Evidently some believe working hard is a Socialist value.

Presented below is the full text of a news release from the Polk County Public Schools. It concerns a speech by the President of the United States to the students of America.

Please take a moment to read it.

Want to know what the President plans to say? The White House released a summary. It reads in part:

The President will challenge students to work hard, set educational goals, and take responsibility for their learning. He will also call for a shared responsibility and commitment on the part of students, parents and educators to ensure that every child in every school receives the best education possible so they can compete in the global economy for good jobs and live rewarding and productive lives as American citizens.

Oh my! Work hard? Stay in School? Take Responsibility for Learning? How dare the President say anything so, well, American.

I’m out of town and can’t ask the obvious question: why are the schools playing politics? We have our children recite a Pledge of Allegiance long before they can understand the concepts. Even a first grade student can understand “work hard.”

In the previous eight years I often heard, “Respect him. He’s our President.” I guess that only works when the President is in your party.

When I was a child, if the President wanted to address the nation…we listened. We didn’t stick our fingers in our ears and chant “nanya nanya nanya.”

The speech should be broadcast live at every school. If a parent doesn’t want his or her children to listen, keep them home. It is a silly rule making every student see or not see the broadcast at the whim of a teacher or principal. It is bending to the cries of a few…and they are a noisy few…who are angry their candidate didn’t win.

Polk School District Protocol For President Obama’s September 8 Speech

(September 4, 2009) The superintendent’s office has announced its directive to schools regarding the broadcast of President Obama’s September 8 speech.

* A determination of whether the speech will be broadcast live in schools is a school-based decision and will be made by principals and teachers at individual schools. The content of the speech, which is to be released Monday by the White House, will be provided to school staffs so that they may determine if the content is appropriate based on students’ ages, curriculum and class schedule considerations. The release of the content of the speech will allow schools to fully analyze the situation.
* If schools decide to broadcast the speech live, schools will provide an opt-out provision for parents or guardians preferring that their children not view the speech. Students may be excused from participating and given an alternative activity if parents communicate to the school with their preference of opting-out. If a student indicates an objection at the time of the speech, an alternate activity will be provided.
* The text of President Obama’s speech will be posted to the school district’s www.polk-fl.net Web site.
* The speech will be recorded and rebroadcast on the school district’s cable and fiber optic television channels at a later time. This will allow parents the opportunity to view the speech in the company of their children at a later time if they so wish. The broadcast time is undetermined at this point and will be provided to schools at a later time. The school district’s cable television channels are Bright House Networks channel 614, Comcast channel 7 and Verizon FIoS channel 45.

Media inquiries on this protocol can be directed to Dr. Bruce Tonjes, associate superintendent for school-based operations, at — REDACTED –.

36 thoughts on “Evidently some believe working hard is a Socialist value.

  1. I wonder, if the speech was so innocuous, why the White House and Department of Education decided to rework it to exclude bits about how students could “Help the President”. See the article from Jake Tapper of ABC news (not a right-winger, to be sure) at http://bit.ly/svlM2 for a more clear picture than the one being painted here in this blurb on lakelandlocal.com.

  2. I wonder, if the speech was so innocuous, why the White House and Department of Education decided to rework it to exclude bits about how students could “Help the President”. See the article from Jake Tapper of ABC news (not a right-winger, to be sure) at http://bit.ly/svlM2 for a more clear picture than the one being painted here in this blurb on lakelandlocal.com.

  3. C’mon, Chuck, you believe a press release? Do you still believe in the tooth fairy, too?

    I heard on CNN that Bush 41 addressed kids in school, and Democrats went nuts. Health insurance, environment, war, all are partisan issues in a very divisive time, and the expected political message (now being revised because of the outcry) from our President is unwelcome. If it was a generic speech, that’d be great, but no one expects that from Obama.

    Why are the schools involved in politics? Any school should be involved in politics, as it’s part of our lives (civics class), but our public schools are government-run schools, so of course they’re involved in politics.

  4. C’mon, Chuck, you believe a press release? Do you still believe in the tooth fairy, too?

    I heard on CNN that Bush 41 addressed kids in school, and Democrats went nuts. Health insurance, environment, war, all are partisan issues in a very divisive time, and the expected political message (now being revised because of the outcry) from our President is unwelcome. If it was a generic speech, that’d be great, but no one expects that from Obama.

    Why are the schools involved in politics? Any school should be involved in politics, as it’s part of our lives (civics class), but our public schools are government-run schools, so of course they’re involved in politics.

  5. Wayne, I’ll write it: “Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president.”

    Bu that leaves out “help the President reduce the national dropout rate.”

    I don’t see anything wrong with that sentence…any more than “I pledge allegiance to the United States of America.” Come on. The right chanted the “respect the office” line from 2001-2009. Be consistent with your politics.

    Why was it reworked? Because this administration seeks consensus to the detriment of its policies. Bad move and destined to keep it mired in the rhetoric of the right.

    Donkeyrock: The tooth fairy exists and she has occassionally borrowed money from me.

    You heard on CNN? What? Mainstream Media? What’s next? You’ll claim Walter Cronkite believed those reports about men on the moon.

    The only reason this is a “divisive time” is because of propaganda from the right feeding the fears and prejudices of a vocal segment of the proletariat — a group from which I sprang and still inhabit today.

    Being involved in politics is possible without playing politics. And “playing politics” is what the PCSB is doing.

  6. Wayne, I’ll write it: “Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president.”

    Bu that leaves out “help the President reduce the national dropout rate.”

    I don’t see anything wrong with that sentence…any more than “I pledge allegiance to the United States of America.” Come on. The right chanted the “respect the office” line from 2001-2009. Be consistent with your politics.

    Why was it reworked? Because this administration seeks consensus to the detriment of its policies. Bad move and destined to keep it mired in the rhetoric of the right.

    Donkeyrock: The tooth fairy exists and she has occassionally borrowed money from me.

    You heard on CNN? What? Mainstream Media? What’s next? You’ll claim Walter Cronkite believed those reports about men on the moon.

    The only reason this is a “divisive time” is because of propaganda from the right feeding the fears and prejudices of a vocal segment of the proletariat — a group from which I sprang and still inhabit today.

    Being involved in politics is possible without playing politics. And “playing politics” is what the PCSB is doing.

  7. Chuck, your mom should’ve warned you about lending money to nymphs and fairies.

    Deny the moon landing? Don’t confuse me with truthers.

    This has been a divisive time since 1988, as the popular vote of presidential elections shows. It’s not the squealing of the right or the left, it’s the amount of information polarizing the public. Catch phrases and fear-based reporting driving the populace nuts. Every example of leftist craziness can be countered with an example of rightist craziness. I prefer libertarian ideals because they are the most fair to everyone; loosely summed up as fiscally conservative and socially liberal.

    As for the PCSB, I honestly don’t recall a time when school boards were a-political, but they’re just covering their legal asses. If someone complains, well, it becomes the fault of the teacher.

    And to your contention that every kid should be forced to watch Obama, I submit your children should be forced to watch Bush 43 talk about what he thinks is important for children to know. Stop whining about your candidates not winning for 8 years.

  8. Chuck, your mom should’ve warned you about lending money to nymphs and fairies.

    Deny the moon landing? Don’t confuse me with truthers.

    This has been a divisive time since 1988, as the popular vote of presidential elections shows. It’s not the squealing of the right or the left, it’s the amount of information polarizing the public. Catch phrases and fear-based reporting driving the populace nuts. Every example of leftist craziness can be countered with an example of rightist craziness. I prefer libertarian ideals because they are the most fair to everyone; loosely summed up as fiscally conservative and socially liberal.

    As for the PCSB, I honestly don’t recall a time when school boards were a-political, but they’re just covering their legal asses. If someone complains, well, it becomes the fault of the teacher.

    And to your contention that every kid should be forced to watch Obama, I submit your children should be forced to watch Bush 43 talk about what he thinks is important for children to know. Stop whining about your candidates not winning for 8 years.

  9. You figured out my middle name though I didn’t include it in my post earlier. Wow. I will put a gold star next to your name. Whateva.

    I guess you got your hands on the same material as the teachers that read “help the President reduce the national dropout rate.”, right? If not then please cite your source because Tapper’s article reads as:

    As one of the preparatory materials for teachers provided by the Department of Education, students had been asked to, “Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president.”

    No offense, but I trust Jake Tapper (relatively) a heck of a lot more than you to deliver an unbiased report of events regarding this administration.

    Anyway, the timing of POTUS’s address to the nation’s children is, at the very least, curious given how full his plate is with this issue alone. I have no doubt that he wants every child to remain in school, graduate, and complete college because the reality is that we will need every child alive now making a college graduate salary to pay for what he is trying to do. That’s real.

    Good luck to you Chuck, I doubt you and I will ever see eye to eye on anything political, but that doesn’t mean we can’t be civil to each other. I will say, however, that passive aggressive moves like addressing me by my middle name, though I never provided it, are a step in the wrong direction.

  10. You figured out my middle name though I didn’t include it in my post earlier. Wow. I will put a gold star next to your name. Whateva.

    I guess you got your hands on the same material as the teachers that read “help the President reduce the national dropout rate.”, right? If not then please cite your source because Tapper’s article reads as:

    As one of the preparatory materials for teachers provided by the Department of Education, students had been asked to, “Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president.”

    No offense, but I trust Jake Tapper (relatively) a heck of a lot more than you to deliver an unbiased report of events regarding this administration.

    Anyway, the timing of POTUS’s address to the nation’s children is, at the very least, curious given how full his plate is with this issue alone. I have no doubt that he wants every child to remain in school, graduate, and complete college because the reality is that we will need every child alive now making a college graduate salary to pay for what he is trying to do. That’s real.

    Good luck to you Chuck, I doubt you and I will ever see eye to eye on anything political, but that doesn’t mean we can’t be civil to each other. I will say, however, that passive aggressive moves like addressing me by my middle name, though I never provided it, are a step in the wrong direction.

  11. Mike: No need for a gold star. Check all my comments. I always address them to avoid confusion. A habit I’ve had for years. When I responded to the two comments there was “Wayne” and “Donkeyrock” Maybe the gravatar? No matter. I always use what I find in the field.

    I’ll address the rest from the bottom up. I’m never passive aggressive. That’s the style found in some political circles. Not from me.

    I believe the timing of the speech has more to do with the fact school is starting across America. As for his plate, I’m sure there are plenty of people who are there to handle the details.

    I’ve never claimed a lack of bias. That was “old journalism.” It was a myth, but many believed it. However, I strive for transparency. I explain all my pertinent bias. In detail off site if you like.

    As for our agreement or disagreement about issues: I’ll take your word for it. With only 3 comments, I don’t have a good idea of where you fall in all issues. I will say, I am not easily pidgeonholed. You might find it difficult to bet on the validity of your blanket statement.

    Continuing to display that quote without context is a waste of time. Your own article answered what was the context of the quote: “The idea, Vietor said, was that students should think of how they could help the President in terms of reducing the national dropout rate.” I encourage you to read deeper than the talking points.

    Donkeyrock: She is a nymph. I’ll give you that.

    I’d say the polarization was long before ’88, but the style of reporting it has changed.

    As for “ideals,” I don’t believe any of the power parties concern themselves with such ideals In other words, there isn’t a party I support wholeheartetly. From my point of view, there is just a minute’s difference between the main two on the subjects I care most about.

    I’ll say my time with PCSB is much shorter than previous boards. Yes, they’re all political, but I found this decision lacking in foresite. Making a decision to cover your ass under the threat of lawsuit reveals a weak strength of character. It also leads to many more such threats.

    “My candidate” was seated as President in only two of the elections where I was eligible to vote. (And most recent election wasn’t one of them.) There was no whining in my house the last 8 years, just simple disbelief that so many bad decisions were made.

    Don’t concern yourself about the education of my children. The older one certainly watched what Bush 43 said. My parenting style is to not censor what political rhetoric my children read or watch. A style that evidently isn’t followed by many parents.

  12. Mike: No need for a gold star. Check all my comments. I always address them to avoid confusion. A habit I’ve had for years. When I responded to the two comments there was “Wayne” and “Donkeyrock” Maybe the gravatar? No matter. I always use what I find in the field.

    I’ll address the rest from the bottom up. I’m never passive aggressive. That’s the style found in some political circles. Not from me.

    I believe the timing of the speech has more to do with the fact school is starting across America. As for his plate, I’m sure there are plenty of people who are there to handle the details.

    I’ve never claimed a lack of bias. That was “old journalism.” It was a myth, but many believed it. However, I strive for transparency. I explain all my pertinent bias. In detail off site if you like.

    As for our agreement or disagreement about issues: I’ll take your word for it. With only 3 comments, I don’t have a good idea of where you fall in all issues. I will say, I am not easily pidgeonholed. You might find it difficult to bet on the validity of your blanket statement.

    Continuing to display that quote without context is a waste of time. Your own article answered what was the context of the quote: “The idea, Vietor said, was that students should think of how they could help the President in terms of reducing the national dropout rate.” I encourage you to read deeper than the talking points.

    Donkeyrock: She is a nymph. I’ll give you that.

    I’d say the polarization was long before ’88, but the style of reporting it has changed.

    As for “ideals,” I don’t believe any of the power parties concern themselves with such ideals In other words, there isn’t a party I support wholeheartetly. From my point of view, there is just a minute’s difference between the main two on the subjects I care most about.

    I’ll say my time with PCSB is much shorter than previous boards. Yes, they’re all political, but I found this decision lacking in foresite. Making a decision to cover your ass under the threat of lawsuit reveals a weak strength of character. It also leads to many more such threats.

    “My candidate” was seated as President in only two of the elections where I was eligible to vote. (And most recent election wasn’t one of them.) There was no whining in my house the last 8 years, just simple disbelief that so many bad decisions were made.

    Don’t concern yourself about the education of my children. The older one certainly watched what Bush 43 said. My parenting style is to not censor what political rhetoric my children read or watch. A style that evidently isn’t followed by many parents.

  13. Chuck, you dirty little fun-haver, you. :>

    Well, with a two party system, it’s automatically polarizing, but I’m referring to the close popular votes from 1988 onward.

    I don’t see how PCSB couldn’t make such a decision with the legal system the way it is. Integrity is a foreign concept.

    Bill Clinton voter, ey? Well, you’ve made no bones about being Liberal-minded, so assumptions about your preferences will tend toward the Democratic.

    That’s one of the things about libertarians… we don’t want to concern ourselves with someone else’s child’s education. That’s all you. But if you advocate forcing children to watch or stay home, then under those rules there’s nothing wrong with forcing your kids to watch a President with whom you disagree or they can stay home. Just pointing out that it’s not a solution people might like.

  14. Chuck, you dirty little fun-haver, you. :>

    Well, with a two party system, it’s automatically polarizing, but I’m referring to the close popular votes from 1988 onward.

    I don’t see how PCSB couldn’t make such a decision with the legal system the way it is. Integrity is a foreign concept.

    Bill Clinton voter, ey? Well, you’ve made no bones about being Liberal-minded, so assumptions about your preferences will tend toward the Democratic.

    That’s one of the things about libertarians… we don’t want to concern ourselves with someone else’s child’s education. That’s all you. But if you advocate forcing children to watch or stay home, then under those rules there’s nothing wrong with forcing your kids to watch a President with whom you disagree or they can stay home. Just pointing out that it’s not a solution people might like.

  15. YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS NOT AN UP FOR PEOPLE RALLY. TAKE AT LOOK AT THE YOU TUBE SNIPPET HERE AND YOU WILL SEE THAT THE INITIAL MESSAGE AIMED AT KIDS APPEARS INNOCENT AND ENCOURAGING, BUT AS IT ENDS, THE MUSIC TEMPO IS DIFFERENT THE DEMEANOR CHANGES AND DEMI MORE IS QUITE EMPHATIC ABOUT HER PLEDGING TO BE A SERVANT TO THE PRESIDENT. THIS IS THIRD WORLD MENTALITY, THIS IS INDOCTRINATION AND THIS IS A REPEAT OF THE INCEPTION OF THE HITLER YOUTH.

    WAKE UP…
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwG5MhVGQ6k

  16. YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS NOT AN UP FOR PEOPLE RALLY. TAKE AT LOOK AT THE YOU TUBE SNIPPET HERE AND YOU WILL SEE THAT THE INITIAL MESSAGE AIMED AT KIDS APPEARS INNOCENT AND ENCOURAGING, BUT AS IT ENDS, THE MUSIC TEMPO IS DIFFERENT THE DEMEANOR CHANGES AND DEMI MORE IS QUITE EMPHATIC ABOUT HER PLEDGING TO BE A SERVANT TO THE PRESIDENT. THIS IS THIRD WORLD MENTALITY, THIS IS INDOCTRINATION AND THIS IS A REPEAT OF THE INCEPTION OF THE HITLER YOUTH.

    WAKE UP…
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwG5MhVGQ6k

  17. Donkeyrock: Are you absolutely sure I meant Clinton? :)

    liberal: “favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.”

    Yes, I’m most definitely favorable to progress or reform.

    For example, the “way the legal system is” is one of the areas that needs reform.

    In one point you simple don’t have your facts correct. If you look back, I didn’t write that children should be forced to watch. I wrote: “The speech should be broadcast live at every school. If a parent doesn’t want his or her children to listen, keep them home.”

    With a consistent plan across the county, it saves parents from the trouble of calling each teacher to see what his or her plan is for the day. Imagine if you had three children in three schools? No matter which side you’re on, there is a going to be a lot of confusion come Tuesday morning.

  18. Donkeyrock: Are you absolutely sure I meant Clinton? :)

    liberal: “favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.”

    Yes, I’m most definitely favorable to progress or reform.

    For example, the “way the legal system is” is one of the areas that needs reform.

    In one point you simple don’t have your facts correct. If you look back, I didn’t write that children should be forced to watch. I wrote: “The speech should be broadcast live at every school. If a parent doesn’t want his or her children to listen, keep them home.”

    With a consistent plan across the county, it saves parents from the trouble of calling each teacher to see what his or her plan is for the day. Imagine if you had three children in three schools? No matter which side you’re on, there is a going to be a lot of confusion come Tuesday morning.

  19. Angela: If it was an Up “With” People rally I could understand the fuss. Those Coke commercials are scary. :)

    But the video you linked to was a video made by Demi Moore and Aston Krutcher and presented by Oprah Winfrey’s production company.

    You can find the original link here:

    http://www.oprah.com/media/20090119_tows_ipledge

    For those afraid to watch it is “celebrities to record their personal pledges of service.”

    So, what does it have to do with the commentary I wrote above?

    PS: This video does have something to do with my commentary: http://www.dailykostv.com/w/002099/

  20. Angela: If it was an Up “With” People rally I could understand the fuss. Those Coke commercials are scary. :)

    But the video you linked to was a video made by Demi Moore and Aston Krutcher and presented by Oprah Winfrey’s production company.

    You can find the original link here:

    http://www.oprah.com/media/20090119_tows_ipledge

    For those afraid to watch it is “celebrities to record their personal pledges of service.”

    So, what does it have to do with the commentary I wrote above?

    PS: This video does have something to do with my commentary: http://www.dailykostv.com/w/002099/

  21. Angela: Might I suggest taking of the caps lock?

    Also, DR, I’m glad to see you still exist. Saddened you never engaged with a few of my questions over at MI4.

    Funny that I don’t remember any outcry at all – from anyone – concerning Republican presidents giving harmless school speeches. DR says people went crazy at Bush 41. I don’t recollect that. Maybe I’m just too young.

  22. Angela: Might I suggest taking of the caps lock?

    Also, DR, I’m glad to see you still exist. Saddened you never engaged with a few of my questions over at MI4.

    Funny that I don’t remember any outcry at all – from anyone – concerning Republican presidents giving harmless school speeches. DR says people went crazy at Bush 41. I don’t recollect that. Maybe I’m just too young.

  23. Chuck,

    Yeah, I’m sure you meant Clinton. :>

    Libertarian: One who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state.

    The legal system… looking for tort reform?

    ““The speech should be broadcast live at every school. If a parent doesn’t want his or her children to listen, keep them home.””

    Since I made allowance in my reply for children staying home, how is this not forcing kids to watch the President? In your scenario, those that do go to school will have to watch, no matter what.

    “With a consistent plan across the county, it saves parents from the trouble of calling each teacher to see what his or her plan is for the day. Imagine if you had three children in three schools?”

    So it’s easier for parents to stay at home and miss a day of work than it is for them to call the teachers and say little Bubba/Bubbette can’t watch the President’s speech? Chuckles, c’mon, man.

    Billy,

    I gotta pick my virtual fights carefully. If you’re looking for more response, you should repost stuff during long weekends like this. More people on the computers, off work.

    CNN said Democrats protested (I don’t recall the exact wording) the Bush 41 speech. I was out of high school by then, so I don’t recall it at all, but knowing Dems, I’d bet dollars it was a panty-bunching hissy fit. :>

    Apparently Reagan did school speeches, too, but no mention/recollection of reaction.

  24. Chuck,

    Yeah, I’m sure you meant Clinton. :>

    Libertarian: One who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state.

    The legal system… looking for tort reform?

    ““The speech should be broadcast live at every school. If a parent doesn’t want his or her children to listen, keep them home.””

    Since I made allowance in my reply for children staying home, how is this not forcing kids to watch the President? In your scenario, those that do go to school will have to watch, no matter what.

    “With a consistent plan across the county, it saves parents from the trouble of calling each teacher to see what his or her plan is for the day. Imagine if you had three children in three schools?”

    So it’s easier for parents to stay at home and miss a day of work than it is for them to call the teachers and say little Bubba/Bubbette can’t watch the President’s speech? Chuckles, c’mon, man.

    Billy,

    I gotta pick my virtual fights carefully. If you’re looking for more response, you should repost stuff during long weekends like this. More people on the computers, off work.

    CNN said Democrats protested (I don’t recall the exact wording) the Bush 41 speech. I was out of high school by then, so I don’t recall it at all, but knowing Dems, I’d bet dollars it was a panty-bunching hissy fit. :>

    Apparently Reagan did school speeches, too, but no mention/recollection of reaction.

  25. Donkeyrock? The parents aren’t already staying home for their children? I am shocked. Shocked.

    I’ll believe in those Libertarians when you believe in the Tooth Fairy.

    Finally, I gotta jump on the “panty-bunching hissy fit” comment.

    Seriously? That was the best you could come up with? You’re obviously intelligent, with a vocabulary above the norm. I have to think you’re phoning it in when you resort to gender/sexuality jibes.

  26. Donkeyrock? The parents aren’t already staying home for their children? I am shocked. Shocked.

    I’ll believe in those Libertarians when you believe in the Tooth Fairy.

    Finally, I gotta jump on the “panty-bunching hissy fit” comment.

    Seriously? That was the best you could come up with? You’re obviously intelligent, with a vocabulary above the norm. I have to think you’re phoning it in when you resort to gender/sexuality jibes.

  27. Chuck, you trying to conflate me with conservative Republicans again? For shame.

    You don’t believe in individual liberty and a limited government? Tsk tsk.

    I may be semi-intelligent, but I am not above childish potty humor. It’s too much fun to give up. You may agree that liberals/progressives tend toward entitlement, while conservatives tend toward the paranoid. With that, my “hissy fit” comment fits with a humorous view of a little girl crying and gnashing for something she wants that mommy won’t buy. Also note the smiley face at the end of my comment about the panty-bunching hissy fit.

    Thanks for keeping me on my toes, though.

  28. Chuck, you trying to conflate me with conservative Republicans again? For shame.

    You don’t believe in individual liberty and a limited government? Tsk tsk.

    I may be semi-intelligent, but I am not above childish potty humor. It’s too much fun to give up. You may agree that liberals/progressives tend toward entitlement, while conservatives tend toward the paranoid. With that, my “hissy fit” comment fits with a humorous view of a little girl crying and gnashing for something she wants that mommy won’t buy. Also note the smiley face at the end of my comment about the panty-bunching hissy fit.

    Thanks for keeping me on my toes, though.

  29. I wrote: “I’ll believe in those Libertarians when you believe in the Tooth Fairy.”

    You rewrote it as: “You don’t believe in individual liberty and a limited government? Tsk tsk.:

    Not even close. Remind me never to trust your translations of any texts. :-)

  30. I wrote: “I’ll believe in those Libertarians when you believe in the Tooth Fairy.”

    You rewrote it as: “You don’t believe in individual liberty and a limited government? Tsk tsk.:

    Not even close. Remind me never to trust your translations of any texts. :-)

  31. Chuck,

    I wrote my definition (Heritage Dictionary):

    Libertarian: One who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state.

    And you wrote:

    “I’ll believe in those Libertarians when you believe in the Tooth Fairy.”

    And I inquired:

    “You don’t believe in individual liberty and a limited government?”

    Since I don’t believe in the tooth fairy, and one could reasonably assume I wouldn’t, it means you don’t believe in Libertarians. The definition of Libertarians speaks of maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state, which — when paraphrased — implies, without losing meaning, that you don’t believe in individual liberty and a limited government.

    Remind me not to trust you when you drink.

    Now, you may’ve meant, jokingly, that libertarians are as fictitious as tooth fairies, which would be humorous, and would make me a mythological creature… which is kinda cool in a greco-roman kinda way (without the nude male wrestling, because that gives me the heebie-jeebies).

  32. Chuck,

    I wrote my definition (Heritage Dictionary):

    Libertarian: One who advocates maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state.

    And you wrote:

    “I’ll believe in those Libertarians when you believe in the Tooth Fairy.”

    And I inquired:

    “You don’t believe in individual liberty and a limited government?”

    Since I don’t believe in the tooth fairy, and one could reasonably assume I wouldn’t, it means you don’t believe in Libertarians. The definition of Libertarians speaks of maximizing individual rights and minimizing the role of the state, which — when paraphrased — implies, without losing meaning, that you don’t believe in individual liberty and a limited government.

    Remind me not to trust you when you drink.

    Now, you may’ve meant, jokingly, that libertarians are as fictitious as tooth fairies, which would be humorous, and would make me a mythological creature… which is kinda cool in a greco-roman kinda way (without the nude male wrestling, because that gives me the heebie-jeebies).

  33. You got it right in your last paragraph. As a mythological creature, I’d say you’re closer to Pan or Loki.

Comments are closed.