Basically this article states that a group of Tea Party protesters have announced that they will have a bonfire and burn Nancy Pelosi and Tom Perriello in effigy. Before, these protests have included violent imagery on posters and statements made, but didn't appear to be planned or organized with that in mind before hand. Now they're actually announcing imagery that, quite frankly, is an open invitation to violence as an official part of their protests.
While I don't agree with them, up to now I've said that they did have a right to protest and speak their mind. At least there was a certain amount of plausible deniability when some people showed up with certain posters or said somethings that crossed the line. However, now their making them an official part of the protest, no longer able to deny that they're condoning this kind of behavior, if not encouraging it.
How many times was Bush burned in effigy during his 8 years in office? Yes, in the US itself. More than once according to google. They even have video of it on YouTube. Was that also an open call to violence or is this yet another case of "well it's different when the nutso rightwing fundies do it!?"
How many times was Bush burned in effigy during his 8 years in office? Yes, in the US itself. More than once according to google. They even have video of it on YouTube. Was that also an open call to violence or is this yet another case of "well it's different when the nutso rightwing fundies do it!?"
Really? I went through 5 pages of google results and I couldnt find a single instance. So I went through that ZombieTimes blog post of all the Anti-Bush rallies and found a single instance of Bush being burned in Effigy in 2004 San Francisco.
All the google results were for Tehran, Baghdad, Montreal, along with a couple false positives for an Anti-Bush rally in Mexico burning an effigy of the then Mexican President Fox.
All of that is a tangent though. Burning effigys is in itself harmless. Its more important what the message of the rally is. If the message is to kill/depose/remove Pelosi, thats pretty harmful/awful. If the message is just to keep pushing their message to stop/halt Pelosis agenda, thats what rallies should be about.
See, the reason we didn't burn GW in effigy so much is because rather than inspire fear or change it would just inspire the religious right to a greater fervor and raise his approval with the Jewish population.
MrMisterJesus dying on the cross in pain? Morally better than us. One has to go "all in".Registered Userregular
edited November 2009
Everybody do the 1st amendment dance. :whistle:
MrMister on
0
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
edited November 2009
I never understood the burning-in-effigy thing. "We don't like you, so we're going to torch a big doll dressed up like you." Intimidating, probably, but the whole thing seems like some sort of voodoo offshoot.
I never understood the burning-in-effigy thing. "We don't like you, so we're going to torch a big doll dressed up like you." Intimidating, probably, but the whole thing seems like some sort of voodoo offshoot.
Ha, tell the Tea Party's fundies that and you'll blow their minds.
I'm not quite sure what's there to discuss here. You'd be hardpressed to find anyone on PA who would be OK with burning Pelosi dolls.
The only vaguely viable answer would be along the lines of "it's just an effigy, we would *NEVER* violently murder that bitch"
Nothing wrong with it. Sometimes I burn myself in effigy.
But seriously I don't see burning a doll as an open call to violence, and even if it were, well I don't really see as it matters unless people actually rally to the call.
This would only be noteworthy if someone found out a producer at Fox News provided the dolls, lit the fire, or told them to be more enthusiastic about the burnination.
How would that be noteworthy? That's pretty much just a continuation of the norm.
override367 on
0
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
edited November 2009
I'd be a hypocrite if I said this was unacceptable; I was well into the Bush-hating crowd myself and would've turned a blind eye to this.
The noteworthy thing here is that the right-wing is pretty much taking a cue from the left on how to do protests and demonstrations, probably the same shit they used to denounce or demonize if you go right-enough. So there's a bit of hypocrisy but nothing to jump up and down about.
tl;dr - Good for them!
Edit - Just to comment on the bolded, I mostly only was like that for the first term and during the re-election process. The second term I ended up winding down and made my best effort to swing toward the middle of the spectrum.
I do remember the "bush is a nazi" stuff, what I don't remember is a major cable news network condoning that, or people showing up with assault rifles.
override367 on
0
PasserbyeI am much older than you.in Beach CityRegistered Userregular
I'd be a hypocrite if I said this was unacceptable; I was well into the Bush-hating crowd myself and would've turned a blind eye to this.
The noteworthy thing here is that the right-wing is pretty much taking a cue from the left on how to do protests and demonstrations, probably the same shit they used to denounce or demonize if you go right-enough. So there's a bit of hypocrisy but nothing to jump up and down about.
tl;dr - Good for them!
Edit - Just to comment on the bolded, I mostly only was like that for the first term and during the re-election process. The second term I ended up winding down and made my best effort to swing toward the middle of the spectrum.
Yeah, it's pretty much in line with them having 'grassroots initiatives' and what-not. They're just taking a few pages from the lefty protest book.
I think it's less scary and offensive and more stupid and juvenile. If I was inclined to pay attention to these guys in the first place, this would just make me write them off as dipshits.
That said, when the left did this to Bush, I'm assuming it wasn't advertised in advance? Like, "This weekend, come see Bush burned in effigy! Live! Only this Sunday-SUNDAY-SUNDAY!" Because I think what this event does do is highlight that the most extremist and retarded segment of the teapartiers are the ones driving the movement.
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
They're just taking a few pages from the lefty protest book.
Unfortunately, they are taking it from the chapter with the title "stupid attention grabbing shit that doesn't actually work in any other way except make you look like a dumb shit."
Couscous on
0
PasserbyeI am much older than you.in Beach CityRegistered Userregular
They're just taking a few pages from the lefty protest book.
Unfortunately, they are taking it from the chapter with the title "stupid attention grabbing shit that doesn't actually work in any other way except make you look like a dumb shit."
Shouldn't that be fortunately, rather than unfortunately?
Don't we want them to be seen as the stupid attention grabbing dipshits that they are?
The noteworthy thing here is that the right-wing is pretty much taking a cue from the left on how to do protests and demonstrations, probably the same shit they used to denounce or demonize if you go right-enough. So there's a bit of hypocrisy but nothing to jump up and down about.
Unfortunately for them, they apparently forgot to include "effectiveness" in their criteria for what to rip off.
Burning authority figures in effigy hasn't been an effective political reform tactic in several centuries at the least.
The noteworthy thing here is that the right-wing is pretty much taking a cue from the left on how to do protests and demonstrations, probably the same shit they used to denounce or demonize if you go right-enough. So there's a bit of hypocrisy but nothing to jump up and down about.
Unfortunately for them, they apparently forgot to include "effectiveness" in their criteria for what to rip off.
Burning authority figures in effigy hasn't been an effective political reform tactic in several centuries at the least.
Oh I'm certainly not giving them credit of being more credible or anything. Like was said already, it's the attention grabbing stuff that just makes 'em look bad.
Henroid on
0
PasserbyeI am much older than you.in Beach CityRegistered Userregular
Teabaggers Exercise First Amenment Rights, Internet Forum Overreacts
There are a lot of things pretected by the first amendment. That doesn't protect anybody from criticism.
That's definitely true. Criticism is protected just as much as the stupid actions or statements that invite it.
The problem starts when we're kneejerking the assumption that people saying stupid things in a stupid way directly cascades into violence, as was pointed to in the OP.
Teabaggers Exercise First Amenment Rights, Internet Forum Overreacts
There are a lot of things pretected by the first amendment. That doesn't protect anybody from criticism.
That's definitely true. Criticism is protected just as much as the stupid actions or statements that invite it.
The problem starts when we're kneejerking the assumption that people saying stupid things in a stupid way directly cascades into violence, as was pointed to in the OP.
Except that the OP's the only one who's saying it'll end in violence.
Not so much of 'internet forum' as 'those guys on that blog over there'.
How many times was Bush burned in effigy during his 8 years in office? Yes, in the US itself. More than once according to google. They even have video of it on YouTube. Was that also an open call to violence or is this yet another case of "well it's different when the nutso rightwing fundies do it!?"
Strawman argument. When have you ever heard someone say "it's okay when my side does it"? It's a sentiment that anyone would recognize as dishonest. Typically if you have someone who thinks it's okay on their side it's not because "they're my side," there's other rationale.
Teabaggers Exercise First Amenment Rights, Internet Forum Overreacts
There are a lot of things pretected by the first amendment. That doesn't protect anybody from criticism.
That's definitely true. Criticism is protected just as much as the stupid actions or statements that invite it.
The problem starts when we're kneejerking the assumption that people saying stupid things in a stupid way directly cascades into violence, as was pointed to in the OP.
Except that the OP's the only one who's saying it'll end in violence.
Not so much of 'internet forum' as 'those guys on that blog over there'.
Fair enough. I retract my non-specific, non-criticism that I didn't make of all you guys that are reacting reasonably to this.
How many times was Bush burned in effigy during his 8 years in office? Yes, in the US itself. More than once according to google. They even have video of it on YouTube. Was that also an open call to violence or is this yet another case of "well it's different when the nutso rightwing fundies do it!?"
Strawman argument. When have you ever heard someone say "it's okay when my side does it"? It's a sentiment that anyone would recognize as dishonest. Typically if you have someone who thinks it's okay on their side it's not because "they're my side," there's other rationale.
To be fair, their actual reason often boils down to "they're my side", because people are good at being hypocrites. But yes, they usually have at least some crappy, half-baked justification prepared.
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Also, I'm not going to say that this event is likely to devolve into a violent lynch mob. What I will say is that when you have a group of people who tend to wave around guns at rallies and make frequent references to the American Revolution, any escalation at all towards implied violence in their organized events is a little worrisome.
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
How many times was Bush burned in effigy during his 8 years in office? Yes, in the US itself. More than once according to google. They even have video of it on YouTube. Was that also an open call to violence or is this yet another case of "well it's different when the nutso rightwing fundies do it!?"
Strawman argument. When have you ever heard someone say "it's okay when my side does it"? It's a sentiment that anyone would recognize as dishonest. Typically if you have someone who thinks it's okay on their side it's not because "they're my side," there's other rationale.
To be fair, their actual reason often boils down to "they're my side", because people are good at being hypocrites. But yes, they usually have at least some crappy, half-baked justification prepared.
Whether it will be planned or impromptu, I don't have the energy to protest distasteful flag and effigy burnings beyond shaking my head and moving on the the next thread. I mention this here because I get the feeling most people will do the same thing. Moral Majority, meet the internet-spawned Apathetic Majority.
Also, I'm not going to say that this event is likely to devolve into a violent lynch mob. What I will say is that when you have a group of people who tend to wave around guns at rallies and make frequent references to the American Revolution, any escalation at all towards implied violence in their organized events is a little worrisome.
I wonder how far it will go, before the government has justification to shut them down. Because they're not backing down, and obviously they wouldn't be able to trigger an actual, honest-to-god revolution.
Posts
The only vaguely viable answer would be along the lines of "it's just an effigy, we would *NEVER* violently murder that bitch"
if glenn beck does it on his show it'll be a little more noteworthy, but these are just crazies doing their thing
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Really? I went through 5 pages of google results and I couldnt find a single instance. So I went through that ZombieTimes blog post of all the Anti-Bush rallies and found a single instance of Bush being burned in Effigy in 2004 San Francisco.
All the google results were for Tehran, Baghdad, Montreal, along with a couple false positives for an Anti-Bush rally in Mexico burning an effigy of the then Mexican President Fox.
All of that is a tangent though. Burning effigys is in itself harmless. Its more important what the message of the rally is. If the message is to kill/depose/remove Pelosi, thats pretty harmful/awful. If the message is just to keep pushing their message to stop/halt Pelosis agenda, thats what rallies should be about.
MWO: Adamski
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Ha, tell the Tea Party's fundies that and you'll blow their minds.
https://twitter.com/Hooraydiation
Nothing wrong with it. Sometimes I burn myself in effigy.
But seriously I don't see burning a doll as an open call to violence, and even if it were, well I don't really see as it matters unless people actually rally to the call.
"We'll burn an effigy!"
"OK. Perfectly legal expression of free speech."
"But... but... you're supposed to be outraged!"
I get the impression that they're really desperate for some sort of martyrship to vindicate themselves by proving that Obama's Out To Get Them.
The noteworthy thing here is that the right-wing is pretty much taking a cue from the left on how to do protests and demonstrations, probably the same shit they used to denounce or demonize if you go right-enough. So there's a bit of hypocrisy but nothing to jump up and down about.
tl;dr - Good for them!
Edit - Just to comment on the bolded, I mostly only was like that for the first term and during the re-election process. The second term I ended up winding down and made my best effort to swing toward the middle of the spectrum.
Yeah, it's pretty much in line with them having 'grassroots initiatives' and what-not. They're just taking a few pages from the lefty protest book.
Face Twit Rav Gram
That said, when the left did this to Bush, I'm assuming it wasn't advertised in advance? Like, "This weekend, come see Bush burned in effigy! Live! Only this Sunday-SUNDAY-SUNDAY!" Because I think what this event does do is highlight that the most extremist and retarded segment of the teapartiers are the ones driving the movement.
Unfortunately, they are taking it from the chapter with the title "stupid attention grabbing shit that doesn't actually work in any other way except make you look like a dumb shit."
Shouldn't that be fortunately, rather than unfortunately?
Don't we want them to be seen as the stupid attention grabbing dipshits that they are?
Face Twit Rav Gram
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Burning authority figures in effigy hasn't been an effective political reform tactic in several centuries at the least.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Crap guys, we've been called out by Zed. I guess saying this is not unlike things done in the past is a matter of overreacting.
There are a lot of things pretected by the first amendment. That doesn't protect anybody from criticism.
Oh I'm certainly not giving them credit of being more credible or anything. Like was said already, it's the attention grabbing stuff that just makes 'em look bad.
The OP's what he's responding to, I think.
Face Twit Rav Gram
It's a blog entry linked though so that's where I got the confusion I guess.
The problem starts when we're kneejerking the assumption that people saying stupid things in a stupid way directly cascades into violence, as was pointed to in the OP.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Is this thing being organized by his ex-wife or something?
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
Except that the OP's the only one who's saying it'll end in violence.
Not so much of 'internet forum' as 'those guys on that blog over there'.
Face Twit Rav Gram
Strawman argument. When have you ever heard someone say "it's okay when my side does it"? It's a sentiment that anyone would recognize as dishonest. Typically if you have someone who thinks it's okay on their side it's not because "they're my side," there's other rationale.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
To be fair, their actual reason often boils down to "they're my side", because people are good at being hypocrites. But yes, they usually have at least some crappy, half-baked justification prepared.
Which wouldn't surprise me in the least.
Im fine with burning Pelosi dolls, but to be fair if I was going to lead an angry mob to violently murder people in DC she is not the top of the list.
+20 fire protection.
As long as we win...
Editted for predictability.
*shakes booty*
Whether it will be planned or impromptu, I don't have the energy to protest distasteful flag and effigy burnings beyond shaking my head and moving on the the next thread. I mention this here because I get the feeling most people will do the same thing. Moral Majority, meet the internet-spawned Apathetic Majority.
I wonder how far it will go, before the government has justification to shut them down. Because they're not backing down, and obviously they wouldn't be able to trigger an actual, honest-to-god revolution.