President's back to school message
The president is to tell America's school kids that many of them are nervous, probably wishing it was still the summer holidays, but when they are struggling they shouldn't give up. Maybe it is heart-felt. It is not only the children who are back at their desks, so are Congress and the president. And it is going to be a tough week.
But my sneak preview suggests that the nationwide address beamed into all state schools will contain little of the liberal indoctrination that his opponents warned about. Some parents are keeping their children away from school, fearful of political polution. But perhaps I am wrong that it is inoffensive: maybe "No-one's born being good at things" is close to communism, the instruction "I hope you'll all wash your hands a lot" intrusive big government.
Of course the fuss springs directly from one of the big differences between the US system and the British one. There would be a furore if the British head of governemnt, Gordon Brown, wanted to beam his message to schools: the opposition would demand a right of reply for a start. But if the head of state, the Queen, wanted to tell them all to work hard, few eyelids would bat.
The trouble is, the president is both. In each administration political opponents don't like it when a man they love to hate wants to earn kudos by behaving like the nation's father, but it's built into the system.
I’m Mark Mardell, the BBC's North America editor. These are my reflections on American politics, some thoughts on being a Brit living in the USA, and who knows what else? My 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~14~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Mark:
« The information about the message the President is going to deliver on Tuesday, is the same type; other Presidents have delivered in years past...
But the entire idea of indoctrination is, simply nonsense; Because, that should be thought of; During the Administrations George Bush (I) and Ronald Reagan speeches...
=Dennis Junior=
Complain about this comment
Apart from all the questions which were/are to be put to the children following the broadcast revolving around assisting the man instead of the country (which sounded pretty queer to me). They rewrote the speech following the uproar so whatever you now think is completely innocuous is not what was originally scripted...
Complain about this comment
It's clear by now that there's a certain segment of our population that has been primed to react, instantly and without any thought whatsoever, with fear and hatred to anything Mr. Obama does or says. My parents were Republicans but never taught me to hate (nor even spoke disparagingly of them in my presence) Presidents of the opposing party. Nor did other adults I knew while growing up. How times have changed.
Complain about this comment
The opposition to Obama's school address does seem silly (although even Obama groupie Chris "Thrill Up My Leg" Matthews expressed reservations about the first draft of the speech). That said, stuff like this is pretty creepy.
(BTW Mark - the BBC's coverage of the resignation of Van Jones was pathetic. No way the BBC would've let a Republican appointee with similar crackpot views get away so lightly.)
Complain about this comment
I for one believe messages like this are too few and far between. I haven't heard or read any objection that makes any sense. Asking kids to study hard and work hard? What's wrong with that? Every level of society starting with parents/guardians needs to repeat this message on a daily basis. This isn't a partisan message. The Republican's objections come down to one thing: They hate that Obama is popular and that people are actually interested to hear what he has to say. They aren't interested in anything good coming out of his presidency - they want to be in power and damn the country in the meantime.
Complain about this comment
"But if the head of state, the Queen, wanted to tell them all to work hard, few eyelids would bat."
In one ear and out the other? And why not. Nothing inbetween to stop it? :-)
As I heard it, he's going to tell school children how to help him. That is the fatal flaw. That's is politicking of the lowest order to a segment of the population that is not in a position to make decisions on what policies to support and which ones to oppose. School kids are being brainwashed enough by their teachers and with lies in their history books as it is. Down with political correctness.
Complain about this comment
"President's back to school message"
Is this little piece what you laboured to do on Labor Day? If so, time wasted, since you finish by writing "it's built into the system." I suppose you have to earn your salary, but let's have something more substantial.
Complain about this comment
If American schoolchildren are indoctrinated on hearing one speech by their president than they are thicker than even their io oppenents claim.
American education is admitted to be in a shocking state (apart from the elite) and it would look odd if the president didn't say something about it.
What is bizzare is the reaction.
There is one school of thought that Obama is deliberately going about choosing issues to make the right look idiotic.
Given the right's desperate attempts to get his birth certificate,uselessly opposing his supreme crt appointment and now this, there seems to be something in it.
Unless someone gets hold of the right and injects some sanity then Obama is home and hosed and so is his party.
Again the man is a master politician.
Complain about this comment
5. At 9:11pm on 07 Sep 2009, duhbuh wrote:
The opposition to Obama's school address does seem silly (although even Obama groupie Chris "Thrill Up My Leg" Matthews expressed reservations about the first draft of the speech). That said, stuff like this is pretty creepy."
I agree. If I was a US teacher last place I would stand is in front of the class in full view - I am convinced that little kid at the back had a piece in her hand, and a number of the others looked dubious as well - where was the armed security when this was going on?
Complain about this comment
"School kids are being brainwashed enough by their teachers and with lies in their history books as it is. Down with political correctness."
Which lies are these, Marcus?
The issue is never that there are lies in history books - even the really good ones are written from a specific perspective - it's that American children are not being taught how to think. Schemes like "No Child Left Behind" and similar initiatives concentrate on passing tests.
When people rant on about "lies in history books" it's a signal that education has failed them, because the first thing a real historian learns is that what the book says is a place to start, and that if you've got an interpretation which differs you need to go away and find evidence to support it.
Complain about this comment
#8 Tub of;
He gives you a platform to spout more of your eternal infernal nonsense and you complain about it? You've never cared what the blog owner's subject matter was in the past? Why break your streak now.
Complain about this comment
11. At 10:05pm on 07 Sep 2009, Dark Side of the Goon wrote:
"When people rant on about "lies in history books" it's a signal that education has failed them, because the first thing a real historian learns is that what the book says is a place to start, and that if you've got an interpretation which differs you need to go away and find evidence to support it."
This is very true but it is a fact that many Americans (and not only Amercians) do not understand what history is.
Of course it is about interpretation of evidence, not futile searching for some mythical "truth" - how can one know the "truth" about people and societies no longer in existence - by holding seances?
Part of this of course has been generated by sinister attitudes towards the jewsih massacres of world war II, where historical study has been practically outlawed. Indeed if Raul Hilberg was to write his magisterial work today one wonders if he would have been prosecuted.
Complain about this comment
11 Darkside...
"American children are not being taught how to think."
You hit the nail on the head. But this problem is not unique to the USA. In the UK it is all about teaching to the test, and less about understanding the reasoning.
If children are not exposed to ideas of varying kinds how will they ever learn how to make up their own minds. I despair of any parent who would keep their child home to avoid hearing a speach by the President.
Teachers should then be using the debate to promote idscussion of ideas in class. Wow, radical me!
Complain about this comment
I confess to being strangely worried about any politicians talking specifically to children. The can't vote, they can't fight for their country, very few pay taxes. We don't of course want to bring up a generation of political illiterates and kids should be encouraged but that should be in a forum where all political views are available and in the context of civics, constitution or history classes. I noticed over in the UK how often Blair and Brown would go for photo-ops surrounded by school kids. The cynic in me thinks that one of two things is happening - either the politicians are going for the legacy thing ('I met him when I was a kid. Total idiot but a hell of a nice guy') or maybe its only people who don't vote that they feel safe with.
Either way, there is something a bit sordid about grooming kids to be good little Democrats or Republicans under the guise of telling them to be good little citizens. I thought parents and teachers were supposed to tell them to wash their hands anyway.
By the way, when is Gavin starting in Brussels? This American coverage is all very entaining but some of us are getting withdrawal symptoms for lack of a good Euro punch up. Or doesn't he do blogging?
Complain about this comment
I am young enough to have had cable in the classroom.Heard plenty from Bush1 and Clinton,even watched Space shuttle blow up,and watched Desert Storm.C-span makes it possible to watch Congress which had to do in Government.watched documentaries on WW2 and Civil war.Why all of a sudden is this a big deal.I am 30 and my entire school years had Cable and Computers Lab in school.I don't care if my kids watch the President,in fact I'm glad he's doing it with cities like Detroit with low grad numbers someone should address education,who better than the President who is leader of the free world.
Complain about this comment
Gavin will be starting in brussels after the irish referendum, I suspect. Given the predictable tone of debate from the despised and unwashed masses, I'd say the BBC is trying to avoid being accused by Europhiles as the instigator of their demise, should that eventuate. Unlike SB2, I don't see this as conspiracy for or against, merely typical policy. If there is one thing the BBC have learned over the years, it is to remain neutral on the side of those who are powerful.
On this issue of preaching to the children.... i mean, sure, it is sad and pathetic. And kind of creepy.
Just who does the Big O think he is? Does he really think that somehow children are missing out on good advice because they have to listen to their crummy old parents, and not a shining light on the hill such as himself?
So, yeah. I can understand the revulsion. If the O thinks he has suddenly made politics the breakfast of champions, I'd say he deserves every bit of criticism he gets.
On the other hand...... Let's face it. Most folks... most educated folks.... think JK Rowling is highbrow literature. If you are going to lecture kids, may as well do the job properly.
Complain about this comment
#11 The cow jumped over the;
"Which lies are these, Marcus?"
That there are two Thanksgiving holidays in America. Somehow the notion that America is a country separate and apart from Mexico has been overlooked in these books. They barely even mention the Pilgrams and Plymouth Rock. Somehow it became a Southwest holiday. Three companies dominate the textbook market and they no longer have to be prodded to write books that are politically correct. They now indoctrinate the internationalist view of the world all on their own. Lies, lies, lies, and more lies. America children now grow up without even knowing what their heritage is. In a generation they won't know what they are supposed to be defending. A dangerous subversive liberal plot. On the other side of the coin, we have lunatics who don't want the theory of evolution taught in science classes. America won't fail because of poor economic mangement but because its children are being systematically dumbed down by extremists on both sides of the political spectrum.
Complain about this comment
This is not about talking to school kids this is a politically motivated reaction but like anything Obama there has to be a negative reaction from the right. Next they will be wearing hoods and burning crosses on the White House Lawn.
Complain about this comment
I'm happy you're back, marcus.
We're on your turf for a change, so maybe you'll step it up to the required standard.
And it will take some of the heat off of me.
Complain about this comment
#17. democracythreat: "Most folks... most educated folks.... think JK Rowling is highbrow literature."
I take it that you consider yourself educated and thus think the novels written by JKR are highbrow. If that's your standard, heaven help us.
#20. "I'm happy you're back, marcus. We're on your turf for a change, so maybe you'll step it up to the required standard."
You've not been around too long, have you? Marcus has no standards.
Complain about this comment
Welcome to the USA, Mark. My wife and I and our two oldest children emigrated back in 1968 for me to join Boeing.
After 41 years, we still love it here. We live in Anacortes, a small town in the northwest corner of Washington State, having moved here after I retired from Boeing.
You'll have an interesting time with the language differences. As other posters have said, use British English for your reports back to the Beeb, but start to figure out the local patois. It's not that much different than figuring out the Cornish or Lancashire dialects.
I rememeber my wife once remarking that "you're not a self-respecting Englishman any more". Whan I asked what she meant, she reminded me that I had once sain that no self-respecting Englishman would ever say "gotten" and I just had.
Frank Damp
Anacortes, WA
Complain about this comment
It might be educational to read what he said. It won't make Democracythreat happy, he mentions J K Rowling.
"Most folks... most educated folks.... think JK Rowling is highbrow literature." Well, books like the Harry Potter series and Philip Pullman's are a damn sight more highbrow and more literary than a good deal of what I read when I was 12 or 13 I'm ashamed to say.
Funnily enough, Obama was telling the kids I suspect just what some of those 'crummy old parents' who kept their children away from school might have wanted to say. What I'm sceptical about is whether those kids will be that impressed just because it comes from a President.
Since he was brought up by a single mum, with not a lot of money, and so was I, maybe I'd listen, I don't know. But like a lot of kids he was trying to get the message over to, my mum didn't give me extra lessons at 4.30am. or 4.30pm for that matter, and I had to do my homework after she'd gone to bed. So maybe I wouldn't have thought his and Michelle's experiences were all that relevant really
I think I was more motivated at school by a talk from a guy who'd spent more than 20 years since he was 16 in gaol--he wasn't forty and he looked sixty--and told us what a hell of a waste it had been than by any 'boot strap' pep talks like this. But that was in another country, and, like history, maybe they do things differently there. . .
Complain about this comment
I have lived in the United States for 10 years and always contrast the UK political system to the US one. I am no great lover of a Monarchy, but it does bring clarity to the political process. In the UK we know our Prime Minister is just a politician, with all the negative implications associated with 'politician'. But here in the US, the most senior politician is also the PRESIDENT, which means that as well as being a politician he has to be revered. It is hard for an ordinary American to criticize the PRESIDENT, which is almost unpatriotic, when they might well want to criticize the politician he is.
God save the Queen.
Complain about this comment
The problem is not the President speeching is was how the Education Dept presented it. With the " How you can help the President Essay"
For a group that arguably ran the best orginized campaign in history they have been remarkebly tone deaf and heavy handed
There is a problem with a minority of teachers pushing their political views and effecting their lesson plans in a negative way
Complain about this comment
qbrearley: Rather than the President having to be revered, it might be closer to the mark to say that he should be respected - and that that respect is a President's to lose according to his actions (or inactions), perhaps beginning with John Adams.
I disagree that it is hard for an ordinary American to criticize a President; however, it could well be hard for him to criticize the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, or the Bill of Rights.
Complain about this comment
qbrearly (#24), I take exception to your statement that Americans must "revere" the president. We should respect the office of the presidency, but the person who holds the office has no automatic claim even to that. It is not unusual for US presidents to be reviled by many citizens. To "revere," in the sense that the Queen is revered, is unknown in American politics.
Complain about this comment
27. At 05:00am on 08 Sep 2009, GH1618 wrote:
'To "revere," in the sense that the Queen is revered, is unknown in American politics.'
Sorry, but I rather doubt any British (or English, before the Union) monarch has ever been 'revered' except possibly Edward the Confessor, and I doubt whether your average peasant was that bothered about him.
Just look at what we've done to them over the last thousand years: William Rufus, shot in the back with an arrow; Edward II and the incident with the hot poker; James I called "the wisest fool in Christendom" with his disgusting personal habits written up all over the place; Charles I neatly divided in two; Queen Vic roundly criticised for years and hissed at and booed for dressing in black and being miserable, and most recently Edward VIII kicked out of the country altogether.
And that's only a handful of examples of how we 'revere' them . . .
Complain about this comment
I honestly think folks particularly those who object to President Obama's address to school kids are just not too busy or plain irrational. i do not see anything wrong with Mr. Obama giving a pep talk to school kids. I happen to work in the Public School system in an inner city district. Believe me, any attempt to motivate those kids to stay in school and graduate is worth it. I don't care whether Mr. obama is liberal, leftist or whatever you cal him. on this particular issue I agree with him. By the way I'd normally be considered "conservative' in my political views. i happen to be a bible believing christian,do not support abortion, believe the creation story!!etc. But i also know that a lot of schoolkids (especilly he males) in the inner cities ahve no father figures in their lives to mentor them or motivate them to reach for a good education. Some are fortunate to have mothers, aunts or grandmothers to care for them but research and experience have shown that oth positive male and female role models are needed in a child's life. so unless Mr. obama's critics can get up and begin to mentor kids in the inner cities(not patronize them-believe me these kids know the difference) they should all be quiet because in the inner city schools we are glad when any positive role model reach out to our kids. And believe me, for being able to get to where he is today in spite of the lemons that life handed him as a child - we in the inner city schools consider him a role model, liberal views or not.
Complain about this comment
25. At 03:31am on 08 Sep 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
The problem is not the President speeching is was how the Education Dept presented it. With the " How you can help the President Essay"
For a group that arguably ran the best orginized campaign in history they have been remarkebly tone deaf and heavy handed"
Did the US education authorities organise Obama's election campaign?
He has succeeded, once again, in showing his opponents as hysterical extremists.
Complain about this comment
18. At 01:43am on 08 Sep 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:
#11 The cow jumped over the;
"Which lies are these, Marcus?"
That there are two Thanksgiving holidays in America. Somehow the notion that America is a country separate and apart from Mexico has been overlooked in these books."
The US is becoming a Latin American country,which of course by geography it should always have been.
It is noticeable that its polarised politics are already far more reminiscent of a Latin country than a mature western democracy.
Complain about this comment
#23. squirrellist: "I think I was more motivated at school by a talk from a guy who'd spent more than 20 years since he was 16 in gaol . . ."
Don't you think the spelling is just a little precious? You may be in good company with Oscar Wilde but, as of hats, Stephen Sondheim wrote "does anyone still wear a hat?" and I would ask "does anyone still spell jail as gaol?" I'd rather some other Amercanisms be dropped - "on" a street for example, when it has always been "in" a street: 'Selfridges is in Oxford Street', not 'Selfridges is on Oxford Street'. I suppose we should be grateful that the word 'street' is still used, but it can't be long before someone so enamoured of America remarks 'Selfridges is on Oxford', which of course would be better than "Selfridges is in Oxford" - since there isn't a branch there.
And so to bed!
Complain about this comment
32. David_Cunard:
What's wrong with it? I just think it looks nicer than 'jail', that's all. I've always thought the way a word looks is important. A gaol is Newgate or the Fleet Prison or even Strangeways, and a jail is more Dodge City. Different things altogether.
I wasn't actually thinking of Reading, though. I don't like Reading. Precious??????? How about 'So-o-o-o gay' ?
Complain about this comment
The Big O said :
"Some of the most successful people in the world are the ones who’ve had the most failures. JK Rowling’s first Harry Potter book was rejected twelve times before it was finally published."
Just then, every English Lit student turned to their friend and puckered their eyebrows.
And every child who has more interesting things going on than magic elves and unicorns figured the president is a waffle machine with too much free time.
That speech was TERRIBLE. Maybe I am getting sick of the Obama style, but I can actually remember what school life was like. Young people are not stupid people. They may not have a lot of wisdom, but a sharp teenager can hold their own on a topic they know something about. People who spoke to me like I was a half wit really got up my nose when I was at school, and Obama is incredibly patronizing.
"I know life is hard sometimes.." he says, about fifty times. So do they, so WHY SAY IT???
He also took the time to mention, several times, that he grew up in an abandoned coal mine, eating rocks that nobody else wanted. Is the man not aware that his Oliver twist story has been broadcast into every corner of the globe, several times, already? There are deaf and dumb chinese people who have been in solitary confinement for ten years who know Obama was raised by a single mother, and had to steal food from rats just to get by.
This speech was extremely indulgent, and bordered on the inane. It bored me, and for sure it must have bored the socks off the students.
And yeah, I do have a problem with JK Rowling being promoted as the sort of writer children should aspire to be. Elves and unicorns? Magic potions and children born with special powers that make them superior human beings?
I am not going to get into a socio-political breakdown of what sort of world JK Rowling's readers inhabit in their private minds (but I could, is the point), because it is insane that I would be talking about adults.
I don't have a problem with children's books about elves. For young children, sure. Rock out the unicorns and the elves. Go nuts.
But my beef with JK Rowling's stuff is that adults read it and discuss it. As with the O's speech, my reaction is just "Haven't you got anything else you'd rather be doing? Because reading fascist fantasy pantomimes about good and evil / making pointless and boring speeches to children is a waste of time."
Anyway, I never said it should be banned. People should be free to be idiots lost in a class based fantasy world where they can dream dreams of power, to make up for their boring and mundane lives. Absolutely. But do we have to celebrate it? Do we have to revere the lowest common denominator because it makes money? Loads of people get fat from eating junk food. It doesn't mean we should aspire to hamburgers.
Complain about this comment
ref #30
Did the US education authorities organise Obama's election campaign?
He has succeeded, once again, in showing his opponents as hysterical extremists
(Once again Simple Simon takes a comment out of contet. The point which may be able to go through your tinfoal is the PR people keep screwing up.)
You miss the point with your personal attacks just like Van Jones and Rachel Maddow who also take points out of context.
Complain about this comment
Mark wrote: "G.Brown is British head of government".
After reading hundreds of British comments on HYS one might get an impression that for many British subjects he's not a British head, while for others he's not a head of British government.
Whereas there are still some who refer to Gordon as 'premier from BP'.
Complain about this comment
"G.Brown is British head of government"
A curious point. I thought he was the prime minister, and the Queen was the head of state?
And surely "head of state" means "head of government"? I mean, if the "state" come to take you away for rendition, that is the government, is it not? And if the "state" passes laws that curb civil liberties, that is the government doing that, no?
In the American context, Gordon Brown is more like "Leader of the House of Representatives", is he not?
The difference between the two systems is that the British focus more attention on the prime minister, whereas the americans tend to focus media attention on the head of state. But I suspect that has more to do with the absurdity of having a bloodline determine who is head of state, than it does anything else.
Complain about this comment
There is something a tad creepy about any politician demanding to speech to all school children and asking them to write an essay on how they would 'help him'.
And Mark I listened to your 'coverage' of the Van Jones affair on PM. Obama appointed someone with a history of saying extreme things (all of which was on YouTube) and it's all the 'conservatives' and 'Fox News's fault that he had to resign? It says something when the likes of Glenn Beck do a better job of investigating White House appointees than the BBC.
Complain about this comment
#28 - squirrellist
William Rufus fell off his horse and beat his head on a rock, which is identified and is still there, no distance from my last home in the New Forest. The village itself is now call Rufus Stone. And Edward VIII was not kicked out of the country altogether, he walked (no mean achievement considering he ended up in Paris and there's the Channel to consider - divine right of ex-kings maybe?)
Personally I blame people for driving on the wrong side of the road and am delighted to report that Samoa is doing something about it Samoa is doing something about it. We can only hope that the 26 EU countries who got it wrong - not to mention you guys - follow suit.
David_Cunard
"Does anyone still wear a hat?" - yes, why? Is it some form of perversion these days?
"Does anyone still spell jail as gaol?" - only those of us blessed with a command of the language.
Complain about this comment
'But other Republicans have taken a calmer approach. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich of Georgia defended the idea of the speech, telling Fox News Sunday: "It is good to have the president of the United States saying to young people across America, 'Stay in school and do your homework.' It's good for America."'
Complain about this comment
There's a plausible reason why so many parents are opposed to their kids watching the Obama speech which I've not seen mentioned.
I suspect that until the speech, in many households the only time the kids have actually seen Obama has been via Fox News or the like, highly edited with critical/hostile comments (not to mention the comments of their parents). For the first time the kids will actually see and hear Obama unfiltered, and - horror of horrors - they may find that Obama doesn't come over as the terrible menacing monster that much of the right - and their parents - portray him as.
Their parents are simply afraid that their kids will see a different Obama from the one they want them to see.
Complain about this comment
37 democracythreat
"And surely "head of state" means "head of government"?
Surely not in fact.
Many countries (not just the UK) have a head of State who has titular but not executive powers, and a head of Governemnt who undertakes the actual running of the country.
And not just monarchies - The Republic of Italy has a President (head of State) by the name of Giorgio Napolitani and a Head of Government (official title President of the Council of Ministers, although in English the title Prime Minister is often misapplied) by the name of Silvio Berlusconi.
The Head of State represents the nation in affairs of state - accreditting ambassadors etc.
The Head of Government governs.
In the US the roles are combined, but that is not universal.
Complain about this comment
Hi Mark,
Nice to hear you have moved to the US. I hope to follow you quite often. Just heard your news report from North America on Radio 4 this morning and it was quite a good spin! No partisanship!
I didn't follow you much when you were in Europe. I do hope to keep checking on your post regularly now that you in the 'Dreamland'
Keep us posted......Justin Webb kept us on our feet during last year's election.
Good luck......and keep the spin!
Komax, Cambridge UK
Complain about this comment
35. At 10:03am on 08 Sep 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
ref #30
Did the US education authorities organise Obama's election campaign?
He has succeeded, once again, in showing his opponents as hysterical extremists
(Once again Simple Simon takes a comment out of contet. The point which may be able to go through your tinfoal is the PR people keep screwing up.)
You miss the point with your personal attacks just like Van Jones and Rachel Maddow who also take points out of context."
DOn't get upset old son just learn how to use English when writing. Rather necessary on a written blog.
And you agree that Obama is succeeding is showing his oponents as extremists.
One hopes you have realised this silly beat up comes at an excellent time for the president - certainly driven healthcare from the FPs.
As I say I think his opoenents make the fatal mistake of underestimating him.
Complain about this comment
Welcome to the States, Mark. I see all the usual suspects have pretty much signed in already.
RE: the President's speech to schoolchildren, ALL Presidents speak to schoolchildren at some time or other in their terms -- Democratic or Republican, whether they support public education or not. It's the obligatory cheerleading-the-future-of-America photo op. Truly, I am as liberal in my political thinking as they come in this country -- and I bear the scars to prove it -- but throughout the conservative Republican administrations of Ronald Reagan and Bushes I and II, it NEVER ONCE OCCURRED to me that any of them were trying to indoctrinate the children with their pernicious political theories. I just don't understand what all the fuss is about this time.
Complain about this comment
The 'row' I think it show the the danger of an elective monarchy even if only lasts eight years at a time. They didn't even manage to produce GeorgeIII's government in a sensible way. It did not matter very much until the Federal Government became so powerful (it is not dominant!) But you cannot combine 'respect' with politics and Americans need a person not only a flag.
Complain about this comment
I am laughing about those who are talking about indoctrination regarding Obama's speach...Is asking children to take responsibilty for their own actions and working hard for their education indoctrination.
No wonder we had the economic melt down in starting in US banks...Maybe those bankers or the people who borrowed from them were not taught to take responsibility for their own actions!
What happened to the great principles of the founding fathers?!
Complain about this comment
Why is it seemingly so difficult for some people to grasp the idea of a 21st century constitiutional monarchy? There are, after all, quite a few around. Or parliamentary governments with Prime Ministers (or the equivalent) and Presidents? It's the US system that's actually the odd one out.
Complain about this comment
Children are the future, absolutely. Any Head of state in any child's eyes is respected and looked up to - why? Because they are 'the big boss of the land'. 'The boss' got there purely because the adults responsible for the children of America voted for him to be there...
Obama has every right to speak to the children of the state he leads... and he is right to tell them to pull finger and work hard. The future of the USA depends on the education they work hard towards gaining. Lord knows the good 'ol US of A needs it's future generations to be substantially more educated than the adults who presently have the responsibility of managing it at the moment.
After all, contrary to the popular belief of most Americans, the USA is not the only civilised country on the planet.
Lead by example and if the children can look up to a man who worked hard to become their president, and maybe, just maybe aspire to become presidents or leaders of Industry themselves one day... America will be a better place in the future because of it.
Complain about this comment
Really nice to see a comment written by an adult there mark.
So unlike your predecessor.
Talking to the kids has always happened.
Bush used it to get the kids that were still young and impressionable to go join up and fight.
How many signed them pre enlistment pledges.
School teachers I knew in Oregon said that the Kids were so sucked into the "protect our country" Join up, support the war. We was wronged.
Carolina lady I would suggest that he did all that they claim Obama is going to do but in a direction that killed some of them kids.
I have a friend here that is back from Afganistan.
that's pretty much how he joined.
right out of school.
LOL komax
you say JW kept us on our feet during the election.
another lol was that because every result was such a surprise;) JW having NO ability to read the ground in front of him.Just from his postings one could have assumed Mc Cain was the clear favourite and hillery a close second.
Complain about this comment
Rome stu did you loose an IN?
Complain about this comment
The original speech was about supporting the President's political agenda and required the students to write answers to points in his speech. The point is that the President is using his power to "talk" to children and influence them when education and values are the sole responsibility of the parents NOT the State.
Complain about this comment
5 dub
(BTW Mark - the BBC's coverage of the resignation of Van Jones was pathetic. No way the BBC would've let a Republican appointee with similar crackpot views get away so lightly.)
Really?
so they didn't let the GOP crackpot views of health care through then?
PS between republicans and dems there seems to be a pretty even mix who think Bush did allow it to happen.
I am surprised at the number of republicans that hate bush who think he was part of it.
The day it happened a friends very republican father said "buildings don't collapse like that somethings up"
The belief that something was ignored or allowed is really very wide spread in the states.
Personally I 'm not so sure and think the evidence we have that is clear, is enough to get a conviction of Dick and GW.
Complain about this comment
45 carolinalady
You write with reason and intelligence and finish with
"I just don't understand what all the fuss is about this time."
Sadly IMHO the fuss is simply that a section of right-wing commentators and opinion-formers simply will bash anything Obama does, irrespective of its actual content, or even potential benefit.
Frayedcat at 40 reminds us t hat not all the right-wing is so blinded by hate and prejudice by giving us Newt Gingrich's quote "It is good to have the president of the United States saying to young people across America, 'Stay in school and do your homework.' It's good for America."'
I rarely find myself agreeing with Gingrich, but at least he is not so bitter and twisted that he can no longer make sense of the world.... or is Newt a socialist now?
Complain about this comment
24 lol people ask a liberal commie like me how I can support a monarchy.
easy answer.
better than having a president.
presidents like bush have no concept of longevity.
and look what he did for short term gains.
Look at tony the GGGRRRRREAT.
Complain about this comment
28 I would add to your comment that no monarch is as revered as GW bush was by most americans just after the towers fell.
Complain about this comment
The "indoctrination" was based on the tasks initially intended for the school children immediately following the movie. The K-6 graders were to "Write a letter to themselves on what they can do to help President Obama". The 7-12 graders were to "Write a letter to themselves on how they will help President Obama with his agendas."
The wording of the tasks was immediately changed, and Gibbs immediately treated the new wording as having been the original all along. It was almost a scene from the book, "1984".
Perhaps, those inspiring to be authors could start writing, "The Rise and Fall of the Fourth Reich". Maybe that will "help President Obama with his agendas."
Complain about this comment
I think Dick Cheney and his puppet George had the market cornered on brainwashing children long before Obama took office. I went through an American airport last year and found myself in an Orwellian fantasy, with a woman's voice echoing in sultry calming tones every ten minutes "the security threat level is yellow".
If George W had wanted to address the children of America and tell them all to start saving up for their first gun purchase, I'm sure the conservative movement would have found some kind of Constitutional justification.
Let The President speak! He has been handed a nation in crisis; trying to distract the populace from his message - which is basically "we are all in this together and we all need to work together to solve our problems" - in order to make negative political gains is demonstrably pathetic and characteristic of the entire right-wing movement.
Complain about this comment
Being an educator and child therapist, I see that encouraging children to work hard to attain their goals and to take responsibility for their lives is basic to the development of self reliance and has little to do with politics. That the President of the United States takes an interest in delivering such a message would likely be well received by many children.
Sadly, portions of the American public and Congress still have racist leanings. As great a statesman and orator Obama is, some people are outraged by the color of his skin. All of us who campaigned feverishly for Obama's election will need to continue to work to turn the tide on racism in the United States.
Complain about this comment
I do think *some* on the right are going overboard about the 'indoctrination' this speech is supposed to give children. I bet somebody read about Venezuela's Hugo Chavez trying to reform his country's school system (and his ideas may very well be socialist indoctrination), and then likened President Obama's speech to it. Sheeple that many are (on all sides of the political spectrum), many were in effect themselves indoctrinated by pundits into believing that this speech will be indoctrinating, instead of rationalizing things for themselves.
I think that for Obama his speeches are one of the few things that has gone right in his administration, and so he likes to give lots of speeches. Clinton runs the state department, Geithner and Bernanke are in charge of the economy, and Gates oversees the military. This is a way for Obama to get more actively involved in helping serve the nation. Ironic, since he's the President.
Complain about this comment
squirrelist (#28), thanks for the history lesson, but I was thinking of QE2 in particular. I admit to not knowing first hand how the British (or English, at least) think of her, but when she visited here I would say she was treated with reverence by many. There was even a television special made to document the visit. That would not be done for a visit by a mere politician.
Complain about this comment
52 bloominglovely
"when education and values are the sole responsibility of the parents NOT the State."
So in your "blooming mad" world only parents should be allowed to educated their children. All schools should be closed and everyone should be home-schooled.
And there was me thinking it couldn't get any worse!
Complain about this comment
i wish it even came close to 'indoctrination' to encourage american kids and their parents that this is a more effective way to protect/create jobs than protectionism and bailouts. if glen beck and his poisoned messages are given full airplay then the elected leader of the country must be free to offer his thoughts.
Complain about this comment
The right-wing nonsense that seeps through the TV set of all americans who have Fox News is starting to get on my nerves. Obama does not have a socialist agenda (although i wish he did). He simply wants a fairer society which is something the republicans have deprived americans of for the last eight years. He is not going to start preaching nationalisation and trade Union membership to school children is he, it is the fear mongering of the right-wing media that is whipping up this trouble.
Complain about this comment
Mr. Mardell makes an excellent point about the U.S. presidency's dual role as head of government and head of state. In giving this speech, President Obama is serving in his head-of-state role. Those who think he is somehow trying to push a political agenda should consider the benefits of having their children listen -- whether they agree or disagree with the president, part of a worthwhile education is learning to listen to various viewpoints and evaluate them for yourself!
Complain about this comment
The whole thing seems completely innocuous, and the fact that there's a row about it is ridiculous. Even the "what can you do to help your President" question, which sounds a little strange in the ears of adults, really doesn't deserve much attention. As far as early grade schoolers are concerned, the President is synonymous with the American goverment system. He's the face of the nation, and prior to the more detailed introduction to the American political system (and, inevitably, partisanship) grade schoolers think about the President in very simple terms. It's the way it's been for years. If kids in the US are both smart enough to understand the finer points of health care, bank reform, and international policy while being simultaneously stupid enough to be indoctrinated to the Democratic party by one speech, we've got bigger issues.
Complain about this comment
How to become a rich lawyer ( a la Obama) may be an O.K. message.
Although we (U.S.) could certainly use more physisists, chemists, biologists and computer engineers rather than two-hand bandids (lawyers always say: on one hand.,.. on the other...).
However, asking pupils to think how could they help THIS president, rather than A president, is a horse of another colour.
Complain about this comment
Lilywhite_King wrote:
The right-wing nonsense that seeps through the TV set of all americans who have Fox News is starting to get on my nerves. Obama does not have a socialist agenda (although i wish he did). He simply wants a fairer society which is something the republicans have deprived americans of for the last eight years. He is not going to start preaching nationalisation and trade Union membership to school children is he, it is the fear mongering of the right-wing media that
I am tired of the left wing machine calling anyone who dares to disagree with President Obama's policy on anything an extremist. What happended to working together and a less divisive tone?
Complain about this comment
Both Bush and Reagan addressed the kids; and they survived it. Personally, I wouldn't call the speech being available on C-span or the White House website being 'beamed into state schools'; and I believe they asked fairly politely for it to be shown- not exactly Stalinist tactics.
The radio spin doctors do seem to be turning the GOP into America's Taliban.
Complain about this comment
So we are not to be concerned that The Dear Leader is beaming his visage to every school child from 6 years to 18 years old. When Saddam fell they went about taking Saddam's portrait OUT of every classroom. The whole thing is creepy and typical of this President as he creates his cult of personality. Coincidentally, my 16 year old is reading "1984" in his English class. Now they have a relevant duiscussion point.
Complain about this comment
We think this makes the right look stupid but they know their supporters and all they think about is how to get them out to vote for them. They know what works and that thought is quite scary.
Complain about this comment
With the greatest respect to all, I think the main thing being overlooked is that the intent ought to be to show respect and allegiance to the office, not the man. There is a fundamental difference.
You may agree or disagree with Obama's views but the Office of the President is the head of state. In the armed forces, you salute the rank not the man. As a citizen, you swear loyalty to the country and usually the head of state. You don't have to like what he does, but you have to respect the office as his powers stem from the will of the people, the majority of whom endorsed his leadership of the US Government through a public election using a system endorsed by virtually all US citizens.
The fact is that there are fundamental and damaging weaknesses in US education policy, which have long been recognised both by Republicans and by Democrats alike. The President wishes to make progressive reforms in education. This doesn't make him a socialist. It makes him a reformer. And the day that politicians who ought to know better start equating reform with red communism is a sad day for the US people.
I see no conflict of interest if the President seeks to instil within the citizens of the US a sense of pride and purposeful encouragement to help them to be better citizens. I applaud it. If that amounts to indoctrination, then all I can say is that McCarthyism did not work as a scare tactic in the 1950s and it won't work now.
Education should not be a political football to be used by either side. In this I agree. But this applies to Obama's critics as much as Obama himself. In rushing to accuse Obama of child indoctrination, one must be wary of not seeking to engage in such indoctrination themselves.
Education policy ought to be above such cynical grandstanding, and those who engage in it do their country no service whatsoever.
Complain about this comment
The only politicising is the critics criticising a simple message. We have seen this happen while he was trying to reform the medical system in the US. The opposition are trying to stop the message getting through before it even reaches their audience. Desperate political manouevrings to prevent the spread of the president's popularity - if you call him socialist enough times eventually a lazy segment of the public will start to believe the message without checking the facts.
Complain about this comment
Now the same folks that have no problem using 'Nazi' comparisons when describing the national healthcare issue in public, are claiming a speech to public school children is 'indoctrinating' them into socialism? Did I just wake up and find myself in 1950? Sorry, but this is ridiculous. I also don't find anything wrong with the wording 'helping the president'. What's wrong with suggesting to the country's leader ways to help better it? I do believe you could make any suggestion, regardless as to whether or not it is from the conservative or liberal point of view. I doubt very much though that young children out there in the U.S. have a concept of the differences between these yet.
This is only any issue with those making it one. I believe people of the centre-left/centre-right variety need to speak up more. Our complacency is allowing the narrative to be taken over by extreme elements on both sides of the political spectrum. Debate over important political issues is one thing (ie: healthcare), but discussions like this seem to distract from more important topics.
Complain about this comment
Marcus Aurelius II "America won't fail because of poor economic mangement [sic] but because its children are being systematically dumbed down by extremists on both sides of the political spectrum."
You've finally made a statement I can agree with. Bravo!
Complain about this comment
70 Howard
The President is not beaming his visage into any classroom (does this "beaming" technonlogy exist yet). He is simply trying to engage with the youth of the country and encourage them to think for themselves and about their future. CAn't be a bad thing really.
As to 1984 I suggest you read it first and then discuss it with your 16 year old, in relation to the patriot act, "with us or against us", accusations of "unamerican" behaviour.
Or better yet, pop down to CostCo and stock up on spam and then dig yourself a big hole in the garden and line it with tinfoil so Obama can't beam himself into your brain (if he could find it).
Complain about this comment
#33. At 09:42am on 08 Sep 2009, squirrellist: "What's wrong with (gaol)? I just think it looks nicer than 'jail', that's all. I've always thought the way a word looks is important."
#39. threnodio: "Does anyone still spell jail as gaol?" - only those of us blessed with a command of the language."
As far back as 1922, The (Manchester) Guardian considered it to be "adopted" spelling and currently its style guide prefers jail, as does The Times.
Not only am I blessed with a command of the language, I keep up with the times and The Times. But address the change from "in" to "on " a street if you can.
#37. At 10:55am on 08 Sep 2009, democracythreat: "I thought (Gordon Brown) was the prime minister, and the Queen was the head of state?"
The Queen is both head of government and head of state since all power rests with the monarch. Without her approval and signature, no bills become Acts of Parliament. Ministers and departments act in her name. The Queen rarely exercises her power since convention has it that she acts on the advice of her ministers, however, on one occasion she returned Harold Wilson's Honours List unsigned. At the beginning of her reign, before the Conservative Party had a formal Leader, she and her advisers took 'soundings' to ascertain who should be the next Conservative prime minister, but today it is understood that the leader of any party would become prime minister should that party be returned with a working majority. If there were to be a coalition, it could well be that once again she would exercise her power of choice. It is the regal function to do so, not that of parliament. Australians know that her representative can act independently - and has.
Complain about this comment
71 silver tim
Sadly you may be right.
Complain about this comment
I do agree with your point Mr. Mardell.
Complain about this comment
"Coincidentally, my 16 year old is reading "1984" in his English class. Now they have a relevant duiscussion point."
And with George Bush and Dick Cheney breeding a culture of fear in order to control the population and forward their neo-conservative viewpoint, they didn't?
BUY A MIRROR. LOOK IN IT.
Complain about this comment
Howardfolden, I'd suggest you have your kid read about Cromwell and the real consequences of intolerance instead. Its how a lot of us got here...
Complain about this comment
afterthought:
JFK said "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." I don't see much difference in what President Obama wanted our kids to write...
Complain about this comment
t_RAV_in_tO wrote:I believe people of the centre-left/centre-right variety need to speak up more
What we need is some extreme moderates - people who go on talk shows and loudly put their views across, cutting off the more interesting far right/left speakers in the middle of their sentences. A bit of condemming the far right/left speakers to eternal damnation might not go amiss either.
Complain about this comment
The accusations against President Obama, particularly that he is a 'socialist' or a 'communist' are simply misguided and inflammatory. They prove that even political commentators have absolutely no understanding of the ideas associated with socialism, liberalism and other political viewpoints. The notion that every child has a chance, that if they work hard enough they can grow up to be president, or a CEO; this is LIBERAL dogma (classic liberalism developed in Europe in the 18th century). It means *liberty* to succeed, not equality. Obama is preaching liberal individualism, to which both Democrats and Republicans adhere. A true socialist would never suppose that by simply trying harder in school a child from the Chicago ghetto would have the same chance as say, a blue-blooded W.A.S.P. from Vermont.
Complain about this comment
"But here in the US, the most senior politician is also the PRESIDENT, which means that as well as being a politician he has to be revered. It is hard for an ordinary American to criticize the PRESIDENT, which is almost unpatriotic, when they might well want to criticize the politician he is."
Criticizing the president is a tradition as old as the republic itself, even presidents we revere today received their share of criticism when they occupied the office. Expressing one's opinion of the president's policies and decisions is perfectly acceptable free speech but it is expected that it be done in a way that shows proper respect for the dignity of the office.
Most Americans would agree that holding up signs attacking the president's policies is an expression of free speech protected by the constitution but most would also agree that holding up signs calling the president rude names is unacceptable behaviour.
Complain about this comment
Here's a link to the official UK government web site: UK government, which describes the Prime Minister as "head of UK government."
Complain about this comment
Phrasing it as “... perhaps I am wrong that it is inoffensive: maybe ‘No-one's born being good at things’ is close to communism ...” seems to me to be setting up a straw dog, inviting ridicule upon those who disagree with you and the current Administration
I have seen many children who excel particularly at one or another academic subject. I have seen a few who excel athletically. As a result, I believe based upon observation, that the President is wrong to claim “... No-one's born being good at things ...” That absolutist claim, coming from the president, is (or should be) influential, and as it flies in the face of experience, should not be asserted as true.
Complain about this comment
The text of the President's speech to schoolchildren includes much that needs to be said. The construction is appropriate: some general exhortations, and giving examples, naming a few famous names - including a UK one in J.K. Rowling - as well as one US university, Brown, which has its original Charter from George III. Maybe the Special Relationship is not really in trouble. I wish there'd been space for another important point: the school curriculum should not be thought to define all that children should try to study, they should take the opportunity to have extra-curricular interests, with the support of local libraries and other sources. Oliver Sacks might object to one aspect of the President's assertion that no child is born capable of doing things, in that possession of perfect pitch seems to be a gift to a fortunate few, as discussed in his Musicophilia. And there's a clever touch in indicating the speech might be banned in places, it encourages more to listen carefully (and for some, clandestinely) and think about what was said.
Complain about this comment
Obamas speech seems innocent but that is only because they recently changed it due to the heavy amounts of criticism laid on him because it was virtually saying that school kids should do well to help him and his liberal buddies
Complain about this comment
After over 3 months holiday, I was definately not keeping them off school today. President Obama is not sayong anything to them I do not repeat every day and I quote "No matter what you want to do with your life - I guarantee you'll need an education to do it," "Your goal can be something as simple as doing all your homework, paying attention in class, or spending time each day reading a book" and "No-one's born being good at things." You have to work hard at everything .... How is this close to communism? Can I suggest you may need to work harder at this blog, because you were not born good at it. Have a nice day.
Complain about this comment
"Neo-cons"...
The lef-wing cons would like us to believe that that there is no such such thing as bona fide conservatives.
[always were, always will be]
Who are you going to con?
BTW. How about libertarians? How are you going to discredit THEM?
Complain about this comment
As a former teacher I think it is great to have the President encourage school children in this way, describing situations where people have done well despite coming from difficult backgrounds. It never ceases to amaze me how Republicans can appear so mean spirited and carp about things which would appear to be helpful to the lower echelons of American society. This being said however, I do have a problem with the concept of talking about working for your country to little kids. It smacks a little of political evangelicanism to me and seems a little bit over the top. And I do realize that there must be some political agenda here somewhere.
Complain about this comment
The tradition in this country is locally elected and locally run school boards. Most of the problems with the school systems started with federally mandated requirements. "No child left behind" basically becomes "No child gets ahead". The President is not the "School Superintendant in Chief" I do not want the government usurping my responsibilities as a parent. I do not care that the speech may only be a pep talk on academic success. Mr. President stay out of my child's classroom - you are way out of bounds!
Complain about this comment
What I find interesting is the concern expressed by some parents that time is being wasted by listening to the president for an hour. Meanwhile, these children will be taken away from their lessons at some point this year to attend an assembly of one kind or another that essentially amounts to a sales pitch for something, resulting in no protests from concerned families and increased sales in products probably manufactured somewhere other than the US.
Probably most concerning is that this tells me there are many households where no meaningful conversations take place; there should be discussion about what the children heard today and how it made them feel.
Complain about this comment
#MA2 post7
Right on Marky,down with political corretness...
History as it was,the life of Thomas the Pain.To the tune,Yankee doodle dandy.
Common Sense is all you need,
Yankee doodle dandy.
If you want a book to read,
keep a copy handy.
Marked down as a troublemaker.
Soon I started packing.
Sailed for the colonies.
The Yanks could use my backing
Wrote my views and published them.
Common sense the title.
Really spelled the message out,
clarity was vital.
Half a million copies sold.
Earned me lots of credit.
Washington said afterwards
it thrilled him when he read it.
Bonapart thought it was great.
Went right off him later.
The French were meant to rule rule themselves
But got a new dictator.
George Washington now the boss,
This is what we heard,
was just as anti-common folk
as Britain`s George the third.
Thought that common sense would do.
I was wrong,full-stop.
Two uprisings I`ve lived through,
and both have been a flop!!!...
J Muirden.
Complain about this comment
@Chicagodave #6
They have a problem with this because this means having the ability to "think for yourself" and use "critical thinking" something that has escaped a great segment of the population. And yes, parents should be the ones instilling this in their children and not the teachers.
I'm not old enough, but after looking at other comments on blogs from older people many of them have said that they do not recall a president being heavily scrutinized as the current president, which indicates that there's more to this. Lot of people get upset when you mention the "R" word and claim that it is a certain number of people that always play this card, but the fact of the matter is, the "r" word is still running deep through America's veins. Maybe I feel like this because I'm also a young woman of color and I guess I'm just being "paranoid." Interesting, how the secret service has said that the current president has been gotten more threats than President Bush. Although I never was a big fan of the former president, I never wished something horrible as death on another person. That's pretty low...
Complain about this comment
Squirrellist @48 "Why is it seemingly so difficult for some people to grasp the idea of a 21st century constitiutional monarchy? There are, after all, quite a few around. Or parliamentary governments with Prime Ministers (or the equivalent) and Presidents? It's the US system that's actually the odd one out."
The problem in the 21st century with constitutional monarchs is that any sort of monarchy goes against 21st century egalitarian principles. They are a throwback to undemocratic, class based systems. Yeah, that's 21st century all right.
Yes, let's have as our head of state some undeserving, inbred German who was given enourmous wealth and power simply because he/she has certain parentage. Can't possibly understand how anyone in the 21st century can't accept that! The US system isn't without flaws but give me a break about the monarchy. Utterly unsupportable in the 21st century. All crowned heads should roll. I would support a friendly dolphin over hereditary rule any day.
Complain about this comment
#6. GH1618: "Here's a link to the official UK government web site: UK government, which describes the Prime Minister as "head of UK government.""
It's wrong, although it may be difficult to find a more appropriate description; the Prime Minister reports to another, The Queen. If you read the site, you will see that it is headed Her Majesty's Government consists of those ministers responsible for the conduct of national affairs. The Queen alone appoints the Prime Minister, and all other ministers are appointed by her on the Prime Minister's recommendation.
You might want to read this link as well as this, the latter which shows the monarch's part in government: "The formal phrase 'Queen in Parliament' is used to describe the British legislature, which consists of the Sovereign, the House of Lords and the House of Commons."
Complain about this comment
A quick look at the right wing Fox News website et al, will reveal who the indoctrinators are in the US, and their name is not Obama! Indoctrinators do not allow questions or discussion, let alone the shouting of objections at rowdy town hall meetings. Exhorting children to make the most of their education is not indoctrination, it's common sense. Typical American over-reaction as usual.
Complain about this comment
This response is perhaps most representative of the core issue affecting the current administration. The US elected a pop star as president. The reaction of either supporters of detractors is never one of policy, position, or even consideration. This President will suffer the reflexive reactions of the US electorate until he lame ducks into history. Irrespective of his politics, Mr. Obama was crowned with the laurel of "first"; which has not been seen in the office of the President since George Washington, and as such no action on his part will be exposed to rational thought.
His supporters immediately cry foul on race at the slightest hint of opposition, while detractors will never see past their issue of a grossly inexperienced candidate elected on Oprah's coattails. His comparison to FDR (a little thin at best), is made even more ludicrous when considering the fact the the Roosevelts were the WASP political dynasty which Joe Kennedy sought to emulate. No such infrastructure exists for the President, nor could it.
And so it is that every event, from selection of a puppy to the commendable effort to support educators and reinforce the notion of work hard, pay attention in class, study all you can, is lost in the clamor. Thus it has been, thus it will ever be.
Complain about this comment
#61. GH1618: "squirrelist (#28), thanks for the history lesson, but I was thinking of QE2 in particular. I admit to not knowing first hand how the British (or English, at least) think of her, but when she visited here I would say she was treated with reverence by many."
QE2 is an ocean liner: she has visited many American ports and is revered by many - QEII is Queen Elizabeth II and is respected and admired rather than revered. Unlike the vessel, she won't be sold off to Dubai.
Complain about this comment
I'd have the President speak to kids for a few minutes before I allowed a science teacher who believes the earth is 3000 years old anywhere near my kids.
He is the President of the nation elected by Americans. He can speak to any American he likes, and American kids are Americans even at school.
It would have made for a better article if you had listed each president who had taken the time to visit schools and address the US children.
Names, dates, and locations would have been informative. Just listing that Bush Junior happened to be in a school reading to kids on a certain day when the world changed would have shown the republicans to be the hypocrites they are.
This hysteria is not racism, it is the screaming fear of rational thought.
A significant minority of Americans are determined to take pride in the lack of education. America, take control of the rabble rousers and sort out your problems please. With dignity.
Complain about this comment
95. ukwales :
Oh good, pomes is back.
Complain about this comment
102 copperdolomite
"Bush Junior happened to be in a school reading to kids on a certain day"
Ohhhh, I thought the kids were reading to him! Doh!
Complain about this comment
If the President's message, or objective, in this speech is to try to encourage children to work hard in school and never give up, then what is so strange about asking the children what they can do to help him accomplish this? I understand it sounds a bit odd to have the children write an essay as to how they can help him, but that would only be odd if he actually used any sort of socialist rhetoric in his speech. He only asked that they work hard because they are the future of this country.
Complain about this comment
97. At 6:46pm on 08 Sep 2009, MasterShogu
So I suppose if you need to find millions or hundreds of millions to fight an election, that's 'egalitarian' is it? I think more than 40 countries are constitutional monarchies. One was actually re-established after the middle of the 20th century. Anyway, it doesn't have to be hereditary. We've changed that when we've felt like it. Haven't you heard of William 'n Mary?
And didn't you have a try at what amounted to a hereditary Presidency quite recently? Apart from that, just look at all the Presidents Dubbya is related to here.
Anyway, what's this got to do with going back to school in the US of A? (Except some people could do with a few more lessons on history and government.)
Complain about this comment
There are so many opinions out there about everything he does, be it good or bad. He’s just trying to reach out to our children and inform them, so we can become a stronger nation again.
The things you want in life don’t come easy as they do in books, movies, video games. In books and movies you can skip to the good parts and in video games there are cheat codes to get you ahead. You actually have to put in the time and effort to make something of yourself. I remind my children that a good education can open doors for you and take you places.
Our children are living in a fast forward world today, just look at the commercials they show. Every time there is a kid’s movie they have some new toy they have to have. There are commercials for us and our teenagers to get a new phone every three or six months. And what about the iPods and gaming consoles? They improve the technology and your kids want to upgrade as fast as you can.
If they don’t get a good education and understand you have to work hard to earn the things you want. You’ll end up in debt and that takes hard work to get out of. In this capitalist country they throw new things at you all the time, making you think you need them. And if you want them and want to keep up with the upgrades, you better be making a decent living. And that requires a good education and hard work.
Complain about this comment
ref #80
canada007 wrote:
"Coincidentally, my 16 year old is reading "1984" in his English class. Now they have a relevant duiscussion point."
And with George Bush and Dick Cheney breeding a culture of fear in order to control the population and forward their neo-conservative viewpoint, they didn't?
BUY A MIRROR. LOOK IN IT.
Bush has been following the tradition of not criticizing his sucessor. Despite 9 months of contiued Bush blaming by Obama. So forget your 9/11 and Illumanati conspiracies Bush is retired from politics.
Complain about this comment
""No-one's born being good at things" is close to communism."
Poor comment, Obama speaks of how important it is for Children to try hard in school. I doubt you would be writing blogs for the BBC without an education that you tried hard in. Would a Republican have said "some people are born good at one thing some are born good at others"? It goes against America's basic values.
Republican parents are well within their rights to fear indoctronation, and I guess it should be up to them whether or not they see this, I wouldn't be to happy with my child seeing a broadcast of someone dissliked. If it were me I would rather see my child not near the monster that is politics at that age but I would gladly allow them to see this speech as i belive Obama is above most (British) politicians morally.
Complain about this comment
First off, parents keeping their children at home for fear of "political pollution" is asinine. To keep a child away from a message by a president due to his politics (which were not the topic of his discussion) is a political act (censorship?), one perpetrated by someone much closer to the children: their parents. So by avoiding this pollution you are in fact, polluting. Secondly, every text book in this nation goes through a checking house in Texas, one of our more radically conservative areas so schools in the U.S are no stranger to political "pollution", just like they are not free of it anywhere on earth. The victors write history, right?
The United States, my country, is a descendent of yours, both are traditionally conservative. Our revolution was run by capitalists, protestants and elites. The same group who still runs our nation. One blip on that screen as "liberal" as Obama is in fact, not very liberal at all. Consider the left of every other nation and then compare it the the "liberals" of the U.S. Our looks a bit weak by comparison.
My point being, all this talk of liberalism, socialism, communism or anything "left" being thrown at Obama is a pile of bogus accusation spat out by folks who do not know about the subject matter they are discussing.
Complain about this comment
I wonder how many of the fearful parents who don't want their kids "indoctrinated" have no problem with their kids watching hours of TV commercials every week, indoctrinating them into crass consumerism. Or are the parents simply too dim to understand the aim of the commercials?
And do they rush to turn off the TV or radio whenever Mr. Obama makes an appearance, so as to keep the kiddies from exposure to someone the parents dislike? Is there some kind of v-chip-like thing to prevent the kids watching the news in the parents' absence?
I really am curious about this.
Complain about this comment
I'm not a Republican, but even so I can say BBC is highly biased. It would have been nice to see a commentator come so strongly to the defense of George Bush such as you have done here in defending Obama. The fact is, if you don't regulate these politicians they will happily promote their agenda through whatever channels they can. The only reason Obama did not is because there was such opposition to it and worry about the "liberal agenda" that brought a lot of attention to the issue. If it was Bush doing it, it would have been offensive by BBC standards just because he was making his speech, but since it's Obama, it's "inoffensive" because he didn't say anything that is "liberal ideology" at least according to the standards of the BBC commentator -- hmm that gives me a warm fuzzy - not. I mean from BBC point of view, if Bush or Cheney even makes a speech it's offensive.
Complain about this comment
As a British-American (Brit recently naturalized as an American) I am incensed by the ghastly partisanship seen recently. Whatever happened to respect for the Commander-in-Chief and working together for the common good? Whatever happened to consensus, compromise....and respect for all?
Complain about this comment
I am currently a junior at a high school in Massachusetts, and I thought that Obama's speech was, for most purposes, very eloquent and completely void of political agenda. While some lines seemed to stereotype 21st century youths, (eg. asking people to put away the television remote), it felt empowering and meaningful to be addressed directly by our president. I can understand how some parents may have felt uncomfortable letting their children view Obama's speech, but after watching it myself I have to say that the backlash it has created is completely unjustified, and any notion that a 'communist' or 'socialist agenda' was at work is downright stupid. It seems to me that the parents that are making this into such a controversial issue are brainwashing their children far more than a president who simply asked people to take responsibility for their education.
Complain about this comment
You know what? I like the idea.. maybe her Majesty should do a back to school speech.
Our kids these days, they have no direction, no heroes to look up to, no one to give them real inspiration.
I liked what Obama had to say, he is quite right, work hard and you will get nice jobs, you are our countries future, there is nothing wrong in any of that, no political message, more Abe Lincoln or George Washington, price in the nation, pride in yourselves, all that is sadly lacking in our kids... you only have to look at todays teenagers to see that. I wish we had someone like that to talk tough and say those things, someone the kids can look up to, but alas today in this celebrity culture thing we are stuck in, the only folks our kids take notice of are skinny models and rich footballers. Our kids need a hero too.
Complain about this comment
# 112 matt_wa
Well, it is just a tad difficult to seriously defend someone who has the codes to nukes and who talks to 'Gawd', has scientific reports on climate rewritten (by non-scientists) to meet political needs, etc.
...ducks from shoes pretty well, though. 'Suppose that is something to be lauded...
Complain about this comment
I'm generally repulsed by Obama's politics, but I have no objection to any of the language in the speech that Obama delivered to the schoolchildren. The hysteria and objections about it from my like-minded political peers are unwarranted, although it's certainly possible that there was some contentious language removed from the pre-delivery drafts.
But I would like to note that while Obama supporters currently lambast those who had problems with the speech, and perhaps rightfully so in this particular instance, these same people regularly turned a blind eye when George Bush received similarly unfair treatment when he was in office. Many left-wing people and groups often ridiculed and criticized Dubya before he'd even uttered a word!
So in a nutshell, the anti-Bush people I've described certainly don't have the credibility to complain about how Obama is currently being treated by the far right. In fact, it could be said that "what goes around, comes around" now that the maltreatment is being reciprocated.
I wish everyone could be more politically civil.
Complain about this comment
#103.
Hi Squirrellist.
Back & way off topic,but serene & harmless.
Hope your keeping ok.
All my best...
Complain about this comment
108. At 7:38pm on 08 Sep 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
ref #80
canada007 wrote:
"Coincidentally, my 16 year old is reading "1984" in his English class. Now they have a relevant duiscussion point."
"And with George Bush and Dick Cheney breeding a culture of fear in order to control the population and forward their neo-conservative viewpoint, they didn't?"
BUY A MIRROR. LOOK IN IT.
Might be worth you reading 1984 (its by George Orwell). Look up the definition of "GOODTHINKFUL" in newspeak. You will find it very relevant to your own curious thought processes. In fact you would be right at home - probably a member of the inner party.
"Bush has been following the tradition of not criticizing his sucessor. Despite 9 months of contiued Bush blaming by Obama. So forget your 9/11 and Illumanati conspiracies Bush is retired from politics."
Did Bush and his gang not blame Clinton for his woes? Did Bush not blame Clinton for 9/11? Did Bush not blame Clinton for er everything?
Think he did.
Complain about this comment
At 8:48pm on 08 Sep 2009, johnnydogmatic wrote:
As a British-American (Brit recently naturalized as an American) I am incensed by the ghastly partisanship seen recently. Whatever happened to respect for the Commander-in-Chief and working together for the common good? Whatever happened to consensus, compromise....and respect for all?
Johnny,
Sadly, this gastly partisanship is not a new or recent phenomenon. It was a regular occurrence during the Bush years when he was crucified on a daily basis by the far left and given ZERO benefit of the doubt. Believe me, Dubya was offered no respect during his days in office by those who disagreed with his politics. Just as there are now "Birthers" who claim that Obama wasn't born in Hawaii, there were those who subscribed to the delusion that George Bush didn't actually win the election in 2000.
The only difference nowadays is that the right is mercilessly beating on a left-wing president instead of the other way around.
The left-wing president at least has a sympathetic media to protect him.
Complain about this comment
johnnydogmatic (#113) "Whatever happened to consensus, compromise....and respect for all?"
You must be thinking of the Era of Good Feelings. That was during the presidency of James Monroe, and it ended about 1824.
Complain about this comment
112. At 8:33pm on 08 Sep 2009, matt_wa wrote:
I'm not a Republican, but even so I can say BBC is highly biased. It would have been nice to see a commentator come so strongly to the defense of George Bush such as you have done here in defending Obama. "
Hmmm and would you like to see someone speak up for Stalin or Robert Mugabe everytime they are traduced? You know for balance. Arguing perhaps that famine can be a good thing.
Perhaps every comment on Osama Bin Laden shuld immediately be followed by a "on the other hand".
Perhaps the point is that Bush had fewer defenders than Obama and attempts to equate their popularity are nonsensical.
Gordon Brown complains the BBC gives him a rougher ride than Blair, but t is a fact Blair was more popular than Brown.
" if Bush or Cheney even makes a speech it's offensive."
Then they should stop saying offensive things. Bush would have done well to learn how to speak rather than how to drink. He rarely made a formal public appearance at which he failed to make a fool of himself by becoming togue tied - and this in a politician.
Complain about this comment
SC_Adept wrote:
""No-one's born being good at things" is close to communism."
"Poor comment, Obama speaks of how important it is for Children to try hard in school. I doubt you would be writing blogs for the BBC without an education that you tried hard in. "
Poor comprehension skills. For a start, Mark prefaced this comment with "MAYBE". This hints at the possibility of admitting contrary views.
Secondly, there is such a thing as "classic British understatement". To explain, it is when a person makes a statement that is utterly absurd on the face of it, in the hope that the listener will bang some neurons together and reason their own way to a blindingly obvious conclusion. In this way, it is hoped, one doesn't need to adopt a didactic style of prose, which can become overbearing and annoying after a while.
Complain about this comment
Oh America it's deniable racism... It behooves me to hear of all of this conservative back-lash, whilst Ronald Regan gave a speech to school children and deeply politicized his speech, and George H.W. Bush did the same in his speech on drugs. Right-wing radio in this country made a big deal about nothing. That's why they're confined to the boredom of AM radio.
Complain about this comment
There is a type of Moose or Elk in Canada where the males spend most of their time challenging and accepting fights with each other to prove dominanace often at the expense of focusing on what is really important-i.e finding food. They often starve to death as a result. This is the USA right now, Right-leaning folks are so pre-occupied with fighting evry single thing Obama says or does they are obstructing the man and his administration from doing anything meaningful to clean up Bush/Cheneys' mess. Case in point Rush Limbaugh: "I hope Obama fails", he'd rather be "right" than have his presidents ideas be successful
Complain about this comment
Gherkin
"I am tired of the left wing machine calling anyone who dares to disagree with President Obama's policy on anything an extremist. What happended to working together and a less divisive tone?"
Yea were pretty tired of you as well but what can we do.
What happened is you Republicans crying like school bullies who got shown up for what they are.
You are an extremist , there are plenty that disagree but you are just disagreeable.
Next time the lot of you will be complaining about State of the Union (UNION(there's a joke)) speeches.
Complain about this comment
At 9:50pm on 08 Sep 2009, Simon21 wrote:
Did Bush and his gang not blame Clinton for his woes? Did Bush not blame Clinton for 9/11? Did Bush not blame Clinton for er everything?
Think he did.
Simon21,
You apparently don't know the difference between successor and predecessor.
What was said is that George W. Bush has not gone on to attack his successor Obama (a president who came after him) like Jimmy Carter has done on multiple occasions from 2000-2008.
Attacking predecessors (presidents who served prior) for a time is accepted practice, but ripping into the president who follows your term is against the unwritten "US presidential code of conduct." Once a president is out of office, he is supposed to shut up and leave the next guy alone. He is NOT supposed to travel the world undermining another presidency.
Jimmy Carter has set a precedent by doing exactly that to George W. Bush.
It is perfectly accurate to say that George W. Bush has NOT torn into Obama in any way as long as Barack has been in office. So far, Dubya has been respectfully silent in accordance with "the code."
Complain about this comment
"Believe me, Dubya was offered no respect during his days in office by those who disagreed with his politics. "
What a laugh. the Dems all jumped to help[ his war of choice when he LIED to them.
He started a war with a lie.
As for his politics.
what tax breaks for driving bigger cars.
tax breaks for the rich so there was no money in the coffers if serious hit the fan.
A drop in bankruptcy protection and credit card companies that led along with the Ignoring of healthcare costs that led us to this pinnacle of success we are on now.
There's a difference between being civil and sucking up to a guy that has such a bad record . What he did do was disastrous.
But you might not know that.
Complain about this comment
Case in point Rush Limbaugh: "I hope Obama fails", he'd rather be "right" than have his presidents ideas be successful.
Moon he also told people to create a fake bubble to set it in. so did pat Robertson.
If a whole bunch of gold were to flood the market now they would loose more money because that's where they hid their money to get it out of the stock market in an attempt to kill the most and survive themselves.
Gold and all them repossessed houses they are buying.
Complain about this comment
tonusabla
Have you seen DICK going on about Obama this and that?
I think you are blinded by your unswerving idolatry of the Bush admin.
Complain about this comment
tonusaitis.
BTW thanks.
between you and marcus make the case that americans are really strange in the head;)
Well done.
Complain about this comment
I am a little bit confused. Surely a President standing up and encouraging young kids to work hard and do their best is exactly the sort of thing a President should be doing. Even the controversial lesson idea about getting kids to write about how they could help the President, what is wrong with that?
The way the American right reacted to this whole thing tells you a lot about their mental state right now. The 'Country First' slogan from the McCain campaign has very quickly been forgotten. Now it seems everything the Republican Party and its followers do is calculated precisely to damage the President. Even when he stands up to encourage young people to work hard, and that people out there do care about them, he is shot down. It really is quite pathetic.
Complain about this comment
then in 110 with bombastic we have the sort that would be damned by the right. for making sense.
An american that makes the country look good.like they had listened to Obama when they were at school and stayed in school.
Complain about this comment
W@hat about the "cult of birthers"
(big birthers)
Complain about this comment
How much power does the Queen have? Nothing becomes law unless the Queen signs the bill, I read, yet does she ever take a stand against something Parliament wants? How often does she use what we Americans call a pocket veto? I thought the monarchy had devolved into a ceremonial role. This is not true?
Complain about this comment
90 mighty mark .
I think you will find that others in the press or tV have said that it is a bit communist. They have suggested it.
Mark asking if the commentators were serious or demented when they suggested this speech smacks of communism.
91
they eat books.
sounds like censorship to me.
Complain about this comment
135 Andypost
The last time a reigning monarch refused to sign a parliamentary bill into law was 1707 under Queen Anne.
We had a civil war and a glorious revolution in the 1600s to bring us to the system of constitutional monarchy, and in both tradition and practise, the monarch allows her government to govern.
If you have any examples of the Queen vetoing any parliamentary business the entire UK would love to hear about it. We won't stand for it.
Complain about this comment
At 10:39pm on 08 Sep 2009, saintlymark wrote:
The way the American right reacted to this whole thing tells you a lot about their mental state right now. The 'Country First' slogan from the McCain campaign has very quickly been forgotten. Now it seems everything the Republican Party and its followers do is calculated precisely to damage the President. Even when he stands up to encourage young people to work hard, and that people out there do care about them, he is shot down. It really is quite pathetic.
You're absolutely right.
But exactly how is this different from what was done to George W. Bush from 2000-2008? I cast no votes for Dubya, so I think I can speak objectively on the matter.
I'll answer my own rhetorical question: No different! The far left was just as unreasonable as some right-wingers are today.
Partisanship is out of control.
Complain about this comment
I am embarrassed for my country today.
Some parents are up in arms, saying his words were telling them how to be a parent. How dare he? POTUS says not to watch TV or play XBox every waking hour. Childhood obesity is rampant in this country. Sounds like a good suggestion to me.
Read a book--every study I have ever read says that will improve vocabulary and intelligence, but I have yet to see TV or XBox making that claim.
It is just plain embarrassing and silly how polarized politically we have become and how this is going to further erode our educational system that is lacking for so many.
Complain about this comment
138 tonusaitis
A significant difference would be that Bush was criticised for lying to everyone to start a war which is still draining the national coffers.
Obama is trying to improve life for the poorest Americans.
Complain about this comment
# 25 MagicKirin wrote:
"The problem is not the President speeching [sic] is was [sic] how the Education Dept presented it. With the " How you can help the President Essay"/For a group that arguably ran the best orginized [sic] campaign in history they have been remarkebly [sic] tone deaf and heavy handed/There is a problem with a minority of teachers pushing their political views and effecting [sic] their lesson plans in a negative way"
Now remember, boys and girls - if you don't pay attention in school.....
Complain about this comment
127. At 10:22pm on 08 Sep 2009, tonusaitis wrote:
At 9:50pm on 08 Sep 2009, Simon21 wrote:
Did Bush and his gang not blame Clinton for his woes? Did Bush not blame Clinton for 9/11? Did Bush not blame Clinton for er everything?
Think he did.
Simon21,
You apparently don't know the difference between successor and predecessor.
What was said is that George W. Bush has not gone on to attack his successor Obama (a president who came after him) like Jimmy Carter has done on multiple occasions from 2000-2008."
Sorry was Jimmy Carter President in 1999 - I thought it was Clinton.
And the point being made was about Obama, not Carter.
You are not saying Obama is criticising his sucessor?
"Attacking predecessors (presidents who served prior) for a time is accepted practice,"
Which is the point, since the criticism was of Obama not Clinton.
"but ripping into the president who follows your term is against the unwritten "US presidential code of conduct." Once a president is out of office, he is supposed to shut up and leave the next guy alone. He is NOT supposed to travel the world undermining another presidency."
Obama has not done this. And the suggestion that any US citizen is not allowed to critise anyone they choose,choose when they is a little ridiculous. Bush's eminence grise has certainly criticised Obama.
Carter is a model President he does not sit back wallowing in his wealth and not caring about anything except himself.
And neither does he whine about how the press/judiciary/Congress/ Commies/The Vietnamese etc etc were out to get him, and anyway who cares about the Constitution.
Jimmy Carter has set a precedent by doing exactly that to George W. Bush.
It is perfectly accurate to say that George W. Bush has NOT torn into Obama in any way as long as Barack has been in office. So far, Dubya has been respectfully silent in accordance with "the code."
Complain about this comment
ref. 137, RomeStu:
"If you have any examples of the Queen vetoing any parliamentary business the entire UK would love to hear about it. We won't stand for it."
No, I don't know of any at present. I promise I'll let you know first if I come across any.
Complain about this comment
Re: MarcusAureliusII, post #18:
"America children now grow up without even knowing what their heritage is."
Which children and which heritage are you talking about, exactly? Native American children and their heritage of having most of their people's land stolen? Black children and the heritage of slavery and racism? The children of Irish, Italian or Chinese immigrants and their heritage?
Oh, right, how silly of me to forget. You were referring to the fact that you want textbooks to pretend that everyone in America is descended from 18th century English colonists.
In my experience, people who oppose "political correctness" are really only concerned with promoting a sanitized version of their nation's history, with all the nasty bits taken out, and all controversies glossed over for the purpose of manufacturing a false impression of national unity in the past.
Complain about this comment
Mark:
I saw parts of the President's Speech on Tuesday; It was nothing more than a pep rally for the school children....
=Dennis Junior=
Complain about this comment
Mark Mardell closing line "In each administration political opponents don't like it when a man they love to hate wants to earn kudos by behaving like the nation's father, but it's built into the system" sums up an American mindset I have trouble understanding, this whole "we love our constitution/forefathers/Declaration of Independenc/greatest country on earth/revered figures like Lincoln, Washington, JFK et al/ anybody can grow up to be president (ie It is something to be admired and inspiring)" and yet simultaneously "we can't trust our government/ we need to guns to fight if the feds take too much control/ we are losing our country/ The president is an evil, hitler-like fascist ,etc etc etc"
Very confusing
Complain about this comment
#144 M5
What a liar. You wouldn't know a standard American history textbook of the type used when I went to school if it came flying through the air and hit you in the head. Yes it told the truth about all of the warts in American history. I wonder what English textbooks tell children in Britain about the countless crimes against humanity and war crimes the British nation committed all over the world for centuries under the glorious British Empire. What do they say about the slave trade and how wealthy British colonists set up an economy in the southern American colonies that was completely dependent on it so that even after independence, they had a market for the human captives they kidnapped in Africa and brought to the new world?
Complain about this comment
Two nights ago I was watching tv here in the US and a woman was being interviewd on the news about her opposition to Obama's school speech. She was in her late 20's or early 30's and she was bawling like she was an 11 year old girl. Her reaction to her children "having to be exposed to" this speech was so outlandish it was almost hliarious, and then I realized her tears were genuine and I thought---This person isn't from another political party or a different social leaning from myself, she is from another planet!
Complain about this comment
Given the childish tenor of what passes for "adult" political discourse in the U.S.A., it is quite appropriate that its President address actual children.
The chief social pleasure when visiting Europe is to escape the kindergarten loony-bin of American "society" where the individual is raised to present a cartoon caricature of themselves in social intorcourse, and rub shoulders with actual adults for a change.
Complain about this comment
Please, readers from Great Britain and around the world, don't judge all citizens of the US by the ignorant comments and outrage raised by those who are the racist, uneducated, dumb and dumber members of US society. These folks seem to be having a very difficult time recognizing and appreciating the fact that at last, we have an intelligent, gifted president who is really well-educated who speaks the English language often in an eloquent manner. And the fact that he is African American is more than these stupid folks can handle. Thankfully there have been others who have recognized the value of having our president encourage and challenge our children to achieve excellence through hard work and discipline. There has never been a more urgent time to reach young people, as the US falls behind the rest of the developed nations in Math and Science.
Complain about this comment
#54
Stu,
I find in many ways that I disagree with Newt, but he is an intelligent, thoughtful man. If you need evidence of this then you only need to look at the terrific debate he held with Jack Horner on the behavior of T Rex a few years ago. I've not looked for it on the internet but he basically sought out the folks most opposed to Horners view (T-Rex was a scavanger) and sought out the evidence, including the view of the guy most opposed to Horner (Bob Bakker, whose look alike was eaten in of the Jurassic Park movies where Horner was the scientific advisor) and constructed a very convincing arguement. Including hand puppets.
Newt is a smart guy who can argue and compromise. We need more of those, not the mindless screamers we see at town halls or on blogs.
Palaeontologist Sam
Complain about this comment
when you are the moon...: I'd recommend Walt Whitman's Leaves of Grass (in particular, Song of Myself) as an aid to understanding the American mindset.
might be its best known snippet.
Complain about this comment
#147
LOL out at Marcus again,
I have an Oxford educated intern who was with us this summer, reading History. She was amazing in her understanding of the history of Slavery and Britain's role, and in fact had long discussions with some of our other interns and staff on the role of William Wilberforce and his inspiration to the Civil rights movement. It was aneye opener to me, both in terms of the timeline, actions and tactics later deployed by our own Civil rights movement.
What is more amusing is MArcus still playing the blame game. 'Waaah. We got independence. Waah, we had slaves years after you abolished them. Waah, your fault. You made us do it. You did. You did. It wasn't me. It wasn't us. We're the good guys. We are, we all are'.
How pathetic to blame others for our history and it's shame. And slavery is our greatest shame
The one thing that holds us back as a society is the small minded 'We're number one and we did nothing wrong' mentality of the poorly educated. Of course we did things that were wrong. All nations did and do, all individuals do. A refusal to accept that and learn from it is the biggest mistake a human being can make.
Why can't we all just get along?
Sad Sam
Complain about this comment
The questions are not about what is happening...but why is it happening?
People are hysterical that their children will hear the president speak in the public schools
What the heck is wrong with America?
This is like living in an insane asylum.
What other nation is going to have respect for a nation with people and a news media that acts like this? Its humiliating for America.
Do other nations have lunatic fringes like this? and this lunatic fringe is in positions of power
What a mess!!!
Complain about this comment
93. At 6:21pm on 08 Sep 2009, howardfolden wrote:
"The tradition in this country is locally elected and locally run school boards. Most of the problems with the school systems started with federally mandated requirements. ... Mr. President stay out of my child's classroom - you are way out of bounds!"
_________
"...way out of bounds!"
As was George W. Bush on September 11, 2001 ?
As was Dan Quayle when learning to spell "Potato"?
Why would anyone have a problem with a President (and first lady in her own right) who actually achieved genuine academic success speaking about the importance of striving for academic success? The US now has a President who really does believe in education, and his life is a testament to it. It's a message that I wish more politicians would spread. It's a message that I wish more politicians had the personal credibility to be able to spread.
Complain about this comment
ref. 146, moon
"Mark Mardell closing line..."
You got it pretty much nailed there. Consider that the examples you gave aren't mutually exclusive. All of them can (and, I agree, do) exist at the same time, namely now.
Complain about this comment
135 Andy
In the present day it would be unconstitutional for the Queen (or any of the Queen's representatives in, for example, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and so on) to attempt to exercise legislative power by refusing to sign an Act passed by Parliament.
Complain about this comment
Interestedforeigner wrote:
135 Andy
"In the present day it would be unconstitutional for the Queen (or any of the Queen's representatives in, for example, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and so on) to attempt to exercise legislative power by refusing to sign an Act passed by Parliament."
If this is so, it rather begs the question of why the Queen, or her representative in the colonies, is required to sign the laws in order for them to assent to law.
I see this sort of comment about what might be unconstitutional as a plea, rather than a conviction based upon hard law. I suspect people desperately want to belong to a modern and democratic social system of lawmaking, because they think it reflects upon them as individuals. Which, of course, it would not, even if it were so.
The thing to remember about the remaining Royal prerogative in law, of which the Royal assent to legislation is but one minor part, is that it is symbolic of the evolution of one form of government to another. The absolute divine rule of Kings was brought to an end when the party system became dominant. Since then, not much has changed.
But it is important to remember exactly what changed, and what did not, when the divine rule Kings gave way to parliamentary rule. To me, the crucial point is that the business community (as opposed to the landed gentry) were permitted to gather their interests under representatives and petition these interest to the representatives of the landed gentry, the nobility, a class with titles and superior legal rights to common men. It was not, however, a revolution whereby the nobility were dispossessed of all their power. It was a compromise between industrialists and Lords, not a revolution promoting the suffrage of the common man.
This analyses is more or less true of the USA, also. The American war of independence gave business owners a say in how the country was run. It did not radically alter the way law was perceived and enforced, as shown by the continuity of the common law in the courts.
The dominance of the representative system by business has not really altered, either in the UK or in the USA, with the emergence of labour politics. Rather than common working people gaining a say in how their communities would be ruled, their organizations and political will has merely been harnessed by various factions within the business community, and pitted against the other factions in a bid to gain parliamentary power though affiliation with popular sentiment. But all the while, government has been the representation of business owners, and not of the common workers who are only permitted to vote for one of the various business factions.
There has been some excellent work on this topic (the investment theory of political representation) by several American scholars. Google is your friend here. But the short version is as follows:
Owners of labour intensive industries, such as factories, mining, oil extraction and farming have traditionally been ANTI labour. This is because a rise in the living standards of workers means significant cost increases for those industrial barons. But for industries which are traditionally not reliant on mass labour, such as banking, law and medicine, the cost of supporting increases in the standard of living for labour has traditionally been reasonably low.
And thus America has two business parties who share power in the congress, just as the UK has two business parties in the parliament. The republicans and tory parties are anti labour, and are made up of the business owners from labour intensive industries like manufacturing, mining, oil and agriculture. The democrats and British labour parties are pro labour, and are made up of the business owners from the financial industry, law, medicine and other industries where very little labour is engaged for the generation of profits.
But the thing to note about this investment theory of representation is that no matter who wins, business wins. The system is one where those who own the country rule the country, and where those who do not own the country watch the spectacle with about the same amount of suffrage as commoners had in the preceding epoch, the age of the divine rule of kings.
Sorry for the long post, folks.
Complain about this comment
#57. Interestedforeigner: "In the present day it would be unconstitutional for the Queen (or any of the Queen's representatives in, for example, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and so on) to attempt to exercise legislative power by refusing to sign an Act passed by Parliament."
But you'll recall that Australia had a bit of a problem with the Queen's representative, the Governor General, over a budgetary matter. Although it raised a lot of hackles, it wasn't considered unconstitutional. I can't see that withholding her signature would necessarily be so; surely it would depend on the Act and the circumstances? Reserve powers are just that, held in reserve just in case something goes amiss. Remember, The Queen did select a Prime Minister and could do so again if there were a hung parliament. With no ministers to advise her, it would be her decision after consultation with the various factions.
Complain about this comment
114. At 8:54pm on 08 Sep 2009, samtboland wrote:
"I am currently a junior at a high school in Massachusetts, and I thought that Obama's speech was, for most purposes, very eloquent and completely void of political agenda. While some lines seemed to stereotype 21st century youths. . ."
It did rather, didn't it? Still, I'm relieved to read something from someone who actually saw the thing at long last. (Instead of some who seem to have been at school with Tom Brown.)
Complain about this comment
154. At 04:21am on 09 Sep 2009, bethpa wrote:
"The questions are not about what is happening...but why is it happening?
People are hysterical that their children will hear the president speak in the public schools
What the heck is wrong with America?
This is like living in an insane asylum."
It is happening because the Republicans were thrown out of office, and they are genuinely terrified that Mr. Obama will bring in a new political system based on the express will of the people, as he promised. (He will also have to defeat the Democratic establishment, but that is for the next half of his administration, or the next four years.)
This incivility, this blatant shouting of obvious lies, this inciting the troops to shout down any civic discussion of an urgent national problem because they fear the power that will fall to any leader who can set it right - these are the acts of partizanship in blinding desperation.
They cover their nakedness by saying it is done by other, more radical groups, but they never have refuted or challenged these atrocious statements and actions. The Republican leaders are quaking in their boots. They would go with Sarah Palin for a national leadership position if the tabloids would hoorah it. Or Joe the Plumber. Or that dufus they have as chairman of the RNC, who cannot express a cogent thought in public. They are casting everywhere for any distraction from the real state of things, in their party as well as in the country.
The rabid jackals of the press look only for fresh kill to scavenge - blood draws a crowd, after all. They are the real criminals and vandals for giving seeming credence to this smoke and mirrors game.
Consider me no longer a Republican - I prefer to be a Hopeful Anachronistic Crank.
KScurmudgeon on a rainy night.
Complain about this comment
158. At 05:33am on 09 Sep 2009, democracythreat wrote:
"But the thing to note about this investment theory of representation is that no matter who wins, business wins. The system is one where those who own the country rule the country, and where those who do not own the country watch the spectacle with about the same amount of suffrage as commoners had in the preceding epoch, the age of the divine rule of kings."
Thanks for a long and excellent post. We would do better if we could think in terms of more than the last 10 years, and beyond our own generation.
I agree that you have described the reality, but it is also true that today more than ever in the past the wage earner is the real source of wealth and power in modern economies. We are the last resource - our ability to pay taxes dependably, to pay our mortgages until recently, to buy vast quantities of goods on credit, has driven the world's economy to unprecedented glories since WWII and before. Now we are asked to bail out our own oppressors - and the world trusts that we will because our small hope of prosperity depends on doing so.
We are the cattle on a thousand hills, to borrow an ancient metaphor, we are the substance and source of wealth. Why can't anyone persuade our owners that their prosperity would only increase if we are well fed, protected from disease, and able to increase?
KScurmudgeon
from an agricultural state
Complain about this comment
154 bethpa
"Do other nations have lunatic fringes like this? and this lunatic fringe is in positions of power"
I'm sure all countries have their lunatic fringes, but it is the power of the fringes in the USA (both right and left) that is disturbing.
Not necessarily positions of elected power, but power of mass persuasion and the media means to get their "version" out to blind supporters looking not for any sort of truth or relative value, but simply another stick with which to beat their chosen bogeyman.
I know of no other country where radio-jocks hold such enormous power. Republican policy seems to be set by a half a dozen talk-show hosts. This way the GOP can distance itself from its own unpleasant brand of politics. I remember being shocked by televangelists in the 80s when I first went to the USA, but now it is the "commentators" who fill me with dread.
And before the right wing-nut jump on the fact that left-wing commentators were out for Bush ... I agree! Not defending it.... but as I've said before, Bush was starting wars with lies, Obama is trying to improve the lot of the poorest Americans, many of whom would not have voted for him due to the bigotry inspired by certain radio commentators.
Complain about this comment
"Carter a model president..."
Tell that to the DNC (Democratic National Committee) which would love that the man (who significantly reduced chances of Democrats being reelected) never existed.
Jimmy, who by doing nothing vis a vis Soviet (through Cuban proxies) interventions in Angola and Mozambik embolded Soviets into invading Afghanistan, and then did nothing again to have them kicked out.
[leaving it to his successor]
Jimmy who did nothing when ayatollahs started Islamic Revolution in Iran and could't even get American hostages back.
Jimmy, the model president? Sure.
And a heroic, capable Commander-in-Chief, to boot.
Complain about this comment
I don't think it is the message which is controversial (for what it's worth, I agree: people should work hard to improve themselves not just blame 'disadvantage' for their failure)
I think the issue is using mass media to try to indoctrinate children on a political issue.
As an example of the dangers...Labour has used the schools for political indoctrination for many years now. Labour political doctrine is pushed on all children under the guise of 'citizenship' and is also concealed in other subjects, eg. history. Some children have now completed the whole of their education under this indoctrination regime, and (surprise, surprise) Labour want to lower the voting age because more young people would vote labour.
The party in power should not be allowed to use their privileged position to indoctrinate vulnerable children as the next generation of voters.
Complain about this comment
164. At 07:39am on 09 Sep 2009, powermeerkat wrote:
"Carter a model president..."
Tell that to the DNC (Democratic National Committee) which would love that the man (who significantly reduced chances of Democrats being reelected) never existed."
I was talking about his more recent activities. Helping to end aparthied for example
In any case though is a president solely defined by what he does to get reelected? There's more to it than that surely.
"Jimmy, who by doing nothing vis a vis Soviet (through Cuban proxies) interventions in Angola and Mozambik embolded Soviets into invading Afghanistan, and then did nothing again to have them kicked out.
[leaving it to his successor]"
His sucessor gave the Afghan militia stinger missiles etc leading to the utter destruction of that country and take over by the Taliban.
One of the militia leaders was a known pedophile - a strange ally for the US surely
Not a great record.
"Jimmy who did nothing when ayatollahs started Islamic Revolution in Iran and could't even get American hostages back."
And he should have what - asked the Israeli's to invade? Dropped an atomic bomb on 24 million people
He also brokered peace between Israel and Egypt - the first US president to do so.
But no he didn't use the army and soldier's lives to get brownie points - his successors did that and what a mess they have made
Complain about this comment
147. At 01:59am on 09 Sep 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:
#144 M5
What a liar. You wouldn't know a standard American history textbook of the type used when I went to school if it came flying through the air and hit you in the head. Yes it told the truth about all of the warts in American history. I wonder what English textbooks tell children in Britain about the countless crimes against humanity and war crimes the British nation committed all over the world for centuries under the glorious British Empire. What do they say about the slave trade and how wealthy British colonists set up an economy in the southern American colonies that was completely dependent on it so that even after independence, they had a market for the human captives they kidnapped in Africa and brought to the new world?"
So do we gather you disapprove of slavery then Marcus? Odd given your devotion to free enterprise and your views on black people, native Americans, gays etc.
Complain about this comment
May be I am naive or missed the political conspiracy theory here? I think it's unbeleievable that simple, clear and good advice can be twisted into a political game - This is the day a successful, grown man cannot offer words of wisdom and encouragement to a hall full of students who are there to study and achieve in the first place - come on world, move on..
Complain about this comment
Mark, you wrote, "There would be a furore if the British head of governemnt, Gordon Brown, wanted to beam his message to schools"
"Government" is spelled thus; not "governemnt". Spell-check much?
Complain about this comment
153. At 03:52am on 09 Sep 2009, SamTyler1969:
I can't bring myself to address him directly any more, he won't listen anyway, but tell him about this and this would you, by way of illustration.
He'll hate it, but since we are a multiculturalsociety and many born here are the descendants of one-time slaves and indentured labourers (probably outnumbering the descendants of slave traders) we're not that uneducated about it.
Did he read Equiano's Travels, African and West Indian poets and novelists who've written about it, or about Mary Seacole or Samuel Coleridge Taylor (it is that way round!) or Marcus Garvey --oops, wrong kind of politics there for Marcus--at school? I did. And I was able to carry on with more as part of my degree.
(I got educated, innit?)
One does read some funny ideas here. (Now, where did I put my red coat, musket, leg irons and whip? Mustn't miss the ship, it's sailing from Bristol on the next tide. I've got a fortune to make and people to oppress.)
Complain about this comment
Ref #166
Carter role in the Egyptian/Israeli has been greatly exagerated. He played host but was a major distraction.
He left the economy in a shambles and was a failure in dealing with Iran. The minute the embassy was invaded he could have sent troops in and arrested Khomeheni and restored the Shah to power.
His post Presidency in supporting bogus election result in Venezuela and other central America. Supporting Palestinian terrorism against Israel and other human rights outrages make his a President that deserves no postumous honors when he does pass on.
Complain about this comment
171. At 10:37am on 09 Sep 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
Ref #166
Carter role in the Egyptian/Israeli has been greatly exagerated. He played host but was a major distraction."
So when the Israelies and the Egyptians paid tribute to him, they were both lying according to you.
Is this because they were semites?
The extreme-right in Israel certainly has a weird view of the world. But extreme rightests always do
"He left the economy in a shambles and was a failure in dealing with Iran. The minute the embassy was invaded he could have sent troops in and arrested Khomeheni and restored the Shah to power."
The fact that 20 million Iranians would have resisted them and shot the hostages shouldn't have been a consideration.
Ah how nice to dispose of other people's lives from a comfortable armchair.
Bit of news The US army is incapable of "dealing with" a bunch of insurgents with old russian weapons, hand made bombs, how would it have invaded Iran successfully?
"His post Presidency in supporting bogus election result in Venezuela and other central America. Supporting Palestinian terrorism against Israel and other human rights outrages make his a President that deserves no postumous honors when he does pass on."
He supports freedomm what a pity you don't.
Let us hope President Chavez continues to show restraint in SOuth America. According to President Bush he is fully entitled to attack Colombia - as Iran is fully entitled to attack Israel if it continues to issue threats.
Complain about this comment
The American Government is once again proving itself to be a place where those who want to get a good message across and change things for the better are not welcome. When people cry 'SOCIALISM!' when you tell children to do well in school, you know you haven't got a chance. Face it Barak, the US government is a place for self serving pompous businessmen who want to build a huge nest egg for themselves, not for those who want to evoke change. In addition, in regards to the whole 'red fear' culture that still exists in right-America... how retro.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The fact that 20 million Iranians would have resisted them and shot the hostages shouldn't have been a consideration.
Ah how nice to dispose of other people's lives from a comfortable armchair.
Bit of news The US army is incapable of "dealing with" a bunch of insurgents with old russian weapons, hand made bombs, how would it have invaded Iran successfully?
(Bit of news it would have been a snatchand grab not an ivasion. Most Irananins would dump the Muillahs they don't speak for the majority of their country)
"His post Presidency in supporting bogus election result in Venezuela and other central America. Supporting Palestinian terrorism against Israel and other human rights outrages make his a President that deserves no postumous honors when he does pass on."
He supports freedomm what a pity you don't.
Let us hope President Chavez continues to show restraint in SOuth America. According to President Bush he is fully entitled to attack Colombia - as Iran is fully entitled to attack Israel if it continues to issue threats.
(Hugo showing restraint by supporting the FARC terrorist closing down independent media. Hey is Hugo attacks Columbia he would lose. The Iranains are already attacking Israel through their proxies armies Hamas and Hezbollah)
Of course left wing autocrats are fine by Jimmy the Appeaser. That is the real tradegy of Watergate is allowed a man of limited inteligence and obvious bigot toward certain ethnic groups to attain the Presidency.
He will be rembered with Chamberlen is allowing evil to flourish.
Complain about this comment
I don't see what all the fuss is about. Doesn't anybody remember where George W Bush was when 9/11 was going down and the news was whispered into his ear???? And the stunned look that followed the message? In a school room preaching his indoctrination to the little kiddies.
Complain about this comment
174. At 11:39am on 09 Sep 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:
Oh dear do not like being reminded of your prejudices Marcus?
Sorry. But is true isn't it. You have views on non white Americans etc
I have never uttered one word that would even suggest that my views are in any way affected by a person's color, ethnic origin, or sexual orientation because they aren't."
Sorry Marcus that isn't actually true is it. Be honest you views are quite strong. Remember your views on the Palestinians for example? All of them, regardless. A whole ethnic group.
" However, that does not hold true for national origin due to the cultural values some nations imbue in their people. While I have never considered that there would be any way to justify slavery,"
SO you condemn the US for holding on to slavery for so long and for aparthied long after that? Yes or no please. Make it cleat.
"it has occurred to me recently that indentured servitude by Britain's native population in repayment for the enormous debt it owes The People of the United States of America might be one exception."
Sorry what have the Welsh and Scots gaels to do with this? You must stop with the liquid refreshment. Are you saying you do not like the Welsh now?
I genuinely cannot make out the connection. I am not fond of the bagpipes or lavabread but what they have to do with slavery in the US is frankly beyond me - explain.
"Perhaps a tax on everything Britain produces to pay America for the huge cost of defending and saving it in three world wars would be an effective means of enforcing it."
No the US owes Britain a huge debt for saving its bacon in both instances.
" Taxation without representation in the opposite direction from what it was in the 18th century before the American Revolution seems fair enough to me. After all, British royal apologists justified the taxes imposed on American colonists based entirely on the same rationale. Say 25% of everything Britain produces for the next 50 years. That or we cut off relations entirely. Should do it anyway for 189 days as a consequence of the release of the Lockerbie mass murdering terrorist. Oh how the British government tried to wriggle out of responsibility for that one. Bad luck for the just convicted British Islamic terrorists that Pakistan doesn't have oil or they'd be serving their sentences back in Pakistan this very minute...in its finest hotels and resteraunts after a hero's welcome even though they aren't Pakistanis."
Sorry let's try again - you approve or disapprove of slavery in the US.?
Is this how they debate in Roumania - no wonder you cannot understand your family.
Complain about this comment
Where was the opposition to national leaders speaking to students when Laura Bush, Jeb Bush and other Republican politicians did the same President Obama is planning to do? Not only does President Obama has the right to speak to American students, he has an obligation to do so. Our education system is lagging those in other industrialized nations in quality, accessibility and affordability.
It is pathetic to see "responsible" adults objecting to a Presidential address intended to inspire and motivate our young at a time when the rate of High School and College dropouts is at unacceptable levels.
The future of our country does not depend on obese imbeciles that spend the day watching TV and playing video games; we need doctors, engineers, chemists, physicists, mathematicians and other professionals to meet the challenges of the 21st century and be able to compete successfully with China, Japan, the EU and other emerging economic super powers.
The large number of foreign professionals working in our country is not an accident, it is the consequence of lack of motivation, neglect, and distorted priorities by our government and our society who do not hesitate to fund B2 bombers but object adamantly to any program - or even a speech - designed to benefit our society. Unless we do something fast we are likely to lose our privileged global position and hegemony, and become a second-rate nation within a generation.
Complain about this comment
175. At 12:17pm on 09 Sep 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
The fact that 20 million Iranians would have resisted them and shot the hostages shouldn't have been a consideration.
Ah how nice to dispose of other people's lives from a comfortable armchair.
Bit of news The US army is incapable of "dealing with" a bunch of insurgents with old russian weapons, hand made bombs, how would it have invaded Iran successfully?
(Bit of news it would have been a snatchand grab not an ivasion."
What like the raid attempted under Carter? The US forces set new standards for incompetence.
The hostages would have been dead before the last helicopter crashed.
But hey what do you care? They were not israeli right wingers.
"Most Irananins would dump the Muillahs they don't speak for the majority of their country"
Bini and his right wing gang do not speak for even half the Israelis
(Hugo showing restraint by supporting the FARC terrorist closing down independent media. Hey is Hugo attacks Columbia he would lose."
The Colombians - even it they were supported by the US would be easily defeated.
Chavez fights poverty, the Colombians use death squads to conduct massacres.
"The Iranains are already attacking Israel through their proxies armies Hamas and Hezbollah"
The Iranian government is duty bound to defend the homeland of the world's Iranians. They are obliged to use any means to defeat those who want to drop nuclear weapons on their country. And that includes some in the US apparently. They too have shown amazing patience and tolerance.
This is the Bush doctrine - thought up by your hero.
"Of course left wing autocrats are fine by Jimmy the Appeaser. That is the real tradegy of Watergate is allowed a man of limited inteligence and obvious bigot toward certain ethnic groups to attain the Presidency."
George Bush did have limited intelligence its good you admit it. And well done for the historical perspective. It is certainly arguable he owes his success in part to yet another Republican political criminal who beleived in indicriminate bombing.
Carter on the other hand has shown himself to be an international stateman and a credit to his country.
He will remembered as one of the few US politicians who had a genuine understanding of the world.
Complain about this comment
Thanks for sharing your view on it.
Complain about this comment
161.
KScurmudgeon
There were once Republicans who had principles and cared about others and saw their principles as the way to help others.
But the Republican party has been taken over by leaders who owe their allegiance to corporations.
All of this is to the benefit of corporations, who want to weaken the US government and its regulations.
Now there is a law before the Supreme Court which will allow the corporations to funnel money directly into the politicians' coffers. If that is allowed its good bye to the United States and hello to United Corporations of America.
Many in the US public are unable to think for themselves and they have knee jerk reactions that are being played to get them to act against their own best interests..
People are being manipulated by power and moneyed groups.
Complain about this comment
163 Romestu
When the US had the run up to the war against Iraq the left was effectively silenced and people who opposed the war could not get air time on tv or on the radio. Even the NY Times under reported the anti war activities of hundreds of thousands of people who were marching in the streets. And the NY Times is paying for its "liberal" points of view by losing ad revenue from the corporations.
Imo this is a war between the people of America (and their government) and the world wide corporations which are using America for their own financial benefit.
American philosophy seems to be particularly vulnerable to this manipulation by the corporations (by comparison to the people in Europe...)
Complain about this comment
Ref 182, Beth
"When the US had the run up to the war against Iraq the left was effectively silenced and people who opposed the war could not get air time on tv or on the radio."
And those that did paid dearly for their audacity. If in doubt, people should read about Ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife Valerie Plame.
Claims of bad intelligence are only accurate if they refer to the intellectual acumen of our former President.
Complain about this comment
Whenever I see Americans getting their corporate knickers in a knot over something like this I turn my eyes to heaven in thanksgiving that Canada is still a monarchy and that we 1) are free to dislike the prime minister without having our patriotism called into question and 2) have the luxury of ignoring our head of state if we choose.
More to the point, my reactions to the president's address to the school children of American (in particular the planned "write a letter to yourself saying you how can help the president" bit) are:
1) schoolrooms in the States all have cable?!?
2) it sounds a bit "Dear Leader"ish and sort of tacky.
Kenneth Moyle
Hamilton, Ontario
Complain about this comment
Ref 182, Beth
"American philosophy seems to be particularly vulnerable to this manipulation by the corporations (by comparison to the people in Europe...)"
The same love affair that facilitated the transfer of a trillion dollars of tax payer's money to corporations and our puppets in the Persian Gulf is also influencing the ongoing healthcare reform debate, with people that ought to be outraged by the abusive tactics and practices of the insurance industry adamantly supporting a continuance of the status quo.
Complain about this comment
164 merely a mewing kitten
"embolded Soviets into invading Afghanistan, and then did nothing again to have them kicked out.
[leaving it to his successor]"
I would be glad to hear what the USA did to kick the Russians out.
I didn't notice that war.
Please do get back to me.
If you didn't recognise the name then recognise the nick..
Please Mrs Power do tell us what the USA did to get the soviets out of afganistan.
Do tell. Come on, don't be shy.
Complain about this comment
"Jimmy who did nothing when ayatollahs started Islamic Revolution in Iran and could't even get American hostages back."
That was a bit hard to do for him when his CIA guys were approaching the Iranians and telling them there were some guns in it if they didn't release the hostages until Carter had lost the elections.
Something that would have been considered treason these days and something that should have been questioned more when electing the guy in charge of that to be President.
YOUR President.
Complain about this comment
Ref 175, Magic
"Let us hope President Chavez continues to show restraint in SOuth America. According to President Bush he is fully entitled to attack Colombia - as Iran is fully entitled to attack Israel if it continues to issue threats."
Deserverdly or not, Hugo Chavez is very popular among the masses throughout Latin America. His popularity is based primarily on his focus to eradicate poverty, provide adequate healthcare and education for all, and that fact that he is throwing out money like confetti. When he paid the national debts of countries like Argentina and Nicaragua he gained the support of the people in those countries, and made us look like a bunch of greedy bankers.
When did President Bush say that Chavez is entitled to attack Colombia?
Complain about this comment
I am sorry but am I totally missing something?!! So Obama goes to a school and tells kids that they have a responsibility to themselves and their country to work hard and that they will only perfect a talent by practice and this is Communism/indoctrination?! My god the Republicans must be in trouble if they're spouting this nonsense. I would also suggest they read the works of Marx as obviously they are unsure what Communism is. I cannot believe some parents did not send their children to school because of this. I teach overseas and actually showed this to the students I teach and encouraged them to discuss what he said....it was very enlightening. When will American Republicans realise that just because someone isn't a Republican doesn't mean they can't say something of value!!
Complain about this comment
188. At 3:52pm on 09 Sep 2009, saintDominick wrote:
Ref
When did President Bush say that Chavez is entitled to attack Colombia?
President Bush made it clear, as did his VP that countries had the right to launch preemptive strikes if they felt this was needed to protect thier populations.
The Colombian death squads have crossed the Venzuelan border on a number of occasions and the Colombian president has invited in US troops, whose politicains have also issued threats.
Chavez is entitled, under Bush's doctrine, to take these threats at face value.
Ditto the Iranians who have been threatened with nuclear annihlation. Even if the President was Mother Theresa they would be obliged to take these threats seriously.
Indeed the Iranian government, going by Bush, may be acting irresponsibly if they do not do everything necessary to deter attackers.
Complain about this comment
#184 moylek
Canada is on the radar screens of these corporations. You have natural resources that can be sold to China and the northern shipping route will open up with global warming.
I hope Canadians are strong enough to hold to their principles.
Who are the people who decided to close the hospital in Port Colbourn and to locate a major hospital in St Catharines? Many people on the Niagara peninusla are vey upset about that decision. The people on the committee that made those medical decisions were appointed by politicans and I think one of them was an attorney whose specialty was commercial real estate. Maybe those committee positions should be elected rather than appointed. Imo the hospital should be centrally located on the Niagara Peninsula and not in an area with heavy traffic. Thorold would be good.
How well are you following your own government?because thats the key. You must be vigilant
Complain about this comment
ref #188
Dominick I can at least have a reasoned argument with you unlike Simon
Deserverdly or not, Hugo Chavez is very popular among the masses throughout Latin America. His popularity is based primarily on his focus to eradicate poverty, provide adequate healthcare and education for all, and that fact that he is throwing out money like confetti. When he paid the national debts of countries like Argentina and Nicaragua he gained the support of the people in those countries, and made us look like a bunch of greedy bankers.
When did President Bush say that Chavez is entitled to attack Colombia?
Regarding his popularity, how about all the protests this weekend around the hemisphere. In regard to Chavez and Columbia I don't know what Simon's point is? But Chavez is funding FARC and if a loyal allie allows us to have bases in Columbia they have good reason. Both Chavez and his lackey Corea are helping FARC.
Complain about this comment
Ref 192, Magic
Again, would you mind telling us when and where did President Bush say that Chavez is entitled to attack Colombia?
It is not unusual for people to demonstrate against leaders they disagree with. No leader, including ours, enjoy unanimous support and Chavez is no exception.
As I have told you on before, I have cousins in Venezuela who oppose Chavez and don't hesitate to voice their disapproval in public. None have been harrassed by government officials and continue to voice their opinion wherever they go. Unfortunately for them, they are part of the elite which because of the social conditions in that country means they are the minority. The masses, including the lower middle class and the poor, are 100% behind Chavez and don't take criticism well.
Whether we like it or not, and regardless of how detrimental his policies may be to the future of Venezuela, Chavez remains a very popular leader in his country and neighboring countries. His biggest problems are his childish rhetoric, which remind me of George W. Bush, and his Bolivarian revolution which involves huge donations to neighboring countries at a time when so many of his people still live in poverty.
I am not as familiar with the socio-economic and political situation in Bolivia and Ecuador as I am with Venezuela, where I lived 12 years, but based on what I have read about Morales and Correa they also seem to be very popular among the poor who constitute the majority in those countries. Obviously, the elite and especially the wealthy landowners who have controlled all facets of life in those countries object to policies that favor the indigenous population at the expense of the descendents of Spaniards whose feudal holdings are suddenly at risk.
Complain about this comment
ref #193
Dominick Inever said that comment about Bush and Chavez, Simon did.
You are forgetting the middle class in these countries (yes a smaller percentage than ours) they also aganinst these 3.
In the case of Morales how can you defend special privliges for one ethnic group. That is what he is doing.
Complain about this comment
Hi Mark. I missed you, so I jumped over the ocean to join you in your new home. What a pity that so far nobody could gather again your congregation on the BBC blog, (this is not a compliment man, it’s the pitiful result of every big change in every big establishment) and, I am glad to be among those who had both the enlightenment and the privilege to follow the parish priest. Many of your bloggers were very, very educated, responsive and marvelous fellows, which is the reason why I tried, though with some delay, to board your vessel on the far end of the world.
@147 MAII
Hi, Markus. All that part of the British history is true man. Sorry to intervene by posting, this time, to your motherland soil. I just wonder where Alice from St Petersburg is now. Both of you were so funny to exchange salvo after salvo as if you were on a battle field. I should confess that I sided more often with that Russian girl (I am orthodox Slav, you know that). Nevertheless, I am back and shall be happy to chat with you.
Generalissimo Franco
Complain about this comment
Generalissimo Franco'
Alice in Abkhazialand is probably making sandwiches for and singing lullabys to the Russian troops occupying that country or South Ossetia. BTW, I only observed what happened in Kosovo, I never felt the US should have gotten involved in it. We had no dog in that fight. I don't deny the genocide but I don't see that it was any more compelling for the US to intervene than the genocides we didn't intervene in in Sudan, Ruwanda, Cambodia, Uganda, and lots of other places. This was strictly a European affair. It's just that as always, they were impotent. All talk and hot air and no action. You can see their pathetic efforts in Afghanistan and Iran...if and when they even exert any. Many such as Germany look for every excuse not to fight. Estonia is doing more than Germany to stop the Taleban and per capita, probably more than Britain. I understand your sympathies. I just don't agree with them.
I was in Franco's Spain in 1973. I crossed the street in Madrid between traffic lights and got a ten minute lecture from a Spanish cop about the dangers of jaywalking. I didn't understand one word he said to me but I knew exactly what he meant, listened politely, and thanked him for the advice. When you are a guest in a foreign country, you obey their rules. The British don't seem to understand that. Wherever they go, they frequently act like they own the place. BBC and Brits are an alien presence in the United States of America. They have an entirely different culture, different history, speak a different language, live under different laws and customs, yet some of them come here like this was still their colony. BBC's political editor Nick Robinson was so rude and disrepectful of President Bush in person as a guest invited to attend a White House press conference in the Rose Garden some years ago, it was a wonder BBC wasn't thrown out of the US altogether. I'm sure any American reporter who'd treated the Queen of England similarly would have been personna non grata in all of Britain....well maybe not in Scotland.
Complain about this comment
So my last comment was not allowed by the 'moderator' because I raised concern that some Republicans are so determined to attack Obama that they are no longer able to see when a Democrat is just talking common sense. As a British citizen I feel ashamed that the BBC has restricted my comments....I have lived overseas for 6 years and have always relied on the BBC for my news. Honestly what is happening to the world when we can't engage in debate anymore?
Complain about this comment
196. At 11:35pm on 09 Sep 2009, MarcusAureliusII wrote:
Generalissimo Franco'
Died years ago.
I only observed what happened in Kosovo, I never felt the US should have gotten involved in it. We had no dog in that fight. I don't deny the genocide but I don't see that it was any more compelling for the US to intervene than the genocides we didn't intervene in in Sudan, Ruwanda, Cambodia, Uganda, and lots of other places."
Yes but the Kossovans were white weren't they.
All the difference.
This was strictly a European affair."
Except for the Kossovan Americans
"It's just that as always, they were impotent. All talk and hot air and no action. You can see their pathetic efforts in Afghanistan and Iran...if and when they even exert any. Many such as Germany look for every excuse not to fight. Estonia is doing more than Germany to stop the Taleban and per capita, probably more than Britain. I understand your sympathies. I just don't agree with them."
So you are saying genocide is a good thing? Or its alright to ignore it.
You wouldn't intervene if you saw a women being raped simply because another person was not intervening.
Do you extend this to your family - since bro wont take dad to the toilet I am not going to either.
Wow.
Ever heard of something called morality.
"I was in Franco's Spain in 1973. I crossed the street in Madrid between traffic lights and got a ten minute lecture from a Spanish cop about the dangers of jaywalking. I didn't understand one word he said to me but I knew exactly what he meant, listened politely, and thanked him for the advice. When you are a guest in a foreign country, you obey their rules."
Depends on what the rules are. Visiting a violent fascist dictatorship which was still murdering its opponents is a bit strong.
"The British don't seem to understand that. Wherever they go, they frequently act like they own the place. BBC and Brits are an alien presence in the United States of America. They have an entirely different culture, different history, speak a different language, live under different laws and customs, yet some of them come here like this was still their colony."
Welll they blend in better than many Roumanians. And the US cries out for them.
"BBC's political editor Nick Robinson was so rude and disrepectful of President Bush in person as a guest invited to attend a White House press conference in the Rose Garden some years ago, it was a wonder BBC wasn't thrown out of the US altogether."
Thrown out for asking a question? A journalist asked a question? L:ots of journalists asked Bush questions. He could not answer any without looking like the empty headed upper class buffoon he was.
His attempts to speak spanish before the spanish king are particularly hilarious. Still play that one occasionally.
" I'm sure any American reporter who'd treated the Queen of England similarly would have been personna non grata in all of Britain....well maybe not in Scotland."
No reporters frequently ask the PM questions. How odd you did not know this.
The queen does not give press conferences, so doesn't get asked questions. COnsitutionally she cannot answer questions of policy since she has nothing to do with it.
Complain about this comment
194. At 7:56pm on 09 Sep 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
ref #193
In the case of Morales how can you defend special privliges for one ethnic group."
Except in the case of Israel eh where only one group matters.
No one could accuse you of consistency
Is Morales bulldozing the houses of people with the "wrong" colour and "religion"?
Complain about this comment
192. At 6:46pm on 09 Sep 2009, MagicKirin wrote:
"Regarding his popularity, how about all the protests this weekend around the hemisphere. In regard to Chavez and Columbia I don't know what Simon's point is?"
That Chavez is entitled to defend his people against Colombian death squads
"But Chavez is funding FARC and if a loyal allie allows us to have bases in Columbia they have good reason. Both Chavez and his lackey Corea are helping FARC."
There is no proof of this and US has helped to train Colombian death squads whihc murder women and children with impunity.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
BBC doesn't like it when you cast their employees in a bad light by telling the truth about them and naming names. Pity. They have no reservations about doing the same to others. Typical European hypocricy.
Complain about this comment
You cannot post anything insulting to the British Royal Family on BBC's web sites. The next entry will be deleted for it even though it will break no BBC rules.
Complain about this comment
#196 "When you are a guest in a foreign country, you obey their rules. The British don't seem to understand that. Wherever they go, they frequently act like they own the place."
Is this an early USA attempt at irony? I know you struggle with this concept over the pond, but really, an American telling any other nationality how to behave on holiday? You are having a laugh!
#203 "You cannot post anything insulting to the British Royal Family on BBC's web sites. The next entry will be deleted for it even though it will break no BBC rules."
If this is such a big issue for you, why not point us to an alternative website where your deleted comments can be read? That way we can form our own view. It's incredibly easy to write a post that gets deleted and then claim foul play on the part of the moderator.
Complain about this comment
Thanks for the comments Marcus. Hope to be able to bring back Alice to this congregation. What I can not understand maybe is your permanent effort to assess what the politicians do. You see friend, I am just a dealer, I am fond of history, of economics, at times I find it interesting in translating novels and poems from Russian to French, at times I relax by trying to draw sketches (though I am not an artist), but I am not much interested in politics. I find it a hypocritical job to do. Luckily enough your comments here are deprived of any hypocrisy, and I appreciate it.
Shall be back by the end of the day. It’s seven o’clock in Sofia and I should see off my wife at the airport.
Complain about this comment
Ref 196, Marcus
"BBC's political editor Nick Robinson was so rude and disrepectful of President Bush in person as a guest invited to attend a White House press conference in the Rose Garden some years ago, it was a wonder BBC wasn't thrown out of the US altogether."
Along those lines, I believe the Republican congressman that called the President a liar when he broached the issue of illegal immigrants eligibility to healthcare should issue a public apology to the President and to his constituents. I don't recall any politician ever doing something like that during a presidential address to Congress.
Regarding Franco, I was in Spain in 1945 and again from 1958 to 1969. Law and order was the norm and crime was virtually non-existant, but there was no freedom of expression or choice. As a foreigner it didn't affect me directly, but I certainly would not have liked to be a Spaniard living in Spain in that era.
Complain about this comment
I've decided not to post anything insulting about the Royal Family of Britain right now. No need to. They've provided enough fuel for people to draw their own conclusions. Like the time that....
crosseyes;
"Is this an early USA attempt at irony? I know you struggle with this concept over the pond, but really, an American telling any other nationality how to behave on holiday? You are having a laugh!"
It isn't the US that has a reputation for drunken soccer hooligans fighting in the stands during matches and starting street riots after soccer games when they are guests in foreign country. Nor do they have the reputation for being out of control drunks in places like the resorts of Spain. Guess who that would be.
"Along those lines, I believe the Republican congressman that called the President a liar when he broached the issue of illegal immigrants eligibility to healthcare should issue a public apology to the President and to his constituents."
Actually he owes an apology to the entire American nation. He has demeaned the dignity of the Office of the President of the United States. He is a disgrace to his party, to his country, and to himself. He should have expressed his opinion at another time and place in more appropriate circumstances and with respect. BTW, illegal aliens don't need to get medical insurance from the Federal government. They usually get free treatment when they can't afford it already as things stand.
Complain about this comment
Marcus, touché with the footy hooligans - then again I guess US sports fans don't have to leave the country to play in the 'World' series, so we wouldn't hear too much about it anyway.
I was actually thinking of those loud, rude, arrogant, educated Americans one comes across frequently when abroad. Of course there's plenty of respectful, intelligent ones too, problem is they sometimes pretend to be Canadian!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Question open to all Americans pureley out of interest (mine specifically)
How would you rate Clinton, Bush I, Bush II, Reagan, JFK, Blair & Thatcher in relation to how they are viewed in America today within this short period of recent history and (using crystal balls) how will Obama fare alongside them?
Complain about this comment
@196 MAII
*I don’t deny the genocide but I don't see that it was any more compelling for the US to intervene than the genocides we didn't intervene in in Sudan, Ruwanda, Cambodia, Uganda, and lots of other places*.
You see Markus, it is very difficult to be an international policeman in any part of the globe, any time, and in time. There must be some priorities. In Europe many people think that the US always applies its own double standard when things seem to be very complicated, of pressing character and requiring a military action. Logically, there are many interpretations about the mere reasons that would motivate the American authorities to intervene or not in some distant, European, Asian or, say African country.
I agree that most of us, European folks, especially in the eastern part of the old continent, still believe that the mere existence of our (Christian) civilization largely depends on the American economic and military presence. At the same time, what is now evident as a new reality, is the slow but irreversible process of shaping of definitely pro-European mentalities when it comes to consider all those issues of important character such as the common defence, the antiterrorist action, the energy supply (Europe is very, very poor of natural resources), the health, the education etc. To that matter, many people here think that the US is not much enthusiastic to see the Europeans united under the same constitution, flag and anthem, especially if they improve and develop very close partnership with countries like Russia, Ukraine, China and India. And, if I go on this way, I should avow that I heard many unpleasant, even sarcastic jokes about Uncle Sam who is often presented here as a smiling, riding, good intended cow-boy who would not hesitate to make use of his Smith & Wesson in order to eliminate some tiny obstacle. Maybe the said jokes have got their historic foundations. But time has changed and we need to reconsider all those new challenges we are facing now after the collapse of the Communism.
My firm believe is that we, the Europeans are still very, very weak to make our own way in this fragile world. We need an ally.
Complain about this comment
Having experienced schools in urban(read poorer) and in middle class schools, I know about the struggles that urban schools have with crime, drop-out rates, and having to be the adult in the family at a young age. OBH made a speech that spoke to all of the kids across a wide spectrum. Most middle class Republicans didn't even read what is supposed to be controversial. Some neo-con wanting to cause trouble started the whole shouting match over the followup course. Really, it speaks to the core problem in American middle-class schooling which is the absence of critical thinking for oneself.
Complain about this comment
Mark:
I think that the School Message, President Obama did was nothing more than an child-oriented audience....
=Dennis Junior=
Complain about this comment
#211 "it is very difficult to be an international policeman in any part of the globe, any time, and in time"
not for the US and the UK, they go into a country (Iraq,Afghanistan) and impose "democracy and order." onto places its not wanted. arab nations do NOT want our style of democracy (well the well educated people anyway, the poor farmers dont really care as long as they can live in peace)
sure the taliban/sadam were evil men but there are dictators in africa that are a million times worse; the congo, zimbabwae(?)and other places, people are ding for nothing and their suffering is unimaginable but we do nothing. why? because there's nothing in it for us; no oil, no resources,nothing.
we went to iraq for oil, dont argue otherwise the fact that more US troops guarded oil than towns spqaks volumes.
afghanistan was invaded because the US didnt want to look like a pushover who could be attacked without consequence. 8 years now, still no bin laden and hundreds of wounded/killed nato troops.
is vengance really worth so much to our goverments?
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS