Sherry Reding: Young School Kids Taught to Praise Barack Obama
RJ: YouTube will be deleting this one too…Obamacensores (Glad this was reposted!)
Obama song for teachers to Indoctrinate children
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8grOVPu_sRU&feature=player_embedded
Sherry Reding: Yes, this is the only one I could find. The rest have been dismantled. There is a few others I’d love to share but hence, they cannot be ‘found’ now. How convenient.
RJ: A middle school teacher in Missouri was suspended Monday for putting a video on YouTube of his students chanting lines from Barack Obama speeches and wearing military fatigues.
http://obama-regime.blogspot.com/2009/10/middle-school-teacher-in-missouri-was.html
Note: I found the video — It wasn’t hard. See this additional page.
Sherry Reding: Yeah, that’s one of the videos I’ve been looking for. I figured it had been taken down. Sensor at it’s best.
SA: I’ve seen a couple of others which have Hitler-like underpinnings as well. Of course they’re going to be gone by now: Do we *really* think o-blab-mu’s henchmen and minions are going to allow the rest of us to pass along what kind of crap is being done to our most vulnerable citizens?
Peter Opdahl: You really believe that in this day and age, with this much technology in place, that effectively censoring the internet is possible? It’s not possible in Iran. It’s not possible in China. It’s not possible anywhere there is internet penetration, and it certainly isn’t technically possible in the USA. Opinions and ideas are all well and good, but building an argument without facts is intellectually dishonest and does neither you nor anyone else any favors. If there were censors operating, don’t you think that this video would be gone as well?
That all said, this teacher made a huge mistake, no doubt about it. I understand that the idea was to promote awareness of black leaders as part of Black History Month, but it was a bad idea, period. I don’t think it warrants the sometimes hysterical responses, but it was wrong.
I’d like to see the other videos. If they don’t exist now, they likely never did, so tell me what to look for and I’ll try to go find them. If I do, I’ll learn something and you’ll get the links. My feeling is that if they exist they will likely be more smoke than fire, and I still don’t see the link between this song and President Obama somehow having done anything wrong — The teacher screwed up, but how is the President’s office involved?
I’ve already searched for the “Jesus Loves the Little Children” song you mentioned, and the only references I could find with links to a video linked to this one. The “red, yellow, black, or white” line is the connection that they see.
Really? That’s it? Come on — There’s got to be more to it than that..
SJE: Yuck!
LGR: I believe that the only presidents who should be praised in the schools are dead presidents. Just the same, my kids think its fun to repeat “mmm mmm mmm, Barak Husein Obama” at the dinner table. I think I need to create a special recipe to name after him. lol.
Peter Opdahl: The “dead Presidents” rule is actually a good one, I think, although I’d modify it to say “Dead or 20 years out of office, whichever happens later.” The last thing in the world we want is a dead President shot by somebody and to have that person, liberal or conservative, instantly become even more of a rallying point for somebodies on the opposite end of the political spectrum.
In all things, moderation.
JCJ: brainwashing!!!!
Sherry Reding: My day has been quite spiritual experience. I’m going to leave it that way. I know how you feel, Peter. You know how I feel. We do not agree with many things and that is fine. Finding solutions to the problems the U.S. is having is a fabulous idea. I wish I would have ‘thought’ of that….. I’m pretty sure that’s why we have the Tea Party Movement… See More – to get our voices heard. Unfortunately, they are not taking the peoples views and ideas into consideration. They think we are stupid. Cannot make decisions on our own without them cramming their garbage down our throats. We can continue on with this pointless exchange or we can call it a day. I choose to call it a day and move on to other things that I have going on in my life that are a lot more important to me right now. Good day.
Sherry Reding: SJE.. I had to go back to your Facebook wall to retrieve “Treason, Obama’s private army” video clip because I searched all over YouTube and could not find it. When did I post that? Do you remember? I think it was only a couple of days ago, right? Something odd going on with certain video clips disappearing – and funny how they are usually anti-Obama.
Note: I found the video. Again, it wasn’t hard. See here.
I know that your husband was a doctor for the U.S. Army and I meant no disrespect to him, whatsoever. My major beef was with Bremerton’s Navy Hospital and the care my children rec’d there.
Peter Opdahl: Sherry:
We can object to each other, but once again I will not have you changing what I have written. The need to find a solution is obvious. The solution is not. I asked you a very simple question about what shape, in your opinion, the US health care system should take. I’m not even looking for details at this point — I just want to know whether you think it should be at the free market end of the spectrum, about where it has been for the past 50 years, or somewhere in-between. I think you’ve been pretty clear that you don’t like where it’s going or where it’s been, so I think you mean that a completely free-market approach is best. I’d be inclined to agree, but it would require an overhaul of the US system that would be much greater than what the new health care bill has done.
If you don’t want to propose a solution, that’s fine, and indeed the conversation should stop here. That will say a lot about you, however.
Sherry Reding: So what your saying is if I can’t find the solution to the health care system I don’t know what I’m talking about? How about the way the bill was pushed through for starters? Are there problems with the health care system? Yes. Is the solution to railroad a 2500 page bill through before it is analyzed? Lets bribe anyone who holds out long enough to gain something for their state, for a vote. Lets tack on student loans that is right up there with getting an appendectomy. The list goes on and on, I am assuming by your support for this bill that you are aligned with all the pork associated with it? If not why have you not spoken out against it? So to go back to your question, find a solution – lets start with the way the solution is approached, if it’s approached breaching ethics, Constitution or any other means to gain control, that is not in the best interest of the country. Any laws passed under those means should be thrown out or tested. Which is going to be done now.
Strapping us and eventually our children / grandchildren with the heavy tax burden for generations to come on an already over burden economy right now is pure insanity… The solution you seek should come from good, honest representatives of the constitution. I will support health reform then which should also include tort reform along with insurance reform along with consumer abuse reform not to mention those in our country illegally consuming our precious money. This is my last reply to this thread any other comments will be deleted I’m a woman I get the last say :)
SJE: Sherry – if you look on my profile and come to the link that you are looking for, I posted it on the same day I saw it on yours. How strange that those You-Tube videos are disappearing.
No offense even taken about any statements made regarding the military.
Have a nice evening.
Peter Opdahl: Again, you put words in my mouth. What I have said from the start is that if you don’t propose a solution, or at least a way forward, you’re not helping. Complaining about something is healthy only so long as at the end it moves things toward a better result. If it doesn’t, complaining simply poisons the situation and makes it even worse than it was before.
I don’t know why it took you until this post to lay out what you thought. As it turns out, we have some similarities in what we believe.
I agree that honest people honoring the Constitution are needed in the government. For the most part, I think we already have them. I also think that one change in the way laws are enacted would have a huge and lasting positive impact on the way the USA is governed: Give the President a line-item veto. The President is where the buck stops, so allow him to stop the buck. Giving the President the authority to selectively remove items from a bill while not allowing him to add things would mean that every piece of legislation, good, bad, or fluff, that gets tacked on to a bill would need the President’s direct and clear-cut acceptance before it could become law. The President’s actions would become transparent, meaning that deniability evaporates and backroom deals become open presentations. I sincerely doubt that this will happen, because both parties have too much at stake, but there’s my proposed solution. You can’t expect all of the people to be honest, so you force the person at the top of the heap to take complete and undisputed responsibility for what passes into law under the President’s pen. If Congress wants to override the veto, they can do it the same way it’s always been done, but by then I would imagine that the story would be well-covered and each member of Congress would be forced to defend their vote.
I agree with you that tort reform is absolutely necessary. We may differ on the details a bit because I have a lot of experience living in a country (Japan) whose legal system makes it very difficult for consumers to win civil cases against corporations that have sold defective products, poisoned the environment or the people around their facilities, or have otherwise lied/cheated/stole their way to profits. I am sure that a good balance exists, however, and I am equally sure that tort reform is required to find it.
I agree with you that insurance reform also needs to happen. I happen to think that the current health care plan is a good step in that direction, so our agreement diverges faster than with tort reform, but the core feeling that the current situation is a bad one is the same.
Without more details, it’s hard to know for sure, but we probably do not agree much on consumer reform. I’ve been accused by friends before of being a cold-hearted SOB because I have very little sympathy for people who overpaid for homes and did so using mortgages that they could not afford. Likewise, people who can’t figure out that not paying your credit card in full each month leads to high interest payments get some pity from me, but no sympathy. I’ve saved at least 25% of my after tax dollars every year I worked after university except the first year, when I bought a used car and paid for my wedding out of my own pocket. Consumers are almost always their own undoing, and the Libertarian in me overrides the Liberal and says that if you dig your own financial grave, you can sleep in it. I wish that both the current and previous Administrations had taken the same approach to dealing with the financial system. The world would be in the biggest depression it has ever seen, the reputation of the USA would be in tatters, and all of our standards of living would be shattered for a good ten years. However, the people responsible for the mess would have actually been forced to pay for it. The way it stands now, they will all be dead and their children living off of trust funds when the bill comes due. Moreover, just like those people with extended credit card payments, when we do actually make that payment it will be much, much more expensive than if we just paid the piper up front.
I don’t know how to respond to the “illegal people” comment. It can wait. People who don’t pay taxes don’t deserve government services, but if they’re paying taxes and helping to fund services then they’ve paid for them as much as we have.
.
.
.
Peter Opdahl: Now, to things we definitely don’t agree about. When we started this discussion, the very first thing that I said was that we, as citizens of the United States, have put into government a group of people that we have selected, and who have in turn made some decisions that I am very concerned about. My concern was about how we will be able to pay for the system our representatives have decided upon, and I see that you have now voiced that same concern. Good, we agree. However, how you got my concern in that first post about how things will be paid to become an acceptance in this last post of political pork (Although I will admit to a great fondness for bacon.) is beyond me. Wait, I take that back, it’s not beyond me. You’ve already mis-stated, selectively quoted, deliberately misconstrued, willfully ignored, or completely twisted my words. At this point the only way that I could not understand how this happened is to myself willfully ignore the evidence you have placed in front of me and the world.
You don’t care, Sherry. Oh, you care about politics, and your family, and God, and I am sure about many other things. But in the end you don’t care what other people think. Being independent and not caring what people think of *you* is one thing, and it’s actually something that I strive for myself. But that’s not what I mean when I say that you don’t care. You don’t care what other people think if they don’t think the same *way* that you do. If you did, you would treat their words with more respect. If you did, you wouldn’t equate your opinion with “the people” or “US citizens”. There are people and US citizens that believe that we should all wear flowers in our hair and eat mushrooms all day long. There are also people and US citizens that believe that the US government itself is illegitimate. All of these people and US citizens have their right to an opinion — if not necessarily a right to act upon it under current US law. These people and US citizens do not think the way that you or I do, but they deserve to be heard. Once they’re heard, they need to be reminded that we live in a democracy, and in a democracy you don’t always get your way. If they don’t like being in the minority, they are welcome to leave and find a place where they can be in the majority, or they can form the loyal opposition and work within and for the country to make the country better — or, in any case, better in their eyes.
That’s the big difference between you and me. You don’t believe that people who don’t agree with you are really American people or American citizens. That’s why you can repeatedly butcher what I have written, or say things like “Obama doesn’t listen to the people” or that he “doesn’t respect the country or its citizens.” What you really mean in those statements is that President Obama, as leader of the Democratic Party now in control of the US government, doesn’t listen to you or people who think like you. The problem with this attitude, however, is that it is much closer to the attitude of those fascist dictators you keep comparing President Obama to than it is to the attitude of President Obama and/or mainstream politicians on both sides of the aisle.
Yes, the health care bill went through Congress without the support of conservatives. As I said, that’s what democracy is, so get over it. Democracy is about compromise, but only just enough compromise to get the majority needed to get your way. What that usually means is that the tails on both ends of the bell curve are unhappy, and I can assure you that the compromise that became our current health care bill has a fair number of detractors coming from both directions as a result. The truth is, when people are voting on something as large and complicated as a national health care plan, a successful compromise almost always leaves everyone a bit unhappy. You need to understand that in a democracy, not winning doesn’t mean you lost — It just means that the system worked.
So, why did I change my tone? Easy. You threatened to censor me. By doing so, even with a little smilie attached, you verified without a doubt the opinion I was forming of you and now laid out in the paragraphs above. So censor me and prove me right, or leave this here and prove me wrong. Nobody is forcing you to respond, but I will not be censored by you any more than I would let the Communist Chinese do it to me. (Sorry, I don’t mean to compare you to the Communist Chinese, but the similarities…) And, if you do, it will simply become an opportunity to prove that censoring doesn’t work, particularly on the internet.
Respectfully,
Peter
Recent Comments