Back in the 60's:
"And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."
-President John F. Kennedy
"What is the President trying to tell me?"
"What is the President asking me to do?"
"Why is it important that we listen to the President and other elected officials, like the mayor, senators, members of congress, or the governor? Why is what they say important?"
"Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the President."
-The Obama Administration
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/10582301/Pr … ber-8-2009
This type of government sponsored event should be hard for any American to swallow. I respect President Obama, he is my elected president. That doesn't mean that I have to agree with everything his administration says and does. No presidency should be viewed this way. At least not here in the U.S.A.
I obviously believe that children should learn about the Presidency and the President, I'm not saying otherwise. I am all for creating respect for those in leadership positions. You can respect someone without agreeing with them 100% of the time. I remember fond times of learning about President Clinton and Hillary Clinton. I remember loving Socks the Cat. However, we weren't politically indoctrinated in the classroom. We learned about democracy, the political process, the executive branch of the government AND the judicial and legislative branches. We weren't told to listen to the President and we weren't told to 'help him'.
Here we are in 2009 and things are so very different. I don't even have children yet and here I am reading this memo feeling incredibly uncomfortable and emotionally affected. This is so far from JFK's inspirational speech. So, very far.
I love my country and it saddens me that our children are starting to be led down the path of loving a leader, rather than loving a country. That is not what was intended for America. We should respect our President but the focus should ALWAYS be on the country. I don't care who is in leadership. I would've been saying the same thing for any other administration, past and looking forward to the future.
"Ask what you can do for your country." - JFK
"What is the President asking me to do?" - The Obama administration
Have kids encourage President Obama to return our bailout money to bail us out, instead of big business.
Oh, good heavens, GG. I just read the initial post. The link took you to a document for K-6 that looks a lot like a lesson plan WRITTEN for that level. There is no comparing JFK's speech (um, entirely different audience?) to this language.
But go ahead and read "fascism and communism" into it all you would want. Common sense would dictate otherwise.
Not impressed with the doublespeak here with aims toward fear.
The answer is nothing. This President CAN'T be helped.
This preoccupation with "Obama as leader" is bizarre. Had the Republicans pulled a stunt like this, with people saying "I want to offer my service to Dubya," the cry of "fascism" would have been relentless.
This is the same kind of nonsense that the Nazis were advancing in the 1930s. They came to the place where they embraced the idea that all political power must be vested in one person (the Furherprinzip). I think the Dems have recognized that the American people aren't going to buy the socialism. So they have to arm one man with the political power to shove the socialist agenda down the throat of the American people.
That's why they're starting to ask, "Obama, what can I do for you"? "How can I serve you"? This is what happens when people stop worshiping God; they start worshiping man. The Maoist cult is case in point.
the president is a servant of the people elected by the people.
not a king.
thank you for posting this.
You're welcome. I'm sure many will find it easy to ignore what I have to say because of my former discussions on here about what political party I belong to. Wake up guys: , it has NOTHING to do with this. I'm an American.
I grew up saying the Pledge of Allegiance, it says nothing about a president or leader, rather my Nation.
Here it is for those who need a reminder:
"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all"
If you ask me, it is just a further development of JFK's statement.
Oh, that's a nice. Is this what he's reduced to? How pathetic is it to try to use kids to manipulate their parents? I know that the Democratic Party counts on college kids to be a major part of their voting block because those kids don't know any better, but schoolkids? Really? I honestly don't know whether to laugh hysterically or cry in despair.
Even as a former political operative I cannot admire this potentially 'smart' move by this administration (or should I say political campaign?)
I hope there is TONS of press about this prior to the event (Sept 8th.) so parents have a clue what is going on. If I had kids, I'd probably want to be in the classroom at that time. I wouldn't keep them home, but I'd still want to be able to participate in the discussion. Not really a fan of one-sided discussions in the classroom. Not terribly educational, if you ask me.
This is the sort of thing that turns otherwise intelligent decent people away from politics. That's why it's usually left in the hands of scumbags who loot from the rich to give to the poor and want to destroy our economy in the first place. Still, the teachers union has been so far behind Obama, it's been disgusting. still it does add to the general "political weariness" that I think most Americans are finally succumbing to. I get the impression that there are a lot of people out there tired of the stupid political gains, the polls, the propaganda and actions like this are exactly what we need to wake people up and see things for what they really are.
Now before you think I'm just arguing against the Democrats, understand that the Republicans in their own way are just as guilty of using similar tactics. Look at the so-called "intelligence failure" that pushed us into the Iraq war. What really happened, is that politicians saw what they wanted to see, ever going to use that propaganda, to convince people to support them. That, in essence, it is politics. Which is why I am so opposed to a political class and politics in general.
All of these shenanigans just proved the point that the power of government should be negative. It's not what the government says it can do, but what the government is limited by law that he can do. Until we start forcing our politicians to adopt a strict constructionist view of the Constitution, these sorts of abuses will not only continue, but they will get worse. Politics is not the art of the possible anymore, if it ever was in the first place. Since the days of the Federalists and anti-Federalists, it's been about taking from one group, and getting to another.
The same thing happened in Germany in the days of Hitler, at the birth and subsequent growth of the Natzis.
The children were indocrtrinated, forced to serve and instructed to follow that leader as well. It was told to them as well that it was to be a great service to their leader.
I guess, once you have seen a system that works, you follow suit with it.
Has this ever happened before..? I can't remember anything like this, ever, and I was a teacher for some time in the 60's and 70's...what the hell is going on with our educational system that we allow privileged comment, without challenge, to occur in our classrooms..?
No, this is unprecedented. I was just talking to a liberal friend of mine (3rd grade teacher) and I told him that I'd have no problem with this is they were also learning about our political system, constitution, etc. These kids will be learning all about one man and not a country this Sept. 8th.
The teacher education programs in universities are all liberal, way liberal and cannot tolerate ANY leaning to the right. I was a late bloomer and went through a teacher education program at a university in the South and was appalled at the crap they taught. I learned very quickly to learn what I needed to and get out of there. Because I was an older student the agenda did not impact me one iota, but many of the students were young and impressionable. The higher I went with my education in the education field, the worse it got. Many teachers feel that parents are useless and think they know more than the parent.
Sure, it's happening right now in North Korea!
Good Question...M101...Someone please let us know the answer...!
NO, I can honestly say I have never seen this happen before. I have never seen so many people in our country with so little respect for our President, AND hell bent on teaching their children to have so little respect for the President of the United States that they can't even sit through a short speech on how they should stay in school and work hard. This is definitely a first for me!
His associations are dubious at best. As with any material brought into our schools it sould be screened, you know, like you're looking for a prayer or something.
LOLOLOLOL!!!!! I guess you were in a coma for the last 8 years...
Every teacher has the opportunity for privileged comment without challenge. Most probably don't abuse the privilege, but we all know some that have.
An Inconvenient Truth has been screened thousands of times in science classes all over the US.
These speeches are very very different from the one that appeared to be coming from the White House next week. They talk about country and succeeding in school. They did not come with talking points that focused entirely on one man - the president, rather they focused on education and patriotism (patriotism for me isn't about honoring a man, rather a country and it's founding principles).
There is no issue with President Obama giving a speech about doing well in school. Based upon the information released earlier this week by the US Dept of Ed., it was hard to tell WHAT the speech was about. This is what caused the major concern.
The issue here is about the questions the administration released for discussion in the classroom beforehand. (This issue is not about President Obama giving an address, rather the CONTENT of what we expected, based upon information released beforehand by the administration) Is that crazy or silly? No, parents and America have a right to have opinions of what our elected leadership is doing. We always have had that right and god forbid we ever lose it or are heavily questioned for raising valid questions.
Now, the White House is essentially calling us 'silly' for those who raised many VALID questions about the speech. (Guess it's better than being called a right-wing domestic terrorist) "I think we've reached a little bit of the silly season when the president of the United States can't tell kids in school to study hard and stay in school,"- Gibbs
Sorry, Mr. Gibbs, it was pretty hard to understand what the speech was about when we were reading questions like the ones below that were a bit alarming (the White House has even recognized since then that these questions were poorly worded)
"What is the President trying to tell me?"
"What is the President asking me to do?"
"Why is it important that we listen to the President and other elected officials, like the mayor, senators, members of congress, or the governor? Why is what they say important?"
"Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the President."
Those questions have nothing to do with succeeding in to school. Those questions have nothing to do with our country, but with one man. Apparently those questions have been retracted by the White House at this point, so I'm looking forward to the fact that President Obama's speech will be only about succeeding in school. (I'm all for that....who isn't?!?).
This isn't about being 'anti-Obama' as the administration would like people to believe, it is about analyzing information yourself, making a decision and standing up for what you believe. I highly doubt there are any parents 'threatening' to keep their kids home because President Obama is involved in the speech, rather their valid concerns were not about HIM, rather the MESSAGE that was released beforehand.
"The leader is good
the leader is great
We surrender our will
as of this date."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zt6JWzBq … r_embedded
This is the scariest video I have ever seen in my life. Gives me the same goosebumps of some other youth 'training' videos that I once watched in a history class....
"Because of Obama, I am inspired to ________."
Now, I really feel invisible
Doncha anyone of you peeps realize that one comes because of another? That as soon as you put a country above an individual, the country leader is necessarily becoming the one to support and praise, as he personifies the country?
I can certainly appreciate how that could happen/is happening, Misha. Americans need to focus and pledge their allegience to the principles that were originally laid out for us in the U.S. Constitution. Those principles are what my allegiance is based off of. I could never pledge to any man. Not Bush, McCain, Obama, et al. I fear that this administration is placing way too much emphasis on the executive branch; last time I checked we still have a judicial and legislative branch, too. Once everything shifts to the executive power, I believe we're screwed.
The President, being himself an individual, is not a personification of the whole country. When I voted, I voted for who I thought would do a better job as executive and military commander in chief, not for someone who would do the combined jobs of mascot and monarch.
Wow, this kinda says it all. Misha, you're right. I'm originally from Europe and became a naturalized citizen several years ago hence my passion and interest in politics. Keep us all updated girly_girl09.
I sent the following email to my son's school superintendent:
"My son, ____ is in 6th grade at ___ Middle School. I would like to know if he will be subjected to viewing the President's speech and participating in the accompanyingsuggested curriculum this coming Tuesday? If his particular class or ___ ISD is taking part, will there be an alternative venue available for the period the class is watching and participating in the curriculum? Please let me know by return email or by phone as soon as possible. Thank you"
Barack Hussein Obama is this country's President. I respect the office he holds and want my son to do the same. But I do not respect or believe in this President's individual ideals or goals.
I do not allow my son to watch movies I do not approve of or listen to music I do not approve of. I certainly would not let him sit in a church for over twenty years if we did not agree and support the message delivered from the pulpit. Why then, should I allow him to be indoctrinated or influenced in any way by this President? I refuse to.
Fortunately, for the time being-this is still a free country. If an alternative venue is not available, my son will simply miss school on Tuesday.
What are you afraid of? Haven't you taught him anything? Do you let him watch the news? Critical thinking skillz are crucial to success these days. We aren't an agrarian society any more.
A 10 minute speech won't indoctrinate any 6th grader that I've ever met.
Okay, at the middle school where I teach, the superintendent of schools emailed each of the schools and told us when obama was on the tv, BUT, we have a choice to watch or not. That is good news. Hopefully this is the case in many of the school districts throughout the country.
I was sure our district would not air this...I am here to say I am wrong. Each school in the district is being given the choice on whether they show it or not. The kids can opt out.
After thinking about this long and hard, I'm going to let my 13 year old make his own choice on this. In the long run, when he is 18, he'll have to make his choices in the voting booth and I hope he is well educated on his choices.
I guess we could push our politics down our children's throats, but that would go against my grain, as religion was pushed down my throat and I swore I'd never do that to my kids. I want them to think for themselves and make their own decisions.
My husband is a DIE HARD Republican, and he doesn't hide it! I think he was a little unnerved when our daughter voted in the Presidential election this year - she is an Obama supporter. She did what I taught her to do, study the facts, study the person, get as much information as possible before you vote.
Just spoke with my son's school administration. They are taping the president's speech to show at a later date due to all the controversy. They will send home a notice and opt out form prior to showing the speech and having any discussion revolving around the suggested curriculum.
RSMallory & Nicomp - I think it is great that school districts are doing this, however I am assuming the speech has changed because of all the attention now surrounding it. The speech, in it's entirety, will be released on Monday for parent's to read.
With the White House retracting the US Dept. of Ed memo and admitting the poorly worded questions, I really do hope and believe that the speech will be more appropriate. I have no issue with focusing on doing well in school, but of course there is a major issue if it turns into a speech about a man, rather a country or education (like the memo had originally depicted!)
It's truly nice to see the White House respond to our concerns surrounding this issue.
What's truly nice to see is the people holding these arrogant and presumptuous politicians accountable and forcing them to keep their crap in check. This is something the "hey, give him a chance! we should all just support the president and be united" folks just do not get.
We got the note today also. Our school district looked at the preliminary notes that were released by the government and decided that the subject matter is 'non-partisan'. They plan to show the speech to all classrooms and they will accept parents' notes for excusing their kids from watching it.
The irony of complaining about the president sharing his socialist agenda with public school children seems to be escaping a disturbing number of people.
Does nobody see the irony in all of this whining and complaining about how we shouldn't have to pay for others' healthcare, if people are poor its because they're lazy, Obama is trying to turn us socialist, blah blah blah... and then saying that we should be asking what we can do for our country? Do you people think before posting? Obama is more like JFK than any president since. If some people spent half the energy actually DOING something for their country and its people that they do writing exaggerated, unintelligent posts, maybe there wouldn't be so many problems to complain about.
Its the conservative MO on this forum have to evade my actual arguments by posting something they think is witty and clever. Good work guys, your still the leading posters!
You had nothing new to say. Your ad-hominem attacks were trite. Make a point and I'll address it.
First you guys argue that Obama is socialist, now you argue that he is fascist. My point is make up your mind -- exactly what I said the first time. When Obama makes a move to help our fellow Americans get healthcare, everybody goes crazy because they just don't care about anybody else and shouldn't have to pay for it. Now you are saying we should be like JFK and say 'ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country?' Same point as last time, hope its not too 'trite' or 'ad-hominem' though.
Oh, is that why the GOP came up with an alternative Bill?
The GOP eats children and hates minorities. They favor Big Business and they want poor people to die in the streets. They live to pollute rivers, shoot helpless ducks, and drain wetlands. They love global warming because they can sell more air conditioners. They want a Cadillac in every driveway, a smokestack on every block, and tax loopholes for anyone making over $250K.
"Republicans say big government doesn't work, then they get elected and prove it." - P.J. O'Rourke.
The alternative was created to oppose Obama, and only came about after he incited real reform. If he had not, this new, weak alternative bill would not exist. Either choose to admit we need reform or delude yourselves about the "greatness" of our current system.
I refuse to respond to the plague of this forum, tksensei.
What a load of crap. How about all the nice talk of 'bipartisanship' turned out to be a lie when the dems decided that with the majorities they hold in the House and Senate they could ram through anything they damn well pleased.
If this speech is truely all about the value of obtaining an education then I have no problem with my child viewing the braodcast. I think the big deal is that the president is making this speech rather than the presidents wife and the fact that it is nationwide rather than geared toward one school. I believe Laura Bush was the spokesperson for education while Bush was in office. I know she made speeches at many school during is eight years in office.
I will not tolerate a speech that is made on any subject other than education. If it is broadcast at my childs school then that is all the subject should be about. If Obama wants to speak on other subjects then the speech should not be broadcast in our schools. It is bad enough some teachers impose their views on our children while in school.
You see, egiv, these 'conservatives' think that communism and fascism are one and the same. As in, "Hitler was a communist." They don't like liberals, but 'democrats' are OK, particularly dems of the recent past that they wax nostalgic about. "Shil" evidently is a new word that one of the Fox news commentators has introduced, as I'm seeing it more and more from each one of them in different instances.
Can't say I find them particularly witty, though. Just kind of lacking in any argument or in saying something relevant whatsoever, just like their heroes, Rush and Glenn Beck. Attacking anyone with a liberal or moderate view point personally seems to be their actual MO, kind of a "Who ya fer?," and "Go Fight Win," sort of thing.
I should've checked the forums before posting my newest hub ... I don't think I can place a link to my own hub here, but if anyone is interested in reading what my Cuban friend wrote about living through the Castro "take-over" and how she compares Obama's ways to that of Castro - particularly when it comes to this ridiculous speech to our kids - read my latest hub: Barack Obama Propaganda In Our Public Schools.
I'm frustrated by all the bullshit propaganda against Obama speaking to our children next week to encourage them to do better in school.
I started writing a post, but ended up turning it into a hub: "Obama Encouraging Children to Succeed: When did "intelligence" become a bad word?"
You know, you have the funniest avatar. Who is that guy? A pet mouse?
I'll read your hub.
Never. The question is pointless and misleading.
I was so glad to hear on the news this morning that he resigned! Whether you're a liberal, conservative, or independent, I think we can all agree that we don't need this man with his controversial history detracting from the many things are country needs to be addressing right now.
The president of the united states suggesting schoolkids stay in school, work hard and not drop out.
Wow. That's the most subversive thing I've ever heard.
I'm shocked there aren't even MORE people up in arms and protesting. What is this country coming to?
Anyone is for that, at least I am! The issue was with the original questions released in the US Dept of Ed memo. They didn't come across as patriotic, whatsoever and had no mention of working hard in school. Since then, the WH has said that the wording was a little off and it will be changed. That's the area of concern and I believe it was correct to raise an eyebrow at the original memo.
I think a speech on doing well in school is great and would be well appreciated by many children. As a kid, I really enjoyed it when legislators came to visit my school and took the time to speak with me.
Good points MM. It is great Obama even wants to give a speech to kids to encourage them to think about why it is good to stay in school. If he did not care he could just say never mind, and I have enough to focus on with health care reform and foreign policy. I know we are not supposed to say this, but I also think Obama being half African-American is very inspirational to many kids who felt they could not accomplish much before. I have taught kids from low income African-American backgrounds, and many of them came from homes where they did not have much encouragement to succeed in school. Seeing a president that reminds them of things they went through can be quite inspirational, but of course someone will sully this point along the way.
For instance the one video everyone was acting scared about of the kids marching and saying Obama inspired them, well it was actually a positive thing. They were saying Obama inspired them to stay in school and get an education. How horrible! Of course anything good about Obama's intentions will be turned into something negative, as the Republican PR is quite viral that way!
Why not say he's half African American? I find it inspirational that our country finally moved beyond race when electing a president (will we find the balls to move beyond the male/female question next?). If there was ever a message to children of all races that they can achieve great things if they work hard, our president personifies that message.
I suspect the racism we thought had subsided enough to elect him is oozing back into the forefront. Why else would the radio/tv right-wingers tell people to carry weapons into rallies where the president is speaking. Do a search for "carry guns" on the web and you'll find story after story of these right-wing nut jobs carrying weapons to wherever Obama will be speaking. If he was an old white man, no one would be carrying a weapon and he wouldn't require as fortified a front of secret service agents as Obama has.
Enough! of the conservative propaganda machine that apparently wants only to dumb down the American population for the sake of maintaining control over their weak minds. Why must they try everything in their power to destroy our country just to prove a point?
Here is a man who actually wants to help the people in this country instead of helping his buddies with multi-million dollar contracts like Bush did. Here is a man who wants children to be proud of themselves for pushing themselves to do better. When our children do better in school, they become productive and contributing citizens. That isn't communistic. If anything, it's the ultimate American story...you can come from nothing, pull yourself up by the boot straps, achieve great things by using the education you worked hard for and give back to your community, your country, the world by being a successful individual instead of being an uneducated/ignorant drag on your country.
As long as you're in a union, he's happy to help you.
And that's wrong because...?
Unions are meant to help the people who don't have the power of business owner/boss/CEO etc.
Try reading the book, "The Jungle," by Upton Sinclair and you might gain a better understanding of why unions became necessary to protect the worker.
When did it become a terrible thing to help your neighbor?
LOL. What great advice! No chance he has ever read that obscure novel before...
"And that's wrong because...?" Not everyyone is in a union! We all know why Unions were created and are very thankful of the things those unions brought about, But Unions hold the business hostage to their demands and really are not interested in the companies bottom line (see GM)even though those Union members got the contracts they wanted they still seem to be unemployed like a lot of others! There is nothing wrong with helping a neighbor! But to make the perceived rich pay more than anyone else is wrong, it will always be wrong!
Well I have known people that work for grocery stores, and there was a big reason for the protests in 2003 at Vons, Ralphs, and many others. The company was pressuring the union to take away medical coverage because the bottom line was the businesses wanted to make more money. In the end the unions and the stores struck a deal, and the newer employees have fewer medical benefits. Even some people working full time have insurance, but they cannot afford the co-pays to see the doctor. That is the every day reality of people that stand in the way of the "bottom line" of business. Interesting how many businesses think about their bottom line and send their jobs to Mexico. Yes we should always worry about the ways business can make more money, and undervalue overseas workers.
Thats called collective bargaining and the Union caved so whats the problem? If you want business to stay in America don't place unreasonable restrictions on how they conduct that business, it would also be in the best interest of the Government to not impose high taxes on the same companies, they may actually hire more people like they did in the 80's!
No, the businesses are interested in making money, period. I hate to say it, but when was affordable health care ever an unreasonable restriction? I am glad I am healthy because I cannot afford any type of health care really, but for those who have medical problems, you basically have just said it is unreasonable they should be able to afford suitable treatment. Ridiculous!
"No, the businesses are interested in making money, period." Imagine that! The Union is for the company paying for everything and whether they can afford it is no concern of theirs! I pay 300 a month for health coverage for my entire family and have not had a single issue of the insurance company demanding a higher premium despite some costly procedures I have had to have. It is affordable if you look hard enough, you are 30 and if you don't have some form of insurance then it is probably because you choose that, Right?
"when was affordable health care ever an unreasonable restriction?" It has never been an unreasonable restriction! Thats because it has not been mandated that a company supply health coverage! It is a benefit not a right!
There is no way I would pay three hundred a month for insurance, even for my family. Only in the US do people think it is reasonable to do that. The cheaper plans have five thousand dollar deductibles, and such a waste of money. I really do not need to go to the doctor really, but my concern for health care reform is for people that have health problems and could not afford insurance. Most people that have it cannot even afford to pay the co-pays and deductibles. However, you seem to think these are reasonable prices because you can afford it. That is the difference.
Then don't pay for it! But if you think I need to supply your health coverage you're wrong. Three hundred a month with no co-pay is just fine with me, I had a pacemaker/Defibrillator installed in my chest and it cost nothing but the premium, lets be clear that 1 operation and 1 night in the hospital cost over 100,000! 300 is a mere pittance! Of course I had the fajitas for dinner in the hospital, they were much better than than the ones I had in California!
I will be fine if health care reform does not pass as I am healthy and young. However, working families that cannot afford three hundred per month are just out of luck I guess. I just tend to have more empathy for others I guess.
30 ain't young sweetheart, I was 41 and in great shape when I had a heart attack, heart disease is that silent killer they say it is! If you don't want to have health insurance then don't but if something happens then you will be one of the reasons it is so unaffordable!
30 is young. And much can be done with diet, etc. Preventative care. And actually, there is a simple exam you can have when you go to the eye doctor that will show the very very beginning stages of heart disease years in advance now. Just FYI. Young women are also protected from heart disease somewhat.
Also...careful. These are just the types you people actually want on your side. (Not that you actually know your 'argument' is in danger or anything.)
I am lucky because I have a pretty good family medical history too. My concern for health care reform is for families I see struggling day to day with their payments. I actually have a lot of empathy for families who cannot afford basic care, and myself in the past with my back I was in that category. Overall I am lucky, exercise, and I am healthy, so I am thankful.
Despite the medical advice of Dr lita 30 is not young, my family does not have a history of Heart disease I am the only one it seems to have hit. Exercise is good and you can have tests done to detect the early onset of heart disease but it still remains the #1 killer of men and women, and the insurance you could buy would be much cheaper than 300 a month! Do you know what these tests run out of pocket?
Tex...thought you were going to help me stop smoking....
Eventually I will get insurance, but right now I am not going to pay for it. As I said my concerns for health care are for those who have more pressing medical issues. I had insurance for hundred dollars a month, and it did not cover very much.
Thats your choice, mine covers a whole bunch of good stuff!
Glad you have good insurance. Not everyone could afford three hundred dollars a month. After rent is deducted from most people's incomes along with living expenses, they would not have that much money left over.
I could go to the VA and get my medical care but I want to walk out of the hospital with all of my appendages, yes health care is expensive, but government health care is more expensive in more ways than just money! They could really reform the system if they wanted to but they don't really want to reform it, its not about insurance reform its about money!
If we were to have single payer model similar to what they have in the UK and Canada it would not be so. Yes it is about money, and keeping the insurance companies functioning with high profit margins. Oh well, I wish people were not so protective of their interests.
It's more like the lack of money. SS is out of money, medicare, medicade..they are panicking because we have no more $$$$
Time to get a secound job. Theres no shame in it I had to for quite awhile. The only thing you miss is alittle sleep.
I have two jobs mr. tell people what to do. I even make money writing online, and I would make more if I stayed out of this forum. Are you saying all the families who cannot afford health care should wave their magic wands and get a second job? With high unemployment in many areas some people have a hard time finding even one.
I'm still trying to figure out making money on Hub.
Move to Texas we have plenty of work for talented people. I continually run ads for workers I haven't stopped for the last two years. I understand the healthcare issue and I'm really in your corner but not for this plan. I want realistic reform that gets a handle on hospital costs, insurance costs and the attorneys that hover looking for a meal. I believe in a free market but the lack of regulations is a losing proposition. All you have to do is see how corrupt people get without regulations, look at our banking system mess.
Don't paint me with that broad brush as a hater, as I've said before, I come here to play.
That is probably out of the question, most people would rather buy a new car than spend for health insurance that is until they need it. I have done with out a lot of things in life in order to afford things I really needed, I am no longer in that position and I can not help if others are. And I hope it is not the aim of those who do without to try and make me feel guilty because I have and they don't, cuz it ain't gonna work!
$300 a month?! Where the hell do you live that it's that cheap?!
The test I'm talking about costs $60 as part of an eye exam.
And people age very differently. 30 is young. And women are protected much more from heart disease...a known fact.
Besides which, ARE you aware that there is a group of Republican types who do NOT want health insurance, and don't want to be made to have health insurance under Obama's plan? Sounds, actually, like you concur with the Obama Admin more than you know. (Why is that not surprising to me?)
I am actually giving her scenarios that could happen, I don't really care if she has health insurance or not, I am certainly not mandating she get coverage which is quite a bit different than the Obama administration wants to do! Your gonna trust an optometrist to diagnose whether or not you have heart disease? Good luck with that!
I got the particular test with my eye exam. I agree with your insight, and I find it surprising some of our Republican friends do not seem to realize how moderate Obama's health care plan really is. See actually admitting that they agree with one of his policies would take away their ability to equate him to the worst leader in history, and then they might have to admit he is not all wrong .
President Obama is our president and he has my support. I can't think of a tougher job. That aside everything else is political posturing, Bush was blasted, Clinton was blasted( I actually voted for him), Daddy Bush was blasted and Reagan was blasted. Both sides do it theres no saints in politics but we are Americans and we'll figure this mess out.
It's a great thing to help your neighbor. It's tyranny to empower the government to confiscate from your neighbor under the guise of helping another neighbor.
You see it clearly and expressed it well. Although I agree and can see all of this is politically motivated, I just cannot see the liberals dragging the discourse, propaganda and reactions down to this disgusting of a level. I cannot say this observation is politically motivated, either. Just stupid is stupid and crazy is crazy.
Here is man who clearly what????
Who would want to be successful or attain great wealth only to have the government come and take it away? For the government to punish you for having achieved that success?
And how is putting millions of Americans out of work by those policies as a result of those policies, helping anyone???
Our economy crumbled as a result of a failing banking system and housing market that propogated what your "messiah" believes in.
Please do show me where in even one instance a socialist economy has worked for the betterment of anyone besides that government which imposes it.
And where does the president come into play on "helping" us poor, disadvantaged citizens? I thought the constitution was designed and created with the mindset and belief that is "WE THE PEOPLE" who have that capability and should have that right to HELP ourselves!
Not to have some person, who is to only be in office for lets say, a total maximum of 8 years to be the one to "save us" from ourselves.
Indoctrinated propaganda. (Sorry.) How can you justify this prose with a simple call for children to do well in school?
Are you deliberately avoiding the point and being misleading?
If the president wasn't trying bipartisan, he would have already passed healthcare reform. It's because he's listening to all these complaints that it's still being debated. If anything, he has changed his original plan because of these complaints so much that it is not nearly as strong as it originally was. When did George Bush really consider what the people, let alone the opposition, thought about his policy? Oh, that's right. NEVER.
Do you honestly have NO IDEA how laws are passed in the US?
Immaterial. Even the new people have got your MO, TK.
Do you honestly have NO IDEA what a nuisance you are? Do you honestly have NO IDEA how to write anything but ridiculous questions? ...or, lol, as Ralph Deeds says, spray fire hydrants, fence posts, trees, etc., etc., and incidentally, liberals?
Oddly, conservatives forget George Bush was in a classroom talking to students when 911 happened. Presidents talk to children all the time. George Bush I did a large telecast to shcool children as well.
This is simply politics being politics. If McCain had won the consevatives think it would be great to have kids learn about service from John McCain and it would be. Democrats would cry foul.
Of course, nobody would pull their kids out of school.
This is politically motiviated objection, pure and simple. And I think much of this is also racially motivated.
Bush was reading to students, which is very odd because Libs didn't think he could read.
Racially motivated??? Why do you libs use that crutch so much? Like the boy who cried wolf found that hysteria soon loses its desired effect!
This is just like 'opposition to Obama's health care reform plan means those nasty conservatives want poor people to be sick' nonsense. Nobody cares if the president gives a message about education. Valid, even essential, concerns were raised over the 'how can I serve the president?' homework assignment and such. The WH recognized that they had dropped the ball AGAIN as evidenced by the fact that they pulled the original material for the talk. Just like they pulled the 'turn in your neighbors' website and 'obamaspam' program, etc.
Do you really think that if you just keep repeating BS no one will notice?
And top it all off with a play of the race card...
Ridiculous, TK. You cannot even see that BGpappa is actual one of the more 'moderate' (in tone) people on this forum. In part, his observation was a political analysis...somewhat in support of 'conservatives.' Although calling you that, I think goes too far. Doubt if the real ones want to own up to having you.
What makes you think I give a crap what label you, in all your wisdom, give anyone? Oh YOU think he's 'moderate'? Well then, I must change my response at once!
You really didn't even get what I said even there. Geez...
And hahahahha, trust me...rational you are not. Nobody rational sits on the internet writing 3,500 or whatever posts. Embarrassed for you, actually.
Thank you for taking pity on me. To think that someone who actually reads the newspaper would spare a thought for little 'ol me is truly touching.
This said by the one with more posts, are you that insecure that somebody comments about what you say or is it that you are just that hypocritical? Both!
Is there EVEN a point in talking to you? I have been here almost a year. The other less than half that time. Uhhhhhhh?
"Who ya fer????"
Are you still here? I thought you promised to do the laundry.
Uhhhhh, what? The forum is for people to post and you find fault in someone doing what you are doing. They should be ignored because they posted more in a shorter period of time? I don't care if you talk to me you don't really say anything worthwhile. I find it funny that you can't seem to help yourself though.
I grew up amid the "War on Drugs" where the President (Reagan)- and sometimes his wife- would address our schools regularly encouraging kids to tell someone if they thought their parents - or a friend's parents -were using drugs.
Presidents giving talks to schoolchildren about what they and their administration thinks is important is nothing new at all. What is new is the immediate pouncing on each and every thing Obama does. God forbid he fart sideways or buy the wrong brand of soap. Sheesh!
Not saying I agree with everything he has done (which is not much yet, for crying out loud). What happened to the whole patriotic sentiment shoved so forcefully down our throats during the Bush era?
Does no one see the hypocrisy and irony here?
It is a parent's job to watch the address and talk to their kids about it in a context that they feel comfortable with. If there are points that you absolutely think are misleading or detrimental to your child, TALK TO YOUR KID about those things. If the kid has an iota of respect for you, he will listen to your opinions and take them as gospel waaaay before he will the President's.
If you disagree, engage and discuss. Burying heads in sand or stonewalling are not rational approaches to such a situation.
Did you go that link?
Did you read what the teachers are to do?
Are YOU or any parent a part of that?
Where does you coming in and talking with your children, if you do not agree etc. come in to play there?
After the fact? After it was already indoctrinated into their young, impressionable minds.
When we learn, ALL of us, we learn first by reading, then hearing and then to concrete it or cement it into our minds we write it.
Now look at the guidelines and or instruction on that link. Tell me if it doesn't sound like they are wanting to cement Obamas policies, thoughts, ideas etc. into the minds of our children.
And then, how do you expect as a parent you are going to be successful at removing it?
Respectfully, by that logic there are myriad things out there being drilled into children's heads all the time. You can home school your kids and run interference with everything they encounter or you can raise them to know that there are all kinds of ideas being presented in the world and that they have choice in subscribing to them.
Again, I've got to refer back to the 'drug war' nonsense. My family feels very strongly about that issue, and felt that it was very invasive to indoctrinate children with the idea that their parents are 'sick' whether they smoked a joint at a party once or whether they are shooting heroin every day (sadly these substances are lumped together in anti-drug propaganda). They made us pledge that we would basically rat our parents out to a school teacher if we had suspicions.
Then, there's the prayers in JC's name we were forced to do in elementary school in my state. I'm sure Jewish or Muslim parents thought that was really uncool, but I also imagine they had the wherewithall to explain it to their children.
I highly doubt that watching the video will brainwash or indoctrinate your children or that you will have to 'uninstall' the information given to them in the speech.
IF the Pres's message is meant to be coercive, don't worry - it won't work unless we truly are a nation of sheep....
I teach my kids too vote for the second amendment rights and join the National Rifle Association..
Bush is the one who started the bank bail outs. It is funny how people are already forgetting this. Obama is not the great socialist, and Germany was not a socialist government in the 1930's. In Hitler's own words he advocated a right wing agenda and was completely scared of Communism and socialist reforms. Fascism and socialism are two different things by the way.
It is highly disrespectful to compare Obama who is very much for equality to Hitler, who was for exterminating those who were not seen as pure whites. I think Joelle is right about the growing racials prejudice towards Obama in the media. Stop comparing Obama to Hitler, and Hitler was not a real socialist. He used the ideasl of socialism to appeal to the workers in Germany after they were punished with heavy sanctions from the treaty of Versailles. As a Fascist Hitler joined with business leaders to have a strong monopoly of the lucrative businesses in Europe. Why do you think the makers of Volkeswagen liked Hitler so? It may have been called a car of the people, but these companies and Hitler were fascists that made money off people. True socialism is not even close to what we find in Germany.
Bush started the bailouts, true. But what is it that he would have started had the banks not failed in the first place?
And you there by using the example of Hitler using the bsuiness leaders etc. to have a strong monopoly on lucrative businesses in Europe have then just made the case for a similarity to Obama as well!
Was it not Obama who took over GM? Did he not fire the CEO? Does not the government now own a 51% ownership/stake in them?
And as far as Hitler selection of who was viable and Obamas "concern" for equality?
How do you then come to that conclusion when you factor his stance on abortion?
When he has knocked down any law that would protect the unborn, or even those who ARE BORN? The ones who have survived abortions? The ones who are born and then aborted/killed?
That to me is the holocaust of this day and time. And Obama has chosen to take the side of it.
Yes, I believe there are many comparisons to be made here.
I find your comparing Hilter to Obama because of his stance on abortion to be way over the top. Ross Perot, who happens to be more conservative, was also pro choice. So was Clinton and many other Democrats. Just because people are pro-choice does not make them like Hilter. Gross exaggerations aboundeth!
Also, Roosevelt in the 1930's passed New Deal legislation that is not all that different than the stimulus with Obama. Did you know Obama is much more moderate and complacent that Roosevelt was? Leaders had to bail out the industries whether you like it or not.
I am stupefied with a comparison between Obama and Hitler. This topic doesn't even merit a response, but I can't help it. Do you know anything about Hitler or Nazism? Seriously.
1. Talking about Obama taking over GM is an argument against COMMUNISM. Hitler was not communist. It's actually a really big difference. Like, opposite ends of the political spectrum. Nazis were fascist.
2. Genocide (the holocaust) is the systematic killing of a certain race. The connection between abortion and the holocaust is, uhm, non-existent. Show me a shred of REAL evidence that Obama wants to extend the law to killing abortion survivors.
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- A new pro-life group that features a late-term abortion survivor is running a national television advertisement against presidential candidate Barack Obama. The ad takes Obama to task for his votes against a bill to care for survivors of such abortions when he was in the Illinois legislature.
The new group, BornAliveTruth.org is a joint effort between Gianna Jessen, who survived a saline abortion decades ago, and pro-life blogger Jill Stanek.
Stanek is the former Chicago-area nurse who exposed the practice of live-birth abortions, where doctors purposefully cause the premature birth of an unborn child for the sole purpose of letting her die.
Her exposure of the practice led to the Illinois bills Obama opposed and a national law President Bush signed requiring medical centers and personnel to provide such babies with adequate medical care after birth.
Any good college textbook on "oppression and how to make the masses scream for it" will tell you that the following pattern must be followed:
1. Introduce oppression as a theoretical idea. Gauge the response.
2. Make oppression optional. Depending on the opposition to the idea (you did remember to gauge the response to the theoretical idea, didn't you?), offer some worthless token that the masses believe has some great value and tell the masses that the oppression is the "trade-off" needed to obtain the token. Highlight the fact that it is still optional -- if they don't want the token, they don't have to accept the oppression. Some people will buy into it; others won't.
3. Make oppression mandatory for some things. It is essential that you create the appearance that the masses have a choice. Only instead of pointing out that those who do not choose your oppression are missing out on exclusive benefits, paint the opposition as a deluded group of sadists who are "depriving themselves" of "basic rights" to your worthless tokens. This will win you converts, because no one wants to be seen as depriving himself of anything.
4. Make oppression mandatory across the board. If you have followed the above steps, you can now claim that the oppression is the de facto standard that has not only been "accepted" but "endorsed" by the masses. Anyone who questions the oppression can be refuted with this claim, which will strengthen the masses' belief that the oppression is "right" and "good." At this point, you may withdraw the worthless tokens or advance your oppression, because the masses no longer have a choice -- they have already made it and must trust their own judgment
I think many would agree to the similarities between what has happened since the dems and Obama have taken over control in our government and the above text.
Malicious PR propaganda is making this speech given by Obama out to be something Hitler would do in Nazi Germany. As I said Hitler was a fascist and not a socialist, and I think if people listened to his speeches they would know that. Hilter hated Communists, and that is why he turned on the Soviets early in 1940.
Hitler was a horrible man, and it is almost bordering on slander to compare Obama to him.
Nazism is "national socialism." That's what they called themselves. As for Hitler turning on the communists, it makes perfect sense that one total state would turn on another. You can't be the "superior race" or the "superior state" with a rival.
There is no proof that Hitler hated the communists because they were socialists.
President Obama is moving our nation closer to national state socialism. The glorification of Obama is bizarre and fascist-like.
If it walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck.........
Just silly. Irrational. All I can say is this: You are able to violently disagree with Obama, correct? Verbally, here on this forum? What does that tell you?
And I see nobody here "glorifying" Obama. I see rational discourse from some, and crazy talk from others.
Really? You've missed all the "Here at last is a man who wants to improve the country" posts? Hmmm.....
In Hitler's own words he wrote speeches about hating socialism and Communism. You can make up what you like, but Nazism is a right wring ideology.
I'm really not trying to be a jerk, but mother of god people take a history class.
Nazism, even though it was officially called the National Socialist Party, was fascism. Nazism was not socialism or communism, but a mix of many different elements that equaled a grand total of fascism.
Hitler HATED communists. In fact, he had most German communist party leaders killed. He scared the population with the threat of communism and then used it for his own rise.
Cute phrase though.
We agree on that...
Please explain this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpAyan1fXCE
Which is the real Obama? The single-payer proponent or not?
Um, so what? Do you think this is supposed to startle people or something? It doesn't...uh, rational people (?)
FYI, uh-oh, HUH! Did you know that Barrack Hussein Obama does not personally believe in gay marriage? Huuuuuuuh! As he explains it, he is a Christian, and believes marriage is between a man and a woman...that is how he was raised (dug out of some old Atlantic article, don't remember where; not that intellectually INSPIRED to go find the reference). However, he realizes and stated that it is his personal belief...
If you cannot see where I am going here, then you can't. Yawn. But there, you have an answer from me.
Oh, another word: Compromise.
Well I know if I was a kid and I heard all these people getting upset about Obama's speech, I would be more curious. Those who are so concerned about Obama have actually drawn more interest to his speech. Kind of ironic .
Great, let the kids be interested in the speech if it really is just about education. AGAIN, that was never the concern. Go ahead, keep repeating another point entirely.
I know my ability to think about more than one topic at a time is astounding. All you are doing is making some kids think well Obama seems interested in us, and some parents seem.....
Could this be why some kids stop communicating with their parents in their teens. These are the same parents that probably freak out about them watching Clueless or other PG 13 movies.
Actually, your inability to maintain any logical connection between the random thoughts that seem to pop into your head is truly astounding, as evidenced by the mess quoted above.
Actually the ability to connect and see the larger picture is what makes me a rational person. Your name calling is notorious, and I actually do not call you illogical. I just happen to think you like attention really .
That's because I am not illogical. I have many faults but that is not one of them.
Where in the handout for teachers, does it tell them to make children pledge something? It sounds to me like your basic US Government elementary level stuff. It is perfectly normal for kids to learn about the President's background. What the holy **** is wrong with ASKING children to think about personal responsibility? Then, there are SUGGESTIONS saying teachers CAN, IF THEY WANT TO, follow up with some additional activities.
I remember every time I complained about something Bush said or did. I was met with the raised-eyebrow and patriotic rhetoric questioning my "American-ness" for not supporting our Pres.
What is the deal?
Even one of my state senators (a staunch conservative for decades) has issued a statement to parents that the speech & its accompanying suggestions are absolutely run-of-the-mill and that everyone should probably tone it down a few notches as they are being rather foolish about the whole thing.
Dilutes the cause to jump on every single thing the guy tries to do. Makes it look as if you are already decided on how you feel about him, facts be damned.
Take a look at the very first post in this thread.
I did, and that's what I was referring to. There are no pledges involved. There are suggestions to continue the lesson and to encourage kids to reflect on what the speech means to them.
So then you saw these:
"What is the President trying to tell me?"
"What is the President asking me to do?"
"Why is it important that we listen to the President and other elected officials, like the mayor, senators, members of congress, or the governor? Why is what they say important?"
"Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the President."
Yes, I did. Thank you. This is not anything out-of-the-ordinary and these are SUGGESTED QUESTIONS kids CAN ask. No pledge, no promise, no requirements.
If you read those and see no problem, that is a problem. On the plus side, you'll be first in line for that nifty barcode tattoo.
Why do these things always evolve into arguments about abortion? I am pro-choice, and any candidate who is sentient should be. If you want to talk about real fascism it would be a government that would ban all abortions, which is what some ultra conservatives would like to do. Thus, illustrating the prime example of the fallacy of small government and minimal intervention in the lives of people. This is why I would never believe any politician that says they are for small government because you know it is just not so. However, at least a pro-choice candidate is sentient enough to allow people to make their own life decisions. You may not like abortion, but many people in this world are pro-choice. Hey I myself would never obtain one, but I am firmly against those who picket clinics.
Oh I see so you are in support of over one million babies being killed in this country every year then?
Why not just call it what it is? A baby and then the practice of aborting it what it is, killing.
And sentient to allow people to mkake their own what? What about the choice which is stripped away from the babies life and sentience? Does the baby feel pain? Yes. can the baby express that? Yes. Look at the video "the silent scream" and tell me if that "fetus" is not experiencing and expressing pain.
Oh and by the way,
One of those who you call sentient was an abortion doctor who thought it wise to put a stop to all the rest claiming that the baby inside a mothers womb does feel the affects of an abortion. So he created the video.
Big problem there though, he found himself guilty of inflicting pain and suffering on that baby. Subsequently, he stopped performing abortions.
Another worth while note here:
I have a hub on the truth regarding Roe vs. Wade. Might want to take a look at as well.
But I am not going to sit in here and debate the abortion with you.
I'm outta here
Maybe some other time in another forum perhaps?
I have actually sonogram pictures of my daughters baby at 3 months and 5 & 7 months, anyone who doesn't think a fetus is a baby has no heart. There are procedures done while inside the womb which show the baby crying. Please again, do a little research. There are extremes which warrant abortions, but Obama's stand is that once the fetus is born, alive, breathing, it should be thrown into the garbage like a dead fish, still gasping for air. It is however still each individuals right to make their own decisions,
When does that individual baby get the chance to make a decision?
As long as the Progressives can use abortion as a political tool to delude more people into voting for them, the babies won't have a voice. The issue has nothing to do with choice; it's all about Liberals accumulating power.
Accumulating power and money.
Abortion is multi billion dollar baby killing industry. The doctors who perform them like CEO's they talk about the baby as though it is just a product. The woman who has the abortion is the consumer, and the abortion or killing of the baby is just business as usual.
Too bad the ones who continue to support the practice of abortion do not see any of that.
I think that last question about why listening to ALL elected official is important is a highly valuable one. Kids should know that its important to be aware of what politicians are saying because they are our representatives in government. If they disagree, they should get involved. I think that's the gist here.
It's not: "Why is it important to listen to Democrats and Obama's appointed officials?" It includes all elected officials, on all levels, and across party lines.
I don't give a shit what party the elected officials are in. It is important for elected officials to listen to the people, not the people to listen to elected officials. If you don't see the problem here something is very, very wrong.
Yes, and in my humble opinion, it is an attempt to get kids involved in the process. You are absolutely correct, and elected officials should listen to The People. However, how can a people be informed if all they do is talk and never listen? It's an exchange. I, too, share your sentiment about not caring which party is in the White House. Both main parties have their (huge) faults.
"What is the President trying to tell me?" No room for others who oppose the presidents views/policies
"What is the President asking me to do?" Leaving again, no room for anyone else in government there only him.
"Why is it important that we listen to the President and other elected officials, like the mayor, senators, members of congress, or the governor?
Note there how it is posed for them to consider first and foremeost the importance of listening to their president first.
"Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the President."
Leaving no room there for those not wanting to help him or even the possibility that there are those who might or should disagree with him.
And by the way please feel free to report your parents to Flags@ if you think they disagree.
A) All these items were suggestions, not requirements.
B) The President is "Commander in Chief," as I was reminded of so often during the Bush Jr. years so yes, he is top of the hierarchy. Been that way since George Washington. Obviously, we have checks & balances - lest someone get lost jumping on the semantics of this comment...
C) Reagan also called upon the young school-aged generation to help him to bring America back to what it should be (according to him). It is completely normal for presidents to tell kids to help America (in whatever vision of America that particular admin. has).
You guys just barely start paying attention since Obama got in?
hmmm, funny, I don't recall a brief, or a guideline like the one we see here. being sent out to ALL schools on just how the teachers were to present and then engage the children, by the government in any of those cases you listed.
Our teachers aren't goofy enough to fall for a brief. If they are pro-BHO, they've already tried to indoctrinate their kids. They did it during the camapign, as one of my kid's teachers did.
We parents are smart enough to deprogram. No worries.
Nicomp, I agree w/ you on that last part. Do parents really think that one speech will sway their children in some irrevocable way? It's honestly rather preposterous! I don't like adverts constantly trying to indoctrinate my kid w/ false needs but I feel that they are no real threat seeing as I am intelligent human with free choice in life, as is my child.
Have you spoken to an educator who has been teaching for a few administrations? I only listed one 'case,' btw. Not meant to sound snippy, just my answer - plain & simple.
So have I. Unsurprisingly, we have heard different stories from 'people who know.' Go figure. My only point is that the logic used to deduce these statements being made about the speech is shaky at best. To me, it is just like the 'if we let gays get married, people will soon be marrying their dogs' argument. Frightening, but highly unsubstantiated.
The point is that the government always opens a new door with just a tiny crack. Then once the "idea" is accepted they move forward with a more heavy hand. A perfect example is the income tax which started in 1912 at 1% "only for the rich". Sound familiar? This concept is the same MO. It's not about the president telling kids to do well in school, it's about getting them to think along the lines of "how can I serve the president and his idea's?"
The president is OUR servant - not us as his servants - at least the last time I checked the Constitution anyway. . .
Thank you Madam. Here's one that the Libs will understand, perfectly clear. Did you know that Obama is now thinking of sending tax returns in the form af Bonds. I'm sure that will go over real well with his people.
President announces measures to make it easier to save more. One new idea: Turn tax refunds into savings bonds.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/09/05/news/ec … 2009090506
I read this thursday on ticker, but cannot find it, this is all I have for now.
That means he is commander of the ARMED FORCES. It doesn't mean we are all his servants FFS.
Good lord. LIBS vs CONS *ding ding*
Thankfully, I align myself w/ neither.
@tk Obviously he is commander in chief of the armed forces. However, it does make sense to list the President before local political leaders without it being construed as some statement about his supremacy. That's all I meant.
Leave the LIBS vs. CONS out of it. The only thing in front of any of us is how much government interference do you want in your life? Or your kids lives? If it makes me a "CON" to want the government to stay out of my life then so be it.
I was referring to jiberish's remark, stating: "Here's one that the libs will understand." I was merely referring to the condescending way each side speaks about the other. But thanks for telling me what to do.
Nothing to do with any of this but I read your Ghost stories, do you have any more coming? Your right those things are not cool to see!
A welcome and much needed shift of direction! Thanks and yes, I plan to write more. Good reminder to get out of the forums and get to writing!! Apologies if anyone is offended by any comment I made. I respect each and every one of you and your opinions even if I disagree with you/them.
Doozy of a thread you started girly-girl!! You are fiery, and should be proud of that. I may disagree with you on some fronts, but have oodles of respect for you and will not quit being a big fan of yours anytime soon!
Texan, I take it you have some scary experiences of your own?? I better go see if you've hubbed 'em....
Nonetheless, we are not his or any other elected official's 'servants' and any implication to that effect is more than worthy of critique.
Is there a precedent for US government policies being brought into our nation's schools? Yes. As RooBee mentioned, the "War On Drugs" in the Regan years.
The example that comes to mind for me is this: in elementary school we had air raid drills. Children were taught to "duck and cover" and hide under our desks. The purpose of this emergency training? Well, it was a well-known fact that the Communists (in the form of big, bad USSR, as it was then called) could attack us at any moment.
The indoctrination was simple and direct. Communists were our enemies. They were evil. They might attack us at any moment. When you hear the air raid sound, get under your desk pronto. Don't ask the teacher questions. Just do as the GOVERNMENT is telling them to tell you to do.
As far as I know, there was not a single Russian attack on any school in the United States during the Cold War. But for the sake of national security, it was necessary for teachers across this great land to indoctrinate their students into "duck and cover."
In comparison, a message of STAY IN SCHOOL and FINISH YOUR EDUCATION seems pretty positive. What part of it is harmful? Oh, right. Obama gets his foot in the door with the message to elementary school students and before you know it, we're a country of friggin PhDs who are smarter than the Japanese, Chinese,Indians, Germans and Scandinavians combined. Oh no! It could even have ramifications for our sacred capitalist society. Why, with Obama's evil education plan (EEP) we might even reclaim our global competitiveness.
Yeah, pretty darned subversive.
LOL I could assure you we had absolutely the same training across the pond.
Which does not really change the tune of my thinking about Obama, cause he goes well in line with the previous several American presidents who were steering the country towards dictatorship. Commies are not aliens, commies are among us, except for the very few nuts they are normal people just thinking that rich are bad and their wealth should be re-distributed. Meet Lita, or CWB, or Ralph - you know all of them...
I assure you, this is exactly what we've been taught in Soviet schools.
Unlike the revolution in USSR, here communism seems to just creep along, with every year acquiring more and more space in so far peaceful ways. Make no mistake though, as soon as they feel they can get away with it, communists will put your country in a blood bath, and based on what I read so far, Obama's speech or whatever goes right in this direction...
Oh, silly Misha. Stop, please, dragging my name into this. Are you aware some of who you named (I'm not going to name them directly, because that's personal info. they might not want to share) are millionaires a couple times over? And I CERTAINLY am not going to share my real estate wealth with you...or my recent Forex wealth with you, either...in such gross terms.
And all this is...is gross terms. Maybe you can drag Pam into it, but she, evidently, is smart and is staying off the forums.
MM-- As usually, subversively and wittily brilliant.
oh, Heck, no. Like that I'm a dern good Republican. You oughta be proud.
No, Republicans address issues rather than obfuscate.
Did it ever cross your mind I am not interested in talking to you THAT much, Nicomp? Just maybe?
Nope. You can't deal with me intellectually but you seem happy to condescend and muckrake.
No. I'm simply not interested in talking to you. Point blank. I'm sure MM can hold down the fort + 10...so be happy.
*edit-- And incorrect on talking 'about laundry.' However, I see you dragged that stuff and my name over two forums... Too cute (not).
I'm happy. I understand you can't hang. Do some research and get back to us. We have a big tent.
I'm actually a man, Nicomp. It's true. I'm having a sex change operation... lolololololo
You just continue to make my points for me. When you're ready to address issues, feel free to stop by. It's always fun to go back and forth with you; I have nothing to lose because you won't (can't ?) support your arguments.
I'm really going through a tough time right now with the sex change operation...Nicomp. It's been quite the transition.
You realize I MUST address my issues... And what with the changes in health care coming up! I've got a lot to think about. I'm just darn scared and a bit freaked out. I'm sure you can understand. But...I truly cannot wait to complete my transition and become the MAN I was actually supposed to be. Maybe it will help my arguments...and supports. I dunno. You'll just have to wait and see.
I have everything to GAIN!!!
Well, Misha, I was kinda hoping you'd show up here.
Your perspective is important and AUTHENTIC, since you've lived in Russia and have personal compare/contrast experience.
I don't see how America could end up a Communist Country. We are still (regrettably) a two-party system. So every 4 to 8 years the pendulum will swing left, then it will swing right again.
I don't think the free market system is going anywhere.
I think the federal government will always go through cycles of less and more "involvement" in people's personal and business lives.
But that's just my opinion. No more and probably much less developed and worthy than yours MM
I hope it won't MM. Yet as I understand it now chances are slim. There is no big difference between rights and lefts in the USA, currently they all put the state above the individual, and this is the cornerstone of tyranny I think.
Your founding fathers were smart, they did quite a bit for you that you had a chance to live in a free country. You (or rather your ancestors during last century or so) blew it, and now the country is running fast towards dictatorship and tyranny. If not communist under democrats, it will be fascists under republicans, does not make a big difference if you ask me...
Thank you, Lita
Appreciate the compliment.
But you know, you are not fooling anyone. We ALL know you are a Marxist Commie Socialista. You are just an ELITE MCS. The elite are always allowed to keep their own wealth-- and as much as they desire of the peasants' assets they seize in the name of the state.
You said it MM! Line 'em up, and let's shear 'em. Doggie goes first.
Witness the Kennedy Family wealth. Sheltered offshore even as Kennedy politicians raise taxes on those unfortunate enough to have a different last name.
I'm not following you, Nicomp.
What issues are being obfuscated by the non-Republicans?
well...all I have to add is...lately, more and more of my friends and family members are shaking their heads going 'hmm', and are not only questioning the President's wisdom, but expressing their disapproval. and these are people who are big Obama fans!
as for me, it's enough to (shudder) defect to the Republican side next election, and I've been a Democrat all my life.
Nicomp -- thank you for the clarification on the obfuscation comment. I feel a little better in that I actually DID miss out on the original question that you claim is being obfuscated. *done scratching head on that.*
The thing about these forum posts is that at any given time there are 2-5 sub-themes being "discussed" (reaching for the most PC term). Maybe some people actually go back 100 posts prior to look up references.
Now, where were we?
Thanks, Mom. I've been asking LS to address my concern for about 3 hours. She made the claim that private insurance would change "very little" (her words) under Obama's plan. I made what proved to be a futile request for her to explain why BHO is on record as endorsing a single-payer system.
Cosette -- I hope you don't throw in the towel yet. This is still the first year of a four-year term.
The economy is in the toilet.
What if in 2011 life is good again here in the US?
What if some healthcare proposal that actually is cost-neutral AND offers coverage to the uninsured gets passed?
What if businesses in the US are thriving again and people are back to work?
I don't know how old you are but it pains me to hear a "lifelong Democrat" defecting on the basis of less than 1 year of Obama's administration.
Truth be told, Obama was not my candidate. But he's our president now.
Whether the guy tanks or rises to stellar heights -- my philosophical ideals do not rise or fall just because of him.
On the other hand, I think it's a sign of intelligence (emotional and otherwise) to be able to vote outside your party if you see a candidate you want to support!
It will probably be a proposal written on the back of a unicorn that gallops into DC on a magic rainbow.
I held my nose and voted for the Democrat challenger in our last House of Representative election. When Rep. Jeannie Schmidt voted for Obama's stimulus I gave up on her.
They can take up a collection for a compass, two hands and a map.
Well see there, Nicomp. That's exactly my point. This thread has hundreds of posts. For me to even try to go back and find the exact place where you and Lita were sparring on healthcare would take me quite a long time.
And to what end?
In the meantime, right here and now Misha is making a very interesting argument about the US government becoming a dictatorship.
I came on here to talk about the Obama speech to kids in classes on Tuesday morning.
Now I don't know what to do.
My best ally is having a sex change operation AND has run off to do laundry (which may or may not be a euphemism for ... what, I can only imagine).
Maybe the best thing is to just go and write a HUB !
In my world we support our points, even if the conversation extends over several pages of threads. There are virtually no Liberals here who can do that. They make an assertion, then resort to name calling and obfuscation when challenged. It'd be more fun if someone could teach me something. Oh well.
Sneakorocksolid. Either that comment is totally random or incredible deep and I'm missing the connection. Sorry.
I hear ya, Nicomp.
I've never quite understood the stimulus deal or the bailouts.
On the other hand, I'm NOT an economist (as my worthy adversary LDT is so fond of reminding me). I can only assume that the intent of the government bailouts was to incent the banks to free up money to flow into the credit market.
Would I have preferred that he give a check to every American?
You bet. But wouldn't that be like, communist or something?
I also hear you in that there are more than a few representatives on "my side of the aisle" with whom I have become disillusioned (again, trying to keep my language contained).
Well, I admit, endurance sports were never my thing.
I'm sorry you feel there are no worthy liberals to keep up with you for 100s of posts.
Maybe we have shorter attentions spans .
Or, it might be that when it's 1 against 3-4 at a time (which it too often is), it's not fun.
I'm just conjecturing here, as I have no right to speak for others, just myself.
As for me, I must beg off. Please don't think me a spoil-sport.
I am off to see Julie & Julia. With any luck, there will be NOTHING to politicize about this film .
Have fun, MM...
I'm still here occasionally 'lurking,' and you made me ROFLMAO all through! O M G
"Lurking" = Pretending to go do laundry whenever you feel uncomfortable with your inablity to support a position.
Even when going through a transition! And I might take MM's advice when I acquire my new...uh, life. Try out something that could use some...support & membership! Republicanism.
I certainly don't want to be any kind of dirty liberal...showing people I lurk and..my hand..
This is so tough! But I have TK and Tex and Nicomp to thank for my turning over to the RIGHT side...and for becoming a man!
I am still a liberal and I do not care what they think. Oh well, I should see what they are up too. I noticed Misha accused a whole bunch of people of being Communists. He also made a point of singling me out earlier today. This forum is ridiculous, as I said in my last hub.
I know. I'm convulsing in a fit of giggles. I just can't help it.
Texan made a big argument for why US companies need sweat shops overseas. Their bottom line is very important you know, and heaven forbid the unions demand decent wages for their workers. That is just an unreasonable burden upon the companies that could be saving money with sweat shops in Mexico and China. Also, overseas they are away from the scrutiny of US laws somewhat, so they can pay their employees next to nothing.
All I can say is that their 'arguments' are likely corralled to this forum.
What I didn't like seeing, after all the serious nasty stuff earlier, is a certain liberal on here kinda giving what they want...validation. I don't think it is all right to call a crazy extreme mode OK and batt your eyelashes while doing it...but again, this is just a silly forum. Thank God.
Queen Lolita hows that nose injury? must be ok, your braying.
Sorry but I think you are sick and gross. I guess Humbert Humbert is your alter ego sneak.
That's my diagnosis/MO on all of the no-name, no-photos, frankly, SP. Too obvious. Too bad we don't have visual confirmation...but, actually, that's probably a good thing!
That sounds about right. What I am trying to figure out is did they say something else really attacking to someone earlier. All they do is attack, but you said some liberal was giving them validation of sorts. I was just trying to figure out what happened.
It is I'm butt ugly. So everything you imagine is true. What do you think about this Obama speech thing? Sorry, I said 'think' I don't want you to sprain your brain muscle.
I'm actually a bald headed man! The speech will be cleaned up and made pretty and a priority to pass the bill or else.
Maybe it so happens people are not going into convulsions over the Obama speech because they can think. The paranoids, on the other hand, really do not want Obama in office, so they are grasping at straws. Like I said earlier I know parents that are so restrictive they would not let their kids watch PG 13 movies or read Sweet Valley Twins books. Those are the same type of parents that are afraid of Obama's speech because since they did not vote for him, his asking children to think about a speech is "sinister". Okay all you Communists from Europe, you were not born in the US and really do not understand the sweep of our history. I am going to say it outright, our teachers always asked us what they thought of political speeches. This is nothing new!
My son attended Christian private schools, while I payed my school taxes. We didn't have to worry about an appropriate curriculum. Our son was also allowed to pray in school. The Presidence speech is fine, its the atheist-gay non-sense I have a problem with.
Yes, I knew that.
I'm so terribly scared I don't meet with your brain muscle criteria. So. Scared. Scroll up a few pages if you want to see my words concerning this forum post.
What's the matter? People deleting your messages on their hubs now?
I love you SP! You get offended by everything! It's pure majic!
Maybe if you would stop making references to bloating, Lolita, and other things that are inappropriate I would not be feeling that way.
I'm sure you have an amazing life. So sure. You are sick.
This is taking on some weird Betty Page Cold War fetish thing. Maybe you should go surf the internet for that kind of stuff!
You could go hit your wife back, if yer into that sorta thing. Might make you feel better.
I think Misha likes to just pick on certain people, it give him a kick, he's actually a nice guy. Am I Wrong?
Stop that lurking right now!
Lurking is a Liberal tactic.
Shhhh. You don't want to show them your hand, do you???
P.S. Will the new, masculinized Lita be a Republican?
I mean, if you're going to change one thing, you might as well see how it feels to be completely opposite to your current self . MM
by nina644 years ago
I'm aware that this is an election year. I know that everyone is entitled to their opinions. But over the last year and a half, I've noticed some blatant forms of disrespect being directed at President Obama. Why? Is it...
by marinealways247 years ago
All opinions respected. Who would win a debate between Obama and Limbaugh?
by Doug Hughes5 years ago
Section 7 1: All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.Section 81: The Congress shall have Power To lay and...
by Beyond-Politics7 years ago
With so much vocal an organizational opposition to President Obama and his policies (such as they are) after only 9 months in office, is such criticism warranted? Does the opposition reflect minority intolerance, or a...
by WeStand4Freedom7 years ago
Impeachment of a President One would think that the impeachment of a president is not conducive in showing him support.”Give him a chance,” people say. President Obama, to be exact, has been in...
by Grace Marguerite Williams4 years ago
Election time is nearer and nearer. It is time now for President's Obama assessment. What grade you give President Obama so far? Please detail what grade you would give and why?
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.