Kathy Griffin Channels Her Inner ISIS [Updated]

kathygriffintweet

As some on this blog know, I have never been a fan of comedian Kathy Griffin.  I have found her crude humor to be juvenile and never understood why CNN and Anderson Cooper continued to use her during New Year’s Eve programming.   As I previously stated, Griffin often seems to substitute an increasingly obvious lack of comedic talent with a rising level of obscenity.  Now, she has shocked even many of her many enablers with a picture holding the bloody severed head of President Donald Trump.  Griffin clearly must have known that a firestorm would result from the disgusting and deeply disturbing image.  That buzz however seems to be turning into a buzz saw with even her former supporters are expressing outrage at the image. Update: CNN finally cut Griffin after two days of fierce criticism.

Griffin initially refused to apologize and insisted that she was just mocking Trump.  She noted that she captioned the picture “there was blood coming out of his eyes, blood coming out of his…wherever.” That somehow was supposed to make this all acceptable and she added “OBVIOUSLY, I do not condone ANY violence by my fans or others to anyone, ever! I’m merely mocking the Mocker in Chief.”

So let me try to work through this.  Griffin (like most of us) found Trump’s comments disgusting.  Her response is to create an even more disgusting image of beheading the President and displaying his blood soaked head.  Moreover, while Griffin has been appalling many of us for years with her crude, shocking comments, this grotesque act was meant for some higher calling.

Late on Tuesday, the hue and cry finally caught up with Griffin who admitted that she went “too far.”  For the irrepressibly and unapologetically profane Griffin, that is quite a statement.  For two days, CNN said that it had not decided whether the grotesque display will keep it from using Griffin again as a co-host for New Year’s Eve.  It later announced that it would indeed cut her from the New Year’s Eve coverage.

Just out of curiosity: if a co-host hoisting the bloody severed head of Barack Obama, would CNN still be deliberating whether she might still co-host New Year’s Eve coverage? Indeed, talking about killing Trump appears a common discussion point for some celebrities.

I once said that Trump seems to bring out the worst in his critics.  Griffin is now the best example of that curious pattern.  Her blood-soaked message will do more for Donald Trump than he could have possibly achieved on his own.  Just as Trump’s ratings were falling, Griffin swooped in to make him the victim and liberal extremism the story.  She is the face of the increasing hysterical and unhinged response to Trump, a trend that undermines the very arguments against his actions and policies.

 The only good thing that could come out of this would be the final removal of Griffin from the public eye, including CNN’s annual shock fest with Anderson Cooper on New Year’s eve.  However, I will not hold my breath.  There remains a percentage of Americans who thrill at the mention of crude sexual references and simulated sex acts.  This is likely to be no different for her target audience of the lowest common comedic denominator.

180 thoughts on “Kathy Griffin Channels Her Inner ISIS [Updated]

  1. Karen,

    This plan (see below) is far more disturbing because we are going to actually kill civilians. USGinc. is funding ISIS and saying they really don’t care if they kill civilians while pretending to kill members of ISIS. That’s far more depraved than this fake head. These are actual women, men and children and USGinc. simply doesn’t care about their deaths. We use cluster bombs. Most of the world has outlawed them as war crimes. We release bombs with fleshettes–random sharp objects that explode and hit anyone nearby. We use depleted uranium. We use drones. This head is fake. Our bombs are real.

    We don’t see the dead on the newz because our propaganda is thick but if you think of what USGinc. is doing, it is absolutely evil and depraved. This is why the rest of the world considers our govt. to be the largest danger to peace, the most terrorist nation on earth.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-01/mattis-us-annihilate-islamic-state-caliphate-civilian-casualties-fact-life

  2. That image is so disturbing…I am shocked at the sheer volume of people without a critical thinking or ethical meter who worked on it, knew about it, or contributed to it. I am shocked at CNN’s reaction for 48 hours. Did this happen because she surrounded herself with sycophants who wouldn’t dare tell her, you know, Kathy, maybe chopping off someone’s head in effigy because you disagree with his politics, in today’s climate of almost daily terrorist attacks, might not be in the best taste? Or do all those people really think that it’s OK to post a pic fantasizing about murdering the president?

    Do we all remember when Sarah Palin used terms like “target” and “crosshairs” to discuss an election? War terms are ubiquitous in politics. And yet there was this controversy that such political usage of battle terminology affects mass shooters, but only if used by a Republican. And then the media vowed never to use such terms themselves. Oh, it was glorious, watching them stumble for weeks trying to cover an election without using terms such as target, in their sights, bullseye, war room, situation room, battle lines being drawn, battle, knocking someone out of the lead, etc. They kept interrupting themselves, apologizing, and then it just went away and they went back to using the same terminology they’d just spent weeks demonizing Republicans for using.

    It was disgusting and wrong when foreign countries (such as Iran during our infamous nuclear talks), that mad cultist pastor, and a couple of people at U of Wisconsin hanged Obama in effigy. This is just as wrong. We are not France during the Terror. We hold an election every 4 years.There are checks and balances that are supposed to help rein in a POTUS with dictatorial dreams (although Obama did succeed in creating an uber presidency of a surveillance nation.) Did these people believe they lived in a One Party State?

    It disturbs me how frequent there are threats or fantasies about killing the President, and even harming his wife and children. That is not democracy. What bothers me most about this image is not the image itself, but that Kathy Griffin felt so confident that she would be praised for it. What does that tell us about political tolerance in Hollywood and the media. These people have gone howling mad.

    • “I am shocked at the sheer volume of people without a critical thinking or ethical meter who worked on it, knew about it, or contributed to it.”

      Yes, the participation is saddening and disappointing. The book The Tragedy of Nazi Germany shows how easily a nation can descend into madness.

  3. Here is a great editorial about why Griffin felt it was OK to do what she did:

    In the bubble in which she lives, in the world in which she travels, in the frame of reference in which she nestles like a baby nestling in a Moses basket, it must have seemed to Kathy Griffin that there could be no way she could go too far if the object of her unspeakable provocation was Donald Trump.

    In fact, she must have believed, the further she would be willing to go, the more praise her action would be likely to engender.

    That was not an unreasonable belief. Stephen Colbert took to the CBS airwaves and used a word to describe Trump that would have gotten him fired had he used it about Barack Obama — only he would never have used such a word about Barack Obama. His show’s ratings have only continued to surge in the wake of it. What would your takeaway be from that if you were Kathy Griffin? You might take one look at the cover of Village Magazine’s February issue, in which Trump appears in the crosshairs of a rifle sight, and figure it got a lot of attention for that so imagine how much more attention I might get for this?

    Griffin probably figured others had crossed the line before her, so she wasn’t really crossing a line at all. Or maybe she figured where Trump is concerned, there is no line.

    Oh, sure, the yahoos would scream, but such screams would surely sound like a thousand angels singing to Kathy’s friends and employers. Their agony would only be a sign her stunt had truly hit home.

    http://nypost.com/2017/05/31/in-her-bubble-kathy-griffin-thought-nothing-was-out-of-bounds-in-mocking-trump/

    That was just an excerpt, and there is more at the link.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  4. “Ted Nugent was obviously using a figure of speech, unfortunate as it was. It just shows the anger people have towards @BarackObama.”

    So Griffin’s picture, using Trump as a role model, “just shows the anger people have towards @OrangeDimwit.”

    • Your link is to someone putting a gloss on Nugent’s remarks, not to Nugent’s remarks.

      I thought it was odd that when I searched for Nugent’s remarks, up popped a mess of commentary from ThinkProgress and AlterNet. However, the Clinton News Network had some reporting, excerpted here:

      “If Barack Obama becomes the president in November again, I will either be dead or in jail by this time next year,” Nugent said, according to a video posted on YouTube by the NRA. “If you can’t go home and get everybody in your lives to clean house in this vile, evil America hated administration, I don’t even know what you’re made out of.”

      He accused the government of “wiping its ass with the Constitution you’re living under a rock some place”and labeled members of the Obama administration, including the vice president, attorney general and secretary of state “criminals.”

      “We need to ride into that battlefield and chop their heads off in November. Am I, any questions?” Nugent said.

      This is not the first time Nugent has vividly espoused his views. In fact, the NRA has a section of its website devoted to some of his statements, including profanity-laced comments and threats directed at then candidates Obama and Hillary Clinton during the last election cycle.

      Maybe it was of less interest to the news media than it was to the prog circle jerk because employees of CNN, unlike employees of the “Center for American Progress” understand what is meant by ‘metaphor’.

  5. Our celebrities have distinguished themselves. Griffin “beheads” Trump. Snoop Dogg shot him in a music video. A SNL “comedy” writer tweeted that Trump’s eleven year old son will be the country’s “first home schooled shooter”. Another alleged “comedian” tweeted Barron Trump looked like a future date rapist. Madonna wants to blow up the White House. Sarah Silverman wants the military to overthrow him. Stephen Colbert said Trump’s mouth was only good for holstering Vladimir Putin’s c*ck.

    When a rodeo clown put on an Obama mask as part of his act, the Democrat’s phony outrage machine hyped it into an international story. The clown lost his job and was banned for life from ever appearing at the Missouri state fair again. He was also forced to undergo sensitivity training.

    • Ted Nugent repeatedly called for Obama’s death and then became one of Trump’s celebrity supporters .Guess the difference was he wanted him hung and not beheaded.

      • Did Nugent simply “call for Obama’s death”, or did he call for Obama and Hillary to be tried for treason, and then if convicted, hung???

        Because if it is the latter, then that is only calling for a legal process to take place, after a trial and conviction. It’s not realistic talk for sure, but I think that is a difference worth mentioning. If it had been the former characterization, and Nugent simply called for Obama’s death, then that would be a felony, and Nugent would be in a federal prison somewhere.

        Because if Trump was ever tried for treason, and convicted, I am sure many, if not most, Democrats would become sudden believers in the Death Penalty, too.

        I sure wish you Democrats would stop reporting half truths. Maybe that is why Democrats are so stupid. They never really get the full story on anything. They just hear what they want to hear, and then run off in drooling, rabid, lynch-mob mode.

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

  6. While at the same time all the kids from Chelsea Clinton to the the Bush girls and the Obama girls have fared well so far. Maybe it toughens you up. May Barron do as well while realizing it is not easy being a president’s kid.

    • Chelsea has been on her mother’s dole and under her mother’s thumb. She’s quite bright, but she’s a chronic dilletente and cannot seem to make up her mind about a career. She’s wandered through McKinsey-type consulting, academic administration, and broadcasting while picking up two graduate degrees she’s not attempted to use. She ended up running her parents’ grift. She’s 37 years old. At least she did not get divorced.

      As for the Bush sisters, one’s married, with children, and settled into a line of work. (I’m not sure what broadcasters see in the children of big-time pols). The other’s a 36 year old spinster who has floated from one philanthropy to another.

      The Obama sisters are adolescents. You cannot make any categorical statements about them except that they’ve avoided the drunk tank and juvenile courts.

      Chelsea and the Bush sisters compare favorably to the Reagan crew and, most of the Ford crew and most of the Carters. Re the Nixon and Johnson sisters, it’s a closer call.

          • Far from being the word police. The young woman, to whom she so inaccurately referred–and that is what she is, a young adult woman–is a mere 35 years of age and born in November, 1981. She happens to be unmarried. So what? This is 2O17, not 1917. On what planet is she considered a spinster? By the way, how old are you? Do you consider yourself to be over the hill? Someone with one foot in the grave? If you are older than 45, which I suspect that you are, people living in the early 20th century would refer to you in such archaic and obsolete terms and describe you as an old geezer and living on borrowed time. I suspect, of course, that there would be no problem if anyone spoke of you in those terms, right?

            • I suspect, of course, that there would be no problem if anyone spoke of you in those terms, right?

              I’m 57. My wife, her mother and her now deceased grandmother (age 99) would ensure I didn’t make it to 58 should I divulge their age to anyone.

              The first thing one learns in the Navy is how to not take the insults you receive seriously. That’s part of the culture. Curse like a drunken sailor is what you learn to do. Those that decide it’s better to fight back physically don’t last long; they certainly don’t get promoted. I retired in 1999 at the age of 39 as a Chief Petty Officer. To my subordinates, I was already considered old. I wore that as a badge of honor and I’ve always considered getting older means you should be getting wiser. I have plenty to learn yet and this blog has been a great resource.

              DSS using terms that are perceived as outdated is of no consequence. I didn’t read spinster as something that should be taken literally. I took it in the totality of the post as a simple descriptor of her “accomplishments” in life.

              To answer your question: no problem at all.

              • You may not like it. . .you may not even enjoy it. . .but words have meaning. Yep. They sure do. Referring to a young and vibrant woman, who is the ripe old age of 35, as a spinster, is ludicrous. I’m quite sure that you heard much worse in the Navy, when women were described or referenced, but this isn’t the Navy.

                • a young and vibrant woman, who is the ripe old age of 35

                  spinster

                  In this context, it happens to be an excellent word choice. It’s quite descriptive and most importantly, it accomplishes that with an economy of words.

                  bam bam, you are an excellent contributor here. You’ve not provided a lot of input recently which is of course a disappointment. And when you do you take up issues such as this to be your mission; Especially with DSS. It’s petty and your usual posts are far, far from petty.

                  • Olly, at one time the term coincided with the mores and norms of the day. That is no longer the case, hence, the cringe worthiness of the antiquated and obsolete term. Women were, at one time, in the not too distant past, viewed, or, shall I say, valued and judged, solely–solely–by their ability to attract men. To have men find them desirable enough to marry them. A woman, obviously incapable of that, was referred to as a spinster. A loser, for lack of a better term. Someone to be pitied and, to a certain degree, mocked. Yes. I find the term, when used to describe a bright, intelligent, vivacious and beautiful young lady of 35, who just happens to be unmarried in 2017, disturbing. I find it disturbing that you don’t find it disturbing.

        • Hey, I still use, “spinster.” I also use mulatto, paramour, and many other out of fashion words. I reject ubiquitous phrases like, “no problem” or “no worries” or saying “I do” instead of just “yes” or starting sentences w/ “So.” Take note of the latter, particularly in TV interviews. It’s incredible how often “So” is used. It’s the adult crutch akin to “Like” used by youths.

          • Nick when my younger sister got married I was still single at 35 so I insisted that people referred to me as “spinstress of honor” as did not consider myself to be a “maid” at that age =)

              • It was a lovely wedding Nick – and at the time my sis worked for one of the presidents at The Venetian so she met a lot of celebs – Robin Leach had his peeps take care of their honeymoon. I keep telling her she should write a book about her time there — great stories — but she’s too afraid. Apparently Adelson is as scary as the Clintons to some folks! =)

          • Nick – I am a big fan of Dude and Dudette, which have gone out of favor with the masses, but not with me. 😉

          • Awesome, man! Like … like … totally awesome. Um, um, you know just sick. That really sh** the bed, dude.
            Yeah, modern language is so full of meaning and elegance. Keep up the good work DSS.

      • dss – what proof do you have that Chelsea is bright? She could be dumb as a bag of rocks and most schools in the US would be happy to take her. None would be stupid enough to turn her down for a degree when her mother might be President. And the family has the money to pay for a ghost writer for her thesis.

        • I agree. How do you know how smart Chelsea is? I don’t buy into the idea that Hillary is so smart either.

          Look at Hillary’s tweet. She’s trying to be so clever, yet she doesn’t seem to know that “glass” and “stones” aren’t the same word. Sad.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s