Apparently, the extremists on the right have their knickers all in a twist over a video going around in their emails and featured on blogs of children in a New Jersey school singing the praises of President Barack Hussein Obama. The video seems to have sent a good deal of these people over the edge, raging about how Stalin and other despots indoctrinated the youth of their countries in the same way. We heard this paranoia when President Obama announced he would speak to America's school children at the beginning of the school year. Indoctrination! they shouted. And many of them kept their children out of school so that their kids wouldn't hear Mr. Obama tell them to be self-reliant, study hard, and succeed in school. Indoctrination!
But the funniest part of all this mass hysteria on the part of the unhinged Right is that the video featured below exists to show them all what loonies they all are. These are the same people that were angry because President Obama was going to speak to America's kids about staying in school. The same people that felt it would be brainwashing to let the kids hear him talk. I'm wondering if Fox news will show this video. And I wonder if FOX, who showed the video of children singing about Obama and then had people commenting that it was sick--I wonder if that "fair and balanced" organization will show this video:
The Swash Zone covered this story the other day. I'm following up just to set the record straight and again point out that certain elements on the Right--the ones who yell the loudest but have no facts on their side--are so easily mocked and shown to be the roaring hypocrites that they truly are.
UPDATE:
Here's a chart for those people who have joined the "Fear the Czars" campaign. There's nothing nefarious or foreign about appointing them: [Click on the image to make it larger.]
72 comments:
Oh my, Shaw... That's totally awesome, in that scary absurdist way that leaves one speechless.
What is this, exactly? I mean, really: A prayer? An exorcism? Over a cardboard cut-out of Dubya, of all things... LOL!
I love the perplexed looks on some of those kids' faces. As in, What the...?!
Somehow I don't think FOX, with its "fair and balanced" coverage, will go down this memory lane as they bash "Obama worship" in schools.
I think George comes off quite well in this footage.
A little stiff perhaps but what a lovely smile.
And quiet.
why does anyone expect consistency from the crazies on the Right?
When they worshiped Dubya, it was seen as patriotic, when kids give praise to Obama, it's seen as indoctrination.
You can't deal with insanity. so don't try to explain it.
I'll second that "Oh my!" President Bush and God ... all in the same sentence. Sheesh! If that were an Obama cutout instead of Bush, the villagers with pitchforks would be storming the outhouse.
Arthurstone, I thought former President Bush came off a bit flat.
Shaw: When I saw the video of the Obama “Song” I must admit, I was outraged, shocked, mortified…you get the idea. However, I also had this little voice inside my head asking, “Did any teachers do this when Bush was in office?” Well, you answered THAT question for me. BOTH are mortifying, shocking and outrageous. This type of behavior is frightening, to say the least. Respect for the President is one thing; worshipping is quite another! BOTH of these teachers need their heads examined.
I wrote that last comment without my caffeine pick me up so I will try again!
Okay, my take on this. First I agree with Pam, both videos were disgusting and sickening!
Although there is one thing I must ask though about this video.......is it in a public school? If it's in a private school, them there is really no issue of church vs state like you would have in a public school, nor do the same rules need to be followed because it is not funded with tax payer money.
Politics doesn't belong in school period. Both video's were disturbing to me. To worship anyone like that, is wrong and you would think that a teacher should know better!!
It's clear to see that the "they did it, so it is OK that we do it" tit-for-tat idea is sometimes OK here.
Arthur: "... and quiet"
You had the perfect opportunity for the "How can you tell when George W. Bush is lying" joke :)
Pamela: That's a nice consistent view.
The point isn't "they did it, so it's okay," or that this happened in a public or a private school
The point is that this type of praise directed at an American president is NOT unprecedented. My sister recalls that in the early '60s, a teevee program for children played in Boston where the host, an older gray-haired guy named "Big Brother" Bob Emery, toasted President Eisenhower every day on his children's program and invited the children in his studio audience and watching on their teevees to raise their glasses of milk in homage to the president. The camera then went to the official photo of Pres. Eisenhower while "Hail to the Chief" played and Mr. Bob drank his milk along with the children.
No one ever mentioned "brainwashing" or "indoctrination" when that happened, that I know of. It was merely a show of respect and support to the US President.
The incident that has gone viral on YouTube involving children singing Mr. Obama's praises was part of a Black History Month program.
It is only recently that hysterical, fearful, people in our population construe that practice as evil and a plot to indoctrinate American children.
We live in a democracy. The comparisons to Stalinist Russia or Communist China are foolish.
American children and parents are not forced to pay homage to their leaders, and it is a infrequent occurrence when songs about them or praise given to them happens.
The video included in this post shows a private school giving praise and praying to President George W. Bush, there is also one on YouTube that shows children gathered around him and singing thank you and praising him at a PUBLIC school in Louisiana after Hurricane Katrina.
So there is proof that both private and public schools offered praise, prayers, and songs to George W. Bush.
I don't think those children have turned into mindless zombies who have set up a George W. Bush cult, nor will those children who participated in the song to Mr. Obama as part of Black History month celebration be scarred for life and indelibly imprinted as Obamabots.
This is all a foolish distraction to keep people from facing very real and important problems.
"The point is that this type of praise directed at an American president is NOT unprecedented."
This comment seems to be the same thing as "they did it too" arguement.
Basically politics need to stay the heck out of schools. We actually have a lot of that in schools around here. Burlington is about a half hour away from where I live. We've had many teachers from my school go the whole supporting Obama route and it's not right. I've involved my boys in politics and they know how I feel. In turn, they are not thrilled with him either. In fact my son got in trouble the other day for saying how he felt about Obama in school. Apparently the teacher didn't feel the same and took exception to his feelings.
This is one example of why politics has no business in school. What if he was in that class in Burlington and didn't feel comfortable "praising" Obama? He would not only be left out but probably put down in the process.
I don't think its a indoctrination at all, just a case of politics being where it doesn't belong.
Politics is too emotional, and it leads people to do things that they would not normally do.
I don't think this situation is paranoid at all, I think it's legitimate concern, especially when it hits so close to home in my case. Being in a state and city filled of liberals, it puts us at a major disadvantage when they start bringing Obama into the classroom.
Off the topic a bit but what the heck. I think politics should be a part of school. Nearly half our citizens don't vote. While a few of them don't out of disgust, the vast majority don't vote out of apathy.
In the name of "protecting our children" what are we denying them by not allowing political discussion in school? If it gets kids watching the news and talking about something more serious than where to buy shoes how is this bad? And let's all be frank. While I have no doubt the visitors to Shaw's blog are well meaning and actually talk to and try to teach their children, we're in a small minority. I know plenty of teachers. They hear the same refrain from just about every parent. "That's what I send my kids to school for."
Truth, the problem in your argument is that it is not discussion, it is a teacher forcing her opinions on the children. Especially on the elementary level.
I have no problem with the teachers in high school presenting the health care bill (for an example) and saying what do you think? The problem with that is unless the teacher can be totally neutral, there cannot be an unbiased discussion on it. Then you are back to teachers forcing their political preferences onto the kids.
Wow. You're using a video from some place that is obviously NOT a public school (speaking in tongues, did you not notice that?) and definitely NOT mainstream, and comparing it to a video from a public school where parents objected to the "Obama praise"?
Sorry, but you're reaching with this one. I cannot say there wasn't any "Bush praise" anywhere, although I seriously doubt it, but this is not a valid comparison.
Sheesh. Anyone can see that Shaw's video takes place in a church. While there's possible violations of tax-exempt status, it's very different from singing praises in a public school.
You can even make the point that in the video, the kids are being taught to respect the president, while in the school video the worship is directed to the person of Barack Hussein Obama.
Either way, the difference in the two situations is pretty clear.
Two people did not read my comment carefully.
There is a video online in which children sing praises to President Bush while Mrs. Bush looked on. This happened in a PUBLIC school in Louisiana after Hurricane Katrina. [I'll have to go looking for it, I saw it on someone's blog yesterday, or the day before.]
Private school, public school, church, it's still children being led by adults in honoring the president, and somehow, in the 21st century, American citizens are aghast at this.
If we should leave politics out of schools, as some have suggested, does that mean we should remove photos of a sitting president from every classroom? Afterall, a president is the head of a political party in addition to being the leader of the USA.
And I'll bring this up just for discussion:
What about certain segments of our population who bemoan the fact that Christian Bible verses and/or prayers are no longer allowed in public schools. I'll bet a lot of those people are the same people who believe singing about a sitting president is "indoctrination," but making a public school teacher read from a Christian Bible to a classroom that may include Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Ba'hai, Buddhists, and nontheists--that's not seen as indoctrination?
What do you think?
Here's the link to the song praising Bush and FEMA, etc. at the PUBLIC school in Louisiana.
And I'll wait to read how Gordon or dmarks will tell me how it's completely different from the Obama singers, who were celebrating Black History month and America's first bi-racial president,
What in the world does a BUSH video have to do with this?
Typical liberal, using arrogance and stubbornness in support of their pathetic, ill-equipped president.
I can tell you this, stupid Principal, leader of children, indoctrinator of children, your Messiah because of what he has done in the last 8 months and what you have done in this school…will guarantee that another black and/or half black man will ever get to sit in the oval office for years to come.
And the author of this blog is still hung up on telling us that Bush was a bad man. Geezzee, get over it already. Bush is gone and Obama is the new bad man.
I guess I am going to be called a troll here, so can I ask a question and get a normal (not rude) answer from someone?
Are there sites where people from the left and right can actually talk about stuff and try to learn from each other?
Steve Nielson wondered:
'Are there sites where people from the left and right can actually talk about stuff and try to learn from each other?'
This is that site!
If you sit quietly and pay attention Shaw definitely has a number of things you should learn.
Every walk of life has bad apples Jennifer. No doubt we'll have a few over opinionated teachers trying to force their opinions instead of encouraging kids to develop their own. This happens already. Do we shelter our kids from school because a few teachers can't tell the difference between facilitating and bloviating?
The problem with the link is that it shows kids from Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi and says nothing about being a public school or private school. It's from three different schools instead of one teacher in one class.
This might surprise you Shaw, but I am actually for separation of church and state. In this day of age to single out one religion over another steps on many toes. Last year they celebrated Hanukkah, Kwanza and Christmas. I don't see a problem with that.
Truth, you were writing while I was so I missed your comment.
A few questions for you....
Where would you draw the line on putting politics in school? Should you need parents permission? Are there issues that are off limits?
I agree that there are a few bad apples in every bunch, but I'm afraid if we give them inches there will be those that take miles and a lot of unhappy parents.
Shaw: I have to disagree with you on this.
Especially "It was merely a show of respect and support to the US President" and any defense of school children being made to sing hymns to Bush, Obama or any President.
It's unseemly and un-American. Can you imagine what the Founding Fathers would say about this? When they fought to be a free of a King, and wanted a government free of any trappings of royalty? They would shudder, and with good reason.
This applies to praise hymns to any President.
If such praise must be sung, then why not a song about the Bill of Rights? Or other protections of the Constitution? That's a better idea than songs that make a President into a God-king.
You asked: "If we should leave politics out of schools, as some have suggested, does that mean we should remove photos of a sitting president from every classroom?"
I would not go as far to remove them. That is harmless as long as the teacher isn't leading the kids to sing praise to him like he is an old fashioned religious icon.
But we really don't need them, do we? When the next President, whatever man or woman it is, replaces President Barack Obama in office, why not take down the President photos. He won't be in office anymore. But do something better and replace them with something like the Bill of Rights, or another part of the Constitution.
I think it was Theodore White who wrote about visiting an Iowa farm home in 1972. He saw, on the wall of the kitchen, a framed photo of President Nixon, and said to the farmer, "I see you have a picture of President Nixon."
The farmer replied, "I have a photo of the president of the United States."
I have no problem with a classroom photo of the president. Many military office buildings will have photos of the president, secretary of Defense, secretary of the appropriate service, major commander, and subordinate commanders right down to the unit level.
Military officers and enlisted personnel swear allegiance to the constitution, not the president, although they also swear to obey orders from those commissioned by the president.
Jennifer: there will always be a few parents that get mad over what is taught in school. Could be evolution. Could be sex education. Even something as seemingly mundane as home economics.
If we spend all our time worrying that somebody might get offended nothing will ever get done.
We just saw millions of people get mad because the President wanted to tell kids to work hard and stay in school. I am in no way advocating indoctrination or partisan teaching. Any teacher that would grade based on a child's agreeing with him politically deserves to be fired. A teacher that gets our kids to think and become more involved citizens deserves our respect and a raise.
Gordon: I think that President photos are much more OK in military and federal executive department offices. After all, the President is their boss.
I found this blog by chance. I find it refreshing and balanced. Unusual in the blog world.
Here's my centavos for all it's worth. This comparing of Bush and Obama misses the point entirely. The use of children mask the core problem. And that core problem is the total lack of experience in the real world of business or war that Obama possesses. His only claim to fame is as a community activist in the political world. And let's face it, most of that kind of activity is leftist.
That said try this for a comparison, world activists that Obama can identify with: Lenin, Marx, Stalin, Fidel, Hitler, Mao, Mussolini. OK, you get the idea. They all have one thing in common that George Bush certainly did not have, single-minded organizations such as ACORN, Hitler Youth, Brown Shirts and so on that did the gumshoe work and other nefarious activities such that we viewed this week in Pittsburgh (these weren't tea baggers in Pitt I assure you).
What is next for our children? Armbands with the Obama "O" on them?
Yes, I am concerned, along with millions more like minded citizens. This is not just some innocent mistake. It is well orchestrated and planned.
What interesting remarks "Jim".
Just kidding.
In your 'balanced' view the President is both Nazi and Communist.
What a breath of fresh air.
Arthur: Re: above comment. I'm pretty much with you.
Jim: It's a wonder that Obama has room on the Oval Office walls for pictures of all of his heroes that you listed.
I hear that he had to keep his pictures of Snidely Whiplash, Sauron, Genghis Khan, and Darth Vader in storage. There just wasn't any room on the walls for them.
What in the world does a BUSH video have to do with this?--Steven Nielson
The Bush video shows that singing a president's praises happened in another president's term, not just Mr. Obama's. This is relevant to the discussion.
Typical liberal, using arrogance and stubbornness in support of their pathetic, ill-equipped president.
I can tell you this, stupid Principal, leader of children, indoctrinator of children, your Messiah because of what he has done in the last 8 months and what you have done in this school…will guarantee that another black and/or half black man will ever get to sit in the oval office for years to come.
And the author of this blog is still hung up on telling us that Bush was a bad man. Geezzee, get over it already. Bush is gone and Obama is the new bad man.
I guess I am going to be called a troll here, so can I ask a question and get a normal (not rude) answer from someone?
Are there sites where people from the left and right can actually talk about stuff and try to learn from each other?
S.N., Nowhere in my post do I say that "Bush is a bad man." Your comment seems to be somewhat confused. You've made stuff up, you've made a prediction based on your prejudices, acted in a way that some people would call boorish, and then after you finished writing your nonconstructive comment, you ask not to be labeled a troll and finally wonder why left and right can't have a discussion.
Actually, that is happening here. Conservatives here voice their opinions and then someone with a different pov answers the comment.
If you look at the comments in this post, the only people who come off as rude and dogmatic are you, Jim, and Flynn.
To the commenter, Jim:
Here's my centavos for all it's worth. This comparing of Bush and Obama misses the point entirely.
The comparison is exactly on point. It shows that other presidents have been the recipient of songs and praise. I offered an example to show that Mr. Bush was treated adoringly, so that those who fear that this country is turning into Communist China would take a deep breath and see how silly that fear is.
The use of children mask the core problem. And that core problem is the total lack of experience in the real world of business or war that Obama possesses. Jim
In the 8 months Mr. Obama has been president, he had gained more than enough experience to run 7 countries while juggling 7 cats while riding a unicycle on a tightrope. You critique no longer holds water.
His only claim to fame is as a community activist in the political world. And let's face it, most of that kind of activity is leftist.--Jim
You lose any claim to credibility here. Mr. Obama has more credentials than what you choose to assert, and either you know it and are being willfully underhanded, or you're not an informed voter.
That said try this for a comparison, world activists that Obama can identify with: Lenin, Marx, Stalin, Fidel, Hitler, Mao, Mussolini.--Jim
This is too dumb to answer, so we'll just snicker, shake our heads, and understand why certain segments of the GOP are seen as unhinged fringers, and why only 23% of Americans identify with the Republican Party.
That statement is one of extremism, and not to be taken seriously by rational people.
the chart at the end of the post shows that Bush had more czars than Obama? why did the righties go nuts over Obama's czars and not a peep out of them over Bush's. is this more of the dreary hypocrisy that we see again and again and again? the right continues to bash Obama over stuff Bush did in his presidency and they never went crazy over it?
OK. Anon, I guess then it is OK for Obama to go overboard on the czars just because Bush did?
There is lots to do. A good manager lays the groundwork and delegates jobs and authority to people he trusts. If Bush or Obama need a thousand "csars" to get things done then I'm all for it.
What is happening is that Obama's detractors have no real ammunition. The "call him a socialist" plan is failing. They have to find a new attack every week in hopes one will stick.
The rightists are so hateful in their white supremacist insanity that they will flail in outrage at anything having to do with Obama that isn't rabidly condemning. They are racist buffoons easily manipulated by their corporate overlords.
These tempests in teapots over schoolchildren just show how incredibly foolish and irrelevant the American right has become.
Just as I suspected, the left goes on a personal attack because they can't refute the truth.
Several things here: I am not Republican, I am not boorish, and I am right.
Praising a President in idolatry is wrong on many fronts, no matter the politics. When I went to grade school we did not pledge our allegiance to Eisenhower and then to Kennedy, we pledged to the principals for which our flag stood for.
I am satisfied however in knowing I pricked someone's scab.
Libhom: And thank you for another comment with a whacky conspiracy element. And along the way, in true troll fashion, you slandered people as "racist" for views that have nothing to do with racism.
Jim: The blog is usually better than this. You caught it on a bad day, with Libhom comments on it.
In the 8 months Mr. Obama has been president, he had gained more than enough experience to run 7 countries while juggling 7 cats while riding a unicycle on a tightrope. You critique no longer holds water.
Really? You think so? Remind me not to hire you as a HR Mgr. OJT is not appropriate in this situation. This is a dangerous world if you haven't noticed and having Mr. Happy Happy Joy Joy in control will only get us all killed.
Mr. Obama's expertise in scamming tax dollars is not good enough. He has not demonstrated that he will offer all to a higher cause than himself. Heck, he is the cause in his mind. In all history, such narcissism only leads to disaster.
You Obama supporters are blinded by the novelty of his presidency. Get over it. Obama's single minded goal of making this once great country a socialist utopia will be the ruin of us all.
But then again, I imagine you don't care.
This is too dumb to answer, so we'll just snicker, shake our heads, and understand why certain segments of the GOP are seen as unhinged fringers, and why only 23% of Americans identify with the Republican Party.
That statement is one of extremism, and not to be taken seriously by rational people.
SK, you doth protest to much. And you claim to be a rational person.
All the leaders I mentioned created universal health care for their peoples, had adoring songs sung to them by school children, had local committees formed to keep a watchful eye on the citizenry, and even made the trains run on time. Socialism. Nazism. Communism. All part of the same stick don't you see? Mr. Obama has not figured out how to get a Gulag system going but I can rest assured his "czars" are working on that even now.
This Great Experiment, these United States, will fail only if there are not enough patriots to keep the principals of personal liberty and states rights alive. I fear the battle is almost lost. Capitalism and rugged individualism made this the greatest country in all history.
BTW - over 50% of Americans identify themselves as conservative. I noticed you did not use that poll.
Jim,
You certainly are being boorish when you come here and say this:
"That said try this for a comparison, world activists that Obama can identify with: Lenin, Marx, Stalin, Fidel, Hitler, Mao, Mussolini. OK, you get the idea.'
The idea I get from you, Jim, is that you believe without a shred of evidence that Mr. Obama "identifies" with mass murderers, with a madman who was responsible for the slaughter of millions of Jews and other minorities in Europe, and with Communists who were responsible for the deaths of millions of their own countrymen.
Anyone comparing Mr. Obama to mass murderers is not just boorish, but mentally sick. Mr. Obama was elected to the presidency in a democracy by a majority of American voters. You are a minority in this democracy with the right to express your opposing views, but that doesn't excuse your outrageous behavior in saying the duly elected president of this country "identifies" with the savage monsters of the last century.
You are out of your mind if you believe this. You do yourself and this country no favors if you continue in your preposterous insinuations and slander.
Jim,
You're not interested in dialog, but only come here to mouth your brand of fearful apocalyptic nonsense. You party lost the election, and you think you can change that fact by implying that President Obama identifies with mass murderers.
That's what the fringers think, and the fringers are a distinct and pathetic minority.
As to your 50% claim, you didn't read that poll carefully:
During Republican President George W. Bush’s second term, the number of self-identified conservatives as measured by Gallup dropped, riding at a low of 37% as recently as last year.
According to new data released by Gallup on Friday, conservatives outnumber liberals in all 50 states--including President Obama’s home state of Illinois--even though Democrats have a significant advantage over Republicans in party identification in 30 states.
“In fact, while all 50 states are, to some degree, more conservative than liberal (with the conservative advantage ranging from 1 to 34 points), Gallup's 2009 party ID results indicate that Democrats have significant party ID advantages in 30 states and Republicans in only 4,” said an analysis of the survey results published by Gallup.
I'll overlook your emotional outburst.
I did not say nor did I imply Mr. Obama had leanings to murder of innocents or anyone else. I am saying that he most certainly does identify with socialism. I am reasonably confident Mr. Obama will not go to a murderous extreme. His associations, his prior dealings with ACORN, all point to socialism. You may want to dismiss the comparison, so what?
His administration can NOT openly admit to a single payer health care plan. It would be political suicide. Yes, he did slip up in an answer to Joe the Plumber and spilled some of the beans. This administration is all about evening the money field so that we all can be equally miserable and Mr. Obama and the Democrats will have one party rule for as far into the future as the money will allow.
Let me ask this, just how motivated were the proletariat in the USSR to produce and excel? But by golly, they were all equally miserable!
Well, I was told to use facts from SK in a reply on my blog page. OK
"When implemented, the Complete Lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years
get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated...
The Complete Lives system justifies preference to younger people because of priority to the worst-off rather than instrumental value." Ezekiel Emmanuel
"I urge that the government should indeed focus on life-years rather than lives.
A program that saves young people produces more welfare than one that saves old people." Cass Sunstein.
Both long time friends and colleagues of Barack Hussein Obama
Humm, I may have been hasty when I denied that Mr. Obama would not go so far as to eliminate the innocent. Doggone it, he does so like to kill the unborn and the recently born of botched abortions. And that is a fact.
Humm, I may have been hasty when I denied that Mr. Obama would not go so far as to eliminate the innocent. Doggone it, he does so like to kill the unborn and the recently born of botched abortions. And that is a fact.
Sorry. But abortion is LEGAL in the US and other countries. And Mr. Obama did not implement that law.
He took an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.
You believe allowing a woman to control her body is wrong, but the law doesn't agree with you.
Your assertions are extreme. The law to allow late-term abortion is not for birth control, but for women whose lives are in peril in the last months of their pregnancy, and in the difficult family decisions on how to deal with such extreme cases.
You pose those horrible choices as Mr. Obama wanting to kill unborn or born babies? That's how a person who has ideological goals to achieve would characterize it.
I actually have personal knowledge of how this impacts families.
Do you?
Shaw said of Jim: "The idea I get from you, Jim, is that you believe without a shred of evidence that Mr. Obama "identifies" with mass murderers, with a madman who was responsible for the slaughter of millions of Jews and other minorities in Europe, and with Communists who were responsible for the deaths of millions of their own countrymen."
That's true of Van Jones, but not Obama, who kicked Van Jones out.
I've read one of Obama's books, but not both. Based on and other things, the names of people who inspired him in different ways for different reasons include Ronald Reagan and Abraham Lincoln.
Van Jones problem is he didn't approach the Communist Chinese as a money making opportunity like a 'real American' would.
So which is better?
Trading with China, as the "real American" Barack Obama likes, or bringing Mao's ideas (cultural revolution, great leap forward, etc) to America, as Van Jones advocated?
dmarks,
You're being silly again. Trading with China "as Obama likes?"
Stop the silliness.
It was under George HW Bush that China received it's Favored Trading Partner status, and it was continued under his son's administration.
We Americans are practical when it comes to dealing with murderous Commie countries and regimes.
If we can make oodles of money off of them, then it's patriotic to deal with dirty Commies.
But we throw that label at people we don't like, hoping to discredit and slander them forever.
dmarks, you constantly remind us all here, everytime Van Jones' name is typed, that he aligned himself with one of the most murderous regimes in human history.
Why don't you set up you own one-man committee to get the US to stop trading with Communist China? Why?
Don't you know how many of Mao's people died of starvation under his revolution? How many people were put to death?
How can you seriously be so indignant over Van Jones and yet remain silent over how the USA and its CITIZENS continue to trade with and visit COMMUNIST CHINA? Certainly Mao slaughtered more people than did Castro.
Why do we practice this stupid double standard with Communist countries? And please, why do you continue with such hypocritical indignation? Van Jones is hardly a revolutionary, and yet every day, Communist China [how's that human rights thing going for them?] and the United States keep their comfy little relationship based on each others' needs going, going, going, just like that bunny with the batteries...
We trade with China because it's in our interest to do so. Liberalizing China's economy is also in our strategic interest. It's hard to maintain an oppressive regime when you're allowing open markets, which require a free flow of information.
But we don't want their oppression here. That's why we object to Stalinists here, whether they are playacting poseurs like Van Jones, or dedicated conspirators like the president's ghostwriter William Ayres.
We don't understand why the left thinks Nazi Germany was horrible, yet the Soviet Union was just suffering from having a few bad apples in charge (the ACORN defense). They used the same methods and the ideology was pretty much interchangeable.
"Best-selling celebrity journalist, Christopher Andersen, has blown a huge hole in the Obama genius myth without intending to do so.'
Christopher Peter Andersen (born May 26, 1949) is an American journalist and the author of 28 books, including many bestsellers. A graduate of the University of California at Berkeley, Andersen joined the staff of Time Magazine as a contributing editor in 1969. From 1974 to 1986 Andersen was senior editor of Time Incorporated’s People Magazine. He has also written for a wide range of publications, including The New York Times, Life, and Vanity Fair.
While his early nonfiction books veered from psychology (The Name Game) to true crime (The Serpent’s Tooth) to art collecting (The Best of Everything, with former Sotheby’s chairman John Marion), he is best known for his controversial biographies.
So a rightwing blogger [with no axe to grind-LOL!] says that a "celebrity journalist" speculates that Mr. Obama's book "Dreams From My Father" may have had input by William Ayers?
That settles it! William Ayers wrote "Dreams From My Father!"
Some malcontent rightwing blogger has been trying to prove this for a long time. It really scratched his ass that Mr. Obama's book got such rave reviews. And he just knows that a HaFrican American couldn't possibly have the brains to write something as brilliant as "Dreams," so the Right is dedicating itself to sniffing out fraud and who the "real" author is.
You know what? I've heard that Mr. Obama really didn't graduate summa cum laude from Harvard, and that he wasn't the first Hafrican-American to head the Harvard Law Review, that Mr. Obama is really the embodiment of Marxist, Socialist, Fascist, Communist, doctrine, and he's been able to fool Columbia University, Harvard University, The University of Chicago [where he taught Constitutional Law--THE FRAUD!].
I've heard from the Right that he was born in Kenya, not Hawaii, THE FRAUD!, and that the millions and millions and millions of people in this country who voted for him, as well as his wife, his children, and even Bo, the dog were tricked into believing that he's capable of anything except tearing down his country and establishing a Communist regime. And also forcing sweet little American children to worship him! ZOUNDS!
Thank you, Gordon, for informing us of ANOTHER huge hoax Mr. Obama is trying to conceal--THAT WILLIAM AYERS PROBABLY WROTE THE BOOK ABOUT HIS OWN CHILDHOOD!
Thank Darwin for the Right! They are champions of finding anything and everything about this FRAUD!
Next thing we'll find out from our vigilant friends on the Right is that Mr. Obama even fooled us into believing he is half-black and that he really wears shoe polish to give himself that minority sheen we Lefties all love and admire.
Go for it, Righties! There is so much more you can do to slander, denigrate, and destroy this man. And you've got 3 more years to do it in!
And you do it so well.
Now, now, Shaw. We were pointing this sort of thing out a year (and more) ago. It's not our fault that the media were having so many thrills up their legs that they deliberately ignored the links between Ayres (who thought that they would only have to kill a quarter of the US population to achieve the revolution) and our president-to-be.
After all, Profiles in Courage was ghostwritten, too, as was It Takes a Village. Not by Marxist terrorists, of course, but still.
The president's Grammy award for reading it aloud was all his, however.
Gordon,
It may give you a thrill up YOUR leg to buy into this conspiracy theory about who really authored "Dreams From My Father," but it'll never satisfy you.
For that, you'll need orgasmic Articles of Impeachment.
LOL!
McCarthyism is alive and well. Gordon & dmarks (and the up & coming 'patriot' Jim) keep up the good work hereabouts.
Van Jones is a Yale graduate who has worked verypublicly in his community his entire career. Leftist? Of course. Communist? Who cares? Jones has worked to improve literacy in prisons to fight recidivism and worked with young urban residents to engage in environmentalism.
He is no mass murderer. He works for his community and like anyone else from the far Left he is demonized, smeared and lied about for his efforts.
No if he'd just picked up his MBA from Yale instead and gone into international business he could at least have made a very good living dealing with murderous regimes who have enacted some market reforms instead he decided to help his community.
Far too often a big mistake in America.
Communist? Who cares?
I care. Socialism in whatever form has not worked in all history (I would lump monarchies here as well). You can't point to one country that has been as successful as we and given its citizens the life style attained here as free citizens. I know, the Roman Empire at first blush comes to mind, however, slavery lasted throughout its history.
I care. Cities across this land are in shambles because of one party rule, New Orleans, Detroit, Atlanta to name just a few.
I care. Our schools, whether they be pre-, k-12, college, or grad are mere reflections of once proud institutions. Self-esteem is not going to put food on the table. Not teaching why these United States became the greatest in all history, and yes the warts as well, no one is perfect, is a mistake. Self-reliance will get you ahead, self-esteem only gets you a pat on the back. Stop the America bashing in our schools.
I care. Just who are these people giving Mr. Obama advice? Is it good advice? Will this advice help or hinder America? The people Mr. Obama surrounds himself is a good indicator of his thoughts and where he plans to take us.
I care. Socialism in whatever form has not worked in all history.--Jim
The good citizens of western democracies like Norway, Sweden, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Canada, Spain may disagree, since they all have some form of socialism going on in their countries.
You are also upset over where this country is and the condition of its institutions? Surely you realize that the dominant party in power for the last 40 years was the GOP. It was in power for 28 of those 40 years, and more recently, the Bush administration, had complete power for 6 of its 8 years.
Surely you and other like-minded citizens would have been able to convince those in power to change the direction of the country.
You aren't seriously blaming Mr. Obama for damage that took years to accumulate, are you? In 7+ months?
Really. People have to make up their minds about this president.
I hear constantly from some on the Right that Obama is incompetent, stupid, an empty suit, and yet at the same time, these same people claim he is responsible for the total destruction of America, as it used to be, in just 7+ months?
You and I know this is nonsense.
Good for you Jim. Good for you.
I'm glad you 'care'.
The lasting legacy of McCathyism is anyone who at anytime, anywhere was a 'Communist' is disqualified from public service forever. The end. As Van Jones' case demonstrates. Smearing Van Jones is the same as suggesting every capitalist wants to go back to the days before child labor laws.
On the other hand work with right wing thugs who actually murder civilians ala Eliot Abrams (in the fight against 'communism' of course) and your rehabilitation and continued success is assured.
You have yet to show any smearing of Van Jones.
"The lasting legacy of McCathyism is anyone who at anytime, anywhere was a 'Communist' is disqualified from public service forever."
Getting rid of the quotes around Communist, what is so bad about this? For the same reason, I don't think Nazis (like Communists, also people who think that really bad hate groups are great) are incompatible with the idea of "public service".
People with the extremely poor judgement to have ever belonged to such hate groupa as the Nazis or Communists (or even lesser groups such as the Weathermen or KKK) have a lot of explaining to do to show that thay are no longer genocidal kooks.
Arthur said: "McCarthyism is alive and well. Gordon & dmarks (and the up & coming 'patriot' Jim) keep up the good work hereabouts."
McCarthyism was the smearing of people as Communists without any evidence that they were Communists. Arthur, you are quite simply making a false accusation. The "McCarthyism" situation does not apply to Van Jones, since he readily admitted he was one.
"Van Jones is a Yale graduate who has worked very publicly in his community his entire career. Leftist? Of course. Communist? Who cares?"
Embracing membership in the worst genocidal group in human history matters. It shows Jones as being either very stupid or ill-willed. It matters as much as someone having been a Nazi matters. For the exact same reasons.
I suggest you look into Maoism sometime. Hate to break it to you, but Van Jones beloved Mao has little in common with actual progressives and actual liberals like the our President, or the late Sens. Wellstone and Kennedy.
Rush Limbaugh and many on the Right seem to think there is no difference. It's all the same ideology. And you are agreeing with them.
"He is no mass murderer."
But he did for a while think that the policies of Mao were a great idea for the US.
David Duke is not a mass murderer, either. But like Van Jones, he disqualifies himself for any serious consideration for anything because he advocates mass murder as the best way to rule.
"He works for his community and like anyone else from the far Left he is demonized, smeared and lied about for his efforts."
He demonized himself by lining up behind Mao, and you have yet to name one smear or lie. The defense of the far left is disturbing, too. The far left, like the far right, is filled with the worst kind of extremists. The problem with the far left Pol Pot/Van Jones fringe is not that people mis-portray them as bad people. It is because they really are bad.
It is one thing to defend liberalism. It is another to lump the worst fascists in with liberals as some sort of respectable part of the Left as you have done.
Still waiting for one lie or smear about Jones that I have defended or made.
Come to think of it, Arthur's defense of someone who once advocated practices which kill as much as 1/3 of the population of a nation when implimented as someone who "worked for his community" makes me think of those KKK groups that do their "civic duty" and sign up for highway cleaning programs.
Yeah, they are all helping the community, right?
The European democracies are fleeing from all the social programs as fast as they can, or do you read the papers? They know they are going broke and are desperately trying to change their ways.
I did not say Mr. Obama caused all the ills in this country. The cities have been in decline for decades due to Democrat rule. When was the last time a Republican held the mayoral office in any of the cities I mentioned? Much less the city councils.
The Presidency has been held by Republicans for somewhat the amount of time you mentioned but rarely with the control of both Houses as well. Not even Eisenhower had that luxury. Not Reagan. George W for a little while early in his administration. Democrats controlled both Houses for over 60 years before 1994, thus Social Security, the Great Society, Medicare and Medicaid, so forth.
What is it about McCarthy that you don't like? You just know what has been written by left leaning writers. Joe has been proven to be right. Of course, Authorstone, you just want to continue bashing the dead.
Give it up dmarks. Van Jones is no more a proponent of mass murder than you are.
And Jim save that 'leftist writer' stuff for your feeble minded cohorts. McCarthy earned his reputation as a demagogue through his actions it isn't an invention of the alleged 'liberal media'.
I guess Jim doesn't read British papers:
http://bit.ly/rU0UN
Arthur: The evidence proves you wrong. Jones was a member of STORM, a specifically Maoist organization. Once you learn this fact, then you can check into what Maoism means.
Not caring that someone is a Maoist is as ignorant as not caring if someone is a Nazi.
Give it up. The facts aren't on your side.
Everything this nut wrote is bullshit.
A typical, paranoid asshole conservative, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing.
Aw, this was an extremely nice post. Finding the time and actual effort to
create a superb article… but what can I say… I hesitate a lot and don't manage to get nearly anything done.
My webpage: Wholesale NFL Jerseys
I loved as much as you will receive carried out right here.
The sketch is attractive, your authored material stylish.
nonetheless, you command get got an shakiness over that you wish be delivering the following.
unwell unquestionably come more formerly again since exactly
the same nearly very often inside case you shield this increase.
Feel free to visit my blog post Authentic Kris Letang Jersey
It's truly a great and helpful piece of info. I'm happy that you shared this
helpful info with us. Please stay us informed like this. Thanks for
sharing.
Review my site: web site
I'll immediately take hold of your rss feed as I can't to
find your e-mail subscription link or e-newsletter service.
Do you have any? Kindly let me realize in order that I may just
subscribe. Thanks.
My webpage ... Recommended Reading
I am really loving the theme/design of your website.
Do you ever run into any browser compatibility problems?
A couple of my blog audience have complained about
my blog not working correctly in Explorer but looks great in Chrome.
Do you have any advice to help fix this issue?
Have a look at my page ... get more info
Post a Comment