NC Teacher Shouting Match with Students Over Obama’s Reelection – She Gets Facts Wrong – Dummying Down of America from the Top Down

Consider the Scores (click to enlarge): Performance Scores from Salisbury High School - On Par with the Social Study Teachers Base of Knowledge


The story began with an article in the Salibury, NC, Post, students had taped their teacher on what can only be referred to as an uneducated rant regarding President Obama. According to the teacher, (who name is being withheld by the school), if one criticizes the President, then on is subject to being slammed in jail, however, it is perfectly ok, to criticize anyone running against the President or who does not agree with the President. In listening to the audio tape, one can tell that the students find this to be on the side of hilarious – and they continue to goad the “educator” until she explodes.

A partial transcript, provides by the

The nearly 10-minute video, shot by a student and uploaded to YouTube on Monday, had been viewed more than 1,000 times by Friday afternoon.
It begins with a classroom conversation about a recent news story detailing Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney allegedly bullying a classmate in prep school. It turns into a heated, sometimes confrontational debate.
One student asks, “Didn’t Obama bully someone though?”
The teacher responds: “Not to my knowledge.”
In response to the Romney story, conservatives have recently been pointing to a passage in Obama’s book, “Dreams from My Father,” in which the president writes that while in grade school he shoved a little girl, the only other black student in his grade, after other students called him her boyfriend.
When the student tells the teacher that Obama admitted to bullying a girl in school, the teacher goes on the defensive.
“Stop, no, because there is no comparison,” she says. Romney, she says, is “running for president. Obama is the president.”
When the student says they’re both “just men,” the teacher continues to argue that Romney, as a candidate for president, is not to be afforded the same respect as the president.
The teacher tells the class Obama is “due the respect that every other president is due.”
“Listen, let me tell you something, you will not disrespect the president of the United States in this classroom,” she says.
The student replies that he’ll say what he wants.
“Not about him you won’t,” the teacher says.
Later in the conversation, the teacher tells the class it’s criminal to slander a president.
“Do you realize that people were arrested for saying things bad about Bush?” she says of former President Bush. “Do you realize you are not supposed to slander the president?”
The student responds by saying being arrested for talking badly about the president would violate the right to free speech.
“You would have to say some pretty f’d up crap about him to be arrested,” he says. “They cannot take away your right to have your opinion. ... They can’t take that away unless you threaten the president.”

The video is worth the agonizing listen (quality of issue) due to the insight it gives one on the tone in the classroom and the trend of students to question the authority of the educator, who, when one listens, understands the students are better educated, and on top of current affairs, than the individual responsible for taking them further in their knowledge. It tells the listeners two things: the classroom appears to have a diverse student body – yet the only one arguing for the President appears to be the Teacher, and to the point of hysterics – the students on the other hand are standing up for Mitt Romney – which infuriates the teacher. The fact that politics are brought into a Social Studies class is, on face, not unusual, as the curriculum blends geography and history into one disciplines, a broad overview of how history has impacted society, therefore a debate would not be in question. However, the fact that the teacher was not debating, in a calm and rational manner, nor backing up her claims in anything approaching honestly rather than blind partisanship – sets the stage for 2012 and the youth vote. This is not an anomaly whereby the message in high schools remains basically the same – however, there’s this backlash very similar to those students in this tape – those who are turning eighteen are either not interested in voting at all, or have chosen to vote the economy, again, if they find the time.

What should infuriate the parents and the taxpayers is that the school system has on its staff an educator who is not educated. It is no wonder that students in states where there is a “race to the top” program found that only 50 percent were able to pass the reading exam in Florida, The Florida Board of Education took the low road and lowered the test standards – graduate at any cost. The losers are the students, and then the taxpayer.

The only thing that keeps these substandard teachers on the public dole – tenure – and unless and until those Union Contracts are written in such a way as to allow public schools to fire for incompetency – then this downward spiral will continue to take its toll – additionally the backlash is that for every one bad teacher, there are thousands of good teachers who end up being painted with the same large brush. Just like politics.

The audio via YouTube below is approximately 10 minutes, but gives on the intensity of the one-sided debate going on between the teacher and students, and the disdain that the students have as well as disgust for her blind partisanship – one can bet, if this teacher is not an anomaly in this system, then these students, their parents and those taxpayers who support the student, should get a tax rebate.



Although the school is not releasing the name of the teach, the School Website easily accessable to the public, does list the staff, there are two female Social Study Teachers at Salisbury High school- from there it's anyone's guess which of these two should be shown the door.

Barack Obama’s Birthplace as Kenya Surfaces Again – Most Probable - a Persona designed for Personal Gain – Get Hillary to a Brokered DNC Convention

Actual Obama Birthplace or Fabrication for Personal Gain? - from Breitbart.com

The call them “birthers”, those who question whether or not President Barack Obama is eligible to even be President due to the possibility he was born outside of the United States –Kenya in fact.(Breitbart.com) According to the U.S. Constitution if that were the case, the President would not be eligible to be – President. That scenario is most unlikely – regardless of the fact that as a nation, we dig deep into our celebrities backgrounds – whether they be a bit player in a hot TV sitcom or a politician, anyone in the spotlight is subject to curiosity by “fans” or by those who are not fans – digging for dirt to find something wrong with that celebrity.

There is however, a trend in academia that has surfaced in the past few years – the most notable being example being one Ward Churchill, who claimed to be of American Indian ancestry to gain employment and tenure at the University of Colorado(New York Sun) and the most recent being U.S. Senate candidate in MA, one Elizabeth Warren, former Obama appointee, whose claim of American Indian Ancestry to gain entrance to and employment within the university system (See: Real Clear Politics: Cherokee Genealogist to Elizabeth Warren – Tell the Truth
It’s called beating the systems, if one claims they are from a certain background, they are able to obtain: student loans, jobs in academia and elsewhere – and yes, acceptance from the perspective of those who feel that today, that those who have certain backgrounds, deserve to have more benefits, better chances than others – who perhaps don’t appear to be as ethnic, or interesting. It is what it is – fraud.

While the race heats up for the 2012 Presidential contest, Mitt Romney has taken heat for pranks he played as a teenager in prep school, he’s being vetted to the extreme, but had Romney the character of any of the aforementioned, he may have found a Mexican relative, who was one sixty-fourth American Indian, and suddenly, he’d be a lot more interesting, although now, that story would be blasted about the headlines – Fraud! It’s the way in which the press in Massachusetts is handling the Warren fraud, all but ignoring the fact that her claims were made to gain “acceptance” (and a job).

Therefore, one can bet the house, that either wanting to sell a book, or say, get student loans, or for that matter, acceptance into prestigious universities to study law, being African-American and Kenyan, and Hawaiian (is there a native Hawaiian we may find in that background?), the young Barack Obama would have a narrative that would make him “gold” to publishers and Universities alike. That is, of course, until he decided to run for the highest office in the United States, and had to divest himself of the identity, most likely created by a vivid imagination, some truth with a dash of embellishment (i.e.: I was in Kenya, with my father, when I was five, so why not back up the clock and get into Harvard?!!), and a great deal of chutzpah.

The latest discovery (a pamphlet printed by Barack Obama’s literary agent, in order to sell books, giving a short bio of Barack as born in Kenya – see Breitbart link first paragraph), is again, a marketing piece, and the biography is most probably the same. One can bet that this was overlooked by the so-called “mainstream media” simply because they never looked past his being “African-American”, and of course, took him at his word. It would not have entered their minds, all trained in academia, to think that something like this would be a red herring, perhaps because so many had used similar methods to get grants, and jobs! In other words – no big deal, nothing to see here, move along, its commonplace to beef up one’s bio to get ahead.

Unless it’s fraud – and it goes to character – so many of our nation’s youth, no matter the ethnicity or race, have parents that work two jobs, they work one or two jobs, in order to attend college, and have for decades – if one was not born with a silver spoon in one’s mouth, and one wants to go to college, one might do anything, take fewer courses per semester, graduate later, lower costs, change schools, compete in Miss American pageants – of course, these are not ivy league schools, but, how important is that moniker in today’s society? Obviously, with the job market the way it is, a degree from Harvard is about as worthless as a degree from any third tier college.

Going back to character for a moment, if one finds the embellishment of a background to be an acceptable way to get ahead, and it involves grants, student loans, jobs that are not in private held colleges (see Ward Churchill), then those individuals show a character that is somewhat lacking ethics, especially at an age of reason where one should know better – or at least man, or in Warren’s case, man up and tell the nation or the state or the University President and Board: I did not think I would be accepted without being more “exotic”, then that may be excusable. Age is also a factor, if someone does something fraudulent in their teens and twenties, and is now older and perhaps wiser, then some may feel it goes to character. In fact, it does, but the character of that person at that time, perhaps not the character of that person forty or fifty years later. It is the fact that pushing something such as fraud/embellishment of a bio for personal gain/under the proverbial rug, later in life, not simply forgetting a prank that occurred at the age of sixteen, actually goes to recent character. One might suggest therefore, that publishers, colleges and universities, do more thorough background checks on potentially “interesting” students or applicants for employment, and save both the workforce, the state and in this case, the Office of the Presidency, a great deal of negative press, and frankly embarrassment.

Finally, the aspect of embellishment is purely hypothesis, however, what else would it be? Either the President of the United States lied about being born in Hawaii, or lied about being born in Kenya, for all the public knows, he may have been born in Kansas – someplace boring, not quite as exciting, and not as lucrative a background. In any event, those who have for years been calling for his removal, have not taken into consideration the Constitution and the ramifications of removing a sitting President – that being the line of succession. One would now have to be prepared to have V.P. Biden as leader of the free world, or should he not be able to serve, the weepiest Speaker of the House, John Boehner. One might suggest: let it ride – and get Hillary Clinton to a brokered Democrat Convention, if one has to drag her there, and by super-delegate, nominate her. The fact is, she won the last round, but was literally robbed by Super-Delegates, based on Barack Obama’s very interesting background – they owe Hillary Clinton and they owe the Democrat Party – my father’s party – and they owe the nation – at least that, if not more.


The Bumper Stickers, the Pins, the Tee-Shirts are ready to go - image irregulartimes.com

2012 Election: Gallup Economy #1 Issue, Historical Polling Trends - Not Indicative of a Second Obama Administration: Wisconsin: Obama Romney Tied

Obama Vs. Romney, Tied in Wisconsin - Democrat Stronghold - image forward.com


Gallup Polling’s, “National Mood” poll suggests that the general election will be based on the economy as the pollsters historical patters indicate that the percentage of mentions of the economy as the number one issue are higher than any general election since May of 1980. In the pollsters report, the comparison of the economy as the top concern among voters began with Lyndon Johnson in 1964 – in May of each general election where the economy was weighed in an incumbents reelection prospects: 1964, Johnson: 0%, 1972: Nixon, 17%, 1976: Ford, 0%, 1980: Carter, 73%, 1984: Reagan, 55%, 1992: Bush, 56%, 1996: Clinton, 44%, 2004: Bush, 39% and May 2012: Obama, 66%. The trend is indicative of an uphill battle for President Obama, with, as Gallup indicates, 6 months to go before the November elections.

Perhaps the best campaign slogan to date, based on economic indicators was Bill Clinton’s in his run against Gerald Ford: “It’s the Economy, Stupid” – which is in use world-wide today, from from Canada’s Ottawa Citizen in regards to the economic downturn being “good” for the current Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, to the Daily Beast’s, “It’s Still the Economy Stupid”, article outlining Bill Clinton’s 2011, 14 point plan to put America “back to work”.

The Gallup Poll also includes May Job approval ratings, the highest incumbents were Johnson in 1964 (75%), and Richard Nixon in 1972 (62%), with the lowest, George H Bush (40%), and Carter (43%) and Gerald Ford, (43%) – tied. 2 points separate the May job approval ratings of George W. Bush (49%) in 2004, and Barack Obama (47%) in 2012. This data, included with the economic indicators give the pollster the sense that currently, the President’s prospects of reelection are “uncertain”.

The latest state poll out of Wisconsin, from Marquette Law School shows a dead heat between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney both at 46% In this most recent poll it was noted that Republican’s are more enthusiastic about voting (91%), compared to Democrats and Independents (83%). In addition, the pollster has found that the Presidents lead of 9% in April has evaporated, his likability has also fallen, while Romney’s has risen slightly – bringing both the incumbent and challenger to the “toss-up” category. The number one issue Democrats: Jobs and the Economy.

Although is it still early in political terms, as far as any election is concerned, the consistency with Gallup polling and Obama’s reelection prospects has remained largely unchanged for the past two years. Should this polling remain the same, going into September and October, it is highly probable that the President would not be re-elected. In addition, branding should be considered as a factor – in 2008, the Republican “brand” had taken a toll, in general, both George W. Bush combined with Congressional rankings made it nearly impossible for a GOP candidate to succeed. Given the fact that John McCain was not the most formidable candidate, it was the Democrat’s election year. In May of that year, it was Hillary Clinton who topped the charts, only losing to Obama at the Democrat Convention – not by popular vote, but by “super-delegate vote” or, in other words, a body of both Clinton’s and Obama’s peers. Super-delegates are generally made up of high profile political party members, as well as current members of the House and Senate. Clinton campaigned heavily on experience, while Obama campaigned on bringing the nation together, politically and more specifically the war in Iraq – at that time (May of 2008) the economy was not a central issue.

It should be noted, that in the Gallup polling data, one understands that factoring the economy alone as the primary focus of the public, those President’s who followed an incumbent who’s handling of the economy was seen as sub-standard by the public, only won re-election by taking steps to improve the economy, in second terms (Reagan, Clinton and George W. Bush) the economy was not a factor.