Kathy Griffin on D Trump.

[MigL]

Would anyone care to comment on the propriety ( or vice versa ) of Cathy Griffin's photo shoot with the images of a beheaded President ?

And now she is doubling down, claiming that the repercussions ( of her actions ) are ruining her life.

 

Typical Hollywood; They are allowed to do whatever they want and protest whoever they want, but no one else should have the rights to protest their actions ?

This has very little to do with the president ( and his incompetence ), but has the media pushed too far in encouraging this sort of behavior ?

Is it now accepted behavior because D Trump 'deserves it' ?

[koti]

I would encourage everybody to calm down. What Cathy Griffin did is just the stuff that women do in locker rooms.

[DrmDoc]

Is it now accepted behavior because D Trump 'deserves it' ?

 

It was acceptable behavior during Obama's presidency, so why should it be any different now?

 

"We need to ride onto that battlefield and chop their heads off in November."-Ted Nugent

 

 

Other than an affront to a sitting president, how is Nugent's advocating decapitating democrats any different from Cathy's artistic expression. Although both maybe deplorable expressions, they are nonetheless expressions necessary to the freedom of our democracy.

[swansont]

They are allowed to do whatever they want and protest whoever they want, but no one else should have the rights to protest their actions ?

 

Who is claiming this?

 

 

 

I thought it was over the top and in poor taste, but as others have noted, this kind of thing is pretty standard. Anyone who didn't speak out against similarly ugly sentiments against Obama (or worse, encouraged them) has no credibility complaining about this.

 

One big difference though, is that Griffin apologized for going too far.

[MigL]

Really ?

The 'they did it so we can also' defense ?

I thought the whole point was to prove that we're not idiots like T Nugent.

Should we not strive to be better, set an example, and not stoop to their level ?

Giffin's video is at the ISIL terrorist level.

I wonder how friends and family of decapitated journalists and others feel, when seeing the level of what passes for political discourse these days.

[Delta1212]

No, it's not "They did it so we're allowed to do it." It's "everyone is always allowed to do it but it's kind of gross when anyone does it."

[koti]

According to wikipedia, Kathy Griffin is an actor, comedian and gay & lesbian activist. No matter how moronic her video is and it is over the top by a long way, it is plain abuse to compare it to real beheadings and state that her video is "ISIS terrorist level"

[DrmDoc]

Really ?

The 'they did it so we can also' defense ?

I thought the whole point was to prove that we're not idiots like T Nugent.

Should we not strive to be better, set an example, and not stoop to their level ?

Giffin's video is at the ISIL terrorist level.

I wonder how friends and family of decapitated journalists and others feel, when seeing the level of what passes for political discourse these days.

 

You misunderstood my point, I've offered no defense. Everyone in America has the right to make idiotic statements, if they're willing to accept the consequences for making them. Though grotesques, Cathy's artistic statement isn't unique or unusual as Nugent's statements attest. Although accountability isn't always equality meted for bad speech, these expressions are a testament to the freedoms our citizen's enjoy.

[studiot]

Perhaps a view from across the water?

 

Ever since I was a small boy, (and I know the tradition goes back at least as far as the 19 century) we have had end of period (week, month, whatever) satirical offerings from the creative arts folks.

 

Some are really good, some are plain trash. Often they are really cutting.

 

Politics has become more personal and polarised in recent years and coupled with the acceleration of output there is bound to be an increase in the rubbish.

 

We should remember the good and forget the bad, there will soon be a better joke available.

Edited June 3, 2017 by studiot

[KipIngram]

Perhaps a view from across the water?

 

Ever since I was a small boy, (and I know the tradition goes back at least as far as the 19 century) we have had end of period (week, month, whatever) satirical offerings from the creative arts folks.

 

Some are really good, some are plain trash. Often they are really cutting.

 

Politics has become more personal and polarised in recent years and coupled with the acceleration of output there is bound to be an increase in the rubbish.

 

We should remember the good and forget the bad, there will soon be a better joke available.

 

This is really a very good general point. The wonderful thing about the web is that it has made it possible for almost anyone to express their opinion to the world. And the terrible thing about the web is that very same thing. Our global communication capability has vastly more capacity than it did a few decades ago - if you fill that capacity starting at the right end of the bell curve describing content quality, you get a lot further to the left (left end of the bell curve - not left end of the political spectrum) than you did with the tiny capacity of the past. So along with the new freedom of expression the web makes possible we have to accept that we're going to see an awful lot of absolute garbage online.

 

I believe in the old "sticks and stones" adage - mere words don't hurt us. I think we've become way, way too sensitive these days and let our "feelings get hurt" way too easily. Trump's supporters just can't claim that things like this didn't happen re: Obama during his administration - they did. All behavior like this is completely tasteless and contributes toward the very damaging political polarization of our culture. I'm disgusted with Griffin, and was equally disgusted with the people who published Obama effigies.

 

Regarding CNN's actions, I regard that as a private matter between employer and employee. I think CNN can handle it any way they want, and it's not my business. Regarding the Secret Service's actions, I think consistency is in order. Their actions shouldn't be driven by political posturing - if it's their policy to investigate each and every incident like this then they should do that. If, however, they chose this particular incident to investigate because it had a high publicity factor, then that's inappropriate. I'd think they would have a process for evaluating things like this to determine whether or not a "seriously real" death threat is in play. It seems pretty clear to me that this was not a serious death threat - this was a celebrity acting like an idiot, primarily to attract attention. Regarding the reactions of the Trump family, what does anyone expect? If someone published a "death effigy" of me my family would be rightly and royally upset - it's unreasonable to expect family members not to feel wrath toward the perpetrator of such a thing. The government's really not allowed an "emotional" reaction, but family members are.

 

As I've noted before, this polarization is likely the biggest problem we have these days. We used to be a nation where disagreement was allowed. These days, though, both sides have declared the other Evil with a capital E. You'd think we were talking about Christ vs. anti-Christ. The whole point of freedom of speech and freedom of the press is to allow disagreement.

 

Also, I believe that the message from both sides that we see in the media is skewed by the media's desire to cover sensational things. I think most of the things we see are drawn from the extreme left and right ends of the political spectrum, because those are the sensational things. The huge majority of us are at various positions in the middle, so that means that most media coverage is directed at what are really minority positions. Allowing the vocal left or the vocal right dictate the way the nation is run would be tragic. But in order to arrive at any sort of sane moderate compromise position requires that people be willing to discuss their disagreements and also willing to compromise. Our current political climate is making that harder and harder all the time.

 

So, MigL - you asked for thoughts on this. It makes me very sad to see that this is the sort of thing we choose to spend our energy and time on, when there are so many real problems that need to be worked out. This sort of thing tips us more toward political warfare and more away from political cooperation, and that's a very sad thing.

Edited June 3, 2017 by KipIngram

[koti]

 

 

So, MigL - you asked for thoughts on this. It makes me very sad to see that this is the sort of thing we choose to spend our energy and time on, when there are so many real problems that need to be worked out. This sort of thing tips us more toward political warfare and more away from political cooperation, and that's a very sad thing.

 

+1 KipIngram. Especially the quote above.

I would add that the "global village" besides creating polarization on all areas of interaction also added (for lack of better phrasing) - an "unhealthy level of political correctness" which distorts exchange of information. It is especially noticeable in social media where only highlights of issues are being discussed completely lacking the crucial details which are the most relevant to a given issue. It is a shame that all those wonderful networking technologies we created in the last 30 years are in a big part used for dumbing ourselves by the means of social media, completely useless smartphone apps and other useless stuff which is out there just to draw bandwidth and gather/sell user data.

[swansont]

You misunderstood my point, I've offered no defense. Everyone in America has the right to make idiotic statements, if they're willing to accept the consequences for making them. Though grotesques, Cathy's artistic statement isn't unique or unusual as Nugent's statements attest. Although accountability isn't always equality meted for bad speech, these expressions are a testament to the freedoms our citizen's enjoy.

Ditto.

 

Consider, also, that Trump's panties have gotten in a twist from SNL's spoofs, and those are absolutely within the realm of acceptable satire. So there are two issues at stake: satire/lampooning as protest, and what level is acceptable. Griffin crossed the line and apologized for it, and (contrary to the sentiment of the OP) I don't see a lot of people defending it*. GOP members have made jokes/used imagery about shooting people and we tend to only hear the rank and file chanting their support.

 

*I did see some discussion about how dems tend to apologize too quickly, and the repubs seemingly never do

 

here's the thread

https://twitter.com/cmclymer/status/869990211140190208

[DrmDoc]

Yeah, those republicans are a rather unapologetic bunch, which they appear to mistake for strength rather than cowardice. Admitting one's mistakes, IMO, requires a bit of courage and a measure of integrity sorely lacking in politics.

[Janus]

Really ?

The 'they did it so we can also' defense ?

I thought the whole point was to prove that we're not idiots like T Nugent.

Should we not strive to be better, set an example, and not stoop to their level ?

Giffin's video is at the ISIL terrorist level.

I wonder how friends and family of decapitated journalists and others feel, when seeing the level of what passes for political discourse these days.

I don't think that was the gist of Swansont's response at all. I think is more along the lines of "You can say it goes to far when either side does it or you can claim it is an expression of free speech when either side does it, but what you can't do is claim it as free speech when one side does it and say it goes too far when the other side does it."

[KipIngram]

I don't think that was the gist of Swansont's response at all. I think is more along the lines of "You can say it goes to far when either side does it or you can claim it is an expression of free speech when either side does it, but what you can't do is claim it as free speech when one side does it and say it goes too far when the other side does it."

 

+1. EXACTLY.

[imatfaal]

I think this is an ethical question as much as a political one; I like to think that I (and the sort of people I am friends with and politically aligned with) would eschew making jokes which rely on recycling images of brutal beheadings. Those that do allude to violence in a "humorous manner" or as part of an "entertainment" tend to be on the other side of the political divide; I would like to keep it that way.

 

I will let UKIP/Tea Party right-winger engage in personality politics, character assassination (see how hard it is to avoid), and attack ads; I would like the liberal left to counter with evidence based politics, honest debate, and face-to-face engagement with the electorate. Of course this it is not as clear cut as I have painted - but in the UK without doubt and I believe in the USA there is a clear difference. When someone from the left uses the inflammatory and brutal language of the right-wing gutter press I am personally a little bit ashamed - one of ours has stooped to their level.

[KipIngram]

imatfaal, I feel exactly the same way, but at least partially the other way around. I don't consider myself "right wing," because I embrace many of the causes of the left. I don't consider myself "left wing" either, because I feel that free enterprise should be the core of our economic approach (it just needs to be suitably regulated to protect us from its extreme outcomes). But I also feel that indulgence in that kind of inflammatory methodology is totally inappropriate and prefer not to align myself with anyone who engages in it.

 

I'll go back to what I said above - I think the media shows us primarily the far left and (especially) the far right, and I really want nothing to do with either. I think most of us are in between.

[Delta1212]

I don't consider myself "left wing" either, because I feel that free enterprise should be the core of our economic approach (it just needs to be suitably regulated to protect us from its extreme outcomes).

The thing is, this is how most of the US left actually feels. I consider myself decidedly left of center in US politics and you've perfectly summarized my economic views with that sentence.

[KipIngram]

Well, probably not if I went into further detail. For example, for what I'll call "tier one" poverty alleviation (by tier one I'm talking about people who are competent to make decisions, as opposed to people who need help caring for themselves) I'd use a negative income tax to put money in their hands, and then just erase the alphabet soup of welfare-related agencies we have now. So the government would still be providing aid to those who needed it, but would so so with much, much less "intervention" into the economy and society. The people who needed more than just financial aid would still need something different, but there are far fewer of them - that would be my "tier two."

 

Generally speaking I support government action to alleviate poverty and similar problems, but I'd like to see the government do that with the broadest possible brush strokes and try not to adopt a "details controlling" position in things. But this takes us OT, so let's not do more.

Edited June 3, 2017 by KipIngram

[Delta1212]

Yes, this is sort of an odd topic to have that discussion in. I'll just leave off by saying that I'm not sure exactly what it is you think I would oppose about any of that.

[iNow]

I'm tired of us holding comedians and actors to higher standards than presidents. I'm tired of manufactured rage storms and overblown hysteria fests distracting us all from the issues that are truly important like our response to climate change, collusion with foreign states, desire to delegitimize the press, take healthcare away from tens of millions of people, give more ethics waivers and lobbying exemptions in 100 days than past presidents did in 8 years, and ad infinitum... Stop chasing the laser pointer, people. We're not cats FFS.

[MigL]

You may be tired of it iNow, but unfortunately a great multitude of people are not.

They hang on their every word: Why are publications/sites like Daily Mail so popular ?

Hell, the ( so called ) President IS a media personality !

 

Idiots like C Giffen ( and T Nugent ) should be condemned by everyone, before the even bigger idiots, who get their 'news' from the likes of Daily Mail, are spurred on to take things even farther.

[KipIngram]

Yes, there used to be a clear line of division between "real news" and the likes of the National Enquirer and so on. That line hardly seems to exist at all any more.

[imatfaal]

I'm tired of us holding comedians and actors to higher standards than presidents. I'm tired of manufactured rage storms and overblown hysteria fests distracting us all from the issues that are truly important like our response to climate change, collusion with foreign states, desire to delegitimize the press, take healthcare away from tens of millions of people, give more ethics waivers and lobbying exemptions in 100 days than past presidents did in 8 years, and ad infinitum... Stop chasing the laser pointer, people. We're not cats FFS.

 

 

Not holding them to higher standards than the president - but claiming that only by distinguishing ourselves by word and deed in both style and content from Breitbart and its hoards are we different from those deplorables.

 

It is noble and perhaps doomed to failure but we look to win by soaring above the moral depravity of trump and his new swamp-minions and not by compromising ourselves by stooping to brawl in their mire-filled gutter

 

Completely agree however that the furore over this has been ridiculous and a deliberate attempt to move the eye of the public and the press away from the trumpster. If the right-wing pseudo-press and president can make the argument about trivialities then they will win or at least not be able to be held to account.

 

That does not detract from a judgment by those here and in other places that the sketch was ill-considered - but you are correct that this inconsequential sketch will be used to distract from massively important flaws at the heart of government à la mode de "...but the emails!"

[John Cuthber]

Ars longa, vita brevis

but this thread is getting ridiculous.

It's bad joke- or bad art.