Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Update 4: Hustler Publishes Fake Pornographic Picture of S. E. Cupp
National Review Online ^ | May 23, 2012 | Greg Pollowitz

Posted on 05/23/2012 7:29:11 PM PDT by neverdem

Update: Will S.E. Cupp sue?

Update 2: Commentary from The Blaze here (pictured obscured).

Update 3: Sandra Fluke, Planned Parenthood condemn.

Update 4: Hustler defends.

I’m not going to provide a link, but along with the picture Hustler added this disclaimer:

No such picture of S.E. Cupp actually exists. This composite fantasy picture was altered from the original for our imagination, does not depict reality and is not to be taken seriously for any purpose.

But just imagine for a second if Rush Limbaugh had gone this far. The Left would have gone nuclear.

I don’t expect S. E. Cupp will be hearing from President Obama anytime soon, however.

And if you’re on Twitter, search for #IStandWithSECupp for the latest.



TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Extended News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 57states; cupp; hustler; mediawingofthednc; mymuslimfaith; partisanmediashills; secupp

1 posted on 05/23/2012 7:29:17 PM PDT by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem

It’s OK, this was DONE WHILE DEMOCRAT, so the mainstream media could care less.


2 posted on 05/23/2012 8:29:01 PM PDT by tcrlaf (Election 2012: THE RAPTURE OF THE DEMOCRATS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tcrlaf

“It’s OK, this was DONE WHILE DEMOCRAT, so the mainstream media could care less.”

No, you are wrong. The mainstream media could NOT care less.


3 posted on 05/24/2012 3:17:12 AM PDT by Lucas McCain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

This is discusting! However, I just want to know where she bought her glasses.


4 posted on 05/24/2012 5:24:25 AM PDT by stayathomemom (Beware of kittens modifying your posts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

OK, so if someone published, in a magazine, a photoshopped pornographic picture of Michelle Obama, or of Barry himself “playing catch”,

that should be OK, right?


5 posted on 05/24/2012 5:29:54 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

There was a porno made about Sarah Palin and a nude painting of Canadian PM Harper just sold so yeah it should be ok but we know it wouldn’t because this is a leftist tactic against conservatives and not to be used against them.


6 posted on 05/24/2012 5:44:57 AM PDT by xp38
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MrB
OK, so if someone published, in a magazine, a photoshopped pornographic picture of Michelle Obama, or of Barry himself “playing catch”, that should be OK, right?

It would be OK for Michelle, but not for Barack.

Hustler Magazine v. Falwell was a 1988 U.S. Supreme Court decision that held that the First Amendment protects parodies of public figures as long as they could not be reasonably taken as true.

7 posted on 05/24/2012 8:57:51 AM PDT by BlueMondaySkipper (Involuntarily subsidizing the parasite class since 1981)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: BlueMondaySkipper

I think it would be reasonable to think that 0bama might be a catcher...


8 posted on 05/24/2012 9:04:21 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MrB
I think it would be reasonable to think that 0bama might be a catcher...

That's what I was saying. The Hustler parodies are OK as long as they are totally unbelievable (such as Michelle as a sex object) but they are NOT OK if they are plausible (Barry "catching").

9 posted on 05/24/2012 9:22:37 AM PDT by BlueMondaySkipper (Involuntarily subsidizing the parasite class since 1981)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: BlueMondaySkipper

ah, gotcha... I was reading your post backwards.


10 posted on 05/24/2012 9:28:43 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson