Deliberate Columbian cluelessness? - Obama's speech to students: Local classes wonder what fuss was about

.
First of all, like most of the MSM, our local rag has a vested interest in seeing the empty suit succeed.

As illustrated in my Brian Baird: Coward series, to get the Columbian to question or condemn almost anything that one of their own does is not unlike finding a Volkswagen-sized gold nugget in your back yard. That is, while it's not impossible, it IS pretty much going to be an unlikely occurrence.

More evidence? Before Jones slinked out of his job, where had the Columbian done any article on the Van Jones debacle? Why, you would THINK that a president hiring a self-avowed communist would be newsworthy. But not when the hiring of a fringe-leftist nut, a nut who actually believed that President Bush was involved in the 9/11 attack and the subsequent brouhaha MIGHT reflect poorly on this rag's messiah... well, not a word.

So, Howard Buck, who I have met and observed during the time he covered the legislative beat for this rag and who I always felt was a solid reporter, does an article that asks the rhetorical question, "What was all the fuss about?"

Well, the fuss was what led to multiple re-wrties of the messiah's speech to students as the Department of Education's lesson plan leaked last week.

But I find it odd that those whining about the reaction of people's concern of additional student inculcation by the empty-suited one have made no mention of the leftist reaction to the first President Bush's same speech to students... because that went something like this:

The day after Bush spoke, the Washington Post published a front-page story suggesting the speech was carefully staged for the president's political benefit. "The White House turned a Northwest Washington junior high classroom into a television studio and its students into props," the Post reported.

With the Post article in hand, Democrats pounced. "The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students," said Richard Gephardt, then the House Majority Leader. "And the president should be doing more about education than saying, 'Lights, camera, action.'"

Democrats did not stop with words.

Rep. William Ford, then chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, ordered the General Accounting Office to investigate the cost and legality of Bush's appearance. On October 17, 1991, Ford summoned then-Education Secretary Lamar Alexander and other top Bush administration officials to testify at a hearing devoted to the speech. "The hearing this morning is to really examine the expenditure of $26,750 of the Department of Education funds to produce and televise an appearance by President Bush at Alice Deal Junior High School in Washington, DC," Ford began. "As the chairman of the committee charged with the authorization and implementation of education programs, I am very much interested in the justification, rationale for giving the White House scarce education funds to produce a media event."

So... I think that THIS "fuss," was NOTHING like the "fuss" this rag's fellow leftists kicked up when George Bush did the same thing.

Since Howard asked.
.