Thursday, September 03, 2009

The President's Upcoming Speech To Schoolchildren

A friend and I have been going round and round about this.

He says to listen to what the President says and then decide.

I say that context is everything, and that when you get your union acolytes to compel kids to listen to you, and then give the students assignments like "write a letter explaining how you'll help Barack Obama", when you see how a cult of personality (see below) is built around this President, and you recognize his style of politics--it's not unreasonable to be suspicious of his motives. I'm sure his talk will be fairly benign, but maybe it'll be more benign now that he realizes that people will scrutinize what he says. Heck, the White House has already removed the "help Barack Obama" part from the lesson plans due to outrage, so someone there is listening.

Want to see what worries me about this type of activity from this particular man? Watch this video, especially near the end--even though you'll want that 4+ minutes of your life back--and this one, which shows how easy it is to indoctrinate students. In both videos, people are pledging allegiance to President Obama himself, not to the nation or its ideals.

It's a bit too Dear Leader-ish for my taste.

My suggestion: give the speech during prime time, advertise the heck out of it, and in those advertisements, ask parents to watch it with their children. If you're going to talk about the importance of hard work and staying in school, that should be the target audience. If he did that, heck, I'd probably watch it with my son.

38 comments:

Forest said...

There are lots of people who can encourage students to work hard...their parents, their teachers, their minister at church, their friends and even themselves.

There are some things that only the president can do and work on. Why doesn't he focus on HIS job instead of trying be everything.

Is he going to start rescuing kittens from trees too?

Guy McBloke said...

http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/kids/guide/



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]

Anonymous said...

Giving the speech in prime time makes sense to parents. But remember, the NEA prefers to keep parents out of the loop. Don't recall the the CTA's lawsuit against homeschoolers last year. The crackerjack CTA lawyer stated "Parents do not have an unfettered right to negotiate the terms of their child's education." Personally, I would like to see commercials with that quote run during primetime. Then Comrade Commissar "Si Se Puede" might be held accountable by the people of California.

MikeAT said...

Darren

Are you saying there is something wrong with the Great Leader addressing his naives…how dare you think such treason. I’ll bet the picture of him in your house is probably coated with dust. There will be AmeriCorps Brownshirts there to inspect you soon enough.

In all seriousness, those Hollywierd idiots pledging to B Hussein Obama was kinda creepy…these are suppose to be thinking people. Supporting or campaigning for someone is one thing, to put out “To be a servant to our President and all mankind….” for eternal viewing is really radical and stupid.

BTY, did you hear about the idiots who did Cash for Clunkers…some are getting shocked that the money is income and they will have to pay taxes on it…how’s the Hope and Change working out!

Anonymous said...

I remember doing something similar when Reagan was in office.

Anonymous said...

What's your thought on keeping your kids out of school that day?
You could have a lot of fun with the note you send in explaining the abscence. I wonder if it would be counted as an "illegal abscence."

We don't start until Wednesday, we'll see how our schools handle it.

Mark in NY

Darren said...

Was it even possible to be as suspicious of President Bush's motives 3 weeks after September 11th as it is to be suspicious of President Obama's today?

Do you even remember hearing about this speech? Did the press--ardent supporters of President Bush, to be sure--hype it like they did this one?

Darren said...

From what I understand, Reagan did this a few weeks before his 2nd term ended. Big difference. Even still, there was no "I pledge allegiance to Ronald Reagan" mindset.

Keeping kids home from school? No. If you'd rather your kid not watch or do such an assignment, I'd suggest telling your child's teacher that--and go from there.

Maybe I should go back to referring to public schools as "government education centers"....

Viki said...

I think that the indoctrination aspect is what has most of us upset.
Help the nation, support America yes, but to "pledge" yourself to
a particular person, that makes me cringe. To pledge to be a "servant"
to that person... I just have no words to describe how I feel about that.

mazenko said...

Let's move past the hysterical fear of politics, and respect the head of state. Let's not be afraid of information, but embrace communication and discussion. The conspiratorial fear of oppressive government is just so sad in the United States. This isn't Oceania, and we can have a little more faith in America.

George H.W. Bush did it in 1991 to encourage kids to stay off drugs. Reagan did it in 1983 to offer his vision of America's promise - and he even digressed into a discussion of tax cuts and praise of supply-side economics. And now Obama is doing it to talk about education. There is much to respect about this president's potential to be a positive role model to a lot of struggling students.

Don't be afraid of discussion in schools. Trust your children and your ability to be their primary influence. Trust Americans of all ages to handle information.

I have no problem with presidents (or teachers) of opposing views speaking to my children. As a child I had great respect for "The President" as the Head of State, even though I didn't truly understand his politics. But I came to understand those issues, through the assistance of my teachers and my family.

He who thinks knowledge is the enemy is a fool.

mazenko said...

Darren, you work in a "government education center." Do you indoctrinate your students?

I, of course, don't believe that you do, and though we disagree, I respect your views, and I would have no problem with placing my child in your class.

I would have no problem with my child watching a speech from Dick Cheney in your class and discussing it - though obviously most schools seem to lean toward doing it in social studies classes.

Either way, it is a "government education center." It's education provided by the government to produce what Jefferson hoped for - "an educated electorate." That's why he supported state-funded education. Jefferson had much to fear from government, but he didn't fear information and discussion.

I'm really think we can trust all Americans more, and we'd benefit from turning against each other less.

Mrs. C said...

Darren, I have opted my children out of this mindless exercise. Likely what he says is benign enough, but thanks, no.

If it were a problem at either school my older children attend, they would be absent when the presentation is shown.

Here's what it would take for me to have my child stay:

1. transcript of speech before presentation

2. reason school time is needed for said presentation.

If I were ok with these two items, they would be asked by me to stay. As it is, I've sent emails opting my children out that will be honoured... IF my children excuse themselves from the room before the speech begins.

They are teens now, and while I hope they make the right decision and leave, I cannot guarantee it.

Your friend said...

"I pledge allegiance to Ronald Reagan" mindset.

I remember quite well a high school Junior/Senior with that attitude. What was you name for him?

Darren said...

It's one thing to admire the man--his ideals, his accomplishments. It's another to pledge allegiance to him, something I never did.

Ellen K said...

I don't have a problem with any sitting president offering a pep talk to kids. What was troubling was the associated literature. I think the idea of having elementary children sit still for a thirty minute speech is not age appropriate and shows little knowledge of children in general. It may be appropriate for the president to remind students of their obligation to be positive recipients of the education that they get for free. Here's the speech I would like to hear:

"A free education is a gift. In many nations, only the elite are well educated. In this country, anyone who works hard can earn entry into almost any college. This is what separates us from other nations.

When you recieve this gift, handle it carefully. Don't take it for granted. Show up and participate. Pull up your pants, stop worshiping criminals as celebrities and do your work. Don't pop out babies before you can drive, don't drop out to take a dead end job and don't expect knowledge to be handed to you. It takes determination, it takes work. In the end, what you have learned can never be taken away....

Yeah, I don't think we're going to hear that speech from this administration.

MikeAT said...

I’ll give you this mazenko, you are consistent.

“George H.W. Bush did it in 1991 to encourage kids to stay off drugs. Reagan did it in 1983 to offer his vision of America's promise - and he even digressed into a discussion of tax cuts and praise of supply-side economics. And now Obama is doing it to talk about education.”

The difference is both of these men didn’t have major cult of personality issues. Telling the kids to stay in school, study hard, stay off drugs, etc, that’s one thing. To have the Department of Education (this is voluntary….oh remember school boards, we have money you want) put out propaganda points (and please don’t argue, that’s what they were) over how eight year old kids can help B Hussein Obama and what is the president telling the kids to do…that is directly out of a third world dictatorship.

According to an AP report (not exactly a part of the VREC), “Critics are particularly upset about lesson plans the administration created to accompany the speech. The lesson plans, available online, originally recommended having students "write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president… The White House revised the plans Wednesday to say students could ‘write letters to themselves about how they can achieve their short-term and long-term education goals.’ ‘That was inartfully worded, and we corrected it,’ (Secretary of Education) Higginbottom said.”

In simple English, they got caught and stopped. Damned, BO hates it when the American people find out what he’s doing and get uppidity. He wasn’t asking about what to do to help you communities, the country or you school, but to help Obama. I think Reagan and both Bushes did not include that with their addresses. If you can find evidence they did, please show it.

Still counting down…..One-thousand, two-hundred and thirty-two days till January 20th, 2013.

mazenko said...

MikeAT,

I feel sad for you that your deeply held prejudice and losers' remorse comes across as such vitriolic suspicion of conspiracy in America. I mean, really. Uppity? There was a time when a president could ask people to consider what they could do for the country, without suspicious deconstruction of the hidden agenda in his words.

Perhaps, someday, you'll better understand the nature and the beauty of our long-lived democratic republic. Your focus on the date is fine, and, hopefully therapeutic for you. For if you have no faith that the republic - and its schoolchildren - can survive a president with whom you disagree, then you have no faith in the republic.

And, in terms of my consistency, if you're speaking of my consistent moderate views by which I vote both Democratic and Republican, then you're right. I vote and then rationally judge the results, confident that I can vote again in two years. It's really quite calming, and it makes me feel good about my country.

Your guy - and ideology - lost this round. It's OK. You'll get another chance. And if you're children are at such great risk in the next week, or four years, you don't have much faith in your ability to parent them. Cult of personality? Really? You're really bothered by people liking the president and respecting the leadership of our elected Head of State?

That's a shame. But your unhappiness and prejudice is your choice. But it will be OK. Really.

Anonymous said...

I'm unsure at the moment. I have 3 opt-out slips waiting for me to sign. Many of the points made hear have been very thought provoking. My gut reaction is to sign them and have them get the " alternative assignment" instead. I can't wait to see what that may be.
All 3 kids don't want to miss it, not because of the message they may miss out on, but because they don't want to be "different". I wonder how many students feel this way too.

I don't want these speeches becomming a common occurence. I think this administration (I finally get to use that phrase)will use this quite often in the future if nobody seriously objects to it. This is only the beginning. If people don't opt out, it will be said that we had the chance to show our disapproval by opting out but not many did.

I will watch it later with the kids and we can discuss it then. I agree with Darren that if they showed it prime time I would always try and get the kids to watch it with me. No matter who the president is.

Mrs. C said...

I hear what you are saying, Anonymous. I signed my opt-out form early on in this debate when the problematic "lessons" were still part of the curriculum. I am not changing my mind precisely because I do NOT want this to be a regular occurrence.

I am also opting out because I think it's important for that respect to work both ways. Generally speaking, I allow my children to listen to the teacher and other points of view when in class. However, some of the more *ahem* detailed aspects of the health curriculum and that sort of thing, my children are usually just told to sit in the hall with a book or go to the library and sign in.

BTW, whether Reagan or Bush or anyone else did the same thing is beside the point. The point is that I as the PARENT ought to have the final sayso on what is presented to my children. Too often we lose sight of that.

Chicken Little said...

MikeAT,

http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_08_30-2009_09_05.shtml#1252117357

And most striking: Bush laid out goals — to increase the graduation rate, improve student competency and better prepare students for entering school — and said, "Let me know how you're doing. Write me a letter. I'm serious about this one. Write me a letter about ways you can help us achieve our goals."

Oh, no. I can't help myself. I'm feeling the urge to write a letter. Help me. No! Not a letter.

Mike, when do become a wingnut?

Darren said...

Chicken Little learned a new word.

Mrs. C said it best:

"BTW, whether Reagan or Bush or anyone else did the same thing is beside the point. The point is that I as the PARENT ought to have the final sayso on what is presented to my children. Too often we lose sight of that."

If parents back then chose not to have their kids listen to such talk--well, I don't even remember such talks being given in the past, so I don't remember how people reacted to them. However, since you're so open-minded, Chicken Little, play along on a little thought exercise with me. What would have been the response had Bush 43 wanted to do this? You know the answer and so do I. It wasn't so long ago, certainly not as long ago as his dad's speech was, so we both remember the political environment in this country.

Darren said...

The major Sacramento newspaper allows comments on its stories, and here's one that's 180 degrees away from Mrs. C's beliefs. I ask you, do you agree with Mrs. C or with this commenter?

"Every single parent who objects to their children hearing a message from the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, should be reported to CPS, have their children taken away, have their citizenship revoked and sent to live in Haiti. You make me SICK"

Kettle said...

Hey, I'm not playing any 'reindeer games'. ;-)

Chicken Little said...

"...do you agree with Mrs. C or with this commenter?"

Only two options? Really?

"What would have been the response had Bush 43 wanted to do this? You know the answer and so do I."

We don't know. And, if you want me to justify Tit for Tat as the way we should conduct civil discourse; Nope. Not gonna do it. Wouldn't be prudent. ;-)

Where is my party? I'm beginning to like what Richard Epstein (noted libertarian law and economics professor) has to say about voting for a political party, "anyone but the Big Two, who are, just two members of the same statist party fighting over whose friends will get favors".

Chicken B. Little

(I figured MikeAT might want to use my middle initial too)

Darren said...

You complain about only two options? Fine. Please, tell me which part(s) of the comment you agree with, and which you don't. Feel free to be as nuanced as you like.

Fritz J. said...

I agree with Ellen K with the caveat that Pres. Obama keep the speech non partisan. I find it sad that Pres. Obama, who promised to try to end partisanship, has been so partisan that I am forced to add the caveat.

MikeAT said...

Page 1 of 3

Did I strike a raw nerve there mazenko? Yes mazenko, you are consistent. You routinely grab the wrong end of the stick and go back to usually liberal tripe. Let me try again.

People in this country are not upset, enraged, and suspicious aka “uppidity” that B Hussein Obama wants to talk to K-6 graders about the importance of staying in school, the need of an education, challenging yourself. I will give him this, he has stressed that message to inner city school kids, you know, the type of schools he would never send his girls to. We are uppidity about his plan for very impressionable children to be required to write reports on how to help not their country or the community, but Obama himself. See the hyperlink (http://www.docstoc.com/docs/10582301/President-Obama%27s-Address-to-Students-Across-America-September-8-2009) Why do these kids need to read books on BO (…reading books about presidents and Barack Obama…)…why should be tell you kids to obey our “leaders” (…Why is it important that we listen to the President and other elected officials, like the mayor, senators, members of congress, or the governor? Why is what they say important? …)…Should we be guiding student to obeying B Hussein….(… Students could discuss their responses to the following questions: What do you think the President wants us to do? Does the speech make you want to do anything? Are we able to do what President Obama is asking of us? What would you like to tell the President...)…

“There was a time when a president could ask people to consider what they could do for the country, without suspicious deconstruction of the hidden agenda in his words.”…“Cult of personality? Really? You're really bothered by people liking the president and respecting the leadership of our elected Head of State?”

Mazenko, we’re suspicious because he is a liar. And it’s not that he doesn’t have any record of achievement prior to January 2009 to judge him on, just his words. Can you name me one major piece of legislation he authored in the Illinois State Senate? Hell, can you name me any legislation he’s authored? I know you can’t do for his time in Washington because he was only in there for 150 legislative days (after swearing to the people of Illinois he would serve his full term….oh, did I just point out another lie, damned, sorry). I will point out his one accomplishment…he has bankrupted this country in a matter of weeks.
On the cult of personality, I refer you to my earlier posting to Darren on the Hollywierd idiots pledging loyalty to B Hussein Obama and my planning assumption is you don’t know what I’m talking about there. In the North Korea every household must have a picture of the Great Leader Kim Il-sung displayed prominently. If there is dust on it, it’s a crime. People disappear for these kinds of acts. If you see that video of those people pledging loyalty to Obama himself brings back memories Germany in the 30’s or North Korea in the present. And Obama loves it. I draw you attention to “The Great Leader” after he was out of the country for a week and had to address his minions, “So I just want to put everybody on notice, because there was a lot of chatter during the week that I was gone: We are going to get this done. Inaction is not an option. And for those nay-sayers and cynics who think that this is not going to happen, don't bet against us. We are going to make this thing happen, because the American people desperately need it. (http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-By-The-President-In-Announcement-Of-US-Surgeon-General/). Forgive me, that’s doesn’t sound like leadership….that sounds like an annoyed parent talking to his kids about failing to do their chores. And as an adult I don't take that well from an overeducated (and please don’t confuse education with intelligence) immature college kids with a major chip in his shoulder. He hates this country and wants it to be a third world nation (but he’ll have no problem flying first class you understand). (more to follow)

MikeAT said...

Page 2 of 3

“And, in terms of my consistency, if you're speaking of my consistent moderate views by which I vote both Democratic and Republican, then you're right. I vote and then rationally judge the results, confident that I can vote again in two years. It's really quite calming, and it makes me feel good about my country.”

I’ll take it you judge the results after you vote. My concern is that you don’t exercise judgment before you pull a lever. That’s not too much to expect from an adult.

“…losers' remorse comes across as such vitriolic suspicion of conspiracy in America.” What conspiracy are you talking about please? You’re sounding like a John Bircher with rambling.
“Your guy - and ideology - lost this round. It's OK. You'll get another chance. And if you're children are at such great risk in the next week, or four years, you don't have much faith in your ability to parent them.

Mazenko, once more you grabbed the wrong end of the stick. I did not vote for John McCain. I pulled the lever next to his name to try and stop B Hussein Obama from having the White House keys. And again, I’m going to have to lead you slowly to the truth…John McCain is a Republican, he is not a conservative. He has spent the last twenty years taking pleasure in annoying the conservative base of the Republican Party (The Amnesty Bill, Cap and Trade, the Campaign Finance Bill to name a few) to the great cheers of the NY Times/ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN/Time/Newsweek/PBS. So you reap what you sew. When he needed the base to put him in the White House, they were not there. BTY mazenko, if the ideology lost why is it because of conservatism Nancy Pelosi is Speaker of the House? It’s taken “Blue Dog” democrats from conservative districts to make the difference in 06 and 08 and they are the same ones who fear for their jobs if they vote for health care nationalization.

“I feel sad for you that you’re deeply held prejudice and losers' remorse comes across as such vitriolic suspicion of conspiracy in America. I mean, really. Uppity? There was a time when a president could ask people to consider what they could do for the country, without suspicious deconstruction of the hidden agenda in his words.”

Yes, Jack Kennedy (and for the record I am no fan of the Kennedy family) could say “ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.” He had spilled blood for America but more importantly, wanted to move it forward. Obama is insane if he thinks socialism will work. I draw you attention to Einstein’s definition of insanity, “To do the same thing over and expect a different result.” Is he a socialist, let me see? Nationalization of major industries. Let me count, two of the three largest car companies (and yes, he has Ford in his target hairs), multiple banks, the mortgage industry and now universal health care….err heath care reform….err health insurance reform. Dimmit Rham, what do the latest focus groups say?! Tell me, where has nationalization of health care worked? It doesn’t. He has a “czar” on executive compensation…that’s none of his damned business. That’s the business of the owners of the company. To hear someone with no accomplishments to his credit (save the pending bankruptcy of the US) lecture anyone on who should run a corporation would be funny if it was not actually happening.

MikeAT said...

Page 3 of 3

“Perhaps, someday, you'll better understand the nature and the beauty of our long-lived democratic republic.”

I more than understand the nature and beauty of our short lived democratic republic. Two-hundred thirty-three years ain’t long lived. If you really need to be told that, you really need to try reading some more history. And I’ll leave you with this quote from the greatest president in my lifetime, “Freedom is a fragile thing and is never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by inheritance; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people. Those who have known freedom and then lost it have never known it again.” ~ Ronald Reagan, from his first inaugural speech as governor of California, January 5, 1967

“Your focus on the date is fine, and, hopefully therapeutic for you. For if you have no faith that the republic - and its schoolchildren - can survive a president with whom you disagree, then you have no faith in the republic.”

Yes, praying that B Hussein Obama’s days in office will end soon helps. And I have faith that a country that survived Jimmy Carter will survive Obama.

Now, finishing this up do you see a difference in postings mazenko. Your attacks on my points were disjointed and implied I don’t want Obama as president because he is black (“I feel sad for you that your deeply held prejudice”). I don’t like him in the Oval Office because he is red. He has no idea how to manage an economy, oversee the executive branch of a major corporation let along the federal bureaucracy, is clueless in world affairs (Hey BO, going around in Air Force One apologizing for things is only going to make you look weak to the world). Darren and I both have more executive experience singularly than he’s had his entire life and I don’t think he’s qualified to run the night shift at a MacDonald’s. And it shows…he doesn’t take critics very well. As a legislator he can blend in and doesn’t have to defend what he wants done. As a president he is out there on his own and he doesn’t like people questioning him. And to say the least, he should be questioned.

Now mazenko, I’ve made specific points of his shortcomings and failures. Try and make a more sensible and logical posting next time.

Darren said...

To piggyback off something Mike said, I've seen it written that the president is faltering because he's trying to force us to do what he wants instead of trying to lead or convince us. He lectures, he berates, he chastises, he denigrates, he talks down to us; these are not the qualities of a leader.

mazenko said...

MikeAT,

It seems I've struck the nerve ... and I hope your blood pressure is coming down from your illogical rant. Mine by the way is 90/60, so, as I've noted, I am calm, and I feel very good about our country, and I have faith in the American people, and I'm rational enough to understand the complex nature of our republic.

Comparisons to North Korea? Socialism? Really? You misunderstand our country enough to believe a cult-like tyranny on par with Kim Jong Il could take over? You are naive enough and ill-informed enough about the political beliefs of our country that you fear Obama creating a Hitler-youth like movement? You ignore the yearly potential for sweeping change through elections? You have no faith in the conservative leaders of America? You feel millions of youth could be brainwashed in a matter of minutes through speeches by the President? You have no knowledge of how I vote, yet you conclude I exercise little judgment before pulling the lever.

As I noted before, how sad your narrow little view of the world and our country is. America is a strong and vibrant democratic republic. And if you don't believe it can survive a president with whom you disagree, you have no faith in America.

That's OK. There are many of us who have enough faith in the meantime to keep a rational eye on things. Cheer up, little buddy. It'll be OK.

Darren said...

Please, let's stop with the personal jabs, and stick to ideas.

MikeAT said...

Page 1 of 2

What have we learned in 2,064 years?

"The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance."

- Cicero - 55 BC

I got this in an email this afternoon and it seemed appropriate. God knows you haven’t learned much mazenko.

“It seems I've struck the nerve ... and I hope your blood pressure is coming down from your illogical rant. Mine by the way is 90/60, …”

Good, you won’t need Obamacare…you don’t want to be put in front a Death Board do you?

Are you this bad when you’re teaching? I’ve made multiple points of why B Hussein Obama is not trustworthy, that while he may meet statuary requirements to be president, he is not qualified to be running the Executive Branch of the US Government and he’s really too much in love with himself. And your answer? A stereotypical personal attack on me as a conservative, implying racism. I would say strange, but liberals are not known for being rational or wise.

Let’s try it in small simple bites.

1. B Hussein Obama has done nothing to make him is not qualified to manage or lead anything. Sorry, being a “community organizer” or a backbencher in the Illinois state senate and a temporary senator from Illinois don’t do that.

2. B Hussein actually believes the crap that’s written about him and he loves people like Demi Moore and her current husband pledging loyalty to him.
3. George HW Bush and Ronald Reagan talked to students in school…they didn’t want the kids asking “What can I do to help the president?”
4. Freedom is a precious thing. And it must be defended.

“You have no knowledge of how I vote, yet you conclude I exercise little judgment before pulling the lever.”

As usual, wrong. I said I question if you exercise judgment before pulling a lever. I think you need to go back to elementary and catch up on your reading.

“You feel millions of youth could be brainwashed in a matter of minutes through speeches by the President?“

I said nothing of the sort and I would say you know that, but in your postings you’ve shown little ability to read and understand. I will remind you of assuming. It makes an ass out of you! The President has a legitimate interest in the education of children in this country. However, using a forced bully pulpit to make kids read books on BO, to instruct them to obey B Hussein and our other “leaders” is not a legitimate government function.

“You are naive enough and ill-informed enough about the political beliefs of our country that you fear Obama creating a Hitler-youth like movement?”

Like using “community organizations” such as ACORN for federal projects, life the census?

MikeAT said...

Page 2 of 2

“As I noted before, how sad your narrow little view of the world and our country is. America is a strong and vibrant democratic republic. And if you don't believe it can survive a president with whom you disagree, you have no faith in America.”

Damned you really aren’t good at this are you mazenko. Again, I’ll quote myself, “Yes, praying that B Hussein Obama’s days in office will end soon helps. And I have faith that a country that survived Jimmy Carter will survive Obama.”

BTY, while I’m quoting myself, “’…losers' remorse comes across as such vitriolic suspicion of conspiracy in America.’ What conspiracy are you talking about please? You’re sounding like a John Bircher with rambling” I know it’s a waste of time to ask if you can answer it…you still seem incapable of engaging in an intellectual debate.

“You ignore the yearly potential for sweeping change through elections?”

Assuming again.

“Comparisons to North Korea? Socialism? Really? You misunderstand our country enough to believe a cult-like tyranny on par with Kim Jong Il could take over?”

Yes, B Hussein Obama is a socialist. But hopefully the fear of God has entered enough members of congress over the last few weeks to stop nationalization of health care and prevent any more damage (Cap and Tax anyone). BTY, it’s Kim Il-sung cult-like tyranny in North Korea, not Kim Jong Il. If you knew anything about what you were writing, you would know the kid is nothing like the Old Man!

As I said earlier mazenko you seem incapable to engaging in a simple intellectual discussion without personal attacks but this should not be surprising from your postings. And if I’m “Little Buddy” and you’re the “Skipper”, damned no wonder we’re lost!

I’ll leave you with a laugh…we can laugh together on this one…you’ve really given me some laughs the last few days.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a61fPIgJfgs&feature=related

mazenko said...

MikeAT,

OK, one, if you're mentioning Death Boards, you've made it clear we're not having rational discussion, and the same goes for charges of socialism. While Obama is liberal, he is not in Hugo Chavez's position to implement socialism against the will of the American people.

Incidentally, I cite your obsession with the name Hussein as evidence of prejudice. If I'm wrong, I apologize. But it seems pretty petty to me. So, that is my source of what you call "a personal attack." I just think your undertone is disrespectful.

Two, after criticizing me for a personal attack, you ask if I am this bad in teaching? As if political philosophy equates to professional knowledge and pedagogy. You can try and naively criticize me as a teacher - but that's a sad, foolish statement - and I've got a 93% pass rate on the AP exam, seventeen years of accolades and awards from my community, to back up my credentials. Speak of, and criticize, that which you know - and my skill in the classroom is out of your league.

Three, I know of only three constitutional requirements for being president, and Obama meets all of them. But if you think running a business or being a governor or sponsoring legislation is the key, then lets start making our list of where that theory is flawed. I'll start with Jimmy Carter. How about Warren G. Harding? Do you know your history?

Beyond that MikeAT, I simply see your "fear" of Obama as a bit excessive. The fear-mongering that was generated from this speech, and a line like "help the president" seems rather hysterical to me. To that end, I simply argue that as the country survived Harding, the Gilded Age, the Depression and FDR, Tricky Dick Nixon, Carter's malaise, Reagan's deregulation, Clinton's infidelities, and the lost years of W., we will survive this.

What was intended to be lighthearted banter, has apparently really bothered you. And my clear statements on America history don't seem to appeal to your sense of rational. But, this was entertaining - at least for me - and I thank you for some engaging reading.

Michael

Anonymous said...

mazenko, thank you for staying polite throughout your comments. i don't always agree with you, but i admire the way you handled this conversation with mikeAT.

~maia_orual

MikeAT said...

“OK, one, if you're mentioning Death Boards, you've made it clear we're not having rational discussion”

You really can’t take a joke can you?

“and the same goes for charges of socialism. While Obama is liberal, he is not in Hugo Chavez's position to implement socialism against the will of the American people.”

I said he is a socialist. If he’s in a position to implement his socialist agenda like Chavez or not doesn’t change what he is.

“Incidentally, I cite your obsession with the name Hussein as evidence of prejudice. If I'm wrong, I apologize. But it seems pretty petty to me. So, that is my source of what you call ‘a personal attack.’ I just think your undertone is disrespectful.”

I enjoy it. And more to the point, it’s something he cannot understand. Respect must be earned.

“Two, after criticizing me for a personal attack, you ask if I am this bad in teaching? As if political philosophy equates to professional knowledge and pedagogy. You can try and naively criticize me as a teacher - but that's a sad, foolish statement - and I've got a 93% pass rate on the AP exam, seventeen years of accolades and awards from my community, to back up my credentials. Speak of, and criticize, that which you know - and my skill in the classroom is out of your league.”

I asked if you’re this bad in educating as your are in debate. I’ll take your word that you’re as good an English teacher as your say. As for my “skill in the classroom” it’s an apples/oranges comparision. Darren will tell you I’m a cop, hell I got to put handcuffs on the man in Houston’s airport once (his son loved it!). And although I do Field Training, that’s to only one personal at a time. You get to deal with over, what, one hundred a day?

“Three, I know of only three constitutional requirements for being president, and Obama meets all of them. But if you think running a business or being a governor or sponsoring legislation is the key, then lets start making our list of where that theory is flawed. I'll start with Jimmy Carter. How about Warren G. Harding? Do you know your history?”

Again, I quote myself, “I’ve made multiple points of why B Hussein Obama is not trustworthy, that while he may meet statuary requirements to be president, he is not qualified to be running the Executive Branch of the US Government and he’s really too much in love with himself.” Also, “And I have faith that a country that survived Jimmy Carter will survive Obama.”

“Beyond that MikeAT, I simply see your "fear" of Obama as a bit excessive. The fear-mongering that was generated from this speech, and a line like "help the president" seems rather hysterical to me. To that end, I simply argue that as the country survived Harding, the Gilded Age, the Depression and FDR, Tricky Dick Nixon, Carter's malaise, Reagan's deregulation, Clinton's infidelities, and the lost years of W., we will survive this.”

Fear-mongering. More like responsive citizenship, like the town hall meetings last month. Someone as arrogant as him needs to be slapped down early and often.

“What was intended to be lighthearted banter, has apparently really bothered you.”

Actually I really enjoyed it Michael….I love slamming someone in a debate! ;<)

“And my clear statements on America history don't seem to appeal to your sense of rational.”

What clear statements on American history. Feel free to quote yourself. Copy and paste is so great

“But, this was entertaining - at least for me - and I thank you for some engaging reading.”

Thanks for a debate…

maxutils said...

A great way to convince students that their time in school is important is to appropriate an hour of their time for your own political gain.