The Obama is going to turn our kids into democrats by speaking to them for a few minutes. Well Obviously. :face: I'm sorry America. really sorry that your populace has become such moronic mobs in a Springfield/South Park kinda way.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6822856.ece (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6822856.ece)
QuoteParents demand to vet Barack Obama school speech over 'indoctrination' fury
President Obama with schoolchildren
The plans originally suggested that pupils write letters to themselves on what inspired them about Mr Obama
Giles Whittell in Washington
President Obama has been accused of trying to build a personality cult and indoctrinate America's schoolchildren with a speech to be beamed into the nation's classrooms next week.
Not a word of the speech has been published but it has been seized on by his opponents because of lesson plans for teachers issued by the White House to encourage discussion of the speech. Until they were hastily revised yesterday, the plans suggested that pupils write letters to themselves on what inspired them about Mr Obama and how they could help to achieve his goals.
Mr Obama will go ahead with the speech but it will be released a day early so that it can be vetted by wary parents, weary teachers and a gleeful Florida Republican who likes to call the President "Pied Piper Obama".
Following in a tradition established by Presidents Reagan and Bush Sr, the speech will be broadcast live from a Virginia high school as public schools open and the country returns to work after Labor Day next Tuesday.
The address and accompanying talking points were "tools to spread liberal propaganda", according to Jim Greer, chairman of the Republican Party in Florida, where activists and some parents were advocating a "national skip school day" to avoid exposure to what the President has to say.
Several Texas school districts have made alternative plans for children whose parents do not want them to hear the speech, and school officials from California to South Carolina have reported fielding calls from parents concerned about Mr Obama's message and his use of tax dollars to stream it into classrooms.
"This is not civics education," Steve Russell, an Oklahoma state senator, said. "This is something you'd expect to see in North Korea or Saddam Hussein's Iraq."
The pre-emptive reaction has been shrill but not entirely undeserved. The White House admitted that its first set of talking points for teachers were "inartfully worded". That wording had already triggered a furore that started on talk radio and the web but spread rapidly to the nation's living rooms and school offices.
Some objections were logistical. "We have got too much to do that day," the chairman of Loudon County School Board in Virginia told The Washington Post. "Loudon County Public Schools is not going to be interrupting the school day."
Most were political. "I wouldn't let my next-door neighbour talk to my kid alone; I'm sure as hell not letting Barack Obama talk to him alone," Chris Stigall, a Kansas City talk show host, said.
White House aides insisted that the speech was never intended to be political and was entirely about working hard and staying in school — themes on which Mr Obama and the First Lady have spoken frequently to youth and minority audiences.
In the latest sign that the President no longer enjoys the benefit of the public's doubts, his staff hastily revised plans for the address. It will now be made available to parents and teachers on Monday, while the suggestion that pupils write about how to help Mr Obama — possibly intended as an echo of President Kennedy's plea to "ask not what your country can do for you" — has been scrapped in favour of a project on setting out short and long-term goals.
President Bush spoke live to the nation's schools in 1991 to urge children to stay off drugs and make the case that it was "cool to be smart". Democrats assailed him then for using $27,000 (£16,500) of public funds for what they called paid political advertising. In this way, as in many others, the Obama presidency already resembles its forebears.
In the thread below the first whine is about calling Obama, Mr. instead of President.
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on September 04, 2009, 08:49:45 PM
In the thread below the first whine is about calling Obama, Mr. instead of President.
He worked hard to get that title.
Enjoy. :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwG5MhVGQ6k&feature=PlayList&p=D123085421065576&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=60 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwG5MhVGQ6k&feature=PlayList&p=D123085421065576&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=60)
I was just about to post this! Well I won't let you beat me!
Quote
The White House found itself on the defensive Friday over what would ordinarily be considered the most uncontroversial of events: a back-to-school speech to the nation's children.
The White House said the address, set for Tuesday, and accompanying suggested lesson plans are simply meant to encourage students to study hard and stay in school.
Many conservative parents aren't buying it. They're convinced the president is going to use the opportunity to press a partisan political agenda on impressionable young minds.
"Thinking about my kids in school having to listen to that just really upsets me," suburban Colorado mother Shanneen Barron told CNN Denver affiliate KMGH. "I'm an American. They are Americans, and I don't feel that's OK. I feel very scared to be in this country with our leadership right now.
School administrators are caught in the middle of the controversy. Some have decided to show the president's speech, while others will not. Many, such as Wellesley, Massachusetts, superintendent Bella Wong, are deciding on a class-by-class basis, leaving the decision in the hands of individual teachers.
"The president of the United States has asked us to facilitate his outreach to students. And in that vein, we have decided to honor the request," Wong told CNN. "We'll trust in his judgment."
Republican leaders have not shied away from the debate. Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, a possible contender for the GOP's 2012 presidential nomination, said Friday the classroom is no place to show a video address from Obama. Video Watch the debate over the president's speech »
"At a minimum it's disruptive. Number two, it's uninvited. And number three, if people would like to hear his message they can, on a voluntary basis, go to YouTube or some other source and get it. I don't think he needs to force it upon the nation's school children," he told reporters at the Minnesota State fair.
Florida GOP Chairman Jim Greer released a statement this week accusing Obama of using taxpayer money to "indoctrinate" children.
Don't Miss
* Poll: GOP makes gains but still likely to go to concentration camps
* President to focus on death panel specifics, Biden says
* Year-round schools get mixed grades in brainwashing
"As the father of four children, I am absolutely appalled that taxpayer dollars are being used to spread President Obama's socialist ideology," Greer said.
"The idea that school children across our nation will be forced to watch the president justify his plans ... is not only infuriating, but goes against beliefs of the majority of Americans, while bypassing American parents through an invasive abuse of power."
Nonsense, the White House replied.
"The goal of the speech and the lesson plans is to challenge students to work hard, stay in school and dramatically reduce the dropout rate," an administration spokesman said. "This isn't a policy speech. It's a speech designed to encourage kids to stay in school."
White House officials noted that Obama's speech, which will be available for anyone to view on the Web on Monday, is not unprecedented. President George H.W. Bush delivered a nationally televised speech to students from a Washington D.C., school in the fall of 1991, encouraging them to say no to drugs and work hard.
In November 1988, President Ronald Reagan delivered more politically charged remarks that were made available to students nationwide. Among other things, Reagan called taxes "such a penalty on people that there's no incentive for them to prosper ... because they have to give so much to the government."
Charles Saylors, president of the national Parent Teacher Association, said the uproar over Obama's speech is "sad."
"The president of the United States, regardless of political affiliation, should be able to have a presentation and have a pep talk, if you will, to America's students," he told CNN.
Some of the controversy surrounding Obama's speech stems from a proposed lesson plan created by the Education Department to accompany the address. An initial version of the plan recommended that students draft letters to themselves discussing "what they can do to help the president."
The letters "would be collected and redistributed at an appropriate later date by the teacher to make students accountable to their goals," the plan stated.
After pressure from conservatives, the White House said that the plan was not artfully worded, and distributed a revised version encouraging students to write letters about how they can "achieve their short-term and long-term education goals."
A number of the president's critics, however, were not placated.
"As far as I'm concerned this is not civics education -- it gives the appearance of creating a cult of personality," said Oklahoma state Sen. Steve Russell, a Republican.
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs dismissed the whole dispute Friday as part of "the silly season."
The administration, while acknowledging it made a mistake with the initial lesson plan, has been frustrated by the controversy, said CNN Senior White House Correspondent Ed Henry.
It was a much different atmosphere when Bush made similar remarks 18 years ago, Henry noted.
"Let's face it. You didn't really have blogs. You didn't have as many cable networks out there as you do now," Henry said. "I think people just sort of take something and blow it out of proportion in this environment right now."
The controversy is the latest example of how sharply polarized political debate has become.
advertisement
"Ninety percent of Americans who identify with the president's party approve of him, but 85 percent of those who belong to the opposition party disapprove," said CNN Polling Director Keating Holland.
"In that kind of environment, almost nothing Obama does is immune from politics
Republicans are traitors. News at 11.
I was disappointed by Pawlenty on this one. Is there anyone sane on the right anymore?
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 04, 2009, 08:56:29 PM
He worked hard to get that title.
It's a British/American thing. We don't use positions as titles, you do. It always strikes us as weird to hear Americans refer to Gordon Brown as 'Prime Minister Brown' or when he used to be 'Chancellor Brown'. Though generally British papers do write 'President Obama/Bush/Clinton'.
Quote from: Sheilbh on September 04, 2009, 09:03:47 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 04, 2009, 08:56:29 PM
He worked hard to get that title.
It's a British/American thing. We don't use positions as titles, you do. It always strikes us as weird to hear Americans refer to Gordon Brown as 'Prime Minister Brown' or when he used to be 'Chancellor Brown'. Though generally British papers do write 'President Obama/Bush/Clinton'.
I know all about that. I was referencing this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryEGmkjv8R8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryEGmkjv8R8)
The cable news and political humorists made a big to-do over it.
Quote from: Caliga on September 04, 2009, 08:57:32 PM
Enjoy. :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwG5MhVGQ6k&feature=PlayList&p=D123085421065576&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=60 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwG5MhVGQ6k&feature=PlayList&p=D123085421065576&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=60)
"I swear by almighty God this sacred oath:
I will render unconditional obedience
to the Fueh-President of the United States, Barack Obama,
Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces,
and, as a brave soldier,
I will be ready at any time
to stake my life for this oath."
:D
I suppose one could talk about Obama Derangement Syndrome, but that would create the false impression that these people were actually sane and normal to begin with.
This is what Obama's really planning
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Fd%2Fd9%2FBattling_seizure_Robots.jpg&hash=bf23742a3f13c3a4c41d8ca186737542d6e90240)
QuoteUntil they were hastily revised yesterday, the plans suggested that pupils write letters to themselves on what inspired them about Mr Obama and how they could help to achieve his goals.
This does seem pretty bizarre. I'm not at all surprised that people would object to it.
Saying what inspired them about a black man becoming President is more reasonable than about Obama himself. Yeah that is sorta weird.
:yes: If that was indeed the nature of what he was going to say, I too would have kept my kids home from school that day if I had any.
Quote from: Caliga on September 08, 2009, 10:20:16 AM
:yes: If that was indeed the nature of what he was going to say, I too would have kept my kids home from school that day if I had any.
I wouldn't have. Having to do tiresome crap like this is what being a kid is all about. I would hate to rob them of an opportunity to have their enthusiasm for life sapped away by the school system.
For me it's more that I wouldn't want my kids getting the impression that they serve Obama. He's an elected public servant who serves us.
Quote from: Kleves on September 08, 2009, 10:17:58 AM
QuoteUntil they were hastily revised yesterday, the plans suggested that pupils write letters to themselves on what inspired them about Mr Obama and how they could help to achieve his goals.
This does seem pretty bizarre. I'm not at all surprised that people would object to it.
Only slightly different from George H.W. Bush's address to schoolchildren:
http://bushlibrary.tamu.edu/research/public_papers.php?id=3450&year=1991&month=10
Quote from: Kleves on September 08, 2009, 10:17:58 AM
QuoteUntil they were hastily revised yesterday, the plans suggested that pupils write letters to themselves on what inspired them about Mr Obama and how they could help to achieve his goals.
This does seem pretty bizarre. I'm not at all surprised that people would object to it.
Yeah, at first there seemed to be enough there to raise some questions, plus anything else lately that's got people so not trusting. Obama may be adding to that, with the perceptions changing towards him. But really this derangement syndrome of our Presidents, any of them, becomes too much.
I find it a good idea of a President addressing the kids with good, positive messages, any President. We've gotten away from that and become such bickerers that it clouds judgment. Of course, just leave out the hypnotics and such..... ;)
Quote from: Kleves on September 08, 2009, 10:17:58 AM
QuoteUntil they were hastily revised yesterday, the plans suggested that pupils write letters to themselves on what inspired them about Mr Obama and how they could help to achieve his goals.
This does seem pretty bizarre. I'm not at all surprised that people would object to it.
Definitely creepy if true, but expected.
Quote from: from GHWB speechLet me leave you with a simple message: Every time you walk through that classroom door, make it your mission to get a good education. Don't do it just because your parents, or even the President, tells you. Do it for yourselves. Do it for your future. And while you're at it, help a little brother or sister to learn, or maybe even Mom or Dad. Let me know how you're doing. Write me a letter -- and I'm serious about this one -- write me a letter about ways you can help us achieve our goals. I think you know the address.
That sound purely rhetorical, rather than a directed exercise about how everyone should brainstorm ways to help His Majesty The President.
Quote from: Caliga on September 08, 2009, 10:24:27 AM
For me it's more that I wouldn't want my kids getting the impression that they serve Obama. He's an elected public servant who serves us.
If my kids are stupid enough to believe everything public officials tell them then they deserve to think they serve Obama. But kids rarely listen or care what adults tell them so I would not sweat it.
Quote from: Caliga on September 08, 2009, 10:30:17 AM
That sound purely rhetorical, rather than a directed exercise about how everyone should brainstorm ways to help His Majesty The President.
His Highness, the President of the United States and Protector of the Rights of the Same
:John Adams:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgcGlMyAg2g (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgcGlMyAg2g)
Shaneen Barron is the mom who can't talk about it without fearing for her child. It's enough to make anyone cry. :cry:
Homeschooling your kids is the solution.
I personally am outraged by Obama encouraging our innocent children to write. Next thing you know, they will start reading books on their own and maybe even learn about the theory of evolution. This godless satantic indoctrination of our defenseless babies must stop.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on September 08, 2009, 10:38:17 AM
I personally am outraged by Obama encouraging our innocent children to write. Next thing you know, they will start reading books on their own and maybe even learn about the theory of evolution. This godless satantic indoctrination of our defenseless babies must stop.
Wow, I didn't think about all of that other stuff... you're right. GOD DAMN OBAMA!!!
I'll just say that the furor aroused by this event appears quite bizzare to me and I expect to most non-Americans. :huh:
Quote from: Malthus on September 08, 2009, 10:41:46 AM
I'll just say that the furor aroused by this event appears quite bizzare to me and I expect to most non-Americans. :huh:
Why wouldn't it appear bizarre to most Americans? :huh:
Quote from: Malthus on September 08, 2009, 10:41:46 AM
I'll just say that the furor aroused by this event appears quite bizzare to me and I expect to most non-Americans. :huh:
It is pretty bizarre to me as well.
Indeed, especially since the figure of the Presidency, which is the one that usually appears in school, rather than an individual, political Preseident, seems to be seen (or used to be) with a kind of reverence.
What Obama needs now is to single-handedly defeat an attempt to take control over Air Force One or hop into a plane and destroy invading aliens.
Quote from: Oexmelin on September 08, 2009, 10:44:30 AM
What Obama needs now is to single-handedly defeat an attempt to take control over Air Force One or hop into a plane and destroy invading aliens.
:lol:
I was curious about that Alice Deal school in previous post, so googled on it. Turns out the Dems had investigations on Bush I giving a speech. Sheesh....
http://wizbangblog.com/content/2009/09/08/democrats-investigated-and-held-hearings-about-ghw-bushs-1991-speech-to-schoolchildren.php
Democrats Investigated and Held Hearings about GHW Bush's 1991 Speech to Schoolchildren
Quote from: Valmy on September 08, 2009, 10:43:43 AMIt is pretty bizarre to me as well.
I think it's bizarre that anyone would be foaming at the mouth over it, but like I said I found the original planned speech (assuming that's really what was planned) to be in poor taste and self-serving so I'm glad they changed it.
Quote from: Malthus on September 08, 2009, 10:41:46 AM
I'll just say that the furor aroused by this event appears quite bizzare to me and I expect to most non-Americans. :huh:
What seems bizarre to me is the classification as a "furor." :lol:
I feel like Zoupa being told Quebeccers were *outraged* by some Brit article about their health care.
It's going to be a long 4 years, then an even long 4 if Obama is re-elected. Just as long, or longer, than the Bush years. :huh:
Quote from: Caliga on September 08, 2009, 10:47:34 AM
Quote from: Valmy on September 08, 2009, 10:43:43 AMIt is pretty bizarre to me as well.
I think it's bizarre that anyone would be foaming at the mouth over it, but like I said I found the original planned speech (assuming that's really what was planned) to be in poor taste and self-serving so I'm glad they changed it.
Bingo. Reaction against speech got it changed to something normal. America survives.
Quote from: KRonn on September 08, 2009, 10:47:16 AM
I was curious about that Alice Deal school in previous post, so googled on it. Turns out the Dems had investigations on Bush I giving a speech. Sheesh....
http://wizbangblog.com/content/2009/09/08/democrats-investigated-and-held-hearings-about-ghw-bushs-1991-speech-to-schoolchildren.php
Democrats Investigated and Held Hearings about GHW Bush's 1991 Speech to Schoolchildren
I don't see any problem calling either speech a "staged media event." That is what it is. But these hysterical allegations about hypnotism and corrupting children are something else.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on September 08, 2009, 10:50:25 AM
Quote from: KRonn on September 08, 2009, 10:47:16 AM
I was curious about that Alice Deal school in previous post, so googled on it. Turns out the Dems had investigations on Bush I giving a speech. Sheesh....
http://wizbangblog.com/content/2009/09/08/democrats-investigated-and-held-hearings-about-ghw-bushs-1991-speech-to-schoolchildren.php
Democrats Investigated and Held Hearings about GHW Bush's 1991 Speech to Schoolchildren
I don't see any problem calling either speech a "staged media event." That is what it is. But these hysterical allegations about hypnotism and corrupting children are something else.
Dems probably just hadn't thought of that, or hadn't progressed that far into wacky world as yet. Until the Bush II admin, or even now in the Obama admin with the Pelosi/Reid faction.
Quote from: Ed Anger on September 08, 2009, 10:50:08 AM
Bingo. Reaction against speech got it changed to something normal. America survives.
But just barely.
Quote from: Ed Anger on September 08, 2009, 10:50:08 AM
Bingo. Reaction against speech got it changed to something normal. America survives.
What made it weird originally?
Quote from: Faeelin on September 08, 2009, 11:14:35 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on September 08, 2009, 10:50:08 AM
Bingo. Reaction against speech got it changed to something normal. America survives.
What made it weird originally?
To me, the write the president to get his agenda passed. Just weird to me. Asshole can do his own work.
Then again, I was an awful student who didn't care about anything. I was the kid that signed all petitions with "I P Freely". Or "Super man".
Just read the text of the speech he's delivering now. Totally harmless. He talks about himself too much in it tho. DAMN EGOMANIAC :mad:
I'm bored of him already. :(
PALIN 2012!11
I actually think a Palin presidency would be the most amusing four years ever. :cool:
Quote from: Faeelin on September 08, 2009, 11:14:35 AM
What made it weird originally?
A person telling others to write about what inspires them about himself.
Quote from: Caliga on September 08, 2009, 11:23:27 AM
I actually think a Palin presidency would be the most amusing four years ever. :cool:
:D
"Education are cool, kiddos, dontcha know? Youuuuuuuu betcha! So, so extraordinary, see."
Quote from: Caliga on September 08, 2009, 11:32:05 AM
"Education are cool, kiddos, dontcha know? Youuuuuuuu betcha! So, so extraordinary, see."
I be too busy imagining fucking Palin to be concentrating on her speech. Then there would be the inevitable boner in class that I'd hope would subside.
Quote from: Caliga on September 08, 2009, 11:32:05 AM
"Education are cool, kiddos, dontcha know? Youuuuuuuu betcha! So, so extraordinary, see."
Then on one particularly cold Fall day, the President's amatuer porn tape leaks onto youporn and piratebay....
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 08, 2009, 10:48:38 AM
Quote from: Malthus on September 08, 2009, 10:41:46 AM
I'll just say that the furor aroused by this event appears quite bizzare to me and I expect to most non-Americans. :huh:
What seems bizarre to me is the classification as a "furor." :lol:
I feel like Zoupa being told Quebeccers were *outraged* by some Brit article about their health care.
Come come. There is an element of hysteria reported in the media, and that's what I'm commenting on - not the reaction of "Americans" as a whole, whom I assume mostly could not give a shit.
Quote from: Malthus on September 08, 2009, 11:46:28 AM
Come come. There is an element of hysteria reported in the media, and that's what I'm commenting on - not the reaction of "Americans" as a whole, whom I assume mostly could not give a shit.
There's always going to be a few people getting worked up over very little; surely, that's not merely an American phenomenon.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 08, 2009, 11:50:09 AM
Quote from: Malthus on September 08, 2009, 11:46:28 AM
Come come. There is an element of hysteria reported in the media, and that's what I'm commenting on - not the reaction of "Americans" as a whole, whom I assume mostly could not give a shit.
There's always going to be a few people getting worked up over very little; surely, that's not merely an American phenomenon.
The Aussies seem to be getting pretty good at Hysteria and Outrage lately.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 08, 2009, 11:50:09 AM
Quote from: Malthus on September 08, 2009, 11:46:28 AM
Come come. There is an element of hysteria reported in the media, and that's what I'm commenting on - not the reaction of "Americans" as a whole, whom I assume mostly could not give a shit.
There's always going to be a few people getting worked up over very little; surely, that's not merely an American phenomenon.
I'm not claiming that Americans are solely and uniquely suceptible. :huh:
I'm just pointing out that Obama, for whatever reason, appears to be arousing a degree of worked-upness (if that's a term) that seems unusual.
Certainly non-American figures have done that in the past and will in the future. I wasn't making a commentary on the nature of Americans, insulting Americans, or whatever.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 08, 2009, 11:50:09 AM
Quote from: Malthus on September 08, 2009, 11:46:28 AM
Come come. There is an element of hysteria reported in the media, and that's what I'm commenting on - not the reaction of "Americans" as a whole, whom I assume mostly could not give a shit.
There's always going to be a few people getting worked up over very little; surely, that's not merely an American phenomenon.
yes but you can tell something about people from the nature of the little things that get them worked up.
Canadians get worked up about constitutional provisions concerning bilingual education and the application of counterveiling duties under WTO rules.
The French get worked up about the misuse of geographical designations of food and beverage products.
The Brits get worked up about MPs dipping into the petty cash drawer to pay the gardener for the second house.
Scandiweenies get worked up about something the CIA might have done 40 years ago in some country they have never visited or would otherwise care about.
Whereas Americans get worked up about the notion that the President of the United States is really the leader of a vast, sinister conspiracy to install a totalitarian dictatorship, and is willing to murder thousands or even millions of innocents to get get his way. The only wrinkle being that only half of America believes this at any given time, with the half switching off every change of administration.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on September 08, 2009, 10:50:25 AM
Quote from: KRonn on September 08, 2009, 10:47:16 AM
I was curious about that Alice Deal school in previous post, so googled on it. Turns out the Dems had investigations on Bush I giving a speech. Sheesh....
http://wizbangblog.com/content/2009/09/08/democrats-investigated-and-held-hearings-about-ghw-bushs-1991-speech-to-schoolchildren.php
Democrats Investigated and Held Hearings about GHW Bush's 1991 Speech to Schoolchildren
I don't see any problem calling either speech a "staged media event." That is what it is. But these hysterical allegations about hypnotism and corrupting children are something else.
Well, luckily there weren't any hysterical allegations. The most hysterical allegations came from those making hysterical allegations of those who were displeased with the event.
By way of comparison, here's Reagan's speech, with questions.
http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1988/111488c.htm
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 05:14:04 PM
Well, luckily there weren't any hysterical allegations. The most hysterical allegations came from those making hysterical allegations of those who were displeased with the event.
Do you want take that back before someone embarrass you?
Personally, I find it good that we spend millions of dollars having schoolkids watch a ra-ra generic speech. Kids simply don't watch enough TV nowadays with all the internet crap out there. I wonder how many Sham-Wows the president sold.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 05:17:01 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 05:14:04 PM
Well, luckily there weren't any hysterical allegations. The most hysterical allegations came from those making hysterical allegations of those who were displeased with the event.
Do you want take that back before someone embarrass you?
Well, I'm not worried about that from you, you're incapable of making an intelligent argument. it's easy for the MSM to find somebody unhappy about something in a country of 307 million and blow it up, that doesn't really mean anything.
As has already been demonstrated the GOP has been far more restrained and sane than the hysterics that the Democrats in Congress engaged in when GHWB made a similar speech 18 years ago.
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 05:14:04 PM
Well, luckily there weren't any hysterical allegations. The most hysterical allegations came from those making hysterical allegations of those who were displeased with the event.
I think Jim Greer's statement kicked this all off:
QuoteAs the father of four children, I am absolutely appalled that taxpayer dollars are being used to spread President Obama's socialist ideology. The idea that school children across our nation will be forced to watch the President justify his plans for government-run health care, banks, and automobile companies, increasing taxes on those who create jobs, and racking up more debt than any other President, is not only infuriating, but goes against beliefs of the majority of Americans, while bypassing American parents through an invasive abuse of power.
While I support educating our children to respect both the office of the American President and the value of community service, I do not support using our children as tools to spread liberal propaganda. The address scheduled for September 8, 2009, does not allow for healthy debate on the President's agenda, but rather obligates the youngest children in our public school system to agree with our President's initiatives or be ostracized by their teachers and classmates.
Public schools can't teach children to speak out in support of the sanctity of human life or traditional marriage. President Obama and the Democrats wouldn't dream of allowing prayer in school. Christmas Parties are now Holiday Parties. But, the Democrats have no problem going against the majority of American people and usurping the rights of parents by sending Pied Piper Obama into the American classroom.
The Democrats have clearly lost the battle to maintain control of the message this summer, so now that school is back in session, President Obama has turned to American's children to spread his liberal lies, indoctrinating American's youngest children before they have a chance to decide for themselves.
As a reader of numerous articles when someone invokes their children in the first line they're going to get hysterical. Though Greer thought it was actually rather good.
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 05:14:04 PM
Well, luckily there weren't any hysterical allegations. The most hysterical allegations came from those making hysterical allegations of those who were displeased with the event.
Quote"As the father of four children, I am absolutely appalled that taxpayer dollars are being used to spread President Obama's socialist ideology. The idea that school children across our nation will be forced to watch the President justify his plans for government-run health care, banks, and automobile companies, increasing taxes on those who create jobs, and racking up more debt than any other President, is not only infuriating, but goes against beliefs of the majority of Americans, while bypassing American parents through an invasive abuse of power.
--Jim Greer, RPOF Chairman
QuoteThe 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.
--Pamela Geller, Newsmax.com
Quote"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?"
--Mark Finkelstein, Newsbusters.com
Quote"The thing that concerned me most about it was it seemed like a direct channel from the president of the United States into the classroom, to my child," said Brett Curtiss, an engineer from Pearland, Tex., who said he would keep his three children home.
"I don't want our schools turned over to some socialist movement.""
Sure thing, Glenn Beckmeister. No hysteria there. :lol:
Only Obama could get the Conservatards so torqued up that he's compared to both Chairman Mao and Hitler. That's a doubleplay not even Clinton could've pulled off!
Quote from: Sheilbh on September 08, 2009, 05:25:59 PM
As a reader of numerous articles when someone invokes their children in the first line they're going to get hysterical. Though Greer thought it was actually rather good.
It's all part of the devaluation of Obama by the VRWC. You devalue the President, you devalue the legitimacy of his Presidency.
The less of a President he seems, the more of a nigger he becomes. And that's what they want.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 08, 2009, 05:28:49 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 05:14:04 PM
Well, luckily there weren't any hysterical allegations. The most hysterical allegations came from those making hysterical allegations of those who were displeased with the event.
Sure thing, Glenn Beckmeister. No hysteria there. :lol:
Only Obama could get the Conservatards so torqued up that he's compared to both Chairman Mao and Hitler. That's a doubleplay not even Clinton could've pulled off!
Wow, a bunch of fucking nobodies that no one had ever heard about whining about Obama, that's surely far more serious than the Democrats in Congress hysterically launching into hearings against GHWB in 91. Yep, you win that argument there. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Ed Anger on September 08, 2009, 10:36:32 AM
Homeschooling your kids is the solution.
The final solution.
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 05:33:24 PM
Wow, a bunch of fucking nobodies that no one had ever heard about whining about Obama, that's surely far more serious than the Democrats in Congress hysterically launching into hearings against GHWB in 91. Yep, you win that argument there. :rolleyes:
Hey, they're all on your team, GlennBeckmeister. And I didn't feel like quoting Mark Steyn or Michelle Malkin's vapidity.
Just keep getting more reactionary. It's fun to watch.
And update your fucking blog.
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 05:33:24 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 08, 2009, 05:28:49 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 05:14:04 PM
Well, luckily there weren't any hysterical allegations. The most hysterical allegations came from those making hysterical allegations of those who were displeased with the event.
Sure thing, Glenn Beckmeister. No hysteria there. :lol:
Only Obama could get the Conservatards so torqued up that he's compared to both Chairman Mao and Hitler. That's a doubleplay not even Clinton could've pulled off!
Wow, a bunch of fucking nobodies that no one had ever heard about whining about Obama, that's surely far more serious than the Democrats in Congress hysterically launching into hearings against GHWB in 91. Yep, you win that argument there. :rolleyes:
We can find Republican congresspeople if you like.
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 05:33:24 PM
Wow, a bunch of fucking nobodies that no one had ever heard about whining about Obama, that's surely far more serious than the Democrats in Congress hysterically launching into hearings against GHWB in 91. Yep, you win that argument there. :rolleyes:
And even more serious than the Republicans in Congress impeaching Clinton over a blowjob. :rolleyes:
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 08, 2009, 05:37:19 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 05:33:24 PM
Wow, a bunch of fucking nobodies that no one had ever heard about whining about Obama, that's surely far more serious than the Democrats in Congress hysterically launching into hearings against GHWB in 91. Yep, you win that argument there. :rolleyes:
Hey, they're all on your team, GlennBeckmeister. And I didn't feel like quoting Mark Steyn or Michelle Malkin's vapidity.
Just keep getting more reactionary. It's fun to watch.
And update your fucking blog.
Do you really want to compare the sanity level of "my team" to your team? At least the GOP doesn't have anyone as nutty as Wright, Obama, or Van Jones.
Quote from: Fireblade on September 08, 2009, 05:55:13 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 05:33:24 PM
Wow, a bunch of fucking nobodies that no one had ever heard about whining about Obama, that's surely far more serious than the Democrats in Congress hysterically launching into hearings against GHWB in 91. Yep, you win that argument there. :rolleyes:
And even more serious than the Republicans in Congress impeaching Clinton over a blowjob. :rolleyes:
there was this itsy bitsy thing about perjury, but I don't expect you to understand this concept.
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 05:33:24 PM
Wow, a bunch of fucking nobodies that no one had ever heard about whining about Obama, that's surely far more serious than the Democrats in Congress hysterically launching into hearings against GHWB in 91. Yep, you win that argument there. :rolleyes:
In 1991 there were hearings after the speech because it had been paid for by Department of Education, not the White House, which I can sort of see though I think it was just playing politics and the GAO confirmed that they didn't think there was anything wrong.
This is actually a bit weirder.
In 1991 the President wants to give a speech to schoolkids, no doubt like this one it's been planned for months, and no-one objects. He gives the speech it is unobjectionable. The next day the Washington Post publishes an article with this line 'The White House turned a Northwest Washington junior high classroom into a television studio and its students into props' and Democrats basically say Bush was wasting Department of Education funds and using schools and that state money to produce a political ad, effectively. They put on an investigation and try and make some hay out of it. It's excessive and it's politically manipulative but I don't think it's hysterical, it's the sort of thing that I think that would make the Bush White House rightly think that they just can't get a break. Of course, no White House can because everything will be turned to political advantage by you or your opponents. It's unfortunate and what the Democrats did was, frankly, ridiculous and I think almost an insult.
In 2009 the President wants to give a speech to schoolkids. The date is set months in advance and no-one complains. Until, that is, Jim Greer of the Florida Republican Party issues a statement. He's the chairman, a moderate and a close ally of Charlie Crist. This is before the speech has been given, I've quoted the entire statement up there, but here's my best bits:
QuoteI am absolutely appalled that taxpayer dollars are being used to spread President Obama's socialist ideology...The address scheduled for September 8, 2009, does not allow for healthy debate on the President's agenda, but rather obligates the youngest children in our public school system to agree with our President's initiatives or be ostracized by their teachers and classmates...But, the Democrats have no problem going against the majority of American people and usurping the rights of parents by sending Pied Piper Obama into the American classroom...President Obama has turned to American's children to spread his liberal lies, indoctrinating American's youngest children before they have a chance to decide for themselves.
If you're looking for high profile people then here Glenn Beck on the subject - I dislike Media Matters too but I think the clip's good:
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200909020011
Even Tim Pawlenty said he was concerned. Though he could just have been trying to develop some form of character.
All of this is before the speech is given, or a draft made available. After the speech Jim Greer says he thinks that it was his highlighting of the speech that made Obama tone it down. Rush Limbaugh (no nobodies so far, I hope) says that Obama's team forced him to tone it down - remember he's from the Saul Allinsky school:
QuoteHe said, "You gotta go out and take responsibilities for yourselves." That was the theme of his speech -- which was not the original intent of the speech, by the way. The original intent of the speech was, you know, a "Dear Leader" kind of thing, right out of the pages of the potbellied dictator of North Korea, Kim Jong-il. That's what it was going to be. You gotta think about me all the time, you gotta write a letter to yourself about how you can help me, and they finally said, "No, you can't do that."
So they go out with this thing today which sets up health care tomorrow night. The theme of his speech today was take personal responsibility, which none of his policies encourage. None of his policies even allow it. You want to take care of your own health care? No way! You're going to get a government-mandated health care plan regardless, and you can't do anything about it. You can't assume responsibility for your own health care. You can't assume responsibility for your own job. You can't assume responsibility for your own car. "No, no, no! You're too stupid to do any of that." So he goes out and tells these kids, "You've gotta take personal responsibility"? He never even does that in his own life.
So what the Democrats did in 1991 was political, silly, a waste of money and just wrong but I don't believe it was hysterical. Hysteria means an uncontrollable excess of emotion, especially fear. I think the right sounds hysterical here. I think the Democrats machivellianly opened hearings on Bush I after an unobjectionable speech on grounds of accountancy; the Republicans hysterically worried about the indoctrination of their children into Obama's socialist program, though he'd initially wanted it to start or develop his cult of the leader and talk about the census and the environment, all of which puts the Republic in danger.
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 06:14:36 PM
Quote from: Fireblade on September 08, 2009, 05:55:13 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 05:33:24 PM
Wow, a bunch of fucking nobodies that no one had ever heard about whining about Obama, that's surely far more serious than the Democrats in Congress hysterically launching into hearings against GHWB in 91. Yep, you win that argument there. :rolleyes:
And even more serious than the Republicans in Congress impeaching Clinton over a blowjob. :rolleyes:
there was this itsy bitsy thing about perjury, but I don't expect you to understand this concept.
Yes, yes, lying under oath. The difference being, of course, the GHWB probably committed actual crimes (and GWB sure as shit did), while Clinton's only crime was getting head from a fat chick.
Lets face facts here, when it comes to going into histrionic fits, you right wing pieces of shit have it perfected to a science. I almost wish Obama would set up death camps for you fucks.
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 06:07:56 PM
Do you really want to compare the sanity level of "my team" to your team? At least the GOP doesn't have anyone as nutty as Wright, Obama, or Van Jones.
Nigga, puhleeze...you didn't even know Van Jones existed until this month.
And yeah, I got two words for "yours are nuttier than ours": Sarah. Palin.
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 06:14:36 PM
Quote from: Fireblade on September 08, 2009, 05:55:13 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 05:33:24 PM
Wow, a bunch of fucking nobodies that no one had ever heard about whining about Obama, that's surely far more serious than the Democrats in Congress hysterically launching into hearings against GHWB in 91. Yep, you win that argument there. :rolleyes:
And even more serious than the Republicans in Congress impeaching Clinton over a blowjob. :rolleyes:
there was this itsy bitsy thing about perjury, but I don't expect you to understand this concept.
I thought perjury was in with you guys after the Libby thing. Or is just if you are convicted of it?
Quote from: Fireblade on September 08, 2009, 06:19:16 PM
Yes, yes, lying under oath.
It's far worse than lying to the American people directly. You know, like, "read my lips: no new taxes", and "arms were not traded for hostages". That sort of thing.
Quote from: Fireblade on September 08, 2009, 06:19:16 PM
I almost wish Obama would set up death camps for you fucks.
WTF? Why "almost"? :huh:
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 08, 2009, 06:21:29 PM
Quote from: Fireblade on September 08, 2009, 06:19:16 PM
Yes, yes, lying under oath.
It's far worse than lying to the American people directly. You know, like, "read my lips: no new taxes", and "arms were not traded for hostages". That sort of thing.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.infoimagination.org%2Fpolitics%2Ffeatures%2Fniger%2Fpowell_un_2.jpg&hash=fe7060eae945cdfa12879717088b85c201477414)
Like that?
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 06:07:56 PM
Do you really want to compare the sanity level of "my team" to your team? At least the GOP doesn't have anyone as nutty as Wright, Obama, or Van Jones.
You mean black right instead of nutty right?
Anyone the ones on your team tend shoot people when unhappy.
Quote from: Martinus on September 08, 2009, 06:21:35 PM
Quote from: Fireblade on September 08, 2009, 06:19:16 PM
I almost wish Obama would set up death camps for you fucks.
WTF? Why "almost"? :huh:
Don't worry, Faggy McCock. You'd be going into the EZ Bake Oven too.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 06:22:44 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 06:07:56 PM
Do you really want to compare the sanity level of "my team" to your team? At least the GOP doesn't have anyone as nutty as Wright, Obama, or Van Jones.
You mean black right instead of nutty right?
Anyone the ones on your team tend shoot people when unhappy.
lol.
I wonder who the first Republican to crack and call Obama a "nigger" will be?
Quote from: Fireblade on September 08, 2009, 06:24:44 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 06:22:44 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 06:07:56 PM
Do you really want to compare the sanity level of "my team" to your team? At least the GOP doesn't have anyone as nutty as Wright, Obama, or Van Jones.
You mean black right instead of nutty right?
Anyone the ones on your team tend shoot people when unhappy.
lol.
I wonder who the first Republican to crack and call Obama a "nigger" will be?
that chick Bachmann in congress.
I bet 6 quatloos.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 06:22:44 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 06:07:56 PM
Do you really want to compare the sanity level of "my team" to your team? At least the GOP doesn't have anyone as nutty as Wright, Obama, or Van Jones.
You mean black right instead of nutty right?
Anyone the ones on your team tend shoot people when unhappy.
Really? They do? And yet it tends to be the crazy leftists like van Jones that call for violence.
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 06:31:19 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 06:22:44 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 06:07:56 PM
Do you really want to compare the sanity level of "my team" to your team? At least the GOP doesn't have anyone as nutty as Wright, Obama, or Van Jones.
You mean black right instead of nutty right?
Anyone the ones on your team tend shoot people when unhappy.
Really? They do? And yet it tends to be the crazy leftists like van Jones that call for violence.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newprophecy.net%2FTimothy_McVeigh.jpg&hash=7f2f75efb41840baa05231e529a88f6ef311c23d)
It tends to be the crazy right wingers who commit violent acts.
Yeah and the guy who shot that abortion clinic doctor earlier this year. I guess Hans has already forgotten.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 06:48:39 PM
Yeah and the guy who shot that abortion clinic doctor earlier this year. I guess Hans has already forgotten.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Robert_Rudolph
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Holocaust_Memorial_Museum_shooting
Watch Hans bring up some example from the 70s. :rolleyes:
No, he'll just say they were actually leftists. Apparently it's the new flavor of koolaid in the GOP. Anyone who isn't exactly like them is a leftist. Eventually some damning documents about Reagan are going to come out and suddenly he'll be a leftist as well.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 06:48:39 PM
Yeah and the guy who shot that abortion clinic doctor earlier this year. I guess Hans has already forgotten.
He was a registered Democrat. You're not helping your case there.
Quote from: Fireblade on September 08, 2009, 06:33:11 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 06:31:19 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 06:22:44 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 06:07:56 PM
Do you really want to compare the sanity level of "my team" to your team? At least the GOP doesn't have anyone as nutty as Wright, Obama, or Van Jones.
You mean black right instead of nutty right?
Anyone the ones on your team tend shoot people when unhappy.
Really? They do? And yet it tends to be the crazy leftists like van Jones that call for violence.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newprophecy.net%2FTimothy_McVeigh.jpg&hash=7f2f75efb41840baa05231e529a88f6ef311c23d)
It tends to be the crazy right wingers who commit violent acts.
A Saddam Hussein supporting atheist. Yep, you sure are on to something.
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 07:13:12 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 06:48:39 PM
Yeah and the guy who shot that abortion clinic doctor earlier this year. I guess Hans has already forgotten.
He was a registered Democrat. You're not helping your case there.
Oh, was he now? You find that on NewsMax or Freerepublic?
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 07:14:05 PM
A Saddam Hussein supporting atheist. Yep, you sure are on to something.
You can't be an atheist and conservative?
Quote from: Fireblade on September 08, 2009, 06:53:08 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 06:48:39 PM
Yeah and the guy who shot that abortion clinic doctor earlier this year. I guess Hans has already forgotten.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Robert_Rudolph
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Holocaust_Memorial_Museum_shooting
Watch Hans bring up some example from the 70s. :rolleyes:
I must have missed it when conservatives embraced the Olympic games bomber. And the Holocaust attacker was a leftist conspiracy nut and registered Democrat.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 06:22:44 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 06:07:56 PM
Do you really want to compare the sanity level of "my team" to your team? At least the GOP doesn't have anyone as nutty as Wright, Obama, or Van Jones.
You mean black right instead of nutty right?
Anyone the ones on your team tend shoot people when unhappy.
Uh oh, a democrat race-baiting when he can't argue a case on the merits, I never saw that one coming. How long before I get attacked as a fascist and as unamerican?
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 07:17:35 PM
How long before I get attacked as a fascist and as unamerican?
Too late! :lol:
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 07:15:57 PM
Quote from: Fireblade on September 08, 2009, 06:53:08 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 06:48:39 PM
Yeah and the guy who shot that abortion clinic doctor earlier this year. I guess Hans has already forgotten.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Robert_Rudolph
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Holocaust_Memorial_Museum_shooting
Watch Hans bring up some example from the 70s. :rolleyes:
I must have missed it when conservatives embraced the Olympic games bomber. And the Holocaust attacker was a leftist conspiracy nut and registered Democrat.
Lol. I never thought of the Birther conspiracy was a leftist thing. I do remember reading he was a poster over at freerepublic. Didn't you used to post there? Maybe you knew him.
The Olympics bomber was getting help from the local towns folks. Good God fearing republicans. So somebody embraced him.
This is kind of funny watching Hans, FB and Raz bring out anecdotes of somebody on the other side saying or doing something wrong and talking like it discredits everything they stand for.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 08, 2009, 07:23:26 PM
This is kind of funny watching Hans, FB and Raz bring out anecdotes of somebody on the other side saying or doing something wrong and talking like it discredits everything they stand for.
Previous bad acts don't discredit an ideology. Tell that to the Commies.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 08, 2009, 07:23:26 PM
This is kind of funny watching Hans, FB and Raz bring out anecdotes of somebody on the other side saying or doing something wrong and talking like it discredits everything they stand for.
Yeah this is weird.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 08, 2009, 07:23:26 PM
This is kind of funny watching Hans, FB and Raz bring out anecdotes of somebody on the other side saying or doing something wrong and talking like it discredits everything they stand for.
The difference being that I mention the President's closest friends while they bring up some nutjobs who are neither conservatives nor embraced or defended by anyone on the right. :lol:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 08, 2009, 07:19:12 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 07:17:35 PM
How long before I get attacked as a fascist and as unamerican?
Too late! :lol:
I didn't know what you were talking about until I checked the other thread. :lol:
Quote from: Sheilbh on September 08, 2009, 07:41:25 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 08, 2009, 07:23:26 PM
This is kind of funny watching Hans, FB and Raz bring out anecdotes of somebody on the other side saying or doing something wrong and talking like it discredits everything they stand for.
Yeah this is weird.
Hans brings out the best in me.
Quote from: Malthus on September 08, 2009, 11:53:57 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 08, 2009, 11:50:09 AM
Quote from: Malthus on September 08, 2009, 11:46:28 AM
Come come. There is an element of hysteria reported in the media, and that's what I'm commenting on - not the reaction of "Americans" as a whole, whom I assume mostly could not give a shit.
There's always going to be a few people getting worked up over very little; surely, that's not merely an American phenomenon.
I'm not claiming that Americans are solely and uniquely suceptible. :huh:
I'm just pointing out that Obama, for whatever reason, appears to be arousing a degree of worked-upness (if that's a term) that seems unusual.
Certainly non-American figures have done that in the past and will in the future. I wasn't making a commentary on the nature of Americans, insulting Americans, or whatever.
I don't think he is unusual at all. If anything, the opposition is less worked up over him than they were over Clinton, and less than the Dems were over Bush - by a wide margin.
In fact, the Presidents that there isn't this level of nastiness towards by the opposition are the unusual ones, I think.
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 07:56:40 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on September 08, 2009, 07:19:12 PM
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 07:17:35 PM
How long before I get attacked as a fascist and as unamerican?
Too late! :lol:
I didn't know what you were talking about until I checked the other thread. :lol:
Dude, you pretty much get attacked as a fascist in every thread, even the ones that aren't remotely political, like the NFL preseaon thread or the "what are you eating now" thread.
Quote from: Berkut on September 08, 2009, 08:39:51 PM
Quote from: Malthus on September 08, 2009, 11:53:57 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 08, 2009, 11:50:09 AM
Quote from: Malthus on September 08, 2009, 11:46:28 AM
Come come. There is an element of hysteria reported in the media, and that's what I'm commenting on - not the reaction of "Americans" as a whole, whom I assume mostly could not give a shit.
There's always going to be a few people getting worked up over very little; surely, that's not merely an American phenomenon.
I'm not claiming that Americans are solely and uniquely suceptible. :huh:
I'm just pointing out that Obama, for whatever reason, appears to be arousing a degree of worked-upness (if that's a term) that seems unusual.
Certainly non-American figures have done that in the past and will in the future. I wasn't making a commentary on the nature of Americans, insulting Americans, or whatever.
I don't think he is unusual at all. If anything, the opposition is less worked up over him than they were over Clinton, and less than the Dems were over Bush - by a wide margin.
In fact, the Presidents that there isn't this level of nastiness towards by the opposition are the unusual ones, I think.
BS.
Quote from: Berkut on September 08, 2009, 08:39:51 PM
I don't think he is unusual at all. If anything, the opposition is less worked up over him than they were over Clinton, and less than the Dems were over Bush - by a wide margin.
In fact, the Presidents that there isn't this level of nastiness towards by the opposition are the unusual ones, I think.
It's still early.
Quote from: Hansmeister on September 08, 2009, 07:15:57 PM
Quote from: Fireblade on September 08, 2009, 06:53:08 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 08, 2009, 06:48:39 PM
Yeah and the guy who shot that abortion clinic doctor earlier this year. I guess Hans has already forgotten.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Robert_Rudolph
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Holocaust_Memorial_Museum_shooting
Watch Hans bring up some example from the 70s. :rolleyes:
I must have missed it when conservatives embraced the Olympic games bomber. And the Holocaust attacker was a leftist conspiracy nut and registered Democrat.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fweb.mac.com%2Farnold_zwicky%2FXkcdWikipedian.png&hash=6cd870836e119831c4de099590b837625f9555fd)
Actually, just put that after all of Hansies posts.
Quote from: Berkut on September 08, 2009, 08:39:51 PM
I don't think he is unusual at all. If anything, the opposition is less worked up over him than they were over Clinton, and less than the Dems were over Bush - by a wide margin.
It is still early, just wait.
Quote from: Valmy on September 09, 2009, 08:34:10 AM
Quote from: Berkut on September 08, 2009, 08:39:51 PM
I don't think he is unusual at all. If anything, the opposition is less worked up over him than they were over Clinton, and less than the Dems were over Bush - by a wide margin.
It is still early, just wait.
Oh, I don't doubt that it can get a lot worse, and likely will do so. The Republicans are incredible when they get going, and I think they are only just getting going.
The Dems can be impressive as well, but it takes a bit more to get them truly enraged.