Please Answer This Question Obama Supporters

Lash wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Lash wrote:
Blinders....I refuse to believe they don't know he knew...This has turned into a weirder game.

The only real game here is 'how can we smear Obama?' And you are one of the players.
Think of it as a continuum...when you are in denial that this guy could possibly ever have a selfish moment or an ethical **** up, people swing into accusatory mode, rather serious about showing you what you are refusing to look at. You are too old and too smart to consider appropriate criticism as smearing...jeez.

djjd62 is correct. He will be taking heat for rational and irrational reasons from you bunch from now until infinity.
Remind you of anything...?
If the rest of us are supposed to act all worried every time a Concern troll like Bear, and a bunch of Republicans criticize what he does, we'd never have a moment to breathe.
True. So just breathe and don't get so pinched off about it.
You ought to get used to him doing things you don't like and disagree with, and get used to most people not caring.
I think YOU should get used to the criticism, and try to understand that he's going to **** up now and then.
For that is the result of your party f*cking things up to the point that they have; a shift of the populace away from Conservatism and towards Liberalism.
These shifts happen cyclically...
You can thank Bush and Cheney for that, and don't forget to look in the mirror and thank yourself as well; as a supporter, you bear some of the responsibility. I haven't seen you calling Republicans out on anything in a long, long time....
When have you EVER called your buds out...?
Cycloptichorn

"
Think of it as a continuum...when you are in denial that this guy could possibly ever have a selfish moment or an ethical **** up"

I have never denied that Obama could have a selfish moment or an ethical f*ck-up. I wonder if you could post a link to my denial of that, or anyone's really.

"When have you EVER called your buds out...?"

Many times, from Dems in Congress who are in bed with the Teleco companies on immunity, to weak Democrats who won't end the war or impeach Bush, to corrupt Dems who can't stop taking lobbyist money or keep it in their pants.

Face it - you have nothing on this issue to attack Obama with. Just smears and insinuations. This is the case for a wide variety of issues. And your bunch of Republicans are going to get punked at the polls this Fall; and ya know it, and it makes you angry, and you look for anything you can find to tarnish Obama, and the cycle continues.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

squinney wrote:

My point earlier was that Obama needs to say "Fock it" and NOT set the stage.

I agree. But let's look at the facts: Obama was in pictures with Muslims, and Muslim women wearing hijabs were on stage, behind Obama, before.

That would be extremely weird if there was some consistent campaign policy to have "no Muslims on stage".

The only thing we know is that staffers turned women with hijabs away.

squinney wrote:

When pics like this get run through the republican e-blast he needs to say "So what?"

Yeah, just like Kerry with the swiftboaters. That worked really well.

I think brushing it off is possibly not the best reaction. I hope we're going to see Muslim women on stage in the next events.

But I also think that confronting the allegations instead of pretending the "Obama is a secret Al Qaeda agent"-attacks don't exist would be wise...

squinney wrote:

THAT would make him different.

Sure.

But even if it'd turn out that he used the same methods as, say, McCain (whose campaign apparently turned away Latinos when picking out people for the background), and even if it turned out that he couldn't, in fact, walk on water, we could still evaluate their political positions, right?

My guess is that there would still be a notable difference between the two candidates.

0 Replies

Re: Please Answer This Question Obama Supporters

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

I'm not knocking Obama. I'm not trying to pick a fight. I just want to know... how many times do Obamas volunteers, staff, adivsers et al... do questionable things and then Obama comes out and says "That doesn't represent me or my campaign or the way I think" and that makes everything all right and no one begins to question even a little bit?

How many times?

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/11168.html

I don't have a number, but it's been pretty often, it's been a frequent source of frustration, and I've said as much in Sozobe's thread.

0 Replies

Lash wrote:

FreeDuck wrote:
Lash wrote:
The only thing that was compared was culpability along a chain of command.

Was that to me? I was responding to squinney.

It was out there to clarify the general idea that gitmo and hijabmo were being compared--since I had done it, in a way.

Hijabmo. Hah!

0 Replies

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

obviously, where cyclo is concerned the answer is many more times.....

0 Replies

for excluding the hijabs, one bluntly political and the other less clear.

In Aref's case, there was no ambiguity.

That incident began when the volunteer asked Aref's friend Ali Koussan and two others, Aref's brother Sharif and another young lawyer, Brandon Edward Miller, whether they would like to sit behind the stage. The three young men said they would but mentioned they were with friends.

The men said the volunteer, a 20-something African-American woman in a green shirt, asked if their friends looked and were dressed like the young men, who were all light-skinned and wearing suits.

Miller said yes but mentioned that one of their friends was wearing a headscarf with her suit.

The volunteer "explained to me that because of the political climate and what's going on in the world and what's going on with Muslim Americans, it's not good for [Aref] to be seen on TV or associated with Obama," said Koussan, a law student at Wayne State University."

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

Lash wrote:
FreeDuck wrote:
Lash wrote:
The only thing that was compared was culpability along a chain of command.

Was that to me? I was responding to squinney.

It was out there to clarify the general idea that gitmo and hijabmo were being compared--since I had done it, in a way.

Hijabmo. Hah!

You have a way with words, Lash....

0 Replies

Lash wrote:

for excluding the hijabs, one bluntly political and the other less clear.

In Aref's case, there was no ambiguity.

That incident began when the volunteer asked Aref's friend Ali Koussan and two others, Aref's brother Sharif and another young lawyer, Brandon Edward Miller, whether they would like to sit behind the stage. The three young men said they would but mentioned they were with friends.

The men said the volunteer, a 20-something African-American woman in a green shirt, asked if their friends looked and were dressed like the young men, who were all light-skinned and wearing suits.

Miller said yes but mentioned that one of their friends was wearing a headscarf with her suit.

The volunteer "explained to me that because of the political climate and what's going on in the world and what's going on with Muslim Americans, it's not good for [Aref] to be seen on TV or associated with Obama," said Koussan, a law student at Wayne State University."

'cept for the fact that you have no evidence it was a 'known policy' of the Campaign, Lash. You are making that up.

The smear isn't that Obama's campaign treated these people badly. They did do that. The smear is that this is the official policy. You are surmising that, but have no actual evidence that this is true; and what more, it seems that at other events there has been no such policy.

You couldn't just leave it at pointing out a gaffe, but had to over-reach into a stupid position.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

I understand your frustration, cyclo. It used to get under my skin to see accusations and criticisms ranging from legitimate to preposterous all hurled in together.

0 Replies

However, in this case---you KNOW he KNEW... Very Happy

0 Replies

Lash wrote:

I understand your frustration, cyclo. It used to get under my skin to see accusations and criticisms ranging from legitimate to preposterous all hurled in together.

I suppose you would consider the word 'hypocrite' an appropriate descriptor of your actions, then?

I rest comfortably upon the fact that the person you were used to defending from the hyperbole and smears, also happens to have been the worst president of our lifetime and a total dunce who ran his political party into the ground through lies and corruption. Whereas in my case, Obama has not done anything of the sort. Which is more worthy of defense?

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

'cept for the fact that you have no evidence it was a 'known policy' of the Campaign, Lash. You are making that up.

We have no evidence about a lot of things but it is reasonable to infer from the facts in this case that it was somebody's policy even if it didn't reach as high as the national campaign headquarters. Keeping in mind sozobe's point about dying by the sword of grassroots organizing and autonomy, it still seems reasonable that somebody higher up than the volunteers made a decision and communicated it.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

'cept for the fact that you have no evidence it was a 'known policy' of the Campaign, Lash. You are making that up.

We have no evidence about a lot of things but it is reasonable to infer from the facts in this case that it was somebody's policy even if it didn't reach as high as the national campaign headquarters. Keeping in mind sozobe's point about dying by the sword of grassroots organizing and autonomy, it still seems reasonable that somebody higher up than the volunteers made a decision and communicated it.

Without evidence of that happening, it's not appropriate to smear Obama over it.

I still would like to know: based upon the original question of the thread, what should Obama or his campaign have said or done that they didn't do?

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

I answered that question on page 2, and no, I don't think it's a smear to infer more knowledge than may have been there. After all, we give him credit for how well his campaign is run, we have to assign responsibility for the mistakes it makes.

0 Replies

you're trying to answer a question with a question but it's not necessary.... you already answered the question for yourself.

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Without evidence of that happening, it's not appropriate to smear Obama over it.

There is evidence, though, that volunteers for Obama denied some women the seats they wanted because they wore headscarfs. Obama as the head of his campaign carries the ultimate responsibility for this, whether he gave the orders or not. If he didn't, he's liable for not being in charge of his own campaign. If he did, he's liable for anti-Muslim bigotry. Either way, he's liable for something.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

I answered that question on page 2, and no, I don't think it's a smear to infer more knowledge than may have been there. After all, we give him credit for how well his campaign is run, we have to assign responsibility for the mistakes it makes.

(responding to Thomas as well)

That's fair enough, and while I think it's perfectly appropriate to criticize Obama's campaign for how they handled this issue, I don't think it's correct to make the logical leap into claiming that this was a policy of the campaign.

The original question:

Quote:

I'm not knocking Obama. I'm not trying to pick a fight. I just want to know... how many times do Obamas volunteers, staff, adivsers et al... do questionable things and then Obama comes out and says "That doesn't represent me or my campaign or the way I think" and that makes everything all right and no one begins to question even a little bit?

Despite the lie of the first two sentences, I think that the question is: what should Obama or his campaign have done differently, once they found out that this happened?

I think it's pretty clear that Bear is implying that this was a policy, that it does reflect the way the Obama campaign thinks. But there's not much evidence of that, and the campaign came out and said 'we're sorry, it's not our policy, and it won't happen again.' What else is there for them to say?

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

I think before Lash gives this any more momentum than it's really worth, it should be re-emphasized that had this been official campaign policy, Obama's past photo ops and rallies would have been devoid of any visible muslims--which they haven't. If he had an anti-muslim strand to his personality, politics or his philosophy then I'm sure after all the campaigning to date, this would have become transparently obvious by now.

That Lash wishes to assert, without qualification and without substantiated evidence that thisin fact official campaign policy, she is simply becoming yet another vile propagandist with the hopes of maintaining the deplorable status quo in American politics.

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Lash wrote:

I understand your frustration, cyclo. It used to get under my skin to see accusations and criticisms ranging from legitimate to preposterous all hurled in together.

I suppose you would consider the word 'hypocrite' an appropriate descriptor of your actions, then?

I rest comfortably upon the fact that the person you were used to defending from the hyperbole and smears, also happens to have been the worst president of our lifetime and a total dunce who ran his political party into the ground through lies and corruption. Whereas in my case, Obama has not done anything of the sort. Which is more worthy of defense?

Cycloptichorn

Case by case, cyclo. He was wrong. I hope you develop a thicker skin. Otherwise, you'd never survive an Obama presidency.

0 Replies

Lash wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Lash wrote:

I understand your frustration, cyclo. It used to get under my skin to see accusations and criticisms ranging from legitimate to preposterous all hurled in together.

I suppose you would consider the word 'hypocrite' an appropriate descriptor of your actions, then?

I rest comfortably upon the fact that the person you were used to defending from the hyperbole and smears, also happens to have been the worst president of our lifetime and a total dunce who ran his political party into the ground through lies and corruption. Whereas in my case, Obama has not done anything of the sort. Which is more worthy of defense?

Cycloptichorn

Case by case, cyclo. He was wrong. I hope you develop a thicker skin. Otherwise, you'd never survive an Obama presidency.

Well, we'll have to wait and see, won't we?

I agree that Obama's campaign acted incorrectly, but disagree that there is a pattern of doing so on his part - or that their apology was insufficient.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Please Answer This Question Obama Supporters

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know