thx for posting this.

I'm too lazy to post links to all the protest signs threatening the life of former President Bush, nor the asinine movie where a successful Bush assassination is used as entertainment.

As for Stenk and the perjurious race-baiting poverty pimp, they work for MS-DNC. I expect no less than endless "outrage".

Ye gods, QM, do you have anything to say that isn't a reactionary cliche? How boring.

Yes. Eat my shorts.

>> ^HadouKen24:

Ye gods, QM, do you have anything to say that isn't a reactionary cliche? How boring.

What's so bad about Broun's response? He removed any reference to violence and reframed the discussion to a political solution. I'm glad people laughed instead of applauding at least (though I haven't heard the audio, so maybe it was both).

QM's comments mostly bore me too, but here he's just turning the tables, and IMO, makes a fair point: Why is it OK to make a joke or entertainment out of threatening President Bush's life, but not President Obama's? Why do we accept Cenk's being outraged by absolute nothings like this innocuous lame joke, but then blame the Faux News hotheads for doing the same thing? The only difference is that you like Cenk, and you know what his guiding beliefs are and you agree with them, so he gets a "by".

>> ^HadouKen24:

Ye gods, QM, do you have anything to say that isn't a reactionary cliche? How boring.

Nothing. Nothing at all was bad, except the fact that he failed to instantly condemn the first supportive, ordinary, non-politician speaker at a townhall meeting for expressing his anger and frustration in a non politically-correct way. He dodged the inappropriate literal question, and instead answered the real question behind the nervous joke, which was, "How can we get rid of Obama?" His answer: through the electoral process.>> ^Psychologic:

What's so bad about Broun's response? He removed any reference to violence and reframed the discussion to a political solution. I'm glad people laughed instead of applauding at least (though I haven't heard the audio, so maybe it was both).

This false equivilancy tactic is getting tiring. Please show me a protest sign that said kill Bush. It doesn't exist. Please show me a public event where a constituent threatened assasination of Bush, and was met with laughter by the federal official, and delight by the audience.

This shit is extreme to the max, and trying to normalize hate speech and sedition won't work on the non-Fox News set.

Yeah, not cool. Making threats in jest like that isn't very smart.

In unrelated news, I actually feel sorry for Obama these days. I feel like he's trying really hard to do what he perceives as good. I think he's a genuine guy and he's trying to do the right thing, but the position of presidency is one where you can really only fail because of bipartisan scrutiny.

It doesn't mean I don't disagree with his policies, just that I think he's a man of character in a difficult situation. God, I hope these words don't come back to haunt me on here.

>> ^longde:

This false equivilancy tactic is getting tiring. Please show me a protest sign that said kill Bush. It doesn't exist. Please show me a public event where a constituent threatened assasination of Bush, and was met with laughter by the federal official, and delight by the audience.
This shit is extreme to the max, and trying to normalize hate speech and sedition won't work on the non-Fox News set.


I specifically remember a liberal commentator on Countdown suggesting the killing of several conservatives in a rather graphic manner and Olbermann just laughed uncomfortably and said something like "I don't know about that" before moving on.

Olbermann doesn't hold public office, but the situation was similar. He obviously didn't agree with the statement, but he also didn't call the other guy out for saying it.

It was posted here on videosift a while back and I had posted a comment about how Keith just glossed past the comment, but no one else seemed to care. I wish I could remember which clip it was.


Edit: As far as signs suggesting violence against Bush, I found several on a quick Google search. The problem is that you can never tell if they're serious or just someone from an "opposing" view doing it to make a group look crazy/extreme.

I did a google search and did see the kill Bush protest signs. Mea Culpa

But I still don't know of an instance where an elected federal official let an assassination threat go so lightly. Over-the-Top Olberman doesn't count, for the reasons you stated.

Treason against a president you don't like is simply not a mainstream sentiment in the democratic party. You will sooner find a democrat getting teabagged by a republican than you will find one advocating for the murder of a republican.

Boring comments?

I don't have a team of writers like Cole-bare and Jom Ste-wart. I cheerfully accept the criticism but c'mon, I'm doing this for FREE!

Kudos to you, messenger, for seeing the other side's POV.


>> ^messenger:

QM's comments mostly bore me too, but here he's just turning the tables, and IMO, makes a fair point:

Oh GOD Al is the guest speaker. Yea that a a man of integrity. Good lord shoot Al and the host. How stupid to even wast peoples time to even mention this stupid crap.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Boring comments?
I don't have a team of writers like Cole-bare and Jom Ste-wart. I cheerfully accept the criticism but c'mon, I'm doing this for FREE!
Kudos to you, messenger, for seeing the other side's POV.

>> ^messenger:
QM's comments mostly bore me too, but here he's just turning the tables, and IMO, makes a fair point:


You don't have a response for the request of Proof? Because I think that would strengthen your argument a whole bunch.

Here's an experiment: Is this funny/ok? If so, what makes it different?

>> ^xxovercastxx:

Here's an experiment: Is this funny/ok? If so, what makes it different?


I was going to say satire, but around the time they pull up their little map--I think they crossed that line. At the beginning it was semi-OK mostly due to them making the joke about the actual phrase, with no actual target except the word president. But, when it changed over into an area where it could be equivocated with a sitting president (just a bit before the map; it may have been the one with the mortar), that is where I think it's needs to stop. They say it's legal though.

I think crazy people often don't understand satire. However, the crazy people that might do this are probably never going to watch, "The Whitest Kids You Know". They defiantly walk a fine line; I think it's better to probably not do that skit. To each to his own.

I think the setting really defines where it shouldn't be used. A comedy club, maybe. A political event, no.