GOP: Run with it and don’t look back!

Saturday, September 5th, 2009 @ 12:05 pm | Barack Obama, Clueless Conservatives

On Glenn Beck fans running schools who are freaking about Obama’s speech:

Asked if the Collier school district would have made the same ruling about webcast “logistics” if Obama’s Republican predecessor, George W. Bush, had proposed making a similar speech to U.S. students, a spokesman for Thompson told TIME, “exactly.” But Dean calls it “a moot question” because “I don’t think President Bush would have ever done it. He understood that this sort of thing starts in the home.” But when reminded that Bush’s father, President George H.W. Bush, broadcast a similar speech to the nation’s pupils, Dean says, “That was different. It was, if I remember, largely a say-no-to-drugs speech.”

And this is a “school is good!” speech, ya friggin’ maroon.

The modern GOP: believing that rejecting all intellectual honesty is the key to making American #1.


20 Responses to “GOP: Run with it and don’t look back!”

  1. Thomas Tallis Says:

    the modern Democratic party: pretending it’s an outrage when the FOIA is disregarded by a Republican president and not giving a rat’s when the Democratic president does the exact same thing

    don’t look for intellectual honesty in partisans of either party: it’s a fool’s errand

  2. jeromy Says:

    While we’re talking about intellectual honesty, let’s keep the comments on topical posts instead of bombing several ones.

  3. Zach Rock Says:

    I don’t understand why any president thinks it’s their job to give speeches to schools. However, people are overreacting a bit to this. I mean one school I went to for my job this week had the kids give a permission slip to their parents about whether or not they could watch it.

  4. jeromy Says:

    You really don’t understand why presidents give positive speeches to schoolchildren about the value of education, Zach?

    Gosh, what a mystery, eh?

  5. Zach Rock Says:

    It’s not in their job description so they shouldn’t do it. I know why they feel they need to, but it’s just them playing politics almost.

    However, it’s kind of ironic that Obama is giving a speech about doing good in school when his VP was almost kicked out of college for plagiarism.

  6. jeromy Says:

    “It’s not in their job description so they shouldn’t do it.”

    I suspect you didn’t believe that until you wrote it. Even more likely, you don’t believe it now. That’s simply ridiculous. It’s an ad hoc standard invented just now, in order to keep momentum behind the goddamn whackjobs who are freaking out about this and talking about “socialist indoctrination.”

    Presidents shouldn’t do anything that isn’t in their “job description,” really? Grow the hell up, man.

  7. Zach Rock Says:

    Why is it naive to believe that? Presidents adhered to it before then that ideal went away. Why is it wrong to bring that type of mentality back? If presidents had less sway and power we would have had fewer wars in the past century. How is that a bad thing? We also wouldn’t have such a high amount of debt accrued over the past half century that we do now.

    To say that letting presidents over step their bounds in certain areas is a good thing isn’t true. That mentality lets presidents over step their bounds in every area and there by it can cause serious damage. Take Korea for example. Congress never declared war on Korea. Truman just ordered troops in saying that he was justified because of the UN. Not under the US law he wasn’t. Besides that Congress never called him on it. They just let it happen.

    How is holding presidents accountable and keeping them in their bounds a bad idea or naive?

  8. jeromy Says:

    “If presidents had less sway and power we would have had fewer wars in the past century.”

    EXACTLY, Zach. You just nailed it on the head. It’s these speeches to schoolchildren about staying in school that have led to all the wars in the past century!

  9. Zach Rock Says:

    I’m not saying that. Quit trying to make it look like that.

    All I am saying is that if it’s not in their position they should stay out of it. It’s not that big a deal.

  10. jeromy Says:

    Zach, I’m not responsible for your failure to make a coherent argument.

    It was never a big deal until rightwing fanatics made it one. Guys like you try to appear like “the sane ones” but you can’t help propping up the insanity.

    If people are making a fuss over something so perfectly innocuous, the problem is with *them*.

  11. Zach Rock Says:

    I though my argument was pretty straight forward but apparently not. What I said before was that letting a person do one thing that’s not in their power gives them the ability to do others. That was it. The other part was an example. There’s a difference between them.

    I like how because I think the president should deal with manners of his office and only those. I’m classified as a right wing fanatic even though I support so many liberal civil issues I would be crucified if I dared to speak them where I live.

    It’s really not that big a deal. I just see things differently but that’s the problem isn’t it?

  12. jeromy Says:

    Is giving a public speech a “power” that needs to be listed in the Constitution?

    I haven’t called you a rightwing fanatic either. In addition to practicing clarity on your own part, also work on comprehending what other people write.

  13. Zach Rock Says:

    Sorry I read that wrong. My bad.

    No it’s not a power, but it shouldn’t be done by the president. More than that he shouldn’t feel like he has to tell children to stay in school. He has more important things to be doing. Especially right now because it seems like an obvious distraction tactic. People everywhere are freaking out and they’re are forgetting the issues at hand.

    He could be doing other things now. Instead he’s scrambling to try to come up with a distraction because he’s losing the health care fight. Then he tries to claim the high ground because people are angry he’s giving a speech to children about doing well in school.

    That’s my feeling on the issue. I’m done talking about it for now.

  14. jeromy Says:

    An obvious distraction tactic?

    Sorry, bud, but he does have the high ground on this, and you’ve utterly failed to offer any remotely serious reason why he doesn’t. Of all the things I complained about with GWB, I can’t imagine going off on him giving a positive speech to schoolchildren about staying in school.

    Presidents make public appearances, shake hands, give speeches. Grow the hell up and stop propping up rightwing lunacy.

  15. Jldmeyer Says:

    How is giving a “Stay in School and Do Your Best” a distraction? For some reason, schools were basically required to look up to and honor their president no matter what party they came from. Until now. We now have a president that we are not supposed to talk about or listen to speak. We now have a president who isn’t supposed to go out and talk to people about issues. He is supposed to sit in his oval office and work. Really? George W. spent 487 days at Camp David and 490 days at his ranch during his 8 years. And now Obama is supposed to stick to important issues. Apparently education is not important. This is only a distraction because of the lunatics who seem to think comparing Obama to Hitler or Stalin is acceptable. Democrats who didn’t support the war in Iraq and voiced their opinion about it were committing treason and traitors. People waving loaded guns in the air and calling our president Hitler, a mass murderer by the way, and we are supposed to find that acceptable. It is only these people who have a problem with Obama speaking to school children. I somehow doubt that teacher’s mailboxes are going to have red armbands with the Obama symbol on them to pass out to their classes. I somehow doubt that teachers across the country will feel compelled to take their class out goose-stepping. I doubt that there will be an uprising of Obama controlled militia groups across the country. This is where fear mongering has brought us. President Obama cannot even talk to school children.

  16. jeromy Says:

    The accusations are the distraction, pure and simple. Zach’s just the tool, the guy whose job is to say, “Gosh, guys, they kind of have a point!” Then we get some incredible blather about “it’s not his job description!” and, “all the wars this problem causes.”

    Like Mike said to me the other day, the Republicans kick the ball and everybody goes running. Each day they try to ramp up the crazy and say something so nuts that people have to react. The press and various “centrists” rub their chins at their “conviction” and the “roots of their fear” while Democrats have to go out and dump water on the fire. Then we’re docked points for being on the defensive. Result: the center is moved to the right, independent of reason.

    This is also what happens when we come out with a plan already compromised. If we refuse to capitulate entirely, we’re being “stubborn.”

  17. ellen Says:

    They were so right – this message is despicable.

  18. Jldmeyer Says:

    Now the excuse is that he changed the speech. He gave in to the demands of the right and toned down the Socialism. Gone were the armbands and goosestep demands. Deleted were the calls to ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country. Wait. Does that mean JFK was a communist?

  19. Descent Says:

    Glenn Beck viewers thinking that JFK was a secret Communist isn’t exactly a stretch at this point and Obama shares part of the blame for that.

  20. sg Says:

    I guess the army reps better stay away from the high school seniors then…because that’s the government asking you to die for them!