Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << If a white Democrat would have been elected, the same attacks would have occured. >> No. They would not be the same attacks. Look back at the attacks on Bill Clinton -- and they were pretty vicious and persistent from the day he took office. They were from an entirely different perspective than the attacks on President Obama. You can even look at the opposition to President Bush, which wasn't nearly as vocal in the early stages of his presidency. The electorate even had a clear reason to believe that Bush was an illegitimate leader when you consider the controversy of the 2000 election -- yet you didn't have the equivalent of a "birthers" movement trying to put Bush out of office. The harshest criticisms of George W. Bush came well after he completely ruined the country with his devastating policies on wealth distribution, war, and social issues.
Originally Posted By DAR There's a lot of issues I have with Obama, his use of a teleprompter is right at the bottom.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 yet you didn't have the equivalent of a "birthers" movement trying to put Bush out of office. << You did have a movement that claimed that he was only elected because his brother was Governor of FL... It was pretty vocal where I lived in 2000
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << Yup, all Republicans are racist, that has to be the case because they don't want a Black President. >> That isn't what I said at all. I opined that the origins of some of the teleprompter arguments were born in racism. A racist element in any faction can infect the entire group if they formulate their arguments in a seemingly benign manner. I don't expect that every Republican that picks up on these narratives has the realization that they were cultivated in the mind of racist ideologues. I think you need to take a hard look at some of these cricisms against the President and test their validity? Why the teleprompter criticism now when these devices have been in wide use for over 30 years? Why is there a birther movement? Would there have been a birther movement if Sen. McCain was elected -- he was born in the Panama Canal Zone? You can put your head in the sand an deny that there are racist undertones here, but that defies the reality and logic of the situation. If you really don't like President Obama's policies, why not argue about how you would make those policies different instead of the way he makes his speeches or why he is not the legitimate President to be making those policies?
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << You did have a movement that claimed that he was only elected because his brother was Governor of FL... >> I wouldn't define that as a "movement." Were there rallies in 50 states advocating this position? Were hours of national news programming devoted to the discussion of this talking point? There is no comparison to what happened when Bush entered office and what is happening now.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy ^^ You recall incorrectly. It wasn't a joke. That was a statement of admiration directly from the black community.
Originally Posted By DAR Well considering I heard from the likes of Chris Rock, Dave Chappelle and Wanda Sykes, comedians, I would put in that category.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>A person could give 99,999 reasonable and unpartisan comments, and you can bet your boots they'll be ostracized for the 10,000th one if it's even slightly off message or "liberal" in tone.<< Exactly. This is the cold, moldy leftovers from the Neocon era. Compare how a William F. Buckley or even George Will approaches discussions with the way Dick Cheney and Limbaugh, Palin, tea baggers, etc. It's all hysterical nonsense, not reasoned discussion.
Originally Posted By Labuda Hey, here's a page that says Obama doesn't overuse teleprompters, and it's from a source *I* trust implicitly! <a href="http://www.labuda.com/obama.html" target="_blank">http://www.labuda.com/obama.html</a>
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "I have posted now many examples of O and his over use of a teleprompter. You're just saying that it doesn't happen/didn't happen and he does not-just makes it seem as if you live in a state of denial." WHO CARES????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <That K2M is exactly what I posted to you since you asked. You didn't like the fact that someone could dare say anything about O. > You reveal yourself with this comment as blinded by ideology. Because K2M has criticized Obama himself. So have I. So have many of us. I know I've been disappointed in a number of things he's done (or hasn't done) since assuming office, and I've said so. So have others. So it's simply not true that we have a problem with somebody criticizing Obama. We just like our criticism to be about substantive things, not frivolous talking points that don't matter in the first place.
Originally Posted By Princessjenn5795 I would like to ask dlkozy why (s)he (?) is so terribly concerned about the president's use of teleprompters? Does it offend you in some way? Do you have moral or religious views against teleprompters? Out of all of thing going on in the country and in the world, why is telepromptergate your chosen battle?
Originally Posted By Mr X dlkozy has left the building. Something about not being about to answer why McCain doesn't deserve the same derision for being away from the Senate and "away from the job" as Obama does for the very same reason (in order to campaign for President). But it doesn't matter, because I know EXACTLY why kozy, and the people who instruct her on what to say, are so fixated on the teleprompter thing. Simply put, they can't stand the fact that President Obama is something ex-President Bush NEVER was, an inspirational and effective orator of the highest order, and they are desperate to "prove" it is somehow, in some way, some kind of a sham of some sort. They are also horribly upset by the fact that President Obama is a very smart guy while ex-President Bush is a complete dummy, and they want to paint President Obama as nothing more than Bush II with better speaking skills (which he is OBVIOUSLY not, but they sure do wish it were so and they imply just that every chance they get).
