Most folks by now are certainly aware of the infamous taser incident that happened Monday at the University of Florida.
In a somewhat stunning aftershock (pun intended!), the editorial board of Colorado State University's student-run paper has offered possibly the finest example of Bush Derangement Syndrome to date by actually blaming this incident on - wait for it! - the current President of the United States.
Isn't that special?
Yet, even better was the simplicity of their statement, and the vulgarity included which will follow after the break so that only those who choose to be offended will be (h/t NBer wiwf):
FUCK BUSH This is the view of the Collegian editorial board.
Apparently, this caused a bit of an uproar forcing the Collegian's editorial board to post an explanation (emphasis added):
On Friday, September 21, the The Rocky Mountain Collegian editorial board printed a statement bashing President Bush in its Opinion section in an effort to highlight the importance of free speech on a college campus. In doing so, the editorial board and I realized the statement was controversial and unpopular among some students and community members.
As local and national media will inevitably jump on this controversy, I strongly urge the university community to try and understand that the intentions of the students on staff, including me, were not to cause harm, but rather to reinforce the importance of free speech at our great institution. My staff and I are extremely proud to be CSU students and members of this amazing community, and it is my sincere hope that our readers understand our intentions were not malicious.
Fascinating, wouldn't you agree? After all, whose free speech were they fighting for: theirs or the person that was tased?
If they were standing up for the tased man's right to speak, what did President Bush have to with that event Monday? Was the Collegian suggesting that he was so treated because of security edicts set forth by the White House?
On the other hand, if this is just their desire to besmirch the president while flexing their first amendment rights, why not come out and say so?
In the end, this explanation was a non-explanation, and students and alumni should ask for a far greater clarification than this piece of detritus.
*****Update: NBer JannyMae posted a truly delicious comment concerning this issue --
Am I the only one who has noticed that the most vocal anti-Bush freaks are the same ones who are claiming that he is, "stifling their dissent?"
Bush surely is doing a poor job of stifling, isn't he?
Yep. With stifled dissent like this, who needs freedom of speech? :-)