Rodeo clowns and the mocking of a president

So, in 2006, they made a movie, called “Death of a President.” It was based on the assassination of George W. Bush.

Do you remember the outcry, the protests, and the movie executives getting reprimanded and fired? Nope, me either, because it didn’t happen.

September, 2008, Russell Brand, scumbag sex-addict British comedian, at the MTV movie awards, said this:

But I know America to be a forward thinking country because otherwise why would you have let that retard cowboy fella be president for eight years?

We were very impressed. We thought it was nice of you to let him have a go, because, in England, he wouldn’t be trusted with a pair of scissors.

Remember the outcries, the protests that a foreigner made fun of our president, the protests of using the word “retard” in relation to a sitting president that resulted in Russell Brand not appearing in America for awhile? Nope. Brand actually hosted the same awards the next year. You can watch his mocking speech here; it’s about a minute into the video.

Here are some of the mocking pictures of George W. Bush when he was president.

bush1

bush 4bush 2

bush3

Remember all the outcries over these? No, no you don’t. Because there weren’t any, at least not in the main stream media.

I won’t even go into the mocking of Ronald Reagan.  I was keen to it because I had just started following politics and I liked President Reagan. Katied Couric, America’s favorite little cutie-pie, called him an “air-head” once, on national TV.

So now a rodeo clown makes fun of Obama. And, “gasp”  it’s so horrible. So, here’s the question. Can we not make fun of the president because he’s black? That’s really the issue here, isn’t it?

Honestly, I was a big follower of “The Daily Show” until the Clinton-Lewinski scandal. I stopped watching because, even though I thought he had it coming, I couldn’t stand to watch the constant mocking and jokes. I stopped watching.

I think we should show some respect to the office, no matter how much we don’t like the person holding it. However, I didn’t set the precedent. It’s been established. The media has allowed all-out mocking of presidents. Well, you know, all the republicans, anyway.

Was the rodeo incident inappropriate? I don’t know. I wouldn’t have done it. But I don’t think anyone should lose their job over it. The NAACP wants an investigation by the Secret Service. Predictable, I suppose. But look at this stuff they said about Bush and there was never a peep. No, don’t even argue with me. Not about this. They made a movie about his assassination, for God’s sake.

So we’re battling two things here. The media’s love affair with liberals, and the “For God’s sake, you can’t make fun of the president because he’s black” factor.

Free speech, baby. Too damn bad. It’s sad that you make the rules and then change them. The guy’s the president, and that trumps being black, at least when it comes to the shit you gotta take.

All presidents take their fair share of the stabs.

If you really want some insight, read Bush’s book, “Decision Points” and he talks about taking the stabs. Stand-up guy, I don’t care who you are.

Sorry, rodeo clown, you’re the victim of the national mania of politically correct insanity.

24 comments on “Rodeo clowns and the mocking of a president

  1. fmlinardo says:

    Agree with you on all fronts. President Obama needs to take to the podium and tell everyone expressing false outrage on his behalf to shut the hell up.

    Here’s the part where I argue with you even after your silly warning not to. You conveniently left out the Dixie Chicks incident. Natalie Maines only said she was ashamed Bush was from Texas and then apologized for electing him. This was while they were on tour in London. That’s nothing close to what Brand, Olberman, et al said for 8 years. And, if you remember, they were run out of Nashville for a bit, making a short comeback in 2008. The main stream media made a huge deal out of it, along with the rebuttals from other country music groups. The Dixie Chicks were boycotted in record stores and on the radio stations.

    Why the media only focused on that one incident is still a mystery to me.

  2. Kevin says:

    Maybe the Dixie Chicks were singled out because their followers/fans and hometown are BIG supporters of the Bush family. Media jumped b/c its fun to watch your opponents eat their own. It would be interesting if 50 cent made a disparaging remark during a BET awards ceremony about Obama. You rarely see these two extremes move out of lockstep with the audiences and if they do it makes big news.

    • fmlinardo says:

      That’s as good an explanation as any. But Tony is spot on. There are a lot of people, not necessarily rising to the fame of 50 cent, on the left making disparaging comments about Obama now and yet none of it makes the news. So many liberals have said O is just running Bush’s 4th term. But if you don’t inhabit the remotest corners of political social media you would never know that.

  3. Marilyn says:

    I totally agree. Does free speech only apply if you say things that others approve of? OR does free speech mean that you say what you want as long as it doesn’t harm someone. Posing Obama as a clown hurts no one.

    • fmlinardo says:

      Actually free speech would only apply if the government gets involved, which they won’t. Your speech is protected by the constitutional right of free speech from government persecution only. The public, news media, other rodeo clowns, etc…are free to ridicule you for what you say and your employer has the right to terminate you for what you say. You still have the right to say it but you then must live with the consequences.

      I think the Missouri rodeo association, or whatever, was wrong to fire the clown, but they have every right to do so.

      • Kevin says:

        I agree free speech is fine as long as the Government does not get involved, but when you take into account the creeping P/C police, free speech “was” slowly being eroded. I honestly believe political correctness was the foundation of the erosion of free speech we see today. Political correctness seems to protect the “tolerant” left more than the right, probably due to the control of media and our higher AND lower educational systems. I honestly despise P/C with every fiber of my being. What purpose does it serve other than to act as weapon of mass destruction of free speech. I remember not so long ago we made fun of P/C. We do not any longer lest we feel the sting of its purpose.

        Essentially if you are looking for a reason “why” a simple rodeo clown was a national target you need look no further than the not so tolerant left sided news media. This is why the clown is a national story when so many other much worse on the liberal sides are not.

        I believe BOTH sides should be able to voice their feelings and not be targeted for destruction via labels of hate.

        • fmlinardo says:

          I think you misunderstood. There is no free speech issue here. Free Speech only protects you from the government. It cannot in any way protect you from your employer. Free speech is not being eroded in any way shape or form. You still have every protection to speak your mind that the constitution has provided since the day it was enacted in December 1791. But that protection is only from the government, not from the general public or your employer. You do not have protection from your boss. Your job can cut you loose for the things you say, post on facebook, tweet on twitter, etc… The constitution never protected you from those things. The government didn’t fire the clown, his employer did.

          Now I agree there is a big political correctness issue here. No way the Missouri Rodeo Cowboy Association should have fired that clown. But they bowed to PC pressure. But they were with-in their constitutional rights to do so.

          The President would be smart to step in and help this dude get his job back. Won’t happen though because this administration is not very good at smart public relations, never have been.

  4. Kevin says:

    Actually I believe there is a correlation between political correctness, free speech and Government. Political Correctness in and of itself acts as a stifle to free speech through intimidation. If you don’t agree with certain political correct phrases you could be verbally associated with a variety of nasty groups. In this instance there are calls by the NAACP to the Government to investigate this gentleman. If they comply with this blatantly baseless accusation it shows the Government connection with PC Police. This is what I was trying to point out earlier. The foundation of PC was cultivated over years and now that it is fundamentally accepted the government teeth are being added to it. There is an Ordinance in San Antonio which provides restrictions on persons appointed to Government positions based on among other things bias concerning sexual orientation.

    “No person shall be appointed to a position if the city council finds that such person has, prior to such proposed appointment, engaged in discrimination or demonstrated a bias, by word or deed, against any person, group or organization on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, veteran status, age, or disability.

    Many religions forbid gay relationships as part of their foundations. These persons may preach this in their respective churches and because of this ordinance they may not be eligible for service. It appears a direct contrast of Religion vs. Sexual Orientation. Neither should be discriminated against.

    Personally I believe the President has said too much in local affairs. I will never agree with the way he treated the New England Officer who arrested his friend. I would not have gone anywhere near his beer summit if he made statements about my actions. This coming from someone who is called a racist regularly and knows the sting of the accusation. His involvement in the Florida shooting and statement about how Trevon could have been his son. He didn’t say Zimmerman (who was found innocent) could have been a family member.

    Maybe he should spend more time governing the NSA, IRS and State Department vs. commenting on local affairs.

    • fmlinardo says:

      No there isn’t. Unless the federal government is doing the intimidating then no free speech rights are being violated. Being verbally associated with a group because you use their lingo is not a violation of your free speech. The city council of San Antonio is a very local, appointed government seat. Free speech is a protection from the federal government. Simply meaning, they can’t lock you up if you say Obama is a socialist. Not every state constitution has a free speech amendment. I would wager most city councils don’t either.

      Add to that: the supreme court has ruled that state, city, and local governments may enact reasonable time, place, or manner restrictions on speech. (Oxford Companion to the Supreme Court of the United States, 2nd edt.)

      The NAACP has every right to ask for government review of a case, as does any other citizen, doesn’t mean it will happen as it most likely will not in this case.

      In the end the free speech of the clown was not violated. His employer bowed to the “PC Police” as you say, and fired him. They didn’t bow to the Federal Government, they bowed to the media. They didn’t have to, they chose to. They should not have, but they did. Thems the breaks. The Missouri Rodeo Cowboy Association isn’t the NFL. I doubt they would have been hurt financially had they kept the clown.

      The president should absolutely get involved here and get this guy’s job back, since it was a mask of his face that started this whole deal. Not sure how that’s a local issue.

      • Kevin says:

        He was barred for life from the Missouri “State” Fair. I would guess that might be run by Government Officials in some capcity.

        • fmlinardo says:

          No it’s not. It’s run by the state government, not the federal government. Free Speech only protects you from the federal government.

          He got fired from the Missouri Rodeo Cowboy Association. Being banned from the State Fair as a rodeo clown doesn’t matter much at this point anyway.

          First Amendment to the US Constitution: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

        • Kevin says:

          I suppose since I work for Local Government it’s ok for me to violate someone’s freedom of speech?

      • Kevin says:

        NAACP has every right to ask for an investigation, like the DOJ with the Zimmerman case. They were tasked with investigating whether or not race placed an issue. The FBI had ALREADY investigated and determined there was not. Bowing to public pressure he (one man being investigated by the power of the Dept. of Justice) was investigated again, or at least that is what Eric Holder said he was going to do.

        So you believe it is not a violation of the Church’s freedom of speech to speak out against gay relationships, then bar one of their outspoken members from running for political office?

        • fmlinardo says:

          No, by definition it’s not a violation. It’s city government. The city of San Antonio is free to appoint who they want, bar who they want. City council is not an elected office, it’s appointed in San Antonio. Nothing would stop any member of that church from running for elected office, like mayor of San Antonio, or Governor of Texas.

  5. Kevin says:

    One quick example. What would happen if two members of the Aryan Nation showed up outside of a Alabama polling station wearing full regalia and carrying a club? Charges maybe? There should be. Nothing happened to the New Black Panthers that did it in PA. Too politically charged to arrest these two men.

    • fmlinardo says:

      What would be the crime of the two aryans?

      Google R.A.V vs City of St. Paul (1992). In short, US Supreme Court overturned the conviction of a teenager who burned a cross on the lawn of a black family. Minnesota Supreme Court ruled it hate speech, US Supreme Court ruled it free speech.

      This is not an example, this is a real case.

      • Kevin says:

        Smarter people than I indicated that voter intimidation was in progress at the PA polling place. Standing outside of a polling door in military style uniform brandishing a club. You think that would not intimidate someone?

        • fmlinardo says:

          But you said charges. What’s the crime? Did they physically bar anyone from entering? Did they verbally challenge anyone from entering? Actually if you read the report on Fox News web site, in 2012 it was one man, and he held the door open for voters. In 2008 in was two guys. The DOJ brought charges against the man holding the night stick.

        • Kevin says:

          You asked whether or not anyone was verbally challenged: “IT” is the billy club. These two people can say what they want, BUT not standing outside of a polling place. Several people were witnessed to have walked up, then turned away when they saw these two Patriots.

          “Minister King Shabazz carried a billy club, and is reported to have pointed it at voters while both men shouted racial slurs,[5] including phrases such as “white devil” and “you’re about to be ruled by the black man, cracker.”

  6. fmlinardo says:

    Kevin because you work for local government you neither have the authority, nor the power, nor the capacity to violate someone’s freedom of speech. Can you arrest people for saying the government is socialist? Can you detain people because they shout white power? Can you stop someone from speaking because they yell, marriage equality? I doubt it.

    I didin’t write the constitution. It says what it says. Your free speech is protected from abuse by the federal government. That’s it. Organizations, churches, clubs, jobs, have standards. Violate them and you get fired or fined or whatever.

    You have the right to say what you want without fearing the federal government. It’s everyone else you have to worry about and the constitution doesn’t protect your speech from them.

    • Kevin says:

      But I can violate someone’s freedom of speech while working in the capacity of my job, just like the Counsel can violate a church members freedom of speech by enforcing their ordinance. The City Counsel and my job as a police officer represent the Government. There is a bright line difference between ANY Government Official and a purely private employer.

      Elected/appointed to their Government makes little difference.

      • fmlinardo says:

        How can you violate someones free speech?

        The council did not violate anyones free speech. Can’t explain it to you any further.

        And appointed vs elected is a huge difference. Its all the difference. Anyone can run for office. The leader of the Klu Klux Klan, David Duke ran for governor of Louisiana in 1991. He got 39% of the vote. He could not be appointed to the city council. Can you not see the difference there?

        And none of that violates his right to free speech.

        For some reason you refuse to accept the difference between the federal government and state or local governments. No point in talking about it anymore if you refuse the simple definition of the first amendment to free speech.

  7. JETSR says:

    Well said Tony. Political correctness is destroying the “reality” of life in many areas. Couple the “PC” environment with an out of control liberal press and you are right on…the rodeo clown is toast.

  8. Kevin says:

    I’ve been sued for violating someone’s civil right during the course of my profession. If I can be sued apparently I can violate them.

    I’ll just have to disagree with your interpretation Federal vs. State vs. Local.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s