Should the president be able to address school children

[MMM]

Originally Posted by tksensei

Other than the cult of personality? Controling the population by making them subsverient to the state as personified by a charismatic leader? Indoctrinating children in service to the state rather than responsible exercise of their personal rights? The only thing missing is the blue suits and bad architecture.

That was not a slippery slope, but a mile high cliff you just jumped off of.

Since the speech is now history, and we know it's contents inside and out, is your above statement still relevant?

There was nothing in Obama's speech about subservience to the state, indocrination, or reduction of rights.

Really? The only thing missing is "blue suits and bad architecture"? As a joke it is only remotely funny, but if you are serious I think you to do some serious fact checking and self exploration.

[tksensei]

Originally Posted by MMM

There was nothing in Obama's speech about subservience to the state, indocrination, or reduction of rights.

The speech, and 'suggested' homework was changed because some people were paying attention and gave a damn.

Originally Posted by MMM

Really? The only thing missing is "blue suits and bad architecture"? As a joke it is only remotely funny, but if you are serious I think you to do some serious fact checking and self exploration.

I believe you mentioned "slippery slope"?

[MMM]

Originally Posted by tksensei

The speech, and 'suggested' homework was changed because some people were paying attention and gave a damn.

The suggested homework assignment was changed after conservatives put pressure on the White House to do so. The original suggested assignment came from the Dept. of Education and not from the White House (as I have stated several times).

But I would like to hear more details on how the speech changed. Please tell me what the original speech was, and what was removed?

[clintjm]

Originally Posted by MMM

I agree with you. But on the other hand Blind Mistrust and Condemning every word can not only be just as bad, it can be worse.

At least you know what you are getting when you flip on his show.
Its not the "Let's celebrate government" with your host Rush.

Originally Posted by MMM

LIMBAUGH: He is lying, President Obama is, from the moment he opens his mouth until he ends the speech.

LIMBAUGH: If you want to talk about demeaning the chamber, the president of the United States demeaned the chamber last night. He showed up and lied through his teeth. He was petulant, he was mean-spirited, he was angry, he was arrogant, conceited, condescending, but more than anything else, he lied through his teeth. And everybody knows it.

This in not investigative language, this is divisive language. There is no fact checking and counter-pointing. It is just sweeping accusations...not even accusations. These are sweeping statements based on nothing but Rush Limbaugh's desire to get payed. He is the Insane Clown Posse of right-wing punditry, though he is more successful.

Last time I listened, he quotes his sources and give you his commentary. You have every right to disagree with his commentary and take as much as he has his right to give it.

Are you just angry at the "Insane Clown's" success? Sounds like it to me.

Originally Posted by MMM

I noticed you didn't address any of the quotes I put up from Rush Limbaugh. Those statements are not fact-checked and are not factual.

<sigh> If I must...
You know, it goes both way last I checked... I think I remember a little something in the presidents speech about “It is a lie, plain and simple made not just by radio and cable talk show hosts, but prominent politicians.” “Such a charge would be laughable if it weren't so cynical and irresponsible,”... On the very speech Limbaugh was going on about. I don't see much difference, nor do I see much about Limbaugh's opinion isn't shared with much of the nation. Heck, just flip it over to NPR and get an ear full now a days. Log on to CNN...

You state "They are not factual". That is your opinion.. Rush's opinion is that they are... what makes this different?

Its as if you think people can't think for themselves and determine what is fact and what is opinion. Would you like the people on the Internet and on Talk show to state "The following I know is a fact " "The following is my opinion"?

Originally Posted by MMM

I agree that investigative reporting is essential and government corruption should be exposed and broadcast. I will keep my opinions of Van Jones to myself, but his idiocy was exposed and he was forced to go. That is the right thing to have happen.

Conservative talk radio shows are not investigative, their opinions and commentary on the news and theories. Larger ones can be considered "think tank", just in a different form.

Way to go on keeping your opinions to yourself...
but I'm not disagreeing with you on it.

Originally Posted by MMM

And it government and presidents will lie again. That's not my point.

Well you seem angry at the commentary Rush presented above...thats the jist of what Rush is saying right?
What is the point?

Originally Posted by MMM

You said With this line of thinking you might as shut down the internet of any type public communication.

Where that came from I have no idea. Taking the idea that non-journalistic broadcasters should take responsibility for their words and turning that into "shut down the Internet" is a slippery slope on a hill I was no where near.

I think your going on the path of Rush being a powerful well know voice on a nationalized accessible media (radio), and that he should be responsible for what he says. I mean I see nothing in the quote from Rush above that is irresponsible.

If Rush were to go on the air and say "Kill all democrats" that would be irresponsible.

Here was the point I was trying to make, but I think I wasn't clear:

Originally Posted by MMM

Rush Limbaugh cannot possibly believe all the lies that come out of his mouth, but the problem is there are people that do.

Basically you want to stop such comments from Rush (like the one your quoted) because you feel there is a problem that some people may tend to agree and believe his opinion.

People do this everyday in all kinds of forms on the Internet, in Newspapers etc.. If you say stop this guy Rush from his opinion, stop the internet, stop any kind of free thought...

Originally Posted by MMM

I don't think it is ridiculous. People like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly have worked for many hours a day to help create a culture where disrespecting not just the man, but the office of the president is not only OK and normal, but is patriotic. And not only the president, but all elected officials.

You are welcome to that opinion as well, but otherse feel the opposite when government belittles them as demonstrated by elected officials (and the President) in the town halls, and this last speech.

I think the culture created by these groups are simply galvanizing people to wake up before government swallows the nation.

The government serves the people, not the other way around.
We don't serve the president, the president represents the people of the United States.

Originally Posted by MMM

To broadcast that the president wants to tear apart the Constitution with such fervor...is there no responsibility? I don't know how many times he has said it, but it was more than once on Thursday...I would be surprised to hear that is the first time.

Can't someone have an opinion about the President or government not following the consititution.
By what I'm reading, you feel that someone with an audience shouldn't be allowed to voice any opposition.

Originally Posted by MMM

Of course I did. I signed a petition on Facebook which led to several people attacking me. She was one of them. When I asked the question suddenly she was tired and needed to go to bed (there were other questions I had she couldn't answer). There are corrupt police. Does that mean all police shouldn't be trusted? Some coaches and teachers molest their students. Does that mean all teachers and coaches are not trustworthy? Some troops in Iraq have committed crimes...does that mean we shouldn't support our troops?

I'm not sure what petition you are talking about, or why the person she hates Obama...so you lost me there.

Well from this I'm guessing your drawing the analogy "because there is government corruption we shouldn't trust any government"
No, you will still interact with government as you will with police or whomever, but again I think from these shows/people and commentart/opinions that you should learn to question and be aware of what corruption may exist.

Originally Posted by MMM

You think Rush Limbaugh gives you the real facts? These are all political entertainment shows. I agree with you, people need to search for the facts on their own. Unfortunately the vast majority of people don't do that. Is that Rush's fault? No, of course not. But if they did he would probably be out of a job.

Its commentary and opinions. The guy states his sources, gives his commentart on it... gives opinions and theory. Its not the Rush Public Service announcement show. Its not news radio. It is political entertainment... you got it... but you act like people don't know this and they are being brain washed into a culture of "You lie" in an address by the president. Good god man, the public are not borg drones.

So basically you leave it at there wouldn't be these shows if people followed up on their commentary and opinions... and thus the people that listen to Rush and friends that don't know this is opinion and commentary and will believe whatever they say ... that it will change their way of thinking... and the political entertainment commentary hosts are irresponsible for doing what they do?




Wow.

[burkhartdesu]

And what's even more interesting is that both Rush Limbaugh and the bank owners of the world attend the Bohemian Grove.

[MMM]

Originally Posted by clintjm

So basically you leave it at there wouldn't be these shows if people followed up on their commentary and opinions... and thus the people that listen to Rush and friends that don't know this is opinion and commentary and will believe whatever they say ... that it will change their way of thinking... and the political entertainment commentary hosts are irresponsible for doing what they do?




Wow.

If you want me to go point by point I can and am happy to, but you sum it up pretty well here.

I would say that there is a significant faction of the conservative talk show listening public that, yes, does not check facts and, yes, believes every single word that comes out of Rush Limbaugh's mouth. I don't know that it changes their way of thinking, actually it is probably the opposite. Rush panders to that that way of thinking with intelligent-sounding soundbites and "from my dead hands" undying fortitude that what people are hearing is exactly what they want to hear from someone who can say it better than they can.

With freedom and power come responsibilty. And I would say that Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly, Beck, etc. show diminishing responsibility in their positions.

Wow? Fine. This is America, they have freedom of speech, people are free to listen, I get all that. But this summer Americans were hanging stuffed dolls of reform supporting politicians at town hall meetings. People were bringing guns to presidential events. People were calling the president's policies socialist, fascist, Maoist, communist, Stalinist, and Nazi with no sense of shame or irony. I dare say half of the people using these (often contradictory) terms don't even know what they mean.

But Rush has compared President Obama to Adolf Hitler on more than one occasion. And he still defends that comparison.

Does he have the right to say it? Sure. It is irresponsible? Absolutely. But to think he doesn't feed a demon that is hurtful to the country is naive.

[tksensei]

Originally Posted by MMM

The original suggested assignment came from the Dept. of Education and not from the White House (as I have stated several times).

Buck - stop - yes?

[samurai007]

Originally Posted by MMM

If you want me to go point by point I can and am happy to, but you sum it up pretty well here.

I would say that there is a significant faction of the conservative talk show listening public that, yes, does not check facts and, yes, believes every single word that comes out of Rush Limbaugh's mouth. I don't know that it changes their way of thinking, actually it is probably the opposite. Rush panders to that that way of thinking with intelligent-sounding soundbites and "from my dead hands" undying fortitude that what people are hearing is exactly what they want to hear from someone who can say it better than they can.

With freedom and power come responsibilty. And I would say that Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly, Beck, etc. show diminishing responsibility in their positions.

Wow? Fine. This is America, they have freedom of speech, people are free to listen, I get all that. But this summer Americans were hanging stuffed dolls of reform supporting politicians at town hall meetings. People were bringing guns to presidential events. People were calling the president's policies socialist, fascist, Maoist, communist, Stalinist, and Nazi with no sense of shame or irony. I dare say half of the people using these (often contradictory) terms don't even know what they mean.

But Rush has compared President Obama to Adolf Hitler on more than one occasion. And he still defends that comparison.

Does he have the right to say it? Sure. It is irresponsible? Absolutely. But to think he doesn't feed a demon that is hurtful to the country is naive.

Would you please point to the thread a year or 2 ago where you called Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, the anti-war demonstrators, and many, many others on the left irresponsible for saying Bush was fascist, comparing him to Hitler and Saddam, hanging him and burning him in effigy, and generally feeding the ignorance and bias of the far left with hate and bigotry which all too many gullible folks swallowed hook, line, and sinker without checking their facts? Because I must have missed that thread, and I'd like to read it...

[Ronin4hire]

Originally Posted by MMM

Wow? Fine. This is America, they have freedom of speech, people are free to listen, I get all that. But this summer Americans were hanging stuffed dolls of reform supporting politicians at town hall meetings. People were bringing guns to presidential events. People were calling the president's policies socialist, fascist, Maoist, communist, Stalinist, and Nazi with no sense of shame or irony. I dare say half of the people using these (often contradictory) terms don't even know what they mean.

But Rush has compared President Obama to Adolf Hitler on more than one occasion. And he still defends that comparison.

Does he have the right to say it? Sure. It is irresponsible? Absolutely. But to think he doesn't feed a demon that is hurtful to the country is naive.

Samurai007 for example

[clintjm]

Originally Posted by MMM

If you want me to go point by point I can and am happy to, but you sum it up pretty well here.

Originally Posted by MMM

I would say that there is a significant faction of the conservative talk show listening public that, yes, does not check facts and, yes, believes every single word that comes out of Rush Limbaugh's mouth.

And I say that anyone who blantenly believes every single word from anybody is mentally insane.

Basically if you hear Rush say "Today Obama has decided today the official Obama national holiday" and he/she just don't check up on it and just don't go into work... then they are a nut bag.

Originally Posted by MMM

I don't know that it changes their way of thinking, actually it is probably the opposite.

You don't know? Well make up your mind. You wrote

Originally Posted by MMM

What it does is slowly create a culture where elected and respected officials will yell things at the president while he is speaking.

Originally Posted by MMM

Rush panders to that that way of thinking with intelligent-sounding soundbites and "from my dead hands" undying fortitude that what people are hearing is exactly what they want to hear from someone who can say it better than they can.

Sounds like the people who tune in then are getting what they are asked for.

Originally Posted by MMM

With freedom and power come responsibilty. And I would say that Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly, Beck, etc. show diminishing responsibility in their positions.

How so? By calling them out? By stating their opinion. By pushing the conservative agenda?

Sorry... thats what they do... I don't know how you can call that irresponsible.

Originally Posted by MMM

Wow? Fine. This is America, they have freedom of speech, people are free to listen, I get all that. But this summer Americans were hanging stuffed dolls of reform supporting politicians at town hall meetings. People were bringing guns to presidential events. People were calling the president's policies socialist, fascist, Maoist, communist, Stalinist, and Nazi with no sense of shame or irony. I dare say half of the people using these (often contradictory) terms don't even know what they mean.

Yes... these are the crazies and the uninformed/uneducated.

You can also draw the same conclusion from what the government has declaired a health care emergency where people have no access to medical care. The ONLY way to fix this is socialized health insurance.... ., we would actually be saving money, and it won't cost us a dime to the deficit...
We would save pay back 4 trillion to the deficit in so many years

Now if someone believes this without checking the facts then I declair them nut jobs.

Originally Posted by MMM

But Rush has compared President Obama to Adolf Hitler on more than one occasion. And he still defends that comparison.

Does he have the right to say it? Sure. It is irresponsible? Absolutely. But to think he doesn't feed a demon that is hurtful to the country is naive.

Going to play the Hitler comparison are we? To be fair, lets post some links to the audio or the transcript. Throw in Beck's "Obama is racists" too.

I would say if Rush said "Obama is hitler" "Hitler killed so many and Obama is too" "Kill Obama because he is the new Hitler" that is irresponsible.... But if he was comparing polictal tatics simularities..., which he was, that is just shock jock commentary... and you have to have the education of a first grader to believe Obama is the next Hitler.. or be a wacko.

Are you going to have wackbags call Obama as evil as Adolf Hitler? Sure... they are fulfilling there role as wackbakgs..

Is it a good idea to keep his listerners? Rush thought so...
He knows his listeners and assums they are sane.

If you think that is irresponsible... so be it....
Obama telling people opposed to his plan to get out of the way... is also irresponsible.

But I'll tell you one thing:




we are soo far off topic...