Censorship and anti-patriotism - the way of the Republicans (Obama's speech to kids)

[X]

I guess it was ok to call bush hitler, but all I did was say that obama and hitler both gave speeches to kids I'm a racist. OK.

It doesn't make you a racist, but it does make you rather stupid.

Obama and Hitler both gave speeches to children?! My God, that Obama is a Nazi clearly! You realize of course that most politicians over the course of the last century have made speeches to children, yes?

If critisze obama by saying there is "very little substsnce to what obama says........" is ok, but if I say I disagree with something he says or a specific policy, I'm racist. OK

I guess I need to go to camp and learn to love the dear leader.

No, what you should do is

A) Learn to spell

and

B) Learn to use common sense

Those would probably be helpful in life.

I find this whole speech fiasco to just be ridiculous. It's a fucking speech. He's not installing microchips into our children's skulls to do his evil bidding for God's sake, he's TALKING to them.

 

[Razor]

Well, I've been gone for a good two months, and I'm not going to jump into the middle of a debate that's raged for pages. I will, however, speak my mind and if anyone wants to help get me warmed up for my return, let's roll.

I don't understand why Obama can't speak to the future of his nation. He's the President, and the United States is his nation, so it would make sense he wants it to succeed. How are you going to do that when you have 50+% of your high school graduates not graduating on time, with a great number of those not graduating at all? How are you going to make sure your country has the infrastructure to last after you leave without trying to boost the confidence of the future workers right now?

They need to know that they are the ones that will be leading the fight for America in 30 years. And if the parents are too busy whining that Obama is making our Socialist Capitalist state too socialist for them while listening to the inane blatherings of conspiracy websites and Limbaugh/Beck, then Obama will step in and do it for them.

No one ever told me I would be the future of this nation until well into my 10th grade. Even then, it was only because I was in AP classes. What about those children who are struggling through school? That don't think school is worth it? Here is an easy answer. Fucking have the President of the United States, the Commander in Chief, tell them they are the way. That would get me to listen. Just sayin'.

I fully believe that this is nothing more than people being pissed over Healthcare and the Economy, and choosing to whine about something else. If the elementary schools were to have Sarah Palin come in and say Obama was a dirty liberal that wasn't even a United States citizen, would the same people fuss? I'd wager a guess no.

 

[Goo Punch]

Oh he did a bad with his words, he obviously isn't charismatic. The terms Bush uses "insurgency", "war on terror" have come into our everyday language, because he instilled them into our minds. By no means was Bush a great leader, or one of the worlds great speechwriters, but he managed to convince your government into two wars that it was ill equipped to win and in the case of one had very loose reasoning. If being able to convince people that what you are doing is the right thing, when it really isn't, isn't being charismatic, than I don't know what is. Nice try though. You could have said John Major, I suppose. Still, maybe I should have said "influential" world leaders.

You obviously don't understand the meaning of the word "charismatic". Using catchphrases like "the war on terror" doesn't make you a great speaker. With that logic, John Morrison has great mic skills because he says stuff like "the palace of wisdom". No, he still sucks on the mic.

And how hard do you think it is to convince flag-waving Americans to go to war with a country you're telling them is responsible for an American tragedy? You could teach a parrot to do that. Come on, now.

Have you ever wondered why Bush beat a man that was clearly better suited to the job?

No, it's pretty clear he won because the American system is corrupt. Hell, the first time he had his brother rig the election in FL and STILL lost the popular vote.

And having a bit more personailty than Al Gore and John Carry doesn't make you charismatic.

Well, its hard to justify why they are saying it otherwise. It seems the man can't do anything without being "sneaky" or "deceitful".

Because he keeps proving himself to be. We have a President who's birth certificate can't be found. Yeah, that's totally normal. Happens all the time.

Because most of the criticisms levelled at them are legitimate.

As are the ones on Obama. Unless someone says "I don't like Obama because he's black", it's not racism.

Or maybe they just don't want to admit it. You know how those racists are, they never tell you how they really feel.

 

[Razor]

I would just like to take this moment to reinforce the fact that all the fuss over the fucking President speaking to the future of his nation was over nothing.

Newt Gingrich supporting the speech.

That's right guys. Newt fucking Gingrich supports the speech. Gingrich. The dude who fought so hard for the impeachment of Bill Clinton for getting a blowjob in the Oval Office, and not wanting to admit to cheating on his wife. He said the speech was a great speech that every child should read.

If you're still against the idea of Obama telling your children that they're the future, you've just got told by Newt Gingrich. You've only really got Limbaugh and Beck now, and they are no one to hold an entire argument up with.

I'll close with this. As Gingrich said, Reagan did it. George H.W. Bush did it. ...So what's so bad about Obama doing it?

 

[SSJPhenom]

It's very simple people. A big deal was made by REPUBLICANS because Obama was going to give a speech to children about staying in school. REPUBLICANS.

This is a simple republican vs democrat thing. The democrats would probably do the same thing if it were Bush. Although, I wouldn't want Bush talking to the children of the U.S. either. I mean, c'mon, he obviously missed a few years of school or something.

 

[Goo Punch]

As Gingrich said, Reagan did it. George H.W. Bush did it. ...So what's so bad about Obama doing it?

The wording. Simple as that. Telling students to "wirte letters to themselves on how they can help the President" is creepy and none of the other people did that.

I don't think anybody has a problem with a President trying to keep kids in school. The problem people have is with a President using children for his own agenda.

 

[Tastycles]

You obviously don't understand the meaning of the word "charismatic". Using catchphrases like "the war on terror" doesn't make you a great speaker. With that logic, John Morrison has great mic skills because he says stuff like "the palace of wisdom". No, he still sucks on the mic.

Charisma is defined as the ability of a leader to arouse ferverent popular devtion and enthusiasm. George Bush managed to get the population of a country to elect him twice. That is inspiring enthusiasm and devotion. So I suggest that next time you try and insult my intelligence by saying that I don't know the meaning of a word you pick up a dictionary yourself first.

And how hard do you think it is to convince flag-waving Americans to go to war with a country you're telling them is responsible for an American tragedy? You could teach a parrot to do that. Come on, now.

Yes, because those politicians, almost all of whom have the highest level of education are likely to blindly follow Bush into war. What the man on the street feels is irrelevant, Bush managed to convince some of the most intelligent people in the country that going to war was the right thing to do. Twice. Again, that is inspiring people with populism to do what you want them to do.

No, it's pretty clear he won because the American system is corrupt. Hell, the first time he had his brother rig the election in FL and STILL lost the popular vote.

2004.

And having a bit more personailty than Al Gore and John Carry doesn't make you charismatic.

The fact you don't even know John Kerry's name shows how ignorant you are to politics.

Because he keeps proving himself to be. We have a President who's birth certificate can't be found. Yeah, that's totally normal. Happens all the time.

You mean the one that they found immediately after those allegations were made? You mean the one that is 100% certifiable as a genuine Hawaiian birth certificate? You mean the birth certificate that was corroborated by a newspaper announcement of the birth in 1961? Is that the birth certificate you are talking about? The one that you clearly know nothing about whatsoever?

As are the ones on Obama. Unless someone says "I don't like Obama because he's black", it's not racism.

And with this statement, you prove that you are ignorant of the meaning of racism too. Maybe you should have listened to Obama and stayed in school.

Or maybe they just don't want to admit it. You know how those racists are, they never tell you how they really feel.

Dear lord.

 

[Dexter]

Charisma is defined as the ability of a leader to arouse ferverent popular devtion and enthusiasm. George Bush managed to get the population of a country to elect him twice. That is inspiring enthusiasm and devotion. So I suggest that next time you try and insult my intelligence by saying that I don't know the meaning of a word you pick up a dictionary yourself first.

The fact that someone gets elected twice doesn't make them charismatic. That's kinda.. dumb. Most of the time, the only reason anyone gets elected to any kind of public office in America is because they're the lesser of two evils, not because people actually like them. That was very much the case with Bush. He ran against John Kerry.

Kerry had absolutely no platform of his own. His entire campaign platform was "I'm not Bush". In other words, he figured he could get elected solely on the basis of lots of people hating Bush. And he certainly got quite a few votes from it, but you're not going to sway anyone on the fence when you're saying "The other guy sucks" and the person you're running against has actual goals. Now, maybe his goal suck, but at least he's doing something.

Seriously though, point being, no one in their right mind would ever call Bush "charismatic". Even people that loved him as a president (if you can find one) wouldn't call him "charismatic". He just wasn't, by any stretch of the imagination.

Yes, because those politicians, almost all of whom have the highest level of education are likely to blindly follow Bush into war. What the man on the street feels is irrelevant, Bush managed to convince some of the most intelligent people in the country that going to war was the right thing to do. Twice. Again, that is inspiring people with populism to do what you want them to do.

Bush didn't convince anyone to go to war. Condoleeza Rice did. Not saying Bush was innocent or anything, just saying he wasn't the major player there.

 

[KKarvox]

I'm going to straight out say i very much dislike Obama, and his economic policies, but calling for censorship is uncalled for and unconstitutional. At first when i heard Obama was going to address the kids, i was heavily against it, because i though it was going to be a political speech, trying to instill his views into the kids, but it turned out to just be a "stay in school" speech, which is fine. I think if they had givin' more warning and maybe released what the speech had earlier so people had a chance to look at it and understand that it was a-political, it would have been more welcome, but it kind of just jumped out that Obama was addressing students, and people, mostly conservatives, Jumped on it. I also think the speech should have been elective, because alot of people might not like the idea of someone they intensely dislike or disagree with preaching to their kids about morality, i don't like when Republicans or Democrats do it. Back in 1992 i believe, Liberals were up in arms about Bush senior addressing the kids, which is just as stupid as this was. So while i agree that the speech was harmless, a little more of a warning would have been good to help us get an idea of what was going on.

 

[Dexter]

Interesting article about this topic.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/53712

Seems Obama did do a little preaching about health care to students in the face to face discussion prior to the broadcast speech. Not sure how I feel about that. It was done in the context of answering questions posed by the students but... it's still maybe a bit too much like pushing his politics to students without allowing for the alternate view to be presented. I dunno, it's a gray area.

 

[Slyfox696]

Interesting article about this topic.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/53712

Seems Obama did do a little preaching about health care to students in the face to face discussion prior to the broadcast speech. Not sure how I feel about that. It was done in the context of answering questions posed by the students but... it's still maybe a bit too much like pushing his politics to students without allowing for the alternate view to be presented. I dunno, it's a gray area.

Good god, are you seriuos? He's the president and the highest man on his political totem poll. He was invited by the school to give a speech, so he is well within his right to push a political agenda if he wants. The only students who may have been forced to hear his speech is the ones at the one school.

He's a politician, he's allowed to make political speeches.

Good grief.

 

[Dexter]

Good god, are you seriuos? He's the president and the highest man on his political totem poll. He was invited by the school to give a speech, so he is well within his right to push a political agenda if he wants. The only students who may have been forced to hear his speech is the ones at the one school.

He's a politician, he's allowed to make political speeches.

Good grief.

Sure, but if you're serious about teaching kids about the political process, and you should be if you're the top politician in the country (if not the planet), shouldn't part of that include demonstrating the fact that there's always two sides to every issue in a two-party system?

Quite frankly, I don't even know the answer to my own question here, I'm just posing hypotheticals. I haven't made up my mind yet. On the one hand, I don't suppose it's necessarily his job to present a position that disagrees with him, but on the other hand, it's the perfect opportunity to introduce them to the political process and it might have been nice to invite a Republican along for that purpose. Again, I dunno. Just something to think about.

 

[Razor]

The wording. Simple as that. Telling students to "wirte letters to themselves on how they can help the President" is creepy and none of the other people did that.

How so? I had to write a letter to myself in AGS that would be sent to me a year later. It was an exercise in identifying that what may seem like the major obstacles in your life and looking back on them a year later and realizing that they weren't that big at all. Also, it was a self-help sorta thing. Area III ftw.

Is it now creepy for the President to tell them to write letters themselves about how they can help the President make the country better? Such as, you know, staying in school? Not being ignorant douchnozzles?

I don't think anybody has a problem with a President trying to keep kids in school.

It would seem so, considering that's all he did...and yet, people are in a uproar.

The problem people have is with a President using children for his own agenda.

If Newt Gingrich supported the whole speech, then it didn't have one ounce of liberal agenda in it. So yeah. Stop with that.

As far as Obama pushing agenda in the face to face with students before the speech...and? He was speaking to students, and I am sure they asked him questions about healthcare and shit. So he answered like he wanted to. Is he supposed to be ambiguous when a child questions him? He didn't push his agenda when he was speaking to all of the students in the nation, and that is what is being argued over here.

 

[Shocky]

Meh, it's being made out too much in my opinion. As Sly said, if it were a Republican, then the Democrats would be either shouting out how so in so is a Nazi or someone is a Facist. The shoe is on the other foot in this country, and Democrats are getting to feel what the Republicans felt for 8 years, while the Republicans now get to act like the Democrats.

The Republicans are playing to their base, and their base is happy with the Anti-Obama sentiment out there. It's merely politics. These politicians that live in deep Red country are going to have to answer to their voters if they support Obama in anyway, so the louder you are against him, the better it plays to the base. It's pretty simple.

Do I have a problem with the President speaking to children, no, but I also believe that if there wasn't the loud protesting against it, that the President (any president) might over step there bounds. These are children, and they are impressionable, regardless of what you may think. Just think about to your youth, and if a major celebrity came to your school and said something, it would probably stick because it makes an impression. That's the only thing Republicans were worried about.

 

[Dexter]

How so? I had to write a letter to myself in AGS that would be sent to me a year later. It was an exercise in identifying that what may seem like the major obstacles in your life and looking back on them a year later and realizing that they weren't that big at all. Also, it was a self-help sorta thing. Area III ftw.

Is it now creepy for the President to tell them to write letters themselves about how they can help the President make the country better? Such as, you know, staying in school? Not being ignorant douchnozzles?

With all due respect, Razor, now that the administration themselves have said that it was poorly worded and retracted it, this isn't really an arguable point anymore. It's point of fact now.

The issue wasn't the writing a letter thing. That's fine. I did that in school too. The issue was the "help the president" part. The insinuation there was that they were expected to serve the president. That's not how it works in this country. The president is a civil servant. He serves us. I'm sure they meant nothing by it or anything, but the way it came across just didn't look good for him.

No harm, no foul though. They rescinded that and apologized.

 

[Kenny Powers]

I'm sure people would even complain if the President asked students to draw a chicken in class. Would that be part of his political agenda too? No matter what side you are on, if a politician or The President speaks at your class; it should be welcomed. I wouldn't go to a Dick Cheney speech at my College, but I wouldn't protest it. Ignorant parents wanting to take their children out of school due to Scare Tactics is ridiculous.

Some people need to view the whole picture instead of the bogus media from the right or even the left. False accusations about Obama's birth certificate and his "death panels" are as old as Marxism almost. First Obama was accused of being a Socialist, The Antichrist, Communist, and recently not a US Citizen. What's next? is he going to be burned at the stake for being a witch?

I love how in world history all the intelligent men and women of our time were accused of being the Anti Christ or Witches. This is 2009, some people need to turn off Glenn Beck, Rush, and Sarah Palin. They need to start thinking for themselves for a change. Think about the future for once and stop bickering about who is right and who is wrong.

 

[KKarvox]

Good god, are you seriuos? He's the president and the highest man on his political totem poll. He was invited by the school to give a speech, so he is well within his right to push a political agenda if he wants. The only students who may have been forced to hear his speech is the ones at the one school.

He's a politician, he's allowed to make political speeches.

Good grief.

The point is kids shouldn't be subject to a person's political agenda, similar to the fact that teachers are not supposed to impose their political views on students, because its one sided. It's not like he said, alright here are the pros, and here are the cons, now you decide which is better, he just gave his opinion and view on the subject, which is one sided. Kids are naive and should be taught to make their own decisions on subjects, not to ake someone else's word for it.