• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should Obama Have Attended Je Suis Charlie March?

Should Obama Have Attended Je Suis Charlie March?

  • Total voters
    40
US Conservative said:
You are in that place as well, kid. Its the company you keep. And for the record...I am Charlie.
Click to expand...

Social steam and operations are different. Social steam is for us -- you and I. Operations are for them -- politicians.

I don't care where they do or don't march, as long as they're doing their job.

As a citizen, I care where people employ their social steam.

As someone who's done journalism and walked into the news of both a dead journalist and a severely wounded source, I'm Charlie more than you know. And I think politicians should stay out of it and stick to their jobs.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
Social steam and operations are different. Social steam is for us -- you and I. Operations are for them -- politicians.

I don't care where they do or don't march, as long as they're doing their job.

As a citizen, I care where people employ their social steam.

As someone who's done journalism and walked into the news of both a dead journalist and a severely wounded source, I'm Charlie more than you know. And I think politicians should stay out of it and stick to their jobs.
Click to expand...

Please. Your admission implies that govt can't keep up with life. I agree, but not for the same reason. I live where life is, and Ive been constantly tested..can you say the same? If so, say now how.
 
I voted no:

1. Too much American security around the President would have made the march an Obama circus. Can you imagine Obama walking in the street without security with the other leaders of Europe? Never would happen.

2. Obama didn't come to Canada or go to Australia for the funerals or rallies related to the recent terrorist attacks in those two countries. Canada's attack was against our Parliament buildings. France's attack was against a satirical magazine. What would be more appropriate - marching against attacks on a symbol of democracy or marching against attacks on crude cartoons?

This "Charlie" hoopla is totally out of proportion and an entirely media ginned up circus, complete with complementary poster cards and 24/7 navel gazing news coverage of the media.
 
US Conservative said:
Please. Your admission implies that govt can't keep up with life. I agree, but not for the same reason. I live where life is, and Ive been constantly tested..can you say the same? If so, say now how.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't. It implies their job is different. And when they're at a photo op, they're not doing it.

Gimme a break. What have I to prove to someone we both know would be complaining whether he went or not? It clearly isn't the principle of the thing.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
No it doesn't. It implies their job is different. And when they're at a photo op, they're not doing it.

Gimme a break. What have I to prove to someone we both know would be complaining whether he went or not? It clearly isn't the principle of the thing.
Click to expand...

Its very much the principle. You pick where where you stand, and have chosen poorly.
 
US Conservative said:
Its very much the principle. You pick where where you stand, and have chosen poorly.
Click to expand...

With people doing their jobs rather than disrupting something for the people with their black vans and getting my panties in a twist over the lack of posed pictures? Oh gee, shame on me. :roll:
 
No. Doing so would have presented a security nightmare for officials.
 
US Conservative said:
So dozens of world leader were able to assemble, but Obama would have tipped the scales? Gonna have to post some documentation of that, or its just a convenient (and thin) excuse.
Click to expand...

Use some common sense.

us-president-car-10.jpg
 
Frankly I don't give a **** if he went. We have bigger problems with him than a lousy trip to Paris.
 
I voted "no" because "I don't give a ****" wasn't an option. With all that is going on in the world him joining 3 million people marching around Paris is really inconsequential. He made his feelings on the events known and that was good enough for me. I don't care for the man but I don't just criticize him for the sake of criticizing him.
 
ModerateGOP said:
Pretty Straightforward question. Do you think he should have and you can discuss why you think he didn't below explaining your answer.
Click to expand...

It was an attack in France and he is a US president, there is no requirement.

His time would be better spent dealing with officials in france for advanced planning efforts to minimize future issues.
 
Last edited:
“The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam” barak h obama.


maybe he didn't want to?
 
Where's the poll option for "who f'n cares"????

Honesty, this whole discussion is silly.
 
Obama probably should have gone but it is all symbolic at best, avoids the bigger discussion on what we need to be doing about religious fundamentalism and extremism.
 
OrphanSlug said:
Obama probably should have gone but it is all symbolic at best, avoids the bigger discussion on what we need to be doing about religious fundamentalism and extremism.
Click to expand...

isn't that Obama's turf? I'm surprised he didn't go. Kerry is going later today I think, but once again, this administration misses the mark. They always seem to be one step behind.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Given the security that would have had to have been in place, not attending was a good call. He should make it clear that he supports the movement, as I'm sure he must.

Had he gone, his opponents would have been ranting about the cost of his "vacation to Paris" no doubt. It would have taken a major effort.
Click to expand...

I agree, however, he should have at least sent a high level official. Don't you think? What's up with that?
 
ModerateGOP said:
isn't that Obama's turf? I'm surprised he didn't go. Kerry is going later today I think, but once again, this administration misses the mark. They always seem to be one step behind.
Click to expand...

Unsure I can buy into all the articles today that Obama not going was some "swipe" or "snub" at the French. I agree that politically it would have been better for Obama to be a bigger part of this symbolic showing of unity, but I keep looking at a bigger picture item here.

It is not that I intend to defend Obama, it is that I intend to suggest we keep avoiding the real issue.
 
is he the only world leader with a security detail?

44 world leaders....some that absolutely hate each other marched arm in arm down the streets of Paris to say as one voice......"freedom reigns"

in that he, the symbol of freedom throughout the world didnt attend, sends a very strong message imo

and not a very pleasant one.....at that.....

i have disagreed with a number of things he has done in the last six years......but i had never been ashamed for the first time since he took office

today i am ashamed......and saddened
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
“The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam” barak h obama.


maybe he didn't want to?
Click to expand...

Comment: No, we are not all Charlie | SBS News

The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. But to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see in the images of Jesus Christ that are desecrated, or churches that are destroyed, or the Holocaust that is denied.
Click to expand...

Seems like the entire quote meant that the future shouldn't belong to people who put their hatred of religion on display.
 
Should Obama have spent millions of dollars America does not have to go to some march in France?

NO.

If he wants to pay for it himself or he can raise the money from private sources - go ahead (though I don't really give a **** about the March anyway).


I will say it again, 12 westerners are murdered by a few whacko terrorists and everyone in the west freaks out.

But up to 2,000 people are murdered by terrorists in Africa and no one in the west gives a ****.

More evidence that the west is full of hypocritical, racist idiots.
 
First it was outside... no I can't see that happening. VP, Sec. of State, absolutely. Sending Holder was ok since Holder wasn't there to march, he was there for other reasons. Having Holder march with the rest of that group would have been more insulting, so I'm glad Holder skipped it. That the VP or Sec. of State wasn't there - also insulting and begs questions that do not have answers.
 
Hatuey said:
Comment: No, we are not all Charlie | SBS News



Seems like the entire quote meant that the future shouldn't belong to people who put their hatred of religion on display.
Click to expand...




The first sentence is exclusive, while it may set up the rest of his quote, it cam and does stand on it's own.


the future should belong to free speech, up to and including calling peoples gods as they wish. including those who "slander the prophet"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom