Is that a common point of view in the USA? I recall from my own school days having some wonderfully disrespectful conversation about the major political figures of our time.
Come to think of it, I can’t really conceive of a situation in the UK where the concept of “disrespecting the PM” would even come up. It is pretty much a given.
(though I confess I have never got my head around the concept of respecting the “position” either…whatever that means)
Hell, Tony Blair “won” the Channel 4 vote-in show “Britain’s 100 Worst People” back when he was still in office. Largely a pointless exercise, obviously (he was also ranked in the mid-30s on the “100 Best Britons” show), but it’s a rare political figure in the UK who’s immune from criticism.
Ever seen Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQs)? if the PM isn’t disrespected* at least once a week, the Opposition** is accused of not doing its job.
*I still have a hard time using “disrespect” as a verb
**This is not just a reference to the other parties but a more formalized arrangement.
I am now imagining British government as a large scale, ongoing rap battle. Thanks ! 
Just in case I wasn’t clear, I mean that I can’t imagine a situation in the UK where disrespecting the PM would be a problem, or be frowned upon.
Hell, Spitting Image was so vicious in its scorn for British politics it makes The Daily Show look like The Mickey Mouse Club.
…not on Sunday Morning though. Those guys have a monoply on “smart” during that time slot!
That’s an easy one… confiscate all cell phones at the door and carry-on.
Yeah, it’s weird, that. During the Bush years, there was this meme on the right that it was wrong to criticize (not even necessarily in a disrespectful way) the POTUS because the US were at war. I never got that; I think that when you send your soldiers oversea and you’re in the business of killling people and getting some of your own killed, that’s when you scrutinize the executive the most, and criticize them if need be.
No, I’m agreeing with your point.
I remember a news conference some years back with Blair and Bush, where BBC political correspondent and speccy bald guy* Nick Robinson asked Blair what was a fairly standard question - I can’t remember about what (probably Iraq) but not overly hardball in the grand scheme of BBC questioning, and certainly the type of question Blair was well used to answering. Before he could, however, Bush jumped on the question and accused Robinson of “calling out” Blair. Even Blair looked surprised. It was a bizarre moment.
*From Wikipedia:
I’d settle for presenting the average (and the below average) “academic” as a leftist.
On a CSPAN3 panel this past weekend on the legacy of the Civil War one of the academics admitted as much.
No, not at all. Her reaction is approval for calling Bush shitty even during his term, because he was in fact shitty, but to call Obama names during his term is wrong, because you can’t disrespect the President.
She also has some…um…creative views about what “slander” means and some even more bizarre ideas about how free speech relates to Miranda rights*.
When the students are orders of magnitude smarter, better informed and able to present their ideas better than the teacher, it’s time for the teacher to go. (Actually one of the students impressed the hell out of me)
*I don’t understand those views, but she seemed CERTAIN they’re connected. Somehow.
Well, somehow, this is all Bush’s fault, for having his minions start the whole meme of ‘you can’t speak ill of the president abroad - it’s treason,’ and this poor, sweet woman misunderstood it was all faux-righteous, falsely indignant bluster.
Um…yeah. Bush’s fault.
Can you link to the thread you’re talking about? Sounds like a good read.
In the teacher’s defense, maybe her district uses old textbooks and they haven’t been updated to show the expiration of the Alien and Sedition Acts.
Uh-huh. School creationism controversies never make the news. :dubious:
I’m not sure which is worse in the OP’s example - that the teacher is attempting to restrict political views in her classroom to her preferred ones, or that she’s a major dumbass.
Yes, you missed something. She said you can’t criticize any president past or present and then a couple of minutes later she called Bush shitty.
So she totally contradicted herself.
At 8:46 on the video she says, “As a Social Studies teacher, I cannot allow you to slander any president in here, past or current. If that’s the case, someone could say some negative things about the Tea Party, and there’s a lot of that going on!”
I have no idea what her point was about the Tea Party.
I have to say that while the teacher is clearly an idiot, and an unprofessional one at that, her students seemed pretty well informed and intelligent. And they probably learn more by thinking on their feet in that sort of raucous free-for-all debate than they ever would by actually listening to that teacher lecture from a textbook. But yeah, she should be transfered to Guam along with the Secret Service agent who arrested the guy for criticizing Cheney. She’d probably end up teaching that guy’s kids!
ETA: I had a girlfriend in college whose dad was in the Navy, and she told me that if someone fucked up really badly and the commanding officer couldn’t or didn’t want to bring actual charges under the UCMJ, the absolute worst thing they could do was to send you to Guam. Apparently she was telling the truth!
An academic on a C-SPAN3 panel discussing the Civil War admitted that the average academic is a leftist? My God, talk about burying the lead!