HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » The morons at Wonkette ar...

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 06:19 AM

 

The morons at Wonkette are selling a tee shirt depicting HRC holding Trump's severed head




Yeah, yeah. It's a biblical reference- as if that makes it any easier to defend. And of course, the wingnuts have picked up this story and our reacting with predictable hypocritical outrage. T

It's still jaw droppingly stupid to be selling this.

http://wonkette.com/602757/oh-whoops-we-just-forced-you-to-buy-this-shirt-of-hillary-clinton-cutting-off-trumps-head

64 replies, 3210 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 64 replies Author Time Post
Reply The morons at Wonkette are selling a tee shirt depicting HRC holding Trump's severed head (Original post)
cali Jun 2016 OP
Miles Archer Jun 2016 #1
cali Jun 2016 #2
Fumesucker Jun 2016 #3
Cobalt Violet Jun 2016 #4
Warren DeMontague Jun 2016 #5
joshcryer Jun 2016 #17
femmedem Jun 2016 #6
seabeckind Jun 2016 #13
OnDoutside Jun 2016 #7
Brickbat Jun 2016 #8
cali Jun 2016 #10
LineLineLineReply .
Brickbat Jun 2016 #11
Dr. Strange Jun 2016 #35
glennward Jun 2016 #60
MADem Jun 2016 #9
seabeckind Jun 2016 #12
cali Jun 2016 #14
joshcryer Jun 2016 #16
seabeckind Jun 2016 #18
MADem Jun 2016 #32
seabeckind Jun 2016 #36
MADem Jun 2016 #40
seabeckind Jun 2016 #42
MADem Jun 2016 #43
seabeckind Jun 2016 #45
MADem Jun 2016 #47
seabeckind Jun 2016 #48
MADem Jun 2016 #49
seabeckind Jun 2016 #50
MADem Jun 2016 #54
seabeckind Jun 2016 #57
MADem Jun 2016 #63
joshcryer Jun 2016 #15
notadmblnd Jun 2016 #19
seabeckind Jun 2016 #20
Bluenorthwest Jun 2016 #21
cali Jun 2016 #22
Bluenorthwest Jun 2016 #23
PJMcK Jun 2016 #28
MADem Jun 2016 #33
TreasonousBastard Jun 2016 #24
cali Jun 2016 #25
TreasonousBastard Jun 2016 #27
emulatorloo Jun 2016 #26
PJMcK Jun 2016 #29
TacoD Jun 2016 #30
LenaBaby61 Jun 2016 #31
L. Coyote Jun 2016 #34
Amishman Jun 2016 #37
Major Nikon Jun 2016 #38
Bettie Jun 2016 #39
MADem Jun 2016 #44
trumad Jun 2016 #41
cali Jun 2016 #58
trumad Jun 2016 #59
cali Jun 2016 #61
trumad Jun 2016 #62
Donald Ian Rankin Jun 2016 #46
Seeking Serenity Jun 2016 #51
mwrguy Jun 2016 #52
ileus Jun 2016 #53
msanthrope Jun 2016 #55
Beacool Jun 2016 #56
aikoaiko Jun 2016 #64

Response to cali (Original post)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 06:27 AM

1. That kind of crap doesn't help at all.

It's not that Trump supporters are going to see that as the hipsters at Wonkette having a laugh.

It's the fact that it will be seen as "Liberals"...that's right, every last one of them...are no better than ISIS.

I haven't read any of the blowback on this, but I know how their minds work. The pack mentality is going to run this one all the way up the ladder, and by the time they are finished, Hannity will be re-posting Brietbart articles on Facebook "exposing" how Clinton Photoshopped this personally.

I've never been a Wonkette fan...too much snark where there should be insight...but yeah, this is not a golden moment for them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Miles Archer (Reply #1)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 06:29 AM

2. The blowback from this hasn't started yet. It will be a big fucking wave

 

particularly in the light of the two beheaded Canadians.

It's just moronic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Miles Archer (Reply #1)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 06:30 AM

3. Snark travels around the world while insight is putting its boots on

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 06:36 AM

4. Looks like something republicans would do.

Not surprise since the Democratic party is what it is now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 06:39 AM

5. Wow, that's a weak-ass photoshop job.

I mean, fine if you're just throwing something together in 15 minutes for shits and giggles, but to sell to people on shirts that they would actually consider wearing around?

I'll get around to the content, sure... eventually.

but right now I'm still trying to get my head around anyone paying for such a craptastic copy and paste job.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #5)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 07:06 AM

17. Right?

I'm more annoyed by the attempt than I am anything else. They could've put more effort into it, for sure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 06:40 AM

6. Awful. It plays into the notion that violence is just fine so long as the victors are righteous

and the murdered are in the wrong.

Politically, it's not smart. But I'm less concerned with the politics than I am with the trivialization of violence.

I know it's a joke, but I can't laugh at it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to cali (Original post)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 06:40 AM

7. Too biblical and poor taste.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 06:48 AM

8. I would have preferred Gentileschi's version myself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Brickbat (Reply #8)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 06:50 AM

10. OK, you got me

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Brickbat (Reply #8)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 10:03 AM

35. If it ain't Baroque, don't fix it!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dr. Strange (Reply #35)

Sat Jun 18, 2016, 07:22 AM

60. Best post of the year! nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 06:49 AM

9. The original painting references a Jewish widow who killed an Assyrian general.

https://www.royalcollection.org.uk/collection/404989/judith-with-the-head-of-holofernes

?itok=S4p3Nbdk

I think the market for this work are people who are professional snarksters, not necessarily Clinton fans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 06:54 AM

12. I see a lot of hate Trump here.

You really think the opposition doesn't notice?

Try this thread:

http://www.discussionist.com/1015860048



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeckind (Reply #12)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 07:01 AM

14. Obviously the opposition notices. I couldn't possibly have made that clearer.

 

duh.

And frankly, much as I think of Skinner- and I do, my estimation of him sadly went down when he decided to start a site where hate was the métier for lining his pockets.

Discussionist is vile and the hate comes from the right there.

As for hating Trump, I prefer to use the word despise. He is a proto hitler. Go read Shirer or Reck.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #14)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 07:05 AM

16. Aww, hate against a racist bigot xenophobe!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #14)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 07:07 AM

18. The point I am trying to make is that

a campaign built upon hate and fear (and I don't care what terms you use)

doesn't do anyone any good. For every nasty thing that is thrown at Trump, there's an equal an opposite reaction.

DU is becoming a bubble. Denying its own shortcomings by pointing outside.

We have met the enemy and....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeckind (Reply #18)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 09:51 AM

32. DU isn't "becoming" anything. Try reading the TOS--it's been the same since 2011.

THAT is what DU is--if you don't like it, no one is holding you hostage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #32)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 10:05 AM

36. Has nothing to do with the TOS

Another right wing talking point argument.

My way or the highway. Love it or leave it.

Lord, it's like 2002 all over again.

And look where that got us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeckind (Reply #36)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 12:50 PM

40. If you are bashing or trashing Democrats.....

is NOT a "right wing talking point." And this has always been a PARTISAN site, so yeah, "Love it or leave it." Your choice--no one is holding any of us hostage.

In fact, people who bash and trash Democrats just might be shopping that very thing.

Not sure what you think happened here in 2002--I seem to recall a very peaceful, civil and unified DU back then. We had a common enemy (who was elected two years prior) and his name was Bush.

seabeckind
36. Has nothing to do with the TOS
View profile
Another right wing talking point argument.

My way or the highway. Love it or leave it.

Lord, it's like 2002 all over again.

And look where that got us.


Don't be a wingnut (right-wing or extreme-fringe).
Democratic Underground is an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working within the system to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of political office. Teabaggers, Neo-cons, Dittoheads, Paulites, Freepers, Birthers, and right-wingers in general are not welcome here. Neither are certain extreme-fringe left-wingers, including advocates of violent political/social change, hard-line communists, terrorist-apologists, America-haters, kooks, crackpots, LaRouchies, and the like.

Vote for Democrats.
Winning elections is important — therefore, advocating in favor of Republican nominees or in favor of third-party spoiler candidates that could split the vote and throw an election to our conservative opponents is never permitted on Democratic Underground. But that does not mean that DU members are required to always be completely supportive of Democrats. During the ups-and-downs of politics and policy-making, it is perfectly normal to have mixed feelings about the Democratic officials we worked hard to help elect. When we are not in the heat of election season, members are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials, or to express ambivalence about voting for them. In Democratic primaries, members may support whomever they choose. But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees (EXCEPT in rare cases where a non-Democrat is most likely to defeat the conservative alternative, or where there is no possibility of splitting the liberal vote and inadvertently throwing the election to the conservative alternative). For presidential contests, election season begins when both major-party nominees become clear. For non-presidential contests, election season begins on Labor Day. Everyone here on DU needs to work together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government. If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during election season, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #40)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 02:07 PM

42. Oh no, it was never intended to be a bash of democrats.

The democrats as a whole aren't using right wing talking points.

Many of those who voice sentiment or attitudes more indicative of right of center most definitely are.

Case in point.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeckind (Reply #42)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 02:53 PM

43. When you say "Case in point" that is usually followed by an example.

Would you please elucidate?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #43)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 03:45 PM

45. Not always.

Sometimes the example precedes the observation.

Like this time....

My way or the highway. If you're not with me, you're against me, etc.

A little review of the rhetoric around the 2002 beating the drums of war would show them all over the place. I had it thrown against me when I demonstrated against it. Then and in the 70s.

Some people took the abuse and stood up to them. Some didn't.

Wasn't it something like 21 democratic senators (and 1 independent) who voted against the Iraq thing? The ones voting for it looked like a rogue's list of third wayers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution

oh wait... maybe too vague: This statement right here: if you don't like it, no one is holding you hostage.

(Translated) Love it or leave it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeckind (Reply #45)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 04:02 PM

47. A lot of them had constituents who agreed with the notion that Bush should have the "authority"

(i.e. the clout) should he need it--their mistake was trusting him and his national security team to be reasonable with that blank check.

Of course, IWR or no, Bush would have gone ahead with his plans based on the resolutions that were voted on in the late nineties--the ones that some of those "against" voters voted FOR.

Bush's attitude was always "The Constitution is just a goddamned piece of paper" and he wasn't going to let Congress stop him once his mind was made up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #47)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 04:04 PM

48. Whatever helps you sleep at night. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeckind (Reply #48)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 04:06 PM

49. What an odd comment. I don't lose sleep over problematic votes in Congress--in the 90s or later. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #49)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 04:16 PM

50. It refers to a rationalization on your part.

A psychological defense to deny a mistake.

IOW, pretend it wasn't a mistake.

But empirical evidence proved that it was. And then you did a little contortion dance to exonerate the senators who stood with Bush.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeckind (Reply #50)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 09:59 PM

54. You should really stop making the conversation about me--or anyone else with whom you converse.

Speaking of those "psychological defenses" and all.

But I guess that's a "little contortion dance" as well, wouldn't you say, Dr. Freud?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #54)

Sat Jun 18, 2016, 06:24 AM

57. I calls em as I see em.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to seabeckind (Reply #57)

Sat Jun 18, 2016, 10:01 AM

63. I'll bet you do. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 07:04 AM

15. Obviously protected speech.

Despite the utterly terrible photoshop.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 07:11 AM

19. Do they really think this will get her votes?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to notadmblnd (Reply #19)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 07:22 AM

20. No. They are using it to sell their product.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 08:01 AM

21. Wonkette I already intently dislike, I consider thir work (her work?) to be habitually nasty and

 

self indulgent with regular helpings of backhanded homophobia. This, a piece which is horrific in concept and botched in execution if you can pardon the pun, is definitive of both what they do and how they do it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #21)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 08:02 AM

22. perfectly said.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #22)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 08:08 AM

23. It's Wednesday and the power of speech is returning to me.....

 

not a great couple of weeks in the world.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #21)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 09:08 AM

28. They're elitists and unhumorous (n/t)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #21)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 09:57 AM

33. Anna Marie Cox (the "her" in Wonkette) stepped away from her editorial duties there years ago.

She used to frequently reference a sexual practice that wasn't conversed about in polite society, but I think you mistake homophobia in her crude remarks when she was actually referring to a method of virginity retention and birth control. She was rather equal opportunity in that regard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 08:46 AM

24. I doubt you'll see many on the street, but...

even if you do, why waste outrage on this rather lame product?

Seems the RWNJs are expending enough outrage for all of us. The clowns of DI are getting more apoplectic by the day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TreasonousBastard (Reply #24)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 09:01 AM

25. have you written that message about the horrid Hillary products offered?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #25)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 09:07 AM

27. This is gearing up to be the nastiest campaign in my lifetime...

but not nearly the nastiest in history. So far.

So I really don't see any reason to lose it over anyone's idiocy this early in the game.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 09:06 AM

26. Doubt that will be a big seller for them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 09:10 AM

29. That's dumb

It's in poor taste, it isn't funny, it won't help Secretary Clinton and the Photoshop work is amateurish.

Thankfully, her campaign will continue on a much higher plane than Wonkette.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 09:53 AM

30. Talk of guillotines, tumbrels, Mme. Defarge, "French razor," "French Solution" etc. are a cherished

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Wed Jun 15, 2016, 09:57 AM

31. NOT something....

I'd EVER Endorse, and certainly not purchase.

This is wrong on so many levels and completely unnecessary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 10:01 AM

34. At Whois, "the morons" seems to be singular, not plural.

Domain Name: WONKETTE.COM
Registrar: ENOM, INC.
Reseller: NAMECHEAP.COM

Registrant Name: REBECCA SCHOENKOPF
Registrant Organization: WONKETTE
Registrant City: LOS ANGELES

Wikipedia: Wonkette is an American online magazine of topical satire and political gossip, established in 2004 by Gawker Media and founding editor Ana Marie Cox, edited by Ken Layne from 2006 to 2012, and owned and edited by Rebecca Schoenkopf since 2012.[2] Prominent U.S. political bloggers including Juli Weiner, Jim Newell and Alex Pareene established their careers at Wonkette. The current editor is Rebecca Schoenkopf, formerly of OC Weekly. Wonkette covers US politics from Washington DC to local schoolboards.

Taking a sarcastic tone, the site focuses heavily on humorous breaking news, rumors, and the downfall of the powerful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 10:42 AM

37. decapitation is not a progressive value

never thought I would type that sentence...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 10:47 AM

38. Kinda funny how the wingnuts don't get as worked up about the shit sold AT Trump rallies

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 11:14 AM

39. Not OK

in any way.

We'd be outraged if a similar thing was out there with Trump holding Clinton's (or Sanders' or anyone's) head.

Poor taste to say the least.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bettie (Reply #39)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 02:55 PM

44. I'd consider it par for the course. You don't have to look very hard to find cruel images

of HRC. The rightwing loves that shit. It is what it is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 12:50 PM

41. The concern is dripping.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #41)

Sat Jun 18, 2016, 06:55 AM

58. you really are... paranoid here, trumad

 

I just think that it's a really bad idea. That simple. No agenda. I want Hillary to beat Trump. No ifs ands or buts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #58)

Sat Jun 18, 2016, 07:14 AM

59. And you are a big yawn.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #59)

Sat Jun 18, 2016, 07:26 AM

61. lol. whatever, darling trumad. You're so cute.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Reply #61)

Sat Jun 18, 2016, 09:27 AM

62. Thank you

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 03:51 PM

46. But when Palin used targets to indicate target states, that was an outrage!

The double standard of people who defend things like this when it's liberals, but would be up in arms if the right wing did this, is sickening.

FWIW, I think this is less bad than overt incitement to violence, but I'm still spectacularly unimpressed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Donald Ian Rankin (Reply #46)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 04:49 PM

51. Hell's bells

If über-partisans, on both the left as well as the right, didn't have double standards, they'd likely have no standards at all.

"Hey, if a single standard is good, a double standard has to be twice as good, right?"

Feh

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 05:07 PM

52. Boo hoo

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 05:14 PM

53. It's okay when we do it...their poutrage can simmer.

After November we'll add their heads to the pike.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 10:37 PM

55. Holofernes apologia. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Fri Jun 17, 2016, 10:59 PM

56. I would rather have this one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cali (Original post)

Sat Jun 18, 2016, 10:49 AM

64. What does the original painting portray? What Biblical story? Is there a metaphor here?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread