School speech: where was all the outrage when Bush Sr did it?

[SpeedRacer 1]

http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2009/09/george_hw_bushs_speech_to_scho.php GHW Bush gave a speech to school children back in 1991, the usual "stay in school, don't do drugs" type thing. Where was the hysterical outrage back then?

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

[riddler 0]

There wasn't hysteria, but Bush Sr. was criticized by the Democrats for the school speech. It just wasn't full of right-wing propaganda, such as "socialist", etc.

Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

[downwardspiral 0]

Well let's see. I was a sophmore in highschool at the time skipping class and smoking drugs. Damn I wish I coulda heard his speech.

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[Dewhast 0]

I am not a parent and I have no problem with what they are currently saying the speech will be about. I was upset with what the speech was going to be about.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/02/wh-withdraws-call-students-help-obama/

"The novel curriculum plan brought sharp criticism from conservatives, including some who complained that classrooms were being used to spread political propaganda. In response, the White House last night confirmed they were revising the lesson plan that was distributed last week by the U.S. Department of Education."

"We're clarifying that language," White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said.

By Wednesday evening, the sentence asking children to think about how they can "help the president" had been replaced. The rewritten line said students should "write letters to themselves about how they can achieve their short-term and long-term education goals. These would be collected and redistributed at an appropriate later date by the teacher to make students accountable to their goals."

IMO there is absolutely nothing wrong with asking a student to "ask what they can do to achieve their education goals" or to "stay off drugs" for that matter. I do have a problem with asking a student to write about how they can help the president achieve his goals.

You must see the difference there.

[Andy9o8 0]

It's quite simple: Bush was, well ... quite simple. Thus, expectations for him were always low from the git-go.

[downwardspiral 0]

Quote

It's quite simple: Bush was, well ... quite simple. Thus, expectations for him were always low from the git-go.

in comparison to a guy that said," I don't know all the facts but the police acted stupidly?"(paraphrasing)

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[quade 3]

Quote

It's quite simple: Bush was, well ... quite simple. Thus, expectations for him were always low from the git-go.

Don't confuse the 41st and the 43rd Presidents.

Bush 41 was -quite- sharp. I didn't agree with some of what he did, but he was sharp as a tack.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[downwardspiral 0]

Quote

I am not a parent and I have no problem with what they are currently saying the speech will be about. I was upset with what the speech was going to be about.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/02/wh-withdraws-call-students-help-obama/

"The novel curriculum plan brought sharp criticism from conservatives, including some who complained that classrooms were being used to spread political propaganda. In response, the White House last night confirmed they were revising the lesson plan that was distributed last week by the U.S. Department of Education."

"We're clarifying that language," White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said.

By Wednesday evening, the sentence asking children to think about how they can "help the president" had been replaced. The rewritten line said students should "write letters to themselves about how they can achieve their short-term and long-term education goals. These would be collected and redistributed at an appropriate later date by the teacher to make students accountable to their goals."

IMO there is absolutely nothing wrong with asking a student to "ask what they can do to achieve their education goals" or to "stay off drugs" for that matter. I do have a problem with asking a student to write about how they can help the president achieve his goals.

You must see the difference there.

Excellent post! THAT was what I was upset about as well. Where does he get the balls asking children what they are going to do to help him succeed? Not help America succeed. Help OBAMA succeed.

It's perfectly reasonable to wonder WTF when our President does stupid shit like this. Thankfully the paranoid people of world got him to fix it.

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[quade 3]

Quote

Excellent post! THAT was what I was upset about as well. Where does he get the balls asking children what they are going to do to help him succeed? Not help America succeed. Help OBAMA succeed.

So, wait, you actually think Obama himself sat down and wrote the study guide? That it wasn't some politically inelegant wording by some well meaning yet not politically savvy person over at the Department of Education? That the document in question actually was created by Obama's hands on the keyboard?

Really?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Dewhast 0]

Does that make any difference whatsoever? The topic was B.S., they got called out, and they stepped up and changed it.

I personally feel that the new topic actually has a chance of being inspirational as opposed to agenda pushing.

[downwardspiral 0]

of course not quade. but doesn't the buck stop with Obama just the same way it stopped with GWB?

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[quade 3]

Quote

of course not quade. but doesn't the buck stop with Obama just the same way it stopped with GWB?

I think we're talking orders of magnitude worth of difference between some words written by a hack over at ed.gov vs say, the start of the Iraq war.

When in the entire 43rd Administration can you point to any amount of hysteria similar to this based on a few words in a study guide for a one-off talk?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[quade 3]

Quote

Does that make any difference whatsoever? The topic was B.S., they got called out, and they stepped up and changed it.

I personally feel that the new topic actually has a chance of being inspirational as opposed to agenda pushing.

The topic of the speech has never changed. There was some inelegant language changed in a study guide written by some well meaning but politically inept person over at ed.gov that had to be changed, but the topic of the speech itself has never changed a single bit.

This entire controversy was simply trumped up by right wing trolling talking heads looking for a fight to get people fired up about. It made for "great" filler so they didn't have to talk about real issues.

Congratulations, mission accomplished.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Dewhast 0]

Again, does that make any difference? I am just pointing out why people got upset.

"Presidential aides acknowledged the White House helped the U.S. Education Department craft the proposal, which immediately was met by fierce criticism from Republicans and conservative organizations who accused Mr. Obama of trying to politicize the education system.

White House aides said the language was an honest misunderstanding in what was supposed to be a inspirational, pro-education message to America's youths.

Among the activities the government initially suggested for prekindergarten to sixth-grade students: that they "write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president." Another task recommended for students immediately after listening to the speech: to engage in a discussion about what "the president wants us to do."

Yes they said it was a misunderstanding, but the letter and post speech discussion topic sure sound like propaganda. Again, I am just pointing out why there was an uproar. This is very different than "say no to drugs" no matter what your politics are.

[downwardspiral 0]

Quote

There was some inelegant language changed in a study guide written by some well meaning but politically inept person over at ed.gov that had to be changed, but the topic of the speech itself has never changed a single bit.

Do you have evidence or is this simply your opinion?

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[quade 3]

See post above yours.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[GeorgiaDon 340]

Quote

Another task recommended for students immediately after listening to the speech: to engage in a discussion about what "the president wants us to do."

Do conservatives have no sense of context? WTF? Think about it. The president gives a talk about setting personal goals in education, and working hard to meet those goals. Nothing more. Immediately afterward, the kids are asked "to engage in a discussion about what the president wants us to do". Rational people would recognize that there is a connection between the speach and the question. Why would anyone conclude that the "correct answer" would have anything to do with matters that were not specifically discussed in the speach? How can people who think like that even function?

Teacher: How much is 2 plus 2?
Student: Australia!
Teacher: 2 plus 2 is 4. How did you get "Australia"?
Student: Well last week you were talking about where kangaroos live.

Quote

but the letter and post speech discussion topic sure sound like propaganda.

Only if you think "Australia" was a good answer.
Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[billvon 2,426]

>Where was the hysterical outrage back then?

The Internet was in its infancy, so there were no forums to get people all worked up. But let's take a look retroactively:

". . in terms of feeding the world. One of the worries I have is there are a lot of hungry people in the world. Somebody is hungry halfway around the world, we need to help them."

Did you see that? SOCIALISM! Why can't they feed themselves? Why is the president trying to cram his socialistic 'feed the hungry' agenda down innocent children's throats? Is he afraid that they might think for themselves?

"They have measures now to determine what countries are ahead, and, regrettably, we're about 12th in that special field."

Why does he hate America so much? Why didn't he use the poll from Fox News that shows that the US is both first AND second in education?

"The education goals, a very good question. I'll tell you what we did. We met with all the Governors. And I went down to Charlottesville, Virginia, and met with the Governors. And then they went back to the States and working with the White House staff and the Governors' staffs we came up with these national goals."

Bush wants to create FAIL BOARDS that will FAIL your child for not passing his arbitrary political litmus test! Who is going to control the goals? His fascist education "czar?"

"But I don't think you ought to drop out of school. You can have one discipline. You can have one area of expertise. But to be a full human being you need a wide array of knowledge."

Did you see that? He is calling disabled people who can't attend school NOT FULL HUMANS! What's next - a DEATH BOARD for people with learning disabilities?

"I just met with the President of Peru before I came over here. And they grow something like 40, 60 percent of the coca leaf"

The President is forcing children to learn the practical details of the DRUG TRADE! Why would he want young children to become experts at cocaine sourcing, unless he had a hidden agenda with the narcotics crime rings?

"We've had lots of fun here together. We want to thank the public television stations who've chosen to carry us today. And we want to encourage all of you to take heed at the words that you heard today: study, study, study; read, read, read."

And no one said a word about his unabashed attempt to spread his agenda amongst those young kids who were forced to go to this indoctrination.

It's a wonder the country didn't come apart at the seams right there and then.

[downwardspiral 0]

Quote

See post above yours.

ah missed that. thank you. betcha that politcally inept, well intentioned person was a Republican.

www.FourWheelerHB.com

[quade 3]

Quote

Quote

See post above yours.

ah missed that. thank you. betcha that politcally inept, well intentioned person was a Republican.

While I'm not 100% ruling out the idea of somebody setting a little linguistic booby trap, I also highly doubt it.

My inclination is to believe it was simply ineptitude on the part of whoever wrote the document.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kallend 1,644]

Quote

Rational people would recognize that there is a connection between the speech and the question.

I thought we were discussing right wing reactions, not rational ones.

...

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

[GeorgiaDon 340]

Oops, my bad.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Quote

It's quite simple: Bush was, well ... quite simple. Thus, expectations for him were always low from the git-go.

Don't confuse the 41st and the 43rd Presidents.

Bush 41 was -quite- sharp. I didn't agree with some of what he did, but he was sharp as a tack.

Oops, my bad; didn't read carefully. I confess I thought this was about Dubya.
Anyhow, the phenomenon we're witnessing re: Obama is straight out of the Gingrich playbook, which was mainly post-Bush, Sr.