That is actually funny.pdubyoo wrote:That's what he appointed the czars for!Purplehood wrote:Of course he has an agenda, but he doesn't have to spend every waking moment pursuing it.
![I Agree :iagree:](./images/smilies/iagree.gif)
Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
That is actually funny.pdubyoo wrote:That's what he appointed the czars for!Purplehood wrote:Of course he has an agenda, but he doesn't have to spend every waking moment pursuing it.
Purplehood wrote:That is actually funny.pdubyoo wrote:That's what he appointed the czars for!Purplehood wrote:Of course he has an agenda, but he doesn't have to spend every waking moment pursuing it.
The big problem with this fantasy is that we cannot have the same influence on our children as their peer group at school. This is not the same as drugs or some other vice. Teachers and even the president say drugs are bad. But with socialistic politics, the support group is all chanting in unison. After all, how can supporting the current regime be a bad thing??? All the teachers are telling you to follow his principles, your fellow students all think it is "cool" to support the first BLACK president. It makes you a racist to appose him or his ideas and being a racist is the worst thing you can be. Our children have already been indoctrinated by the day care centers to believe life should be fair. Now the government will play that angle to justify socialistic ideology.Liberty wrote:I see it a little different. Its an opportunity to teach our children
Remember we as parents get to have tha last word. I do not believe in isolating our children from the evils of socialism, but instead we should be exposing the children to evils and the consequences of such evils. Children should be aware that evil can present itself itself in the means of a charismatic leader. We should show them how Stalin and Hitler lead millions to their death and they did it by taking away our rights a little bit of a time. Children can understand that the more that the goverment does the more government takes away from good people. Children need to be exposed and understand the principles of consequences. and that evil isn't always done by roughian types and that satan can present himself in the form of a smooth talking charismatic politician.
This will be a great oportunity to show how poorly socialist governments have done.. Tell and show them about communist China, Cuba and Venesuala.
With children everything is a learning experience .. Its up to us as parents to but it all in context. We need to understand what they are exposed to and present it in a proper light. censorship is a poor alternative.
boomerang wrote:They already backpedaled a couple of times on this. Imagine the sermon Obama would have delivered if nobody spoke up.
Notice they waited way into last night before getting the "text" of the "speech" out to the public???boomerang wrote:They already backpedaled a couple of times on this. Imagine the sermon Obama would have delivered if nobody spoke up.
I agree with Newt, that the current speech is "good". It's a positive and encouraging message to the students. I don't remember there being any concern with Reagan, Bush or Clinton, from either side of the aisle, that there would be an attempt to use the forum to advance political agendasPurplehood wrote:Newt Gingrich states that he read the speech and thought it was "good". That came from FOX News.
EDIT: Just watched him again on the news... he stated that both Reagan and Clinton spoke to the students and that they were positive experiences. Gingrich advised anyone that is concerned to go to the White House website and read the speech.
I realize that lots of folks don't like the President. But knee-jerk reactions by folks that don't like him simply teach our kids to be totally intolerant and not listen to other peoples points of view. I too don't trust the guy, but I really really try to avoid jumping to conclusions. Let your kids watch the speech. Discuss the good points of it with your kids. If there are any bad, discuss those too. Be adult. Doesn't mean you have to vote for him.
Of course, the speech writers had over a week to "change" the speech. Obama would have been an idiot to have allowed any hint of a political agenda in today's speech, with the amount of scrutiny it was under. They had no choice but to rewrite it just to get out of the cross-hairs. Even the director of the DOE admitted that the initial curriculum, that was to be used before and after the speech, was "not worded well" in the initial drafts that were posted last week.joe817 wrote:The President's high school speech just ended. I listened and watched with great intensity. I digested and dissected every word he said. Where WAS the socialist indoctrination we were expecting? Where WAS the brainwashing we were told to expect?
I tried as hard as I could to shoot holes in his speech...to find something I could object to, even a little bit. But I couldn't. I could find nothing to fault in his speech. Nothing.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opini ... 94347.htmlpdubyoo wrote:I don't remember there being any concern with Reagan, Bush or Clinton, from either side of the aisle, that there would be an attempt to use the forum to advance political agendas
when President George H.W. Bush delivered a similar speech on October 1, 1991, from Alice Deal Junior High School in Washington DC, the controversy was just beginning. Democrats, then the majority party in Congress, not only denounced Bush's speech -- they also ordered the General Accounting Office to investigate its production and later summoned top Bush administration officials to Capitol Hill for an extensive hearing on the issue.
Unlike the Obama speech, in 1991 most of the controversy came after, not before, the president's school appearance. 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.