Obama making his speech to the schools...

[Jason Rees]

My personal favorite Obama song

Kids

PTAs getting in on the action!

He's even the favorite of North Korean Kiddies

Cringe time

Comparison Time

[IJ]

Is that Hitler comparison a joke? Did I miss the part where the kids sing "for OBAMA we DIE," "OBAMA is our LORD," or something?

That last one really did clue me into one reason why this isn't bothering me much. There's a bunch of parents who think it's cool their kids are excited by the optimism and hope (I know, kinda vacuous sentiment, but something we're in short supply of these days with war, financial crisis, healthcare issues, environmental problems, terrorists and everything else) and they're ok with them learning a pro-Obama song. And the Obama opponents are freaking out.

Here's the thing. ALL across this nation, in something of a real aberration in Western cultures, people are much more likely to be evangelical or otherwise devoutly religious, and they're perfectly happy to believe in creationism, a 10k year old earth, that we're in end times, that God required the blood sacrifice of his son to pardon all future people for their inherited sinfulness, that you go to burn in hell if you don't embrace the ideology.

And they teach this to their youngest children. They learn terrifying things at a time when they're implicitly trusting and not in possession of science fact or method, nor of adult judgment or reasoning. They sing songs of praise and they actually DO sing stuff like they'd die for Jesus or that Jesus is their LORD (a bit stronger than the Obama stuff). And the corresponding evidence for these assertions is astonishingly weak to absent and primarily consists of the convictions / personal experience of other locals, in a many which is equal to the conviction and experience of all those other people from other religions who are just as confident in their beliefs. Longterm result: devotion to a religion they would have been very unlikely to embrace if they were raised on facts (without mention for or against religion) and then presented with a balanced view of religion at the age of maturity. THAT brainwashing makes me more nervous.

Could it be that we just live in a culture where critiquing the religious indoctrination of children is a-ok and to be respected and considered private, whereas something just a fraction as extreme, and much more plausible (eg, that Obama can change our nation for the better), is awful because of the culture permitting the attack of political ideas and our unfortunate political tendency to polarization and division?

I don't believe for a minute that this is JUST an issue of school time indoctrination. Obviously school doesn't teach us to praise Jesus (while we are instructed / pressured to accept that our nation has been "under God" (since the 50s when we found him)--I don't hear any concern about kids pressured to worship THAT diety or vision of our nation, least of all from the outraged conservatives who hate these videos. But there would be a similar creep factor if all these Obama worshipping kids were filmed at a church or social gathering rather than solely at schools.

...

When I saw that stern German teacher tapping her pointer, the scene reminded me a lot more of a nun in Catholic school with her ruler, than the smiling, cheering song leader doing the Obama stuff. That's fer sure.

[Jason Rees]

And once again a topic becomes a rant against that pincushion of villains... Christianity... and they're ok with them (kids) learning a pro-Obama song.

I just can't get rid of the feeling that if there had been actual pro-Bush songs, or pro-Reagan songs, or pro-Nixon songs, teachers' and principles' heads would have rolled. And for good reason.

But, hey. The good thing about all this is that hypocracy on all sides is being exposed. Nobody (ok, there are crackpots everywhere, but even this forum's posters haven't stated it) believes that the cop who arrested the harvard professor was a racist. Nobody believes that if a woman is raped by a president with a D, that womens' groups will go ape on him. A great many people are having their eyes opened about hope, and about a man whose greatest accomplishment is getting elected. And we all know that religious and irreligious bigotry are alive and well.

A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to "win" an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic. This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:

Topic A is under discussion.
Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).
Topic A is abandoned.

[IJ]

"The good thing about all this is that hypocracy [sic] on all sides is being exposed."

Yeah, that was my point. To show how people freaking out about some lyrics of benign enthusiasm for our President think it's routine and laudable to indoctrinate children with fundamentalist fervor. That's hypocrisy. But, if you want to push this red herring thing, go on about how exposing hypocrisy about the issue isn't about this issue, but rather is a red herring itself. That's like, Orwellian or something. Good on ya, mate.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/

See the section "Target America" from 9/28. Typical Daily Show juxtapositions of politicians changing their tune based on the politics of the issue under discussion, and also the lyrics from a pro-Bush administration as sung by children.

"Congress, Bush and FEMA, people across our land, have come to rebuild our land, and we join them hand and hand."

I mean, that's indoctrination about specific performance in a crisis / policy! Not just, "Bush said we must all lend a hand" in some vague way to the nation. And it wasn't some (parent notified, no controversy before, during or after until this got on Fox etc) local middle school, this was with Laura Bush smiling in the middle of the group, eg, administration propaganda! The horror!

Show me the Republicans and or conservatives at the time demanding hearings, or comparing this to Hitler youth, and comparing it to the Khmer Rouge (can't stop with just one genocide--see the Daily Show clip). For that matter, show me the hypocritical Democrats freaking out!

This just in: 80% of children who appeared in that video have since performed executions as Acorn Ninja Assassins! It's true! They're practicing for the coming genocide! Speaking of Hitleresque legislation, does anyone remember two-bit politicians and preachers calling for a Biblical US government that would execute homosexuals? I do--total outlier, wasn't worried about it--this is America afterall. What about those legislative restrictions on same sexers? Was that (are those?) the beginning of a Nazi campaign to exterminate us? It's a heck of a lot more parallel to '30s Germany than a few kids signing a song for black history month that praises the first black President? Could be, if you side with all the people indicating that these songs indicate the coming Obamocalypse.

Peace, people. A few dozen kids learned an Obama song. Meanwhile, there's a HEALTHCARE and FISCAL CRISIS and Iran has secret NUCLEAR FACILITIES and is testing medium range missiles that can reach ISRAEL, PARTS OF EUROPE AND US MILITARY BASES. Focus!

[Rising Star]

We have all those issues and more! And the president is in Copenhagen making a pitch for Chicago to host the Olympics!

John

[Bill Glasheen]

the lyrics from a pro-Bush administration as sung by children.

"Congress, Bush and FEMA, people across our land, have come to rebuild our land, and we join them hand and hand."

Congress, Bush and FEMA. Pro Bush? Egad... that's just pro silly.

They forgot to praise the good Mayor of New Orleans. After all if you're going to start with praising Congress...

We have all those issues and more! And the president is in Copenhagen making a pitch for Chicago to host the Olympics!

John

Meanwhile, his former constituents at home in Chicago are protesting the request for the Olympics, because the city is half a billion dollars in debt.

What the heck... let's all forget about it and sing songs praising the dear leader. Isn't ignorance blissful?

Bill

[Jason Rees]

We have all those issues and more! And the president is in Copenhagen making a pitch for Chicago to host the Olympics!

John

I won't criticize Obama for this one. He's the guy responsible for projecting our image around the world, and hosting the Olympics helps remind all those rubes over in Europe that all their notions about who Americans are doesn't hold up under inspection. It doesn't last long with most of them, but it can't hurt.

Also note it helps with his 'hope' mantra to have all that feel-good stuff that comes with the Olympics here at 'home.' Budgets? What budgets? Obama couldn't keep a budget if his life depended on it. Too bad Chicago can't print up its own trillion dollars, eh?

As for Chicago, I hope the Olympics breaks that can of corruption wide open, breaks their budget, cleans up their streets, smacks some gang activity around, and causes some much-needed change in that 'den of scum and villainy.'

Meanwhile, there's a HEALTHCARE and FISCAL CRISIS and Iran has secret NUCLEAR FACILITIES and is testing medium range missiles that can reach ISRAEL, PARTS OF EUROPE AND US MILITARY BASES. Focus!

Just following the Won's example, Ian! While all this has been going on, Dear Leader has made issues out of a cop arresting a belligerent harvard professor; sic'd his people on Rush Limbaugh; tried to slam his healthcare 'solution' unilaterally down our throats; criticized Israel more than Iran; bemoaned the media reporting 'making an issue' of all this; and spent a horrendous amount of money on our fiscal issues, demonstrating yet again that America has no idea how to act responsibly with money, from the poverty-stricken drunk, all the way up to the highest office in the land.

Focus.

[Glenn]

I enjoy the Olympics, the Winter Games more than the Summer ones, and see value to these kinds of grand international events, both for the host company on display and for promoting a sense of international community as they were created to do. But I gotta say, I too would be less than enthusiastic about one coming to a city I lived in. Not only the cost, but the construction mess, traffic re-routes, and then congestion while the games are occurring. For many, even those who are fans, I believe it becomes a NIMBY (Not In My BackYard) scenario.

Like Jason said though, great promotional opportunities for the host country, if done well. And of course the geographer in me cannot help but recognize the opportunity the Games provide for some basic world-geography education, when the media bothers to include that in their coverage that is (they have done a good job with some Games, but largely ignored it with others).

[IJ]

If involving Congress and encouraging them to draft legislation, rather than presenting them with a pre-drawn out plan, and if holding a billion town hall discussions and soliciting input from stakeholders from patients to the AMA to insurance companies and indicating flexibility on issues as central as a public option is "unilateral" or "slamming" his program down our throats, rather than making an attempt to pass legislation (which won't pass itself; this is a contentious issue that is both critical and at an impasse since the 70s), you must have been really, really upset at how that Iraq war was unilaterally rammed down our throats by an administration that favored expansive powers for the executive branch, and produced tremendous fiscal incontinence to the tune of 1.3 trilion dollars spent messing up the occupation of a country that hadn't attacked us, right?

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/13/ ... war.costs/

Another irrelevant red herring? Well, back to the Singing Children of the Obamocalypse. Could the singing children of the Bush administration beat them at hockey? Discuss amongst yourselves.

[Bill Glasheen]

Good news on the healthcare legislation efforts. A bipartisan Senate Committee killed "the public option", thereby probably saving us (for now) from an eventual single-payer, government system.

Not "what the president wanted", but then I wonder about that. Like Republicans pandering to the Christian Right before doing what they're going to do anyway, I'm thinking that the Obama push for the public option was just lip service to the liberals in the Democratic party who helped get him in office. If you know something's doomed to failure anyway then preach, fail, and move on.

"Laws are like sausages; it is better not to see them being made."
- Otto von Bismark

- Bill

[Jason Rees]

Ian, you and I are in agreement that the Bush administration was flipping terrible at managing the government's finances.

However, there were many good reasons to get involved with Iraq, and many more to stick it out and finish it right. I've lost friends in that conflict, and have others who served in it. I'm sorry you don't feel it was worth our while, but we refuse to see what we have done there as unworthy of our time, sweat, blood and tears.

[Glenn]

However, there were many good reasons to get involved with Iraq, and many more to stick it out and finish it right. I've lost friends in that conflict, and have others who served in it. I'm sorry you don't feel it was worth our while, but we refuse to see what we have done there as unworthy of our time, sweat, blood and tears.

This is an area where you and I agree Jason (probably one of several we'd find if we were to actually sit down over lunch some day). While not the only reason for going into Iraq, Hussein's fall from power was long overdue, and frankly should have been dealt with back in 1991. To be fair, that's easier said in hindsight, and I think Bush senior was likely correct when he said such a move in 1991 would have opened up a lot of tension in the coalition. On the other hand, there is the possibility that there would have been less Iraqi opposition to coalition occupation then due to a more clear-cut reason in the minds of many Middle-Easterners for us to be there to start with.

Regardless, we are there now and there is a lot to be said for seeing it through. What the public tends to overlook is that the military is a profession, not just a temp job to earn money for college (although admittedly some try using it solely for that purpose). The service men and women I know have a lot of professionalism for what they do. They want to do their job well and to some sort of completion, and not be pulled out every time the going gets rough. Unfortunately, as with most jobs really, the decision-makers tend to overlook the opinions of the front-line workers.

Should soldier sentiment be the only factor? Of course not. But if we are to continue to maintain an effective professional military, and not just attract people who are only out to serve the minimum possible time so that they can then go to college at the government's expense (a benefit for military personel I whole-heartedly support by the way), there has to be the ability for the military to accomplish the major goals like a successful transition in Iraq. Otherwise, why would anyone bother to make a career out the military.

[Jason Rees]

This is an area where you and I agree Jason (probably one of several we'd find if we were to actually sit down over lunch some day).

If that's gonna happen, it's gotta happen soon. I leave in January. I've been to Lincoln three times in the 5 1/2 years I've been here, and two of those were time spent at Nebraska Heart Institute, both outpatient and inpatient. The other time, we took the kids to the Capital, the kids' museum, and Cold Stone Creamery, before my oldest son got a chance to dive off the 7 meter board at a huge sports complex there.

I'd love to set something up. I don't take any of these chats personally; I'd even meet up with Ian if I got the chance. Lincoln's a nice place to visit... but then so's Omaha!

[IJ]

Hey, I'd hang out with you over coffee anytime.

Here's the thing about Iraq. There WERE many worthy reasons to go in there. I think it's a very noble cause to free a people from a dictator (but we f'd up that occupation so very hard that many many many of them are cold and dead and the rest often have fewer services than they did before--whether gas or electricity or safety). I am primarily mad at Bush Co for how sadly they managed the postinvasion situation, but also their decision to go in, distracting us from Afghanistan. They figured all they needed to do was remove the bad guy. So sad. Hadn't we already seen this movie (Black Hawk Down)? Haven't we already seen what happens with sudden artificial change to a dictatorial or centrally controlled economy (Russia)? So much blood and treasure spent for the hubris of these fools and their yes men and their religious (yes, religious) certainty in their inerrant logic. Sigh*

Wait, I was saying that thing about Iraq... yeah here's that thing. Somehow it's laudable to lose thousands of American lives in that conflict. It's ok the average american family spends 20k of money we don't have on it. It's ok tens of thousands of Iraqis have died. It's the judgment of our Dear Leader and his cronies that we needed to do this. And the government (see widespread mismanagement issues) is the best positioned agency to do it.

Why is universal healthcare all that different? Thousands of American lives are being lost. Lots of treasure would be involved. Laudable goals are involved. There is a broad coalition of nations in the West who feel it is the duty of every civilized and wealthy state to provide it. We have evidence of a huge crisis ready to crush us. And the government involvement now is the anti-christ, it's hitler, it's khmer rouge. Where does all the extreme vitriol come from? What supposed free market magic (where consumers have no stake and little say in the spending, where performance is so poorly linked to success, etc) and supposed choice and benefit is everyone so passionate about defending? I don't think the government is automatically Satan for a war that was a big oops in hindsight, although some great things were done. I don't think the government would do an awesome job at all aspects of healthcare. In either case some independent advice is /was sorely needed. I wish though that this wasn't black and white for the opposing sides of both debates.

PS: I have a little brother (who weighs more than me, so big brother in that sense) and good friends in Afghanistan to worry about and I have nothing but respect for the bravery and commitment of our troops--I tell them that when I take care of them, which is pretty much the only venue I interact with them.

*I lead a hospital medicine team, this week numbering 7 trainees. I publicly praise anyone on my team that adds to my knowledge or asks us to reconsider a course of action or teaches me anything, and I put the comments in their evaluations as well. I also publicly and loudly make an effort to tell them about things I do not understand or need help with. I think this attitude woulda served GW very well.

[Bill Glasheen]

Interesting speech, Ian.

Iraq is behind us - thankfully. So are the many presidents and other foreign leaders who mucked up the Middle East and created what got changed. So far so good now. What is done is done, and finger-pointing does no good unless it first is to oneself.

Afghanistan is still with us. I'm not sure it could have been done much better up until now, given the many times other foreign powers have meddled there and come out with their tails in-between their legs. And I'm not feeling warm and fuzzy about the way it's being handled now by any foreign power in there. And it's not just Afghanistan; it's Pakistan as well. The problem crosses borders and gets into others' back yards.

So what does this all have to do with healthcare? You see a parallel; I don't.

The only thing I will say about healthcare financing and coverage is that no matter what paradigm we have, those who don't like it will do what they can to muck it up so they can say "See!! See!!!" and pine for their "better" way. There's much we can do to make things better without drastic "change" for change's sake. There's tort reform, spreading the tax advantages, pooling risk, breaking down state barriers, evolving away from fee-for-service, rewarding excellence, banning certain conflicts of interest, etc. But parties are going to protect their special interests. And few trust a central group to come in and force drastic change.

And the system really can't take drastic change without additional chaos. Remember that sudden artificial change thing you were talking about earlier? Where's the primary care supply going to come from if you create universal care all at once? Where's the booming economy to support those who will take more than they can give?

Who gets to ration care in a rational fashion?

Laws and sausages, Ian. It's probably going to stay ugly for a good while.

- Bill