Bush Bashing to the Extreme

[gemini 0]

Is this guy really implying that assassination of a President is preferable to reelection?


Charlie Brooker
The Guardian
10-23-2004

"...Throughout the debate, John Kerry, for his part, looks and sounds a bit like a haunted tree. But at least he's not a lying, sniggering, drink-driving, selfish, reckless, ignorant, dangerous, backward, drooling, twitching, blinking, mouse-faced little cheat. And besides, in a fight between a tree and a bush, I know who I'd favour.

On November 2, the entire civilised world will be praying, praying Bush loses. And Sod's law dictates he'll probably win, thereby disproving the existence of God once and for all. The world will endure four more years of idiocy, arrogance and unwarranted bloodshed, with no benevolent deity to watch over and save us. John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr - where are you now that we need you?"

Blue skies,

Jim

[Jimbo 0]

Sheesh - that's a little over the top.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[sundevil777 102]

Whoa, where's the outrage?

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

Whoa, where's the outrage?

You're kidding, I know.

Democrats have no sense of morals when it comes to winning. They're scorched-earth all the way, baby. And they are the epitome of hypocrisy when it comes to their so-called "compassion." Wishing for assassinations is just one example of their cynical hate-filled rage at not being able to run the show. They crave power, and are worse about the means they'll use to get it than a crack-addict is about how he gets his rock.

The funny, fucked-up thing is that they are the only ones blind to their own hypocrisy. To them, they're doing/saying nothing wrong. To everyone else, they are pitiful lying hypocrites.

-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[quade 4]

Got URL?

It'll be "interesting" to see how the Secret Service deals with this.

And I'm going to go out on a limb here and risk being called a flip-flopper (in light of my views on EO 12333), but think it's out of line.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[gemini 0]

I pulled it off Saturday's drudge report. I also wondered if the Secret Service would be interested in the comment.

Blue skies,

Jim

[likearock 2]

Quote

Got URL?

http://www.nbr.co.nz/home/column_article.asp?id=10544&cid=1&cname=Media

Quote

It'll be "interesting" to see how the Secret Service deals with this.

And I'm going to go out on a limb here and risk being called a flip-flopper (in light of my views on EO 12333), but think it's out of line.

Not only out of line but stupid as well. Does that guy really prefer a pissed off Cheney over Bush?

Wayne

[wmw999 2,575]

Quote

Democrats have no sense of morals when it comes to winning. They're scorched-earth all the way, baby.

Jeffrey, I realize that I'll probably get banned for this, but shut up and quit with the generalizations. It's vicious and mean. Did it ever occur to you that you turn more people into hard-lined opponents with that kind of talk? If I'm either with you or against you, well, frankly, I'd rather be against your kind.

I find that statement "where's Hinckley, etc) to be appalling. I'm sure it's just empty rhetoric, but, well, it's stupid empty rhetoric, and I hope he pays wiht being surveilled and hassled. He didn't do anything illegal, so he can't go to jail this time for being against GWB.

I plan on voting for several Democrats this election, and I'm sick and tired of the vicious generalizations that come out. If you'd talk to some liberals, you might find that they're not all evil incarnate. Of course, you probably realize that, but, well, you can't be bothered to note that you're characterizing as "Democrat-like" the behavior of radical outliers. It'd be like me categorizing the people who assassinate gynecologists as being examples of all Republicans.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

Quote

Democrats have no sense of morals when it comes to winning.

Bwahahahah!!! Now this one was funny!!!!

Sorry there Jeff, but greed and desire for power knows no boundaries. And most (but not all)politicians seem to desire both. As it has been demonstrated quite a few times this election, neither side has any true morals.

BTW - the article was way out of line and disgusting. ALL human life should be allowed to live out a natural progression and NO ONE is important enough to make that decision. I don't care if the person isn't liked - they still have the right to live.

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[Hazarrd 1]

im pretty sure assassination would be better than reelection

.-.

[TheAnvil 0]

You shouldn't be banned for that Wendy. You made no personal attack. Then again, I got banned for not making any personal attack either. However, since you're not TheAnvil, you probably won't get banned even if you DO make a personal attack or two because a) you're a cute & smart chick and b) you're not TheAnvil.

Not that I advocate you making any personal attacks or encourage you to do so. You're above such things and manage to get your point across without them.

Have a peachy Sunday evening.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[billvon 3,096]

>but shut up and quit with the generalizations.

The now-traditional one warning. You know better than that.

[quade 4]

And now . . . the corporate, public apology.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguide/tvradio/story/0,14676,1335307,00.html

Quote

The final sentence of a column in The Guide on Saturday caused offence to some readers. The Guardian associates itself with the following statement from the writer.

"Charlie Brooker apologises for any offence caused by his comments relating to President Bush in his TV column, Screen Burn. The views expressed in this column are not those of the Guardian. Although flippant and tasteless, his closing comments were intended as an ironic joke, not as a call to action - an intention he believed regular readers of his humorous column would understand. He deplores violence of any kind."

Yeah, sounded really non-violent to me.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Alienangel 0]

Well, I thought it sounded like a jokey comment even before the corporate apology. Then again I am a sick bastard.

I thought the references to God made it clear he was being humorous....I guess not. And a point of interest ...the Brit sense of humour is often perceived as sick/ cynical/ sarcastic, or close to the bone, as compared to the Septics'. Case in point?

[jerry81 10]

Quote

It'll be "interesting" to see how the Secret Service deals with this.

And I'm going to go out on a limb here and risk being called a flip-flopper (in light of my views on EO 12333), but think it's out of line.

Well, to me it seems like tasteless British humour. (No particular surprises there.)

But here's another funny story; three years ago, there was a minor affair with some guy who had, in a moment of drunken inspiration, sent a threatening email to GWB's address, just before he was actually supposed to come to Slovenia to meet with Putin. Something to the extent of; 'Dear mr president, save the Earth, you [something], don't come to [our capital], we're gonna fu*king kill you.' Upon sobering up, he realized what he had done and wanted to apologize, but his inbox already contained a form email from the White House thanking him for his message. Well, a few days later, the police came and got him. Seems that they received a copy of the email, along with satellite photos of his house and his address, from America. Saying it was only a drunken joke did not help. He was found guilty of attempting to endanger an 'internationally protected' person and sentenced to two years probation.

---

[nacmacfeegle 0]

Och Jim, anyone picking up the Grauniad in this country knows well in advance which side of the political divide their editorials tend to lean towards.
If this offends you, read the Telegraph.Bias in our written media is pretty well established, and taken for what it is.

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[wmw999 2,575]

I didn't pick up that it was a British paper. I believe that other countries are allowed their opinions. I can only imagine what the Iraqi (they used to be a sovereign nation) reaction was to our newspapers' announcing a decision to oust Saddam Hussein.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[nacmacfeegle 0]

"I didn't pick up that it was a British paper."
I did, I generally read it of a Saturday, and used to take it daily, no time these days, sigh.....That said, I also get the Telegraph (the Guardian's right wing rival) at least once a week to keep the balance, and also cos it has the best tech jobs ads each thursday.

"I believe that other countries are allowed their opinions."
So do I, and I believe I should tell others what they are.

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[kallend 2,137]

Quote

Och Jim, anyone picking up the Grauniad in this country knows well in advance which side of the political divide their editorials tend to lean towards.
If this offends you, read the Telegraph.Bias in our written media is pretty well established, and taken for what it is.

Grauniad - that takes me back 30 years... Does Private Eye still exist?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

You're kidding, I know.

Democrats have no sense of morals when it comes to winning. They're scorched-earth all the way, baby. And they are the epitome of hypocrisy when it comes to their so-called "compassion." Wishing for assassinations is just one example of their cynical hate-filled rage at not being able to run the show. They crave power, and are worse about the means they'll use to get it than a crack-addict is about how he gets his rock.

The funny, fucked-up thing is that they are the only ones blind to their own hypocrisy. To them, they're doing/saying nothing wrong. To everyone else, they are pitiful lying hypocrites.

So, when a Republican says or does something stupid, people can post this same garbage about all Republicans.

If Republicans are all as stupid as your comment, they could never lead a country.

[nacmacfeegle 0]

Yeah the Grauniad, I wondered if any of the cognoscenti might pick up on that.

Aye, Private Eye is still going strong, possibly stronger than ever as Ian Hislop (editor) is now a pretty regular face on TV, "Have I Got News For You" in particular.

http://www.private-eye.co.uk/

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[Zep 0]

line.

[RoadRash 0]

Quote

Quote

Democrats have no sense of morals when it comes to winning. They're scorched-earth all the way, baby.

Jeffrey, I realize that I'll probably get banned for this, but shut up and quit with the generalizations. It's vicious and mean. Did it ever occur to you that you turn more people into hard-lined opponents with that kind of talk? If I'm either with you or against you, well, frankly, I'd rather be against your kind.

I find that statement "where's Hinckley, etc) to be appalling. I'm sure it's just empty rhetoric, but, well, it's stupid empty rhetoric, and I hope he pays wiht being surveilled and hassled. He didn't do anything illegal, so he can't go to jail this time for being against GWB.

Just to play a little devil's advocate, but:

I plan on voting for several Republicans in this election, and I'm sick and tired of the vicious generalizations that come out. If you'd talk to some conservatives, you might find that they're not all evil incarnate. Of course, you probably realize that, but, well, you can't be bothered to note that you're characterizing as "Republican-like" the behavior of radical outliers. It'd be like me categorizing the people who assassinate people who have abortions as being examples of all Republicans.


There are two faces to every coin...And liberals on this forum are just as vicious and demeaning as conservatives...We tend to attack each other because of labels that have been either assumed or that we wear like name brand clothes...plastered to the fronts of our shirts...I personally find the bickering annoying...and would prefer that people keep to criticising policy as opposed to each other...


Just my $0.02...but who really gives a shit...


~R+R...S.O.S.

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Fly the friendly skies...^_^...})ii({...^_~...

[SpeedRacer 1]

holy crap who is this Brooker a*hole?? I don't like Bush, but this is ridiculous! How did this kind of crap actually get printed in a real newspaper?? Don't they have an editior, or what?

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[jerry81 10]

Quote

Well, to me it seems like tasteless British humour. (No particular surprises there.)


Hey don't knock the British sense of humour, Every civilised country on the face of this planet knows and agrees that it is the best
thier is.

I do apologize if my post implied that tasteless humour equals bad humour...it certainly does not.

---