Millions of Grade-Schoolers Drafted into Communist Youth
One must feel sorry for the GOP which, on a daily basis, seems to be further succumbing to a sort of panic psychosis. Leading the charge this round is a bona fide knuckle-dragger, Florida State GOP Chair Jim Greer, who claims that President Obama's plans to address America's school children next week is nothing short of mass Marxist conversion.
Greer called the President's speech skedded for next week an attempt by Obama to “indoctrinate America’s children to his socialist agenda.”
“The idea that school children across our nation will be forced to watch the president justify his plans for government- run health care, banks, and automobile companies, increasing taxes on those who create jobs, and racking up more debt than any other president, is not only infuriating, but goes against beliefs of the majority of Americans,” Greer said Sept. 1 in a statement on the party’s Web site. (Editor's Note: a majority of Americans elected Barack Obama on a platform further to the left than how he has been governing).Pretty damn fantastic. What's got the Fringe all lathered up, apart from the President's skin color, was a suggestion by the U.S. Department of Education that children watching the speech should write letters to themselves outlining how they might "help the president." Roll over, JFK. We sure as hell wouldn't want red-blooded American school children thinking about what they might do to support the U.S. government and its elected commander-in-chief. No doubt that left to their own, and after being mesmerized by Obama's call for the implantation of the Iron-Clad Dictatorship of the Proletariat, the first thing millions of school children writing letters on how they might support him would demand: "Comrade Obama: Please pull the plug on Granny and then put Mommy and Daddy on the death panel list!" Sorry to keep repeating myself, but my talents are limited and so I keep coming back to the word "psychosis." In fact, whenever Obama has spoken of children and public schools, he has generally struck a Bill Cosby-like tone, urging them to shut off the TV, do their homework and stay in school (and, of course, increase steel production for the People's State). Look, elections have consequences. And so do all other political actions. Barack Obama's obscure handling of the health care issue and 10% unemployment have helped erode his popularity down to around the 50% level -- for the moment. The Republicans, however, are bye and bye forcing themselves into a political Siberia -- a wasteland in which they will be destined to dwell for years to come.
Please subscribe to my Twitter feed at http://twitter.com/marc_cooper
Join me on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/marc.cooper1
Watch my regular Video Blogs by subscribing at http://www.youtube.com/McooperTube
September 4th, 2009 at 1:27 am
A reader at TPM wrote:How long did it take the right to go from: “if you criticize the President you are a traitor” to “School children should not trust the President.”
Excellent question.
September 4th, 2009 at 5:14 am
Anyone who objects to the President speaking to the schoolchildren of America has gone past the point of rationality. I read of a school district where some parents were saying they would keep their children home on that day if their school participated. Sick. Sick. Sick.
September 4th, 2009 at 8:02 am
Oh yeah. The children. In Florida. Better keep things simple. Like a Republican would:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rO3F6mZUaE
September 4th, 2009 at 8:34 am
I’m guessing he’s going to quote Adolf Hitler and tell the children they should ask not what their country can do for them but what they can do for their country. Then probably a line from Stalin, like “We must lay hold of the fact that economic laws are not made by nature. They are made by human beings.” Then he moves all of the Communist art from Rockefeller Center to the Capitol, and we’ve got maybe a year before they drag everyone who reads Newsbusters into the camps. Glenn Beck has revealed that Obama is already training an army of youth obedient to the President to carry out this nefarious plan.
Okay, now will someone please make me head of a state GOP or nominate me for the vice-presidency or give me a daily cable show ? Lord knows I’m crazy enough…
September 4th, 2009 at 8:46 am
It is a sad state of political affairs in our country when its President cannot say a few words to our school children. Sad sad indeed.
But Marc must admit the NEA would never have even entertained this idea for President Bush. Can you imagine this left liberal monopoly allowing a President, who was killing innocent people he attacked in two countries, being allowed to address the Nation’s school children on closed circuit TV. Paaaaleeeze!
In fact, it was the NEA, not the Right or the President, that caused this problem for President Obama It was they, in their fawning furor, that made this a political event by engineering an ‘after speech’ requirement teachers ask the children to write down what they can do to help President Obama, not the country. It was the NEA that wanted to require all children, left and right, to support the President, and by extension his current controversial and highly unpopular policies of a gov’t taking over their healthcare, and prosecuting those who protected them over the last eight years.
I fully believe President Obama’s intent was totally unpolitical and there would have been no resistance whatsoever, excepting the Woody’s world. And it makes me sick to my stomach, and depressing, our Nation has come to this. It is the fringe nuts that seem to be driving our country, driving a wedge between us on every benign and non-political innocent thing our leader may want to do to inspire us and our children to do better, to bring us together just once in a while.
Yes this controversy over the President of the United States addressing our school children make me sick! But it is the fringe on BOTH sides that created a problem out of a non-problem.
Disgusting!
September 4th, 2009 at 8:49 am
“..their fawning furor..” is “fawning fervor”.
September 4th, 2009 at 8:56 am
Jim R, actually, GWB was in a public school classroom when he decided to ignore the news that the United States was under attack.
September 4th, 2009 at 9:12 am
Speaking of education monopolies, I see the total financial collapse it CA are having some positive results. The necessary belt-tightening is forcing Mayors, even in the most liberal enclaves like LA, to demand more for the public’s money.
LA Mayor Villaraigosa, no right-wing bible thumper by any means, is opening up for private/charter management, many NEA run schools that have consistently put its members interest before its customers, parents and their children.
The Mayor, for the first time in his political career, has been force to get more for parents money that heretofore was being sucked into a black hole, where no light(children) was allow to escape. And being a popular political animal, headed for the Governors office, the demand from Californians to get more for their money has given him the political cover to do what, instinctively and ideologically, a liberal mayor like he would never even entertain.
September 4th, 2009 at 9:12 am
But Marc must admit the NEA would never have even entertained this idea for President Bush.
Not true. I would imagine that they would use the speeches of both GWB and Sarah Palin as examples of mangled syntax, warped grammar and obtuse semantics.
September 4th, 2009 at 9:33 am
“that heretofore was being sucked into a black hole, where no light(children) was allow to escape.”
Ok, that was too harsh and ‘fringy’. I am becoming that which make my stomach sick.
Teachers have a very tough job in any venue they teach in, with more than 50% of minority children now without two parents. And even the ones that have two parents, and I can tell you from experience it takes two for the tag team, most both have to work to make it these days. So our education problem is is far from just the teachers and their unions problem. I would not want to do their job, especially in intercity schools, for what they are paid.
At the same time, it is difficult to pay good teachers more when bad one have an army of union lawyers to put their interest before the children’s in all sorts of questionable behaviors, from plain old incompetence, to political indoctrination, to outright sexual abuse.
September 4th, 2009 at 9:36 am
Randy has resorted to giving Woody’s lately.
September 4th, 2009 at 9:44 am
Btw, here’s how Jim Greer’s veiws on President Obama upcoming address to school kids was portrayed by a local blog in Florida:
http://www.orlandoweekly.com/blog/default.asp?perm=2450
September 4th, 2009 at 10:00 am
Btw X, it is instructive, and amusing, to observe how ones political preference can influence what they see from the same video clip.
Where you saw President Bush’s reaction to the 9/11 news, while reading to school children, as not knowing what to do, frozen from shock, I say just the opposite.
I saw a very cool and calculatingly calm (at least doing his best job of looking that way) leader, that rather than jump right up and leave in an emergency looking way, his behavior did two positive and beneficial things. One he downplayed the seriousness of a true emergency in front of an already terrified USA, and secondly more importantly, he was showing the bastards attacking our country they were not going to be driving him into a panic, they were not going to be driving the agenda from here on out.
It took only about 2 more minutes to accomplish this, by continuing to read to the children as calmly as he could. I saw a true and composed leader in the face of an emergency. I saw he did exactly the right thing.
Can’t you see bin Laden and Tonto, in their f–king pup tents in a f–king 5th world country, getting a big belly laugh out of the President of the most powerful country in the Free World jumping up in a tissy and rushing out on their command?
The test of leadership is when you keep your head, while everyone else around you are losing theirs. President Bush passed with flying colors.
September 4th, 2009 at 10:04 am
OT, but this came up in another thread and may be of interest to people here.
It’s a clip of Franken talking to a (mildly) hostile crowd at the State Fair about the health care debate (gotta love the one guy who just sticks his toe over the line of blaming high costs on immigrants): http://www.boingboing.net/2009/09/03/al-franken-talks-an.html
September 4th, 2009 at 10:23 am
Thank god we had President Bush on 9/11, instead of a team of lawyers with the idea of hunting down the alleged perpetrators in order to read them their Miranda rights followed by a reminder they would not be subjected to any discomfort of any kind if they choose not to cooperate and would be guaranteed the right to bring the book and prayer rug that drove them to burn alive 3,000 of our citizens and would also be automatically entitled to all the legal rights and protection of the citizens whose country they attacked, including an army of lawyer for them whose job it would be to set them free using any and all tactics, lies, fabrication, stories, and deception needed to prevent them from ever being subjected to the barbaric punishment of death by painless injection, just in case it may not be totally without pain.
Because we are a good an noble people. We are against any retribution whatsoever. We believe we bear equal responsibility for whatever crazy things crazy murders to, well, because if we had only been better yourselves, you may never have behaved the way you did. We believe we can change you into being as kind and generous and forgiving and nice and stupid as us, if only we can get you the mental health you have are right to, but been deprived of, due to the greedy, selfish, imperialist, capitalist, bulling, dominating, and arrogant nation we are.
We would like to apologize for us.
September 4th, 2009 at 10:25 am
“..if we had only been better yourselves..” would be “..better ourselves..”.
September 4th, 2009 at 10:31 am
Randy has resorted to giving Woody’s lately.
Oh please. Are you going to make the case that GWB and SP are good grammarians, have a firm and coherent grasp of our language?
Even though I disagree with you about 99% you didn’t use to whine so much. Honestly, your side doesn’t have very many representatives who can articulate a position without resorting to hyperbole and hysteria.
You have John McCain, who’s been covered by government run health care programs since he was a fetus opposing the public option for no other reason than his party commands him to. You have a congressman in California appaluding a man who proclaims himself a rightwing terrorist. You have the head of the Republican party, Michael Steele heckling a protester whose mother died of cancer because she couldn’t afford chemotherapy.
Your side exudes precious little other than an inchoate rage and the sheer inability to engage in dialogue other to say no and yet you insult me by pointing out obvious and documented flaws in the native tongue of two of the most prominent figures in your party.
Heal thyself, whiner.
September 4th, 2009 at 10:31 am
Thank god we had President Bush on 9/11, instead of a team of lawyers with the idea of hunting down the alleged perpetrators in order to read them their Miranda rights followed by a reminder they would not be subjected to any discomfort of any kind if they choose not to cooperate and would be guaranteed the right to bring the book and prayer rug that drove them to burn alive 3,000 of our citizens and would also be automatically entitled to all the legal rights and protection of the citizens whose country they attacked, including an army of lawyer for them whose job it would be to set them free using any and all tactics, lies, fabrication, stories, and deception needed to prevent them from ever being subjected to the barbaric punishment of death by painless injection, just in case it may not be totally without pain.
OBL is walking free.
September 4th, 2009 at 10:40 am
And by the way, we not only want to apologize to you, but we are now beginning to correct some of our faults, starting with the prosecution of those who inflicted pain on you, by lawyers you had a right to have to begin with and didn’t get your legal rights endowed upon you by our goodness.
And further, we are going the gut those barbaric agencies in our country that has embarrassed us and tender hearts throughout the world. But please understand, in doing so, we are relying on your intrinsic kindness to not attack us again in such an unreasonable way, like you just did because we had gutted these barbaric agencies once before.
We have done our part by being stupid and denying reality as our hearts have told us we must….did we mention apologizing too. So now it is time for you to do your part and make us not look stupid by coming to have a beer with us.
September 4th, 2009 at 10:49 am
When you get Obama lecturing to captive students and those students being led by NEA union teachers to have the students “help the President,” it would turn into one big national indoctrination of our youth.
Obama could make a better impression by leading the kids in the Pledge of Allegiance, but that might be asking him to compromise his feelings about our nation.
September 4th, 2009 at 10:52 am
woody
i dont think it would be appropriate to have a Kenyan-born illegal alien lead the pledge — especially one who secretly plans to gas all of these kiddies’ grannies afterward.
September 4th, 2009 at 11:17 am
They’re not going to gas the grannies, Marc; it would render them useless for making Soylent Green.
September 4th, 2009 at 11:27 am
Do you think that Obama will set such an example that teachers will let students use teleprompters for their oral reports and exams?
I dread to think that Obama might do this every semester.
One thing is for sure, when liberals want to do something “for the children,” you can bet that they are doing it for themselves.
September 4th, 2009 at 11:32 am
And when the conservatives want to do something for the children, they start a war, to prevent youngsters from having to work menial jobs at McDonalds.
September 4th, 2009 at 11:33 am
I hate to sound like a broken record, but these days my solid litmus test for “extremist vs. sane” right-winger is often LGF:
“The right wing blogosphere is hyperventilating again, and again I just can’t join the freak-out.”
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/34582_Freak-Out_of_the_Day
Agree or not with Johnson’s politics (I often don’t), but it’s a good indication that you’re dealing with the shrill and irrational extremist crowd when they’re to the right of Charles Johnson. Interesting stuff.
Oh, and Dan O, I saw that Franken link last night. Excellent example of how healthcare system changes should be discussed: rationally, informatively, and humanely. Also, the man’s got a ton of patience–many of my relatives are Minnesotan, and if they took that tone with me I’d have been decidedly less polite.
September 4th, 2009 at 11:59 am
But Marc must admit the NEA would never have even entertained this idea for President Bush. Can you imagine this left liberal monopoly allowing a President, who was killing innocent people he attacked in two countries, being allowed to address the Nation’s school children on closed circuit TV. Paaaaleeeze!
Not the Prez Bush you had in mind, but I think the tape tells the tale: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/9/3/776393/-Another-wingnut-meme-goes-down-the-drain
September 4th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
That top paragraph was a quote from Jim R. Sorry if that’s unclear.
September 4th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
And what I want to know is why is this even a news story? Why are all of these stories generated by fringers on the president’s speech and death panels monopolizing our political coverage? I mean, so 1,000 parents think Johnny is going to be brainwashed. So what? I don’t get it.
If I convince enough people that circus peanuts are made by a cabal of international Jewish bankers do I get to be on the news too?
Raise your hand, say some crazy shit, and wallah, you’re on the news? Is that really how it works now?
September 4th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
Careful, Dan O, or I’m gonna bite your finger.
September 4th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
For another two sides from a conservative perspective, here is a post from Neal Boortz, who sees no need to be concerned, vs. many of his readers who disagree and express such in the comment section. Maybe that will help people like Dan “get it.” I don’t get why Obama’s Greene Czar is a “9-11 Truther.”
SPEAKING OF OBAMA ADDRESSES
September 4th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Jim R – in order to read bin Laden his “Miranda rights” – or to waterboard him or threaten to rape his wife or try him before the 9th District Court of Appeals or subject him to an interview by Glen Beck or stuff him in a black hole in Eastern Europe or whatever – one would first have to track him down and snatch him up. Bush didn’t accomplish that, mostly out of sheer incompetence and enthusiasm for moving along to Iraq…
September 4th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
ooops – Randy beat me to it…
September 4th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
For some context to maybe quell some of the shrillness about this, here is the letter from the DOE on this event: http://www.ed.gov/admins/lead/academic/bts.html
How innocuous.
Note that it is not mandatory, and is shown on C-Span and Whitehouse.gov. A classroom has to make the decision to view this–it’s not piped into the schools.
And the subject, as you’ve probably seen is, “youth about persisting and succeeding in school. The president will challenge students to work hard, set educational goals, and take responsibility for their learning.” That’s hardly political.
I guess we’ll just have to wait and see what Goebbles actually has to say to see if I’m right, huh Woody?
September 4th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
Ah, this is fun:
“In other words, the Truthers lied about the real intent of their document in order to get people to sign it…. There are plenty of real, valid reasons to question the appointment of Van Jones, and there’s no need to go hunting around on zero-credibility hate sites to find them.”
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/34594_Truther_Document_Signatories_Say_They_Were_Misled
So, no. Van Jones is not a 9-11 truther. See how easy it is to be an honest conservative?
Refreshing.
September 4th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
Dan O., if you had paid attention, you would have found that Obama has already modified his indoctrination speech to the students because of parental concerns raised. It would be nice, though, for the local school boards to be able to review the curriculum material in advance. After all, they are the ones that we elect to run our local schools and they are closest to our seeing our needs.
I’m not sure why Obama feels the need to tell students about persisting and succeeding in school. Did their parents, teachers, and school boards forget to include that advice along the line? Did they ask anyone for help on this? Was there an obvious problem that only Obama saw and is the only one to correct it? Heck no! He’s trying to pump up his popularity after a record drop and to get the kids on his side for the next level of turning up the heat on the frog.
And, don’t give me this bull that attendance is not mandatory, especially if your teacher is a member of the NEA. What kid would risk the peer pressure and pressure from a teacher to be different? Where’s the parents’ opt-out form?
September 4th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
Kyle, the 9-11 Truther site has come out and said that Van Jones, in so many words, is lying. Somehow, I want to believe that both are lying and crazy.
If Jones felt that his name was on the list under false pretense, he has had plenty of time to ask that his name be removed — not just when it became a political issue.
Anyway, that guy has so much commie baggage, he shouldn’t be working for our White House.
But, let’s concentrate on the main Marxist in the White House for now and his Youth Corp to inform on parents.
September 4th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
You’re the one who has joined up with the LaRouchites and the rest of the Goebbels Memorial Truth Squad. You’ve been reduced to a shrieking brownshirt, Woody, mired in your own hysteria and web of delusions and lies. You make Joe McCarthy seem almost sober – John Birch territory. May God have mercy on your soul, because you’ve sunk so far beneath contempt that I don’t give a shit…
Enjoy the madness.
September 4th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
“Somehow, I want to believe that both are lying and crazy.”
Of course you do–that’s your usual trusty-rusty partisan motivation. But it doesn’t matter what you “want”; what matters is what’s true. You’re free to pick from any number of reasons to criticize Van Jones, but you’re not free to make up facts.
It really is that simple: it’s called being an honest conservative. And an example toward
which you should aspire.
/lesson
***
Now, stay on topic. We’re talking about the coming youth communist nation.
September 4th, 2009 at 1:43 pm
Obama Youth Corps
September 4th, 2009 at 1:55 pm
I called the GOP HQ in Florida and politely engaged with the voice on the other end. In the most pleasant, but patronizing tones queried as to what point even they must feel embarrassed having the head of the Rethugs in Florida mouth such atavistic nonsense. There was some agreement.
I then went on to call the Congressional Rep for a certain district and again in tones reeking of exhaustion and entre nous ness raised the spectre of his having to deal with such an embarrassment. I mean after alllllllllllllll…………….Its hardly likely the PResident addressing a bunch of school children who won’t be paying one whit of attention will be turned into soldiers for Stalin now would they? Blah Blah.
Plus I was put on to the state Campaign HQ for the Republican Reps Congressional re election. I said….you know HE is the one who has the vote…after alllll. ANd reeeee allllll leeeeeee one doesnt need the albatross of a Jim Grier around one’s neck does one.
September 4th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Randy: “Not true. I would imagine that they would use the speeches of both GWB and Sarah Palin as examples of mangled syntax, warped grammar and obtuse semantics.”
Absolutely the case. Neither of the two noted (SP or GWB) were masters of the spoken word.
The people of the left and right that want to opt out are not upset that the President of the United States wants to speak to the children as much as they are that this wasn’t done through the schoolboards or the offices of the superintendent. It went directly to the Principals.
I wouldn’t have a problem with it, providing the program had been vetted by the school boards – the organization charged with formulating educational programs for our kids. Obama could be a highly motivating speaker (look at all the folk who bought his spiel) for kids to stay in school and/or to continue their education despite any hurdles. Instead, it came down as a pronouncement from on high.
GWB was in a public school on 9/11 as Mr. X notes, but he asked and was invited, he didn’t demand. There is a difference.
September 4th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
Will you guys get your facts straight?
Quoting from the DOE letter, “The U.S. Department of Education invites students of all ages, teachers, and administrators to participate in this historic moment by watching the president deliver the address…” (my emphasis).
Where is the demand? Stop making stuff up for the sensational value of it.
September 4th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
People objecting to this are some combination of insane and hatemongering proto-fascists.
And a concern troll like GM Roper – who surely didn’t protest when GHWB1 was broadcast into the schools as a campaign ploy – are as full of shit as the rest of these cranks and brownshirts. (I’m betting that GWB’s “Pet Goat” read was not scheduled through a schoolboard and that there were no “opt out” slips circulated to parents who didn’t want their children to sit in a classroom w/ the guy. As memory serves, that took place in Florida, so there might well have been parents who felt like their votes had been tossed into the toilet. I’ll put $100 on the invite being pushed through administrative channels and no prior option offered to parents. (The difference between contacting a principal vs. a superintendent eludes me.)
September 4th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
“Stop making stuff up…”
It’s all they’ve got left. Pitiful creatures.
September 4th, 2009 at 5:38 pm
Republicans, however, are bye and bye forcing themselves
What’s Dylan got to do with any of this?
September 4th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
There’s a “Marxist” in the White House?
I hope he’s a fan of Chico. grouch and Harpo always got the attention, but Chico always made me laugh.
September 4th, 2009 at 6:45 pm
“And a concern troll like GM Roper – who surely didn’t protest when GHWB1 was broadcast into the schools as a campaign ploy ”
Which only goes to show what you know reg – nothing.
I not only objected, I voted against GHWB (you are such an idiot…. you didn’t need the “1″ after his name to differentiate G.H.W.B. from G.W.B.) because I didn’t like his policies and I didn’t like his breaking his “read my lips.” pledge. But then, you always were a KnowNothing.
September 4th, 2009 at 7:00 pm
So did you object when reagan did it?
September 4th, 2009 at 7:48 pm
Dan O., when the President “invites” principals to “invite” the students, then it’s not an invitation but, effectively, is mandatory.
How many principals are making provisions for students who actually want to learn rather than be indoctrinated during that period? It would be a short list.
No one is making up or denying the substance of the matter except you.
September 4th, 2009 at 7:49 pm
Reagan wasn’t friends with a bunch of terrorists and Marxists nor did he appoint any.
Obama can’t run the White House. I sure don’t want him trying to run our schools.
September 4th, 2009 at 9:06 pm
Obama has lost the confidence of a whole lot of people. They (rightly) don’t trust what he says, and they fear what he has done and is trying to do with his “urgent” need to take over health care (what’s the urgency) and gut Medicare. Furthermore, they can clearly sense that this arrogant elitist believes that if he only figures out the right message, he can enchant the rubes into going along with him.
The result of this is a disorganized and heterogeneous group of people, some of whom freak out at the tiniest thing. They (correctly) know that they are endangered and that the Obama administration is more ofa danger than a protection, so they direct their reaciton in that direction.
It does appear that some conservatives (such as the Fl politician) are trying to dishonestly take advantage of it. Then there’s Glenn Beck, who himself is freaked out and has a penchant for conspiracy thinking.
Oh well, it still doesn’t compare to the widespread leftist accusations that Bush chose to go to war for profit, or the incredible paranoia (on right and left) about the stupidly named PATRIOT Act.
September 5th, 2009 at 7:19 am
Reagan wasn’t friends with a bunch of terrorists and Marxists nor did he appoint any.
Saddam Hussein had no better friend in the West than Ronald Wilson Reagan.
September 5th, 2009 at 8:07 am
“When the conservatives want to do something for the children, they start a war, to prevent youngsters from having to work menial jobs at McDonald’s.”
Those McDonald’s burgers were killing them anyway.
September 5th, 2009 at 9:12 am
Randy — did you know that if you took all of the letters in “Ronald Wilson Reagan” and rearranged them, using each letter only once, you could spell “Insane Anglo Warlord”?
On topic — here’s today’s Orlando Sentinel columnist Scott Maxwell with a Jim Greer smackdown:
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/education/orl-loc-maxwell-greer-obama-090509,0,3762186.column
Starting to sound like these Floridians are getting a little embarrassed by Mr. Greer.
September 5th, 2009 at 9:35 am
Rob,
Yes, the anagram maker!
Did you also know that Reagan’s names each have six letters so it would read 666?
September 5th, 2009 at 9:49 am
Poland, E Germany, Czechs, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Albania, Panama, Granada, Iraq, and Afghanistan like warlords….of the Reagan and Bush kind.
When was the last time your guys freed anyone. Let me answer that, S Korea…….but he was also your war criminal.
It gets all so confusing for you.
September 5th, 2009 at 10:17 am
Poland, E Germany, Czechs, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Albania, Panama, Granada, Iraq, and Afghanistan like warlords….of the Reagan and Bush kind.
Granada? Reagan liberated a city in Andalusia from democratic government?
Saying that Reagan and GHWB “liberated” Eastern Europe has as much intellectual heft as a rooster claiming authorship of the sun rising because of his crowing.
It’s also insulting for it denies the contributions of those who were actually in Eastern Europe like Lech Walesa and Vaclav Havel, like the brave individuals who decided to kick the Ceasescus to the curb.
As for Iraq, I will type those slowly so that you will understand: Reagan was Saddam’s friend. Bush the father only moved against Saddam when he invaded Kuwait. Reagan gave Saddam US$500,000,000 in credits from the Commodity Credit Corp. Bush pere doubled that number – after the gassing of the Kurds in Halabja. Those are facts, Jim, unlike your platitudes.
Noriega was Reagan’s conduit in Central America. The only reason why Bush moved against him was because he became an embarrassment when his ties to the drug dealers became too obvious to ignore.
Indeed, when you speak of Reagan “freeing” people, you should also acknowldge his support of brutal dictatorial regimes in Guatemala, El Salvador, Argentina and Chile (until Pinochet also became too great an embarrassment), likening a bunch of terrorists and drug dealers to being the moral equivalent of our founding fathers.
I will give him credit, however, for getting some hostages released – by selling missiles to a terrorist regime in Iran in violation fo the law in order to find his drug dealing terrorist contra buddies.
Maybe you should crack open a book now and then.
September 5th, 2009 at 10:36 am
Crack open a book? (Sigh…)
Randy, we’re dealing with the worshippers of the make-believe.
Anyways, here’s a little toe-tappin’ ditty I picked out just for you, Mr. Jim R. Our beloved friend.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60jNs-M6BrI
September 5th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
What nonsense. Reagan’s policies were acknowledged by Russians as being significant in the fall of their empire. In the specific case of Poland, The Reagan Administration’s CIA worked directly through the Pope to provide support to the Polish resistance, using the strong Catholic presence in Poland. The Poles (and Eastern Europeans in general) credit Reagan for their liberation, even if you don’t.
I will type slowly for those who fail to understand how the the difference between real politik and “friendship” (which includes our current President): sometimes you have to make deals with bastards. The Reagan administration supplied small amounts of support to Iraq to check Iran. That doesn’t make Saddam his friend any more than Stalin was Churchill’s friend.
Your statement about Bush 41 is odd. Are you asserting that 41, who clobbered Iraq, was Saddam’s friend? If not, what are you saying? And what does this have to do with Reagan.
I guess you just can’t help bringing up a Bush in order to bash him.
September 6th, 2009 at 9:14 am
That worked real well in Afghanistan didn’t it? Helping the mujahadeen who then decided to attack us.
John, the comment about Bush 41 is a fact. In April 1990 Alan Simpson and Bob Dole made a sycophantic visit to Saddam in which Simpson made the following comment to Saddam:
Prior to the invasion of Kuwait, Bush the father had no problem with Saddam.
The Reagan administration supplied small amounts of support to Iraq to check Iran.
Really? It was more than that:
Of course you ignore the part about Reagan supplying missiles to Iran.
As for Poland, you also fail to acknowledge that Solidarity and the Gdansk shipyard strikes took place before Reagan was even elected, which is the basis for my argument. Reagan did not liberate Eastern Europe: the citizens of Eastern Europe liberated Eastern Europe. I certainly don’t give Jimmy Carter credit for creating Solidarity.
I will give credit to Reagan for liberating Easter Eurpe the day after his hagiographers acknowledge his support of Iraq was dangerously shortsighted, his policy in Central America resulted in numerous atrocities against civilians in that region and that Iran Contra was illegal.
Deal?
September 6th, 2009 at 10:28 am
The new book by Archie Brown – the Oxford scholar who is probably the only “expert” who saw Gorbachev coming and persuaded Maggie Thatcher to invite Gorby to London (against her own hard line instincts) a year before he became head of the party – writes that Reagan’s biggest assist in “ending communism” was when he changed from aggressive loud-mouth to perceptive negotiator and partner with Gorbachev, who any sane person recognizes as the key actor in ending the Soviet empire and bringing the first semblances of an “open society” to Russia. Without Gorby – and despite Reagan’s first-term ravings – the USSR could have stuck it out for a while under a hardliner. There’s really no question about that. Some sort of “end” may have been “inevitable”, but had the Soviet Union actually been the kind of totally closed system run by Marxist Leninist drones bent on nothing less than totalitarian control of the entire world that Reagan claimed in his public speechifying, it wouldn’t have “collapsed” under his term. (Only children believe in fairy tales…)
September 6th, 2009 at 10:34 am
I want to stress that Randy is absolutely right in putting the protest movements in Eastern Europe at the forefront of the challenge to Soviet hegemony – but if we’re talking about heads of state who changed the game radically as the USSR had played it, Gorbachev stands alone.
Reagan didn’t see him coming and was shocked (in a good way) when he actually met him and sat down to discuss nuclear weapons and such. Remember how his aides freaked out when he proposed a weapons agreement that I doubt even Jimmy Cartger would have put on the table and they forced him to pull back ? Reagan was a naif…
September 6th, 2009 at 2:20 pm
Nobody claimed that Reagan was the only human being on earth who was involved in liberating Eastern Europe. He was, however, probably the most important single individual, which is the point.
If you think the citizens of Eastern Europe liberated themselves, you have to explain how it failed in Hungary and Czekoslovakia previously.
September 6th, 2009 at 6:48 pm
Jim R has frequently referred to Reagan liberating Eastern Europe.
It’s timing, John. Reg makes a good point about Gorbachev. Gorbachev was the right man at the right time. I can remember when he became General Secretary telling a friend that there is one unique trait about him: he was the first one born post-revolution.
Times change and it’s important to be aware of this. The USSR, post Afghanistan was weakened considerably and dispirited. It was most assuredly not the same USSR of the 1950′s.
As for Hungary, you might want to examine the role of Radio Free Europe.
September 6th, 2009 at 8:31 pm
Yep – Gorby was Reagan’s “useful fool”
Gorby did not intend for the USSR to fall apart. His goal was to improve the Soviet economy, and he felt that Perestroika and Glasnost would help.
It wasn’t enough.
Gorby was the leader who unintentionally lost an empire, and has gotten rich off of Western fools who adore him for it. Reagan clobbered him.
September 7th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Keep that hagiography going. Those of us who wish to dig a little deeper know it’s a load of crap.