Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (655657)	5/20/2012 5:09:43 PM
From: joseffy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579899

N.C. Teacher Tells Student He Could Be Arrested for Talking Badly About Obama May 20, 2012 by Mike Opelka theblaze.com Last Monday, a high school student in North Carolina engaged his social studies teacher in a heated debate about politics and the two leading presidential candidates. During the exchange, the teacher (an obvious Obama supporter) got very angry with the student and accused him of disrespecting the president. She even went so far as to tell the boy that he could be jailed for speaking ill of Obama. Sarah Campbell of the Salisbury Post first reported on the story. She claims that the school district is not releasing the name of the teacher and that she is not responding to requests for public comment (although the two students identified her to the newspaper). According to Campbell’s story, the teacher will not be suspended or even face disciplinary action for what was heard on the recording. A statement from the school was released at the end of the week: “The Rowan-Salisbury School System expects all students and employees to be respectful in the school environment and for all teachers to maintain their professionalism in the classroom. This incident should serve as an education for all teachers to stop and reflect on their interaction with students. Due to personnel and student confidentiality, we cannot discuss the matter publicly.” So, how bad was the exchange? It got fairly heated, with the teacher shouting at times. The kerfuffle started after one student asked a question about the teacher’s “fact of the day” that said Romney was a bully back in high school. A student asked: “Didn’t Obama bully somebody, though?” The teacher started to get angry and said: “Not to my knowledge.” A couple of students relayed the story about Obama admitting that he bullied someone when he was younger. And that seemed to light the fuse on his teacher’s anger. A couple of the students exchanged words with the angry teacher. “Stop! Stop! Because there’s no comparison. He’s running for president. Obama is the president.” As one student attempted to argue for a fair, two-sided debate on the history of the candidates, he was shouted down and talked over by the teacher. She continued: “You got to realize, this man is wanting to be what Obama is. There’s no comparison.” Once again, the students pressed for equal discussion of the histories of both men, with one saying: “If you’re gonna talk trash about one side, you gotta talk trash about the other.” The teacher just seemed to dig her heels in deeper and press her defense of Obama telling the defiant teen: “You will not disrespect the president of the United States in this classroom.” Again the student persisted and invoked his First Amendment right. “I’ll say what I want.” The still unidentified teacher read the student her rules…her Obama rules. “Not about him, you won’t!” The back and forth continued and the most strident of the two students reminded his teacher that President Bush was constantly treated to negative statements about him while he was in office: “Whenever Bush was president, everybody talked sh-t about him.” To which the teacher responded: “Because he was sh-tty.” The social studies educator went on for a full minute with more ranting, saying that people were arrested for saying derogatory things about President Bush. The student correctly reminded the teacher that opinions are protected, but you cannot be arrested unless you threaten the president. Our research has not turned up a single case of anyone in America being arrested for speaking ill of former President Bush. The local newspaper story also mentioned that their discussions about the story with a political science professor could not recall the arrests that the teacher was speaking about. The entire confrontation was recorded by a student and posted on YouTube. Listen below; slight content warning for language. H/T @keder on Twitter

To: Brumar89 who wrote (655657)	5/20/2012 5:15:54 PM
From: joseffy	1 Recommendation Respond to of 1579899

Kathleen Sebelius's Orwellian Assault On the First Amendment 05/20/2012 \| Kevin A WArd kevin-wardsworld.blogspot.com Kathleen Sebellius this past Friday delivered a commencement address at Georgetown University. CNS.com has a fine article with video of the speech. In her comments she seemed to respond to the criticism of Catholic Bishops by quoting from President Kennedy's famous speech on September 12,1960. She stated: “In his talk to Protestant ministers,” Sebelius said, “Kennedy talked about his vision of religion and the public square, and he said he believed in an America, and I quote, ‘where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials; and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against us all.’” George Orwell would be impressed by this brand of double speak. Let's see if I have this right. The federal government is trying to force the Catholic Church and other faith based institutions to violate the most principled tenets of their faith or face sanctions for failure to comply and it's the church that's trying to impose its values? The most telling part of the quote is her failure to comprehend its double meaning. When JFK, as she quotes said: "and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against us all.’”, JFK was defending the core principle of "Freedom of Religion" as stated in the First Amendment. JFK was alleviating historic sensibilities that held that to elect a Catholic would subject the United States to Papal governance, thereby undoing the first amendment. He expressed himself in such a way as to be true to himself while reassuring all to his commitment to defend people of all faiths. Kathleen Sebelius, Barack Obama and the rest would have us believe that compelling Americans to violate their faith is an effort on our part to impose our faith on everyone else. In truth those who object to this unlawful compulsion are evoking the true spirit of Kennedy's speech. Kathleen Sebelius has taken it to another level. With her at Obama's right hand they are engaged in an insidious campaign, the worst effort to undo the First Amendment since the "Alien" and "Sedition" Acts. The HHS Mandate as a critical component of Obamacare and advanced by the HHS Secretary is the most despicable action taken by a President since Woodrow Wilson endorsed D.W. Griffith's "The Birth Of A Nation". I am a child of Irish Catholic parents and an alumni of twelve years of Catholic schools I was fed a steady diet of JFK, the one and only Catholic President. Both of my parents turned twenty one in 1960 and proudly voted for JFK. My mother told me the story of my great grandmother,at the age of 70 staying up to watch election returns until 3AM, because having lived through Al Smith's 1928 campaign she was convinced that a Catholic could never be elected President. My mother also tells of my grandmother who was often required to list her religion on job applications. Then of course there's the infamous "No Irish Need Apply". What would my grandmother and great grandmother have to say if they were compelled to violate their faith? Whatever, they might have said just doesn't matter because Kathleen Sebelius just doesn't care.