Michelle says it’s “not the speech, it’s the subtext.”
And I wonder if I would have seen the uproar in the rightosphere as nothing more than a tempest in a teapot were it not for the preparatory materials the Department of Education provided exhorting teachers to have students, “Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president.” Ed Morrissey offers a similar view:
In fact, had the White House skipped the study guide and simply released the speech from the beginning, it seems unlikely that this would have created much controversy at all. Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush both gave similar speeches in similar circumstances to students without creating a lot of hard feelings. That isn’t to say that their political opponents all yawned.
In the end, the remarks seem remarkably banal, but I wonder if they would have been more pointed (and more partisan) had the right not raised suck a ruckus.
Morrissey finds the speech quite self-referential with the President referencing “himself more than school, education, responsibility, country/nation, parents, and teachers combined.” (Read the whole thing.)
Similarly finding the speech “unobjectionable” as it “exhorts students to study hard and aim to achieve big things. It is devoid of any controversial content,” Paul Mirengoff also laments the speech’s self-referential aspect:
One might have hoped for less discussion of Obama himself, particularly the things he’s tried to accomplish in the area of education. But that hope would have been unrealistic with this president.
If not for the right leaning blogs and conservative talk radio, this Obama radio talk to the kids would have been much more like a Castro indoctrination. Even still, they had to adjust the “lesson plan” for the broadcast to make it less political. Remember liberal communist indoctrination is called a “discussion” in Democrat language.
‘Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush both gave similar speeches in similar circumstances to students without creating a lot of hard feelings.’
Thats because they didnt have a political opposition that was totally batcrap insane.
‘I wonder if they would have been more pointed (and more partisan) had the right not raised suck a ruckus.”
How pathetic. Here is a clue Dan. He has given versions of this speech several times. Its not a new message from him. Neither is it “banal”. Rather it is a message that anyone who lived and worked in the neighborhoods that he has, knows is vitally important to repeat, over and over again, if one hopes to maximize the chances for success for lots of our young’uns.
When are you people going to learn that bitter, hateful, kneejerk opposition to absolutely everything the President says seriously erodes any credibility you might hope to someday earn (since you dont really have much to begin with),
Do you even read my posts, Tano or just respond in a bitter, hateful, kneejerk manner?
Did H.W. and the Gipper have their Education Department’s issue talking points asking students to write letters to themselves on how they could help the President? Do you criticize the left-wingers who then raised a ruckus against their addresses?
By, “banal,” I mean lacking in originality. We’ve heard similar exhortations before. If you can show it’s a new type of pitch to schoolkids that we’ve never heard before, well, then, I’ll think you’re onto something. But, your suggestion that HW and the Gipper gave similar speeches suggests it’s not original.
Banal is not always a bad thing.
So, please, Tano, read my posts before your criticize and think before you respond.
“When are you people going to learn that bitter, hateful, kneejerk opposition to absolutely everything the President says seriously erodes any credibility you might hope to someday earn (since you dont really have much to begin with),”
The Left never purged their 9/11 truthers, their Bush and Palin haters, so what credibility do they have to talk about lowering the tone of dissent?
Google “BusHitler” and then tell me of dissenting with calmness.
Google “Trig trutherism,” and then tell me of kicking out “Birthers”
We are only giving the level of dissent the left gave since December 12, 2000.
Don’t like it? Don’t start it.
Shorter JSF:
“Some liberals acted like assholes when Bush was in power, therefore our acting like assholes under Obama is perfectly legitimate.”
Dan,
For the record, Bush asked for students to write him a letter in his speech. See here.
Cheers,
S
I think that there wouldn’t have been such opposition if it hadn’t been for the study guides. They’re what are batcrap insane.
#2: “Rather it is a message that anyone who lived and worked in the neighborhoods that he has, knows is vitally important to repeat, over and over again, if one hopes to maximize the chances for success for lots of our young’uns.”
Tano, you’re surprising no one with this demonstration of the profound and irreversible effect Obama-worship has had on your ability to think for yourself. We are well aware that every time Obama opens his mouth, you see magical, flying unicorns galloping out in a spectacular flourish of flowers and rainbows. So, of course you see Obama making this speech as “vitally important” to maximize our “young’uns” chances for success. But Tano, can you think of anything else that Obama could do or not do to maximize their chances for success (other than dazzling them with his spine-tingling delivery of meaningless platitudes)? Anything?
Obama has already saddled these kids with crushing debt that can only be paid with half or more of their adult incomes, he’s in the process of crushing the businesses that might have given them jobs with cap-and-trade, and he’s not going to give up until the healthcare system they inherit is a bureaucratic, useless Euro-nightmare.
If Obama were not such a useless elitist scumbag, he would spend the entire speech BEGGING these kids to forgive him for constricting their available opportunities, capping their potential for financial success, and stacking the deck against their futures before they have even learned their multiplication tables. He is doing everything in his power to ensure that the next generation will be the first in decades to have a standard of living that is LESS prosperous than their parents’. So, the fact that Obama thinks it’s a good idea for him to give these children a presidential pep-talk about “working hard” and/or “achieving their dreams” is sickening and just reminds us of the unmitigated, all-consuming extent of his narcissism.
If he had done as a PSA with no materials by which the liberal union teachers could then do their damage with NO ONE would have had a problem with it. It stands as testimony that The Won does nothing that does not pimp himself and the liberal way…..I believe there is a portion that states something along the lines of this country could be great and kind when it should say WE ARE the BEST country in the WORLD!
There will not be a moment’s rest for this President anymore then there was for President Bush. I expect him to walk out to go home in 2012 all GRAY and WRINKLES for as far as the eye can see. The left started this political hate and paybacks……well you know what they are!
Obama once again proves he is the greatest high school graduation speech-give EVER! That’s his trump card. That’s his meal ticket. He is a one-trick pony.
There’s nothing particularly wrong with this speech. There’s just no need for it. All the cool kids will be yawning and throwing pencils at the nerds who are paying attention. This speech will end with the biggest under-the-breath “Whatever” in the history of education.
“Did H.W. and the Gipper have their Education Department’s issue talking points asking students to write letters to themselves on how they could help the President?”
Well, here is an excerpt of Reagan’s talk to the kiddies.
Since you love so much to play the game of “what if a Republican had done this” – please tell me – what would the reaction be if THIS (or the liberal version of something like this) is what Obama was going to say?
” We got inflation down, interest rates down, and our economy created over one and a half million new jobs just last year alone. The poor are now increasingly able to dig themselves out of poverty, and that’s been good economic news.
The good news in defense is that our Armed Forces, which were suffering from neglect and low funding, have now made a comeback. Morale is up in the services, and the quality of our men and women in uniform has never been better — and I mean never. As a matter of fact, we have the highest percentage of high school graduates in uniform today than we’ve ever had in the history of our nation, even back when we had the compulsory draft. In addition, our nation has encouraged a more realistic sense of defense needs.
In foreign affairs we’ve kept our friends close and the lines of communication with our adversaries open. We’ve tried to give the world the sense that the United States has a coherent and logical foreign policy that reflects our respect for freedom and our opposition to tyranny.”
Now THAT is some pure partisan propaganda. Obama, on the other hand, gives a talk about working hard and taking responsibility. And all you can do is hunt around desparatly trying to find some way to trash the guy.
Jaded writes,
“There will not be a moment’s rest for this President anymore then there was for President Bush. …The left started this political hate and paybacks…”
Well, inaccurate of course. But finally a rightwinger with the intellectual honesty to characterize the right’s message accurately.
Ooopps, Scrolling upward, I see there is another one who admits to the right’s motivations.
“We are only giving the level of dissent the left gave since December 12, 2000.
Don’t like it? Don’t start it.”
First of all – never in my life have I ever called Bush Hitler. Neither did 99% of liberals. But of course, the fact that some did, and the fact that the favorite rightwing parlor game is to attibute to all liberals the opinions of the nuttiest that can be found – I guess you all find a way to justify your own extremism.
So no, you are not putting yourself down to the level of liberals. You are operating at the level of the most nutty and extreme people on the left.
Surprising that you cant figure that out.
Even more surprising that your mind makes these equations in the first place. Since when does it make sense to point to the worst of your opponents and model your behavior on them? What does that lead to? What does that make you into? Have you ever even thought about that?
#2: Tano – I think Obama’s speech is a waste of time. But whatever. If kids really need the President of the United States to tell them to brush their teeth and wash their hands then we are doomed, doomed, doomed. I’m an old fart but I don’t remember needing Presidents Kennedy and Johnson to tell me to study.
If Obama really wanted to make a difference to all these young’uns, he would make a short speech to this effect:
If you want to succeed in this world then stop listening to racial demagogues who keep telling you that because of whitey, you don’t stand a chance in hell so there’s no point in trying; that you’re just a leaf in a river with no control over you’re own future. He’d tell kids that they’re responsible for their own destinies so if they want to do well then get to work; if they want to be ne’er do wells then that, too, is a choice they make.
And in addition to apologizing per Sean’s suggestions, we would apologize for hanging around wingnuts like Van Jones and Jeremiah Wright.
If he’d do that (and mean it) then he’d have my respect and admiration.
Obama’s speech includes this passage:
But at the end of the day, we can have the most dedicated teachers, the most supportive parents, and the best schools in the world – and none of it will matter unless all of you fulfill your responsibilities. Unless you show up to those schools; pay attention to those teachers; listen to your parents, grandparents and other adults; and put in the hard work it takes to succeed.
I have to agree 100 percent. There are a lot of problems with our incredibly expensive and increasingly ineffective government schools but the biggest problem of all is students and parents. Good teachers will fail in classrooms full of unruly students with litigious parents and administrators who won’t back them up… so we lose a lot of good ones and keep a lot of mediocre ones.
One of the things I hear on the right that I disagree with is that Johnny can’t read because of school teachers. I’ve known a couple of people who tried teaching (not for long) and gave up because of the never-ending battles with disrespectful students, their “my kid can do no wrong” parents, and spineless administrators.
Now if Obama would back education reform that returns control of the classroom back to teachers, dismisses bad teachers, dispenses with gobbledygook multi-culti pablum and leftist indocrination, and emphasizes the basics and American history/culture… we’d be on to something.
#9-
Tano, we’ll never know what reactions would be to Obama making a speech like Reagan’s b/c obama will never be able to say he’s created jobs, improved the military or improved the plight of the poor.
Having followed along here for a while now I’m left to wonder just why the hell you even bother to read this blog or contribute your ill informed opinions. I’ll assume its an ego thing.
Bill Chrystal made an excellent point yesterday; the concern with the speech (beyond the accompanying recommended lesson) is, for example, you would never hear nor would you imagine George H W Bush degrading any of his predecessor or his opponents. Obama on the other hand has already done both.
His nature is simply political and he sees no problem with sounding like left wing blogs in daily speaking if it means he can win his agenda.
David
May I ask a sincere question? Is GayPatriot now dedicating 95% of its posts to attacks on Obama? I mean, there are other things to cover. I scrolled down this entire page and it is just post after post after post of anti-Obama screeds. OK, criticize him, criticize him a lot. but the obsessive character of these attacks is a bit off-putting and, frankly doesn’t really make for a great gay conservative blog.
Does GayPatriot ever intend to make a positive contribution to the fight for marriage equality in Maine? I know that 3 weeks ago you deigned to bestow a positive judgment on the first pro-equality TV ad, but that’s the extent of your contribution. Can there be a post, for example, discussing what GayPatriot readers might do to help? Since the pro-equality folks are not running a lefty or otherwise objectionable campaign, can we not consider extending some financial support? Or is this site just about grousing, criticizing and attacking?
We’ll never now what Obama planned before the red flags were raised, but one thing is clear: With a staff full of subtle political indoctrinators like Cass Sunstein on his staff, you may be sure they aimed to bond the youth of this nation to the Anointed One.
Thats because they didnt have a political opposition that was totally batcrap insane.
Yeah? Where’s Dick Gephardt and his imaginary friends these days? Not behind the desk in the Oval Office.
Rather it is a message that anyone who lived and worked in the neighborhoods that he has, knows is vitally important to repeat, over and over again, if one hopes to maximize the chances for success for lots of our young’uns.
Despite the fact that they’ll all have to drop out and go to work to pay for Chairman Obama’s wasteful spending orgy.
You mean like your most senior elected Senators who compared our military to Pol Pot, the KGB, and unless I am mistaken, nazis. You mean like YOUR former first lady, Senator and current Secretary of State (not to mention felon) Hillary Clinton, and YOUR Speaker of the House, and YOUR Senate Majority Leader, and YOUR BIGGEST ACTIVIST GROUP who called the commanding general in Iraq a liar and a traitor, or the most influential and successful members of your party who produced full length motion pictures, off-broadway plays, and best selling books calling for the assassination of president Bush.
PLEASE!
Republicans havent even come CLOSE to even visiting the depths that the most prominent Democrats in America LIVE in on a daily basis.
Tano, you cut and paste my question without answering it.
Did the Bush and Reagan Education Departments issue talking points?
Nor did you answer my question about whether you intend to criticize the liberals who took the Republicans to task for the speech. (Since you’re now taking conservatives to task for criticizing a Democrat’s speech.)
As for me (the one to whose post you choose to respond), I doubt I (and daresay (as I noted again in the post to which you chose to respond) would have paid much attention to this story had it not been for the talking points issued by the Administration. Again, a point you chose to ignore in your zeal to attack conservatives.
So, please address my points before offering bitter, hateful, kneejerk responses.
Oh, and if you think Reagan and to a lesser extent HW Bush didn’t have (as you put it) “a political opposition that was totally batcrap insane,” well, then you have little knowledge of the state of affairs in “smart circles” and on college campuses in the 1980s.
Reagan was quite vilified in the MSM; if you don’t believe me, head down to the Reagan Library where they have posted some of the magazine covers of the era. (SIDE NOTE: Interesting that the Gipper’s team would allow presentation of the hateful opposition of the era.)
Please note, I won’t speak for the others who have chimed in to defend me or criticize you, but will merely point out you ignore one of the salient points of this short post–the study guide issued by the White House in conjunction with the speech.
(Nor do you address another point– the speech’s self-referential nature.)
Steven in #7, just caught your comment in the spam filter and rescued it. Yeah, seems HW did ask students in his speech to write letters to him, not in the talking points to write letters to themselves.
Still, I find the phrasing of both (the talking points) and HW speech troubling and paternalistic.
And Steven in #17 (another comment rescued from the filter), I would hardly call our posts anti-Obama screeds. We don’t engage in name-calling, but actually make points about why we’re unhappy with the Administraiton.
As to “marriage equality,” if you read my posts on gay marriage, you’d know that I objetc to that term and am not in favor of equality (though do oppose the Maine initiatve). And the very term you use “pro-equality” shows why the campaign is objectionable to me. (Scroll back through my old posts to see my discussion of the tension between the notion of equality and the ideal of freedom.)
Oh, and a piece of advice, if you want to solicit someone’s support, don’t spend the better part of your supposed plea attacking them. Yea, telling us that our content doesn’t make for a “great gay conservative blog” is really the way to convince me that you have the solution for us to run a better one.
I highly doubt you’re a conservative and question the supposed sincerity of your question.
OH, and as to my contribution, I have written ad nauseum on how I believe those favoring state recognition of gay marriage can best conduct their campaign. It may not be what you want to hear, but I have offered my input. I guess you only note GayPatriot posts when they fit your narrative of this as grousing, criticizing and attacking blog, but it’s there and in our archives–on more than one occasion.
Oh and Steven, maybe it’s that I’m tired, but, well, if you don’t think what we say makes a great gay conservative blog, then, well, we’re not compelling you to read our content.
And, well, if you know how to make a better one, well, then got ahead and do so.
The controversy is a little overblown, but I’ve of two minds about it. 1) Obama brought it on himself by surrounding himself with leftist cartoon characters and cluelessly peddling in Marxist academic shibboleths like they were all broadly unobjectionable. For some arcane reason, he was so steeped in the university bubble that it didn’t occur to him that he might need to put some lipstick on that leftism. 2) I say go ahead and let all the children watch Obama’s half hour of commercial-free nonsense. Let the kiddies get a good eyefull of Obama’s sermon and see how cool and interesting he stays. Obama will go from the hip-hop Jesus all the teachers are talking about to a much more boring version of Bill Cosby lecturing them about how cool kids stay in school and don’t do drugs.
@14 “First of all – never in my life have I ever called Bush Hitler. Neither did 99% of liberals. ”
According to Jame Hamsher, at least 33% of Dems are Truthers (a hilarious admission she made in the course of defending Van Jones as believing “what we all basically believe on the left”)… a further 25% “aren’t sure”. I think your statistic is a little off.
Tano,
Welcome back. Sine you have time now (or rather your parents gave you back internet access in the basement) perhaps you’d like to spend some of that time giving us the talking points on how a truther and racist conspiracy nut like Van Jones got into the administration? Or maybe the Obama economy.
I read your talking points. As shown here in that right wing mouthpiece, the LA Times…
“No amendment can ever change (1) the country’s borders, (2) the rules that limit a president to a single four-year term and (3) the requirement that presidential administrations must “succeed one another” in a “republican form of government.”
In addition, Article 239 specifically states that any president who so much as proposes the permissibility of reelection “shall cease forthwith” in his duties, and Article 4 provides that any “infraction” of the succession rules constitutes treason. The rules are so tight because these are terribly serious issues for Honduras, which lived under decades of military rule. ”
I await your reply with amusement.
I have read all of these comments with great interest. Unless there is a National Crisis I do not think that any President should address the nation’s children.
And especially have a study guide for the teachers to use afterwards. I applaud the administrations who have chosen not to air this live. They are taping it and reviewing it.
Captive children are not the forum that a President should be addressing. It reeks of mind control.
The thing I find most curious is that Mr Obama was asking children to think of how they could help their President – not their country. Interesting choice of priorities, that.
Reagan and Bush never cultivated the trappings of a fascist personality cult the way Obama has; the rallies in sports stadiums with thousands chanting party slogans, the children singing hymns to the dear leader, a fawning mass media made into a relentless propaganda machine for the regime. To anyone who isn’t a glassy-eyed cultist, all of this seems profoundly un-American. Obama has never told his followers to knock it off. Quite the contrary, he acts as though he feels entitled to it. The man is devoid of humility.
It was so pleasant around here without Turdo’s insane commentary…why don’t you go back on vacation?
“a political opposition that was totally batcrap insane,” well, then you have little knowledge of the state of affairs in “smart circles” and on college campuses in the 1980s.”
Hey, I was in college in the eighties, having gone back to school later in life. Of course Reagan was reviled – he was a terrible president. I didn’t complain about people criticizing Obama. I made the point that they were obsessed and lunatic about it. We the critics of Reagan did not run around day in and day out and go nuclear over every last word he said, concocting glassy eyed conspiracy theories on a daily basis about how he was trying to exterminate our grandparents, brainwashing our children, setting up concentration camps for his critics and polluting our precious bodily fluids. You people are not being critical, you are being totally nutso.
” Interesting that the Gipper’s team would allow presentation of the hateful opposition of the era.’
For instance, what does that mean? Are you not allowed to present your hateful opposition? Are you implying that you are somehow about to be shut down and sent off to the reeducation camp?
‘…you ignore one of the salient points of this short post–the study guide issued by the White House in conjunction with the speech.’
Hogwash. Its not a salient point – it is merely the last talking point that the nutjobs have left after it has become apparent that there is nothing you can really sustain against the speech. The study guides are, to you use term, banal. Noone but a loony would find them objectionable.
“Nor do you address another point– the speech’s self-referential nature.’
He is trying to make the point that if you work hard and stay in school, and dont wallow in making excuses, then you can be successful, like the President. OF course he is going to reference his own experinece. Thats part of the whole point. I did this, you can do similar things, if you accept repsonsibility for your own future.
Once again, only someone who is obsessed with finding some reason to trash the speech would find this to be a problem.
Tano’s points make the point. Presidents, all of them, should stay out of the public schools and using kiddies as props. Obama has been dished up a mountain of political dissent on his little foray. Tano is still smarting over the deep damage Reagan did to his ego.
GW was found wanting on 9/11 because of his location and the title of the book at hand. It was all politics gone badly wrong.
Obama has no message for education. He is no different from Reagan. They both became President. Neither of them had any more magic to work on kids than the average dedicated teacher.
“Stay in school” is no different than “just say no” was for Nancy Reagan. Let Obama have his speech and maybe we can all send off for the DVD to watch it over and over. If it saves just one student, it will have all been worth it….blah, blah, blah.
When is Obama going to take a few days off from the campaign and start tending to business?
Good point. 8 months into this and he is still campaigning.
STOP!!!
Be the President – WORK in the Oval Office…..
Turns out that back in 1991 when Bush 41 gave a speech to school kids, House Democrats protested and launched investigations.
I read over the speech and while I agree there is nothing in it that is objectionable per se, I still see the speech as a complete waste of time and nothing more than a self-serving exercise designed to feed Obama’s insatiable ego. For example, there’s nothing intrinsically wrong with this message:
“Where you are right now doesn’t have to determine where you’ll end up. No one’s written your destiny for you. Here in America, you write your own destiny. You make your own future.”
However, having to hear it come from Obama is downright insufferable because his policies categorically reject the concept of individuals being in control of their own future. In every other speech Obama has EVER given, most Americans spend their day being fu*ked over by one evil corporation after another, being persecuted for the color of their skin by society generally, and being lied to by our government when a Republican is in charge. If we’re not being spied on, we’re being stolen from with our pensions being looted, having limbs unnecessarily amputated, left destitute by our health insurers, or being tricked into signing loans we can’t pay back or enlisting in the military having no idea we might be sent to war. Well, no wonder we need to hand the reigns over to Obama and the sweet, caring, compassionate liberals who just want to take care of us. The bottom line is, considering that Obama has spent his entire eight months in office insisting that we can’t take care of ourselves, his speech to school children (with passages like the one quoted above) deserves a laugh-track.
One other idiotic paragraph that jumped out at me from the speech:
“You’ll need the knowledge and problem-solving skills you learn in science and math to cure diseases like cancer and AIDS, and to develop new energy technologies and protect our environment. You’ll need the insights and critical thinking skills you gain in history and social studies to fight poverty and homelessness, crime and discrimination, and make our nation more fair and more free. You’ll need the creativity and ingenuity you develop in all your classes to build new companies that will create new jobs and boost our economy.”
Note that in listing all of the different subjects that the students will need for different purposes, Obama lists history as necessary to “fight poverty and homelessness, crime and discrimination, and make our nation more fair and more free.” This is no surprise because how many times have we been told that we are opposing “what this country was founded on” when we disagree with yet another liberal entitlement program? In reality, Obama and his minions have no use for the real history of this country because it categorically rejects the class warfare “steal from the ‘rich’ and give to the ‘poor’” methods that are an essential component of everything they want to do.
#33: “He is trying to make the point that if you work hard and stay in school, and dont wallow in making excuses, then you can be successful, like the President. OF course he is going to reference his own experinece. Thats part of the whole point. I did this, you can do similar things, if you accept repsonsibility for your own future.”
And by the way, Tano, Obama’s “own experience” cuts against the message he is attempting to convey. He cites to the adversity faced by three different young people and shows how they managed to overcome the difficulties in their lives to graduate from high school and go on to college. However, Obama did not succeed simply by “accepting responsibility for his own future” because he benefitted tremendously from affirmative action programs due to the color of his skin. The majority of students he will be addressing today will never enjoy that edge that Obama had, courtesy of the federal government.
The entire problem with the speech rests on two facts that the American public has realized:
1 – Obama is a complete narcissist.
2 – Obama is a liar.
Obama’s “own experience” cuts against the message he is attempting to convey.
If Obama were honest, his speech would contain the line, “And if you don’t succeed, blame the kid who sat in your desk last year.”
Yes Tano…
Ending the cold war, bringing unprecidented peace and liberation to the world, being able to actually tell the difference between a coup and a legal ouster of a President who’s violated his oath of office, bringing prosperity and confidence back to the nation…
Reagan was a horrible president, indeed.
Of course folks, note again how Tano doesn’t even try to defend his lord and master for his decision to include Van Jones in his administration.
Wow, Tano, you do have a way of making an argument. Instead of addressing my point, you say it’s only one nutjobs would use.
Oh, and please identify a President (save Bill Clinton) who has referenced himself as often in speeches as has this President. Perhaps, if this were the only speech where Obama had done this, you might have a point.
Well, it is good to see that not all Republicans are nutjobs. LINK
I agree with Livewire that now that Tano is back could he address the new record unemployed and the 9.7 % unemployment and the 17% unemployed and discouraged unemployed. How bout the failure of the pork bill and 72% of the people would like the unused portion of the pork bill returned to the people. How about Obamas record low approval ratings and falling approval amongst independents.
People are suffering and Barack and Michelle go on another vacation. Obama has a joint session of congress to try to salvage socialized health care. Since the Democrats can pass anything they want, why not just schedule anther Democrat only junket to the Bahamas. What does Tano think about the Rangel corruption case. Should he resign immediately? How bout the Murtha corruption case? Pick any or all of the above.
Oh another question for Tano…..where have there been more murders and killings this year… Afganistan or Obamas home town of Chicago?
BUZZZZZZ
I’ll save Tardo the trouble. “It’s Bush’s fault.”
First of all – never in my life have I ever called Bush Hitler. Neither did 99% of liberals.
Tano, how much effort did you expend telling that other 1% of liberals to tone down their rhetoric during the Bush presidency? That 1% made a lot of noise yelling “Bush = Hitler,” “Impeach Cheney first,” and “worst.president.ever.”
And I’m getting tired of hearing liberals say what almost sounds like, “Aw, c’mon guys, lighten up. This isn’t just any president we’re talking about, this is Obama!”
ConGuy,
Actually, I got banned from a lefty blog for telling folks to cut out the extremist nonsense.
But, for the record, impeaching Cheney was not an extremist idea. Nor was the notion that Bush may have been the worst president ever. Personally, I think Buchannon may edge him out, and maybe even Harding, but one could certainly make the case for Bush.
Hey Gene,
“the 9.7 % unemployment”
What about it? Unemployment goes up in recessions. And it is the last indicator to get solved when recessions are over. Everyone knows that. I really dont see your point. Yes, its true, that back in January, the administration, along with almost every private sector forcaster, predicted that unemployment would not go over 8 percent or so. Everyone underestimated the seriousness of the recession. Y’know, the recession that started in late 2007 and continued and deepend throughout 2008. No. I am not blaming Bush. He may deserve some blame, but there is such a thing as a business cycle. And this cycle was thrown into a deeper hole by the financial crisis – the fault overwhelmingly of Wall St. and all the free-market fundamentalists who protect them from as much regulation as possible.
In fact, once everyone understood the seriousness of the recession paired with the financial crisis, then suddenly the estimates were that we would certainly get well over, if not WAY over 10% unemployment. Since that hasnt happened yet, the seems to be a good case to be made that Obama’s policies have prevented a lot of bad things.
“How bout the failure of the pork bill”
If you are referring to the stimulus, then it has most certainly been a success. I think there is wide agreement that it stopped the downturn – and helped spark the recovery which has begun earlier this summer. Latest estimates I heard is that we will have 3-4% growth for the rest of the year, especially after Oct 1 when the bulk of the stimulus kicks in. How on earth can you possibly claim it has failed?
“How about Obamas record low approval ratings”
HUH? ARe you on drugs or something? RealClear has his approval at 52.8% today. I dont think GWB got that high at any point in his second term, and was usually 20 points lower. What kind of a “record” are you fantasizing about?
“People are suffering and Barack and Michelle go on another vacation.”
I guess you cant hear me, but I am playing a violin for you. A small one.
“Since the Democrats can pass anything they want”
You know that is not true. Takes 60 votes in the Senate.
” What does Tano think about the Rangel corruption case. Should he resign immediately? ”
Sounds bad. Investigate. Prosecute if there is a case to be made. See what a jury says. Its the American way.
“How bout the Murtha corruption case?”
Ditto
Tano, with so many American families suffering, losing jobs being thrown out of their houses, it is appalling how cold hearted and mean you are. No compassion at all. Your cold calculating Democrat party and President are ignoring the plight of so many. He told us he would shorten the misery shorten the pain. He wasn’t honest and tell us he didn’t have a clue. He tripled the countries debt for what? More debt for our children and grand children. To fatten the pockets of his friends in the GREEN industries and George Soros. Pathetic. And then he has the likes of you trolls still defending him. Look to a non partisian polling company for true and accurate polls, Rasmussen who had the election results right onthe money……says Obamateleprompter
negative STRONGLY DISAPPROVE NUMBERS HAVE INCREASED dramatically while his strongly approve numbers have decreased.
Open your mind Obama toadies, your nazi goose stepping is frightening.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
Notice the pattern of duplicity and lies practiced by Barack Obama.
Latest estimates I heard is that we will have 3-4% growth for the rest of the year, especially after Oct 1 when the bulk of the stimulus kicks in. How on earth can you possibly claim it has failed?
But then, when actual numbers come in showing that Barack Obama’s policies failed, such as what happened with unemployment, what is Barack Obama’s excuse?
Yes, its true, that back in January, the administration, along with almost every private sector forcaster, predicted that unemployment would not go over 8 percent or so. Everyone underestimated the seriousness of the recession.
Spin, lie, and blame others.
Barack Obama said that unemployment would not go over 8% if the “stimulus” bill was passed. Unemployment is now at 9.7% and rising. Barack Obama lied — and worse, Barack Obama is trying to drag other people down with him by blaming others, instead of being a man and taking responsibility for his actions and statements, as he blabbers other people should do.
Sounds bad. Investigate. Prosecute if there is a case to be made. See what a jury says. Its the American way.
Actually, it isn’t; Nancy Pelosi, for example, said that anyone who was accused of a crime should be required to step down from their leadership positions and leave Congress.
Amazingly enough, she can’t fulfill her own demands. She is a liar and a hypocrite, just like Barack Obama.
MS Pelosi said that if the Rangel corruption charges were even marginally true she would have an answer and recommendation and punishment by Jaunuary. JANUARY 2009.
Democrat justice.
How can we say the stimulus has failed? Easy.
First, remember that *the deficit* is the stimulus. Obama has voluntarily chosen to increase Federal spending in myriad ways and run $1.6 TRILLION annual deficits… after having campaigned on spending cuts, haha. So “the stimulus” is all of the Obama-owned deficit increases, current and proposed, including:
– the last-minute additions by Democrats to the FY2009 budget
– the official Porkulus bill
– the spending of all the bailout money (which Obama did not need to do and should not have done)
– the proposed escalation of spending under KopechneCare
– Cash for Clunkers (bribing people to destroy used cars and take on more consumer debt)
– and the rest.
How can we say it’s a failure? By simply LOOKING AT IT.
– It’s adding crushing debt burdens to future generations.
– It’s a giant reward for the lazy and the corrupt. (a category in which I include most government employees)
– It’s part of a pattern of government hyper-growth that UNDERMINES confidence in the economy and America’s future. Notice how the markets have panic attacks, for example, when it seems like Obama’s latest fascist boondoggle is about to pass (be it cap-n-tax, KopechneCare, or what have you)… then get better when Obama’s plans recede.
– It’s the driver for increasing Fed monetization of debt, which means that some combination of double-digit interest rates (if they stop monetizing) and/or double-digit inflation (if they keep monetizing) is certainly in the Dear Leader’s future.
Anything that adds $1.6T per year to the U.S. national debt is a colossal failure, in and of itself. As for the idea that the economy will have a short burst of growth at some point, before the hyperinflation sets in: It would have anyway. That’s what economies naturally do, when government aren’t burdening and destroying them as the Dear Leader has been doing.
Gene,
“He told us he would shorten the misery shorten the pain.”
Which is exactly what he is doing. Without the stimulus, we would now be in a depression.
” He tripled the countries debt for what?”
He did not triple the debt. Get a clue before you make statements.
“Look to a non partisian polling company for true and accurate polls, Rasmussen’
Dont be a clown.
“your nazi goose stepping is frightening.’
So this is the only way you can deal with people who disagree with you, eh? You bring disgrace to your political movement.
Man the liberal Democrats are dumb. Those in here defend the pork bill and the cash for clunkers bill. Dumb.
Cash for clunkers.
The month ending August 09, auto sales….
Privately held auto companies:
Hyndai +45%
Ford +18%
Govenment bailedout government run…..
Chrysler – 18% that’s MINUS 18%
GM -20% that’s MINUS 20% for those who went to public schools.
Only dumb liberal Democrats can point to programs like these as a success.
Since the pork stimulus bill passes unemployment went from 7.8% to 9.7% yet the leftists in here praise it as having been successful.
The man, our young President promised if passed, unemployment wouldn’t rise above 8%. He was wrong. Horribly wrong. Now we are suppose to trust him with health care and health insurance reform.
No thanks. Administration of dummies and boobs. Wanna tell me something they’ve done right? Iran? Afganistan? Speech to Arabs in Egypt? Unemployment? Pork Bill? Crooked Secretaries? Racist truther Czars? Oil rights to Soros?
Now the country has to sit through a speech to the Joint Session of Congress. This from the man who every time he opens his mouth, the support for Obamacare plummets. Geez give it a rest Mr President.
I was disappointed in the President’s address to the American children today. I thought for sure he was going to tell them each and every one of them now owed $50,000 because oh his horrific spending. I wish he would have detailed for the children what all he has spent their money on in the most recent pork stimuls bill. If I was an 8th grader I would have raised my hand and said ” Mr President you said you would veto any bill containing pork from Congress, why didn’t you?” People like Tano would have shuffled the 8th grader out of the classroom. To a re education center.
Re: Cash for Clunkers – Gene, that’s not the half of it.
CforC bribed consumers to turn in perfectly good cars for destruction, thus defeating its own environmental goal. The environmental impact of destroying a working car and replacing it with a new one is far greater than the environmental impact of letting a good 12-year-old car stay on the market and make someone happy (either the current owner, or the new owner they would have otherwise re-sold it to).
CforC also got consumers who were going to buy a new car anyway to “time” their purchase to match up with the CforC program – in other words, to a large extent it only cannibalized the car sales of a few months later and earlier. It will be interesting to see those numbers, when they come out.
CforC bribed people with shaky debt records, who should be getting out of debt because that is the solution to the recession as well as their own financial problems, to take on tens of thousands of dollars of new debt. It’ll be interesting to see the CforC loan default numbers, a year or two from now.
Finally – Why CforC? I mean: why not cash for refrigerators, or old LP records or brand-new copies of World of World of Warcraft? If it’s the road to prosperity, why not expand it infinitely? (But of course it isn’t.)
CforC: A plan so incredibly stupid and destructive that only Democrats could think of it… and only Tano could defend it.
No, he’s only going to double it, over the projected course of his administration. Gene slightly misspoke. Instead of saying Obama’s plans will triple our total national debt, to be accurate, Gene should have said Obama plans will be doubling our total national debt. Big. Freaking. Deal.
Tano, I love your utter cluelessness. People like you are part of how I have made money with my investment theses of the past 10 months and thus will survive the long-term process of DEPRESSION that we are already in, and that Obama is worsening, cluelessly.
I really hope the economy does seem to recover well, now and for the next several months. (I know it can’t last much longer than that, before we take the next step down.) When the fat lady sings I want Obama to have been in power for at least a year and to receive the full blame, that he is going to deserve richly.
“I want Obama …to receive the full blame, that he is going to deserve richly.”
Deal. But you gotta man up and give him full credit if your prediction turns out to be wrong. Or are you one of those who assumes it is impossible that you are mistaken?
btw, morons, the “write a letter to the president about how you can help him reach his goals” thing is being taken way out of context. the original idea was developed by the department of education, not the white house, and what they were talking about was helping obama reach his goal of GETTING KIDS TO STAY IN SCHOOL AND WORK HARD. we’re not talking about health policy here. jesus you people are batshit crazy.
Without the stimulus, we would now be in a depression.
Actually, no.
Barely 10% of the “stimulus” money has been spent, yet above Barack Obama was blabbering about how we would experience “3 – 4% growth” for the remainder of the year.
Obviously the “stimulus” was completely unnecessary — unless the point was to provide Barack Obama’s cronies with payments, which seems to have been the only goal, given how Barack Obama ignored requirements and urgency in favor of rewarding cronies.
Deal. But you gotta man up and give him full credit if your prediction turns out to be wrong.
Sorry. Barack Obama doesn’t have to take responsibility, as we see above with Barack Obama’s babbling that Barack Obama is not responsible for his failed unemployment projections.
Why does Barack Obama demand of others what he won’t do himself? Is it because Barack Obama believes that his skin color exempts him? Is Barack Obama a racist who has double standards based on skin color?
the original idea was developed by the department of education, not the white house
Let’s see; what is the Department of Education? Oh, that’s right; an agency of the executive branch.
And who heads the executive branch? Oh, that’s right; the President.
Funny; in the past, Barack Obama and the liberal left wouldn’t let CEOs get away with the excuse that their underlings did something wrong and that they weren’t responsible. But when it comes to following their own standards, Barack babbles and screams that he can’t be held accountable.
Again, Barack Obama the racist believes that his skin color exempts him from having to follow his own rules. Barack Obama is a hypocrite and racist who applies different standards based on skin color.
#63: “Funny; in the past, Barack Obama and the liberal left wouldn’t let CEOs get away with the excuse that their underlings did something wrong and that they weren’t responsible.”
Thank you, NDT, for once again calling bob on the carpet for his hypocritical and pedestrian efforts to distance his master from his own fu*k-ups without even having to be asked. bob is clearly angling for that prestigious Plausible Deniability Czar appointment. And how sweet is it that bob calls us “morons,” and in the next sentence attempts to cure our ignorance by offering up this perfectly logical, eminently reasonable explanation for all of the confusion about Obama’s speech to the nation’s school children: the US Department of Education WENT ROGUE! DUH–of course that’s what happened! I don’t know how we missed that considering how fiercely independent those public school bureaucrats are. Obama turns his back for one minute and…total chaos. Thanks, bob, for that “insiders” view of what was clearly a simple misunderstanding.
Now, obviously, this is a completely different situation than something like, I dunno…the Sigma Chi hazing that went down at the Abu Ghraib detention center 10,000 miles away from the continental US in the middle of the Iraqi desert. It’s beyond dispute that Rumsfeld, Bush, Rove, and Cheney had full knowledge of every single thing that went on in there (right down to the configuration of every last naked-enemy-combatant-pyramid) because they most certainly watched the floor shows for laughs via their real-time web cams. Yes, knowledge of the horrors of Abu Ghraib tore a super-sonic, high-definition path out of the desert, through the Middle East, across the Atlantic, and all the way to the halls of power and the Oval Office itself. They knew EVERYTHING that went on.
But Obama’s Department of Education? Clearly a situation where the right hand and the left hand were not communicating.
the part i said about who developed the idea wasn’t the main point i was making, you idiots..
get back to me when your IQ is higher than the temperature. luckily, winter isn’t too far off.
And again, we see bob reduced to sputtering incoherence. Reduced to insults when he’s smacked down, again. Good to see that Harvard education coming in handy.
Much like the President w/o a teleprompter.
To all the lurking liberals: Can we please get a higher class of troll?
Oh, my predictions could easily be wrong. If Obama started a war, that could be a game-changer. (The irony would be, of course, that that is what the Left always accused Bush, falsely, of trying to do with the War on Terror.)
Also, Obama might always wake up one morning and suddenly realize that he needs to cut spending by $2 trillion (not grow it), harden the dollar and lift regulations so that productive people can grow the economy again. It happened for a brief moment with Lenin in the early Soviet Union, after all.
Talking to my friends in the auto industry in Detroit, car sales are down 60% so far in September. The $3 Billion cash for clunkers poured down the Obama sewer. Nice job Mr President.
Wonder if the news media will revise their “wildly popular” monicer for cash for clunkers. Dopes and dummies.
“The irony would be, of course, that that is what the Left always accused Bush, falsely, of trying to do with the War on Terror.”
Correction. The end should read: “correctly, of trying to do with the war in Iraq”
Ah, poor Tano-truther.
If President bush ‘started a war with Iraq’ then why didn’t they plant WMD?