how disingenuous these righties are regarding the president’s speech to school children! it’s not unprecedented as i’ve heard stated repeatedly. it’s not even unusual. presidents have used technology as it’s become available. 25 years ago when reagan was president, this just wasn’t an easy possibility. presidents regularly speak to school children.
(now i know that bush only read a story to the kids but you have to keep the speeches at the intelligence level of the speaker and an elementary book was all he could handle.)
i do agree that asking ‘how you can help the president’ is a poor choice of words. it sounds like a plea for assistance in pushing an agenda. i would hope that what they meant was how can you be involved in the government.
every year in school we had to write some type of essay about the government. (what needed to be done. why our government is great, etc…) i am fully behind any assignment that would help my kids get involved in our governmental processes.
i wish these righties would just come out and say it in plain speak. you don’t want your kids to hear from a democrat in general…obama specifically. you would like to keep your indoctrination inside the home. fine…keep your kids home. don’t deprive my children of being involved in seeing what their government is all about.
i guess this all comes from sour grapes. after adulterous newt promised a republican revolution and piggy rove promised a permanent republican majority, it must be a disappointment to realize they screwed it all up. i’m not so stupid as to think the democrats will be in power forever or even for the next 8 years. i do, however, realize that holding the governing process hostage because you’re pissed that you’re a minority is childish! democrats may have disagreed strenuously with what bush was doing but it did NOT require a 60 vote majority every time he wanted something done! the dems were smart enough to use that awesome power responsibly…when it was very important. repugs are causing great harm to the governing process all for sour grapes. it’s sad, childish and irresponsible.
i know, i know….this debate has been beaten to death but i just can’t believe what is being thrown around out there!
at the end of this blog is an excerpt from the UN convention on torture; a document which ronald reagan signed. i disagree completely with torture and mostly with ronald reagan. i guess i just think it’s morally wrong. i don’t want our country to be in danger nor do i want our troops to be in danger and i feel if we commit torture we endanger or troops abroad.
i heard jonathan turley today in a video clip from hardball i believe it was and he made a much better argument than i could ever think of. essentially, torture is illegal. we signed treaties to that effect. we agreed to prosecute perpetrators of torture. (we’re not so good at holding our own accountable.) i’m disappointed in chris matthews and unsurprised by pat buchanan but i liked turley’s statements. this line was especially nice:
“so we‘re not supposed to be like Serbia, where we say, look, this just isn‘t a good time for us to investigate torture. it‘s an inconvenient thing. It‘s going to be divisive. None of that matters. under the treaties that we helped write, a country is morally and legally obligated…”
Article 1.
1. For the purposes of this Convention, torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.
2. This article is without prejudice to any international instrument or national legislation which does or may contain provisions of wider application.
Article 2.
1. Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction.
2. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.
3. An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture.
