This Country is Coming Apart at Its Seams.

[mpohl 1]

Quote

[...]

This country is going to come apart at its seams!

Exactly my point (#1 in this thread): Quod erat demonstrandum.

[1969912 0]

Quote

It seems you missed that this was an insertion by a poster who quoted the original AP release.

It was very clear to me that rushmc added the highlighted text. Seems you might have missed the point - as predicted.

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[kbordson 8]

Quote

Quote

[...]

This country is going to come apart at its seams!

Exactly my point (#1 in this thread): Quod erat demonstrandum.

Ummm.

still nope.

[DanG 1]

Quote

And when they did, the race cards flew so fast and thick it looked like a blizzard in here.

Still does, from time to time.

You, and others, keep saying that. I never saw anyone called a racist for opposing Obama's policies.

Making jokes about fried chicken and ho slappin, yes that was rigthtly labeled racist. I really can't remember anyone throwing the racist flag on other things.

- Dan G

[wmw999 2,123]

Some people, through their (or their parents') life experience, hear racism more acutely than others.

There are others who seem to hear the race card more acutely than others.

Of course, having others tell you what you're hearing makes it easier, too

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Prepared modified and changed text of Obama's speech.....

An important point that many will miss.

As I wrote on Friday (post 82):
After Tuesday, the transcript of his speech will be available and we'll all know how ridiculous this discussion was. Of course, the ones responsible for making something out of nothing will insist that it was their cries that made Obama steer clear of the evil plan he got out of Mein Kamph.

[futuredivot 0]

Once again-the problem wasn't the speech, it was the study helps that that focused on the person Obama instead of the nation , where loyalty should be. The study guides were changed. I'm good with the speech. It could be inspiring. The President is a heck of a speaker when he has prepared statements. I think that he, his advisers, or handlers should have been in touch with the nation enough to realize there would be some flash from those study notes. It was just a lack of experience in this level of scrutiny that caused the oversight and that particular verbiage. Obama, like past Presidents, is surrounded by people he chose because they think like he does. I think the administration should pay me to follow Obama around just to ask him several times a day "Have you really thought about this?". I could be the Get A Clue Czar.

You are only as strong as the prey you devour

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I think that he, his advisers, or handlers should have been in touch with the nation enough to realize there would be some flash from those study notes.

Right now there is a flash no matter what he says and does. And it's not just his inexperience. Most of this flash was based on FUD intentionally spread by his opposition.

Too much of the GOP is focused on saying 'no' rather than trying to contribute useful proposals. The party needs to move on - the Bush administration is over, and was a total failure. The midterm elections start in about 6 months and it would be great if new leaders (not quitters from Alaska) emerge.

The problems are too significant to leave to a single party.

[kbordson 8]

Quote

Quote

I think that he, his advisers, or handlers should have been in touch with the nation enough to realize there would be some flash from those study notes.

Right now there is a flash no matter what he says and does. And it's not just his inexperience. Most of this flash was based on FUD intentionally spread by his opposition.

Too much of the GOP is focused on saying 'no' rather than trying to contribute useful proposals. The party needs to move on - the Bush administration is over, and was a total failure. The midterm elections start in about 6 months and it would be great if new leaders (not quitters from Alaska) emerge.

The problems are too significant to leave to a single party.

WOW!

Ya know..... there are just as many things wrong with that post as there are with many of the "GOP" posts/ attitudes. You do know that BOTH sides have messed up, right? You do know that BOTH sides have valid concerns and not so "valid" "paranoia" issues. Blindly following EITHER side is a folly.

[d_squared431 0]

Obama's lesson plan is unlawful. (U.S. Code Title 20, Chapter 48, Section 3403) Obama's violated our federal laws! He was aware he violated our federal level laws and yet he still did what he wanted. How is that for a role model of a our nation? The laws and principles of what our nation was built on are slowing being pushed aside for his own political agenda, not the good of the nation. I for one am not happy about this. What is next?

TPM Sister#130ONTIG#1
I love vodka.I love vodka cause it rhymes with Tuaca~LisaH
You having a clean thought is like billyvance having a clean post.iluvtofly

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

What is next?

Next thing? Obama will probably have all Medicare recipients herded onto boxcars to be taken to the gas chambers.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[billvon 2,400]

>Obama's lesson plan is unlawful.

From the section of the code you posted:

=========================================
(a) Rights of local governments and educational institutions

It is the intention of the Congress in the establishment of the Department to protect the rights of State and local governments and public and private educational institutions in the areas of educational policies and administration of programs and to strengthen and improve the control of such governments and institutions over their own educational programs and policies. The establishment of the Department of Education shall not increase the authority of the Federal Government over education or diminish the responsibility for education which is reserved to the States and the local school systems and other instrumentalities of the States.

(b) Curriculum, administration, and personnel; library resources

No provision of a program administered by the Secretary or by any other officer of the Department shall be construed to authorize the Secretary or any such officer to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational institution, school, or school system, over any accrediting agency or association, or over the selection or content of library resources, textbooks, or other instructional materials by any educational institution or school system, except to the extent authorized by law.

(c) Funding under pre-existing programs

The Secretary shall not, during the period within eight months after May 4, 1980, take any action to withhold, suspend, or terminate funds under any program transferred by this chapter by reason of the failure of any State to comply with any applicable law requiring the administration of such a program through a single organizational unit.
=======================================

Care to point out what was violated?

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Care to point out what was violated?

That wasn't a serious question now, was it?

[dsandreas 0]

Obama's speech refers to himself over 50 times...mostly using the word "I". He refers to the country less than 10 times. But the speech isn't about him.

[billvon 2,400]

Wow, is that really the best the right wing can do? He used himself as an example too much? That is truly an epic fail.

[kbordson 8]

Quote

Wow, is that really the best the right wing can do? He used himself as an example too much? That is truly an epic fail.

It's almost as bad as quoting the Onion.

[billvon 2,400]

>It's almost as bad as quoting the Onion.

I can't believe there are contemptible scoundrels who would do that!

[kbordson 8]

Quote

>It's almost as bad as quoting the Onion.

I can't believe there are contemptible scoundrels who would do that!

I can.

[RhondaLea 3]

...and then one of my friends linked this on her Facebook page...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adiLJxayfg8

Made me laugh.

If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

[skydance1954 0]

From the point of view of someone on the outside looking in - I don't understand why all of a sudden, we have this very vocal group screaming about not trusting the president's speech, and his "indoctrinating" young minds to his agenda.

The past three sitting presidents all did a similar things in addressing young school children, and there was no outcry.

My kids are grown and full adults - but I can relate to concerns that a parent would have about anyone coming to a school to give a speach about something. So it's OK to be aware and take note of what is being said.

However - (again from the point of view of someone on the outside, with no dog in the fight) - what I see here is that some parents don't like the man and what he represents. That's fine too. As a free country you're allowed to disagree.

But here's where we have a problem - even when the man stands up and gives a speach about something we can all agree on (work hard, stay in school, live up to your potential, contribute something positive to society in your own unique way) - above said parents refuse to allow their children to listen to this message. Apparently because it comes from a specific source that they don't want their children to listen to - about anything, even when it could be something that is right.

My concern here goes beyond the speech itself. The pattern I've seen from the "loyal opposition" is not one of competing ideas and working on compromise - it's one of simply trying to torpedo whatever agenda the administration has. No alternative ideas, nothing constructive - just resistance and demonizing.

Don't like what you see? Fine. Provide an alternative and start negotiating.

Mike Ashley
D-18460
Canadian A-666

[skydance1954 0]

I looked that up, too, and I would like to also know what specific point is being violated here.

And how is it that previous presidents didn't violate this law, but the present one does.

Mike Ashley
D-18460
Canadian A-666

[LyraM45 0]

Quote

From the point of view of someone on the outside looking in - I don't understand why all of a sudden, we have this very vocal group screaming about not trusting the president's speech, and his "indoctrinating" young minds to his agenda.

The past three sitting presidents all did a similar things in addressing young school children, and there was no outcry.

My kids are grown and full adults - but I can relate to concerns that a parent would have about anyone coming to a school to give a speach about something. So it's OK to be aware and take note of what is being said.

However - (again from the point of view of someone on the outside, with no dog in the fight) - what I see here is that some parents don't like the man and what he represents. That's fine too. As a free country you're allowed to disagree.

But here's where we have a problem - even when the man stands up and gives a speach about something we can all agree on (work hard, stay in school, live up to your potential, contribute something positive to society in your own unique way) - above said parents refuse to allow their children to listen to this message. Apparently because it comes from a specific source that they don't want their children to listen to - about anything, even when it could be something that is right.

My concern here goes beyond the speech itself. The pattern I've seen from the "loyal opposition" is not one of competing ideas and working on compromise - it's one of simply trying to torpedo whatever agenda the administration has. No alternative ideas, nothing constructive - just resistance and demonizing.

Don't like what you see? Fine. Provide an alternative and start negotiating.

VERY VERY VERY VERY GOOD POST!!!!! Well said! Thank you for being objective in this situation. We need more people from the outside looking in trying to see it from everybody elses shoes and then make fair judgment.

Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :)

[Ion01 1]

Wow! Talk about completely missing the point. The problem was never the speech or desire to give the speech. It was the fact that he went directly to the principles with his agenda and completely bypass the school boards and such. The other problem was the agenda which asked things like "what can I do to help the president?" It said that teachers should have the children write letters to themselves about how they can help the president and the teachers could help hold them responsible for it. (not how they can help themselves achieve goals or help others achieve thiers but help the president.) The problem was with the agenda suggesting that quotes and pictures of the president be put up around the classroom. No president in the past has done anything like this.....unless they are the president of a country like north korea. Unlike the past presidents he didn't give any indication of the content of his speech.....which apparently changed because of all the outcry.

[kallend 1,625]

Quote

...and then one of my friends linked this on her Facebook page...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adiLJxayfg8

Made me laugh.

Thanks, I needed that.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[skydance1954 0]

No, I haven't missed the point. I was making an observation on the behaviour of the current minority party and their supporters.

Now, you have clearly defined the nature of the problem in a dispasionate manner, which is excellent. Now we have a place to begin a civilized discourse.

To play devil's advocate here: perhaps asking young people "what they can do to help the president?" could simply be a method to troll new ideas from young people. Kinda like brainstorming - throw everything against the wall and see what sticks. This only works if you ask the question and stand back. Give no guidence for one side or the other. Young folks look at things differently, and we can all do well to listen to their ideas. Sometimes something really good comes out of it. I can attest personally that I've learned as much (or more) from my kids as they have from me.

It can also be construed to be a sinister plan to brainwash the youth of America into a specific line of thought. The opposition and several private citizens chose to see it as the latter, and objected. The objectionable content was then removed, and a more neutral tone was applied to the speech.

And hasn't there been pictures of the sitting president in schools and classrooms around the country for at least the past 100+ years anyway? I seem to recall a LOT of movies about young people where there's a picture of the president in the background. I seem to recall there being a shot of Eisenhower behind the principal in Grease.

A good percentage of the people who originally objected to the specific (and possibly legitimate) issue above, still removed their children from school, stating straight up that they don't want their children listening to "that man", no matter what message he carries. The news even showed several parents pulling their kids from school, watching the speech, agreeing with what was said - and STILL telling the cameras that they are glad they pulled their kids from school because they don't want this president talking to them. And they'll do it again if he chooses to give another speech. They don't care what he intends to say.

From my point of view on the sidelines - this isn't about the issues. They are the justification being used to engage in extremely negative behavior.

We have parents that are deliberately and unapolligetically (sp?) restricting their children's right to hear both sides of an argument. At this point, I'm not talking about the school thing. I'm saying that these people are going to spend the next 4 years telling their kids that there is only one way to go - their way - all other arguments are invalid. Period.

I was taught that America is a land where diverse opinions are meant to be discussed in an open forum for all to hear. We are allowed to disagree. We must try to be civil to one another and respect the opposition, even when we don't agree with it, and try to work on something we can all live with.

This isn't what these people are doing.

Mike Ashley
D-18460
Canadian A-666