American History Will Now Reflect Barack Obama In Text Books. Except Kids Won't Learn His Middle Name Is `Hussein'

[Nagishkaw 510]

He's ashamed of it.

[lostinblue 1,989]

How will the history books in kenya handle this issue?

[Pooky 3,783]

He's ashamed of it.

I dare say that he is not in the least bit ashamed of it ...

The whole of the Texas Board of Education, on the other hand, should be ashamed of the games they're playing with kids' educations. That they would play political games with future generations of American kids is plain wrong.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I dare say that he is not in the least bit ashamed of it ...

The whole of the Texas Board of Education, on the other hand, should be ashamed of the games they're playing with kids' educations. That they would play political games with future generations of American kids is plain wrong.

It would be nice if history was taught as it happened, without an agenda, but the ones with the most guns make all the rules, and get to tell the version that best sets their agenda. How would you explain how children don't understand that lumber is a renewable resource, unless science was taught with an agenda as well.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

How will the history books in kenya handle this issue?

Don't worry. It's a non-issue there.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Does anyone here know what George Washington's middle name was? How about Thomas Jefferson? Abraham Lincoln?

How about Stephan Grover Cleveland who just went by Grover Cleveland?

Personally I think the people behind this "why can't we say his middle name" fiasco are disgusting and deeply dishonest.

That ####### was manufactured by Obama's opponents during the campaign and taken up by the Talk Radio morons as a way of emphasising their view that Obama isn't a bona fide American and is somehow "other". It isn't that the guy or anyone is ashamed of his name (more disingenuous garbage), it's that noone else really cared that Hillary Clinton's middle name was Diane, or that John McCain's is Sidney. So a controversy had to be manufactured - for the benefit of the few whacked out arseholes that really do believe that Obama is some sort of muslim terrorist Manchurian Candidate.

It's a non-story in almost every way - except for the fact that the people promoting it and trying to keep it alive via a pointless and idiotic debate about whether to include it in school textbooks are doing so in order to make a racist comment, and then trying to wash their hands of what they are doing by feigning surprise and outrage that their interest in Obama's middle name is innocent, when it is clearly nothing of the sort.

[Pooky 3,783]

Personally I think the people behind this "why can't we say his middle name" fiasco are disgusting and deeply dishonest.

That ####### was manufactured by Obama's opponents during the campaign and taken up by the Talk Radio morons as a way of emphasising their view that Obama isn't a bona fide American and is somehow "other". It isn't that the guy or anyone is ashamed of his name (more disingenuous garbage), it's that noone else really cared that Hillary Clinton's middle name was Diane, or that John McCain's is Sidney. So a controversy had to be manufactured - for the benefit of the few whacked out arseholes that really do believe that Obama is some sort of muslim terrorist Manchurian Candidate.

It's a non-story in almost every way - except for the fact that the people promoting it and trying to keep it alive via a pointless and idiotic debate about whether to include it in school textbooks are doing so in order to make a racist comment, and then trying to wash their hands of what they are doing by feigning surprise and outrage that their interest in Obama's middle name is innocent, when it is clearly nothing of the sort.

So why, if that is the case, is it the Democrat members of the board who shied away from including his middle name? Surely, if it is a non-issue for them, the best way to negate the topic is not to argue the point. All they have done is fuel the belief that they are the ones ashamed of the President's middle name. For a group of people on an Education Board, that's just dumb.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So why, if that is the case, is it the Democrat members of the board who shied away from including his middle name? Surely, if it is a non-issue for them, the best way to negate the topic is not to argue the point. All they have done is fuel the belief that they are the ones ashamed of the President's middle name. For a group of people on an Education Board, that's just dumb.

What does it matter? The entire story is lunatic nonsense.

[Pooky 3,783]

What does it matter? The entire story is lunatic nonsense.

No argument there, but that doesn't stop people talking about it. That's what this country does, it psychoanalyzes every little thing, in public, with extreme prejudice. The Republicans on the Education Board basically dared the Democrats to show some balls, which they promptly failed to do. A simple, "Go on then, include his middle name" would have killed the story stone dead. As it is, their perceived "shame", and abject chickening out became the story.

And it's a slow news day.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Personally I think the people behind this "why can't we say his middle name" fiasco are disgusting and deeply dishonest.

That ####### was manufactured by Obama's opponents during the campaign and taken up by the Talk Radio morons as a way of emphasising their view that Obama isn't a bona fide American and is somehow "other". It isn't that the guy or anyone is ashamed of his name (more disingenuous garbage), it's that noone else really cared that Hillary Clinton's middle name was Diane, or that John McCain's is Sidney. So a controversy had to be manufactured - for the benefit of the few whacked out arseholes that really do believe that Obama is some sort of muslim terrorist Manchurian Candidate.

It's a non-story in almost every way - except for the fact that the people promoting it and trying to keep it alive via a pointless and idiotic debate about whether to include it in school textbooks are doing so in order to make a racist comment, and then trying to wash their hands of what they are doing by feigning surprise and outrage that their interest in Obama's middle name is innocent, when it is clearly nothing of the sort.

[twowls 217]

Why is the middle name issue a topic but not the other, far more damaging revisions? As in, the absurd and demonstrably false notion that McCarthyism has been vindicated, that the slave trade be referred to as the "Atlantic triangular trade"--it's still slave-a-rific but sounds much prettier!--the incorrect meaning of separation of church and state, and the minimization of the role of Thomas Jefferson.

Hussein it up; don't Hussein it up. These are the least of our problems with these backwoods f*cks.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

When it comes to historical names of past presidents, many history books have omitted or chose not to use their full names. So why is this any different? I personally don't see any problem listing Stephan Grover Cleveland with just his middle name, Grover, and I don't see how this would be any different. There are far more troubling issues of omission by this Texas School Board than fretting over a president's middle name.

I believe there is a difference between omitting something because its not noteworthy versus censorship. Am I wrong in assuming this is censorship?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I believe there is a difference between omitting something because its not noteworthy versus censorship. Am I wrong in assuming this is censorship?

One Democratic board member said that referring to the President by his middle name would be "impolite". Another Democratic board member said to refer to him by his middle name would de derogatory and subject him to ridicule. In the end, the board dropped the issue.

Bradley finally withdrew his amendment, saying it was "to put an end to the whining."

[sjr09 155]

Wasn't George Washington's middle name "Dave"?

I think 'Dave' was chong's roomie in the first feature-length movie, Up in Smoke?

[Darnell 8,478]

ya - I can understand the issue - but ..

Most academic textbook publishers pay attention to the Texas State Board of Education and the Textbook Review committee - Texas is huge, is huge market for these publishers

and

most states will purchase the textbooks from a publisher that gets 'approved' from the Textbook Review Committee.

It's a 'known thing', these past 40 years...

IMO, it's hard to 'push back' on this kinda thing.