Posted on 11/19/2007 6:00:25 PM PST by boughtwithaprice
Arno, a 21- year veteran of the NYPD, wanted to add vanity license plates reading "GETOSAMA" to the 1993 Ford Aerostar he had already hand-painted red, white and blue. But New York's DMV red-lighted the anti-Usama bin Laden plates, banning them under an agency regulation that prohibits anything "obscene, lewd, lascivious, derogatory to a particular ethnic or other group or patently offensive."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
How about one that says, “NYDMV SUCKS”... ;-)
Do you think the Plate Nazis would let
FU ELIOT
get by?
Like banning a “GETADOLF” license plate because it might offend a German.
how much longer will we allow political correctness to choke the “red white and blue” out of us? I mean, we aren’t even drilling for oil in 85% of our reserves out of political correctness....we are destroying ourselves.
POS NYC DMV
There’s your license plate.
Just another sign that america is no longer a great nation.
Not that the NYDVMV would actually do this, but that they and the individuals responsible are able to get away with it.
What about Freedom of Speech - you know, the right to wear shirts that say “America %^#$^” or the right to desecrate an American Flag, or the right to produce obcenities against religion which are tolerated, while this is not?
Like I said, the REAL shame is that they are allowed to get away with this.
When dems smell potential votes from islamics, “we” are.
POS NYC DMV
There’s your license plate.
BWHAAAAH top DRAWYER w/y TOP drawer.....
Let me start
NYSUUCKS
It should be obvious that there is nothing obscene, lewd, or lascivious about the proposed vanity plate, "GETOSAMA." As to the prohibition against anything "derogatory to a particular ethnic or other group," it would require some serious mental gymnastics to arrive at the conclusion that this plate slurs all Muslims--or all Sunnis, or all Arabs, or...well, whatever.
And as to the possibility of its being "patently offensive," that is so vague and subjective as to be meaningless.
The statute might as well read: "Any choice of words or letters is illegal if we say it is illegal. Period. From this, there is no appeal."
At least that would have the virtue of being honest.
Until we are just blue.
GETOBAMA would be ok, I’m sure.
That is an excellent point.
Of course, this flagrant double standard derives from the fact that leftists are persuaded that "unpopular beliefs" need special "protection"; whereas mainstream beliefs can safely be flouted.
Conveniently for those who proclaim this dogma, in practice it translates roughly to this: Far-left views and attitudes must be tolerated--even encouraged--regardless of whose sensibilities are offended by them; whereas traditional beliefs are always fair game.
You're kidding. Right? Perhaps you and I aren't but the pupating aphids who are in charge, seize any chance to demean themselves by denying the truth about those who would happily kill us.
Well said.
These losers would say exactly the same thing about "God Bless America".
The only part of the prohibition that fits is 'patently offensive', and that is entirely an arbitrary and subjective call --- not legal to be made by a mindless bureaucrat-- only a judge is entitled.
“Since when are we concerned about offending terrorists?”
Since the chief dhimmi in the White House started telling all of us that Islam is “The Religion of Peace”?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.