Analysis: Obama foes contrived back-to-school fuss

[Pens1566]

Yes, the crazies have prevented yet another commie plot to brainwash our kids.

lol @ using Rove as a "source".

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: PokerGuy
The lesson plan getting changed is a FACT, and you'd have to be very naive to think the speech didn't get cleaned up after the hubbub as well. I guess the attempt to get the socialist message to the little ones without the parents being able to act as a filter got thwarted.

Prove it.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Oh noes...contrived fuss...Dems would never do such a thing! The horrors!

This whole thing is ridiculous. Good speech and message by Obama BTW...and I'm damn glad he didn't politicize it.

 

[DealMonkey]

A timeline of radical stupidity:

On Aug. 26, the White House officially announced Obama would be addressing students.

The next day, a conservative Web site criticized the speech, without even knowing what the president intended to say.

Just days later, on Sept. 1, Florida Republican Party chairman Jim Greer slammed the speech as "indoctrination." By the next day, conservative talk show hosts Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck had picked up the rallying cry.

Leave it to the morons in the GOP to knee-jerk without having ever seen the text of the speech. :roll:

 

[PokerGuy]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: PokerGuy
The lesson plan getting changed is a FACT, and you'd have to be very naive to think the speech didn't get cleaned up after the hubbub as well. I guess the attempt to get the socialist message to the little ones without the parents being able to act as a filter got thwarted.

Prove it.

OK....

"We changed it to clarify the language so the intent is clear,? said White House Spokesman Tommy Vietor. Linky

I'm guessing that if the white house spokesman said they changed it, it's a pretty safe bet that they changed it

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: PokerGuy
The lesson plan getting changed is a FACT, and you'd have to be very naive to think the speech didn't get cleaned up after the hubbub as well. I guess the attempt to get the socialist message to the little ones without the parents being able to act as a filter got thwarted.

Prove it.

OK....

"We changed it to clarify the language so the intent is clear,? said White House Spokesman Tommy Vietor. Linky

I'm guessing that if the white house spokesman said they changed it, it's a pretty safe bet that they changed it

Context dude, context:

Much of the controversy stemmed from one of the optional preparatory materials for teachers provided by the Department of Education, in which students had been asked to, "Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president." The White House and the Department of Education changed the section to now read, "Write letters to themselves about how they can achieve their short-term and long-term education goals.?

?We changed it to clarify the language so the intent is clear,? said White House Spokesman Tommy Vietor.

Tommy was talking about one of the OPTIONAL PREPARATORY MATERIALS, NOT THE SPEECH.

Got it straight now?

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: PokerGuy
The lesson plan getting changed is a FACT, and you'd have to be very naive to think the speech didn't get cleaned up after the hubbub as well. I guess the attempt to get the socialist message to the little ones without the parents being able to act as a filter got thwarted.

Apparently, I bolded the wrong part.

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: PokerGuy
The lesson plan getting changed is a FACT, and you'd have to be very naive to think the speech didn't get cleaned up after the hubbub as well. I guess the attempt to get the socialist message to the little ones without the parents being able to act as a filter got thwarted.

Prove it.

OK....

"We changed it to clarify the language so the intent is clear,? said White House Spokesman Tommy Vietor. Linky

I'm guessing that if the white house spokesman said they changed it, it's a pretty safe bet that they changed it

Context dude, context:

Much of the controversy stemmed from one of the optional preparatory materials for teachers provided by the Department of Education, in which students had been asked to, "Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president." The White House and the Department of Education changed the section to now read, "Write letters to themselves about how they can achieve their short-term and long-term education goals.?

?We changed it to clarify the language so the intent is clear,? said White House Spokesman Tommy Vietor.

Tommy was talking about one of the OPTIONAL PREPARATORY MATERIALS, NOT THE SPEECH.

Got it straight now?

Yep i guess PG did not even read the link he gave as the headline says...

"White House revises proposed lesson plan on Obama speech"


So PG where is the proof that his speech was changed?

 

[Thump553]

It's absolutely amazing that this speech was protested (in advance) as politicing when God Reagan specifically stumped for tax cuts in his speech to school children. Either very short memory or hypocrisy, take your choice.

I don't lay all the blame at the GOP-they played right into the hands of the media, which seems to have an obsession recently of making the gripes of LaRoche supporters and other fringers appear to be a mass movement, which they certainly are not. Nut jobs have always been with us and always will.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: PokerGuy
The issue was not with the president talking to the children, it's with the content of the speech / materials distributed with the speech: it was a creepy political "lets get the kids on board with the socialist agenda" kind of activity. After it got outed, it was changed into what it was supposed to be: just a talk with a generally positive message for the kids.

I keep asking people to provide the text of the speech before and after it was changed, but nobody seems to be able to do it. Amazingly enough, not having any evidence for the speech being changed has not affected the right wing's belief that it was.

Rove: "I would suspect, a dime to a dollar bet you, that they altered that speech." Fox News contributor Karl Rove stated: "I would suspect, a dime to a dollar bet you, that they altered that speech. And they certainly altered the study guides. But the purpose was partly good, partly political. It's now been turned a lot more good, less political." [Fox News' Happening Now, 9/8/09]

The lesson plan getting changed is a FACT, and you'd have to be very naive to think the speech didn't get cleaned up after the hubbub as well. I guess the attempt to get the socialist message to the little ones without the parents being able to act as a filter got thwarted.

oh...no you didn't....

:baby jesus cry;

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: PokerGuy
The issue was not with the president talking to the children, it's with the content of the speech / materials distributed with the speech: it was a creepy political "lets get the kids on board with the socialist agenda" kind of activity. After it got outed, it was changed into what it was supposed to be: just a talk with a generally positive message for the kids.

I keep asking people to provide the text of the speech before and after it was changed, but nobody seems to be able to do it. Amazingly enough, not having any evidence for the speech being changed has not affected the right wing's belief that it was.

Rove: "I would suspect, a dime to a dollar bet you, that they altered that speech." Fox News contributor Karl Rove stated: "I would suspect, a dime to a dollar bet you, that they altered that speech. And they certainly altered the study guides. But the purpose was partly good, partly political. It's now been turned a lot more good, less political." [Fox News' Happening Now, 9/8/09]

The lesson plan getting changed is a FACT, and you'd have to be very naive to think the speech didn't get cleaned up after the hubbub as well. I guess the attempt to get the socialist message to the little ones without the parents being able to act as a filter got thwarted.

/facepalm

 

[Phokus]

GOP = worthless scum, shocking news at 11

 

[cubby1223]

Is it any difference when the Democrats put up a huge stink when Bush Sr. talked to students? Their congressional hearings into the planning and financing of the "political stunt"?

This is just politics as usual. Democrats are just as guilty as Republicans.

 

[Pens1566]

First, there was no outcry of "teh socilizm", "we're taking our kids out of school". Second, I believe the GAO was the one responsible for initiating the investigation. And only because it looked like using tax $ for campaigning. That I would have an issue with (as should most sane people). But "stay in school and work hard" isn't what I'd classify as campaigning.

Next deflection ...

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: PokerGuy
The issue was not with the president talking to the children, it's with the content of the speech / materials distributed with the speech: it was a creepy political "lets get the kids on board with the socialist agenda" kind of activity. After it got outed, it was changed into what it was supposed to be: just a talk with a generally positive message for the kids.

I keep asking people to provide the text of the speech before and after it was changed, but nobody seems to be able to do it. Amazingly enough, not having any evidence for the speech being changed has not affected the right wing's belief that it was.

Rove: "I would suspect, a dime to a dollar bet you, that they altered that speech." Fox News contributor Karl Rove stated: "I would suspect, a dime to a dollar bet you, that they altered that speech. And they certainly altered the study guides. But the purpose was partly good, partly political. It's now been turned a lot more good, less political." [Fox News' Happening Now, 9/8/09]

The lesson plan getting changed is a FACT, and you'd have to be very naive to think the speech didn't get cleaned up after the hubbub as well. I guess the attempt to get the socialist message to the little ones without the parents being able to act as a filter got thwarted.

It's awesome that you are so far divorced from reality that you think Karl Rove is a credible source. Like I said before, you don't seem to have a problem believing something with zero evidence to back it up. I guess that works for you.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
How is it any different than the left fringe during the Bush Administration, who similarly attempted to politicize every Bush decision? Cindy Sheehan, Code Pink, 9/11 conspiracy theorists and other vocal activists are certainly not representative of all Democrats.

Because this wasn't a political objection. The objectors, abetted by fox news, propagated their belief that Obama was trying to "indoctrinate" their children. The conservative talking didn't object to the 'waste of tax payer dollars' the speech would cost as dems did when reagan/bush gave similar speeches (also a dumb objection); they claimed Obama was acting as a dictator would, as would Mao, Stalin, etc. It's an extension of the xenophobic paranoid racially tinged birtherism. Dems didn't pull kids out of school when republican presidents addressed the nation.

Further, the difference is truthers were outcasts among political circles. Bill Maher and other liberals were attacked for calling them crazy. Yet the Rep giving the response speech tonight after Obama once said there were "valid questions" about Obama's birth. Tim Pawlenty, viewed as a conservative moderate and presidential candidate expressed "concern" over the content of Obama's message to students. Death panels has been repeated ad nauseum by those on the right despite complete annihilation of the scare tactic, and so it lives on. This mainstream right acceptance of the fringe movement is what is different.

 

[PokerGuy]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: PokerGuy
The issue was not with the president talking to the children, it's with the content of the speech / materials distributed with the speech: it was a creepy political "lets get the kids on board with the socialist agenda" kind of activity. After it got outed, it was changed into what it was supposed to be: just a talk with a generally positive message for the kids.

I keep asking people to provide the text of the speech before and after it was changed, but nobody seems to be able to do it. Amazingly enough, not having any evidence for the speech being changed has not affected the right wing's belief that it was.

Rove: "I would suspect, a dime to a dollar bet you, that they altered that speech." Fox News contributor Karl Rove stated: "I would suspect, a dime to a dollar bet you, that they altered that speech. And they certainly altered the study guides. But the purpose was partly good, partly political. It's now been turned a lot more good, less political." [Fox News' Happening Now, 9/8/09]

The lesson plan getting changed is a FACT, and you'd have to be very naive to think the speech didn't get cleaned up after the hubbub as well. I guess the attempt to get the socialist message to the little ones without the parents being able to act as a filter got thwarted.

It's awesome that you are so far divorced from reality that you think Karl Rove is a credible source. Like I said before, you don't seem to have a problem believing something with zero evidence to back it up. I guess that works for you.

I didn't cite Rove as "evidence" of anything, I quoted him because he articulated the logical conclusion very well. The lesson plans were changed, and there's no reason for anyone who's not incredibly naive to believe that the speech was not altered as well. Is there evidence of that? No. Doesn't mean it didn't happen.

 

[Pens1566]

My bengal tiger jumped out my window this morning. No evidence of it, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: PokerGuy

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: PokerGuy
The issue was not with the president talking to the children, it's with the content of the speech / materials distributed with the speech: it was a creepy political "lets get the kids on board with the socialist agenda" kind of activity. After it got outed, it was changed into what it was supposed to be: just a talk with a generally positive message for the kids.

I keep asking people to provide the text of the speech before and after it was changed, but nobody seems to be able to do it. Amazingly enough, not having any evidence for the speech being changed has not affected the right wing's belief that it was.

Rove: "I would suspect, a dime to a dollar bet you, that they altered that speech." Fox News contributor Karl Rove stated: "I would suspect, a dime to a dollar bet you, that they altered that speech. And they certainly altered the study guides. But the purpose was partly good, partly political. It's now been turned a lot more good, less political." [Fox News' Happening Now, 9/8/09]

The lesson plan getting changed is a FACT, and you'd have to be very naive to think the speech didn't get cleaned up after the hubbub as well. I guess the attempt to get the socialist message to the little ones without the parents being able to act as a filter got thwarted.

It's awesome that you are so far divorced from reality that you think Karl Rove is a credible source. Like I said before, you don't seem to have a problem believing something with zero evidence to back it up. I guess that works for you.

I didn't cite Rove as "evidence" of anything, I quoted him because he articulated the logical conclusion very well. The lesson plans were changed, and there's no reason for anyone who's not incredibly naive to believe that the speech was not altered as well. Is there evidence of that? No. Doesn't mean it didn't happen.

So we are playing the "No evidence, but doesn't mean it did not happen" game?

So I guess since I have no evidence you are a pedophile, that does not mean you have never had sex with a 12 year old boy.

So we all must assume, per PGs rules, that PokerGuy is a pedophile that picks up little boys and unless he can prove he is not, its true. [/KarlRove+Fox]

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: Pens1566
My bengal tiger jumped out my window this morning. No evidence of it, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

DUDE!!! I saw that on Fox this morning reported by Karl Rove. Damm, I hope you find your tiger. I bet he is scared and wants to come home by now.

 

[jackschmittusa]

Face it! The Republicans are lost in the wilderness and have nothing to offer the country. They have realized it and are resorting to making shit up to raise hell about so it looks like they are doing something.

Will their future campaign strategy consist of "I may be loony, but you need to believe that my opponent is scarier than I am."?

It's truly pathetic that they have reached the point that factual information is deemed unnecessary for communicating with their constituents and they need to rely on manufactured outrage to rally their troops. Directing the country through fear and emotion instead of rational thinking does not bode well for America.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

This is no different than the wingnuts on the left screaming about Bush and fascism for years and all their paranoid, contrived crap about invasions of Iran and October surprises.

The nuts on both sides are ridiculously stupid, always have been, and always will be.

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
This is no different than the wingnuts on the left screaming about Bush and fascism for years and all their paranoid, contrived crap about invasions of Iran and October surprises.

The nuts on both sides are ridiculously stupid, always have been, and always will be.

So your answer to crazy is to be crazier? :laugh:


That and last year when Bush signed the remember 9/11 I do not remember the "left" screaming. Yet Obama does the SAME thing and yet its all over the right wing blogs and many post here.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: jackschmittusa
Face it! The Republicans are lost in the wilderness and have nothing to offer the country. They have realized it and are resorting to making shit up to raise hell about so it looks like they are doing something.

Will their future campaign strategy consist of "I may be loony, but you need to believe that my opponent is scarier than I am."?

It's truly pathetic that they have reached the point that factual information is deemed unnecessary for communicating with their constituents and they need to rely on manufactured outrage to rally their troops. Directing the country through fear and emotion instead of rational thinking does not bode well for America.

Yes the GOP is lost in the wilderness; however, that doesnt stop the left from blaming them for their own failures. As Ive mentioned before, when the GOP had a majority at least they could get shit passed they wanted. The left is throwing tantrums blaming the GOP for their own failures and lack of unity. Its pretty funny.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: jackschmittusa
Face it! The Republicans are lost in the wilderness and have nothing to offer the country. They have realized it and are resorting to making shit up to raise hell about so it looks like they are doing something.

Will their future campaign strategy consist of "I may be loony, but you need to believe that my opponent is scarier than I am."?

It's truly pathetic that they have reached the point that factual information is deemed unnecessary for communicating with their constituents and they need to rely on manufactured outrage to rally their troops. Directing the country through fear and emotion instead of rational thinking does not bode well for America.

Yes the GOP is lost in the wilderness; however, that doesnt stop the left from blaming them for their own failures. As Ive mentioned before, when the GOP had a majority at least they could get shit passed they wanted. The left is throwing tantrums blaming the GOP for their own failures and lack of unity. Its pretty funny.

The GOP is and always has been a far more monolithic party than the Democrats. Of course that tends to be true about conservative parties anywhere. At least in nominal terms the Democrats are the party of 'lets change things in some way', while the Republicans are the party of 'lets keep things the same'. (in a very general sense) With the Democrats you get a collection of people who dislike the current system for any one of a hundred reasons, and that will always lead to a less unified party.

Meh, so far the Democrats have been doing just fine in my book. They've passed quite a large amount of legislation and we've still got more than a year left to go. Chances are good that there's a LOT more to come after this.