To Kill a Mockingbird becomes an Obama Re election commercial

[BlindBoo]

Seems the world hasn't changed all that much in 50 years.

Poor JR, Need a tissue?

 

[Vel]

What was the movie Bush introduced?

Porky's ?

My pet goat the movie, He starts with 7 minutes of silence and then calls Cheney.

That's "winning" in the mind of the conservative.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QS0q3mGPGg]Songify This - Winning - a Song by Charlie Sheen - YouTube[/ame]

As he is a 911 Truther, I'm pretty sure that makes Sheen one of your team's players.

 

[BlindBoo]

Why did he choose to introduce any movie?

It's good publicity.

Why shouldn't he?

Oh for sure he. Should take every opportunity to show how those mean. Old white people. Treated blacks even though it is a work of fiction divide divider dividing

Atticus was white.

Sure it's fiction. In reality they'd have lynched Robinson back then.

 

[BlindBoo]

I'm not getting the "outrage".

Why is it bad that the President will be introducing the movie?

You're not serious......are you?

This is a subject Obama shouldn't touch with a ten meter cattle prod.

But he's going out of his way to do this knowing there is a race war going on.

Obama is the most divisive president of my entire lifetime. He should be trying to unite the country. Instead he just continues to open wounds which should have healed long ago. It will get worse. This is his last term. He has only a short time now to incite as much racial hatred as he can. And he will do it too!

This is SO inappropriate for a president to be doing. If he wanted to introduce classical literature turned vid, there is plenty of good stuff out there. But he chooses the one most likely to damage the country.

Were you asleep between 2001 and 2009?

As a master’s student of statistics at Oregon State University, Carolyn Webb’s Feb. 20 letter caused me to investigate her claim that Obama is the “most divisive President ever.” What I found is that she or her source got the information wrong.

Gallup’s poll (TinyURL.com - shorten that long URL into a tiny URL

6ohgr7y) measured the difference of the average approval ratings of Republicans and Democrats. This past year ranked as the fourth-most divisive year after George W. Bush’s fourth, fifth and sixth years. Not the most divisive ever.

Political differences get magnified in election years, so Gallup also compared the ratings in presidents’ third year in office. Obama’s third year indeed comes in as the most divisive, right above G.W. Bush’s and Bill Clinton’s third years.

The poll clearly states this polarization “may not be a reflection on Obama himself as much as on the current political environment,” contrary to Ms. Webb’s claim.

Obama is presiding over the most polarized third year ever, but any good statistics student will point out that correlation doesn’t imply causation. Obama could be divisive (a claim I disagree with) but it is possible that other items are influencing this polarization, such as Speaker Boehner’s rhetoric, biased news sources or even individuals that spread misinformation about polls.

Andrew Burkey, Corvallis


Read more: Letter: Is Obama the most divisive president ever? Poll says no!

 

[BlindBoo]

are you people fucking idiots....its the 50th anniversary of the book.....get a fucking life people

if this is all you can bitch about then life is good....

classic literature lol.....it was written in the 20th century.....do you know the depth of classic literature?

Sorry, this is not....I repeat....not a very smart thing he's doing. The timing of this is for shit. I'm sure if they could find some other book or film that focused on racism they would feature that.

Osama hasn't said a word about all of the violence and all of the real turmoil he has caused over Trayvan Martin.......and this simply shows he doesn't care. As a matter of fact it shows he wants to encourage it.

The racial angle in the film to me was only a small part of it......but Obama wants to focus on it like Al Sharpton.

Al Sharpton uses thuggery to get what he wants. Obama likes to use imagery. That is what this is about.....not that it's the 50th anniversary. It's about causing divisions, re-opening old wounds and rubbing salt in it.

Personally I'm tired of hearing friends and relatives down in Florida bitching about Trayvan.

You are SO right. He is pulling out ALL the stops and if he gets reelected, God forbid, this country will be in turnoil like it has not seen in the last two centuries!

See US History 1860-1865.

 

[BluePhantom]

Obama is presiding over the most polarized third year ever, but any good statistics student will point out that correlation doesn’t imply causation. Obama could be divisive (a claim I disagree with) but it is possible that other items are influencing this polarization, such as Speaker Boehner’s rhetoric, biased news sources or even individuals that spread misinformation about polls.

yeah...cause you know....everyone listens to every little word out of Speaker Boehner's mouth. I can't go a eight hours without hearing Boehner speak.

Regardless, what you are arguing then is that since the Obama administration isn't the most divisive (at least according to this guy's opinion and research) but only the second or third most divisive , and that even though his third year is the most divisive (though we should assume it's fault of media and Republicans), that we should give Obama a pass and start to buy into the bullshit that he is a uniter and not a divider? Is that what you are suggesting?

 

[candycorn]

Seems the world hasn't changed all that much in 50 years.

Poor JR, Need a tissue?

Ya know, I was just struck by that when I saw this was still being talked about today.

"Rapid Progress" sayeth Q on StarTrek TNG.

 

[BlindBoo]

Just consider the source ... her inane comment doesn't surprise me in the least.

As I'm learning.

The problem with his supporters is they don't think he could possibly be the kind of person we keep attempting to remind them he is.

I think if their eyes were finally opened they would feel extremely foolish for being duped......and then slip into denial.....much the way most folks in Hollywood have. However, there are some that openly admit he isn't the great healer they had hoped for.

Simnce you don't believe anything he has ever published or said why on earth would anyone believe what you have to say about the man. Only a dupe would.

 

[mudwhistle]

Seems the world hasn't changed all that much in 50 years.

Poor JR, Need a tissue?

It's funny how the left likes living in the past.

Maybe they should call themselves "Regressives".

 

[BlindBoo]

Obama is presiding over the most polarized third year ever, but any good statistics student will point out that correlation doesn’t imply causation. Obama could be divisive (a claim I disagree with) but it is possible that other items are influencing this polarization, such as Speaker Boehner’s rhetoric, biased news sources or even individuals that spread misinformation about polls.

yeah...cause you know....everyone listens to every little word out of Speaker Boehner's mouth. I can't go a eight hours without hearing Boehner speak.

Regardless, what you are arguing then is that since the Obama administration isn't the most divisive (at least according to this guy's opinion and research) but only the second or third most divisive , and that even though his third year is the most divisive (though we should assume it's fault of media and Republicans), that we should give Obama a pass and start to buy into the bullshit that he is a uniter and not a divider? Is that what you are suggesting?

Boehner was just one example. There is no doubt that Barack took over the WH after the most divisive presidencies in modern history. Faux (Not)News and the Republicans propagandist have continued to foster that atmosphere, for example, this post.

 

[BlindBoo]

Seems the world hasn't changed all that much in 50 years.

Poor JR, Need a tissue?

It's funny how the left likes living in the past.

Maybe they should call themselves "Regressives".

Yeahsure keep on pretending that racism don't exist in our culture anymore, espcially in the south!

 

[Barb]

"A GREAT MOVIE."
For fuck sakes, I know there's a movie, but what happened to appreciating literature? THAT is what is appalling, not that our President introduces a movie, but that people remember it firstly and fore mostly AS a movie. Does anyone read anymore? My main critique of any movie that was based on a book has always been if it was as good as the book. It almost never is. It can't be. SO much of the imagery is lost, and the back story can never be completely told in film. smh, this generation is so deprived of so many of the the truly good things in life.

 

[Full-Auto]

Seems the world hasn't changed all that much in 50 years.

Poor JR, Need a tissue?

It's funny how the left likes living in the past.

Maybe they should call themselves "Regressives".

Yeahsure keep on pretending that racism don't exist in our culture anymore, espcially in the south!

Racism is alive and will be for several hundred years out.

Human nature is a bitch.

So why doesnt government get out of the business? My color has zero bearing on my taxes or in utilizing my rights.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Seems the world hasn't changed all that much in 50 years.

Poor JR, Need a tissue?

It's funny how the left likes living in the past.

Maybe they should call themselves "Regressives".

Yeahsure keep on pretending that racism don't exist in our culture anymore, espcially in the south!

Oh nice.... sorry bub, some of the biggest bigots I ever met were in my time living in NYC. I heard racial slurs I never knew existed.

Nice try though.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Obama is presiding over the most polarized third year ever, but any good statistics student will point out that correlation doesn’t imply causation. Obama could be divisive (a claim I disagree with) but it is possible that other items are influencing this polarization, such as Speaker Boehner’s rhetoric, biased news sources or even individuals that spread misinformation about polls.

yeah...cause you know....everyone listens to every little word out of Speaker Boehner's mouth. I can't go a eight hours without hearing Boehner speak.

Regardless, what you are arguing then is that since the Obama administration isn't the most divisive (at least according to this guy's opinion and research) but only the second or third most divisive , and that even though his third year is the most divisive (though we should assume it's fault of media and Republicans), that we should give Obama a pass and start to buy into the bullshit that he is a uniter and not a divider? Is that what you are suggesting?

It means investigate the haters of the far right for hating so stupidly.

 

[BluePhantom]

Obama is presiding over the most polarized third year ever, but any good statistics student will point out that correlation doesn’t imply causation. Obama could be divisive (a claim I disagree with) but it is possible that other items are influencing this polarization, such as Speaker Boehner’s rhetoric, biased news sources or even individuals that spread misinformation about polls.

yeah...cause you know....everyone listens to every little word out of Speaker Boehner's mouth. I can't go a eight hours without hearing Boehner speak.

Regardless, what you are arguing then is that since the Obama administration isn't the most divisive (at least according to this guy's opinion and research) but only the second or third most divisive , and that even though his third year is the most divisive (though we should assume it's fault of media and Republicans), that we should give Obama a pass and start to buy into the bullshit that he is a uniter and not a divider? Is that what you are suggesting?

Boehner was just one example. There is no doubt that Barack took over the WH after the most divisive presidencies in modern history. Faux (Not)News and the Republicans propagandist have continued to foster that atmosphere, for example, this post.

Oh so it is the Republicans' fault that Obama is at least the second or third most divisive president ever. I mean it wouldn't have anything to do with statements about bitter people in Pennsylvania clinging to religion and guns, or that Republicans have to sit in the back seat, or anything like that. It's Fox news and the Republicans that are to blame for Obama's divisiveness.

 

[BluePhantom]

Obama is presiding over the most polarized third year ever, but any good statistics student will point out that correlation doesn’t imply causation. Obama could be divisive (a claim I disagree with) but it is possible that other items are influencing this polarization, such as Speaker Boehner’s rhetoric, biased news sources or even individuals that spread misinformation about polls.

yeah...cause you know....everyone listens to every little word out of Speaker Boehner's mouth. I can't go a eight hours without hearing Boehner speak.

Regardless, what you are arguing then is that since the Obama administration isn't the most divisive (at least according to this guy's opinion and research) but only the second or third most divisive , and that even though his third year is the most divisive (though we should assume it's fault of media and Republicans), that we should give Obama a pass and start to buy into the bullshit that he is a uniter and not a divider? Is that what you are suggesting?

It means investigate the haters of the far right for hating so stupidly.

But haters on the left hate brilliantly and should therefore be ignored.

 

[JakeStarkey]

yeah...cause you know....everyone listens to every little word out of Speaker Boehner's mouth. I can't go a eight hours without hearing Boehner speak.

Regardless, what you are arguing then is that since the Obama administration isn't the most divisive (at least according to this guy's opinion and research) but only the second or third most divisive , and that even though his third year is the most divisive (though we should assume it's fault of media and Republicans), that we should give Obama a pass and start to buy into the bullshit that he is a uniter and not a divider? Is that what you are suggesting?

It means investigate the haters of the far right for hating so stupidly.

But haters on the left hate brilliantly and should therefore be ignored.

Nah, they are stupid, too, but the extremist right haters are far more dangerous than the 9 members of the NBPP.

If the GOP does not figure out how to dump the extreme right, Obama is going to skip home by ten percentage points.

 

[Barb]

It's funny how the left likes living in the past.

Maybe they should call themselves "Regressives".

Yeahsure keep on pretending that racism don't exist in our culture anymore, espcially in the south!

Racism is alive and will be for several hundred years out.

Human nature is a bitch.

So why doesnt government get out of the business? My color has zero bearing on my taxes or in utilizing my rights.

 

[BluePhantom]

It means investigate the haters of the far right for hating so stupidly.

But haters on the left hate brilliantly and should therefore be ignored.

Nah, they are stupid, too, but the extremist right haters are far more dangerous than the 9 members of the NBPP.

Really? So hate from the right is extreme and dangerous, but hate from the left is simply distasteful? I am sure those who lived under the Khmer Rouge might have a vastly different opinion. And laying a bounty on a man "dead or alive" is less concerning than a Tea Party rally? Hmmmm....I would argue that your definitions might require some adjustment.

If the GOP does not figure out how to dump the extreme right, Obama is going to skip home by ten percentage points.

The extreme right is certainly a pain in the ass and doesn't do a great deal to portray the GOP in a positive light. However, the extreme left is just as problematic. Hate is hate pal and trying to justify or minimize one kind while blasting the hell out of the other is arguably just as problematic as the hate itself.