Elesha Gayman is a faggot and Iowans would do well to be rid of her at the ballot box.
Is it any surprise she wants to call a snowman scene on someone's private property a Hate Crime and Hate Speech? Her name is GAYman. She would shoot you in the fucking head if she knew you didn't have access to firearms.
Snowmen for white supremacy
"Mike Matson, the mayor of Davenport, said he asked the city's police chief to investigate the display, which he called "an embarrassment to our city.""
How does a single person's display embarrass the city? He does not represent the city in an official capacity as you do, and your emotional knee-jerk reaction is exactly why he did this in the first place.
"Hesseltine [the amateur yard artist] laughed off concerns about the display, saying he created it over the weekend to "mess with" friends who support the Democratic presidential candidate."
At least someone in the community at large gets it.
"Davenport Alderwoman Marion Meginnis called the depiction "bad taste, unneighborly.""
Exactly. It might be in bad taste and it might not be neighborly, nonetheless it is something which, as the Alderwoman has done, is a personal expression.
"Elesha Gayman, chair of the Iowa based Scott County Democrats said the display was "a hate crime and hate speech.""
Which is the protected class, here: Democrats? Democratic candidates? Would the same be said of a display of a Bernie support shooting up a Republican baseball game? Or less literal a Bernie-bro depicted shooting up an effigy of Trump or any of his voters? How about showing Trump voters incarcerated in gulags?
"“It’s as bad as if someone burned a cross in someone’s yard,” Gayman said. “We have got to stop this. This is not the Wild West. We should be able to civilly disagree with one another, where you’re not displaying acts of murder on your front lawn.”"
Really, lady. There is a great movie quote with which you should familiarize yourself: "You never go full retard." Per my questions above, where would you draw the line? Exactly how do you propose to "stop this?" Is not a harmless display, the intention of which is to evoke an emotional response, far more civil than, say, staking out a sniper position and actually taking out candidates or their supporters?
"David Millage, chairman of the Scott County Republican Party, found the display “terrible” but said it was protected as free speech."
Which is the exact, proper response. I find it tacky, not something I would do, and at the same time I can appreciate the frustration it represents and the hyperbolic rendition of the frustration.
"Even with Matson's strong feelings towards the display, he added it's likely the city can't do anything about it, because of Hesseltine's free speech rights."
Indeed. As the greatest man to ever walk the Earth once said, unfortunately in our country we have a First Amendment.
As is already precedent with speech, I would not be surprised if new city ordinances appear which find some way to curtail such a display, such as its position on a public walkway, or a safety hazard on steps, etc. People with fragile sensibilities such as Mike Matson, Elesha Gayman, and Marion Meginnis would champion such intrusions with reckless abandon.
How the fuck is this hate speech?