As reported elsewhere, Obama’s Back To School Speech isn’t the first time a president has addressed school children. Bush Sr. asked kids to “say no to drugs” and to “stay in school”, and Ronald Reagan injected a little anti-big government and anti tax speech into his address.
Obama is different, though. If you’re one of those content and complacent persons who took a seat and flipped the channel when Obama was elected – knowing that in our new “post-race, post-Bush America’ everything was going to be ok, then I need to help you see the other side’s point of view, so you can see that they have their own perfectly sound reasons for being afraid.
A MASTER OF PROPAGANDA AND MASS PSYCHOLOGY
It is necessary, first, to look at the background of Obama’s political win to see where the genesis of these fears began. As outlined in prior posts, there is a very real – though whether masterminded by man or purely “chance” (for scientists) or “masterminded by the devil” (for others) – structure/pattern/scheme to the operations of the “grassroots movements” and media control used by the Obama campaign.
During the campaign, direct and indirect affiliates and supporters of Mr. Obama frequently “leaked” false news into the press. This actually began prior to Obama, with things like the attempted CBS smear of George Bush, Jr which used forged papers in an attempt to call Bush’s military service into question, and continues through to this day, with quasi-news sources like Michael Moore, Comedy Central and Saturday Night Live being officially recognized as “entertainment”, while functionally being centerpieces of the propaganda mill. Sarah Palin, for example, suffered heavily during the recent election because of the myriad of clever edits, impersonators, hilarious skits and humorous commentary aimed at discrediting her and making her seem like some backwoods airhead. The majority of the things that have been attributed to Palin are fabricated, and the very small few which are based on the truth (or some part thereof) are either grossly stripped of context or turn out later on to have been fact. The “Palin Rape Kits” is an excellent example of one of those slivers of truth that was put out of context, had jokes added to it, and got a bunch of bad media. Most people who heard the “scandal” still believe that Palin actually charged rape victims for the evidence kits used by local police. The under-reported truth – revealed after the fact, and buried under the continuous barrage of shocking news and myth used by the Obama campaign – is that Senator (now VP) Joe Biden sponsored a bill that withdrew federal funding from states and county law enforcement, causing local governments to seek new ways to offset the high costs of protecting the public. Some states are “wealthier” than other states, and those which fall to the “poor” end of the scale – like Alaska – were hit harder by Mr. Biden’s myopic politics. When Palin was mayor of Wasilla, she learned that previously the city had decided to bill victims’ insurance for the cost of rape kits. Though Palin’s administration did not see any rapes billed that way in the time she was mayor (which in itself is strange, since Alaska has the highest number of rapes in the country), Palin was on record as having been opposed to such a practice, and volunteered to pay the costs out of her own pocket. While Palin was mayor of Wasilla, a rape victim in Juneau may have been billed – but by the time Palin was elected governor, the practice had been abolished.
The reason the public at large is not aware that Palin was far from a supporter or enforcer of such a policy is that the Obama campaign (official as well as unofficial campaigns) ensured a steady stream of big-headline news would continue to distract from each retraction and counter-story. They’d realized that with the public’s short attention span, apology stuck in a readers mind less firmly than the original scandal, and if new scandals kept coming out – true or not – the public would be focused on the latest tale and less interested in checking up on the facts of yesterday’s news. Americans are, by and large, lazy and careless when it comes to being indoctrinated.
CRAFTY OPPONENT OF FREE SPEECH
The official Obama campaign/administration has been and continues to be strongly opposed to free speech. During the campaign, they sent letters threatening legal action to any broadcaster who aired an NRA ad exposing Obama’s history of support against the second amendment. The letters claimed that campaigns had the right to air whatever material they wanted, but that third-party groups were obligated to tell the truth, and stations could be prosecuted if they chose to air an ad that wasn’t telling the truth. (So the threat was implied … they did not specifically say “you will be sued if you air the NRA ad” … they said “these websites, which are part of the Obama campaign, declare the NRA’s ad to be false. If you choose to air a false ad, we can sue you out of business.” Those stations who did air the ad were never sued, largely due to the fact that the ads were, in fact, accurate.
Since entering office, Obama and his party have begun setting up a “network busting” of syndicated radio by appointing a “diversity czar” (in the belief that the lack of minority radio is due to “big radio networks taking up all the airwaves” which is, especially in light of the mandatory switch from analog television to digital television, a huge falsehood that takes advantage of the average American’s ignorance over FCC airwave allocation). They are also looking at something to back that concept up that they call the “Fairness Doctrine”. To those who aren’t aware of the big picture, network radio allows a talk show or radio program in one state (let’s say Florida) to also air the show in another state (Wisconsin or Oregon). While that might hurt Dr. Demento or America’s Weekly Top 40, it hits a lot harder in Obama’s main source of competition: Conservative talk radio. Without Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck, or the scores of other conservative talk radio hosts, the facts and accusations against the left/democrats/progressives/liberals/socialists/Obama Administration will be harder to spread. If you think, “dude – that’s what the internet is for!”, think again! At this very moment, they are trying to pass a “Cyber security act” which, under the guise of protecting our (Federally owned) banks and aiding national security, the President would have the power to – at any time – effectively throw a switch shutting down portions of internet access within the United states. (Yes, the technology is more involved than simply throwing a big fat switch … i should have said “make a phone call”). There’s much more to be said on this subject alone, but let’s move on …
THE ADVANTAGES OF DYNAMIC MEDIA TECHNOLOGY
Obama is pretty “wired in”. He’s made a lot of use of his Blackberry, texting, and various websites. The websites themselves are of particular interest, because they give a dynamic platform by which to announce new doctrines and then edit or pull back those doctrines at a moment’s notice. Since becoming elected, Obama has made good use of this technology. He began his Presidency by posting a website, “Change.gov” where he outlined some of his new policies. He was going to funnel more money into urban areas because they needed it (according to him) more than rural America, he was going to take guns away from people living in the cities and restrict ownership nationwide. he was going to get rid of the Tiahrt amendment so private individuals and anti-gun groups would be able to view the same ownership records that Law Enforcement currently has access to. He was going to create a national police force. He was going to create new programs to further give ‘free money’ to people based solely on their race or gender.
When hard-working, gun-loving, rural Americans heard about this, they began directing people to his site (particularly the “Urban” section, where much of the crazed stuff was found). In just two days (slower than their later pace), the site had vanished – though archive sites were still able to pull up the site from their historical archives. After a week or so, the site re-appeared, this time with much of the extreme points toned down.
More recently, the White House website began soliciting fwd’s from people. They said they wanted to see what kind of rumors were being spread about the President and the administration. The request seemed fair enough, but a week later names that had been pulled from the forwarded emails suddenly began receiving propaganda-emails from the White House. This caused an uproar, as many persons who were recipients had never emailed the White House, and could not figure out how they had ended up on such a list. Quickly, uncontrolled (by the OA) news sources began pointing out that it is constitutionally illegal for the President to maintain lists of private citizens, except in very specific circumstances (the Secret Service can maintain lists of those who are threats to the president). Immediately the page on the White House vanished – again, the only way to view it is to go through internet archive services.
Obama also has a well-known record of breaking promises. This record is well documented, but some versions show different statistics. Some of these promises are going to be impossible to keep – on the campaign trail he promised support to some and promised support to their opposition later. Perhaps it is no wonder that little has been accomplished nearly a year into his presidency.
“YOU’RE ABOUT TO BE RULED BY THE BLACK MAN, CRACKER!”
Finally, Obama has been, at times, outspoken on some of his views. It is no secret, for example, that he considers himself a champion of minorities, even when his actions clearly go against common sense. He jumped at the chance to call officers responding to a possible break-in “stupid” when the officers (some of whom were white) arrested the suspect (who is black) when he refused to cooperate and show identification. The mostly-minority Obama Administration also “let off” black panthers who were holding weapons and intimidating white voters in Pennsylvania during the election that got Obama elected.
Race isn’t the only topic Obama is pretty pushy about. He also caters to radical environmentalists, including those with unsound views, and (as was brought up numerous times during the election) has several close ties with proven terrorists – something even Bush detractors could never claim.
A SKILLED SPEAKER
As I will get more into in posts related to “The Plot”, The OA are masters of mass-manipulation and indoctrination. If you watched the debates during the election, Obama is clever enough to use key words to polarize and to “plant” (through repetition) ideas even in “innocent” speech. (During the debate he frequently said “George Bush” because of the anti-Bush sentiment, even though McCain was much further from Bush’s ideologies than Obama himself was).
Obama and his understudies know quite well how carefully crafted language can impress and indoctrinate. Bush’s weakness was talking without the well-crafted scripts many presidents have used, and rather than receiving respect from America for (usually) knowing his topic well enough to speak without a script, it made him look foolish and backwoods. Obama – again, like most presidents – is just as ignorant as the next guy, but does stick to his script and the teleprompter, usually making him look ‘sharp’, and gaining the confidence of America.
During the campaign, Obama supporters indoctrinated and harassed school children into accepting Obama. Some of the outstanding examples:
The Obama Song:
Because of Obama (Obama Youth Movement) This is part of a Kansas City, Mo. Charter school:
(Certainly a little more threatening than Hollywood’s “pledging to serve our president” films produced by Oprah)
Congress passing the “Obama Youth Bill” (actually known as the “Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act" (GIVE) or the Serve America Act): http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-1388 (If you read the first link, also check out Snopes.com for an accuracy check.)
And finally, the mother of all Obama-indoctrination efforts, the Ashville, N.C. teacher who lies to a little girl about McCain in the midst of an outburst of profanity:
As you can see, to understand the fear that many Americans have of Obama’s speech to kids, you must look at the context. This fear is based on a growing stack of evidence that suggests (to them) that Obama, his administration and his supporters are trying to push an agenda, and are pushing that agenda in a way that is far beyond the ‘personality cult’ propaganda ever used by any prior president in the United States. It’s pretty common in Putin’s Russia, Kim Jong Il’s Korea, Mussolini’s Italy, Castro’s Cuba, Saddam’s Iraq and Hitler’s Germany:
KIM JONG IL: http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/obama-vs-kim-jung-il-who-is-the-greater-leader/ (just read it)
MUSSOLINI: Mostly the same speaking style, using rallying to pump up the adrenaline, so the rush brings ‘em back for more.
CASTRO: Change, anyone?
SADDAM: I’m not even going to go here, but Glenn Beck was crucified for making some comparisons (is there a double standard in “hooray free speech! now let’s have him ousted for speaking!”?)
HITLER: a pretty lengthy collection of the numerous comparisons …
OK, FINE. WHAT’S THE PROBLEM, THEN?
With all the super-slick propaganda, logos, and speeches, Obama looks like a new Hitler to a lot of people. With all of the “Obama Youth” and “Pledging” going on, that image is even more reinforced. With the legislation to control the media, the leftovers from prior presidents (terrorist watch list, homeland security, getting rid of the national guard), the push by unofficial Obama-ists to force school children to admire and accept this new leader, and then the fear that he will use this admiration to indoctrinate a new generation into bad-science environmentalism, socialist economic equalization programs, business buyouts, forced public service, and the new racism of affirmative action and “race-carding”.
The original plan was to give the speech, then post video of it online for parents to watch after the fact. Because millions of parents protested, the White House agreed to put a draft of the speech online today (Monday, 09/07/2009) so parents could read the words before hand. While I seriously doubt my six-year old would even pay attention to more than the first few words (instead choosing to make jokes with friends, draw pictures or otherwise find reasons to be naughty), I think those who were worried have a RIGHT to be upset. Taxes pay for our schools so they can teach our children, NOT so they can indoctrinate them, whether for good (“stay in school”, “say no to drugs”, “help your community”, “work hard”) or bad (“here’s how you practice safe sex”, “some people mistakenly believe that a supernatural being created the earth”).
We may never know what the speech was going to include (and it is likely it has been tamed a bit to both “prove” there was nothing to worry about, as well as to prevent any further hard feelings), but reading through the draft today (again, it is 09/07/09, around noon), I see that much of it is harmless “get involved with community service” type things – things which I advocate anyway.
There are some hints of ideologies in his speech, however, and these are as serious (or harmless) as Reagan’s anti-government, anti-taxes:
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.
Without a doubt (and without regard to personal opinion), these phrases did not have to be used, and do serve to press an agenda, especially oft-repeated campaign phrases like “create new jobs and boost our economy”. Later in the speech, Obama gives some examples that exclude the racial majority from his speech (not trying to be racist, but if he is addressing the country, a country where 7 out of 10 people are white, he could have at least aimed one part of his speech toward that segment:
Jazmin, Andoni and Shantell aren’t any different from any of you.
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.
Perhaps, though, we should ignore this, because, after all, race doesn’t matter, and we needn’t be worried that our president and his administration is largely ignorant of the culture and needs of non-minorities. I would have liked, for example, to have seen some kind of “You can’t expect to go out and make a living playing World of Warcraft and Mafia Wars!” bit added so as not to exclude those whites who are losers. I do have to suppose, however, that Mr. Obama is convinced that all whites have their kids in private schools, or may be out this week hunting and clinging to their bibles, so I guess I just have to accept the fact that he did the best he could with his deficit of ethnic experience.
In case you’re wondering, yes, I am sending my kid to school! I’m not going to have him failing at math or reading just because some stupid time-wasting event is taking place. We teach our children to think critically, and to always look for alternate views, to be mindful of other’s feelings, and to maintain their faith and good beliefs even in the face of the perverted doctrines of the world. We are not fearful that we’ve been neglectful parents, or that some man on television is going to usurp our ability to parent according to the dictates of our own conscience.