Zombie Obama image with bullet hole sparks outrage

[SuperiorDG]

Okay I just had to post this. The Nancy Pelosi one is the best.

http://hamptonroads.com/2011/10/zombie-obama-image-bullet-hole-sparks-outrage

9182

[TFOGGER]

Okay I just had to post this. The Nancy Pelosi one is the best.

http://hamptonroads.com/2011/10/zombie-obama-image-bullet-hole-sparks-outrage

9182

the Pelosi one appears to be unaltered, as near as I can tell....maybe retouched a little to remove wrinkles..

[Mountain Boy]

the Pelosi one appears to be unaltered, as near as I can tell....maybe retouched a little to remove wrinkles..

Made my morning!!! [ROFL1]

[CMP_5.56]

I guess all the images of Bush being portrayed as Hitler and such were not crossing the line. You only cross the line if you are on the right side of the fence I guess. When a dumbycrat crosses the line it is free speech! I personally want a bumper sticker of the offending image.

[sniper7]

http://peacemoonbeam.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451af9f69e20133f2650d60970b-500wi


they didn't even have to edit this photo!
[ROFL1][ROFL2][ROFL3][LOL]

[jackthewall81]

I personally want a bumper sticker of the offending image.
ME TOO!

[jhood001]

I guess all the images of Bush being portrayed as Hitler and such were not crossing the line. You only cross the line if you are on the right side of the fence I guess. When a dumbycrat crosses the line it is free speech! I personally want a bumper sticker of the offending image.

While the 'poor ol conservative me!' and 'the entire media is liberal and biased' defense is an entertaining one, it isn't applicable here.

While those Bush/Hitler images you referenced were ridiculous and despicable, they did not imply bodily harm against a past or currently serving POTUS. The Secret Service HAS to investigate those things. They don't have any choice in the matter and they do it without any direction by the administration whatsoever.

As a side note, I would take one of the Pelosi-zombie bumper stickers.

[Elhuero]

yeah, and liberals never made mock up photos of bush.

in a few more years we'll be to the point that if you say anything against the dear leader, the SS will be at your door.

[Byte Stryke]

http://i.imgur.com/FtMuq.jpg

this one has allot of people pissed off as well.


[ROFL1]

[Ridge]

^^^I like that one. The truth is offensive to some, it'd seem.

[sneakerd]

I'll bet if Pelosi was forced off of her Botox- that's exactly what she would look like in less than a year.

[Bailey Guns]

While the 'poor ol conservative me!' and 'the entire media is liberal and biased' defense is an entertaining one, it isn't applicable here.

While those Bush/Hitler images you referenced were ridiculous and despicable, they did not imply bodily harm against a past or currently serving POTUS. The Secret Service HAS to investigate those things. They don't have any choice in the matter and they do it without any direction by the administration whatsoever.

As a side note, I would take one of the Pelosi-zombie bumper stickers.

Save the watch...the boots are already lost.

[DD977GM2]

the Pelosi one appears to be unaltered, as near as I can tell....maybe retouched a little to remove wrinkles..

I thought they added some eyeliner and highlighted the hair a bit. [Muaha]

[jhood001]

Save the watch...the boots are already lost.

Draw a line... And cower behind.

What exactly are we doing here?

[Drilldov2.0]

While the 'poor ol conservative me!' and 'the entire media is liberal and biased' defense is an entertaining one, it isn't applicable here.

While those Bush/Hitler images you referenced were ridiculous and despicable, they did not imply bodily harm against a past or currently serving POTUS. The Secret Service HAS to investigate those things. They don't have any choice in the matter and they do it without any direction by the administration whatsoever.

As a side note, I would take one of the Pelosi-zombie bumper stickers.

You have to be ****ing kidding?

[jhood001]

You have to be ****ing kidding?

Not kidding at all.

It is pretty cut and dry. You can do pretty much whatever you want with the likeness of any POTUS current or past in any way you see fit, but if you depict bodily harm in any way shape or form, the Secret Service will investigate. That is just the way it is. Go ahead and debate how reasonable that may or may not be, but don't bother debating that that is the way it is. Because.... that's the way it is.

[spittoon]

did not some one come out with a game to shoot republicans or tea party folk what a joke them lefty's wtf grow the f@#$ up[Bang]

[mevshooter]

While the 'poor ol conservative me!' and 'the entire media is liberal and biased' defense is an entertaining one, it isn't applicable here.

While those Bush/Hitler images you referenced were ridiculous and despicable, they did not imply bodily harm against a past or currently serving POTUS. The Secret Service HAS to investigate those things. They don't have any choice in the matter and they do it without any direction by the administration whatsoever.

As a side note, I would take one of the Pelosi-zombie bumper stickers.

http://www.imdb.com/find?s=all&q=death+of+a+president

This movie came out in 2006 while Bush was in office. Didn't hear much of an "outrage" from the typical media outlets over its release or the fact that anyone would even attempt this project with a sitting president.

So, something far worse than the Zobama has been done before.


Not kidding at all.

It is pretty cut and dry. You can do pretty much whatever you want with the likeness of any POTUS current or past in any way you see fit, but if you depict bodily harm in any way shape or form, the Secret Service will investigate. That is just the way it is. Go ahead and debate how reasonable that may or may not be, but don't bother debating that that is the way it is. Because.... that's the way it is.

With that said, not sure if that's truly "the way it is."

[Bailey Guns]

What exactly are we doing here?

Making a very adult attempt to tolerate your liberal nonsense. But that's just me.

[mevshooter]

http://www.amazon.com/Empire-Zombie-Novels-David-Dunwoody/dp/B004JZWKBY/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8&qid=1320197326&sr=8-9

This book also has a depiction of George W. Bush becoming a zombie, and subsequently being "taken out" by the secret service while still in office.

Now, this is more of an "indie" book that most are not familiar with, but there still wasn't any outrage over it. Things go viral quick, and I didn't hear anyone making a fuss over this.

I'm not arguing whether or not it is "appropriate" or "okay" to do things like this, I just think the main point of this thread is to show there is an extreme lopsidedness when it comes to these issues regarding the mainstream media.

[Bailey Guns]

Because.... that's the way it is.

Was Walter Cronkite a hero of yours?

[jhood001]

This movie came out in 2006 while Bush was in office. Didn't hear much of an "outrage" from the typical media outlets over its release or the fact that anyone would even attempt this project with a sitting president.


I read about this film and I recall seeing several stories in the media condemning it.

I'm sure they were investigated by the Secret Service. In fact, I recall an article that referenced such an investigation. Pretty sure it can be found if someone cares to dig.



So, something far worse than the Zobama has been done before.


'Far worse... has been done before' has never been a method for setting my own personal precedent for what is and is not acceptable.

Jesus Christ, people! I was commenting on the Secret Service response and how the 'its so unfair for us' diatribe is so pathetically tired, old, and unproductive. Nothing more.

If you want to be a victim, be a victim... Champion your assumed inequality! Otherwise, dismiss it personally and move on. Or... do something about it.

[jhood001]

Making a very adult attempt to tolerate your liberal nonsense. But that's just me.

Attempt failed. What I got out of it was an 'attempt' at ASSuming my position on the matter and side-stepping the merits of my statement with an obscure analogy. An analogy that implicated that the latter half of my comment was a method to placate an unsympathetic crowd so that the preceding half would be better received.

If you want to attack the merits of my original statement and point out how the secret service WON'T or SHOULDN'T investigate a depiction of bodily harm on a past or present POTUS, regardless of their political affliation, be my guest.

OR

If you want to point out how the media is biased in one way or another, be my guest. I'm all ears.

Otherwise, in typical fashion:
-Cue Bailey Guns exit for the day-

[mevshooter]

I read about this film and I recall seeing several stories in the media condemning it.

I'm sure they were investigated by the Secret Service. In fact, I recall an article that referenced such an investigation. Pretty sure it can be found if someone cares to dig.

Come on, man, take the 5 minutes and find the articles to back up what you're saying. I did it for mine, and when/if you do find them, it only strengthens your stance.

And saying something like "I don't care enough about this to take the time out to do it" is crap because if you're taking the time to respond with some decently lengthy posts in the first place, you obviously care enough about the subject matter.

Not saying you feel that way or were going to comment in such a manner, just preemptively shooting that idea down for anyone else who wants to say things like "I recall seeing that article" or "in fact, I remember that article" without actually posting any links or references.

[jhood001]

Come on, man, take the 5 minutes and find the articles to back up what you're saying. I did it for mine, and when/if you do find them, it only strengthens your stance.

And saying something like "I don't care enough about this to take the time out to do it" is crap because if you're taking the time to respond with some decently lengthy posts in the first place, you obviously care enough about the subject matter.

Not saying you feel that way or were going to comment in such a manner, just preemptively shooting that idea down for anyone else who wants to say things like "I recall seeing that article" or "in fact, I remember that article" without actually posting any links or references.

You're right. I'll see what I can dig up.

[jhood001]

Come on, man, take the 5 minutes and find the articles to back up what you're saying. I did it for mine, and when/if you do find them, it only strengthens your stance.

And saying something like "I don't care enough about this to take the time out to do it" is crap because if you're taking the time to respond with some decently lengthy posts in the first place, you obviously care enough about the subject matter.

Not saying you feel that way or were going to comment in such a manner, just preemptively shooting that idea down for anyone else who wants to say things like "I recall seeing that article" or "in fact, I remember that article" without actually posting any links or references.

What a pain in the ass. Keywords for 'death of a president', 'secret service', etc, either pull up stuff about that film or information regarding the Kennedy assassination.

Anyway, I did find this after a few searches:



"I couldn't convince him we were just shooting a movie. I even got a call from the real Secret Service, who wanted to know what we were doing. They wanted to confirm that we were indeed just shooting a movie," Range says.


http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-1390398.html

I'm not going to sign up for service to 'Highbeam' or pay for Chicago Sun-Times archives go get a real copy of this article, but I doubt people are sitting around in a room somewhere fabricating false articles in order to get people to pay for archives.

At the same time, the lack of available articles regarding an investigation or the director's quote does provide some ammunition towards the media-bias argument.

[Irving]

While the 'poor ol conservative me!' and 'the entire media is liberal and biased' defense is an entertaining one, it isn't applicable here.

While those Bush/Hitler images you referenced were ridiculous and despicable, they did not imply bodily harm against a past or currently serving POTUS. The Secret Service HAS to investigate those things. They don't have any choice in the matter and they do it without any direction by the administration whatsoever.



I usually agree with you, but...ahem (stretch your scroll finger) http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=621


Also, that movie wasn't made in the US.

[Bailey Guns]

Attempt failed. What I got out of it was an 'attempt' at ASSuming my position on the matter and side-stepping the merits of my statement with an obscure analogy. An analogy that implicated that the latter half of my comment was a method to placate an unsympathetic crowd so that the preceding half would be better received.

If you want to attack the merits of my original statement and point out how the secret service WON'T or SHOULDN'T investigate a depiction of bodily harm on a past or present POTUS, regardless of their political affliation, be my guest.

OR

If you want to point out how the media is biased in one way or another, be my guest. I'm all ears.

Otherwise, in typical fashion:
-Cue Bailey Guns exit for the day-

Or maybe it's just not worth the time/effort to argue with you.

[Robby30-06]

The only thing missing in the Obama pic is the word HOPE at the bottom[ROFL2]

[roberth]

The only thing missing in the Obama pic is the word HOPE at the bottom[ROFL2]

Good one. [Beer]

This thread is just another example of the double standard blamed on conservatives but practiced by crapstain liberals.

[Ronin13]

Good one. [Beer]

This thread is just another example of the double standard blamed on conservatives but practiced by crapstain liberals.

So I'm confused... is JHood causing issues because he's saying there is no double standard these days? Or that it isn't the case? Because I see a big correlation between Zobama and Adolf Bush... the fact that one displays a bullet hole shouldn't change the fact that while both are abhorrently wrong, you'd be more likely to see people up in arms if we depicted the current president as a mindless undead (or what if we had him dressed up like Idi Amin?) than you'd see with the Hitler/Bush. The issue is that the left always gets away with poor taste jabs at a Republican, and the moment the right does something along the same lines they are instigating a media witch hunt... If you ask me it's bullsh*t. Now we shouldn't stoop to the same level but for the sake of criticism and comedy it's been done and we should be free to point out "You d*cks displayed Bush as Hitler, so STFU when we do something along the same lines just because you don't agree with it." That is what pisses me off to no end, this double standard. I get harassed because I say that Obama is an evil communist, but when someone said that Bush was an evil Fascist no one jumps down their throat... liberal bullsh*t double standards.

[mevshooter]

What a pain in the ass. Keywords for 'death of a president', 'secret service', etc, either pull up stuff about that film or information regarding the Kennedy assassination.

Anyway, I did find this after a few searches:



http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-1390398.html

I'm not going to sign up for service to 'Highbeam' or pay for Chicago Sun-Times archives go get a real copy of this article, but I doubt people are sitting around in a room somewhere fabricating false articles in order to get people to pay for archives.

At the same time, the lack of available articles regarding an investigation or the director's quote does provide some ammunition towards the media-bias argument.

Thanks for looking that up. I agree, most likely not falsified.

I completely agree with your stance of "just because it has been done before, doesn't make it right in my book" (not exactly what you said, but I think it works). And while I do normally feel that way, I personally am at the point where I'm completely fed up with the way I believe this president has been handled with kid gloves regarding critical comments about him and his administration.

If, in my opinion, people hadn't been so sensitive about stupid things, I might actually see that outrage over this and say "yeah, I agree with that." Any and all sympathy I have for this guy was a lost a long time ago.

That's just how I feel about it.

But yes, I also understand the obligation the Secret Service has to investigating these types of things.

[Drilldov2.0]

Not kidding at all.

It is pretty cut and dry. You can do pretty much whatever you want with the likeness of any POTUS current or past in any way you see fit, but if you depict bodily harm in any way shape or form, the Secret Service will investigate. That is just the way it is. Go ahead and debate how reasonable that may or may not be, but don't bother debating that that is the way it is. Because.... that's the way it is.

While that is not the issue I was addressing in your post, let's play. Do you have proof of that statement? Did the secret service investigate every instance of Bush's likeness, effigy being mutilated, burned, hung dismembered, disfigured, etc.?

I wasn't not debating btw, I was making a statement. If you can burn the flag in this country you sure as hell can represent your discontent, in the fashion which it was in this instance, without violating a law.

That pesky little document called the Constitution works for everyone's causes whether or not you agree with them.

[TFOGGER]

I still can't figure out how the Pelosi image was altered....is that part of the joke?

[BlasterBob]

Hope this one does not get me kicked off the site or hurt someone's tender feelings:


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v310/bobjan/OBAMANATION-2.jpgLooks like he may be emptying the last of the beer that he was unable to finish.

[BlasterBob]

Thought sure there'd be at least a couple of Obama followers here who would give me a ration of shi- about posting such a picture of their election choice. Guess I'll go back to sleep now.[Tooth]

[Ronin13]

Thought sure there'd be at least a couple of Obama followers here who would give me a ration of shi- about posting such a picture of their election choice. Guess I'll go back to sleep now.[Tooth]

I think we all agree that it's a pretty accurate picture... Did you take that after he finished at the Inauguration Ceremony?

[BlasterBob]

I think we all agree that it's a pretty accurate picture... Did you take that after he finished at the Inauguration Ceremony?

Naw, I think it was probably taken DURING the time some Pastor was leading the Senate with the opening prayer or maybe when out in the White House rose garden while the National Anthem was being played.[Rant1]

Back in my days in the U.S. Army (1955 - 1958), at exactly 5PM while the Post flag was being lowered for the day, all of us, still out doors, would stand at attention, facing the flag and salute until the music stopped. Wonder what this guy would have done had he been in the Service at that particular time.

[Ronin13]

Naw, I think it was probably taken DURING the time some Pastor was leading the Senate with the opening prayer or maybe when out in the White House rose garden while the National Anthem was being played.[Rant1]

Back in my days in the U.S. Army (1955 - 1958), at exactly 5PM while the Post flag was being lowered for the day, all of us, still out doors, would stand at attention, facing the flag and salute until the music stopped. Wonder what this guy would have done had he been in the Service at that particular time.

Bob, you're talking about Revile and Retreat... the raising and lowering of the flag on military bases- it's still done today (and I find myself still, after 1 year of being out of the Army, listening intently if I'm outside at 1700). I'm willing to bet he'd just sit there and wonder why music is being played. But I think they check for testicles on men and a spine on everyone who joins the military, so Oblowme is not eligible for service.

[TFOGGER]

I live close enough to Buckley that I can hear the post PA. Reveille at 0730, Taps at 2200(chAir Force, go figure). Depending on who the post commander is, they used to play the Star Spangled Banner after Reveille each morning. It irks me that Obamao flies through there when he comes to Denver to spread bullsh!t...

[Ronin13]

I live close enough to Buckley that I can hear the post PA. Reveille at 0730, Taps at 2200(chAir Force, go figure). Depending on who the post commander is, they used to play the Star Spangled Banner after Reveille each morning. It irks me that Obamao flies through there when he comes to Denver to spread bullsh!t...

IIRC the schedule for the "bugle" (which these days is a recording played over the PA) for all military installations is 0600-0730 (depending on the CG's preference) is raise the flag (Reveille), 1700-1800 is lower the flag (Retreat), and usually 2200 or 2300 is what used to be called "Lights out" which would play Taps, signaling lights out for trainee's or "bed check" for fire guard. Many of the current traditions are left overs from the olden days.