I'll bet those who hate the shoe thrower, really hated this guy:

[arcadian]

After all, he's braking several traffic codes by standing there.

Those that hate the shoe thrower obviously don't get symbolic gestures. Zing! Flies right over their heads... like a shoe.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

1. I bet they applauded when that bulldozer ran over Rachel Corrie.

Corrie? Was that her name?

[acmavm]

57. That was her name.

Funny how people condemn this guy for throwing a shoe at the front man for the cabal who murdered a million or so of his countrymen/women/children.

I wish the shoe had been loaded.

[Pavulon]

2. Will be funny in 60 days?

probably not. So in 3 months if Barack Obama has a boot thrown at him in Afghanistan by a local reporter or us soldier that is an acceptable thing?

Respect the office. That constituted a major lapse in security and put people in danger.

If an agent had reacted to that as a weapon and shot at the guy (which would hit people around him) would it be funny then?

The person in your picture is only endangering himself.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

5. This is a really, really pathetic argument.

It only works if Bush and Obama were in some way comparable.

It's like saying "Oh, were you in favor of the execution of Saddam Hussein? Well then I guess you're in favor of hanging Hillary Clinton."

[Pavulon]

9. You cant go throwing shit at national leaders

it is stupid and while great for the Daily Show is not acceptable. Bush or Obama are afforded physical protection while in office. Throw something at either and you will BE LUCKY to be arrested.

Like has NOTHING to do with it.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

12. Fuck Bush. Fuck his apologists.

Fuck anybody who respects him, and considers him their leader.

[Pavulon]

24. Well thats like your opinion man...

country of laws, elects a president. That president, even if YOU DO NOT LIKE HIM, is afforded protection.

That simple. No more complicated than that. No Drama required. I dont like GW, but the man holds the office.

I am not apologizing for him or his actions, only stating that the office affords him physical and legal protections, just like every president before and after him.

[GReedDiamond]

34. Again with the "he was elected" bullcrap...

...Bushler was NOT elected, he was selected in 2000 by partisan activist judges on the Supreme Court, after utilizing voter intimidation and disenfranchisement tactics and electoral fraud in both "elections" he "won." How does that constitute a "country of laws" that "elects a president"?

Personally, I find it impossible to respect a mass murdering/torturing war criminal, who has committed his crimes in Our Names, whatever the "office" he may be squatting in and shitting all over. Bush is the one who has dishonored the "Office of the President," and he has needed no help from anybody (except maybe Darth Cheney), in doing so.

[Pavulon]

39. Impeachment

is the recourse for every bit of what you posted. That is a legal process. More effective than a shoe.

No one asked you to respect anyone. It is common sense that the POTUS be secured from attack, with shoes or guns.

[wtmusic]

42. How effective has impeachment been against W?

Do you feel W should be impeached?

[Pavulon]

46. Yep.

That is the legal method. If there is sufficient evidence to support a charge an conviction let it roll. However those things dont work on feelings.

If not then we have a different issue, no supportable charge. Hence a transition of power to take place in days.

As long as the system is functional the rules are in place.

This is not a shit third world country, overthrowing the government is not an option.

[wtmusic]

49. So you think he should be impeached. But he wasn't.

Justice wasn't served. That OK with you? Is that "functional"?

I'll risk invoking Godwin's Law and remind you that Nazi Germany wasn't a "shit third world" country, and add that your ethnocentrism and good old-fashioned "America Can Do No Wrong" elitism is pretty fucking ugly.

[Pavulon]

52. So we should overthrow the fucking government

Justice isn't always served. There is a system that can be used to deal with illegal actions. However even a president is afforded due process.

Things like proof are required.

Ethnicity is irrelevant. Germany is irrelevant. Germany was 3rd world at the end of ww1 but that is a different topic.

Again, overthrowing the government is not a great solution at this point. Agree?

[wtmusic]

58. al-Zaidi harbored no illusion that he was overthrowing the US government

but that doesn't imply that defiance in the face of injustice is not a useful tool. Yes, I agree that overthrowing the government is not a great solution nor practical at this point, but nonetheless this man is now a hero in Iraq. Why?

Funny, W could relegate this incident to history by pardoning him, but instead he chooses to martyr him by keeping him in jail for throwing his fucking shoes and hurting no one.

[GReedDiamond]

63. If * HAD been elected legally...

...he would be the "POTUS" and there MAY be some "respect for the office" due. Unfortunately "W" is an impostor, a fraud, a liar, a thief and a sadistic war criminal, to mention but a few of his "accomplishments," and as I mentioned before HE is the one who has defamed the Office of the President, nobody else.

He (and most of the Bush Gang), SHOULD have been impeached years ago, but since our "Nation of Laws" has been hijacked by political hacks/opportunists/corporatists and outright criminals in both Parties, the Bush Gang is free to carry on in OUR NAMES with their criminal activities.

Enough with this "respect for the office" above all else nonsense, it doesn't play well in too many places (although I'm sure that opinion is shared with you by many of those posting over at FreeRepublic.com). I seem to remember that there was a lack of "respect for the office" when Clinton occupied it, why is that such a sacred concept at this point in time, after said office has been so thoroughly defamed by the current war criminal/squatter?

Hopefully Obama will return us to a REAL Nation of Laws, and we may see the Office of the President restored to the level of respect you put it above over the actions of its occupant.

Thanks for the debate. You can't convince me to respect your abstract concept of symbolic "respect" for a non-entity, and it looks like you are likewise unwilling to change your opinion based on anything I have to say. I'm done.

Best of luck in the future.

[riqster]

66. Well said, and good to see you again!

Hope all is well with you and your band. :hi:

[GReedDiamond]

135. Hey Riqster!

Small world, ain't it?

Here's the new CD:
http://www.benedictarnoldandthetraitors.com/audio/ny/

Hope you and yours are doing well.

If there's a way to message you through DU, I'll do that once I figure it out.

[riqster]

143. Sent you a message, but just in case

here's my website:

[Pavulon]

70. You too.

again this is not a pro bush thing, just a baseline. The POTUS even one I dont like, needs to be protected. That did not happen.

The office remains after the man leaves.

Lots of people in the NG hated clinton, but orders issued were followed. The office holds power and is a part of the government. The office has value.

I am sure Obama will do well, but he also must be protected as the person holding the office.

[Duende azul]

134. If only al-Zaidi had thought of impeachment!

To bad he wasn`t taught the inner workings of american legal process.
Some years of occupation should have given him plenty of opportunity.
He could have avoided serious trouble and pain.

And apparently most important to you: He would have spared you the pain of seeing your pres - sorry the office - humiliated.

[OwnedByFerrets]

68. This fucking ass wasnt elected. I hate war criminal apologists.

:mad: :mad: :mad:

[Pavulon]

72. Throw your shoes in disgust.

or put a call in to have the man impeached. That is the actual way to remove a criminal from office.

[surrealAmerican]

85. He's is afforded protection from physical DANGER, not ...

... public humiliation. Even if the shoe had hit him, its not like it would have caused any real damage. That was the whole point of this gesture, not bodily harm, but shame.

[arcadian]

15. Since you stand for the letter of the law so much.

Why aren't you breaking down the Whitehouse doors to drag Bush away to a tribunal? You know he's broken international law on numerous occasions. No, but you'd be shouting at any person who took Bush kicking and screaming, that they aren't, "respecting the office". Please.

[Pavulon]

26. Go break down the doors

see how far you get. Are there any adults online during the day? Take him where, man. County lockup? Is this before or after the SS does their job?

There is a PROCESS to address the president and remove him from office. It does not include people breaking down doors.

The office is granted legal and physical protections. The LEGISLATIVE branch can impeach.

[wtmusic]

28. And throwing tea in Boston Harbor is a shameful, shameful act.

Sometimes the "process" doesn't cut it. What then?

[Pavulon]

31. Silly comparison

the office of POTUS is afforded protection, even when people you do not like occupy it.

I will not speculate on what then because it can lead to visits from federal agents.

what then is generally done without violence.

[wtmusic]

36. Whether I "like" the president is irrelevant

If you saw a president who you were convinced was guilty of heinous crimes, and nothing is being done about it...what then? What about when all peaceful means are exhausted? You probably think there is no relation to revolutions or other political criminals throughout history; I'll put forth that there were people echoing your very sentiments - placators - during the worst moments of world history. "Silly comparison". "This time is different". Then there were those who were brave enough to step outside an ineffectual process and do what was right.

[Pavulon]

40. Yep, let me know when we get there

impeachment is the legal way to deal with this. This is not property damage or refusal to pay tax. You cant go throwing shit at leaders of nations.

I can be convinced of all kinds of things, actually taking action based on my opinion is another matter. I voted, that is a recourse.

Again there is a line here and I will not cross it.

So if you are advocating murder you may want to try a different approach.

[wtmusic]

44. Easy to say sitting in your comfortable U S of A.

Perhaps if you had been through what al-Zaidi had been through you'd be heaving some footwear as well, or worse.

[Pavulon]

48. Easy in Yugoslavia

some people did not like Bill Clinton, however his orders were carried out. I did my part, and this is not about bush, it is about protecting a sitting president.

Maybe not on the shoe throwing.

[Nederland]

90. I don't think you get it

There is a process for determining whether or not a president is guilty of heinous crimes. Believe it or not, that process is NOT defined as "A president is guilty of heinous crimes when wtmusic thinks he is guilty of heinous crimes."

[wtmusic]

91. And sometimes that process is broken.

So you either sit around with your finger up your ass, or you do something about it.

[Nederland]

92. What about the process is broken?

Articles of Impeachment were introduced and the House voted on them. You're just pissed off that members didn't vote the way you wanted them to. What are you going to do, mount a revolution every time Congress votes in a manner you don't approve of?

[wtmusic]

94. When one million people are dead for no good reason

and there is no punishment to the offenders, the process is broken.

If you can't see that, I can't explain it to you.

[Nederland]

98. You are not explaining why the process is broken

You are complaining about the outcome. I'm sorry, but no process can ever guarantee outcomes that you'll always like. That's called reality--if you don't like it, leave it.

[wtmusic]

101. "Liking" an outcome and recognizing a disastrous, tragic outcome

are two wholly different things. Reality? That's a shoe flying through the air in an act of desperation, a reaction to a tragedy which you are apparently incapable of recognizing.

So keep bopping along in your little bubble where W shits rainbows and one and one add up to zero. I'm done.

[Nederland]

116. You don't get it

Believe it or not, millions of people are rather happy with the outcome and don't regard it as tragic at all. You act as if what has happened is objectively horrible. It is not.

[arcadian]

35. If somebody took Bush into custody.

And they had to go THROUGH the Secret Service, I'd have absolutely no problem with that.

[Pavulon]

43. You mean killed

you realize even if you are sitting in an internet cafe in midtown you are just as private as posting this from you home connection. Some of these posts get really close to the line.

The only way "custody" can be taken is by leo after a president is impeached and convicted. Power would be transitioned.

Anything else would be a crime and result in deaths.

[arcadian]

51. I'm sure you are contacting Homeland Security as I type this.

Collaborators come in many forms.

[Pavulon]

53. So do morons.

advocating murder is insane. Your post is insane. There is a vast difference in disliking an administration and advocating the overthrow of an administration.

The country is not the president. I have a firm belief in the laws and structure laid out in american government.

I am sure the DHS has plenty to do without internet ranting. No worries.

[arcadian]

64. You are nothing but a fear-monger.

You tried to use fear in your post above (internet cafes). Not only are you a Bush apologist, but you have taken up using their tactics. And this is your keyboard cause celebre, defending Bush. Wonderful for you.

[Pavulon]

71. Fuck you, poster is disussing a crime

so rather than egg him on I told him he is not anonymous here or anywhere on the net. You can discuss some topics, even on the internet. Ever hosted a site, ever been served with a lawful warrant to disclose ip logs?

I know a discussion that can bring guys in tacky suits to my house when I see one, and avoid I it. How do you get past the secret service? Ask real nice? get real.

And did I say fuck you for calling me a bush supporter. moron.

[arcadian]

74. Easy there, champ.

Better cut back on the caffeine there, chooch.

[Pavulon]

76. Slinging shit gets a response

you are sitting around talking about getting through secret service and dont expect to be called out? really?

Grow up and get real.

The amount of crackhead logic on one thread is impressive.

[arcadian]

78. Keep digging, Bush apologist.

Keyboard commando! :rofl:

[Pavulon]

80. school is out, no home room to keep you busy.

Have you made that citizens arrest yet. you can mapquest your way to the white house.

[Zodiak]

115. Correction...authoritarian

These are classical authoritarian arguments, and in no place will an authoritarian and a non-authoritarian agree on this issue...dissent, and what is considered acceptable in the pursuit of dissent.

Authoritarians do not dissent except by the proscribed methods, and they typically look down on dissent anyways. Anything out of the box is worthy of swift punishment. Notice how there is the constant reminder that violence could have been used on the shoe-thrower? Violence is only acceptable by authorities to an authoritarian, and if someone receives this violence, they deserved it. Revolution is out of the question.

There is also a smattering of insults to your intelligence and attempts to infantilize you...also authoritarian modes of argumentation.

[Pavulon]

120. Define THROUGH the Secret Service (an authority)

can you tell me how to do that without violence or criminal act? Only one legal way, impeachment and president cheney is in power. you meant that right? Any other way would mean killing people.

Call all the names you like. You posted it. If thinking that is fucked up makes me authoritarian then so be it.

[pipi_k]

100. Wow..I don't see anywhere

in any of your replies where you admit or acknowledge that George W Bush was NOT honestly elected, even though the point has been made a number of times. That makes him NOT the POTUS, and undeserving of any of the usual "respect" such a person would be given.


He is NOT "The President". Except to the morons who voted for him the first time because he looked like someone they'd like to have a few beers with and voted for the second time by morons who were scared into thinking that the country would be overrun by swarthy "terrists" unless he was there to "protect" us. Even that time he needed a bit of help from voting machine fraud, but whatever.

See it any way you want to...if you think he was elected by honest and legal means, and you think he's the honest and legitimate "President", then bully for you.

Have any opinion on that you want to, but please don't sit on your high horse and look down with contempt on those of us who do NOT believe he has any right to respect that goes along with being POTUS because we do NOT believe he was rightfully elected by the American people.

[Pavulon]

106. Explain that to the SS

when you make your citizens arrest. Right before they arrest and mock you as an idiot, at best. He is a the POTUS, a really terrible one.

You can argue the fake moon landing but it means the same, dick. He is not impeached nor is there ANY legal challenge to his holding the office. You have to present proof and have it accepted into evidence to make the stuff you assert become reality.

He is the president in the eyes of the US Government.

[wtmusic]

17. Aristocracy worship is so like 19th century. nt

[Pithlet]

38. Can you not understand how a person can be driven to the brink

by the torture and the murder experienced by the people they care about. For the love of everything that as ever mattered on this god forsaken planet, can you people who are making that stupid argument try to see things from his perspective? For at least a second? You can't just go throwing shit at national leaders. Right. Fucking duh. That's easy to say when you HAVEN'T BEEN FUCKING TORTURED. Yes, he shouldn't have done it. But it's completely understandable that he did it. You can't see that? Really? You can't see that what Bush has done is a whole lot worse? They were shoes. Get over it. I'm a whole lot more outraged over the fact that a few of you are offended that he did this. I think that's despicable. How can you look at man who has been through what he has, and judge him for that. Honestly.

Of course none of us want to see the same thing happen to Obama. But as far as we know, Obama hasn't tortured anyone, and doesn't plan on doing so. You cannot compare him to Bush. He hasn't even served, yet.

[wuushew]

60. Throwing shit at Bush is part of the Iraqi healing process

Without that pressure release valve more deaths will undoubtedly occur. Is Bush's life more valuable then anybody else's? The government will not fall apart if something happens to Bush. It is not possible to make martyr out of Bush in his last 35 days.

You claim the SS dropped the ball, but there is no reason Bush had to be in Iraq in the first place. Malaki could have come to Washington or conversed via teleconference.


It is inconsistent to seek maximum physical protection via bodyguards while also voluntarily site seeing an active war zone for most of your term. Doesn't that seem like a massive hypocrisy?



This shoe incident is the best of all possible outcomes for American interests.

[wtmusic]

95. If W keeps al-Zaidi in jail it could have bad outcomes for US soldiers

But like all despots, W is incapable of forgiveness.

[malaise]

87. Rubbish

If more leaders knew they can't get away with murder, genocide, violating the constitution, maybe they'd follow the law. That was one great symbolic act on behalf on an entire planet. Fuck Bush! He is no leader -he's a war criminal.

Guess you'd have defended Hitler the same way. As long as it's OK to illegally invade and occupy countries, to kill and maim innocent civilians, it's OK to pelt leaders with shoes.

[Pavulon]

114. Hitller time on this thread

when the point that it is really fucking stupid to throw something at a guy in a warzone who is surrounded with heavily armed men. That act endangers other people, bullets tend to go through people.

It is not acceptable that a person got that close to ANY PRESIDENT, including bush, and did that.

Would hitler drive a Prius or Jetta diesel? I bet on jetta.

[Dr.Phool]

88. Sure you can.

In January of 1973, I was with a bunch of Yippies at Nixswines second coronation. Our Madison, Wisconsin chapter brought down over 10,000 dead laboratory rats. Guess where they wound up?

And, if I remember correctly, wasn't chimpolini egged pretty good at his first coronation?

[tomp]

104. yes, you can. it is totally acceptable.

your arguments are preposterously bad.

[Career Prole]

137. Throwing shit at him?

Now there's some symbolism that wouldn't require a bunch of explanation after the fact.

[tomp]

103. do i have to choose just one to hang? nt

[riqster]

8. I do respect the office. But Bush is not a legitimate occupant thereof. nt

[Pavulon]

11. Please.

and barack's birth certificate is a forgery, right?

The man is the president and is afforded physical protection while in office. They guy was doing fine until he threw his shoes.

I respect the guy in lower right of frame, with the wtf expression, he is the going to be hit with sub machine gun fire too if an agent had reacted to that incident as a weapon.

[riqster]

47. Bush assumed power by unconstitutional means

Ignore it all you want, like lots of American Lemmings (buryourheadsinthesandsus ) but that's the law. No matter how many people call Bush 'President', he has never truly been one. And foreigners know it better than most 'Murcans.

[Pavulon]

50. Great, we have a con law finding

there is a process here and in every other first world democracy to deal with illegal acts in office.

Proof is required. Not opinion, or feelings.

There is a process in place that has not been initiated. Very simple.

[riqster]

62. The fact that the Criminal has not been brought to Justice

..does not mean that he is not a Criminal. By your logic, a pedophiliac who has not been caught yet is not molesting children; that bank robber who has not yet been arrested is not robbing banks. Specious and sophomoric reasoning.

I suggest you research the actual law for deciding between different slates of electors, noting that the Supreme Court may not step in unless the U.S. Congress is unable to make a decision . That is why Bush's occupation of the White House is illegal, because the Supremes stepped in and usurped the authority of the Legislative Branch. Blatantly unconstitutional, and they tacitly acknowledged the fact by noting that Bush V Gore was not a precedential ruling.

The law goes back to 1884, by the bye, and was written to address another disputed election and ensure that that the people knew that their Executive was in fact elected to that office in a fair and legal manner.

This is a nation of laws (whether we obey them or not), not men.

[Pavulon]

73. Well now that you have clearead that up I have a bridge to sell you

get real. The man is the president, a very bad one. The congress can impeach him. Thats it, those are the legal options.

You can not charge a person as a criminal until you have PROOF that meets a basic standard in any given venue. 101 shit.

A person is not a criminal by opinion, they are a criminal by conviction.

The law is clear here. The law and the office are more important than the occupier of the office.

[riqster]

77. He is not the legitimate occupant of the office. By law.

He is NOT the president. That's the law. I see you are determined to ignore this crucial issue, like many other stupid-fuck American Lemmings. Enjoy your blinkered ignorance.

[Pavulon]

81. Sounds like grounds for impeachment, or legal review by scotus

he is the president. Your position is not supported by case law, or by any branch of the government. Including the one that could do something, like impeach him. It is just plain nuts.

That is some bullfrog with wings bullshit.

He will serve out his term as a shitty president, that makes me a realist.

[riqster]

82. It makes you someone who never bothered to check the law

...on presidential elections. Willfully ignorant is what you are. Enjoy.

[Pavulon]

84. Well I am sure your position is accepted

by those in congress and the judicial branch. I expect to see swift action.

Is there even a case in the system that is testing this?

[Nederland]

93. That's not "the law"

That's your opinion of what the law says. Big difference.

[riqster]

141. Nope. Go look it up. Dates to 1884 and lays out the process

...for dealing with disputed slates of electors.You might also look back to the discussions that took place in the legal community during the aftermath of the 2000 election.

The amazing thing is, had the Bushistas simply waited and followed the process laid out in the law rather than short-circuit it, the outcome would have been the same: Bush in the White House, courtesy of the Reep-dominated legislatures involved. That would have been constitutional, if not completely clean or palatable.

As with Watergate, 'they could have won it clean, but they had to win it dirty'.

(edited to clarify the second sentence)

[Creationismsucks]

13. That's a funny response

I actually can't tell whether you're being sarcastic or not.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Pavulon]

29. To what point?

shoes, bricks, rifle round?

The SAME SYSTEM that gave bush authority gives obama authority.

What defines war criminal, you alone, a poll here, general consensus. Did you really think this through?

Speaking truth to power is not the same as physical action.

[JackRiddler]

59. It's not the Iraqi's system, is it now?

He reacted to a foreign invader and destroyer of his nation.

[MarianJack]

20. I Half agree with you.

I'm concerned that something was thrown at the PRESIDENT.

For bush personally, I couldn't give 3/10 of a rat fuck. I will be overjoyed when he goes back to the pig farm and pickles his liver and snorts a mountain of cocaine into his nose.

If there is a threat to President Obama I certainly hope the Secret Service reacts a bit faster.

PEACE!

[Pavulon]

32. Agree 100%

this is not a bush thing, this is a sitting president thing. This is a massive SS screwup and there is no room for that.

[Mari333]

25. If Obama starts a 'war' that causes 4000 plus soldiers

and hundreds of thousands of people to be killed for nothing, he deserves to have a shoe thrown at him also.

[SammyWinstonJack]

27. Agree!

[Pavulon]

30. A US Army (WHAT) is deploying to Afghanistan?

thats right alex, a us army division. That is around 20,000 people. The ARMY fights wars by killing people.

You cant go around throwing shit, this is not kindergarten. There are legal processes to address politicians.

[muriel_volestrangler]

37. There's no legal process for an Iraqi to address the US president

The US president ordered an illegal invasion of his country, and has caused the place to be a hellhole since. The journalist has suffered personally. He can't write to his congressmasn to ask for impeachment, nor could he have voted against Bush.

He could have written to Bush, I suppose, but do you suppose Bush would have even seen the letter? Somehow, I think the email I sent to Dick Cheney saying "fuck you, too" didn't get beyond his staffer, if it wasn't stopped by a spam filter first (I guess Cheney gets a tone of mail saying 'fuck you', especially when he says it to senators).

[Pavulon]

55. It is not about that guy

or the guy who rolled a frag grenade in ukraine. It as about safety for the sitting president.

I agree with everything you posted though about the war.

[muriel_volestrangler]

69. This isn't about the guy who threw the shoe?

I think you'll find it is. That's why he's mentioned in the title of the thread.

[Pavulon]

75. Give it 6 months

this will not be funny. People throwing shit at heads of state is dangerous and not a great thing. Just because I dislike bush does not mean his safety should be compromised.

[muriel_volestrangler]

79. It's not about comedy; it's about a symbolic gesture

The OP says nothing about whether it's funny or not. It's the equivalent of an American reporter standing up at a press conference and shouting "good riddance, you murdering motherfucker". I highly doubt the shoes would have caused any significant injury, even if Bush had stayed absolutely still.

[Pavulon]

83. Oh it is funny, since no one got hurt

if someone had popped him with an mp5 and hit two or three others in the process it would not have been to funny.

People dont need to go around throwing shoes at heads of state. Even though it really is funny now.

[muriel_volestrangler]

99. Sorry, I thought you were criticising others for finding it funny

If you're just saying you think it's funny now, but won't soon, then OK. :shrug:

[Pavulon]

111. That is how the situation would be percieved in 6 month

some guy throws something at brack obama in Afghanistan, and no one dies or is injured. Will it be funny?

I am criticize those who thing throwing shit like a primate or kindergartner is acceptable action.

The office deserves more respect and protection.

[awoke_in_2003]

61. "Respect the office"

I will once again respect the office of President when we get a president that actually respects the office (and constitution). When the Unitary Executive is abolished (I suspect that will occur Jan 20th) respect will return.

[ZombieHorde]

86. Respect the office. - The office is an illusion. There is nothing to respect.

If an agent had reacted to that as a weapon and shot at the guy (which would hit people around him) would it be funny then?

Does anyone fart during your fake scenario? If the fart was loud enough, then even the people who were shot, (oh fuck it, lets go with children and kittens) then even the children and kittens who were shot, would share a hearty laugh.

[chrisa]

89. Respect the Office?

You mean like warrantless wiretapping, saying that the Constitution is just a piece of paper, and allowing mercenaries to run around in New Orleans, while taking weeks to get help there?

The people on DU are only giving Bush Co. the respect that they gave America in the last 8 years.

[northofdenali]

108. Straw man argument there, you betcha.

No comparison. BUSH doesn't respect the office, why should we respect him? And, if Barack screws up badly enough to warrant shoe throwing tactics, by all that's holy, I'll respect the tosser there, too. Not that I expect he will.

I'd like to extend a formal invitation to Mr. al Zaidi to visit us here in the Great Land. I know where Sarah will be giving public speeches......... and I have extra shoes.

[Pavulon]

117. Not throwing shit is not respect

that is not acting like a feces throwing monkey. He had me right up to where he made a violent move towards a sitting president. If I find myself in disagreement with barack's policy to escalate in afganistan I think I can restrain myself and keep my shoes on.

There are plenty of ways to make a point without increasing the chance somebody standing behind you is injured when you are shot to death for being really stupid.

Jesus, I can not understand how this is acceptable to people.

[northofdenali]

123. It, to me, was a justifiable protest against an

unelected pResident and his misAdministration, all of whom are war criminals and will be proven such.

If my President, Barack Obama, becomes a lying, thieving, misbegotten son and grandson of a war criminal, starts a preemptive war against a country that had nothing to do with an attack on our soil, eliminates a major part of our Constitution, and laughs about it -

YOU ARE FUCKING RIGHT I'D THROW SHOES.

Your argument based on respect for the Office of the President is illegitimate. It was an act of protest and disrespect against the man, not the office - the man who continues to lie to an occupied, bombed-out, starving, infrastructure-less country whose misery BUSH caused in OUR NAME.

As a not-elected (but selected) pResident, he has NO claim to the respect shown for the office. I had more respect for Johnson and Nixon during Viet Nam - and yeah, bro, I was on the front lines of protests there, too, as well as supporting the number of young men I knew who came home with PTSD and maimed, and those who died there.

Neither Johnson nor Nixon laughed about that war, and neither did they start it preemptively. I have more respect for GHWB - Iraq attacked an ally, Kuwait, and GHWB ended it quickly and with minimal damage (as modern warfare goes) to either country done by US.

I may have given a boost to GWB had he invaded Saudi Arabia; instead he holds hands with them.

I reiterate that your "respect for the Office" is a straw man in this dogfight.

I didn't start the shitstorm, friend, but we are all entitled to our opinion and have the right to share it here. Being disrespectful to or of those whose opinions differ from yours is not the way.




Edited to add: I stepped in it big time on this one, but dammit, my cat told me to! :rant::hide:

[Pavulon]

127. Protest is great, nonviolent disobedience

great. Lining a parade route with rats, cool. I dont to watch brarack ducking shit thrown at him. That was a security mess and someone will probably loose a job over it.

I like the law, it is a good thing. So when bush is convicted and his presidency stripped (dont know what happens after he leaves office) that will be interesting.

But it is speculation and feeling, as well as factually incorrect to say the man is not the president. The law is based on due process, even for assholes.

I get the feeling some did not listen during the debates and stumps, we are onramping 20,000 soldiers to Afghanistan, we are in Iraq until sofa expires. That is a minimum.

I disagree with that policy, but I will keep my shoes on...

[Laelth]

109. A shoe is not dangerous.

Are reporters going to be required to attend press conferences nude from now on? Come on! You can't stop bra-throwers, belt-throwers, bikini-bottom-throwers, or shoe throwers. We live in enough of a police state as is without having shoes listed as deadly weapons.

-Laelth

[Pavulon]

113. The ACT of throwing it

at the POTUS in a warzone is. Luckily someone did not jump and light that guy up. There by injuring or killing those who are not stupid enough to throw something in a highly secured area.

It is not acceptable behavior towards any head of state. A violent response could be set off.

[Laelth]

121. Seriously, now. I hear your concern, but what do you want to do about it?

All naked journalists? That's the only way to fix the problem you describe.

:shrug:

Perhaps a shoe isn't that dangerous after all.

The United States is a LIBERAL Country.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Pavulon]

124. This has become an INSANE topic

hopefully the poor guy does not get some draconian punishment.

My point is that it is not acceptable for people to throw stuff at the president. That means people who dont like bush, and the people who will not like obama. It is a security issue.

It is just wrong in my eyes. You cant do it in kindergarten and it is not acceptable now.

All the shoe guy is jesus people freak me out. I hate bush but some of the content on this topic is nuts.

[Laelth]

128. Please hear me, OK?

Let's just assume that I agree with you that it's not OK to throw stuff at people, period, regardless of who they are. I'm a lawyer. I agree with that statement in principle. It's not OK to throw stuff at people. It's rude. It's an assault (possibly, if the victim has a real fear of a harmful or offensive contact).

But the only question I have for you is ... what are you willing to do about it? Please answer that question. The only solution I see is to strip naked every person who gets near the President, and that's clearly ridiculous. This reporter was checked many times, I'd bet, for any dangerous weapons, bombs, or anything else that could injure the President. What more do you want us to do?

:shrug:

The United States is a LIBERAL Country.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Pavulon]

130. Nothing you can do really..

I am spinning wheels trying to defend due process and right to jury trial.

It is funny only because nothing bad happened. Do hope the guy is not injured in custody.

[Laelth]

131. Fair enough.

I too hope the guy is not injured, but I bet he had a pretty good idea of what the probable consequences of his actions would be. Looks like he was willing to take the risk.

Was it wise? No. Was it a calculated risk to make a powerful, global statement ... perhaps. If so, it worked brilliantly. Was it also dangerous to others? Yes. I don't deny that, but, as you concede, there is nothing that anyone could have reasonably done to stop it.

Now, let's have a beer. We agree much more than we disagree, it seems to me. :toast:

The United States is a LIBERAL Country.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Pavulon]

132. Agree.

I think he is really related to or under the employ of John Stewart..

Kidding.


cheers.

[Greyskye]

118. If Obama causes as much damage to the world as Shrub has...

...I'll throw the first shoe.

I somehow don't think that I'll be feeling the urge, though.

[Pavulon]

125. Someone will, and they should keep their shoes ON

this turned out to be harmless and funny. It could have been a mess.

[Canuckistanian]

136. Sorry, I've heard that "respect the office" argument too many times

Respect for "the office" has to be EARNED. Even AFTER an election.

I never respected Nixon, Reagan or Bush the Smarter as some kind of abstract symbols of America.

They were aberrations, departures, twisted parodies of America.

But NONE were worse than the present infester of the White House.

[pacalo]

138. If Obama lied to get this country into war against a small, sovereign country,

causing hundreds of thousands of American & Iraqi lives -- & depleting our national treasury -- then Obama would deserve the shoe hurls. Until then, Obama has earned respect.

And about that person in the OP's picture, it's the endangerment itself that exudes heroism. To stand up for right against unsurmountable odds takes tremendous courage.

[zorahopkins]

3. And You Knouu They Also Hate

And you just knouu that they also just hate Helen Thomas.

They cannot stand anyone uuho doesn't uuorship at the feet of the Idiot Son.

Note: In protest of the continuing occupation of OUR Uuhite House by the illegal and totally corrupt Bush/Cheney regime of thugs and cronies, I REFUSE to use the letter betuueen "V" and "X". Instead, I use a "double u", as in "Uuhite House".

[mrreowwr_kittty]

4. Does anyone here hate the shoe thrower? nt

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

6. A handful of concern trolls are pretending it wasn't funny or justified.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

10. I think it's justified but I don't think it's funny.

Do I have to think it's funny?

[arcadian]

7. Some are calling his actions deplorable.

n/t

[tomp]

107. i salute him...courageous man! nt

[stray cat]

14. No - but some are not sure it was the most productive journalistic move

and would hate to see someone do it to Obama like a white supremacist in the name of free speech

[spiritual_gunfighter]

22. I hate the people that hate the shoe thrower n/t

[el_bryanto]

18. Hate vs. disagree with

I don't hate the guy; i'm impressed with his courage. I'm just not sure this was the best course of action.

Bryant

[wuushew]

19. I really can't think of a more effective symbol to communicate to Bush

the man is dumb as a rock and wouldn't understand anything else. What would be a better course of action? A sternly worded letter to the editor?

Destroying his legacy is a valid goal. He is a despicable man.

[arcadian]

21. Well, while you are weighing your options.

Some people are taking a stand.

[el_bryanto]

23. Bully for them.

To thine own self be true, as the saying goes.

Bryant

[Orsino]

33. As with the shoe, I think one has to duck pretty vigorously...

...to miss the point.

[BurtWorm]

41. With all due respect, this doesn't seem like an apt comparison.

The Tiananmen Square demonstrator used nonviolent means to symbolically stop state violence. He even succeeded briefly.

Zaidi's action wasn't intended to stop violence. It was an act of anger toward the instigator of violence.

If you want to analyze it further, you could say that the Tiananmen demonstrator exhibited real power over those tanks. Very impressive courage and poise. Zaidi on the other hand expressed his anger very quickly, missed his mark, wound up on the floor in no time. It took courage to do what he did certainly, but what did he achieve exactly, besides giving a lot of people who hate Bush something to chuckle over? Not the same thing as the Tianenmen guy.

On the other hand, he did inspire a whole lot of Shiites to chuck shoes at American GIs today. Of course their demonstration was to get Zaidi out of jail, and I doubt that will work. But maybe it will spark a real revolution? Who knows?

You're still left comparing an act of nonviolent defiance and a brilliant exercise of people power with an act of bluntly articulate rage with dubious pay-off. I greatly admire Tiananman guy. I don't admire Zaidi, exactly. I sympathise with him.

[LoZoccolo]

45. That's not a symbolic gesture.

That's the guy blocking the tanks from doing what they were gonna do.

[arcadian]

54. symbolic

because we all know that he really didn't stop the tanks and as soon as he was removed the tanks did what they going to do anyway.

[riverdeep]

56. If after all Bush has done while in office

is get a couple of shoes thrown at him, and that's probably all that will happen to him, then he should consider himself lucky. The man and his cohorts thoroughly gutted one of the great nations of the world.

I'm surprised by the outrage that people have shown to Blago, and rightly so, yet are so blase when it comes to Bush, who has done ten times worse on a far greater scale.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

65. The man threw a dirty, dogshit-encrusted shoe at the leader of the free world.

He's my goddamn hero. Where do I donate to the legal defense fund?

[wtmusic]

97. Was there really dogshit on it?

Please say yes.

[PVnRT]

67. Wow, that's like apples and intake manifolds

Not even remotely related.

[wtmusic]

96. Defiance comes in many colors. nt

[fascisthunter]

102. NICE

:thumbsup:

[Gregorian]

105. The only ones braking were in the tanks.

Sorry.

:)

[DonEBrook]

110. Fail.

Miserably.

[newtothegame]

112. I don't think it's that they don't get it...

I think it's that they don't care and see symbolism as pointless.

Repugs are idiots.

[Dukkha]

119. If you oppose the shoe thrower you support Bush. period.

There no way to spin out of it so deal with your guilt assholes. You don't belong here.

[Pavulon]

122. Binary stupidity

no gray, no second look at something. Just your way or the highway.

[Dukkha]

126. Whatever Bush apologist

deal with it. you support a war criminal.

[Pavulon]

129. I support the law, and due fucking process

which means EVERY American gets a trial before conviction, even pricks and assholes get due process. I think it is bad for an american president to be ducking shit. Obama or Bush should end their terms alive.

Just because you THINK he committed crimes does not make a conviction or sentence. That is the law and why people hate the aclu. Everyone gets due process.

Reality exists even for those who choose not to participate.

[muriel_volestrangler]

139. Stop being so self-righteous about the letter of the legal and penal process

This is just DU; it's not like someone here saying "Bush is a war criminal" is the official conclusion, and will result in someone putting the handcuffs on him today and throwing him in prison forever. It's their opinion that he has committed war crimes; and it's an opinion with a lot to back it up (eg several people knowledgeable in international law have concluded the invasion of Iraq was illegal, and therefore a war crime).

By harping on about 'reality', you are making yourself look like someone who wants to make excuses for Bush. I'm sure you don't, really; but your zeal for "no-one can call anyone a criminal until they've been convicted" makes you seem self-righteous, and implies that we are all deluded, while you have some magic 'clear vision'.

[slackmaster]

142. That's a really fucking stupid thing to say

I oppose both Bush and the shoe thrower. I have no guilt about it, I don't owe you any spin, and you have no business saying who belongs here and who doesn't.

[MellowDem]

133. If that guy threw a shoe at Mao...

he'd have been lit up like a Christmas tree. Now there's a good analogy! Also, the symbolic gesture of that man standing up to tanks is much greater than that of a journalist throwing shoes at Bush. It brings him down to Bush's level if you ask me. The man is responding to violence with violence. Always defuses the message. All he had was hate of Bush. The symbolism in that picture stands for something positive. Nothing is better than using love to stop violence. Using hate is petty and nothing new.

And the journalist was off target, both symbolically and literally. He was tortured by people he doesn't know and blames it all on Bush? There are many Iraqi widows and orphans due to the US, but mostly due to fellow Iraqis slaughtering each other wholesale. He's missing the bigger picture for the lazy convenience of having someone to hate, some tangible person. He isn't throwing shoes at the crazy shit that is Shiite and Sunni civil war? Or the foreign insurgents who blow up themselves and countless civilians every day? He's confused alright. As many on the left have made the mistake of doing, you can't put all the blame on Bush. Hell, Bush himself is just a front for a whole host of shitty ideas, none of which are his own. He is just the puppet. It's like throwing shoes at the President of Iran. It's the system he represents that is what we are up against. So resorting to a two minute hate of Bush and lumping everything bad that happens on him is convenient, but it also causes us to ignore the real issues behind the problems, the system that Bush represents.

I think if the journalist had simply just stood up and waved the soles of his shoes at Bush, the message would have been just as clear, but more effective.

[lonestarnot]

140. K & R!