In all due respect, i think you are taking some liberties with your assessment. i don't see that. What i intrepret from this poster is a willingness to accept this as unfortunate political play calling. Like i have stated, i would have made a different call, but at the same time i understand the difficulty of this decision and can at least understand what motivated these volunteers to make the judgement call they did. That doesn't mean i support religious intolerance. i'm assuming this poster is seeing this through similar lenses.
Could you point out exactly what liberties I am taking in my assessment?
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Its just hysterical to see the tide turn on this guy. Now that People realize that hey this guy might not be a Hamas loving suicide bomber they dont like him anymore! Hysterical. You Vedderzombies should go back to youir clueless Nader roots and leave the politics for the grown ups.
Its just hysterical to see the tide turn on this guy. Now that People realize that hey this guy might not be a Hamas loving suicide bomber they dont like him anymore! Hysterical. You Vedderzombies should go back to youir clueless Nader roots and leave the politics for the grown ups.
He's right, you know.
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
Its just hysterical to see the tide turn on this guy. Now that People realize that hey this guy might not be a Hamas loving suicide bomber they dont like him anymore! Hysterical. You Vedderzombies should go back to youir clueless Nader roots and leave the politics for the grown ups.
i've already explained it. Look, if its a fight you're looking for, you'll have to look somewhere else.
If you are taking issue with my past statements, fine.
I've amended them and moved on to the statement of fact, wherein puremagic supports people being removed due to religious dress.
To me this is abhorrent. As I know it is to many. It's fundamental discrimination, undoubtedly. I personally wouldn't support that. I also understand many do. However, it cannot be justified.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
If you are taking issue with my past statements, fine.
I've amended them and moved on to the statement of fact, wherein puremagic supports people being removed due to religious dress.
To me this is abhorrent. As I know it is to many. It's fundamental discrimination, undoubtedly. I personally wouldn't support that. I also understand many do. However, it cannot be justified.
Exactly. That's what I was trying to say but you were more straight to the point here.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
“This is of course not the policy of the campaign. It is offensive and counter to Obama’s commitment to bring Americans together and simply not the kind of campaign we run,” said Obama spokesman Bill Burton. “We sincerely apologize for the behavior of these volunteers.”
But anyway...
wow, me and obama agreed on somethin!!! :eek:
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
I will say that I would let it go as long as it was there campaign Volunteers and there was an apology issued. Again this was not in Obama's control just like it wouldn't have been in Hillary's or McCain's control.
Of course its damage control but so are most public apologies.
I am in the camp that this is Anti-Obama people grasping at straws.
i almost begged for news of brittany spears during break how they kept beating this to the ground
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Who knows....race is a huge issue we shouldn't ignore one week and the next it's grasping at straws....
hahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
Pretty much a no win situation for Obama on this one. Refuse to seat the women behind the podium and look prejudicial. Seat the women behind the podium and see the photos scatter across the internet as proof that Obama is a radical muslim jihadist. Either way Unsung wets himself in euphoric anticipation of a ridiculous Obama smear pulled straight from the Sean Hannity show.
It shouldn't have happened. It is offensive and counter to Obama's commitment to bring Americans together. I believe Obama's campaign has apologized to the ladies concerned, but i would like to see Obama personally address it.
Do i blame Obama? No. To the best of my knowledge he was not the one who walked up to the people concerned and asked them to move. Is he responsible for his volunteers actions? Bottom line is yes he is, as they are representing him.
Like someone else has already mentioned, those that still have a problem with obama after he apologizes on behalf of his volunteers, are going to have a problem with him anyway.
0
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
Pretty much a no win situation for Obama on this one. Refuse to seat the women behind the podium and look prejudicial. Seat the women behind the podium and see the photos scatter across the internet as proof that Obama is a radical muslim jihadist. Either way Unsung wets himself in euphoric anticipation of a ridiculous Obama smear pulled straight from the Sean Hannity show.
If you are taking issue with my past statements, fine.
I've amended them and moved on to the statement of fact, wherein puremagic supports people being removed due to religious dress.
To me this is abhorrent. As I know it is to many. It's fundamental discrimination, undoubtedly. I personally wouldn't support that. I also understand many do. However, it cannot be justified.
They were ADMITTED to the function, not TURNED AWAY. They were MOVED f rom a seating area not REMOVED from the function. Take a step back in time and you'll recall that Bush wouldn't even let people who disagreed with his viewpoints near his functions and those that managed to get in, were FORCIBLY removed.
Obama has been put under a microscope with people looking for ANY little thing to turn into an all out nasty media bash feast. Obama didn't benefit from this action because it presented a no win situation. A photo or an apology, which is more damaging, which is more lasting? His staff's action as a prevent measure is something I don't have a problem with.
Does it mean the person who ask them to move, or the people who understand why such an action was taken are prejudice and practice racial or religious discrimination, NO. It means they understand the nature of the beast known as POLITICAL CAMPAIGNING and are able to see through the smoke screens when people try to pigeonhole an issue into one category.
You understand all that, what you seemingly can't handle is the fact that I understand it because you have this overwhelming desire to paint my understanding as racial and discriminatory, while other statements within this thread are clearly racial and discriminatory, but, hey, whatever gets you off.
SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
They were ADMITTED to the function, not TURNED AWAY. They were MOVED f rom a seating area not REMOVED from the function. Take a step back in time and you'll recall that Bush wouldn't even let people who disagreed with his viewpoints near his functions and those that managed to get in, were FORCIBLY removed.
Obama has been put under a microscope with people looking for ANY little thing to turn into an all out nasty media bash feast. Obama didn't benefit from this action because it presented a no win situation. A photo or an apology, which is more damaging, which is more lasting? His staff's action as a prevent measure is something I don't have a problem with.
Does it mean the person who ask them to move, or the people who understand why such an action was taken are prejudice and practice racial or religious discrimination, NO. It means they understand the nature of the beast known as POLITICAL CAMPAIGNING and are able to see through the smoke screens when people try to pigeonhole an issue into one category.
You understand all that, what you seemingly can't handle is the fact that I understand it because you have this overwhelming desire to paint my understanding as racial and discriminatory, while other statements within this thread are clearly racial and discriminatory, but, hey, whatever gets you off.
You painted your view as discriminatory by supporting discriminatory action. It's very simple.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Obama didn't benefit from this action because it presented a no win situation. A photo or an apology, which is more damaging, which is more lasting? His staff's action as a prevent measure is something I don't have a problem with.
Obama could have won, though. By doing the right thing, now I know he personally didn't pick them out and had the moved, but I disagree that it was a no win situation.
Obama could have done the right thing and that is standing up against prejudices as he claims to do in his speeches. He could lead by example so to speak.
What's the point in preaching all that stuff if you're afraid to stand by it?
I'll tell you, gaining votes. And if a candidate is willing to set aside his principles to gain votes... you have to ask yourself how real his principles really are and if they're not just another way of playing the game (you know, the beast known as political campaigning).
edit: the answer to your question is fairly easy, by the way. What's more damaging? The apology is. The pictures would have shown Obama is a man of his word, or not as much but that at least he doesn't have a problem at all with muslims sitting behind him, regardless of other people's opinions.
Does it mean the person who ask them to move, or the people who understand why such an action was taken are prejudice and practice racial or religious discrimination, NO. It means they understand the nature of the beast known as POLITICAL CAMPAIGNING and are able to see through the smoke screens when people try to pigeonhole an issue into one category.
But when you're a participant in political campaigning that includes racial or religious discrimination, you're part of the problem. The volunteers didn't do what was best for Obama's campaign, they did what best supported the broken value system of American politics.
Or are they one and the same?
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
You painted your view as discriminatory by supporting discriminatory action. It's very simple.
You interpreted my view as supporting and justifying a discriminatory practice because YOU see this incident as some monumental discriminatory affront. I DON'T!!!!!!!!
I see it as a politically motivated incident, nothing more and nothing less. For me, it is just that simple.
SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
But when you're a participant in political campaigning that includes racial or religious discrimination, you're part of the problem. The volunteers didn't do what was best for Obama's campaign, they did what best supported the broken value system of American politics.
Or are they one and the same?
Did Obama initiate the racial and religious discriminatory practices, NO. What he has had to do, and what his campaign team has had to do is to is to tread lightly at every turn, every word and every appearance because of the RNC's slime campaign. Can a person make a change if they're not in the game? No! and Obama is no different than any other politican running for office when it comes to protecting his image. In Obama's case, its become two-fold, protecting and defending.
SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
Did Obama initiate the racial and religious discriminatory practices, NO. What he has had to do, and what his campaign team has had to do is to is to tread lightly at every turn, every word and every appearance because of the RNC's slime campaign. Can a person make a change if they're not in the game? No! and Obama is no different than any other politican running for office when it comes to protecting his image. In Obama's case, its become two-fold, protecting and defending.
I think your campaign's actions when you're the presumptive candidate count as being part of the game - this is how his administration handles difficult situations. Obama might not have initiated the discriminatory practices, but he's not exactly doing much to fix them. He's too pre-occupied proving that he's a good, all-American Christian.
You interpreted my view as supporting and justifying a discriminatory practice because YOU see this incident as some monumental discriminatory affront. I DON'T!!!!!!!!
I see it as a politically motivated incident, nothing more and nothing less. For me, it is just that simple.
So discrimination is a-okay, as long as it's politically motivated?
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
I think your campaign's actions when you're the presumptive candidate count as being part of the game - this is how his administration handles difficult situations. Obama might not have initiated the discriminatory practices, but he's not exactly doing much to fix them. He's too pre-occupied proving that he's a good, all-American Christian.
So discrimination is a-okay, as long as it's politically motivated?
yeah, this is a terrible thing....I mean, my goodness, a couple of non-paid workers made a choice to seat these women elsewhere....yeah, I guess Obama should be held accountable...heck, he should have gone right out and embraced these folks....he should commit his entire campaign to righting this horrible, horrible wrong....
You interpreted my view as supporting and justifying a discriminatory practice because YOU see this incident as some monumental discriminatory affront. I DON'T!!!!!!!!
I see it as a politically motivated incident, nothing more and nothing less. For me, it is just that simple.
discrimination:treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit: racial and religious intolerance and discrimination. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/discrimination
When we deal with one based on their group and the identity of such (as in religious dress) and treat them based on that, rather than on individual merit -- ie: such as the person in question acted unruly or inappropriate, that's exactly what discrimination is.
I observed you supporting such action. And justifying it. No interpretation.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
discrimination:treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit: racial and religious intolerance and discrimination. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/discrimination
When we deal with one based on their group and the identity of such (as in religious dress) and treat them based on that, rather than on individual merit -- ie: such as the person in question acted unruly or inappropriate, that's exactly what discrimination is.
I observed you supporting such action. And justifying it. No interpretation.
yup, life is so black and white, no gray areas exist....
two workers make a poor choice and Puremagic is a racist....that sounds right...
please note: I do not in any way, shape or from think Puremagic is a racist...
yeah, this is a terrible thing....I mean, my goodness, a couple of non-paid workers made a choice to seat these women elsewhere....yeah, I guess Obama should be held accountable...heck, he should have gone right out and embraced these folks....he should commit his entire campaign to righting this horrible, horrible wrong....
I'm not saying Obama is personally responsible for this incident - I never once said that. What I am saying is:
1 - This incident, whether Obama supporters like it or not, is part of Obama's campaign, and while he wasn't directly involved, it does reflect badly on him.
2 - Obama's campaign shouldn't be so touchy about being associated with Muslims. If their platform is change, and unity, playing the Political Prejudice game shouldn't be on their agenda.
3 - You can't excuse discrimination just because it's politically motivated. In fact, especially if it's politically motivated.
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
Comments
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
He's right, you know.
Me... ...eat... ...brain... ...of... ...J....
naděje umírá poslední
i thought it was obvious. The whole business about the poster being in full support of religious prejudice, in my opinion, was a huge liberty taken.
Gibson Amphitheatre (Los Angeles): 10/7/09
This is pre-interpretation. This is a statment of fact.
If you can show where I have taken liberties or misconstrued facts, I'm waiting to hear it!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
i've already explained it. Look, if its a fight you're looking for, you'll have to look somewhere else.
I've amended them and moved on to the statement of fact, wherein puremagic supports people being removed due to religious dress.
To me this is abhorrent. As I know it is to many. It's fundamental discrimination, undoubtedly. I personally wouldn't support that. I also understand many do. However, it cannot be justified.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Exactly. That's what I was trying to say but you were more straight to the point here.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I'm happy to see you!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
wow, me and obama agreed on somethin!!! :eek:
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
i almost begged for news of brittany spears during break how they kept beating this to the ground
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
hahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
enlighten me?
Do i blame Obama? No. To the best of my knowledge he was not the one who walked up to the people concerned and asked them to move. Is he responsible for his volunteers actions? Bottom line is yes he is, as they are representing him.
Like someone else has already mentioned, those that still have a problem with obama after he apologizes on behalf of his volunteers, are going to have a problem with him anyway.
Straight from his rah rah sis boom bah website
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/18/obama.event.ap/index.html#cnnSTCText
They were ADMITTED to the function, not TURNED AWAY. They were MOVED f rom a seating area not REMOVED from the function. Take a step back in time and you'll recall that Bush wouldn't even let people who disagreed with his viewpoints near his functions and those that managed to get in, were FORCIBLY removed.
Obama has been put under a microscope with people looking for ANY little thing to turn into an all out nasty media bash feast. Obama didn't benefit from this action because it presented a no win situation. A photo or an apology, which is more damaging, which is more lasting? His staff's action as a prevent measure is something I don't have a problem with.
Does it mean the person who ask them to move, or the people who understand why such an action was taken are prejudice and practice racial or religious discrimination, NO. It means they understand the nature of the beast known as POLITICAL CAMPAIGNING and are able to see through the smoke screens when people try to pigeonhole an issue into one category.
You understand all that, what you seemingly can't handle is the fact that I understand it because you have this overwhelming desire to paint my understanding as racial and discriminatory, while other statements within this thread are clearly racial and discriminatory, but, hey, whatever gets you off.
http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2008/06/muslim_grievanc.html
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Obama could have won, though. By doing the right thing, now I know he personally didn't pick them out and had the moved, but I disagree that it was a no win situation.
Obama could have done the right thing and that is standing up against prejudices as he claims to do in his speeches. He could lead by example so to speak.
What's the point in preaching all that stuff if you're afraid to stand by it?
I'll tell you, gaining votes. And if a candidate is willing to set aside his principles to gain votes... you have to ask yourself how real his principles really are and if they're not just another way of playing the game (you know, the beast known as political campaigning).
edit: the answer to your question is fairly easy, by the way. What's more damaging? The apology is. The pictures would have shown Obama is a man of his word, or not as much but that at least he doesn't have a problem at all with muslims sitting behind him, regardless of other people's opinions.
naděje umírá poslední
But when you're a participant in political campaigning that includes racial or religious discrimination, you're part of the problem. The volunteers didn't do what was best for Obama's campaign, they did what best supported the broken value system of American politics.
Or are they one and the same?
You interpreted my view as supporting and justifying a discriminatory practice because YOU see this incident as some monumental discriminatory affront. I DON'T!!!!!!!!
I see it as a politically motivated incident, nothing more and nothing less. For me, it is just that simple.
Did Obama initiate the racial and religious discriminatory practices, NO. What he has had to do, and what his campaign team has had to do is to is to tread lightly at every turn, every word and every appearance because of the RNC's slime campaign. Can a person make a change if they're not in the game? No! and Obama is no different than any other politican running for office when it comes to protecting his image. In Obama's case, its become two-fold, protecting and defending.
I think your campaign's actions when you're the presumptive candidate count as being part of the game - this is how his administration handles difficult situations. Obama might not have initiated the discriminatory practices, but he's not exactly doing much to fix them. He's too pre-occupied proving that he's a good, all-American Christian.
So discrimination is a-okay, as long as it's politically motivated?
yeah, this is a terrible thing....I mean, my goodness, a couple of non-paid workers made a choice to seat these women elsewhere....yeah, I guess Obama should be held accountable...heck, he should have gone right out and embraced these folks....he should commit his entire campaign to righting this horrible, horrible wrong....
When we deal with one based on their group and the identity of such (as in religious dress) and treat them based on that, rather than on individual merit -- ie: such as the person in question acted unruly or inappropriate, that's exactly what discrimination is.
I observed you supporting such action. And justifying it. No interpretation.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
yup, life is so black and white, no gray areas exist....
two workers make a poor choice and Puremagic is a racist....that sounds right...
please note: I do not in any way, shape or from think Puremagic is a racist...
I'm not saying Obama is personally responsible for this incident - I never once said that. What I am saying is:
1 - This incident, whether Obama supporters like it or not, is part of Obama's campaign, and while he wasn't directly involved, it does reflect badly on him.
2 - Obama's campaign shouldn't be so touchy about being associated with Muslims. If their platform is change, and unity, playing the Political Prejudice game shouldn't be on their agenda.
3 - You can't excuse discrimination just because it's politically motivated. In fact, especially if it's politically motivated.