Conservatives alarmed: nation's children to be exposed to Obama's dangerous words

[Name Lips]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32673334/ns/politics-white_house/


Critics take aim at Obama's speech to kids
Florida GOP chief: Motive is to indoctrinate children with 'socialist ideology'

TALLAHASSEE, Florida - President Barack Obama's plans to give a back-to-school address next week has provoked a backlash from some within the Republican Party, with the chairman of the GOP in Florida saying the real motive is to indoctrinate students with his "socialist ideology."

Obama plans to address students across the country on Tuesday with a message about staying in school, working hard, and achieving educational goals.

The speech will be broadcast on television and through the White House's Web site — with Education Secretary Arne Duncan encouraging principals across the country to have their students tune in.
Story continues below ↓advertisement | your ad here

In advance of this address, the Department of Education is also providing resources and lesson plans.

Florida Republican Party Chairman Jim Greer issued a press release Tuesday slamming the plan, saying he is "absolutely appalled that taxpayer dollars are being used to spread President Obama's socialist ideology."

He said the event "obligates the youngest children in our public school system to agree with our president's initiatives or be ostracized by their teachers and classmates."

"While I support educating our children to respect both the office of the American president and the value of community service, I do not support using our children as tools to spread liberal propaganda," Greer added.

Spokeswoman Katie Gordon told NBC News that Greer's concern stems from Duncan's recommended lesson plan. She also stressed that parents should be able to decide whether their children should be allowed to participate in this kind of discussion.

Idea of writing letters is tweaked
In the wake of this criticism, some of the supplemental materials offered by the Education Department have been changed.

One bullet point that had encouraged students to "write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president," now asks students to focus on achieving "their short-term and long‐term education goals."

The White House said Greer has nothing to worry about. Spokesman Tommy Vietor said Obama has no plans to give a policy speech to school children and that the text of his comments will be posted online beforehand for teachers and parents to review.

On Wednesday, two House Republicans — Rep. John Kline of Minnesota, the ranking Republican on the Education and Labor Committee, and Rep. Thaddeus McCotter of Michigan, chairman of the House Republican Policy Committee — wrote to the White House asking for the early release of the text.

The controversy quickly generated discussion on Web sites.

"I'll be keeping my kids at home that day," a person identified as "Nascar Dad" wrote on the Tampa Bay Times Web site. "Our school is offering an 'alternative' activity, but if millions of parents across the country keep their kids out of school; Ouch!"

Others defended the speech. "President Obama has always been a strong supporter of education for our kids," wrote someone identified as Ellen Field on the Orlando Sentinel site. "To say he has some ulterior motive for supporting education is paranoid nonsense."

Virginia issues guidelines
Education officials in Virginia, where Obama will deliver his speech, issued a statement in response to the controversy.

"Whether a school or class views the address is a local decision to be made by teachers and principals in keeping with other demands of the instructional day," Superintendent of Public Instruction Patricia Wright said in statement. "Teachers who decide to incorporate President Obama's speech into their instructional program also are free to develop their own follow-up classroom activities."

Schools should make "reasonable accommodations" for any students whose parents object to them viewing the speech, the statement added.
Wow. I've never heard of parents being horrified that their children might observe a speech by the President. They don't even know what he's going to say! They just assume that any words that transfer from his mouth to their kids' brains MUST be a dangerous and terrible thing.

They're truly behaving like Obama is a foreign invader who's goal is to Destroy America As We Know It.

[TiQuinn]

I remember watching Reagan on CSPAN in my Junior High School back in the day. There was no furor then about "OHMIGODZ THE PRESIDENT IS GOING TO INDOCOTORINGATE US!!"

Just plain stupidity, but that's the world that we're in now. Politics is a zero sum game, scorched earth warfare, everything needs to be contested as if the world depended on it, etc.

[The Winslow]

They're truly behaving like Obama is a foreign invader who's goal is to Destroy America As We Know It.

But isn't he an Australian-born Kenyan Muslim terrorist who is French? No wait, that was Kerry.

[obryn]

Maybe I just wasn't paying attention, but didn't W do this, too? I don't remember anyone threatening mass absenteeism over that one, either. :)

-O

[The Winslow]

Maybe I just wasn't paying attention, but didn't W do this, too?

Yes; that he did.

And you know what happened last time he was reading "The Pet Goat (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0026863553)" to elementary schoolkids? 9/11! OBAMA IS GOING TO PROVOKE MORE 9/11 BY READING MORE STORIES ABOUT GOATS TO CHILDREN!

[Utrecht]

Has anyone actually read the original lesson plan and the original wording? - very poorly done and the conservatives did have a valid point.

Now, in truth, I think this is (yet another) earnest attempt by the White House to do something that got messed up in the wording (see the fishy email thing).

Apparently this was done once before by Bush the elder - but with out the "homework" part (which is where the issues came in for the WH)

[Varaj]

Looks like the requested changes are good ones.

[Atropine Mama]

Only if the requested change results in a truly reasonable accommodation, i.e. instead of a viewing of the speech and participation with the class in a conversation about it, Little Johnny's parents can yank him -- but then he has to read and write a report about the speech after reading the transcript. Let the parents read the transcript first, if they want to be asses about it.

[TiQuinn]

Oh, it's complete and utter bullshit. It's not the lesson plans: there are people getting up in arms over the temerity that their kids actually have to watch the President on TV. :rolleyes:

[Harry]

Oh, it's complete and utter bullshit. It's not the lesson plans: there are people getting up in arms over the temerity that their kids actually have to watch the President on TV. :rolleyes:

The thing that bothers me is the disrespect they are teaching their kids. Most kids end up thinking the world of whatever President they grow up with. When I was young and impressionable, it was Nixon. I adored him and wrote him letters. Still have one of the replies from his staff. Later on, I was just as fond of Carter. No politics involved, just a kid respecting the awesomeness of the office. I saw kids acting the same way with Reagan and later both Bushes and Clinton. My aunts and uncles grew up adoring Kennedy and Johnson, my parents both Roosevelt and Eisenhower. It's normal. And quite charming to my way of thinking.

[Brynja]

I wrote a letter to former President Clinton when I was 13, I was sooooo thrilled he replied. It was a pretty standard reply but still, the President responded. TO ME!

[Utrecht]

Oh, it's complete and utter bullshit. It's not the lesson plans: there are people getting up in arms over the temerity that their kids actually have to watch the President on TV. :rolleyes:

Sure it is for some - but the majority seem to be objecting to the content of the lesson plans - did you read the original plans?

Secondly, why now? Why September 9th? What is important about it to justify the President speaking to the nations school children? - the closest thing I can come up with is school starting. In the past when presidents (Reagen and Bush the eldar - both who were villified for this as well) spoke to the student, there were definable events tied to them.

So yes, there were nutjobs out there (pulling your kid out is just plain stupid), but why is it difficult to acknowledge that the WH fucked up what would already be a challenging thing to pull of (see Reagen and Bush's experience)?

[TiQuinn]

Sure it is for some - but the majority seem to be objecting to the content of the lesson plans - did you read the original plans?

Yes, I did. And honestly, I think this is just another instance where we're just not seeing the same things. I'm certainly not reading people complain about the lesson plans: It's the actual address.


So yes, there were nutjobs out there (pulling your kid out is just plain stupid), but why is it difficult to acknowledge that the WH fucked up what would already be a challenging thing to pull of (see Reagen and Bush's experience)?

Because this has never been made such an issue in the past. Yes, there were jokes after the fact: Bush and Quayle's classroom goofs come to mind. But this is on a whole different level.

FWIW, I don't feel the whole thing is worth arguing over because it's on the whole stupid and there are more important things in the world.

[Utrecht]

Yes, I did. And honestly, I think this is just another instance where we're just not seeing the same things. I'm certainly not reading people complain about the lesson plans: It's the actual address.

Because this has never been made such an issue in the past. Yes, there were jokes after the fact: Bush and Quayle's classroom goofs come to mind. But this is on a whole different level.

FWIW, I don't feel the whole thing is worth arguing over because it's on the whole stupid and there are more important things in the world.

Overall, I agree with your FWIW - and I think the argument has gone completely off the rails thanks to partisans on both sides.

However, the original push back had merit - or are you OK with asking kids to read Obama's books as part of a lesson plan? This (IMO) is where the Dept of Education fucked up.

Finally, Bush the Elder and Reagan both did indeed get villified for it.

[tleilaxu]

Overall, I agree with your FWIW - and I think the argument has gone completely off the rails thanks to partisans on both sides.

However, the original push back had merit - or are you OK with asking kids to read Obama's books as part of a lesson plan? This (IMO) is where the Dept of Education fucked up.

Finally, Bush the Elder and Reagan both did indeed get villified for it.

and the whole town hall BS this summer was nothing out of the ordinary. got it.

[The Theocrat of Poon-Tang]

More detail on Utrecht's mention of HW's speech and the fallout.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/When-Bush-spoke-to-students-Democrats-investigated-held-hearings-57694347.html


When Bush spoke to students, Democrats investigated, held hearings
By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
09/08/09 7:11 AM EDT
The controversy over President Obama's speech to the nation's schoolchildren will likely be over shortly after Obama speaks today at Wakefield High School in Arlington, Virginia. But when President George H.W. Bush delivered a similar speech on October 1, 1991, from Alice Deal Junior High School in Washington DC, the controversy was just beginning. Democrats, then the majority party in Congress, not only denounced Bush's speech -- they also ordered the General Accounting Office to investigate its production and later summoned top Bush administration officials to Capitol Hill for an extensive hearing on the issue.

Unlike the Obama speech, in 1991 most of the controversy came after, not before, the president's school appearance. The day after Bush spoke, the Washington Post published a front-page story suggesting the speech was carefully staged for the president's political benefit. "The White House turned a Northwest Washington junior high classroom into a television studio and its students into props," the Post reported.

With the Post article in hand, Democrats pounced. "The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students," said Richard Gephardt, then the House Majority Leader. "And the president should be doing more about education than saying, 'Lights, camera, action.'"

Democrats did not stop with words. Rep. William Ford, then chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, ordered the General Accounting Office to investigate the cost and legality of Bush's appearance. On October 17, 1991, Ford summoned then-Education Secretary Lamar Alexander and other top Bush administration officials to testify at a hearing devoted to the speech. "The hearing this morning is to really examine the expenditure of $26,750 of the Department of Education funds to produce and televise an appearance by President Bush at Alice Deal Junior High School in Washington, DC," Ford began. "As the chairman of the committee charged with the authorization and implementation of education programs, I am very much interested in the justification, rationale for giving the White House scarce education funds to produce a media event."

Unfortunately for Ford, the General Accounting Office concluded that the Bush administration had not acted improperly. "The speech itself and the use of the department's funds to support it, including the cost of the production contract, appear to be legal," the GAO wrote in a letter to Chairman Ford. "The speech also does not appear to have violated the restrictions on the use of appropriations for publicity and propaganda."

That didn't stop Democratic allies from taking their own shots at Bush. The National Education Association denounced the speech, saying it "cannot endorse a president who spends $26,000 of taxpayers' money on a staged media event at Alice Deal Junior High School in Washington, D.C. -- while cutting school lunch funds for our neediest youngsters."

Lost in all the denouncing and investigating was the fact that Bush's speech itself, like Obama's today, was entirely unremarkable. "Block out the kids who think it's not cool to be smart," the president told students. "If someone goofs off today, are they cool? Are they still cool years from now, when they're stuck in a dead end job. Don't let peer pressure stand between you and your dreams.

[Brynja]

Well we watched the speech here at Tech. It was pretty generic. I liked it, it put responsiblity on students for their success as wel as acknowledged that others were also charged with responsiblity. All in all a good pep talk.

[The Winslow]

Unlike the Obama speech, in 1991 most of the controversy came after, not before, the president's school appearance. The day after Bush spoke, the Washington Post published a front-page story suggesting the speech was carefully staged for the president's political benefit. "The White House turned a Northwest Washington junior high classroom into a television studio and its students into props," the Post reported.
See, that's an important difference. With Obama, the cons did not wait and see before jumping.

[Name Lips]

One of Emerad's students was kept home today because of the speech.

She teaches a special-ed preschool class. He's 4. She doesn't even have a TV in her room.

[obryn]

I think one key difference is that Obama isn't cutting educational spending. And the problems with his speech aren't policy-based at all.

There's a pretty big difference between "This was money we could have used to feed poor kids" and "OMGZsocialismhitlernazis!" Not that I think $28k is a legitimate amount of money to get your panties in a bunch over, but at least they tried to make a sensible point about policy that wasn't "We hate the President."

-O

[Radu]

Listening to hate radio (sorry, conservative talk radio) today I actually heard someone try to spin the President's speech as an "indoctrination" attempt. Indoctrinating kids with what? Personal responsibility, pride in their education, and a sense of control over their own destiny? If so, then I think we could damn well use more of it.

I can't believe the hoops some of these people will jump through to find something they hate about this President. At least with President Bush people (generally speaking) waited for him to fuck up* before getting on his case.

*I'm not counting the 2000 vote results.

[tleilaxu]

omg obama is making his speech about health care on 9-9-09! it's obviously a satanic conspiracy. plus he wants a revolution number 9... number 9... number 9, so he's a satanic communist! why isn't the liberal media covering this?

[Utrecht]

Listening to hate radio (sorry, conservative talk radio) today I actually heard someone try to spin the President's speech as an "indoctrination" attempt. Indoctrinating kids with what? Personal responsibility, pride in their education, and a sense of control over their own destiny? If so, then I think we could damn well use more of it.

I can't believe the hoops some of these people will jump through to find something they hate about this President. At least with President Bush people (generally speaking) waited for him to fuck up* before getting on his case.

*I'm not counting the 2000 vote results.

Again, welcome to the fringe. Lets review the numbers

28% of Republicans feel that Obama was not born in the US and is not president

31% of Democrats feel that Bush had foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks

There is simply no relating to certain people. Oh, and if you think that people were waiting for Bush to fuck up (or Clinton, or Bush the elder or Reagan or......) before jumping on them, I have a bridge to sell you.

[DarwinOfMind]

28% of Republicans feel that Obama was not born in the US and is not president

31% of Democrats feel that Bush had foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks


Your saying 59% of the country is fringe? I don't think that makes them fringe.

[Utrecht]

Your saying 59% of the country is fringe? I don't think that makes them fringe.


You are forgetting the independents....

[The Theocrat of Poon-Tang]

See, that's an important difference. With Obama, the cons did not wait and see before jumping.


No, they waited until the speech was over, a speech that was by all accounts plain vanilla (see below - a point you selectively ignored), and then attacked it. The dems in 1991 were attacking it for something it wasn't, while the conservatives were attacking Obama's for what they thought it was going to be.


Lost in all the denouncing and investigating was the fact that Bush's speech itself, like Obama's today, was entirely unremarkable. "Block out the kids who think it's not cool to be smart," the president told students. "If someone goofs off today, are they cool? Are they still cool years from now, when they're stuck in a dead end job. Don't let peer pressure stand between you and your dreams.

Both sides were trying to score political points For you to try and equivocate the democratic position in '91 as being somehow better than the republicans in '09, means that you, my friend, are being totally disingenuous.

[obryn]

Both sides were trying to score political points For you to try and equivocate the democratic position in '91 as being somehow better than the republicans in '09, means that you, my friend, are being totally disingenuous.
Do you really see no difference between the Democrats' policy concerns (Specifically, "Bush is cutting education spending, and doing nothing to help our schools. Why spend money on what amounts to an ad?") and the Republicans' panic that the President is going to indoctrinate the kids to Nazi-ism resulting in parents pulling kids out of school?

Also, it should be noted that Bush's speech to students was mostly about hard work, but it included a quick ad for his educational policy. (Read it yourself. (http://bushlibrary.tamu.edu/research/public_papers.php?id=3450&year=1991&month=10)) Obama's had nothing of that nature, and was more or less a discussion of "conservative" values of hard work and self-sufficiency.

You want to talk disingenuous... It's barely even the same ballpark.

(And let's not even talk about Reagan's address to students which included defense and tax policy...)

-O

[The Winslow]

Your saying 59% of the country is fringe? I don't think that makes them fringe.

28% of group A + 31% of group B, where groups A and B are mutually exclusive, do not amount to 59% of groups A and B together. Or, in other terms, a×b + c×d is not the same thing as (a+c)×(b+d). Do you need Obama to come speak to you about maths?

[DarwinOfMind]

No, I realize that I made the purposeful mistake in math as sarcasm

Once again humor on the web does not carry

But honestly if almost 1/3 of democrats are crazy and 1/3 of republicans are crazy then can't we assume 1/3 of independents are crazy, and higher percentages of the "third" parties.

So can we just say 1/3 of people are crazies

[The Winslow]

So can we just say 1/3 of people are crazies

Or morons. People too intellectually lazy to exercise the critical mind required to discriminate between the plausible and the implausible, and who will therefore accept at face value whatever negative things are said of the people they don't like as it reinforces their bias and makes them feel justified in not liking these people.

[Utrecht]

So can we just say 1/3 of people are crazies

Sorry for not reading the humor there - you are right teh intraweb is bad for that. :cool:

and yes, it is safe to say 1/3 of people are absolutley certifiably batshit crazy

[Snatch]

People too intellectually lazy to exercise the critical mind required to discriminate between the plausible and the implausible, and who will therefore accept at face value whatever negative things are said of the people they don't like as it reinforces their bias and makes them feel justified in not liking these people.

Sadly - I believe that the fraction of people who fall into this category is much higher than 1/3.

[The Theocrat of Poon-Tang]

You want to talk disingenuous... It's barely even the same ballpark.

(-O

Of course not, because then you'd have to admit that your party was actually wrong.

[Xavier Lang]

omg obama is making his speech about health care on 9-9-09! it's obviously a satanic conspiracy. plus he wants a revolution number 9... number 9... number 9, so he's a satanic communist! why isn't the liberal media covering this?

He just wanted it to come out the same day as the movie 9.

[obryn]

Of course not, because then you'd have to admit that your party was actually wrong.
WTF? The Democratic Party is wrong about plenty of things. This is just not one of them. This is a case of false equivalence - conservatives realizing they may have gone off the rails a bit here, and trying to make it just the same as how the Democrats reacted to something similar nearly 20 years ago.

You're telling me that you see no difference whatsoever between the two reactions and reasons for the reactions, then? No difference between "I'm keeping my kid home because that Kenyan guy is going to make him a socialist or maybe a Nazi" and "You know, talking about educational policy to kids when you cut education spending sucks"?

-O

[Utrecht]

WTF? The Democratic Party is wrong about plenty of things. This is just not one of them. This is a case of false equivalence - conservatives realizing they may have gone off the rails a bit here, and trying to make it just the same as how the Democrats reacted to something similar nearly 20 years ago.


Speaking of false equivelnces - trying to link loonies who keep thie kids away from school to the republican party.....


You're telling me that you see no difference whatsoever between the two reactions and reasons for the reactions, then? No difference between "I'm keeping my kid home because that Kenyan guy is going to make him a socialist or maybe a Nazi" and "You know, talking about educational policy to kids when you cut education spending sucks"?

-O


Of course there are differences - but the extreme reaction happened in both circumstances - please let me know where for the Obama speach anyone from the Republican party began forming congressional investigative panels to see if something illegal happened.

[The Winslow]

Theo's new avatar and custom title cracks me up.

[Brynja]

:bow:

I will however remove it if he really hates it.

Let this be a lesson to all!!

Arbitrary Admin is in your ceiling watching you masturbate!

[obryn]

Speaking of false equivelnces - trying to link loonies who keep thie kids away from school to the republican party.....
Other than Laura Bush, did you hear or see any counterpoint to the loonies coming from the Republican Party? How about Jim Greer, chairman of the Florida Republican Party? And in a different but related topic, Jean Schmidt (R-OH) publicly agreed with the birthers on camera in a recently-released video. It's endemic right now.

Of course there are differences - but the extreme reaction happened in both circumstances - please let me know where for the Obama speach anyone from the Republican party began forming congressional investigative panels to see if something illegal happened.
Well, for one thing, there was no discussion or endorsement of Obama's educational policy; it was a motivational speech.

If Obama spent time talking about policy in what amounts to a paid advertisement for his platform using government funds, I'd expect there would (and should) be an uproar. But Obama wasn't pitching any education plan or policy. Heck, any policy at all that I saw. Granted, I think the Gephardt thing was silly. But at least there was a reason behind it.

-O

[Hatter]

Arbitrary Admin is in your ceiling watching you masturbate!

That's a fairly dangerous vantage point in my room.

[Snatch]

Arbitrary Admin is in your ceiling watching you masturbate!

I believe this is the greatest and most thrilling revelation in this thread.

[doc]

Arbitrary Admin is in your ceiling watching you masturbate!

Ahh but is the lurkers watching YOU !?

[Utrecht]

Other than Laura Bush, did you hear or see any counterpoint to the loonies coming from the Republican Party? How about Jim Greer, chairman of the Florida Republican Party?

Jim Greer spoke out when circus broke - when the Department of Education was still pushing their lesson plans that included having students read Obama's books and write essays on how they can "help Obama".

Futher, there you go again, linking loonies to the republican party - are they some/many likely - but no more than any other party.


And in a different but related topic, Jean Schmidt (R-OH) publicly agreed with the birthers on camera in a recently-released video. It's endemic right now.


I dont think endemic means what you think it means - because one person is not endemic. and playing the counter point - Van Jones signed a petition stating that Bush knew about 9/11 - does that mean that batshit crazy is endemic in democrats?


Well, for one thing, there was no discussion or endorsement of Obama's educational policy; it was a motivational speech.

If Obama spent time talking about policy in what amounts to a paid advertisement for his platform using government funds, I'd expect there would (and should) be an uproar. But Obama wasn't pitching any education plan or policy. Heck, any policy at all that I saw. Granted, I think the Gephardt thing was silly. But at least there was a reason behind it.

-O

Again, there are two phases to this whole thing. Pre revamped Study Materials and Post revamped study materials.

All of the push back (IMO) was fully justified before the items are revamped - afterwards, just political maneuvering - and most of that seemed pretty mild. Even the anti op-ed pieces were saying the message was good, execution sucked balls.

On a somewhat related note - whose idea was it to schedule this during the first week of school (and oops, New York Public Schools are not even back yet)? eek - and these guys want to revamp health care (I know cheap shot) :lol:

[Trainz]

:bow:

I will however remove it if he really hates it.

Let this be a lesson to all!!

Arbitrary Admin is in your ceiling watching you masturbate!

I did this to him when I was an admin and he said I was abusing my epeenar.

Since you're a girl... eclit? eboobies?

[Trainz]

Sadly - I believe that the fraction of people who fall into this category is much higher than 1/3.

My personal observations would confirm this. (http://www.kaytastrophe.com/vb/showthread.php?p=100039&highlight=moron#post100039)

[Harry]

Jim Greer spoke out when circus broke - when the Department of Education was still pushing their lesson plans that included having students read Obama's books and write essays on how they can "help Obama".

Keep on hammering at that, why don't you? The actual meaning was "...help Obama achieve his education goals."

hth

[Utrecht]

Keep on hammering at that, why don't you? The actual meaning was "...help Obama achieve his education goals."

hth

....and those would be?

....and if that was indeed the case, then why the inclusion of reading Obama's books? Last time I peroused them, there was little in them on his education goals....


Like I said before, the Dept of Education fucked up. It was well meaning, but showed a gross lack of politics and communiucation skills.

[ROGAN GOSH]

The Republican propaganda machine is hard at work. Working almost as hard as the Nazi propaganda machine in the 1930's and mid 1940's. We all know the truth about that. Unfortunately people still cling to ignorance and divisiveness to pacify their misunderstandings and arrogance.
Common sence(and respect) ain't so common!

gwb worked hard for the nasty rep that hangs over him. It didn't happen all at once. Over time the deceit and power-mongering of his administration, the blatant disregard for the diligance and hard work our founding fathers put into to creation of a government as balanced as they could.
No, not perfect but pretty awesome compared to the rest for the world.
And in the small time gwb "guided" our amazing counrty, him and his ilk has pissed on all the checks and balances, shit on personal rights and liberties (the same that SOOOOOOO many americans have fought for and died for) and in my honest opinion fucked the very nature of our socio-politcal future.

While he was president he completely deserved all the respect due to the president. Whether I liked him or not. Obama deserves the same.

Republicans stop your crying. Obama hasn't pissed on, shit on or fucked over the American people like you wish he did.......:tongue:

[obryn]

Jim Greer spoke out when circus broke - when the Department of Education was still pushing their lesson plans that included having students read Obama's books and write essays on how they can "help Obama".
You know that's out of context. :)

Also, this is 2009. Everything that goes out to a school has study guides and curriculum plans attached. It's par for the course.

Futher, there you go again, linking loonies to the republican party - are they some/many likely - but no more than any other party.

I dont think endemic means what you think it means - because one person is not endemic. and playing the counter point - Van Jones signed a petition stating that Bush knew about 9/11 - does that mean that batshit crazy is endemic in democrats?
Have any Democratic congresspeople visibly supported 9/11 Trutherism?

-O

[Radu]

Futher, there you go again, linking loonies to the republican party...

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/07/house-gop-vice-chair-on-birthers-id-like-to-see-the-documents.php

I'd say that loonies and the Republican party are closer than you may think. Perhaps CONSERVATIVES and loonies are further apart, but as long as there's folks like Limbaugh, Hannity, and Beck around towing the Republican line the connection's going to be almost too easy to make.

[The Theocrat of Poon-Tang]

:bow:

I will however remove it if he really hates it.

Let this be a lesson to all!!

Arbitrary Admin is in your ceiling watching you masturbate!

Baby, I'm olllld school. I remember when Nutkin would have to give you an avatar to have one.

So no, it's fine. The title, too. ;)

[Brynja]

:flirt:

[Name Lips]

...


I think I'm in love.

[The Theocrat of Poon-Tang]

gwb worked hard for the nasty rep that hangs over him. It didn't happen all at once. Over time the deceit and power-mongering of his administration, the blatant disregard for the diligance and hard work our founding fathers put into to creation of a government as balanced as they could.
No, not perfect but pretty awesome compared to the rest for the world.
And in the small time gwb "guided" our amazing counrty, him and his ilk has pissed on all the checks and balances, shit on personal rights and liberties (the same that SOOOOOOO many americans have fought for and died for) and in my honest opinion fucked the very nature of our socio-politcal future.

Sorry man, but I have to call at least partial bullshit on that. How exactly were your personal rights and liberties shit on in the last eight years? Government thugs come knocking on your door late at night that I didn't hear about? :D

To me that's just one of those things people say because it sounds good but doesn't mean anything. The truth is that aside from longer airport waits which were and are necessary, the average American citizen at home wasn't even inconvenienced post 9-11.

Now you can argue that all you want, but that's simply a fact.

I do know for a fact that George W. Bush, in his eight years in office kept Al Qaeda at bay during a time when they were poised to plan more attacks and cripple us further. Instead he smashed their safe haven network and turned a troublesome middle eastern dictatorship into a functioning democracy.

Additionally, and I know this for a fact, he saved both of our families probably in excess of $10,000 in federal taxes during his tenure. The federal income tax burden was probably never lower on middle income families in recent times than it was under GWB.

In 20 years you'll realize that your rights were just fine under him, and that the only rights that were trampled were those of the scumbags we captured on the battlefiled. You may remember with some fondness, too, how much of your own money you were allowed to keep under GWB.

Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains. - Winston Churchill ...


While he was president he completely deserved all the respect due to the president. Whether I liked him or not. Obama deserves the same.

Agreed.

Republicans stop your crying. Obama hasn't pissed on, shit on or fucked over the American people like you wish he did.......:tongue:

If Government run health care is passed, he'll have started that process.

[Varaj]

Sorry man, but I have to call at least partial bullshit on that. How exactly were your personal rights and liberties shit on in the last eight years? Government thugs come knocking on your door late at night that I didn't hear about? :D

To me that's just one of those things people say because it sounds good but doesn't mean anything. The truth is that aside from longer airport waits which were and are necessary, the average American citizen at home wasn't even inconvenienced post 9-11.

Now you can argue that all you want, but that's simply a fact.

:grey:

So when the rights of the American people are eroded if my door isn't personally kicked in I don't get to complain?

[The Theocrat of Poon-Tang]

:grey:

So when the rights of the American people are eroded if my door isn't personally kicked in I don't get to complain?


Oh, this is the internet, you can complain as much as you want, Varaj. :tongue:

Still, I've keep hearing stories about rights trampled under W, but if it was the brutal dictatorship you all make it out to be, I would figure that at least someone here would know someone who was dragged off to a cell for no reason and waterboarded, or surveilled by the gestap...errr...FBI.

So far my search has been fruitless.

Oh, I'm sure here and there people were caught up in the post-9/11 dragnet, but those are lone exceptions in my book. Widespread civil rights crushing? Come, on, let's actually be serious here. My wife's cousin works at the CIA and I think I've told you all this before. But she was part of the much vaunted wiretapping program, and I asked, jokingly, if she was listening in to joe average citizen and checking off misdemeanors to use against them. She laughed and rolled her eyes. Uh, no, they had a specific set of things they were looking for regarding terrorism and that's it. By the way, she and her family absolutely despised GWB. Despised him.

[Varaj]

Oh, this is the internet, you can complain as much as you want, Varaj. :tongue:

Still, I've keep hearing stories about rights trampled under W, but if it was the brutal dictatorship you all make it out to be, I would figure that at least someone here would know someone who was dragged off to a cell for no reason and waterboarded, or surveilled by the gestap...errr...FBI.

So far my search has been fruitless.

Oh, I'm sure here and there people were caught up in the post-9/11 dragnet, but those are lone exceptions in my book. Widespread civil rights crushing? Come, on, let's actually be serious here. My wife's cousin works at the CIA and I think I've told you all this before. But she was part of the much vaunted wiretapping program, and I asked, jokingly, if she was listening in to joe average citizen and checking off misdemeanors to use against them. She laughed and rolled her eyes. Uh, no, they had a specific set of things they were looking for regarding terrorism and that's it. By the way, she and her family absolutely despised GWB. Despised him.

:grey:

Once again, so breaches in the Constitution have to personally impact individuals, joe average, before we sit up and notice?

That is utterly a retard position. Seriously.

[tleilaxu]

i'm interested in hearing from conservatives on this article. do you think it is accurate and fair? do you think that the criticisms of and fears expressed by republican lawmakers and activists are legitimate, and how would you like to see the right-wing comport themselves in the future?

as for myself, the state of discourse in america makes me sad.

GOP 'cranks' dominating debate

Joe Wilson’s outburst Wednesday night earned more than a personal rebuke from the president and a dagger-eyed gasp from the speaker of the House; it drew winces from Republicans worried that their party is becoming known less for the power of its ideals and more for the pettiness of its vitriol.

“Neither party has an exclusive on whack jobs,” says Republican media consultant Mark McKinnon. “Unfortunately, right now the Democrats generally get defined by President Obama, and Republicans, who have no clear leadership, get defined by crackpots — and then they begin to define the Republican Party in the mind of the general public.”

Turn on the TV, and you see what he means.

Here’s Orly Taitz, insisting that the commander in chief was born in Kenya. There’s a flock of town hall protesters, waving photos of the president in a Hitler moustache. Former GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin warns darkly that Obama is planning “death panels” for senior citizens. Georgia Rep. Paul Broun equates the president’s plans with “Nazi” policies. Ohio Rep. Jean Schmidt — last heard calling John Murtha a “coward” — tells a birther: “I agree with you, but the courts don’t.”

And then, in the midst of all the catcalls, hand-held signs and “I’m not listening” BlackBerrying, Wilson interrupts Obama’s address to a joint session of Congress by shouting, “You lie!”

“The president was helped more by the optics of House Republicans than by his own speech,” says former Rep. Vin Weber (R-Minn.). “It’s not likely to do any long-term damage, but they need to be very careful how they oppose this president.”

One veteran GOP official puts it bluntly: “The image of a bunch of white guys booing an African-American president is about as bad as it gets.”

Republican leaders were quick to distance themselves from Wilson’s outburst. John McCain said Wilson should apologize, and he did — although he also insisted that he was right about Obama’s lack of candor.

Brian Jones, a former communications director for the Republican National Committee, finds it frustrating when lawmakers like Wilson hijack the party’s public persona.

“You have a little bit of tyranny of the minority with these people,” he says. “It may raise their profile, it may make them more attractive in their district — but does it really help the image of the party in the midst of an important debate? I think no. Obviously, there are some who will be cheering this, but I think the cake is baked with them in terms of how they feel about Obama and health care.”

But Texas Sen. John Cornyn, the chairman of the Republicans’ campaign arm in the Senate, suggests that it’s not fair to tar the GOP with its fringier elements — and that it won’t last anyway.

“I think that it’s a free country,” he says. “Anybody can say what they want, they can identify themselves as a Democrat, independent, a Republican, a socialist or whatever they want to call themselves. That doesn’t mean they were representative of a political party or the mainstream of a political party.”

Down the line, he says, when the primary fields clear and the party’s candidates become better known, “then the voice of the Republican Party in states across the country are going to be their Republican nominee and candidate,” he says.

But “right now,” he says, “there’s sort of a void because that hasn’t formed yet.”

The question for the GOP: What will fill that void in the meantime, and will it leave an indelible stain on the party even after its election-year A-team emerges? Will the party be known for its members of the Gang of Six — the senators working, with varying degrees of success, on a bipartisan health care plan — or for those who question everything from the president’s place of birth to his right to talk to the nation’s schoolchildren?

“As someone who is center-right, it does make you cringe,” says Jones. For example, he says, “the notion of certain parents not sending their kids to school because they don’t want their kids being exposed to the propaganda of the president — to me that’s absurd. And parents have right to do that, I guess, but that’s representative of the same mind-set, I think.”

Jones notes that such sentiments are not limited to Republicans: “I lived in New York, in Brooklyn in ’04, and I remember hearing people saying, ‘When the Republican Convention comes, should we take our kids out of town? Because I don’t want them to be exposed to that.’”

Nor are Democrats strangers to having their crazy uncles take center stage. During the run-up to the Iraq war, for example, Reps. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.), Mike Thompson (D-Calif.) and David Bonior (D-Mich.) famously flew to Baghdad, where McDermott asserted that he believed the president would “mislead the American public” to justify the war. The trip made it a cakewalk for critics to describe the Democratic Party as chock-a-block with traitorous radicals.

If Republican Party leaders are concerned that their members will suffer the same fate, however, they’re sure not acting like it.

The Wilson incident was “certainly unfortunate,” said Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.), but “I don’t see it as any definition of our party,” he said.

And while House Minority Leader John Boehner said Thursday that he was glad Wilson had apologized for his outburst, he seemed to forgive the impulse behind the outburst, noting that passions over the health care debate are running high: “Don’t underestimate the amount of emotion that people are feeling,” he warned at a Capitol news conference.

Former Rep. Charlie Bass (R-N.H.) notes that hot tempers and high spirits are not uncommon when the stakes are high:

“I remember after [President George W. Bush] announced his Social Security plan, I had 15 town meetings, and they were nasty. But I didn’t call them unruly mobs. The fact is this is a very, very contentious issue, and it’s a do-or-die issue for a lot of people,” he says.

While Wilson’s outburst was “the kind of thing that should never happen,” Bass says, it captured “this enormous pent-up frustration” among conservatives and Republicans over the issue of health care.

“I did not view him as some fringe crazy person at all,” Bass says. “He reflected the temperature of the public, at least the opponents of this plan, and I think there are enough of them that there isn’t a sense that the Republicans are out of their minds for opposing this plan.”

Indeed, both Cantor and Boehner behaved Thursday like parents who know they must reprimand a child whose misbehavior has secretly delighted them — later in the day, both could be found praising the efforts of hundreds of conservative activists assembled outside the Capitol, who several times chanted “You lie!” en masse, openly rallying around the very incident their leadership had supposedly disavowed.

Longtime GOP strategist John Weaver said the Wilson incident isn’t a “huge deal” by itself, but “taken together with what’s happened over the last eight years, it’s symptomatic of what our problem is.”

“We do have structural, demographic issues we’re not addressing,” he said. “But we also have tone problems. We could have the best policy ideas in the world, but we can’t get anybody to buy them if our salespeople are angry. Nobody wants to hang out with a bunch of cranks.”

-- Manu Raju, Patrick O’Connor and Jonathan Martin contributed to this story.


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27015.html

[Name Lips]

I know I get more than a little irritated when radicals like Cindy Sheehan, Hollywood celebrities, and pundits shout loud enough to become the voice of the Left.

As far as I'm concerned govermental debate should be a contest of intellectuals and experts, not fanatics and pundits.

[Trainz]

Baby, I'm olllld school. I remember when Nutkin would have to give you an avatar to have one.

So no, it's fine. The title, too. ;)

:what:

Oh, so when SHE does it it's cool, but when *I* do it you cry?

:tongue:

Not only that, but with that title and avatar, the noobs (we still get some from time to time?) will be confused as hell when they get to read your posts.

:D

[Radu]

We get noobs? If so, where's the KJTW/introductions thread?

[The Theocrat of Poon-Tang]

:grey:

Once again, so breaches in the Constitution have to personally impact individuals, joe average, before we sit up and notice?

That is utterly a retard position. Seriously.


What serious breaches did GWB put in the constitution?

And if you all are going to excoriate W for the patriot act, be prepared to do likewise for FDR and his "these couple hundred thousand Jap citizens might give us trouble, so let's lock them up for 3 or 4 years" policy.

[The Theocrat of Poon-Tang]

:what:

Oh, so when SHE does it it's cool, but when *I* do it you cry?

:tongue:


Yes, but you've probably got French blood in you. Nothing you do is cool. ;)

[Utrecht]

i'm interested in hearing from conservatives on this article. do you think it is accurate and fair? do you think that the criticisms of and fears expressed by republican lawmakers and activists are legitimate, and how would you like to see the right-wing comport themselves in the future?

as for myself, the state of discourse in america makes me sad.



http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/27015.html

It cetainly has some valid points, the biggest one being

The Democrats have Obama and the Republicans really have no one - and in that comparison, the republicans will always lose out. Even after support for many of his policies have eroded, his personal appeal is sky high.

Second, part of it has to do with being the opposition party. Effectively the party of No. It was the same issue that challenged the democrats during the Bush years - if it were not for the emergence of Obama and the arrogance of the GOP, this election cycle would likely be much different - very hard to be a national party when your percieved spokesperson is Pelosi (or in the republicans case now, Palin/Rush/Steele)

As to the fairness of the article, it is not bad - about typical for an op-ed piece. You can find similar ones bashing the dems.

[The Winslow]

And if you all are going to excoriate W for the patriot act, be prepared to do likewise for FDR and his "these couple hundred thousand Jap citizens might give us trouble, so let's lock them up for 3 or 4 years" policy.

And what makes you think anyone who disliked USAPATRIOT would have supported FDR's racist dickery, had they lived back in those days?

Or does it mean it's fine to bring up "Christianity one thousand year ago" in the next Islam thread?

[Varaj]

What serious breaches did GWB put in the constitution?

Did I use the word serious? Does a breach in the Constitution have to be serious before we are concerned?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/05/AR2005110501366.html
This one is a one of many examples. It just got tossed out by the Supreme court. The ruling was 9-0 against. 9 to fucking 0 with a strong fucking smack down. The court basically said "A retarded sea sponge would have known this wouldn't fly"

All the Gitmo rulings against the last Administration are good examples. The Administration got smacked up and down in Court over and over. It shows our system works but damn the fuckers shouldn't have been trying and should have damn well know better.

Don't give me the excuse "It was a tough time after 9-11, and we had to make tough decisions to protect our country."
Bullshit, they were bullies and cowards and idiots that didn't have the brains nor the fortitude for the job in a time of crisis and they failed our country.


And if you all are going to excoriate W for the patriot act, be prepared to do likewise for FDR and his "these couple hundred thousand Jap citizens might give us trouble, so let's lock them up for 3 or 4 years" policy.

Ok if you really want but you really should read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque

[Trainz]

And what makes you think anyone who disliked USAPATRIOT would have supported FDR's racist dickery, had they lived back in those days?

Or does it mean it's fine to bring up "Christianity one thousand year ago" in the next Islam thread?

...

[tleilaxu]

And if you all are going to excoriate W for the patriot act, be prepared to do likewise for FDR and his "these couple hundred thousand Jap citizens might give us trouble, so let's lock them up for 3 or 4 years" policy.

ok. now what?

[Harry]

What serious breaches did GWB put in the constitution?

And if you all are going to excoriate W for the patriot act, be prepared to do likewise for FDR and his "these couple hundred thousand Jap citizens might give us trouble, so let's lock them up for 3 or 4 years" policy.

Oh, are we freeing all the Gitmo "detainees", apologizing to them and paying them reparations?

[The Theocrat of Poon-Tang]

Oh, are we freeing all the Gitmo "detainees", apologizing to them and paying them reparations?

If some liberals had their way.

[Brynja]

Well what if the detainees were mostly american citizens? Would we repay then? I suppose what folks are asking for Stannis is this:

Just where is the line?

[doc]

at the unemployment office

[The Theocrat of Poon-Tang]

Well what if the detainees were mostly american citizens? Would we repay then? I suppose what folks are asking for Stannis is this:

Just where is the line?

If they were American citizens then the people crowing about Gitmo being unconstitutional would have a better case.

Fortunately they're not.

[Brynja]

Are any of them American citizens?

I can see where it is appealing to not extend our rights to non citizens and in most cases we do but I can see where this is extraordinary.

[doc]

If thier in Gitmo their foriegn nationals that were fighting our troops in a war zone, now if they had intered Americans without a trail I would be upset

[obryn]

I thought this was somewhat apropos, since we're talking about birthers and truthers upthread...

Are Birthers Really the New Truthers? (http://gawker.com/5357508/are-birthers-really-the-new-truthers)

-O

[Freedom Canadian]

That's a fairly dangerous vantage point in my room.

In my case, I hope she has goggles and not the kind that do nothing. :D

[The Winslow]

In my case, I hope she has goggles and not the kind that do nothing. :D

One needs goggles to be in FC's ceiling. Hmm... OMG! You live in an underwater dome! Cool!

[Random Encounter]

If thier in Gitmo their foriegn nationals that were fighting our troops in a war zone, now if they had intered Americans without a trail I would be upset

Ok, if they are/were "foriegn nationals fighting our troops in a war zone" and are being detained as such, that makes them prisoners of war, with all the international responsibility that comes with holding such.

My problem is not defining them as anything. They aren't on US soil or US citizens so they don't get the rights guaranteed by the constitution to those arrested commiting a crime. And they aren't representing a country or recognized government so we don't list them as prisoners of war.

They kind of hop back and forth between criminal and POW, depending on what is most convienent at the time. Just like the Vice President being part of the Executive branch and Legislative branch depending on what gets him out of needing to answer questions.

[Name Lips]

What I don't understand is the "US soil" argument. Do US laws apply at Guantanimo or not? Can the people stationed there break any laws they want, since they're apparently on land that is not part of any nation?

[The Winslow]

Can the people stationed there break any laws they want, since they're apparently on land that is not part of any nation?

Well, yeah. The whole point of Gitmo is to be a convenient loophole.

[Aloysius]

Well, yeah. The whole point of Gitmo is to be a convenient loophole.

So, if some soldier shoot his officer in gitmo, he can't be tried. Of course, he can be shot immediately without trial. That's great ! It should be renamed "Quake".

[Dacke]

Not a legal expert or anything, but as I understand it American military personnel are not, per se, subject to regular US law. They are instead subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which applies to them regardless of whether they are on US soil or not. I'm pretty sure that the UCMJ prohibits opening fire on a superior officer (or inferior, for that matter).

[The Winslow]

I'm pretty sure that the UCMJ prohibits opening fire on a superior officer (or inferior, for that matter).

Hence "fragging": to kill your fellow soldiers, you use a fragmentation grenade, because contrarily to gun bullets which can be used to identify which weapon fired, you can't tell who owned the grenade that exploded.

[Name Lips]

But, for instance, if they want to host an internet gambling site, purchase Cuban cigars, violate copyright law, or anything else that would be prohibited by US law but not military law... it's obviously fair game.

[Dacke]

True, in a way. However, there is article 134:
Article 134. General article:

Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special , or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court.

Or in other words, "We can court-martial you for anything we want and levy whatever punishment we see fit."

[The Theocrat of Poon-Tang]

Well, yeah. The whole point of Gitmo is to be a convenient loophole.

So, if some soldier shoot his officer in gitmo, he can't be tried. Of course, he can be shot immediately without trial. That's great ! It should be renamed "Quake".

Hide under your bed, that nasty GITMO will come and get you in the middle of the night. :rolleyes:

I'll take "Hysterical Answers & Comments" for $100, Alex.



Not a legal expert or anything, but as I understand it American military personnel are not, per se, subject to regular US law. They are instead subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which applies to them regardless of whether they are on US soil or not. I'm pretty sure that the UCMJ prohibits opening fire on a superior officer (or inferior, for that matter).

Exactly. You sign away more than a few rights when you sign on the dotted line and get your fatigues and rifle.

[obryn]

Hide under your bed, that nasty GITMO will come and get you in the middle of the night. :rolleyes:
Gitmo will be used as the new home base for Obama's Nazi Death Panels.

-O

[The Theocrat of Poon-Tang]

I remember watching Reagan on CSPAN in my Junior High School back in the day. There was no furor then about "OHMIGODZ THE PRESIDENT IS GOING TO INDOCOTORINGATE US!!...

I know, the temerity of conservatives. Next thing you know they'll be crying about forcing school kids to sing songs to Obama like the North Koreans do about Kim Jong Il. :)

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/24/elementary-school-students-reportedly-taught-songs-praising-president-obama/

A video posted on YouTube appears to show a New Jersey elementary school class being taught to sing praises of the "great accomplishments" of President Obama.

The video shows nearly 20 young children taught a song overflowing with campaign slogans and praise for "Barack Hussein Obama," repeatedly chanting the president's name and celebrating his accomplishments, including his "great plans" to "make this country's economy No. 1 again."

The video identifies the kids as students at the B. Bernice Young Elementary School in Burlington, N.J., with taping taking place last June.

The song quotes directly from the spiritual "Jesus Loves the Little Children," though Jesus' name is replaced with Obama's: "He said red, yellow, black or white/All are equal in his sight. Barack Hussein Obama."

Among other lyrics, touting a fair-pay bill Obama signed in January: "He said we must be clear today/Equal work means equal pay."

Click here to see the video.

The author of the full lyrics is unknown, but a woman -- possibly a teacher -- can be heard in the beginning of the video correcting and helping a student who has forgotten the words.

Click here to see the full lyrics to both songs.

The office of the superintendent of Burlington Township School District did not provide comment or confirmation to FOXNews.com that the songs were recorded at B. Bernice Young Elementary when contacted by phone Thursday.

The video was originally posted Sept. 6, two days before Obama made an address to the nation's schoolchildren in which he praised the American education system as the best in the world and urged students to stay in school.

"At the end of the day, we can have the most dedicated teachers, the most supportive parents, and the best schools in the world," Obama said.

[Name Lips]

That's... bizarre.

[Varaj]

The office of the superintendent of Burlington Township School District did not provide comment or confirmation to FOXNews.com that the songs were recorded at B. Bernice Young Elementary when contacted by phone Thursday.

If they were recorded at the school somebody needs to smack them around.

[obryn]

Why do I get the feeling there's more to this story... :) It seems ... well, more than a bit sketchy in exactly the same way that Ol' Backwards-B-Face was sketchy during the campaign. Like, "This supposed teacher is singing boldfaced socialist songs that confirm all the worst fears of conservatives with a camera rolling, along with using Obama's middle name." It's just too ... perfect, you know?

Also, assuming this is exactly what it looks like (which, like I said, I strongly doubt)... what in the world could this have to do with the school address? Are you saying that Obama told an insane teacher to compose hymns? Maybe through mind control rays? I can't see the relevance.

-O

[The Theocrat of Poon-Tang]

Why do I get the feeling there's more to this story... :) It seems ... well, more than a bit sketchy in exactly the same way that Ol' Backwards-B-Face was sketchy during the campaign. Like, "This supposed teacher is singing boldfaced socialist songs that confirm all the worst fears of conservatives with a camera rolling, along with using Obama's middle name." It's just too ... perfect, you know?

Also, assuming this is exactly what it looks like (which, like I said, I strongly doubt)... what in the world could this have to do with the school address? Are you saying that Obama told an insane teacher to compose hymns? Maybe through mind control rays? I can't see the relevance.

-O

Oh I don't know how true it is or not. Sure looks legit, but who knows.

I will say that it's pretty refreshing to watch you Obama-nuts have to squirm a bit over something that is this distasteful and unsavory. :tongue:

[tleilaxu]

Oh I don't know how true it is or not. Sure looks legit, but who knows.

I will say that it's pretty refreshing to watch you Obama-nuts have to squirm a bit over something that is this distasteful and unsavory. :tongue:

anything to keep you from having to confront your consistent wrongness on the issues. :D

[The Winslow]

I know, the temerity of conservatives. Next thing you know they'll be crying about forcing school kids to sing songs to Obama like the North Koreans do about Kim Jong Il. :)

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/24/elementary-school-students-reportedly-taught-songs-praising-president-obama/

That's funny.

Of course, Fox News is the kind of messenger that one has to shoot on principle, because they're nothing but a bunch of slimy, douchebaggy, lying scoundrels. They couldn't say the undistorted even if their life depended on it.

But nevermind Murdoch's propaganda platform. That's just funny.

That's funny because of the comparison with North Korea.

:tongue:

[obryn]

Oh I don't know how true it is or not. Sure looks legit, but who knows.

I will say that it's pretty refreshing to watch you Obama-nuts have to squirm a bit over something that is this distasteful and unsavory. :tongue:
Erm, okay? Can you tell me where this has anything to do with Obama?

Like I said, if it's true, did he mind-control her with secret death panel rays or something? Did Rahm Emanuel abduct her late at night and brainwash her? I mean, does she have any connection with the government, like, at all?

EDIT: And, for the record, didn't you believe B-Face's story, too?

-O

[The Theocrat of Poon-Tang]

I know this is going to devastate those of you who thought it was a FoxNews conspiracy story as well as those of you who maintain that this has nothing to do with Obama whatsoever(!), but it appears that the story about the children singing praises to the Dear Leader is factual.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/25/principal-nj-school-long-obama-supporter/

N.J. Principal Unapologetic for Videotape of Kids Praising Obama, Parents Say
The principal of a New Jersey elementary school where young students were videotaped singing the praises of President Obama is making no apologies for the videotape and says she would allow the performance again if she could, according to parents who spoke with her Thursday night.

FOXNews.com

Friday, September 25, 2009

794 Comments | Add Comment
Photos


The principal of a New Jersey elementary school where young students were videotaped singing the praises of President Obama is making no apologies for the videotape and says she would allow the performance again if she could, according to parents who spoke with her Thursday night.

Three parents told FOXNews.com that Dr. Denise King, principal of B. Bernice Young Elementary School in Burlington, N.J., defended the controversial performance, which was videotaped and posted on YouTube, when they approached her during a "Back to School" event.

Parent Jim Angelillo said King told him the lesson was merely part of Black History month, and not an attempt to indoctrinate students, as critics have charged. He said he believes teachers have the freedom to express their political views, but not in the classroom.

"Freedom of speech, not freedom to teach," Angelillo told FOXNews.com.

King has long been a fan of Obama, hanging pictures of the president in her school's hallways and touting her trip to his inauguration in the school yearbook.

Included in the full-page yearbook spread were Obama campaign slogans ("Yes we can! Yes we did!") and photos King took in Washington on Jan. 20, when she attended the inauguration.

There also were photos taken at the school depicting students doing Obama-themed activities about their "hopes for the future," featuring posters of Obama. According to the yearbook, students watched the inauguration in class.

Parents said Elvira James, the teacher of the class that was videotaped, also seemed to be promoting Obama.

"She praised him, she put pictures on the walls," said Jim Pronchick, whose 8-year-old son, Jimmy, was in James' class last year. "When he won (the election) they really went off."

Leslie Gibson, who has two children at the school, said she was "shocked" at the videotape, adding that political beliefs, like religious views, should be kept at home. She also said King made a "big deal" about her attendance at the inauguration.

"Throughout the school, there were signs posted supporting Barack Obama quite a bit," Gibson told FOXNews.com. "I understand it's a historical event, but on the same token, I like politics to be left at home and I think she should follow that as well."

Attempts to reach King on Friday were unsuccessful. A recording at the school said its mailbox was full and could not accept new messages.

A search of public records revealed that King, 46, of Cinnaminson, N.J., last voted in 2004 and had not declared any political affiliation. No records of political contributions could be found.

In November, the 9,700-plus residents of Burlington, N.J., a Philadelphia suburb, voted overwhelming for Obama, who received 3,285 votes to Sen. John McCain's 1,308.

The controversy over the YouTube video extended into northwest Arkansas on Friday, as officials at the Bernice Young Elementary School in Springdale said they had been received calls from across the country and Canada from irate parents and other individuals.

Principal Debbie Flora told the Associated Press that the callers claimed the school was teaching political opinion and that some "did not use very kind language."

FOXNews.com's Cristina Corbin, Joshua Rhett Miller and Joseph Abrams contributed to this report.

Yep, those "indoctrination" fears of some were sheer lunacy. :rolleyes:

[tleilaxu]

Yep, those "indoctrination" fears of some were sheer lunacy. :rolleyes:

the fact you are more interested in this than in any of the real (read: important) news stories proves my point.

[The Theocrat of Poon-Tang]

the fact you are more interested in this than in any of the real (read: important) news stories proves my point.


:lol:

Is that the Obama Two-Step? Something embarrassing happens that proves the naysayers were right (and the irony is that I was one of the ones who didn't care about this thing - hence my absence for most of this thread), and the response is "tut-tut, there's really more important things to worry about".

Now I can't wait for Ob-ama-ryn to come in and once more declare that this has nothing to do with Obama. Nothing at all.

I'm just shocked that somehow Bush wasn't blamed, as that's usually an integral part of the Obama Two-Step.

[tleilaxu]

:lol:

Is that the Obama Two-Step? Something embarrassing happens that proves the naysayers were right (and the irony is that I was one of the ones who didn't care about this thing - hence my absence for most of this thread), and the response is "tut-tut, there's really more important things to worry about".

Now I can't wait for Ob-ama-ryn to come in and once more declare that this has nothing to do with Obama. Nothing at all.

I'm just shocked that somehow Bush wasn't blamed, as that's usually an integral part of the Obama Two-Step.

nothing wrong with talking about this stuff, though it doesn't have anything to do with obama, and it doesn't 'prove the nay-sayers right' about anything. what exactly do you think the significance of this event is?

i just think it's funny that you're talking about it while avoiding talking about all of the diplomatic advances made this week. see, one of these things plays into your worldview, while the other does not. that's why you're talking about the one and not the other. i wish you could see this!

[Hatter]

Look in my eyes, what do you see?
the Cult of Personality
I know your anger, I know your dreams
I've been everything you wanna be ohhh…
I'm the Cult of Personality
Like Mussolini and Kennedy
I'm the Cult of Personality

[Varaj]

I know this is going to devastate those of you who thought it was a FoxNews conspiracy story as well as those of you who maintain that this has nothing to do with Obama whatsoever(!), but it appears that the story about the children singing praises to the Dear Leader is factual.


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/25/principal-nj-school-long-obama-supporter/



Yep, those "indoctrination" fears of some were sheer lunacy. :rolleyes:

Principle needs to be smacked around since politics do not belong in the class room but wake me up when you have something other a random idiot breaking the rules.
When you have a conspiracy from the administration you won't sound as bad as the lady leading the kids.

[The Theocrat of Poon-Tang]

Look in my eyes, what do you see?
the Cult of Personality
I know your anger, I know your dreams
I've been everything you wanna be ohhh…
I'm the Cult of Personality
Like Mussolini and Kennedy
I'm the Cult of Personality

Damn, and I was this close (fingers centimeters apart) to throwing out a "cult of personality" reference.

Kudos. :)

[AZRogue]

I don't know, unless Obama or one of his staff/associates encouraged the behavior, I don't see what it has to do with him at all. It makes no sense. It's ridiculous behavior that needs to be slapped down hard, though. There's no room for that sort of bullshit in this country no matter the topic. Do it after school, and not on school grounds, privately, and then it's just strange. Doing it at school with the principle behind it makes it very, very wrong.

But it isn't Obama's fault in any way. I can't stretch it in any direction that could make it his fault, either, unless he encouraged it or helped them do it. It's no more his fault than it would be Bush's fault if some dude began attacking Islamic Americans after Bush gave a speech denouncing Islamic extremism.

It's a pretty bizarre and disturbing story, though, that's for fucking sure.

[obryn]

Now I can't wait for Ob-ama-ryn to come in and once more declare that this has nothing to do with Obama. Nothing at all.
Ah well! Looks like it's real! (EDIT: For the record, I didn't think it was Fox's hoax. I think Fox is easily duped, mind you, but they're not even slick enough to rouse up rabble at a tea party without being filmed doing it.)

I still would like to hear how this implicates Obama, though? Are you seriously promoting my alien-mind-control-ray hypothesis? I mean, naturally the teacher is an idiot. But I'm just simply not following your logic, unless it involves more of your (somewhat telling, IMO) sexual fantasies. :)

I'm just shocked that somehow Bush wasn't blamed, as that's usually an integral part of the Obama Two-Step.
I didn't blame Bush when kids prayed to his cardboard cut-out, either.

-O

[Harry]

Look in my eyes, what do you see?
the Cult of Personality
I know your anger, I know your dreams
I've been everything you wanna be ohhh…
I'm the Cult of Personality
Like Mussolini and Kennedy
I'm the Cult of Personality

When Bill Clinton was elected to his first term as President, I cut a large picture of him out of some newspaper or oversized magazine, put it in a glass frame and hung it on the wall behind the checkout counter at my store, surrounded by red, white and blue bunting and a little sign beneath saying "Our President". I don't recall anyone complaining, customers or my clerks.

Of course, I was a little bent out of shape following the twelve years of the Reagan presidency.

hth

[Ancalagon]

In a more general sense, I think that the Obama team has to be careful not to build up TOO the whole Obamamania thing... it leads to unrealistic expectations.

I expect him to be a good President (at least, I am hoping), but he's not going to do miracles.

[obryn]

So did anyone happen to catch the Daily Show's takedown of this schoolkids non-story?

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-september-28-2009/america--target-america

Hilarious and precise, as always. And the clip of schoolkids singing the praises of Bush and FEMA is pretty classic, too. :D

-O

[Snatch]

Here's the Canadian feed for that clip from the Daily Show. (http://www.thecomedynetwork.ca/shows/showdetails.aspx?sid=3350)

[The Theocrat of Poon-Tang]

So did anyone happen to catch the Daily Show's takedown of this schoolkids non-story?


-O

:lol:

You know, if you keep calling it a "non-story" maybe, just maybe, it will have never happened.

Although I'm glad you found comfort in the arms of The Daily Show, the same way conservatives often find comfort in the arms of Rush Limbaugh's show.

It's so cute the way the two sides are so similar at times. :tongue:

[obryn]

:lol:

You know, if you keep calling it a "non-story" maybe, just maybe, it will have never happened.
...or if it were reported with actual context, in that it was part of a presentation about presidents, and there were songs about other presidents, too, during that same presentation, and that all the parents got a list of all the lyrics ahead of time... it would have been seen as the absolute non-starter it is?

Although I'm glad you found comfort in the arms of The Daily Show, the same way conservatives often find comfort in the arms of Rush Limbaugh's show.

It's so cute the way the two sides are so similar at times. :tongue:
Sigh.

-O