Friday, November 20, 2009

The Left Wing Protesters Of Bush

 protest happened, and the Web site that originally hosted the report is now defunct.)

Two different pictures of the same sign saying “Bush — the only dope worth shooting,” at the March 15, 2008 anti-war rally in Los Angeles.
(Source: photo on the left from Ringo’s Pictures; photo on the right reposted on

A sign showing Bush being shot in the head, at the March 15, 2008 anti-war rally in Los Angeles.
(Source: Ringo’s Pictures.)

Remember the guy in our first picture? Here he is again, with another explicit death threat against the president, this time calling for “Death to…Bush” at the October 27, 2007 anti-war rally in San Francisco.
(Source: zombietime. Click picture to see the image in context with other pictures from that day.)

And here he comes again with a third message, this time brazenly calling for “Death to…Bush” at the March 18, 2007 anti-war rally in San Francisco.
(Source: zombietime. Click picture to see the image in context with other pictures from that day.)

A protester with a sign showing Bush being beheaded.
(Reposted on; original source unknown.)

Bush being beheaded by a guillotine, at an Obama campaign rally, Denver, October 26, 2008.
(Source: Looking at the Left.)

Bush’s head in a basket after being decapitated by a guillotine, at an Obama campaign rally, Denver, October 26, 2008.
(Source: Looking at the Left.)

A sign saying “SMITE BUSH” at the June 5, 2004 anti-war rally in San Francisco.
(Source: zombietime. Click picture to see the image in context with other pictures from that day.)

Protesters call for Bush to be beheaded with a guillotine, at a protest against Bush’s second inauguration, January 20, 2005, in New York.
(Source: Fred Askew Photography.)

An effigy of Bush being killed, at the April 10, 2004 anti-war rally in San Francisco.
(Source: zombietime. Click picture to see the image in context with other pictures from that day.)

Bush being burned in effigy, at a November 3, 2004 post-election anti-Bush rally in San Francisco.
(Source: zombietime. Click picture to see the image in context with other pictures from that day.)

There are literally hundreds of videos currently viewable on YouTube of Bush being burned in effigy. I’ve posted a screenshot of one above, but rather than clog up this post with several embedded YouTube videos (which slows down the page loading), I’ll simply post links to several of the videos here:
Bush getting burned
bush you liar we’ll set your ass on fire
Burning George Bush
George W Bush burns in effigy (Washington DC)
And for a little variety: Bush getting smashed
(On the “Related videos” sidebars for all of these you can find many additional burning-Bush-in-effigy videos.)
In case you feel that burning Bush in effigy “doesn’t count” — just imagine the outcry there would be if even a single instance of Obama being burned in effigy was filmed (claims of “lynching,” etc.).

Bush being lynched by an American flag at a rally in New York on September 19, 2006.
(Source: Fred Askew Photography.)

A protester with a shirt that said “Death to all posers” with a picture of Bush superimposed, at the October 27, 2007 anti-war rally in San Francisco.
(Source: zombietime. Click picture to see the image in context with other pictures from that day.)

This sign from a protest in Chicago says “Lee Harvey, where are you?” at the bottom, referring to JFK’s assassin Lee Harvey Oswald.
(Source: Chicago Indymedia.)

A protester in Denver calls for Bush to the get the Louis XVI treatment — i.e beheaded by a guillotine.
(Source: Looking at the Left.)

Woman holding a puppet of Bush being hung by the neck, from a March 17, 2007 protest in Hollywood, California.
(Source: Ringo’s Pictures.)

Fantasy of Saddam Hussein killing Bush, from an October 27, 2007 protest in Los Angeles.
(Source: Ringo’s Pictures.)

A sign implying Bush should be killed for being a war profiteer. From an October 27, 2007 protest in Los Angeles.
(Source: Ringo’s Pictures.)

A child holding Bush’s tombstone, at the February 16, 2003 anti-war rally in San Francisco.
(Source: zombietime. Click picture to see the image in context with other pictures from that day.)

Threats in other settings (i.e. not at protests)

Bumper sticker implying that Bush should be hanged.
(Photo by Last Mohican.)
As far as I can tell, no one was ever stopped or investigated by the Secret Service for displaying this bumper sticker. Compare that to what happened to a man in Oklahoma on February 12, who had a sign in his car saying “Abort Obama Not the Unborn” — which not only caused the police to pull him over and confiscate the sign, but which eventually led to the Secret Service searching his house looking for evidence that he was a threat to the president. Double standard? You decide.

Wider-angle shot showing the bumper sticker above in context, with a pro-Obama sticker on the same car, proving that the sticker was displayed by a Bush detractor, not a supporter.
(Photo by Last Mohican.)

The anti-Israel conspiracy site hosts this pdf file which describes a mock trial and execution of George Bush for a bizarre litany of purported crimes; included in the document is this image of Bush being hanged at the trial.

A promotional photo from the mock-docmentary film “Death of a President,” showing Bush being killed. You can watch a short clip of the film’s assassination sequence here on YouTube.
(Source: USA Today.)

Threats against Bush by celebrities which were never investigated
John Kerry

The picture above shows John Kerry as he was being interviewed by Bill Maher in October of 2006 on the HBO show Real Time. As can be seen in this video exclusively on the ongoodmove blog, starting at about one minute into the clip Kerry says what can only be interpreted as a threat to kill Bush:
Maher: You could have went to New Hampshire and killed two birds with one stone.
Kerry: Or, I could have gone to 1600 Pennsylvania and killed the real bird with one stone.
Full transcript of the interview here.
Was John Kerry ever questioned or investigated for making a threat against Bush? No.
(Source: National Review.)
Betty Williams (Nobel Peace Prize winner)

On July 11, 2007, Nobel Peace Prize laureate Betty Williams gave the keynote speech to the International Women’s Peace Conference in Dallas, Texas, and said (to laughter and applause from the audience):
“I mean right now, I could kill George Bush, no problem. No, I don’t mean that. I mean — how could you nonviolently kill somebody? I would love to be able to do that.”
You can hear the audiotape of her threat on Breitbart.TV. Despite the fact that threatening to kill the president is a crime, the Secret Service refused to question her or detain her; according to the Dallas Morning News, “Secret Service spokesman Eric Zahren in Washington declined to comment, but a Dallas agent said Ms. Williams had not been questioned and there were no plans to do so.” However, the people who emailed the conference in anger about her threats — they were the ones investigated: “Conference organizers reported that a Dallas police detective was working with hotel security to review about 40 hateful e-mails received in response to Ms. Williams’ speech.”
Earlier, Betty Williams said essentially the same thing in a speech in Australia on July 24, 2006, proving that this was not just a slip of the tongue but something she thinks about frequently:
“I have a very hard time with this word ‘non-violence,’ because I don’t believe that I am non-violent…. Right now, I would love to kill George Bush…. I don’t know how I ever got a Nobel Peace Prize, because when I see children die the anger in me is just beyond belief.”
Was Betty Williams ever questioned or investigated for making a threat against Bush? No.
(Source: wikipedia.)
Craig Kilborn

On August 4, 2000, when Bush won the Republican nomination (but before he was president), Craig Kilborn on CBS’s The Late Late Show with Craig Kilborn ran a graphic of the words “SNIPERS WANTED” under George Bush as he gave his acceptance speech. Although CBS belatedly apologized five days later, Kilborn was never investigated, questioned or punished, and continued to host the show for four more years.
Was Craig Kilborn ever questioned or investigated for making a threat against Bush? No.
(Source: The Smoking Gun.)
Also see:
New York State comptroller, Alan Hevesi said during a June 1, 2006 speech that Senator Charles Schumer “will put a bullet between the president’s eyes if he could get away with it.” Hevesi later apologized for the statement.

Death threat t-shirts

Look at the two pictures above. Which do you find more offensive? Which is more obviously a threat to kill or disrespect a president?

For a while, CafePress allowed violent anti-Bush paraphernalia (such as this “Kill Bush” shirt) to be sold by users on its site, but after they were publicized by the Drudge Report, they were pulled offline; though, as far as I can tell, the designers were never investigated by the Secret Service.
(Source: Lifelike Pundits.)


  1. While the left wing nutsacks are trying to tell everyone we are the scary ones this is proof that they are the sickos in this world. I think they think we never knew this stuff was happening. Throw this in their face when they get all fack afraid of us conservatives. They lie about everything.

  2. There are more pictures then I could ever post. They have pictures that are so disterbing and perverted I couldn't post them. This is the liberal world and they see nothing wrong with these protesters but calling Obama a socialist is off base. Both side have done stupid things but the left take the cake on how sick and the pure volume of sick protests. The White house said that death threats are up over 400%. Not true.

  3. Chris, they were certainly wrong, and shame on them for even thinking those things. They represent the extreme form of thinking that doesn't represent the majority of the left.

    Now does that make the signs, threats and the racist actions of you side correct. Its purely partisan to suggest that the left is any worse than what the right is doing now. They are both equally horrific and need to be investigated.

    Calling Obama a socialist is off-base not because its hateful, but because its not true. As a social anarchist, i can tell you that He is a moderate liberal, no where near a socialist. Go over to Sweden or Iceland and see real socialism, not partisan descriptions.

    As for calling the threat levels untrue, taker a look at this Newsweek story

  4. Joey - Definitely, it comes from both sides. It is just irritating that the libs act all Pollyanna-ish, as if they have never done a thing like that. Not you, but Bruce and his ilk in particular. I think the ones on the right that are doing it aren't even on the right... in fact I'm not sure WHAT the Lyndon LaRouche guys are... I got some of their lit at a protest once, and it was sooooo out there I couldn't read beyond a couple of paragraphs. Anyway, those are the guys who I have found have the most out-there literature. You're right, both sides need to quit doing it, but the libs also need to quit acting like a bunch of innocents.

    I'm sincerely curious Joey (I preface that with sincerely because I realize that my naivete and questions may be construed as sarcasm, but it is not), what is a "social anarchist"? Is that different than a regular anarchist? Is it limited to social but not other aspects?

    Well I truly believe that Obama is a socialist. Or, at least, he would be one publicly if he thought he could get away with it. He believes that nothing can run a company, program, education, your and my life, as well as the government can. There is really no place in his ideal government for the private sector, except to fill his coffers and lube up the Democratic party. That's my opinion, which as well all know are just like a-holes, everybody has one!

    Regarding the article you posted a link to, I would just say that I would believe the SS before I believe an author who is writing about the SS. Why would the SS lie about the numbers? Perhaps Kessler got his numbers during one of the "spikes" and is using that, kind of like the report that, I don't remember the exact number they used, but weren't people saying that 400,000/month were losing health insurance or something? It was some crazy number that was correct for maybe one month, but certainly not for each month on average. Anyway, again, just my opinions on that article.

  5. Joey - Not to talk about your kid again, but you know what's funny? Until Herb said something about your picture for your ID, I had never clicked on your name and looked at your profile, and I thought the picture you had was of the Looney Tune's Tazmanian Devil. Maybe my eyesight really sucks, but if you just look at the little picture, doesn't it look like the T.D. standing there with his mouth open (the mouth being the Bat symbol)?!

  6. Joe I pointed those things because Bruces blog is saying that the right wing is the ones doing all these sick things. The left keep saying how dangerous the right wing is. But compared to what the left have done the right are almost saints. There has yet to be one arrest at a Tea Party and yet there has been thousands arrested on the left since Bush took office.

  7. JoeC if Obama isn't a socialist then why is every bill he trys to pass socialist in nature? I am also wondering what a social anarchist is? Is it the Weather Underground that Obama thinks so highlly of?

  8. Wow Chris, the Republicans may be the party of the angry white guy, but the Democrats appear to be the party of the angry psychotics. They don't discriminate when it comes time to be hate-mongers and threaten the life of our president. Shame on all these people, they should know better. I guess we won't see Bruce commenting on this story. Thanks Joey for at least having the stones to speak on this matter. I guess it's easier for you though Joey, you never made any outlandish claims at innocence and perfection like Bruce did and does.

  9. I did a paper on this very subject. It proved the 80/20 rule. It showed that 80% of crimes are by 20% of the population. 80% of the arrests at protest were by 20% of the population. And 20% of society is liberal. There are a lot of stats on this subject. Liberals are the cause of 80% of the problems in society while they only make up 20% of the population. Those are bad odds for a liberal.

  10. Chris - Remember when Bruce said we would never thank him when the Democrats saved us from global warming? I wonder what Bruce would have to say about this:

    In a potentially game-changing turn of events regarding “global warming” alarmism and its cap-and-trade policy implications, a hacker got into the computer system of the British University of East Anglia Climate Research Unit ("CRU"), one of the leading sources of the climate change hoax, and has made public a large amount of data and e-mail among the usual alarmist suspects.

    CRU director Phil Jones has admitted that the data archive, including e-mails, is likely genuine.

    If you follow the link above, the gentleman is, as we speak, wading through the mass of information, exposing all the cover-ups, lies, disinformation, etc. of the global warming hoaxers.

    Why do I find it so hilarious that Bruce bought this crap hook line and sinker? Is it because of Bruce's car with that bumper-sticker, or the fact that he has a picture of that car's ass?!!?! If ever there was a time that I wanted to, but could not, express my utter joy and full belly-laughs, it was now. BWAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

  11. Whats good for the Liberal APPARENTLY is not good for the CONSERVATIVE! Anybodt heard from BRUCE! I notice on issues where TRUTH is involved he just DISAPPEARS!

  12. Chris,John, Social anarchism to me is alittle like a left wing libertarian with a little government and society thrown in.

    Most Social anarchists are very anti-capitalistic and many are extreme syndicalists, who believe in union control of politics and industry. I'm a bit right of all that, but i still have strong unionist beliefs, am distrustful of industrial control of property both physical and intellectual, and find communal or societal control of politics to be desired.

    To me socialists would be interested solely in a single payer system, not an overhaul of the existing system, including private insurance companies.

    Does that answer your questions?

  13. We will start to see fewer and fewer liberals as we get to see what the liberal agenda is all about. We conservatives are making an impact on the liberals community. You almost never see one with an up to date blog. Now that Bush and the Republicans can't truly be blamed any more they have lost the wind in their sails.

  14. So Joe I take it you don't like anything about the constitution or the USA that was built on all the things you hate. Do you like Mao and communism? Do you believe in the abolishment is personal and private wealth? Do you believe all people of America should be unionized? Do you think it is OK for our govt to take ones wealth and give it to who they choose? So from what I get you want the unions to take the place of gov't. It's an interesting Marxist view on the role of govt. JoeC you are the farthest left person I have ever known. Libertarian want personal freedom not union control. And if unions are to survive this next decade they need the govt to take away the rights of the worker so unions can plunder business. Well yo ho ho and a bottle of rum. You must be pulling our legs on your beliefs on the role of govt. I find it hard to believe any mindful person could believe such a thing. Is the world flat?

  15. JoeC said,"To me socialists would be interested solely in a single payer system, not an overhaul of the existing system, including private insurance companies." A socialist would want a single payer system and they do. But they are realist and they know they can't make a single payer happen now. Key word is now. They are however setting the framework to make a single payer system more likely in the near future. The Socialist/Democrats are putting us on a baby step plan to socialized single payer. I know JoeC you work for Ford UAW and you think a single payer would be a big bailout to the unions. And who cares how much $ we all have to pay to make the unions happy. Did you know Joe that 46% of the UAW members consider themselves conservative. And 40% vote for Republican. The union is as divided as it ever has been. I do feel bad for the workers if and when the union devours their host. Thank God the govt took the union jobs away with OSHA and what not. The union had its position whith worker safty,far work environment and far wages. But now the govt does all those things. Now the job of the union is to get as much from it's host to give as much as they can without killing the host. By the look of things I'd say the unions overshot things. Single payer will take care of a lot of money issues the union has. You wont see one dime of that and you will have bad health care on top of it. That is why 40% of union members vote Republican. Do you know how corrupt the unions are? Do you know how much your local "lost" over the last decade?

  16. Wow that CRU global warming thing is big news if it is correct. I have been reading a lot about how this global warming thing is a big money making hoax. It's to give the govt even more control over our lives. I hope it is true and it stops Cap and Trade. Hell we can't aford this healthcare bill but that doesn't stop these Democrats. I'm starting to think there are more anarchist in the Democratic party and this White House then I imagined. Cloward-Piven Stratagy at work.

  17. This Administrations GOAL is not Socialized Medicine. I beleive that what they want and it could happen eventually is Socialized Insurance and that where the Control will Come from!Sounds like they may get Social Security back on coarse also by killing off as many Seniors as Possible. If you dont think Govdernment Health Care will have NON Doctors deciding by your AGE the treatment you will receive than you are the PROBLEM and not part of the Solution. Health Care Needs reform NOT GOVERNMENT Control!

  18. Chris, I am not a communist nor a Maoist. Marxism is an interesting philosophy, but not a reality. You'd have to rely on people to put society over the individual and for all people to work together. Your always going to fail on both. Someone will always be out to get over on everyone else and someone won't want to pull their weight.

    As a union member i am well aware of the flaws of unions what exactly the union is capable of. I don't feel that all industry needs to be unionized. I feel enough to protect workers rights but not all.

    As for the healthcare as a boon to the Union, i am interested in single payer as a citizen first and second as a equal playing field with Japanese and European car makers. It would remove much of the legacy costs related to our 100 year industry. I don't see it as a union thing at all. So you wouldn't be paying for my insurance, but your own.

    As for your figure on voting i'd love to see the source. But i don't expcet that all union members would vote Democrat. I don't think all Christians vote right, nor all businessmen either. So that matters little to me. I'm flexible.

  19. No JoeC you just have the same idealogy as communist and marxist. A healthcare policy expert says there are details in the Senate healthcare bill that will frighten everyone.

    Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) has unveiled his more than 2,000-page healthcare bill with an estimated price tag of $849 billion. However, as Grace Marie Turner of the Galen Institute points out, one of the reasons the bill was scored under President Obama's $900 billion cost goal is because no one gets any benefit from the program until 2014.

    "So they start collecting taxes and fees now, and...the first ten years of full implementation of this bill is $2.5 trillion, and that's only the beginning," Turner explains. "So this does not in any President Obama's budget specification. And there are all sorts of tricks that they have pulled in this bill to try to pretend that it's deficit-neutral."

    Turner says although the bill is a "carefully crafted" document designed to garner as close to 60 votes as Senator Reid can, it contains lots of new taxes and $500 billion in cuts to Medicare.

    "They're assuming that Congress is going to have the will to make those cuts, which they have no track record in doing -- which means they're going to have to come back to taxpayers for more and more taxes to pay for these alleged promises of accessible healthcare for more Americans," Turner suggests.

    She further says that many promises President Obama made to the American people are broken in the Senate healthcare bill, including the notion that "if you like your current health insurance you'll be able to keep it." The Congressional Budget Office predicts that under the Senate's proposal, millions of Americans will lose the employer-based coverage they currently have.

    If Democrats' healthcare reform as currently proposed is rammed through,

    Healthcare dubbed too pricy
    A Mississippi senator says with a $12 trillion debt and record job-loss rate, the U.S. cannot afford the Democrats' healthcare plan.

    At a Capitol Hill rally, Senate Majority Leader Reid claimed Thursday that the $849-billion, 10-year bill he unveiled hours earlier will save lives, save money, and save Medicare. The Nevada Democrat claims the bill is not just a milestone in a journey of a few months or a few years, but rather, it culminates an effort that began over a half century ago.

    But Senator Roger Wicker (R-Mississippi) does not agree with Reid's assessment.

    "It's a terribly expensive bill," states Wicker. "I don't know how they can tout it as something that actually saves money; except that they're using a few accounting gimmicks to maybe make it look better at first. It raises taxes to a tune of half-a-trillion dollars." (Listen to audio report)

    The GOP lawmaker says there is another huge problem with the Senate bill as "it eliminates the so-called 'Stupak language' which was negotiated in the House and was designed to ensure that no taxpayer dollars go to fund abortion through these insurance plans." The Mississippi senator points out that "that language is taken out."

    Wicker is hopeful he can find at least one principled pro-life Democrat who will help Republicans prevent the bill from going forward in its present form. That one vote would be enough in the Democrat-led Senate.

  20. I think these pictures are great. And Bush didn't do one thing to those people. You on the right got put on the Homeland watch list before you could become the enemy. How is that any different then the preemptive wars?

  21. Herb i doubt you'd know a communist idealogy if i stapled the manifesto to your eyes. But if it makes you feel better go with yourself brother.

  22. communism - 4 dictionary results
    Capitalism vs. Socialism
    Save 60% on TOS and learn to defend capitalism on moral grounds.
    Black Liberation Theology
    Learn about what it is and its implications for our society
    Russia: Communism
    Russian History Highlights Basic Facts, Local News.
    com⋅mu⋅nism  /ˈkɒmyəˌnɪzəm/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [kom-yuh-niz-uhm] Show IPA
    Use communism in a Sentence
    See web results for communism
    See images of communism
    –noun 1. a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state.
    2. (often initial capital letter) a system of social organization in which all economic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian state dominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party.
    3. (initial capital letter) the principles and practices of the Communist party.
    4. communalism.

    1835–45; < F communisme. See common, -ism Unabridged
    Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2009.
    Cite This Source |Link To communism
    Capitalism vs. Socialism
    Save 60% on TOS and learn to defend capitalism on moral grounds.
    Black Liberation Theology
    Learn about what it is and its implications for our society
    com·mu·nism (kŏm'yə-nĭz'əm)
    A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.


    A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people.

    The Marxist-Leninist version of Communist doctrine that advocates the overthrow of capitalism by the revolution of the proletariat.

    [French communisme, from commun, common, from Old French, from Latin commūnis; see commune2.]

    The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
    Copyright © 2009 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
    Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
    Cite This Source

    Cultural Dictionary


    An economic and social system envisioned by the nineteenth-century German scholar Karl Marx. In theory, under communism, all means of production are owned in common, rather than by individuals (see Marxism and Marxism-Leninism). In practice, a single authoritarian party controls both the political and economic systems. In the twentieth century, communism was associated with the economic and political systems of China and the Soviet Union and of the satellites of the Soviet Union and the UAW/SEIU. (Compare capitalism and socialism.)
    So now you theaten me?

  23. Now if I was a pussy like bruce I would be looking for a lawyer because you threatened me JoeC. But I'm not a liberal pussy like you two social retardes.

  24. These liberals always get out of control. I heard about them betting that poor man for his conservative views. Did you hear about the beating and rape of that women with the NOBAMA shirt on? It was done because she had the shirt on. You don't hear about that one do you?


Please keep it clean and nice. Thank you for taking the time to post you thought. It means a lot to me that you do this.