And the craziness continues…
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MF-aoQQ5nsA[/youtube]
This being TV news, most of the potentially relevant details have been glossed over. Does the union have a dress code? Did it cite a violation of specific union policies in firing the individual? Were the stagehands instructed beforehand not to wear political clothing? Was there a specific provision in the contract that barred political commentary by workers?
It’s likely that this person knew what he was doing when he wore a hat and shirt that said “Bush” to build an Obama stage, it’s likely that it was meant to be subversive, and it’s likely that there was ample cause for the individual to know that there would be repercussions. Of course, that’s just speculation, but TV news is at best a limited source of information on a complex case like this, and at worst it is sensationalist and intentionally leaves out details in order to elicit an emotional reaction from its viewers.
The clothing the man is wearing is very explanatory. He is proud of his son being in the navy for which it is serving the present administration. The newsperson also tried to get the union’s side of the story but did not. So, the ball is in their court until they decide to explain their side of the story.
In the court of public opinion, that may be the case, but legally they likely do not have to release any information surrounding the circumstances of his termination. It may even be illegal for them to do so.
Personally, his explanation strikes me as flimsy. How often does he wear two articles of clothing on which the largest word is “Bush”? Is he really doing that every day because he supports his son? Is he doing it on certain days? Or did he choose to do it on that day specifically because he was working on a stage to be used by Obama? It’s not impossible that he was just really into supporting his son, and completely oblivious of the political statement he was making, but it’s exceedingly unlikely.
There could be a lot of ‘ifs’ and ‘maybes’ as to why they didn’t give a reason for not making a statement. It could be that company was told before hand by President Obama’s staff that they don’t want embarrassing oppositional political gestalt at that site. How could that be a problem if he and the crew is gone after setting up for that appearance?
Would there had been a problem if had been wearing clothing that says ‘yes we can’ or ‘hope and change’ or even if his clothing had said 'USS Obama? I don’t think so. There must have been some type of political bias going on concerning the union and was probably seen by one of the administraion’s staff.
Maybe it means another kind of Bush…the pubic kind…
Just what isn’t a political statement when you’re anywhere near a political event? People who go out of their way to display symbolism have to expect consequences. The lady “stomped” in the Rand Paul episode didn’t deserve the violence, but surely she understood the potential of confrontation. People are neither innocent or dumb (a few exceptions). Wrapping yourself in a symbolic flag of any cause is guaranteed to bring confrontation. There isn’t anything surprising in this, and in general social interaction such knowledge is expected of everyone. It doesn’t make any difference whether an employer or a political hack expects people to not set up a confrontation, those who ignore common sense propriety are looking for consequences. What is disgusting is the violence toward dissenting symbolism. It has no place in what is supposed to be discussion and debate. The radical right’s willingness to promote violent “solutions” says a great deal about their agendas. Paul, Miller, and Angle… Just what the fuck are “second amendment remedies”? Are we supposed to close our eyes and not see the parallels to brown shirts in Germany and Italy prior to WWII?
I got forcibly thrown out of a Republican HQ and the cops called on me because I stopped in while I was canvassing for Kerry and had a Kerry shirt on. Just wanted tickets to go see Pres. Bush at the campus rally.
If I was a douche-bag I would have blamed one man’s decision on the entire GOP. But the volunteers working there were fine with it, so was every other person in the building, it just so happened that the one guy in charge didn’t like it. Still, though I probably should have sensationalized it, polarized it, and claimed myself a victim of a political cabal trying to crush opposing viewpoints that reached to the top echelons of power. You know, my shirt, and especially me were just that important.
This is obviously ridiculous, but it’s even more ridiculous to feign innocence as you wax philosophical about a conclusion that expresses as much political bias as it’s supposed the firing did.