Tuesday, November 19, 2013

Obama at Gettysburg..............oops

Wrong title;  It should read "NOT at Gettysburg!"

Mr. Obama was sworn in with Lincoln's Bible at his inauguration.  He frequently likens himself to Lincoln.   Suddenly, on the 150th anniversary of Mr. Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, Mr. Obama's giving it a miss.
WHY?   Even Carney was fumbling around for an answer.  Why do YOU think?  He has one engagement which, by helicopter, he could reach in 20 minutes from Gettysburg, that's IT for the day.

WHAT's UP?  By the way, while Googling around for info on this, I came upon this excellent piece at Forbes and thought I should link it. 

So...seriously..............why would Obama miss this chance to identify with his hero Lincoln ???



JonBerg said...

Lincoln, as well as our Founders, must be spinning in their graves! For their sake and mine I hope reincarnation is impossible.

Average American said...

Must be because he was reminded that Abe was a REPUBLICAN!

Mustang said...

Why on earth would Obama celebrate the memory of white people who died to free blacks?

Constitutional Insurgent said...

It's irrelevant to me. There is enough ammunition with which to be in complete opposition to the Administration and it's policy agenda.

When we go down the road of criticizing what appearances he did or did not make, we set ourselves up for hypocrisy when another Administration is occupying the People's House.

Porter Stansberry. said...

I support the rights of anyone regardless of race, creed or color to say whatever they want to, without any restrictions as long as it does not cause any harm or danger to anyone, and that included insulting the First lady or Mr. Obozo.

DaBlade said...

Why? Let me guess... "Par four score, and seven mulligans ago, my caddy brought forth on this golf course a new sleeve of balls, conceived in free drops and taking Liberties, and dedicated to the proposition that no man is my equal."

American Jihad said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
American Jihad said...

Does anyone know the origination of Political Correctness? Who originally developed it and what was its purpose,if any?
I looked it up. It was developed at the Institute for Social Research in Frankfurt, Germany, which was founded in 1923 and came to be known as the "Frankfurt School." It was a group of thinkers who pulled together to find a solution to the biggest problem facing the implementers of communism in Russia.
The problem? Why wasn't communism spreading?
And their answer? Because Western Civilization was in its way.
What was the problem with Western Civilization? Its belief in the individual, that an individual could develop valid ideas. At the root of communism was the theory that all valid ideas come from the effect of the social group of the masses. The individual is nothing.
And they believed that the only way for communism now to be known as the “PROGRESSIVE MOVEMENT” to advance was to help (or force, if necessary) Western Civilization to destroy itself. How to do that? Undermine its foundations by chipping away at the rights of those annoying individuals.
One way to do that? Change their speech and thought patterns by spreading the idea that vocalizing your beliefs is disrespectful to others and must be avoided to make up for past inequities and injustices.
And call it something that sounds positive: "Political Correctness."
Inspired by the brand new communist technique, Mao, in the 1930s, wrote an article on the "correct" handling of contradictions among the people. "Sensitive training" – sound familiar? – and speech codes were born.
In 1935, after Hitler came to power, the Frankfurt School moved to New York City, where they continued their work by translating Marxism from economic to cultural terms using Sigmund Freud's psychological conditioning mechanisms to get Americans to buy into Political Correctness. In 1941, they moved to California to spread their wings.
But Political Correctness remains, and is alive and well in the Liberal, Progressive camp just what it was intended to be: a sophisticated and dangerous form of censorship and oppression, imposed upon the citizenry with the ultimate goal of manipulating, brainwashing and destroying our society. and is the liberal scum who are killing the American Golden dream. Why would you be ok with supporting the liberals freebie programs? We did not have all these problems before FDR started giving handouts to the lazy no good losers in life that want to sit on there rumps and beg for things they are to lazy to work for and it has snowballed into letting illegals be citizens . Why are those lefties preventing us from using the First Amendment when it doesn’t suit their purpose? For example Free Thinke’s blog of yesterday that cause such a who-ha with the Progressives on these boards!
Political correctness means no longer having the ability to tell anyone "bug off, bitch" without the threat of encountering some sort of recourse from the authorities.
Think about this!
Cheese and Whine, is a LIBERAL’S diet

Remember Ben Gazi said...

Why should all these lazy people get any help with Healthcare (Obamacare) when most all of them don’t contribute a hill of beans to this country. All these fat and lazy girls running around getting knocked up and then sitting around letting their already fat rumps get even fatter while they sleep with every guy that will stick it to them and their nasty kids will turn out the same way. And all these so called basketball and Football players waling around with guns shooting innocent little kinds in the School Yards. I am sick of all these handouts to the lazy people others just because some people of their color had been slaves hundreds of ears ago, and others because they are lazy it is these people that are ruining our country so vote tea party and then we can kill Social Security, SSI, Food Stamps, Medicare, Medicade, Obamacare, and all these other free handouts that these lowlife liberal lazy scum so eagerly take. Open your eyes people, we are being sold a bill of goods by a Charlatan in the White House. This is not what Lincoln wanted, and it's sure as hell not what I want either...

Always On Watch said...

Appearing at Gettysburg at this point won't do anything toward garnering more votes for the Democratic Party.

Thersites said...

Perhaps he now realizes how the Lincoln story ended!

Sic Semper Tyrannus!

Mustang said...

According to a WaPo/ABC News poll, Romney would walk away with a clear victory if the election were held today.

Timing, timing, timing ... but sadly, I have to say that Romney and McCain have far too much in common to suit me.

No, I think that if we all gather in a circle, hold hands, and begin repeating, "Barack is my savior" we all should be converted Obamites within ten or 20 years.

Darth Bacon said...

I think that I'll pass on that thought.

sue hanes said...

Z - Maybe he's busy enough trying to straighten out the Obamacare mess. With his low ratings he may not feel like trying to identify with Lincoln right now.

Who knows why.

Duckys here said...

That's interesting ,AJ, many think it originated with Tacitus.

Duckys here said...

@mustang -- Timing, timing, timing ... but sadly, I have to say that Romney and McCain have far too much in common to suit me.
Yeah, bring on Ted Cruz.

You can sell tickets and let us watch you set your hair on fire when Hillary wins.

Z said...

Average American...good one!

JonBerg..it really is such an important speech and Gettysburg was so important, it's really stunning that he's not going.

Const. Insurg... then please don't publish it at your blog.
I think it's important to examine points like this on both sides.


Am Jihad...we've discussed the Frankfurt School here in length, so yes, we're well up on that damage.
Political correctness is something I frequently bemoan at this blog.

AOW; ya, what good would it do?
Right. But the wrong it's done is obvious.
I'm so sad about Creigh Deeds today...what a horrible family nightmare.

Sue..could be, but he's not too busy to speak to the Wall St Journal this afternoon

Thersites said...

many think it originated with Tacitus.

Tacitus may have been the first to "speak of it" under Augustus and early Emperor's, but PC is the Rule, NOT the exception. The notion of non-PC was perhaps best exemplified by Thucydides, "History of the Pelloponesian War"... except that Aristophanes proved that even Thucydides was a "politically correct liar".

Aristophanes, "The Acharnians"

I detest the Lacedaemonians with all my heart, and may Posidon, the god of Taenarus, cause an earthquake and overturn their dwellings! My vines also have been cut. But come (there are only friends who hear me), why accuse the Laconians of all our woes? Some men (I do not say the city, note particularly, that I do not say the city), some wretches, lost in vices, bereft of honour, who were not even citizens of good stamp, but strangers, have accused the Megarians of introducing their produce fraudulently, and not a cucumber, a leveret, a sucking-pig, a clove of garlic, a lump of salt was seen without its being said, "Halloa! these come from Megara," and their being instantly confiscated. Thus far the evil was not serious, and we were the only sufferers. But now some young drunkards go to Megara and carry off the courtesan Simaetha; the Megarians, hurt to the quick, run off in turn with two harlots of the house of Aspasia; and so for three gay women Greece is set ablaze. Then Pericles, aflame with ire on his Olympian height, let loose the lightning, caused the thunder to roll, upset Greece and passed an edict, which ran like the song, "That the Megarians be banished both from our land and from our markets and from the sea and from the continent." Meanwhile the Megarians, who were beginning to die of hunger, begged the Lacedaemonians to bring about the abolition of the decree, of which those harlots were the cause; several times we refused their demand; and from that time there was a horrible clatter of arms everywhere. You will say that Sparta was wrong, but what should she have done? Answer that. Suppose that a Lacedaemonian had seized a little Seriphian dog on any pretext and had sold it, would you have endured it quietly? Far from it, you would at once have sent three hundred vessels to sea, and what an uproar there would have been through all the city! there 'tis a band of noisy soldiery, here a brawl about the election of a Trierarch; elsewhere pay is being distributed, the Pallas figure-heads are being regilded, crowds are surging under the market porticos, encumbered with wheat that is being measured, wine-skins, oar-leathers, garlic, olives, onions in nets; everywhere are chaplets, sprats, flute-girls, black eyes; in the arsenal bolts are being noisily driven home, sweeps are being made and fitted with leathers; we hear nothing but the sound of whistles, of flutes and fifes to encourage the work-folk. That is what you assuredly would have done, and would not Telephus have done the same? So I come to my general conclusion; we have no common sense.

Ideology taints both the PC AND the non-PC.

And were I a scholar today, I would study Latin, not English.

Thersites said...

BOTH the PC and the "imaginary" non-PC eat from the trashcan of Ideology.

The only difference lies in their "brand" of "sunglasses". Mine are "Ray-bans". ;)

Mustang said...

@ Ducky

You're right. How much do you think we can charge for that clown show?

Duckys here said...

Enough for you to buy one spiffy new set of clubs, mustang.

Thersites said...

"Spiffy" lies in the eyes of the beholder, duckmeister.

Im Krabby said...

"Gaffe" or Purposely?

President Obama joined a cast of 61 "noted lawmakers, politicians, news anchors and celebrities, including every living President, in reciting the Gettysburg Address" for PBS star Ken Burns, who made "The Civil War" documentary series.

Everyone else delivered the address as Lincoln had written it, including the phrase, "that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom." But in his version of the address, President Obama omitted the words "under God." Will the networks notice this gaffe?

How could he omit this? It's clear to me it's on purpose and tells us much more about this guy then he lets's on.

Liberalmann said...

In celebration of the 150th anniversary of the Gettysburg Address, filmmaker Ken Burns asked dozens of public figures to read the speech.

Burns specifically asked the president to read from the “Nicolay Version,” which was written before
the phrase “under God” was added.

JonBerg said...

"Burns specifically asked the president to read from the “Nicolay Version,” which was written before
the phrase “under God” was added."


viburnum said...

JonBerg: "Why?"

Historical accuracy I'd imagine. Neither the Hay or Nicolay copies which are the earliest extant manuscripts contain the phrase 'under God" It's likely the speech as given.


Always On Watch said...

A bit of information about Ken Burns: "Filmmaker Ken Burns Calls For Bigger, Wider Church-state Wall."

Duckys here said...

Asked if he thinks the Christian faith in the American experience is a possible film subject, Burns replied, “Absolutely. I think I am leery about pursuing it in a direct way – only because it then becomes appropriated by those who wish to use religion as a bludgeon, as a tool, as a political wedge, and that is not my purpose of religion or what I’m about.”

Can't happen here.

Constitutional Insurgent said...

"Filmmaker Ken Burns Calls For Bigger, Wider Church-state Wall."

Thanks for posting the link. I didn't know much about Burns other than the authorship of his documentary's.

I like him even more now, after reading this piece.

"The genius of America, again, is being able to worship God on our own. When religion becomes a force in government, it has lost its raison d’être.”

Ed Bonderenka said...

Let's also remove all evidence of "Humanism" from government, or atheism, another belief system.

Constitutional Insurgent said...

I wouldn't be opposed to that, though I'm not sure what you'd be intending to remove.

Kid said...

Why? Because he's on his last term. No need to mention any of this sort of marketing hoohaa anymore.

Kid said...

DaBlade +2

Kid said...

American Jihad,PC was developed by the KGB to demoralize America.

Kid said...

ahhaaa. Libgirl, how many pictures of obama do YOU have plastered on your ceiling.

Ed Bonderenka said...

CI: I don't know. Maybe STEM only, no "humanities", etc.
Go to a private school for that.

Duckys here said...

Sure it wasn't the Illuminati, kid?

Or maybe the Moonies.

Duckys here said...

I think you're down to seeds and stems, Ed.

Ed Bonderenka said...

I don't believe it would happen Duck.
CI asked. I, perhaps foolishly, responded.
I stopped running into seeds and stems years ago.

Kid said...

duck, you're mumbling like a numbnuts now. Zero value. Sometimes you show a spark that indicates you're connected to the real world, but most of the time, like now, zero value, nothing to respond to. Idiotic ramblings that maybe other idiots will identify with.

Why does anyone bother. I'm going to try like Hell to avoid bothering now.

I apologize profusely to the other commenters here for engaging you in the first place.

Z said...

it's the oddest thing, by the way.

Martin Bashir, big time lib, said THE most awful thing about Palin (who I'm no fan of, either, but...) and are you hearing it in the mainstream media? NO.

IMagine if a rightwing news guy said the same thing about a liberal woman?


Thomas Jefferson said...

Never let it be said I am not sympathetic to the Black experience in America!

Always On Watch said...

about "under God" in the Gettysburg Address

Ed Bonderenka said...

Z: The real problem with Bashir's comments, is not that palin should be treated such.
What I believe is worse is that he said she was stupid because she called economic bondage to China of our children: slavery.
He confused torturous behavior (such as he said Palin should experience) as slavery, not understanding that it was the slavery that lead to that behavior.
Palin was more correct in her definition of slavery.

Ed Bonderenka said...

AOW: Thanks for that link.
I wonder how there can be so much controversy over what he said when we have the written observations of a witness.

Always On Watch said...

Yes, it is strange.

Why did Ken Burns give Obama a copy that omitted "under God"? Also, strange.