Advertisement

Archive for Friday, September 4, 2009

Obama speech to students draws conservative ire

September 4, 2009

Advertisement

— President Barack Obama’s back-to-school address next week was supposed to be a feel-good story for an administration battered over its health care agenda. Now Republican critics are calling it an effort to foist a political agenda on children, creating yet another confrontation with the White House.

Obama plans to speak directly to students Tuesday about the need to work hard and stay in school. His address will be shown live on the White House Web site and on C-SPAN at 11 a.m. CST, a time when classrooms across the country will be able to tune in.

Schools don’t have to show it. But districts across the country have been inundated with phone calls from parents and are struggling to address the controversy that broke out after Education Secretary Arne Duncan sent a letter to principals urging schools to watch.

Districts in states including Texas, Illinois, Minnesota, Missouri, Virginia, Wisconsin have decided not to show the speech to students. Others are still thinking it over or are letting parents have their kids opt out.

Some conservatives, driven by radio pundits and bloggers, are urging schools and parents to boycott the address. They say Obama is using the opportunity to promote a political agenda and is overstepping the boundaries of federal involvement in schools.

“As far as I am concerned, this is not civics education — it gives the appearance of creating a cult of personality,” said Oklahoma state Sen. Steve Russell. “This is something you’d expect to see in North Korea or in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.”

Arizona state schools superintendent Tom Horne, a Republican, said lesson plans for teachers created by Obama’s Education Department “call for a worshipful rather than critical approach.”

The White House plans to release the speech online Monday so parents can read it. He will deliver the speech at Wakefield High School in Arlington, Va.

“I think it’s really unfortunate that politics has been brought into this,” White House deputy policy director Heather Higginbottom said in an interview with The Associated Press.

“It’s simply a plea to students to really take their learning seriously. Find out what they’re good at. Set goals. And take the school year seriously.”

She noted that President George H.W. Bush made a similar address to schools in 1991. Like Obama, Bush drew criticism, with Democrats accusing the Republican president of making the event into a campaign commercial.

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,” Higginbottom said.

In the Dallas suburb of Plano, Texas, the 54,000-student school district is not showing the 15- to 20-minute address but will make the video available later.

PTA council president Cara Mendelsohn said Obama is “cutting out the parent” by speaking to kids during school hours.

“Why can’t a parent be watching this with their kid in the evening?” Mendelsohn said. “Because that’s what makes a powerful statement, when a parent is sitting there saying, ‘This is what I dream for you. This is what I want you to achieve.’”

Comments

logicsound09 4 years, 7 months ago

Oklahoma Rep. Steve Russell compared this speech of Obama's to "something you’d expect to see in North Korea or in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.”

That is far more vitriolic and fear-mongering than criticizing the president for using taxpayer money (which, for the record, was also stupid).

0

Calliope877 4 years, 7 months ago

The Dems accusing Bush in 1991 of spending taxpayer money is a weak comparison to what the Republicans are accusing Obama of. Yeah, the Democratic complaints from '91 were dumb, but at least they weren't completely absurd; however, accusing the president of brain-washing school children for a socialist agenda?!!! Gimme a f***in' break!!! This foolishness is proof that IQs have dropped considerably in the past 20 years.

0

beatrice 4 years, 7 months ago

Sati, imagine being a kid and the President of the United States is speaking just to you! This talk could be amazingly powerful to inspire students all across this nation to do better in school. Do you really believe that Obama will somehow create little liberal Democrats with a single talk? Please.

This is a great idea, and Obama shouldn't be criticized if he is the first to think of it. I believe all of our presidents from this point on should do similarly at some point while in office. What a great civics lesson for kids. To argue against this is simply wrong.

0

Pilgrim2 4 years, 7 months ago

P.S. If he sticks to "stay in school, work hard, learn something," I have no problem with the speech itself. It is the "study guide" materials that have people upset. Yes, the wording has been changed, but for those who got such glee from ridiculing George Bush's malapropisms for eight years, is it too much to ask for the Dept of Ed to be able to put together a sentence that says what it means? (Or was the original version the accurate version?)

0

Pilgrim2 4 years, 7 months ago

deathpenaltyliberal (Anonymous) says…

Why is it OK for Presidents Ford, Reagan, and George H.W. Bush to address school kids nationwide, but not Pres. Obama?


Ah, but it wasn't OK.

From the Washington Post, published Friday, October 4, 1991: Democrats assailed the Bush Administration today for spending $26,750 in taxpayer money to hire a production company that oversaw President Bush's telecast from an eighth-grade classroom here to schoolchildren around the country on Tuesday. The money came from the Education Department's salary and expense budget. As a result, Representative William D. Ford, the Michigan Democrat who heads the House Education and Labor Committee, demanded that Education Secretary Lamar Alexander appear before the committee to defend his "spending scarce education dollars to produce a media event." And the House majority leader, Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri, said, "The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the President."

=============================

House Democrats criticized President Bush yesterday for using Education Department funds to produce and broadcast a speech that he made Tuesday at a Northwest Washington junior high school.

The Democratic critics accused Bush of turning government money for education to his own political use, namely, an ongoing effort to inoculate himself against their charges of inattention to domestic issues. The speech at Alice Deal Junior High School, broadcast live on radio and television, urged students to study hard, avoid drugs and turn in troublemakers.

"The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students," House Majority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) said. "And the president should be doing more about education than saying, 'Lights, camera, action.' "

0

Agnostick 4 years, 7 months ago

exhawktown...

You might find it helpful to actually check links, and read through those anonymous emails you get piped over from your fellow freepers, before you just copy/paste 'em over here.

Just a suggestion...

0

farfle 4 years, 7 months ago

While he's making his speech he should include a part about why he spent a million dollars to keep his own student records and passport records secret. Maybe explain why he refuses to release his long form birth certificate.

0

Katara 4 years, 7 months ago

Satirical (Anonymous) says…

When GHWB gave his talk in 1991 it was just a speech, nothing more. And ironically (not really when you think about it) the Dems “accused him of using taxpayer money — $27,000 to produce the broadcast — for 'paid political advertising.'”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/04/us/… ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I don't know where you went to school but my school district had lesson plans for Bush's speech. They also had ones for Reagan's too.

GHWB also had Q&As with school children via teleconference.

He was asked what it was like being the President. His answer?

"The President. You mean President? Well, it's pretty long hours. I get up every morning at 5 a.m. This might be of real interest to you. Our dogs are like alarm clocks. We have two dogs, you know, Millie and Ranger. They're like alarm clocks. They wake at 5 a.m. every morning. And so I have a long day. So, I go home and go to the Oval Office. Then in the evening I work. I have an office in the White House, the big White House part, the residence. And sometimes it's very difficult and complicated, and you worry about people and how they're doing: drugs or the cities or whatever else it is. But I don't know that it's harder than your teacher's job or the astronaut's job. I don't think it's a question of difficulty. Again, it's a question of, ``Are you up for it? Do you think you can do it? Do you want to make a contribution?'' Something like that." http://bushlibrary.tamu.edu/research/public_papers.php?id=3394&year=1991&month=9

Pretty similar in what President Obama is encouraging kids to do.

Oh and Gephardt does not = the "Dems".

0

farfle 4 years, 7 months ago

Looking over the educational materials, they seem innocuous. But I'm also glad that people are on the lookout against children being indoctrinated in such a manner.

0

Satirical 4 years, 7 months ago

Does the help clarify Katara?

0

Satirical 4 years, 7 months ago

When GHWB gave his talk in 1991 it was just a speech, nothing more. And ironically (not really when you think about it) the Dems "accused him of using taxpayer money — $27,000 to produce the broadcast — for 'paid political advertising.'"

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/04/us/04school.html

0

Satirical 4 years, 7 months ago

The Department of Education has posted instructional materials to help teachers prepare for Obama’s speech and what Obama wants students to remember. Here is an excerpt from those materials to be used before Obama’s speech for students in grades 7-12 [emphasis supplied]:

"Is President Obama inspiring you to do anything?" http://www.ed.gov/teachers/how/lessons/7-12.pdf

Dear Leader inspires me everyday!!

0

georgiahawk 4 years, 7 months ago

As someone that considers himself to be a pretty "down to earth" sort of guy, this is one of the stupidest things I have ever heard. Anybody that finds objection with this is just plain silly (is this a Monty Python skit?). They are either silly or being manipulated!!!

0

Katara 4 years, 7 months ago

Satirical (Anonymous) says… Katara….

“See the several previous posts that have pointed out other presidents that have done so.”

Re-read what I stated - “in this manner” ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Clarify what you mean by "in this manner".

0

Satirical 4 years, 7 months ago

Katara....

"See the several previous posts that have pointed out other presidents that have done so."

Re-read what I stated - "in this manner"

0

Katara 4 years, 7 months ago

Satirical (Anonymous) says… Isn't Obama the first POTUS to ever make an address to school children in this manner?

Maybe there is are reasons why no POTUS has ever done it.

Time to put on your thinking caps liberals. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ No, President Obama is not the first POTUS to ever make an address to school children in this manner. See the several previous posts that have pointed out other presidents that have done so.

0

Calliope877 4 years, 7 months ago

I remember when GHWB gave his speech to students in 1991. I was in junior high at the time. I also vaguely remember Reagan's speech. My parents are both Democrats, and I don't recall them being scared that a Republican president would influence my impressionable young mind into conforming with an ideaology they didn't agree with.

0

farfle 4 years, 7 months ago

Arizona state schools superintendent Tom Horne, a Republican, said lesson plans for teachers created by Obama’s Education Department “call for a worshipful rather than critical approach.”

0

Satirical 4 years, 7 months ago

Oh no!

I lost my copy of Dear Leader Obama's Little Red Book of quotations and motivations statements!!

Does anyone have a copy I can borrow?

(Just in case anyone is missing my historical reference see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotatio...)

0

Satirical 4 years, 7 months ago

Isn't Obama the first POTUS to ever make an address to school children in this manner?

Maybe there is are reasons why no POTUS has ever done it.

Time to put on your thinking caps liberals.

0

Satirical 4 years, 7 months ago

Everyone be quiet!

It's time for Dear Leader Obama's daily motivational statement to keep us happy and productive members of society. I don't know what I would do without Dear Leader's inspiration.

I always repeat Dear Leader's main point of the day three times, just like he says I should. Boy am I glad we have such a generous and thoughtful leader who takes care of all my needs if I simply hang his picture in my house and religiously listen to his daily motivational statements.

I know he cares about me because he tells me what I should be doing. Unlike that old political party which shall-not-be-named, which required everyone to inspire themselves, and didn't give the people everything they want. I sure am glad we now only have a one party system, because there is really only once choice if you care about people. Thank you Dear Leader!!

0

commuter 4 years, 7 months ago

I do not have a problem with the President addressing students as long as he does talk politics.

Personally, I feel any person who has children under the age of 18 and runs for the oval office is not putting their children's best interest at heart. They are too self centered. The media and the public can be cruel to the kids and a parent should put the child's welfare and well being above their own ambition.

0

tomatogrower 4 years, 7 months ago

John Legg would get my vote. Good for him for standing up to this stupidity. Tune out Rush people. He is a hate monger.

0

sfjayhawk 4 years, 7 months ago

The republican leadership has sunk to an all time low, for shame. They keep alienating all independents and anyone with half a brain. What happened to the old republican party, the one that actually had ideas and solutions?

Lets all hope that a new, sane and intelligent republican party will rise from the ashes of the current one.

0

feeble 4 years, 7 months ago

Given the 200+ year history of bitter partisan politics and winner take all mentality in this country, we really shouldn't expect any kind of bipartisanship from our elected officials.. The US has been enraptured with partisan politics since 1792 and the days of the Federalist and Democratic-Republicans, and the continues today with our current parties.

Senator William Learned Marcy accurately captured the idea in his famous quote, "To the victor go the spoils." Both sides realize this, and the Republicans are simply working to regain power by vilifying and blocking the president at every opportunity, just as the Democrats did during the Regan/Bush era and Bush II.

There are no points for second place. In the words of Heidi Klum, "You're either in, or you're out."

Obama's failing is that he believes bipartisanship is possible. He needs to realize what every president before him has realized, bipartisanship is a fiction invented by the losing party. If Americans were really gung-ho on bipartisanship, we would switch to a parliamentary system that rewards collection building and abandon our majority-rule system.

Of course this will never happen, as both sides would rather be the winner some of the time than be forced to compromise most of the time.

0

Alia Ahmed 4 years, 7 months ago

As this article points out, George H.W. Bush addressed school children in 1991 so it is not unprecedented. Some Democrats did complain about it. Is there any documentation that schools encouraged parents to keep their children at home if they disagreed with Bush 41? Here's what Newt Gingrich said about it at the time.

Republican Newt Gingrich defended Bush's speech, though. "Why is it political for the president of the United States to discuss education?" Gingrich said at the time. "It was done at a nonpolitical site and was beamed to a nonpolitical audience. . . . They wanted to reach the maximum audience with the maximum effect to improve education."

What will Newt's position be this time around? To be fair, there has been at least one Republican speak out in support for Obama's speech to the school children. He serves on a committee pertaining to k-12 education. Perhaps cooler, rational heads do prevail some of the time. Here is his statement about this below from the Orlando Sentinel.

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news_education_edblog/

President Barack Obama's planned address to school kids should be viewed as an "educational opportunity" that could promote civics and teach children "a respect for the office of the President and whoever occupies that honorable position." That comes from Rep. John Legg, a Republican lawmaker from Port Richey. He is chairman of the House's pre-k-12 committee. Legg's statement released today read in part:

"While I respect a parents’ individual rights, I would offer that this event should be used as an educational opportunity and learning tool to cultivate discussion among parents and their children. Civic and public discussion should be a priority for all schools. It is important that we instill in our children a respect for the office of the President and whoever occupies that honorable position.

Rather than excluding children from this event, I would strongly encourage parents and students to participate and be a part of the dialogue; using this opportunity to explain their family values to their children and encourage them to discuss what is occurring and why. Parents may choose to attend school with their children, experience this event together and to participate in their child’s education."

0

Alia Ahmed 4 years, 7 months ago

brian1981 (Anonymous) says…

LOL.

I guess the liberals forgot the last eight years of mindless, irrational, vitriolic hate they piled on the previous administration. The left really sucks when they have to play defense.

Brian, I agree that mindless, irrational hate spewed is leading us down a very uncivil path in our country. I started to say that mindless, irrational hate is counter-productive but it seems to be very productive for the insurance companies who don't want healthcare reform to limit their profits as well as others who hope to see this president fail.

I don't think I ever spewd mindless, irrational hate about GWB. I didn't call him Hitler, say he was a socialist, say he didn't win either election fairly. However, I did peacefully and respectfully protest the invasion of Iraq prior to that occurring and felt very angry and betrayed that that mission was carried out by providing inaccurate information about weapons of mass destruction that has led to over 4000 American deaths and 100,000's of Iraqi deaths. That is NOT mindless or irrational hate, it is quite rational.

I don't have any problem with people disagreeing with President Obama's policies, but comparing him to Hitler, calling him a socialist and fascist, denying his citizenship and now saying he has some socialist agenda for speaking to our school children is ridiculous. I went to grade school in the early 60's and remember reading about our president in our weekly readers, most likely reading letters from our presidents in those weekly readers and hearing our president speak on TV. We were encouraged to honor and respect the president even if our parents disagreed with his politics. President Obama is using today's technology to communicate with school children just as Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson used their day's technology to communicate with school children.

Since I've been around, presidents have communicated with school children in one form or another to be good citizens and work hard in school. It's just people's perceptions that are different. My children were in school when Reagan and GHWB were in office. As a Democrat, I would not have considered keeping my children home from school because one of them was speaking to them via television, a web cast, a weekly reader. Their education was important to me and I had confidence that my children were not going to be swayed by a president who's political affiliation was different than mine. I still wanted my children to respect the president and value our form of government which means that, at times, there are going to be presidents, governors, senators and legislators in power that I disagreed with. It's interesting that we want to promote this form of government to others but act like spoiled brats when our side doesn't win.

0

deathpenaltyliberal 4 years, 7 months ago

brian1981 (Anonymous) says… "Unless liberals are racist for not liking Clarence Thomas, JC Watts, and Alan Keyes."

I don't like Clarence Thomas because he was an unqualified affirmative action appointment.

I don't like Alan Keyes because he is a one issue candidate.

I neither like nor dislike JC Watts.

So there.

0

exhawktown 4 years, 7 months ago

Yep, conservatives are all always very much against education. Let's have some more blanket statements--it's so fun and um, critically thought out.

No. If it's a simple talk to kids about education, that's fine. Give it some context, though. Items 2 - 4 of my earlier post are about information control. Given that context, it's just a little weird.

Am I worried about the president brainwashing America's youth through an address to schoolkids? Not yet.

Have a great weekend all!

0

spiff 4 years, 7 months ago

I hate when world leaders demonstrate their belief in the value of education. It draws my ire.

0

sinverguenza 4 years, 7 months ago

Wow brian - I didn't know that speaking out against an illegal war that has contributed to 4,000+ deaths (U.S. only) and the bankrupting of the nation's wealth and moral standing in the world, or against extraordinary rendition, against warrantless wiretapping and other civil rights violations, against a poorly-planned and failed before started education plan (NCLB), against the failures of emergency response (Katrina) and all those other factual, concrete policies and practices with which I disagreed was just "mindless, irrational, vitriolic hate."

Guess I thought I knew how to find the facts and debate them in a rational, logical manner rather than just attacking one man (the President) or one group of people (those in the opposing party). Silly me. I'm just a hater.

0

tomatogrower 4 years, 7 months ago

Wow, now we know. Radical conservatives are against education. Since they like to gut education funding every chance they get, I guess I already knew that. Plus, I'm sure they don't want their kids goin to any liberal college. I mean what's this librahal arts stuff anyway?

0

brian1981 4 years, 7 months ago

Oh, assuming that just because you disagree with a black guy you're a racist is also stupid.

Unless liberals are racist for not liking Clarence Thomas, JC Watts, and Alan Keyes.

Tell us again about open-mindedness, diversity of opinion, and not prejudging others, my liberal friends.

0

logicsound09 4 years, 7 months ago

And for the record...

If there had been a story about multiple school districts boycotting a harmless address to students about working hard in school by G.W. Bush, I would be just as outraged.

These kind of political shenanigans are a waste of everyone's time and patience.

0

brian1981 4 years, 7 months ago

LOL.

I guess the liberals forgot the last eight years of mindless, irrational, vitriolic hate they piled on the previous administration. The left really sucks when they have to play defense.

Oh, and one more thing. No matter what party you are from, comparing Americans to Nazis just because you don't like them is childish and a horrible disgrace to the soldiers and civilians who died at their hands. It's designed to p*** people off, not to solve problems.

I doubt you'll win many people to your side painting the opposition with a giant Third Reich paintbrush. And yeah, it was dumb when the Oklahoma Republican did it too.

0

logicsound09 4 years, 7 months ago

I was going to comment, but then I noticed that a short passage from the article sums up my feelings on the matter:

[“I think it’s really unfortunate that politics has been brought into this,” White House deputy policy director Heather Higginbottom said in an interview with The Associated Press.

“It’s simply a plea to students to really take their learning seriously. Find out what they’re good at. Set goals. And take the school year seriously.”]

This issue is a mircrocosm of the absurd level of criticism being aimed at Obama. He's been far from perfect, and deserves his fair share of criticism. I don't consider whining about a harmless address encouraging students to work hard at school to be part of that "fair share"

I can't shake the feeling that at least part of the reason for the criticism overdrive that's been going on for about 8 months now is due to Obama's skin color. He was being called a failure a mere month and a half into his presidency. So much of the criticism against him is nebulous, nonspecific or completely baseless claims.

"He's dismantling the country"

"I want the American I know back!"

"He's promoting a socialist agenda"

"He's not the valid President"

"He wants death panels"

I've been dismissing most of this garbage as just poor acceptance, but the longer this goes on, the more I begin to worry for our country. I worry that there aren't enough well-educated and critically-thinking people to see through the all-out political assault that has been coming from some on the right for 8 months now....

...wait a second. I just realized why there is this opposition to Obama telling children to work hard in school. An educated populace doesn't get hoodwinked by the PR war being waged by a good majority of the Republican party right now.

I guess we should have seen this coming, given the vitriol that started rearing it's ugly head near the end of McCain's ill-fated campaign...

0

sinverguenza 4 years, 7 months ago

Regarding...

4) encouraged people to report “misinformation” about health care reform to a white house website

You see confronting misinformation as a bad thing? I shudder to think of the piss-poor education you and so many others apparently received. Please Obama, if you can encourage just one exhawktown of this nation to stay in school and learn critical thinking, you're good in my book.

6) attended a church whose pastor bellowed “God Damn America!” repeatedly

Again, you see this as a bad thing? Guess you're not really into that whole freedom of religion bit after all.

0

exhawktown 4 years, 7 months ago

Oh, wrong link. Here is the link about Obama's interest in limiting conservative talk radio. Please excuse. http://www.patriotroom.com/article/obama-s-background-fairness-doctrine

0

exhawktown 4 years, 7 months ago

BTW, I plan to stick around, if nothing else, to annoy the likes of you, liberal dude. ;-)

0

exhawktown 4 years, 7 months ago

Liberal Dude: I was wrong about the Fairness Doctrine, I should have been absolutely precise. He is still interested in the issue, but is not going about it via the "front door."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/sep/03/arne-duncan/barack-obama-not-first-president-address-school-ch/

Do tell, what are the other "lies"?

0

LiberalDude 4 years, 7 months ago

exhawktown- Your list of 6 is full of lies. An example of this is that Obama has never expressed support for the fairness doctrine- http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/02/18/white-house-opposes-fairness-doctrine/ - it's even a conservative fox news link!

Obama is President of the United States. He was democratically elected. Anyone who doesn't think it is OK for the President of United States to give a speech to American kids about doing well in school is not patriotic and should leave America.

0

kugrad 4 years, 7 months ago

Stupidist manufactured outrage incident yet. We've sunk to a new low.

0

jonas_opines 4 years, 7 months ago

"the need to work hard and stay in school"

Yaaarghhh!!! Teh Sociiialistz agendaz!!!

Give me a farking break, will you.

0

BuenaVista 4 years, 7 months ago

All that we are missing is Obama's "Socialismo" after school TV show.

0

jonas_opines 4 years, 7 months ago

"It was done to death by the far-left between 2000 and 2008. Don't you remember?"

I remember significant problems from 1992-2000, snap, and I was pretty young. Why don'y you remember those?

0

exhawktown 4 years, 7 months ago

This probably would NOT be a big deal to most, if this president hadn't already done the following:

1) openly talked about his desire to redistribute wealth in America 2) proposed legislation to exert control/takeover of the internet during times of "emergency" that he himself would determine 3) expressed interest in the Fairness Doctrine, in order to try to limit broadcasting of certain talk radio hosts 4) encouraged people to report "misinformation" about health care reform to a white house website 5) extended executive branch power by creating numerous czar positions, that fall outside of congressional oversight, to oversee various . . . things 6) attended a church whose pastor bellowed "God Damn America!" repeatedly

So, to some, maybe, just maybe, this is not a simple issue of our president addressing our children.

0

Flap Doodle 4 years, 7 months ago

"Whatever happened to respect for the Office?" It was done to death by the far-left between 2000 and 2008. Don't you remember?

0

deathpenaltyliberal 4 years, 7 months ago

Why is it OK for Presidents Ford, Reagan, and George H.W. Bush to address school kids nationwide, but not Pres. Obama?

Who appointed school administrators as censors?

Whatever happened to respect for the Office?

0

Flap Doodle 4 years, 7 months ago

I'm running out of Godwin flags. Slow down, you people.

0

beatrice 4 years, 7 months ago

As long as he isn't reading them "The Pet Goat," I'm okay with it.

0

Fred Whitehead Jr. 4 years, 7 months ago

Tex, I could not agree with you more. This controversy over the president's speech is further proof of the deterioration of the Republican party into a horde of vicious and angry limbaugh-bots. People who are making this sort of reaction are simply knee-jerk idiologues that will roll any way the "party" directs them. Sort of like the National Socialists in Germany in the late 9030's.

This is truly frightening. Much of this opposition to President Obama is simply racism, pure and simple. I know people who will openly bash the president or more directly, "that black bas'''rd in the White House." Anyone who thinks that racism in America is non-existant is blowing sunshine up your skirt.

I do not have an answer for this ugly resurgence, it is disgusting and dangerous.

0

texburgh 4 years, 7 months ago

"'As far as I am concerned, this is not civics education — it gives the appearance of creating a cult of personality,” said Oklahoma state Sen. Steve Russell. “This is something you’d expect to see in North Korea or in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.'”

As opposed to say, the new fascism which has taken root right here in the United States thanks to the relentless efforts of Goebbels admirers like Limbaugh, Hannity, Glenn Beck, and O'Reilly. Our nation is slipping slowly into a fascist state that would be recognizable to the founders of Nazi Germany. It is a message built on fear and xenophobia. Not Jews and communists this time but Muslims and liberals.

This is a sad America where anti-Obama preachers openly pray for his death and their followers show up at speeches carrying automatic weapons like modern day Brownshirts.

This is a sad America that would not be recognizable to Dwight Eisenhower or Harry Truman. Not even to Richard Nixon and John Kennedy.

Hatred, fear, loathing, and racism are the hallmarks of political discourse. I fear our best days are far behind us now.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.