Life

Obama Falsely Blamed for Muslim Stamp

123RF

An email  making the pre-Christmas rounds claims that President Obama — excuse me, make that “President Barack Hussein Obama,” because those right wing extremist nutjobs can’t resist calling him that — has directed the U.S. Postal Service to “remember and honor” the Eid Muslim holiday season with a new holiday postage stamp.

The email then urges you to adamantly and vocally boycott the stamp when purchasing postage, adding that using it would be a “slap in the face” to all those Americans who died at the hands of “those whom this stamp honors.”

Well, they at least got the whom right, so I guess I should give them one point for that.

Unfortunately, I can’t give them much credit for checking their facts.

This stamp has absolutely nothing to do with President Obama. It was introduced on September 1, 2001, just ten days before the terror attacks of 9/11. Oddly enough, though George W. Bush was in office at the time, the original version of the email spam made no mention of him and made no attempt to blame him for “directing” anyone to honor anyone: back then, the email said, “the United States Postal Service REMEMBERS and HONORS the EID MUSLIM holiday season….”

I guess there’s no doubt about the political leanings of the people behind this little missive, is there?

Incidentally, the EID that appears on the stamp is roughly equivalent in English to “celebration” or “festival,” and could relate to Eid Al-Fitr, a three day celebration ending the monthlong fasting of Ramadan, or Eid Al-Adha, a three-day celebration of the willingness of Abraham to sacrifice a son in response to God’d command.

The Postal Service has several holiday stamps available representing a variety of diverse celebrations: there are Christmas stamps, Hanukkah stamps, and Kwanzaa stamps.

Sorry, right-wing nutjobs: if any president is to blame for this stamp, it’s yours.

Next time, why not do a little research before filling up our email box with lies!

22 Comments

  1. Patrick – I told myself that I would not bother you any more but I just cannot say goodbye with you believing that I am not a fair minded person. Please, allow me to digress…

    I live in Montgomery, AL – home of the civil rights movement. I am a soon to be (12.31.09) 59 year white male. I can honestly tell you that the vast majority of my friends are black. I tell you this for no other reason than to let you know that I AM NOT a racist of any form. Additionally, three of my friends are Muslim – each own and operate grocery markets. I have known all of these friends for over 20 years – I feel comfortable with each and every one of them.

    Now, my parents taught me as did my delivery of mail for over 30 years in the poor housing projects of my city that one cannot trust everyone – looks and actions are sometimes deceiving. So, my trust MUST be earned. Until proven otherwise if you look and act like a thug I will proceed with caution. If your actions prove that my gut feelings are wrong then at that time I will let my guard down. This same self imposed caution personally applies to Muslims or people with Muslim associations. For me this was not true until 9/11 took place.

    So, no…I do not automatically apply guilt to all Muslims or any people – BUT, I do proceed with caution just as I do in the bad sections of any city. If it sounds like a bear – walks like a bear -growls like a bear – it may well be a bear, so tread lightly.

    I hope this clears this up a little – if not, then I am not explaining my position properly.

    Once again – MERRY CHRISTMAS and HAPPY NEW YEAR!

    1. Rick, you’re honestly not bothering me. I’ve enjoyed the discussion, and in particular finding out that we’re not all that different after all.

      I tend to trust people cautiously myself, so I do understand that very well. Perhaps I read a bit too much into your previous comment, and I appreciate the clarification.

      Merry Christmas and all the best to you as well, and I hope you’ll visit again.

  2. Patrick – I believe you are correct in that we are almost on the same page here. I am thankful and hopeful for that reason.

    In this last presidential election I did not vote for Obama and I reluctantly voted for McCain. I thought, and still do, that McCain was the more qualified candidate for the job – BUT, I also thought, and still do, that McCain would have swayed toward more of the same – which, IMHO, would have been not 100% bad for our nations future but not exactly the direction I would like taken. As far as our world conflicts I believe McCain had and has a better handle on handling these issues. It is my opinion that said conflicts are the most important issue at hand simply because of the critical worldwide consequences that can and could happen as a result of terrorist attacks, nuke issues, etc.

    I have agreed all along that I agree with you that the email in question was wrong and should have never been circulated. The only thing I took issue with is the fact that you said “An email making the pre-Christmas rounds claims that President Obama — excuse me, make that “President Barack Hussein Obama,” because those right wing extremist nutjobs can’t resist calling him that…

    I say, and have said, that I have no problem with the use of his full name IF the reason for the use of his full name is to make certain people remember his Muslim roots. If the reason of the email or any communication is to accuse him of something he did not do or was not associated with then yes, it is wrong. There is a difference here – maybe I just do not have the ability to explain it clear enough.

    Palin? I admire the lady for her intelligence, gutts, and character. Do I believe she would make a good president? Don’t know, but at this moment I do not think she would. At this time I see no person that may run for president that I would vote for. During the next election I may have to once again settle for a candidate that I really do not believe in.

    If Palin’s middle name was Hussein then I would certainly agree with letting everyone know at every opportunity it arose – as long as the communication was true and factual. If your middle name was Hussein I would not even be posting at your blog – it’s not, is it?

    Am I being dishonest to my own beliefs? Certainly not. I disagree with false information and accusations but I do believe that ones roots certainly plays an important part in the goals of their lives and the direction in which they may lead others. This is why I do not approve of Obama as our president but must accept that he is. His roots are Muslim and, in my mind, therefore he is Muslim. IMHO I do not want a Muslim rooted, or associated, person as my president.

    If this is wrong then so be it. But, I do not believe it is wrong and I strongly believe that millions feel the same way I do.

    I hope you and yours have a GREAT and Wonderful CHRISTMAS and HOLIDAY Season!

    1. Rick,

      I think the biggest point at which we seem to disagree is that a person who has Muslim roots is automatically a threat of any kind.

      The people behind 9/11 were Muslim, but all Muslims are extremists, just as all right-wing voters are not nutjobs.

      I go to a church that is interdenominational; as far as I know, there are no Muslims there, but there are Baptists, Catholics and even Jews who worship together, and yes, mine is a Christian church that teaches and celebrates Jesus Christ.

      If a Muslim were to comment on my blog or if I found reason to comment on theirs, and it was a reasonable discussion, as this has been, I’d have no problem with responding or discussing whatever the issue might be.

      I think we benefit from treating people of different beliefs with respect, and learning about who they are and why they believe what they believe. I think it makes them better as well to learn those things about us.

      Since I’m not in any position of power, if my middle name were Hussein, I don’t know why you’d care, especially since other posts about my beliefs about Christ as my savior would establish that regardless of my name, I don’t exercise any Muslim beliefs.

      In any case, you’ll be happy to know that mine is an Anglo-Saxon middle name, from the same general region that Patrick came from.

      I hope you have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year as well.

  3. Patrick – I believe you think that I don’t get it…but, YES, I DO get it.

    You say it was/is wrong to send emails (or any communication) that is false – I agree.

    You say that it was/is wrong to add to these false stories the full name of Obama (or anyone) IF the only reason was to associate him (Obama) with guilt by association. Again I agree.

    You cannot sway me from thinking that those who can POST or communicate TRUE FACTS regarding Obama and attach his full name are wrong and should not do that.

    What do you want? Me to bottomline this thing? Well, here goes.

    I told you that a vast majority of people do not feel comfortable with Obama’s Muslim associated name – I believe you agreed this is true. You may not feel this is fair and it truthfully isn’t fair, as I said, but it is a fact and will remain so because of all the terriorist acts around the world that also bear association with Muslims.

    Do I feel uncomfortable with his name? Yes. I do. Do I have to explain to you or anyone why I feel uncomfortable with his name? No, I do not.

    Neither you or Obama himself or any court of law can change or influence that…at least not at the present. You said “…if you have a problem with something Obama does, tell me what you’re unhappy about and why. Then tell me what should have been done instead and why that plan would be much better for all involved.”

    It’s not totally Obama – but since he now sits before this nation as our President – stands responsible for the path of our future as a nation – stands as Commander and Chief in charge of the protection of our citizens, our soldiers, and our children I hold him to and responsible for his word…every word that he spoke during his campaign and every word that he speaks in front of or behind the backs of this nations citizens…this includes all of his czars and administration.

    Every single day that passes I hear news of or read newspaper articles, etc that either attest to his lack of getting a handle on this nations future – or his lack of being honest with all of our citizens – or his lack of making decisions that are made with best interest TO ALL. I cannot and will not make a laundry list of these things… if you watch the news or read the papers you know of what I speak. If you’re happy with him then I am glad that you are happy with that. I am not – will not – and never will be happy with his leadership simply because IMHO he is led by too many people and groups that do not fit well into the future of myself, my wife, or my child. He takes too much advice from groups and individuals that I wouldn’t give the time of day to. He leans WAY too far left for me. I could go on and on but it is useless because those whose eyes have been blinded (that is my opinion) by this presidents movie star presence and path will never agree with me nor see any fault in his practices or associattions.

    1. Rick, on the contrary, I think you DO get it. Otherwise, I wouldn’t have even discussed the scenario this long. I also think, and have thought from early on, that we’re more on the same page than off of it.

      Of course you don’t have to “explain” your views to me. Did I say otherwise? Participation here is purely voluntary, as always.

      I also don’t think I claimed to be setting out to sway your opinion. I’m merely trying to understand exactly where you and I seem to differ.

      And that point seems to be this:

      You seem to think it’s okay to believe on one hand that Obama isn’t guilty by association, yet on the other, use his name (or support others who do) in a manner that intentionally seeks to coerce voters into thinking he is as long as it makes them vote your way.

      I think that this seems dishonest. Perhaps you don’t see it that way, or perhaps you do and it doesn’t bother you. But as you say, you don’t have to explain to me which it is.

      I know that as a voter, one who is interested in facts, when I encounter blatant innuendo, I stop reading. So for folks like me, such messages usually accomplish nothing and occasionally make me side more with the party being blasted because it makes me question whether the other side seems to need to resort to such tactics for want of a better ideas.

      I also know that if I believe one thing to be true, I’d have a big problem with actively trying to convince people of the opposite; I’d also have a problem sitting back and watching others make such insinuations without calling them on it, which was, in fact, the origin of this initial post.

      I’m not saying that I’m right and that you’re wrong. I’m merely pointing out that as best as I can understand the situation, this is the main point at which we seem to differ.

      In fact, let me try to bottom-line my point with a practical example pointed at the other side. Let’s say that I wouldn’t want to have Sarah Palin as our next president, in 2012, 2016 or anytime thereafter. Let’s also say that I think that Palin is not the mental lightweight she is often portrayed to be. It would be wrong of me to circulate emails spotlighting some misstep she made that calls her intelligence into question. And it would be wrong of me to sit back and allow others to do so if I truly believed she was a smart woman who just happened to be on the wrong side of issues that are important to me. I’d want to argue what issues I think she’s wrong about and why. To do otherwise, it would seem to me, would be dishonest to my own beliefs. And I’d have a problem with that.

  4. I said…”Does his name make many people worry that his hidden heart of hearts may not be in the best interest of ALL USA citizens…IMHO yes.”

    This is a fact that cannot be denied. MANY people DO, in fact, worry that his Muslim association (no matter how it came to be) DOES in fact worry them or make them have grave concerns that in his heart of hearts (unknown to you or I or anyone) his interests may not be in the best interest of ALL citizens…in the best interest of his chosen peers…yes.

    You may argue this all you like but it will not change this fact. Do I feel this way? Yes and no.

    Nothing you or anyone can say will change my opinion that if ANYONE does not agree with the current Presidents path or the path of his political peers or the path of his adminstration then it is their right to use his full name whenever and wherever they deem necessary to make their point if they believe it will help solidify their position or opinion – in propagating lies? No – only in what they know or feel is the truth.

    You continue to say “The use of his whole, Muslim-sounding name, used in this manner, seeks to intentionally create questions based in “guilt by association.”

    Hussein is NOT a Muslim-sounding name…Hussein IS is commonly given as a male given name among Muslims, in honor of Husayn ibn Ali (626-680 AD).

    This name makes many people uncomfortable when the person bearing such name is holding the office of President of the United States. Obviously it does not bother you in the least…that is fine.

    I am trying to point out that either it be right or wrong this is a fact that WILL NOT go away.

    You said “Would you honestly feel that this is a fair practice if the opposing party used a guilt by association ploy against the candidate you support?”

    You are kidding right? Are you trying to tell me, or your readers, that both political parties do not use guilt by association? Of course they do and you know it.

    As I said – the current president and his adminstration keep pounding away with WE INHERITED THIS or WE INHERITED THAT – well, he also inherited his name…so live with it and expect to find that not all USA citizens feel comfortable with this fact.

    Whatever we say here will never change that – never.

    1. Let me clarify a few points here:

      1. I never said that the notion that Obama’s name making people worry about his “true” intentions wasn’t a fact that could be denied. The fact is that there are people who think Obama should not be president because of his family’s Muslim roots. There are people who think Obama should not be president because of his African roots, too.

      I happen to believe, however, in a country that supposedly still believes that all citizens were supposed to be created equal, this is an unfair belief, much the way it would be unfair to associate all Christians with those violent bible-thumpers who don’t mind killing because they’re so determined to protect life.

      But as we all know, there are people who do this, too. The fact that they do doesn’t make them right, either.

      2. I also never said that you or anyone else doesn’t have the right to use a president’s full name to “make their point.” Of course you do. That’s not even an issue.

      3. The whole reason Hussein is a “Muslim-sounding” name is because it’s a common name given to Muslim males, just as Pierre is a “french-sounding” name because it’s a common name in France. If a name is common to a particular group, the name can be said to sound characteristic of that group. There’s no need to run around semantics here: it comes to the same thing.

      4. I’m not kidding about asking if you think this would be a fair tactic if used against your selected candidate. I’m also not trying to tell you that both parties don’t use “guilt by association.”

      Ironically, you still answered my question by acknowledging, essentially, that this kind of letter is a case of trying to establish “guilt by association.” You yourself said that you don’t believe Obama is guilty by association. Those were your words. Yet you approve of an email that tries to establish in the minds of voters as true something that you simultaneously say you think is not.

      I honestly don’t understand why someone wouldn’t have a major problem with that. It seems outrageously dishonest to me, and I can’t imagine, given the intelligent, eloquent way you’ve presented your case here, that in your own “heart of hearts,” you don’t see how this kind of tactic could be construed as at least a little dishonest.

      Sure, it can be chalked up to “the nature of politics.” And of course I know that both sides do it. (And I don’t mind calling Democrats on it when I see them do it, either.)

      But the fact that both sides have been guilty of playing dirty pool doesn’t make it right. Why can’t those who oppose Obama play above board rather than demonstrating their dislike and distrust of him (and in some cases, frankly, prejudice against him)? Why can’t the party that likes to brand itself as the “moral” party, the “Christian” party, the party with all of the honest family values everyone should want, drop this kind of character assassination?

      Here, Rick, is the main point I keep coming to: if you have a problem with something Obama does, tell me what you’re unhappy about and why. Then tell me what should have been done instead and why that plan would be much better for all involved.

      I’m not interested in snide comments about the man’s race, or religion, or name. Don’t try to brand it as one -ism or another, hoping that this will make me reject it outright without thinking at all about what it really means. These kinds of tactics are what turn so many people off from politics to begin with.

      No matter which side you and I each support on any individual issue, I would hope that you would at least agree that the voters would have a chance to make much better decisions if presented with truth and accuracy rather than insinuation and paranoia.

      Can we at least agree on that last statement?

  5. Rick,

    The fact that you believe that the current President and his administration are too far to the left is a point of view I can completely respect.

    I’m not sure how much a president on either side is necessarily supposed to “think down the middle.” I don’t think there are many on the left who would agree that George W. Bush “thought down the middle” during his eight years in the White House, and I doubt that many conservatives would say that Bill Clinton did, either.

    While the president is supposed to take care of ALL Americans, does he not have a responsibility to those who voted him in because of the platform he presented to do what he said he’d do? Isn’t that, in a perfect world, WHY he was voted in to start with?

    But back to what I see is a much more important point:

    If you feel Obama is too left and you feel he’s hurting the country, in my opinion, THAT is the message you and people who agree with you need to be communicating.

    Do I agree that the email I spotlighted in this post is acceptable if it helps get him out of office? No. Not at all. BECAUSE IT’S DISHONEST. Period.

    Part of the reason we have so many voters who are becoming more and more disenfranchised with out political system is because of this kind of foolishness.

    I’m glad to read other people’s point of view of what Obama’s doing right and what he’s doing wrong and why.

    But when I read emails like this one, falsely blaming him for something he had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with, and worse, trying to make him “guilty by association” just because of his foreign-sounding name, it makes me wonder this very simple question: Is this, honestly, the best they’ve got?

    It doesn’t make me side with the people hoping for a single term; it makes me wonder why they can’t come up with a good argument to keep him from being re-elected without lying. And it makes me distrust the people who are using this kind of communication to get that message across.

    After all, if they can’t be honest about a silly little stamp, how can I expect them to be honest about much more important issues that affect this country?

    This, to me, is the “big picture” of this kind of dirty politics: it further makes people who ought to be involved, who NEED to be involved…the American people…not want to be involved because they suspect that everything everyone says is dishonest.

    That’s not the way to get someone elected, or to even build faith in the process. And that’s why I can’t support AT ALL the distribution of this kind of email and why I chose to “myth-bust” it in this forum.

    Again, I respect your opinion about Obama pulling us in the wrong direction; that argument makes perfect sense and is perfectly reasonable. And I appreciate your taking the time to express it here.

    At the same time, I think those who share that opinion — as well as those who think that it’s the Republican leaders who pull us in the wrong direction — should make their case with facts, not “anything it takes” (lies and distortions included) just to “get the job done.”

    The voting public deserves better than that. And so do the men and women who’ve given their lives in our nation’s history to preserve our rights to cast a well-informed ballot.

    1. Patrick – I apologize to you and your readers. In my haste to post I wrongly stated that I was in support of the email you mentioned…what I MEANT to say is that I support the use of the presidents full name by those who can post ‘factual’ news, emails, etc.

      NO – I am not in favor of ANY communication that is an outright lie. Obama had nothing at all to do with this stamp issue as did NO past president. USPS chooses their stamps…I know this because I retired from USPS with almost 35 years service. Can USPS be influenced on their stamp issues? yes.

      I won’t take this any further other than to say that it is MY opinion that his name SHOULD BE remembered and kept in the forefront simply because of his INHERITED muslim roots. Do I believe all muslims are bad – no, not by any means – but, I do know that the biggest problems (war and terriorist), heartaches (9/11), and worry (Ft. Hood) are all rooted somehow or someway with muslims. Does this make Obama guilty by association – no. Does his name make many people worry that his hidden heart of hearts may not be in the best interest of ALL USA citizens…IMHO yes.

      1. Let me point out two of the things you said:

        First: “Do I believe all muslims are bad – no, not by any means….”

        Second: “Does this make Obama guilty by association – no.”

        The use of his whole, Muslim-sounding name, used in this manner, seeks to intentionally create questions based in “guilt by association.”

        That’s my point.

        If you honestly believe that a Muslim heritage must mean that one’s “hidden heart of hearts” should be suspect, then you are automatically arguing guilt by association by raising that very question.

        For the emails that use that “full name” to resonate with people who, as you put it, “worry that his hidden heart of hearts may not be in the best interest of ALL USA citizens,” they must rely on “guilt by association.”

        Otherwise, adding his middle name would carry no weight at all.

        You can’t believe Obama isn’t guilty by association while simultaneously using it as a ploy to get him out of office. Doesn’t that sound illogical to you on some level?

        Would you honestly feel that this is a fair practice if the opposing party used a guilt by association ploy against the candidate you support? And I don’t mean accepting it in an “oh, it’s the nature of politics” way: I mean would you really call such a practice fair if the situation were reversed?

  6. You say “excuse me, make that “President Barack Hussein Obama,” because those right wing extremist nutjobs can’t resist calling him that”

    Well hell, isn’t that his name or would you like for everyone to just forget or ignore that fact?

    The Muslim Stamp story makes it rounds every year – has been for a LONG time. And, yes, over the years I have received many of these emails with President BUSH being blamed within the message.

    You say that the original email did not mention President Bush – how do you know that YOU received, or read, the original email? You DO NOT know. I saw many of these emails – some with most without any mention of any President.

    You cannot move forward by always looking back. 20/20 hindsight is a guide and lesson to be remembered…not a roadmap to the future.

    You say “Sorry, right-wingers: if any president is to blame for this stamp, it’s yours.” And just who would that be? So, you are saying that President Obama is to blame? He is my President as well as yours you know.

    Let your brain think down the center sometimes instead of only the left or right lobes and you will surely live a better and much happier life.

    1. Rick,

      I’ll take the last part of your comment first: thanks so much for your concern about my relative state of happiness. For the record, and you can confirm this by reading a variety of posts I’ve done over the years, I’m far more middle of the road than you obviously think I am. I defended President Bush when people tried to place all of the blame for 9/11 on his shoulders, and I skewered John Kerry’s preposterous campaign that spent all of its time painting him as the right man for the job because of his military service after he himself had denounced that very practice when Republicans used it against Bill Clinton.

      I attack bad ideas and illogic on both sides of the political spectrum, and frankly, I take a great deal of happiness in doing so.

      Let’s take your other points:

      The Muslim Stamp story makes it rounds every year — has been for a LONG time. And, yes, over the years I have received many of these emails with President BUSH being blamed within the message.

      You say that the original email did not mention President Bush — how do you know that YOU received, or read, the original email? You DO NOT know. I saw many of these emails — some with most without any mention of any President.

      In doing research, something I pointed out was severely lacking on the part of people who send this kind of email, I found that Snopes.com posted a version of this email dating back to 2002 and there was no mention of Bush there. I’ve received the emails over the years as you have, and I don’t recall one single instance in which Bush was blamed for the stamp. Every time I’ve seen this email over the years, blame has always been placed squarely at the Postal Service.

      Until now.

      Frankly, I’m pleased to know that you’ve received emails that did blame Bush, even though, for obvious reasons, he was not to blame, either. But it does illustrate that there are “nutjobs” on both sides, a fact you will find that I have never denied.

      You cannot move forward by always looking back. 20/20 hindsight is a guide and lesson to be remembered…not a roadmap to the future.

      I agree, although I don’t see what this has to do with anything; my point was that the majority of these emails, when blaming a president, seem to target Obama, which is clearly impossible since his predecessor was in office at the time. What does 20/20 hindsight possibly have to do with that?

      You say, “Sorry, right-wingers: if any president is to blame for this stamp, it’s yours.” And just who would that be? So, you are saying that President Obama is to blame? He is my President as well as yours you know.

      Perhaps I should have repeated the phrase “right-wing nutjobs.” They are an entirely different breed than people who simply are on the right. It is the “right-wing nutjobs” who brand everyone who says anything that isn’t patently negative about a Democratic president as “biased” whether they are or not, and they walk around saying, “He’s not my president.” If you’ve never heard anyone say that, spend some time with some Republican extremists in South Carolina…it won’t take you long to hear it.

      I realize that President Obama is our president. But then I’m not a “nutjob” on either side. It is the folks who refuse to accept a president they didn’t vote for — and who stoop to any level to smear his name or reputation, including blatant lies — to whom I referred.

      And I saved this for last:

      You say “excuse me, make that “President Barack Hussein Obama,” because those right-wing extremist nutjobs can’t resist calling him that.” Well hell, isn’t that his name or would you like for everyone to just forget or ignore that fact?

      When the first President Bush was in office, he wasn’t referred to as “George Herbert Walker Bush” among most Democrats. Republicans didn’t refer to Clinton in the majority of references as “William Jefferson Clinton.” (I believe you’ll recall that more often than not, they called him “Slick Willy,” but that’s another story.)

      The only reason the most recent Bush was referred to as “George W. Bush” was to distinguish him from his dad. Otherwise, we’d have called him “George Bush” the way we called his dad “George Bush.”

      Having said that, do I expect everyone to “forget” or “ignore” what Obama’s middle name happens to be? No. But we’re talking about a series of emails that refer to Obama by including a middle name that happens to be common to Muslim countries while accusing him of favoring Muslims.

      You don’t honestly believe that the two aren’t connected in the hopes of trying to create or perpetuate a negative image, do you? If Obama’s middle name had been, for example, William, do you really think that his middle name would ever appear on any of these pro-Muslim accusations? And suppose it were still a foreign-sounding name, though not a Muslim-sounding name, like Pierre. I’m sure nobody’d be referring to him as Barack Pierre Obama unless we were suddenly waging war in the streets of Paris.

      In fact, it’s safe to say that almost any email that makes mention of his middle name is, by pattern, a negative email.

      With all due respect, I might be inclined to suggest that anyone who doesn’t see that this name could be use for obvious prejudicial effect might be refusing to “let their brain think down the center sometimes.”

      1. “You don’t honestly believe that the two aren’t connected in the hopes of trying to create or perpetuate a negative image, do you?”

        Certainly I believe they’re connected and rightfully so. It is my opinion (and I can share my opinion as I like to whomever I like) that everyone should be repeatedly reminded of, as you stated, THIS NAME – and that is probably the attitude of whatever idiot started the email that you reference. Out of sight – out of mind…you know? I relate this to the fact that the immediate administration and democrat majority keep repeating WE INHERITED this or WE INHERITED that. Yes, you inherited it BUT you promised to fix it…they are not – they are perpetuating it to an even greater degree.

        “In fact, it’s safe to say that almost any email that makes mention of his middle name is, by pattern, a negative email.”

        Agreed and accepted.

        “With all due respect, I might be inclined to suggest that anyone who doesn’t see that this name could be use for obvious prejudicial effect might be refusing to “let their brain think down the center sometimes.”

        With all due respect…YES, I see it and if it works to provoke a change in the masses minds and enlighten them to make (what I think is) better decisions come election time then I have no objection to using THIS NAME in in manner that will reach the desired goal – what goal? One term and out.

        We can agree to disagree.

        1. Rick,

          You’ll just have to forgive me if I find it more than a little ironic that you began by telling me that I should let my brain “think down the center.”

          If you believe engaging in tactics that, as you’ve just admitted, are intentionally calculated to bring about the result of defeating this particular president is an example of “thinking down the center” rather than thinking on the opposite side you assume I’m on, then you and I can add the definition of “thinking down the center” as one of the things we will have to agree to disagree on.

          In any case, thanks for reading and your input. I do appreciate it.

          1. Patrick – I appreciate you allowing me to post. Thank you.

            My point, that I may or may not have stated correctly, is…

            I am of the opinion that the current President and his full administration are way LEFT – too left in fact. That was, or should have been, my point of thinking down the center. Obama and this admin are not, IMHO, doing this at all in any manner – and show no signs of relenting.

            Therefore, if emails such as these will at all help relieve this current situation in ANY way or manner and return this nation and its people to center line then I am fully in support of same.

            I am not trying to imply or at least did not mean to imply that you are far left or far right – I only intended to provide an opposing view regarding whether emails, or campaigns such as this email, are right or wrong when viewing the big picture.

            Again, thank you for letting me post.

        2. How exactly does THIS NAME enlighten people? Are we supposed to somehow perceive a person differently because of his name?

  7. Does the President even get involved in the approval process of new stamp designs? Doesn’t seem very…presidential.

    1. I don’t think the president is involved in any way in that process. I think it’s all done within the Postal Service itself, which is probably why these right-wingers didn’t bother to mention President Bush in the original version of this email when the stamp first appeared.

      Now that they assume no one has ever seen this stamp in eight years, it was just time for them to rewrite their emails and blame a Democrat for it. Obama was just the easy target.

  8. Research? Research turns up facts. Facts are death to knee-jerk reactionary displays of righteous outrage. And what fun is that?

Comments are closed.

Patrick is a Christian with more than 30 years experience in professional writing, producing and marketing. His professional background also includes social media, reporting for broadcast television and the web, directing, videography and photography. He enjoys getting to know people over coffee and spending time with his dog.