digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

See the original image at politico.com

Obama's Volunteers Aren't Doing Him any Favors

politico.com — Volunteer workers for the Obama presidential campaign are apparently doing their best to cheapen their candidate. After yesterday's request of two Muslim women that they not sit behind Obama during his rally, apparently several women in headscarves were asked not to be in a photo with the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • legolas68, on 06/18/2008, -144/+155The Obama supporters will come out quickly and say, "Everybody does it". Typical.
    • JAVandiver, on 06/18/2008, -30/+7Send them a message:
      http://digg.com/political_opinion/Attention_Far_Le ...
      • tjmb9, on 06/19/2008, -2/+9I wish I could have the three minutes it took to read that back.
    • fuzzmeister, on 06/19/2008, -14/+51As an Obama supporter, I will certainly say that this is the wrong strategy for him to take. However, it sounds like this was the work of a few volunteers, and not of the whole campaign (at least officially), as evidenced by this quote:

      “This is of course not the policy of the campaign. It is offensive and counter to Obama’s commitment to bring Americans together and simply not the kind of campaign we run,” said Obama spokesman Bill Burton. “We sincerely apologize for the behavior of these volunteers.”
      • qwertydvorak, on 06/19/2008, -19/+11on the same note, bill clinton didn't have sex with that woman, going by this quote:

        "I did not have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinski" *jabs finger on podium*

        the more things change, the more they stay the same in politics.
        • ShorD143, on 06/19/2008, -1/+4to be fair, she was less of a woman and more of an ogre.
      • griz, on 06/19/2008, -1/+13Those volunteers should be asked to leave the campaign. The potential loss of their votes is well worth the gain of the respect of the Muslim community.
      • Muyoso, on 06/19/2008, -9/+10You would NEVER give McCain the same courtesy of just blaming it on volunteers.
        • bruce86, on 06/19/2008, -3/+3you are confused. I think you are thinking Obama supporters are conservatives.
        • fuzzmeister, on 06/19/2008, -2/+6Yes, I actually would. Have you ever considered the concept that I might be a reasonable person?
      • OYAHHH, on 06/19/2008, -6/+2>> This is of course not the policy of the campaign

        Then,

        Let's see Obama take a photo with a headscarved women!
        • malakite33, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4-from the article, which I'm sure you took the time to read through.

          "An Obama aide also noted that the campaign has no policy against the candidate’s appearing with women in headscarves: The next morning at Wayne State University, Obama posed for a picture with a student wearing a hijab. "
        • malakite33, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4From the article that I'm sure you took the time to read..

          "An Obama aide also noted that the campaign has no policy against the candidate’s appearing with women in headscarves: The next morning at Wayne State University, Obama posed for a picture with a student wearing a hijab. "
        • Junah, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3Here:

          http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/slideshow/photo/0806 ...

          June 17th.
        • slvrbullet87, on 06/19/2008, -6/+2@malakite

          Posing with a girl in a hajib the next day is even more about political pandering than not having the ladies sit behind him in the first place
      • Peetweefish, on 06/19/2008, -5/+4Pass the buck. Way to go you tool. Whether it is a few volunteers or not, Obama is responsible for HIS campaign and thus needs to be held accountable for the actions of his campaign. Regardless of who does whatever action, they do as part of his campaign and thus are a reflection of his campaign.
        • fuzzmeister, on 06/19/2008, -0/+7Of course, hence the statement of apology from his spokesman.
    • aliengoods, on 06/19/2008, -21/+109While traveling in Africa, Obama put on the native clothing, which most every candidate does to show respect when traveling to a foreign country. Look at the flack that caused.

      I don't agree with excluding people, but I do understand it.

      Also, McCain doesn't do that. Instead of telling people they can't sit behind him he keeps them out of the town hall meeting entirely, unless of course you're a loyal Bushie. Where's your outrage on that one?
      • thebaron2, on 06/19/2008, -5/+11People wearing Muslim headscarves aren't allowed at McCain's townhalls? That's pretty ***** up, if true, but this is the first I've heard of it.

        Any links or stories to back that claim up?
        • kreneskyp, on 06/19/2008, -4/+15he wasn't entirely accurate.

          the last "town hall" he had WAS staged. It wasn't so much that they weren't allowed in as the audience was preselected from republicans and mccain supporters. The most despicable thing about it was not that anyone was being excluded but that it was billed as a town hall with a diverse crowd of "republicans, democrats and independants". after the fact they admitted it was a preselected audience of republicans and mccain supporters.

          You can however easily twist that into him excluding people because he certainly isn't going to select a muslim for his audience.

          [fox news admits it] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9979CZ9vII

        • thebaron2, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1Well I don't doubt that there's a selection process for most, if not all, of these sorts of things, but that's a far cry from keeping Muslims out period, regardless of their political affiliations.

          I'd be extremely surprised if someone couldn't find a muslim wearing traditional garb in the background at one of McCain's townhalls.
        • pprovo1, on 06/19/2008, -1/+3***** I wouldn't be surprised...what kind of muslim would want to support a president who basically wants to keep our troops in Iraq and possibly invade Iran??
      • Jackson0909, on 06/19/2008, -8/+7Wow.......... way to try and spin the story. Sorry, pal, but it isn't going to work this time.
      • shawn1122, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2It is understandable for sure, but it definitely is not acceptable. Seriously, do these volunteers have any idea what Obama stands for?? It's an absolute shame that stuff like this even happens...
      • jsully, on 06/19/2008, -1/+9I was in a cab going from Manhattan to Brooklyn the other night with a middle aged white woman driving. Somehow the Presidential race came up, and she remarked that she wouldn't be voting for a Muslim. I didn't know what to say. I don't know what irritates me more, the fact that she's racist and wouldn't vote for a Muslim, or the fact that she has actually been convinced that he's not Christian. People are just ***** retarded...
        • diggduggDOOM, on 06/19/2008, -0/+5Did you say you had a white woman cab driver in Manhattan/Brooklyn?
        • dexter411, on 06/19/2008, -2/+2Would you vote for a Scientologist if he was running for President? What's racist about not voting for someone because of their religious beliefs? Are Muslims a race?
        • luet, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1I would vote a scientologist if he wasn't forcing me to be a scientologist. Vote people for what they say they will do and if they will do it, nothing else matters.
        • Demener, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2I would vote for someone of any religion except Scientology. Well technically I consider Scientology more of an evil pyramid scheme cult than a religion so I suppose I'd vote for someone of any respectable religion.

          Even if Obama was Muslim I'd still vote for him.
      • Peetweefish, on 06/19/2008, -2/+1You can't justify the actions of one candidate by your dislike of the actions of another candidate. That is third grade debate strategy.
      • vat0r, on 06/19/2008, -0/+5Seriously if they would of let them sit behind him FOX would of covered it like the coming of Satan. I can see the headline.. Terrorist connection at Obama rally. I don't blame them for protecting or at least trying to protect their candidate at all costs.
        • dexter411, on 06/19/2008, -3/+1Oh how the apologetics come out of the woodwork...
        • Demener, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2Apparently you haven't seen the part where a 'fist pond' is being twisted into a 'terrorist fist jab'.
      • silverbulletky, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1If it was up your ass you'd know it.
    • dinot, on 06/19/2008, -9/+43I'm an Obama supporter, and I'll come right out and say that this was a pretty ***** stupid move. His campaign should be more afraid of tainting his "unity" message rather than appealing to the paranoid dumb ***** out there.
      • LLamaStar, on 06/19/2008, -13/+43you're forgetting that the majority of americans are paranoid dumb *****. jesusland ***** voted for bush twice. :|
      • bysin, on 06/19/2008, -9/+11What voter base is this hurting? The Muslim voters? Obama can stab a Muslim on national TV, and they'd still rather vote for him over McCain. Theres no question that this is wrong, but I doubt it will cut into Obama's polling numbers.
        • Pittance, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3I dont necessarily agree. But "Obama can stab a Muslim on national TV, and they'd still rather vote for him over McCain." was pretty damn funny.
      • arkboysooner, on 06/19/2008, -2/+10V O L U N T E E R S. There are a different group of them in every state. You can't keep a leash on all of them. Obama had nothing to do with it and this wasn't a campaign decision.
        • ProUSADigger, on 06/19/2008, -7/+4He may have had nothing to do with it, but it shows what type of people blindly support
          him. Remember the campaign office with the Cuban flag and the Che Guevara poster? Kind of telling, if you ask me.
        • juniorb, on 06/19/2008, -2/+7People on both sides of the aisle have a proven history of participating in their opponents' events to disrupt them. If you can't imagine that these might be a) Republicans, b) Hillary supporters, you must not know how dirty this game can get.
        • griz, on 06/19/2008, -2/+4These people were present at his speech. Which means other officials on his campaign were present as well as Obama himself. Those who were responsible for the decision to refuse seating to these women should be removed from the campaign.
        • arkboysooner, on 06/19/2008, -2/+4"These people were present at his speech. Which means other officials on his campaign were present as well as Obama himself. Those who were responsible for the decision to refuse seating to these women should be removed from the campaign."

          100% agree
      • jerbaker, on 06/19/2008, -6/+2If you're an Obama supporter (which you're not), please resign to the McCain camp. You're attitude isn't welcome.
        • dinot, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2There's a thing called post history. Use it. You'll see that I've been an Obama supporter this whole time.
        • Peetweefish, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2What the ***** jerbaker? Most ridiculous post on this page. Where the hell do you get off telling someone who they do or do not support based on a comment on digg?

          By the way, dinot's posting is supportive of Obama. Retard.
    • smacksaw, on 06/19/2008, -13/+29You know what else everybody else does? Takes a picture of that and then sends out emails with slanderously racist text.

      You and your supporters. So stop forwarding retarded chain emails full of lies and then you have nothing to be smug about.
    • Entroper, on 06/19/2008, -5/+23I think his supporters will be more likely to realize that this was the work of a few volunteers, not Obama himself. They will also realize that it would never have been an issue had Obama's detractors not been trying to scare people into thinking that he is a radical Muslim terrorist in disguise. That doesn't make it right, but it's certainly a contributing factor, and a sad reflection on the racism still existing in the U.S.
    • dinostabOMG, on 06/19/2008, -5/+45Bleh. They shouldn't have done it, but the reason they did it is exactly because of the sort of people who are going to make a big stink now - namely the ones who are out to get Obama any way they can.
      • BrendanSheehan, on 06/19/2008, -1/+6Exactly if there are no turbines or shawls in his backdrop they, the swiftboaters have nothing to get him on. Now they are trying to get him on being prejudice, because they can't take that damning photograph.
      • shawn1122, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2Basically people who would never vote for Obama, so why should it matter? If someone is on the fence and sees a couple of muslim people behind Obama during a speech, and decides to vote McCain because of it, then I don't think Obama would want such a retarded and twisted person's vote anyways.
        • dinostabOMG, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4It's hard to get elected without a segment of the ***** idiot vote. This country is one-half retarded. That's why we have Bush.
        • Jackson0909, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1It's AMAZING how many excuses you lemmings are willing to make for this man's campaign. Can he do any wrong? It's always someone else's fault. Why is that Republicans are all somehow of sub-par intelligence and all Obama-backers are somehow above everyone else? Get a clue. You people are so pompous it's unbelievable. On this issue, he's wrong. The campaign is wrong. And the volunteers are wrong. You need to understand that it is POSSIBLE for your glorious leader to stumble, but I'm sure there will always some sort of excuse.............. I mean, how can the savior of the world make a mistake?
        • Demener, on 06/19/2008, -0/+11/2 retarded? Try 80-90%.
    • sarge96, on 06/19/2008, -7/+31It was a catch 22. If they had let them, that image would've been blasted around in emails like dynamite blasts fish out of water. There was no winning situation in this case. They should've let them sit there, but given past experiences by the campaign, I don't blame them a bit.
      • dexter411, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2Way to stand up for equality and unity. You don't blame them one bit? Weak.
    • xNarrowSoulx, on 06/19/2008, -5/+14But he didn't do it, did he?
      • BrendanSheehan, on 06/19/2008, -0/+5No, it was some supporters.
        • juniorb, on 06/19/2008, -1/+5Supposed supporters. Anyone can sign up and volunteer. Could've been anybody, including people out to create just this kind of controversy.
        • locamama, on 06/19/2008, -4/+3Oh no it couldn't have been a "real" St. Obama supporter. Obama is the king of passing the buck. Everybody say it with me "These are not the volunteers I thought I knew."
        • rossmcd, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4His campaign made a formal apology to the two women for the actions of the volunteers. So in this case Obama took responsibility for the actions of people working in his name ... which is not "passing the buck."
    • xenotek, on 06/19/2008, -6/+20Enough moralizing, everybody. Sarge96 is correct here: had the campaign let the scarved women sit behind Obama, it would have just been fodder for all the frothing pundits who want to paint him as a Muslim. We all know that a picture is worth 1000 words and the potential damage it could have caused to his campaign outweighed having to apologize to the women after the fact. Don't get angry at the Obama campaign here for what might seem hypocritical - get angry at the media spinsters or hordes of idiots who listen to them. Obama can't change America unless he beats McCain and this is simply the nature of the game.
      • locamama, on 06/19/2008, -7/+2Sounds pretty racist to me.
        • locamama, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1Oh digg me down Obamabots. How about this - that's not racial transcendence or religous transcendence. better?
      • jameskong15, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2It doesn't seem hypocritical, it is hypocritical. You definitely have to look at the act in context though because sometimes it may be for the greater good, necessary to avoid unfair/slanderous messages, etc. So while I think it was hypocritical of whoever made the decision (since they supposedly support Obama's beliefs), I do understand why it was made and the context is a big mitigating factor for me.
        • xenotek, on 06/20/2008, -0/+0good point. it was hypocritical, but a necessary hypocrisy.
      • dexter411, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1"Obama can't change America unless he beats McCain and this is simply the nature of the game."

        I agree with you starting with "unless." More stupid "Change!" zealots with no idea what they want to change and how a president could go about doing it, anyway.
    • playuhh, on 06/19/2008, -9/+2You guys ***** suck. This is STRATEGY.
      I'd say the same about John McCain.

      Except any politically aware self-respecting muslim would never find themselves behind McCain like that.
      MUSLIM in america's mind is still a goddamn terrorist. Obama can't just say "screw what people will think!" because there's too much at stake in the election to not microstrategize.

      In all fairness to the muslim ladies though. If he happened to adress the issue and adress the women sitting behind in the process... it would prevent manipulation attempts by MSM and/or bitch pundits. I think Obama is smart enough to minimize the exploitation opportunities in a speech. He's a powerful speaker. Unfortunately this is not the case in this situation. I also feel he should rather be aware and stand his ground and have them back there. That's what he stands for IMO.
    • ICSU, on 06/19/2008, -6/+11Scarves are a display of treating women as unequal.
      • bloosteak, on 06/19/2008, -3/+6sex in the city is a display of treating women as equal
    • ZenMojo, on 06/19/2008, -4/+9Considering they apologized the next day and released a photo of Obama with a girl in a headscarf, I believe this was a stupid volunteer and not the campaign.
    • fx666, on 06/19/2008, -7/+7These Muslim women are the least of Obama's problems. Does the name Tony Rezko ring the bell? Rezko has a potential to do to the Obama campaign what Bernard Kerik did to the Guilliani campaign. Very few people living outside my native NYC know who Kerik is. He used to be a NYC Police Commissioner with questionable business ties and a founder of Guilliani/Kerik business group. After Kerik plead guilty on several accounts Guilliani's supporters abandoned him. Obama is a closed friend with Rezko who helped the Presidential hope-full to buy a house at a very low price which is substantially lower than the average market price for the area. Rezko was found guilty on several accounts and now the Republicans are using this fact against Obama. This is just the beginning, Rezko will be sentenced in Sept and I predict that after the sentencing the Obama approval rating will be in a free-fall.
      • BabyWookie, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1At least Obama doesn't celebrate his birthdays on a boat with Russian mobsters.
    • rblancarte, on 06/19/2008, -2/+2I won't. People questioned me about my calling the GOP stupid for allowing the racist buttons (implied support for not removing them), mainly due to being an Obama supporter.

      Now that this new has broken, I think Obama needs to publicly state that actions like this are not condoned. I think he should ask that the volunteers that did this step down, or even more, have them removed form his campaign. And finally I think he should make sure that his campaign is clearly told that actions such as these are not acceptable.

      I would like to think that the stupidity of moves like this are common sense, but clearly they are not.
    • jerbaker, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2Way to set up the straw man and then knock it down.
    • Hypomanic, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1The campaign apologized, but yeah, this could be a problem in Michigan, a swing state, which has a large Muslim population. Just what Obama needs is a new demographic crisis. Good job whatever genius that was that made that decision.
    • Buzzpatrol, on 06/19/2008, -3/+7It's truly a travesty that the U.S population is so stupid that a candidate that wants a chance to become president has to dumb down his speeches and 'remove Muslim looking elements' from press photos so that rednecks and illiterates won't think hes a terrorist!

      I don't blame Obama or he's aids, I blame YOU!
    • joeanon, on 06/19/2008, -3/+4You right, it is typical, Typical of how American's think, opportunistically and without accountability.

      It's the public who is allowing the anti Muslim sentiment and the GOP helping to enforce it calling him Muslim.

      Cmon... His Baby Mama ? A terrorist first jab ?

      The old guard is ***** itself trying to stop Obama.



    • Takfam, on 06/19/2008, -3/+1McCain's people would ask single-toothed trailer trash with a gob of chaw wearing a confederate flag baseball cap and holding a shotgun to not stand behind him in his pictures. How is this any different?
    • MxM111, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1Everybody does it!

      See your reverse psychology does not work!
    • cyclades, on 06/19/2008, -3/+1Go ***** yourself Legolas68.
    • ASSASSYN360, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2"Everybody does it."-Obama 08
    • kingjam, on 06/19/2008, -4/+1Obama is a *****
      • OwdenBowden, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1You sir are an *****!
      • Demener, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1I agree with the comic that said that term should be turned into a snack food.
    • OwdenBowden, on 06/19/2008, -2/+2Obama is a Lying ***** of an Empty Suit.
      If these idiots elect him into the White House we are all Doomed. Look out when the Obama-heads request all of us to move to Guyana and have a tall cup of grape kool-aid.
    • BabyWookie, on 06/19/2008, -2/+1What the *****? What did Obama have to do with this? These volunteers were cowardly jackasses though.
  • teddyrxpin, on 06/18/2008, -135/+167The rally was on Monday, not yesterday. Either way, Obama will get a pass on this just like he does on everything.
    • Spuy767, on 06/18/2008, -13/+8You are correct, the rally was on monday, and I believe this photo op was yesterday, in any case, the Obama campaign needs to school its volunteers a little better.
      • SpectralSounds, on 06/18/2008, -8/+21It didn't matter what Obama or his volunteers did that night. They were ***** either way. On the news you would have heard how, "He is a terrorist! Look at those muslims sitting right behind him Obviously, because there are muslims there, that makes him a muslim, and we all know muslims are terrorists!"


      • TheTSArt, on 06/19/2008, -1/+4Many years ago I sat behind a presumptive nominee and it wasn't volunteers who picked me out, it was heads of staff and secret service.

        Isn't Obama supposed to be a micro-manager, so all of the sudden is he not involved in something as important as this??
    • Disneyisevil50, on 06/19/2008, -5/+46Oh come on, you can't seriously say that he should be scrutinized for this. There was no way that he knew his campaign people would say this. It's a non-issue. Obviously some PR people saw the women and got worried the news would overplay it if there were muslim women at the meeting, and it's not like that's all that crazy of a thought.
      • PeacefulKancer, on 06/19/2008, -9/+8Point is... you surround yourself with people you trust to represent you. This is especially true knowing that any of these said representatives could be interviewed and thusly "speak for you." If your representatives are doing things such as removing people of Muslim faith, then you are guilty by association. Furthermore, if he is getting a pass, and this story is out there, then maybe he should be more vocal about denouncing it.

        "Obviously some PR people saw the women and got worried the news would overplay it if there were muslim women at the meeting, and it's not like that's all that crazy of a thought." So, you like politics as usual? Step on the Muslim women even though they support you? Step on anyone who isn't going to give you a "pretty image"? Muslim women are already treated (by some) as second class, now Barrack "the supporter of all" Obama is renigging on them as well? Despicable.
        • blackdude, on 06/19/2008, -3/+2Well your volunteers should work with you as a team and represent you but "speak for you" is farfetched. Personally I don't think this matter is a big deal anyhow.
        • Asrrin29, on 06/19/2008, -2/+1You can't control what people will do or say. Even if you direct them, pay them, threaten them, do whatever to try and get them to do what you want to do, people still have free will. Obama has no more control over these people, who most likely were picked by subordinates of subordinates of staffers of his. Obama does not hand pick every volunteer of his campaign. It's terrible that the women were treated this way, and I know Obama personally will do the right thing, but as far as his campaigning is concerned, this is a none issue.
      • Screwy1138, on 06/19/2008, -1/+6"Oh come on, you can't seriously say that he should be scrutinized for this"

        I agree wholeheartedly. But that wouldn't stop people if it were McCain.
        • BabyWookie, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1McCain wouldn't be in the same situation, because no idiotic *****-nuts are spreading e-mail hate campaigns, suggesting that he's a terrorist infiltrator.
      • Spudster, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1It'll become a non-issue once he gives her a formal apology and a chance to sit behind the candidate. That'll show Obama is putting his money where his mouth is.
    • kreneskyp, on 06/19/2008, -2/+14and if he had been in a picture with people wearing head scarves? would he get a pass on that? Of course not. We'd see it all over the news along with the "fist jab" and other non-news items that were MADE into scandals. Some people, fox news especially, are looking for things like this just so they can exploit them into ratings.
      • shawn1122, on 06/19/2008, -2/+3This is an excuse to discriminate people?? "Oh please, go sit over there, you can't be seen on camera" I don't know how you guys are justifying this, in Canada this ***** would never fly, and those volunteers would be asked to leave.

        I know that Obama himself would have let them sit there no problem, but these volunteers need to get a clue. Obama could possibly lose quite a few muslim votes over this..
    • monoa, on 06/19/2008, -2/+8Obama doesn't need a 'pass' - it was volunteers who did this. Or did you not bother reading the article or its title?

      Some people just jump on anything that confirms their prior bias and prejudice....
      • nalen33, on 08/29/2008, -2/+2Like every statement McCain makes?
        • monoa, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3What you mean like calling his wife a *****? Or singing "bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran"? Or "why not a hundred [years to stay in Iraq]"?

          Statements like that? Set me straight if I've got it wrong.
    • drunkinbda, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2well he gets shunned when peopel think he's muslim..now he's getting shunned for hiding a muslim connection (even if it wasnt him doing it himself)..

      there are no other options.. so it seems you are just gunnin for him in any way you can.
    • bcclist, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4His volunteers are idiots. They were arrogant pricks during the super tuesday rally in Chicago. I called numerous times from the phone banks in Chicago. Each time i was "greeted" by pompous idiots that "managed" the office. Actually, they were all pretty much like Michael Scott from The Office. I support the candidate but despise his campaign staff/volunteers.
    • Cuchanu, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2If you think Obama gets passes on everything than you must not have had TV in your cave during the Rev. Wright days...or the "bitter" comments...etc.
    • BabyWookie, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Considering that he didn't actually have any thing to do with this, I am sure that he will.
  • AugustusOsari, on 06/18/2008, -135/+20Women in headscarves?

    You come to America, you become American. Don't bring your foreign culture ***** with you.

    I guess I'll probably be buried for this.
    • teddyrxpin, on 06/18/2008, -30/+6You're right. You will, and deservedly so. You need to shut the ***** up, and Obama needs to find better help, or use that warchest of his to start paying people not to make PR blunders like this.
      • AugustusOsari, on 06/18/2008, -12/+3Culture is just another form of dogmatism, and all dogmatism needs to be shot down. Nothing that is neither natural nor reasonable has a place in any decent society.
        • actorboy, on 06/18/2008, -0/+10Ah, shooting down one culture in defense of another.

          "Define: Dogma (the plural is either dogmata or dogmas, Greek δόγμα, plural δόγματα) is the established belief or doctrine held by a religion, ideology or any kind of organization, thought to be authoritative and not to be disputed or doubted"

          By your own standard, your ideology should be "shot down".
        • romistrub, on 06/19/2008, -6/+3Seriously, though. ***** religion.
        • haydesigner, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2@ AugustusOsari: "Culture is just another form of dogmatism, and all dogmatism needs to be shot down"

          Yeah!
          Except for lapel pins.
          'Cause those... well, they totally ROCK, man!
          Yeah!
          Everyone else is wrong except us!
          Yeah!
      • kansai22, on 06/19/2008, -3/+3They were unpaid volunteers at the rally that did this.
    • Jashobeam5, on 06/18/2008, -7/+28If you had added in "male dominated foreign culture symbols that attack the primary beliefs of feminism" people would have dug you up, most likely.
    • ssn697, on 06/18/2008, -13/+18your relatives must be one of those people who said the Irish were monkeys, that Italians need not apply, etc.

      Your enlightenment is overwhelming.

      Am I allowed to were bright colors, or be bi-racial in your little world? If I sing an Irish song, should I be deported?
      • AugustusOsari, on 06/18/2008, -8/+4Wear, not were.

        Bright colors? Go ahead.

        Bi-racial? What's this 'race' thing you speak of?

        Irish song deportation? Define "Irish song," please. (No deportation, though. The law should stay out of these matters.)
      • AvidPreatorian, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3you dumb scum, if foreigners didn't bring their culture to the U.S. then wtf would America be? an empty, boring plate.

        people like you disgust me. your generation must go.
        • thegreenspanput, on 06/19/2008, -4/+0Muslims are a different kettle of fish. They are just awful basically. I say don't let them in in the first place.
        • IpecacNeat, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1It isn't just the Muslim culture that wear head scarves.
    • lastoftheidiots, on 06/19/2008, -1/+22Do you like pasta dishes? You know, things like lasagna. How about tacos or fajitas? Or any other "foreign" foods? Cuz, you know, that's culture too.
    • charm803, on 06/19/2008, -3/+20I agree. Let's start sending Europeans back home first....right? That's what you meant?
    • kinseyincanada, on 06/19/2008, -3/+24Wow i can not believe someone like you exists in this day and age. You sir are what is wrong in this world.
    • dagnome1984, on 06/19/2008, -2/+12Well if you don't like it stop ordering out for Chinese because your very actions encourage it.
    • tjmb9, on 06/19/2008, -7/+5You broke the first and second rules of the Right Club. Don't talk about racism. Ever. Just Believe it to the core.
    • FecalHurler, on 06/19/2008, -0/+5Well, if you're Christian make sure not to wear that Cross.

      Don't bring your foreign ***** over here.
    • glasnostic, on 06/19/2008, -1/+3where are your ***** moccasins you asshat.
    • loudmouth11, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1dugg for being correct on his guess
  • thatguy331, on 06/18/2008, -144/+142This will never make it to the front page... Obama can do no wrong in the eyes of a lot of Digg'ers...
    • zephyear, on 06/18/2008, -25/+90uh, obama did no wrong here?

      his volunteers did
      • follower64, on 06/19/2008, -18/+5That's what they want you to think...
        • arkboysooner, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2conspiracy theorists like yourself would have us believe anything.
      • romistrub, on 06/19/2008, -4/+16I can't believe people dugg you down for this.

        I would not blame McCain for what his volunteers (or his fundraisers) do. That type of politics is ridiculous!
        • jgzman, on 06/19/2008, -2/+3No, but I do expect Obama to do something about this. He did not act wrongly, but if he fails to correct an error that has been brought to his attention, then he is wrong.
        • arkboysooner, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3He already has corrected it. He apologized and said it has no place in his campaign. This should be a non issue, but it is made into one by Republicans and Ron Paul supporters who are trying to get their conspiracy laced voices heard here.
      • zacharytelschow, on 06/19/2008, -3/+5You really think "volunteers" had the gall to tell minorities they would not be allowed to sit behind Obama without someone else having told them? Fat freaking chance.
    • wright3279, on 06/18/2008, -29/+33Just another politician and hypocrite. I've wondered also if those fainting women at his rallies are plants.
      • smacksaw, on 06/19/2008, -6/+34No, I assure you that they are fully mammalian.
      • defectDS, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Sandy, I don't know if you've noticed, but I's is 100% ma-MALE.
      • Dimbleby, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Uh, for your information, I was at one of his rallies and a woman a few feet from me fainted. The speech continued while the ME came over and did stuff to her. She was completely out, limp and white as a sheet.
    • Felixthecat71, on 06/18/2008, -26/+36*****! Obama is well aware of the set up and what is going on. A good candidate is always aware. He knows what he can and can not do... This is one. Another free pass for the boy wonder!
      • tweehopper, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1You think a single person can know everything that is going on with thousands of people working under him? That's ridiculous. Stuff will inevitably happen that is out of his hands and unfortunately in his name.
      • dexter411, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Apologetics...lalalalala...
    • ssn697, on 06/18/2008, -19/+24What wrong was done, exactly? Wearing clothing that you don't approve of, or living in a country where we are so non-Christian phobic, that this is a story?

      The fact that it is 2008, and politician can't even betake a CHANCE that there would be a non-Christian centric picture with them in it, says more about how ***** up we, as a nation, are, then anything else.
      • actorboy, on 06/18/2008, -7/+13This is the correct answer. Obama can only do good for people, including these women, when he gets in office -- but the Republican smear machine would use this picture to try to keep him from getting in office. It is a sad state of affairs in regard to what our country has become.

        To the women in question: see the forest, not the trees.
      • romistrub, on 06/19/2008, -5/+5Seriously. OMG MUSLIMS. I have as much respect for a muslim as I do for a christian. No more, no less. I think they're both stupid in their own right, but besides that, they both want the same thing... to be left the ***** alone.
      • TedLW30101, on 06/19/2008, -2/+0It is telling how weak a person Obama is for not having stood up for these women (if he was truly unaware).

        After all, isn't he supposed to be the 'agent of change'?

        You are getting played just like Congressional Democrats told you what you wanted to hear in 2006 to get elected and did NONE of what they promised you.
        • IpecacNeat, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Are you just naive? Imagine the firestorm if those women were allowed to stay. Obama has enough fake ***** to deal with, he doesn't need another e-mail being passed around by my Grandmother saying "Obama holds Muslim rally." Or "Obama supports the degration of women by encouraging head scarves." It is wrong that it would be spun this way, but it is a fact of this country. Obama needs to make it to office before he can help change things.
        • TedLW30101, on 06/20/2008, -0/+0So, what you are saying is that he is weak and will cave and/or manipulate his surroundings for fear of being criticized. He's willing to discriminate in order to make others feel good.

          Wow, some leader he's going to be.
      • ileftfark, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1What the ***** are you talking about? OF COURSE he can be seen around Muslim peoples. Don't act like he has no choice but to push them off into the corners. If he or members of his campaign CHOOSE to shun them, that's one thing. Don't even try that "Oh, no, he couldn't risk it" *****. It's ***** up and you know it, no matter who did it. Why you are defending prejudice and poor judgment is beyond me.

        Also, politically speaking, any idiot who's going to make a big deal about Obama being seen around a Muslim was never going to vote for Obama anyway. Just a little FYI.
        • IpecacNeat, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1That is so bull, and you know it. A picture with those women in the background would unfortunately be spun in so many ridiculous ways. This is just like Obama having to leave his Church. It was necessary to further his campaign. Somethings like this are horrible, but necessary. I'll eat my words when I see McCain in a photo opportunity with these women.
        • TedLW30101, on 06/20/2008, -0/+0Obama didn't have to leave his church, especially if he really believed in the teachings of his mentor.

          So, the reasons he left his church could be he found out how crazy the Rev was and left (like most rational people would) or he left because he is marketing himself and being a typical politician (not a change imo).
    • DeskFlyer, on 06/18/2008, -5/+18I'm an Obama fan and I dugg this story simply because I think everyone should be exposed to all viewpoints on each candidate, good and bad. It would be unwise of me to believe my candidate of choice is perfect and could do no foul, which would simply portray blind ignorance on my part.
      • smacksaw, on 06/19/2008, -10/+11I dugg the story because of the implication (that the righties are ignorant of) that the fact they take these pictures and use them to spread fear, intolerance and hate - that's the problem.

        I think it's almost genius hilarity how people pat themselves on the back for Obama's mistake when their own intolerance is the breeding ground for this sort of discrimination.

        As a libertarian, I try to believe and even align myself with Republicans in that they claim we don't need any laws about race or treatment of minorities, but EVERY SINGLE TIME they have a chance to do the right thing based upon their semi-libertarian "leave me alone and I'll leave you alone" principles, they fail.

        Like the picture of Obama at the anthem or in his traditional garb - it all got forwarded for purely discriminatory reasons. It's this sort of ***** that makes it hard to be a libertarian because so many people who call themselves libertarians all say "leave me alone and I'll leave you alone" when what they really means is "leave me alone while I ***** with you and/or leave you to rot."
        • tjmb9, on 06/19/2008, -1/+4You just restored my faith in libertarians.
        • Spudster, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1The Republican party is NOT the party for libertarians. This party has had a monopoly on libertarians for way too long and have done little service to their cause. Face the facts, both the Democrats and Republicans are quite frankly economic capitalists with very little differences on the economic side that would sway any libertarian. In fact, Republicans are now the party against the free market with their corporate welfare actions. Much of the party differences now come down to civil rights and social issues (where any good libertarian sits to the left with the democrats and not the Republicans).

          It is now the left that defends civil liberties, not the right. A defence of free markets does not mean a defence of corporate welfare. I really hope fellow libertarians understand this message: Your views align more with the left than the right, it's time to switch.
    • SethEllis, on 06/19/2008, -1/+8I'm glad to find out that you're wrong, and the story hit the front page :)
    • mudpuddle, on 06/19/2008, -4/+9And yet, here it is!

      And, wow, all the top comments are also "anti" Obama. Look, every couple days an anti Obama article makes it to the front page, and all the top comments either complain that the article will never make it to the front page, that the comment will be buried, or that no Anti-Obama articles ever get publicized. Stop wallowing, it's getting plenty of play.

      Now how about some useful comments instead of misplaced whining?
      • TedLW30101, on 06/19/2008, -2/+0I believe the front page people are speaking of are the major newspapers and news stations.

        Why don't you think that discrimination done on behalf of Barack Obama is newsworthy?
        • ileftfark, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1...starting after this comment. GOGOGO
        • mudpuddle, on 06/19/2008, -0/+0I'm sorry you misunderstood me. When did I say this story wasn't newsworthy?

          I'm whining about the whining. When this story first broke, all the top comments berated the *Digg Community* for ignoring these types of articles, despite the fact that the article itself was on the front page and the comments stating so were topping the list.

          It's like if I released a statement damning people for not listening to me, and then that statement is the top feature in every newspaper and nightly news.
        • TedLW30101, on 06/19/2008, -0/+0First, I understood you fine. Digg is an opinion pool. Yet the comments are asking why it isn't being shown via the mainstream media.

          I understand the that people who think Digg is great would equate 'front-page' with only Digg site and not any other media materials.

          Also, as far as newsworthy I didn't ask strictly about the article. I posed a simple question: If the act of preventing these women from sitting behind him can be classified as discrimination, why wouldn't that be newsworthy of the 'agent of change'?

        • mudpuddle, on 06/19/2008, -0/+0It *would* be newsworthy.

          You posed a simple question, but you rephrased it in your second attempt. You first asked why I thought it wasn't newsworthy, which I never stated. The second time was more unassuming. It's like asking:

          "Why don't you think children have a right to an education?"

          vs

          "Do you think children have a right to an education?"

          See the assumption in the first question?
    • ZenMojo, on 06/19/2008, -3/+6It was on the news all day Wednesday. Nobody's missing anything. And if you watched the news, it's clear that Obama knew nothing about it. His campaign released a photo of him with a girl in a headscarf taken from earlier and an apologetic statement.

      I guess we should blame John McCain for those "If Barack Obama wins the presidency, can we still call it the white house" buttons sold by the Texas GOP at the even he was at. I mean, it's a bunch of volunteers at his campaign stop. What's the difference?
      • Spuy767, on 06/19/2008, -1/+5Ummm, I saw plenty of comments doing exactly that, blaming McCain for the printing of those buttons.
        • IpecacNeat, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1...and that was also wrong.
        • BabyWookie, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1Really? I was following that thread quite closely and didn't see any one blaming McCain personally for it. Yes, plenty of people were saying that the Republicans are mostly a bunch of thinly veiled racist WASPs, but that's just stating the obvious.
    • ligyron, on 06/19/2008, -1/+3Wow, thatguy331, you've been here for one day and you already have the digg community figured out. Or are you on some kind of agenda?
    • TheTSArt, on 06/19/2008, -2/+6This is a perfect Digg story because it tries to show that another of Obama's failings is not his fault. Blame it on some "volunteer."

      I guess Obama's not a fan of 'the buck stops here.'
      • rossmcd, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3And yet he made an apology to the women for the behavior of the volunteers. Some people would call that taking responsibility, not passing the buck.
      • BabyWookie, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Hey, right-wing scum-bucket. How did Obama fail here, again? He can't personaly oversee some kind of selection proccess for his campaign volunteers.
    • jDerek, on 06/19/2008, -1/+3Hey, it made the front page. How about that.
    • afajem, on 06/19/2008, -2/+2thatguy331, what kind of toppings would you like on your words, sir?
    • x1soundgarden1x, on 06/19/2008, -2/+1Ummm, are you no blaming Obama for what his volunteers and affiliates did without his knowledge? Wow, is that a standard you set for yourself?
    • DemiRonin, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1Lol you can be sure if this was Mc Cain the story would have been titled a lot harsher. MC CAIN THROWS TURBAN WOMEN BACK STAGE.
  • rjwusa, on 06/18/2008, -73/+64Didn't Hillary stick a bunch of blacks into camera shot at one of her campaign rallies? Why must liberals and democrats manipulate the media so often?
    • bluestater, on 06/18/2008, -26/+29This is Hitler-esque. Everything is staged because they, democrats, can't afford to be real and show America who they really are. Nobody would like them, except roughly 25 percent of hardcore voters who think like they do, so they have to try to fool people. The Clintons did this all the time.
      • kinseyincanada, on 06/19/2008, -4/+5wow a little over the top Hitler-esque but still i agree it was wrong, all he was simply trying to do is prevent a backlash against him being a secret muslim or a terrorist or some crap, which could of resulted in a picture of him with muslims.
      • mattlohkamp, on 06/19/2008, -2/+6Yeah, looks like you've tripped Godwin's Law with that Reductio ad Hitlerum argument. Fail!
      • BabyWookie, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Whatever you say... as long as it makes you feel better about supporting a bunch of blood-thirsty, corporate fascist traitors known as the neocons.
    • lydecker, on 06/18/2008, -13/+52"Why must liberals and democrats [and conservatives and republicans] manipulate the media so often?"

      That's better.
    • btschul, on 06/18/2008, -16/+9It's the only way they can get votes?
    • follower64, on 06/19/2008, -18/+9"Why must liberals and democrats manipulate the media so often?"
      It's what they do. They can't stand on their own two feet, so they make it look like they can.
      • TheLoneHoot, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1much the way the swift boat asshats did, and the way the Bushies did w/ manipulating the press into going along w/ the idea of WMDs, and the way the hawks got the "military consultants" on TV 24/7 in the lead up to the war, and...

        ...well, you get the picture.
        • follower64, on 06/20/2008, -1/+1Bushes manipulating the press? ***** that! The media hates Bush and the war
        • TheLoneHoot, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1Re-read what I wrote please...
    • unearth, on 06/19/2008, -6/+21Bush manipulated the ***** out of the media in 2003. Bush staged a Q&A with the troops. McCain staged a fake town hall meeting.

      But no, it's those damn libruls and their Democrat [sic] Party.
    • Tocc, on 06/19/2008, -1/+4Simply from the article:
      "On the Republican side, a Hispanic New Hampshire Democrat, Roberto Fuentes, told Politico that he was recently asked, and declined, to contribute to the “diversity” of the crowd behind Sen. John McCain at a Nashua event."
    • coleyslaw, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3had he not manipulated the media, the media would have manipulated the situation to make the general american public believe he was once again, a muslim.
    • herbertstrasse, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1"Why must liberals and democrats manipulate the media so often?"

      http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/washington/20gen ...

      /argument
    • Spudster, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3Why must Conservative and Republicans manipulate voters with empty rhetoric?
  • tman84, on 06/18/2008, -22/+9totally original I SWEAR
    http://digg.com/politics/Muslims_barred_from_pictu ...
    • teddyrxpin, on 06/18/2008, -3/+4Posted at exactly the same time you *****. Plus, it would appear that the poster of this article though of his own summary instead of copy pasting from the article.
      • JointVenture, on 06/18/2008, -4/+3Yeah, but this submitter toned the title down so that the link couldn't be presented as titled.

        *****.
      • tman84, on 06/18/2008, -6/+2Check the timestamps douchenozzle, I was in 2 minutes before him. Also, of course he wrote his own summary, it was most likely handed to him by the McCain staff, who happens to be his only friend on digg. I'd rather have readers form their own summary.
        The only thing this hurts is those of us who want Obama exposed for the liar and hypocrite he is, because its less likely either of these will be on the front page with a dupe.
      • mechnoch, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2@*****, *****, and douchenozzle
        You folks make me proud of American politics.
  • poploserdigg, on 06/18/2008, -39/+12Buried for Douche...I mean...Dupe.
  • Griberal, on 06/18/2008, -81/+73Let's see, Obama slams muslims by saying on his website that it's a smear to be called a muslim. He also used a sexist reference to a reporter in Michigan. Now he and his campaign discriminate against muslim women. The more we learn about this guy, the worse he looks. Change, my ass.
    • facelesscoward, on 06/19/2008, -10/+35Ugh...this is so ***** up. If Obama lets them spread the lies about him being a Muslim, hundreds of thousands of ignorant Americans who think that terrorism and Islam are inextricably bound won't vote for him. If Obama doesn't let them spread the lies, he looks like a bigot for implying that being a Muslim is necessarily a bad thing. Obviously, his volunteers requesting that Muslims keep their distance is really ***** up, but I really can't fault him for trying to push back against these baseless claims because, unfortunately, in America's current political climate, falsely declaring someone running for political office a Muslim is a smear.
    • skteoievtehr, on 06/19/2008, -5/+19Let's remember that these are Obama's VOLUNTEERS. People like myself who have no official affiliation with the campaign, some of which happen to be jackasses, just like the assortment of independent and republican jackasses. And Obama has repeatedly advocated for Muslim Americans--note his 2004 keynote address to the DNC in which he proclaimed that if an Arab American family is being rounded up without the benefit of an attorney, that threatens his civil liberties, as well. The media has made being Muslim an insult. Not Obama. Because his supporters have become scared is not due to Obama's actions.
      • zacharytelschow, on 06/19/2008, -3/+2You really think volunteers (two of them, independently and at the same event) made this decision all by their lonesome? I really doubt it.
        • IpecacNeat, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1You really think that Obama came in and made the decision for them? I really doubt it.
    • romistrub, on 06/19/2008, -4/+14Alright, I'll bite.

      Conclusion: you're ***** stupid
      Premises:
      A) A smear is based on intent to destroy character. The smearER must therefore believe that what they put forth will destroy said character. Obama can therefore justifiably call this a smear, attributable entirely to intent.
      B) Hypothetical situation: Your kid skips school. Is it fair for me to say "Griberal and his close friends all skipped school today". See how ***** stupid that sounds? Guilt by mere association is never justified.
    • tjmb9, on 06/19/2008, -2/+2Griberal would never vote for a Muslim President.
    • twiztidsinz, on 06/19/2008, -1/+4smear: (transitive) To damage someone's reputation by slandering, misrepresenting, or otherwise making false accusations about an individual, their statements, or their actions.

      Seems like a lie would be a smear to me...
    • neofreakiii, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1Even if "smear" had any negative connotations, I don't think that Obama would actually put that on his website. He knows that the internet is for everyone and anything is accessible, so he would be shooting himself if he were to say that.
  • mathewsjw, on 06/18/2008, -28/+16ha ha ha
  • Felixthecat71, on 06/18/2008, -113/+108So much for "Change You Can Believe In".
    • JAVandiver, on 06/18/2008, -29/+28Tell them, "NObama '08: Keep the change."
      • tjmb9, on 06/19/2008, -11/+5Great message. That's sure to get people involved in the process.
        I hate you.
      • Spudster, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1Your cunning wit amazes me.
    • joeanon, on 06/19/2008, -4/+11If you think it's easy for a black man to get elected in the good ol US of A... you're a ***** retard.

      Flag pins, Is he Muslim, he went to 'Muslim' school, he isn't black enough, Michelle is his Baby Mama, Terrorist Fist Jab, have heard of Jeremiah Wright, black power connections, kill whitie.

      Do you even watch news that does anything more than agree with you own limited opinion.

      No one who is informed would dare say Obama is getting a free pass, especially compared to McCain who is flip flopping like some crazed old man GOP bobble head. He can't even remember his OWN STANCE from 3 years ago or probably even 3 days ago.
      • SuperVepr308, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1It's Whitey.

        Thanks!
      • msk275, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Exactly.

        And the thing with this is.. he's damned if he let's them in.. he's damned if he doesn't let them in.

        But I don't see him trying to suck up to both sides of the fence. Flip flopping like a fish out of water. If he doesn't have a solid stance.. what the hell is he doing running for president? Oh that's right... he's a puppet for the power-mongers. doh! The same quality that roasted Kerry and Romney before him is going to send him to the same place.. 2nd.

        This election in November shouldn't even be close if people know what the hell they are voting for. A friend of mine says he's not paying attention and is going to vote Republican/McCain as default. He's on the underside of the poor line and not collecting welfare.. He's a college dropout and dumb. And I smoked his ass in 3 straight chess games. End of story. haha.
      • Spudster, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1I don't think these attacks are getting any momentum though. The media is obsessed with horse-race politics and as a result they need stories to run. The only logical result is a great focus on tiny campaign "gaffes" to feed the public interest in the campaign.

        Realistically, I don't think anyone is actually changing their minds from these attacks. If they are, then they were a lost cause to begin with.
  • wright3279, on 06/18/2008, -75/+68Don't you know? Obama is the next messiah. It has been reported that he can walk on water.
    • isparadiselost, on 06/19/2008, -5/+12Plus he can shoot fireballs out of his arse.
    • brad3378, on 06/19/2008, -3/+4http://watchingamerica.com/images/JesusObama.jpg
    • phrenzy, on 06/19/2008, -4/+5Damn man, that is the most ORIGINAL and SCATHING sarcastic remark I've ever heard about Obama. Did you come up with that all by yourself?
      • Spudster, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1I must say, his witty remark really flipped everything I think about U.S. politics upside down...
    • gotrootdude, on 06/19/2008, -3/+0I am the messiah. Wright3279, your message is distasteful too me. Repent or face the wraith of God.
    • Screwy1138, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2The amount of + diggs and - diggs on your post amuse me.
    • ponyboy96, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2More like the anti-Christ. I know it sounds crazy, but there are just way too many similarities, IMO. Every time I hear him speak, I just seem to get that vibe from him.
  • Christianptriot, on 06/18/2008, -51/+43CAIR will NOT enter into this as they would if it were McCain supporters who did this. They love Obama and could care less about how he treated these women, since muslims think of women as property and second-class citizens or worse anyway.
    • tjmb9, on 06/19/2008, -6/+5CAIR? Obama didn't do ***** to those women. It also sounds like you are implying that Obama is a Muslim. The level of stupidity in not only your comment, but about 90% of the comments on here trying to make a big deal out of this is astounding.

      You people are the reason America is in this mess. How the ***** did Bush win twice. Are you ***** kidding me? I'm joining the Taliban if McCain ***** wins this.
      • Christianptriot, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1According to islamic law, since Obama was born to a muslim father he is a MUSLIM. Until he publicly renounces that heritage, by muslim edict he is a muslim.

        Your personal attacks are telling of the shallowness and weakness with which you enter a battle of wits.
    • phrenzy, on 06/19/2008, -6/+3You are the same person who would be forwarding a picture of Obama with "fellow muslims" in the background to every ignorant hick you know.
      • Christianptriot, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1Did you get the email? Sorry, I must have overlooked your email address somehow....
    • munawarali2, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2You should know what you're talking about before you start spewing your hate. CAIR did issue a statement after this event:

      "We welcome the campaign's apology and urge candidates of all parties not to give in to pressure from the vocal minority of Islamophobes in our society that seeks to stigmatize Islam and marginalize American Muslims," said CAIR National Legislative Director Corey Saylor. "All presidential campaigns need to clearly answer the question: Should American Muslims be marginalized from their country's political process simply because of their faith?"

      http://www.cair.com/ArticleDetails.aspx?ArticleID= ...
      • Christianptriot, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1My point is that they are not going to make a big public splash over this like they would if this was McCain's campaign - or Hillary's. They basically leak some remarks that almost no one picks up - at leasts the liberal MSM. How hard have they tied to speak out about ANYTHING that might be negative toward Obama??
  • suttercain, on 06/18/2008, -51/+137I am not a Republican nor am I a supporter of McCain so I have no agenda here. But this is pretty damn repulsive. Had McCain supporters done this, this would be front page news. The bottom line is: We cannot judge EITHER of the candidates based on what others do, unless they were instructed by the candidate to do so. This goes for McCain too.
    • wonderworm, on 06/19/2008, -16/+23Dude, McCain goes much much further. McCain gets fed questions from plants in the audience from his "straight talk" town meeting where supposedly anyone can ask him a question. The reality is the exact opposite and questioners are carefully chosen from strongly Republican stock or even local republican party workers. No front page news there.

      And what is repulsive? The actions of the unpaid volunteers who have seen first hand the dangerous and deceitful bias of the media? Or the actions of all the millions of bigots whom seeing a single headscarf would stoke their ignorant delusions about Obama? The thing that is repulsive is the latter and after 8 years of Obama, we won't have to worry about those repulsive racists and bigots anymore. Because Barack will kill them with kindness, integrity, and success for all Americans.
      • jefferygomer, on 06/19/2008, -3/+8Could you please provide an article, a video, a picture, or anything to support your "straight talk plant" claim? Without some sort of evidence, I call "*****."

        I'm no fan of McCain, but unsupported claims like this is just as bad as playing dirty politics. Just as bad as Fox News shenanigans. Instead of putting so much blame on "MSM" and those corrupt politicians, it's about time some of us walked the walk instead.
        - Especially since digg IS a news source.
        • TsuruchiBrian, on 06/19/2008, -1/+3I think this might be what wonderworm is referring to:
          http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/12/mccain-st ...

          I don't know if this is true or not. I also don't know if fox news can be considered a news source.
        • wonderworm, on 06/20/2008, -1/+1But wait there's more! You ask and you shall receive gomer. There's far better evidence right here in my links than even our great (cough) president Bush had for invading Iraq.
          http://www.dailykingfish.com/showDiary.do?diaryId= ...
          http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/6/5/01122/67527 ...
          This is classic Rove strategy, well what do you know?
          http://www.newshounds.us/2008/06/03/colmes_identif ...
        • jefferygomer, on 07/02/2008, -0/+1I know I'm late in responding.
          You provided one link to a blog, which had no more evidence than your original claim, and then a DailyKos blog echoing the first link. Don't piss on my leg and tell me it is raining.

          I'm not surprised that Rove is an informal adviser to McCain. I'm willing to bet Obama has received a couple tidbits of info from other people too. It's very Rove-esque. So?

          TsuruchiBrain provided a much better link, though that still is more of a wishy-washy thing. And being that it was Fox News talking about planting people in the crowd? Hi my name is Kettle, and you are black.
    • giskard88, on 06/19/2008, -10/+6This wasn't campain policy. this was a couple of grunt level volunters who thought they were media savy political operators deciding it was up to them to protect Obama's image. This kind of stupidity happens all of the time.
      • suttercain, on 06/19/2008, -2/+5The other day there was an article that made it on the front page about a McCain supporter selling some buttons about "Are we still going to call it the White House if Obama is elected?"

        Numerous people started blaming McCain. Is that not some type of double standard? All I am saying is be fair when looking at all the candidates.
        • BabyWookie, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1I don't ***** remember any one blaiming McCain in that particular thread.
        • suttercain, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Just because you don't '***** remember' doesn't mean it didn't happen....

          "Is this suppose to persuade the voters to go for McCain? Seriously? Seems stupid to me that they'd do it."
    • PhilliesBlunt, on 06/19/2008, -4/+9It's like this, the reason Republicans don't survive sex scandals while Democrats do is because the Republican party platform has a holier then thou attitude about it. Similarly, the Democrats are holier then thou about being the party of inclusion, so when they pull something like this, they (rightly) take heat for it. Gotta love professional campaign strategists.
      • TsuruchiBrian, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2So when a Republican candidate's volunteer has an affair, the candidate takes the blame?

        Wow what a deal, I'll take it.
      • rald84, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1you have it backwards. sens craig and vitter and rep. fossella are still in office, while clinton was impeached and spitzer forced to resign.
        • PhilliesBlunt, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Clinton stayed in office and most people saw the impeachment for the BS that it was.
    • joeanon, on 06/19/2008, -4/+7Yea, but judging reality by what appears on the front page is a great logic flaw.

      McCain has not been repeatedly slandered with the claim he is Muslim, so the comparison is completely invalid.

      On the other hand McCain is getting away with calling his wife a ***** in public and that's not making the front page.

      You just don't really follow the news enough to know what you're talking about.

      If you think it's easy for a black man to get elected in the good ol US of A... you're a ***** retard.

      Flag pins, Is he Muslim, he went to 'Muslim' school, he isn't black enough, Michelle is his Baby Mama, Terrorist Fist Jab, have heard of Jeremiah Wright, black power connections, kill whitie.

      Do you even watch news that does anything more than agree with you own limited opinion.

      No one who is informed would dare say Obama is getting a free pass, especially compared to McCain who is flip flopping like some crazed old man GOP bobble head. He can't even remember his OWN STANCE from 3 years ago or probably even 3 days ago.

      He has no clue what the conditions of Iraq are like, hence his entirely false statement of how it's same to drive around unarmed. Then he visits Iraq under the guard of a hundreds troops, armed escort vehicles, and 5 helicopters along with being clad in body armor. YEA that sounds like a real safe place you braindead *****.

      Free pass my ass.

      Go look up all the times McCain has blow up, threatened congressmen, tried to physically intimidate congressmen.

      He left his GOD DAMN disabled wife to marry millionaires Cindy.

      I don't read ANY of that ***** on mainstream news. *****, the Daily Show reports more real news than CNN.

      If you want your country to be great again, you have to start telling the truth... end of story. Great countries are not built on lies, propaganda and individual opinion mascaraing as reality.

      • StateRadioFan, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3bloody brilliant! you kick ass joeanon.
    • EskNerd, on 06/19/2008, -3/+3Yeah, but McCain has no non-White supporters, so how would this happen at one of his rallies?
  • cwmather, on 06/18/2008, -47/+35It's unfortunate that this will never make it to the front page.
    • Spuy767, on 06/18/2008, -15/+5Surprisingly, it has enough diggs/comments to be on the front page. If it doesn't make it, I'll have serious questions about Digg's "algorithm."
    • fxu1989, on 06/19/2008, -2/+8Frontpage'd...

      Take a seat __
      • cwmather, on 06/19/2008, -2/+1For once, I am very pleased to be proven wrong. Of course, if this was John McCain the headline would read. JOHN MCCAIN IS A F***ING RACIST C*NT LOVING PIG WHORE!!!!!!!
  • DuggDowner, on 06/18/2008, -55/+104Funny that the only time these repugs care about the rights of Muslims is when they can bash Barack Obama. The rest of the time they advocate for their torture and genocide.
    • stickywheelz, on 06/18/2008, -16/+21Seems to me that the Obama campaign is doing the bashing in this case.
      • charm803, on 06/19/2008, -8/+19If they would have sat behind him, you would have posted this and said "See! He's a terrorist!"

        You can't win with you guys.
        • PeppermintPig, on 06/19/2008, -6/+9Agree. I've seen a great deal of bashing of Obama on these non-issue issues. That said, I wouldn't waste all my time obsessing over what these radical 'conservatives' think about Obama if it's only going to be more of the same. It just goes to show that they don't have a serious critique about Obama and would probably like his policies as much as McCain's.
        • thebaron2, on 06/19/2008, -2/+4You're kidding right? Even according to the article Barack has been photographed with Muslims in traditional garb before. And he did a photo op yesterday just for damage control because of this.

          If Obama was getting bashed for stupid ***** like this, where was the bashing when Muslims were in previous photo ops with the headdresses on? Where's the bashing from the photo op yesterday?

          This was just a stupid call by some dumb asses on the ground. Until, and if, it's revealed that these marching orders came from above this is just stupid.
        • legolas68, on 06/19/2008, -3/+1Are you implying that somewhere there is a legitimate "policy" to critique?
        • IpecacNeat, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3Umm, thebaron2, I've been sent many stupid forwarded e-mails from my Grandmother showing Obama with Muslims. People take everything he does out of context. It doesn't make what was done right, but it is almost necessary.
      • juniorb, on 06/19/2008, -2/+2How are a couple unpaid, low-level volunteers who worked that specific event part of Obama's campaign? Anyone can sign up to volunteer.
    • dexter411, on 06/19/2008, -9/+7Republicans advocate for torture and genocide of Muslims? Source?
      • fungistratus, on 06/19/2008, -4/+8Guantanamo Bay....?
        • dexter411, on 06/19/2008, -1/+3You do understand that prisoners at Guantanamo Bay are treated better than any enemy combatants in military history, right? Their diets are rationed similarly to US troops on the island (with considerations for Muslim food restrictions no less) and they are allowed time to practice their religious beliefs and given prayer rugs. You're going to say that American forces pouring water on the faces of three terrorists (yep, we did it to three higher ups in Al Qaeda) is evidence for GOP advocacy of torture and genocide of Muslims?

          Are you that ***** stupid?
        • BabyWookie, on 06/19/2008, -2/+2@dexter411:

          I guess that you haven't read the latest Red Cross report on the torture of detainees in US prison camps. Every person that the interviewed was severely tortured using such methods as electric shock, sodomy, etc.
        • dexter411, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2I read it. I don't buy that "loud noises" is tantamount to torture nor that depriving someone of sleep is the same as beating them brutally three times a day. Where are you "humane treatment" zealots when our troops get beheaded in Afghanistan?
        • herbertstrasse, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1Regardless of the veracity of your dubious claim, the comparison falls flat because most Gitmo detainees are "enemy combatants" in name only. Or did you miss that memo?

          Also, I love how BabyWookie said "using such methods as electric shock, sodomy, etc" and you read that as "loud noises". Uh, last time I checked, neither the words 'electric shock' nor 'sodomy' equate to a loud noise.
      • herbertstrasse, on 06/19/2008, -3/+8"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity."

        Ann Coulter?
        • dexter411, on 06/19/2008, -2/+3Yes, because one right-wing nut is representative of all Republicans. Is Reverend Wright (a lifelong registered Democrat) mirroring the beliefs of all Democrats?
        • BabyWookie, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1Rev. Wright's beliefs sure mirror my own. That guy is a true American hero. It's unfortunate that Obama felt that he needed to distance himself from that great man.
        • dexter411, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1HAHA, you believe that the American government invented AIDS?
        • herbertstrasse, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1Wright has some crazy ideas, but Coulter has a much broader audience.
      • source1984, on 06/19/2008, -3/+5add to that Mike Savage for bombing us all. And Michelle Malkin for putting us in interment camps. YEA, I'M MUSLIM AND I'M NOT A REPUBLICAN.
  • JointVenture, on 06/18/2008, -46/+31Obama is self destructing just as predicted. You cant HOPE the truth away, even though he and his supporters do a damn fine job trying to suppress the truth. For that they deserve some credit as top notch political operatives.
    • phrenzy, on 06/19/2008, -3/+2What is the "truth" exactly? That he is indeed a muslim?
      • Spuy767, on 06/19/2008, -2/+1I think more that his whole "Change" mantra is just that, a mantra. All fluff, no substance.
        • mcquitty, on 06/19/2008, -2/+2I agree. If he were really into change, he would be looking at good energy policies versus fluff.

          Why aren't we doing more drilling in America? Why hasn't he embraced a nuclear energy policy?

          Those ideas are change above today's status quo.

          Nope, he wants more government spending, more government programs. How is that change?
        • IpecacNeat, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2I don't call more drilling in America a sound energy policy. I agree with the nuclear issue. That is a good idea. The oil reserves are not in trouble. It is the energy companies, and the economy driving up the prices, not lack of production.

          We need a way to get off of oil for automobiles. We need more money into alternative fuel resources.

          Mcquitty, you don't see his whole picture. He stands for change, not just on the issues, but symbolic as well. Obama as President will change our whole world image. You can say "***** the rest of the world", but reality is, having a sound relationship with strong countries is necessary in this day in age. An isolationist policy would have worked 100 years ago, but with telecommunications we are as close as ever.

          I hope Obama adopts a nuclear policy, but the drilling in America would do nothing for oil prices. The same can be said about that moronic "gas tax" holiday.
  • hagingtree, on 06/18/2008, -78/+102Just cant wait to hear all the Obamabots saying how this is ok.

    Last week a woman at a Mcain rally called Hillary a bitch, and it made the front page, with a thousand comments saying it was Mcains fault.

    So by this logic, this is Obamas fault right?
    • FreshHaikus, on 06/19/2008, -13/+16Actually, if you recall, most of the popular comments pointed out how it was a McCain volunteer who said it, and that McCain was simply fielding the question. Oh, aside from the comments pointing out how digg has called her much worse. Its still up there anybody can go check, but I'm afraid it makes your cunning little remark look pretty stupid. (this guy has plus 16 diggs? seriously guys?)
    • romistrub, on 06/19/2008, -1/+52I'm not going to lie... I find the people that promote or approve a policy of "guilt by association" are ***** retards. Coincidentally, digg is full of ***** retards.
    • Barackalypse, on 06/19/2008, -4/+10Could you please use the word "Obamaton" to describe the brainwashed masses of Obama followers? Obamabot is lame and unoriginal, just like the term "Paulbot" was. Obamaton is a clever word play because it is quite close to the word "automaton". Remember, when you're dealing with Obama's supporters you must realize these people are all about the rhetoric.
      • tjmb9, on 06/19/2008, -3/+8Obamaton isn't really that clever. Barackalypse is though. Thanks Colbert.
      • TsuruchiBrian, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Mindless Obamanatamanatons....
    • phrenzy, on 06/19/2008, -11/+11You are the same person who would be forwarding a picture of Obama with "fellow muslims" in the background to every ignorant hick you know.
      • Spuy767, on 06/19/2008, -3/+8Don't post the same stupid comment multiple times. At least if I feel I need to make the same post twice in a story, I have the grace to type it out again and it always ends up being just slightly different.
    • Gev1982, on 06/19/2008, -2/+3I don't remember even seeing that--but I do see the media jumping on Obama at every turn in an attempt to find something wrong. No man is perfect, (McCain sure as hell isn't) and I don't see why Obama has to be vilified due to the fact that most of the preconceived notions that republicans carry about him are based on ignorance and lies...I don't blame this on him at all--I blame it on the rest of us--call me an Obamabot if you wish, but at least I will use my vote to get an EDUCATED man into office--this country cannot survive another idiot driven by the interests of corporate America.
    • TotalHalibut, on 06/19/2008, -2/+2Funny how this isn't actually happening. Your out-rage is misplaced, there are not legions of Obamabots defending this to the hilt. And indeed, why would there be? We're imperfect people supporting an imperfect candidate, and we accept that there will be ***** along the way, and those ***** should be condemned. And they already have, by Obama's spokesman.
    • source1984, on 06/19/2008, -1/+6the lady called hillary a bitch and mccain laughed it off. This happened BEHIND obama's back. And he didn't laugh it off.
    • BabyWookie, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2No one is saying that this is ok, you ***** wingnut. We are just saying that Obama had nothing to do with it.
  • dayal911, on 06/18/2008, -54/+40The fact that this only has 40 diggs shows you how retarded the Diggers are.
    The majority of Digg users do NOT care about truth, they only want to push an agenda.

    I see my co-workers reading the DailyKos, Huffington Post, etc etc etc, and taking it as the absolute cold truth, when in reality, all my co-workers are getting is completely biased, and usually twisted, news.

    I don't know how people can claim to know what they are talking about when they only read 1 genre of news; in this case, the far-left genre. So many of them still believe that Bush started the lies about Iraq having WMD's, when in reality, it was started in the 90's by the Clinton regime.

    Most of Digg will never know the truth because they are brainwashed to be far left. When someone is brainwashed, they will try to squash ANYTHING that provides a counter argument to their bias. It's the same thing Scientologist's do.

    • tjmb9, on 06/19/2008, -2/+3Bush is blamed for lying about WMDs as an excuse for war. When did Clinton do that again?
      • Spuy767, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2Bush never lied about WMD's, he simply changed his stories when the WMD's that Sadam pretended for half a decade to have weren't there. (Probably because he used them all on the kurds and couldn't afford to make more.)
      • dayal911, on 06/19/2008, -2/+1Clinton bombed Iraq for 4 days and signed the IRAQ LIBERATION ACT, which called for a REGIME CHANGE in Iraq.
        • Rednik2011, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4Ah, ok. So it is Clinton who unilaterally invaded Iraq based on lies and got us stuck in a quagmire. I'd love to live in your reality, *****.
        • publiclurker, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2What does that have to do with Bush's lies other than a pathetic attempt on your part to avoid admitting the truth.
    • dayal911, on 06/19/2008, -2/+0I love all the liberals who can't accept that the democrats were wrong about WMD's before the Bush administration was, it's quite comical.

      Clinton paved the way for the Iraq war with the Iraq Liberation Act.

      Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, and a whole SLEW of others CLAIMED THAT IRAQ HAD WMD'S IN THE 90'S.

      They later voted FOR the war in Iraq BASED ON THE SAME EVIDENCE that was presented 4 years earlier during Clinton's administration.

      Get that through your head.

      These democrats claimed that Iraq had WMD's before Bush, then VOTED FOR the war in Iraq based on THE SAME EVIDENCE that Bush presented.

      There's a reason democrats are called POPULISTS. They will vote for something, then when popular opinion changes, they will switch over.

      The reason they won't impeach Bush is because they don't want their SECRET WRONG DOINGS investigated and made public.

      Get it through your heads: it's not all Bush's fault, no matter how much you Scientologists want to believe it is.
      • Spudster, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Actually, Clinton resisted invading but signed the Iraq Liberation Act because a group called PNAC (Project for a New American Century) was pressuring him hard to go to war with Iraq. Isn't it conveniant that Dick Cheney and other prominant republican white house figures were members of that group back in the 90's?

        Stop lying to yourself, while Clinton used rhetoric against Saddam, invasion was never on the table. All the pressure for war was started by Republican Bush neocons, even during the 90's.
    • dayal911, on 06/19/2008, -1/+0My point is this:

      There were 2 paths of evidence: both for and against the belief that Iraq had WMD's. McClellan even says in his book, that Bush truly believed that Saddam had WMDs.

      Bush didn't vocalize the other sides of the story, of course. I'll admit that. Both administrations had it out for Iraq, and even Clinton signed a bill funding for a regime change in Iraq.

      Bush had to make a judgment call, and he made the WRONG call, I agree completely. However, his judgment wasn't as off base as you guys want to claim.

      Several UN members, the UK, the NY Times, the Clinton administration, and several prominent democrats like PELOSI and KERRY, all claimed that Saddam had WMD's.

      I know you guys want to believe that Bush is Hitler and this and that, but in reality, he just made a bad call based on evidence brought forward by DEMOCRATS no less.
      • Spudster, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Many people were still against the war regardless of WMD's and for good reason too. I'm not saying this foresight was hard to see either, many other leaders from other nations (Canada, France, Russia) refused to take part because they predicted exactly what would happen. Canadian Prime Minister at the time Jean Chretien about his persistent efforts to convince Tony Blair not to join the U.S. into Iraq. He and many other leaders had the obvious foresight to know that 100,000+ Iraqi's would die in pursuit of stabilizing Iraq and the result would be an absolute quagmire. This is basic logic too. Who in their right mind believes that the invasion of a sovereign country could lead to anything different? But ultimately the question about WMD's came down to this for Bush: What is worse, Saddam possessing WMD's, or the death toll and economic costs the conflict has produced as a result of the stopping that possession?

        The fact that the WMD's were lies was just icing on top of the cake for the anti war movement.
  • alais, on 06/18/2008, -74/+86***** disingenuous bastards, if it were McCain the headline would read "McCain hates muslims" or something else along those lines. Get a spine you doucebags.
    • Gutterpunk, on 06/19/2008, -11/+9Nah, no need for headlines, everyone already knows that McCain hates Muslims.
      • publiclurker, on 06/19/2008, -1/+5And Asians.
      • yojiffyskippy, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1He may hate Obama but he doesn't hate ALL Muslims.
    • cobophers, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2Spelled it wrong :)

      Douche is the correct spelling. Like as in: "I am a douche for not learning how to spell correctly."
    • FecalHurler, on 06/19/2008, -2/+1Hey man when you're right- you're right.

      ...And you're right.
  • Barbrady, on 06/18/2008, -36/+40A couple months ago it was "We need more white people", not it's "We need less headscarves."
  • stickywheelz, on 06/18/2008, -49/+76Stop the Smear! Oh wait this one is true. Never mind.

    • BrendanSheehan, on 06/19/2008, -7/+3What's true? His supporters (not him) stopped some Muslims from getting in his backdrop to stop the swift-boaters for getting their damning photo of him, and thus helping to lose him the election. I've nothing against Muslims, but you what, I don't blame his supports, I blame Fox news for his supporters having to resort to these tactics to have the man being judged on his policies, instead of some fabricated lies.

      The day he does get into that oval office I'll think of Sean Hannity's (Faux news bigot) face and laugh myself silly.
      • nimbleprune, on 06/19/2008, -3/+1I would not vote for a muslim...im assuming most Americans would not. Since his family is from an area that is mainly islamic and his name seems to portray that kind of heritage. His campaign feels the need to seperate themselves from that particular religion.
        • BabyWookie, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Go back to the Dark Ages, you ignorant savage.
        • nimbleprune, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1what...just stating why they did that...
  • rpfinley, on 06/18/2008, -61/+66It seems like his whole campaign has been carefully scripted, I can't wait until we hear actual policies instead of "hope and change"
    • legolas68, on 06/18/2008, -20/+38Policies are not part of the Obama rock tour . This is the very reason that he is balking at the majority of debates with McCain. He has to discuss the issues with some semblance of knowledge at a debate with McCain. This is their worst fear. Second to having women with head-scarves in the photo-ops of course.
      • BrendanSheehan, on 06/19/2008, -7/+5What *****. Obama could out-debate McCain on the issues any day of the week.