Why name a school after a sitting president? This is really amazing for a number of reasons.
And it’s never ever been done before.
That makes it ok how? I still think it’s a terrible idea.
I personally think it’s a bad idea to name things after people who are still alive, much less still in office (or wherever). For example: Pete Rose Way in Cincinnati.
They renamed Enron Field, I doubt this school will keep its name long.
I have always thought that this sort of thing is a really lame arguement. Who the fuck cares if the “other guys” did the same thing? How does that make the complaint less valid.
I am proud of the fact that I have never been a member of the either of our two major parties. I’ve had it both ways. That is, I have made a comments against Bush and had some lame brain say that the Democrats did the same thing and in a different thread made a comment against a Democrat and had a different lame brain tell me that some GOP guy did the same thing. Is that really the best you could come up with?
It depends on the nature of the complaint.
If the complaint is, “They shouldn’t do this! It’s unprecedented!” then it’s obviously very relevant to point out a precedent.
If the complaint is, “They should STOP doing this - it’s a terrible idea!” then obviously the practice should be discussed on its merits.
The OP read, in total:
The OP does not disclose what the ‘number of reasons’ are, and the link he provides does not illuminate the point any further.
It’s unclear to me what the objection is, precisely, to the practice.
Exactly correct. I should have mentioned this. If, for example, a group of Democrats were protesting the naming of the school, it would have been a valid argument.
I can think of one (if a non-American may be allowed an opinion on this 
). Schools shouldn’t be named after sitting Presidents because there’s still time for something to go wrong with that presidency to the extent that you wouldn’t *want * your school named after them. It’d be like naming the Richard Nixon High School in 1971; chances are over the next few years it’s not going to be as popular.
Sure. But the objection still applies after they leave office – what if something were discovered about their exercise of office (or their personal life) that made the choice a poor one? Indeed, such a discovery could even be posthumous.
The remedy is simple: rename the school. And that remedy exists no matter when the school is originally named.
I live in Stockton. am Republican and was surprised by this as well.
True, but generally a period of office can’t have been *that * bad if no hints towards whatever the scandal is come out. Correct me if i’m wrong, but I don’t believe any scandals - to the level of which you wouldn’t want to name a school after them - have been found out about Presidents *after * their presidency, with not even a whisper during it.
Simple /= good. Renaming the school, again, would be pretty embarassing. Add in the costs for rebranding (which may not be that much, but we are talking about schools) and it’s pretty reasonable to say prevention is better than a simple remedy.
And yet you assumed it was a partisan snipe. You’re acting like a hack, plain and simple. There are so many reasons (some have been mentioned) it is a dumb idea to name a school after a sitting president, I didn’t think it was necessary to mention them.
Not at all. I rebutted the only argument that I could even infer was being made. I grant you that this is not GD, where a rigorous standard of stating your argument is more explicitly in effect. On the other hand, it’s not MPSIMST (Mundane Pointless Stuff I Must Share Telepathically). Beyond the obvious inference I made, I wasn’t able to peer inot your mind and construct the rest of your argument for you.
Well, I’d say JFK’s sexual frolics are a contender for the phenomenon you mention. While they were apparently an open secret amongst DC insiders and the press corps, I think it’s fair to say they were not well-known to would-be school-namers in Middle America. Having them come out many years later has blunted their edge, of course, and Kennedy’s legacy was sealed by other events; no one will now suggest renaming a JFK Elementary School based on those stories. But it’s an example that fits your general criteria.
I don’t see any problem with naming a school or other building after a sitting President, be he R or D.
Well, it doesn’t fit the criteria, since as you say no-one will now suggest renaming a JFK school. The scandal wasn’t enough to erase the things people consider him noteworthy for. Now, it’s fair to say that it never having happened before doesn’t mean it never will, but I think 43 Presidents (some of whom with considerable scandals associated with them) is enough of a precedent to say it’s pretty unlikely.
Hmm. Was that a suggestion* I * might have a problem with it if a President was of one party, but not the other? It did seem somewhat implied, though I could easily be mistaken.
I’m not actually that bothered with schools being named after people point blank; it just seems kinda worrying to me. But it’s understandable why people would want to, so i’m not going to move over there and campaign against the practice or anything.
I think it’s tacky to name a building after anyone who’s still alive, much less a sitting President. However, I think this instance isn’t that big of a deal beyond tackiness - he doesn’t have direct control over that school or district, after all.
What I find much worse is the case of John H. Stroger, Jr. Hospital of Cook County in Chicago, named after the then-currently sitting president of the Cook County Board, which has direct control over and responsibility for the county hospital. (An amusing sidenote is that when Stroger had a stroke earlier this year, he was not taken to his namesake hospital, but to a private hospital a block away. After touting what an upgrade the new hospital was - which no one can deny as the old facility needed to be replaced - and what excellent healthcare it provides, it was interesting to see him be taken elsewhere.)
Well, there you are. Everything has already gone wrong with Bush, so it’s perfectly appropriate to name a school for him now.
Seriously, though:
Quebec’s Commission de Toponymie does not allow features to be named after anyone until they have been dead for at least a year.
Jeez, I was surprised when I opened it and it said “Stockton” and not “Lancaster”! I nearly expected this to be in my hometown, where our new, bright, shiny, highest point on the city skyline courthouse is named after a dude still in office. He has a wildlife preserve too. :rolleyes:
Personal insults are not allowed anywhere outside the Pit, brickbacon. Please don’t do this again.