Russert suggested GOP would run ads against Obama featuring "Pledge of Allegiance" charge without noting it's false
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
SUMMARY: On Meet the Press, Tim Russert asserted that "many Democrats fear Republicans in the fall will string together an ad which shows," among other things, "[Sen.] Barack Obama with his hands clasped in front of him rather than holding his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance." However, the photo to which Russert was apparently referring appeared in Time magazine with a caption indicating it was taken during the national anthem, not the Pledge of Allegiance.
On the April 20 edition of NBC's Meet the Press, host Tim Russert asserted that "many Democrats fear Republicans in the fall will string together an ad which shows," among other things, "[Sen.] Barack Obama with his hands clasped in front of him rather than holding his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance." Russert then asked David Axelrod, chief strategist for Obama's presidential campaign, "Are you concerned that all those kinds of issues could be strung together to create an impression of Obama that would make him almost unelectable to a lot of swing voters?" However, as Media Matters for America has noted, the photo to which Russert was apparently referring -- which is being spread in a chain email -- appeared in Time magazine with a caption indicating it was taken during the national anthem, not the Pledge of Allegiance.
Washington Post "fact checker" Michael Dobbs noted in a November 2, 2007, item about the email: "Contrary to the e-mails attacking Obama for disrespecting the flag, the candidates were not reciting the pledge of allegiance. They were standing for the national anthem." Dobbs also wrote: "Asked whether Obama normally puts his hand over his heart while listening to the national anthem, Obama spokesman Bill Burton replied by e-mail: 'Sometimes he does, sometimes he doesn't. In no way was he making any sort of statement, and any suggestion to the contrary is ridiculous.' " Indeed, other photos show Obama with his hand over his heart during the national anthem.
TPM Media editor and publisher Josh Marshall also noted that Russert failed to mention that the charge against Obama was false in an April 20 post titled "Russert Dumpster Diving."
From the April 20 edition of NBC's Meet the Press:
RUSSERT: Let me ask about two final issues. David Axelrod, based on the last couple of weeks, many Democrats fear Republicans in the fall will string together an ad which shows Michelle Obama saying that she really never had pride in America until this campaign, when Barack Obama's running. Barack Obama with his hands clasped in front of him rather than holding his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance. Barack Obama not wearing a flag pin. Barack Obama talking about clinging to faith and to guns. Suggesting -- Barack Obama meeting with Bill Ayers, a former Weatherground Underman -- Weatherman Underground figure. Are you concerned that all those kinds of issues could be strung together to create an impression of Obama that would make him almost unelectable to a lot of swing voters?
As a Democrat I'm very afraid that Timmy and cohorts will string together many pictures of Obama scratching his cheek and call it giving somebody the finger. Oh, they already did that piece of dog poo (props to Mary and Liz Lemon). I have no doubt the gop sloppers have more dog poo up their sleeves. Tim isn't officially gop slop, but since he did an internet ad for John McCain, I think we can rule him out as an unbiased source.
I'm sure that these people will try whatever tricks they can to persuade many non thinkers to vote against their own best interests. We've already been treated to a plethora of distractions courtesy of the corporate media people essentially pimping McCain and denigrating Democrats. But I'm so glad that Timmy gave us the heads up (as if we needed it).
You just outed yourself as a non thinker. If you haven't caught on by now, then maybe you're a very rich guy. If and only if you are a very rich guy should you be voting for another Bush clone. Then you would be a very rich guy with no moral underpinnings. Of course there are rich guys who wouldn't think of voting for the Bush clone because they have more scruples. 8 years of Bush is enough for me. I'd rather get my country and the rule of law back. Just call me quirky that way.
December, 1945, is when the Pledge of Allegiance was adopted by Congress as our pledge. It was written in the 1890's, and published in a childrens book. Conservitives won't bother to look up it's history, but will simply follow the leader.
Need facts ? Here ya go:
The Pledge of Allegiance was initially written by Francis Bellamy (1855-1931), a Baptist minister, and Christian Socialist.
OH MY GOD, WILL THAT KEEP THE CONSERVATIVES FROM RECITING IT ?
Gosh Rick, you really blew the lid off of that story...?
But as the MMFA article states, the picture was taken during the National Anthem, not the Pledge of Allegiance. And Obama aint gonna show no respect for no damn country where a man don't got a chance to get ahead. Well, except for those who are willing to get an education and work and save, but those are tough requirements for Obama supporters.
"But as the MMFA article states, the picture was taken during the National Anthem, not the Pledge of Allegiance."--BM
Thank you for confirming that this went way over your head. You must be short, because I threw it very low.
BM,
I have a law degree and I am an Obama supporter. I challenge you to name one talking head on TV or on the radio with LESS education than Hannity and Limbaugh who supports Obama.
BM,
I have a law degree and I am an Obama supporter. I challenge you to name one talking head on TV or on the radio with LESS education than Hannity and Limbaugh who supports Obama.
Fried: "I have a law degree and I am an Obama supporter".
Good for you, Fried. I'll assume that you've been somewhat successful which was the point of my post - it isn't that hard in this country. If you finish high school, stay out of jail and get married before you have kids your chances of living in poverty in the U.S. are almost zero. A little more effort than than and you're middle class or better. But if you listen to the pathetic diatribes of Michele Obama and her pansy husband you'd think that it's almost impossible to make it here.
POV,
What do you consider the main issues for candidates to address in order to secure your vote?
If you are under 42, and a McCain supporter, do you have an obligation to fight in his war(s) if he is elected? All reports seem to show that the military is being stretched to or beyond its limits.
If National Security is your primary issue, do you want to vote for a candidate who favors the occupation of Iraq and continue the policies of Bush which have led to this GAO report or do you want a change:
http://www.hcfa.house.gov/110/GAO041708.pdfDoes the deficit bother you? What about the new GI Bill? If your primary issue is lower taxes, how do you suggest we pay down the deficit?
POV, without knowing what your interests are, your question doesn't have an answer.
Fridge
Concerning Iraq, I want us to leave when we can, but I do not favor the policies of HO and Bo who have a set timeline for a withdrawl. Either they have no intention of sticking to it, or they will pull troops out whether it is safe to or not. That is not the way to do it. I also think McCain had his comments grossly distorted over the whole 100 year war thing. It is not at all what he said. The fact is we will be in Iraq for some time to come.
I do not trust either HC or BO on tax policy. I am under 42 and I am not rich but rather middle class. The dems do not want to refrom the AMT. If that is not dealt with, it will hurt my family for sure.
I also can not support a candidate who favors no restrictions on abortion. BO and his "punished with a child" remark would not be my choice.
Finally, I do not trust HC. I simply think she would day or do anything to get elected. I do not put BO in that same catgory, but I would feel better if he has more experience.
When it comes down to it, I dont think any of them really care about a white middle class family. Call McCain the lesser of all evils if you will, but that is the reality. I make to much money for any kind of govt aid. My kids will get no special money for anything, and will not benefit from any kind of affirmative action. There are programs at my kids schools that they can not use because they are not black or poor enough. I also do not make enough money to be rich and able to afford it all myself. In short, smack dab in the middle class. The dems could care less about my vote, because they have nothing to offer any of the millions in my position.
Thats not a lot to anser your question, but it is a start.
Since you're under 42, you did not answer how you hold staying in Iraq as important but not important enough for you to join up.
As far as not voting for a candidate who does not favor restrictions on abortion, 23 of the the 35 years since Roe v. Wade were under the rule of GOP presidents. A majority of the Supreme Court is GOP appointees. Yet abortion law remains unchanged. So tell me again how voting for pro-life Republican presidental candidates has helped your cause?
You ask how voting for Obama or Clinton is going to help you. How will voting for McCain?
POVs full of it... he's just trying to find a way to support the last white man standing in the race, pure and simple.
Heru
You comment makes a nice sound bite, but I notice you did not deal with any of my coments. If you want to have a real debate concering race and and socie-econimic status than so be it. But that kind of a comeback shows you have no depth of understanding on any of the key issues. You may not agree with what I posted, but is that really the best response you can muster?
Heru
Wow..your intelect is amazing. I guess you know that you have nothing constructive to say. Only took you two posts to result to the troll remark. Mama must be proud.
Liars.
They're here to demonize the spirit of liberalism, plain and simple. When they're not throwing stones, they're using every extent of their considerable influence to squelch untidy outburts of dissenting citizens. It's no suprise though, the 20%ers will stop at nothing to maintain control of a culture that is progresively passing them by. Remember how they tried to shut down Spocko when he dared exercise his right as a citizen to voice his opinion?
They're dangerous people and they feed off the allegiance of people like pov and genghiz.
"If you are under 42, and a McCain supporter, do you have an obligation to fight in his war(s) if he is elected? All reports seem to show that the military is being stretched to or beyond its limits."
You responded saying that you want us out of Iraq, then listed why we have to stay. Or let's be honest, why they have to stay? Not YOU.
The question was about what YOU are willing to do. Typically, you didn't say that it was so important that YOU'D volunteer to go.
McCain's 100 year's in Iraq line has been distorted, it's true, but it's underlying theme is to continue with this "stay the course" nonsense. Staying the course will mean a multi-generational war. Are you preparing your children to serve?
Every American needs to speak up, and speak up publicly. Then we'll all know who the true patriots are, those who propose we admit to our past mistakes and end this war. Or those who pump themselves up by selling us war and hide here in their comfortable homes, wrapped in the flag and the sham of false patriotism and tin flag pins.
Quit you whining, pay your taxes and thank God you and yours don't need any MORE government aid. Enjoy what the government does provide with your tax dollars, that being the legal system, highways, schools, services and protection for your sorry ass from brave people whose actions speak, not their lips.
Worrier,
I took his non-answer to the war question as a reluctance to sign up.
- juliajayne
My only history on this board is not accepting everything MMFA has to say, and not buying all the dem talking points.
You say McCain and the GOP only serve the rich, do you really think it would be that much different under BO or HC. The rich did pretty well under the first clinton, I dont think they suffered to much. And before you tell me how great it was for all under clinton, you better factor in the dot.com boom that made many rich and had nothing to do with clinton.
I agree, a solution needs to be found for Iraq. Unlike you, I think a 6 month pull out would result in the deaths of tens of thousands.
I for one do not believe the abortion issue is a hoax. Will it change dramaticaly under McCain, probably not. But I think he will put Justices on the supreme court that are closer to Roberts than Ginsburg. That impact alone is huge.
Do I look only at republicans to the exclusion of dems. No. I prefer conseratives for sure. Perhaps the best Dem candidate was never given a serious look because he was not liberal enough. I loved Biden, and he would have made a great president. So before you tell me I am looking to exculde based upon party, explain to me why someone as good as Biden, with all his experince was passed over for a 2 year senator, and the wife of a former president.
The dems did not pick their person based on skill or ability. They picked a candidate based on gender, race, and who could pass the ultra liberal test.
Who's talking 6 month pull out? And what is going to happen exactly when we do pull out? You don't have answers any more than I do. We aren't wanted over there. Look at the big picture and quit moving the goal posts.
I liked Joe Biden as well. But the people vote for the candidates. The (national) party didn't decide anything for or against him.
Abortion IS a distraction issue. Same as gay marriage. While you're worried about that, the CONservatives are stealing you blind. They have nothing to offer. They have been an unmitigated disaster. But by all means, stick your head in the sand and pretend they are "values" people. Yeah, they value money and power to the detriment of our country. Who else could screw up our country so fast?
What are you, a racist or just blind? Ever notice that every candidate the Rupugnants ever picked was white and lately a moron to boot?
---------------------------------------------------
The dems did not pick their person based on skill or ability. They picked a candidate based on gender, race, and who could pass the ultra liberal test.
pov, for such an ardent biden supporter, he sure does not agree with you on iraq.
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/04/biden_on_john_mccain_election.php
mefirst
I am well aware of Biden's position on Iraq. He is not my perfect candidate by any means....but rather he is a dem I could support, who is actually qualified for the job.
POV,
As your hypocrisy is exposed on every point you make, you perhaps won't mind another. To you and all now worrying for the tens of thousands of casualties in Iraq because of our pulling out, there was nary a murmur of concern for the hundreds of thousands killed and millions displaced by our incursion into and our continued occupation of that country!
POV,
Does the AMT hit you now? If not, how would it affect you later? As far as the Iraq policy, I don't think any of the candidates will have us out in 6 months. I think it will be over a year at the earliest for any of the candidates. I don't think McCain's 100 year comment is his realistic plan, but I don't think he will get us out at all. Maliki doesn't want us there, the Iraqi people don't seem want us there at all: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/10_09_07_iraqpollaug2007_full.pdf
Many of them seem much more pessimistic about the future. Their level of confidence in our forces is declining. 85% of the Iraqis surveyed either had not very much confidence or no confidence at all in the U.S. and British (not sure if there are more recent numbers than that poll or not). From February to August 2007, 12% more of the people surveyed wanted the forces to leave immediately, 72% of the people think that the U.S. presence is making security worse.
As far as trusting McCain with taxes, he has admitted he doesn't know much about the economy. When he flat out lied about his rationale for voting against the tax cuts, I lost what confidence I had left in him.
I can see your point of view on HC. I feel the same exact way with McCain and his constant political flip-flops. Had McCain been the nominee in 2000 with his positions then, I might have voted for him.
Personally, I like Obama's position on abortion and educating the women on their choices and letting them pick. McCain had flipped on this one at least a few times.
I really think Obama's "punished with a child" comment was overdone. I think it wasn't phrased the best, but overall I know wht he meant. I think sex ed in this country needs to teach kids all the ways to prevent pregnancy.
I think the McCain comment about trimming the deficit like Reagan is something to ponder.
I fear the Supreme Court that McCain would shape with his new audience of Religious Right backers. I fear not getting out of Iraq. I fear that the military won't recover unless there are major, major changes.
Anyway, I hope that eases some of your concerns, but I know I am far from having all of the answers.
Fridge
My wife and i both work, and are about 4000 to 5000 away from hitting the AMT. That means with any raises or bonuses we get, there is always the fear we wil hit that magic number. If that happens, most of the deductions we get now will disappear. Because the AMT is not indexed, it is a huge tax concern for the middle class.
Actually, Mefirst used the six month time line, and I confused that post with yours. I just think announcing a time frame in general is difficult, and gives the bad guys an edge they dont need to have.
His punished with a child remark probably was overblown as was the 100 year war remark by McCain. All told, Bo does not have the experince, but he does not scare me to near the extend HC does. I at least think BO wants to win for the right reasons.
Without a timetable there is no way to judge our success or lack thereof. McCains' bomb bomb Iran attitude will guaruntee we are stuck there for 100 years. The punished with a child line is purposely distorted as I'm sure you know. Republican tax policy is twisted, using fake averages and obscure scenarios to pretend it isn't overwhelming tilted to the wealthy.
As JuliaJayne said.... nonthinkers.
That sentiment is the core failure of the rightwing perspective and why the middle class is dying. You believe someone else's prosperity must come at your expense. Never once considering that prosperity is interconnected you ignore that public education is itself government aid.
I'll agree that government aid does not go far enough, it should be extended to every citizen in the form of not for profit single payer healthcare.
Russert suggested GOP would run ads against Obama featuring "Pledge of Allegiance" charge without noting it's false......
Which is precisely why the GOP will use it! They have nothing on Barack and tons on Hillary..... this is why they want her and are deftly afraid of Barack.....
I give Hillary some credit..... when she claims that she can take the heat from the right-wing attack machine.... no doubt she can.... but the amount given will not be for her benefit or the right-wing phychopantic appetite for spewing hate.... it will be for the fact that many Americans will be yet again turned off about politics and will stay home or simply vote against their own interests.....
A Hillary nod will open up the flood gates to all that is unholy in the GOP..... And as much as I think Hillary would make a fine president.... it will be uglier than when Bill was in.....
A Barack nod will simply open up the flood gates for all to see that the GOP and their corporate masters really are a scared bunch of hypocritical double standard racist homophobes!
I saw a poll a few weeks ago where the question was asked whether people believed Obama was unpatriotic. Amazingly the majority of the people responding to the poll replied "yes." Tim Russert just reinforces the incorrect information which serves to underscore this erroneous belief. It seems there are few standards of accuracy and truth in our media anymore. There are many serious issues facing our country and, instead, the media seems to be following the standards of tabloid journalism. For the record, I am not committed to any specific candidate, but at a minimum i think people should be presented with facts, context and truth about issues, not innuendo and distortion about split second moments related to the candidate.
I'm very concerned that Obama doesn't believe in Santa Claus. Why doesn't he love us as much as that fat white man at the North Pole? Why o why waa (choking back tears)
Insignificant things, such as how your hands are held, during the National Anthem or the Pledge of Allegiance (to a flag)... also, the inconsistancy of wearing certain insignia (a flag lapel button)... these things are analyzed to an absurd degree... And no joke, I expect to see soon some type of high-res super-macro lens video, showing us Sen. Obama's eyes, to the degree where you could actually measure the size of his pupils, filmed perhaps during the playing of the National Anthem, or during the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance (to a flag), or while Mr. Obama is perhaps looking at the American Flag...
I expect an endless analysis of what the man's eyes indicate, of what the size of his pupils tell us, as the man looks at the American Flag, or hears the National Anthem, or hears or recites the Pledge of Allegiance (to a flag).
What's truly in his mind? What's truly in his heart?
No joke, truly, in all seriousness: This stuff is so much like what the infamous "Inquisition" was, which was an over-reaching and strained analysis of people's words, and of what would otherwise be the insignificant things they do (or even wear), all towards the end of "seeing into their minds", and "knowing truly what's in their hearts"...
All towards the end to branding them an "unbeliever", and a heritic... and burning them at the stake for being such.
True. It's exactly like the Inquisition, except without the funny hats worn by the Inquisitors.
Oh yeah, the flag is different too.
HA! Nicely done, Linden!
hey rumpley,
stick to the israeli issues. leave american issues to americans.
So that explains why Bush always puts his hand over his dick whenever the pledge is recited.
That code also says you shouldn't wear it like clothing either, doesn't stop the GOP from wearing flag shirts and matching pants during their rallies, does it?
What the biased Media Matters comment writers won't tell you is that the code says the national anthem should be sung while having the right hand over the heart.
Actually, it doesn't. If the "code" (which doesn't exist) were worded the way you say, anytime someone placed their hand over their heart they would have to sing the national anthem.
It is customary to place ones' hand over their heart when the anthem is being sung or played in ones' presence. But there is no mandatory code of any kind requiring it.
That's probably why MMfA doesn't mention it. It's thr wingnuts who try to pull nonexistent "code" from their ass.
Yes,the code does exist:
(b) Conduct During Playing.— During a rendition of the national anthem— (1) when the flag is displayed—
(A) all present except those in uniform should stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart; http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode36/usc_sec_36_00000301----000-.htmlWhy on earth do your consider this an important issue? Are you that devoid of substance that you and the other little Sherlock Holmes' wannabes spy on whether people wear flag pins or salute or stick their hand on their heart (or on their dick as Snoopy pointed out) but do not notice that your country is being stolen from you by the flag saluters?
wow.
What code, the one Republican Larry "Wide Stance" Craig was writing on the restroom stall?
---------------------------------------------------------
What the biased Media Matters comment writers won't tell you is that the code says the national anthem should be sung while having the right hand over the heart.
Here. Learn something new, so you won't make the same mistake Obama made:
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode36/usc_sec_36_00000301----000-.html
You are right!
That proves he's a terrist.
The only proper way to honor this country during the singing of the national anthem is to have your hand over your heart or to be reading My Pet Goat
It's ok. He's a republican and therefore a "Real American". He could get a lap-dance performed during the anthem if he wanted to and the media would talk about how he is a maverick and outside the everyday politics of Washington (well that last part might be a bit of a stretch).
Some people will believe anything they hear on the TeeVee.
Only if the flag is displayed are you to place your right hand over your heart and that is because of the flag not the anthem, obviously.
In the event where Richardson and Clinton had their hands over their hearts and Obama didn't, the flag was present while the anthem played.
However, the others were not turned to face the flag, as is stated in the code.
My question would be whether the flag behind them is considered an actual flag, or was it a representation of the flag. Because, when the flag is not present, the code states that you should not have your hand over your heart, and should trun to face the music, which it appears Obama was doing.
My real question, however, is WHO THE F%&* CARES?
Oops, I am wrong. The code states that if ther eis no flag, you should face the music and also have your hand over your heart.
My second question still stands.
>>What "code" are you referring to?
The one you uncover with your official Rush Limbaugh secret decoder ring. It tells you where all of the commies are. And you get a t shirt.
My brother, a Marine, holds his hands exactly as Obama does during the anthm. So does my father, a Vietnam vet, and my grandfather, a WWII vet.
But their not nearly as patriotic as Sean Hannity, I guess.
Not any more...
So Timmeh asks "Are you concerned that all those kinds of issues could be strung together ..."
Since this is the umpteenth time we've heard this, it's kinda late to ask this question, isn't it?
The real question is how many times Lil' Russ and the rest of the bobble-headed, teleprompter-reading ball-chasing puppies in the MSM will repeat this kind of bullscat.
Gooooood Puhhh-peeeees!
So Tim Russert thinks that Democrats "fear" that Republicans may put together an ad that strings together a series of lies, distortions and non-issues. I don't fear that Republicans are going to do that. I EXPECT it, just like I expect childish behavior from a child.
I'm looking forward to Russert's next interview with a Republican strategist when he asks if Republicans fear that someone might put together an ad that strings together things like Senator McCain's involvement in a criminal conspiracy, that this champion of campaign finance reform may be in violation of campaign finance laws, that he continues to conceal information on the family fortune he married into and the effect on that fortune of the tax cuts he now supports, that he's flip-flopped like a fish out of water every time he courts a different part of the Republican base, that he courts "values voters" without mentioning (with the help of the media) that the current Mrs. McCain is his second wife while both Democratic candidates are committed to their first marriages, that he is content with the permanent occupation of a country where tens of thousands of American kids have been killed and wounded and 4 million citizens have been displaced. I can hardly wait.
don't hold your breath...
Unlike he did with the one from FOX SPEWS' Sean Haminahaminahannity, this morning, Georgie Boy didn't ask St. McSame any of the questions suggested by Olbermann earlier this week.
I think that Keith may have been the source for your questions. If not great minds....
So Tim Russert thinks that Democrats "fear" that Republicans may put together an ad that strings together a series of lies, distortions and non-issues. I don't fear that Republicans are going to do that. I EXPECT it, just like I expect childish behavior from a child.
So true. And I expect the idiots in the media to keep talking about stupid crap like that too. That's why I decided to stop watching ANY political coverage on TV until the election night. I suggest everyone else do the same.
comment makers". Biased? You're goddamned right I am biased! I want my country back! I want this insane bunch of authoritarian, anti-american, treasonous, theocratic scumcakes OUT! Liberal? YEAH, Baby! I happen to CARE about my fellow creatures.
I happen to believe that everyone should get a fair shake, not a shake-down. I believe in the old fashioned things, like common sense, partnership with our friends around the rest of the world, taking care of business at home, and not attacking countries that have not attacked us. If you follow the GOP shills like Russert and the rest of the mind-less clones of the MSM who are hell-bent on giving us another 4-8 YEARS of terrible "leadership", then pile on! You may get your way in having more people without health insurance, more people out of work, more tax cuts for the greedy, yet another bloody war, and, if you are really, really lucky, you might live to see our great country become a second-class one. Hey, it worked for you twice; just convince all the other folks out there to cast their votes for Johnny Mack. After all, how hard can it be? You've got a whole lot of media idiots just itching to help ya.
There's no doubt in my mind that the Iraq war was waged to secure the Iraqi oil fields for western Oil Companies, probably in hopes of giving us leverage against OPEC and make a fortune for their stockholders. The obscene thing is that the authors of this disastrous policy will walk away with platinum parachutes, and will never feel the sting of $4.00+ gasoline Surge or no surge, the Iraq invasion has been a dismal failure. McCain should lose in a landslide for his position on that issue alone. Unfortunately, the nonthinkers are going to vote on the Flag Pin issue, or the Jeremiah Wright issue , or the aging Hippie "terrorist" issue. Non of which mean SQUAT in the grand scheme of things.
So being biased justifies not mentioning the fact that Obama did not behave as he should have while listening to the National Anthem?
Bias is good, if it's a liberal bias when it comes to casting a ballot. But if your goal is to find the facts-- the truth in an issue, as we are doing in this thread, bias gets in the way of good fact-checking and we end up pretending that no code exists telling us that we should have our hand over our hearts when the National Anthem is being sung.
Obama made a mistake.
Let me ask you something, Thruthie: Did you EVER give a good Goddamn about where people put their right hand during the National Anthem BEFORE this phony wingnut dust up about Obama? Did you EVER go around correcting people's behavior at the start of ballgames that you had attended? Had you EVER looked up "the code" BEFORE the corporate (i.e. REPUBLICAN) media started examining every tiny, irrelevant stance or gesture by Obama?
Or are you simply another in a nearly endless line of hypocritical wingnuts, gleefully reveling in the trite and totally insignificant 'gotcha' bullsh*t moment that a WRONGFULLY captioned still photo affords you?
And, are there any OTHER such meaningless 'issues' that you are determined to obsess about here?
Hiveminders gotta repeat what hiveminders are instructed to repeat
Hiveminders gotta repeat what hiveminders are instructed to repeat
MMFA People are AGAIN implying that someone is in the wrong for NOT saying something they beleive should be said.
Russert said the Republicans will string these together! and
they WILL! And they WILL misrepresent the photo.
THAT's when we go after THEM, the Republicans... NOT Russert!
John Cheney 88
Too bad there's no time to discuss such things in the media... they've only got 24 hours in a day, and they MUST talk about friggin FLAG PINS first.
December, 1945, is when the Pledge of Allegiance was adopted by Congress as our pledge. It was written in the 1890's, and published in a childrens book. Conservitives won't bother to look up it's history, but will simply follow the leader.
Need facts ? Here ya go:
The Pledge of Allegiance was initially written by Francis Bellamy (1855-1931), a Baptist minister, and Christian Socialist.
OH MY GOD, WILL THAT KEEP THE CONSERVATIVES FROM RECITING IT ?
Yes, in 1954 due to pressure from the Nights of Colombus. They said it was needed because Abe Lincoln used the phase "under God" in the Gettysburg Address.
I've heard from many reliable un-named sources that non-thinking Conservatives think the Gettysburg Address is the address where Lincoln was shot.
"Allow the president to invade a neighboring nation, whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion, and you allow him to do so whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such a purpose - and you allow him to make war at pleasure."
stick your pen, but my sensitivity and class will not allow me.
Second, thank the good liberal lord for MMFA and all the other "biased" sites that are doing the job that our MSM can't seem to do. Does MMFA make mistakes? Certainly, but at least it's not on purpose or for the SOLE reason to completely mislead us. If one gets his or her information from the White House Press Secretary, then, well, what can I say? Doyle Redland of The Onion is more believable.
Third, there is NO EXCUSE WHATEVER to continue accepting this horrible criminal
abuse from the current administration. NONE! To cling to that belief is truly a "faith-based" stance. I would rather cast my lot with "science", that is, FACTS.
Fourth, thanks, guys an gals for your clear-headed sense of humor. Keep it comin'!
Jeez O'Flip, I'm so sick and tired of Obama being portrayed as the Manchurian Candidate. Is not saying the pledge of allegiance really more offensive than 4,000 plus of our bravest citizens dying for a lie? We are still waiting for those weapons of mass destruction and I am still waiting for someone to tell me how Osama Bin Laden equates to Saddam Hussein.
"Is not saying the pledge of allegiance really more offensive than 4,000 plus of our bravest citizens dying for a lie?"--August Heat
It would seem that 1/2 of the voters in this country know who the real patriots are. The other half can't tell the difference and are the target for Republicans. The nonthinkers, who are too lazy to check the facts, and the bigoted who are hearing only what they want to hear from the right.
Republicans biggest problem is they don't stand a chance of getting elected if voters were to cast their ballots based on issues and beliefs. Decades ago, Republicans yard signs never stated their party, and instead they often wrote "Good Candidate" in the area where Democrats signs read: "DEMOCRAT." That, in itself, tells everything. Republicans only choice is to demonize their opponents, and gloss over what they've done, and will continue to do.
truthseeker77,
"What the biased Media Matters comment writers won't tell you is that the code says the national anthem should be sung while having the right hand over the heart."
What "code", the Code of the West, Morse Code or maybe it's part of Obama's Zip Code?