This crap couldn't be more Orwellian if it tried.



http://www.floppingaces.net/2009/09/02/school-children-asked-to-pledge-to-serve-obama/

Alice, are you simply trolling, or are you really so gullible that you believe this propaganda?

which is the propoganga, the Obama speech, or the website about the Obama speech?

Well, I found it originally on Huffpo, but couldn't get a live link to the commerical, thus the aces site. Thought it was kind of interesting at the end when they all pledge to serve the President. I thought the President was our public servant? Reminds me of the Twilight Zone episode, "To Serve Man"

If the excrement filled disgraced president Bush had done this, we wouldn't have heard a peep out of you.

You might want to read this:
http://mediamatters.org/blog/200909030020

But instead of urging kids to stay in school, Regan used it as an excuse to indoctrinate the kids on his economically flawed view of tax cuts.

I have to agree with Alicex4 that the video is on the creepy side. But it wasn't put out by the administration; it was put out by Demi Moore and Ashton Kutcher back in January.

As for Obama addressing students, the administration has, appropriately in my opinion, removed the portion about having students write letters to themselves about "helping the president." Some staffer may have put it in and the political folks should have caught it. Since some in the public saw it and objected, and the objection is legitimate, now it's out. Democracy in action. (And at least these folks can admit when they've made a mistake.)

I have to agree with Alicex4 that the video is on the creepy side.

More silly than creepy -- quite a few of those pledgers cannot possibly fulfill their pledges. I might as well pledge to do what Kodos would have done.

I admit I couldn't bear to watch the whole thing.



WWKD?

Yeah, I can see how you would compare 4 schools of kids brought to the executive office building with a live video stream to every public school in the country. Just goes to show the govt. is getting savvier in it's indoctrination techniques.

Regan's indoctrination was broadcast live, and rebroadcast multiple times to schools.

Your revisionist history is charming. Next thing we know, you'll be telling us really idiotic stuff like Obama isn't a US citizen or that commercial aircraft are spraying chemicals at high altitude.

Sorry Marc, I only read the first couple of lines.

Next thing you know you'll be biting off my finger!

??? uh 20 years makes it possible

No finger biting, I promise (provided you don't punch me in the face like that 65 yr old anti-healthcare-reform asshole did. He's lucky he only had his fingertip bitten off.)!

But I understand why "Conservatives" and Rethuglicans would be upset by the president of the United States delivering the message to kids: work hard, stay in school, succeed. They're anti-education - and the young, educated demographic voted overwhelmingly for Obama.

They're not upset that the POTUS is going to speak to their kids. They're upset because the POTUS is a black democrat.

At the beginning of August, one prominent media figure openly advocated for Obama to address America's children. In the August 9 Parade Magazine, he wrote a column titled "What President Obama Can Teach America's Kids." The piece is a thoughtful and sentimental take on how Obama's experiences Obama could translate into lessons that children could benefit from, like "forgiveness" and "persistence." One of his suggestions reads:


The author? None other than right-wingnut gasbag Bill O'Riley.

You do understand that this shows us that the right is even crazier than we thought, right? For all we hated about Bush, no one freaked out like this over a pro-education speech. Sure, we joked about the irony, but there certainly wasn't the rabid frothing we're seeing from mouth-breathers like Malkin and Beck. These people, seriously, believe that somehow Obama plans to do a Vulcan mindwipe of their children and turn them into robot socialists and communists. In the entire history of the US, that last sentence would be a joke and made in jest. But now we have the right taken over by the truly insane wingnuts. Somehow, because of a poorly worded sentence in a draft statement done back in February and a video done by unaffiliated actors, the Beck-Limbaugh-Hannity-Malkin led right is getting otherwise intelligent people believing them. If you buy this ignorant nonsense and post things about how Orwellian it all is, you're just as ignorant. You folks on the right, are you actually proud of yourselves for being this insane and ignorant? That your hatred of the president being black and a democrat squarely puts you in the position of being anti-education?

I think (but am not sure) that it's a bit much to think all Repubs are stupid or delirious. Rather I see this as all-out partisan warfare on the part of the GOP to attack this Dem President and Congress as viciously as they can, on each and every issue, using whatever tools are at their disposal. If they can whip the public into a paranoid frenzy, they'll do it. Hey, it worked for the War on Terrorism! So I expect it to continue for the next 3 years unabated. If the religious fundie side of the GOP does it better than the more centrist-small gov't faction (if there remains such a thing these days), then that's the direction we'll see the GOP take as we head into future election cycles. And that is indeed a troubling vision.

I generally agree with Mike. Without some data, it's hard to tell how many Republicans really buy into the Beck-Hannity-Limbaugh-Malkin rhetoric--though the education speech stuff has been ridiculous, especially considering that it was all optional on the part of the schools to begin with.

Still, it's amazing how much misinformation is out there. Substantial portions of the public believe that proposals for health care reform include government making end-of-life decisions and subsidies for illegal aliens to buy insurance. As with the run-up to the Iraq war, I think the press has been terrible as they continue to report what each side says instead of investigating what the facts might be. I know some conservatives will mock administration supporters for attacking the press, but it's for a different reason: it seems to me that conservatives attack the press for having a "liberal bias," while I'm complaining that the press just fails to deliver basic information whenever there's a dispute. (It seems to me people having a better handle on the facts would help the health care reform cause, so that doesn't say much for the liberal media bias theory.)

There does seem to be a conservative faction--I don't know how sizable--who just want Obama to fail at any cost. That's not to deny that there was probably a similar liberal faction when Bush was in office. But it's interesting to me that this Obama-hatred (if that's not to strong a word) started even before he took office, before he had a presidential record to criticize. In that way, it's not unlike when Clinton won; his detractors were ripping into him on Day 1, long before the Lewinsky affair or other scandals.

I was willing to give W the benefit of the doubt at first because he really did seem like a moderate during the 2000 campaign. But the true-but-misleading statements started pretty darn fast, the secrecy was ramped up almost immediately, and post-9/11 assertions of unchecked executive power posed what I thought was a threat to the foundations of our system of government. So if people have reasons to criticize Obama, that's fine with me.

But the education speech stuff really is bordering on the truly absurd and represent some other kind of opposition. As I wrote before, sometimes I think that if Obama brokered world peace, some people would attack him for putting defense contractors out of business.

The Times has it:

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/09/08/us/politics/AP-US-Obama-School-Speech-Text.html

The nerve of the man to spew forth such grotesque and distorted values to our nation's youth.

I think (but am not sure) that it's a bit much to think all Repubs are stupid or delirious. Rather I see this as all-out partisan warfare on the part of the GOP to attack this Dem President and Congress as viciously as they can, on each and every issue, using whatever tools are at their disposal. If they can whip the public into a paranoid frenzy, they'll do it. Hey, it worked for the War on Terrorism! So I expect it to continue for the next 3 years unabated.

You do understand that this shows us that the right is even crazier than we thought, right?

Still, it's amazing how much misinformation is out there.

"You folks on the right, are you actually proud of yourselves for being this insane and ignorant? That your hatred of the president being black and a democrat squarely puts you in the position of being anti-education?"

So I guess this is how misinformation gets a life. You keep repeating the charge, despite my many denials, that the reason I disagree with (you say hate) the President is because he is black. That has nothing to do with it. It's his ideas I disagree with, not his skin color. How much clearer can I be on that point so you do not misrepresent it anymore?

Your posts suggest we should consider you ignorant or worse.

Only the deeply predjudiced admit to hating Obama partly if not solely because he is black. Of course I realize that theere are plenty of reasons for the right not to agree whith Obama. Still
I would not find it surprising if the basis of your feelings were because he is black, despite what you write.

That's some seriously lame-o personal invective, mworking. Why don't you go smoke a bowl?

Still I would not find it surprising if the basis of your feelings were because he is black, despite what you write.

So much for the benefit of the doubt.

While the majority of your posts are obviously left slanted, I usually find them thought provoking, interesting and often very well written.

And, I while I normally don't become involved in political bantering here, this post has certainly erased any pre-conceived respect I had for you and your musings in the past.

Since reading this absolutely horrid drivel, I have gained more respect and admiration for Alice and what she's stood for on this forum than anyone on the left or right could ever write here.

You just couldn't help yourself and keep your opinion based solely on the issue(s) she raised, so you sunk to a new low.

You sir are no better than the post you wrote.

Yet you keep posting things that originated from racist, vile assholes like Beck, Malkin, Hannity, Drudge, Kristol, and Limbo. And you've never repudiated them. Either you agree with them or you're unquestioningly ignorant. Either way it's a bullshit response on your part.

This one's for you Marc, Paglia's nailed it IMO.
Too late for Obama to turn it around?

http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2009/09/09/healthcare/

Nailed it? She didn't say anything.

"But the truly transformative political energy is coming from talk radio and the Web -- both of which Democrat-sponsored proposals have threatened to stifle, in defiance of freedom of speech guarantees in the Bill of Rights."

????

"I rarely watch TV anymore except for cooking shows, history and science documentaries, old movies and football. Hence I was blissfully free from the retching overkill that followed the deaths of Michael Jackson and Ted Kennedy"

Kennedy's death as I saw it was not overkill. Besides Whether or not you liked him he was a very influential and important legislator.

On the other hand, she must have been dead if she didn't experience the Jackson overkill, which hasn't even completely ended yet. What did he do or try to do for our country? Sure he was of great importance in the entertainment areas, but he didn't deserve he moment of silence he got in congrees.



" -- I never saw a single minute of any of it. It was on talk radio, which I have resumed monitoring around the clock because of the healthcare fiasco, that I heard the passionate voices of callers coming directly from the town hall meetings. Hence I was alerted to the depth and intensity of national sentiment long before others who were simply watching staged, manipulated TV shows."


???? she's full of herself and happy to help you with the same.

Again she really said nothing but what she would like you to belive followed by the usual general attack.

Normally I respect Paglia's views, but she lost me at that "threatened to stifle" comment

Maybe, or not. What does this have to do with your original post that bought in to the false Beck-Malkin created controversy about Obama's speech supporting staying in school and working hard?

Here is somone much closer to nailing it:

http://www.npr.org/templates/rundowns/rundown.php?prgId=13

NO, no, no, Ped. When it comes right down to it the only reason to be so against Obama telling school kids to stay in school and work hard there is because of prejudice! Think about it, plenty of other presidents have spoken to kids without such criticism, and no other president, none, has been asked for their speach in advance!

Ok prejudice comes with ignorance, and you really have to be ignorant to believe Fox news propaganda.

Besides I don't smoke.

I'm not so sure. No other recent Democratic president has addressed school kids (though I suppose there has been only one other recent Democratic president).

While there may be some portion of the radical right that has a racist motive in opposing Obama, my recollection is that there was also severe Clinton opposition starting from Day 1 that had little to do with his policies.

If Obama were white, might there be somewhat fewer people ranting at him? Perhaps. But I think there would still be considerable numbers doing what they're doing now. There are groups on both sides of the political spectrum who are so ensconced in ideology, so sure they are right, that those who disagree with them cannot be "real" Americans. A corollary would be that if a majority disagree with their positions, they must have been misled or brainwashed, hence the fear of further "indoctrination" by the leader.

I'm willing to accept the prejudice explanation for some portion of the dissenters, but I'm not willing to speculate how widespread it may be absent evidence to do so. And given the vitriol launched at Clinton by some groups that for reasons that lacked any real connection to his policies, I think there's evidence that the reaction is simply a radical expression among true believers of the incredibulity that one's side lost the election.

Really? There's nothing worse than an internet troll who doesn't even smoke dope. It's like your main excuse for trollishness has been taken away, along with any of the redeeming, entertaining and comical qualities that potheads are known for.

Pedestrian to Mworking: Why don't you go smoke a bowl?

Mworking's reply: Besides I don't smoke.

Pedestrian's reply: Really? There's nothing worse than an internet troll who doesn't even smoke dope. It's like your main excuse for trollishness has been taken away, along with any of the redeeming, entertaining and comical qualities that potheads are known for.

....................................................................

What is to be made of this colloquy? Upon seeing the first of the above quotes, I concluded that these guys knew one another and Pedestrian knew that Mworking smoked a bowl every now and then. But upon seeing the second above quote, I conclude that Pedestrian deems cannabic intoxication an antidote to vexation about an issue. The last above quote seems to confirm my impression.

Now I don't promote either man's point of view of the issue presented before the smoke-a-bowl post. And yes, I've smoked a bowl or two in my past. If the smoke-a-bowl post was a jocular comment, that is one thing; if it were serious advice, it is downright ludicrous.

oeno, I think you're reading too much into this. Overanalyzing a bit. Maybe you should... drink some wine

or smoke something.

Maybe you should... drink some wine

or smoke something.

Try such a reply at a debating competition.

You're assuming I think it's worthwhile to debate. Horse was dead as soon as the accusations of racism were trotted out. No pun intended.

??? I disagree. Pretty good traffic for a thread you are calling dead.

Is there any legitimate reason to worry about what the president of the United States will say to school children? No! Havent all our presidents held their office in some regard? Of course they have! There is nothing that anyone of them did or would have said that should have caused the clamor Obama has had to put up with! Everyone knows this and none has previously given it a second thought except a comment after the fact that a few lines were self serving, or bridged the separation of church and state which I think was my criticism of Bush.

Is there any legitimate reason to be so concerned about what any president of the United States will say to our school children via a video screen in the safety of their school or home? I think not. The only reason I can come up with is fear, but fear of the president of the United States talking to school children?

Give me a legitimate reason why would any American be as afraid the recent hysteria would indicate.

You should look up the phrase "flogging a dead horse." Apparently you don't understand what it means... it doesn't mean that there isn't any traffic

Oh what the heck. I'll go there: You are just another Left-Wing McHitler! No tolerance for anyone else's viewpoint. Built any gas chambers lately?

Actually there was never a direct accusation of racism by me. I don't know Alice, and I left space to be wrong for that reason. Read my post. Getting that close was in poor taste, but so is perpetuating completely false propganda.

Built any gas chambers lately?

It seems as if a gas chamber of text flatulence was built in this very thread.

oeno - Zing!

mworking - Hmpf. Was there propaganda? You betcha. False propaganda? I missed that part.