The Obamassiah says "Gather unto me the little children"

[basspig]

This is how the Hitler Youth got its start.

About 11 years ago, I read Dr. Leonard Peikoff's book, The Ominous Parallels, which compares the shift to the left in pre-Nazi Germany to the US situation, circa 1991 or so, when it was written. Frighteningly on-target.

I wrote my school super about this matter, in no uncertain words.

The Messiah has surrounded himself with self-described communists: e.g. the FCC "diversity" czar, the "green jobs" czar. Tell them to teach kids about the Founding Fathers instead! And NOT the vicious "politically correct" approach, that blames them for slavery--but the historical approach, that shows how, in a world of slavery, they challenged its basic premise and set the stage for the abolition of slavery.*

Those communist bastards the Messiah loves, want to REIMPOSE slavery. What is communism but slavery?

 

[Soundman]

Why parents do not trust our President

This is not a new thing. I remember having to watch Bush Jr. when I was in school and my sister watched Regan. Obama is just doing what previous presidents have done, big deal.

http://www.postonpolitics.com/2009/09/obamas-not-the-first-president-to-address-nations-schoolchildren-on-live-television/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/sep/03/arne-duncan/barack-obama-not-first-president-address-school-ch/

It's a little bit different this time. This is outright propaganda that most parents would not be in favor of:

They think we're crazy. "They" are the sneering defenders of Barack Obama who can't fathom the backlash against the president's nationwide speech to schoolchildren next Tuesday. "We" are parents with eyes wide open to the potential for politicized abuse in America's classrooms.

Ask moms and dads in Farmington, Utah, who discovered this week that their children sat through a Hollywood propaganda video promoting the cult of Obama. In the clip, a parade of entertainers vow to flush their toilets less, buy hybrid vehicles, end poverty and world hunger, and commit to "service" for "change." Actress Demi Moore leads the glitterati in a collective promise "to be a servant to our president." Musician Anthony Kiedis pledges "to be of service to Barack Obama."

The campaign commercial crescendos with the stars and starlets asking their audience: "What's your pledge?"

This same "Do Something" ethos infected the U.S. Department of Education teachers guides accompanying the announcement of Obama's speech -- until late Wednesday, that is, when the White House removed some of the activist language exhorting students to come up with ways to "help the president." Education Secretary Arne Duncan had disseminated the material directly to principals across the country -- circumventing elected school board members and superintendents now facing neighborhood revolts.

O's bureaucrats can whitewash offending language from the Sept. 8 speech-related documents, but they can't remove the taint of left-wing radicalism that informs Obama and his education mentors. A spokesman maintained that the speech is "about the value of education and the importance of staying in school as part of his effort to dramatically cut the dropout rate." But the historical subtext is far less innocent.

Obama served with Weather Underground terrorist and neighbor Bill Ayers on the Chicago Annenberg Challenge education initiative. Downplaying academic achievement in favor of left-wing radical activism in the public schools is rooted in Ayers' pedagogical philosophy. Obama served as the program's first chairman of the board, while Ayers steered its curricular policy. The two oversaw grants to welfare rights enterprise ACORN and to avowed communist Michael Klonsky -- a close pal of Ayers and member of the militant Students for a Democratic Society. SDS served as a precursor to the violent Weather Underground organization.
As investigative journalist Stanley Kurtz reported, Klonsky and Ayers teamed up on the so-called "small schools movement" to steer schoolchildren away from core academics to left-wing politicking on issues of "inequity, war and violence."

A cadre of like-minded educators and national service administrators across the country share the same core commitment to transforming themselves from imparters of knowledge to transformers of society. The "change" agenda trains students to think only about what they should do for Obama -- and rarely to contemplate how his powers and ambitions should be limited and restrained.
Ayers preached his education-as-"social justice" agenda to his "comrades" at the World Education Forum in Caracas, Venezuela, three years ago:

"This is my fourth visit to Venezuela, each time at the invitation of my comrade and friend Luis Bonilla, a brilliant educator and inspiring fighter for justice. Luis has taught me a great deal about the Bolivarian Revolution and about the profound educational reforms underway here in Venezuela under the leadership of President [Hugo] Chavez. We share the belief that education is the motor-force of revolution, and I've come to appreciate Luis as a major asset in both the Venezuelan and the international struggle -- I look forward to seeing how he and all of you continue to overcome the failings of capitalist education as you seek to create something truly new and deeply humane."
Ayers continued:

"I walked out of jail and into my first teaching position -- and from that day until this I've thought of myself as a teacher, but I've also understood teaching as a project intimately connected with social justice. After all, the fundamental message of the teacher is this: You can change your life -- whoever you are, wherever you've been, whatever you've done, another world is possible. As students and teachers begin to see themselves as linked to one another, as tied to history and capable of collective action, the fundamental message of teaching shifts slightly, and becomes broader, more generous: We must change ourselves as we come together to change the world. Teaching invites transformations, it urges revolutions small and large. La educacion es revolucion!"
This is why informed parents do not trust the Educator-in-Chief and his "comrades." You can take Obama from the radicals in Chicago. But you can't take the Chicago radicalism out of Obama.

You can find it here among other places: http://www.onenewsnow.com/Perspectives/Default.aspx?id=669676

One canot help but find this sightly alarming, especially if you have a child in the public school system.

 

[darien87]

Spoken like a true liberal.This sounds like something out of the Communist Manifesto.

Why are these people from these other countries flocking to the US for treatment? It's because, even with our flaws, we have the best care in the world. Now listen to what I'm saying. I'm talking about superior care. I'm not talking about problems with some of the insurance companies. The insurance system can be improved, but in this country (contrary to your comments above), you cannot be denied services. You will be taken care of regardless of your ability to pay. I could list you horror stories of people under a universal health care system which Obama's plan is modeled after and it would make you sick. This is not the direction our country needs to go.

So now I'm a Communist?!?!

You said yourself that government, albeit in a limited capacity, is necessary. How is that any different than what I said?? Are you honestly trying to tell me that there is no greed in the American healthcare system??? If that is the case, why can't you get coverage for alternative medicine? I'll tell you why, because Kaiser doesn't make money from this. Give me a break, I couldn't even get Kaiser to pay for Chiropractic visits for my lower back problems. Apparently Chiropractic is too "alternative" for Kaiser.

And as far as everyone flocking to the US for treatment. I can give you quite a few examples of US citizens that happily go to other countries for medical care. My boss is from New Zealand. His father has been undergoing treamtent for a heart condition for years. Both of his parents don't work, but since they have universal health care, they don't have to worry about paying the tens of thousands of dollars he would have racked up in medical costs and losing their house. He says that if he ever needs treatment like that, he's moving back home to NZ.

Where are you getting that insurance companies don't deny people coverage?!?!? That happens every day. My own mother has gone through this. What about people that have a serious illness that get denied access to new or experimental drugs because they are too expensive?

Our medical system is very good in many ways, but is far from the "coverage for all" utopia that you make it out to be.

 

[lsiberian]

So now I'm a Communist?!?!

You said yourself that government, albeit in a limited capacity, is necessary. How is that any different than what I said?? Are you honestly trying to tell me that there is no greed in the American healthcare system??? If that is the case, why can't you get coverage for alternative medicine? I'll tell you why, because Kaiser doesn't make money from this. Give me a break, I couldn't even get Kaiser to pay for Chiropractic visits for my lower back problems. Apparently Chiropractic is too "alternative" for Kaiser.

And as far as everyone flocking to the US for treatment. I can give you quite a few examples of US citizens that happily go to other countries for medical care. My boss is from New Zealand. His father has been undergoing treamtent for a heart condition for years. Both of his parents don't work, but since they have universal health care, they don't have to worry about paying the tens of thousands of dollars he would have racked up in medical costs and losing their house. He says that if he ever needs treatment like that, he's moving back home to NZ.

Where are you getting that insurance companies don't deny people coverage?!?!? That happens every day. My own mother has gone through this. What about people that have a serious illness that get denied access to new or experimental drugs because they are too expensive?

Our medical system is very good in many ways, but is far from the "coverage for all" utopia that you make it out to be.

I've read the communist manifesto and nothing you said reflects it. I must say you are far from communism. which consists of levying heavy progressive taxes and redistribution of property.

No one is proposing that. The goal of the democrats I believe is to give poor people to opportunity to succeed. There are many kids today that flat out have no chance to make something of themselves.

Every kid should have a fighting chance to succeed in our society regardless of race, color, creed, faith, or parental income level.

Kids are the ones feeling the brunt of our health care crisis. I personally know of folks that couldn't afford the medicine for their kids curable illness. Health care is a basic universal necessity and all children should be covered.

Tort Reform is needed, but it has to come later. A common sense law for the nation is what we really need when it comes to lawsuits. Good luck getting it past the lawyers running our country though.

 

[aberkowitz]

This is how the Hitler Youth got its start.

About 11 years ago, I read Dr. Leonard Peikoff's book, The Ominous Parallels, which compares the shift to the left in pre-Nazi Germany to the US situation, circa 1991 or so, when it was written. Frighteningly on-target.

I wrote my school super about this matter, in no uncertain words.

The Messiah has surrounded himself with self-described communists: e.g. the FCC "diversity" czar, the "green jobs" czar. Tell them to teach kids about the Founding Fathers instead! And NOT the vicious "politically correct" approach, that blames them for slavery--but the historical approach, that shows how, in a world of slavery, they challenged its basic premise and set the stage for the abolition of slavery.*

Those communist bastards the Messiah loves, want to REIMPOSE slavery. What is communism but slavery?

I believe this has to be one of the silliest things I've ever read. You start off with the Hitler Youth (a fascist organization that was part of a regime that mass murdered Communists among the many others they decided to kill) and end on Communism. If you want to compare Obama to fascists then do so, if you want to compare him to Communists, then do so. But by definition, he cannot be both.

And by the way, if you're going to quote a book maybe you should actually know what you're talking about. Peikoff wrote his book in 1982, not 1991, and it had more to do with the historical context around Hitler's rise to power and how it was influenced by hundreds of years of German interpretation of ancient philosophy (e.g. Aristotle and Plato), as well as religion and ethics. One of his key theses is that the idea that Nazism took root in Germany as the result of generations of philosophers promoting the principles of Plato. The book then goes on to make comparisons between the exposures and the mindset of the young people in 1920s Germany and the US in the 1960s, specifically focusing on the education systems of the two countries. It's a very deep book that deals with the concepts of Objectivism, Metaphysics, and Epistemology, and which was not done nearly enough justice by the one liner your wrote which clearly misrepresented what the book said.

All of that said, before you quote Peikoff as the conservative savior, you may want to read more about his politics. He described George Bush as "apocalyptically bad", and made the following comment about the 2006 congressional election:

Given the choice between a rotten, enfeebled, despairing killer [Democrats], and a rotten, ever stronger, and ambitious killer [Republicans], it is immoral to vote for the latter, and equally immoral to refrain from voting at all because "both are bad.

His comments about the 2008 candidates were even more hilarious...

 

[Soundman]

So now I'm a Communist?!?!

You said yourself that government, albeit in a limited capacity, is necessary. How is that any different than what I said?? Are you honestly trying to tell me that there is no greed in the American healthcare system??? If that is the case, why can't you get coverage for alternative medicine? I'll tell you why, because Kaiser doesn't make money from this. Give me a break, I couldn't even get Kaiser to pay for Chiropractic visits for my lower back problems. Apparently Chiropractic is too "alternative" for Kaiser.

And as far as everyone flocking to the US for treatment. I can give you quite a few examples of US citizens that happily go to other countries for medical care. My boss is from New Zealand. His father has been undergoing treamtent for a heart condition for years. Both of his parents don't work, but since they have universal health care, they don't have to worry about paying the tens of thousands of dollars he would have racked up in medical costs and losing their house. He says that if he ever needs treatment like that, he's moving back home to NZ.

Where are you getting that insurance companies don't deny people coverage?!?!? That happens every day. My own mother has gone through this. What about people that have a serious illness that get denied access to new or experimental drugs because they are too expensive?

Our medical system is very good in many ways, but is far from the "coverage for all" utopia that you make it out to be.

Hey Darien,
There have been a lot of posts on this subject and I don't have the time to respond to them all. I will address you because my comments were directed at you and I believe your questions are sincere. First of all, I don't believe you are a Communist. I do believe that you have been misled. Some of your statements line up directly with many of Carl Marx's work. I mentioned the Communist Manifesto in particular because it is scary how closely it lines up with some of your comments. There are many in our educational system who are propogating these dangerous philosphies so I can only gather that that is where your ideas may have come from. As for the healthcare debate, I think we can all agree that the system has some problems that needs fixing. My point was that government is not the answer to the problem. In fact, it will without a doubt create a worse problem. Not to mention the fact that the cost involved is so enormous that long term our country will not be able to sustain it. But that's another point that would take a lot of number crunching in this thread to show you what I mean.
The main issue you mentioned was with your argument about your boss's father from New Zealand. My previous arguments were not about coverage. We all know that there are issues. When I mentioned that we have the best health care in the world, I'm referring to the level of "care" not "coverage" you receive. We have some of the best doctors in the world with some of the best facilities and technologies. This level of care is supurb. Also, you cannot be denied treatment. If you were to walk into the hospital with a need and had no money, no job, and no insurance. They cannot deny you those services in this country. The insurance system can use some work, but we have the best care available. As for your boss's father, God bless him. I hope things work out well for him. I wonder how long he had to wait for treatment though? The problem with many universal healthcare systems is the amount of wait time to receive services. You are also putting the power in the hands of the government to dictate what kind of coverage you will receive. They can decide to deny you the service. When you are talking about a life and death situation, this is critical. Many have suffered and died under that system.

 

[Soundman]

I've read the communist manifesto and nothing you said reflects it. I must say you are far from communism. which consists of levying heavy progressive taxes and redistribution of property.

Here is the main statement by Darien I was referring too:

...But you can't deny that there aren't instances when totally free capitalism, with no sort of limits, leads to greed and oppression. There needs to be a balance between freedom and doing what's right for society.

Here's part of the introduction to the Communist Manifesto:

Communism, in which they (Marx and Engel) invision a society without classes, private property, or a State. The Manifesto claims that the increasing exploitation of industrial workers will produce a global economic crisis, leading to a revolution in which Capitalism is overthrown by the new working class.

Does his statement not sound Anti-Capitalist to you? It's the kind of thinking that Marx wanted to start a revolution.

 

[Tomorrow]

I believe this has to be one of the silliest things I've ever read. You start off with the Hitler Youth (a fascist organization that was part of a regime that mass murdered Communists among the many others they decided to kill) and end on Communism. If you want to compare Obama to fascists then do so, if you want to compare him to Communists, then do so. But by definition, he cannot be both.

And by the way, if you're going to quote a book maybe you should actually know what you're talking about. Peikoff wrote his book in 1982, not 1991, and it had more to do with the historical context around Hitler's rise to power and how it was influenced by hundreds of years of German interpretation of ancient philosophy (e.g. Aristotle and Plato), as well as religion and ethics. One of his key theses is that the idea that Nazism took root in Germany as the result of generations of philosophers promoting the principles of Plato. The book then goes on to make comparisons between the exposures and the mindset of the young people in 1920s Germany and the US in the 1960s, specifically focusing on the education systems of the two countries. It's a very deep book that deals with the concepts of Objectivism, Metaphysics, and Epistemology, and which was not done nearly enough justice by the one liner your wrote which clearly misrepresented what the book said.

All of that said, before you quote Peikoff as the conservative savior, you may want to read more about his politics. He described George Bush as "apocalyptically bad", and made the following comment about the 2006 congressional election:

Given the choice between a rotten, enfeebled, despairing killer [Democrats], and a rotten, ever stronger, and ambitious killer [Republicans], it is immoral to vote for the latter, and equally immoral to refrain from voting at all because "both are bad.

His comments about the 2008 candidates were even more hilarious...

Let me ask you something. Did you actually read this book or did you plagiarize this http://astore.amazon.com/theligh-20/detail/0452011175 with full statements lifted directly and worded exactly as the reviews? That's not a good thing if you're going to scold someone about its contents, as you did. (And I'm not talking about your italicized items.)

 

[aberkowitz]

Let me ask you something. Did you actually read this book or did you plagiarize this http://astore.amazon.com/theligh-20/detail/0452011175 with full statements lifted directly and worded exactly as the reviews? That's not a good thing if you're going to scold someone about its contents, as you did.

No- I read the book back in college as part of two classes- one was a history class on the rise of the Weimar republic, and the other was a political philosophy class that included a section of Objectivism and the work of Ayn Rand and her disciples. One of the papers I wrote had to do with challenging Peikoff's ideas around Plato and his influence on German thinkers. The only plagiarism I can be accused of was not to properly source my quotes regarding Peikoff's view on the 2006 election, those I grabbed from Wikipedia.

That said, I looked at the link you provided, I didn't see anything that I "lifted directly". Most of my statements were fairly generic, and probably would have been made by anybody who read the full book.

I would never make the claim to have read something that I never read.

 

[lsiberian]

Here is the main statement by Darien I was referring too:

Here's part of the introduction to the Communist Manifesto:

Does his statement not sound Anti-Capitalist to you? It's the kind of thinking that Marx wanted to start a revolution.

I think you are really stretching yourself to try and tie the two statements together. He simply proposes controls in Capitalism. Not the end of private property. Public health care doesn't equal communism. First it doesn't involve redistribution of income. Second it doesn't represent any of the previously mentioned 10 step to toward communism on this forum.

Furthermore I believe medicine is far too inelastic economically speaking to keep entirely private. I believe in public hospitals and in public healthcare services. I don't think all doctors should be brought in, but I think hospitals should be owned and controlled by the government rather than private industry. I view hospitals in the same manner as schools. I think we can allow for both private and public institutions. This reduces the regulation required for private hospitals while providing somewhere anyone can go for treatment.

 

[darien87]

Here is the main statement by Darien I was referring too:

Here's part of the introduction to the Communist Manifesto:

Does his statement not sound Anti-Capitalist to you? It's the kind of thinking that Marx wanted to start a revolution.

I can see where you would think that what I said was slightly similar to your quote from the Communits Manifesto, but I still think you're reaching.

 

[darien87]

No- I read the book back in college as part of two classes- one was a history class on the rise of the Weimar republic, and the other was a political philosophy class that included a section of Objectivism and the work of Ayn Rand and her disciples. One of the papers I wrote had to do with challenging Peikoff's ideas around Plato and his influence on German thinkers. The only plagiarism I can be accused of was not to properly source my quotes regarding Peikoff's view on the 2006 election, those I grabbed from Wikipedia.

That said, I looked at the link you provided, I didn't see anything that I "lifted directly". Most of my statements were fairly generic, and probably would have been made by anybody who read the full book.

I would never make the claim to have read something that I never read.

Remind me not to debate Philosophical literature with you.

 

[aberkowitz]

Correction- my previous post said rise of the Weimar republic. I meant to type fall of the Weimar and rise of the Nazis.

 

[Tomorrow]

No- I read the book back in college as part of two classes- one was a history class on the rise of the Weimar republic, and the other was a political philosophy class that included a section of Objectivism and the work of Ayn Rand and her disciples. One of the papers I wrote had to do with challenging Peikoff's ideas around Plato and his influence on German thinkers. The only plagiarism I can be accused of was not to properly source my quotes regarding Peikoff's view on the 2006 election, those I grabbed from Wikipedia.

That said, I looked at the link you provided, I didn't see anything that I "lifted directly". Most of my statements were fairly generic, and probably would have been made by anybody who read the full book.

I would never make the claim to have read something that I never read.

That's really very interesting. Very! I copied this quote of yours onto my Bing search engine... "the idea that Nazism took root in Germany as the result of generations of philosophers promoting the principles of Plato". It comes up word for word in the search results for the website I gave you. (Still does.) BUT cool, now when you link to the reviews, they have changed and you cannot find this quote that was there 1/2 hour ago (and is still in the search summary).

Do the search of this statement yourself.

Dunno, abe...I'm just sayin'.

 

[aberkowitz]

That's really very interesting. Very! I copied this quote of yours onto my Bing search engine... "the idea that Nazism took root in Germany as the result of generations of philosophers promoting the principles of Plato". It comes up word for word in the search results for the website I gave you. (Still does.) BUT cool, now when you link to the reviews, they have changed and you cannot find this quote that was there 1/2 hour ago (and is still in the search summary).

Do the search of this statement yourself.

Dunno, abe...I'm just sayin'.

Are you trying to say that in 30 minutes time I had a review removed from a site??? I certainly don't know how I'd do that. I don't review books, never have, so I can't help you there.

As for the thesis I quoted, I'm not taking credit for that as an original idea. That is one of the key tenets of the book. I never claimed that as my own idea. It was my impression.

 

[Tomorrow]

Are you trying to say that in 30 minutes time I had a review removed from a site??? I certainly don't know how I'd do that. I don't review books, never have, so I can't help you there.

As for the thesis I quoted, I'm not taking credit for that as an original idea. That is one of the key tenets of the book. I never claimed that as my own idea. It was my impression.

I understand the generic nature of most of your statements. It was just odd that the one statement I searched came up exactly. And by the way, the website did get changed, but I managed to find the original review. It's likely coincidental that your statements match exactly. Here it is..

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Product Details
Amazon Sales Rank: #22047 in Books
Published on: 1983-06-01
Original language: English
Number of items: 1
Binding: Paperback
352 pages

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Customer Reviews
"We have to be strong enough to live in contradictions;"
The ideas of the Third Reich can be exemplified...[snip]

Piekoff introduces the idea that Nazism took root in Germany as the result of generations of philosophers promoting the principles of Plato...[snip]. "

 

[aberkowitz]

Crap- that posted before I was done typing. Damn iPhone!

Anyway, as I was saying, that was my interpretation of the book, buri know nor alone in that. Half oy class Came to that conclusion. I don't doubt there are many others who express the same view.

You can believe me or not, it's really not going to effect how I sleep tonight.

 

[lsiberian]

I understand the generic nature of most of your statements. It was just odd that the one statement I searched came up exactly. And by the way, the website did get changed, but I managed to find the original review. It's likely coincidental that your statements match exactly. Here it is..

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Product Details
Amazon Sales Rank: #22047 in Books
Published on: 1983-06-01
Original language: English
Number of items: 1
Binding: Paperback
352 pages

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Customer Reviews
"We have to be strong enough to live in contradictions;"
The ideas of the Third Reich can be exemplified...[snip]

Piekoff introduces the idea that Nazism took root in Germany as the result of generations of philosophers promoting the principles of Plato...[snip]. "

Somebody's got a problem

 

[Tomorrow]

Crap- that posted before I was done typing. Damn iPhone!

Anyway, as I was saying, that was my interpretation of the book, buri know nor alone in that. Half oy class Came to that conclusion. I don't doubt there are many others who express the same view.

You can believe me or not, it's really not going to effect how I sleep tonight.

I believe you, abe. I'm sure the exact wording could be pure coincidence as it's the essence of one part of the book. That's why I asked. But you must admit that it was odd that the review got moved, too.

 

[10010011]

The best thing the Obama administration can do is simply release a transcript of what he plans to say. Then people can decide for themselves if they want their children to hear it or not.

I have been thinking about when I was in school and I remember whenever Nixon, Ford, Carter, or Reagan held a speech during school we watched it during class, and often discussed it as a class afterwords.

Our parents were never asked for permission before hand.

I don't see the difference here.