Journalist throws shoes at Bush

[Angrist]

America, delivering the world the freedom to throw shoes.

[Bube]

To be honest, if it wasn't for himself, Bush would never have been able to go to Iraq, so the guy would never have needed to throw his shoes at him. Bush brought this upon himself.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by manasecret

He's not exactly free right now, still in custody, now with the Iraqi military. Now, if you meant his shoe-throwing-without-getting-beheaded freedom to the man that he threw shoes at, then ok.

Thats basically what I meant, being that the man has the freedom to communicate dissent. Under Saddam, the man would have been sent back to his family in a series of plastic bags.... and that's not hyperbole, thats historical fact. If he were a woman, he would have been raped first and then sent back in small plastic bags.

Regardless of whether or not you agree with the Iraq war, there is no arguing that the Iraqi people are far better off now than they were then. I'm sorry, there is that argument, but it simply lacks any credibility under any fair analysis whether you want to crunch casualty numbers or preferrably just use common sense.

That said, throwing shoes is still assault, so I wouldn't expect him to get off scott free. You can't just go around throwing your shoes at people, President or no.

[Nighthawk]

the game everyone has been waiting for

[Angrist]

Hehe, great.

[KillerGremlin]

Funny shit....Bush's grin is priceless.

I keep saying it...Bush is a hella cool guy. I mean I think he would be a fun guy to smoke a bowl with and go to the strip club. I could see him having a few drinks, putting some singles in some g-strings....

I mean he seems like a really cool guy.

Cool president? Eh....entertaining, sure. Intelligent, probably. Good president? Not likely.

He'd make a cool uncle though.

Add to the list of Muslim stereotypes:
1) keep their women in check
2) go alalalalala and darka darka
3) fly planes into things
4) throw shoes

[KillerGremlin]

[mickydaniels]

Originally Posted by Professor S

Thats basically what I meant, being that the man has the freedom to communicate dissent. Under Saddam, the man would have been sent back to his family in a series of plastic bags.... and that's not hyperbole, thats historical fact. If he were a woman, he would have been raped first and then sent back in small plastic bags.

I really hate comments like this. What you really mean to say is that the consequences have changed.

[KillerGremlin]

Originally Posted by mickydaniels

I really hate comments like this. What you really mean to say is that the consequences have changed.

They rape him like a woman now?

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by mickydaniels

I really hate comments like this. What you really mean to say is that the consequences have changed.

Ah, more senseless equivocation! When the consequences move from torture and dismemberment to being charged with simple assult, which he is guilty of BTW, and I think thats a significant change in consequences and worthy of comment.

remove the shoe throwing, and he likely would have been questioned and released.

Now if it ends up this idiot is sent to GITMO, maybe you'd have an argument, but even then he wouldn't be summarily executed.

[mickydaniels]

Sorry, but the fact that the guy left behind a note saying it's great to die a matyr tells me he could care less about his punishment, only getting out his message.
By the way, this guy could get 15 years in prison, not exactly simple assault. Interesting that you state he was an idiot for using his shoes. Is nonviolent protest the only acceptable form of protest now? Would King George III have received a respectable reception here in the 1770's?

[KillerGremlin]

Originally Posted by mickydaniels

Is nonviolent protest the only acceptable form of protest now

Well when you put it that way, we should have just shoot the shoe-throwing mother fucker. And then when the rest of the world complained about our cruelty we could wave our big American dicks at them and remind them that we have the largest stockpile of nukes, the largest spread of foreign occupancy, and huge economic power.


seriously you guys are making way to much of something that is supposed to be funny.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by mickydaniels

Sorry, but the fact that the guy left behind a note saying it's great to die a matyr tells me he could care less about his punishment, only getting out his message.
By the way, this guy could get 15 years in prison, not exactly simple assault. Interesting that you state he was an idiot for using his shoes. Is nonviolent protest the only acceptable form of protest now? Would King George III have received a respectable reception here in the 1770's?

So assualt is acceptable protest? In that case, I'm going to go smash Obama in the head with a brick because of his stimulus plan. After all, its just protest, right?[/sarcasm]

Yes, non-violence is the only form of protest that is acceptable. Anything else is not protest, but revolution. Protest works to CHANGE THE MINDS of those in power by making a statement. Revolution is an attempt by bypass the system all together. You reference of King George only serves to illustrate that fact, as the Colonists petitioned George for YEARS to have a voice and equal rights without success, and the revolution was a war to send them home, not a form of protest.

I'm a little dismayed at you seeming acceptance of violence as a legitimate form of protest. Martin Luther King and Ghandi understood that when you react violently you only serve to alienate those that you disagree with, rather than changing their minds.

In the end Bush came out looking good in all of this, and most people view the shoe thrower as a fool. Bush didn't overreact and even made some memorably funny quotes. So this "protester" did nothing to help his cause, and instead made Bush look better because of his moronic actions.

[thatmariolover]

Originally Posted by Professor S

So assualt is acceptable protest? In that case, I'm going to go smash Obama in the head with a brick because of his stimulus plan. After all, its just protest, right?[/sarcasm]

Of course I don't think throwing a shoe (or violence in general) is an acceptable form of protest. But you do have to take his point of view to heart before judging him. He doesn't recognize Bush as somebody that gave him freedoms. He sees Bush as the leader of a military occupation of his country. If the US was crumbling from within and another country came over and enforced unfamiliar rules and laws, of course part of the population would rebel.

Those supporting this war see themselves as benefactors, bringing the light and justice to the underprivileged. But not all of them want our help, and you can hardly expect them to take that sitting down. Of course there are less violent ways to express your frustration than throwing a shoe.

In the end I think 15 years in prison is hardly a just punishment for somebody who threw a shoe for something he truly believes in.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by thatmariolover

Of course I don't think throwing a shoe (or violence in general) is an acceptable form of protest. But you do have to take his point of view to heart before judging him. He doesn't recognize Bush as somebody that gave him freedoms. He sees Bush as the leader of a military occupation of his country. If the US was crumbling from within and another country came over and enforced unfamiliar rules and laws, of course part of the population would rebel.

Those supporting this war see themselves as benefactors, bringing the light and justice to the underprivileged. But not all of them want our help, and you can hardly expect them to take that sitting down. Of course there are less violent ways to express your frustration than throwing a shoe.

In the end I think 15 years in prison is hardly a just punishment for somebody who threw a shoe for something he truly believes in.

I recognize his rights to dislike Bush, and I recognize his argument as being a legitimate one, even if I disagree with it. What Im disagreeing with is the shoe tossing. Its his actions that are punishable, not his ideas or speech, and that was and is my point. The reporter simply could have stood up and screamed the same messages and gotten as much attention for his beliefs.

His show throwing destroyed his own argument and marginalized his opinion because he looks like a fool.