Why President Obama speaking to school children isn’t controversial
*UPDATE* - Education reporter Kira Cox tells me that they will indeed be watching this at Shuksan Middle School. That is the only school where officials have made it known to her, she says.
And why I’m not writing an article on it. Local conservatives have e-mailed me stating that I must write an article about President Obama’s Sept. 8 speech that will be live fed to schools around the nation on the first day of school (for many kids, anyway).
I am not writing a print article on the topic, because for the life of me I don’t see the alleged controversy.
But I’ll explain why I’m not, because as you know I always want to be as transparent as possible in the way I cover government and politics news.
Meanwhile, one e-mailer tells me I need to report it because “many parents will want to keep their children at home” on the day President Obama speaks. That’s their choice, and I assume that local schools will be notifying parents about the event.
But as a journalist who is very busy, this isn’t something that is shocking.
According to the main news item at the U.S. Department of Education Web site (where all of the documents related to the president’s speech are front and center and not hidden), this is what’s going to happen:
The President will challenge students to work hard, set educational goals, and take responsibility for their learning. He will also call for a shared responsibility and commitment on the part of students, parents and educators to ensure that every child in every school receives the best education possible so they can compete in the global economy for good jobs and live rewarding and productive lives as American citizens.
The issues over President Obama’s speech appear to have been started by conservative columnist Michelle Malkin, whose main post and current syndicated column claims that President Obama is trying to “indoctrinate” school children. You can read her full column, right here.
Says Malkin:
Instead of practicing cursive, reviewing multiplication tables, diagramming sentences, or learning something concrete, America’s kids will be lectured about the importance of learning. And then the schoolchildren, from pre-kindergarten through 12th grade, will be exhorted to Do Something — other than sit in their seats and receive academic instruction, that is.
My only response as to why this isn’t newsworthy in terms of controversy is this:
I want to thank the Boys and Girls Clubs that are involved here, as well. I appreciate that. We’re going to change America one heart and one soul and one conscience at a time. And the Boys and Girls Clubs are an integral part of providing help, particularly in after-school programs. And I want to thank you for being here.
Those aren’t the words of President Obama trying to indoctrinate your children, or change their souls.
Those are the words of President George W. Bush from a May 2002 speech at Clarke Street Elementary School in Milwaukee, Wisc. You can read the entire thing, right here.
More from the speech:
Okay, I’ve got some questions for you. Ready? How many of you are going to college? (Applause.) That’s good news. See, that means you’ve set a goal. In order to meet that goal, you’ve got to really be good readers, and you’ve got to study, and listen to your teachers.
President Bush, like many presidents before him, asked children to take responsibility for their educations and to do something about it, by reading, studying and being respectful.
This is what president’s do when they speak to school children.
And that’s why it’s not controversial.
September 2nd, 2009 at 11:36 AM
I remember GWB getting the info on the 9-11 attacks while in a classroom with children.
But has presidents ever before given a mass speech aimed at all children on the start of the school year before?
Is this something new, will it be required of everyone’s children to attend by any or all of the government run schools in any state? Should it be?
Asking questions is never wrong. Jumping to conclusions can be.
AFY!! (informally known as AFY!!!)
September 2nd, 2009 at 11:41 AM
I remember him just sitting on that tiny schoolroom chair,
a thousand miles from the action,
doing something he’d never done before,
and would never do again,
dumbstruck as if he’d just won the lottery.
September 2nd, 2009 at 11:48 AM
President Bush made several speeches aimed and school kids every year in September. Education was actually something he was quite interested in promoting (Thank you Laura Bush!). It is just up to the media whether they cover it.
September 2nd, 2009 at 11:56 AM
Oh They covered Bush’s promotion of education.
They covered Bush’s relatives profiting big time with contracts for Educational software,
software for issues,
surprise surprise,
mandated by Bush policies.
September 2nd, 2009 at 12:06 PM
Our local schools don’t apparently have plans to participate as far as the communications person I spoke with knew. She’ll update me if she learns more.
If they do participate, they always inform parents about special events before hand through a variety of communication methods (thousands of parents are signed up for e-mail notifications, they use newsletters and their Web site, etc.)
September 2nd, 2009 at 12:10 PM
And to answer your question, AFY, no it’s not required. It’s not a direct broadcast into schools. It’s being broadcast on the White House Web site. It will be live fed only if the school takes advantage of the Web cast.
September 2nd, 2009 at 12:13 PM
The bottom line is: We don’t trust Obama with the ear of the nation’s children. We don’t trust him with much of anything because of his political philosophy, his collectivist plans, his contempt for the views of the average American, the philosophy and goals of his closest advisers, and his constantly changing dialectics.
September 2nd, 2009 at 12:19 PM
Spinnwolf, as always I thank you for sharing your perspective as matter of factly as possible. I enjoy getting this perspective on the blog for all to discuss.
September 2nd, 2009 at 12:53 PM
So, when Bush did these on an almost annual basis, no one cared. General messages from our President to our kids about the importance of education is an accepted tradition.
But when Obama does it, the radical movements of hate and disinformation get in a tizzy. They see conspiracies where none exist. They live in fantasy worlds of no memory of history or understanding of basic facts.
Wars based on lies? no problem. Torture for political purpose? sure. Rampant illegal acts by both elected and appointed officials resulting of more convictions than any administration in the history of the country? nary a peep. Policies that result in the largest discrepancy in wages in the history of the country? Yeah, Bush was for the little guy. An Economic meltdown because of corporate greed and lack of government oversight? Who cares?
The radical Right cared not about any of this, and swallowed the party line. Talk about indoctrination and the politics of personality.
Members of the Radical Right, you are delusional. You lost and election in a democracy, by a landslide after years of failure. Deal with it.
Your fear of a black president if obvious. Your hatred for American institutions is sickening. Go ahead keep your kids home and instill fear of ideas, aspirations and the importance of having goals. Great move.
September 2nd, 2009 at 12:53 PM
I trust Obama with the ear of our children, and just to drive the point home, here is Obama reading my favorite children’s book to kids at Easter.
http://www3.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/White+House+Hosts+Annual+Easter+Egg+Roll+TNxFF50ZYnAl.jpg
September 2nd, 2009 at 12:57 PM
Well spoken Phranc68!
September 2nd, 2009 at 1:38 PM
Actually, fun fact, when I first began this job I generally got calls from local liberals who wanted me to write stories about various things President Bush was doing in terms of speaking to children, too. I told them no also, and explained why (basically the same thing), but I didn’t have a blog at the time to more fully disseminate the reason.
Since the election, I’ve heard from way more conservatives than I used to. It seems like an obvious thing, now that an opposition president is in office, but it’s just weird how my contacts with the public have changed since the election. I heard very rarely from local conservatives on national issues until Obama was elected but heard a lot from liberals before on national issues. It’s completely the other way around now.
September 2nd, 2009 at 1:40 PM
On the other hand, I do trust Barack. I don’t trust unsupported opinions candied by buzzwords I see and hear from rightist opinionist. Look for bad, you’ll find it. Or make it. Look for good, you can find that too. I choose the good. But, I choose the good without blind allegiance, and with consideration.
School districts can, and some will, supply this stream to children. Barack is showing political wisdom with this address over the Internet, but I see no plot.
I don’t think the right liked FDR and his fireside chats, either. The American people, however, loved it. I think American children will respond likewise this time around.
What the right fears most, and they should, is these children looking back, as adult voters, and saying to themselves, “My God! Why did Americans put up with no national health care?” Much like the Great Depression, they will have stories of citizens terrorized by bankruptcies and home foreclosures due to illness, while insurance CEO’s compensated themselves billions. And they will remember what president helped America dig itself out of such ethical and financial depravation. And maybe they will remember when he gave them hope, in a very personal way, back in school those many years before.
We are the greatest nation on earth. Health care for our citizenry will only make us a stronger nation. This oppositional stonewalling is not helping our national will to succeed in everything we dedicate ourselves to accomplishing. This needs doing. It will be done with, or without, Republican support, and it will succeed. My advice to centrist Republicans is to get their party on board, or get ready to party with the Whigs, Prohibitionist and Dixiecrats. Let your fringes party with that every popular historical oddity, “The Know-Nothing” party. They should fit in well.
September 2nd, 2009 at 1:57 PM
UncleGeorge, you are definitely becoming my favorite poster here. Thanks for the cognizant opinions.
I can’t speak to the issue, not having children.
September 2nd, 2009 at 2:24 PM
Sam,
The dynamic of who contacts you is interesting. What roll do you think the blog plays? It is so much easier to harass you now.
But the larger picture seems clear enough. When your party is in power, there is less to complain to the press about.
September 2nd, 2009 at 2:38 PM
I’d say people don’t necessarily harass me here, Phranc (except for the occasion outraged person from the right or left who believes I’m shilling for the other side only because reality doesn’t mesh with their personal views … two posters are banned here for now, one liberal, one conservative not for their ideas, but the way they treated others and me here).
This blog is the best thing that could have ever happened to my beat and my job. I love speaking to everyone here, continuing the community conversation about a variety of government and politics topics. This blog is the best thing since sliced bread. My only regret is that it was up and running sooner.
September 2nd, 2009 at 2:59 PM
Here’s a good first day of school story for all me friends:
http://townhall.com/columnists/MikeAdams/2009/08/31/my_little_utopia?page=1
Hey, ST, can’t wait for your call mix to flip agin, don’t ya know!
AFY!! (informally known as AFY!!!)
September 2nd, 2009 at 3:11 PM
Sam,
Of course I meant harass in the most loving possible way. Perhaps, harangue…hassle…contact with enthusiasm would have been a better choice of words!
September 2nd, 2009 at 3:13 PM
Ha, “contact with enthusiasm.” I’d say that both sums it up well and might be understating it, depending on the call.
Then there was the time I got the call asking when I was going to cover “the secret interrogation prison on the waterfront.”
The conversation went like this:
“I’m never going to cover that.”
“Why not?”
“Because it doesn’t exist.”
September 2nd, 2009 at 3:42 PM
Phranc78 you have descended once again into hateful speech. I did not mind when Bush visited schools. He was a good and modest man who had no pretensions to megalomania. That is quite different from Big Brother taking over the schools’ airwaves to promote his collectivist agenda.
A better choice would be for all Presidents to stay out of our schools, out of our health care, out of our medical care, out of our hospitilizations, and out of our medicine cabinet. It is not their business. A president’s business is to stay in his office and run the executive branch, and to keep it as small and as inexpensive as possible, not to grow it like a cancer.
And you just reiterated all the politically generated lies that undermine our institutions and open the door to the kind of legislative excess that is destroying our economy and our freedoms.
September 2nd, 2009 at 3:47 PM
Spinnwolf - they’re not taking over the air waves. It’s being broadcast on the White House Web site and the schools are being invited to tune in if they so choose.
You can visit the link to the Department of Education’s Web site for all of the information right there at the main page.
September 2nd, 2009 at 3:55 PM
Whilst I agree with spinnwolf in that I don’t trust President Obama any farther than I can throw cheesecake under water, and that Phranc78 is plumbing the depths of pot-stirring yet again, I say as a staunch conservative that this is really a non-issue. I’m a bit puzzled by the controversy it has stirred. We have MUCH bigger fish to fry than this little minnow.
If President Obama says or does something out of line in this broadcast, then it may become an issue, but right now it’s nothing to have all this sparring over.
September 2nd, 2009 at 4:36 PM
Sam, I am glad to see that you are receiving more input from the “outs” than from the “ins” no matter which “party” is in power.
That is as it should be, and is a sign that the republic and it’s 4th estate are still functioning as intended, at least in some ways.
Which founding father was it who said he would rather have a nation with no government than a nation with no free press? A free press is, or should be, the bastion of the loyal opposition.
What interesting times we live in—when both political parties are in a process of massive transformation, and simultaneously The Press is in the process of transforming into who knows what?
Will paper and ink survive? Or will it all go electronic? I hope I can make it to age 110 to see how this phase of history turns out!
September 2nd, 2009 at 4:47 PM
Spinn - I believe that was Thomas Jefferson.
September 2nd, 2009 at 4:48 PM
Edmund Burke said:
Pointing at the Press Gallery of the House of Commons, “Yonder sits the fourth estate, and they are more important than them all.”
AFY!! (informally known as AFY!!!)
September 2nd, 2009 at 5:47 PM
Another good reason why I’ll be looking to alternatives to public schooling for my kids.
What is “new” about Obama is doing is that instead of speaking in front a single classroom or school he is trying to speak to every K-6 public school student.
The most alarming thing about this to me was the “curriculum” that the US Department of Education advised for teachers available here: http://www.docstoc.com/docs/10582301/President-Obama?s-Address-to-Students-Across-America-September-8-2009
Of specific concern to me are these “questions”:
>Why is it important that we listen to the President and other elected officials, like the mayor, senators, members of congress, or the governor? Why is what they say important?
As students listen to the speech, they could think about the following:
What is the President trying to tell me?
What is the President asking me to do?
What new ideas and actions is the President challenging me to think about?
Students can record important parts of the speech where the President is asking them to do something. Students might think about:
What specific job is he asking me to do?
Is he asking anything of anyone else? Teachers? Principals? Parents? The American people?
Students could discuss their responses to the following questions:
What do you think the President wants us to do?
Does the speech make you want to do anything?
Are we able to do what President Obama is asking of us?
Given all this, wouldn’t it be fair that parents atleast be able to look over the transcript before he delivers it? If that happens I think the concern regarding this whole matter would be reduced.
September 2nd, 2009 at 6:13 PM
Barack Obama will use his bully pulpit, I understand that. As long as Obama keeps it apolitical, and doesn’t turn it into a national 2010/2012 campaign stop with a captive audience, then I guess I’m OK with it. It does seem like a time-waster on a national scale to me, but what the heck. It isn’t as if most of the idle students would have been getting the 3R’s otherwise.
I believe that teachers (teacher’s union members all) will gladly devote class time to Obama’s internet feed. How many would devote class time to a conservative rebuttal (should Obama promote a statist agenda requiring a rebuttal)? There is a reason why we home school, and our kids will probably watch the feed, and then they’ll work through the US Department of Education “curriculum” with their teacher/mother. One thing’s for sure, they’ll get the rebuttal at our house, if one is called for. I love freedom of choice.
September 2nd, 2009 at 8:48 PM
What seems to be missing from those study materials is the encouragement of scepticism. Children, while being taught to respect the Office, should also be encouraged to question everything their elected officials say, and to view what they say always in the light of their Study of the Constitution.
The children do all study the Constitution and it’s Bill of Rights, do they not? ???? ???
September 2nd, 2009 at 9:52 PM
You think a kindergarten student should be taught to question everything, Spinnwolf? I’m genuinely curious. They set up to standards of study materials, and it appears that the 7-12 grade materials are more toward what you’re expressing. Perhaps because they’re more mature and psychologically able to question things? I’m not sure little kids even have that capacity in the way you’re describing, simply based on the psychology classes I took in college.
Anyway, I honestly am going to be watching out for various essays and Web diagrams from high schoolers that might end up online after the speech because, being somewhat sarcastic and sardonic myself in high school (to put it mildly), I can really envision some funny comments coming out of this from various high schoolers.
Kind of like these high school student analogies and metaphors:
http://solar.physics.montana.edu/home/www/reu/2005/jretten/analogies.html
September 2nd, 2009 at 11:53 PM
Kindergartners are truth-seekers, soaking up learning no matter where they are or who is around. The Bill of Rights is so simple and straight-forward anybody should be able to understand it, even a five-year-old. My mother explained it to me when I was five. It’s not nearly as complicated as the convoluted reasoning involved in propagandizing children about global warming and the “poor polar bears,” and a half dozen other liberal falsehoods with which their childhoods are darkened.
September 3rd, 2009 at 12:38 AM
Spinnwolf, you really, honestly believe that a five year old can understand the Bill of Rights?
Honestly, there are adults that don’t understand it. And not without good reason: It’s been interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court, per U.S. judicial tradition since the beginning of this country, in a myriad of ways that makes it so that the language isn’t as straightforward as it appears.
I was a political science minor and I confess I don’t at all fully understand it. I’m a government reporter and I can’t explain every facet.
But I bet I could argue most of it with the average person.
But you really think a 5-year-old can understand it and have opinions on it?
Spinnwolf, I know it’s been awhile for you … but do you remember being 5? It’s only been 20 years for me now and I hardly have a recollection. I remember being sat on a couch once for spitting on a girl from a tower on the playground … but I don’t remember a single lesson other than the time I got to write an essay on Joe Montana and the school principal (who I also can’t place with a name) asked me about it.
Bill of Rights? I’m genuinely asking you to be straightforward with me. You really think 5-year-old can get it?
September 3rd, 2009 at 12:41 AM
Oh, yes, and one time we milked cows and then shook the milk in a jar to make cheese. Those are my two memories of kindergarten aside from the time they told my mom I read at a 4th grade level and we had to do a bunch of extra work at home that worked me up because I would have rather played than read more books.
September 3rd, 2009 at 1:12 AM
And, yes, Spinn, I’m glad you’re on when I am. It pleases me when one of my favorites (yes, I can have favorites on a blog I run!) is up at the same time I am, though I probably shouldn’t be working this late. I can’t help it, you people keep my interested!
September 3rd, 2009 at 11:28 AM
If we like Obama or not he is our President and he dose deserve respect. Children today have there parents makeing so many excusses for them this is an oppertunity for one more. In the real working world if they had a speaker coming to their office they would have to suck it up and show up at work. Children need to learn that even though they might not like something or someone they still have to repect what or who they are. Children look up the the President and that is a great role modle, but they can stay home and watch MTV, that has many great people to look up to. What is the big deal with him asking our kids to take schook seriously and work hard, isn’t that what we all want for them???
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:03 PM
I happend upon this blog when a coworker asked me if I was keeping my child home on the 8th due to Obamas speech. Honestly I didn’t know what she was talking about so I came home and googled. I really liked reading this blog because people from both ends of the spectrum are speaking on it. I am not a conservative nor am I a liberal. I didn’t vote for Obama and I am not a fan of his politics. I do not think that Obama will be brainwashing my 11 year old or discussing health care reform to school children. Obama will be doing what just about every president has done. Talking to children about staying in school. Dear God help us all. Our president wants to make our kids stay is school and learn! The questions that the Obama adminstration provided are to help teachers make the kids pay attention discuss what they heard. That is a little funny to me but harmless. Knowing my daughter she will be to busy thinking about other things than to even pay attention. Lets face it when we were kids and the president talked we all found it boring and started drawing pictures on paper waiting for the guy to finish.
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:50 PM
My concerns are reduced given the fact that it appears that his speach will now be avilable online before he delivers it so parents have a chance to review it and the suggested “curriculum” has been reworded to focus on education and not “how you can help the President”.
September 3rd, 2009 at 5:55 PM
Bellinghammer, a follow-up for you, just popped into my head when I read your last statement. Should children not be asked to help the president? Why is it bad to help the president?
September 3rd, 2009 at 6:06 PM
As this AP Article pointed out:
Without knowing the context of his speech there are many things that the President could be promoting in his agenda that I wouldn’t want my kids to feel they need to “help” him with. In general the President is supposed to work for us, not us for him.
The above changes along with this:
Will hopefully defuse the whole situation.
September 3rd, 2009 at 6:10 PM
So was it wrong for President Kennedy to say to the entire country, including children, to help in his “Ask Not” speech?
September 3rd, 2009 at 6:46 PM
Yes, Sam, I do remember clearly the many lessons of liberty my mother taught to me and some of the places where it happened beginning when I was about five. I was an only child and had my mother’s undivided attention until I started school . We were living in Washington DC while WWII was raging in Europe. Every summer we visited Congress, and Mt. Vernon, and all the museums, and the Library of Congress where she showed me the actual Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, sealed in their cases, and explained to me that those were the most precious documents in the world and that their existence was what made us free, and that it was what our nation was fighting for. Once when I was about five and expressed fear at the sight of a policeman, she took me to a bench and sat me down and explained to me that I should never, ever fear a policeman because no policeman could ever do anything but protect me as long as I never stole anything, or hit anybody or killed anybody. She said that would always be true as long as we had those documents.
So, yes, of course there are nuances and intricacies to all of the first ten amendments which scholars and fools will debate to the end of time or the end of those documents (I hope it will be the former). But basically, they are brief and simple, in their broader meaning. At minimum, they state exactly what the Federal Government cannot do to us. They define freedom, and that should be taught to children as soon as they have the least bit of verbal understanding.
I was taught that #I. the government couldn’t tell us what religion we had to believe in, nor what we could or could not say or think, or who our friends could or could not be, and that we could always ask our government to change something if we thought it was a good idea. #II> The government couldn’t take away people’s guns in case we ever needed them to protect the Constitution. #III. (While we might invite a soldier far from home to our Thanksgiving Dinner because we wanted too,) still, the government could not order us to take soldiers or anyone else into our private home. IV. Nobody could bang on our door in the middle of the night and search our house or take our stuff. Nor during the day either.(I had seen these things happening in movies about Nazi Germany, and the fourth amdmt relieved my young mind of much anxiety.)
V. Having seen a movie about a person falsely-accused of a crime, I wondered if that could happen to me sometime, and she explained to me the protections of the fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth amendments, about grand juries, evidence, warrants, double jeopardy, just compensation, confronting ones’ accusers, the right to counsel, the right to a jury of one’s peers, all of these she explained in simple words I could understand. Movies about crimes and trials provided points of discussion. Pirate movies provided ample material for “cruel and unusual punishment” cited in VIII.
The ninth covered any other rights they hadn’t thought about, and of course the tenth warns the feds not to meddle in anything not specifically listed above, but to leave everything else to the states and the people. And there you have it. It’s not a thousand page document. The common man was supposed to be able to read it and understand it and demand that it be honored.
And no, my mother was not a lawyer. She never finished college. She was born in Milton FL in 1909, grew up in the Florida Panhandle and received her schooling both in the classroom of the local schoolhouse and at the knee of a wise old black woman whom she called “mammy” and who helped her with her homework served up with cornbread and greens, while she waited for her physician-father to come home from work. I expect she gained her understanding of the Constitution in Civics Class, and her love of freedom from “Mammy” whose own mammy had lived both slave and free.
Are my memories real? Yes. Those were frightening times. My father wasn’t in the miltary but he was an air raid warden. We had blackout curtains on all our windows and fearful things got seared into one’s brain. A five-year-old could not be protected from what was going on in the world so my parents chose not to hide it from me, and often used the Constitution to reassure me. I was two years old when Pearl Harbor was bombed, and the reaction of the adults in the room was so electric that the moment was burned into my memory. At two. My next memory is around age four.
September 3rd, 2009 at 7:03 PM
Sam,
Kennedy wasn’t asking the entire country to follow him he was asking them to help each other. I am also in favor of helping one another, but out of civic and moral duty, not because our President is demanding it of us.
I don’t see how “following your President” fits in with Kennedy’s “Ask not” speech because right now it would seem that the President’s agenda and most of his supporters agenda is indeed centered around what this Country should be doing for each and every person instead of people to take any sort of personal responsiblity for themselves and/or others.
September 3rd, 2009 at 7:08 PM
Sam, you say was it wrong for JFK to say to all “ask not”. I think it was not wrong. It was within the scope of rhetoric often used in major speeches such as an inauguration speech.
The problem with the current speeches is that there have been 110 of them since this guy got inaugurated, and now he’s going to do more of it both to the children and to Congress. This is a nation of laws, not a nation that is led by the cult of personality. A cult figure in the White House is a very dangerous situation if you want a nation of laws.
Children should be learning the rights and responsibilities of their citizenship under the Constitution, including its limits upon our government and our president; when they have learned that, then they will be in a position to DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES whether they think the President’s ideas are worth supporting and perhaps debate these questions in class.
September 3rd, 2009 at 11:17 PM
“Mammy”?
September 4th, 2009 at 4:44 AM
As far as Im concerned we don’t need Obama telling our children to stay in school.
If Obama wants to preach that message he ought to be doing it in black schools where kids get pregnant at 13 and where 50% of them are too lazy to finish school anyway.
We do just fine, instilling in our children a sense of responsibility and a work ethic.
We don’t rely on the government for handouts.
Our kids don’t get preferential treatment
There are no quotas for our kids.
Obama should save his “stay in school speeches” for his own people.
They’re the ones who really need to hear that message
September 4th, 2009 at 5:36 AM
Wow. Norris Hall’s shockingly broad generalization about “black schools” says a great deal about the basis of this entire topic. It leads me to ask some questions.
1) “Black Schools”? Did you miss the civil rights act are are you still holding out hope that it was all a bad dream?
2) Can you provide a link showing documentation that a student in a “white school” has not gotten knocked up at the age of thirteen?
3) Would any of you freepers be upset over this silliness if Obama happened to be white?
4) Why do you listen to Michelle Malkin? Don’t you people have anything better to do?
5) How many hours per day is your TV tuned in to Fox News?
September 4th, 2009 at 5:39 AM
Oops… Did you miss the civil rights act OR are you still holding out hope that it was all a bad dream?
September 4th, 2009 at 7:49 AM
‘Obama should save his “stay in school speeches” for his own people.
They’re the ones who really need to hear that message’
You mean American people?
Don’t forget to wear your hoodie with the eyeholes facing forward.
September 4th, 2009 at 9:30 AM
No black schools??? Are you nuts? OH, that’s right, we call them “inner city schools” now, the new plantations created by Liberals who encourage disfunctionality by saying “now, don’t you drop out of school, you heah? Don’t you even think about DROPPING OUT OF SCHOOL!” drip, drip, keep the attention on the DROP OUT OF SCHOOL part, because if inner city students actually stay in school and get a real education, they wouldn’t grow up to be angry left wingers, would they. And then what would the poor old community organizers do for a living?
September 4th, 2009 at 10:06 AM
Some Americans would rather go straight to hell on their own ignorance,
than be led to heaven by an intelligent black man.
September 4th, 2009 at 10:18 AM
Sorry, citizen, a direct name calling attempt by you can’t be allowed. You’re always on the fine line and unfortunately that last comment crossed it. Referee rules: 5 yard penalty. Redo of down.
September 4th, 2009 at 10:26 AM
I see, Citizen, that you have no answer to my proposition, since you respond with personal attacks. Students fulfill the expectations of their teachers. And that is a fact.
In my opionion, all black men (and women) are intelligent. Yet you say “led to heaven by an intelligent black man” as if that were something exceptional. As I write this I am listening to the words of an exceptionally brilliant black man, the economist and writer Walter Williams who is making some of the most insightful arguments to be had on the subject of the “general welfare” clause.
We must stop the kind of subtle racism inherent in statements like “intelligent black man” and similar sexist statements such as were applied to Sen. Clinton when she was called “bright” as if most women were not quite bright.
I should have thought that after all these years, we would have come to judge people by their character and not their color. And you know what? I think the majority of Americans DO judge people by their character and not their color. Unless the have something to be gained by perpetuating division and hatred to their own benefit: by maintaining the community organizers’ inner city farm.
September 4th, 2009 at 10:27 AM
Back to the discussion at hand. I think the administration did a great job of:
1: revising the curriculum to focus on the importance of education rather than the importance of Obama
and
2: Release the transcript a day early so parents and others have a chance to review it.
Finally an example of an open/responsive administration like President Obama promised.
As far as the comment made by Norris Hall. That does not help this discussion.
September 4th, 2009 at 10:31 AM
Ditto to what Bellinghammer just said.
September 4th, 2009 at 10:47 AM
My problem with this is: the Federal Government has no business reaching into our local schools. It opens the door to propagandizing children. With the door open, we must constantly monitor what comes through it. Parents are responsible for the education of their children. They delegate this authority to their local community through their local school board. I think they need to insure that they are not turning their children over to the Federal Government to be molded into little Federal Citizens.
September 4th, 2009 at 10:47 AM
Spinnwool, i meant.
A typo?
Uh, yeah, that’s it.
And whaddya mean I’m always on the fine line?
You have to be pretty savvy in English to take personal offense at anything I write,
and that’s usually far beyond the ability of anyone I’d personally insult.
Maybe that favorite status blinds you a little to the disgusting nonsense posted within?
I know it does me.
September 4th, 2009 at 11:00 AM
Citizen, your comments rarely are polite to those you’re speaking with and I’ve determined they’re on the line of civility I’m willing to accept. I appreciate how active you are on here and that you’re willing to debate things, but sometimes you focus too much on the person and not the idea. That’s unfortunate.
As to the favorite thing, it’s not my job to police the opinions of people here, just the way they go about delivering them. I kill comments from liberal and conservative alike and there are currently two people banned from the site … one liberal and one conservative.
September 4th, 2009 at 11:03 AM
Spinnwolf,
Point to remember, back in 1991 Bush did a very similiar thing, atleast according to Politico.
I am no defender of Bush as I believe he made many similiar federal intrusions into people’s personal lives as President, but I know all the lefties on this forum love to remember the good ole Bush bashing days.
September 4th, 2009 at 11:06 AM
Black man speak to school kids - propaganda.
White man speak to school kids - inspiration, motivation, unity.
September 4th, 2009 at 11:08 AM
I think you not only misread my comments,
but use your personal filter to remind yourself of the cogent complaints I’ve had with your interpretations in the past.
That’s the truth behind your irritation.
And that’s your privilege.
September 4th, 2009 at 11:15 AM
I trusted Bush. ( A mistake where his economic policies were concerned.) Therefore I was less inclined to notice his intrusion into the schools. I do not trust Obama. Therefore I am quick to notice similar activity. This is why the Federal Government should be kept out of our schools–which ever group is in power, the other group is going to be upset by the intrusion. Best answer: keep our schools totally under local control. That government which is closest to the people (city, county) is the one they can best control.
In other words, you keep “your” president out of our schools, and I’ll keep “mine” out. Sorry I didn’t notice until it was on your watch. But that’s human nature.
September 4th, 2009 at 11:18 AM
I would also challenge you to prove any personal attacks,
AFY!! excluded since he and I kind of understand that sort of rhetoric,
that don’t speak directly to the statements made by the poster in question,
at least primarily.
September 4th, 2009 at 11:20 AM
Citizen,
Beautiful attempt at pulling race into this issue. Your statement would have been more accurate if you had said:
liberal/progressive man speak to school kids - propaganda.
neo-con man speak to school kids - inspiration, motivation, unity.
And the reverse of the above would probably hold true for your thoughts as well.
September 4th, 2009 at 3:58 PM
Students in our schools no longer practice cursive.. they no longer diagram sentences.. so Michelle Makin is out of touch.. at least with the schools in Franklin County, Kentucky. I would not deny my children the opportunity to see the President speak.. whether I voted for the sitting President or not I always encourage my children to listen to their addresses. That is how we make a great America.
September 4th, 2009 at 5:15 PM
Obama’s presidential address to school children may not be controversial, as Sam contends.
However, I the amount of controversy surrounding President Obama’s address surely must be worthy of a story somewhere.
The amount of suspicion many people feel toward President Obama is really quite astounding.
September 4th, 2009 at 7:17 PM
Todd, indeed, I appear to have been on the forefront of discussing this issue with readers. There was basically no coverage, not even in the national media, when I began discussing it except for in specific conservative commentators like Michelle Malkin.
Since then, my position actually has changed. This has gotten quite large and frankly I think at this point it’s the role of the media to cover it and to fact check and be fair about it.
Still, locally, it’s not much of an issue. There are a few people who have complained directly (I’ve not received a huge amount of contact, only two people) and those people happen to not have school-aged children. I’m not trying to discount their thoughts on it, but I haven’t heard that there is any huge fervor locally that the president of the United States is going to tell school children they should, in essence, stay committed to learning. Again, as pretty much every president always does.
September 4th, 2009 at 7:42 PM
Dear Sweet Bellinghammer,
I would sincerely wish to respectfully disagree with your contention that I invented the racial division from which you speak of propaganda by Black Person addressing schoolchildren.
We both know better.
With regards, Citizen.
P.S. Please refrain from the faulty reasoning whereby your place your own words into the mouths of those with whom you differ as a strategy for bolstering your views.
Ohhh, that’s painful.
See, Idiots need to be addressed as idiots since nobody has
and so their lessons haven’t been learned.
It isn’t a matter of difference of opinion since nobody has the right to make up their own reality under the guise of personal preference.
And then spew out those accusations as if they meant something.
Even politely.
September 4th, 2009 at 8:42 PM
In my Experience
Rude is calling a poster a liar and then slinking away and deleting all the evidence instead of manning-up and
making an apology when discovered to be wrong.
Why would a polite person ever do such a thing?
Or making accusations of personal attacks and uncivil discourse and yet not producing a shred of evidence.
But that’s a fine line of civility that I would tolerate.
Regards,
citizen
This post is an opinion based upon reality and intended to insult no-one but merely as a reminder for the hypocritical types that might find this experience useful when castigating any other writer.
This post has been Rated P for Polite and B for Blunt by Citizen’s Mom.
September 5th, 2009 at 9:56 AM
Citizen, I’ll be honest, your disclaimers have me chuckling this morning. A good way to start my Saturday.
September 5th, 2009 at 6:01 PM
I have been a life long Democrat but I do not support Obama. I would not send my child to school on that day for him to be stuck in a room listening to him preach. He is causing enough controversy with American’s that he needs to stay away from our Children. Whether he is doing a good thing or if people think he is my son will not be attending class on the day our “President” is prepared to speak. He had Americans blinded and now as I recall one of the latest articles I have read is he is now the most hated President. Next we will all be on a Government line to buy our milk and break. A President in my eyes is someone who leads us not tries to control us.
September 7th, 2009 at 12:50 PM
Uh, Brought to you by two pints of Boundary Bay IPA and an idee fixe.
September 7th, 2009 at 3:17 PM
Citizen, I’m puzzled by your reference to Boundary Bay, when it is not mentioned in anywhere in this thread. Is it an inside joke, or can you elucidate?
September 7th, 2009 at 5:35 PM
Dear Karl Uppiano,
They sell that elixir in bottles you can take home and swill at the keyboard!
It’s automatic inspiration.
September 7th, 2009 at 6:38 PM
Citizen,
Ah, I thought it was perhaps a veiled reference to our discussion on the other thread, but I didn’t see the connection. Perhaps it was nothing.
September 8th, 2009 at 8:29 AM
I try not to cross threads, it’s too confusing.
It was only a reference to my idee fixe about being called a liar.