What if?

13

Comments

  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,725
    Please, fix this irritating quote system.
  • tbergstbergs Posts: 2,450
    unsung said:
    Ugh, poor form Kathy. I feel for Trump's kid if he saw that.
    Supposedly he did, and was traumatized.  The left sure likes to harass this ten year old.
    Hard to believe anything from the biggest liar and bully there is. It might work with his base, but no one else buys his sob story. He's earned his shitty reputation and nothing is going to change that. Not even a stupid act life Griffin's. What she did is pretty harmless compared with what he has done and continues to do. The fact that people who support him are outraged by this is the biggest hypocrisy.
    It's a hopeless situation...
  • Gern BlanstenGern Blansten Your Mom'sPosts: 6,370
    yeah Trump talked about killing the families of terrorists, grabbing pussy, etc.  Give it a rest.
    Former BernieBro, turned Hillary rotten Clinton #1 Fanboy

    1998: Noblesville
    2003: Noblesville
    2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville
    2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Chicago
    2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 10,622
    unsung said:
    Please, fix this irritating quote system.
    it's really easy. if you find the cursor "trapped" in the previous person's quote, then just backpage and do it again. 
  • jeffbrjeffbr SeattlePosts: 5,448
    unsung said:
    Please, fix this irritating quote system.
    it's really easy. if you find the cursor "trapped" in the previous person's quote, then just backpage and do it again. 
    Yup. Or just click the </> formatting button to toggle HTML view and start typing after the '</blockquote>' tag.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 8,613
    Kat said:
    Kat said:
    Hopefully they would have received condemnation from everyone, no matter the political leanings. It was wrong and that's why she has apologized...more than certain presidents have done. I repeat myself here.
    This is so wrong. It's awful. Trump's tweet is pretty awful as well if he mentions his son being upset just to get attention and his son has never seen it (that's my thoughts, so it certainly might not be true). Everyone should be losing their shit over this. I'm not into the the whole "fire that person" etc crap that many seem to jump on whenever someone makes a mistake. But in this case, I do think she should be more accountable then just say "sorry". It's a legit threat against a sitting president. If other people's comments matter and they should be accountable for the idiots that mimic them or take it to the next level (and they should)....then she certainly should be held accountable as well. No - the motivation does matter some...so in my opinion a picture of a hanging Obama is still worse than this.
    In no way did I think an apology was enough. I knew it wouldn't end there and she'll be going through a lot because she made a very bad choice. One quote from the article by her made it obvious that she knew it was going to cause a huge uproar but she did it anyway. I think it's important to listen to our inner monologues and if you know it's going to upset people, why the hell do it? Something wrong there but at least she did apologize. That's an important thing in life too. Good to see you, Cincy.
    Hey to you to Kat.

    After thinking about it more, I wish we'd make this stuff more about the message then the person.  I don;t care if she gets fired, etc....I want people to all understand how awful it is.  And get rid of the stupid "it's art" argument.  That does not give you a license to do whatever you want.  So - I'm ok with her apology and wish it wouldn't impact her more as long as she is honest about her motivations for the apology.  1 stupid incident doesn't make a trend.  But I'm not ok with "art" that shows the murder of specific....still living people.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • Halifax2TheMaxHalifax2TheMax Posts: 8,206
    edited June 1
    unsung said:
    Classic unsung; activates the bomb and then gets the hell out of town before it blows up. 

    Kathy Griffin is disgusting. This was disgusting. No one on the credible left is applauding this. I've already wasted enough energy on this. 

    The classic unsung that has to work to support this pathetic State.  After yesterday I have had enough.
    Guess you weren't feeling nearly as full of faux outrage of having had enough when Sasha & Malia had to witness and experience all the vile hate directed at their father, a much more honorable and decent man than Trump will ever be. But being as it is that you fear elimination of the white race and repeatedly expose your racist biases, I'm not surprised. Poor you, working so hard to support this pathetic state. Join the club, you're not special.
    Post edited by Halifax2TheMax on
    09/15/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/29/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield, MA; 08/18/08, O2 London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL;

    Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.

    Brilliantati©
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 36,172
    unsung said:
    Ugh, poor form Kathy. I feel for Trump's kid if he saw that.
    Supposedly he did, and was traumatized.  The left sure likes to harass this ten year old.
    According to Trump, lol. So that statement is meaningless, obviously. I kind of just assumed Trump made that up.
    Nobody is harassing the ten year old.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • Gern BlanstenGern Blansten Your Mom'sPosts: 6,370
    edited June 1


    This was a 4th of July parade just a few miles up the road from me....happened a few years ago.  
    Former BernieBro, turned Hillary rotten Clinton #1 Fanboy

    1998: Noblesville
    2003: Noblesville
    2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville
    2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Chicago
    2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1
  • Gern BlanstenGern Blansten Your Mom'sPosts: 6,370


    I guess it was just last year....imagine that
    Former BernieBro, turned Hillary rotten Clinton #1 Fanboy

    1998: Noblesville
    2003: Noblesville
    2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
    2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville
    2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
    2013: London ON, Chicago
    2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
    2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 36,172


    This was a 4th of July parade just a few miles up the road from me....happened a few years ago.  
    In an Independence Day parade?!? That is seriously fucked up. What the hell kind of July 4th parade allows political things like that in it??
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • OnWis97OnWis97 St. Paul, MNPosts: 409
    edited June 1
    The difference is...stay with me...those people are going after Obama's race.  Therefore, you have to be OK with it lest you be an overly-sensitive PC crybaby. The Kathy Griffin thing is just plain crude and wrong; being outraged by that is OK.  But everyone outraged by the Obama stuff is just playing the race card.

    EDIT: No tone in this medium so please note the facetiousness.
    Post edited by OnWis97 on
    1995 Milwaukee
    1998 Alpine, Alpine
    2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston
    2004 Boston, Boston
    2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty)
    2011 Alpine, Alpine
    2013 Wrigley
    2014 St. Paul
    2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 36,172
    edited June 1
    OnWis97 said:
    The difference is...stay with me...those people are going after Obama's race.  Therefore, you have to be OK with it lest you be an overly-sensitive PC crybaby. The Kathy Griffin thing is just plain crude and wrong; being outraged by that is OK.  But everyone outraged by the Obama stuff is just playing the race card.
    I agree that the outwardly racist Obama stuff is a completely different animal than the Griffin photo shoot.
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • ledveddermanledvedderman Posts: 7,123
    @unsung are talking about the minimum wage bill that is on it's way to Rauner? I honestly haven't been following it because why would the governor sign it? It will go back to the GA for veto session but I don't know if it will have enough support to override. 
  • KatKat There's a lot to be said for nowhere.Posts: 3,068
    Kat said:
    Kat said:
    Hopefully they would have received condemnation from everyone, no matter the political leanings. It was wrong and that's why she has apologized...more than certain presidents have done. I repeat myself here.
    This is so wrong. It's awful. Trump's tweet is pretty awful as well if he mentions his son being upset just to get attention and his son has never seen it (that's my thoughts, so it certainly might not be true). Everyone should be losing their shit over this. I'm not into the the whole "fire that person" etc crap that many seem to jump on whenever someone makes a mistake. But in this case, I do think she should be more accountable then just say "sorry". It's a legit threat against a sitting president. If other people's comments matter and they should be accountable for the idiots that mimic them or take it to the next level (and they should)....then she certainly should be held accountable as well. No - the motivation does matter some...so in my opinion a picture of a hanging Obama is still worse than this.
    In no way did I think an apology was enough. I knew it wouldn't end there and she'll be going through a lot because she made a very bad choice. One quote from the article by her made it obvious that she knew it was going to cause a huge uproar but she did it anyway. I think it's important to listen to our inner monologues and if you know it's going to upset people, why the hell do it? Something wrong there but at least she did apologize. That's an important thing in life too. Good to see you, Cincy.
    Hey to you to Kat.

    After thinking about it more, I wish we'd make this stuff more about the message then the person.  I don;t care if she gets fired, etc....I want people to all understand how awful it is.  And get rid of the stupid "it's art" argument.  That does not give you a license to do whatever you want.  So - I'm ok with her apology and wish it wouldn't impact her more as long as she is honest about her motivations for the apology.  1 stupid incident doesn't make a trend.  But I'm not ok with "art" that shows the murder of specific....still living people.
    I'm with you and free speech means she can do what she did and I can say she crossed a line and I found it awful, even say that it was moronic. We seem to be in a national political mode of tit for tat and I don't see where it's going to end. We've had leaders, the world has had leaders, who bring people together and I think that's extremely important but I don't see anyone on the horizon who can get that done. :(


    "Well, as far as I know, music makes people happy. I know it makes me happy." -- Fats Domino
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,725
    @unsung are talking about the minimum wage bill that is on it's way to Rauner? I honestly haven't been following it because why would the governor sign it? It will go back to the GA for veto session but I don't know if it will have enough support to override. 
    That and the tax hike.
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 36,172
    Kat said:
    Kat said:
    Hopefully they would have received condemnation from everyone, no matter the political leanings. It was wrong and that's why she has apologized...more than certain presidents have done. I repeat myself here.
    This is so wrong. It's awful. Trump's tweet is pretty awful as well if he mentions his son being upset just to get attention and his son has never seen it (that's my thoughts, so it certainly might not be true). Everyone should be losing their shit over this. I'm not into the the whole "fire that person" etc crap that many seem to jump on whenever someone makes a mistake. But in this case, I do think she should be more accountable then just say "sorry". It's a legit threat against a sitting president. If other people's comments matter and they should be accountable for the idiots that mimic them or take it to the next level (and they should)....then she certainly should be held accountable as well. No - the motivation does matter some...so in my opinion a picture of a hanging Obama is still worse than this.
    In no way did I think an apology was enough. I knew it wouldn't end there and she'll be going through a lot because she made a very bad choice. One quote from the article by her made it obvious that she knew it was going to cause a huge uproar but she did it anyway. I think it's important to listen to our inner monologues and if you know it's going to upset people, why the hell do it? Something wrong there but at least she did apologize. That's an important thing in life too. Good to see you, Cincy.
    Hey to you to Kat.

    After thinking about it more, I wish we'd make this stuff more about the message then the person.  I don;t care if she gets fired, etc....I want people to all understand how awful it is.  And get rid of the stupid "it's art" argument.  That does not give you a license to do whatever you want.  So - I'm ok with her apology and wish it wouldn't impact her more as long as she is honest about her motivations for the apology.  1 stupid incident doesn't make a trend.  But I'm not ok with "art" that shows the murder of specific....still living people.
    How can you get rid of the "it's art" argument? Just because you're disgusted, that doesn't mean that argument isn't valid, or that that argument works on everything that offends people. I get that you're not okay with it (I also think it's stupid at best, and that Griffin did it makes it even more distasteful just because it's here), but that is actually completely irrelevant at all in the context of the freedom of expression argument. The "it's art" argument is completely valid where you like it or not.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 10,622
    PJ_Soul said:
    Kat said:
    Kat said:
    Hopefully they would have received condemnation from everyone, no matter the political leanings. It was wrong and that's why she has apologized...more than certain presidents have done. I repeat myself here.
    This is so wrong. It's awful. Trump's tweet is pretty awful as well if he mentions his son being upset just to get attention and his son has never seen it (that's my thoughts, so it certainly might not be true). Everyone should be losing their shit over this. I'm not into the the whole "fire that person" etc crap that many seem to jump on whenever someone makes a mistake. But in this case, I do think she should be more accountable then just say "sorry". It's a legit threat against a sitting president. If other people's comments matter and they should be accountable for the idiots that mimic them or take it to the next level (and they should)....then she certainly should be held accountable as well. No - the motivation does matter some...so in my opinion a picture of a hanging Obama is still worse than this.
    In no way did I think an apology was enough. I knew it wouldn't end there and she'll be going through a lot because she made a very bad choice. One quote from the article by her made it obvious that she knew it was going to cause a huge uproar but she did it anyway. I think it's important to listen to our inner monologues and if you know it's going to upset people, why the hell do it? Something wrong there but at least she did apologize. That's an important thing in life too. Good to see you, Cincy.
    Hey to you to Kat.

    After thinking about it more, I wish we'd make this stuff more about the message then the person.  I don;t care if she gets fired, etc....I want people to all understand how awful it is.  And get rid of the stupid "it's art" argument.  That does not give you a license to do whatever you want.  So - I'm ok with her apology and wish it wouldn't impact her more as long as she is honest about her motivations for the apology.  1 stupid incident doesn't make a trend.  But I'm not ok with "art" that shows the murder of specific....still living people.
    How can you get rid of the "it's art" argument? Just because you're disgusted, that doesn't mean that argument isn't valid, or that that argument works on everything that offends people. I get that you're not okay with it (I also think it's stupid at best, and that Griffin did it makes it even more distasteful just because it's here), but that is actually completely irrelevant at all in the context of the freedom of expression argument. The "it's art" argument is completely valid where you like it or not.
    I just think calling everything art is kinda lazy, and a very easy way of explaining away someone's distasteful actions. I don't consider it art if it's inciting hatred. 
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 36,172
    edited June 1
    PJ_Soul said:
    Kat said:
    Kat said:
    Hopefully they would have received condemnation from everyone, no matter the political leanings. It was wrong and that's why she has apologized...more than certain presidents have done. I repeat myself here.
    This is so wrong. It's awful. Trump's tweet is pretty awful as well if he mentions his son being upset just to get attention and his son has never seen it (that's my thoughts, so it certainly might not be true). Everyone should be losing their shit over this. I'm not into the the whole "fire that person" etc crap that many seem to jump on whenever someone makes a mistake. But in this case, I do think she should be more accountable then just say "sorry". It's a legit threat against a sitting president. If other people's comments matter and they should be accountable for the idiots that mimic them or take it to the next level (and they should)....then she certainly should be held accountable as well. No - the motivation does matter some...so in my opinion a picture of a hanging Obama is still worse than this.
    In no way did I think an apology was enough. I knew it wouldn't end there and she'll be going through a lot because she made a very bad choice. One quote from the article by her made it obvious that she knew it was going to cause a huge uproar but she did it anyway. I think it's important to listen to our inner monologues and if you know it's going to upset people, why the hell do it? Something wrong there but at least she did apologize. That's an important thing in life too. Good to see you, Cincy.
    Hey to you to Kat.

    After thinking about it more, I wish we'd make this stuff more about the message then the person.  I don;t care if she gets fired, etc....I want people to all understand how awful it is.  And get rid of the stupid "it's art" argument.  That does not give you a license to do whatever you want.  So - I'm ok with her apology and wish it wouldn't impact her more as long as she is honest about her motivations for the apology.  1 stupid incident doesn't make a trend.  But I'm not ok with "art" that shows the murder of specific....still living people.
    How can you get rid of the "it's art" argument? Just because you're disgusted, that doesn't mean that argument isn't valid, or that that argument works on everything that offends people. I get that you're not okay with it (I also think it's stupid at best, and that Griffin did it makes it even more distasteful just because it's here), but that is actually completely irrelevant at all in the context of the freedom of expression argument. The "it's art" argument is completely valid where you like it or not.
    I just think calling everything art is kinda lazy, and a very easy way of explaining away someone's distasteful actions. I don't consider it art if it's inciting hatred. 
    Who's calling everything art? I'm calling Griffin's photo shoot in particular art, not everything. Also, I don't think what she did incites hate at all. That is a very specific thing and has legal connotations, and that photo wasn't it.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 10,622
    PJ_Soul said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    Kat said:
    Kat said:
    Hopefully they would have received condemnation from everyone, no matter the political leanings. It was wrong and that's why she has apologized...more than certain presidents have done. I repeat myself here.
    This is so wrong. It's awful. Trump's tweet is pretty awful as well if he mentions his son being upset just to get attention and his son has never seen it (that's my thoughts, so it certainly might not be true). Everyone should be losing their shit over this. I'm not into the the whole "fire that person" etc crap that many seem to jump on whenever someone makes a mistake. But in this case, I do think she should be more accountable then just say "sorry". It's a legit threat against a sitting president. If other people's comments matter and they should be accountable for the idiots that mimic them or take it to the next level (and they should)....then she certainly should be held accountable as well. No - the motivation does matter some...so in my opinion a picture of a hanging Obama is still worse than this.
    In no way did I think an apology was enough. I knew it wouldn't end there and she'll be going through a lot because she made a very bad choice. One quote from the article by her made it obvious that she knew it was going to cause a huge uproar but she did it anyway. I think it's important to listen to our inner monologues and if you know it's going to upset people, why the hell do it? Something wrong there but at least she did apologize. That's an important thing in life too. Good to see you, Cincy.
    Hey to you to Kat.

    After thinking about it more, I wish we'd make this stuff more about the message then the person.  I don;t care if she gets fired, etc....I want people to all understand how awful it is.  And get rid of the stupid "it's art" argument.  That does not give you a license to do whatever you want.  So - I'm ok with her apology and wish it wouldn't impact her more as long as she is honest about her motivations for the apology.  1 stupid incident doesn't make a trend.  But I'm not ok with "art" that shows the murder of specific....still living people.
    How can you get rid of the "it's art" argument? Just because you're disgusted, that doesn't mean that argument isn't valid, or that that argument works on everything that offends people. I get that you're not okay with it (I also think it's stupid at best, and that Griffin did it makes it even more distasteful just because it's here), but that is actually completely irrelevant at all in the context of the freedom of expression argument. The "it's art" argument is completely valid where you like it or not.
    I just think calling everything art is kinda lazy, and a very easy way of explaining away someone's distasteful actions. I don't consider it art if it's inciting hatred. 
    Who's calling everything art? I'm calling Griffin's photo shoot in particular art, not everything. Also, I don't think what she did incites hate at all. That is a very specific thing and has legal connotations, and that photo wasn't it.
    it just seems today people think they can pick up a camera, or write something on a wall, anything they want, and hide behind the "it's art" shield when people get outraged. 
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 8,613
    PJ_Soul said:
    Kat said:
    Kat said:
    Hopefully they would have received condemnation from everyone, no matter the political leanings. It was wrong and that's why she has apologized...more than certain presidents have done. I repeat myself here.
    This is so wrong. It's awful. Trump's tweet is pretty awful as well if he mentions his son being upset just to get attention and his son has never seen it (that's my thoughts, so it certainly might not be true). Everyone should be losing their shit over this. I'm not into the the whole "fire that person" etc crap that many seem to jump on whenever someone makes a mistake. But in this case, I do think she should be more accountable then just say "sorry". It's a legit threat against a sitting president. If other people's comments matter and they should be accountable for the idiots that mimic them or take it to the next level (and they should)....then she certainly should be held accountable as well. No - the motivation does matter some...so in my opinion a picture of a hanging Obama is still worse than this.
    In no way did I think an apology was enough. I knew it wouldn't end there and she'll be going through a lot because she made a very bad choice. One quote from the article by her made it obvious that she knew it was going to cause a huge uproar but she did it anyway. I think it's important to listen to our inner monologues and if you know it's going to upset people, why the hell do it? Something wrong there but at least she did apologize. That's an important thing in life too. Good to see you, Cincy.
    Hey to you to Kat.

    After thinking about it more, I wish we'd make this stuff more about the message then the person.  I don;t care if she gets fired, etc....I want people to all understand how awful it is.  And get rid of the stupid "it's art" argument.  That does not give you a license to do whatever you want.  So - I'm ok with her apology and wish it wouldn't impact her more as long as she is honest about her motivations for the apology.  1 stupid incident doesn't make a trend.  But I'm not ok with "art" that shows the murder of specific....still living people.
    How can you get rid of the "it's art" argument? Just because you're disgusted, that doesn't mean that argument isn't valid, or that that argument works on everything that offends people. I get that you're not okay with it (I also think it's stupid at best, and that Griffin did it makes it even more distasteful just because it's here), but that is actually completely irrelevant at all in the context of the freedom of expression argument. The "it's art" argument is completely valid where you like it or not.
    Because I don't think "art" applies to depicting real, living human beings being decapitated. If the head wasn't a specific living person ... it's art.  If it is....I think it could be close to inciting violence against someone.

    If there is a gallery that has a black mannequin hanging in a tree....I don't like it....but it's art so long as it's not a living black person and it could incite violence.   

    I do get your point, I'm just stating my opinion. If your "art" can lead to violence and seems to be inciting violence, you should be held accountable.  But it's hard to prove in most cases and likely would lead to no consequences.  And just because it's legal doesn't mean people have to exercise that right.  Being an ass and saying "it's art" is weak in my opinion.   So again, since this is a message board and we are allowed to share opinions that may not match up to the legalities of today...that's what I did. 
    hippiemom = goodness
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 36,172
    edited June 1
    PJ_Soul said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    Kat said:
    Kat said:
    Hopefully they would have received condemnation from everyone, no matter the political leanings. It was wrong and that's why she has apologized...more than certain presidents have done. I repeat myself here.
    This is so wrong. It's awful. Trump's tweet is pretty awful as well if he mentions his son being upset just to get attention and his son has never seen it (that's my thoughts, so it certainly might not be true). Everyone should be losing their shit over this. I'm not into the the whole "fire that person" etc crap that many seem to jump on whenever someone makes a mistake. But in this case, I do think she should be more accountable then just say "sorry". It's a legit threat against a sitting president. If other people's comments matter and they should be accountable for the idiots that mimic them or take it to the next level (and they should)....then she certainly should be held accountable as well. No - the motivation does matter some...so in my opinion a picture of a hanging Obama is still worse than this.
    In no way did I think an apology was enough. I knew it wouldn't end there and she'll be going through a lot because she made a very bad choice. One quote from the article by her made it obvious that she knew it was going to cause a huge uproar but she did it anyway. I think it's important to listen to our inner monologues and if you know it's going to upset people, why the hell do it? Something wrong there but at least she did apologize. That's an important thing in life too. Good to see you, Cincy.
    Hey to you to Kat.

    After thinking about it more, I wish we'd make this stuff more about the message then the person.  I don;t care if she gets fired, etc....I want people to all understand how awful it is.  And get rid of the stupid "it's art" argument.  That does not give you a license to do whatever you want.  So - I'm ok with her apology and wish it wouldn't impact her more as long as she is honest about her motivations for the apology.  1 stupid incident doesn't make a trend.  But I'm not ok with "art" that shows the murder of specific....still living people.
    How can you get rid of the "it's art" argument? Just because you're disgusted, that doesn't mean that argument isn't valid, or that that argument works on everything that offends people. I get that you're not okay with it (I also think it's stupid at best, and that Griffin did it makes it even more distasteful just because it's here), but that is actually completely irrelevant at all in the context of the freedom of expression argument. The "it's art" argument is completely valid where you like it or not.
    I just think calling everything art is kinda lazy, and a very easy way of explaining away someone's distasteful actions. I don't consider it art if it's inciting hatred. 
    Who's calling everything art? I'm calling Griffin's photo shoot in particular art, not everything. Also, I don't think what she did incites hate at all. That is a very specific thing and has legal connotations, and that photo wasn't it.
    it just seems today people think they can pick up a camera, or write something on a wall, anything they want, and hide behind the "it's art" shield when people get outraged. 
    Well.... art photography IS art. I don't think anyone has to use the "it's art" term as a shield. It just is. If it happens to work as a shield against people who think such a thing should be illegal, great, but it isn't a contrived or fake notion. I am not saying that people should not get outraged over art. Actually, I think it's GOOD when people are outraged by art. No matter how much you hate it, at least the art is doing its job. It is eliciting an emotional response. Isn't that what art is supposed to do? And sure, there are things that don't qualify as art. For instance, a swastika spray painted on a Synagogue doesn't qualify. However, I think this photo very obviously does qualify. I don't think whether or not this is art is even logically up for debate. Everything about it screams photographic art. It was planned, arranged, thought out, sends a specific political message via a designed image, and it's stylized, light and shadow and colour are in play, etc. The fact that people are outraged and disgusted changes nothing.
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,725
    @unsung are talking about the minimum wage bill that is on it's way to Rauner? I honestly haven't been following it because why would the governor sign it? It will go back to the GA for veto session but I don't know if it will have enough support to override. 
    I should say that and the retroactive tax hike.
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 10,622
    PJ_Soul said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    Kat said:
    Kat said:
    Hopefully they would have received condemnation from everyone, no matter the political leanings. It was wrong and that's why she has apologized...more than certain presidents have done. I repeat myself here.
    This is so wrong. It's awful. Trump's tweet is pretty awful as well if he mentions his son being upset just to get attention and his son has never seen it (that's my thoughts, so it certainly might not be true). Everyone should be losing their shit over this. I'm not into the the whole "fire that person" etc crap that many seem to jump on whenever someone makes a mistake. But in this case, I do think she should be more accountable then just say "sorry". It's a legit threat against a sitting president. If other people's comments matter and they should be accountable for the idiots that mimic them or take it to the next level (and they should)....then she certainly should be held accountable as well. No - the motivation does matter some...so in my opinion a picture of a hanging Obama is still worse than this.
    In no way did I think an apology was enough. I knew it wouldn't end there and she'll be going through a lot because she made a very bad choice. One quote from the article by her made it obvious that she knew it was going to cause a huge uproar but she did it anyway. I think it's important to listen to our inner monologues and if you know it's going to upset people, why the hell do it? Something wrong there but at least she did apologize. That's an important thing in life too. Good to see you, Cincy.
    Hey to you to Kat.

    After thinking about it more, I wish we'd make this stuff more about the message then the person.  I don;t care if she gets fired, etc....I want people to all understand how awful it is.  And get rid of the stupid "it's art" argument.  That does not give you a license to do whatever you want.  So - I'm ok with her apology and wish it wouldn't impact her more as long as she is honest about her motivations for the apology.  1 stupid incident doesn't make a trend.  But I'm not ok with "art" that shows the murder of specific....still living people.
    How can you get rid of the "it's art" argument? Just because you're disgusted, that doesn't mean that argument isn't valid, or that that argument works on everything that offends people. I get that you're not okay with it (I also think it's stupid at best, and that Griffin did it makes it even more distasteful just because it's here), but that is actually completely irrelevant at all in the context of the freedom of expression argument. The "it's art" argument is completely valid where you like it or not.
    I just think calling everything art is kinda lazy, and a very easy way of explaining away someone's distasteful actions. I don't consider it art if it's inciting hatred. 
    Who's calling everything art? I'm calling Griffin's photo shoot in particular art, not everything. Also, I don't think what she did incites hate at all. That is a very specific thing and has legal connotations, and that photo wasn't it.
    it just seems today people think they can pick up a camera, or write something on a wall, anything they want, and hide behind the "it's art" shield when people get outraged. 
    Well.... art photography IS art. I don't think anyone has to use the "it's art" term as a shield. It just is. If it happens to work as a shield against people who think such a thing should be illegal, great, but it isn't a contrived or fake notion. I am not saying that people should not get outraged over art. Actually, I think it's GOOD when people are outraged by art. No matter how much you hate it, at least the art is doing its job. It is eliciting an emotional response. Isn't that what art is supposed to do? And sure, there are things that don't qualify as art. For instance, a swastika spray painted on a Church doesn't qualify. However, I think this photo very obviously does qualify. I don't think whether or not this is art is even logically up for debate. Everything about it screams photographic art. It was planned, arranged, thought out, sends a specific political message via a designed image, and it's stylized, light and shadow and colour are in play, etc. The fact that people are outraged and disgusted changes nothing.
    I'm not equating outrage = not art. to me that's irrelevant. I'm just saying that not everything you put in a photo is art. 

    why can't the swastika symbol qualify? you do know that before it was co-opted by the nazis, that it was a symbol of peace and prosperity, right, and is used in many different cultures with many different but similarly positive meanings. so you are saying because the western world deems it offensive, then it can't be art?
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 36,172
    PJ_Soul said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    PJ_Soul said:
    Kat said:
    Kat said:
    Hopefully they would have received condemnation from everyone, no matter the political leanings. It was wrong and that's why she has apologized...more than certain presidents have done. I repeat myself here.
    This is so wrong. It's awful. Trump's tweet is pretty awful as well if he mentions his son being upset just to get attention and his son has never seen it (that's my thoughts, so it certainly might not be true). Everyone should be losing their shit over this. I'm not into the the whole "fire that person" etc crap that many seem to jump on whenever someone makes a mistake. But in this case, I do think she should be more accountable then just say "sorry". It's a legit threat against a sitting president. If other people's comments matter and they should be accountable for the idiots that mimic them or take it to the next level (and they should)....then she certainly should be held accountable as well. No - the motivation does matter some...so in my opinion a picture of a hanging Obama is still worse than this.
    In no way did I think an apology was enough. I knew it wouldn't end there and she'll be going through a lot because she made a very bad choice. One quote from the article by her made it obvious that she knew it was going to cause a huge uproar but she did it anyway. I think it's important to listen to our inner monologues and if you know it's going to upset people, why the hell do it? Something wrong there but at least she did apologize. That's an important thing in life too. Good to see you, Cincy.
    Hey to you to Kat.

    After thinking about it more, I wish we'd make this stuff more about the message then the person.  I don;t care if she gets fired, etc....I want people to all understand how awful it is.  And get rid of the stupid "it's art" argument.  That does not give you a license to do whatever you want.  So - I'm ok with her apology and wish it wouldn't impact her more as long as she is honest about her motivations for the apology.  1 stupid incident doesn't make a trend.  But I'm not ok with "art" that shows the murder of specific....still living people.
    How can you get rid of the "it's art" argument? Just because you're disgusted, that doesn't mean that argument isn't valid, or that that argument works on everything that offends people. I get that you're not okay with it (I also think it's stupid at best, and that Griffin did it makes it even more distasteful just because it's here), but that is actually completely irrelevant at all in the context of the freedom of expression argument. The "it's art" argument is completely valid where you like it or not.
    I just think calling everything art is kinda lazy, and a very easy way of explaining away someone's distasteful actions. I don't consider it art if it's inciting hatred. 
    Who's calling everything art? I'm calling Griffin's photo shoot in particular art, not everything. Also, I don't think what she did incites hate at all. That is a very specific thing and has legal connotations, and that photo wasn't it.
    it just seems today people think they can pick up a camera, or write something on a wall, anything they want, and hide behind the "it's art" shield when people get outraged. 
    Well.... art photography IS art. I don't think anyone has to use the "it's art" term as a shield. It just is. If it happens to work as a shield against people who think such a thing should be illegal, great, but it isn't a contrived or fake notion. I am not saying that people should not get outraged over art. Actually, I think it's GOOD when people are outraged by art. No matter how much you hate it, at least the art is doing its job. It is eliciting an emotional response. Isn't that what art is supposed to do? And sure, there are things that don't qualify as art. For instance, a swastika spray painted on a Church doesn't qualify. However, I think this photo very obviously does qualify. I don't think whether or not this is art is even logically up for debate. Everything about it screams photographic art. It was planned, arranged, thought out, sends a specific political message via a designed image, and it's stylized, light and shadow and colour are in play, etc. The fact that people are outraged and disgusted changes nothing.
    I'm not equating outrage = not art. to me that's irrelevant. I'm just saying that not everything you put in a photo is art. 

    why can't the swastika symbol qualify? you do know that before it was co-opted by the nazis, that it was a symbol of peace and prosperity, right, and is used in many different cultures with many different but similarly positive meanings. so you are saying because the western world deems it offensive, then it can't be art?
    Right... I'm not claiming that everything you put in a photo is art either, necessarily, but actually, if someone purposefully stages a photo, yeah, it is art.

    Lol, if you want a swastika spray painted onto a synagogue to be art and ignore the context and instead talk about how a backwards swastika is a symbol of peace, fine. If it is, then burning a cross in front of a church is art too. Whatever. I'm just saying that the Griffin photo in particular is unarguably art. You seemed to be saying that if's not and suggested that calling it art was just a lazy and easy way to explain away a distasteful action. You also said that if it's inciting hatred you don't think it's art. Well, swastikas and burning crosses are hateful acts and based on racism and are specifically meant as a hate message against people of an entire ethnicity/religion. That is not even close to the same thing as someone making an artistic statement about a particular political figure. If the Griffin thing isn't art, then neither is Bu$hleaguer.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • hedonisthedonist standing on the edge of foreverPosts: 17,980
    The beauty of "art" is that anyone can deem it whatever they want...even shit.


    That said, I have respect neither for Griffin nor her insincere apology.
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 36,172
    Ha, she is getting more attention than she ever has in her life - I'm assuming she is secretly overjoyed by the whole thing.... although I doubt she's enjoying the threats to her life, and no, I don't think that ironic, because what she did wasn't a threat.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 20,271
    What I don't like, especially what I deplore, I try not to give attention too.  Giving it attention is what it wants.  Just like bratty kids who will do anything for negative attention.

    With that in mind, you could say I am a hypocrite for even the smallest post here.   I will try to ignore this thread from here on. 

    And I apologize to those who found my comments about the "art" offensive.  I was not supporting the piece, merely the concept of what I believe art is and that should be reserved for another, less provocative thread.

    Adieu...
    We're living on the edge of something big. It's a fantastic time in history to be alive.
    AMT, 1.25.15, 00:36 hrs.
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.
  • BentleyspopBentleyspop Craft Beer Brewery, ColoradoPosts: 3,720
    hedonist said:
    The beauty of "art" is that anyone can deem it whatever they want...even shit.


    That said, I have respect neither for Griffin nor her insincere apology.
    Art is like pornography......

    I can't  define it but I know it when I see it
This discussion has been closed.