It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Romney calls for NH police commissioner to apologize, resign for Obama slur

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2014 @ 10:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

I suppose she does.

However, does one not have a reasonable expectation of privacy while at dinner? Yes, it's reprehensible that he chooses to use "that" word.

Does this episode cast an unfavorable light on this guy? Most certainly. But what has he done? What does the community say, or has it said in the past about him? Complaints? Praise? Anything at all?

To judge him on this incident?

Are there other incidents that help put that in context?




posted on May, 19 2014 @ 10:21 AM
link   
a reply to: skalla

I'll be QFT'ing you in future as you clearly like to edit your posts long after receiving critical replies. This is ofc the section that you added.
Just wanted to highlight that you want to punch busy body women in the mouth.


Ha ha I have to laff out loud because your "busybody" post affirms in spades the definition of "busybody" that I edited into my post, which was not done in response to anyone or anything other than to clarify my own position by adding a definition of your behavior. I frequently either post an edit as a new post or if not too much time has passed I'll edit in the existing post.

So I am happy to know that you will will be monitoring my posts - taking on the function of moderator, which us a further affirmation of your qualifications of 'busybody.'

As for your accusation of my being a misogynist? ROLF - my dear, I've never set foot inside a massage parlor in my whole life.



edit on 19-5-2014 by FairAndBalanced because: edit to correct



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 10:23 AM
link   
a reply to: seagull

I agree that more info would be useful to judge the conduct of this man in his current role, but sometimes we do things so face-palmingly stupid or inappropriate that we just have to fess-up, get our coat, and find something else to do.

"Sorry babe, i humped the dog.... but it's the first time i cheated on you in ten years of marriage"



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 10:29 AM
link   
a reply to: skalla

No arguement... It was staggeringly stupid of him, and doesn't reflect well... But everyone does "facepalmingly stupid" things. I certainly have, and undoubtedly will again.

Is this an indicator of true opinion? Or is it, perhaps, a drink or five too many? One is bad, and deserves a firing. IMHO. The second? A smack upside the head with a cluestick, and a chokechain short leash...again, IMHO.

I reserve the right to change that opinion at any time.



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 10:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: LDragonFire

(CNN) - Mitt Romney is calling on a police commissioner to apologize and resign after using the N-word to describe President Obama

"The vile epithet used and confirmed by the commissioner has no place in our community: He should apologize and resign,” Romney said Sunday in a statement provided to CNN.

Robert Copeland, 82, is the police commissioner in Wolfeboro, New Hampshire - where Romney owns a home and spends a lot of time.

CNN
He should apologize and resign, on this point I completely agree with Romney. This kind of public idiotic behavior and then the justifying of if with free speech rhetoric is what will lead to the republican defeat in the upcoming elections, no matter how much money special interest spend. This type of speech in public then the reaction later is lunacy, bigoted and racist in nature and rubs the real America the wrong way.

Am radio and fox news has created a almost militant segment in society and as long as they continue to speak publicly it will continue to hurt there efforts to control the rest of us.


So we have freedom of speech as long as you don't offend someone? Granted the choice of words was poor, but why are we dictating a man's fate off of a word he said in public that he is legally allowed to say (see 1st amendment)?



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 10:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: seagull
However, does one not have a reasonable expectation of privacy while at dinner?


If I exclaim something loudly in a public place (as he did), I have relinquished any expectation of privacy that I may have had.



To judge him on this incident?


In this instance, he said enough for ME to judge that he is a stubborn, old bigot and very possibly a racist. What other people judge of him is their business. Does he have a right to be a stubborn old bigot and even a racist? You bet he does. But if his employers share my judgement and don't want a stubborn old bigot or racist working for them and representing their tourist town, they have a right to ask for his resignation. And he has a right to refuse.

Aside from calling someone a "f****** n*****", he said this:



“While I believe the problems associated with minorities in this country are momentous, I am not phobic. My use of derogatory slang in reference to those among them undeserving of respect is no secret. It is the exercise of my 1st Amendment rights,” Copeland wrote. “I believe I did use the ‘N’ word in reference to the current occupant of the Whitehouse [sic]. For this I do not apologize – he meets and exceeds my criteria for such.”

So for the record, the 82-year-old Copeland is not “phobic” about minorities, and in fact he has “criteria” for who deserves to be called the N-word. He’s not just throwing the word around.

We seem to have an epidemic of elderly white racists trying to explain their racism, to give what they believe are considered explanations for their abhorrent beliefs. They have criteria. They’ve thought this whole thing through. They’re not expressing loathsome and ignorant and hateful prejudice; they’ve got fact and reason on their side.


I can't help but ask myself what he calls white people who are undeserving of respect...

As regards my personal judgment, if ANYONE exclaims in anger that ANY black person is a "f****** n*****", that's not someone I want to be around, be friends with, hang out with or even look at... and I judge that they have racist and bigoted views. My judgement is my business, as the judgments of the townspeople are theirs.
edit on 5/19/2014 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 10:41 AM
link   
a reply to: FairAndBalanced

Just ensuring that you don't entirely change the context of our exchanges, you don't have to get all aggro punch me in the mouth or anything



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 10:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
So we have freedom of speech as long as you don't offend someone? Granted the choice of words was poor, but why are we dictating a man's fate off of a word he said in public that he is legally allowed to say (see 1st amendment)?


The First Amendment protects people against GOVERNMENT interference. This man has not been arrested, nor are there any laws against what he did. PLEASE study the Constitution before making such ignorant remarks.



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: FairAndBalanced

And btw, you never did say what charges the woman in question should face.



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 10:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

You know I agree with you, right?

I'm playing Devils Advocate. Though, to an extent, I don't want to see someone vilified for what may be an egregious social lapse.

Not saying it is, not saying it isn't... Judging someone on one event just strikes me wrong, that's all.



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 10:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
So we have freedom of speech as long as you don't offend someone? Granted the choice of words was poor, but why are we dictating a man's fate off of a word he said in public that he is legally allowed to say (see 1st amendment)?


The First Amendment protects people against GOVERNMENT interference. This man has not been arrested, nor are there any laws against what he did. PLEASE study the Constitution before making such ignorant remarks.


I know what it protects against. This man is police commissioner, he was speaking (he thought) in private, and it seems like it wasn't related to his job. So does that make it right to publicly lynch the man for saying something offensive?

I just find it hugely hypocritical that people support freedoms such as free speech but then condemn a man and try to ruin his life for saying ONE no-no word. It seems like we are just a few steps away from implementing the thought police and regardless of what the 1st amendment protects, by allowing mob justice like this, we are edging closer and closer to revoking the 1st amendment.



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 10:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: seagull
I don't want to see someone vilified for what may be an egregious social lapse.


I do think it's his age and ignorance on his part that caused him to think it's ok to utter these words, but ignorance is no excuse for his stubbornness and lack of understanding of the situation. Where has he been since the civil rights era? Does he not know that some may find it socially unacceptable to shout this in a restaurant?

To me, a "social lapse" is accidentally saying "Oh, Sh**" in front of a religious person, or asking a widower how his wife is doing. Calling a black person that word is no accident. This is not an Oops situation - He fully owns what he did and feels no remorse whatsoever.

I play devil's advocate all the time. No worries. I will always love you. LOL



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 10:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: skalla
a reply to: FairAndBalanced

And btw, you never did say what charges the woman in question should face.



Misandry will do.



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t
Unfortunately if he were just any individual, holding this belief, hurling racial epithets would be ok by your standard, and of course he has every right to say what he thinks, but what this is going to come down to is, he is a police commissioner, someone that is viewed as having some public trust, possibly not supposed to show bias, but he has revealed by his own words it would be hard for someone to see anything good of what came out of his mouth and it really reveals his insensitivity to people of color, so can someone shut those feelings on and off, no I do not think.

The line would be blurred on any judgement call this buffoon would have to make in his line of work as a police commissioner, concerning that type of language in a government workplace and having to enforce policies against it, he let all of the people down he works for when this came out, his credibility in matters concerning these issues, have been greatly diminished especially if he would have to make judgements about it, for him not apologizing it really reveals that he has no time for sensitivity to others and more importantly he let everyone know what is really on his mind.

If you do not know how to discretely use free speech there is a chance it might be used against you on some other level if it were seen as divisive, offensive or racist and your line of work and livelihood is made possible by all people that pay their taxes, white or black, I think there should be some say in that regard and he should have enough sense to realize the position he is now in and simply step down than attempt to defend this language especially if he has blacks and other people of color who are his subordinates, what kind of example is that ?



edit on 19-5-2014 by phinubian because: spelling



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 10:57 AM
link   
a reply to: FairAndBalanced

and what is the typical come-uppance for that, getting you a sammich?



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 11:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t
The scales of justice and judgment are supposed to be equal, he showed bias by his choice of words, unfortunately in this day and time, most people are attempting to rid themselves of good ol boys that have the power to hire and fire, and quite simply no matter how you might try to water it down, his language was that of a racist bigot

Anyone that cannot see the main point of the story , I really can't have a balanced discussion about it because you missed the real point and that point has absolutely nothing to do with free speech or privacy, it has everything to do with the public position of power this man has been trusted to uphold and again, it is great that this came to light, who knows what other kinds of negative beliefs or prejudice he harbors, I hope he is replaced by someone that is balanced, sensitive to all people and more deserving of holding that high office of power.


edit on 19-5-2014 by phinubian because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 11:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
I know what it protects against.


Then why bring it up? It is totally NOT relevant to this situation.



This man is police commissioner, he was speaking (he thought) in private, and it seems like it wasn't related to his job. So does that make it right to publicly lynch the man for saying something offensive?


1. Shouting something in public is NOT private.
2. The townspeople are neither right or wrong. They have the right to say what they are saying, just as the old man had a right to say what he said.



I just find it hugely hypocritical that people support freedoms such as free speech but then condemn a man and try to ruin his life for saying ONE no-no word.


I support free speech! I support this man's free speech rights, that doesn't mean I agree with what he said. That doesn't mean that he's free from repercussions.

Like it or not, there are social and cultural norms. Stepping SO far outside those norms is going to have repercussions. Welcome to living in a world with other people.



It seems like we are just a few steps away from implementing the thought police and regardless of what the 1st amendment protects, by allowing mob justice like this, we are edging closer and closer to revoking the 1st amendment.


So, you're supporting HIS right to free speech, but you don't think the people of his town should have free speech rights. Am I getting that right? All they have done is share their thoughts and beliefs. Would you have them silenced? Give me a break, here.

edit on 5/19/2014 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: skalla
erroneously introduced by the OP of the 30+ page thread.

Not exactly.

The original 'the witness is a waitress resident in town' comment comes from the TV News. The written story doesn't have 'waitress'. We have no idea if the woman is a waitress or not. The TV news had said she was.

The news has dropped this story ... probably because it was never a big deal to begin with. It's only 'certain people' at ATS who are dragging it on and beating it like a dead horse.


originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
In all of these "racism" situations lately, certain people scramble to defend the alleged racist ....

More racist or 'red flag' insinuations from BH ...
'Certain people' aren't 'scrambling' to defend a racist .... I, and others, are stating that people have a right to their opinions. I, and others, say that the Clippers Owners girlfriend is trashy ... and she is. I, and others, say that if it was a waitress listening in on conversations, then she should have minded her own business. At no point did we 'certain people' scramble to defend a racist. That's hogwash.

edit on 5/19/2014 by FlyersFan because: spelling



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 11:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
I know what it protects against.


Then why bring it up? It is totally NOT relevant to this situation.


The topic of free speech is relevant to ANY discussion involving what someone says.




This man is police commissioner, he was speaking (he thought) in private, and it seems like it wasn't related to his job. So does that make it right to publicly lynch the man for saying something offensive?


1. Shouting something in public is NOT private.
2. The townspeople are neither right or wrong. They have the right to say what they are saying, just as the old man had a right to say what he said.


He didn't shout, he was speaking to someone at a restaurant which was overheard by the waitress. Get your facts straight.

Of course they have the right to say what they want. I never said they didn't. I just condemned public lynchings that's all. I'd say that one PC unfriendly word said to someone in private is a tall order to condemn him as a racist hate monger.




I just find it hugely hypocritical that people support freedoms such as free speech but then condemn a man and try to ruin his life for saying ONE no-no word.


I support free speech! I support this man's free speech rights, that doesn't mean I agree with what he said. That doesn't mean that he's free from repercussions.

Like it or not, there are social and cultural norms. Stepping SO far outside those norms is going to have repercussions. Welcome to living in a world with other people.


Free speech means there are NO repercussions...

No sh##. I just want people to think about what they are doing before they condemn the man and ruin his life. What about his other actions in office? How does his service record look? Does any police actions in his past appear racially motivated? If yes, investigate it. There are SO many more factors to look at here, but all because he said ONE naughty word, the public demands his head.




It seems like we are just a few steps away from implementing the thought police and regardless of what the 1st amendment protects, by allowing mob justice like this, we are edging closer and closer to revoking the 1st amendment.


So, you're supporting HIS right to free speech, but you don't think the people of his town should have free speech rights. Am I getting that right? All they have done is share their thoughts and beliefs. Would you have them silenced? Give me a break, here.


How did you get that from what I said? I don't have a problem with the people complaining about his use of wordage. That is their right, I just question their reasoning for complaining.
edit on 19-5-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2014 @ 11:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
Romney, all class since day 1, the President who could have been. Hope the guy listens and resigns.


I'm not a Romney supporter, but he's right on this, and in retrospect correct on previous things, eg. the 47%, Putin was a threat (said during the 2012 debates). Persona seemed a little stiff and fake back then, making a few notable gaffes, but maybe he can reinvent himself for a 2016 run. With the current field in the GOP, he seems to have a good as a chance as anyone.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join