That Rainbow Whitehouse Light Display Took How Many Days To Set Up?

[Political Junky]

That lighting system is most likely computerized, this is the 21st century.

 

[Pogo]

How is it "inappropriate"?

When the WH celebrates the concept of America for the Fourth of July in a few days, will that be "inappropriate"? After all, most of the world is not America. Won't that be "taking sides"?

The 4th of July is a celebration for the nation as a whole. Gay rights are a celebration for only one group that not all Americans agree with. Shouldn't the White House represent all the people all the time and not show favoritism toward one group? Isn't showing favoritism anti American? It's "We The People" not we the Gay, we the Religious,we the Democrats, we the Republicans,we the Tea Party, we the North,we the South.

I put this question out before and got no response, so here goes again ---

If this were 1964 and the Civil Rights Act had just been passed, would it be "inappropriate" for the White House to display, say, a white hand and a black hand coming together? Would that be an "in your face" to racists?

The White House( as in the actual building) isn't there to make political statements for or against anyone or anything period unless it involves the nation as a whole like the fourth of July and with red white and blue lights the colors of our nation as a whole. Government Buildings should be impartial.State flag,government flag that's it. If private citizens want to make such displays they have the freedom to do it.

Exactly. And that's why I point out the SCOTUS ruling is the final say, and it's OVER. That means it DOES involve the nation as a whole.

Get it now?

Again --- if this were still an issue on the table subject to sway either way and the WH put the lights up then, THAT would be taking sides. But it isn't -- that period is done now.

So what your saying is when Illegals make a victory in the USA we should light up the government buildings in the color of the I.E. Mexican flag? How about the KKK or the Nazi's? Should we do it then? Illegal Aliens got the right in the state of CT to apply for college tuition assistance, lets light up Hartford and the White House with red green and white or maybe yellow blue and red or any other combo of an Illegals flag because I believe the new law goes in effect today! Yea us...

Senate House OK Education Bills For Undocumented Students - Hartford Courant

Noooo, I'm not saying anything remotely like that, and that's quite the safari you went on to make that stretch.

I'm saying that pretending the insertion of half a dozen spotlight gels amounts to "taking sides" on a SCOTUS ruling that's already decided ---- is a dishonest argument.

That's IT.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

"Partisanship" no longer applies. It's the law of the land now. Done deal. Finito. The End. Waiter, check please. Ain't no "sides" left.

Just like Dred Scott.

And Dred Scott was dealt with via Constitutional Amendment.

But you say it's all set in stone now.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Another thread about GOP butthurt. Great

No, it's about Americans being insulted.

Speak for yourself, good people are not insulted by this.

Homonazis are not good people. People advocating fascist defacing of American landmarks are not good people. It's like swastika graffiti.

The same Right Wingers who display the Confederate Flag also display the Swastika.

That's a totally bigoted statement. You should fly a swastika. It would be appropriate.

 

[Pogo]

"Partisanship" no longer applies. It's the law of the land now. Done deal. Finito. The End. Waiter, check please. Ain't no "sides" left.

Just like Dred Scott.

And Dred Scott was dealt with via Constitutional Amendment.

But you say it's all set in stone now.

Aye, that it is. As I also said, if we don't agree with the SCOTUS, the remedy is Constitutional Amendment. Which is what we did after Dred Scott.

I'm pretty sure we didn't flock to message boards to whine about colored lights.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

"Partisanship" no longer applies. It's the law of the land now. Done deal. Finito. The End. Waiter, check please. Ain't no "sides" left.

Just like Dred Scott.

And Dred Scott was dealt with via Constitutional Amendment.

But you say it's all set in stone now.

Aye, that it is. As I also said, if we don't agree with the SCOTUS, the remedy is Constitutional Amendment. Which is what we did after Dred Scott.

I'm pretty sure we didn't flock to message boards to whine about colored lights.

Whine? That's inconsistent criticism. If it was a Westboro light show you'd have none of it and wouldn't consider it whining.

 

[HenryBHough]

That lighting at the (former) White House?

Took only a couple of hours.

Just had to remove the disused Christmas colours and substitute gay ones. Simple job of unscrewing and (apparently the fun part) screwing. Not just the lamps; the American people.

 

[Pogo]

"Partisanship" no longer applies. It's the law of the land now. Done deal. Finito. The End. Waiter, check please. Ain't no "sides" left.

Just like Dred Scott.

And Dred Scott was dealt with via Constitutional Amendment.

But you say it's all set in stone now.

Aye, that it is. As I also said, if we don't agree with the SCOTUS, the remedy is Constitutional Amendment. Which is what we did after Dred Scott.

I'm pretty sure we didn't flock to message boards to whine about colored lights.

Whine? That's inconsistent criticism. If it was a Westboro light show you'd have none of it and wouldn't consider it whining.

Yuh huh.
How exactly would the WBC set up a light show on the White House? Is the Secret Service that bad?

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Just like Dred Scott.

And Dred Scott was dealt with via Constitutional Amendment.

But you say it's all set in stone now.

Aye, that it is. As I also said, if we don't agree with the SCOTUS, the remedy is Constitutional Amendment. Which is what we did after Dred Scott.

I'm pretty sure we didn't flock to message boards to whine about colored lights.

Whine? That's inconsistent criticism. If it was a Westboro light show you'd have none of it and wouldn't consider it whining.

Yuh huh.
How exactly would the WBC set up a light show on the White House? Is the Secret Service that bad?

What if obama opposed the SC ruling and demonstrated his disapproval with a Westboro light show on the WH? Same damn thing.

 

[Pogo]

And Dred Scott was dealt with via Constitutional Amendment.

But you say it's all set in stone now.

Aye, that it is. As I also said, if we don't agree with the SCOTUS, the remedy is Constitutional Amendment. Which is what we did after Dred Scott.

I'm pretty sure we didn't flock to message boards to whine about colored lights.

Whine? That's inconsistent criticism. If it was a Westboro light show you'd have none of it and wouldn't consider it whining.

Yuh huh.
How exactly would the WBC set up a light show on the White House? Is the Secret Service that bad?

What if obama opposed the SC ruling and demonstrated his disapproval with a Westboro light show on the WH? Same damn thing.

BFD.

I wouldn't be running to a message board making dishonest arguments about it.

 

[mdk]

And Dred Scott was dealt with via Constitutional Amendment.

But you say it's all set in stone now.

Aye, that it is. As I also said, if we don't agree with the SCOTUS, the remedy is Constitutional Amendment. Which is what we did after Dred Scott.

I'm pretty sure we didn't flock to message boards to whine about colored lights.

Whine? That's inconsistent criticism. If it was a Westboro light show you'd have none of it and wouldn't consider it whining.

Yuh huh.
How exactly would the WBC set up a light show on the White House? Is the Secret Service that bad?

What if obama opposed the SC ruling and demonstrated his disapproval with a Westboro light show on the WH? Same damn thing.

Not hardly. You could fit the amount of people that support Westboro in conversion van. It would be insult to the vast and majority of Americans. Gay marriage however has large support across the country.

The endless whining about this is rather delightful to behold though.

 

[Ravi]

Once again -- the lights are already there. And once again, they're lit up every night; this was a simple matter of changing gels. And once again, even the lights themselves were donated by a lighting company in Iowa. So there is literally no expense. How much of your money was spent on this? I have your figure right here:

$0.00

Pay up.

Ok it was done for free, great because if it wasn't the Obama should get the bill. How about the inappropriateness of the gesture? +

How is it "inappropriate"?

When the WH celebrates the concept of America for the Fourth of July in a few days, will that be "inappropriate"? After all, most of the world is not America. Won't that be "taking sides"?

The 4th of July is a celebration for the nation as a whole. Gay rights are a celebration for only one group that not all Americans agree with. Shouldn't the White House represent all the people all the time and not show favoritism toward one group? Isn't showing favoritism anti American? It's "We The People" not we the Gay, we the Religious,we the Democrats, we the Republicans,we the Tea Party, we the North,we the South.

I put this question out before and got no response, so here goes again ---

If this were 1964 and the Civil Rights Act had just been passed, would it be "inappropriate" for the White House to display, say, a white hand and a black hand coming together? Would that be an "in your face" to racists?

The White House( as in the actual building) isn't there to make political statements for or against anyone or anything period unless it involves the nation as a whole like the fourth of July and with red white and blue lights the colors of our nation as a whole. Government Buildings should be impartial.State flag,government flag that's it. If private citizens want to make such displays they have the freedom to do it.

Civil rights aren't political. They are constitutional. There is nothing wrong with celebrating unconstitutional laws being overturned.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

But you say it's all set in stone now.

Aye, that it is. As I also said, if we don't agree with the SCOTUS, the remedy is Constitutional Amendment. Which is what we did after Dred Scott.

I'm pretty sure we didn't flock to message boards to whine about colored lights.

Whine? That's inconsistent criticism. If it was a Westboro light show you'd have none of it and wouldn't consider it whining.

Yuh huh.
How exactly would the WBC set up a light show on the White House? Is the Secret Service that bad?

What if obama opposed the SC ruling and demonstrated his disapproval with a Westboro light show on the WH? Same damn thing.

BFD.

Right. Now you're being dishonest.

 

[Pogo]

Aye, that it is. As I also said, if we don't agree with the SCOTUS, the remedy is Constitutional Amendment. Which is what we did after Dred Scott.

I'm pretty sure we didn't flock to message boards to whine about colored lights.

Whine? That's inconsistent criticism. If it was a Westboro light show you'd have none of it and wouldn't consider it whining.

Yuh huh.
How exactly would the WBC set up a light show on the White House? Is the Secret Service that bad?

What if obama opposed the SC ruling and demonstrated his disapproval with a Westboro light show on the WH? Same damn thing.

BFD.

Right. Now you're being dishonest.

Explain.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

But you say it's all set in stone now.

Aye, that it is. As I also said, if we don't agree with the SCOTUS, the remedy is Constitutional Amendment. Which is what we did after Dred Scott.

I'm pretty sure we didn't flock to message boards to whine about colored lights.

Whine? That's inconsistent criticism. If it was a Westboro light show you'd have none of it and wouldn't consider it whining.

Yuh huh.
How exactly would the WBC set up a light show on the White House? Is the Secret Service that bad?

What if obama opposed the SC ruling and demonstrated his disapproval with a Westboro light show on the WH? Same damn thing.

Not hardly. You could fit the amount of people that support Westboro in conversion van. It would be insult to the vast and majority of Americans. Gay marriage however has large support across the country.

The endless whining about this is rather delightful to behold though.

Homo marriage has a lot of opposition, too, and for good reason. Obama himself was against it as recently as the 2012 campaign.
Whining is what closeminded bigots call dissent.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Whine? That's inconsistent criticism. If it was a Westboro light show you'd have none of it and wouldn't consider it whining.

Yuh huh.
How exactly would the WBC set up a light show on the White House? Is the Secret Service that bad?

What if obama opposed the SC ruling and demonstrated his disapproval with a Westboro light show on the WH? Same damn thing.

BFD.

Right. Now you're being dishonest.

Explain.

Your alleged indifference.

 

[Pogo]

Aye, that it is. As I also said, if we don't agree with the SCOTUS, the remedy is Constitutional Amendment. Which is what we did after Dred Scott.

I'm pretty sure we didn't flock to message boards to whine about colored lights.

Whine? That's inconsistent criticism. If it was a Westboro light show you'd have none of it and wouldn't consider it whining.

Yuh huh.
How exactly would the WBC set up a light show on the White House? Is the Secret Service that bad?

What if obama opposed the SC ruling and demonstrated his disapproval with a Westboro light show on the WH? Same damn thing.

Not hardly. You could fit the amount of people that support Westboro in conversion van. It would be insult to the vast and majority of Americans. Gay marriage however has large support across the country.

The endless whining about this is rather delightful to behold though.

Homo marriage has a lot of opposition, too, and for good reason. Obama himself was against it as recently as the 2012 campaign.
Whining is what closeminded bigots call dissent.

So you call this thread about conspiracy theories where changing spotlight gels takes several days "dissent"?

Interesting.

I call it "whining". Albeit creative.

 

[Pogo]

Yuh huh.
How exactly would the WBC set up a light show on the White House? Is the Secret Service that bad?

What if obama opposed the SC ruling and demonstrated his disapproval with a Westboro light show on the WH? Same damn thing.

BFD.

Right. Now you're being dishonest.

Explain.

Your alleged indifference.

Excellent -- the good old Speculation Fallacy train, right on time.

Whoot whooot.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Whine? That's inconsistent criticism. If it was a Westboro light show you'd have none of it and wouldn't consider it whining.

Yuh huh.
How exactly would the WBC set up a light show on the White House? Is the Secret Service that bad?

What if obama opposed the SC ruling and demonstrated his disapproval with a Westboro light show on the WH? Same damn thing.

Not hardly. You could fit the amount of people that support Westboro in conversion van. It would be insult to the vast and majority of Americans. Gay marriage however has large support across the country.

The endless whining about this is rather delightful to behold though.

Homo marriage has a lot of opposition, too, and for good reason. Obama himself was against it as recently as the 2012 campaign.
Whining is what closeminded bigots call dissent.

So you call this thread about conspiracy theories where changing spotlight gels takes several days "dissent"?

Interesting.

I call it "whining". Albeit creative.

Now you're deflecting. The thread is more about the blatant in-your-face display by an obstinate, self-focused president. You selectively call it whining. I think your whining about what you call whining is more like whining.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

I don't find it offensive. It really looks kind of pretty, but I wonder how much tax payer dollars went into something so stupid!! Our government NEEDS to stop wasting our money on nonsensical things!

Zero. We did that.

It's interesting how you can call it "kind of pretty" in one sentence and then "something so stupid" in the next.
Fascinating.

Just because something is pretty doesn't mean it isn't stupid.

so you've met my ex wife?