Bush Booed at photo-op

[CarolinaTiger 0]

w.r.t. bush doing the MLK thing because it's an election year photo-op:

bush gets bashed because he does it "only because it's an election year".

does that mean that his detractors would NOT have bashed him if he hadn't done the event -- actually passing up an opportunity to bash him during an election year? doesn't seem likely, does it?

"GWB hasn't attended a MLK event in 3 years running..."

yep...i think TT is right...he was gonna get bashed either way.

[Tiger Al 0]

w.r.t. bush doing the MLK thing because it's an election year photo-op:

bush gets bashed because he does it "only because it's an election year".

does that mean that his detractors would NOT have bashed him if he hadn't done the event -- actually passing up an opportunity to bash him during an election year? doesn't seem likely, does it?

"GWB hasn't attended a MLK event in 3 years running..."

yep...i think TT is right...he was gonna get bashed either way.

Has he gotten bashed the prior years???

[TitanTiger 21,064]

I've seen those documents and aside from people going back and forth asking for ratings, they don't prove your assertion that he deserted or was AWOL. He was suspended from flying for failure to have an annual medical exam. Big deal. He was "not observed" at his unit in Texas because a "civilian occupation made it necessary for him to move to Montgomery, Alabama" where he "...performed equivalent training in a non-flying status..." Again, big deal.

I could go on, but it's pointless.

[Tiger Al 0]

You have got to be kidding me! 

Affirmative action was good in theory but doesn't give anyone rights to SECURE a job.  In theory, it would allow a minority worker (that is equally qualified to hold a job as a white person) get an equal chance at the job.  It set quotas to help close the gap between the whites and minorities, mainly white men and everyone else.  It has since become a tool of certain special interest groups to change the guidelines for certain minorities to make it easier for them.  And quotas are now just a nicer way to say discrimination in most cases.  In some instances, the quotas have actually hurt equally or even more qualified people that didn't fall into the "minority" category.

Your idea of Afirmative Action and the truth of the matter in 2004 are quite different.  You still in some way think it is like the theory.  You are sadly mistaken.

And you have a problem with affirmative action and quotas now because blacks are no longer discriminated against, right? After all, it's been 40 years since the Civil Rights Act was signed and therefore, by law, blacks are no longer discriminated against.

You are pathetic! I never said that blacks were not dicriminated against today? You are totally overlooking the way donut decided to portray Afirmative Action to attack me because I am a conservative.

Afirmative Action in it's purest form is great! To help MINORITIES get an equal shot! Afirmative Action was never meant to discriminate against the majority. What I was saying is that it has been manipulated in many ways now that it has gotten away from what it was intended to do and become a tool for special interest groups even in places where it was no longer needed. But at the risk of being called a racist or cheauvinist, etc. many times it hangs around.

Nice try with the attempted incinuation that I am a racist, though. I wouldn't expect anything less from libs like you since my opinion doesn't fit nice and neatly with yours!

Sorry, I wasn't implying any such thing. Just trying to clarify your position. Being opposed to AA doesn't equate to being a racist by default. Unfortunately, you don't know me as well as you've assumed you did.

[TitanTiger 21,064]

w.r.t. bush doing the MLK thing because it's an election year photo-op:

bush gets bashed because he does it "only because it's an election year".

does that mean that his detractors would NOT have bashed him if he hadn't done the event -- actually passing up an opportunity to bash him during an election year?  doesn't seem likely, does it?

"GWB hasn't attended a MLK event in 3 years running..."

yep...i think TT is right...he was gonna get bashed either way.

Has he gotten bashed the prior years???

Have the prior years been a 75th anniversary? Do you honestly think a milestone like this would pass without the President attending some kind of formal ceremony and there not be bashing over it?

[CarolinaTiger 0]

w.r.t. bush doing the MLK thing because it's an election year photo-op:

bush gets bashed because he does it "only because it's an election year".

does that mean that his detractors would NOT have bashed him if he hadn't done the event -- actually passing up an opportunity to bash him during an election year?  doesn't seem likely, does it?

"GWB hasn't attended a MLK event in 3 years running..."

yep...i think TT is right...he was gonna get bashed either way.

Has he gotten bashed the prior years???

per what i've read here, no...i have no idea, but my point is, given it's an election year, i'm sure this opportunity to bash him would not have gone unnoticed....

[Donutboy 0]

It's about blacks who want the same rights as whites to secure a job.... you know. WORK!!

No it's not. It's about giving a person a job based on their race, because you don't think they're qualified otherwise. You know...RACISM. You don't believe they can do it on their own...the government has to help them.

Democrats want to do everything they can to further this philosophy, because it creates the opposite of what is right for this country "individual responsibility." The democrat party wants to grow the class of dependants so they can stay in power. Right know were beating that philosphy and hanging on by a thread. It won't last long because people like you have kids and educators have the same philosophy as you. I'm afraid your ideals will win in the end, and that's what it will be "the end."

Hopefully, I'll be dead by then.

WE96, I grew up in the 50s and 60s. I witnessed what you're opining on. Blacks COULDN'T compete with whites for jobs, but it wasn't because they were unable to compete fairly. Blacks were considered a second-class citizen by MANY, if not most, whites in those now glorified days. Blacks not being able to compete for jobs had NOTHING to do with ability and EVERYTHING to do with discrimination. If a white person and a black person were equally qualified, or even if the black were more qualified, the white person invariably was given the job. Just as Bush wants to keep the illegal aliens for the menial jobs today, blacks were considered mostly for the menial jobs in the 50s and 60s. Affirmative action held companies accountable for their hiring practices, providing blacks "equal opportunity" with whites.

[Donutboy 0]

w.r.t. bush doing the MLK thing because it's an election year photo-op:

bush gets bashed because he does it "only because it's an election year".

does that mean that his detractors would NOT have bashed him if he hadn't done the event -- actually passing up an opportunity to bash him during an election year?  doesn't seem likely, does it?

"GWB hasn't attended a MLK event in 3 years running..."

yep...i think TT is right...he was gonna get bashed either way.

Has he gotten bashed the prior years???

per what i've read here, no...i have no idea, but my point is, given it's an election year, i'm sure this opportunity to bash him would not have gone unnoticed....

PERHAPS if he had visited the MLK grave in non-election years, he MIGHT have ben given the benefit of the doubt when visiting this year!!

[MDM4AU 337]

Being opposed to AA doesn't equate to being a racist by default.

You sure tried to equate it rather passive agressively here:

And you have a problem with affirmative action and quotas now because blacks are no longer discriminated against, right? After all, it's been 40 years since the Civil Rights Act was signed and therefore, by law, blacks are no longer discriminated against.

And the sad part is that I never once mentioned Black people in my post...

Unfortunately, you don't know me as well as you've assumed you did.

...so I hope you will forgive me for my assumption about you.

[Tiger Al 0]

It's about blacks who want the same rights as whites to secure a job.... you know. WORK!!

No it's not. It's about giving a person a job based on their race, because you don't think they're qualified otherwise. You know...RACISM. You don't believe they can do it on their own...the government has to help them.

Democrats want to do everything they can to further this philosophy, because it creates the opposite of what is right for this country "individual responsibility." The democrat party wants to grow the class of dependants so they can stay in power. Right know were beating that philosphy and hanging on by a thread. It won't last long because people like you have kids and educators have the same philosophy as you. I'm afraid your ideals will win in the end, and that's what it will be "the end."

Hopefully, I'll be dead by then.

So, you're insulted because a law was created 40 years ago to undo the 400 years worth of laws that came before it? Do you think that the Jim Crow laws were fair to blacks? How about the slave codes? Poll taxes? The 3/5 rule?

WE96, black people were oppressed in this country, BY LAW, for 400 years. How do you think that the mindset that perpetuated that to occur could've been changed any other way? How can you honestly believe that the mindset that was the norm for 400 years was abolished 40 years ago and no longer exists, to a lesser extent, yes, but still very much alive?

[War Eagle 96 10]

Well there's an interseting slant. Whites are being discriminated against by the law.

Not a slant, nor is it new.

[Donutboy 0]

It's about blacks who want the same rights as whites to secure a job.... you know. WORK!!

No it's not. It's about giving a person a job based on their race, because you don't think they're qualified otherwise. You know...RACISM. You don't believe they can do it on their own...the government has to help them.

Democrats want to do everything they can to further this philosophy, because it creates the opposite of what is right for this country "individual responsibility." The democrat party wants to grow the class of dependants so they can stay in power. Right know were beating that philosphy and hanging on by a thread. It won't last long because people like you have kids and educators have the same philosophy as you. I'm afraid your ideals will win in the end, and that's what it will be "the end."

Hopefully, I'll be dead by then.

So, you're insulted because a law was created 40 years ago to undo the 400 years worth of laws that came before it? Do you think that the Jim Crow laws were fair to blacks? How about the slave codes? Poll taxes? The 3/5 rule?

WE96, black people were oppressed in this country, BY LAW, for 400 years. How do you think that the mindset that perpetuated that to occur could've been changed any other way? How can you honestly believe that the mindset that was the norm for 400 years was abolished 40 years ago and no longer exists, to a lesser extent, yes, but still very much alive?

TA, I guess you had to have been there. Most of the younger people on this forum never witnessed the blatant discrimination against blacks in this country. What little they purport to know about the situation comes from second-hand conservative views of the era that started Affirmative Action. No one today could fathom a business with signs stating for blacks to go elsewhere. It was prevalent in the 50s and early 60s. Of course, they don't show that on "That 60s Show" or "Happy Days". In Athens, my childhood hometown, there were seperate restroms for blacks and whites. I can still remember the signs on the doors. Discrimination, though still existant today, is NOTHING like what it was before Affirmatice Action. Affirmative Action has been successful but the discrimination that was the reason for it is not gone. Unemployment is double for blacks than it is for whites today.

[War Eagle 96 10]

WE96, black people were oppressed in this country, BY LAW, for 400 years. How do you think that the mindset that perpetuated that to occur could've been changed any other way? How can you honestly believe that the mindset that was the norm for 400 years was abolished 40 years ago and no longer exists, to a lesser extent, yes, but still very much alive?

All I know is that I employ 4 people 2 black, 1 white and 1 white that's 65 yrs.-old. I don't operate my business, or my life based on what happened to people good or bad 40 years ago.

It's about performance...if you can do it better than someone else for a competitive or lower wage I don't care who you are or what you look like.

[MDM4AU 337]

Side Note:

What the heck is "That 60's show?" I realize I don't watch a lot of TV but is that actually a show?

[Donutboy 0]

Side Note:

What the heck is "That 60's show?"  I realize I don't watch a lot of TV but is that actually a show?

OOPS!! My bad. I was thinking of "that 70s Show." :redface: You'll have to forgive my slip. I watch very little nighttime network TV.

[Tigermike 3,657]

TA, I guess you had to have been there. Most of the younger people on this forum never witnessed the blatant discrimination against blacks in this country. What little they purport to know about the situation comes from second-hand conservative views of the era that started Affirmative Action. No one today could fathom a business with signs stating for blacks to go elsewhere. It was prevalent in the 50s and early 60s. Of course, they don't show that on "That 60s Show" or "Happy Days". In Athens, my childhood hometown, there were seperate restroms for blacks and whites. I can still remember the signs on the doors. Discrimination, though still existant today, is NOTHING like what it was before Affirmatice Action. Affirmative Action has been successful but the discrimination that was the reason for it is not gone. Unemployment is double for blacks than it is for whites today.

But you being a good democrat know and feel so much more than everyone else. That has been the spin from the left for years and will probably never stop.

[Donutboy 0]

TA, I guess you had to have been there. Most of the younger people on this forum never witnessed the blatant discrimination against blacks in this country. What little they purport to know about the situation comes from second-hand conservative views of the era that started Affirmative Action. No one today could fathom a business with signs stating for blacks to go elsewhere. It was prevalent in the 50s and early 60s. Of course, they don't show that on "That 60s Show" or "Happy Days". In Athens, my childhood hometown, there were seperate restroms for blacks and whites. I can still remember the signs on the doors. Discrimination, though still existant today, is NOTHING like what it was before Affirmatice Action. Affirmative Action has been successful but the discrimination that was the reason for it is not gone. Unemployment is double for blacks than it is for whites today.

But you being a good democrat know and feel so much more than everyone else. That has been the spin from the left for years and will probably never stop.

I've never stated as much. My contention is that Affirmative Action was needed. I never meant to demean anyone else's position as based on racism or anything else. My contention is that unless you had witnessed it firsthand, you really would have a hard time understanding that there truely was a need for government action. If in doing so, I might have implied that anyone with a dissenting view was basing their opinion on racism, I apologize. That was NOT my intention.

[Tiger Al 0]

Side Note:

What the heck is "That 60's show?"  I realize I don't watch a lot of TV but is that actually a show?

OOPS!! My bad. I was thinking of "that 70s Show." :redface: You'll have to forgive my slip. I watch very little nighttime network TV.

Maybe you were thinking of American Dream.

[Jenny AU-92 0]

Just FYI, according to the King Center, NO President has ever been officially invited to lay a wreath on MLK Day, but every President since Reagan has done so.

Heard that on the radio, so no link.

[Donutboy 0]

Just FYI, according to the King Center, NO President has ever been officially invited to lay a wreath on MLK Day, but every President since Reagan has done so.

Heard that on the radio, so no link.

Rush Limbaugh's show? Just curious!!

[Tigermike 3,657]

My contention is that unless you had witnessed it firsthand, you really would have a hard time understanding that there truely was a need for government action.

I did see it first hand. In the 50's and 60's it was not popular to have black friends but I did have several. We went horseback riding almost every weekend.

I also watched and heard my Dad tell some redneck peckerwoods, "They (blacks) would be welcome in our restaurant!" When told that they (the redneck peckerwoods) would stop coming there, my Dad quickly told them "All you do is come in every morning and buy ONE cup of coffee then sit and talk for hours and drink FREE REFILLS! We will not miss your business!"

My contention is that unless you had witnessed it firsthand, you really would have a hard time understanding that there truely was a need for government action.

But if the government had not forced the issue, it may never have happened.

[TitanTiger 21,064]

Just FYI, according to the King Center, NO President has ever been officially invited to lay a wreath on MLK Day, but every President since Reagan has done so.

Heard that on the radio, so no link.

Rush Limbaugh's show? Just curious!!

Just curious, Donut...I have no idea where Jenny heard that, but if it's true, does it really matter whether it was from Rush or anyone else? Try addressing the content of what she said rather than throwing a red herring into the discussion.

[Jenny AU-92 0]

Just FYI, according to the King Center, NO President has ever been officially invited to lay a wreath on MLK Day, but every President since Reagan has done so.

Heard that on the radio, so no link.

Rush Limbaugh's show? Just curious!!

No, smartalek, CBS radio news.

[Donutboy 0]

Just FYI, according to the King Center, NO President has ever been officially invited to lay a wreath on MLK Day, but every President since Reagan has done so.

Heard that on the radio, so no link.

Rush Limbaugh's show? Just curious!!

No, smartalek, CBS radio news.

I love ya Jenny and wasn't trying to be a smart aleck. I had just assumed that it was something that Rush would say. Of course, he doesn't have to back up anything he says with facts. His listeners will swallow it like an Oxycontin. OOPS. Bad anology?

[Tiger Al 0]

His listeners will swallow it like an Oxycontin. OOPS. Bad anology?