OK this is getting bizarre. This mother breaks into tears when she thinks of the President of the United States speaking to her children in school. We are less than two days away from Obama’s brain-washing, soul-crushing, communist-loving subliminal-laced speech to our children. By Wednesday, our schools will be little more than communes with kids calling for redistribution of wealth and reeducation of parents.
There was a time when the lunch lady was the scariest thing at school.
I am honored to speak to the Kent Gardens Elementary School on Constitution Day and I have been looking for tips on the brainwashing techniques. (I would like my car washed everyday by zombie elementary students). I assume that the subliminal messages work something like this: “Hello children, I am the President of the United States (undervoice: “vote Democratic”). I want to speak with you about education (undervoice: “Republicans shot Bambi”) . . .”
Even some Chicago schools are refusing to air the speech. While some schools have banned the speech on the ground that they would not be able to read it, the White House always promised to release it on Monday — the day before. The speech was actually released on Sunday and it proved every bit as indoctrinating as feared. Among other things, Obama asks the children to wash their hands. What totalitarian hogwash. Then there is this frightening bit:
Every single one of you has something you’re good at. Every single one of you has something to offer. And you have a responsibility to yourself to discover what that is. That’s the opportunity an education can provide.
Everyone knows that “opportunity” is doublespeak for enslaving your parents and sacrificing them to gay socialist feminist union overlords. What is even more frightening is that Obama has already brainwashed Laura Bush, who has come out in favor of the subliminally laden speech, here.
In one Fox story, a parent explains how a president speaking to school kids is “very socialistic.” What they do not realize is that there is little to worry about. To be sent to a re-education camp, you first have to be educated. According to recent data, the schools in many of the states opposing the President’s speech have already protected against that danger.
However, as this clip shows, even our classic movies were used to shape us unconsciously through subliminal messages:
For the story, click here.
Mespo,
I was going to include the “Goat” speech, but I didn’t think the blank stare into space can be defined as a speech!
puzzling
It’s the walk, talk, and look like a duck rule. You can make any pretext you like, but do you really think it coincidence that red states are flocking to avoid this speech when it passed without incident or even a peep there twice before when white Republican Presidents did it? No one said “all” opponents are racists, some are enablers or fools who buy the racist’s drivel that there “good reasons” not to “disrupt” the first day of school. Oh, really, tell us every one that wasn’t also true when Reagan and Bush I did the talking.
“I actually do resent the implication by many here that opponents of Obama’s speech are necessarily racist.”
Resent it all you want but that doesn’t dismiss the innate racism. Any white President would make the speech with little public notice. I resent those who would deny the fact of the racism inherent in the various attacks on President Obama. This in itself has become a common racist tactic, to deny the right to call racists racist. It allows Rush, Billo, glen and Sean to stay on the air.
I actually do resent the implication by many here that opponents of Obama’s speech are necessarily racist.
Sometimes I cringe when I hear this argument because it demeans very real and deeply motivated racist processes in our society. It is meant to put people on the defensive through some innate sense of shame, but doesn’t address the underlying issues. By extension it implies that any opposition to Obama’s policies is racist! How can that be?
I say this to supporters of Obama’s speech to children: calling opponents racist is like like calling them Nazis… it’s an innately weak and off-putting style of argument. Let’s debate the role of government, or the role of the presidency, or the influence of media and propaganda in our society.
Opposition to the president (or any other government official) mandating media coverage to children need not be political or racist. It is not the role of government to motivate children.
Should congressmen be able to mandate that schools in their district carry their speeches? Can senators require their whole state to watch? What if Obama wanted to make a similar address every week, on a motivational topic of his choice? What if cabinet members want to make an address, or the Speaker of the House? Where does it end?
rafflaw:
Surely, you recall that inspirational reading by “W” to the kids at Booker Elementary on that bright September day. I believe the seminal work, “My Pet Goat,” was discussed until the President was notified of the tragic day’s events:
Wayne you are correctg that George the First spoke to the school children, but you forgot about Ronald Reagan’s speech via C-SPAN in 1988 that did include political aspects. Here is a link to both GWHB’s and RR’s speeches: http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/57308457.html. I am a bit confused about your claim that the Dems made a big fuss about Daddy Bush’s speech. The only fuss that I could find or remember was Dick Gephardt complaining about the cost. I could not find a single claim that Bush was a Socialist or was indoctrinating students. I also could not find any widespread call to allow School children and districts to opt out of the speech. By the way, you may want to actually read the transcript of the speech and check out his allegedly non-political speech. http://bushlibrary.tamu.edu/research/public_papers.php?id=3450. Have a nice night.
Wayne:
“I am scared shitless of sheep who are “inspired” by politicians, orthodontists, and pervy clowns with wandering hands. But mainly politicians.”
************
Personally, I pity those who aren’t inspired by Madison or Jefferson or Lincoln or Churchill or Cicero or Aurelius–politicians all.
Exhibit 1.
http://jonathanturley.org/2009/09/07/faithful-rally-around-paster-anderson-as-caring-human-being-as-anderson-reaffirms-his-desire-to-see-obama-die/
Anyone who sees this in a political context is part of the problem. This is not about politics from any perspective you come from. This is shear racism and hatred of the fact that a black man is President. I don’t care whether you like President Obama or not, that is irrelevant to what is happening here. This represents a strategy by the Racist segment of our population to deligitimize the President and to possibly foment assassination or even revolution. To blithely ascribe this to politics, is to be totally unaware of the world around us and not capable of seeing any path towards a better world. I say this not in defense of the President’s policies, but in the fear that racial hatred will lead to chaos.
Rich: there was no hysteria about GWB’s speech to school children because, well, GWB never gave a speech to school children. GWHB did. And while the Democrats did make a big fuss about it, people were obviously not as fired up about it then as they are now.
NOW, if GWB actually would have given a similar address you can bet your ass the moonbats would have kept their kids home from school.
Swarthmore mom, rafflaw and lottakatz,
I must not be making myself clear, so sorry and I’ll try again. I agree with you that there are people it makes no sense to reach out to. Where I differ from you is that I include Obama in the group that I will not bother with, whereas you all feel he’s on the side of the people. If he’s on the side of the people why did he make a secret deal with Pharma against the people and why has he taken national health care off the table should he feel it’s necessary? He’s not working for the poor and the middle class of this nation. He works for the “have mores”, just as Bush did.
So I guess we will have to agree to disagree about Obama’s concern for the poor and middle class. But here’s my point. Let’s take the issue of abortion. There’s no sense in speaking to anyone who opposes abortion because, whether they will admit it or not, they hate women and want to control women. This group exists, they are not a insignificant group and they can all go to hell as far as I’m concerned. But there are other people who are against abortion in the sense that they would never consider having one because they feel it is immoral. However they also feel it is immoral to stop another woman from gettin an abortion. Those people exist and their is a common cause between us. There are also people who wish to ban all abortions but will talk with those of us who are pro-choice to get moving on accurate information about birth control and having easy access to birth control. There’s a common goal there, and I for one, will work on that common goal, even though I completely abhor the banning of abortion. So that is what I mean about working with people who you can work with and moving around those you cannot.
This is a true story about hippies and survivalists in Oregon. These groups viewed each other as evil and insane for a very long time. Then they started smoking pot together and decided that maybe them hippies and those weird folk was O.K., just a little. And then they got to know each other a little better and some of them even interbred. If pot weren’t illegal I’d say, Pot All Around! but since it is I’d say start bringing cookies and good food and sit down and start to know “the other” and see if you get somewhere. You don’t start with people you already know you won’t get anywhere with but they won’t sit down to eat with you anyway. So take the openings that come.
It’s in the ruling elite’s interest that you never do this. It will undo their power.
What a mess….I’m speaking of the comments as much I am about Faux News. There was nothing even approaching the hysteria about GWB’s address to school children. there was no network devoted to claiming this was “socialism”. Much of the rhetoric here has had little to do with whether the President addresses a particular segment of the population. Instead, it’s been more of a Rorschach of pet political points. principals, teachers, and parents all have the option of not having children listen. If I’d had kids during the GWB speech’s time, I would have wanted them to hear him–it would not have been difficult to notice what an uninspiring dim bulb he was. Ditto–listening to Obama means being able to talk about the substance of the speech. Race or at least an overriding need to identify Obama as “the other” underlies a lot of this. In general, the Right has sought to undermine his credibility on everything. They know they cannot win on substance, but they can weaken faith in the President.
Rafflaw I guess the few rational house members that were left lost in 2008. I really don’t see how we reach out to these people as Jill says. Obama tried it in the beginning and got the door slammed in his face.
Okay. I read the speech online. It’s the same old “be cool, stay in school” speech that they commonly have well known sucessful individuals give.
It’s boring and if I was a highschooler, I would probably pass notes to my friends during the speech. Nothing about it stands out as shocking or amazingly inspiring. Yeah the parts about the three kids having struggles in life is great and I’m glad things worked out for them. But I just don’t really see what the big deal is about it all.
Swarthmore mom,
You are correct, except the percentage of Republicans is 99%+. I have not seen any evidence of a single Republican who will consider the public option.
Today is a good day to be having this kind of discussion, Labor Day is the USA’s version of May Day without the nod to history and context so I’m just going to jump in with a rant.
The ‘two names, one party’ point of view is correct IMO and we have come up with a lot of contemporary names (corporatist) and allusions to old results of it on both sides (fascist, socialist) but what this is is the very public face of class war. It has never been as stark or public as it is today but that’s what it is. It’s them that work and them that don’t and all of the permutations out current technology and forms allow. Short selling isn’t new, the first law against it was in the 17 hundreds after a crafty Dutchman screwed the British and brought both countries to a diplomatic showdown. Derivatives are new but it’s the same old shell game with the same class getting rich off of it while paid political lackeys look the other way. Extend that to the ongoing loot of the national treasury called the bailout while the too-big-to-fail investment banks set aside billions (of taxpayer dollars) to enrich themselves. Congress still has not placed any meaningful restrictions on these practices.
On another thread regarding the History Channel there is a sentence about an A&E merger with Disney and others to form a new group of channel selections, new channels but the same old safe, sensationalist crap no doubt. Popular media nurtures the ownership class because it offers nothing of value to the rest of us, the 95% of the country making do on 50% of the wealth – and most of that wealth is false; it’s credit based. 3000 people demonstrated in Times Square FOR health care reform and a public option on the 29th of August, how much air time did that get? I didn’t even see that on the national news shows. People are being starved of the information they need to make good decisions by an unregulated media industry controlled by fewer corporations than we have fingers.
The health care industry and the media have conspired, overtly or as a matter of unspoken, institutional behavior, to use the very people most in need of reform to deep-six any chance of reform. I hold them in particular contempt because they are using people that IMO are clinically mentally ill. I dealt with mentally ill people for many years. People that were paranoid, passive-aggressive, low intelligence to the point of being developmentally disabled but high functioning enough to work and lead independent lives and the downright delusional when they were off their meds. I got to be very good at spotting them and I have to say much of the Republican base – especially the evangelicals – are not sane. Anyone here seen first hand an evangelical christian touched by the spirit? Talking in tongues and rolling on the floor? I have, and if anyone did that outside of a ‘church’ a decent passer-by would call 911. Those people and their brethren that welcome the end of days, the love of God through Jihad against abortion and medical providers, the rejection of science, the fear of women and the wearing of majik underwear are just plain ill and dangerous. The flat-out racists seem to be comfortable with the Republicans also. Unfortunately, they have gained a prominent place at the table as the heart and soul of the Republican Party’s base. They account for about 26% of the electorate. Ghod only knows where the old militia and survivalists are or if they vote.
So I disagree that seeking common ground with these people is of value. You can’t reason with crazy people. You can deal with them in narrow ways and you can use them as the Republican Party and the ownership class has shown, but you can’t convert them and you can’t reason with them – they’re crazy; appeals to reason is an oxymoron when you’re dealing with crazy people.
The common ground that people need to understand in order to reach the consensus that some have advocated is IMO class based. Obama needs to make a strictly economic, class based argument for health care legislation and hope to reach sane people and use the power of the presidency against anyone in his own party or the Republican party that stands in opposition. More a**-kicking and way less conciliation. If he’s serious about it. And he really needs to stop giving those fools Jindal and Perry my tax money, I’m going to hold that against him.
Rant, rant, rant.
In solidarity from an old Wobbly, Happy Labor Day.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Workers_of_the_World
I don’t understand “who” is teaching us to turn on each other. I don’t think it is Obama that is standing in the way of the public option, but rather 95 percent of the republicans in congress along with the conservative democrats.
WJ,
Are you intentionally leaving out part of my statement? I said, “If the result is good for the party being inspired, does it really matter who did the inspiring?” I don’t include Hitler’s influence as being good for the people and the same can be said about David Duke. However, I am not a fan of Pat Buchanon, but I don’t believe he should be included in the same group as Hitler and David Duke, no matter what he has said recently. If someone was helped by listening to JFK, Ronald Reagan, Martin Luther King, for example, it is all good. Even if I do not agree with everything each of them has said or done. As to George W.’s influence, if he inspired someone to do good works, I am all in favor of that. Even if he is a war criminal.
Swarthmore mom,
You’ll have as much luck getting Obama to support national health care as you will the people shouting at the rallies. He has made his intentions on “insurance reform” clear. I am suggesting that people work with others who will actually work with them. This isn’t a pro and anti Obama problem. It is a real problem and Obama as well as the shouters are standing in the way of single payer, universal health coverage. I’m suggesting that we are being taught to turn on each other instead of trying to reach out to each other. Not everyone is unreachable. But if we keep believing it’s impossible while unquestioningly turning to Obama to solve this problem, I promise you it will not be solved. He’s made his deal with Pharma and he’s made his deal with insurance companies. So why should any progressive work with Obama to benefit, not people, but corporations? It makes no sense. Of course you’re not going to get far with screamers, but they are a small percentage of people. Move around them, move around Obama and reach out with good ideas, good arguments to other people. You’d be suprised who might listen and it might even be a good idea to listen to them.
r
Raffy: really? You don’t have a problem with “anyone” being inspired by “anyone”?
Here’s a thought experiment. Would you be scared of people who are inspired by Hitler? Of course. That’s an easy one. As the old joke goes, now we are just negotiating the price.
How about David Duke? Still pretty easy. Pat Buchanan? Now we are starting to get closer.
How about George Bush? You are not a little scared of sheep who find George Bush to be an inspirational figure?
I am.