Two Shoes

[Homo Aestheticus]

Are you arguing, on that basis, that you're entitled to a spot there?

Not at all... I'm simply saying that much of what the Supreme Court does is a joke.

[Bulldog]

There are several idiots on the Supreme Court, starting with Scalia.

You're so quick to take stabs at people who are superior to you in intellect and common-sense.

[mn dave]

Are you arguing, on that basis, that you're entitled to a spot there?

[Wanderer]

An appropriate end to an embarrassing term of office. As for the offender, I'm sure he has already been "punished" beyond what's prescribed by law.

[imperfection]

You can now chuck footwear at the president yourself: www.sockandawe.com

[drogulus]

      We should investigate the circumstances of the decision to use torture in interrogations, and if that means Cheney and Rumsfeld are indicted, or even the President, then so be it. In the meantime we should continue to support the Iraqis and help them fight the people who deliberately target civilians. It should be possible to do both, and both are necessary. Obama gives us the chance to start anew and in the process show the world that we intend to correct our mistakes, and if they are crimes punish those who committed them.

     When Obama leaves office we'll still be in Iraq. Whether that is a measure of success or not depends on what we do as well as what the Iraqis do with the opportunity they have due to our presence. One Iraqi who supports our efforts there says this:

     Some writers try to come off as concerned about Iraq's civilians. They even say that it's wrong to use them as political pawns. But actually that's all Iraqis are to the mainstream media. The journalists hate George Bush so much that they put the Iraqi population in the same recycle bin with Bush.

     It looks as though no matter what the Iraqi people do, we will always be viewed as Bush's children. The mainstream media will dismiss us because they will always associate us with the president they hate so much.

     It isn't just the "mainstream" media that can't wait for Obama to abandon the Iraqis, it's most of the "alternative" media as well. Fortunately Obama is not going to do this. His desire to disassociate himself and this country from Bush will not lead him to abandon the Iraqis like the bodycounters want (they don't make much of an effort to point out who is deliberately targeting civilians, do they? Why would that be irrelevant if you purport to care about them?).

[Andante]

What should be done with the reporter?

Make him take lessons in shoe throwing, I recon he was trying to miss, what a girl

[Solitary Wanderer]

Yes, the heroic shoe thrower should have hurled the verbal insult after hurling the shoe 'cause without the warning Bush might not have evaded the missile. Would have struck him square on the nose - might have even been some blood!

[SonicMan46]

Considering the enormous disaster that this man has wrought I believe that the Iraqi reporter was (in a way) justified in what he did.

Well, since you seem to support the Saddam Hussein regime that existed in Iraq before the invasion, then I would suggest giving him the same treatment if he had thrown a pair of shoes @ Saddam - 

[Szykneij]

What should be done with the reporter?



Ban him! Ban him!

[karlhenning]

I'm not a reporter.

— But you are dressed as one.

They dressed me like this.  And this isn't my nose: it's a false one.

[Florestan]

What should be done with the reporter?

In the Western legal system, he would have been fined for insult and released.

In the Arab legal system, he has already been hardly beaten and I fear his fate will be much worse than that.

Succesful democracy in Iraq, anyone?

[orbital]

In the Western legal system, he would have been fined for insult and released.

I doubt that. What happened was an assault not an insult. The fact that Bush dodged those shoes does not alter the intent. I think that under current US laws, an American assaulting the president (even if not fatally) would probably be taken away to jail, hopefully miss out the arm breaking part, and await trial.

[Andante]

Perhaps the terrorists will make shoe bombs instead of nail bombs and Iran will launch a shoe armed missile this could end up as a win win situation

[Bulldog]

I doubt that. What happened was an assault not an insult. The fact that Bush dodged those shoes does not alter the intent. I think that under current US laws, an American assaulting the president (even if not fatally) would probably be taken away to jail, hopefully miss out the arm breaking part, and await trial.

Exactly right and no bail either.

[Renfield]

An appropriate end to an embarrassing term of office. As for the offender, I'm sure he has already been "punished" beyond what's prescribed by law.

I have to agree.

And in any affair, I fail to see how The American President having A Shoe thrown at him should be so shocking, regardless of who He is or who The United States of America is or is not at war with; capitalisation intended.

Though a symbol, even presidents are human beings, and yes, they can be insulted - or assaulted, if you prefer.

[Bulldog]

Though a symbol, even presidents are human beings, and yes, they can be insulted - or assaulted, if you prefer.

The important factor is that an assault is a criminal act.  If it wasn't, there would be a few guys I'd be tracking down.

[Renfield]

The important factor is that an assault is a criminal act.  If it wasn't, there would be a few guys I'd be tracking down.

But would a thread be created about John Mitchell attacking his neighbour, Dave Stephens, with a broom?

I'm only noting how the importance of the important factor seems to scale, and whether that's consistent with this specific assault being particularly outrageous, as the reason offered for the "outrage".


(Incidentally, no offense meant to any Messrs. J. Mitchell or D. Stephens reading this forum.)

[Florestan]

If someone's actions and orders lead directly to the throwing of bombs at innocent civilians, resulting in their being killed or maimed, he is exonerated of any responsibility by "reason of state".

If at the self-same someone two shoes are thrown, the "perpetrator " is immediately taken into custody, beaten to the breaking of arms and ribs and trialed for assault, facing years of prison.

Dura lex, sed lex. 

[orbital]

But would a thread be created about John Mitchell attacking his neighbour, Dave Stephens, with a broom?

I'm only noting how the importance of the important factor seems to scale, and whether that's consistent with this specific assault being particularly outrageous, as the reason offered for the "outrage".

Well, Mr Mitchell's views on the fate of American automobile industry does not prompt for a thread (or a headline) either. The scale you mention is of course true, but nothing to be surprised about.
Bush and the Shoe makes headlines not only because he is the president but also because what he decides to do about Iraq (or the auto industry) makes a difference.

(I am not saying the man does not have valid reasons to not like -even hate- Bush btw)