NAACP says: Oust Bush!

kermit

Legend
Nov 13, 2003
15,477
807
49
Visit site
✟27,358.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
jameseb said:
Now...where did I miss something at? ;) :p They opposed him in 2000... hence, Bush isn't exactly feeling all warm and fuzzy towards a group that opposed him, and is opposing him once again.
The opposed him during in 2000 campaign. Bush wasn't first candidate that they opposed and he won't be the last.

Bush was promised by the head of the NAACP to be treated fairly and with respect. Bush refused. The NAACP bashing of Bush didn't start until after he showed no respect for themby swatting away the olive branch that they offered. When that happens the kid gloves came off.

Bush stands to loose a lot of conservative black votes due to this move. It was foolish and stubborn; two qualities that I don't admire.
 
Upvote 0

charis

Well-Known Member
Jun 14, 2004
607
21
✟875.00
Faith
Protestant
stray bullet said:
Answer me this and I might post an article-
Do you think the NAACP has no intention of bashing Bush?

I'm more interested in why when he was political candidate Bush he deigned to address them; now that he's President Bush he's the first president never to have addressed them.

I have no idea what their intentions are.
 
Upvote 0

jameseb

Smite me, O Mighty Smiter!
Mar 3, 2004
14,862
2,332
North Little Rock, AR
✟116,968.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
kermit said:
The opposed him during in 2000 campaign. Bush wasn't first candidate that they opposed and he won't be the last.

Bush was promised by the head of the NAACP to be treated fairly and with respect. Bush refused. The NAACP bashing of Bush didn't start until after he showed no respect for themby swatting away the olive branch that they offered. When that happens the kid gloves came off.

Bush stands to loose a lot of conservative black votes due to this move. It was foolish and stubborn; two qualities that I don't admire.


You're incorrect, kermit.

Bush did visit with the NAACP back in 2000. The NAACP also endorsed and actively sought voter support for Al Gore.

Now let's try to be honest about this. If an organization such as the NAACP is going to actively involve itself in poliitcs with the intent to elect Democrats, then no one should be complaining, or surprised, that a Republican will not visit with them a second time and the charges that Bush isn't for unity is an ad hominem attack.
 
Upvote 0

kermit

Legend
Nov 13, 2003
15,477
807
49
Visit site
✟27,358.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
jameseb said:
You're incorrect, kermit.

Bush did visit with the NAACP back in 2000. The NAACP also endorsed and actively sought voter support for Al Gore.

Now let's try to be honest about this. If an organization such as the NAACP is going to actively involve itself in poliitcs with the intent to elect Democrats, then no one should be complaining, or surprised, that a Republican will not visit with them a second time and the charges that Bush isn't for unity is an ad hominem attack.
The NAACP always endorses one candiate over another. Sometimes they win sometimes they don't, but whoever wins always speaks before the NAACP.

I am not arguing that Bush never visited the NAACP. What I am arguing is that Bush is holding an unreasonable grudge against them. The statements made by the NAACP in 2000 were not scathing. The ones now are, but they are a reaction to the disrepect Bush has shown toward them. I don't condone, but I understand it.

BTW an ad hominem attack isn't possible when a person or his actions are the argument.

Examples:
1) You say you're for Bush. Me calling you stupid is an ad hominem attack.
2) You wipe your butt with poison ivy. Me calling you stupid is not an ad hominem attack.
 
Upvote 0

Michael0701

Harley Ridin' Believer!!
Nov 13, 2002
719
6
63
Tax Free Delaware!!
Visit site
✟8,417.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I like the "den of wolves" euphemism (sic?). It boils down to them (the "leaders" of the NAACP) publicly condemning the president and in return the president choosing not to appease the "leaders" by attending, call it a snub or a payback or whatever. The city is "hostile" to him as well. So I sure as heck can't blame him for not taking part and sticking his neck out only to be chopped off by Bonds.

The president must feel that he either does not need their support or felt that he had absolutely nothing to gain by attending. The post election results will either prove him right or show him he was wrong.
 
Upvote 0

hyperborean

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2004
589
24
✟850.00
Faith
Atheist
kermit said:
BTW an ad hominem attack isn't possible when a person or his actions are the argument.

Examples:
1) You say you're for Bush. Me calling you stupid is an ad hominem attack.
2) You wipe your butt with poison ivy. Me calling you stupid is not an ad hominem attack.
True, but if one were to say "Bush wipes his butt with the Constitution", would that be a little of both?;)
 
Upvote 0

Seeking...

A strange kettle of fish ...
May 20, 2004
864
112
49
Southern California
✟9,064.00
Faith
Deist
Politics
US-Others
I don't undersatand why this is a big deal. The is no chance that the NAACP is going to endorse Bush - so why should he speak to them? If he is looking for conservative Black votes - then I'm sure there are other organizations that are more apt to meet that demographic. I'm a registered Republican and Black and I don't see myself referring to their voter guide any time soon. I think they have done great work in the past, but they are horribly out of touch with reality now. This was a no win situation for Bush - he was likely to get bashed and accused of pandering if he had attended - so he doesn't attend and he gets bashed and called a racist...
 
Upvote 0

2001MustangGT

FORD lover
May 27, 2004
2,735
144
45
reality
✟3,614.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
stray bullet said:
The NAACP is full of it.
Either way, the NAACP commands the opinion of a significant portion of the American voting population. Not only that, but the disrespect perceived because of Bushs move will surely inspire more blacks to go to the polls and vote against him. Maybe if Bush visited the NAACP, some of them would vote for Bush or not bother to vote at all.

The point is, that no matter how much you bash the NAACP, Bush made a political blunder, and it will reflect in the numbers come November! :p

Kerry will win! :clap:
 
Upvote 0

2001MustangGT

FORD lover
May 27, 2004
2,735
144
45
reality
✟3,614.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
SuzQ said:
I very much respect Mr. Mfume - he's a wonderful motivator of the African-American community. However, the only reason Mr. Mfume is so upset & is doing this is because Bush turned down an invitation to speak at their annual dinner. This was the fourth time he turned it down. Again, you can complain all you want about Bush - but here's another example of Bush NOT being "fake" and standing by his convictions. Admirable, very admirable.

Why is Bush doing this, you say? I just saw an example of how badly the NAACP campaigned AGAINST Bush in 2000! (On CNN, I believe).
Do you deny that snubbing the NAACP is gonna hurt him at the polls?:confused:

They ran an ad that implied a black man was being dragged behind a truck & that "George W. Bush" was responsible simply because he didn't support Texas's proposed hate crime VERBIAGE when he was Governor. They then showed a panel of two different liberals who displayed obvious disgust in this tactic. Uh, yeah. I don't think I would accept any invitations without a public apology for that kind of hatred. Go Dubya!!!
Didnt Bush oversee like a record number of death penalty executions while he was governor in Texas? Werent most of those death row inmates black? Im sure it goes deeper than that anyway. Entire social groups dont get mad at governors or presidential candidates without any provocation, do they?

You are begging the question: "why does Bush get this treatment in the first place?"

Not only that, but I wouldnt be suprised if Bushs treatment of the NAACP caused people of other races (white, hispanic, asian, etc...)to not vote for him! ;)

But the NAACP is the voice of ALL people of color & Bush is obviously racist, NOT. That's why he appointed Colin Powell & Condoleeza Rice, to name a few great leaders of COLOR in his administration.

Give me a break.....
Do you know what the black community views those two as? (hint: sellouts to the man)

On the other hand, maybe if Powell ran for President himself, he could get the black community, and other communities, to support him. I know Id vote for him! :)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

jameseb

Smite me, O Mighty Smiter!
Mar 3, 2004
14,862
2,332
North Little Rock, AR
✟116,968.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
kermit said:
The NAACP always endorses one candiate over another. Sometimes they win sometimes they don't, but whoever wins always speaks before the NAACP.

I am not arguing that Bush never visited the NAACP. What I am arguing is that Bush is holding an unreasonable grudge against them. The statements made by the NAACP in 2000 were not scathing. The ones now are, but they are a reaction to the disrepect Bush has shown toward them. I don't condone, but I understand it.


So you're not going to admit you were wrong about Bush never meeting with the NAACP, eh? ;)

Kermit... c'mon.... I've got a sense of humor, but you're gettin' funky on me ;) :p Seriously, when is the last time a Republican was endorsed over a Democrat by the NAACP? C'mon.... really... no, no, I mean it... seriously. ;)


BTW an ad hominem attack isn't possible when a person or his actions are the argument.

Examples:
1) You say you're for Bush. Me calling you stupid is an ad hominem attack.
2) You wipe your butt with poison ivy. Me calling you stupid is not an ad hominem attack.


I can't believe it.... I'm going to have to bust out the dictionary again... :p


ad homi·nem adv.

Usage Note: As the principal meaning of the preposition ad suggests, the homo of ad hominem was originally the person to whom an argument was addressed, not its subject. The phrase denoted an argument designed to appeal to the listener's emotions rather than to reason, as in the sentence The Republicans' evocation of pity for the small farmer struggling to maintain his property is a purely ad hominem argument for reducing inheritance taxes. This usage appears to be waning; only 37 percent of the Usage Panel finds this sentence acceptable. The phrase now chiefly describes an argument based on the failings of an adversary rather than on the merits of the case: Ad hominem attacks on one's opponent are a tried-and-true strategy for people who have a case that is weak. Ninety percent of the Panel finds this sentence acceptable. The expression now also has a looser use in referring to any personal attack, whether or not it is part of an argument, as in It isn't in the best interests of the nation for the press to attack him in this personal, ad hominem way. This use is acceptable to 65 percent of the Panel. ·Ad hominem has also recently acquired a use as a noun denoting personal attacks, as in “Notwithstanding all the ad hominem, Gingrich insists that he and Panetta can work together” (Washington Post). This usage may raise some eyebrows, though it appears to be gaining ground in journalistic style. ·A modern coinage patterned on ad hominem is ad feminam, as in “Its treatment of Nabokov and its ad feminam attack on his wife Vera often border on character assassination” (Simon Karlinsky). Though some would argue that this neologism is unnecessary because the Latin word homo refers to humans generically, rather than to the male sex, in some contexts ad feminam has a more specific meaning than ad hominem, being used to describe attacks on women as women or because they are women, as in “Their recourse... to ad feminam attacks evidences the chilly climate for women's leadership on campus” (Donna M. Riley).


Conclusion: It was an ad hominmen.

By the way, I haven't seen ya around much. Good to see you again... even if you are fighting for the wrong side. ;)
 
Upvote 0

Doctrine1st

Official nitwit
Oct 11, 2002
10,007
445
Seattle
Visit site
✟12,523.00
Faith
Politics
US-Others
stray bullet said:
What does compassion and forgiveness have to do with going into a cave of hungry wolves?
I'm sorry, I made the mistake of him claiming to be a Christian and a uniter, not a divider. My bad, it will never happen again.
 
Upvote 0

Mistyfogg

Well-Known Member
Oct 30, 2003
782
120
✟9,034.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
ufonium2 said:
When is the last time the NAACP endorsed a Republican for president? Bush knows he can't get their endorsement no matter what, and the demographic that they primarily influence is not one that was ever going to vote for him anyway. So, I can see why he wouldn't think it's a crucial stop on his campaign.

I bet Kerry isn't addressing any Texas oil conventions either, for the same reason.
Actually, most newly registered minorities tend to register as independents. I would think that Bush would strategically try and garner new supporters from the neophyte voters. So actually, it would have been very wise of him to at least stand up and make an effort.

But it goes to show there is a deeper meaning to this.....
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2001MustangGT
Upvote 0

HumbleMan

Ragamuffin
Dec 2, 2003
5,258
273
Mississippi by way of Texas
✟17,870.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Why is every one so hung up on whether GWB will get voter support from the NAACP or not? His job, as leader of this country, is to work for the betterment of ALL Americans. By snubbing the NAACP, no matter what your opinion of it is, he is saying he has no interest in hearing what a large part of American society has to say.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

2001MustangGT

FORD lover
May 27, 2004
2,735
144
45
reality
✟3,614.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
sad astronaut said:
I don't think a meeting between Bush and the NAACP would be very productive.

NAACP: We think affirmative action is great.

Bush: I don't.

I think that covers it.
It would have been more productive for Bushs campaign than not even appearing!

Looks like bush dont want votes too much do he?
 
Upvote 0

Michael0701

Harley Ridin' Believer!!
Nov 13, 2002
719
6
63
Tax Free Delaware!!
Visit site
✟8,417.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Does anyone reeeeealy believe that his attendance would have won him an endorsement?


Does anyone believe that if the NAACP tells it's "members" to vote for Kerry that said "members" would go against them just because he showed up in Philly?

Some of you say that he lost votes, I ask whose?
 
Upvote 0

Michael0701

Harley Ridin' Believer!!
Nov 13, 2002
719
6
63
Tax Free Delaware!!
Visit site
✟8,417.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
HumbleMan said:
Why is every one so hung up on whether GWB will get voter support from the NAACP or not? His job, as leader of this country, is to work for the betterment of ALL Americans. By snubbing the NAACP, no matter what your opinion of it is, he is saying he has no interest in hearing what a large part of American society has to say.


I respectfully disagree. In my opinion he turned his back/snubbed/dissed ...whatever .... the leadership of the NAACP. Those men and women who publicly demean him and who are leading their followers to elect Kerry. Not black America.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jameseb
Upvote 0

jameseb

Smite me, O Mighty Smiter!
Mar 3, 2004
14,862
2,332
North Little Rock, AR
✟116,968.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
2001MustangGT said:
It would have been more productive for Bushs campaign than not even appearing!

Looks like bush dont want votes too much do he?


Mustang, my friend..... :) Now surely you realize this would be like Bush going to the DNC looking for votes. ;)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Personally I have always disliked any canidate playing to any special interest group, I mean you got this guy going to the "Black" Community, this one goes to the "Gay" Community.. it's hog wash.. The NAACP is nothing more then another radical racist group that's upset someone "white" running for president didn't go to them and try to get their vote. I salute the man myself..

I'm not a racist by any means but I think any group that deals with special treatment for one group over another needs to be out lawed.

Take Bill Cosby for example that man is coming out and telling the truth about tstuff that the NAACP should be taking care of and isn't and Black leaders don't like it, why? Power!

The man is running for president and he should play to the "American" people not to some group that has its own agenda for it's own people.. Can I create my own college fund and call it United Caucasian Colledge Fund, and then get upset if GW doesn't come and try to solicate my vote?

Just my opinion.. I could be wrong
 
Upvote 0