Obama Puts Foot In Mouth (Again)

The OP failed on so many levels.

Let’s just say, that the kid was a troubled teen and did provoke an incident. (You might not have try too hard to imagine such a thing Ralph, but for most of us, it’s a big stretch of the imagination to say the least.)

TWICE in three years (according to you) did the president put his foot in his mouth. (But not really, because you’re seeing shit that just isn’t there)

That’s not a bad record IMO, considering the fact that every word out of his mouth goes on public record.

ralph124c, please post a quote from Obama that you disagree with or at least comment on why you won’t.

Reading the quote I think he interjected himself into an issue unnecessarily. Perhaps he could have simply said that this is a tragedy, that the grand jury is still looking into it and that justice will prevail. I think the issue here is twofold: he implicitly brings race into it by saying his son would look similar to the victim. There was no need for that and somehing a white politician could not do Secondly he references the need to look into laws surrounding this incident which implies the SYG laws. Apparently these aren’t even going to be used by Zimmerman’s defense lawyer.

He could and should have been a little more artful in his comments and perhaps waited until the facts were more fully developed.

Everytime I see this, the preface that he is speaking directly to Martin’s parents is left out. Look at trayvon Martin: if Obama had a son that resembled him physically, that’s pretty much what he would look like.

Why not just say that he also has kids and he knows what it is like to be a parent. He introduced a racial element to an already racially charged environment. Unstatesman like (unless his comment was off the record and just to the parents, still it’s not a necessary comment).

How, precisely, did he “introduce” a racial element into an “already racially charged” environment? I mean, if it was already there, he was hardly introducing it.

I don’t see how anyone else other than perhaps David Duke and Al Sharpton would have handled the Treyvor Martin case differently. The GOP candidates all said pretty much the same thing after all.

By rather oddly saying that if he had a son then his son would have looked like the victim. It implies that this he supports that version of events and that this killing had a racial element (which we cant confirm one way or another). It wasn’t needed and frankly is incredibly self-absorbed if nothing else.

Have you somehow failed to notice that President Obama is black?

Sorry, other than black and slender, it’s a no go.
ETA: He *could *have looked like that, but he *could *have looked like Seal as well. Or Dr. Dre. Somebody just ramrodded it into the speech. And, let’s be real…it was a bizarre thing to say.

So what? And he’s bi-racial though he can call himself whatever he wants. So when a white person is killed Clinton or Bush or whomever should say if I had a son he’d look like the victim? Even setting aside the racial issue, so what if you had a son. It’s not about you. Just say that as a parent you can feel their pain.

Again, it interjects even more racial rhetoric when it isn’t needed. We don’t know all the facts, we don’t know if there is a racial motive here and frankly we don’t know if the victim was entirely innocent. He overstepped the mark and added unnecessary comments to a situation that no one fully understands.

I agree that it was WEIRD for Obama to mention that if he had a son, he would look like him, but it wasn’t insensitive, offensive, racially charged, etc.

It’s not all that different a sentiment than, “It could have been my own child,” or something similar, but it is a weird way to say it.

There are at least two other threads on the SDMB for arguing the merits of the homicide.

You’re arguing that it is wrong for a President of the United States to bring his personal views into his comments on something that happened into the United States. You’re wrong.

It’s the weekend. How are people supposed to tell you what they think when Limbaugh and Hannity aren’t even on?

Apparently I’m having trouble reading for comprehension. Please, help a foolish young man by pointing out something Obama said that can be interpreted that way.

I think the President’s comment was spot on. He acknowledges the need for an nvestigation, does not leap to any conclusions about what the results of that investigation might be, and obviously reacts to the pain of a parent losing a child at such a young age.

Unless there was soe additional comment somewhere that I missed, I don’t see any foot-mouth connection here at all.

All the words Obama used are in the dictionary. So are other words. Mix and match for desired result.

What he said about Trayvon looking like his own possible son – it wrung my heart a little, and I am a white woman without sons. Instead of the expected canned “this-is-a-tragedy-we-are-investigating” line, it was personal, human, caring. And you know, it was racially charged, because, you know, the murder was.

Even if Trayvon was guilty of something, it still was.

I happen to be very proud of my president for saying that.

I’m proud of my President for saying that, but you’ll notice you did the stuff that I’m proud of him for not doing, like saying it was a murder and saying it was racially motivated. You don’t know that it was, and neither does Obama. The difference is: Obama doesn’t decide to say it anyway, and you do.

Not Gingrich. He attacked Obama for his comments, just like Ralph did:

Forgot to mention, this makes me think Gingrich is even less of an honorable person than I thought he was, and I didn’t really think that as possible.