I don't post articles I haven't read. While the article states the rats were inside the cage, it does not state they were confined there, and the video shows that one was placed on the chandelier.
Where was "desecration" implied? Both the article and video clearly state the room was left as found. As for the article title, I have no control over that, and conceivably the group knew what to expect for headlines from the select group of journalists invited and it is likely precisely what they wanted.
What Trump actually delivered to them in the form of the hotel room was nice, but what he gave them didn't fit the image they wanted to portray, so in order to make a political point, they covered it in a false facade of ugliness and filth.
If you take the hotel as a whole, the only shitty room there is the one controlled by leftists, and it was nice before they got a hold of it. Detroit anyone?
The ugly environment they created will likely never be experienced by Trump, he may see a picture or two, but they're the ones who get to live the full experience of what they created. He might be the object of their rage, but they themselves are the recipients of their abuse. Well, them and anyone who shows up to watch.
In terms of it as art, I see good art as a beautiful expression of great talent. They took a room that was basically quite attractive, made it ugly and then called that art. If what they did took any talent at all, I don't think it took much, so I'd say they failed on both parts: no beauty, no talent. It may technically be art but it definitely isn't good art.
Imagine if this was done to the previous prez. Weaponizing the IRS and FBI would be child's play compared to what would have happened to anyone who did this to him.
If what I've read is accurate, I don't find it disgusting...IF they left the room as they found it, and no rats were harmed.
I'm not sure what people call it, those many times that Trump has continued to mention his remaining major opponent in the presidential race. Those many times when he has referred to her as crooked, and had crowds chanting "LOCK HER UP!"
I do not agree with everything the activists said or did, but I think the video qualifies as "artistic".
Referring to Clinton as "crooked" is, imho, simply stating the truth, and people were calling for her to be locked up long before Trump became a candidate. Trump has, no doubt, been very petty with her, as he was with all his opponents during the primaries. If Hillary wishes to return petty with petty, perhaps she should target Trump rather than those who voted for him.
Okay. It's fine for Trump and others to repeatedly demean his former opponent, have crowds chanting "lock her up", and call her "crooked Hillary". This group thinks Trump is crooked, stages a video depicting him in a cage, and it's disgusting?
Yes, perhaps she should. She really screwed up with that "deplorables" comment, and several others. She isn't very relevant these days, though, in the scheme of things. I brought her up only because of the parallel.
As stated above, I think it very petty of Trump. Frankly, unless/until the DOJ has something to officially report, I don't think Trump should bring up Clinton at all. Even though that's unlikely to happen, if it did, I still think he should keep quiet. But then, Trump doesn't consult me on such matters.
Clinton may not be relevant, politically speaking, but she has continued to place herself in the public arena. While her "deplorables" comment dates back to the election, she has just very recently renewed her ignorant and disparaging commentary on said deplorables.
Political cartoons, caricatures of and jokes about presidents have been a long-standing tradition in American media, from editorial pages to late-night talk shows to SNL. The internet has brought things to a whole new level, however, and with practically everyone capable of producing a disparaging meme things have devolved to new lows. I lost several "friends" back on SH because I found some of the memes and comments regarding the Obamas disgusting. Despite my extreme dislike of Clinton, there are lines I won't cross. Calling for the death of anyone, displaying mock bloody heads, depicting people in naked sculptures, and yes, taking rats into their establishments are all things that are lines I, personally, wouldn't cross.
People are free to say whatever they wish about Trump. They are free to create displays I find disgusting, too. As I am free to express my disgust in them.
I couldn't agree with you more! There was a particularly disgusting cartoon on this site that I called attention to and it eventually got taken down. It didn't matter who it was about because I would and have called foul on both sides of the isle when it was warranted.
I know she has, Bozette, and am aware of some her more recent, and rather cringeworthy, comments. No more ignorant or disparaging than those put forth by our current president on an almost daily basis, in my opinion, but still...
For sure. I didn't start spending much non-work related time on the internet, until 2010. The things I saw about the Obamas were downright sickening, and it never stopped, the whole time he in was in office. That was mainly on SH, because it was the only "opinion" site I participated on. I lost some friends there too, when I expressed my thoughts on some of the comments and memes posted regarding the Bushes. We are in agreement about calling for the death of anyone, the mock bloody heads, and naked statues.
Well that just makes all the difference then. Otherwise it'd be insane hypocrisy to act that way while condemning someone else.
I don't post articles I haven't read. While the article states the rats were inside the cage, it does not state they were confined there, and the video shows that one was placed on the chandelier.
Where was "desecration" implied? Both the article and video clearly state the room was left as found. As for the article title, I have no control over that, and conceivably the group knew what to expect for headlines from the select group of journalists invited and it is likely precisely what they wanted.
It speaks volumes on many levels.
What Trump actually delivered to them in the form of the hotel room was nice, but what he gave them didn't fit the image they wanted to portray, so in order to make a political point, they covered it in a false facade of ugliness and filth.
If you take the hotel as a whole, the only shitty room there is the one controlled by leftists, and it was nice before they got a hold of it. Detroit anyone?
The ugly environment they created will likely never be experienced by Trump, he may see a picture or two, but they're the ones who get to live the full experience of what they created. He might be the object of their rage, but they themselves are the recipients of their abuse. Well, them and anyone who shows up to watch.
In terms of it as art, I see good art as a beautiful expression of great talent. They took a room that was basically quite attractive, made it ugly and then called that art. If what they did took any talent at all, I don't think it took much, so I'd say they failed on both parts: no beauty, no talent. It may technically be art but it definitely isn't good art.
There's going to be some really good crying videos.. the next time..
Imagine if this was done to the previous prez. Weaponizing the IRS and FBI would be child's play compared to what would have happened to anyone who did this to him.
Are kidding me? There are literally 1,000s of memes showing Obama in far worse situations than this, including lynching, burned alive and beheaded.
Ozzy you are right. Nobody could even say anything about ob.
If what I've read is accurate, I don't find it disgusting...IF they left the room as they found it, and no rats were harmed.
I'm not sure what people call it, those many times that Trump has continued to mention his remaining major opponent in the presidential race. Those many times when he has referred to her as crooked, and had crowds chanting "LOCK HER UP!"
I do not agree with everything the activists said or did, but I think the video qualifies as "artistic".
We disagree.
Referring to Clinton as "crooked" is, imho, simply stating the truth, and people were calling for her to be locked up long before Trump became a candidate. Trump has, no doubt, been very petty with her, as he was with all his opponents during the primaries. If Hillary wishes to return petty with petty, perhaps she should target Trump rather than those who voted for him.
Again, we disagree.
Okay. It's fine for Trump and others to repeatedly demean his former opponent, have crowds chanting "lock her up", and call her "crooked Hillary". This group thinks Trump is crooked, stages a video depicting him in a cage, and it's disgusting?
Yes, perhaps she should. She really screwed up with that "deplorables" comment, and several others. She isn't very relevant these days, though, in the scheme of things. I brought her up only because of the parallel.
I figured we would.
As stated above, I think it very petty of Trump. Frankly, unless/until the DOJ has something to officially report, I don't think Trump should bring up Clinton at all. Even though that's unlikely to happen, if it did, I still think he should keep quiet. But then, Trump doesn't consult me on such matters.
Clinton may not be relevant, politically speaking, but she has continued to place herself in the public arena. While her "deplorables" comment dates back to the election, she has just very recently renewed her ignorant and disparaging commentary on said deplorables.
Political cartoons, caricatures of and jokes about presidents have been a long-standing tradition in American media, from editorial pages to late-night talk shows to SNL. The internet has brought things to a whole new level, however, and with practically everyone capable of producing a disparaging meme things have devolved to new lows. I lost several "friends" back on SH because I found some of the memes and comments regarding the Obamas disgusting. Despite my extreme dislike of Clinton, there are lines I won't cross. Calling for the death of anyone, displaying mock bloody heads, depicting people in naked sculptures, and yes, taking rats into their establishments are all things that are lines I, personally, wouldn't cross.
People are free to say whatever they wish about Trump. They are free to create displays I find disgusting, too. As I am free to express my disgust in them.
I couldn't agree with you more! There was a particularly disgusting cartoon on this site that I called attention to and it eventually got taken down. It didn't matter who it was about because I would and have called foul on both sides of the isle when it was warranted.
Well, we can at least agree about that. :)
I know she has, Bozette, and am aware of some her more recent, and rather cringeworthy, comments. No more ignorant or disparaging than those put forth by our current president on an almost daily basis, in my opinion, but still...
For sure. I didn't start spending much non-work related time on the internet, until 2010. The things I saw about the Obamas were downright sickening, and it never stopped, the whole time he in was in office. That was mainly on SH, because it was the only "opinion" site I participated on. I lost some friends there too, when I expressed my thoughts on some of the comments and memes posted regarding the Bushes. We are in agreement about calling for the death of anyone, the mock bloody heads, and naked statues.
Of course you are.
That is nasty. Probably the hotels have lots of rat traps all around. Everyplace has them you just don't see it. So that art project won't last long.
They didn't leave the rats there, Lorraine.
OK BOZ I can't seem to read everything on these posts.
the rats were not "released" as the heapline claims.