Muslims barred from picture at Obama event

[William Haskins]

Two Muslim women at Barack Obama's rally in Detroit Monday were barred from sitting behind the podium by campaign volunteers seeking to prevent the women's headscarves from appearing in photographs or on television with the candidate.

The campaign has apologized to the women, all Obama supporters who said they felt betrayed by their treatment at the rally.

"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."

<snip>

"I was coming to support him, and I felt like I was discriminated against by the very person who was supposed to be bringing this change, who I could really relate to," said Hebba Aref, a 25-year-old lawyer who lives in the Detroit suburb of Bloomfield Hills. "The message that I thought was delivered to us was that they do not want him associated with Muslims or Muslim supporters."


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

[robeiae]

I have an idea for a new button...

[mscelina]

I am absolutely gobsmacked. The peon who actually stopped for a moment and said, "Hey! Wait a minute! We can't have Muslims in the picture because then people will think that Obama is a Muslim..." should b e hung, drawn, and quartered for just weakening his candidate's stand on "Change."

Seriously.

[mscelina]

I have an idea for a new button...

ooooooooooo....a new button? *grin* Can we sell it at a small campaign event in rural Wyoming?

[Aglaia]

I am absolutely gobsmacked. The peon who actually stopped for a moment and said, "Hey! Wait a minute! We can't have Muslims in the picture because then people will think that Obama is a Muslim..." should b e hung, drawn, and quartered for just weakening his candidate's stand on "Change."

Seriously.
:Wha: Well, that is a "change." Maybe not exactly the change Obama was thinking of, but...

Ack, I hate this election.

[Williebee]

It was a moron move, but not a new one.

I've been backstage at a couple of these things. They try to keep "pretty people" who will stay awake in the frame.

It's just another version of the shaking hands and kissing babies pictures.

[johnnysannie]

While this should not have happened, "staging" who appears in the news footage and photo ops is common to all campaigns. Bush Sr. did it to my brother and his friends when Bush visited his college campus. Not only were they asked to leave the event, they were told they would be arrested if they did not comply. No "scruffy" college students in their Levis and t-shirts allowed on the Bush platform, apparently.

That said, to play devil's advocate, how much shit would have been stirred if the Muslim women were in the news footage? It would have lent credence to the fallacy that Obama is a Muslim. I can understand why some peon did what he did.....but I agree totally that the women should have be allowed to stay and be visible.

[Jcomp]

Ack, I hate this election.

Everybody's wearing their Bad Idea Jeans...

[mscelina]

Yeah, I know johnnysannie. It's a sad state of affairs when a political event becomes a choice between discrimination and 'what will lok good on TV.'

[William Haskins]

While the crowd was indeed diverse, some students at the event questioned the practices of Mrs. Obama’s event coordinators, who handpicked the crowd sitting behind Mrs. Obama. The Tartan’s correspondents observed one event coordinator say to another, “Get me more white people, we need more white people.” To an Asian girl sitting in the back row, one coordinator said, “We’re moving you, sorry. It’s going to look so pretty, though.”


http://www.thetartan.org/2008/4/7/news/obama

[odocoileus]

The new Obama campaign slogan:

"More white people, less Muslims!"

At the next photo op:

"Okay, black people in the middle, all you white people up front, and you Latinos squeeze in here. And uh, all you swarthy guys with big noses, who look like you haven't shaved, feel free to sit this one out."

[SHBueche]

Political correctness (excluding some campaign buttons) is alive and well, in the 2008 campaign.

[odocoileus]

http://www.thetartan.org/2008/4/7/news/obama

In the biz, they call 'em background. You phone in your order to Central Casting, and there they are bright and early the next morning. Which makes me wonder if the Obama campaign, or campaigns in general have ever used an extras casting service.

[Aglaia]

Quote:"It’s going to look so pretty, though."
Priceless.

And I was a Clinton supporter before. What was I thinking? :D

[Takvah]

Oh my. I'd be shocked if I could stop laughing.

[William Haskins]

it was a boneheaded move in the state with the largest arab / muslim population in the US.

it also offers an interesting contrast in perception.

had it been mccain's people ushering muslims out of the photo-op, it would be proof-positive to many that mccain hates muslims and indeed that he wants to bomb ann arbor.

and don't even think about if mccain's people had shouted out "we need more black people!"

[mscelina]

it was a boneheaded move in the state with the largest arab / muslim population in the US.

it also offers an interesting contrast in perception.

had it been mccain's people ushering muslims out of the photo-op, it would be proof-positive to many that mccain hates muslims and indeed that he wants to bomb ann arbor.

and don't even think about if mccain's people had shouted out "we need more black people!"

Very good point. What a furor that would cause.

[James81]

Is it any damned wonder?

I say good for them. But it STILL bit them in the ass. The poor guy just can't win, can he?

[Cranky]

Everybody's wearing their Bad Idea Jeans...


And in the wrong size. Political muffin tops.

[odocoileus]

and don't even think about if mccain's people had shouted out "we need more black people!"


"... to mow our lawns!" ?

"...to refresh our drinks!" ?

"...to start working for a living!" ?

I'll take "Things a Republican Would Say" for a thousand.

[William Haskins]

Is it any damned wonder?

I say good for them. But it STILL bit them in the ass. The poor guy just can't win, can he?

you're saying "good for them" as in the obama campaign did the right thing by playing into the fear of muslims that so many accuse of being the province of the right?

[Haggis]

had it been mccain's people ushering muslims out of the photo-op, it would be proof-positive to many that mccain hates muslims and indeed that he wants to bomb ann arbor.


It's Dearborn he wants to bomb, not Ann Arbor. At least I hope so.

*ducks and covers*

[James81]

you're saying "good for them" as in the obama campaign did the right thing by playing into the fear of muslims that so many accuse of being the province of the right?

I say "good for them" in a "how, look what you made me do" sort of sense.

It's a shame that the man can't even have Muslims on his platform lest someone take a picture of it and circulate it in a spam email 4 trillion times a day.

[Gravity]

Sadly, it's only the opening act for the BOssiah; I hope he gets better staffers as the summer progresses.

[cethklein]

I am absolutely gobsmacked. The peon who actually stopped for a moment and said, "Hey! Wait a minute! We can't have Muslims in the picture because then people will think that Obama is a Muslim..." should b e hung, drawn, and quartered for just weakening his candidate's stand on "Change."

Seriously.

Agreed. Let's face it, the rINY minority of half-wits who still think Obama is a Muslim aren't going to have their minds changed anyway. In fact, having Muslim women in the picture could probably HELP Obama. So yes this staffer needs to be canned (or drawn and quartered, as you said, I can see that fitting here.)

[mscelina]

The bigger shame is that in order to reinforce his image, they committed discrimination against two of their own supporters. It would have been far, far better for the women to have been onstage and for Obama (if it was brought up) to say, "Hey. I represent ALL Americans regardless of their religious affiliation." No one 'made' the Obama camp do anything. THey took that responsibility upon themselves.

[Robert Toy]

Here one they missed.

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l253/RT_2006/Obama.jpg

[Aglaia]

It's Dearborn he wants to bomb, not Ann Arbor. At least I hope so.

*ducks and covers*
:ROFL:

Er, uh, wait, do we think McCain knows the difference?

*looks for a place to hide*


The bigger shame is that in order to reinforce his image, they committed discrimination against two of their own supporters. It would have been far, far better for the women to have been onstage and for Obama (if it was brought up) to say, "Hey. I represent ALL Americans regardless of their religious affiliation." No one 'made' the Obama camp do anything. THey took that responsibility upon themselves.
Yes indeed. If only politicians did the things they said they'd do...

[James81]

The bigger shame is that in order to reinforce his image, they committed discrimination against two of their own supporters. It would have been far, far better for the women to have been onstage and for Obama (if it was brought up) to say, "Hey. I represent ALL Americans regardless of their religious affiliation." No one 'made' the Obama camp do anything. THey took that responsibility upon themselves.

Politicians are just puppets of the people. They do what they think pleases the people. Always have and always will.

So, yes, in a sense the people of America DID make that happen--through incessent bashing and fear mongering.

Do you think they would have had them removed from the platform if there wasn't 11ty billion emails going around everyday and such news frenzy over his religious beliefs?

You say it's sick of him to remove those 2 advisors from his platform. I say it's sick of the American people to make him feel like he HAD to do it or suffer the loss of votes.

Yeah, the morality is that he should've had backbone and stood up for what he believed, but since when do we hold politicians to some moral code?

[rugcat]

you're saying "good for them" as in the obama campaign did the right thing by playing into the fear of muslims that so many accuse of being the province of the right?Depends on whether or not you feel actually winning an election is important.

Fear of Muslims is mainly the province of the ignorant. And yes, it's the right that plays on that fear. Obama still is perceived as a Muslim by a surprising amount of people. A photo op with women in headscarves right behind Obama would be reproduced ad nauseum on Fox News and every right wing blog. It would cost him votes; no doubt about it.

If you want to call it an act of cowardice, fair enough. I see it as political savvy -- those who take the high road and stand on principle do not get elected -- and that includes McCain and every other candidate who has ever been elected.

[mscelina]

Since they represent themselves as the triggerpoint of "change" James. Obama has touted himself as being different from other politicians. This fiasco is just another example of him showing how much like everyone else he actually is.

[James81]

Since they represent themselves as the triggerpoint of "change" James. Obama has touted himself as being different from other politicians. This fiasco is just another example of him showing how much like everyone else he actually is.

Does anybody really buy the whole "change" BS that he's touting?

I had no idea that people actually believed him. lol

[mscelina]

Yes, a lot of people do buy into it--quite a few of them post here regularly. That being said, it's a shame that the people who do believe in him as a candidate and a man have the rug jerked out from underneath them because of some mistake on the part of a campaign flunky.

[William Haskins]

I had no idea that people actually believed him. lol

he doesn't believe it himself, but he's banking on a lot of americans believing it.

[pconsidine]

With all the Obama/Osama comments already going around, I'm not surprised a staffer made this decision. From here on out, reactions will strictly follow party lines. In other words, just another day on the campaign trail.

[odocoileus]

he doesn't believe it himself, but he's banking on a lot of americans believing it.

So Obama doesn't see himself as an agent for change?

The Obama campaign, then, is a sinister plan to maintain the status quo?

[William Haskins]

well, what's happening is that obama is using high-profile stages (speeches, debates, etc) to say one thing, only to backpedal in interviews or through his surrogates.

[Bird of Prey]

you're saying "good for them" as in the obama campaign did the right thing by playing into the fear of muslims that so many accuse of being the province of the right?

It's most definitely not the province of the right. Quite the contrary.

Years ago, at a certain company, we used to have lively political discussions after hours - sometimes during hours if things were slow.
Republicans were outnumbered. About 35 percent of the employees were Republican, the rest Democrat; but not included in that equation though participants in the discussions were green card Mexicans: who equaled in number the Rep/Dem employees.

Strictly my experience/my observation: the Republicans were willing to work alongside the Mexican people, regardless of how hard the labor, if it meant we could get the job done sooner, and thus make more profit. The Democratic employees were the first ones to find Mexicans if some rudimentary labor was involved.

Around '98, about sixty percent of the Mexican workers got citizenship, and believe me it was hard-earned. By 2000, nearly all had their citizenship. Election year? Every single Mexican vehicle - every single vehicle, now - that pulled into work - I'll never forget it - had a Republican bumper sticker on it.

They knew.

The story you posted is no surprise to me, William.

[Bird of Prey]

Muslim woman demands an apology from Obama after camera snub

One of two Muslim women who were denied visible seats behind Barack Obama’s stage at Joe Louis Arena on Monday because they wore head scarves said they deserve a personal apology from Obama and close-up seats at a future campaign rally.


Hebba Aref, 25, and her friend, Shimaa Abdelfadeel, received apologies from the campaign Tuesday after they complained that they were not allowed to sit near the podium when campaign volunteers learned that they wear the traditional Muslim head garb called a hijab.


Aref said she was especially disappointed because she was attracted to Obama’s message of unity and inclusion. She said she’d like more than an apologetic phone call from a campaign official.


“I was kind of in shock that had happened,” said Aref, a Bloomfield Hills resident and graduate of the University of Michigan Law School. “I’ve lived here practically my whole life, and never been treated that way. It’s so s ironic that it was at his rally, he obviously would not promote any discrimination at all.”


Aref said she received a phone call and apology from an Obama campaign offiicial, but said that’s not enough.


“I do appreciate they’re taking the time to look into what happened,” Aref said. “I think it’s a huge deal. I was hoping for an apology form Senator. Obama himself. He needs to send a strong message this kind of discrimination won’t be tolerated. . . . .”




http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080618/NEWS07/80618043/1008/news

In other words, the policy isn't written down somewhere so the Democrats can deny it exists at any time, but just like his middle name "Hussein," any affiliation of Obama with one of the world's largest populations - Muslims - is somehow, taboo. Yet, if called on it, the Democrats will declare that it shouldn't be construed as anything other than a little mistake, when it is in fact pure, unadulterated bigotry.

[pconsidine]

Any affiliation of Obama with one of the world's largest populations - Muslims - is somehow, taboo.

If you think that it wouldn't be spun by the opposing side as "cozying up with terrorists" in a heartbeat, then you really haven't been paying attention to American politics at all.

[Bird of Prey]

Any affiliation of Obama with one of the world's largest populations - Muslims - is somehow, taboo.

If you think that it wouldn't be spun by the opposing side as "cozying up with terrorists" in a heartbeat, then you really haven't been paying attention to American politics at all.


I don't believe that for a second. Republicans wouldn't dare. It's only the Democrats that are so comfortable with blatant bigotry that it works for them.

If the Republicans had done the same, the Democrats - in transparent fashion - would have called for their heads.

But Democrats keep fielding this appallingly phony bullshit: the party of the people. . . . What people?

Oh. The people that um, well, are, you know. . .useful.

[Tirjasdyn]

I've been backstage at a couple of these things. They try to keep "pretty people" who will stay awake in the frame.

It's just another version of the shaking hands and kissing babies pictures.

McCain's folks did the same thing.

[pconsidine]

I don't believe that for a second. Republicans wouldn't dare. It's only the Democrats that are so comfortable with blatant bigotry that it works for them.Seriously? I can't tell whether that's just a lack of imagination or if your experience has been so wildly different from mine that you genuinely can't picture it. Huh.

Edited to add: There's absolutely no reason to point to Democrats as the ones who'd be calling for someone's head. Clearly, there's enough pseudo-outrage being generated already that it hardly matters whether it's a GOP staffer or just some random internet poster who's driving it. The net effect is the same.

[astonwest]

Oh. The people that um, well, are, you know. . .useful.The people that um, well, are, you know...going to vote for us...at least until after the election. :)

[Don Allen]

You can condemn this thing for being wrong on every level you want,,, but politically it would be suicide for Obama to be photographed in arenas that may suggest a following of Muslims with ties to his campaign. Many who posted above are dead on correct that the pictures would be used as campaign fodder, if not by the networks then certainly by the political action committies.

Also, Muslims that support Obama need to understand that their communities have done little and in most cases nothing as far as condemning the radical nature of Islam. This first and formost has ostersized their communities from the rest of Americans and garnered a mistrust that if associated with any national campaign would result in failure.

Obama already has a good third of the nation who absolutly won't vote for him because he's black, the proof is in the poll numbers, he should be leading McCain by 15 points, easily. If the republicans are successful in labeling him a Muslim sympathizer, which is where they've been headed this week he'll lose without question. He's actually better off to shun the Muslims and let everyone know he dosen't care what they think. It was a good move, politically,, as for the two woman, probably not...

[Bird of Prey]

You can condemn this thing for being wrong on every level you want,,, but politically it would be suicide for Obama to be photographed in arenas that may suggest a following of Muslims with ties to his campaign. Many who posted above are dead on correct that the pictures would be used as campaign fodder, if not by the networks then certainly by the political action committies.

Also, Muslims that support Obama need to understand that their communities have done little and in most cases nothing as far as condemning the radical nature of Islam. This first and formost has ostersized their communities from the rest of Americans and garnered a mistrust that if associated with any national campaign would result in failure.

Obama already has a good third of the nation who absolutly won't vote for him because he's black, the proof is in the poll numbers, he should be leading McCain by 15 points, easily. If the republicans are successful in labeling him a Muslim sympathizer, which is where they've been headed this week he'll lose without question. He's actually better off to shun the Muslims and let everyone know he dosen't care what they think. It was a good move, politically,, as for the two woman, probably not...

Oh Lord. . . .

So true. Instead of standing on principle we have the phony aka Democratic bigot party.

Isn't that wonderful? Just what we all need.

[Don Allen]

...and the republicans are different?????

[MattW]

...and the republicans are different?????

But the Republicans aren't the ones who run on anti-discrimination platforms.

[Don Allen]

But the Republicans aren't the ones who run on anti-discrimination platforms.



To quote Michael Coreleone from the Godfather,," Who's being naive now, Kay"

To wit: Anti - gay...repubs
Anti - immigrant...repubs
Anti - anything that dosen't revolve around judeo/christian belief.

You better think that one through/////

[Bird of Prey]

To quote Michael Coreleone from the Godfather,," Who's being naive now, Kay"

To wit: Anti - gay...repubs
Anti - immigrant...repubs
Anti - anything that dosen't revolve around judeo/christian belief.

You better think that one through/////


That's simply not true, Don, especially the part about immigrants.

[Bravo]

it's a sad incidence but i don't really blame him for this.

it's the world we live in now.

[Bird of Prey]

it's a sad incidence but i don't really blame him for this.

it's the world we live in now.

It doesn't have to be the world we live in now, and that's the point. He's the candidate for change; he has the opportunity to change it.

There is no reason why something like this should have happened in the USA in 2008. It's disgusting.

[Bravo]

i think it's exactly because we're in the USA in 2008 that these sorts of things do happen.

[William Haskins]

so it's the american public's fault that obama can't be seen with muslims?

this is bullshit, in my view, and yes, as rugcat suggested, i believe it's an act of political cowardice on the part of his staffers.

this pattern of obama apologists blaming everyone but him or his staff for their own fuckups——even when his campaign later apologizes and they, themselves, admit is was wrong and embarrassing—is part of why some of them get tagged as silly cultists.

[Bird of Prey]

i think it's exactly because we're in the USA in 2008 that these sorts of things do happen.


No.


We've been forced to tolerate it because of the neoconservative movement that is currently in power. That movement depends on animosity to "keep unity," in other words, provide a certain hysteria about so-called enemies to maintain a distraction about the true condition of the economy, etc. . . .

It's a typical ploy.

But the Democrats are not better, in fact, worse. Much worse, because they so vociferously claim otherwise.

Obama made his foreign policy known and then "reknown," in favor of the money, which in part happened to be Israeli militant aka Likud. Just like his party, he has no principles, but worse, he can be bought without even a charlatan fight.

Better the enemy you know. I'd rather have a Republican to near any of the Democrats I've seen.

[pconsidine]

so it's the american public's fault that obama can't be seen with muslims? Since it's safe to assume he actually wants to win the election, yes it is. If the American public could be counted on not to fall prey to the kind of intellectually dishonest but sadly effective advertising you've decried elsewhere in these forums, I don't believe it would have even crossed that staffer's mind to exclude anyone.
i believe it's an act of political cowardice on the part of his staffers. No argument there. But at the same time, it's disingenuous to claim that it wasn't justified in some way by the nature of modern campaign practices.

Edited to add: Before I get lumped in with the "apologists," allow me to state, with respect to the above, that the fact there's a reason for the action is not an excuse for the action.

[Bravo]

so it's the american public's fault that obama can't be seen with muslims?


yes.

those 30% who think he's a muslim and who associate being a muslim with being a jihadist are to be blamed for this. there've been rumors circulating from the beginning of this campaign and i know that realistically he can't be seen with any islamic links.

that said, because of his weakness here, i don't think he will ever bridge the gap between the muslim world and america, as he promised during his campaign. i dont think he'll do much of anything foreign policy wise.


this pattern of obama apologists blaming everyone but him or his staff for their own fuckups——even when his campaign later apologizes and they, themselves, admit is was wrong and embarrassing—is part of why some of them get tagged as silly cultists.

i'll ignore the kneejerk attempt to pigeonhole me as a member of the obama cult.

[donroc]

Wonder how it played in Kenya? :Shrug:

[William Haskins]

those 30% who think he's a muslim and who associate being a muslim with being a jihadist are to be blamed for this. there've been rumors circulating from the beginning of this campaign and i know that realistically he can't be seen with any islamic links.

is it 30% now? i recently read 10 to 13%, which is shameful, but given the fact that more than 30% believe in UFOs, witches and astrology, i don't put all that much faith into the critical thinking abilities of the populace.

that said, i dont think he will ever bridge the gap between the muslim world and america, as he promised during his campaign. i dont think he'll do much of anything foreign policy wise.

he'll make sure jerusalem stays undivided. or maybe not. he'll get rid of the cuban embargo. or maybe not. he'll pull the troops immediately. or maybe not.


i'll ignore the kneejerk attempt to pigeonhole me as a member of the obama cult.

i would never pigeonhole you as anything, sir. but if you can't see the ridiculousness in die-hards defending rev. wright or shuttling away muslim girls, even after the campaign has condemned these things as something beyond normal political support, you ain't looking hard.

[rugcat]

his pattern of obama apologists blaming everyone but him or his staff for their own fuckups——even when his campaign later apologizes and they, themselves, admit is was wrong and embarrassing—is part of why some of them get tagged as silly cultists.Yes. Those who make excuses for Obama are cultists. Those who make excuses for other candidates are ... what, William? Loyalists? Partisans? Right thinking people? Understandable?

As to political cowardice, I'm sure you would prefer an Obama who would stand on principle and nobly go down in flames, leaving John McCain in control of our country for the next four years.

[Bravo]

is it 30% now? i recently read 10 to 13%, which is shameful, but given the fact that more than 30% believe in UFOs, witches and astrology, i don't put all that much faith into the critical thinking abilities of the populace.

you're right. i heard from someone that it was 30 but now i just looked it up, it says 1 in 10.


would never pigeonhole you as anything, sir. but if you can't see the ridiculousness in die-hards defending rev. wright or shuttling away muslim girls, even after the campaign has condemned these things as something beyond normal political support, you ain't looking hard.

i know there are, i thought you were putting me in this category.

glad to see that wasnt the case.

[William Haskins]

As to political cowardice, I'm sure you would prefer an Obama who would stand on principle and nobly go down in flames, leaving John McCain in control of our country for the next four years.

i've so missed your lovely condescension, john.

to be quite honest, i would have actually respected obama and/or his staff standing on principle and if those idiots at fox news or on the net said something about it, hold a press conference and say, "these young ladies represent the diversity of america, and i will not shy away from being the same agent of hope and change that i am for white people and black people by being bullied by scurrilous emailers and reactionary talkshow hosts into ignoring nearly two million americans."

[rugcat]

It's most definitely not the province of the right. Quite the contrary.

Years ago, at a certain company, we used to have lively political discussions after hours - sometimes during hours if things were slow.
Republicans were outnumbered. About 35 percent of the employees were Republican, the rest Democrat; but not included in that equation though participants in the discussions were green card Mexicans: who equaled in number the Rep/Dem employees.

Strictly my experience/my observation: the Republicans were willing to work alongside the Mexican people, regardless of how hard the labor, if it meant we could get the job done sooner, and thus make more profit. The Democratic employees were the first ones to find Mexicans if some rudimentary labor was involved.

Around '98, about sixty percent of the Mexican workers got citizenship, and believe me it was hard-earned. By 2000, nearly all had their citizenship. Election year? Every single Mexican vehicle - every single vehicle, now - that pulled into work - I'll never forget it - had a Republican bumper sticker on it.

They knew.Yes, Republicans are far more racist than Democrats.

It's a little known fact the the majority of young people who risked their lives and even died during the civil rights struggles in the 60's South were arch conservatives.

Country clubs that used to exclude backs (and some still do) are mostly populated by rich Democrats -- CEOs of companies and the like.

Look at any campaign rally for McCain and marvel at the diversity, as opposed to the all white crowds at Obama or Clinton events.

Republican lawmakers are also noted for their commitment to gay rights issues, as opposed to the legions of Democrats determined to marginalize them.

Hey, thanks for the good laugh. I needed it.

[xhouseboy]

They might have a case for 'injury to feelings.'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7457794.stm

[robeiae]

to be quite honest, i would have actually respected obama and/or his staff standing on principle and if those idiots at fox news or on the net said something about it, hold a press conference and say, "these young ladies represent the diversity of america, and i will not shy away from being the same agent of hope and change that i am for white people and black people by being bullied by scurrilous emailers and reactionary talkshow hosts into ignoring nearly two million americans."
Actually, this would have been the politically astute move. The politically astute response now from McCain would be to find some Islamic supporters (if he has any) and get them on camera with him. But I doubt McCain will do it.

And if Bill Clinton was--theoretically--the opposing candidate instead of McCain, you can be damn sure there would be Muslim women on camera at his next press conference/photo op.

But it is highly amusing when an opportunity to be the candidate Obama claims to be presents itself--and he runs away in fear.

[mscelina]

Now wait a second--it's the American public's fault?

Perhaps I would buy into this if it were blamed on the American media, but not the public. Blaming the American public is like blaming the victim of a crime.

The people at fault are Obama's so-called advisors who were stupid enough to discriminate in order to keep their candidate's image pristine from Muslim references. Period.

[rugcat]

The people at fault are Obama's so-called advisors who were stupid enough to discriminate in order to keep their candidate's image pristine from Muslim references. Period.Well, I agree, but exactly what were they afraid of? The American people and their prejudices, and with good reason.

[rugcat]

i've so missed your lovely condescension, john.
I've learned from the best, Obi Wan.

[mscelina]

Well, I agree, but exactly what were they afraid of? The American people and their prejudices, and with good reason.

Was it the American people and their prejudices or the American media and their biases that are actually the problem here?

"Change" would indicate (at least to me) a candidate who's not afraid to stand up to outdated prejudices. *shrug*

[Don Allen]

What i love about these forums and the people who post here in general is that most if not all, (including myself interestingly enough) look at these issues with a degree of puzzlement wondering why on Earth Obama's handlers would even think of doing such a thing. Haskins had a wonderful repose a few posts up that any half way intelligent being would wrap themselves around as a genuine well thought out answer to any critisism about the event.

BUT!!!!! (screamed loud and long))) We overlook the fact that a HUGE part of our wonderful countries voters have the attention span of a flea with a political education to match. The sound bite is the extent of their political knowledge coupled with whatever the most influential person, at the time,(mechanic, nephew, old man at the barber shop, old bitties putting scrapbooks together, tupperware parties, etc.) happens to say. Most don't read daily papers, those that surf the web avoid politics like the plague, BUT... show them a picture of muslims lined up behind Obama and what do you think will stay with them, what do you think they will pass on at the next party,,, come on guys we all know the answer.. ..and this is just as true for McCain... The reason you keep hearing the 100 year war tag is because its sticking, total bullshit but it sticks, so thats why I can't really blame the Obama camp anymore than I'd blame McCain for doing the same thing...... Damn now im tired....

[William Haskins]

if mccain, who was smeared with rumors of having fathered a black lovechild in the 2000 run, had shuttled blacks away from his photo ops to avoid the perception of being too "close" to blacks, i would have been calling him a racist piece of shit.

and, guess what? every goddamn obama apologist in this thread would have done the same.

[Don Allen]

William, you honestly won't draw a distinction to the subliminal connotation of Muslims backing the guy when McCain has just blasted him over the last few weeks for being soft, or not understanding terrorism, or wanting to treat it as a civil crime instead of a war.

[pconsidine]

Was it the American people and their prejudices or the American media and their biases that are actually the problem here?

"Change" would indicate (at least to me) a candidate who's not afraid to stand up to outdated prejudices. *shrug*I suppose this is the downside of running on a platform of Change – you still have to face current reality sometimes.

And I'd still put it on the American people and their prejudices, myself. Unless one were to include individual message board posters, bloggers and the like in the category of "American media," in which case I might be swayed to your point of view.

[mscelina]

I suppose this is the downside of running on a platform of Change – you still have to face current reality sometimes.

And I'd still put it on the American people and their prejudices, myself. Unless one were to include individual message board posters, bloggers and the like in the category of "American media," in which case I might be swayed to your point of view.

LMAO! God forbid! Can you imagine the outright confusion if AW P&CE posters could actually influence the election?

Jesus Christ.

:roll:

[robeiae]

LMAO! God forbid! Can you imagine the outright confusion if AW P&CE posters could actually influence the election?

Jesus Christ.

:roll:
If you only knew...

*straightens all-seeing eye lapel pin*

[kuwisdelu]

Why do so many threads always have to pick on us UFO believers?

[William Haskins]

William, you honestly won't draw a distinction to the subliminal connotation of Muslims backing the guy when McCain has just blasted him over the last few weeks for being soft, or not understanding terrorism, or wanting to treat it as a civil crime instead of a war.

no, i honestly won't.

[Bravo]

so i glossed over this earlier:

Here one they missed.

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l253/RT_2006/Obama.jpg


apparently this pic was taken after hijabgate.

wow.

lol.

this guy....

:ROFL:

[William Haskins]

well yeah, after realizing what happened, he threw a hajib on the closest mexican girl...

[Joe270]

So much for Hillary's lock on the 'women vote'. Ol' Obama sure can line up the lovely ladies.

Damn, what a wingman. His single friends must adore him.

[Bird of Prey]

Yes, Republicans are far more racist than Democrats.

It's a little known fact the the majority of young people who risked their lives and even died during the civil rights struggles in the 60's South were arch conservatives.

Country clubs that used to exclude backs (and some still do) are mostly populated by rich Democrats -- CEOs of companies and the like.

Look at any campaign rally for McCain and marvel at the diversity, as opposed to the all white crowds at Obama or Clinton events.

Republican lawmakers are also noted for their commitment to gay rights issues, as opposed to the legions of Democrats determined to marginalize them.

Hey, thanks for the good laugh. I needed it.

Here. How bout this for a good laugh:

Originally Posted by Bird of Prey http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2187372#post2187372)
And my opinion is as follows:

You won't vote for Hillary Clinton although you think she's the better suited for the presidency because you don't think she can win. And you don't think she can win because of sexism. You fully acknowledge as much.

So you won't vote for her because you'd rather capitulate to bigotry than vote your best judgment.

I don't know what's worse: the outright bigotry from posters here toward women or the people who won't take a step to rise above it.

Your rationale is particularly hurtful to me because it comes from an otherwise seemingly intelligent and thoughtful person. I'm sorry for your rationale, and for all the American daughters whose opportunities will be limited because of those that would surrender to a gross injustice.

"Told you. I'm a pragmatist. . . . ." Rugcat; 3-23-2008; post 238; Thread: Typical White Person. . . .

My bold. So spare me the lectures about those fair-minded, self-sacrificing Democrats if you're a shining example.

Democrats are no better than Republicans when it comes to bigotry.

[Joe270]

Yes, Republicans are far more racist than Democrats.

Bullshit of the first order.

So you post crap about elitist rich, many of whom are probably democrats.

I notice you leave out the large population of southern democrat working class, a hugely racist crowd. Not to mention some of the democrat leadership which are confirmed, card carrying KKK member.

Watch where you point the finger of racism, because it seems to me the democrats have a long history of it.

[poetinahat]

"I was coming to support him, and I felt like I was discriminated against by the very person who was supposed to be bringing this change, who I could really relate to," said Hebba Aref, a 25-year-old lawyer who lives in the Detroit suburb of Bloomfield Hills. "The message that I thought was delivered to us was that they do not want him associated with Muslims or Muslim supporters."
Maybe they just wanted to avoid people from Bloomfield Hills. That is one swanky - some might say snobby - suburb.

Getting off the alliteration train now.

[benbradley]

This sort of "what citizens/supporters the candidate is seen with" thing has definitely been going on (and surely not just with Obama). Here's a Usenet post from a little over a month ago, before Obama had the nomination wrapped up over Hillary. It's of course impossible to know the veracity of such a post, but it seems reasonable enough that this happened, especially after this "scarfgate" episode:

...
When we got our places on the bleachers we were a few rows up and not
too off-center of the podium - and we were happy with that. After they
passed out the signs and flags (by the way: those "home made" signs aren't!
They're made by the campaign and passed out before the event) the guy in
charge of video moved people around. He came up to me and my friend and
said "come with me" and I said "you're moving us?" (rather sadly) and he
said "yes, I'm putting you on TV" Guess how they arranged us? All white
women right behind Obama with very little exception (again, it depends on
how zoomed in the TV cameras are by the different networks). We had been
next to an African-American father and son but that guy moved us from them
so that we'd be in the shot.

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.gossip.celebrities/browse_thread/thread/8d72c4ac4ef91e64

[rugcat]

Democrats are no better than Republicans when it comes to bigotry.That's not what you said. You said Democrats were worse than Republicans.

And being a pragmatist is a choice, and I think a good one. Idealists stick to principles, refuse to compromise, and get nothing accomplished. Pragmatists make the best of a bad situation and realizing no one ever gets exactly what they want, work to make things better the best way he or she can.

Getting a Democrat elected is what's important to me. As I've said before, those who voted for Nader in 2000 voted their conscience, but they had to know it was impossible for him to get elected. So instead of compromising (or selling out, as you might term it) they were able to feel morally superior -- and the resulting election of GWB has caused untold misery and disaster to our country. The war, the failing economy, the gutting of environmental programs -- none of this had to happen.

As for Hillary and Obama, I've often said I thought either one would do a fine job. They both have things about them that I like and things I don't -- so it was a toss-up for me. Going with the one I think has the best chance to win is nothing I'd apologise for.

And you may keep your intense air of moral superiority. I've spent much of my life attempting to make things better as I see them, whether it's working law enforcement, tutoring prison inmates, fostering rescue group dogs, marching against the war, or writing silly and (hopefully) entertaining books.

I may be flawed. I am flawed. But I think about stuff and I care about things. I try to do right, and I do stuff. All I've ever heard from you is a litany of complaint, outrage, and fault finding, with both the world in general and the posters at AW. Your approval of me or lack of it means less than nothing.

[rugcat]

Bullshit of the first order.

So you post crap about elitist rich, many of whom are probably democrats.

I notice you leave out the large population of southern democrat working class, a hugely racist crowd. Not to mention some of the democrat leadership which are confirmed, card carrying KKK member.

Watch where you point the finger of racism, because it seems to me the democrats have a long history of it.I stand corrected. I said Republicans when I really meant conservatives.

Individually, both liberals and conservatives can be racist idiots or wonderful, caring people. Being conservative is certainly no marker indicating racial views.

But in the aggregate, I believe people with racist, antisemitic, and homophobic views are more often politically conservative than they are liberal.

Gosh, I wonder if anyone is going to disagree with me on this.

[Bravo]

Gosh, I wonder if anyone is going to disagree with me on this.

timesaver for conservatives:

stalin was a commie!

[blacbird]

Maybe somebody else has already expressed this (I haven't taken the tedious time to read every post in this thread), but I guarantee that the very same people trying to make hay about this incident would have been first in line to blast Obama if a picture had emerged with a woman in a Muslim scarf behind him. Imagine the fun Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity would have tried to make with that.

This will be forgotten by Saturday. Republicans are going to have to come up with something positive about why we should all be voting for McCain. So far, not many arrows in their quiver.

caw

caw

[clintl]

Republicans are going to have to come up with something positive about why we should all be voting for McCain. So far, not many arrows in their quiver.

caw

caw

Well, not much other than a future of oil spills and dead sea birds.

[MattW]

Well, not much other than a future of oil spills and dead sea birds.If it means not pouring billions of dollars into the black hole of the Middle East, let the extinction parade commence.

[Don]

I stand corrected. I said Republicans when I really meant conservatives.

Individually, both liberals and conservatives can be racist idiots or wonderful, caring people. Being conservative is certainly no marker indicating racial views.

But in the aggregate, I believe people with OPENLY racist, antisemitic, and homophobic views are more often politically conservative than they are liberal.

Gosh, I wonder if anyone is going to disagree with me on this.

Fixed it for you. :D

You've never known a Liberal who supported the nanny state because "those people" don't know what's good for themselves or how to take care of themselves, so we need laws to protect them from themselves? I'd say most nanny-staters fall under that category. I've certainly never heard one stand up and say 'Please pass this law to protect me from my bad habits.' Laws they propose are always about making other people do / not do something they personally believe it's important to control.

How about ANY celebrity who wants to get the drugs and the guns off the street to protect the children in the ghetto, but sees nothing wrong with bolting back a few stiff ones and hiring armed bodyguards? If their guards are capable of safely handling a weapon, what makes them think the poor woman in the ghetto who has to walk to work every night in the dark isn't?

You've never known a Liberal who thought the government needs to be in control because 'those damm bankers' are screwing everybody else over so they can get rich?

You've never known a Liberal who was just peachy with the whole homosexual thing until one day their son came home and said, "I want you to meet my life partner, George?"

Many Liberals are just better at hiding behind a veneer of political correctness until their particular ox gets gored, but to say that people with racist, anti-semitic, or homophobic viewpoints are more likely to be conservative than liberal? Hmm, that sounds like a class-based judgement call to me, and isn't that what we're talking about here? Pot, meet kettle.

We have met the enemy, and he is us. Don't feel bad, I've done it myself before, when I lump all Liberals together. I try to remind myself, Liberals aren't bad people, they're just misinformed by the government indoctrination camps they spent twelve years in. :)

[Bird of Prey]

All I've ever heard from you is a litany of complaint, outrage, and fault finding, with both the world in general and the posters at AW. Your approval of me or lack of it means less than nothing.


It's a board of political debate. I approve and disapprove of political stances, and now and then, a few philosophical ones. I hear plenty of "outrage and complaint and fault finding" from you.

I word about your post. If it had been reversed, that you wouldn't support Obama because he was black, I wonder what the reaction would have been. I can imagine.

And my point about the Democratic party is very simple: talk is cheap, especially with regard to sexism and racism.

[robeiae]

I stand corrected. I said Republicans when I really meant conservatives.

Individually, both liberals and conservatives can be racist idiots or wonderful, caring people. Being conservative is certainly no marker indicating racial views.

But in the aggregate, I believe people with racist, antisemitic, and homophobic views are more often politically conservative than they are liberal.

Gosh, I wonder if anyone is going to disagree with me on this.
I disagree. Well, no I don't. If it's what you believe, how can I disagree with the statement, itself?

But...I don't think your belief is well-founded. I think this is better:

But in the aggregate, I believe people with openly racist, antisemitic, and homophobic views are more often politically conservative than they are liberal.

Of course, we can't do anything about people who aren't open about their bigotry. Also, I have to take issue with the antisemitism. Of late, it seems to be a very liberal way of thinking...imo, of course.

ETA: You know, I didn't read the other replies before I posted and I see Don already made the principle change, here. Good show, Don.

[AncientEagle]

I don't believe that for a second. Republicans wouldn't dare. It's only the Democrats that are so comfortable with blatant bigotry that it works for them.



You have got to be kidding.

[Bird of Prey]

You have got to be kidding.

No I'm not, and here's why. I demonstrated right here on this board.

It is very unlikely that a Republican would tell a woman that he/she wouldn't vote for her because she was a woman. He/she might think it, but there's a certain restraint in saying it, say a certain understanding of the shame or the pain and/or the ramifications. A Democrat - who gives women all kinds of lip service about the importance of equal rights - will stand there and point blank tell you if you are a woman, that your equality is not worth fighting for. Sorry, voting for a man.

I can't begin to tell you what that feels like.

[Aglaia]

Also, Muslims that support Obama need to understand that their communities have done little and in most cases nothing as far as condemning the radical nature of Islam. This first and formost has ostersized their communities from the rest of Americans and garnered a mistrust that if associated with any national campaign would result in failure.

I think that's really unfair. I don't particularly seek it out, and yet I've come across lots of articles and interviews with leaders in the Muslim community (this is over several years, mind you, unrelated to this election) making an effort to discuss the difference between radical Islam and the religion practiced by most people in the U.S. (and, yes, condemn the extremists). I think the problem is that people just don't listen. We all like to argue, don't we? Life's a little easier with someone to blame.


As to political cowardice, I'm sure you would prefer an Obama who would stand on principle and nobly go down in flames, leaving John McCain in control of our country for the next four years.
I'd have a lot more respect for Obama if he would have manned up and stuck to his message of "change." I never bought it, which is why I never supported him or thought he could cut it as president. He had a chance to win me over. He didn't.

[pconsidine]

LMAO! God forbid! Can you imagine the outright confusion if AW P&CE posters could actually influence the election?Here's a sobering thought then – this thread has 952 views and 95 posts (at last check). Of all those people who have read this thread but not posted in it, isn't it possible that the discussion here has colored their opinions of Mr. Obama? And we'd never know until election day.

[Robert Toy]

Here's a sobering thought then – this thread has 952 views and 95 posts (at last check). Of all those people who have read this thread but not posted in it, isn't it possible that the discussion here has colored their opinions of Mr. Obama? And we'd never know until election day.
No I seriously doubt any opinions have been changed, I give AWers more credit than that.

[pconsidine]

It's not that existing opinions will be changed, but that previously non-existent opinions will be formed. There are a lot of people that don't feel strongly enough about this kind of thing to actually post in the thread, but are curious enough to read it. It's only my intuition talking, but I wouldn't be surprised to find that these sorts of things help the Undecided decide.

[William Haskins]

i sure hope so.

[AncientEagle]

It is very unlikely that a Republican would tell a woman that he/she wouldn't vote for her because she was a woman. He/she might think it, but there's a certain restraint in saying it, say a certain understanding of the shame or the pain and/or the ramifications. A Democrat - who gives women all kinds of lip service about the importance of equal rights - will stand there and point blank tell you if you are a woman, that your equality is not worth fighting for. Sorry, voting for a man.

That's a pretty sweeping assertion of the attitudes and actions of two huge segments of the population. I can't prove you wrong. I can only say that I'm a Democrat, and I would never either think or say, to a woman or a man, that I would not vote for a woman just because she's a woman. I fully support equal pay and equal opportunity, political or otherwise. I was fully prepared to vote for a woman if she had become the candidate of the Democratic Party. I also know a few Republican women I could vote for.

I'm a pretty insensitive clod at times, but I really believe I, also, have "a certain understanding of the shame or the pain and/or the ramifications" to as great a degree as most of my Republican acquaintances. I thought party affiliation was a sign of political philosophy, not character, thoughtfulness, morality, and ethics.

But I'm sure my comment won't change your, or anyone else's, stance on this subject. It's been my experience that, on political matters, minds once made up are almost never changed, no matter the evidence on either side.

[Takvah]

What will the benefit of this maneuver be for candidate Obama? Will it make him less suspicious to those that think he's a "sleeper"? HELL NO. What this story and his staffers have done... is give imbeciles that think he is a muslim the evidence they need to say he's engaged in "cover-up"! ROFLMAO!

[Bird of Prey]

That's a pretty sweeping assertion of the attitudes and actions of two huge segments of the population. I can't prove you wrong. I can only say that I'm a Democrat, and I would never either think or say, to a woman or a man, that I would not vote for a woman just because she's a woman. I fully support equal pay and equal opportunity, political or otherwise. I was fully prepared to vote for a woman if she had become the candidate of the Democratic Party. I also know a few Republican women I could vote for.

I'm a pretty insensitive clod at times, but I really believe I, also, have "a certain understanding of the shame or the pain and/or the ramifications" to as great a degree as most of my Republican acquaintances. I thought party affiliation was a sign of political philosophy, not character, thoughtfulness, morality, and ethics.

But I'm sure my comment won't change your, or anyone else's, stance on this subject. It's been my experience that, on political matters, minds once made up are almost never changed, no matter the evidence on either side.


I think the point that I'm making is that I'd rather command enough respect from a party affiliate that - even if he/she thought I, as a woman, was a lower form of human - that I wasn't so low that he/she would flat out say it in the wide open, as this individual did by default on the board, expressing that woman's equality aka her candidacy was not worth fighting for because she was a woman. Better to sacrifice the vote to a man. And that - to me - is an example of the difference - very generally speaking - between the Republican party and the Democratic party.

The Democratic party elite give all kinds of lip service to equality, but it took the Republican elite to put a woman in Rice's position. Likewise, the Democratic elite take a self-righteous stand about equality for all, but quickly shuffle a couple of Muslim women out of the picture because God forbid, the Democratic party elite should actually mean what they say regarding respect of all.

Now I'm well aware the majority of Democrats are just like you, wanting fairness and decency for all people, so please don't take offense when I say this, but I prefer the devil I know when it comes to racism and sexism. I'd rather take on certain conservatives that consistently say what they believe. At least they're honest about it. As for the rest, I'd just as soon they hesitate before flat out telling me in so many words that it's tough shit for women.

[AncientEagle]

The Democratic party elite give all kinds of lip service to equality, but it took the Republican elite to put a woman in Rice's position.


Does the name Madeline Albright ring a bell?

[mscelina]

damn. I was going to bring her up.

[Takvah]

Does the name Madeline Albright ring a bell?

I'm sorry but Albright is half a man... *snickers* So again, the Dems have been trumped.

[mscelina]

*kicks Takvah in the knee*

Cut that out. Albright was a savvy, no bullshit politician along the lines of Margaret Thatcher and both, as I recollect, maintained their femininity during their tenures. Since when does an accomplished female politician have to be 'half a man' in order to be considered successful?

*kicks harder*

You're smarter than that, Takvah. Dude.

[dmytryp]

*kicks Takvah in the knee*

Cut that out. Albright was a savvy, no bullshit politician along the lines of Margaret Thatcher and both, as I recollect, maintained their femininity during their tenures. Since when does an accomplished female politician have to be 'half a man' in order to be considered successful?

*kicks harder*

You're smarter than that, Takvah. Dude.
I think he meant the heighthttp://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/images/icons/icon7.gif

[donroc]

A Sandra Day O'Connor trumps an Albright. :D

[AncientEagle]

A Sandra Day O'Connor trumps an Albright. :D

I don't recall that she was ever Secretary of State, the position referred to in the original comment.

[mscelina]

We were talking about women who reached high-level political positions in a general fashion, AncientEagle, and not necessarily restricting ourselves to SoS. In that context, I'd think that Albright and O'Connor would be comparable examples--specifically since O'Connor's arrival on the Supreme Court heralded a significant change in the way that Americans viewed women's viability for success in these types of appointed positions within the Federal Government. Madeline Albright was the first woman SoS--and the first woman to attain that level of power in US History. By the same token. O'Connor was the first female justice on the SCoUS--also a milestone in regards to the high level of power such a position holds.

[donroc]

I don't recall that she was ever Secretary of State, the position referred to in the original comment.

SCOTUS ain't bad either, just making a point about Republican appointments regarding women`

[Bird of Prey]

Does the name Madeline Albright ring a bell?

Sure does.

She was Secretary of State, not National Security Advisor then appointed Secretary of State in war mode.

Still. . . I'll give you Albright. You're right. O'Connor I see a bit differently.

[mscelina]

Why, BoP? They are both women who broke the barrier for that particular position of power in the US hierarchy, aren't they? Pioneers?

Just because you don't agree with O'Connor's legal ideology is no reason to discount her achievements--or her impact on the women (like Ginsberg, for example) who followed and will follow her example.

[pconsidine]

I think there are enough examples on both sides of the aisle to make women's advancement a less partisan issue. For example, Jeannette Rankin (the first woman elected to Congress) was a Republican, but Shirley Chisholm (the first black woman elected to Congress) was a Democrat. As mentioned above, Madeleine Albright was a Dem, but Condi is a Republican. Nellie Ross, the first female governor, was a Democrat, but there have been plenty on both sides since then (including my own current governor, Gov. Rell of Conn., who is a Republican). I'd say we call it a wash, but that's just me.

[AncientEagle]

We were talking about women who reached high-level political positions in a general fashion, AncientEagle, and not necessarily restricting ourselves to SoS.

I'm arguing this more for the fun of the game than for any particular need to make a point. But the original quote to which I responded was "it took a Republican elite to put a woman in Rice's position." My bold. That doesn't seem to be just a general discussion of "women who reached high-level political positions in a general fashion." If I'd thought it was that, I'd have seen your bid and raised you by throwing in Frances Perkins, FDR's Secretary of the Treasury sixty-odd years ago.

But as someone has said in following posts, neither party can really claim to have outdone the other in opening up positions for women, and for that matter, neither party can claim to have fallen over themselves to do it more quickly.

[Bird of Prey]

Why, BoP? They are both women who broke the barrier for that particular position of power in the US hierarchy, aren't they? Pioneers?

Just because you don't agree with O'Connor's legal ideology is no reason to discount her achievements--or her impact on the women (like Ginsberg, for example) who followed and will follow her example.

Well, in context to the prior discussion: she was nominated by Reagan, a Republican, if I'm not mistaken.

[kuwisdelu]

Just in case anyone hasn't heard by now, Obama's personally apologized to the two women (http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080619/pl_politico/16847), and offered them front-row seats at some future speech. They accepted his apology, still angry at the volunteers who committed the infraction, but are without hard feelings against Obama, and are still supporting him in his campaign.

[soleary]

If Obama had been photographed with a bunch of Muslims in full dress it would have been posted by every right winger on the planet as proof positive of his swift boat Muslimness. Do we remember the photo that showed him in garb that was spun as Muslim garb? I can't blame his aides for trying to keep that out of the negative right wing spin coffers.

[William Haskins]

... are without hard feelings against Obama, and are still supporting him in his campaign.

of course. muslims stick together.

[benbradley]

If Obama had been photographed with a bunch of Muslims in full dress it would have been posted by every right winger on the planet as proof positive of his swift boat Muslimness. Do we remember the photo that showed him in garb that was spun as Muslim garb? I can't blame his aides for trying to keep that out of the negative right wing spin coffers.
This just goes to show how strange politics is. McCain may HAVE to be photographed with a group of people in "full Muslim garb" in an attempt to placate those who might accuse him of being out to destroy the religion of Islam.

[MattW]

In all honesty, Obama was damned if he did, and damned if he didn't.

Unfortunately, for the party that stresses equality and tolerance, the volunteers erred on the side that is diametrically opposed to the Obama platform.

[kuwisdelu]

of course. muslims stick together.

:Headbang:

[William Haskins]

spare your poor forehead. you're gonna mess up those dreamy bangs.

i know obama's not a muslim.

he's a lapsed black liberation theologist.

[kuwisdelu]

spare your poor forehead. you're gonna mess up those dreamy bangs.

i know obama's not a muslim.

he's a lapsed black liberation theologist.

I figured you were probably joking, but thought it appropriate anyway ;)

[William Haskins]

i've debunked the muslim emails more than anyone on these boards; however, i will generally be inappropriate on a daily basis.

[kuwisdelu]

i've debunked the muslim emails more than anyone on these boards; however, i will generally be inappropriate on a daily basis.

That's okay. I'm all for inappropriate.

:e2moon:

[Joe270]

however, i will generally be inappropriate on a daily basis.

Certainly, you must keep up the Haskins rep. After a few months at AW, most people know you are actually Susie's alter-ego second user name.

[William Haskins]

yin and yang, sir. yin and yang.

[Joe270]

Yeah, after handing out caring advice, giving virtual hugs and support, distributing human kindness and nurturing, you just get to the point where you need to rip someone a new asshole.

We understand.