I thought this had to be a joke, but sadly no. We have an idiot in charge.

[Dill]

(01-04-2022, 12:08 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Honestly, to me, I really don't care about any of those instances. Free speech being what it is I have no objections to any of it. Respect for the office, to me, means things like standing when POTUS enters the room and waiting to sit (like you do for a judge, for instance) or recognizing the gravity of the office in certain dealings. I've met high ranking political figures from both major parties and some Libertarians, Greens, and independents. I've shaken hands with G. W. Bush and Al Gore. I've had long chats with Sen. Mark Warner, and I also discussed issues with his predecessor John Warner. I can respect the offices they held or hold and still say outright that George Bush ***** sucks.

I think what makes this particular instance so egregious to me is that the individual who did it didn't just post online or even write a letter. They interrupted a broadcast intended for children that was intended to help them bask in the magic of Christmas. That was honestly worse, to me, than any of your examples. The Tony's one comes the closest, but even it doesn't compare because of the intended audience. That, to me, is the biggest difference here.

Yes, the distinctive feature in this case is the venue, one goal of which was, as you say, to help children "bask in the magic of Christmas," but also to build inter-generational trust in and respect for our political system. This will be a topic of discussion at the child's school, and it think it worse than an instance of a parent cussing out a teacher or administrator before a class. 

As someone who works with children, you can obviously see/feel how such actions can affect children's trust in and respect for authority.

(01-04-2022, 12:32 PM)Nately120 Wrote: To me it's less about ragging on the president and more about that being such a feather in the cap of some people.  It's always been around, but the amount of legitimizing it's being given is what makes it look like one of our two major parties (and the that has the easier path to power) has become so specifically geared towards the f*** the other side manta.

Songs, writings, speeches, jokes about the president being a dolt are nothing new.  John Denver and the Smothers Brothers would take shots at Nixon, so how badass could that be?  The part that amuses me is how telling the president to fudge himself can make you a national hero these days.  This has been really amped up in the Trump-era as I see it.  People can be jerks, I can be a jerk, but it's the idea that being a jerk is an accomplishment that hits my cynical bone.  ...

But it also drives home how effective "screw the other side" is as not a rallying cry, but a lynchpin policy of a major political party.  I was watching an interview where a non-Trump republican politician was saying that one of his go-to talking points over the years was "Our policies are so good, they even help the people who don't vote for us" and that in the current era he had to take that point out because it was now getting boos instead of cheers as it had before.

Right, "both sides" aren't doing it.

What you say here expands my original point. Not only is it a bad thing that a parent can use the intimacy and trust of a child's national dialogue with the president to insult Biden, but also that becomes a "selling point" to the right, a notoriety that can attract political support.

This imports a kind of social breakdown quite different from celebrity "shots" at a president, which have been with us since John Adams.

Wonder how many of the "family values" camp are on board with this?