Bush Booed at photo-op

[Donutboy 0]

Bush booed as he lays wreath at King's grave

January 16, 2004

BY DEB RIECHMANN 

ATLANTA -- Looking for election-year support from black voters in the South, President Bush was greeted at Martin Luther King's grave here Thursday by noisy demonstrators who chanted ''Go home, Bush!'' after receiving a warmer reception at a run-down church in New Orleans.

As Bush placed a wreath on King's crypt, a low chorus of boos could be heard from across the street where an estimated 700 to 800 protesters beat drums and waved signs bearing slogans such as ''War is not the answer'' and ''It's not a photo-op, George.''

Bush's four-stop swing through Georgia and Louisiana allowed him to court two important constituencies -- religious conservatives, who make up his base of support, and black voters, only 9 percent of whom supported him in 2000. Events in both states were paired with fund-raisers, which raised $2.3 million for his campaign account, already brimming with more than $130 million.

The president, standing silently, his head slightly bowed, appeared unfazed by the protesters at King's tomb, where he laid a wreath to mark what would have been the civil rights leader's 75th birthday.

King Center officials said they extended no formal invitation but accepted Bush's offer to come.

The president's critics dismissed his visit to the grave as a symbolic gesture that only underscored shortcomings in the administration's relationship with blacks.

In Washington, Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, said not one policy decision made by the Bush administration has mirrored King's dream. AP

[Tiger Al 0]

This is another example of Dubya exploiting tragedy for his own political gain. First, he was not invited to the memorial but instead INVITED HIMSELF and then had the gall to try to get the participants to rearrange the schedule and end their PLANNED events sooner than they had PLANNED which would've knocked some of the speakers off the itenerary. Second, this is the FIRST and ONLY memorial for MLK that Bush has attended since being in office. He's never seen fit to go there until an election year. Then, his handlers have the Atlanta city police park five busses between him and the hundreds of protesters who showed up to 'welcome' him. What a pig.

[TitanTiger 20,708]

This was already mentioned last week when it happened. Seems to be a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario to me. If he doesn't come, he doesn't respect King's legacy and what he accomplished. If he does come, he's disrupting someone else's plans for the memorial and he gets booed. Hypocrites.

Funny thing is, in every high level meeting, Bush looks across the table at two black people that he appointed...the highest ranking African Americans ever in the history of this country. But Clinton, the first "black president", gave 'em some lip service and said the right things about affirmative action, and he's their darling.

Logic escapes some.

[Tiger Al 0]

Here's a short video from the event. The fraud

[Donutboy 0]

This was already mentioned last week when it happened.  Seems to be a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario to me.  If he doesn't come, he doesn't respect King's legacy and what he accomplished.  If he does come, he's disrupting someone else's plans for the memorial and he gets booed.  Hypocrites.

Funny thing is, in every high level meeting, Bush looks across the table at two black people that he appointed...the highest ranking African Americans ever in the history of this country.  But Clinton, the first "black president", gave 'em some lip service and said the right things about affirmative action, and he's their darling.

Logic escapes some.

No TT. I tell you what true hypocrisy is. This Bush administration not only doesn't try to preserve King's dream but has undermined it at every venture, re: Bush's questioning Michigan's hiring practices. He then waits until an election year, after not attending in his first two years in office, to lay a wreath on King's grave. This was nothing but pure politics and, fortunately, the people targeted for this photo-op saw right through the hypocrisy. I'm surprised he didn't show up with a "DREAM accomplished" banner draped on one of the buses that were there to try and control the crowd.

[TitanTiger 20,708]

No TT. I tell you what true hypocrisy is. This Bush administration not only doesn't try to preserve King's dream but has undermined it at every venture, re: Bush's questioning Michigan's hiring practices. He then waits until an election year, after not attending in his first two years in office, to lay a wreath on King's grave. This was nothing but pure politics and, fortunately, the people targeted for this photo-op saw right through the hypocrisy. I'm surprised he didn't show up with a "DREAM accomplished" banner draped on one of the buses that were there to try and control the crowd.

Actually, King's dream and what the libs have twisted it into are two vastly different things. King, following the legacy of Frederick Douglas, simply wanted the law to stop hindering blacks from being able to pursue their dreams equally. Dr. King never advocated hiring quotas, or quotas to get into law schools, or anything of the sort. He would be proud of the accomplishments of Dr. Rice and Colin Powell and the person who saw their qualifications for the jobs and gave them an opportunity to serve.

As far as Bush visiting Dr. King's grave...as I said, if he didn't go, they would have railed at how he was insensitive to the importance of Dr. King to the black community. There is no winning with the radical fringe. They'll soak up all the lip service the Dems toss their way, but blatantly ignore or even openly disdain any effort made by those who don't fit their ideological paradigm. THAT is true hypocrisy...though I hardly expect you to understand that.

[Tiger Al 0]

I don't remember hearing any railing the last two years he avoided it. I think the railing this year is the timing. No election, no visit. Just like before.

[Donutboy 0]

No TT. I tell you what true hypocrisy is. This Bush administration not only doesn't try to preserve King's dream but has undermined it at every venture, re: Bush's questioning Michigan's hiring practices. He then waits until an election year, after not attending in his first two years in office, to lay a wreath on King's grave. This was nothing but pure politics and, fortunately, the people targeted for this photo-op saw right through the hypocrisy. I'm surprised he didn't show up with a "DREAM accomplished" banner draped on one of the buses that were there to try and control the crowd.

Actually, King's dream and what the libs have twisted it into are two vastly different things. King, following the legacy of Frederick Douglas, simply wanted the law to stop hindering blacks from being able to pursue their dreams equally. Dr. King never advocated hiring quotas, or quotas to get into law schools, or anything of the sort. He would be proud of the accomplishments of Dr. Rice and Colin Powell and the person who saw their qualifications for the jobs and gave them an opportunity to serve.

As far as Bush visiting Dr. King's grave...as I said, if he didn't go, they would have railed at how he was insensitive to the importance of Dr. King to the black community. There is no winning with the radical fringe. They'll soak up all the lip service the Dems toss their way, but blatantly ignore or even openly disdain any effort made by those who don't fit their ideological paradigm. THAT is true hypocrisy...though I hardly expect you to understand that.

TT, one simple question!! If it isn't a photo-op, why wait until an election year to make your first appearance? Why did he not care about honoring King in January 2001 as president select? Why not honor him in 2001? Why not honoe him in 2002? Why not honor him in 2003? It's hard to gain sympathy for you theory that he can't win when he makes it so easy by ignoring King until an election year.

[Tigermike 3,425]

TT, one simple question!! If it isn't a photo-op, why wait until an election year to make your first appearance? Why did he not care about honoring King in January 2001 as president select? Why not honor him in 2001? Why not honoe him in 2002? Why not honor him in 2003? It's hard to gain sympathy for you theory that he can't win when he makes it so easy by ignoring King until an election year.

And it's easy to overlook 99%of your ranting because it's always the same BS. One thing you dems should be familiar with is photo-ops. Remember Slick Willie on the beach at Normandy? Remember that God of the democrats straightening the flag in the cemetery?

[TitanTiger 20,708]

Could it possibly be because this is MLK's 75th birthday? Generally speaking, bigger deals are made of 25th, 50th, 75th, and 100ths of anything, whether it be a birthday, an anniversary, etc.

Nah, couldn't be...because that wouldn't fulfill your daily mindless rant quota.

[Tigermike 3,425]

Nah, couldn't be...because that wouldn't fulfill your daily mindless rant quota.

Once again TT you have hit the mark squarely!

[Tiger Al 0]

But Clinton, the first "black president", gave 'em some lip service and said the right things about affirmative action, and he's their darling.

Oddly enough, TT, Clinton established MLK Day as a paid federal holiday in 1994.

[War Eagle 96 10]

I'm sure GWB is worried about the backlash among black voters.

See, unlike modern-day democrats he doesn't do things like that JUST for votes (i.e. Hillary goes to Iraq to congratulate the military, even while SHE IS ON THE RECORD as "loathing" those in our nation's uniform.

See, clear-thinking people know that blacks in the U.S. vote (the overwhelming majority of them) for the Democrats, even though they are a party of racists. See the American Democrat (not Democratic) philosophy on minorities is,"you're black, you're not as good as white people. You need the government to take money and opportunity from those who have earned it and give it to you, because you can't do it yourself."

Sickening.

[Donutboy 0]

TT, one simple question!! If it isn't a photo-op, why wait until an election year to make your first appearance? Why did he not care about honoring King in January 2001 as president select? Why not honor him in 2001? Why not honoe him in 2002? Why not honor him in 2003? It's hard to gain sympathy for you theory that he can't win when he makes it so easy by ignoring King until an election year.

And it's easy to overlook 99%of your ranting because it's always the same BS. One thing you dems should be familiar with is photo-ops. Remember Slick Willie on the beach at Normandy? Remember that God of the democrats straightening the flag in the cemetery?

TT, is Clinton "a draft dodger" any worse straightening a flag at a military cemetary than Bush, "a deserter"? Remember all of the conservatives denouncing "photo-op Willie", the same ones who are now showing disdain for our use of the term concerning Bush? Any hypocrisy there TT?

[Donutboy 0]

I'm sure GWB is worried about the backlash among black voters.

See, unlike modern-day democrats he doesn't do things like that JUST for votes (i.e. Hillary goes to Iraq to congratulate the military, even while SHE IS ON THE RECORD as "loathing" those in our nation's uniform.

See, clear-thinking people know that blacks in the U.S. vote (the overwhelming majority of them) for the Democrats, even though they are a party of racists. See the American Democrat (not Democratic) philosophy on minorities is,"you're black, you're not as good as white people. You need the government to take money and opportunity from those who have earned it and give it to you, because you can't do it yourself."

Sickening.

WE96, do you know what affirmative action is? It has nothing to do with blacks being given money for doing nothing. It's about blacks who want the same rights as whites to secure a job.... you know. WORK!!

[TitanTiger 20,708]

TT, is Clinton "a draft dodger" any worse straightening a flag at a military cemetary than Bush, "a deserter"? Remember all of the conservatives denouncing "photo-op Willie", the same ones who are now showing disdain for our use of the term concerning Bush? Any hypocrisy there TT?

Two things...the comments you're quoting were from Tigermike.

That said, I'll address it anyway. It has been shown, time and again, that this bullcrap about Bush being a deserter is just that. Repeating it over and over doesn't make it anymore true than the first time you spewed it.

[TitanTiger 20,708]

I think Jenny addressed this best:

http://www.aunation.net/forums/index.php?s...t=0entry38717

[MDM4AU 337]

WE96, do you know what affirmative action is... It's about blacks who want the same rights as whites to secure a job.... you know. WORK!!

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.

[rexbo 104]

WE96, do you know what affirmative action is? It has nothing to do with blacks being given money for doing nothing. It's about blacks who want the same rights as whites to secure a job.... you know. WORK!!

You said 'same rights', did you mean 'equal rights'? Affirmative action does not mean equal, it means special, and does as much to harm the long term race relations in this country than discrimination did 30 years ago. Reverse discrimination does not solve discrimination. We will never solve our racial problems until all races feel that they are not being discriminated against. Two wrongs do not make a right. There, that is all the anti affirmitave action cliches I know...

[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.

[MDM4AU 337]

And from that same thread, another important statement that still holds true and so greatly compliments Jenny's post:

Donut has a hard time grasping facts. He's much more comfortable dealing with the irrational and repetitive rantings of rabid left-wing lunatics and Bush haters. You're not giving him a fighting chance. Please try to be more considerate by confining your arguments to those of an unreasonable and uninformed nature.

[Tiger Al 0]

You said 'same rights', did you mean 'equal rights'? Affirmative action does not mean equal, it means special, and does as much to harm the long term race relations in this country than discrimination did 30 years ago. Reverse discrimination does not solve discrimination. We will never solve our racial problems until all races feel that they are not being discriminated against. Two wrongs do not make a right. There, that is all the anti affirmitave action cliches I know...

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

[Donutboy 0]

TT, is Clinton "a draft dodger" any worse straightening a flag at a military cemetary than Bush, "a deserter"? Remember all of the conservatives denouncing "photo-op Willie", the same ones who are now showing disdain for our use of the term concerning Bush? Any hypocrisy there TT?

Two things...the comments you're quoting were from Tigermike.

That said, I'll address it anyway. It has been shown, time and again, that this bullcrap about Bush being a deserter is just that. Repeating it over and over doesn't make it anymore true than the first time you spewed it.

Why did Dubya REFUSE to release his military records during the 2000 elections? He tries to portray someone proud of his military record today. He can still release it and stop all of the criticism of his purported desertion..... or can he?

Follow the link below and get his records, as released by the Freedom Of Information Act!!

http://www.awolbush.com/

Even though this is an anti-Bush site, it DOES provide government documents obtained through the FOIA.

Suspended from flying August 1972...

Annual Officer Effectiveness Report, 5/2/73: "Not Observed" from May 1, 1972 to April 30, 1973...

In June of 1973, Air Force HQ asks for more information...

...and in November, Major Rufus Martin tells them he has none to give.

Here are the rest of the documents!!

[MDM4AU 337]

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!

[War Eagle 96 10]

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.