The lyrics:
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama
He said that all must lend a hand [?]
To make this country strong again
Mmm, mmm, mm!Barack Hussein Obama
He said we must be clear today
Equal work means equal pay
Mmm, mmm, mm!Barack Hussein Obama
He said that we must take a stand
To make sure everyone gets a chance
Mmm, mmm, mm!Barack Hussein Obama
He said Red, Yellow, Black or White
All are equal in his sight
Mmm, mmm, mm!Barack Hussein Obama
Yes
Mmm, mmm, mm!Barack Hussein Obama
segue to
Hello, Mr. President we honor you today!
For all your great accomplishments, we all [do? doth??] say “hooray!”
Hooray Mr. President! You’re number one!
The first Black American to lead this great na-TION!
Hooray, Mr. President something-something-some
A-something-something-something-some economy is number one again!
Hooray Mr. President, we’re really proud of you!
And the same for all Americans [in?] the great Red White and Blue!
So something Mr. President we all just something-some,
So here’s a hearty hip-hooray a-something-something-some!
Hip, hip hooray! (3x)
This is how to implement “the dictatorship of the proletariat”; start by brainwashing the children.
10 comments:
This reminds me of one of my college professors who is still a rabid liberal, atheist, and homosexual Unitarian. He came to US History class with three or so tee-shirts on. He stood in front of the class and stripped each tee-shirt off, each which said something. I remember one of them said to, "Question Authority." Of course our authority at that time was a well-respected conservative president. This brings to mind, what happened to the concept of questioning authority that my liberal mentors tried teaching me? I currently do not hear them questioning Obama.
Those who were alive and living in Germany during the rise of Hitler must think they are reliving those days.
this is a fine example of things not being what they seem. did you make any attempt to ferret out the truth behind your claims? it was one school, the students were not TAUGHT the song but helped write it themselves, and it was a part of a larger project on the contributions of African Americans to the world. in other words, they made up a list of African Americans who were important to history and made up a series of songs about them to honor them as part of a school presentation for their parents. they used words from his speeches to make it historically correct. they used a familiar song as the basis because that is how these projects are structured, to modify the familiar for the lesson content. after they 'wrote it' together, they practiced it with the teacher leading, just like they did some other songs and poems about other black leaders and scientists and such. they also made posters and wrote reports. in its correct context and in perspective with the rest of the project, it is appropriate. but leave it to you guys to make it into something it is not.
"Barack Hussein Obama
Yes
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama"
I don't care what kind of spin anon 2 puts on this. In the context described by anon 2 and viewing the above words, it is still wrong. RWR, GHWB, and GWB wouldn't have received this patronizing garbage in a public school setting, and they were a lot greater men than this little child we have as president whose primary training was in setting up advisement on tax shelters for pimps and underage teenage hookers.
Schools do this all the time, write their own little plays and skits. I bet the did other presidents. I bet they did scientists maybe for other units of study.
In any other context, teaching kids respect for the seated president would be something you conservatives would be all about. Respect for the office. But your racist hatred colors all you see here.
We should be MORE concerned that they used a RELIGIOUS tune as their basis for this song as having that Jesus song in a public school violates separation of church and state, a constitutional issue. How come no one is all over THAT little detail?
OK, I'll bite.
Where, exactly in the constitution is separation of church and state?
I would expect a lefty to come up with this because they don't know anything about the constitution of the USA. It would challenge their core flawed beliefs.
It doesn't exist. I'll let you look it up.
Just for a tiny assist. WIKI is pretty good.
There is not pronounced separation of church and state in the constitution.
if you have read wiki, what is your question. by including any one religion in 'state', that would amount to 'establishing' that religion. it would amoint to prohibiting free expression of other religions in that situation. that line of the constitution is pretty clear and the supreme court continues to interpret it that way, despite what your born again church friends keep trying to tell you. listen to your head and stop letting them lead you around.
So, you can't find the words separation of church and state in the constitution. Nuff said. Knew you couldn't.
You never do get these things right.
"...that line of the constitution is pretty clear and the supreme court continues to interpret it that way..."
If the US Supreme Court had its way, we would still have black slavery in this country. To my knowledge, the US Supreme Court has not reversed itself on Dred v. Scot. Fortunately, Dred v. Scot was reversed militarily. My point is the US Supreme Court is not the purveyor of all knowledge as some liberals think it is. In fact, the US Constitution delegates it a rather minor role. It granted itself a larger role in Marbury v. Madison.
As far as establishing a religion, where is the liberal dissent for the government establishing the religion of Atheism? There is none from that sector. The religion of Atheism is established onto our school children on a daily basis. Atheism believes in the absense of God. That is exactly what is imposed in a school setting.
Post a Comment