No, I’d never even think such a thing. But an Obama event coordinator would.
“We Need More White People”
April 09, 2008 8:47 AM
At a Michelle Obama event, reporters from the Carnegie-Mellon University student newspaper "observed one event coordinator say to another, ‘Get me more white people, we need more white people.’ To an Asian girl sitting in the back row, one coordinator said, ‘We’re moving you, sorry. It’s going to look so pretty, though.’
“‘I didn’t know they would say, “We need a white person here,”’ said attendee and senior psychology major Shayna Watson, who sat in the crowd behind Mrs. Obama. ‘I understood they would want a show of diversity, but to pick up people and to reseat them, I didn’t know it would be so outright.’”
(For those who would criticize this blog for relying on a college newspaper, please recall how much the Obama campaign in its TV ads relied upon the support for his health care plan by the college newspaper the Daily Iowan.)
In any case, that Michelle Obama advance staffer just summed up the candidate’s issues in Pennsylvania. They do, indeed, need more white people."
and you have not already realized that the presidential election is a game, won by the person who can emotionally manipulate the masses, and in which the rules limit the available available means by limiting overt violent acts and threats?
it seems to me that your article here is merely analogous to a chess player moving a piece on a chess board.
Yeah, because white candidates don’t have coordinators saying “We need more black people here”. And in the case of republican candidates’ coordinators, “We need more coloreds here”.
[quote]Inner Hulk wrote:
Yeah, because white candidates don’t have coordinators saying “We need more black people here”. And in the case of republican candidates’ coordinators, “We need more coloreds here”.[/quote]
True, but does that make this PARTICULAR instance okay then or wtf is your point? Everyone is doing it so its okay?
I would think in any of these cases its dispicable.
[quote]stokedporcupine wrote:
and you have not already realized that the presidential election is a game, won by the person who can emotionally manipulate the masses, and in which the rules limit the available available means by limiting overt violent acts and threats? [/quote]
Good point. People all too often forget that it’s nothing more than a glorified toothpaste ad.
It’s a perfect example of PC at its worst. Pathetic, but apparently it works with all the hyper-sensitive Americans out there. Putting people of different colors in certain places solely because of skin color only makes the whole “racism” problem worse, because it caters to those who make a big fuss about the issue. It’s telling people they really are judged on their skin, at least on some level. Is that really equality?
[quote]hungry4more wrote:
It’s a perfect example of PC at its worst. Pathetic, but apparently it works with all the hyper-sensitive Americans out there. Putting people of different colors in certain places solely because of skin color only makes the whole “racism” problem worse, because it caters to those who make a big fuss about the issue. It’s telling people they really are judged on their skin, at least on some level. Is that really equality?[/quote]
No…It sucks. In the interest of “equality” there is way to much emphasis on skin color. Choosing to give based on skin color is the same as taking away on that fact. You are still putting the color of skin ahead of the value of the person.
I hate race whores…People over analyze and beat the shit out of the topic. It’s really simple, don’t consider someones color, period. We don’t have to beef one up or bring the other down, or vice versa.
It kind of reminds me of how the Nazis would put young blond haired boys and girls where the cameras would be rolling. “Who can object to a regime that has all these healthy young Aryans in the forefront?”
