4 Responses to ““But When Bush 41 Spoke…”

1. Chuck Says:
   September 8th, 2009 at 9:17 am

   Ha, that is kind of funny. Holding hearings to see if the $26K was spent on politically purposes. And by the way, President Bush could have made 19,230 speaches for what the Congressional Democrats were going to spend last month on a no bid contract to purchase luxury jets for their private use.

2. Right Says:
   September 8th, 2009 at 1:05 pm

   Good catch Mitch.

   From the Examiner: “The National Education Association denounced the speech, saying it “cannot endorse a president who spends $26,000 of taxpayers’ money on a staged media event at Alice Deal Junior High School in Washington, D.C. — while cutting school lunch funds for our neediest youngsters.”

   The NEA is right that these Presidential appearances in schools are staged political events. Every time a President speaks in public, or the cameras are rolling, he’s serving a political purpose and trying to improve his approval ratings.

   This is what the NEA has just posted on their website:

   “If students want to be successful, they must take responsibility for getting the most out of their educations. That was the message delivered by President Barack Obama to millions of students across the nation in an inspirational address on Tuesday, September 8.”

   http://www.nea.org/home/35721.htm

   So when a Republican does it, it’s a waste of money that would be better spent on school lunches. When a Democrat does it, it’s “inspirational”.

   Obama did refrain from partisanship during the speech, but the brat who introduced him didn’t pass up the opportunity to give a shout out to the “yes we can” campaign slogan.

3. Dog Gone Says:
   September 8th, 2009 at 3:02 pm

   So some little kid gave a pro-Obama shout out? Big deal. So long as no one pushed the kid to say something that was not what the kid wanted to express I have no problem with it.

   I find a big difference in criticizing Bush 41 from pressuring schools not to let kids see the speech, or keeping kids home because of some crazy notion the president is going to be radicalizing them. What was said of Bush 41 was pretty consistent with the kind of criticism emanating from both sides of the political spectrum. It challenges spending decisions, but seems to stop well short of the demonizing and polarizing going on now.

   Call it perhaps NOT a difference of kind (common to both sides), but a significant and much larger difference of degree.

4. Right Says:
   September 8th, 2009 at 4:52 pm

   Dog Gone, this “little kid” was a high school student was CHOSEN to introduce Obama. That type of political message is what the Obama administration said would not occur.

   “The day after Bush spoke, the Washington Post published a front-page story suggesting the speech was carefully staged for the president’s political benefit. “The White House turned a Northwest Washington junior high classroom into a television studio and its students into props,” the Post reported.”

   One difference, and an important one at that, is that the GHWB criticism was driven by the liberal MSM, and the Democrats called for an investigation. The criticisms of Obama have been the result of concerned parents.

   And how do you explain the duplicity of the NEA? Why is it that moonbats think they have a patent on protesting?

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.