Northstarmom

FORT COLLINS, Colorado (CNN) -- The College Republicans, a student organization at Colorado State University, weren't planning anything special for the last week of September.

Then on September 21, David McSwane, the editor-in-chief of The Rocky Mountain Collegian, the daily student newspaper, printed the four-word column that sparked a national free speech debate and sent the College Republicans into action, writing a petition to force him to resign.

"Taser this: [f word spelled out] Bush" was printed on the opinion page of the newspaper, causing CSU president Larry Penley to issue a formal statement and the Board of Student Communications to plan a meeting for Wednesday night. During the meeting they will decide on the fate of McSwane and his future involvement with the publication.

"We'll present our petition to the board at the meeting," said student Chelsey Penoyer, the chairman of the College Republicans.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/25/bush.cnnu/index.html

punkdudeus

which is why it's awesome to have an independent student news paper like berkeley does. we can write w/e the f&%@ we want.

AUlostchick

Why should he have to resign? First of all, it's in the editorial section, not the front page. Maybe some disciplinary action, like a written apology to whoever that word might have offended, but he should not have to apologize for his opinion that Bush sucks, which is what it sounds like the CR want him to do by resigning.

ChamilitaryMayne

Buck Fush?

diehldun

People seem to forget that as unpopular President Bush is with many (I am not a fan of him or this administration), he is still the President of the United States and deserves proper respect, regardless of his popularity. He IS the President, whether you like it or not, and saying "____" Bush like that was uncalled for, especially from an Opinions Editor's and professional journalist's point-of-view.

punkdudeus

so what? disrespect is an article included in free speech. If we can't say ___bush, ___jesus, ____ america ___the troops...then what's the point's of having it at all? free speech is meant to **** people of, if you don't **** someone off you're not saying the right things.

same goes for burning the flag

tetrahedr0n

Why? I never can understand why people consider that there are specific people who just magically should be respected. Respect is earned. Not given. Not automatically bestowed, no matter what position someone is in. Bush does not have my respect.

imran

I dont like Bush's foreign policy, and I despise the administration, but I agree with diehldun; if we can't treat our own president with some level of respect (no matter how much we dislike him), how can we expect other nations to treat America properly? Whether we like it or not, Bush represents America on the world stage, and beyond disagreeing with him/his actions, ad hominem attacks aren't going to help anybody.

AlphaInsidious

Well, that depends on the definition of free speech that you prescribe to...sounds like the marketplace of ideas to me. However, keep in mind that there is no first amendment protection for obscenity, so not anything is kosher.
Also, burning the flag does NOT always constitute speech. It has to pass the symbolic speech doctrine tests. Essentially, it has to be meant to convey a political message, and there has to be a reasonable likelihood that the audience will understand that political message. Otherwise, nope.

-Alpha

punkdudeus

alpha. texas v. johnson, the burning of the flag does constitute free speech. How is it not a symbolic act? It's the same as burning a piece of paper with the word "AMERICA" on it, it expresses a certain ideology. same with the _____bush idea. IF obscenity isn't protected speech, then...what's the point of having it?

and on the whole...we have to respect the president because he's the representative of the US...nationalism like that is a stupid form of patriotism. It's a refuge for the irresponsible. We're citizens of the world as well as citizens of the US. if someone disrespects the world then why respect them?

Vail

How the heck did Bush's name get mixed up in a tasering incident which took place at John Kerry's speech?

David McSwane, like that Myers kid, just wants attention, they both got it, end of story.

niddumas

McSwane misused his right and the influence of his position by petty ad hominems, regardless of protected speech. Of course its protected speech but as good as it feels, there is no efficacy in saying ***** Bush. If his opinions are so strong, why isn't he out on street protesting, why isn't he raising money, why doesn't he articulately structure his argument? As the article says, he makes himself and his paper look uneducated.

diehldun

"He makes himself and his paper look uneducated."



Exactly. And by respect, it's not whether you like President Bush or not, or if you agree with his policies or not. It's basic manners; I really don't understand how hard that is to understand. I don't like him, but I don't immaturely go around saying "____ Bush!". Fine if you don't respect him, but that's far different than plastering a page with "____ Bush". What McSwane did as a journalist (as an Editor!) was journalistically very unprofessional, and that likewise makes his paper appear so too. No sympathy or pity here if he ultimately resigns.

AlphaInsidious

punkdudeus
No, it counted as free speech in that case perhaps. I didn't say it never constituted free speech, but it doesn't always constitute it. It has to be a special circumstance because free speech doesn't include actions, only speech, written words, music, etc. Under the symbolic speech doctrine, if something passes the two tests i mentioned, it will be considered free speech.

-Alpha

GoldShadow

I agree wholeheartedly.