An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

« Is the Stimulus Working?

‘Shocking’ Russian and American Ignorance About World War II : Izvestia, Russia »

The Permission Slip Of The Silly (Well Not To Some) Times

Posted by TYRONE STEELS II, Site Administrator in Politics, Society.
Sep 4th, 2009 | Comments

silly_catMy neighbor and I both have daughters in middle school. Both of our daughters came home from school today with a permission slip asking if we wanted our children to participate (or not) in the viewing of President Obama’s “National Address To The Students” on September 11th (school recording it from September 8th). My neighbor walked over to me and said:

You got to be kidding me??

We both did not remember a time when we were kids that we needed permission slip to listen to the President of the United States. I remember we had this television system called Channel 1 back in my middle school days. On several occasions, Presidents Reagan and Bush Sr. were broadcast with pre-recorded messages of working hard, saying in school, and learning. My neighbor had the same system as well and remembered the same messages. We both shook our heads and returned to our homes. I understand the school’s reasoning for this but it’s quite amazing to me that it is needed.

Look I know [SARCASM ON] President Barack “Hussien-Che Guervara-Socialist-New Nazi Party Chairman-America Destroyer-Kenyan Citizen-Usurper-Mister Teleprompter-Death Panel Czar-Unicorn Latte Liberal-Filthy Liar-Half Negro-47 Year Conspiracy-Big Eared Something” Obama [SARCASM OFF] (wow what a middle name) has done too many speeches, but he is the President Of The United States.

And can’t Presidents Of The United States of America challenge students to work hard, set educational goals, and take responsibility for their learning? Those three things sound universal. Not partisan.

But we don’t want to infringe on parental rights. So I guess this will be the trend. I think I will go looking for a genie in a magic lamp so I can wish a Sarah Palin presidency in 2012. The amount of permission slips that will be generated would really stimulate the economy (no disrespect intended Mrs. Palin).

Also my friends, it will be extremely difficult for [SARCASM ON] President Barack “Hussien-Che Guervara-Socialist-New Nazi Party Chairman-America Destroyer-Kenyan Citizen-Usurper-Mister Teleprompter-Death Panel Czar-Unicorn Latte Liberal-Filthy Liar-Half Negro-47 Year Conspiracy-Big Eared Something” Obama [SARCASM OFF] to indoctrinate the children with Marxism/Socialism/Nazism with so many eyes watching (and not just “the kids”). Just think about it… Or not!

  • D. E.Rodriguez
    Great post, TS, with, as you say, lots to think about.

    I don't have young kids anymore, but I do remember the times when our president either addressed our children in their school (via radio/TV/recorded medium) or through the printed medium: No permission slips, not a second thought, no controversy, no innuendos, no fearmongering, no insults, no panic in the streets. Just trust, respect and patriotism.


    Sad...
  • tidbits
    Love the picture of the cat & the "sarcasm on" put a smile on my face.
  • shannonlee
    Before you know it, we'll need permission slips to watch the space shuttle launch. We'd have to have those crazy liberals influencing our children with "science".
  • I wish that I needed a permission slip when younger, for having my parents force me to watch most State of the Union addresses - and that was after school, in the safety of my own home. I would have loved, at that point, to have been able to skip the political science lesson and focus more on my own interests. For me, the President was just a stodgy old guy talking to other stodgy old people who clapped every now and then.

    Now that I'm a little closer in age to that "old guy," and directly due to my having watched so many speeches that I didn't want to, I have a much better appreciation for what's going on in my country, and its government. It also taught me a valuable lesson: I may not agree with what your speech says, but I'd be a damned bit better off hearing it and scowling than smiling as I pretended it never happened. Ignorance may be bliss, but intentional stupidity is just plain... stupid.
  • DLS, Casual Observer, what say you?
  • mlhradio
    Y'know -- not *everything* in this world *has* to be political. Sometimes a speech from the President is just that: A speech from the President. It's not a left-wing or right-wing speech, it's not a conservative or a liberal speech; it's not a Democratic or republican speech -- it's a *presidential* speech.

    Yes, yes, I understand that one of the ultra-right-wing's best lines of attack is to inject politics into everything from Michele Obama wearing shorts to visiting a national park. But really now, republicans are dangerously close to 'chicken little' territory (many would argue they've already crossed that line months ago). They doth protest too much.
  • DaGoat
    I think the school was smart to ask for parental permission. No matter how you feel about Obama I think you can agree that the US has become polarized, probably much more so than when we were kids. The days of respecting the president just because he's the president are over. In any school you are certainly going to find kids with very partisan parents. by approaching it this way the school is pre-emptively defusing any problems.

    By asking for permission the school is notifying the parents and giving them an element of control. It would be better if they'd included a transcript of the speech so parents could see it was nothing to worry about (most people are not news junkies and may have little idea of the speech's content), but a transcript has not yet been released.
  • Almoderate
    Oh em gee... I was just thinking about Channel 1 and Anderson Cooper when all this started going around... So many in our generation saw the POTUS on their classroom televisions (and often), and I suppose this whole hoopla just really caught me as so unusual considering. Although I did joke to my husband that as kids we did consider having to listen to the president talking to be torture.

    Up next... Decoding the secret socialist messages in congratulatory letters and cards sent from the White House to new parents who send birth announcements to the Obamas and finding the hidden subliminal images in the Christmas video. (You laugh, but I can almost GUARANTEE you that it will be done.)

    On a serious note for DaGoat... It's been announced that a transcript will be available on the web on Monday.
  • jeff_pickens
    I agree, this newest protest will be remembered far and wide into the future. I suspect there will never be a chance to hear a next Republican president address school kids. Forevermore, anything from the White-house, directed to school kids, will be considered partisan extremism and attempts at vehement indoctrination.
  • We are talking about the 20% of the population who can't get over the fact that we have a black president. To quote Frank Schaefer, one of the founders of the Religious Right, the election broke their brains. It's not about health care or socialism, it's all about a black president.
  • D. E.Rodriguez
    "On a serious note for DaGoat... It's been announced that a transcript will be available on the web on Monday"

    Yeah, but how about those embedded microdots and subliminal messages!!!???
  • mlhradio
    >>We are talking about the 20% of the population who can't get over the fact that we have a black president....It's not about health care or socialism, it's all about a black president.

    Be careful about such blanket statements, it's dangerous to automatically discount the entire anti-President crowd on such simple terms. Sure, there is a definite segment on the far right that have a strong racial prejudice that is coloring their judgment, there's no doubting that. However, I see those Obamaphobes as a small minority percentage of the anti-President crowd.

    If you paint every single anti-President protester as a racist, and attribute their dissent to everything he does as a racist reaction, you run the danger of losing touch with the true motives of the opposition. Respond to the anti-President crowd based on the arguments they present, just throwing up your palm and saying "racist!" is meaningless.
  • I have ot disagree, while I'll admit that some of those opposed to Obama may not be biggots I think the majority are and they are fired up with coded language by the Glen Beck's and Shaun Hannity's. The Republican Party has milked this demographic since Nixon - it's their base. But that demographic is dying. Their children and grandchildren are going to school and working with, and yes for, minorities.
  • DaGoat
    On a serious note for DaGoat... It's been announced that a transcript will be available on the web on Monday.

    True but releasing it on Labor Day the day before he speaks is akin to releasing it via smoke signals translated into Sanskrit. It would have been better if he released the transcript this week.
  • denisedh
    Next up, 2 sets of American history books depending on partisan leanings?
  • I was planning to post on this but since the ever amazing Tyrone has beat me to it I will comment here.

    My first reaction to the whole hubub over the Presidential speech was to think it was silly, and 95% of my reaction is still in that vein. The President telling kids to stay in school, work hard, etc is pretty non partisan and innocuous.

    However in listening to the debate I have heard a couple things to catch my ear.

    First, during the first George HW Bush years, he was attacked from some on the left, including then Congressman Richard Gephardt who called it "paid political advertising". The fact that some on the left were as dumb as those on the right are now doesn't excuse either, but it does show stupidity is bipartisan.

    Second, I do think at least the earlier versions of the class guides put out by the Department of Education were out of line, focusing too much on 'how Obama inspires us' and the like. If this is going to be a non partisan education event then the focus should be on the Presidency in general and what the students hope to do with *their* futures, not on the amazing Obama.

    I don't blame Obama for this, I think it is another case of members of the administration (in this case at the DOE) going overboard in the whole Obama worship thing. Even a liberal commentator from Salon (who was on MSNBC's Chris Matthews show) conceded that there is often a tin ear syndrome when it comes to people around Obama.

    So I don't think the speech is a big deal, I think the whole 'keep your kids out of school' protests are silly, but at the same time I think that people at DOE did give quite a lot of ammo to those who wanted to make this bigger than it is.
  • Jim_Satterfield
    Of course. Guess which set Rupert Murdoch will be printing.
  • TheMagicalSkyFather
    My guess is that they just expected it to be like speeches to kids from the other presidents before him that actually were political and pushed their agendas. Yet again he is "seemingly" rising above that and focusing on the kids side which is pretty amazing in my opinion. Not a big deal for him so much but the next president that tries to actually make it political will be in for a very bad poll day.
  • joeaudio
    "The days of respecting the president just because he's the president are over."
    Yes, and the days of respecting the local police are over too, because who the hell do they think they are?

    Idiot.
    GFY
  • joeaudio
    "releasing it on Labor Day the day before he speaks is akin to releasing it via smoke signals translated into Sanskrit. It would have been better if he released the transcript this week."

    Is the English language so difficult for you that it requires translation?
    Did you hold the previous President to the same standard of when and how information is released?
  • joeaudio
    Sorry for the ad hominem, but I have zero tolerance for arguments that only apply to a specific individual or political party. If Bush wanted to speechize to the school kids, goats would be thrilled.
  • And one could argue that many who support the Obama speech would have kittens if Bush tried to give a speech.

    Stupidity and bias are bipartisan
  • mgardener
    Those schools who do not allow the president's speech to be shown should give back every single federal dollar that they were sent this year.
    Put your money where your mouth is.
  • Almoderate
    Um... Both Bushes actually spoke to school children-- a lot. In fact, the whereabouts of 43 on 9/11 are very well known. There's no "if Bush gave a speech." He did. Now perhaps I'm remembering this wrongly, but I don't recall anyone yanking me or anyone else out of school when 41 was speaking, and I don't recall anyone up in arms when 43 was speaking. Of course, I might have missed it.
  • StockBoySF
    "First, during the first George HW Bush years, he was attacked from some on the left, including then Congressman Richard Gephardt who called it "paid political advertising".

    Sure this is a political statement by a politician and I don't particularly care for it. However when Republican presidents spoke I don't remember the Democratic Party actually calling for boycotts of school that day and forcing the school districts not to show the Reagan, Bush, etc. speech.
  • Father_Time
    This is just way to much.

    This is Racism camouflaged as partisan politics.
  • EEllis
    "However when Republican presidents spoke I don't remember the Democratic Party actually calling for boycotts of school that day "

    That's because the Pres has never before tried to become part of the lesson plan. Bush Sr. gave a speech from a classroom he didn't give a speech that he wanted shown in every classroom. There is a difference between the two so lets stop with the false equivalencies please.


    I pretty much agree with PE on this. I heard the "I Pledge" commercial that they plan on showing before the speech. 95% fine but a few of the things are a bit political. I mean "what can I do for my country" fine but "What can I do for my President" seems strange. And the whole lesson plan thing was just off. Of course people would be pissed no matter who was doing it. The idea that it wouldn't be happening if it was a Repub. is absurd. Someone thought to use this as a political tool and went a little to far. Now they are pulling back but it is impossible to remove the thought from peoples minds so even if the Pres gives a perfectly reasonable speech the admin has hurt itself again by over reaching.
  • EEllis
    "Those schools who do not allow the president's speech to be shown should give back every single federal dollar that they were sent this year."

    To bad that would be against the law for the feds to do so isn't it?
  • EEllis
    Isn't anyone else getting tired of every criticism of Obama being greeted with the cry of racism? Are there no Obama supporters who think it's over the top?

    It just seems so petty. Increased govt spending, increased taxes, expanding govt, policy based on pc ideas, but the only reason a conservative could ever disagree is racism.
  • "That's because the Pres has never before tried to become part of the lesson plan. Bush Sr. gave a speech from a classroom he didn't give a speech that he wanted shown in every classroom. There is a difference between the two so lets stop with the false equivalencies please."

    Not necessarily EEllis. I distinctly remember President Bush during my high school days saying things such as "You can help your President by working hard and studying" and more over the Channel 1 broadcast network (which was broadcast to thousands of schools nationwide with the system). So Obama isn't the first president to be broadcast to "every classroom" or to mention "helping the. The technology has changed making it easier to reach more. And I absolutely no problem with a POTUS addressing every child in American classrooms with solid and timeless messages.

    I heard a parent say at a PTA meeting yesterday, "We pledge allegiance to our flag and mention God when everyone doesn't go to church. What's wrong to with pledging to help the President by working hard?" Fair question.
  • I too tire of the racism angle, EEllis. But I knew this would happen when the first black person or first woman (sexism angle) got elected. The is way too much baggage out there regarding racism and sexism for it not to be said (legitimate or not).
  • mlhradio
    >Next up, 2 sets of American history books depending on partisan leanings?

    If you've been watching the latest textbook controversy here in Texas, you may find that your comment may be closer to the truth than you may think:

    http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/...
  • I just saw a note that my child brought home from kindergarten yesterday, saying that her class would not be watching. It didn't say why, but can I only assume it's because some parents might get upset. I did not vote for Obama, and I disagree with many of his policy positions, but I have to say I was disappointed. Partially that my child would not get to participate in this with her classmates, and partially that our politics has come to this. The president is the president. He is the leader of our country. Our children should learn to respect the office.

    (I do think the one line in the lesson plan about writing a letter about how to help the president probably isn't appropriate. It should have been how to help our country. But I don't blame the President for that, nor do I think it warrants not showing the broadcast at all.)
  • DaGoat
    Sorry for the ad hominem, but I have zero tolerance for arguments that only apply to a specific individual or political party. If Bush wanted to speechize to the school kids, goats would be thrilled.

    To clarify I am not objecting to Obama's addressing the school children, I am agreeing with the way that TSteel's daughter's school handled it. I also think Obama's admin could have done a better job rolling this out. It sounds like the speech will be pretty generic - if that had been made clear earlier we probably wouldn't have had so much controversy. One way they could have made that clear would have been releasing the transcript this week.
  • TheMagicalSkyFather
    I think its more the 10-15% of actual racists(I know its a low percentage just not sure what it is now) comfortably hiding behind politics because a larger percentage 20% have an actual political gripe. A misled one and a divisive one but I really think this one has little to nothing to do with race other than allowing the racists to hide in their numbers. Also some of those racists are Dems that voted for him but they were none to happy about it and would probably prefer if their kids could avoid the speech as well but I think they are a much smaller number than the people with a Fox fueled gripe. Having said all of that I think the older among us see racism everywhere. I know I will raise the ire of both sides with this but the older lefties see racism everywhere and the older righties see reverse racism and favoritism everywhere. In my opinion this is due to both sides not only buying into but actually believing their own sides propaganda. The younger generations tend to think that they are both insane but thats because we did not live through the 60's/70's political era and therefore missed those animosities. In 20-30 years it will probably mystify people that the Bush and Obama people looked like they were about to rip each others throats out most of the time but that will be due to many Bush and Obama policies becoming the norm. I still think the Birther thing is racist though but thats just my opinion.
  • EEllis
    'I heard a parent say at a PTA meeting yesterday, "We pledge allegiance to our flag and mention God when everyone doesn't go to church. What's wrong to with pledging to help the President by working hard?" Fair question."

    People bitch about the pledge too............. maybe if they pledge to Obama it would be ok.



    I don't think it's that big of a deal, we keep telling kids to stay off drugs and we see how well that works so even if you don't t like the message.........

    The problem as I see it isn't the "damage" it will do but the the almost "creepy" feeling I get about the whole cult of personality thing that is going on with Obama. It seems just a bit overly political and they pulled back to where, if that's where they started, there might not of even been any real traction on the story. Of course now that it's such a big deal even with pulling back they have still hurt themselves again by over reaching.


    On a second note: A president cutting a PSA to be shown at schools is just not the same thing, and there was loud dissent when Bush Sr. gave a speech from/to a classroom. A district deciding to do something is different than the Feds pushing a "lesson plan". The main reason it may be happening now is because of technology but this is new.
  • TheMagicalSkyFather
    EEllis-I think the essential question is are we one nation anymore? Did he win the election to his office? If we are one nation and he is our president we should not have an issue. If on the other hand some would prefer a Red president and a Blue president then we are not really one nation and dont expect anyone you like in the future to be treated with any respect either. It is showing to those that disagree with those protesting it just how extreme they are becoming mostly because any in school in the 80's and 00's had these speeches and many people remember them. If you have an issue with the speech it would be more wise to wait until after he made the mistake to attack. Continuing to attack before he does something and then watching him change those things makes him look like a grown up to moderates which is not the best political strategy for Repubs.
  • "I heard the "I Pledge" commercial that they plan on showing before the speech. 95% fine but a few of the things are a bit political."

    Who plans on showing this before the speech?
  • I used to complain about the Pledge Of Allegiance in my far, far left Black Nationalist days. All I got out of the deal was a sore throat from all the screaming, temporary hearing loss, and countless empty magic markers. :-)

    The definition of a cult of personality is a country's leader uses mass media to create an idealized and heroic public image, often through unquestioning flattery and praise. If you look at that, many of our Presidents had cult of personalities created by their respective "bots". Ronald Reagan, John F. Kennedy, Dwight Eisenhower, and George Bush Jr (1st term) come to mind. But there are cults of personality and CULTS OF PERSONALITY. Every time I look at Joseph Stalin's propaganda, my mind explodes. But I digress...

    President Obama is of a generation that is more technology savvy and "in the loop" so to speak. So he presents "messages" utilizing all tools available. He has set a standard that I know the Republicans will use as well (they would be foolish not to).

    But I will agree with you on overreaching. Obama has folks in his administration that, in my opinion, looks at his historic election and presidency as a green light to make a "historic image". And it's not limited to his administration. My grandparents, civil rights activists in Mississippi back in the "bad times", have three big pictures on their living room wall, Jesus Christ, Martin Luther King Jr, and President Obama. They are still stunned that he won and they are extremely emotional about it. And there are folks in Obama's administration that know people like my grandparents exist and are going to piggyback off of that. I don't like it one bit but it is a time-honored tradition among politicians.

    Personally I'm heartened somewhat by President Obama's willingness to pull back. Even though he and his administration may use "tricky language" to explain it, the pull back shoes where that they can admit a mistake. I would like that in a few other areas but not going to hijack my own post thread!!
  • mamj
    Don't forget theat both Pres. Reagan and Bush 43 both gave speeches that were carried over C-Span to schools. Reagan went off on tagent regarding how great to lower taxes it is and Bush went on about his agenda "vision" for the country. Where are they with the "respect the office of the President" now that their party is not in the white house. Grow up people. We are not turning into Russia etc.
  • EEllis
    TMSF, look I don't think it's that big of a deal but if you can't understand why there is some issues with people then you just aren't trying. Is it really a big deal to you that some people think it should be less about Barack and more about the country?

    And no there has never been this kind of event before. Also the feds have never tried to push (which is a violation of their own rules) a lesson plan based on such an event.
  • EEllis
    My understanding is the "I Pledge" commercial is going to play as part of the "broadcast". Now that may or may not be true and to be honest I don't know who is showing the speech so I can't answer who would be showing the commercial.
  • EEllis
    "Personally I'm heartened somewhat by President Obama's willingness to pull back. Even though he and his administration may use "tricky language" to explain it, the pull back shoes where that they can admit a mistake."

    The funny thing is that if it wasn't for all the BS about how there is no problem at all, the repubs did it to, you're a racist, it's inconceivable that any rational person would ever see anything wrong in the least, ect garbage I would be bothered a lot less
  • EEllis, thanks for your reply. I'm seeing this (the I Pledge commercial will be shown) popping up here and there in comment sections, but I'm not finding the source anywhere for it.

    You probably already know that the "commercial" is actually a video produced in January (around inauguration time) by some extremely star-struck hollywood folks swept fully up into the hope-and-change theme. It's got nothing whatsoever to do with teh white house.

    Strangely, it appears to have become merged w/ the president's Tuesday speech in some quarters -- likely because a less-than-perceptive elementary school principal in Utah showed it in an assembly on August 28th -- and michelle malkin then put that story into her hard spin about the speech.

    It would be extremely inappropriate to show -- not just in the context of the speech, but to a school in general. But nowhere (other than by malkin and a couple of comments) have I seen that obama / the white house are incorporating it -- or even that they're aware of its existence.
  • TheMagicalSkyFather
    I think this is where we are getting confused. I sat through Bush I and Reagan speeches in school. I suppose it just confused me and made me think this was common place and even though I actually bickered with my teacher at the time over Reagan bringing up the tax cuts I did not think he should not have done it then or now. He was my president at the time. I was too young to have voted but he was still my president and elections have consequences.

    Most of my point though was hyper-ventilating over this issue as with many others that have come up does give red meat to the right but it doe not actually help them with the middle or the soft left since then Obama(unlike prior GOP admins.) actually moderates what they were planning and comes off like calm grown ups. I would eventually like to have two parties to choose from again but freaking out before something happens makes that side look bad if it does not go down that way. If you want Obama to lose the best course of action is to sit back and let him overreach and fall on his face. Instead I think the right is actually helping to hold him up though they would of course be horrified by the thought. I do think freaking out about this before it happens is an extreme stance. In essence it sounds like "I dont trust you to not win over my child with tv waves" which of course is the kind of crazy that the Dems found themselves in 30-40 years ago and still carry the label for it. When the election happened I thought he could be the lefts Reagan swinging the country back the other way for 30 years or so until we switch course again after going too far. Moments like this just make me more certain that this is the case. Well that and the tax=theft thing which is as common now as the property=theft thing was in the 60's/70's.
    The technology has changed the type of event that can be held but I am seeing the seeds of a future where either the left will flip out just as hard or worse when the next Repub tries it or neither party will ever again be able to speak to our children and I think that is actually a bad thing.
  • EEllis -- since you weren't the first perfectly reasonable person I've seen worrying about the "I Pledge" video, I decided to run a whole post on the subject. It's here (link).

    I'm not cross-posting to TMV cuz I don't want you to feel like I'm picking on you. I'm definitely not. Yours was just the catalyst that made me finally write something about it.

    :-)
  • I've mostly just tweeted (http://twitter.com/jillmz) my thoughts on this situation but I also have been using this quote from the blog of a friend of mine in the Ohio blogosphere who is a conservative former political operative, and a father:

    This is what he wrote:

    "I could care less that Obama is speaking for 15-20 minutes to my daughter during school.

    "I am 100% positive that he will not successfully change any of the beliefs & values she has come to hold after being on this planet for nearly 14 years.

    "If you think Obama is going to have that kind of influence on your child then you might want
    to take a look in the mirror at the type of parent you have been to your child up to this point in their life that you believe the Snake Oil Salesman in Chief can change your child's beliefs & values in a speech that is less than 20 minutes long."

  • EEllis
    I don't know if that commercial is part of the "speech" or not. I did hear it would be, but since it hasn't happened yet who knows. I also figure they'll be doing a little work after all the hoopla. I do want to thank Polimom for saying I'm perfectly reasonable, that's not something I've heard much of here. As far as what difference Obama's speech would make please see my reference to anti drug speeches that seem to fall short.
  • TheMagicalSkyFather
    I work hard to remain in the unreasonable camp. If the nation were to swing that direction I would likely swing back to libertarianism and go all Ron Paul. I think I just like to poke people in the eye.

    Edit-and with the commercial it would be over the top.
  • Father_Time
    Oh it's racism. What people say about the President when black people are not around, is unbelievable.

    What they say when black are around, is mere partisan politics.

    A lack of confidence based in racism permeates America and it makes me sick. Worse yet, it gives ME a lack of confidence in Americans.
  • EEllis
    "Oh it's racism. What people say about the President when black people are not around, is unbelievable"

    Try hanging around with a better class of people. Perhaps it's just like calling to like because right now you seem like a bigot to me.
  • kritt11
    Its easy in the talk radio world to create the false impression that any black liberal Democrat has to be a socialist or a Communist. This is the far right's plan to win back the WH in 2012. Its brainwashing- pure and simple.

    You righties want pure capitalism? Why not give back your Social Security checks and refuse your Medicare benefits. We've had pure capitalism, and it resulted in child labor, unsafe working conditions and filthy tenements full of disease. Robber barons made huge fortunes which their descendants used for philanthropic causes. Presently, we have a hybrid of capitalism and socialism and it works pretty well. It enabled a poor fatherless kid born in Hawaii to become president.
  • EEllis
    "Why not give back your Social Security checks and refuse your Medicare benefits."

    Sure right after you get those a--holes to stop taking my money!!!
  • TheMagicalSkyFather
    Kritt11-Well I agree 100% with your first paragraph.
  • kritt11
    Well, half a loaf is better than none,lol.

    But though many conservatives seem to want to go back to the good old days, its important to note that during the last century most people worked until they died and most- before the New Deal could not own their own homes. Workers had to put up with unsafe conditions in many occupations and often worked 6 12 hour days.

    In this country wealth is concentrated at the top--- we are nowhere near being socialist or communist.
    To suggest this is just as bad as comparing Bush and Cheney to Hitler. In other words, its only the desperate who resort to these kind of suggestions.

    The right can't fight fair so they conjure up images of a totalitarian state- so that their followers won't even give the new administration a chance. Its fear-mongering at its worst- something the far right has gotten extremely good at.

    If there are policy disagreements, come out with them. But put a kibosh on these idiotic comparisons.
  • EEllis
    "But put a kibosh on these idiotic comparisons"

    You mean crap like asking conservatives to give back SSI and Medicare? Practice what you preach and maybe you'll have a little credibility. Right now you're pigs in the same pen bitching about how the "other" pig smells bad.
  • kritt11
    Obviously, that was not a serious suggestion, but if you have a short fuse-- go ahead an vent :-)

    I said it to make a point that we do have some elements of socialism already, and they have served the elders, widows and disabled in our society fairly well.

    Many on the far right are prepared to oppose Obama no matter what he says or does. He could capture OBL and there would be those who would claim that Osama is no longer important, and that Obama only captured him to create a diversion from the health care mess.
  • EEllis
    "Many on the far right are prepared to oppose Obama no matter what he says or does."

    Which is why when some overreact you and others overreact in reply and pretend there was never any basis for any concern. Makes sense to you I'm sure.

    "Obviously, that was not a serious suggestion"


    So maybe you could denote what part of your arguments I should respond to and whats total BS that you will jettison and mock people for countering. Just to save us both the trouble.
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC