Obama's new/old cheerleaders
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
From: Massachusetts
Yet… there is still a difference.
You have to choose one or the other... it's either right or it's wrong to bring your kids to church.
You'll call being brought up in a faith an "indoctrination" which by definition you'd be correct.
The context in which you are using the word, is where we differ.
These kids are getting a big dose of Alinsky / Obama
Religious kids get a big dose of God.
Do I really need to say which “ideology” I’d rather teach my kids?
You have to choose one or the other... it's either right or it's wrong to bring your kids to church.
You'll call being brought up in a faith an "indoctrination" which by definition you'd be correct.
The context in which you are using the word, is where we differ.
These kids are getting a big dose of Alinsky / Obama
Religious kids get a big dose of God.
Do I really need to say which “ideology” I’d rather teach my kids?
Since when did “large evangelical churches” become social pariahs? “Evangelical Church” is a large brush… care to be a little more specific? Just who is it common knowledge with? So in 1970 or there about… and since then… what have we been teaching our children…what?
We're getting a little myopic on this though. Let’s get back to the big picture… The Dems are trying to elect Obama... the fact of the matter is, this issue brings campaigning to an all time low. All the other videos drawing a parallel to other unsavory historical events and what these kids were made to do, are not that far off base.
This particular instance it is wrong, and it is from Liberal Democrats.
I still want to see an example where a "Right-Winger" used kids for nefarious purposes.
We're getting a little myopic on this though. Let’s get back to the big picture… The Dems are trying to elect Obama... the fact of the matter is, this issue brings campaigning to an all time low. All the other videos drawing a parallel to other unsavory historical events and what these kids were made to do, are not that far off base.
This particular instance it is wrong, and it is from Liberal Democrats.
I still want to see an example where a "Right-Winger" used kids for nefarious purposes.
I thought we were discussing parents influencing (or brainwashing) their children, and certainly James Dobson and Reverend Moon have been doing it for years through books and television. If you want examples of conservatives using their children to promote their ideology, you don't need to look any farther than examples like Kyle Williams, 12 year old columnist for WorldNetDaily, or kids picketing for McCain, here are some conservatives stealing signs, and re-using them for their own purpose, along with their kids, and yes, even McCain supporters video their children in support of McCain, is that nefarious enough?
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
From: NY
you're more than welcome to address it with me... not saying that I would, but I certainly have a right to do so. Gona' try and stop me?
We have a right to freedom of speech... not a right to be free of offense. Save the "PC" crap for those that appreciate it.
I find Obama offensive... by your standard he now has to stop talking. Actually, most of the things he says "are just asking for trouble"... as you put it. By your standard that abridges his freedom of speech? There is no double standard.
I hope I made it clear, I have no problem with people bringing their kids to church, but by definition and reality, I am correct. Just because you and I, and most people, see it as a good thing, it is still shaping an impressionable mind. Making the Obama kids out to be some sort of brainwashing is ridiculous.
No where did I say it legitimizes or demonizes it, let's just call apples, apples. T-Shirt boy is obviously too young to know or understand anything about politics as are the Obama singers. If the singers parents are wrong, then so is the t-shirt kid's parents.
Just so happens your Obama kids are doing both (singing of Obama and wearing an Obama "blue" tee shirt)... so I guess it makes them twice as wrong?
Please, the Hitler youth programs were run by Hitler and forced on the population, the Obama singers were not attached to Obama's will in any way, there is no similarity.
I thought we were discussing parents influencing (or brainwashing) their children, and certainly James Dobson and Reverend Moon have been doing it for years through books and television.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
From: Massachusetts
None of that is offensive to me. Let's just say if I was wearing a "Country Musicians Are Backwards, Alcoholic, Wife-Beating, Inbred, Ex-Prisoner Hicks"
you're more than welcome to address it with me... not saying that I would, but I certainly have a right to do so. Gona' try and stop me?
We have a right to freedom of speech... not a right to be free of offense. Save the "PC" crap for those that appreciate it.
I find Obama offensive... by your standard he now has to stop talking. Actually, most of the things he says "are just asking for trouble"... as you put it. By your standard that abridges his freedom of speech? There is no double standard.
you're more than welcome to address it with me... not saying that I would, but I certainly have a right to do so. Gona' try and stop me?
We have a right to freedom of speech... not a right to be free of offense. Save the "PC" crap for those that appreciate it.
I find Obama offensive... by your standard he now has to stop talking. Actually, most of the things he says "are just asking for trouble"... as you put it. By your standard that abridges his freedom of speech? There is no double standard.
Is it clear now? I'm not using anything, I'm trying to look at it from both sides. Sorry if I don't fall into that black and white answer category.
you're using examples of openly radical individuals. The difference here is that Obama is supposed to be "main-stream" or "normal". We're not attributing the sining directly to Obama, but rather to the overzealous nature of his ardent supporters. It is in this context where the creepiness of that video comes in to play. There is a big difference between using the child as the main focus of the issue to that of using one to hold a sign at a rally.
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
From: NY
Originally Posted by momalle1
Subjective? No, wearing a T-Shirt that says "Country Music Sucks" is offensive, wearing one that says "Rock Rules" is not. One that says "Country Musicians Are Backwards, Alcoholic, Wife-Beating, Inbred, Ex-Prisoner Hicks" is just looking for trouble.
Subjective? No, wearing a T-Shirt that says "Country Music Sucks" is offensive, wearing one that says "Rock Rules" is not. One that says "Country Musicians Are Backwards, Alcoholic, Wife-Beating, Inbred, Ex-Prisoner Hicks" is just looking for trouble.
Is it clear now?
BS, you're comparing state sponsored propaganda with parents influencing their children.
The end result is the same, and if in fact it's parental sponsored, then it's even more heinous... as every one has been pointing out.
I went back and viewed those links of yours...
Kids putting up "Support the Troops" signs
2 kids holding a McCain sign at an anti-war / pro obama rally
and a video of some kids being interviewed...
sorry... these don't even come close to the level of creepiness seen on the Sing for Obama video... not even close... nice try.
Last edited by S-76; Oct 7, 2008 at 01:41 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
From: Massachusetts
All I said is one was more offensive than the other, you can twist my words all day, it doesn't change that I never said people don't have the right.
What part of I have no problem with people bringing their kids to church isn't clear?
OK, parental sponsored propaganda... better?
The point is if it's wrong, then it's wrong regardless of where it comes from, right or left. Why is that so hard to say? Instead you go off asking for proof of the right doing the same, and when presented with it, you go off somewhere else. You're making a simple statement complicated.
What part of I have no problem with people bringing their kids to church isn't clear?
OK, parental sponsored propaganda... better?
The point is if it's wrong, then it's wrong regardless of where it comes from, right or left. Why is that so hard to say? Instead you go off asking for proof of the right doing the same, and when presented with it, you go off somewhere else. You're making a simple statement complicated.
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
From: NY
The point is if it's wrong, then it's wrong regardless of where it comes from, right or left. Why is that so hard to say? Instead you go off asking for proof of the right doing the same, and when presented with it, you go off somewhere else. You're making a simple statement complicated.
The issue at hand is the creepy Liberal Democrat parents coercing their children to sing in a Hollywood type production of Obama electoral propaganda.
If you think it's ok, then fine. You're obviously the type that this video was addressed to. The rest of us think it's sick.