WEST HOLLYWOOD, Calif. (AP) ― A Halloween decoration showing a mannequin dressed as vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin hanging by a noose from the roof of a West Hollywood home is drawing giggles from some passers-by and gasps of outrage from others.
The mannequin is dressed in brunet wig, glasses and a red business suit. Another mannequin dressed as John McCain emerges from a flaming chimney.
Chad Michael Morisette, who lives in the house, told CBS 2 News that drivers and bus passengers have been stopping to snap pictures of the macabre scene.
Morisette says the effigy would be out of bounds at any other time of year, but it’s within the spirit of Halloween.
He says “it should be seen as art, and as within the month of October. It’s Halloween, it’s time to be scary it’s time to be spooky.”
And to be fair, how long do you think this guys house would be standing if the “objet d’art” was Obama?
#30 brenda lee – And doing a damn fine job of it too!
http://www.northjersey.com/news/ALERT_Obama_assassination_plot_stopped_feds_say.html
#29 – Just in time for him to win reelection, quit and for Palin to name herself as successor.
This isn’t a Halloween themed display, art, nor is it political commentary. At least if he posed them in some sort of scenario similar to those you see in editorial cartoons to convey a statement or joke, his art would be credible. But this is just lazy and sends of a message of hate, despite it being Halloween. I hope he gets the attention he’s looking for, because I imagine a lot of it he won’t like. And I’m an Obama supporter.
Guys, I strongly disagree with a lot of what Paddy-O says. I often get the feeling that a lot (but not all) of what I disagree with comes from his misguided loyalty to the republican party. I hear a lot of the same points he makes also coming from O’Reilly and Limbaugh and occasionally hearing them gets me steamed.
That said, when he puts forth a reasoned, calm argument (right or wrong) and he is responded to with so much flame and vitriol it, well, annoys the shit out of me. If Paddy-O flames you and you flame back, fine. His reference to free speech was on topic, well reasoned and holds a lot of merit. Most importantly, it didn’t suggest that anyone who disagreed was stupid or slight anyone in any way, unlike the responses. His only testy response was actually pretty mild given it was a response to being called a “shit talker”.
I agree that this “display” is pretty stupid and sensational and obviously entirely intended to just get attention. I would say it succeeded well at that. Is it art? Not by my definition. To make a more accurate comparison, though, it would have had to been Joe Biden in the noose and Obama popping out of a burning chimney. That would probably have generated roughly the same response. If you put Obama in the noose it references pre-civil rights days and lynching and so the response WOULD have been much stronger. Is it racism that the response is different? *That* can be argued either way.
I would much prefer people tone down the flames, though. It makes it much less likely that *ANYONE* will learn and makes you seem like an idiot whether you are right or wrong.
#33….maybe then she’ll get a chance to get in there and run the Senate. That might be interesting.
#32 Miss XXL – I thought Palin was going off script but I had no idea how far!
The Secret Service takes a dim view of this sort of thing. To the humorless it could be interpreted as a threat.
# 26 Paddy Cake the Ignorant Shit Talker
“And, as this has been transmitted coast to coast and isn’t an actual threat”
Who has determined that? The public? The artist? Sorry, Paddy Cake they aren’t the ones that make that determination. It IS being investigated so I guess we will see if it is protected won’t we?
# 38 John C Dvorak
John they can’t afford to take any other view! That could cost lives.
#36 – I don’t think she’ll be in charge, but I could see her in the Newt role in a new Republican Revolution.
I wonder if “PFD checks for everybody!” will be in her version of the Contract With America.
This year I think I will write in the “Kicked-in-the-nuts” clown for pres. His camera-man can be Vice.
At least hanging an effigy of an orange wigged clown would not be too outrageous?
Besides, having a president running around kicking senators and congress critters in the crotch ought to be popular with most of us.
Like burning the flag, hanging in effigy is very well understood to be POLITICAL SPEECH!! In both cases, it is a sledgehammer to say “I disagree with …..”
Do the target think it is dangerous?
Off course. Thinking then talking always is.
# 43 bobbo
“Like burning the flag, hanging in effigy is very well understood to be POLITICAL SPEECH!! ”
Sorry bobbo but no it isn’t. When you cross over into the territory of threat or possible threat. You have gone over the protected free speech line.
I personally don’t think it was meant as a threat but what I think doesn’t count. Also, I have the luxury to think that.
J==ok. I say it is political speech. You say it wasn’t a threat but was a possible threat (think about your contradiction and pick a side?)
So==between you and me==the threat/speech meaning of the “symbol” is ambiguous.
Traditionally, threats to the President are actionable only when the perp has the means and circumstances to follow thru.
How does an effigy in California amount to means and circumstances against someone constantly moving around?
Yes, I can imagine a circumstance when the “speech” involved in an effigy is a direct actionable threat but it is very rare.
So, when speech is ambiguous can/should the free speech component be ignored in favor of the “intent and ability to take action” component?
The more absolutist First Amendment type you are (like me) the more protected effigies will be.
The more you are chicken little AND want to stifle free political speech, the more you will see some line that has been crossed, even when you don’t think so yourself.
For grins, I’m gonna google effigies and see what pops up.
I wonder if she’s wearing panties.
Absolutely, the homeowner would have probably been arrested and charged with a hate crime. Not to mention the outrage in the liberal media. I imagine this story will get little play and forgotten by the end of the week.
# 45 bobbo
“You say it wasn’t a threat but was a possible threat (think about your contradiction and pick a side?”
Did you read what I wrote? It doesn’t matter what I think or what you think!!
“Traditionally, threats to the President are actionable only when the perp has the means and circumstances to follow thru.”
Not true
“The more absolutist First Amendment type you are (like me) the more protected effigies will be.”
It isn’t the effigy that is the problem. It is the fact that it is hanging by the neck with a noose.
#46 Special – I believe that would be an effi-‘G’ string she be wearing pard’.
That wasn’t hard. Seems hanging in effigy is purely free speech EVEN WHEN the hanging takes place adjacent to the college campus where the target is the dean.
http://cases.justia.com/us-court-of-appeals/F2/415/1077/279971/
and sadly, seems Hanging Obama in effigy is going on all over the place. First 2 pages of google search was full of them.
Occams Razor==you have to assume a hole lot more facts to get to a credible safety threat AND over look the free speech elements.
What else is “a symbol” but speech that at worst must be explained?
This is not art. Paintings of fat women laying on couches half naked, THAT’S ART.
But it IS (or used to be) a free country. Although so called hate crime laws have contributed to the demise of free speech, this is a political statement, and as such protected by the 1st Amendment.
It also IS in incredibly bad taste, and neither funny nor scary. Rather stupid, actually.
Oh, I’m voting for Obama and can’t stand either McCain or Palin, bye the way.
It is free speech, but it is also highly repugnant. The ‘artist’ – like anyone who would do such a thing to an Obama effigy – should be ashamed of himself and every halfway decent person should condemn this thing.
Defending free speech doesn’t mean only defending speech that we agree with or find inoffensive. Nor does it mean shrugging your shoulders in indifference to repellent speech. It only means that the government should not be allowed to censor speech.
This simple statement brought to you by the letters A C L and U, and the number 1, as in First Amendment.
It seems that everyone has forgotten the “noose” issue in Louisiana months ago. There wasn’t even anything in the nooses and riots were breaking out in the streets, Al “The Pimp” Sharpton was crying foul and instigating violent protests. Maybe they should have waited for Halloween then.
#22 that wasn’t “art” you crapped out, that was Paddy-o- sh*t, the Irish idiot.
Also lib and I think this is in poor taste.
WTF?
Relax folks, it’s a Halloween decoration FFS.
Really bad taste installing an effigy of a specific person in a noose. Had it been anonymous it would be just another Halloween prop.
I disagree that its morally any different if it was an Obama effigy, but a hanging black man is a powerful symbol of racist America and therefore only an inconsiderate douche or a racist would use it. Making it an issue of free speech is just using the law to aide and abet being an inconsiderate douche or a racist.
While we’re on the topic of seasonal decorations:
http://tinyurl.com/5ush5o
“J” and “John C” are both correct. All you First Amendment “free speechers” are wrong.
Any time the speech is slanderous / libelous, threatening, illegal (see National Security Laws), dangerous (encouraging others to commit a crime), or irreverent (ask my wife)* the First Amendment doesn’t apply.
The Secret Service take a very dim view of even the slightest hint of a threat to any of its charges. They do investigate and have charged people for what they thought was their “god given right” to spout off their yaps.
This is probably a bad joke. That does not make it protected speech however.
* For the Morans, that was a joke.
/#2 NoKnockerz
Well, he is from West Hollywood…