It was good to hear President Bush speak out forcefully this week against noose displays and lynching jokes that have been the subject of recent national controversies. “The noose is not a symbol of prairie justice, but of gross injustice,†he said. “Displaying one is not a harmless prank. ‘Lynching’ is not a word to be mentioned in jest.†He called such references and displays “deeply offensive†and out of place in America today.
They also reflect a gross ignorance of recent history.
Bush noted that not so long ago in this country, “Fathers were dragged from their homes in the dark of night before the eyes of their terrified children. Summary executions were held by torchlight in front of hateful crowds. In many cases, law enforcement officers responsible for protecting the victims were complicit in their deaths.â€
79 Comments
Not to “push any buttons” here, but it’s a noose. They used those well before the rascists took them over. Lots of outlaws in the days of the “Wild West” were strung up by them. Why does everything have to be “racial”?
But this statement also came from a guy who doesn’t mind ripping simple farmers and goat herders (as a lot of the so-called Al Qaeda people are in Gitmo) away from their homes in full view of their terrified children in Afghanistan to go and be tortured and killed.
Seems to me that Americans in general reflect a gross ignorance of history, recent or otherwise. We’re all being dumbed down…proper.
Agree with you one both counts, Pl…the emphasis on racism is out of control in this country. And people like Al Sharpton keep it going.
April 13, 1965 killers Richard Eugene Hickock and Perry Edward Smith were taken to the Kansas gallows and hanged.
Guess we don’t need to go back to the Wild West to find an incident of a noose used with no racial association. I don’t think bush is “up” on history any more than he is on many other subjects — talk about dumb…
Bush is grossly late on his statements as all of these incidences went without ONE single word from his mouth till now.
It would be really nice if he’d take such a strong stance (and mean it) against nations who treat women so poorly, and other human rights violators.
The noose wasn’t used to taunt innocent white men either.
It has traditionally been an object of fear against blacks. They intended it that way- right on line with a big cross burning in a black family’s yard. So to try to rewrite history here and say that it isn’t racially intended, tell me….how did all these kids just start using a hangman’s noose in all these racially charged incidents? Think they all just up and decided to choose that symbol?
Mommy, you race baiters need help. Should we ban candy and teddy bears because freakin’ child molestor’s and abductor’s use them to intice the children? Gimme a break, it’s the same way dumb asses call guns dangerous. It’s the one who weild’s it that either is or isn’t dangerous.
wields, even.
And I’m sure those old outlaws were pretty taunted with the idea of getting hung-high.
PoliMom, Pleef, et al. I agree with both of you. I don’t think there should be a blanket ban on the image, but incorrect usage of the symobol should be punished with extreme prejudice (ok, I actually intended the pun).
My cheeks are still slightly chapped I’m no longer allowed to use the word ‘niggardly’, no matter how innocent the connotation.
In the context that the noose was used, it was obviously racial, and I’m not sure why you’re condoning it Pleefer. Sure, sometimes a noose is just a noose, but sometimes it really isn’t.
Yeah, and about that freedom of speech thing? George, have someone read it to you and explain the big words for you.
Mr. Scholfield,
As you seem to promote this story as well, please correct me if I’m wrong, would you also support a state and federal level auditor to review your writings before they are published? Tell you what is or isn’t authorized by the government?
The first amendment folks. You either love it or hate it. You can’t encapsulate the little parts that put a hair up your ass. If you don’t like what someone writes. don’t read it . If you don’t like what someone displays in their yard don’t look at it .
As soon as you ban nooses, ban every picture of babies under the age of 6 months from public view. What the hell were you thinking? How do you think that affects mothers who lost their pregnancies? Mothers that lost their babies? You atrocious vile people, how can you display pictures of babies in public. The sewer is far more refined than thou.
#
ghotiphaze
Posted February 15, 2008 at 9:04 am | Permalink
PoliMom, Pleef, et al. I agree with both of you. I don’t think there should be a blanket ban on the image, but incorrect usage of the symobol should be punished with extreme prejudice (ok, I actually intended the pun).
My cheeks are still slightly chapped I’m no longer allowed to use the word ‘niggardly’, no matter how innocent the connotation.
——————–
Actually, the Brits I talk to online use “niggardly” all the time in their conversations, only with another curious word, “niggles.”
I agree that if you hang one up at a black families house, if you get caught, you need to be beaten severly by everyone in that family. But you can’t control any idiots thoughts, you just can’t. Stupid people that hate are just stupid people that hate. These same retarded white folks that pull this kind of sh.it are the same ones that must believe white men built the great pyramid’s of Egypt, or have a picture of the white Jesus on their walls. They believe what they believe and you can’t prove anything to these morons. But a noose is a noose. I don’t want thought-crime or hate crime legislation because after the precedent is set, where does it stop?
yeah, i use ‘niggling’ alot. It’s amazing how often the phrase ‘pot calling the kettle black’ is construed as racist. I kept trying to get a black seasonal worker to put on a shirt during the summer. The sun was really bright and UV index was way up there. So I innocently asked if he was trying to be a melanoma test case. He got irate at me for saying something about ‘melons’. Too often people’s knees jerk too quickly.
So lets change the symbolism a little. Say a catholic and a jew got into a fight at school, and the catholic goes home and gets a huge swastika and hangs it from a tree at the school. Maybe even with a picture of Hitler. That still okay?
TDT
Posted February 15, 2008 at 9:33 am | Permalink
Being as it is school property, that would be up to the school. If the catholic kid hung that at his house, then yes, of course it is OK.
TDT, if you were to put a poster of your new born (grand?) daughter on your front line being the proud (grand)mother or (grand)father, should a woman who lost her pregnancy be allowed to have that poster removed?
line = lawn in sollies world
TDT, that’s not what we’re saying at all. I’d agree, that isn’t acceptable. Like pleef said, a noose at a black person’s house, (or jewish, or mexican, or even irish or scot for that matter). But at the same time, no sense pixilating the opening scene to ‘the good, the bad, and the ugly’.
I’d hate to see the swastika chiseled off the temples of india because of the insanity of one flake.
Actually, it seems we’re all in agreement, just arguing about semantics
Ghoti…your statement about knees jerking too quickly is soo true. One well publicized case..on the tv show Apprentice a couple seasons ago. Someone used the old phrase, “pot calling the kettle black” and a nearby black woman got all huffy and offended. The context and statement were made with absolutely no racial inferences at all, but the “chip on the shoulder” mindset is quick to explode at any second. Sad…
Okay Fish, I think we are arguing semantics.
Sol - On MY front lawn? No, I don’t think they should be able to take it down. But if I go around putting nooses or swastikas in areas to intimidate blacks or jews, I really do feel there should be some kind of punishment for that.
“bong hits for Jesus”…
“deeply offensive,”
Whoopie $hit. I am deeply offended that my tax dollars are spent for welfare for some who have no intention of garnering work and wages for themselves. End welfare.
I am deeply offended that there are billboards and menus printed in Spanish, that I need to press one to continue in English. I am deeply offended that Gaelic is not offered as well. Mandate that every billboard and every menu and every telephony application include Gaelic.
It is time to get over being offended. The government is not her to provide for your comfort. If something is offensive and on someone else’s property GET OVER YOURSELF !!!
It is everyone’s right to express themselves without government censorship if you are on your own private property.
I’m of Irish decent. I hold no grudges over my ancestors being discriminated against – Mics need not apply — . That is the business owners right to hire whomever s/he wants. I’m not ashamed of being labeled a lush because of my heritage. That is my heritage and I am proud to be of Irish decent. I expect no favors nor harbor ill feelings towards those that do discriminate. Their loss, not mine.
Sol, in the 1850s the irish were stokers of choice on locomotives and paddlewheelers. Tehy were cheaper to replace when the boilers blew (avg. longevity of paddlewheelers–2 years before the boiler went)than buying slaves.
Fish,
There might not be a race of people who have not been discriminated against.
I know the Irish have had a hard lot in this country, but, much as I hate to admit it, research Mormons. No matter how you disagree with their ideology, you have to respect ltheir chtzpah. Everytime they settled an area, carving a workable land/city area out of scrub/swampland, the ‘God-fearing, TRUE christians came in killing and driving them off the land just to have them settle further away. Thank (inset deity of choice) they finally found the worst desert possible to actually get some peace.
You know Sol, I think that Fish hit the nail on the head. We’re arguing semantics. I too believe if you’re on your own private property, you should be able to display what you wish, within reason. (I’m thinking porn here). But the nooses weren’t on private property, they were on school property. That’s the difference.
TDT,
Then I believe that the school has the right to remove the - hell anything that the school did not place there.
As per discipline, the person(s) responsible should be handed the same punishment as a student hanging a flier for a party that was not authorized.
By promoting such press and attention over so called hate crimes, hate speech, or any other resemblance of hate, this perpetuates the feelings. If Sharpton and Jackson had found real jobs, I have to wonder where this hate movement would be right now.
Even on your own property, I hold certain reservations. A noose on your own property around the end of Oct. is fine as long as your scarecrow doesn’t have a peaked white hood.
So fish,
If I were to hand a noose from a tree and a rebel flag above my garage, the police should be authorized to force removal?
Meant no disrespect. Please replace fish with Fish.
Maybe not remove by force; just not notice your neighbors obscuring the sight of such with eggs.
No disrespect, Sol. If you had the monkey fingers I have, your typing would be worse. Seems I backspace twice for every character that stays. Harder’n snot for me to hit the shifts and anything from right ring finger especially.
ghotiphaze
Posted February 15, 2008 at 10:17 am | Permalink
Maybe not remove by force; just not notice your neighbors obscuring the sight of such with eggs.
Fish, that sounds like you support vandalism.
Well, yeah, kinda, in a way. Neither is an appropriate action. I’d prefer theft as that way there’d be less chance of the accidental over-coverage (like the actual garage, your car, your wife). There are occasionally times when you can’t let your morals get in the way of what’s right. I know, I’m just making excuses and validations (how Republican of me!). I detest it, but at the same time I despise unwarranted hate.
Confederate flag is ok in a museum or history book, but flown next to a noose carries only one meaning (no matter how you argue the flag is a ‘freedom’ symbol)
we = were in sollies world. Good NIGHT I can’t freakin type !!!!
LOL, sol, wanna borrow my fingers?
With 10 left thumbs, maybe a finger or two would help !!!
Freedom of speech is freedom of speech. If someone’s speech offender another, the offended. have every right to use thier own freedoms to villify that person, or his thoughts and acitons.
For the past few years, it has been cut down to
“Freedom of speech is okay for me, but not for you if you offend me” That is not freedom. WHile it is not absolute, (shouting fire in a movie theater for instance), most speech is and should be protected to the extent of being allowed by law. That the speakers pay some social penalty for their words and actions must be understood. That includes the obnoxious, and the offensive.
LJ - You’re right of course. So is Sol. It just bothers me that people can legally intimidate someone with symbolism and there be no penalty. But stepping back and thinking about it, I know how important my rights are now that GWB has endeavored to take them piece by piece. I was arguing the wrong side. I’m flip flopping!!
I hear where you are coming from TDT and I really have no place for those that hate, intimidate, and/or use their freedom to compromise the feelings of others. But it is their right to do so. IMHO it says more about the person that displays the noose.
Just as my neighbor in my above analogy, I would first try to laugh it off. Have you ever noticed when someone is pissed at you in traffic and flipping you off or whatever, a smile and a wave have a far greater impact than flipping them the bird back? Try it once or twice. It is very liberating.
I try not to label folks, but when someone displays something stupid, as is their right, haven’t they labeled themselves? The next time you see them at TSC or Gander Mountain, you say in the back of your head – “Oh yeah, that is the dumb ass that…”
Once you begin to travel down the road of censorship, it is damned hard to stop. Where do you draw the line - religion - politics - gender?
That having been said, PUBLIC organizations have to respect the considerations of all people. No nooses, no swastikas, etc.
The other incident involving a noose was the golfing magazine cover and the comments about Tiger Woods. That was a private company, but they did the right thing in firing the editor, if for nothing else, a complete lack of judgment.
WSClark
Posted February 15, 2008 at 11:41 am | Permalink
Once you begin to travel down the road of censorship, it is damned hard to stop. Where do you draw the line - religion - politics - gender?
The world ends today. WS and Sollie agree on something.
Goodbye all, hope it is quick and painless.
“WS and Sollie agree on something.”
Aw, come on Sollie, it happens every month or two - if only by accident.
Actually we have agreed a few things lately - Ron Paul, deficit spending, Iraq.
Damn, Mr. Dev VB, are you starting to lean to the Left or am I starting to lean to the Right?
The racists are stupid, and the people offended by the racists are stupid.
Sol’s a libertarian, so it makes since that he will agree on many issues with Liberals. I agree that one has a right to have a swastika flag on his porch at the same time i dont see the police spending a lot of resources trying to find out who keeps slashing his tires or poured the Karo syrup in his gas tank
Unknown Clarkie. I seem to be ‘fighting’ more with the GOPers though. Hmmm.
‘at the same time i dont see the police spending a lot of resources trying to find out who keeps slashing his tires or poured the Karo syrup in his gas tank”
Too bad. The police should spend just as much time on these crimes as any other acts of vandalism. Vandalism because you disagree with someone’s point of view, or speech, or displays, makes you only one thing. A criminal worthy or prosecuting.
Holding somewhat loosely to the theme of the thread, I think Bush is basically far too late with making this statement… Where was he when the situation was in full blow down in Louisiana??? Were he and Cheney in that undisclosed secret location?? Why did he wait until it looks like Obama is heading toward a nomination, for Bush to make a statement??
Just a lingering curiosity….
The police dont really investigate any types property crime why would they go out on a limb for a racist? Theirs a child molester that that lives down the block. more than once he’s had his tires slashed, house egged, car egged, teepeed. list goes on other than file a report the police have solving his case up on their list, I know one Kid involved (pretty sure theirs more than one) but I’m not about to rat him out and put myself on the side of defending a molester.
but I’m not about to rat him out and put myself on the side of defending a molester.
Let’s hope the person doesn’t feel the same about you when he is the only one that notices your house on fire and does/n’t call the fire department.
The police dont really investigate any types property crime…
Good point.
“know one Kid involved (pretty sure theirs more than one) but I’m not about to rat him out and put myself on the side of defending a molester.”
So, you won;t defend the law, but the lawbreaker because the one he commits violence against is distatestful? So, violating the rights of someone who is a terrorist is okay? So waterboarding known terrorists is okay? Or just vandalizing the property of a child molester is okay? WHere do you draw the line?
Oh, and I thought you were more liberal than that. (And I am not throwing eggs) or criticisms. What happened to “he’s done his time, paid the penalty for his crime, leave him alone” ?
LJ, I certainty dont blindly follow the Law for its own sake, hell tonight I’m going to play poker, which is illegal, usually dont wear a seat-belt either. Maybe I should turn him in, although I’m not 100% sure of his guilt, but it would be interesting since I’m sure the harassers of the molester got their info from a government published website sit.
TP, we too have a Registered SO in our neighborhood. There are many children in the neighborhood besides just mine. Whenever said SO is driving around the neighborhood with the side door of his van open, I’m probably the first to call the police. I’m sure he’s just taking his parakeet for a walk, but I feel it imprudent to take chances.
Here something to ponder WHY does the government publish info on where child molesters live? they dont do it for other more violent crimes. You find out your neighbors on the sex crime list what are you going to do not let your kids play outside? Of course the government is going to say dont be vigilantes but what other use is their for it. So you can protest in front of the house, hand out leaflets, get him fired from his job, isn’t that also harassment?
LJ, there is a bit of difference between a kid and people entrusted with people’s welfare.
Poker is great, not wearing a seat belt not so great. However, those are things that you do to yourself. Giving assent to the criminal actions of others, because of the past of those they are victimizing is a whole different story. However, since you know this individual, I probably would not “rat out” him or her either, until I had a chance to tell them the incorrectness of their action. Once I have done so, and I actually kow of their doing it again, i would indeed report it the next time thier was an incident.
As to child molesters, one has to be careful of the definition, but in general, someone convicted of rape or child molestion should be given a choice. They should have their scrotum nailed to stump. The stump should be set on fire,
and the convicted one given a dull knife. His choice. Or course, that probably would fit the definition of cruel and unusual and not be Constitutionally allowed, but, since it was their choice, maybe?
ghotiphaze
Posted February 15, 2008 at 1:47 pm | Permalink
LJ, there is a bit of difference between a kid and people entrusted with people’s welfare.
Maybe. But the principle is the same. See, that;s the thing about principles. Either they are, or they aren;t. GIving quiet assent to destroying someones property, regardless of the “reason” is not a principle I choose to stand on. And befor you or others ask, that includes the victimization of Tillers clinic and staff, or any other group I may or may not agree with. Eithe you are for the law whenit comes to the property of others, or you are not.
Tom Paine
Posted February 15, 2008 at 1:46 pm | Permalink
Here something to ponder WHY does the government publish info on where child molesters live? they dont do it for other more violent crimes
Because there was a hue and cry from the public, and poiticians saw a way to get votes. Besides, who wants to be caught “defending a monster”
Tom Paine,
I sure hope that someone who sees your house vandalized or burning feels the same way. Turn about is fair play is it not?
Are you a liberal Tom? You support vandalizing private property. How American of you.
LJ, you’re mixing apples and oranges to come up with grapefruit. There is no reasonable way you can equate egging the residence of an advertising racist (or convicted and obviously practicing SO) with waterboarding. As to the ONLY 3, I’m more apt to believe it’s only 3 that are undeniably provable. It’s another one of those We didn’t do it but since you caught me this time we won’t doi it anymore until you catch me at it again.
We already admitted it’s a Republican attitude of us, so you should embrace our brief lapse as a supreme victory for you (Mission Accomplished).
As stated eralier, sometimes you can’t let your morals get in the way of doing what’s right. It doesn’t count when you have no morals and do only what’s right for you.
“Here something to ponder WHY does the government publish info on where child molesters live?”
Before the wack jobs say I am defending sex offenders, tain’t true, BUT………..
A nephew of mine, my daughter’s cousin, was a registered sex offender. He had to notify the sheriff when he moved, etc.
If you tracked the website for sex offenders, you would have found him, assumed that he was a lowlife pervert and a danger to your children.
You might have even slashed his tires or egged his house.
His crime was that he received oral sex from a consenting young lady of age while driving his car.
Now Road Head is not exactly a good driving practice, but to classify my nephew the same as a child rapist is just not right.
And, no I am not questioning the convictions of the SO’s in your various neighborhood, just pointing out that not all “Sex Offenders” are a threat.
It doesn’t count when you have no morals and do only what’s right for you.
Would that fall under vandalizing someone’s house or witnessing the vandalization and doing nothing about it?
Which is right and which is “right for me”?
Im not advocating vandalism (just not suprised when it happens to certain people), but considering who the victim is I’m certainly not gonna shed any tears over it, like LJ said who wants to defend a monster. and Sol that you defend child molesters the slime of humanity, how American of you. if it really bothers you so much that people harrass child molesters Im sure NAMBLA is looking for donors.
Yes, I understand that Clark, and am in complete agreement that offenses aren’t listed. What’s worse, with the zone of SOs, it’s nearly impossible for many benign convicts to obtain a residence, much less a job.
The person who I’m speaking of is known as a child molester (didn’t have to get it off the web, this is a small town, and we know of the kids–don’t socialize with the kids or thier folks, but friends of friends, yada yada). And YES! he really does cruise the neighborhood in his yellow panel van with the sliding door open. I don’t know if he’s made any catches since he’s been released to the public, but I don’t want my kid to be the 1st. He hasn’t been egged, or vandalized that I know of and he’s only 3 houses away (on the next block, so possibly I just don’t know), but the neighbors all keep their kids well away from the area when he’s outside.
ghotiphaze
Posted February 15, 2008 at 2:06 pm | Permalink
I am sorry, I am having trouble following this particular post. So, it is okay to destroy the property of an advertized racist or child molestor, but not someone else? I am sorry, but this part,
“As stated eralier, sometimes you can’t let your morals get in the way of doing what’s right. It doesn’t count when you have no morals and do only what’s right for you.”
Seems to assert my argument. Where are you going with this? So, if they robbed a bank and did their time, is it okay to egg their house? I am not following your argument.
Tom I see Sol’s point. Not everyone listed on the SO websites are child molesters, and many of the crimes of SO are pretty innocuous. Like doing your wife in the park with no one else around (until the cop raps on your window).
And Sol, like I say, you can’t equate vandalizing the house of someone who flies a confederate flag next to a noose to waterboarding someone that if done enough just might confess to being a terrorist to validate the waterboarding.
WS, I agree the SO list needs tweaking, they also put all the Romeo and Juliet types on it 16 year old with 14 and 15 year old, even saw a guy on it said his crime was adultery, I didn’t even know that was still enforced
Tom Paine-
What? why the blast at SOl? He defends the law, and you think he should get in touch with NAMBLA? I dont’t give a damn who they are, kids should be taught to respect the rights and property of others, not just whom they respect. I will certainly stand up for the rights of a “molester” or a rascist, or anybody else, to not have their property destroyed.
So, if they robbed a bank and did their time, is it okay to egg their house? I am not following your argument.
No, I’m saying it’s ok to egg their house WHILE they’re robbing the bank. You’re trying to say it’s ok to rob a bank because just maybe they’ll steal money from me.
like LJ said who wants to defend a monster.
I defend American’s and their right to freedom and liberty Tom. Has this individual lost his citizenship? So you pick and choose whose rights to uphold. Should the fire department do the same when your house is ablaze (god forbid)? Would you respect their decision to pass on by your house as you support the vandalism of someone’s property? Would you support the right of a police officer to pick and choose whose rights he enforces as you are mugged?
You believe in civil liberty and freedom or you don’t. I think you have stated your case Tom.
Fish, I never brought up water boarding. I don’t defend torture of anyone; American nor foreign.
What? Where in the hell did you get that idea? I am saying, respect the rights, and property rights of others. I do not know what you are talking about.
LJ,
The quote is from Tom’s post. Sorry for the confusion.
Fish, I never brought up water boarding. I don’t defend torture of anyone; American nor foreign.
LOL, Sol, I know. Debating against 2 people at once gets confusing.
LJ, I agree with respecting others and property. It started out as a hypothetical as an illustration on difference of degrees. Y’all fixated on the wrong aspect of it. It isn’t a matter of whether the neighbors egged the house (remember, this didn’t happen in real life), but the fact that the confederate flag was flown next to a noose(once again, remember, Sol didn’t actually doo this, at least I hope he didn’t). Sol’s point was that according to the 1st amend. the police couldn’t do anything. My point is not everything that’s wrong is against the law, and not everything against the law is wrong. Between flying the rebel flag next to a noose and egging the flown flag (remember, that’s all I was calling for), in your own conscience, which is the more evil?
You’re the one who brought up egging property of people who one time in their past robbed a bank and equated egging with waterboarding.
Generally crimanals lose many rights, cant vote, cant own guns. barred from many types of work, teaching, police, daycare others. And Like I said I dont advocate violence against lowlifes, I just dont shed any tears when happens to them. If I’m in a crowd protesting the Phelps clan, and some pissed off marine starts wailing on them I wouldn’t stop him either, but if I’m in the park and see a guy wailing on some chick I probably would get involved, call it moral revalistim if you want but I dont see it being particularity Moral defending Phelps and getting beat by a Marine myself. BTW I believe Phelps has a right to do what he does and if is attacked the people who do it have to suffer the consequences of their actions, at the same time if I was on the jury I would probably vote for an acquittal, I aslo support Jury Nullication in some cases too.
I would probably vote for an acquittal
Nah, I’d nail them to the wall–Fined one dollar, time served (all 5 minutes), and forced to eat the largest steak in the best steak house in town. That’ll lurn ‘em, durn ‘em!
Pleefer asks why nooses and lynchings have to have a rascist connotation. The reason for that is that that all rascist claims are raised by rascists. So, its like the proverbial pot calling the kettle black. During Hurricane Katrina one newscaster referred to the victims (or volunteers - your call) as refugees and was shot down for using rascist language and making disparaging remarks about the New Orleans people (refugees) that decided hanging out in the Super Dome was better than getting out of harm’s way. Let’s get over it folks, we all look different from where I’m sitting. Are we a melting pot or a tray of ice cubes with our own little cubicles of heritage?
One Trackback
[...] WE Blog » The Wichita Eagle Editorial Department Blog wrote an interesting post today on President speaks out on nooseHere’s a quick excerptPresident speaks out on noose Posted6:00 a.m. It was good to hear President Bush speak out forcefully this week against noose displays and lynching jokes that have been the subject of recent national controversies. “The noose is not a symbol of prairie justice, but of gross injustice,” he said. “Displaying one is not a harmless prank. ‘Lynching’ is not a word to be mentioned in jest.” He called such references and displays “deeply offensive” and out of place in America today. They also reflec [...]