Conservatives on Obama's stay-in-school speech: "Indoctrination," "brainwashing," Communist China, Hitler Youth
Numerous conservatives have claimed that President Obama's upcoming September 8 speech about "persisting and succeeding in school," along with classroom activities about the "importance of education," will "indoctrinate" and "brainwash" schoolchildren. Conservatives have compared Obama's address to Chinese communism and the Hitler Youth, while also calling for parents to "keep your kids home" from the "fascist in chief."
Secretary Duncan: Obama speech "about persisting and succeeding in school"
Duncan: Speech about "the importance of education" and "persisting and succeeding in school." In an August 26 letter to principals, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan described Obama's September 8 speech as being about "the importance of education" and "persisting and succeeding in school." Duncan also offered K-12 "classroom activities" to "engage students and stimulate discussion on the importance of education in their lives." From his letter:
In a recent interview with student reporter, Damon Weaver, President Obama announced that on September 8 -- the first day of school for many children across America -- he will deliver a national address directly to students on the importance of education. The President will challenge students to work hard, set educational goals, and take responsibility for their learning. He will also call for a shared responsibility and commitment on the part of students, parents and educators to ensure that every child in every school receives the best education possible so they can compete in the global economy for good jobs and live rewarding and productive lives as American citizens.
Since taking office, the President has repeatedly focused on education, even as the country faces two wars, the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression and major challenges on issues like energy and health care. The President believes that education is a critical part of building a new foundation for the American economy. Educated people are more active civically and better informed on issues affecting their lives, their families and their futures.
This is the first time an American president has spoken directly to the nation's school children about persisting and succeeding in school. We encourage you to use this historic moment to help your students get focused and begin the school year strong. I encourage you, your teachers, and students to join me in watching the President deliver this address on Tuesday, September 8, 2009. It will be broadcast live on the White House website www.whitehouse.gov 12:00 noon eastern standard time.
In advance of this address, we would like to share the following resources: a menu of classroom activities for students in grades preK-6 and for students in grades 7-12. These are ideas developed by and for teachers to help engage students and stimulate discussion on the importance of education in their lives. We are also staging a student video contest on education.
Conservatives react: Communism, indoctrination, brainwashing, Hitler Youth
Glenn Beck: Obama speech more evidence of the "indoctrination of your children." On his radio show, Beck discussed Obama's speech with a caller and said, "On Tuesday, the president is going to be speaking to classrooms and your children, if they go to school -- K through sixth grade, I believe. You know, hey, get 'em while they're young." Beck added that he was planning on airing "a special one-hour broadcast next Tuesday on television on the indoctrination of your children," explaining that he decided to air "it on that Tuesday because of Barack Obama speaking [to students] on that Tuesday." Beck continued: "Gang, you have a system that is wildly, wildly out of control, and they are capturing your kids. As [special adviser for green jobs] Van Jones himself has said, the earlier we get the kids, the earlier we make this adjustment with the youth, the easier this transition is going to be. Stand guard America. Your republic is under attack." [Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program, 9/2/09]
NewsBusters' Finkelstein: "The Sayings Of Chairman Barack." In a September 2 blog post, contributing editor Mark Finkelstein repeatedly compared Obama's address to Chinese communism, writing: "Our leader will be addressing all schoolchildren on September 8th. ... Will our MSM report on the interesting parallel between our president's plan for our children and the approach of another Great Leader from the past?" From his post:
Say, here's an idea. Pres. Obama's quotations on a variety of topics could be assembled in a small book, and every citizen given one -- free of course -- by the government. Citizens would then be encouraged to meet and discuss "what can we infer the President believes is important" in every aspect of life.
Naturally, those citizens who improperly interpret "what the president believes is important" will be given additional educational opportunities to learn and reflect on his message. They will be housed in special government schools for people of all ages, to be set up across the country in quiet, rural areas, free from the stress of everyday life that can cloud clear thinking.
These schools will also be free, and staffed by special teachers, members of course of our wonderful labor unions, who correctly understand the president's message and will be sure to imbue every student with correct thinking in the wisdom of the president before he or she is freed, um, graduates.
Will our MSM report on the interesting parallel between our president's plan for our children and the approach of another Great Leader from the past?
Finkelstein also posted a picture of the book, Quotations from Chairman Mao Zedong, next to his post.
Michelle Malkin: "School Indoctrination," "No junior lobbyist left behind." In her September 2 Creators Syndicate column, Michelle Malkin claimed that Obama's speech amounts to recruiting "junior lobbyists." From her column, titled, "Obama's classroom campaign: No junior lobbyist left behind":
The activist tradition of government schools using students as junior lobbyists cannot be ignored. Zealous teacher's unions have enlisted captive schoolchildren as letter-writers in their campaigns for higher education spending. Out-of-control activists have enlisted their secondary-school charges in pro-illegal immigration protests, gay marriage ceremonies, environmental propaganda stunts, and anti-war events.
[...]
So when the Department of Education directs schools to gather children 'round the TV monitors for Obama's pep talk and then do this...
- Create posters of their goals. Posters could be formatted in quadrants or puzzle pieces or trails marked with the labels: personal, academic, community, country. Each area could be labeled with three steps for achieving goals in those areas. It might make sense to focus on personal and academic so community and country goals come more readily.
- Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president. These would be collected and redistributed at an appropriate later date by the teacher to make students accountable to their goals.
...parents have every right to worry about their children being used as Political Guinea Pigs for Change.
In a blog post discussing her column, Malkin posted a graphic with the words, "School Indoctrination." Malkin also linked the speech with "Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers' pedagogical philosophy."
American Thinker: "Obama has turned his team of brainwashers on the task of indoctrinating America's youth." In a September 1 post, Lauri Regan wrote that "Obama has turned his team of brainwashers on the task of indoctrinating America's youth. ... My children are off limits."
In a recent article that I wrote for AT, I stated that while I feared it imminent, the Obama administration had not yet turned its attention to controlling the public education system. Little did I know that my fear would come to fruition so quickly.
Perhaps because he has had enough of adult Americans questioning his policies and his lies, or perhaps he would like to take some attention away from his falling approval ratings and failing healthcare overhaul, Obama has turned his team of brainwashers on the task of indoctrinating America's youth.
[...]
Well, I know what I "would like to tell the President" and it does not include praising him for his past 8 months of "serving" the country. I also have no intention of having my children write a letter to themselves or anyone else "about what they can do to help the president." It seems to me that the president has enough help devastating the country with community service from the likes of ACORN, George Soros' cabal of organizations, and brainwashed liberals who still adore him. My children are off limits.
WND: Speech "raising the specter of the Civilian National Security Force." WorldNetDaily news editor Bob Unruh wrote, "Parents across the country are rebelling against plans by President Barack Obama to speak directly to their children through the classrooms of the nation's public schools without their presence, participation and approval" and said the speech raises "the specter of the Civilian National Security Force." WND also forwarded comparisons of Obama's speech to Hitler's youth brigade. From WND's September 1 article:
Parents across the country are rebelling against plans by President Barack Obama to speak directly to their children through the classrooms of the nation's public schools without their presence, participation and approval.
The plans announced by Obama also have been cited as raising the specter of the Civilian National Security Force, to which he's referred several times since his election campaign began, but never fully explained.
"He's recruiting his civilian army. His 'Hitler' youth brigade," wrote one participant in a forum at Free Republic.
"I am not going to compare President Obama to Hitler. We'll leave that to others and you can form your own opinions about them and their analogies. ... However, we can learn a lot from the spread of propaganda in Europe that led to Hitler's power. A key ingredient in that spread of propaganda was through the youth," wrote a blogger at the AmericanElephant.com blog, where the subject of the day was a national "Keep-Your-Child-at-Home-Day."
"Totalitarian regimes around the world have sought to spread their propaganda and entrench their power by brainwashing the children. I guess it's easier to indoctrinate a six-year-old instead of fighting a 26-year-old or being challenged by a 46-year-old in the voting booth," the blogger wrote.
Townhall.com's Meredith Jessup: "Massive abuse of government power." Assistant editor Meredith Jessup wrote in a September 1 Townhall.com post: "[L]eave our kids alone. ... This massive abuse of government power -- reaching into our kids' classrooms -- is unacceptable." From her post:
Parents, prepare yourselves -- your kids are going to be made a captive audience to this forced nonsense. I suggest you plan your own civics lesson to teach your children when they get home from school on September 8. Teach them that "civic duty" does not mean doing whatever the President wants you to do, but instead, being strong-minded enough to stick to your principles and formulate your own thoughts about the role government should play in our lives.
Teach them that "citizenship" means something more than living within the geographical borders of the country and paying taxes; it means caring for and looking after your neighbor because it's the moral and right thing to do, not because the government told you to.
And teach them that personal responsibility is self-reliance and independence -- ideas that can only grow to their fullest potential when a person maintains his liberty.
Do not begin to relinquish your rights and responsibilities as parents to the government. This massive abuse of government power--reaching into our kids' classrooms--is unacceptable. We've watched as prayer and religion have been tossed out the schoolhouse doors, but big-government influence continues to be ushered in. It's unacceptable--and the best way we can fight back is to take pride in the America we believe in and empower our children to carry on its legacy. [emphasis in original]
Conservatives: "Keep your kids home" from "brainwashing"
Pamela Geller: "Keep Your Kids Home from School." In a September 1 post on her blog, Newsmax.com contributor Pamela Geller encouraged parents to keep their kids home because the "fascist in chief" will "brainwash" their children. From her blog post:
The fascist in chief is taking his special brand of brainwashing to the classroom. Keep your kids home. I think this man is a threat to our basic unalienable rights. I don't want him indoctrinating my children. Seriously.
Ask your school what their participation is in this leftist indoctrination outrage. Keep politics out of the classroom. Keep communists and their propagandists away from small children.
Bryan Fischer: "Parents: Opt-out of Obama speech?" American Family Association radio host and conservative activist Bryan Fischer wrote in a September 1 column that Obama's speech "is likely to be an exercise in nation-wide indoctrination ... The capacity for mischief here is enormous. The president will have moldable minds, being led by enraptured teacher-acolytes, at his disposal. What better time to urge them to tell their folks to support health care reform, or his cap and trade taxapalooza?" Fischer later suggested that parents should opt their children out of the speech:
Unless we get public assurances from the White House that the president won't address health care or global warming or the homosexual agenda (under the color of "human rights for people different than us") this might be a great time for parents to exercise their opt-out authority and give their students a biography of George Washington to read while the President turns the minds of an entire generation to mush.
Obama's actions not without precedent
George H.W. Bush: Encouraged "America's students to strive for excellence." While president, George H.W. Bush gave a speech to schoolchildren intended "to motivate America's students to strive for excellence; to increase students' as well as parents' responsibility/accountability; and to promote students' and parents' awareness of the educational challenge we face." According to The Washington Post, the "White House sent letters to schools across the nation to encourage teachers and principals to allow students to tune in the speech, which was also carried live by the Mutual Broadcasting and NBC Radio Network. The live television and radio coverage was arranged at the request of the Education Department." [Washington Post, 10/2/91]
George W. Bush: Learning materials from White House. As Media Matters for America deputy research director Simon Maloy noted, former President George W. Bush posted a "teacher's guide" on the White House website intended to help students understand the "freedom timeline" and encouraged them to "explor[e] the biographies of the President, Mrs. Bush, Vice President, and Mrs. Cheney."
He says "Stay in School" and the Right goes into their Conspiracy Drama.
Is having a Black President really that Threatening?
I Want My Country Back? Is this what the Right-Wing is Reconing?
Speak truth to power.
Mr. News
You just said stop with the race bs, and then you call Obama half black. Oookkk...
How long will BO have to be in office before he takes his well deserved credit for taking that debt and multipling it - its growing so fast BO is going to have to appoint another Czar to come up a new word to describe it.
Racist? No one is more racist than Liberals. PC? What you hide behind for fear of others finding out how you really feel.
BO's radical ideals, programs, and policies, associations, etc. are what makes conservatives distrust him, not the color of his skin. That argument is so predictable from the left who showed their true colors with the treatment of Condi Rice and our conservative black judges and any other African-American who dared to be on the right.
BO needs to stop his apoligizing for our great country and start being an example of how anyone, no matter what your background, childhood, income level, color, etc. can be whatever you want to be, including the first black President of the greatest country in the world.
Wow....must be great living under a green sky with the blue grass, because you live in bass-ackwards world.
Really? You're going to call someone out for playing the race card, and then immediately turn around and make ridiculously racist statement like that? Obama identifies himself as black. He's black. Get over it.
Did I say that? I don't even know who Gary Sheffield is, so I have no idea what you're talking about.
Yeah, he's our first biracial president. He's also our first black president. What's your point?
Also, claiming he's "more white than black" is really sort of bigoted. It implies that there are automatic, learned behaviors specific to white people and specific to black people, and that people displaying those behaviors are really of whatever race their behaviors display, not their skin tone. It's a backwards way of calling President Obama an "Oreo," someone who's "not black enough" and presumably isn't white enough either. People's behaviors are not based on their race, and their race is not based on their behaviors. People are individuals who are products of their upbringing and experiences.
You can't blame us for seeing racism here; not necessarily from every individual, but from certain sectors. There are a lot of people who would not be reacting the way they are if the President was a white man.
Of course there are white people I disagree with, and black people and Hispanic people and people of every color. But when President Bush gave a speech about the importance of education or when we watched a clip of one of his speeches in school, I didn't assume it was part of a communist conspiracy or a method of indoctrination. I figured that it was a way of trying to encourage children to stay in school, which, let's face it, just about everyone agrees is important for their futures.
We're very tired of the massive overreaction to everything President Obama says or does. If you disagree with a portion of his agenda, fine. I disagree with some of the things he believes in. But that doesn't make him determined to destroy the country. Is he more left than President Bush was? Of course. But, if you look at what he's trying to do, nothing is so far to the left as to promote these sorts of outrageous accusations of destroying our country and turning our children into Hitler Youth. He's no communist, or even a socialist. He's a Democrat instead of a Republican, and he's our elected President.
Opps, I don't think he realized that.
Of course, they never do.
Police Officer: "I didn't stop that young man because he was black, I stopped him because he was in a white neighborhood."
What this brings to mind is the very thing that Republicans hate... communism.
During the Russian Revolution, the minority political group became known as the "Bolsheviks", which is basically translated into English as "majority". It is nice to see the Republicans using the tactics that the communists used in early last century.
seriously how could you possibly spin this to be defensible. giving a speech encouraging to stay in school? do you want kids to drop out? would you want your own kids not to be encouraged to stay in school and be educated?
Of course they want their kids to stay in school, develop the skills they need to build a better future for themselves.
The problem is, if EVERYONE does that, how can their child stand out?
Who is going to fill all those low wage postions?
Etc, etc.
It is OK for my kid to go to the prestige school, get the best education, and then take over the family fortune. Let's just not give everyone else that opportunity.
I think there's another factor that's even simpler than that. Ignorant people are more likely to vote Republican. Education is right up there with organized labor as a demon to the right.
They don't like the commoners having power, and as long as they can confuse enough of those peasants to vote GOP, they cam maintain some power.
They don't want their useful idiots getting too much of that edumacation.. oops, I mean "indoctrination".
I'm not sure why you would feel ashamed for realizing that Dems are enlightened but...
Oh! It was sarcasm!! Haha, well done !
Projection, methinks.
Especially when you consider where the conservatives' preferred model of education is National Christian Homeschooling, itself rooted in apartheid South Africa's official syllabus of National Christian Education (as sought to justify on Calvinist Christian grounds the defence of apartheid and free-market capitalism under White Afrikaner control being one with National Honour).
Put an end to this now before some poor black, brown or non white looking person gets killed over nothing.
God forbid, if something were to happen to Obama, all of these imbeciles will act like they don't know why anyone would want to hurt Obama.
Being from the deep south, I have seen the same thing from the oppisite side. If it isn't stopped early then the "mob" mentality takes over and it can't be stopped. Any well meaning person who gets in the way will just get trampled with the rest.
It may not be as bad as it used to be but; it does still happen.
People die every day, not because of what they have done but; because of who they are.
You bet your sweet bippie.
I've had a job since I was 15. I had 2 part time jobs in college. I've had several jobs since college. I am against tax cuts for the richest of the rich when we are running deficits and have huge piles of national debt to pay off.
squandered it and made a record deficit even before we went to Iraq.
Are you Rip Van Winkle? Where the hell have you been for the last 8 years?
sheesh!
Here is the problem as I see it. Yesterday evening, I was on Interstate 81 driving through Bristol, Va and was listening to a local right wing radio host (John Quaintence(SP?))Anyway, he had a caller, the guy was hillbilly as h3ll. This guy said he was against Obama talking to his son in school because of indoctrination. When asked what caused this fear, the hilbilly said that he heard on Laura Inghraham's show earlier that no President had aver done this before and it was clearly an effort to indoctrinate children much like Kim Jong Il does in North Korea. I'm not making this up!!! So the guy calls the principal and ask her about the speech and tells her his concerns. She apparently indicated that she felt no need for alarm and asked the guy where he got the information which indicated this was a dangerous thing. When the guy said Laura Ingraham she apparently tried to explain to him how it was obvious he was getting his information from a clearly subjective source who wants to see nefarious plans in everything Obama does anyway. This didn't phase the guy. He then went into a tirade about how this woman was obviously a "lefty" and how he tried to explain to her that Obama had already labeled all veterans "terrorists." He explained with an ignorance filled distortion of the Homeland Security study about returning Iraqi vets being susceptible to right wing fringe groups.
Anyway, I got to thinking.....the point here is that this hillbilly personifies the base of the Republican party. People such as this are either too lazy to check the "facts" they hear on right wing radio or they are too simple minded and as such are easily persuadable. Secondly, on issues such as the homeland security report, they blindly accept distortions given to them by people, who in the pursuit of ratings, have no interest in being objective or fair. They just want to give out some juicy gossip and innuendo because they know people eat it up. In the end, people like this hillbilly don't even understand they are being lied to and led by the nose down a road of ignornace, hate, and lies by people who simply want higher ratings, more wealth, and more name recognition to fuel their narcissistic egos.
So in the end, this complete idiot declared that he was going to keep his son out of school on that day because he didn't want him turned into a communist. The sad reality is that these are the people at these town halls and tea parties. Flat out sheep who pose more of a danger to this republic than any terrorist on the planet. the only solace I can take is that the majority of the populace will realize at some point how unimaginably crazy this type of thinking is and as such equate it further with the Republican party. In the end, I just can't see this type of thinking helping the GOP, nor can I see people like Beck and others doing anything but marginalizing the GOP.
You're a racist because you only chime in on intrusive government when a black man is in office. He hasn't done anything intrusive yet and if all the plans we the people want implemented gets implemented it would be nothing like Bush, whom you conviently forget.
Nobody hated Bush this early into his presidency. Heck, we were too busy being amused by all his bikin', fishin', golfin', vacationin', and clearin' brush.
(Well, there was hatred about him being appointed by the Supreme Court - but that's a reasonable argument)
Bush was given the benefit of a doubt until people realized he was a complete, total, utter, magnificent FAILURE.
And, who do you want your country back from? Is it the black man?
Well, it's in quotes, so I'm guessing he has to go ask his source.
But I will confess, I really hated Bush for stubbing his toe.Especially when his toe followed up by getting plastured on tv.
And I agree with you, it was not this early in his Presidency that the real vitriol began...and even when it did, it wasn't this bad.
Did you ever, vette454, see signs in America saying "death to Bush" or "death to laura and her two stupid kids"?
No, you didn't. Because they would have been arrested. Only Obama haters can get away with that.
During the Bush administration, people were actually, literally, arrested for showing up in W's vacinity with the wrong T-Shirt slogan or the wrong bumper sticker.
The comparson just doesn't hold water, vette. Not in the least!
I think they mean "back to their beloved 1950's ideel."
One which may actually be closer to white middle-class Levittown ideals, one which expected "right-thinking Americans" to essentially ignore the existance of the poor, the disabled and National Minorities.
One in which those holding unpopular or otherwise contrarian ideals were expected to be seen, if not exactly as a Communist or as a Communist Fellow-Traveller, than as a likely candidate for the insane asylum and the inhumane, sadisto treatments on offer (recall the movie Frances for a clear idea of what I mean in those glory days before medications prevailed in the treatment of Serious Mental Disorders).
One as was basically xenophobic, and which saw xenophobia as one with True Patriot Love in All Thy Sons Command.
Do you remember those things? Because if you do, you're imaging things again.
The reason people are getting upset with the Obama administration is becuase the are trying to limit our liberties. Just look as the thirtysomthing czars & their backgrounds. I, for one don't like the idea that the "Diversity Czar" thinks Hugo Chavez did a good thing by taking over the broadcasting to spare the "Democratic Revolution". this is a very small example. Or how about the Regulatory Czar thinking it's okay to animals to have legal representation? The "Science Czar in favor of forced sterilization & population control. last time I looked these aren't America values.
It's not only the President people ar upset with it's the politiicans themselves. Where do they get off with such a poor performance of their duties and maintain such an elitist attitude! Charlie Rangel is a perfect example.
My kids don't watch anything I don't watch vet myself. Based upon this man's ideologies & the people he surrounds himslef with I prefer the view the speech first. I scrren what my children watch at home I should be able to do the same here. I'm sure it will have a lot of buzz works the usual ACORN stuff.
Please name one liberty that has been curtailed by Obama.
>>Or how about the Regulatory Czar thinking it's okay to animals to have legal representation? The "Science Czar in favor of forced sterilization & population control. last time I looked these aren't America values.
You need to stop believing all the propaganda you read. If your really believe this nonsense, then are so blinded by hate that you can't see anything right.
Michelle Obama told us when she address UCLA:"Barack Obama will require you to work. He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism. That you put down your divisions. That you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zones. That you push yourselves to be better. And that you engage. Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed".
As far as John Holdren is concerned a simple look at Wikipedia will support my statement.
It's not me having an issue w/propaganda. wake up..
Of course I Encourage all to become involved and informed. Afterall, the reason our gov't is in such a shambles is because so many are uninvolved and uninformed.
I always strive to continue my education and I encourage my children everday to not be complacent with their learning bit to strivwe for more. I encourage them to see what is going on in our world
I just don't need someone telling me who my governement will require anything from me in my personal life.
Michelle Obama knew what she was saying and meant every word of it. The Obama's ideology is consistant wiht such strict language.
He did, the Supreme Court handed it to him, even though Gore got more votes in Florida. Strike One.
He did, for seven minutes even though he' was the President and he's just been informed that we were under attack. It's on film. Strike Two.
He took the entire month of August off in 2001, 6 months into the job. Plus, he broke the record for vacation time taken by a president (previously held by Reagan) throughout his two terms. Strike Three.
So, your problem is, that people criticized Bush for the questionable or terrible things he actually did or failed to do, and you don't like it. Your credibility is shot.
[i[/i]]No, I don't remember this kind of hate being perpetrated towards Bush 7 months into his first term. I certainly don't remember major players in the media calling him a Nazi, or a commie, or a socialist, or someone who initiated a coup in the US by getting elected, and I certainly never heard anyone in the media talk about him indoctrinating kids when he gave speeches to schoolchildren.
Do you remember those things? Because if you do, you're imaging things againu]
I didn't lose any credibility, I was showing the fallacy if previous statement. And for the record, I criticized President Bush too, just not for the same reason you did.
Sadly, it won't be.
... but then I remember thinking that before. Many times.
Still, this is particularly disgusting. This element of the right simply has no shame and no integrity, and the people that they deceive so well has no desire to use critical thinking.
My mom taught me by 8, that if someone lied to me, not to believe them a second time.
Even Bush said, "There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again."
So if George H. W. Bush made a similar speech in 1991, as Media Matters' reseach shows, then the Duncan letter is wrong.
You bolded the first part of Duncan's sentence.
But if you had read the rest you would see that Duncan is saying this is the first time a US Prez has spoken directly to school children about staying in school.
George Bush I & II, Saint Reagan and other presidents have spoken directly to school children in the past.
Duncan's letter does not say this is the first time a prez has spoken to school children.
This is the kind of out-of-context baloney that we see from WND and wingnuts all the time ...
I'm sure some may reply that he was really only reading a book to them, but let's face it, that requires a bit more skill than he may possess... ;)
None-the-less, he had personally "invaded" an elementary school classroom.
"People can be made to believe any lie, either because they want to believe it's true, or because they are afraid it's true." Goodkind
Unbelievable.
Don't these people understand that spreading all these "don't let your kids get brainwashed" mumbo-jumbo itself is a brand of brainwashing?
This is just the neoconservative factions all bent out of shape over liberal agendas in textbooks exploding from a liberal president addressing the kids. Really.
From M. Malkin's "comments" section for her column on her homepage:
I was pounding the table and crying tears from laughing so hard.
Sorry about that.
Everyone, please change the thumbs-up to thumbs-down.
But this seems about right: retardlicans need to keep people as stupid as possible because who else would buy their deranged misinformation. Learning bad!
However, ignorance spreads like a disease and sadly just because these people are really stupid doesn't mean we can ignore them. I mean, to borrow their comparisons, let us not forget that during the early years of Hitler's rise to power, his party was considered inconsequential and full of dumb barbarians who'd storm political meetings to break them up (like our Health Care town halls) and scream and rant about the enemies of their people (like Dobbs and Beck do about Mexicans and liberals and such- are we turning Mexicans into the Holocaust-era Jews? Given the armed vigilante patrols on the border maybe, then again, we've done a heckuva job interning Muslims in camps already.). The German intelligentsia chuckled and laughed at those loudmouth crass idiots and then 10 years later those "intelligentsia" were all dead, in prison or in exile. I hold the one shred of hope that we've all truly learned from the German experience, but since people and our "opinion leaders" can't tell the difference between a Communist and a Fascist I am not sure how widespread those lessons are.
I know there is a staunch Conservative who posts here frequently. I would like him or her to please explain, before responding to us, what the philosophies of Communism and Fascism entail so that we can at least know that ONE person on the Right knows the difference.
Let's hope that when some fanatic Republican supporter tries to burn down the Halls of Congress our situation will become clear.
I know...but they sound scary don't they?
Let alone know the essential ideological differences between Fascism and Communism.
For one, Communism expects the workers to rise up in armed insurrection against the capitalist socioeconomic model and paradigm towards achieving control of the means of production and distribution.
Fascism/Nazism expects the voters to decide @ the ballot box, usually through sugar-coated appeals to patriotism and country which conceal an overzealous nationalism excusing enforced racism, concentration of wealth and power into the fewest hands possible, an overzealous militarism, usw.
Now you know.
Conservatives who go after Obama on every single word he utters or every single thing he does only risk their own credibility. They look petty and foolish.
If you read these statements, the fear is that conventional wisdom will change as they look to someone whom they admire, Barack Obama, and see that gov't solutions CAN work and that big business is NOT the answer to all our problems and that a politician CAN be trusted.
Thus, they are very, very scared.
And it reinforces their paranoid argument against health care reform.
God forbid, if something were to happen to Obama, all of these imbeciles will act like they don't know why anyone would want to hurt Obama.
and "conservatives" have a complete meltdown.
i mean i guess maybe their problem is that its the president doing this and with their whole family values ideology that it should be parents doing this. but i cannot see the problem with a little extra reinforcement that, to me, this speech represents.
it is absurd to me that anyone could call this brainwashing or anything like that. i can remember public service ads from when i was a kid saying "stay in school" i dont see any "conservative" have a freak out about any of that.
there could be many inferences made about the purpose behind these attacks. i hope to god none of them would be true but given what has come out so far i cannot help but wonder what is their problem. it is a simple matter of encouraging kids to complete elementary and secondary school. to at least attain a high school diploma. and many of them could go on to college and get decent jobs and be contributing members of society. isn't that something everyone should want?
I guess stupidity is a bottomless commodity.
The two most common things in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity.
If George Bush urged our children to stay in school would republicans have had this same reaction . .
In our seriousness, can anyone give me a sane explanation for this republican uproar?
These people are determined to drive home, in the most velvet-glove way possible, the viewpoint that this "uppity" black man needs to learn his place in what they see as the natural order of things in America.
"This has been a country built, basically, by white folks"
Buchanan declares white firefighters victims of "Jim Crow liberalism," admits he "may have" opposed 1964 civil rights act
On Hardball, Buchanan said Reid doesn't want Burris seated "[b]ecause he's an African-American"
"Offended" Buchanan stands up for "white males," claiming only "white males" died at Gettysburg, Normandy
Buchanan book featured on Today: For nation to "survive[ ]," U.S. must keep "Americans of European descent" from becoming "minority"
But after awhile such frequent labelings risk taking those that truly are ugly racist attacks and just lumping them altogether, thereby minimizing them. That is dangerous, in my opinion.
By that standard it's pretty clear most Obama haters are racist.
Just as Brabantio said below, there are plenty of driving forces behind the rightwing's hatred of Obama, just as there were with Clinton - the analogy you couldn't comprehend. Don't worry, I know exactly what you are saying.
Insults and putting words in my mouth are apparently all you've got here.
No, just the ones that don't have any rational basis, this one being a prime example.
But as usual, anyone who identifies that part of the picture is labeled a "race hustler," one of your favorite insults that many will recognize from your Tommy days.
Thank you. So anyone that introduces a racial motivation in this instance, where none exists, is a race hustler. Pure and simple. For there is no other reason to do so. Pure and simple.
Race baiting....This can also be accomplished by implying that there is an underlying race-based motive in the actions of others towards the group baited, where none in fact exists.
What I'm seeing here is the communist/socialist nonsense. If someone put up a picture of Stalin, comparing Obama to him, would that be racist?
Also, do you think it's possible that the extreme failure of Bush might have some effect here? It seems to me like people who are this partisan and dishonest have to compensate for the disaster on their side by attacking everything humanly possible in order to make Obama look worse, or at the very least equivalent. I agree there are definitely racists who have made their presence clear, and the tone is much worse for that, but every ridiculous attack against a black Democrat by conservatives is not necessarily based on racial bigotry. It doesn't logically hold up.
No, but again, a big part of the communist/socialist nonsense is to instill a fear of the "other." Many of the epithets hurled at Obama make no literal sense, and I'm hardly the first to make the observation that they can serve as substitutes for more socially unacceptable slurs.
Why? I was very specific from the beginning that I was talking only about this particular incident.
Here's the thing:if something is due to racism, then it wouldn't exist without the racism. If this was Al Gore trying to pass his agenda, nobody would bring up socialism or communism, because he's white. Conservatives wouldn't be threatened by any comparison to the debacle of the Bush years or the thought of losing power in Congress for decades. If they didn't have a legitimate criticism to make against health care reform, they would just...
What would they do? I have the worst time trying to wrap my mind around the concept that this sort of speech wouldn't exist for a white Democrat in this political environment. The level of it, sure, but not the existence of it.
No, I don't and neither do you. We can't apply specific motivations to an entire group of people. Which is exactly why I made my comments in the context of the larger picture. I'm not sure why I have to keep reiterating that.
This racism? Meaning the specific "communist/socialist nonsense" example that you came up with after I'd written that word? No. By definition, dog whistle codewords are not blatant. I believe I mentioned "both thinly veiled and blatant racism." There has been much of both.
Again, if this isn't blatant, then what's the relevance? If you can claim that "socialism" is a code word, then what can't be construed as a code word? What was Reagan talking about as "socialism" regarding Medicare if the President wasn't black? Didn't he know he was talking in code?
As for the example I "came up" with, read the article. That's what the people in it are specifically talking about.
I'm not arguing for Pete, and it should be obvious that I'm not making the same argument as he is. I never made the charge that the attacks on Obama's upcoming stay-in-school speech were racially motivated. I know you and RightON keep insisted that I did, but I simply did not. What I did say was that it was obvious to me that racism was a driving force behind all these incoherent, knee-jerk attacks. Sorry that you don't find my line of thought relevant, but that's where the conversation took me.
Now you're making the same fallacious argument that RightON made. This is reminiscent of the Bush-as-monkey/Obama-as-monkey debate. If somebody calls Bush a monkey, it is not racist. If somebody calls Obama a racist, it is. I recall somebody (not you) claiming that there was nothing racist about calling Obama a monkey, since people had also called Bush a monkey. Obviously the word "monkey" doesn't in every context have racial overtones.
Likewise, if I say that the incoherent cries of "communist! socialist!" can be used as racially-motivated codewords, that doesn't mean that they are always codewords. In the context of Obama, there has been a whole series of coordinated attacks that focus on identifying him as "the Other." I was sure that you knew what I meant by that when I wrote it above, but if not, there's this.
Huh? You are contradicting yourself here. If the attacks on Obama regarding this speech were not racially motivated, as you admit - then how can it also be obvious to you that racism is a driving force behind it? Either it is, or it isn't. If it is, show us. If it isn't, it isn't.
There's nothing there. I'm not sure what extremist criticism you could possibly point to that doesn't have the "other" connotation to it. That's sort of the whole point, to make the person seem unacceptable because they're not in the norm somehow. Without some clear explanation of how the word changes meaning based on the race of the subject (such as "monkey"), then you could use the same reasoning for pretty much anything said against him.
When it's a white politician, they use the word "elitist" in order to paint him or her as not in the norm. The word has also been used to attack Obama, but there's no racial element to it that I can see.
"Exotic" is racist, precisely because it doesn't make much sense when applied to a white person. Again, some of the criticism is racist. That doesn't mean this is. That was the whole point.
There's a flaw in your usually rock solid logic, and you keep repeating it...
Calling Bush a monkey makes perfect sense, but that doesn't mean it isn't racist to call Obama a monkey. The metric you're using for what constitutes a racist slur or racial codeword isn't at all accurate. And to come back to this:
No. You mentioned straw men? That's an absurd generalization that nobody made. In many instances--so many, in fact, that it has lost any real meaning in this debate--the word has been used against Obama (specifically) as an all-purpose slur to paint him as Other.
Let's review something before you think about accusing me of making a straw man argument, shall we?I talk about a distinction based on race, and you say a "white politician", not "any other politician". So don't tell me I'm misrepresenting what you're saying when I don't recognize that you're saying that this "code" wouldn't apply to other black politicians. If you meant that, you should be more careful with your words.
I do know that this is a misrepresentation of what I wrote:
And again, that's not what I'm saying. You keep repeating that as if it's something I've written. I don't know if you're really arguing with Pete, and I'm just his involuntary proxy, but you don't seem to be arguing with my actual words.
The funny thing is that I'm in agreement with pretty much everything you've said. The straw man you're arguing with is speaking in Manichean absolutes. I've made a conscious effort not to. Be careful with my words? I've certainly tried to, but you really seem intent on finding any chink in the armor. I feel like we've devolved into argument for argument's sake now, and as I said, I've felt like you've been arguing with somebody else from the start.
I only brought up Pete to demonstrate the context of right ON's comments, and show that you were addressing an argument he never made. I'm most certainly addressing what you are saying.
Just because in this particular case he isn't using Obamas race doesn't mean to his viewers and followers the dye hasn't been cast. It's there and I don't think it's insignificant.
Drop the Ebonics crap
Why I don't have a lot of African-American friends
Obama might as well be white
...and on and on and on. It's immaterial whether or not he's "just taking advantage of anything he possibly can to tear down a Democrat." If you say racist things--no matter toward what end--you are a racist.
Why even make the distinction? It's sounding uncomfortably close to an excuse for racist behavior.
I don't make excuses for racist behavior. If you cry racism at every turn, it loses its effectiveness and credibility when a clear case of it comes along. "Boy who cried wolf" and all that, you know.
Much of it was, and obviously so.
If by other Democrats you mean a white candidate and white minister, then you've just removed the racial component and your example makes no sense. This is the same illogic you've been using throughout this whole debate.
So that's your definition of racism? Somebody can say something racist, but we can't label them a racist because we don't know what they "actually believe"? Beck's not a racist, he just plays one on tv? In order to qualify as a "clear case" we must first be certain that the person actually believes that "black people are inferior"?
Yep, my mistake. Obviously I was thinking of Wright. No, I didn't see anything inherently racist about the media's hyping of the Ayers connection.
In my opinion, you've set a ridiculously forgiving measurement for racism. To quote Chris Rock in the wake of the Michael Richards incident: "What, does somebody have to lynch Medgar Evers before we can call him a racist?"
And why in the world would we not want to take history (personal or otherwise) into account when looking for motivation? This has been my central point the entire time, but for whatever reason, you've chosen to ignore it.
I posted this earlier:I didn't see you address that. If I was misinterpreting you, then you should have said so. Saying "personal or other" would suggest to me that I've understood you correctly and addressed your point.
I honestly don't understand who you're arguing with anymore. What is the "comment in question" that you think we're talking about here? It should be obvious that I'm not talking about any specific comment. Are you trying to make this about Beck's accusation that Obama is racist?
And again, I am not talking about certain people or specific comments. I really think you need to go back and read my earlier posts, particularly my first one, because you have me speaking in absolutes, when I've done nothing of the kind. From the start, I've noted that I was making a generalization, which is something quite different.
As for my "personal or otherwise" parenthetical, the otherwise I was referring to were things like the fact that Obama is our first black president, and the fact that we are seeing an unprecedented amount of vitriol from the Right, much of racially charged.
Let me just reiterate my original point here, because I honestly don't see how you can disagree with it. Forgive me for reposting this, but at 300+ posts, it seems to have become lost in the mix:
And let me stress again that I wrote "a driving force," as in one of many, because this is apparently the point when you and RightON decided I was speaking in absolutes, and that I was accusing everyone of being solely motivated by racism in every single instance.
As for the second part of that sentence, that's where I'm taking issue. "We are seeing an unprecedented amount of vitriol from the right, much of it racially charged." Of course, but what you're doing is giving credence to assumptions of racism where there is no evidence to support it. The point isn't that you're accusing everyone of being motivated by racism, it's that you're creating an excuse for others to make that accusation regarding any outlandish criticism. "Incidents like this one don't happen in a vacuum..." That covers all of the irrational criticism. Any such incident would be evaluated the same way. "But since it has no merit, we must look at the larger picture in order to divine their motivations." Now, if you were talking about an individual person, I'm on board with that. If someone has a history of racism, then it's fair to deny the benefit of any reasonable doubt that's raised. However, when you talk about "the Right" as a group, then you are straying from that. At that point, you can no longer look at other irrational criticism or the behavior of other people as an indicator for evaluation. The general atmosphere does not justify an accusation of racism for any particular incident.
I've never lost track of your original comment.
I certainly hope that it won't.
Nobody asked to see Clinton's birth certificate. Nobody called Hillary angry or said that she hated her country. Nobody called Clinton a socialist/marxist/communist. Nobody screeched at the town halls saying they wanted their country back and that this isn't the America they remember. Etc. Etc. Etc.
It's different this time. And I"m with pete592. It's all about the black man being in the White House.
And for what reason did you blame the irrational crap thrown at Clinton?
The irrational crap thrown at Clinton was because a hick from Arkansas had the audacity to take the presidency away from the Republicans.
These attacks are SO over the top and worse than anything Clinton faced that it can only be due to one and only one thing.
Doesn't it seem likely that conservatives are terrified of having a major success in health care? You don't think that the decades of being shut out of Congress after the New Deal weighs on anyone's mind here? I think that's a major factor as to why we're seeing so much garbage about socialism. Some people are more vocal about it than they would be for a white person, but I think it's clear to see they are scared of Obama's potential success, especially when contrasted to Bush.
Agreed.
A very conveying picture to Americans, Hitler is. Scary, something to be afraid of, something to defend against, something to revile.
I feel the people who hate Obama because of his race, being the cowards they are to admit it publicly and face repercussions, are using the other extreme as a symbol of their hatred.
Thumb me up if I make sense, down otherwise.
Group A hates Obama because he's black, and wants to undermine him at every turn. They use terms like "socialist" and "militant".
Group B hates Obama because he's a Democrat, and wants to undermine him at every turn. People from this group say Obama is a "socialist".
Person X calls Obama a "socialist". Is he from group A or group B?
They choose party over all else. If "all else" includes a black man they may very well use racism, or race-baiting when it suits them. However, this does not mean that every nutty political attack is necessarily racist. I think RightOn's example of Bill Clinton makes a pretty good point. They were NUTS after that guy and would certainly be after any Democratic president after him until some adults get control of the Republican party back whether or not they were white, black, Hispanic, etc.
The above by Brabantio is important, and very well said. If you charge racism towards a comment where there is no clear evidence, then all you are doing is giving that person an "out" so to speak. They can throw back in your face and they will never have to defend their original criticism, no matter how ridiculous it was in the first place.
Racist charges should be direct and with evidence to support it, not default.
How do you know this other than what you feel?
I'm not claiming for a fact that any of these people are not making their charges because their racist. It's not based on anything I "feel".
What is it then? What's the basis for this utterly irrational chains of ignorant meltdowns? You tell us.
"conservatives" knocking encouragement to stay in school. to me its simply that. there is nothing more to it than that
It is, however, truly bizarre. How can we take anyone seriously in a political debate of any merit if they attack the president for giving a "stay in school" speech to school children? Is there nothing the far right can keep politics out of?
I find myself all too often these days remembering how consistent the drumbeat from the right was after 9/11 that it was not a time for partisan politics. I can't help but think what the reaction of the right-wing would be if any kind of an attack was successful in Obama's eighth month in office. They attack him speaking to schoolchildren about staying in school for god's sake. What can these people possibly offer in the way of actual political debate at this point?
What kind of concern do you have about this speech (it's been printed and released beforehand like almost ALL of his speeches)?
He's giving out an inspirational message to students about working hard, and staying in school.
How subversive...
Clinton was a Democrat, and that was good enough to drive the right crazy, but it didn't compare (even considering millions of dollars on witch hunts) to the things being unloaded on Obama.
None of us know how much of that is based on racism , trying to salvage W (as noted above), extra stress from the economy, or just a general decline in the mental state of the far right, but this is a real WTF moment, the outrage at telling kids to stay in school.
No, there is no specific racial element in this item. But, no, I don't think the well-documented racism already exposed by many on the right magically disappears when an issue isn't explicitly racial.
Wrong. It has everything to do with it. Most if not all rational adults since the dawn of time would be overjoyed that the president would be addressing their school-age children. Why is this president different?
Oh, that's right - he's the only one that's BLACK.
See, I think eight is enough is actually making the point for us that Brab and RightOn and I are arguing. Read this insanity posted by enough. He thinks he should be able to decide whether or not the President of the United States should be allowed to give a speech that his children can hear. This doesn't necessarily make him a racist. It makes him a partisan nut.
He would probably be the same partisan nut if Hillary were president and would probably have no problem if his kids heard a speech from Michael Steele. It does not always come down to race. Sometime, people like enough are just plain ignorant and small-minded without it being racist. Thanks for giving us the example, enough!
Man, this is desperation squared from the usual suspects. I hope their monetary compensation for spouting BS propaganda is worth the selling of their souls.
Have mercy.
My sentiments EXACTLY. I'd say, "Fine, keep your brainwashed little tykes at home," but those little buggers will be 18 some day, and there's still no IQ requirement at the voting booth.
(Unless, however, it was designed for placing ideology above core skills requisite to future success. Recall, as example, apartheid South Africa's National Christian Education syllabus, expected to be perpetuate in the National Christian Homeschooling model.)
I was a bit uneasy about an Obama presidency because I had seen no evidence that he had endured overt bigotry in his previous quests for public office. I was sure he'd known personal bigotry, but I was unsure of how he'd deal with it as president.
Now we see bigotry in its tissue paper disguise. The bigoted bile by Beck the Brain-Bashed and his ilk is spewed in the form of "Damn! We can't just call him a NI66ER, so let's call him a COMMIE", gasoline-looking-for-a-match hate speech.
I wonder if we'll ever hear anything about this from the bobble-head teleprompter readers in the Corporate Controlled Media?
Silly me.
Who are you talking to, and what are you talking about?
Hint: A little detail helps, maybe a name, a subject, a reference to the point your vague question is responding to. Makes you look less loony, too.
No more sheep, no more ginning up the ignorant. It isn't surprising these political mouthpieces are screaming for an all-out war on education! Pretty sad, isn't it!
Just so everyone knows, this was a paraphrase of a position espoused by Voltaire, the apostle of modern liberalism. If there's a conservative who actually believes it and abides by it, more power to him!
One of the best teachers I ever had was a guy named Norm Foster. He taught civics, social studies, history, and government. What he would do back in the day, would be to take one side of an issue we were discussing (usually the most un-popular side of an issue), and then try and teach that to us. At first, you'd see kids looking around the room at each other, like WTF is he talking about? But, we would sit there, listen, and take notes. Then towards the end of class, he'd ask who disagreed with what he was saying. A few hands would go up, and then he'd get into the "why didn't you call me out on it?" And we'd be off to the races.
His overall point, don't take what teachers tell you at face value, think for yourselves, and if something sounds or seems wrong to you, say something. Don't sit mute and accept it all.
One of Obama's better ideas, in my opinion. I wish him much success.
Never mind that your kid was flunking classes left and right, they were made because little Johnny couldn't play on Friday night.
Although I have had to write to the state board about NOT having so called intelligent design taught at the school. Some were pushing for that a few years ago. So far it's been voted down.
Whats really scary is there are going to be more right wing crazies that will beleive this absolute BS.
Hate radio nutjobs - "Well, since everyone has to breathe, this is another in the long line of Obama's socialist/Marxist/communist policies to evenly distribute oxygen."
I am convinced that Obama could dive into a pond to save a child from drowning and the Right would complain that he ignored a "No Trespassing" sign which PROVES that he has NO respect for the law!
IDIOTS!
Further I am tired of references that our black President is more white! What the hell does that mean? Are black people supposed to act a special way and if you don't you're not really black? This is a well educated American who has risen to the highest office in the country and his background should serve as a guiding light for young people who don't belive they can strive for something better. By the way, I'm white of Italian parents and grew up in New Jersey so based on "being what I am", I should be in the mafia and you should watch out for your kneecaps.
BTW, most of us conservatives are not Obama haters, what concerns us is the people "he" surrounds himself with and the effects they have on his brain.
Ha!! Most conservatives don't even think he's a legal US citizen.
Funny how that was never a concern under GW.
And it also costs about $50,000 a year to go there. So looks like Ms. Malkin grew up with a silver spoon in her hate-filled mouth.
It's also kind of funny, if you go back into the Malkin archives, she has rantings and writings about how you don't need a college education to get ahead in America.
Why is it people who have college educations are the ones always saying that?
Believe it or not, conservatives, but Obama is big with the "book learnin'". That's how he got his degree from Harvard. Not as a legacy, but by actually excelling in school. Strange but true.
Randy
http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1986/51386d.htm
"As you know, my remarks are being broadcast live over radio and television to high school students throughout the country." - President Ronald Reagan, May 13, 1986
http://www.nytimes.com/1989/09/13/us/bush-urges-youngsters-to-help-friends-on-drugs.html... Read More
"At least 15,000 superintendents and 55,000 principals were notified by the Education Department of the speech today, and many schools held assemblies or brought television sets into classrooms so students could watch Mr. Bush."
Do you want any more examples of this being done before?
I think what you just said makes even less sense to me.
nice try to bash this attempt at encouraging education. because thats all it is.
Not to mention considering Knowledge to be some class of a Loathsome Disease on a par with HIV/AIDS, cancer, TB and Loathsome Social Diseases.
S.O.R.E.,(School Of Radical Elitism) is upset about education. What do they want taught, in an average school-year cycle? I understand their agenda may include creationist science, English only, and the philosophy of denial. School motto: W.A.R.,(We Are Right). Classes: rancor, hate, double-talk, misinformation, superfluous sophism...
S.O.R.E. is not mad, that B.Obama is black. It is mad because he is the President. Oh, yeah, right, ahem, sure, you betcha! The freshman year, you are a pawn, sophomore a tool, junior a puppet, and senior a parrot. The wall of fame is endless. The mascot-burning cross with super imposed swastika-is best viewed at night.
Woo-hoo! Can I bring marshmallows? No, O.K., see ya! Why join a party where no one is smiling? How is that a party? Loud voices set a tone, in glee or hatred.
It be it,
Ronin Kannsuhi.
S.O.R.E.,(School Of Radical Elitism) is upset about education. What do they want taught, in an average school-year cycle? I understand their agenda may include creationist science, English only, and the philosophy of denial. School motto: W.A.R.,(We Are Right). Classes: rancor, hate, double-talk, misinformation, superfluous sophism...
S.O.R.E. is not mad, that B.Obama is black. It is mad because he is the President. Oh, yeah, right, ahem, sure, you betcha! The freshman year, you are a pawn, sophomore a tool, junior a puppet, and senior a parrot. The wall of fame is endless. The mascot-burning cross with super imposed swastika-is best viewed at night.
Woo-hoo! Can I bring marshmallows? No, O.K., see ya! Why join a party where no one is smiling? How is that a party? Loud voices set a tone, in glee or hatred.
It be it,
Ronin Kannsuhi.
S.O.R.E.,(School Of Radical Elitism) is upset about education. What do they want taught, in an average school-year cycle? I understand their agenda may include creationist science, English only, and the philosophy of denial. School motto: W.A.R.,(We Are Right). Classes: rancor, hate, double-talk, misinformation, superfluous sophism...
S.O.R.E. is not mad, that B.Obama is black. It is mad because he is the President. Oh, yeah, right, ahem, sure, you betcha! The freshman year, you are a pawn, sophomore a tool, junior a puppet, and senior a parrot. The wall of fame is endless. The mascot-burning cross with super imposed swastika-is best viewed at night.
Woo-hoo! Can I bring marshmallows? No, O.K., see ya! Why join a party where no one is smiling? How is that a party? Loud voices set a tone, in glee or hatred.
It be it,
Ronin Kannsuhi.
The president is saying that he wants students to set goals, define the steps it takes to reach them and then check back later to see how you are progressing. Are any of these people making these comments present on this planet (or at least in the workforce)? Every job above minimum wage has goals, benchmarks and metrics to measure against.
Hey Mr. Business Man, let's set sales goals to make your company viable, then make the sales and evaluate how you have done.
Hey Ms. Scientist, let's figure out how to treat this disease. Let's set a goal of this many months to find something, otherwise our investors will cut our funding.
Hey Mr. Media Man, let's set ratings goals to keep our advertisers happy. We need people looking at us when we cut to commercial, otherwise they will not pay us anymore.
You notice a theme? Set goals, plan a path and then look back at what you have done. It looks like Mr. Media Man is following what Mr. President plans on telling children. But the children aren't allowed to listen. Do as I tell you, not as I do. It may make me less powerful over you.
IF my students watched the 'indoctrination' (I may not have time because I am busy TEACHING them how to set goals and reach them), I could care less about their parents political leanings. If the students 'goal' is to get lower prices on school lunches (analogous to lower taxes) and they steps of getting elected to student government, then doing a compare/contrast or multiple vendors and pick the cheapest one, then awesome. They learned the lesson.
Conversely, if they wanted to hold a protest how to raise the janitors salary cause they think the janitors rock and do a great job, I would ask them to lay out a plan as well. If they laid out steps of organizing the students, making themselves heard and making a disruption to the school to draw attention the janitors situation, then great. Once again, they got the point of the lesson.
I cannot stress how detrimental to the learning process, not to mention asinine, these knee jerk reactions to whatever the other side of the political spectrum says. The absolute shocking lack of civility bodes so well for our future. Do any of you realize that kids learn and act by what they see?
So glad I switched to an underpaid, Sisyphean career. Thank God I am an optimist.
"And what is a good citizen? Simply one who never says, does or thinks anything that is unusual. Schools are maintained in order to bring this uniformity up to the highest possible point. A school is a hopper into which children are heaved while they are still young and tender; therein they are pressed into certain standard shapes and covered from head to heels with official rubber-stamps."
H.L. Mencken
I think that pretty much sums it up.
i wish your children the best of luck when they drop out of school and dont receive any education. and their children when the cycle repeats.
Mencken was an elitists, and a racist:
In 1989, per his instructions, Alfred A. Knopf published Mencken's "secret diary" as The Diary of H. L. Mencken. According to an item in the South Bay (California) Daily Breeze [1] on December 5, 1989, titled "Mencken's Secret Diary Shows Racist Leanings," Mencken's views shocked even the "sympathetic scholar who edited it
Woops! Next time maybe you just shouldn't cut and paste what sounds good, huh?
As you can see conservatives fear people with an education. They lose their grip on being able to spout the ridiculous things they do and get people to follow them. This is I believe their main fear. Not that their is a "black" man as president but that their ideology was rejected so badly in the last election cycle. If we have future generations growing up and thinking for themselves Republicans lose.
Does anyone remember the times past of the Book-Burning Mobs?
Those Mobs were reaching into our schools to take away the rights of our children to think for themselves.
Any book that spoke contrary to the "We Know Whats Best for You" mindset, was summarily pulled from libraries and thrown into the garbage or burned, by those Rightous ill-informed and ignorant few.
I remember, and as a child I understood what the mobs were doing!
We survived that era, will we survive this era, I hope so!
Either way, I don't think you have anything to worry about. This is about a president talking to kids about staying in school, not the anti-education ideas of the GOP.
I should have explained it better! The folks who are censuring this administration in encouraging education...these folks are the Children of the Book Burners! I'm concerned if we are going to survive THESE people! Hope I cleared that up...Thanks!
I remember when Ronald Regan visited marine military academy. I thought "Great. I've gotta shine my f'n shoes and march in another parade".
How can one possibly counter the stupidity of this argument. Congratulations. You have constructed an argument so stupid, it is refutation proof.
scary scary! run! hide!
So George H.W. Bush's message to students on drug abuse should be disregarded?
Bottom line: if a President says ANYTHING to children, are we supposed to dismiss it? Politics IS a subject to be taught in schools under social sciences.
Second bottom line: would you be so demanding if it were a non-Democrat in office?
groucho lives!
Awesome, dude! Keep posting that everywhere. That is really hysterical and spot on.
Why are they getting attention outside of their own deranged universe?
so it doesn't surprise me that a push to improve the abysmal education system would rankle the powers that be; they like it just the way it is.
Here's an interesting thing about that story. Since God kept Adam and Even ignorant, why shouldn't they have believed the serpent? They acted on their best judgment.
Of course, if President Obama encourages children to succeed in school, then how scary will the up-coming generations be to the Beck's, Limbaughs, Savages, Malkins, etc.? I work at small 2-year college and nothing is more satisying than a decaf Americano at the local coffee shop and stimulating conversation with the kids. I still believe that the neo-cons are much smarter than many give them credit for. I think their "stoopid" schtick is just that (much like Larry the Cable Guy), and that they are having the last laugh all the way to the bank.
Honest reporters ... no ... entertainers ... I guess it depends upon who's watching.
DANGEROUS ... hell, yes!
you dont want to get smart
smart is bad M'kay
you dont want to have a good job
If you feel that strong about a black president you should leave the country.
but you should at least have the respect to hear the message. since its about kids staying in school. unless you dont want that
~President George W. Bush, Aug. 2002
Beside it will be a perfect opportunity for this president who loves to apologize for his perception of American misdeeds, to apologize to the children of America for burying them in a mountain of debt. (I apologize for the cheap shot)
There were no "dubious" facts spread. Just keep up the hate.
and get it through your thick head that this is nothing more than encouraging kids to seek education.
and guess what people do have the right to be indignant about this. cause it crap and you damn well know it. yet you spew it anyway.
the last time? you mean Bush had gore go on tv for him to talk about environmentalism?
either get your head out of the sand or just dig yourself deeper.
This has nothing to do with Right, Conservative, etc. People conspire all the time. You people make it sound like this never happens. And you try to sell it has some illogical paranoid thinking.
I'm very mentally and spiritually stable, I just happen to be aware. Are there paranoid people out there? Sure, but it doesn't make them any less right when it comes to the government.
I guess you have no idea at how Obama's rise to power and what he is doing parallels Hitler. I'm sure the Patriot Act doesn't bother you either, right? Because you have nothing to hide? You can't give freedom when you TAKE IT AWAY with the Patriot Act. You can't have both, it doesn't work that way. Our forefathers made the constitution for a reason. And forced vaccines with force entry into your home with being taken away to a nondisclosed place if you don't comply is unconconstitutional. This was just passed yesterday in MA, look it up. Vaccinating people with a drug that hasn't even been tested. Just look at 1976 Flu Vaccination. Vaccine killed 25, Flu killed 1 let alone the cases of Guillane Barre syndrome.
This is just a plan by the elite to work toward a one world governance. What, you think this drive ended with Hitler? Hitlers Eugenics program and its scientists were brought over after WWII to continue under our administration. The desire for control just shifted faces but the same globalists were behind it then and now. You are focusing on the wrong thing/people.
who is that your speaking of. is this one of those bildeburg conspiracy theories?
Most of us Dems gave Bush a chance, until he lied about "I have no war plans on my desk" (see Bernie Trainor's book) or lied about WMD (over and over) or underfunded the SEC (and guess what happened there!) lied about torture and got HIS "health care reform" through (the terribly confusing Rx plan that favored the businesses over clarity for the elderly).
There's plenty more. Secret meetings with industry reps (who the hell does he/Cheney represent?), forbidding note-taking during WH meetings with Congressmen, golfing while men bled to death, a month long vacation in Aug 2001 while warnings abounded, "Bring 'em on", Mission Accomplished...
And then... during an interview, Bush strained to identify one mistake he made (April 13, 2004) and couldn't find one!. He populated agencies with unqualified cronies (Justice Harriet Myers???) and fired REPUBLICAN Attorneys General who didn't play politics enough. Bush fought and lost when his own conservative Supreme Court sided with his own EPA that C02 was a pollutant.
Anyway, you get the point. So here is Obama trying to spare the nation more of our messed up and too-expensive health care -- which if you have a decent employer your lucky -- and all a right winger can do is, let's see.. vote no while stating he won't read the bill! (wasn't that the demand of the Teabaggers?). Just ask Uber-dork Inhofe, who PROUDLY made that statement.
This fear and hatred of Obama is a warning to us all. These dorks aren't beyond bringing semi-automatic weapons or inciting groups to converge on Washington (see Grassley presser). In my 50+ years, I cannot recall a time when an opposition was so paranoid, so angry, so unstable. WE NEED TO KEEP WATCH.
Not sure debate is even possible under these circumstances.
Who said this quote? My guess is that it was a Democrat concerning a Republican president doing the exact same thing Obama is planning on doing.
Then there is the issue of the number of people who feel they are having an original thought when in actuality you have been brainwashed by the money hungry power grabbers from the past who are afraid of losing their control of their lowly minions. PLEASE, call it socialism if you want, I prefer to think of it as someone finally putting some controls in place to protect us bottom dwellers from the corruption that left us in this financial mess to begin with. Yeah, I guess you wouldn't want some of that wealth to be redistributed; by all means keep pretending that the Bushy group wasn't picking your pockets and focus on Obama wanting your child to do well in school. How dare he?
I'll tell what I heard though. Big secret from a well-placed source. Obama is giving Texas back to Mexico! Yep. You heard it here first. And Alaska's next. Goodbye Juneau, hello Moscow.
Maybe these parents who are against their children listing to this speech need to understand this..when the President of the US, and leader of the free world speaks (on any topic), the whole world listens, and so too should you and your children. Make 'informed' decisions.