instinct: that it's inherently unfair when they're criticized. And now, apparently, it's even unconstitutional. b,121b,121According to Palin, what the Founders intended with the First Amendment was that political candidates for the most powerful offices in the country and Governors of states would be free to say whatever they want without being criticized in the newspapers. In the Palin worldview, the First Amendment was meant to ensure that powerful political officials such as herself would not be "attacked" in the papers. Is it even possible to imagine more breathaking ignorance from someone holding high office and running for even higher office?b, 21b, 21UPDATE: The Constitution also guarantees freedom of association. Thus, by Palin's "reasoning," when newspapers -- or Palin herself -- criticize Obama for his associations, they're threatening his constitutional rights.b,121 b, 21b, 21h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121b, 21WOW... b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121This is stunningly inept ??? to an dangerous level. She's a journalism major, too, so she can't weasel her way out of this.b, 21b, 21 a href="http://www.tinyrevolution.com/mt/archives/Palin.mp3" target="_blank"1actual audio of this incident/a1b,121b,121The country needs to hear this.
Quote:/font1h,121b,121She's a journalism major, too, so she can't weasel her way out of this.b, 21b, 21b, 21h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121Is she even, though?b,121b, 21When her nomination was first announced, she had majored in "communications"... which was upgraded to journalism over the course of the next few weeks.
Excellent comment from Chuck Hagel on Palin's dangerous anti-intellectualism:b, 21b, 21/font1
Quote:/font1h,121b,121There???s no question, she knows her market. She knows her audience, and she???s going right after them. And I???ll tell you why that???s dangerous. It???s dangerous because you don???t want to define down the standards in any institution, ever, in life. You want to always strive to define standards up. If you start defining standards down??????Well, I don???t have a big education, I don???t have experience??????yes, there???s a point to be made that not all the smartest people come out of Yale or Harvard. But to intentionally define down in some kind of wild populism, that those things don???t count in a complicated, dangerous world???that???s dangerous in itself.b, 21b, 21h,121
Quote:/font1h,121b,121/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121She's a journalism major, too, so she can't weasel her way out of this.b, 21b, 21b, 21h,121
font class="post"1b,121b,121Is she even, though?b,121b, 21When her nomination was first announced, she had majored in "communications"... which was upgraded to journalism over the course of the next few weeks. b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121With Sarah Palin, even a half-hearted attempt to qualify her on the most basic levels results in failure. I cannot even begin to get angry at this woman because she does not even fu[i]cking exist to me[/i].
Quote:/font1h,121b,121Excellent comment from Chuck Hagel on Palin's dangerous anti-intellectualism:b, 21b, 21/font1Quote:/font1h,121b,121There???s no question, she knows her market. She knows her audience, and she???s going right after them. And I???ll tell you why that???s dangerous. It???s dangerous because you don???t want to define down the standards in any institution, ever, in life. You want to always strive to define standards up. If you start defining standards down??????Well, I don???t have a big education, I don???t have experience??????yes, there???s a point to be made that not all the smartest people come out of Yale or Harvard. But to intentionally define down in some kind of wild populism, that those things don???t count in a complicated, dangerous world???that???s dangerous in itself.b, 21b, 21h,121
font class="post"1 b, 21b, 21h,121font class="post"1b,121b,121It's the crashing of the Reagan Hindenburg. Despite how you personally consider him, Reagan had policies and advisors to push a goal forward. George W. Bush protracted the Reagan image until it thinned out, and after September 11th, added a more intensely divisive quality to the GOP and America at large. He took his conservative brand of populism to know-nothing depths because he had to in order to win. Hell, he had little else to recommend about him. But that's a mistake the country has already made twice in eight years. I agree with David Brooks that the Sarah Palin archetype - a direct extention of Bush the Second - is a cancer to the Republican Party. It's either a further drive down the road of increasingly George-Wallace-style class wars or a slow slog to recovering the traditional principles of the fractious GOP. I only wish that Brooks, Buckley, and even Hitchens would have come to this conclusion at least 4 years earlier.
Comments