Posted on 05/11/2011 12:08:03 PM PDT by Nachum
Shoutouts at presidential speeches are nothing new in politics, but which ones should be included in the official White House transcripts? Conn Carroll, senior editorial writer at the Washington Examiner, points out that the White House transcript of President Barack Obamas immigration speech in El Paso, Texas, includes this text: AUDIENCE MEMBER: Theyre racist! (Snip) Normally, outbursts are only included in transcripts if the president responds to the remark
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
Oh the media says this because Herman said he would not have any Muslims? I thought being a Muslim is a faith and not a race?
That wasn’t the reason, from what I read.
The reason was that he was “acting Tea Party” and criticizing 0bama, and therefore he was “a racist with a black face”.
Cain said he would not appoint Muslims to his Cabinet if elected. Like I said before being a Muslim is about faith and not a race. Of course the rats know this, but still want to play the race card because they need to push a lie.
I guess they are calling him racist for anything he does that does not worship Obama?
You and I are not arguing, but we’re talking about separate things.
Yes, you saw that he said he wouldn’t appoint Muslims in his cabinet.
Yes, I saw that he was being called a “racist with a black face” for criticizing 0bama.
No, the two are not related.
I can find the thread that I’m talking about if you want a reference.
Just another example of the fact that they really can’t honestly defend their ideology, their policies, or those that attempt to implement them.
Im thinking that many on the Left dont even know what racist means. I think they think it means, Person who is bad because they disagree with you.
I expect them to start overusing the word inconceivable
What you describe is textbook alinsky. In this case, I wouldn't be surprised if candidate moonbeam sent an advance team to coach supporters, or even spot staff in the crowd to spew this at the planned time. As a matter of fact, I'd wager it was scripted.
To your point, for maximum effect, the "group" needs to be scattered throughout the crowd. When one makes a comment the others shout in agreement or add some supporting applause. To an uniformed observer this looks like a group consensus. Theres also a good chance the speaker gets knocked off track and makes either verbal or emotional mistakes that plant doubt in the rest of the crowd.
Ping!
I’d expect that was something scrolling past on the teleprompter...
The immigration debate is the Democrat FALLBACK position when the Republicans start to advance on other FISCAL REFORMS. Expect this and other similar SOCIAL issues to take center stage from now until next summer. Fiscal issues will NOT be discussed by this Administration or the Democrat-led Senate.
You are right. What was I thinking?
Tacky,unprofessional, partisan hacks that are not only race baiters but also incite class warfare while Obama himself aids the wealthiest and excepts his union thug buds from ObamaCare.
The Mugabe option, I’m just sure our creditors just love Obama and his team.
I could give a flip what the ‘rats do and say. We must not allow their childish rants interfere with adults doing what we need to do. Put them on IGNORE - they want to distract, so don’t let them distract.
You think Herman Cain would get treated any better than Clarence Thomas was?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.