It could be considered "hate speech" comparing Obama to a terrorist icon.

And every school board is obligated to ensure an academic environment free from these kinds of culture-clashes that provide distractions. It is that one word; distraction, that makes all the difference.

If the kid had a handmade shirt that was just pro-McCain, or even if it only said "Nobama" I'm sure he could've worn his stupidity all day long.

Is it "child abuse" to infuse your kid with this much false hatred?

"Obama - a terrorist's best friend."

Nothing inflamatory about that, huh?

They were right to suspend the little bastard.

Lying is not a right.

A shirt saying "George Bush is a terrorist" likewise wouldn't be appropriate for school or most places of work.

They asked for it when they said dress patriotically.

They should have expected this.

Simply should have sent him home, now they get a lawsuit.

Its free speech, if you don't like it don't look at it.

Its an idea, it didn't come out and hurt you did it? No.

But if it would have says MCCAIN is a shriveled up prune you guys would have been OK with it right?

This is clearly relative, and subjective.

>> ^NordlichReiter:
But if it would have says MCCAIN is a shriveled up prune you guys would have been OK with it right?

No. That would be just as inflammatory.

Much more accurate, but still inflammatory.

That was mean for the school to pick on the down syndrome kid.

>> ^NordlichReiter:Its free speech, if you don't like it don't look at it.


Free speech isn't exactly a "right" in public schools. There are dress codes for specific reasons, the biggest one is to not make useless disruptions.

Nothing to do with "freedom of speech". Especially since this is apparently his fathers doing, not the kid.

^volumptuous:
Is it "child abuse" to infuse your kid with this much false hatred?


Makes me think of: http://www.videosift.com/video/South-Pacific-Youve-Got-to-be-Carefully-Taught

I agree with the dad that he should have the right to wear that...

...that is if he can explain what his shirt means and give examples of how the statement on his shirt are true. What does this dumb kid know about politics?

I also disagree with the generalization of the kind of people (kids to be specific) that are in public schools. Apparently all children are librals according to the father...

Our right to free speech only means something when it's inconvenient to defend and the fact they're in a public school shouldn't make any difference. Also, there is no "except if you're a jerk" clause to the first amendment.

The kid should not have been suspended but I'm glad he chose suspension over curbing his free speech.

Plus, he used apostrophe-s correctly, which is so rare today!

volumptuous is right when he (she?) says: "Free speech isn't exactly a 'right' in public schools." My mom was a middle school librarian. Children would be asked to turn their shirts inside-out or go home and change if they caused any sort of disturbance like this.

Honestly, can you see a 13 year old girl wearing a Hooters t-shirt to school? How about a bikini top? How about a microbikini bottom like this? Any shirts with messages that would get the rest of the room riled up makes it harder for the teachers to maintain a learning environment. In a similar vein, any children that choose to speak up and voice their opinions in a disruptive way also make it difficult for teachers to maintain control of the classroom and keep the kids learning.

It's one thing to have a political discussion. It's quite another to stand in the corridor and yell "OBAMA IS A TERRORIST'S BEST FRIEND"; the voiced equivalent of this shirt.

I don't understand why so many here are having a problem with this.

Public schools have dress codes, period. Dress codes aren't only to dissuade kids from wearing hotpants and peek-a-boo bras, but to prevent "disruption" or "distraction" from the academic environment.

This shirt, obviously falls under the distraction rule. In fact, many schools also don't allow the public display of religious symbols. My old highschool forbid them, outright. You couldn't wear a jesus cross as a necklace unless it was inside your shirt.

The school enforced the dress code. The end.

Where's that *brainwash channel?

>> ^oohahh:
volumptuous is right when he (she?) says


Don't call me a he/she. That's just rude, and I know what you're getting at and for the last time I AM NOT A TRANSVESTITE!

If the school/community has a problem with his expression, then certainly they have a right to do what they did. So, fine.

That said, I'm glad he took the suspension as I would have done the same. I probably would have gone the other way, politically, but I'd have gladly taken the suspension.

Schools can take reasonable measures to maintain a secure learning environment--but they cannot do so at the expense of free speech: see Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District. I'll quote just this snippet: students don't "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech and expression at the schoolhouse gate."

You can't wear a bikini to school because wearing a bikini would disrupt the learning environment and because wearing a bikini is not, as the courts say, "expressive conduct." In other words, it doesn't express an opinion on some issue.

The shirt in this case clearly DOES express an opinion--an unpopular or misguided one maybe, but still an opinion. So long as the expression of that opinion does not use vulgar or obscene language, (see Bethel School District v. Fraser) the Supreme court has ruled it must be allowed. This includes unpopular or even anti-diversity opinions (search for Elliot Chambers and his "Straight Pride" t-shirt, although that issue was on a college campus).

And Christ, volumptuous, that school of yours sounds like a massive lawsuit waiting to happen. I'm pretty sure the courts would agree that wearing a cross or other religious symbol is "expressive conduct" and would strike down any attempts to prevent students from wearing them. Which of course means that some asshat student would probably come to school with a pentagram or something and claim they worship Satan just to rile people up on purpose, but I can live with that as the price paid to live in a free society.

Even if you disagree with his politics, it's still a violation of freedom of speech, no? What if he wore a shirt that said "Barney the Dinosaur is a terrorists best friend"? Would that be okay, or should he also be sent home for that, too?

This dad is NEGLIGENT and WRONG--The school does NOT oblige to respect a student's "freedom of speech" inasmuch as it is an elective environment (a place where people gather in public) and, as such, is subject to its own rules and regulations.

Besides that, the two are completely deluded. At least the child has an excuse for having a complete imbecile for a father.


(On a side note, I remember kids getting in trouble for wearing those "I'm Bart Simpson, Who the Hell Are You" T-shirts back in the day. They, too, were given the option of crossing out the word Hell, wearing it inside out, changing the shirt, or -- if they are stupid enough to have their heads up their asses -- get suspended for willful disobedience. And, I might add, it was probably a good move on the school's part.)

>> ^volumptuous:
I don't understand why so many here are having a problem with this.
Public schools have dress codes, period. Dress codes aren't only to dissuade kids from wearing hotpants and peek-a-boo bras, but to prevent "disruption" or "distraction" from the academic environment.
This shirt, obviously falls under the distraction rule. In fact, many schools also don't allow the public display of religious symbols. My old highschool forbid them, outright. You couldn't wear a jesus cross as a necklace unless it was inside your shirt.
The school enforced the dress code. The end.


This was a public school. Not private. If freedom of speech isn't protected in the public, where is it protected?

So after 8 years of bush and cheney (people I'm almost certain that this man still supports to this day) doing everything they could to destroy the constitution and limit free speech this guy is gonna get upset about his son's homemade puffy paint shirt!? REALLY!? You're just getting upset about your free speech getting trampled NOW!!??? Kinda sucks when all those things that you've been supporting over the last 8 years come back to bite you in the ironic part of your ass doesn't it?
I have absolutely no sympathy for this man or his clueless little boy and their sudden awareness of our rights and privileges, or lack there of.
give.me.a.break.

The fact is if any of you think the 1st amendment is somehow a right in any public school you haven't been in some time...

What we can wear and how we can dress is extremely regulated... and the father i am certain knew this when he sent the child to school...

It's a completely ridiculous argument... from 'thug' wear... to 'goth' clothing... to how short a skirt or even shorts can or cannot be... (minus uniforms it would seem)... I wont't even get into what might be considered unacceptable actually on the clothing... but suffice to say it generally comes to down to administrators discretion... and is highly subjective... the point is this is just another example...

>> ^blankfist:This was a public school. Not private. If freedom of speech isn't protected in the public, where is it protected?


"The public" and a public schools internal dress-code are 100% different, I don't understand what the confusion is about.

This is why so many public schools have gone the direction of uniforms (which I am in favor of).

You can argue this all the way to the supreme court, and possibly win. But these court-cases and lawsuits are why the rest of the world laughs at us. Putting this on your kid and sending him off to school is begging for a conflict, and a conflict in the last place it is needed: junior high school...uggh

> Simply should have sent him home, now they get a lawsuit.
They did send him home. That's all being "suspended" is.

I support free speech. This boy can wear whatever shirt he wants, out on the street or at home. But the school is better off without distracting everyone from whatever they're supposed to be learning by starting a flame war over Rush Limbaugh talking points.

>> ^blankfist:

This was a public school. Not private. If freedom of speech isn't protected in the public, where is it protected?

Public schools are not "public" property, they are secure sites with their own system of rules and regulations for behavior. If the administration and duly elected school board decided that they should require a dress code and a code of conduct, and little Daxx was in violation of them due to the events surrounding his choice of garment, then his suspension is fitting.

Now if he wishes to amend his shirt to something less inflammatory but with the same anti-Obama sentiment, and they were to suspend him, then at that point I'd be happy to denounce the schools actions. But he won't, he'll wear the same shirt on Nov. 4th and get suspended again. At which point I'll laugh at the stupid kids and his equally dumb pappy.

>> ^Trancecoach:
This dad is NEGLIGENT and WRONG--The school does NOT oblige to respect a student's "freedom of speech" inasmuch as it is an elective environment (a place where people gather in public) and, as such, is subject to its own rules and regulations.
Besides that, the two are completely deluded. At least the child has an excuse for having a complete imbecile for a father.

(On a side note, I remember kids getting in trouble for wearing those "I'm Bart Simpson, Who the Hell Are You" T-shirts back in the day. They, too, were given the option of crossing out the word Hell, wearing it inside out, changing the shirt, or -- if they are stupid enough to have their heads up their asses -- get suspended for willful disobedience. And, I might add, it was probably a good move on the school's part.)


>> ^jwray:
I support free speech. This boy can wear whatever shirt he wants. But he's a moron and the school is better off without him. You don't see conservatives complain when kids get suspended for wearing profanity on t-shirts, which is the same fucking thing.


As I mentioned in my post above, the Supreme Court ruled that vulgar or obscene language is not protected. But the courts do guarantee free speech in public schools. The kid has the right to wear the shirt and the Dad has the right to raise his kid the way he sees fit. We may disagree with what he's teaching him, but we sure as hell would fight back if someone started telling us how to raise our own kids.

I am the product of the public school system 100% and in my time spent in these kinds of schools I've been limited from wearing hats of any kind blank or not, scarves, bandanas, specific colors, baggy pants/clothing, shirts with any number of sayings, specific kinds of jackets and so on...
This man knew exactly what he was doing when he sent his son off to school that day. This man used his son as flame bait to try and make a statement and slander Obama in the most ignorant way possible. I see this as nothing more than a way to "energize" the ignorant republican base that live in his community.

Nothing about it was vulgar.. it just offended some people.

Personally they can cry more because why?! Its their right too!

Okay, Trancecoach, please explain the downvote on my comments. Because I've noticed you doing it a lot lately in pretty much all the threads you and I both post on, and it's starting to look like some sort of personal problem between you and me rather than you actually finding something rude or offensive about my comments. If it is something personal, I'm sure we can work it out without resorting to childish antics like mass down votings. Or we can talk to the admins. Your choice.

If this kid was kicked out of school for an anti-McCain shirt, everyone in here would be in an uproar.

Any opinion anyone may have for or against what was printed on the shirt is completely meaningless.

The only issue is the schools regulation on clothing and whether or not this kid was in violation.

Set aside your anger at what was said on the shirt and consider the situation objectively.

Not that it matters, but I'm in disagreement with what his shirt said, but we live in a society that (ideally) abides by rules, not opinions.

The indoctrination is strong in this one.

maybe this ignorant ass family should keep up with federal court rulings...they have ruled not once, not twice, not three times, but at least four times that there is no freedom of speech in schools.

I bet this dumbass kid can't even spell "constitution"

Tinker v. Des Moines, Bethel v. Fraiser, Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier, Poling v. Murphy....

I bet if the kid's shirt said "Execute Bush for war crimes", "Bong Hits 4 Jesus", "Cunning Linguist", or "Buck Fush" he'd be asked to change shirts too. Kids are there to learn science and stuff, not get in a flame war with a redneck.

I'm of the opinion that the 1st amendment doesn't apply in a school, not even a public school. Note that I'm not saying that's how it should be, I'm just saying that's how it is.

If the 1st amendment did apply in school, kids wouldn't still be forced to say the Pledge of Allegiance and/or pray in homeroom.

The first amendment DOES apply in school to some extent. Tinker v. Des Moines ruled that only disruptive speech may be restricted by the school.

Students can NOT be forced to say the pledge, and retribution against a student for abstaining from the pledge is unconstitutional according to the Supreme Court (though it often still happens informally). Some public school teachers have to lead their class in the pledge, while individual students can choose to abstain. When the state of Missouri forced my school district to reinstate recitation of the pledge after 9/11, I objected.

Unisons are crap because they promote groupthink, empty platitudes, (in-group-ism regardless of merit), and implicit compulsion of everyone to say it. Unisons remind me of the Borg and the Nazis.

It's apparent that the kid was not practicing his own free speech rights, but his fathers.

This racist asshole used his kid to abuse our public education system and the 1st amendment rights they are afforded, to make his own, illigitimate, pathetic little racist statement. I don't know if he understood what a shitstorm it would cause, but if that was also a part of his plan then he needs a visit from child protection services.

By suspending the child, they're going after the wrong person. This kid should be sent to grandma's house for milk, cookies and a debriefing.


(Anyone else notice the shirt in question is actually about twice his size, which just so happens to be his fathers size? Ugggh.)

I don't think the t-shirt was necessarily racist. It could refer to Obama's slightly more conciliatory foreign policy. What the fool who wrote the shirt fails to consider is that if jihadists make peace and make friends with the USA, then everybody wins the war on terrorism. It's not a zero-sum game.

^jwray.

I'm sorry but "conditional" freedom is not freedom...

The supreme court has repeatedly ruled either that 1. the student either has no rights or 2. the judgment is at the discretion of the school board. In Tinker v. Des Moines the supreme court ruled that students can express themselves only if they are not "...materially and substantially interfer[ing] with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school..." so yeah...the students have the "freedom" to have their speech interpreted, judged, and punished by the principle.

that is not "freedom of speech" by any stretch of the imagination.

That "...materially and substantially interfer[ing] with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school..." is in the interpretation of the courts, not the school administrators. The student can sue and win if the administrators restrict speech that isn't really interfering with the school's operations in the interpretation of the courts. But if you sue the school for suspending you for yelling "George Bush is a two-cent transvestite hooker" during the principal's speech at an assembly, you're gonna lose.

The Tinker case allowed students to wear black armbands opposing the Viatnam War despite the objections of the school administrators. More recently, SCOTUS ruled 5-4 to allow a principal to suspend a student for displaying a 14-foot "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" banner right outside a school event. If one of those 5 dies and Obama replaces him, that could be reversed.

>> ^imstellar28:
^jwray.
I'm sorry but "conditional" freedom is not freedom...
The supreme court has repeatedly ruled either that 1. the student either has no rights or 2. the judgment is at the discretion of the school board. In Tinker v. Des Moines the supreme court ruled that students can express themselves only if they are not "...materially and substantially interfer[ing] with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school..." so yeah...the students have the "freedom" to have their speech interpreted, judged, and punished by the principle.
that is not "freedom of speech" by any stretch of the imagination.


Sorry, but how did you come to the conclusion that Tinker v. Des Moines said there is no freedom of speech in schools? The courts decided 7-2 that free speech rights are protected in public schools. They in fact went so far to say that schools must show a constitutionally valid reason to deny such rights. Such constitutionally valid reasons include speech acts intended to induce criminal acts (which is why in many schools you can't go to school with a marijuana leaf symbol on your clothing or belongings), comments deemed obscene or vulgar (profanity, including "hell"), and threatening speech acts.

EDIT: just saw jwray's post above. I'd agree that the "bong hit for Jesus" slogan runs afoul of the "speech which promotes criminal acts" reason for the school winning in the Supreme Court.

>> ^xxovercastxx:
I'm of the opinion that the 1st amendment doesn't apply in a school, not even a public school. Note that I'm not saying that's how it should be, I'm just saying that's how it is.
If the 1st amendment did apply in school, kids wouldn't still be forced to say the Pledge of Allegiance and/or pray in homeroom.


My sarcasm detector almost missed this one.

This is an outrage! Let him wear that shirt all day!
In fact, I want one too!

>> ^jwray:
I don't think the t-shirt was necessarily racist. It could refer to Obama's slightly more conciliatory foreign policy.


Watch the video again, and tell me this guy knows what a "conciliatory foreign policy" is.

^SDGundamX

I thought I already explained why I thought it wasn't freedom of speech...

case in point...this video... what was wrong about this kids shirt other than the fact that the principle, teacher, or others don't agree with it. his shirt is not anymore disruptive or offensive than a shirt that says "kermitt is bert's best friend" or "2+2=5". the fact that anyone can even judge whether your speech is offensive, and thus silence you negates any concept of freedom. if this kid had the freedom of speech at school we wouldn't even be sitting here watching this video because we never would have seen or heard of this stupid kid or his ignorant ass family.

you don't have rights unless you have them when you need them. how could this video make it any clearer? remember--and this is important--we aren't arguing whether students should have the freedom of speech in schools, we're arguing whether or not they have the freedom of speech.

and the answer is emphatically no

>> ^NordlichReiter:But if it would have says MCCAIN is a shriveled up prune you guys would have been OK with it right?

Oh those darn prunes that blow demselfs up at vacation hotels, and disco's, and embassy's, and take aeroplanes and smash em into giant skyscrapers filled with peoples!!!

Yeah! Prunes, terrorists... It's all subjective.

^volumptuous, freedom of speech refers only to your freedom with respect to the government. colbert and stewart could have been kicked out of the emmys at any point. hell, they could have been forbidden to come because they are white--if that is what the emmys dictated. same thing goes for your house, or any other private property. you could be kicked out of the supermarket and permanently banned for asking "where are the prunes?" if they had some kind of anti-prunes policy.

>> ^blankfist:
If this kid was kicked out of school for an anti-McCain shirt, everyone in here would be in an uproar.


I think you're right, people would -- with the same people defending the school, and the same people defending the kid's unfettered right to freedom of speech.

There probably wouldn't be as many people accusing the parent of child abuse, but then, I doubt I could find a t-shirt with John McCain dressed in Muslim garb giving Osama bin Laden a bear hug, either.

Part of why I like my party is that our idea of an insult is to call him a rich old white man with no new ideas. Or when we're particularly feisty, a confused, angry, warmongering liar.

On the Republican side he's a Muslim marxist terrorist n***er who wants to rape your underage daughters on top of a bed stuffed with shredded American flags.

The real question is, would anyone have found a McCain = Bush, or even "No more blood for oil" t-shirt offensive or disrupting? Has anyone seen an anti-McCain t-shirt that your 2nd grade teacher would be aghast about?

^But n***er is a racial epithet. And, people sporting that word on an anti-Obama t-shirt probably aren't part of the Republican Party "officially" (in terms of being on the McCain team). Once again, not to stick up for the Repub party, but rather I'd like to point out the hypocrisy of the Dem party... your party members may call him a white guy, but I've felt racial anger from people of color in your party for not wanting to vote for Obama.

From slate.com: "If Obama loses, our children will grow up thinking of equal opportunity as a myth. His defeat would say that when handed a perfect opportunity to put the worst part of our history behind us, we chose not to. In this event, the world's judgment will be severe and inescapable: The United States had its day but, in the end, couldn't put its own self-interest ahead of its crazy irrationality over race."

So we vote black or nothing else? Classic fear mongering. The worst your party has done, NR, is use racism and self-righteousness against the rest of us.

P.S. I'm not voting for McCain. I feel I must reaffirm that in fear of a vote retaliation on the Sift.

Wow. I expected this video to barely be published, if at all. I was certainly wrong.

free speech is for adults. neither the kid nor his parent apply.

The only thing wrong with this video (well, one of the things wrong) is the 'school asked them to wear red white and blue to show their patriotism'.

Patriotism is the dumbest thing ever, next to religion. 'Oh i was born here, therefore i should love this country above all others'. What the hell sorta mentality is that?

Who was this kid targeting with this message? The other kids in school who can't vote yet?

I seriously doubt this kid has these strong kind of views on politics, he's simply spewing the non-sense his dad believes.

Oh, and you don't have "Freedom of Speech" in a public school, you go to school to learn, not be an obnoxious brat.

I would have suspended him for being fat and sloppy.

>> ^blankfist:
From slate.com: "If Obama loses, our children will grow up thinking of equal opportunity blah blah blah blah


Your first problem is thinking that Slate.com somehow is the standard bearer for every POV on the left. It's just not. And pointing to one crappy article to prove your point is a bit ridiculous.

This kid was not practicing his 1st amendment rights. His father was using his child, and abusing his public education system, to spew this ugly and racist statement. This is a case for child services, not the ACLU.

>> ^thinker247:
Wow. I expected this video to barely be published, if at all. I was certainly wrong.


Hmm, what's that whiff? Is that the smell of ... liberal OUTRAGE?

Please... handicap rednecks have no rights.

You use the term "liberal" as if it's a bad thing. Like "elitist" or "Al Gore."

>> ^RedSky:
>>^thinker247:
Wow. I expected this video to barely be published, if at all. I was certainly wrong.

Hmm, what's that whiff? Is that the smell of ... liberal OUTRAGE?

In my view, the dress code is a farce. The phrase "Is our children learning?" comes to mind. Every person who agrees with enforcing a dress code does so in connection with the idea, "Will it affect the ability of children to learn by distracting them?" This is a false argument, as it denies the ability of students to think for themselves and to pay attention to the teacher, while ignoring distractions.

When I was in school, there were kids who didn't want to be there, so they wouldn't learn even in a structured environment. There were other kids who were perfect students, and they could pay attention in a hurricane. Then there were the majority of the students who were average and paid attention most of the time, but not always.

A t-shirt like the one the kid wore is certainly distracting, but does it really stop anybody from learning? I saw girls wearing halter tops, and I spent half the class transfixed on teenage boobs, because I was in the middle of my puberty shock. But did that stop me from learning? No. I'm a multi-tasker. I can stare at boobs AND learn at the same time. And if you can't, well, maybe you shouldn't be in school at all.

Maybe I see things differently, I don't know. I just don't see how this kid's shirt (although stupid) was distracting.

>> ^volumptuous:
>> ^oohahh:
volumptuous is right when he (she?) says

Don't call me a he/she. That's just rude, and I know what you're getting at and for the last time I AM NOT A TRANSVESTITE!


The proper term when referring to one you have no real way of discerning gender is "they"

eg. "volumptuous is right when they say..."





Grammar and Syntax Nazis of the World UNITE!

The more I've thought about this the more I come to this conclusion. This man could care less about free speech and maintaining that right. The America that he and others like him fight for is not an America where all opinions and view points are openly discussed, it's an America completely void of it. In fact the America he strives for is one in which views and opinions in opposition to his own would be abolished at best. He fights for noone but himself and those with whom he agrees. At best this man is a fraud and a poser. Free speech to this man is nothing more than a tool to rid the world of those he hates, not a tool for discussion. He seems to only fight for those rights only when the mood suits him.
As for the shirt, fine, wear it because he degrades himself more than anyone else.

The point here is being lost...

The father if he has any responsibility for his son what so ever knew in advance what the school policy was regarding attire... he recieved the exact result he was looking for...

The issue of 'free speech' as i've said before absolutly does not apply to students... It is both highly subjective and open to interpretation from administrators... right or wrong... thats debatable... but still.

Just a quick couple of examples i remember off hand.. friends with band logos on their tee-shirt... I don't recal which... but it was like a skull and crossbones but with six-shooters instead of swords... A number of friends have been sent home for wearing team appearel and jerseys... or example personally... i'm realtively tall.. it's actuall difficult to find shorts today that adhear to the letter of the law... which is... believe it or not... they can't be shorter than my hands when laying them to my side...

My point is... this has nothing to do with the first amendment... and students have never truly enjoyed '1st amendment rights'... actually if you go down the list... they don't enjoy many of them...

>> ^blankfist:
From slate.com: "If Obama loses, our children will grow up thinking of equal opportunity as a myth. His defeat would say that when handed a perfect opportunity to put the worst part of our history behind us, we chose not to. In this event, the world's judgment will be severe and inescapable: The United States had its day but, in the end, couldn't put its own self-interest ahead of its crazy irrationality over race."

I don't think you'd get kicked out of school for wearing a t-shirt with that on it.

"Vote for Obama or you're a racist" might, but I defy you to find some Obama supporter selling a t-shirt like that.

The key portion of the program here and THE REASON he cant wear it in school is because of the idea of it "interrupting the learning process" as they said in the telecast.

It used to be that in school you were a person first and student second, but some court cases and some school shootings have changed all that. They introduced the idea of "reasonable suspicion" as well as the idea that you HAVE the right to free speech as long as you do not create the kind of situation that would cause a riot OR disrupt the learning process.

In this case, the kid is wearing a shirt that said "Obama is a terrorist best friend" (or just friend, i dont feel like checking at this moment) but either way it's something that would catch other student's eyes. If you're an Obama supporter and you're sitting near this kid it is going to be a HUGE distraction. Not to mention the kid could also meet up with some people who strongly disagree with him and potentially duke it out because of how strong the statement is.

So in short, yes the school made the right decision. They were protecting him as well as other students in the building from the various situations that could come up, and no, nothing will happen as far as a lawsuit (except maybe these people will lose big money on attorney fees) but the school in this case is untouchable. And it should be!
The line needs to be drawn somewhere.

Now if the kid wanted to wear a shirt that said uhhh ^looks up anti obama slogans^
"Defend America, Defeat Obama"
then i would argue that this would be the kind of thing that should be allowed. It's just clearly not as inflammatory. It makes it's point and carry over into the insulting (the kind of thing that people would be offended by)

but btw obama RULES w00t

^"the line needs to be drawn somewhere"

says the guy drawing the line...

>> ^imstellar28:
^volumptuous, freedom of speech refers only to your freedom with respect to the government. colbert and stewart could have been kicked out of the emmys at any point. hell, they could have been forbidden to come because they are white--if that is what the emmys dictated. same thing goes for your house, or any other private property. you could be kicked out of the supermarket and permanently banned for asking "where are the prunes?" if they had some kind of anti-prunes policy.


That was dead-on. Thanks for pointing that out. I wish more people would pay attention to what the constitutional rights actually apply to. People seem to equate freedom of speech with the freedom to say whatever they want whenever they want... I suppose the Internet being a prime example of that kind of behavior.

I'm offended by the child's poor artistic skills, in addition to the father teaching his son bullshit, but I ultimately have to side with freedom of speech here. I don't see how anyone could consider wearing that shirt disruptive to learning, but even if some dorky schmuck couldn't focus on his work because he was too fascinated by the reckless paint splotches all over the shirt, that's not someone else's problem. Although we are talking about kids here, and kids aren't all that focused to begin with. Hmm.

I can has broked sarcasm detector??

Bah, you're such an 'Al Gore'!

>> ^thinker247:
You use the term "liberal" as if it's a bad thing. Like "elitist" or "Al Gore."
>>^RedSky:
>>^thinker247:
Wow. I expected this video to barely be published, if at all. I was certainly wrong.

Hmm, what's that whiff? Is that the smell of ... liberal OUTRAGE?

Kudos to the kid for choosing suspension over removal of the shirt... Even if it's a wtfbrandstupid shirt ( Not unlike the Bush=Hitler shirts i've seen highschool kids wearing ).

Ah... now I get it... see I've been asking over and over why 50% of this country doesn't get it, well, I just got my question answered: stupid people raise their kids in ignorance and they grow up to be just as stupid!

^bingo. except the number is actually around 94%

>> ^SDGundamX:
>> ^imstellar28:
^volumptuous, freedom of speech refers only to your freedom with respect to the government. colbert and stewart could have been kicked out of the emmys at any point. hell, they could have been forbidden to come because they are white--if that is what the emmys dictated. same thing goes for your house, or any other private property. you could be kicked out of the supermarket and permanently banned for asking "where are the prunes?" if they had some kind of anti-prunes policy.

That was dead-on. Thanks for pointing that out. I wish more people would pay attention to what the constitutional rights actually apply to. People seem to equate freedom of speech with the freedom to say whatever they want whenever they want... I suppose the Internet being a prime example of that kind of behavior.


I didn't say any of the above.

My only point is that this racist asshole used his child to spew his ugly comment, and abused his public school system just so he could do his little "so there!" dance.

This is not about the child, it's about the father. And his father doesn't have "free speech" rights at his kids school.

his shirt is not anymore disruptive or offensive than a shirt that says "kermitt is bert's best friend" or "2+2=5"

O RLY?

>> ^jwray:
his shirt is not anymore disruptive or offensive than a shirt that says "kermitt is bert's best friend" or "2+2=5"
O RLY?
I disagree. His shirt could start a fight. No one would care about the two shirts you suggested.

in principle, how are the three any different?

all three are false statements. you happen to care more about certain nouns than other people (i.e. obama as opposed to bert or arithmetic) but explain to me how the concept is any different?

are you saying that a bert fan could not take offense at someone claiming that ernie is not bert's best friend? or a die-hard mathematician could not take offense at someone claiming 2+2=5?

just because you consider "obama" to be a noun worth initiating violence over, doesn't mean everyone else does.

just because you consider "obama" to be a noun worth initiating violence over

Nice strawman there. I never said that. But it's pretty fucking obvious that statements about a PERSON carry more weight with most people than statements about a NUMBER.

>> ^imstellar28:
^"the line needs to be drawn somewhere"
says the guy drawing the line...


No contradiction there. Troll better next time.

Yeah, an 11 year old understands what's on his shirt.

If you could print anything and everything there wouldn't be any such crime as Libel. Prove Obama is what you say, then wear the shirt. Or take the easier road, and just make a shirt that says Obama sucks. If thats what the shirt said, it would be easier for me to feel outraged.

It was his douchebag of a father who put him up to it.

>> ^jwray:
>> ^imstellar28:
^"the line needs to be drawn somewhere"
says the guy drawing the line...

No contradiction there. Troll better next time.


Whats the contradiction?

Oximoronic language "freedom of speech"
The school's dress code is not available here, lack of information is the hallmark of reactions/decisions/sensibilities in the newsspeakin' 21st....

Most folks whose illusion of "choice" with regard to the ballot box (rigged computer?), shaped from birth by the machine, cultivated and nurtured to fruition in the form of a fleshbot.

Two to "choose" from, one actual, "choice".

>> ^imstellar28:
>> ^jwray:
>> ^imstellar28:
^"the line needs to be drawn somewhere"
says the guy drawing the line...

No contradiction there. Troll better next time.

Whats the contradiction?


You posted a snippy reply that was structured like you were trying to point out the JiggaJohnson's self-contradiction where there was no self-contradiction.
>> ^imstellar28:
^"the line needs to be drawn somewhere"
says the guy drawing the line...

*kill