SuicideGirls > Boards > Current Events > NEWS: Grandpa McCain Gets Pwned

JunkyardAngel

San Gabriel, CA

February 2006

SEP 08, 2007 02:57 PM

BlastProcessing said:

Who needs what spelled out, again?

Obviously you. Finish reading my post.

Subrosa

San Francisco, CA

July 2004

SEP 08, 2007 02:59 PM

JunkyardAngel said:

Whatever. This has gone way off topic anyway and I have better things to do with my time. Like saving lives (animal) and teaching (humans).

Let's hope that what you're "teaching" is not civics, government, history, logic or anything of any importance whatsoever. Toodles.

BlastProcessing

Knoxville, TN

OLD SKOOL

SEP 08, 2007 03:16 PM

JunkyardAngel said:

BlastProcessing said:

Who needs what spelled out, again?

Obviously you. Finish reading my post.

Yeah, the part where you pretended that you fucking up was actually you trying to brilliantly point something out was comedy gold.

Red_Russian13 said:
Regarding the kid who asked the other question, well, he's a punk. No one has any respect anymore. Yay, he was admonished by the administration of the school. Who cares? Surely, if he has so little respect as to speak that way to a US Senator, then he couldn't give a shit less about a school principle's opinion.

If you think that speaking your mind to a political adversary in (apparently) even and appropriate tone is "disrespect", I shudder to think of what the founding fathers would think of you.

If this were my kid and he were disciplined for it, I would fight it to the very end. Whether I agreed with his political viewpoint or not. This is the kind of speech that the First Amendment was specifically designed for and it's the kind of dissent that America was founded on. If you've got a problem with that, then frankly you can get the fuck out of my country.

+1... although I am not technically in your country

NickFaust

USA

April 2004

SEP 08, 2007 06:12 PM

chainlink said:

NickFaust said:

TheFuckOffKid said:

JunkyardAngel said:
So, in theory, with moderated forums and all that, censorship is alive and well in SGland!

In theory, in practice, and it's never been claimed otherwise. The SG boards and groups are not and have never been argued to be "free speech zones".

And the last time I checked SG made no pretensions about being a democratic republic and did not have a constitution. But then I haven't been to the "about SG" page recently, so maybe that has changed.

yeah, SG also has a policy about name calling and other non-constructive behaviors on the CE boards. Don't make me flag you old man.

FLAG!

NickFaust

USA

April 2004

SEP 08, 2007 06:19 PM

JunkyardAngel said:
So basically you are saying that free speech only applies situationally/arbitrarily--to places that have guidelines/rules that you do not agree with; or at the very least to situations you are not currently discussing.

Like, if a school had certain guidelines/rules--that would be censorship; but the guidelines here at SG are cool with you, so they do not count. To you. (Which is obviously the key issue.)

Interesting.

And that SG does not have a constitution - um - hello? If iIt's run in the US, ifalls under US laws, constitution, etc.

And you have a very easy chain to yank.

Just FYI.

Ladies and gentlemen the prosecution rests.

SnowgodCCR

Derry, NH

November 2006

SEP 09, 2007 08:38 AM

DanielK said:

Toku666 said:
First of all, the only true respect is that which is earned.

I agree, but it could be argued that Sen. McCain has earned a certain degree of respect over the years.

I'm no McCain fan and I disagree with many of his political positions and I think the kid at the high school was right about him not being a leader and I totally back the kids right to say it how and where he did....but I do have some respect for McCain.

The thing is, because I respect the man I probably would be a bit harsher if I were able to talk to him face to face. I'm a bit pissed that he sold out the way he did with Bush and I would express serious doubts about what that sort of President that would make him.

Respect, yes, but there is that huge character flaw sitting in the middle of the room too.

And really, if a presidential candidate can't stand up to a harsh comment on leadership delivered by a high schooler, then how the fuck is he going to handle the pressure of being in office? Where was the "Let me take this opportunity to educate you on my leadership experience" retort? Where was the "Leadership is about... ...and that why I feel you are wrong," retort? If I were a senator and I kid drilled me and then got scolded by the admin I'd jump in to defend the kid because allowing dissent is what our political system is all about.

Daniel

Holy crap! A post that makes sense! I wish I were as articulate as you so I wouldn't get flamed. That's more or less exactly what I was trying to portray in my first post, but failed at.
Kid = snot for the way he said it
McCain = experienced US senator that deserves some degree of respect, but definitley fucked up on this one, and has been doing so more and more for the past 5 years, thus losing his "good leader" status. I don't respect the man anymore, but I can still respect his position, if that makes any sense. If the kid had said "the way you're handling XX brings me to question your leadership abilities", I wouldn't have a problem with it. The kid has a RIGHT to say what he did, I don't think that anybody will question that, but I still believe that the way he said it was a bit rude.
I truley agree with the last thing said in DanielK's post, that if McCain were still the man that he seems to think he is, he would have turned this situation into an opportunity to show us that.

JunkyardAngel

San Gabriel, CA

February 2006

SEP 09, 2007 02:00 PM

NickFaust said:

JunkyardAngel said:
So basically you are saying that free speech only applies situationally/arbitrarily--to places that have guidelines/rules that you do not agree with; or at the very least to situations you are not currently discussing.

Like, if a school had certain guidelines/rules--that would be censorship; but the guidelines here at SG are cool with you, so they do not count. To you. (Which is obviously the key issue.)

Interesting.

And that SG does not have a constitution - um - hello? If iIt's run in the US, ifalls under US laws, constitution, etc.

And you have a very easy chain to yank.

Just FYI.

Ladies and gentlemen the prosecution rests.

Note that this: And that SG does not have a constitution - um - hello? If iIt's run in the US, ifalls under US laws, constitution, etc.

Is followed by this: And you have a very easy chain to yank.

Get it? No?

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

NickFaust

USA

April 2004

SEP 09, 2007 03:28 PM

JunkyardAngel said:

NickFaust said:

JunkyardAngel said:
So basically you are saying that free speech only applies situationally/arbitrarily--to places that have guidelines/rules that you do not agree with; or at the very least to situations you are not currently discussing.

Like, if a school had certain guidelines/rules--that would be censorship; but the guidelines here at SG are cool with you, so they do not count. To you. (Which is obviously the key issue.)

Interesting.

And that SG does not have a constitution - um - hello? If iIt's run in the US, ifalls under US laws, constitution, etc.

And you have a very easy chain to yank.

Just FYI.

Ladies and gentlemen the prosecution rests.

Note that this: And that SG does not have a constitution - um - hello? If iIt's run in the US, ifalls under US laws, constitution, etc.

Is followed by this: And you have a very easy chain to yank.

Get it? No?

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

Yes. I see. You're not really a fucking idiot, you're just pretending to be one.

And doing a damn fine job too, I might add.

Gringo

USA

May 2006

SEP 09, 2007 03:30 PM

JunkyardAngel said:
Note that this: And that SG does not have a constitution - um - hello? If iIt's run in the US, ifalls under US laws, constitution, etc.

It's still a private site and they can edit or ban whatever they wish.

You really should read the F.A.Q. for the site some day; it may lessen the waddage of panties up one's ass.

Or in your case, maybe not.

tonkakatt

Boston, MA

June 2004

SEP 09, 2007 04:56 PM

I'm glad i got to see the whole clip, all the news & radio keep talking about is how he talled the kid a little jerk. as even though I agree that a person in his position shouldn't be saying things like that, to hear it at the end of his rant was kinda funny. it was like he was mimicking his kids or grandkids behavior.

JunkyardAngel

San Gabriel, CA

February 2006

SEP 09, 2007 05:40 PM

TheGringo said:
It's still a private site and they can edit or ban whatever they wish.

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

Yes, dear.

Kabbiebar

Citrus Heights, CA

November 2002

SEP 09, 2007 06:34 PM

Subrosa said:

JunkyardAngel said:

Subrosa said:

JunkyardAngel said:

Subrosa
If this were my kid and he were disciplined for it, I would fight it to the very end. Whether I agreed with his political viewpoint or not. This is the kind of speech that the First Amendment was specifically designed for and it's the kind of dissent that America was founded on. If you've got a problem with that, then frankly you can get the fuck out of my country.

Do you really think this is the kind of speech the 1st Amendment was designed for? A snotty kid being rude to an adult for a few high fives? This is the kind of "speech" that deserves lunch detention or "a call home to your mom." This is the kind of speech that on a normal day, if said to a teacher, would get a kid booted out to the AP's office. Or if said to a parent could get a kid grounded.

Holy shit. YES. YES a THOUSAND FUCKING TIMES. Yes, this is precisely the kind of speech that the First Amendment is designed to protect. Political. Fucking. Speech. Whether it be politically popular or unpopular, whether it be "appropriate" or not, this is exactly what the fucking Amendment is for. So people in authority can't make willy-nilly and arbitrary decisions about who can say what in what way about the way our government is run.

This is the type of speech that is given the highest degree of protection by our Constitution and by the courts that interpret it. Welcome to first-semester high school civics. Jesus CHRIST, do you even know what the fuck you're talking about?

Apparently not. Go back to school, Junior.

Um. He's a kid in school at a school event.

Um, it's a political speech where a candidate took questions. Doesn't matter one whit where that takes place.

Have you ever taken U.S. History or Civics? Are you from America? Have you ever learned anything about the way our Constitution works?

Um, according to your Supreme Court the fact that he's a kid in school at a school event matters quite a bit. Bethel School Dist. No.403 v. Fraser, Fredrick v. Morse, etc. The speech rights of schoolchildren in school are not equal to the speech rights of adults in other settings. In fact, a credible argument can be made that there was no such thing as freedom of speech in public schools at America's founding.

NickFaust

USA

April 2004

SEP 09, 2007 07:04 PM

Kabbiebar said:

Subrosa said:

JunkyardAngel said:

Subrosa said:

JunkyardAngel said:

Subrosa
If this were my kid and he were disciplined for it, I would fight it to the very end. Whether I agreed with his political viewpoint or not. This is the kind of speech that the First Amendment was specifically designed for and it's the kind of dissent that America was founded on. If you've got a problem with that, then frankly you can get the fuck out of my country.

Do you really think this is the kind of speech the 1st Amendment was designed for? A snotty kid being rude to an adult for a few high fives? This is the kind of "speech" that deserves lunch detention or "a call home to your mom." This is the kind of speech that on a normal day, if said to a teacher, would get a kid booted out to the AP's office. Or if said to a parent could get a kid grounded.

Holy shit. YES. YES a THOUSAND FUCKING TIMES. Yes, this is precisely the kind of speech that the First Amendment is designed to protect. Political. Fucking. Speech. Whether it be politically popular or unpopular, whether it be "appropriate" or not, this is exactly what the fucking Amendment is for. So people in authority can't make willy-nilly and arbitrary decisions about who can say what in what way about the way our government is run.

This is the type of speech that is given the highest degree of protection by our Constitution and by the courts that interpret it. Welcome to first-semester high school civics. Jesus CHRIST, do you even know what the fuck you're talking about?

Apparently not. Go back to school, Junior.

Um. He's a kid in school at a school event.

Um, it's a political speech where a candidate took questions. Doesn't matter one whit where that takes place.

Have you ever taken U.S. History or Civics? Are you from America? Have you ever learned anything about the way our Constitution works?

Um, according to your Supreme Court the fact that he's a kid in school at a school event matters quite a bit. Bethel School Dist. No.403 v. Fraser, Fredrick v. Morse, etc. The speech rights of schoolchildren in school are not equal to the speech rights of adults in other settings. In fact, a credible argument can be made that there was no such thing as freedom of speech in public schools at America's founding.

Well, yes, except that McCain was there making a politcal speech. A detail that the court has NOT ruled on.

Ascanius

South Royalton, VT

October 2006

SEP 09, 2007 10:59 PM

NickFaust said:
Well, yes, except that McCain was there making a politcal speech. A detail that the court has NOT ruled on.

Exactly. The court hasn't ruled on it one way or the other, as far as I know. And wrong as it may be, the court hasn't had any problem repressing student speech in public schools recently. I believe this kid was damn brave for speaking up to McCain the way he did, and I believe he was well within his rights, but I have doubts whether the current court would agree.

BOARDS:

TOPICS:

San Gabriel, CA

February 2006

SEP 08, 2007 02:57 PM

San Francisco, CA

July 2004

SEP 08, 2007 02:59 PM

Knoxville, TN

OLD SKOOL

SEP 08, 2007 03:16 PM

Emo, ON

January 2005

SEP 08, 2007 05:20 PM

USA

April 2004

SEP 08, 2007 06:12 PM

USA

April 2004

SEP 08, 2007 06:19 PM

Derry, NH

November 2006

SEP 09, 2007 08:38 AM

San Gabriel, CA

February 2006

SEP 09, 2007 02:00 PM

USA

April 2004

SEP 09, 2007 03:28 PM

USA

May 2006

SEP 09, 2007 03:30 PM

Boston, MA

June 2004

SEP 09, 2007 04:56 PM

San Gabriel, CA

February 2006

SEP 09, 2007 05:40 PM

Citrus Heights, CA

November 2002

SEP 09, 2007 06:34 PM

USA

April 2004

SEP 09, 2007 07:04 PM

South Royalton, VT

October 2006

SEP 09, 2007 10:59 PM

South Royalton, VT

October 2006

SEP 09, 2007 11:00 PM