Hide Your Children’s Eyes! It’s Obama’s Speech!
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Barack, Obama, Partisan Nonsense, Republicans
As I said before, I’m completely and absolutely bewildered at how this even turned into a story.
And, by the way, shame on all of you who needlessly fueled this fire. If you really want to set a good example for your children, how about teaching them to not jump to conclusions. Think that might be a worthwhile lesson for the future?
Here’s the speech in its entirety…
===============
Prepared Remarks of President Barack Obama
Back to School Event
Arlington, Virginia
September 8, 2009
The President: Hello everyone – how’s everybody doing today? I’m here with students at Wakefield High School in Arlington, Virginia. And we’ve got students tuning in from all across America, kindergarten through twelfth grade. I’m glad you all could join us today.
I know that for many of you, today is the first day of school. And for those of you in kindergarten, or starting middle or high school, it’s your first day in a new school, so it’s understandable if you’re a little nervous. I imagine there are some seniors out there who are feeling pretty good right now, with just one more year to go. And no matter what grade you’re in, some of you are probably wishing it were still summer, and you could’ve stayed in bed just a little longer this morning.
I know that feeling. When I was young, my family lived in Indonesia for a few years, and my mother didn’t have the money to send me where all the American kids went to school. So she decided to teach me extra lessons herself, Monday through Friday – at 4:30 in the morning.
Now I wasn’t too happy about getting up that early. A lot of times, I’d fall asleep right there at the kitchen table. But whenever I’d complain, my mother would just give me one of those looks and say, “This is no picnic for me either, buster.”
So I know some of you are still adjusting to being back at school. But I’m here today because I have something important to discuss with you. I’m here because I want to talk with you about your education and what’s expected of all of you in this new school year.
Now I’ve given a lot of speeches about education. And I’ve talked a lot about responsibility.
I’ve talked about your teachers’ responsibility for inspiring you, and pushing you to learn.
I’ve talked about your parents’ responsibility for making sure you stay on track, and get your homework done, and don’t spend every waking hour in front of the TV or with that Xbox.
I’ve talked a lot about your government’s responsibility for setting high standards, supporting teachers and principals, and turning around schools that aren’t working where students aren’t getting the opportunities they deserve.
But at the end of the day, we can have the most dedicated teachers, the most supportive parents, and the best schools in the world – and none of it will matter unless all of you fulfill your responsibilities. Unless you show up to those schools; pay attention to those teachers; listen to your parents, grandparents and other adults; and put in the hard work it takes to succeed.
And that’s what I want to focus on today: the responsibility each of you has for your education. I want to start with the responsibility you have to yourself.
Every single one of you has something you’re good at. Every single one of you has something to offer. And you have a responsibility to yourself to discover what that is. That’s the opportunity an education can provide.
Maybe you could be a good writer – maybe even good enough to write a book or articles in a newspaper – but you might not know it until you write a paper for your English class. Maybe you could be an innovator or an inventor – maybe even good enough to come up with the next iPhone or a new medicine or vaccine – but you might not know it until you do a project for your science class. Maybe you could be a mayor or a Senator or a Supreme Court Justice, but you might not know that until you join student government or the debate team.
And no matter what you want to do with your life – I guarantee that you’ll need an education to do it. You want to be a doctor, or a teacher, or a police officer? You want to be a nurse or an architect, a lawyer or a member of our military? You’re going to need a good education for every single one of those careers. You can’t drop out of school and just drop into a good job. You’ve got to work for it and train for it and learn for it.
And this isn’t just important for your own life and your own future. What you make of your education will decide nothing less than the future of this country. What you’re learning in school today will determine whether we as a nation can meet our greatest challenges in the future.
You’ll need the knowledge and problem-solving skills you learn in science and math to cure diseases like cancer and AIDS, and to develop new energy technologies and protect our environment. You’ll need the insights and critical thinking skills you gain in history and social studies to fight poverty and homelessness, crime and discrimination, and make our nation more fair and more free. You’ll need the creativity and ingenuity you develop in all your classes to build new companies that will create new jobs and boost our economy.
We need every single one of you to develop your talents, skills and intellect so you can help solve our most difficult problems. If you don’t do that – if you quit on school – you’re not just quitting on yourself, you’re quitting on your country.
Now I know it’s not always easy to do well in school. I know a lot of you have challenges in your lives right now that can make it hard to focus on your schoolwork.
I get it. I know what that’s like. My father left my family when I was two years old, and I was raised by a single mother who struggled at times to pay the bills and wasn’t always able to give us things the other kids had. There were times when I missed having a father in my life. There were times when I was lonely and felt like I didn’t fit in.
So I wasn’t always as focused as I should have been. I did some things I’m not proud of, and got in more trouble than I should have. And my life could have easily taken a turn for the worse.
But I was fortunate. I got a lot of second chances and had the opportunity to go to college, and law school, and follow my dreams. My wife, our First Lady Michelle Obama, has a similar story. Neither of her parents had gone to college, and they didn’t have much. But they worked hard, and she worked hard, so that she could go to the best schools in this country.
Some of you might not have those advantages. Maybe you don’t have adults in your life who give you the support that you need. Maybe someone in your family has lost their job, and there’s not enough money to go around. Maybe you live in a neighborhood where you don’t feel safe, or have friends who are pressuring you to do things you know aren’t right.
But at the end of the day, the circumstances of your life – what you look like, where you come from, how much money you have, what you’ve got going on at home – that’s no excuse for neglecting your homework or having a bad attitude. That’s no excuse for talking back to your teacher, or cutting class, or dropping out of school. That’s no excuse for not trying.
Where you are right now doesn’t have to determine where you’ll end up. No one’s written your destiny for you. Here in America, you write your own destiny. You make your own future.
That’s what young people like you are doing every day, all across America.
Young people like Jazmin Perez, from Roma, Texas. Jazmin didn’t speak English when she first started school. Hardly anyone in her hometown went to college, and neither of her parents had gone either. But she worked hard, earned good grades, got a scholarship to Brown University, and is now in graduate school, studying public health, on her way to being Dr. Jazmin Perez.
I’m thinking about Andoni Schultz, from Los Altos, California, who’s fought brain cancer since he was three. He’s endured all sorts of treatments and surgeries, one of which affected his memory, so it took him much longer – hundreds of extra hours – to do his schoolwork. But he never fell behind, and he’s headed to college this fall.
And then there’s Shantell Steve, from my hometown of Chicago, Illinois. Even when bouncing from foster home to foster home in the toughest neighborhoods, she managed to get a job at a local health center; start a program to keep young people out of gangs; and she’s on track to graduate high school with honors and go on to college.
Jazmin, Andoni and Shantell aren’t any different from any of you. They faced challenges in their lives just like you do. But they refused to give up. They chose to take responsibility for their education and set goals for themselves. And I expect all of you to do the same.
That’s why today, I’m calling on each of you to set your own goals for your education – and to do everything you can to meet them. Your goal can be something as simple as doing all your homework, paying attention in class, or spending time each day reading a book. Maybe you’ll decide to get involved in an extracurricular activity, or volunteer in your community. Maybe you’ll decide to stand up for kids who are being teased or bullied because of who they are or how they look, because you believe, like I do, that all kids deserve a safe environment to study and learn. Maybe you’ll decide to take better care of yourself so you can be more ready to learn. And along those lines, I hope you’ll all wash your hands a lot, and stay home from school when you don’t feel well, so we can keep people from getting the flu this fall and winter.
Whatever you resolve to do, I want you to commit to it. I want you to really work at it.
I know that sometimes, you get the sense from TV that you can be rich and successful without any hard work — that your ticket to success is through rapping or basketball or being a reality TV star, when chances are, you’re not going to be any of those things.
But the truth is, being successful is hard. You won’t love every subject you study. You won’t click with every teacher. Not every homework assignment will seem completely relevant to your life right this minute. And you won’t necessarily succeed at everything the first time you try.
That’s OK. 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. Michael Jordan was cut from his high school basketball team, and he lost hundreds of games and missed thousands of shots during his career. But he once said, “I have failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed.”
These people succeeded because they understand that you can’t let your failures define you – you have to let them teach you. You have to let them show you what to do differently next time. If you get in trouble, that doesn’t mean you’re a troublemaker, it means you need to try harder to behave. If you get a bad grade, that doesn’t mean you’re stupid, it just means you need to spend more time studying.
No one’s born being good at things, you become good at things through hard work. You’re not a varsity athlete the first time you play a new sport. You don’t hit every note the first time you sing a song. You’ve got to practice. It’s the same with your schoolwork. You might have to do a math problem a few times before you get it right, or read something a few times before you understand it, or do a few drafts of a paper before it’s good enough to hand in.
Don’t be afraid to ask questions. Don’t be afraid to ask for help when you need it. I do that every day. Asking for help isn’t a sign of weakness, it’s a sign of strength. It shows you have the courage to admit when you don’t know something, and to learn something new. So find an adult you trust – a parent, grandparent or teacher; a coach or counselor – and ask them to help you stay on track to meet your goals.
And even when you’re struggling, even when you’re discouraged, and you feel like other people have given up on you – don’t ever give up on yourself. Because when you give up on yourself, you give up on your country.
The story of America isn’t about people who quit when things got tough. It’s about people who kept going, who tried harder, who loved their country too much to do anything less than their best.
It’s the story of students who sat where you sit 250 years ago, and went on to wage a revolution and found this nation. Students who sat where you sit 75 years ago who overcame a Depression and won a world war; who fought for civil rights and put a man on the moon. Students who sat where you sit 20 years ago who founded Google, Twitter and Facebook and changed the way we communicate with each other.
So today, I want to ask you, what’s your contribution going to be? What problems are you going to solve? What discoveries will you make? What will a president who comes here in twenty or fifty or one hundred years say about what all of you did for this country?
Your families, your teachers, and I are doing everything we can to make sure you have the education you need to answer these questions. I’m working hard to fix up your classrooms and get you the books, equipment and computers you need to learn. But you’ve got to do your part too. So I expect you to get serious this year. I expect you to put your best effort into everything you do. I expect great things from each of you. So don’t let us down – don’t let your family or your country or yourself down. Make us all proud. I know you can do it.
Thank you, God bless you, and God bless America.
===============
By the way, Reagan and the elder Bush gave similar speeches. Just in case you didn’t know.
This entry was posted on Monday, September 7th, 2009 and is filed under Barack, Obama, Partisan Nonsense, Republicans. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
September 7th, 2009 at 8:23 pm
f$%&^kin commie!
Good speech. A simple solid message. Line drive up the middle. Cancel the panic, folks.
I really like how he stressed hard work over aptitude. Research shows that when you take two groups of good students and tell one they are smart and congratulate the other for their hard work, it’s the latter group that achieves more.
Of course, over time, Obama’s critics will come to complain bitterly that he is paternalistic, pedantic, moralistic, and in general, a scold. It’s the only way to make him into a sort of a bad guy when you agree with everything about the message except the identity of the delivery man.
September 7th, 2009 at 8:24 pm
As I said before, I’m completely and absolutely bewildered at how this even turned into a story.
Oh come on, we know why some “conservatives” hate the idea of this particular president speaking to school kids. And we know why they get hysterical over health plans that haven’t even been proposed. We know why they are enraged. And we know why many of them insist that Obama cannot be the legitimate president.
We know why they use words like “socialist,” “communist” and “fascist.” It’s because they can’t use the word they want to use. That word starts with an “N.” And that’s what this is about.
September 7th, 2009 at 8:30 pm
Just noticed that last bit about Reagan and Bush Sr. Pretty funny, because one of my first thoughts was that if Reagan had given such a speech, conservatives would have wet themselves in delight.
September 7th, 2009 at 8:53 pm
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by MohawkFohawk. MohawkFohawk said: Donklephant » Blog Archive » Hide Your Children's Eyes. It's …: As I said before, I'm completely a.. http://bit.ly/AT6fq [...]
September 7th, 2009 at 10:41 pm
As a person that leans a little more to the right than most on this site, I have to admit I didn’t have much objection to the president giving a speech to school children as long as it was apolitical. The Neo-con media trumped up this problem the way the liberal blogosphere trumped up much of Bush’s trouble. Bush didn’t change the important aspects of Clintons policy. I.E. Rocket technology passed from Dept. of Defense to the Dept. of Commerce. Obama continues with the perpetual war theory of Bush.
I really don’t see much difference between the two. Obama seems to be a little more intelligent, but actions speek louder than words.
September 8th, 2009 at 12:23 am
It is even funnier if you actually look at the content of Reagan’s 1986 speech to the students (Ed Morrissey does here). It has elements that are far more political and self-serving than anything in Obama’s speech.
Of course, the Dems were also up in arms about Reagan and Bush giving speeches to students, although nothing to the degree seen in this particular tempest in a teapot. So it goes.
September 8th, 2009 at 7:25 am
[...] who could object to Obama’s message for our kids? …at the end of the day, we can have the most dedicated teachers, the most supportive [...]
September 8th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
I got a kick out of one of the pundits on CNN saying that all the uproar about the speech caused Obama to change it. Of course he could have said the speech was going to be about invading Martians and made the same claim (and made about as much sense). Then again this does play to a certain demographics fears and since the Republican’s can’t really play to anyones hopes, they are doing going after people’s fears. Every time there is a discussion about this, it is one less discussion about health care, or the environment, or the economy. At face value it is a laughable tactic, but I think it is working better than many might believe.
September 8th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
As I understand it, there was a lesson plan to accompany this speech. The plan originally contained some leading questions of a more partisan nature. However, those questions were withdrawn. Unfortunately, the GOP (or at least some loudmouths in it) wouldn’t let it drop. Good job, Mr. President. On this one at least, you’re making your political opponents looks silly.
September 8th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
I wouldn’t call it a smart tactic, or even go so far as to call it a tactic.
A few weeks ago they had total control of the health care debate. We were debunking ridiculous BS they made up, and catching hell from moderates because we weren’t explaining the policy. The mess was the only story anybody cared about.
Now the debate is still messy, and the media is still focusing way too much attention on the mess and ignoring substantive issues. But the Main Story is not health care, and the Health Care story is that Obama will give a speech tomorrow that will (finally) show us exactly what he wants.
What seems to be happening is pretty simple. The public (including crazies) only has a limited attention span. Therefore a guy like Glenn Beck can’t keep up sustained pressure on any individual issue. He has to jump around, or lose ratings. All Obama has to do is wait for the outrage machine to move on.
September 8th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
Noce to think that, but it’s wishful thinking Nick. The most enduring quality of the outrage machine is that it NEVER moves on. It just plays whatever tune from the greatest hits album happens to be most appropriate. The price one pays to be a successful outrage salesman is eternal vigilance. Cue up the right rant at the right time, lest someone else steal your congregation.
Glenn Beck can simply repeat whatever his healthcare rant is in response to Obama’s speech. He doesn’t really need new material, nor does he need to respond to any germane points Obama might make.
That’s the best part about preaching to a choir. All you need is the existing hymnal. Stick to it with zeal and absolute faith, and you’ll go far.
September 8th, 2009 at 5:29 pm
Racists never seem to get tired of being racists. The birthers, deathers, um . . . speechers, that’s what they are.
70 year-old white people don’t howl like agitated baboons at town halls because they’re upset over health insurance reform. They’re on medicare, and they’re draining social security. The issue doesn’t even involve them.
And people don’t scream and yell about a president giving a conservative speech to school kids because they’re concerned about local control or whatever other smokescreen these idiots threw up.
Obama’s been in office 8 months, done nothing remotely radical, and yet a large number of mostly older white people hate him. Hate. Hate hate hate him.
It’s not about policy. It’s about Obama being black.
And once again, as it has since the 60′s, the GOP moves to exploit race hatred.
September 8th, 2009 at 7:17 pm
Racism. (rey-s?z-?m) – noun. (1) The admission, on behalf of the accuser, that one has lost an intellectual argument or debate. (2) The lack of substance or compelling evidence to continue presenting a rational or well-formed argument. (3) A means to smear an opponent so as to avoid confronting legitimate counter-arguments or evidence that may invalidate one’s point of view. See Also: Hitler
September 8th, 2009 at 7:40 pm
Jimmy:
Please don’t use the word “intellectual.”
You just defined racism out of existence. Interesting. What was the date on which all the racists disappeared?
September 8th, 2009 at 8:04 pm
Jimmy I don’t know where you got your lame ass definition. But here is the full *real* entry from dictionary.com:
rac?ism
??/?re?s?z?m/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [rey-siz-uhm] Show IPA
Use racism in a Sentence
See web results for racism
See images of racism
–noun
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.
September 8th, 2009 at 10:53 pm
The aforementioned fact that the folks are singing all the same songs from the same hymnal that has been used for years makes me think the racism argument is a bit silly.
Of course, if the current admin was Hillary and Biden, Mike would be saying it was sexism. Exact same behavior, different cause.
I am happy to notice the troubling occurrence of angry, ignorant, kneejerk reactions from some conservatives these days. Especially when such folks are no more than ignorant parrots of bile-spewing rabblerousers.
But blaming it on racism seems like such a useless and counterproductive approach to me .It immediate changes the subject of this thread to estimations of just how much of a whiny idiot the race card player is.
September 9th, 2009 at 12:31 am
Let me get this straight, I oppose government run healthcare and that makes me a racist. How intellectual is that?
Considering the original post has to do with President Obama’s speech to school children, here is the story of how Democrats treated President Bush.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/When-Bush-spoke-to-students-Democrats-investigated-held-hearings-57694347.html
Until you realize that the two party system is a shell game, you will never understand why you always end up losing.
September 9th, 2009 at 2:10 am
You saved me some time Jimmy. I was going to go back and look up and list a reprise of MR’s tiresome racism epithets in the comments – maybe a duet between MR and Jim S – but just don’t think it necessary now.
I think we need a variant of Godwin’s Law.
If you invoke racism in the defense of the policies of a sitting president.
You lose.
September 9th, 2009 at 7:50 am
mw:
And if you deny the existence of racism?
You think you can come up with some cutesie-poo formula and racism goes away? Can you make anti-semitism disappear too? How about gay bashing? Hey neat! Poof! No more racists. Poof! Could have really used you two in 1942.
And why stop there? Surely you can make rape and murder and torture evaporate as well with a few clever phrases.
You’re denying that evil should ever be called out. That’s not clever, that’s not smart, that’s not moral.
Here’s a cutesie-poo formula for you two: 100% of people who deny the existence of racism are white.
Interesting how that is.
September 9th, 2009 at 8:28 am
Jimmy and mw:
Do me a favor and explain this to me without reference to the forbidden “R” word.
http://newnation.cc/forums/showthread.php?p=265331
September 9th, 2009 at 8:35 am
Mike, why should I listen to you? You obviously hate women because you are against off-shore oil drilling in Alaska.
Sexist hypocrite.
September 9th, 2009 at 8:51 am
Jimmy:
You’re a perfect example of why we need to teach some basic philosophy in schools. You actually don’t know how to formulate a rational argument. As a consequence you don’t know that you deal in nothing but non sequitur. Although I’m sure you think you’re making sense.
September 9th, 2009 at 10:32 am
Let me get this straight, I oppose government run healthcare and that makes me a racist. How intellectual is that?
That’s not what we’re saying.
We’re not saying the majority of opposition to Obama is based on race. We are saying there’s a tiny, vocal, minority that is really uncomfortable with black authority figures, especially black male authority figures with power over white children, and that those idiots are racist. We’re only talking 2-3% of the population, but it’s a 2-3% that actually shows up.
In this case there’s no sensible justification for making a huge fuss as this was not a policy speech, and the lesson plan was specifically altered to make it less partisan.
Considering the original post has to do with President Obama’s speech to school children, here is the story of how Democrats treated President Bush.
Did you read the article? The Dems didn’t demand schools not show the speech, or keep their kids home from school. They did get all high and mighty that Bush used $27,000 in tax money to produce the speech.
Politicians do that kind of BS about money all the time. It’s a cliche.
These guys were demanding schools not tell kids to study.
September 9th, 2009 at 10:46 am
Noce to think that, but it’s wishful thinking Nick. The most enduring quality of the outrage machine is that it NEVER moves on. It just plays whatever tune from the greatest hits album happens to be most appropriate. The price one pays to be a successful outrage salesman is eternal vigilance. Cue up the right rant at the right time, lest someone else steal your congregation.
Yeah Beck will repeat his BS tomorrow when he analyzes the speech.
But tomorrow when Justin won’t bother posting Beck’s outrage because it’s old news. He’ll post about the actual speech. CNN won’t run saturation coverage about Beck’s idiotic followers, they’ll try to figure out what the silent majority thinks.
If Beck had kept up the pressure the story would be that Obama’s on the defensive, responding to Beck’s people, but he didn’t. The story will be that he’s wrested control of the debate away from guys like Beck.
September 9th, 2009 at 10:56 am
Michael, maybe I’m missing it but I think Jimmy was trying to be funny. At least that’s how I took it. He can definitely throw out some non sequiturs every now and again, but I don’t find that it’s his standard operating procedure.
As for the charges of racism, well, I think that’s an overly simplistic answer to a complicated problem. Of course there are those who do have genuine, misguided prejudices about Obama, but do they make up the majority? Doubt it. Trust me, I’m frustrated too, but nothing good ever came of calling people racists and stopping there intellectually.
So what’s happening?
Well, people have been so scared by the right wing that Obama is some sort of crypto-communist-facist that they’ll believe literally anything that comes from the noise machine and Fox News. But this is nothing new. It just spreads faster because of the internet and the 24 hour news cycle. So the trick now is to continue to call it out in a way that makes sense for the majority so these scare tactics don’t spread any further.
What’s nice about Obama is that he’s NONE of these things, and the right wing is setting the bar so low that all he has to do is show that he’s NOT these things and the majority of folks will see it, acknowledge it and stop listening to those who are spreading smears, lies, etc. This is EXACTLY what happened during the primaries and the general election and he beat these folks at every turn. And if this persists and the right wing doesn’t come up with any genuine criticism, 2012 will be a cake walk.
September 9th, 2009 at 11:09 am
Justin:
I think you’re naive.
People don’t grow the kind of rage and hatred the right wing has in the soil of policy. People don’t spit in rage and hold up “Obama is Hitler” posters because they have a problem with health insurance policy. That’s absurd.
And people do not hide their children away from the president of the United States because they dislike TARP.
This heat did not flow from policy differences. And this heat could not have been artificially ginned up by Fox News if they were not tapping into some pre-existing condition.
You’re younger than I am. I’m old enough to have seen segregated drinking fountains and 45 years ago to have my family threatened by the KKK for having a black person in our home. 10 years ago I have relatives who decided against using a diaper service for their kids because n—- used the same service. I’ve worked for companies that refused to hire blacks.
Denying that racism is deep in the blood of this country is about as rational as holocaust denial. Racism did not disappear suddenly. And it is no coincidence that all of the hate-filled, screaming faces we see are older white people.
Jimmy is not “trying to be funny” he and mw are trying to deny that racism can even be discussed.
September 9th, 2009 at 11:49 am
To mw
“If you invoke racism in the defense of the policies of a sitting president. You lose.”
To this should be added “If you invoke patriotism in the defense of the policies of a sitting president. You lose.”
I do agree with some of what Michael proposes..”Denying that racism is deep in the blood of this country is about as rational as holocaust denial.” I have good (white) friends who become apoplectic to think a black man is now the president of the US. I have had many overtly racist emails sent to me (a photo of Air Force One with the call letters spelling nixxer on the tail) with the phrase “only joking” used to justify no harm meant. Maybe you live and associate in a more accepting culture, but from where I have lived across the US, I don’t see it the same.
September 9th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
One way to find out is ask yourselves this: If the president was a democrat with the same policies named Bob Johnson who wasn’t half black would there have been this reaction?
The answer is a clear no.
September 9th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
No one in this thread, not me, not jimmy, made any statement that can even vaguely be interpreted as denying racism exists or asserting that racism cannot be discussed.
That makes MR’s assumed posture of the indignant righteous warrior wielding a white hot sword of justice to smite the evils of racism to be – just another straw man.
His generalization to “racism denial” is as preposterous as claiming that MR and the liberal extreme find racism to be the motivation for every single criticism of Obama’s policies and the base nature of everyone who voted against him. Oh wait…
I find what Democrat and Obama supporter Camille Paglia said in her column today to be apropos, and at least on the topic of politics and education, which is a bit closer to what this post was about:
Perhaps it is useful to keep in mind that this country with racism “deep in its blood” elected Barack Obama president.
and “cutesy-poo”???
September 9th, 2009 at 2:08 pm
mw now:
No one in this thread, not me, not jimmy, made any statement that can even vaguely be interpreted as denying racism exists or asserting that racism cannot be discussed.
mw then:
I think we need a variant of Godwin’s Law. If you invoke racism in the defense of the policies of a sitting president. You lose.
So racism exists. We just can’t talk about. Or we can’t talk about it at the same time we talk about a president.
Racism exists but we are not allowed to confront people we think are behaving as racists. Right.
Perhaps it is useful to keep in mind that this country with racism “deep in its blood” elected Barack Obama president.
Interesting statement, mw. So you’re not denying that racism exists you’re just denying that racism is “deep in the blood” of the US?
And now that we (53%) elected a black guy all the racists disappeared?
Why don’t you clarify because I’m finding this fascinating:
1) Is racism still a serious problem in this country?
2) Can we discuss racism?
3) Can we suggest that some people are racists?
September 9th, 2009 at 2:28 pm
There’s actually a perfect example of that:
Bill Clinton
The extreme right thought he had actually murdered Vince Foster to cover up the cocaine-smuggling operation he ran out of Little Rock Airport.
People said some nasty stuff about him, but they usually waited for him to do something (such as seduce an intern) before they let loose publicly.
They certainly would not have wheeled their disabled son to a local Congressman’s forum, seized control of said forum, demanded to know why said son was being screwed by the bill, and then kept on ranting after the Congressman explained that oversight had already been corrected via an Amendment.
They would not have gone on to claim they only did so because they were so angry that the Congressman was using an “apparently disabled” woman to advance his agenda.
September 9th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
Yes.
Yes.
Yes.
It still has little or nothing to do with the topic in this post.
Except, presumably in your mind.
But hey… knock yourself out.
September 9th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
mw:
Okay then, you agree that racism is a serious continuing issue and that we can talk about it.
Then let’s start over.
I assert the strong likelihood that older white people who have in the course of eight short months conceived a virulent hatred for Obama — a hatred that expresses itself in calling him Hitler, a fascist and a communist — may be motivated by race.
I further suggest that older white people who deny in the face of all the evidence that Mr. Obama is an American citizen and insist that he is not only a foreigner but a fraud and a Muslim to boot, might just be motivated by race.
I would suggest that many conservatives are deliberately using racially-charged code words, for example Mr. Chambliss of Georgia who insists that the president needs to be “humble” and that he has not in the past been sufficiently “humble.” (If you don’t like that example, I can find a few dozen more.)
Finally, I’m at a loss to explain why — other than racism — an American citizen would insist that their school-age child could not watch a speech by the President of the United States. A speech calling for kids to work hard and stay in school.
Now that we’ve disposed of your and Jimmy’s attempt to dismiss all suggestion that race might play a role in the widespread hysteria on the Right, perhaps you could explain some of the above. And explain how race could not possibly play a role.
September 9th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
michael reynolds — Re: “We know why they use words like “socialist,” “communist” and “fascist.” It’s because they can’t use the word they want to use. That word starts with an “N.” And that’s what this is about.” — an astute observation. I appreciate your insight.
Nancy
September 9th, 2009 at 4:21 pm
Or how about a democrat named “Bill Clinton” who proposed something similar in 1993, which was killed off by conservatives in Congress amidst a huge grounswell of opposition from the regular population.
It was so unpopular that it led to the republican takeover of both houses a year later, and some would argue, put conservative talk radio on the map.
But then again, Clinton was considered our first black president, so maybe you have a point.
September 9th, 2009 at 9:01 pm
I am waiting for a cogent response to Michael’s post “Then let’s start over. “
September 9th, 2009 at 9:14 pm
Mike:
I suspect you are doomed to disappointment.
September 9th, 2009 at 9:35 pm
Michael,
I am doomed regardless
September 10th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
@Michael and Mike
Too many Mike’s here. I should use my first name for a handle and really confuse the comment threads.
Ok. I’ll play one more time. Then its all yours and you can have the last word.
Yes. But I never said anything different. If you recall, that was you creating a strawman and putting words in my mouth so you could change the subject and make a strong passionate argument that the world is not flat. It was a very persuasive argument. I just don’t know who you were arguing with.
Okey dokey.
Well – maybe that is what you are saying now. But that is not quite what you were saying at the beginning of the thread. the big difference being the qualifier “may”. It leaves open the possibility that some “may” not be motivated by race. It leaves open the possibility that some are and some are not. Let us contrast that slightly more reasonable construct with what you were saying earlier.
That statement has a more absolute, all inclusive quality – don’t you agree?
Also you do not explain why it is necessary to invoke racism on the right for calling Obama a Hitler and a Fascist, when we just completed eight years of virulent hatred from the left calling Bush a Hitler and a Fascist. Remember Bush Derangement Syndrome? What is it? – calling him a Communist too that makes all the difference?
Again the operative word here is “might” which implies a subset of the group. See above discussion and compare with your earlier statement in the thread. Also the combination of foreigner, fraud, Muslim is interesting. Question: Do you have to believe all three to be a racist? Or is any one of them sufficient? I am wondering, because I think Obama is certainly a fraud when he positions himself as fiscally responsible, moderate or centrist. I think he is fraudulently misrepresenting health care reform when he says it will contain costs, the costs are understood, and it will all be paid for. I can go on.
I think that combining those three in the way you do, goes to your actual unspoken belief – that virtually all opposition to Obama is racist. I feel comfortable commenting on your motivations and state of mind on this question, since that is exactly what you are doing with large swath of Americans, so it is fair game.
No. You can’t take “humble” away. Too useful a word. I used it a lot when quoting Chuck Hagel in complaint of GWB’s arrogant foreign policy. If you have a president adopting an arrogant posture (as I consider GWB to have done on foreign policy) you need to use the word “humble” to describe the preferred policy or posture. We have a president now whose domestic industrial policies can only be described as arrogant. We need more humble domestic policies.
I am good with Democrat and Obama supporter Camille Paglia’s explanation quoted above – “…imbecilic support materials soliciting students to write fantasy letters to “help” the president (a coercive directive quickly withdrawn under pressure).” It is perfectly reasonable to strongly oppose that kind of blatant political “coercive” overreach to students. If you don’t include that lesson plan – you don’t trigger the reaction. Once the emotional cat was out of the bag,it went too far. Once the lesson plan was retracted and modified, the reaction – as I said – turned into a ridiculous overreaction. But that just looked pretty much like politics as usual to me.
Just some more semantic sleight of hand by Mr. Reynolds. No one, not me, not Jimmy, anywhere in this thread tried to “dismiss all suggestion that race might play a role… or asserted that “race could not possibly play a role” Pure straw men.
What has actually taken place is that MR has dramatically changed his tone from the unsupportable absolutist statements charging racism he was making at the top of this thread to the somewhat more reasonable heavily qualified statements on racism he is making at the end.
What we have actually done is dispose of MR’s original contention that virtually all the opposition on the right is racially motivated, and I take this change in tone as acceptance and acknowledgment by MR of the point I was making in my original comment.
One last point. Given the virtually identical percentage of “birthers” in the GOP under Obama, and the “truthers” among Democrats under GWB, I think the burden of proof belongs to the one making the charge – why racism must invoked as the primary motivation on the right, as opposed to the simpler explanation of usual paranoid political nutcase parity on the right and left.
September 10th, 2009 at 1:15 pm
MW:
The qualifications such as “may” were mostly tongue in cheek. As in “you might be a redneck if . . .” jokes. “It may just be racism.” I don’t have any doubt these are racists. Not all, but racism is the soil in which this brand of crazy grows.
And the GOP has a long history of pandering to racists.
And the GOP relies on the electoral support of racists.
Doesn’t make the GOP racist, just makes them creeps who will cozy up to anyone to win.
You and Jimmy tried to formulate a rule that denied anyone the capacity to accuse anyone of racism. That’s what you tried to do, that’s quite clear.
So we’re back to the question of why you would want to formulate a rule that denied the legitimacy of any claim of racism. So don’t pretend you were doing something different. You were either 1) denying that racism exists or 2) denying that we have a legitimate reason to discuss racism. I’m at a loss as to how you can admit racism exists but then formulate your cutesie little aphorism that denies we should discuss it.
Rape exists. Should we refrain from ever discussing it? Should we not call rapists out?
This is the problem you have and share with your friends on the right. You know you have to, when pushed, admit racism is real and still around. But you hate ever admitting it because your side is in bed with racists. They are your political allies. So you don’t run around saying “racism is dead,” you just say, “no one can talk about it.”
Because it would upset racists.
Who you don’t want to upset.
September 10th, 2009 at 1:56 pm
MIchael:
No.You are playing the same game. I never said “don’t talk about racism”. You can keep saying I said that, but i didn’t. Sorry – no one said it. No one implied it. I said you lose the argument when you invoke racism to explain opposition that has other, better, explanations, particularly when the opposition you cite is completely consistent with the kind of numbers, the insanity and ferocity that we saw on the left under GWB.
Hey – but yet another great argument that racism is bad! You really knock that one out of the park.
September 10th, 2009 at 2:41 pm
mw:
What Jimmy said:
Racism. (rey-s?z-?m) – noun. (1) The admission, on behalf of the accuser, that one has lost an intellectual argument or debate. (2) The lack of substance or compelling evidence to continue presenting a rational or well-formed argument. (3) A means to smear an opponent so as to avoid confronting legitimate counter-arguments or evidence that may invalidate one’s point of view. See Also: Hitler
You seconded:
You saved me some time Jimmy. I was going to go back and look up and list a reprise of MR’s tiresome racism epithets in the comments – maybe a duet between MR and Jim S – but just don’t think it necessary now.
I think we need a variant of Godwin’s Law.
If you invoke racism in the defense of the policies of a sitting president.
You lose.
And you expect a rational observer to conclude from that:
I never said “don’t talk about racism”. You can keep saying I said that, but i didn’t. Sorry – no one said it. No one implied it. I said you lose the argument when you invoke racism to explain opposition that has other, better, explanations, particularly when the opposition you cite is completely consistent with the kind of numbers, the insanity and ferocity that we saw on the left under GWB.
Not credible.
You were clearly saying that no one should ever impute racist motives to anyone. In other words: don’t talk about it. You want to exempt racists from criticism. That’s the crystal clear import of your words.
You didn’t say, Michael, I don’t think these guys are racists. You said, Michael, even suggesting they are racists means you’re wrong.
You attacked not on the specifics but on the very notion that it’s even possible these were racists.
Older, white people screaming hatred and paranoia about our first black president mere months into his tenure, and you dismiss even the possibility that racism might play a role. You don’t think I even have the right to suggest such a thing.
How dare I? Even to suggest that raging old white people who shout ‘Hitler’ at Obama might just be racists is to lose!
Why it’s impossible! Right? They couldn’t possibly be racists. Zero chance.
So you and Jimmy think we should formulate an aphorism to be used as some sort of magic rune to stave any future possible suggestions that people who screech in livid hatred might be motivated by racism.
Totally not buying it.
September 10th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
Also you do not explain why it is necessary to invoke racism on the right for calling Obama a Hitler and a Fascist, when we just completed eight years of virulent hatred from the left calling Bush a Hitler and a Fascist. Remember Bush Derangement Syndrome? What is it? – calling him a Communist too that makes all the difference?
Bush Derangement Syndrome didn’t strike until he’d been in office awhile. By that time he had implemented major tax cuts without paying for them, implemented extremely draconian anti-terror policies, and was trying to start an unnecessary war in Iraq.
These guys were talking Gestapo, and claiming Obama was not American, BEFORE election day. This indicates these particular protesters hated Obama before they knew much about him, and as the first thing you learn about Barack Obama is that he’s not white that implies an awful lot of them hate him because he’s black.
And when they try to keep their kids from hearing him say controversial things like “study hard.” it’s hard to conclude their racism is not involved.
September 10th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Bot comments were about your “argument”, or more accurately your broad brush generalization. Both comments pointed to your rant as a losing argument in the context of this post. Both attempted to do so with a touch of humor. Neither by any wild stretch of the imagination was an argument that racism should not be discussed. That was only brought up by you as a straw man from the lofty vantage point of the high horse you were/are riding.
And I am done with this now. All yours. Giddyup.