Obama's Classy White House guests

[Expat]

I actually did some research into this event, apparently there were scores of people, and they had a fairly decent run of a small portion of the White House, unsupervised. He's the video, where the people who committed the tasteless acts can be seen:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaQ-e-It0kM&feature=player_embedded#!

I not seeing how this is pinned on Barry.

You can tell from that video that they were unsupervised?

I doubt any civilians are ever unsupervised in the WH.

 

[Hotdoger]

You caught me, I'm Barack Obama himself.

I'm just getting sick and tired of those who see EVERYTHING through their red colored (republican) or blue colored (democrat) glasses. Especially those who refuse to admit or don't believe they are wearing them. We all wear them at times but why can't we ever take them off and look at something objectively?

Take this thread I started. https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...romney_has_been_to_all_57_states_as_well.html

I posted it as a joke and I got hammered for it. In no way is misspelling America on par with classless idiots posing with presidential paintings in the white house and posting them online but look at how everyone here reacted. The app gaff couldn't be Romney's fault. There's no way he could have known about it and he can't personally be involved with everything that happens under his name. Now that these pictures of the people flipping the camera emerge, Obama must have personally orchestrated the photo shoot, is good friends with the guys in the pics, he personally invited them, etc.

One day, Obama is a muslim and wants sharia law and the next, he's inviting homosexual advocates to the white house to disrespect it. One day, he's an empty suit, the next he's a master of destruction. Perjury is understandable in Zimmerman's case but it's worthy of throwing an entire nation into political upheaval when it's a democrat who lied about sex.

The reason things will never change politically is because seldom will you ever get more than 40% outraged about anything at any one time. When a politician does something wrong, those who back him will make excuses and those who oppose him cry foul and vice versa. If act A is wrong for your opponent, it's wrong for your guy too.

The problem I see is there is a difference. Like I have said before, I have Thomas, Roberts, Alito and the Rats have Ginsberg, Kagen and The wise Latina.
You see no difference and many conservatives like me do see a obvious difference.

 

[hornadylnl]

I actually did some research into this event, apparently there were scores of people, and they had a fairly decent run of a small portion of the White House, unsupervised. He's the video, where the people who committed the tasteless acts can be seen:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaQ-e-It0kM&feature=player_embedded#!

I not seeing how this is pinned on Barry.

You weren't wearing your red colored glasses?

 

[Phil502]

What colored glasses do you have to wear to blame aids on Reagan?

 

[hornadylnl]

What colored glasses do you have to wear to blame aids on Reagan?

Blue

Both sides do it. They ignore their sides faults while carping about the others. Why don't we all focus on all of the faults and try to fix them vs a small vocal minority who can't speak loud enough to effect change?

 

[Kutnupe14]

You can tell from that video that they were unsupervised?

I doubt any civilians are ever unsupervised in the WH.

"Unsupervised" as far as hand-holding guests. I have no doubt the there was somebody there, but not someone eagle-eying the obviously large crowd in such a way that a moment in time (ie a tasteless photograph) couldnt be taken without them noticing.

 

[melensdad]

People really need to learn their history lessons when they are in school.

This week President Obama had some gay rights wack jobs at the White House and some radical feminist lesbians decided to make out in front of the portrait of Ronald Reagan while giving him the one finger salute.

Do they not know that Ronald Reagan was given credit for opposing Anita Bryant and her crusade to eliminate individual gay liberties? Do they not know that California's Prop 6, which would have made it illegal to be a teacher and be gay, or even to support gay rights, was defeated because Ronald Reagan came out against it publically shortly before he started his bid to run for President of the USA?

LINKY TO THE FACTS that these stupid people don't know => The American Spectator : Reagan and Milk

 

[churchmouse]

Blue

Both sides do it. They ignore their sides faults while carping about the others. Why don't we all focus on all of the faults and try to fix them vs a small vocal minority who can't speak loud enough to effect change?

Have to agree with this statement.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Blue

Both sides do it. They ignore their sides faults while carping about the others. Why don't we all focus on all of the faults and try to fix them vs a small vocal minority who can't speak loud enough to effect change?

If and when Mitt Romney or Gary Johnson or whomever the next guy is has invited guests in the white house desecrating that symbol of our country in this or similar manner(s), I can say now I believe it will reflect poorly on the office of the president (whomever it may be past or present).

Boorish, crude behavior is everywhere and is excused by everybody whether they're wearing blue, red, or rainbow colored glasses. I think it's a sad state of affairs, personally.

 

[Kutnupe14]

If and when Mitt Romney or Gary Johnson or whomever the next guy is has invited guests in the white house desecrating that symbol of our country in this or similar manner(s), I can say now I believe it will reflect poorly on the office of the president (whomever it may be past or present).

Boorish, crude behavior is everywhere and is excused by everybody whether they're wearing blue, red, or rainbow colored glasses. I think it's a sad state of affairs, personally.

Perhaps, I'm missing something. How does this reflect poorly on the presidency. A group of people were invited to the White House. I'm sure names were submitted, and the people were checked out by the secret service. In absence of a criminal history, how exactly is it going to be known if someone has poor manners?

Groups of people are routinely invited to the White House, this isn't exactly a uncommon thing. What I want to know is HOW in your opinion this could have been avoided?

 

[strahd71]

Perhaps, I'm missing something. How does this reflect poorly on the presidency. A group of people were invited to the White House. I'm sure names were submitted, and the people were checked out by the secret service. In absence of a criminal history, how exactly is it going to be known if someone has poor manners?

Groups of people are routinely invited to the White House, this isn't exactly a uncommon thing. What I want to know is HOW in your opinion this could have been avoided?

buy not inviting militant homosexuals?

jake

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Perhaps, I'm missing something. How does this reflect poorly on the presidency. A group of people were invited to the White House. I'm sure names were submitted, and the people were checked out by the secret service. In absence of a criminal history, how exactly is it going to be known if someone has poor manners?

Groups of people are routinely invited to the White House, this isn't exactly a uncommon thing. What I want to know is HOW in your opinion this could have been avoided?

Perhaps I'm the one missing something. I guess poor behavior is in the eye of the beholder. If you see people you invited into your house behaving a certain manner, you either find it in poor taste or not or some degree in between. This happened in my house, the house of my country's president, I found it to be in poor taste, therefore it reflects poorly on the office.

As I said earlier, it's not like somebody was filming oral sex acts with employees or committing murder--it's not that big of a deal. It is what it is. I see it in one light and others seem to be ok with it.

 

[strahd71]

Perhaps I'm the one missing something. I guess poor behavior is in the eye of the beholder. If you see people you invited into your house behaving a certain manner, you either find it in poor taste or not or some degree in between. This happened in my house, the house of my country's president, I found it to be in poor taste, therefore it reflects poorly on the office.

As I said earlier, it's not like somebody was filming oral sex acts with employees or committing murder--it's not that big of a deal. It is what it is. I see it in one light and others seem to be ok with it.

i'll even go so far as to admit the administration has spoken against the pictures and behavior. my issue is obama has a history of surrounding himself with people who hate america and are disrespectful to it.

jake

 

[Hookeye]

Certain people/groups claim they want to be treated like others/normal, and when given the opportunity to prove it, they fail.

Fail...........not out or error, but out of revealing the truth.

 

[strahd71]

Certain people/groups claim they want to be treated like others/normal, and when given the opportunity to prove it, they fail.

Fail...........not out or error, but out of revealing the truth.

it certainly didnt do anything for their agenda.......... just showed them not to be legitimate

jake

 

[Hookeye]

They can't even pretend to have class.

 

[strahd71]

They can't even pretend to have class.

not even for an evening, but yet they cry for equality?

jake

 

[Hookeye]

not even for an evening, but yet they cry for equality?

jake

EXACTLY!

But wait.........they're "special" (insert whatever person or group that misbehaves)..............they can act however they want and you're supposed to accept it. Not doing so means you've got issues, not them.

 

[TheRude1]

In this case this is no big deal !

Now if it was a group from the Teaparty flipping off Carter or some other dipstick dem, NOW THAT would be offensive,disraspectful and possibly a hate crime ?

But here ? Naaaaa

 

[Expat]

"Unsupervised" as far as hand-holding guests. I have no doubt the there was somebody there, but not someone eagle-eying the obviously large crowd in such a way that a moment in time (ie a tasteless photograph) couldnt be taken without them noticing.

They were lining up for the photo op it sounded like to me. They had 3 or 4 pictures in the story of the people flipping off the portrait. Want to bet there were more than that?