.

What Did You Think of the Controversial Obama Logo?

The logo, which stirred up some controversy recently, was apparently dropped by the Obama campaign last weekend.

Much is being made by politicos about the Obama campaign's representation of the flag, which puts the campaign logo in place of the field of stars.

Conservative media and websites have come out strong against the logo, which might have caused the campaign to quietly drop its use over the weekend. Obama supporters can no longer purchase merchandise with the controversial logo. An error message is returned for anyone attempting to access the link on the the campaign's website.

What did you think of the logo? Much ado about nothing by Republicans? Or a disrespectful overstep by the Obama campaign? Tell us below in the comments.

Jack of Kings September 29, 2012 at 03:40 PM
The flag means more to some people than others. Why risk offending a large group of the demographic by having this logo? And, technically, you are not supposed to use the likeness of the flag in clothing etc., but it is done. I think it was wise that the Obama campaign recognized that the President of the United States' relelection ccampaiggn should not be a perecived violator of the flag.
"E Pluribus Unum" September 29, 2012 at 04:21 PM
Phil, I am only now catching up on the flag redesign by the Obama campaign. I am an Obama supporter and I agree with your last statement. I will need to hear more about what they were intending to do. Now, I would also caution certain folks not to use this as an opportunity to foster racial hatred and bigotry. How? By making up false messages that he is using this art form as the "official" U.S. flag. I also would expect hate groups to use this incident as another way to brand the President as unAmerican, a Muslim in disguise, and another opportunity to fan fear and hate "and let's take our country back" from those people.
"E Pluribus Unum" September 29, 2012 at 04:41 PM
Phil, after a quick check this is a non-story. This is a poster, art form being made available through social media outlets. The sources of this non-news story is Fox News, The Blaze (Glen Beck's outlet) and other ultra right outlets. They are trying to manufacture hysteria because of racial bigotry and fear. Let's see how the rest of the story plays out. PS Kiri, why is the Patch jumping on a non-story, manufactured news? This is all about fanning hate and racial bigotry. Don't play along. PSS Phil, please hear this...I am NOT saying this about you. I am only using your entry and reasonable comment to present a concern. Thank you.
Kiri Walton (Editor) September 29, 2012 at 05:46 PM
Hi E Pluribus Unum, Patch is a forum for the community to discuss issues. On weekends, the site may carry some stories that can initiate more conversation about specific issues that may be of interest to people but are not only about Brookhaven. The story above describes what happened with this logo and poses questions to get input about this logo. It was also first published on other Patch sites.
"E Pluribus Unum" September 29, 2012 at 06:38 PM
Kiri, I sincerley appreciate your follow-up and answer. What I am still trying to reconcile is this. This "breaking news" appears to be an intentional misrepresentation by conservative and ultra conservative "sources" (Fox News, Blaze, Infowars, Twitchy, etc.) to feed into a bigoted mindset that the President is not an American, is unpatriotic and a Muslim. There is an agenda here. The presidential campaign is trending downward for Mitt Romney. Taking posters with artwork of the U.S. Flag, selling them in social media outlets, is NOT the same that the Presidents is intentionally changing the current Flag and as being reported as news and fact. It's a fabrication. Yes, I believe it wasn't a smart move by campaign staffers since the Flag is such a sensitive, protected symbol. This could have, should have been avoided. But poor judgement does not justify fear and hate bating. And it appears IMHO the Patch is unintentionally feeding into it by asking folks to give input on a conspiracy. Kiri, thank you for the chance to offer this feedback.
Kiri Walton (Editor) September 29, 2012 at 09:18 PM
You're welcome, E Pluribus. That's why this was posted so everyone can offer their opinions.
Eddie E. September 30, 2012 at 10:30 PM
Precisely what is 'controversial' about the President's campaign logo? The people who are offended have been serially offended by everything the President has done since he was elected........especially the things that have been successful. They will be angry when the President is re-elected and they will kvetch as he brings the bush depression to an end. I guess they are just an angry bunch.
Jack of Kings October 01, 2012 at 01:10 AM
There are always people kvetching. Some kvetch about the city they did not want, but have. But they will kvetch and fill the boards with their kvetching--to their supporters in the audience that probably number less than five.
HamBurger October 01, 2012 at 01:23 AM
Mr. Phil, gee, kvetching . . . What about your endless whining about me and whether I am actually running for political office in your new city? Does that count? Please pass the yellow mustard! Hey! Would you like some on your chili?
Grieg Ericsson October 01, 2012 at 01:29 AM
Mr. Burger, I'm thinking the rash from those shorts of his are a real kvetch.
HamBurger October 01, 2012 at 01:36 AM
Mr. Grieg, you mean those tight white shorts? Yeah, plus, he is a little old to be going out in public like that, right? Please pass the yellow mustard!
Jack of Kings October 01, 2012 at 01:38 AM
Running for public office,like you are, and posting anonymously about your opponents is a serious lack of transparency and a character flaw. You have repeatedly REFUSED to say you were not running for office and have lied that you have answered the question. I am not the only one on these threads that suspect you are running for council. I understand why you will not say you are not running for office--because you are and when the truth comes out, your candidacy would be finished. I actually agree with you that the CIty needs to start by being transparent. But you, HamBurger, are not being transparent. You are between a rock and a hard place. You started posting in February and have been negative on the City since Day One. You hoped the City would not pass. But it has. So you chose to run for council AND continue posting. Now, if you started posting under your real name like all other candidates have, what would happen to HamBurger?? The mere fact that HamBurger STOPPED posting and a candidate started would confirm to all that you were bashing your opponents under an alias. So you have to continue to obfuscate and never answer whether you are running. And you cannot post under your real name, because anyone reading these threads are beginning to realize what I have suggested may be true. If you really are not running--just say so now, HamBurger. But do not complain when you see I will not drop this issue. The upfront candidates deserve better
HamBurger October 01, 2012 at 01:40 AM
Mr. Phil, I am not going to answer your question. I did that once before and you would not accept my answer and continued to harass me and the individual you maliciously mistook me for. You continued to manipulate our conversation to denigrate me. No thank you. You are such an arrogant individual that you have no concern for your actions and how much harm you did to the individual you mistook me for. Speaking of character, maybe you should take a look at yourself. Have you seriously considered professional help? Please pass the yellow mustard!
HamBurger October 01, 2012 at 01:41 AM
Mr. Phil, you do know that there are a few folks you would associate with Brookhaven Yes that are running for office and one that was not associated with Brookhaven Yes but is pro-city also running for office that participate on the Patch forums don’t you? One has a consistent name and others use multiple names. Just thought I would bring this to your attention . . . But, that is OK, you are a strong supporter of Brookhaven Yes. Man! Just smell that special hamburger!
Jack of Kings October 01, 2012 at 01:48 AM
ARE you running for public office, HamBurger? Everyone sees you are ignoring the direct question. Maybe because you think there are others posting likeyou who are running for office. May be you think it is wrong for me to single you out because you think others are doing what you are doing. But you are one of the most prolific of the posters. And you are very transparently bashing candidates. Bottom Line? You are not answering the question. So, to me and others here, you are running for council. VOTER'S TIP: When you see HamBurger bash candidates, you may wonder what his motivations are. The last bashing was of two candidates for District 2. And yet he has tried to misdirect by saying he lives "on the other side of Peachtree". Full Disclosure: I am NOT running for public office.(See, HamBurger, how easy it is when you are not running?)
HamBurger October 01, 2012 at 01:50 AM
Mr. Phil, I am not going to answer your question. I did that once before and you would not accept my answer and continued to harass me and the individual you maliciously mistook me for. You continued to manipulate our conversation to denigrate me. No thank you. You are such an arrogant individual that you have no concern for your actions and how much harm you did to the individual you mistook me for. Speaking of character, maybe you should take a look at yourself. Have you seriously considered professional help? Please pass the yellow mustard!
Grieg Ericsson October 01, 2012 at 01:53 AM
Phil, They will not allow tight white shorts at the voting precincts...FYI.
Grieg Ericsson October 01, 2012 at 02:12 AM
Phil, Let's be brief. Brief.
Booyah October 01, 2012 at 02:31 AM
The Patch and the characters posting here have devolved into something completely useless.
hmm October 01, 2012 at 10:49 AM
LOL This thread is classic. I LOVE YOU GUYS! Thread story, a little Cox inserts itself into the Patch, added return on investment. Comments, priceless.
Eddie E. October 01, 2012 at 11:53 AM
Lets not lose sight of the very obvious fact that it is only a minority of the party that will lose in November that is even tangentally disturbed about the President's campaign logo.
Thomas October 01, 2012 at 08:12 PM
I am more distrubed by the coverup in the Benghazi attack and the media's yawn on the scandal. With a different president in the WHite House, it would have been a scandal. The more things changge, the more they stay the same.
Pam Lentz October 04, 2012 at 09:01 PM
What he's done something while in office??

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »