The Grand Island Independent Forums

On Halloween night, Nebraska Republican Party Chair, Mark Fahleson posted this on his NEGOP Twitter account:



He's been criticized for this. He's been asked by media to explain his comment. Did he think it a joke to call one of his kids the name of a murdered little girl? Does it go further and did his child get dressed like that little girl used to get dressed up? What did it mean?

So far, he's kept silent.

What are your thoughts?

I think that's a good idea. Keeping silent, I mean.

And there isn't enough information in that tweet to determine whether it was tasteless on his part or not.

I think too much is made of personal lives. Does he hold a publicly elected office that represents a town, community, district, or even state?

I could go through Twitter and find hundreds, nay thousands of tweets that could be criticized for the content. Especially on Halloween.

And another question, which little murdered girl are we talking about Jon Benet or Cleopatra?

Howsoon,

As you can see on the image, Fahleson is the Chair of the Nebraska Republican Party. He is the primary voice of the NEGOP and he uses that same Twitter account to attack and go after Democrats.

And if you really remember history, Cleopatra killed herself some 2000 +/- years ago and she was no little girl.

Lisa, I understand this, but does he hold a publicly elected office over the entire people of the area? If not, what is the big deal? So he uses the same Twitter account to attack and go after Dems. There are a ton of Twitter accounts that are used for personal, private and even crap type of things. I still fail to see why this is such a shock to you. Try reading the public timeline for Twitter sometime.

And as for Cleopatra and killing herself,
murder: v. to kill by an act constituting murder
suicide: v. to kill (oneself)

So roll those eyes all you want. Why is it "bad" to reference one subject that was killed and it is not "bad" to reference another that was done. I am sure that there were "Michael Jackson" costumes this Halloween, same with Abe Lincoln, same with Jim Morrison, and others. Would it be "bad" if a major celebrity dressed their kids up in that guise?

I think you are making way too much out of something like this. Why not take this same type of effort and energy to track down why some people in the Obama administration would publicly claim that they like Mao and his politics? I would think that would be a higher issue than what some GOP chairman dresses his kids up as for Halloween.

Personally I'm appalled and disgusted by his tweet.

I mean, seriously, he went to have a FAMILY meal at a place with 5 GAMES ON AT THE SAME TIME?!?!

WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN?!

On a serious note, he made a tweet, big deal.

There wasn't enough info in that tweet to determine exactly WHO Cleopatra and Jon-Benet were in real life. Was it two of his children? Was it two people he saw out trick-or-treating at the same time he was?

This is a good example of "Making a mountain out of a molehill." There's a lot more stuff that is a lot more important than that tweet.

Some Republican on another forum "in the know" said it was a reference to his children. He also posted on his blog a picture of himself and his wife dressed as health care reform......looking all dead and all.

So.....so far we have one who keeps saying he has to be an elected official for his comments to matter - even though it's pointed out he is the Chair of the Party and the NEGOP spokesperson using the very account he uses to do his political comments. Oh, and he was elected by the Republican Central Committee, who are picked by the registered Republican voters in the state every two years at state convention. But in this case, Fahleson was pretty much as shoo in since he was hand picked by Gov. Dave Heineman.

And of course another who keeps wanting to explore all other options. Fine. But fellow Republicans have made it clear it was his children. One person even stated they've heard him call one of his children Jon Benet because they like to dress her up like Jon Benet used to be dressed up.

Any more questions?

Yeah, I got a question Lisa, a few maybe:

1. What kind of power and authority does this person have over you?
2. Why does it matter what he dressed his kids up in for Halloween?
3. Why do you immediately take offense at a costume, when it is entirely possible the costume was to honor Jon Benet and not degrade her memory?
4. How does this tweet really affect you, in your overall life and in your daily life?

Lisa, I agree with OC on this one, you are making a mountain out of a molehill. He tweeted a comment. Big deal. Is this really that important of a tweet, and if so, why? It is not like this guy can affect anything in your day to day life. He has no authority to legislate laws, execute laws, or interpret laws. It is not that he has to be an elected official for his comments to matter, it is that he really is of no real importance. And I should also point out, especially to you. It is not like you are a GOP member, or even rely on the GOP for the dictation of the platform.

Since we are making mountains out of molehills:

http://twitter.com/whitehouse

What?! The First Lady dressed up as a super-villain?! What is she thinking, has she no shame. She needs a whole character makeover, those Dems will just stop at nothing to thumb their noses to the law. Catwoman is after all, "a whip-carrying burglar with a taste for high-stake thefts, and is a prostitute in order to survive and wants to break away from her abusive pimp" (according to wikipedia).

I can not believe how heartless and uncaring the First lady is to be showcasing theft, illegal activities and prostitution.

Or, maybe she just was dressing up for Halloween.

Speaking of Halloween, how do you like my mask-??

2009

I fixed the other link. I just had to remove the 4:28 from the end of it.

Thanks OC. Another fail for Twitter copy and paste.

If you want to make light, so be it, Howsoon. I expect nothing less of you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JonBen%C3%A9t_Ramsey

The case remains open and unsolved. The family was dragged through for years, and we may never really know if they had any involvement, or if they were totally innocent. Jon Benet Ramsey's mother died in 2006 never knowing who killed her daughter. It was botched and a blight on the legal system overall.

I found the comment highly tasteless and offensive. It's insensitive, coarse, crass, crude, foolish, graceless, hideous, improper, indecorous, indelicate, indiscreet, low-down, off-color, rude, stupid, and tacky, if you want another way to put it. It's should be beneath the person who is the primary spokesperson for the party of the Governor and who is the appointed attorney (public servant) for the City of Ashland. It's a case that affected many people deeply, even if they had no direct connection to it.

If you don't like that opinion, then that's your opinion. I've given mine. And just so you know, when I first heard about this, I didn't know who at first had said it. My first response to the one who told me was "please don't tell me it was a Democrat, because I'll be the first in line to say what an idiot they are for saying it." When I heard it was Fahleson, I actually wasn't surprised. You don't know him in Arizona. I see what he has to say on a regular basis. He is happy to take the position of the party hack and spokesperson, but comments in these parts from those who follow him and the Democratic Chair and their back and forth is what a joke they both are. All we can hope is that he and his counterpart are replaced in 2010 with better people. But at least Vic Covalt hasn't stepped over a line like this, even if he does say dumb things on a regular basis.

Lisa, that is fine that you have your own opinion of the matter. My whole point is that he made a tweet on Twitter. Why do people have to be so thin skinned? You find that comment tasteless, coarse, crass, crude, foolish, etc. Yes it is still an open case, and yes it was publicized way more than it had to be in the media, which in turn made Jon Benet a celebrity. Like it or not, that is what it is. There are many Halloween costumes that are based on celebrities, like Jack the Ripper, John Lennon, Charles Manson, and more. Why would those costumes be any less offensive than a costume of Jon Benet?

We could even take that a step further, and any pirate costumes, gang costumes, costumes for movie characters like Jason (Friday the 13th), Freddy Krugar, or even Jigsaw should all offend people then too, correct? Pirates used to kill and plunder, gangs are a constant problem (now here in AZ even more with the illegal drug/coyotes). And there are people who murder by emulating things they see in the movies, so any movie character that inflicts torturous pain and kills should offend as well. Because I am sure it affected someone, it just was not reported 24 hours a day 7 days a week for years. How many people cried when Lennon was shot. So should any costume of Lennon offend?

it is not about making light of things, Lisa It is about not taking everything a GOP person says so personal and let it hurt or offend. The GOP, for the most part, is the party run by idiots. Why be so thin skinned about everything. I go back to an earlier comment, we have people in the White House who have said they admire Mao, a brutal murdering dictator, and that does not even raise a peep out of you, except to start slamming down people for watching Beck/Fox. But this guy, an appointed attorney for Ashland, the GOP chair in NE, makes a tweet about a halloween costume and you have a huge problem with it. Why?

I get it, your offended at this tweet, you did not like the comment. OK. But why would you not be questioning why people in the White House come out and say that they agree with Mao, turn to Mao, and like Mao's politics. You even admitted yourself, that when you heard the tweet, you were hoping it was not a Dem, because you would be first in line to say what an idiot they are. Well, here's your chance to be first in line when a Dem had said something very strange and foolish, graceless, improper, etc. And there is silence from you on this.