Flash Mob Doofs

The outcry, especially the reflexive yammering idiots commenting at HuffPo, over these dancing buffoons is annoying. People are responding to this as though it were Kent State or the ’68 Democratic National Convention all over again.

Let’s be clear. These flash mob protesters were engaged in an act of civil disobedience to protest a ruling by the Federal Court in the case of Mary Brooke Oberwetter, who was arrested for dancing inside the Jefferson Memorial.

The court held that “…expressive dancing “falls into the spectrum” of prohibited activities—including demonstrations, picketing and speechmaking—at the memorial.” The rules, the court said, ban conduct that has the “propensity to draw onlookers.”

The point of the decision is that the government has a proper interest in maintaining an atmosphere of tranquility and quiet reflection within that space. Political protest (among other forms of expression) is not conducive to that atmosphere and is, therefore, not permitted.

The general feeling among the righteously indignant seems to be based on a few points: that the protesters were “only dancing” and that “the people have the RIGHT to assemble and protest” – that any infringement upon that right is equivalent to jack booted thugs inflicting a police state.

Fuck, I hate stupid people.

First of all, I’m willing to lay long odds and take heavy action that if the protesters had been members of the Westboro Baptist Church, waving their “God Hates Fags” placards around and yammering how god hates America, loves dead American soldiers and everyone is doomed to hell, none of the blithering imbeciles screaming about rights would have the slightest objection to seeing them bodyslammed.

Fortunately, the right to peacefully assemble and protest is not limited only to those persons with whom we agree. Rights are not only worthy of protection when we find the subject and content of the message laudable or socially virtuous.
If you are going to open up the Jefferson Memorial to dancing assholes, you have to open it up to facist assholes, racist assholes and theocratic assholes. The WBC, neo-Nazis, anti-abortionists and doofs who want to silently dance all have the same right to protest…and none of them are permitted to do so within the Jefferson Memorial.

No one is preventing these idiots (“I can dance where I want to, man!”) from assembling, protesting, or dancing to their heart’s content. They are simply restricted from inflicting their political protest on others within that space. Similarly, anti-abortion protesters may stand across the street from the clinic – they have no right to enter the building; neo-Nazis may don their offensive SS uniforms and Zeig Heil up and down the street in front of a synangogue – they may not enter the shul; the WBC may protest down the street from the funeral of a deceased soldier – they are not permitted at the grave site, and these dancing fools have an almost infinite number of places to get their groove on – they simply cannot do so inside the memorial.

The right to assemble and protest is not unfettered. No right is absolute. Not the right to life (self-defense); not the right to liberty (incarceration after conviction at trial); not the right to free speech (incitement to riot or murder), and the places where rights may be exercised are quite properly limited. Imagine these twits wanted to dance inside a Catholic church in protest of decades of child sexual abuse and the years of cover-up. As much as I support their position, the church has an absolute right to say, “No, you must leave.”
People are allowed to protest on the sidewalk in front of the White House (I don’t know if permits are required…but in any event, people do protest there). Climb the fence and, despite the White House being “The People’s House”, you will encounter a very large, very serious man who will tie your trachea in a reef knot.

America is, allegedly, a nation of laws. The law is clear and the court has specifically addressed this very activity. Break the law, and you will be arrested. When you are given a lawful order by a police officer, OBEY IT. Failure to comply will have consequences, and a determination that being bodyslammed amounts to excessive force will only occur after you’ve been bodyslammed.

Anyone who’s concerned about the erosion of rights in America and points to this pathetic little display as evidence is a moron. In the wake of the Patriot Act, Gitmo, warrantless wiretapping, illegal renditions, the TSA body scanners and pat downs, the erosion of habeous corpus, not to mention torture, getting bent over some prancing idiots who are inflicting their silly crap on everyone else seems shallow and ridiculous.
I’ve even seen people try to compare this to Jim Crowe laws, Rosa Parks, and women’s suffrage. For fuck sakes…get over it, Gertrude!

The law is clear: No dancing inside the Jefferson Memorial. Violate the law and you will be arrested. Resist lawful orders from the police and you may wind up with a civil action for excessive force. Whether anyone wins that argument is another matter, but the premise remains: Dance in that space – get arrested. This flashmob and their foolish infliction of their “rights” on everyone else is nothing more than supreme arrogance and petty, juvenile behaviour rooted in a stunning degree of ignorance and bourgeois entitlement.

28 Responses

  1. I can’t believe that there for a minute I was complementing your ability to hold down a reasonable debate!

    What a ‘stupid’, ‘asshole’, ‘doof’, ‘moron’ you are!

    • No, you were right. But this is a blog post. It’s not a debate – it’s opinion. You get to express yours in the comment box, if you so wish. But I’m under no obligation to present balance or express counter arguments with which I disagree.
      And if you want to insult me, which is fine, try to expand your vocabulary a bit. Pejorative terms half of which are demonstrably inapplicable only damage your credibility.

      • Pejorative terms??? Uh, hey Mr Credibility, I believe the title here is “Flash Mob Doofs”

        There is only so much credibility blogs are capable of.

    • Really? That’s your response to opinions with which you disagree? You call names and cut me off on FB? LMAO. Don’t talk about debating people with whom you disagree. That’s some petty butthurt, right there.

  2. No sound today, so I’m working with video only

    First off, I’d like to say that I hate flash-mobbing & the bullshit “social media” breeding ground it oozes out of. They all need to be body slammed.

    That said, it’s pretty clear the offence does not rise to the level of force used. I mean, it’s not as if these people were guilty of Driving While Black. All they did was “dance”, if that’s what you want to call it. Looks more like they were shaking off a shot of Newfie Screech to me.

    The last time I was at that monument, I saw kids behaving far, far, worse than this and nobody beat them, not even their lousy parents. Where were these fucking goons back then? Oh, yeah. It was pre-9/11.

    And what’s with the abuse of people taking pictures? It’s the fucking Jefferson Monument! Every single motherfucker who goes there takes pictures. But The Pigs started grabbing everyone and throwing them around because, if you got a badge and a gun, you can do whatever the fuck you want today and whatever it takes to cover it up.

    Why not just close the monument off from the general public while you’re at it. It’s not like it’s a public space or anything. Like the White House, it’s not like the public “needs” to go there. They should build a wall around it with guard towers security cams and attack dogs before Al-Qaeda sends in this Canadian http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/81081948/ who was actually arrested for being a terrorist later.

    If we don’t act to protect our public places from the public, then none of us will have public spaces that are safe enough for the public to go to.

    Anyone who’s concerned about the erosion of rights in America and points to this pathetic little display as evidence is a moron. In the wake of the Patriot Act, Gitmo, warrantless wiretapping, illegal renditions, the TSA body scanners and pat downs, the erosion of habeous corpus, not to mention torture, getting bent over some prancing idiots who are inflicting their silly crap on everyone else seems shallow and ridiculous. I’ve even seen people try to compare this to Jim Crowe laws, Rosa Parks, and women’s suffrage.

    Yeah, look at all the fuss Negroes made about eating at lunch counters. Shut up and eat at home, motherfuckers!

    Except for the airport scanners, which idiots mistakenly believe will make them safer, people can’t relate to those other violations of rights. Those serious rights abuses happen to “bad people” out of the spotlight and far removed (they think) from their daily lives. They don’t think it affects them, so they don’t much care, which allows it to continue.

    From that point, the feeling of entitlement to abuse people’s rights trickles down to all in authority until they start beating doofuses (even more) senseless for just shaking their booty in a public place.

    To me, it’s all part of the same puzzle, but this clip gets a reaction because the public can relate to it better. The other stuff is too intellectually inaccessible. Sad, but true.

    • GAH!!! Motherfucker, I expect better from you than this!
      NO ONE is saying you can’t protest. You just can’t protest THERE.
      And the argument that stopping a bunch of petty dickheads from inflicting their stupid boogie on the solemn atmosphere of the Jefferson Memorial is equivalent to shutting down the Selma March with fire hoses is just fucking stupid.
      Yeah, those cops seemed to overreact – there didn’t seem to be any need to slam that fucker. That’s a separate issue entirely.
      Fucking with the videographers is another problem…but that is ALSO a separate issue.
      The ISSUE is whether or not you want to permit political protest inside the Jefferson Memorial…and if you want to let those dancing buffoons in, then you have to let the Nazis silently Zeig Heil, the WBC carry their GOD HATES FAGS placards, and the anti-abortionists stand there with dead fetuses in their hands. FUCK THAT. Fuck it SIDEWAYS.
      NO political protesting INSIDE the Jefferson Memorial…or the library…or the public school.
      Look. Forget the FIRST Amendment. Let’s talk about the SECOND…
      American citizens have the right to keep and bear arms. Does that mean they can carry their gun ANYWHERE they want? Fuckin’ eh, NO it doesn’t.
      There are plenty of places you MAY NOT exercise your RIGHT under the 2nd Amendment. Well, brother, there are places you may not exercise your right under the 1st, too. Here’s ONE example. Next time you’re in a courtroom, try having a little 1st Amendment protest there. When the judge tells you to sit the fuck down and stop dancing, you explain to him how it’s your RIGHT to protest anywhere you want to. And don’t call me for bail.
      The degree of stubborn, obtuse, willful fucking blindness required to argue that these prancing brats have the RIGHT to dance inside the Jefferson Memorial – infringing on the atmosphere of solemn commemoration the COURT deemed worthy of protection; inflicting their shit on anyone who may have traveled there to sit and contemplate the legacy of Thomas Jefferson (or even of Sally Hemings!) – is so goddamn frustrating I want to fucking stab something.

      • First Amendment? Didn’t that involve something about Quebec Sovereignty? And the Second Amendment? Isn’t that the right to carry a hockey stick with you at all times?

        I heard Americans can now carry their “hockey sticks” on Amtrak trains and in public parks, so maybe they already can take them into the Jefferson Memorial. The ability to kill somebody at any moment is the most important right in America, don’t ya know? It’s the only right that’s expanding. Just wait a few years and see where guns will be allowed next.

        Now, before you blow a head gasket, keep in mind that I’m largely just being a dickhead here because I got time today and am just in that kind of extra-contrary mood. This is certainly trivial and stupid, but it is a little more complex than “If we let these flash-morons boogie around, we’ll also have to let Nazis Zieg Heil.” You act as if America is a nation of laws and equality before the law, you naive fool. ;)

        First, I’m not sure why Nazis would be saluting the statue of Jefferson, a guy well known for race mixing. Nazis would be more likely to protest Jefferson and might actually constitute a legitimate threat to the monument and anyone else present. That merits action far more than the Cash For Solid Gold Dancers did. They weren’t even so much as break dancing…until The Pigs slammed them down on the floor and spun them around. The abuse and the forcible ejection of everyone present actually resulted in more damage to the “sanctity of the building” than these flash-morons would have done. I mean, they weren’t even going this far with their dance http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_B-CCX4ff64

        But the (amateurish) goonery showed everyone who was in charge. That’s what a Police State is all about, being in control of everything and everyone. No matter how trivial the “offence”, it is met with as much force as the user of force decides. Look at how China deals with the Falun Gong Show contestants.

        But I’m not kidding about the time I was at the Jefferson Monument. A dozen little fucking shitheads were running wild. They were running laps inside the monument, grabbing the statue and screaming at the tops of their lungs for what seemed like half an hour. If I recall, one little shit was bouncing a super-ball around. Nobody, including their parents, did anything. Is it because the kids weren’t attempting to use their 1st Amendment rights to protest, which is supposed to be protected speech but actually opens you up as a target for special treatment? Or, is the difference merely because of the hysterical post-9/11 Security State that has since sprung up? Either way, those little shits ruined my visit more than a half dozen wiggling retards or a few idiots doing Nazi salutes would.

        As for the “God Hates Fags” losers, placards are props that can be taken at the door. But what about just walking around with a God Hates Fags T-shirt? If it’s just clothing, is that OK? Or, do we now have Big Bro telling us what we can wear & where? My mother was once told she couldn’t enter a Catholic church in Venice because her skirt was too short. Is that next? Ashcroft did cover up those statues in a public building. Sounds like you’re sidling up next to them!

        But the Catholic churches are private property, right? Owners of private property have more right to violate your rights. That’s where the lunch counters come in. They weren’t in public parks. They were private businesses that believed that denying service to blacks was not just legal, but expected by society, if not the law itself. And it was, after all, only robbing blacks of their rights to eat a sandwich in a privately owned establishment that didn’t want them to engage in that behaviour. Change “hungry blacks” to “dancers with Boogie Fever” and what do you have?

        In all seriousness, there is a continuum here. Protest should be more protected than mere bad behaviour. Public property is supposed to offer more rights to the public than the private property of others. This action/ruling on the dancing, while not terribly serious, seems a little “out of step”, so to speak. (Oh, yeah, I went there.)

        The greater context is that there is a massive overall erosion of rights going on everywhere you turn, both big and small. There is over-reach and over-reaction by authorities and with little or no consequence or resistance. (see taser mania) This video is an example of that.

        Are this flash-morons idiots? Yeah. Is there any reason to do what they did? Well, I suppose they’re protesting for the right to protest, but dance ain’t exactly protest per se, so it’s marginal at best. Was there a real threat posed by them? No. What about setting a precedent? If it’s on the forbidden activity list (the forbidden dance?) it’s on the list of forbidden activities. Taking it off is like taking spitting off. Allowing dance can only become a precedent for allowing protests if dance is declared a form of protest to be banned. Only then will Nazis have a case.

        Yeah it’s stupid, but if being stupid was a crime, America should declare itself a prison, build a wall along its borders and -uh- oh yeah.

        • The Jefferson Memorial is NOT public property. It is US Government property open to the public. Weak analogy: A BAR is open to the public but not public property. You are free to enter, but transgress the house rules and you will be leaving, either on your feet or tossed through the door like a Frisbee.

          Lengthy debates about props, t-shirts, stickers and tattoos notwithstanding, you either permit EVERYONE the opportunity to protest there OR you deny everyone. Under the constitution you may not distinguish one form of protest as benign and tolerable while labeling others aggravating and unworthy of access to the specific space.

          This video is evidence of nothing ore than a bunch of spoiled rotten, ignorant, uneducated, stubbornly myopic ass stains being busted for a clear, INTENTIONAL violation of the law.
          That is not to say rights are not being eroded. It IS to say you need to find a better poster child.

        • Hey, they aren’t my poster children! If they were my children, I’d take them back to the wood shed and show ‘em my belt.

          The video contains nothing more than a bunch of self-involved, self-important, idiots who spend way too much time “social networking” and drawing attention to themselves. The only element resembling protest present here is the police violence.

          These clowns are just my convenient sock-puppets for (what I thought was) a satirical debate. For some reason, it seems people all over the Inter-tubes are actually taking this dancing bullshit seriously. Apart from the police goonery, which was WAY over the top, completely unnecessary and yet utterly ineffective (most got back up & danced again in cuffs), I couldn’t give less of a shit. Nor should anybody else.

          The whole thing, even the calibre of “dancing”, is a joke. Jesus, it’s as stupid as censoring Elvis dancing on TV and people arguing if we’ll have to allow Nazis the right shake their pelvis on TV. Elvis was just some guy entertaining people on an entertainment show. And these idiots are just playing to the cameras too.

          They aren’t protesters. Protesters have causes. They’re just disturbing the peace. Just drag these dancing fucktards out one at a time and cuff them to a bike rack for a couple hours. So a few get to “bust a move” while you take the others out. Whup de fucking doo! You don’t really even have to charge them, let alone crack open their skulls in front of tourists & their families. But no, the stupid thugs had to beat them right in front of Jefferson and then go on to bully everyone else in the building.

          Discussing other protests (ie lunch counters) was really just an attempt to flush out any legal distinction between the two. The lunch counters were REAL protests about REAL issues on REAL private property, not a few ass-clowns pathetically wriggling for the “right” to dance on National Park Service property, (because I guess the public doesn’t own the government).

          On paper, those lunch counter managers were just trying to enforce their perfectly legal rules from intentional rule breakers as part of their campaign of law breaking. The store rule being enforced was “We don’t serve niggers here, out of respect to the local custom of hatin’ niggers.” State laws essentially provided them cover.

          While appearing to argue in the dancers’ favour, I was actually belittling the dancers’ “cause”. While the arguments for and against both protests aren’t terribly different, the validity of the cause could not be further apart. Without proper context, the law is just an ass made by stupid assholes. If you let it, it would equate this dancing bullshit with the lunch counter protests AND demonstrations calling for genocide. And they would all get treated as if they were, when they aren’t.

          The court ruling actually gave them a “cause” by claiming their “protest” was justifiably forbidden. Et voila! The Forbidden Dance, and its obvious appeal was born.

          In his infinite wisdom, Judge Sedate Me would have ruled that the dancer was “nothing more than some irritating douche-nozzle who needed to be ejected for annoying people” and that there was no First Amendment claim in play.

          But the court didn’t stress something logical like “potential safety threat”, “causing a disturbance” or even “It’s an American Holy Place, they can ban whatever the fuck they want”. No, the standard was “drawing attention”. (Like being black at a lunch counter?) Does the judge have any idea how many attention seeking losers are out there? Never mind the Internet, half the fucking shows on network TV are dedicated to those desperately trying to draw attention to themselves. That’s the life goal of 90% of people under 30. And surprise surprise when some of these fucktards show up at the Jefferson Memorial to dance “protest” the ruling with their newly minted First Amendment right to “protest” that’s being “violated”. In effect, they won merely by getting the courts to declare dance a protest worth banning.

          But now that there’s a ruling equating “drawing attention” to protesting, just wearing T-shirts like “God Hates Fags”, “Jefferson Owned Slaves” or “I Love Barry O” in a public place runs the risk of you getting body-slammed to the marble by idiots with badges who think Ultimate Fighting is “too intellectual”. As for dance, these knuckle draggers couldn’t tell an epileptic seizure from a Karen Kain performance.

          For that matter, walking backwards, intentional stuttering, claiming Jefferson is staring at your daughter’s tits, or any behaviour that “draws attention” is no longer just stupid or mentally ill. It can now rise to the level of “protest” that needs to be punished. Anybody familiar with protests know how The Pigs go the extra kilometre to grind even potential protesters into pulp.

          This ain’t no fucking protest. It’s a fucking joke.

  3. Why do folks always compare unfavorable conditions in whatever situation to black people and civil rights? From my perspective, you cannot find an equivalent with anything less than the Holocaust, and I’m still questioning which is worse – 400 years of slavery or systematic murder of six million people. Other than those two events – no gay people it’s not the same fight – can we find another analogy when somebody doesn’t get their way?

    • NO. If you cannot account for the egregious case, don’t come whining to me with the minor case.
      Nothing personal…merely pointing out that THAT is how the LAW works.

      • What are you saying here? What case is egregious and which is minor and who is whining?

      • Or how about, “Analogies are only as good as their ability for the listener to comprehend and or appreciate the significance.”

        I can compare my situation to the rights of a left handed, Himalayan yak herder to slaughter the yak by cutting its throat from right to left all day long. Unless I’m talking to a yak herder, where the fuck is that going to get me? Nowhere!

        It has to be easily comprehended, or it ain’t worth shit.

  4. @ staci- what is it you are trying to say, and to whom?

  5. I’m not “trying” to say anything – I asked a question. I absolutely am dumbfounded everytime I see the references to gay rights, can’t dance in the Memorial rights, (fill in the blank with the act somebody feels they’re denied) and civil rights for an entire group of people.

    • Some rights are ignored (or even laughed at). Some rights are fought for and won. Some rights are fought for and won, and then are backslid upon and return to being ignored and violated. It’s generally about demanding and/or meriting the treatment you receive..and defending them.

      Why the comparison to slaves & the Holocaust? First, because they are famous and well documented examples. Nobody ever talks about the right of Madagascar villagers to receive a miniature Eiffel Tower statue from the government every 10 years. Any example has to be something large numbers of people can relate to.

      The other reason is that people without any safeguards to their rights often do wind up like slaves or Holocaust victims. It’s in our human nature to pick on the weak and disenfranchised, to turn them into prison bitches.

      And for every group seeking rights, there are groups opposing/ignoring/laughing at them who have to be overcome. Drawing comparisons to famous examples can be effective, even if over-the-top sometimes.

      History is written by winners. The anti-slavery side won, so rights for black people have been normalized and aren’t as ludicrous a concept as they were back then. If the monument dancers win, a hundred years from now people interviewed between dance breaks at the Jefferson Memorial will think how crazy people were to deny the right to dance at monuments. That’s how it works.

      • The right to live without bondage is comparable to being able to co-habitat/marry a person of the same gender or dance in a federal building – yeah, I can see how they are the similar. Ah, okay, got it (can you feel the snark). Slavery or the Holocaust are not “famous examples” to the people that lived through these atrocities and to demean the severity of each situation to accommodate a need to “be effective with over-the-top examples” should be called out every time.

        Can you really equate the death, destruction of family, the selling of human bodies like chattel as being on the same plane as whether or not we change what is socially acceptable? My personal feeling is that one of the reasons that the gay community cannot get more support from the black community is this outrageous comparison. Lots of us are absolutely incensed that ANYBODY can call these two like situations.

        • Sigh. No one is equating anything. You are missing the point.

          The constitutional right to freedom of speech, of necessity, makes no distinction between messages we like and find virtuous and messages we dislike and find reprehensible.
          IF you permit protesters – gentle, good, progressive, laudable goal protesters to hold their protests within the Jefferson Memorial, THEN you must also open that space to protesters with ugly, vicious, hateful messages.
          It’s not ABOUT equating the two, it’s about recognizing that RIGHTS apply to everyone or they are meaningless.
          Speaking as a matter of pure constitutional law, you don’t get to rank which things are Very Serious and which things are Minimally Concerning. From the perspective of the 1st Amendment, there is NO difference between the major case (protesting for racial equality) and the minor case (protesting for the right to dance at the Jefferson Memorial). They’re both protests; they’re both messages.

          And save the lecture about what the Holocaust means. My great-grandfather was a Ukrainian Jew and I had swastikas painted on the side of our house as a child. No one is demeaning anyone’s suffering in any way, shape or form..

        • I was just answering your “honest” question with an honest answer. If you don’t like the real answer to your question, shove it up your ass. Now, make room for another answer-buttplug.

          So the Holocaust isn’t famous? So slavery isn’t well known? I knew Americans’ knowledge of history was shit, but I figured those 2 examples still carried some resonance. THAT’S WHY PEOPLE USE THEM!!! It’s about the only historical examples that anybody remembers. As a famous Holocaust spokesman once said “Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?”

          “Can you really equate the death, destruction of family, the selling of human bodies like chattel as being on the same plane as whether or not we change what is socially acceptable?”

          Yes. In fact, that’s what it all boils down to. Social acceptability, rights and treatment are virtually inseparable. How your group is perceived generally dictates what rights you get, which generally dictates the treatment you can expect.

          Most people only give a shit about their own rights and of those they can relate to. This is why so few care about torture, illegal wiretapping and other rights violations aimed at Bad Guys. As they say, “People who aren’t doing anything wrong (aka people like me) have nothing to worry about.” If they thought it might affect them, or somebody they gave a shit about, their tune would quickly change.

          Slavery existed in America for hundreds of years, much longer than the length of time without it. It was big business and it helped build the American economy. As such, it was generally considered a good thing both economically and socially, as it also gave good Christians the chance to civilize these sub-humans.

          You couldn’t have slavery without blacks being considered lessors undeserving of certain rights. That’s why the US Constitution included a passage about blacks being 3/5 of a man, (which was actually a bit “too advanced” for some). If they were considered equals, rights would follow and the legal justification for being bought, sold & abused by upstanding citizens would be severely compromised. On the flip side, Jews could not have been sent to gas chambers without first being re-cast as subhuman terrorist threats and methodically stripped of their rights. They came for the Jews and nobody said anything because society no longer gave a shit about them.

          But thanks to changing economic conditions and a change in public attitude, slavery was eventually abolished. Yesterday’s property became (on paper) full human beings from that point on. Because History is written by winners, all who came afterwards retroactively apply “full human status” to slaves. Because we think them equal today, slavery was always wrong. Except it wasn’t.

          For most of American history, it was perfectly acceptable for even leading intellectuals and Presidents, Thomas Jefferson included, to own slaves. Treating blacks as equals was much more unacceptable. In short, everything about slavery was acceptable until it was abolished. Slave owners were just exercising their rights over their (sub)human property, little different than with their horse or ox.

          However, had anti-slavery forces lost, slavery would have continued to be seen as no more offensive than how modern business treats its Human Resources.

          How do I know? I know because, contrary to popular belief, slavery is alive and well. http://www.freetheslaves.net/ It’s been estimated there are more slaves alive today than during the entire run of US slavery combined. Why does this not get much attention? Because, just like with US slavery, the people it happens to don’t count. They are just illegal Mexicans & Asians who’ve “gotten what they deserve” for sneaking into America and darker skinned people on the other side of the world who are considered only marginally more advanced than the savages once brought in slave ships to America. They are criminals and/or people we don’t relate to, so nobody gives a shit. People care more about getting cheap clothes, coffee, chocolate and winter tomatoes than the fact slavery is why those goods were so cheap.

          As for gays, if black black people don’t support gays in their quest for full equality, I suspect it’s due more to homophobia and the fact they finally feel more secure about their own position and just don’t give a shit. While the comparison to slavery is not terribly applicable, the Holocaust works well because gays were actually victims of it. Ultimately though, I think gays have a better comparison with woman’s rights. Women also had some rights, but were inexplicably denied others and had to fight hard for them. But America has almost forgotten about that struggle, so using it as an example requires giving a history lesson in addition to a civil rights lesson.

          But just like with slavery, 100 years from when gays enjoy full rights in America, anybody seen as resistant of gay rights today (and in the past) will be looked upon the way we look at supporters of slavery. Right or wrong, that’s just how the process works.

        • @sedateme I really like your comments.

          as for… “But just like with slavery, 100 years from when gays enjoy full rights in America, anybody seen as resistant of gay rights today (and in the past) will be looked upon the way we look at supporters of slavery. Right or wrong, that’s just how the process works.”……

          That may be how the process works, but the one constant throughout the history you speak of, regardless of anyone’s political or ideological position, is that nobody gets to protest at the Jefferson Memorial!

        • This debate has been going into deep overtime on my FB page. Dave Flint (a name that will foreverafter cause me to roll my eyes) has been inventing quotes, wrapping himself in the flag of Gandhi and the civil rights movement, and asserting that anyone who thinks those Flash Mob Doofs are petty fucking ‘tards whose comprehension of contitutional rights (like Dave’s) would fill the back of a postage stamp with room left over is the equivalent of Hitler.
          Stupid shit like, “Blind obedience is bad.” As though we should all question the laws that say “Stop at red lights” out of fucking principle. Some people are just incapable of making anything like a thoughtful distinction between qualities that people ARE and things people want to DO, so they wind up equating being black with wanting to dance at a memorial. And it gets stubbornly, frustratingly worse. Dave would spend great effort arguing that the IMPORTANT distinction is that black people wanted to DO something (eat at a white’s only lunch counter), utterly ignoring that the law did not apply to ANYONE who wanted to eat there, but only to BLACK people who wanted to eat there.
          It reaches the point where one wants to say FUCK GANDHI! The principles of non-violence are preventing me from slapping someone who needs to be slapped. Gandhi was WRONG!

        • Wrong Banyan Tree, I protested at the Jefferson Memorial and nobody did a damn thing.

          To protest Tommy J. owning slaves, I slowly walked in circles around the statue and sang the theme to The Jeffersons

          OK, so now I guess Hitler can come back from the grave and hold a rally there. Oops, my bad!

          (And yes, that story is more or less true.)

        • Finally got a piece of the pie.

        • Cousinavi, there are many reasons I don’t use Facebook. Expecting that the debate over this kind of nonsense would “go into overtime” on Facebook is one of them. It’s the kind of place where triviality triumphs and this kind of nonsense gets passed off as deep intellectual debate.

          I think the so-called “issue” here is moronic. Dance is only “protest” if some moronic judge calls it a “protest” and not what it is, an idiot causing a disturbance. Despite ruling against the dancer, the robe wearing morons gave these idiots legitimacy by treating their pathetic wriggling as if it were an actual Second Amendment claim. Thus the court gave these idiots the ability to claim there is a “right to dance” and that their rights were being violated.

          In the process, the court also seemed to cast a potential drift-net of what can be considered “protest”. Aka anything that “draws attention”. Great standard! Next group on the block: Hot chicks in mini-skirts.

          I also think the “debate” is moronic in itself and I only intended to participate in it ironically. The only “right” these clowns are “protesting” for is the right to draw attention to themselves. I’m sure that, just like Sarah Palin, the So You Think You Can Dance Here? contestants are loving every minute of their completely undeserved attention. That’s what they were in it for and that’s exactly what they got. They won.

          In the process, I’m pretty sure we all lost something other than the time wasted on the “debate”.

    • If you are unwilling to have the WBC slagging GOD HATES FAGS placards and marching up and down at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier – which any remotely empathic human should reject – you SHOULD ALSO understand why dancing at the Jefferson Memorial is not acceptable.
      If you let one, you must let all.
      Fuck that. Fuck it sideways.

  6. Wow! Spoken like a true conservative.
    There may be hope for you yet !

    ;~D

    • The question isn’t whether there’s hope for ME, it’s whether there is any for THEM.
      I don’t buy the argument that “both sides do it” – the Conservatives are generally dumber, uglier, and shoulder far more of the balme for cocking everything up than the left / Liberals / progressives. That is just demonstrably true.
      Nevertheless, shocking degrees of stupidity on an individual basis are by no means limited to Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and the rest of the blithering fuckwit right. There are some stone batshit stupid Liberals out there.
      I just fucking hate stupid.

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

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 397 other followers

%d bloggers like this: