Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2009 11:11:15 GMT -5
...I don't think it's unreasonable at all for people to say, "Hey, stay away from my kids if that's the stuff you're going to deliver." I would disagree. Parents are basically saying "I don't like him, so I don't even want my kids to hear him speak." Really? He's the President - why not teach your kids a thing or two along the way? Like, "Please listen to our President's speech, and let's talk about what you think of it when you get home." You know, teach your kids to think critically about things instead of knee-jerk reacting to everything. Of course, that may be too much to ask of adults who lack the ability to think critically themselves.
|
|
H2Oya 05
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Let's go Hoyas!
Posts: 298
|
Post by H2Oya 05 on Sept 8, 2009 11:20:10 GMT -5
This isn't good. Obama is boring right now. I'll admit I have a short attention span, but I would have to imagine that highschoolers also don't have the longest attention span. This is not what I expect from Obama.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Sept 8, 2009 11:24:11 GMT -5
I'm just wondering, are you inferring that is what parents are saying, or have you actually heard it being said by a lot of people?
I only ask because I've certainly heard a lot of parents and parent groups talking about the objection I mentioned, but I haven't seen the latter, either anecdotally (i.e. - personally), or on the news.
Granted, it's been a holiday weekend and I've been more about being glued to my XBox than paying too much attention, so I may have missed this. ;D
EDIT: I should add, one other thing I've heard conservatives (more of the libertarian variety, I think) saying is that parents should be the ones telling their children to stay in school, not the President.
I certainly agree that this is the job of parents, but I disagree with those who say the President shouldn't do this because "it's not his job." Yeah, there are a lot of more important things he could be doing, but really, I think this kind of thing is good. Don't be too preachy, sure, but say: "hey kids; work hard." Nothing wrong with that.
As to the other point about whether kids will tune him out? Almost certainly they will, but the message will get through to some.
|
|
|
Post by StPetersburgHoya (Inactive) on Sept 8, 2009 11:28:24 GMT -5
Can we get a new rule, along the lines of Godwin's Law, for how long it takes for people to call "racism" when someone is criticizing President Obama? I do not doubt there are some really vile racists who oppose this president. There you go. It's true. What a revelation. But as exorcist points out, there are vile people on both sides of the aisle. I will leave that there for the sake of this thread, but if anyone would like to dispute that assertion, I'll be happy to provide examples. At the same time, to charatcerize racists (or "other-ists," if you prefer) as the mainstream of opposition is really not at all intellectually honest. There is a very logical reason why people were worried about what Obama was going to say in his speech to schoolchildren. For most of his first months in office, one of the things being debated across the country was how much people wanted government intervention in their lives or in the economy. It began with the stimulus package, and the auto bailout, and reached a very loud point with the health care debate. People flinging epithets at each other (and biting people's fingers off) notwithstanding, this is a very good debate to have. And Obama, for the most part, has come down on the side of wanting government intervention, if not control, on most of these issues. Well, guess what? There are a lot of people in this country who DON'T want that (and here's some more news: they're not all conservatives). You take that context, you add some of the other factors I mentioned in my first post in this thread, add the DoE putting out a REALLY unadvisable "lesson plan," and no, I don't think it's unreasonable at all for people to say, "Hey, stay away from my kids if that's the stuff you're going to deliver." Having said all of that, as I mentioned before, the speech I read was just fine and, more than that (as I have also said before), I encourage the President to deliver this kind of message. It is a good thing to do. Yeah, we can quibble about this line or that line, or this or that theme, but basically it's a good and positive message. (The cynic in me would like to say, when the President delivers the line, "If you fail a test, it doesn't mean you are stupid,".....well sometimes it can mean you are stupid. But that's just a joke, of course). I am more than happy to give this President credit when he does things that I think are good. But if you think for a minute, given the philosophy of government which he espouses and that I do not support, that I am not going to be looking at everything he says with a critical eye, you can forget it. And no, it doesn't make me a racist, or a birther, or an ignorant redneck Klan member. Hell, it doesn't even make me the green jobs czar former green jobs czar. I am not critiquing all people who vote Republican or consider themselves Conservative. I said there is a small minority who have gone beyond being in favor of smaller government to be virulently anti-Obama - the people who when there was no information other than Obama is going to speak to students and there is a lesson plan where you write a letter to yourself about how you can help the President achieve his goals of you staying in school and not dropping out assumed that this was like Stalin, Hitler, Hussein, Mao, etc; or who assumed without information that Obama is not from this country. I was thinking about what Exorcist said in his comparison to the Clinton administration - which was very good. This is like a more wide-spread and vile version of the people who kept on saying without any information that a member of the Clinton family killed Vine Foster.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Sept 8, 2009 11:30:13 GMT -5
Can we get a new rule, along the lines of Godwin's Law, for how long it takes for people to call "racism" when someone is criticizing President Obama? I do not doubt there are some really vile racists who oppose this president. There you go. It's true. What a revelation. But as exorcist points out, there are vile people on both sides of the aisle. I will leave that there for the sake of this thread, but if anyone would like to dispute that assertion, I'll be happy to provide examples. At the same time, to charatcerize racists (or "other-ists," if you prefer) as the mainstream of opposition is really not at all intellectually honest. There is a very logical reason why people were worried about what Obama was going to say in his speech to schoolchildren. For most of his first months in office, one of the things being debated across the country was how much people wanted government intervention in their lives or in the economy. It began with the stimulus package, and the auto bailout, and reached a very loud point with the health care debate. People flinging epithets at each other (and biting people's fingers off) notwithstanding, this is a very good debate to have. And Obama, for the most part, has come down on the side of wanting government intervention, if not control, on most of these issues. Well, guess what? There are a lot of people in this country who DON'T want that (and here's some more news: they're not all conservatives). You take that context, you add some of the other factors I mentioned in my first post in this thread, add the DoE putting out a REALLY unadvisable "lesson plan," and no, I don't think it's unreasonable at all for people to say, "Hey, stay away from my kids if that's the stuff you're going to deliver." Having said all of that, as I mentioned before, the speech I read was just fine and, more than that (as I have also said before), I encourage the President to deliver this kind of message. It is a good thing to do. Yeah, we can quibble about this line or that line, or this or that theme, but basically it's a good and positive message. (The cynic in me would like to say, when the President delivers the line, "If you fail a test, it doesn't mean you are stupid,".....well sometimes it can mean you are stupid. But that's just a joke, of course). I am more than happy to give this President credit when he does things that I think are good. But if you think for a minute, given the philosophy of government which he espouses and that I do not support, that I am not going to be looking at everything he says with a critical eye, you can forget it. And no, it doesn't make me a racist, or a birther, or an ignorant redneck Klan member. Hell, it doesn't even make me the green jobs czar former green jobs czar. I am not critiquing all people who vote Republican or consider themselves Conservative. I said there is a small minority who have gone beyond being in favor of smaller government to be virulently anti-Obama - the people who when there was no information other than Obama is going to speak to students and there is a lesson plan where you write a letter to yourself about how you can help the President achieve his goals of you staying in school and not dropping out assumed that this was like Stalin, Hitler, Hussein, Mao, etc; or who assumed without information that Obama is not from this country. I was thinking about what Exorcist said in his comparison to the Clinton administration - which was very good. This is like a more wide-spread and vile version of the people who kept on saying without any information that a member of the Clinton family killed Vine Foster. Or the people that thought Bush and Cheney were responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
|
|
|
Post by StPetersburgHoya (Inactive) on Sept 8, 2009 11:33:01 GMT -5
I am not critiquing all people who vote Republican or consider themselves Conservative. I said there is a small minority who have gone beyond being in favor of smaller government to be virulently anti-Obama - the people who when there was no information other than Obama is going to speak to students and there is a lesson plan where you write a letter to yourself about how you can help the President achieve his goals of you staying in school and not dropping out assumed that this was like Stalin, Hitler, Hussein, Mao, etc; or who assumed without information that Obama is not from this country. I was thinking about what Exorcist said in his comparison to the Clinton administration - which was very good. This is like a more wide-spread and vile version of the people who kept on saying without any information that a member of the Clinton family killed Vine Foster. Or the people that thought Bush and Cheney were responsible for the 9/11 attacks. Agreed. He should have never been hired.
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Sept 8, 2009 11:42:21 GMT -5
Van Jones doesn't cause the turnout we've seen at the town hall meetings. Obama's birth certificate doesn't lead to the tea party movement. That's inside-the-beltway stuff for the blogs and message boards and Sunday talk shows. What gets the average Joe to speak out and act is a takeover of health care, raising taxes, bigger government. No, actual content of the legislation is "inside-the-beltway" stuff. I guarantee you 95% of people can't tell you what an individual or corporate mandate is or whether the Senate HELP bill or HR 3200 has one or what position the guy they voted for (McCain) held on either. Van Jones on the other hand has been a trending topic on Twitter for the last week. So now we're using Twitter as representative of the general public. I don't think any in my firm uses it, save for our youngest paralegal. And you're dead wrong on the actual content of the legislation being inside-the-beltway. When the proposed legislation can prevent you from having the insurance you want, that's not inside-the-beltway.
|
|
|
Post by StPetersburgHoya (Inactive) on Sept 8, 2009 11:53:41 GMT -5
No, actual content of the legislation is "inside-the-beltway" stuff. I guarantee you 95% of people can't tell you what an individual or corporate mandate is or whether the Senate HELP bill or HR 3200 has one or what position the guy they voted for (McCain) held on either. Van Jones on the other hand has been a trending topic on Twitter for the last week. So now we're using Twitter as representative of the general public. I don't think any in my firm uses it, save for our youngest paralegal. And you're dead wrong on the actual content of the legislation being inside-the-beltway. When the proposed legislation can prevent you from having the insurance you want, that's not inside-the-beltway. Sidenote: I think having anyone in your firm using twitter is asking for ethical or confidentiality problems.
|
|
hoyatables
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,603
|
Post by hoyatables on Sept 8, 2009 11:54:31 GMT -5
I laughed out loud over the weekend at the stupid blonde mother on the news who was in tears -- TEARS -- about Obama speaking to students. The substantive point being made -- that elected officials shouldn't be using such a forum for political speech -- has merit. The actual level of public discussion, which from everything I have read was based on an agency statement that arguably suggested some political component and has been exceptionally hyperbolic (tears, references to Nazis and or other propagandist machines) has no merit.
I recognize the point that much of this could be attributable to a small minority of conservatives, and is no less out of touch with reality than some of the wackos who objected to Bush/Cheney. I realized what's so scary yet powerful, however, about the "conservative" zealots - they look like "us". They are everyday joes at town halls and blonde soccer moms interviewed on the streets, not Hollywood liberals, Michael Moore, or wannabe hippie protesters.
Just some thoughts.
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Sept 8, 2009 12:05:36 GMT -5
So now we're using Twitter as representative of the general public. I don't think any in my firm uses it, save for our youngest paralegal. And you're dead wrong on the actual content of the legislation being inside-the-beltway. When the proposed legislation can prevent you from having the insurance you want, that's not inside-the-beltway. Sidenote: I think having anyone in your firm using twitter is asking for ethical or confidentiality problems. Why? If they want to tweet on their own time at home, that's fine with me.
|
|
hoyatables
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,603
|
Post by hoyatables on Sept 8, 2009 12:07:17 GMT -5
Sidenote: I think having anyone in your firm using twitter is asking for ethical or confidentiality problems. Why? If they want to tweet on their own time at home, that's fine with me. Agree. So long as it is not about confidential matters its fine. Also probably safe to generally stay away from discussions of work and even from general legal commentary, unless the firm has approved it.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Sept 8, 2009 12:11:12 GMT -5
Did you expect everyone who was against Obama to look like David Spade in PCU? (Admit it, you kinda' did, didn't you? ;D )
I hadn't seen/heard of the mother you referrred to. That's fairly pathetic. Someone get Leslie Nielson to slap her. Anyone have a YouTube link? There's no crying in the PTA!!
On the other hand, the moronic Broward County superintendant who made the event mandatory, even though the Education Secretary said it was designed to be 100% voluntary, also could do with a slap across the face, Airplane-style.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,456
Member is Online
|
Post by TC on Sept 8, 2009 12:16:48 GMT -5
On the other hand, the moronic Broward County superintendant who made the event mandatory, even though the Education Secretary said it was designed to be 100% voluntary, also could do with a slap across the face, Airplane-style. This whole mess originated with the guy from the Florida State GOP. I have a feeling the Broward move is reactionary to that.
|
|
|
Post by StPetersburgHoya (Inactive) on Sept 8, 2009 12:24:42 GMT -5
Sidenote: I think having anyone in your firm using twitter is asking for ethical or confidentiality problems. Why? If they want to tweet on their own time at home, that's fine with me. My bad - I thought you were saying he did it at work.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Sept 8, 2009 12:33:40 GMT -5
On the other hand, the moronic Broward County superintendant who made the event mandatory, even though the Education Secretary said it was designed to be 100% voluntary, also could do with a slap across the face, Airplane-style. This whole mess originated with the guy from the Florida State GOP. I have a feeling the Broward move is reactionary to that. How is it appropriate for a county school superindendant to react to something -- even something designed to provoke -- said by the chair of a state party? Particularly when his "reactionary" move is in direct conflict with the policy, or at least guidelines, set forth by the Department of Education? Megyn Kelly made him look like an idiot, which I'm pretty sure he probably is. (of course, I am biased because I heart Megyn Kelly).
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Sept 8, 2009 12:41:39 GMT -5
Why? If they want to tweet on their own time at home, that's fine with me. Agree. So long as it is not about confidential matters its fine. Also probably safe to generally stay away from discussions of work and even from general legal commentary, unless the firm has approved it. I seriously doubt someone is tweeting "Dude, guess what our client said in his depo today..."
|
|
Jack
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,411
|
Post by Jack on Sept 8, 2009 12:53:45 GMT -5
Megyn Kelly made him look like an idiot, which I'm pretty sure he probably is. (of course, I am biased because I heart Megyn Kelly). As someone who does not watch much Fox News (don't worry, I also don't watch much MSNBC or CNN), I wondered who this person is who has stolen young Boz's heart. Imagine my surprise to see this in her authoritative Wikipedia entry: That falls somewhere between Truthers and Birthers on the list of credentials that should cause you to lose all credibility here.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,456
Member is Online
|
Post by TC on Sept 8, 2009 12:55:27 GMT -5
How is it appropriate for a county school superindendant to react to something -- even something designed to provoke -- said by the chair of a state party? Particularly when his "reactionary" move is in direct conflict with the policy, or at least guidelines, set forth by the Department of Education? I don't think it is appropriate. Make it optional, if some parents want to be dimwits and pull their kids out, let them, it's less of a hassle on the teachers who are going to have to deal with those parents all year long. But I also don't think they make it mandatory if the State GOP Chairman doesn't come out and accuse Obama of indoctrinating kids in a socialist agenda. It's backlash, to take a word Republicans love to throw around.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Sept 8, 2009 13:13:31 GMT -5
Ed - you got that off of Drudge. Therefore it is "lunatic BS" and should be immediately discounted. You should know better. As usual, attack the messenger without addressing the substance.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,456
Member is Online
|
Post by TC on Sept 8, 2009 13:17:20 GMT -5
I seriously doubt someone is tweeting "Dude, guess what our client said in his depo today..." Whatever it is, it better be less than 90 characters, because they just wasted 50 characters with that intro.
|
|