View Full Version : obama speech on opening day of school !!
who has kids ? and has seen this
I called up our school to find out if they are going to show it to my Kindergarten class
I sure hope not they should be learning to read and play not politics at this age !
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/02/critics-decry-obamas-lesson-plan-students/
one of the things in the program that bother me and this is PreK - 6
"Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president. These would be collected and redistributed at an appropriate later date by the teacher to make students accountable to their goals. "
and
"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?
"
rifleman2000
09-02-09, 12:16
Yeah, it's scary. I read the whole sheet. Public schools are becoming liberal indoctrination camps. More so now than ever.
M4tographer
09-02-09, 12:21
Yeah, it's scary. I read the whole sheet. Public schools are becoming liberal indoctrination camps. More so now than ever.
It's all part of their movement. ;) They finally got their guy in...
just got word back from our school and they are going to leave it up to the teachers and if they decide to they will send home a permission slip !
rifleman2000
09-02-09, 12:26
just got word back from our school and they are going to leave it up to the teachers and if they decide to they will send home a permission slip !
And write down the names of those who opt their children out... ;)
And write down the names of those who opt their children out... ;)
wife and I were thinking the same thing !!!!!!
I am going to wait for Fri to see if we get a permission slip then ask
I also spoke to our principal and told her why I thought it was wrong !!!
the flip side we get to see at least in our school if our teacher is a lib or not :)
also makes me wonder how the future treatment of our child will be compared to others if we opt out ??
bringing politics into school like this is so so so so wrong on so many points
if he just came in and said congrats on being in school its important to get a education and follow it through and graduate and follow your life dreams !!
and left it at that !
but not this paperwork follow up and who knows what he will be covering !!!
he should be required to post his speech first !!!!
rifleman2000
09-02-09, 13:14
Obama is trying to make himself a cult of personality within the constraints of our strained Constitutional Republic. Following the footsteps of great leaders like Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, Mao, Kim-Jong, and others.
The media is his propaganda machine, along with public schools.
The good news is:
1. We still have the Constitution and the 2nd Amendment, something no other country had (a legal blocking point to a government grab for power, in order to achieve the goals the Democrats want they will have to remove the Constitution, good luck with the fallout... just why do they call themselves Democrats again?)
2. Obama has no personality. He does have a lot of class though, but it is all low.
THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS!
What is best to do here . This is terrible. We are contemplating having our preK just not go to school that day.
Reason number #5,456,355 for;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeschooling
We can call them the obama youth, they can sing songs about him, get cool uniforms, have big bon fires..... wait hasnt this been done before?
so not watching a presidential speech, then having an open debate/discussion about the issues at hand is a good way to educate children?
Yea your right critical thinking, debate, discussion, access to different view points, and exposure to global and national politics have no place in the public school system.
Sorry guys, but this thread makes me kind of sick. What would you have said if the schools banned Bush's speech after 911 because it may have hurt some one's feelings? Or what about if my school would have banned the live footage of Waco Texas, when the compound was burned to the ground, and Clintons later response? I can tell you that that moment taught me a lot about the world, and about big government. I was 11 at the time.
Nah, let's all just stick our heads in the sand.
rifleman2000
09-03-09, 08:01
so not watching a presidential speech, then having an open debate/discussion about the issues at hand is a good way to educate children?
Yea your right critical thinking, debate, discussion, access to different view points, and exposure to global and national politics have no place in the public school system.
Sorry guys, but this thread makes me kind of sick. What would you have said if the schools banned Bush's speech after 911 because it may have hurt some one's feelings? Or what about if my school would have banned the live footage of Waco Texas, when the compound was burned to the ground, and Clintons later response? I can tell you that that moment taught me a lot about the world, and about big government. I was 11 at the time.
Nah, let's all just stick our heads in the sand.
Maybe you should get your head out of the *sand* and read the follow up worksheet they have for this *speech*.
Context clues help too: George Bush and Obama are very different presidents.
George Bush may not have been the best but he did not do the following:
Cheat to win (Acorn)
Receive HUGE amounts of money from unnamed sources (hmmmm foreign money maybe? who does he owe?)
George Bush was never a member of a Socialist club.
George Bush never tried to develop a cult of personality.
George Bush never tried to incite racism to help his cause.
George Bush was never trying to actively subvert the nation.
George Bush was never friends with a domestic terrorist like Bill Ayers and never had a science czar that advocated mandatory abortions and sterilizations to curb population.
Yeah, it's the same all right.
FlyAndFight
09-03-09, 08:52
so not watching a presidential speech, then having an open debate/discussion about the issues at hand is a good way to educate children?
Yea your right critical thinking, debate, discussion, access to different view points, and exposure to global and national politics have no place in the public school system.
Sorry guys, but this thread makes me kind of sick. What would you have said if the schools banned Bush's speech after 911 because it may have hurt some one's feelings? Or what about if my school would have banned the live footage of Waco Texas, when the compound was burned to the ground, and Clintons later response? I can tell you that that moment taught me a lot about the world, and about big government. I was 11 at the time.
Nah, let's all just stick our heads in the sand.
The fact that "the state" is talking to my children, without my consent or without me being present is simply unacceptable. Why doesn't he hold this talk in the evening? Allow the parents to be with their children and explain to them whatever needs explaining. Correct whatever needs correcting. Dismiss whatever needs dismissing. Instead he is removing this "safeguard" and then forcing the children, through OUR own public education system, to "ingest and digest" whatever his agenda truly is.
In the end, it may be harmless banter about "staying in school" and "being all that you can be", but as I mentioned above, I don't like the fact that the parents have been taken out of the equation.
Littlelebowski
09-03-09, 09:07
The science czar advocated mandatory abortions and sterilizations? Can you cite your sources?
rifleman2000
09-03-09, 09:15
The science czar advocated mandatory abortions and sterilizations? Can you cite your sources?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/21/obamas-science-czar-considered-forced-abortions-sterilization-population-growth
It fits with the rest of his seventies cronies. Obama is a through and through left wing radical.
montanadave
09-03-09, 10:07
As has been so aptly said many times before regarding asinine threads which defy description: "Wow, simply wow!"
All of this constitutes partisan political bullshit and further reason why political discussions on a gun site is absolute rubbish. But you're entitled to your opinion so exercise away.
Maybe you should get your head out of the *sand* and read the follow up worksheet they have for this *speech*.
Context clues help too: George Bush and Obama are very different presidents.
George Bush may not have been the best but he did not do the following:
Cheat to win (Acorn)
Receive HUGE amounts of money from unnamed sources (hmmmm foreign money maybe? who does he owe?)
George Bush was never a member of a Socialist club.
George Bush never tried to develop a cult of personality.
George Bush never tried to incite racism to help his cause.
George Bush was never trying to actively subvert the nation.
George Bush was never friends with a domestic terrorist like Bill Ayers and never had a science czar that advocated mandatory abortions and sterilizations to curb population.
Yeah, it's the same all right.
so not watching a presidential speech, then having an open debate/discussion about the issues at hand is a good way to educate children?
Yea your right critical thinking, debate, discussion, access to different view points, and exposure to global and national politics have no place in the public school system.
Sorry guys, but this thread makes me kind of sick. What would you have said if the schools banned Bush's speech after 911 because it may have hurt some one's feelings? Or what about if my school would have banned the live footage of Waco Texas, when the compound was burned to the ground, and Clintons later response? I can tell you that that moment taught me a lot about the world, and about big government. I was 11 at the time.
Nah, let's all just stick our heads in the sand.
I saw the potus more than once in school, but he was not addressing my class and giving me an asignment.:rolleyes::rolleyes:
He was speaking to the nation.....I've never seen any politician stay on the campaign trail after they already won. People are already mad and then sneaks this in and drops a political bomb on our schools. Good Grief, how would you like to be the one answering the phone.
M4tographer
09-03-09, 10:20
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/21/obamas-science-czar-considered-forced-abortions-sterilization-population-growth
It fits with the rest of his seventies cronies. Obama is a through and through left wing radical.
Fox "News" is a source? C'mon...
My 6 year old is staying home that day...
I realize it may be difficult for some of us to see through the red haze that is currently effecting our vision in order to see that we are in fact being LIED to by both sides, but for those that want to realize how insane this has gotten, or that actually have an open enough mind to grasp the fact that yes special interests are manipulating the media and you are being lied to, check out this non-partisan website:
http://www.politifact.org/truth-o-meter/
You'll notice that the first LIE on the site is about a politician saying something about global warming melting the ice caps in four years. The second is about this school thing, and so on and so forth.
edited to add this quote:
We searched previous media reports to see if former President George W. Bush ever gave a nationwide address to schoolchildren, but based on our search, it appears he did not. He did, however, regularly visit individual schools and discuss the importance of education with students.
We did learn, however, that President George H.W. Bush addressed the nation's students in a televised speech during school hours in 1991. ''I can't understand for the life of me what's so great about being stupid,'' Bush said, according to news reports from the time. He told students to ''block out the kids who think it's not cool to be smart'' and ''work harder, learn more.''
Democrats at the time criticized the speech. "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 Democratic majority leader in the House of Representatives.
Republican Newt Gingrich defended Bush's speech, though. "Why is it political for the president of the United States to discuss education?" Gingrich said at the time. "It was done at a nonpolitical site and was beamed to a nonpolitical audience. . . . They wanted to reach the maximum audience with the maximum effect to improve education."
source: http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/sep/02/republican-party-florida/republican-party-florida-says-obama-will-indoctrin/
John_Wayne777
09-03-09, 11:14
http://www.politifact.org/truth-o-meter/
Like many in the mainstream media, politifact is not as objective as they would have you believe...
again I have no problem if the pres came on for 3 minutes and saying
stick in school do well do your homework and get good grades
education is important
but he is setting aside ONE HOUR !!! and its toward our kids !!!
and our nation did not just get attacked etc..
ONE HOUR give me a break
the biggest problem is the worksheet has these things to do for prek - 6th grade
"Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president. These would be collected and redistributed at an appropriate later date by the teacher to make students accountable to their goals. "
and
"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?
"
OK my kid is not going to write a letter on how they can help the president and then be held accountable later on !!!!!!
sorry I think its important the mayor senator and president listen to the people not the other way around !!!
this alone should be a big big big thing
I guess to you lefties here then you should have listened to Bush ?
I think every one in gov has to learn they are there to listen to us and be our voice !!!!!! not the other way around
its important you question everything the gov tells you and is trying to sell you !!!!
so this speech he is targeting to my child in SCHOOL is out of control
you cant pray anymore in school but the gov can shove down their throats what they want !!
the gov should not be in our schools this way
funny how now he is changing what he was asking to do !!
the fact alone shows he is guilty and is changing his mind cause he got caught
I wonder if some of you thinking its OK have kids ???
also he is on the TV way way way to much already I can see him start to do a monthly address to OUR KIDS and then it will be WEEKLY etc..
"Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president. These would be collected and redistributed at an appropriate later date by the teacher to make students accountable to their goals. "
and
"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?
"
.
Source???
Yea I remember my Dad being pissed when DARE came around too, because he realized that once I learned that the state was telling lies to me in order to promote an agenda, that it would ultimately result in me not trusting the state, and police officers. He was right. I understand not wanting political agendas in schools, and that schools should be about teaching problems solving, critical thought, dialogue, debate, ext. What I am saying is that you need to get your darn facts straight on this stuff!
I swear if I turned a research paper into my middle school teachers using some of the sources, and quotes that I see flying around these days I would not have passed 8th grade. Using only ONE source is never acceptable. Using a source that is proven to be bias is also never acceptable.
one of the things in the program that bother me and this is PreK - 6
"Write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president.
Contribute to his opponents?
"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?
"
It's important to listen in order to figure out exactly how, and how badly, they plan to screw us. What they say isn't important, except if you have it on video and can use it to contradict what they actually do - which is what matters.
Source???
What I am saying is that you need to get your darn facts straight on this stuff!
UMM the source was the dept of education !!!!!!
www.ed.gov
PreK‐6
Menu
of
Classroom
Activities:
President
Obamas
Address
to
Students
Across
America
Produced
by
Teaching
Ambassador
Fellows,
U.S.
Department
of
Education
September
8,
2009
I downloaded it and looked at it !!!!!! from the ed.gov site
so before you start throwing around accusations get your own facts straight !!!!!
I dont open my mouth unless I know what I am talking about !!! also I dont tell others to get their facts straight unless I know what I am talking about !!!
Source???
Using a source that is proven to be bias is also never acceptable.
I agree that is also why I used the source itself the actual gov site !!!!!!
but of course since the outcry they have changed the PDF
many of us have the original !!!
I imagine you will call us all liars since they changed it !!! I imagine in your eyes ITS OK they changed their mind
so when your house gets robbed then the bad guys say SORRY you will be OK with that since they changed their mind ?
what I get pissed about is people who dont do their research and then accuse others of doing the same thing !!!!
here is the link
http://www.ed.gov/admins/lead/academic/bts.html
of course they changed the wording in the prek -6 worksheet !!
it now says achieve their short term and long term goals instead of how can you help the president
they also took out the part where they wanted to have the kids turn in a video of themselves
FlyAndFight
09-03-09, 12:29
Source???
Here's your source: http://www.ed.gov/teachers/how/lessons/prek-6.pdf
And here: http://www.ed.gov/teachers/how/lessons/7-12.pdf
Please review and then tell me that the follow up questions don't make your Spidey senses tingle. Follow up questions that surround and are focused on Obama.
What does Obama want you to do?
What can you do to help Obama?
The questions should be focused on and about the child.
Why is it important to YOU to get a good education?
What goals should YOU set for yourself?
How can YOU better acheive those goals?
The days of giving this administration the benefit of the doubt are long gone.
just a note to the above they changed the PDF !!!!!
its now not about obama !!! but it was !!!!!
typical of them push way over the edge hear the people scream then pull back to just inside the line of the screaming people
the problem is he keeps making things about him !!! dictators do this !!!
my buddy who just spent the last 5 years living in south america says he was tired of living under a dictator !!! (he is American his wife is from South America)
they moved back here to get away from it and he is feeling massive flashbacks now !!!!
rifleman2000
09-03-09, 13:20
Left wingers on M4carbine.net? Who'd a thunk it? :rolleyes:
I imagine you will call us all liars since they changed it !!! I imagine in your eyes ITS OK they changed their mind
so when your house gets robbed then the bad guys say SORRY you will be OK with that since they changed their mind ?
Isn't the point of a democratic government to listen to it's people and respond? So if there was a public outcry, and it changed the basis of the questions, does that not mean that you being active in your government paid off? And that essentially the government is listening? I don't know just a thought.
Left wingers on M4carbine.net? Who'd a thunk it? :rolleyes:
Critical engagement of information, questioning what is placed before me, looking at multiple sources before I make up my mind, does not make me a leftist, it makes me intelligent. I am a patriot. I am not left or right. I want what is best for my country, and gut reaction politics is not that. I think the last 10 years of politics and news media has ripped this country apart and allowed for people to make gross accusations like the one you just made in order to divide us into two blind sides and thus silencing critical debate and allowing for the government to go on with business as usual (left and right).
As for asking for the source, all I did was ask for the source! I hadn't heard about this issue until last night on M4Carbine.net. Since hearing about it I have learned all kinds of things. I do not see why the question: "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?", is bad. Nowhere in the language of the question does it indicate that by "listening" you have to "conform, or agree". A good teacher could do a lot with this exercise and teach students how to disagree using facts and logic.
I do see peoples concern as I stated above, but I think it is blown out of proportion. Just like the Dem's blew George H.W.'s address to public schools in 1991 out of proportion!
Darn you guys jump to massive conclusions on here!
You know I heard from a Vietnam Vet that was my best friends Dad the the 5.56 round offers sh*t for stopping power, the M16 jams like crazy, and it's a crap gun! It must mean it's true and the AK is the only good gun on the planet!
Come on guys, things aren't always black and white!
Isn't the point of a democratic government to listen to it's people and respond? So if there was a public outcry, and it changed the basis of the questions, does that not mean that you being active in your government paid off? And that essentially the government is listening? I don't know just a thought.
I should not have to keep up on and keep trying to protect my child from our gov in the first place !!!!
the gov was supposed to be there to protect me ! not the other way around that I have to protect myself from it
they are not listening they are reacting !!!!! to me that is a HUGE HUGE dif
if they were truly listening the PDF and activites would be gone completely
I should not have to keep up on and keep trying to protect my child from our gov in the first place !!!!
the gov was supposed to be there to protect me ! not the other way around that I have to protect myself from it
they are not listening they are reacting !!!!! to me that is a HUGE HUGE dif
if they were truly listening the PDF and activites would be gone completely
That is a very fair point! Now are you willing to apply that to if it was McCainn doing the same thing? Because if so then I will stop arguing and concede the point!
just a note to the above they changed the PDF !!!!!
Honu,
Do you have the original PDF, I sure would like to see what they changed. Thanks.
Critical engagement of information, questioning what is placed before me, looking at multiple sources before I make up my mind, does not make me a leftist, it makes me intelligent.
As for asking for the source, all I did was ask for the source! I hadn't heard about this issue until last night on M4Carbine.net.
Darn you guys jump to massive conclusions on here!
Come on guys, things aren't always black and white!
OK to give you the benefit of the doubt :)
if critical engagement of information makes you intelligent ? yet the first place you heard about it was here ! then you are not seeking out and educating yourself very well are you !!!
and yet you jumped to conclusions I was in the wrong ! (talk about jumping to conclusions)
when you know nothing yet question me !! and made accusations I/we were wrong !
again not doing your own research asking others for source etc.. ? then telling stories of things that have nothing to do with this to try to justify your thoughts ?
(again not very good at doing your own research)
if you had done your own research properly you would have had my ORIGINAL GOV source and read the old and new docs !
as far as B&W ! well when its in print and I read it to me that is pretty darn clear !! and in this case it was truly B&W
sorry to sound jerky or whatever I am :) (I took this apology thing out of the obama playbook)
I do think these kind of things/issues get both sides on edge and touchy ! and I do feel this is what he wants to do is divide the people and get them on edge etc..
I am a mellow island guy but at the same time I am tired of having to constantly be on the watch these days there is enough with bad guys in the world I now have to worry about what the GOV is trying to do with our health care and business and banking and now our kids !!!!
and my wife is Canadian ! so I know the Canadian health care system very very well
her parents are from England and there are to many reasons to get into why they left that country !
even her dad can not believe what this guy is doing to our country !!!
rifleman2000
09-03-09, 14:26
Critical engagement of information, questioning what is placed before me, looking at multiple sources before I make up my mind, does not make me a leftist, it makes me intelligent. I am a patriot. I am not left or right. I want what is best for my country, and gut reaction politics is not that. I think the last 10 years of politics and news media has ripped this country apart and allowed for people to make gross accusations like the one you just made in order to divide us into two blind sides and thus silencing critical debate and allowing for the government to go on with business as usual (left and right).
As for asking for the source, all I did was ask for the source! I hadn't heard about this issue until last night on M4Carbine.net. Since hearing about it I have learned all kinds of things. I do not see why the question: "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?", is bad. Nowhere in the language of the question does it indicate that by "listening" you have to "conform, or agree". A good teacher could do a lot with this exercise and teach students how to disagree using facts and logic.
I do see peoples concern as I stated above, but I think it is blown out of proportion. Just like the Dem's blew George H.W.'s address to public schools in 1991 out of proportion!
Darn you guys jump to massive conclusions on here!
You know I heard from a Vietnam Vet that was my best friends Dad the the 5.56 round offers sh*t for stopping power, the M16 jams like crazy, and it's a crap gun! It must mean it's true and the AK is the only good gun on the planet!
Come on guys, things aren't always black and white!
I certainly appreciate civil and intelligent debate. I certainly don't question your patriotism. But... I think there is a dynamic missing here, analysis. I see your point BUT
I consider my opinion, and reaction to the "speech" by Obama along with the "homework" to be justified based on a lot of things. Not to go into the weeds, but to re-iterate:
The President's actions from day one combine with his history as a younger man indicate that he is prone to cult of personality type socialism. If people don't see it, my answer is: look harder. Read history. Study cult of personality. If this was a simple stay in school message, great. But it does not line up with Obama's past, present, and predictable future agendas.
That is a very fair point! Now are you willing to apply that to if it was McCainn doing the same thing? Because if so then I will stop arguing and concede the point!
yes I am willing to say that :) NO gov official should be asking for feedback from our kids
and if we get attacked again like 911 and he has to come on and give a nation wide speech aimed at ALL not just my kids I am OK with that !
also as I said I think if he came on and wanted to do a 2-3 minute pep talk !
(he will speak now for 15-20 minutes)
and say hey kids stick in school do well follow your dreams etc.. and make no mention of himself etc.. and make it about school I would be fine with that !
the worksheet of recommended activities is the thing that pushed me over the edge and the fact so far his history has shown he tends to have alternate motives and he tends to say one thing then do another then afterwards so OH SORRY when the damage is done
so hope that helps clarify where I am coming from :)
Honu,
Do you have the original PDF, I sure would like to see what they changed. Thanks.
yeah :) they only changed the stuff I mentioned :)
basically taking out the president and putting in yourself :)
I think I have the 6th grade and older on my other computer if you want that let me know ?
stevenhyde
09-03-09, 14:39
I found a few letters that may be useful.
"
Originally Posted By swingset:
Borrowing some excellent language from radiowave (who really disseminated the intent of the DOE's "lessons"), I drafted this letter and delivered it today personally to the principle of my daughter's middle school:
Dear Mr. Principle,
We are the parents of a student attending the (insert school name here), and are writing to voice our displeasure at the upcoming speech and related academic excercises surrounding President Obama's Sept. 8th broadcast to students. We have learned that the Jr. High intends to air the speech in the classroom, live on Tuesday.
We are not upset that the president is speaking to children, or using such an occasion to encourage students to achieve or show responsibility - these are fine goals and we urge the same as parents each and every day. What we object to, in very strong terms, is the manner of delivery and insinuation that this speech is a learning tool or part of a curriculum, and that such a speech and the lessons urged by the Dept. of Education show a biased and unsettling favorability to a political figure and his speech, its content unfiltered or examined prior to delivery. This type of address, unprecedented and new, is disturbing and inappropriate - by a president of any party, for any reason, no matter his or her good intentions or political background. Presidents have spoken to children before, but to do so directly and before parents or educators can review the material is not a wise practice. To suggest preemptively that this speech deserves lessons and assignments confirms that the president is overstepping his bounds.
I have read (and attached) the Menu of Classroom Activities suggested by the U.S. Department of Education, which I am sure you are aware of or perhaps plan on instituting in full or a portion of along with the viewing of the President's Speech on the 8th. Some parts of this "lesson", while innocuous at a glance become insidious and strange when scrutinized.
For instance, these questions to be asked before the speech:
Brainstorm of Concept Web: Why does President Obama want to speak with us today? How will he inspire us? How will he challenge us? What might he say?
This presumes that the president is inspiring, that his speech is meaningful and worthy, before it's ever happened. Is that a lesson you want to convey to the children of this school? That a president's words are inspirational and his challenges worthy before they even exist? That's programming a personal investment in an outcome.
Brainstorm or Concept Web: What other historic moments do you remember when the President spoke to the nation? What was the impact, etc.?
Again, the student is forced to make associations with great historic speeches, even before the speech is even heard. The represents another personal values investment in an outcome which has not yet happened.
And this to be asked during the speech:
...students could take notes while President Obama talks about personal responsibility, or goals, or persistence, trying to capture direct quotations....students could then write the corresponding terms from the word bank....to increase retention and deepen their understanding of an important aspect of the speech.
Talk about creepy, message re-enforcement to a desired and predisposed outcome, that the speech is important and the content deserves lasting memorization. Here's a bold thought, what if Obama's speech is awkward, or bad? Perhaps the fawning over the speech should be held off until it's heard...so that its context can be viewed without a presumption of importance.
This speech and the "lessons" urged, to us as parents, are unacceptable and shows a willful attempt to inject a "hero worship" presentation into the classroom not by an educator but by a sitting political figure, a direct and bold intrusion into our children's daily lives, unprecedented by a sitting president. Historically, the kinds of figures that have spoken this way to children uninvited, asked of them to advance "challenges" facing their administration, have typically been dictators and tyrants. We have all heard our president in the course of our studies - from State of the Union addresses to important speeches, but a subversive and direct dialogue to our children without filter is a wrongheaded and belligerent attempt to directly influence children without the proper role of an educator and parent preceding it, and shame on you for playing a part in this affair.
We do not object because we believe the presidents message to be false or wrong, but because neither you, nor the students, have heard this message yet are being "educated" to believe in its relevance merely because it is being delivered by a certain person. This is not only inappropriate as education, it's inappropriate for the role of the presidency, whose job it is to act as a citizen representative of the people of this country, not as an educator and parent. On that last point, we as parents should ultimately have the final say what our minor child is exposed to and the messages contained therein, so we will be picking our daughter up from school prior to this speech and ask that any questions, assignments or curriculum related to this event be stricken from her school day.
Sincerely,
XXXX & XXXX XXXXXX
Parents of XXXX XXXXXX, (insert child's grade here).
"
and
"
The U.S. Department of Education, apparently with the expanded role of overtly propagandizing America's youngsters, has thoughtfully prepared "learning materials" for teachers to use in preparation for this historic and truly unprecedented event. They have been very thorough, preparing "Classroom Materials" in two separate packages, one directed at children "preK-6" the other of students in grades "7-12." Note: "preK-6" implies that the Dear Beloved Leader anticipates his message being broadcast to pre-kindergarten children.
Below is the announcement from the U.S. Dept of Education. Beneath that is a suggested written excuse of absence for your child to take to school the following day and a link if you would like to download it.
Letter From Secretary Arne Duncan to School Principals
August 26, 2009
Please note that the time of this speech has changed to 12:00 noon eastern standard time.
Dear Principal:
In a recent interview with student reporter, Damon Weaver, President Obama announced that on September 8 the first day of school for many children across America he will deliver a national address directly to students on the importance of education. 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.
Since taking office, the President has repeatedly focused on education, even as the country faces two wars, the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression and major challenges on issues like energy and health care. The President believes that education is a critical part of building a new foundation for the American economy. Educated people are more active civically and better informed on issues affecting their lives, their families and their futures.
This is the first time an American president has spoken directly to the nation's school children about persisting and succeeding in school. We encourage you to use this historic moment to help your students get focused and begin the school year strong. I encourage you, your teachers, and students to join me in watching the President deliver this address on Tuesday, September 8, 2009. It will be broadcast live on the White House website http://www.whitehouse.gov 12:00 noon eastern standard time.
In advance of this address, we would like to share the following resources: a menu of classroom activities for students in grades preK-6 and for students in grades 7-12. These are ideas developed by and for teachers to help engage students and stimulate discussion on the importance of education in their lives. We are also staging a student video contest on education. Details of the video contest will be available on our website http://www.ed.gov in the coming weeks.
On behalf of all Americans, I want to thank our educators who do society's most important work by preparing our children for work and for life. No other task is more critical to our economic future and our social progress. I look forward to working with you in the months and years ahead to continue improving the quality of public education we provide all of our children.
Sincerely,
Arne Duncan
Absence Excuse Suggestion:
To Whom it May Concern:
When it comes to teaching my child about personal responsibility and life goals, I have determined that I am a far better teacher of those objectives than a President who has chosen to surround himself with known anarchists and terrorists.
Therefore, <insert child's name> will be at home on Sept 8th in order not to be corrupted by the propaganda that will be shown in his class room.
Respectfully Yours,
"
one other thing dmcmanus it takes a lot to steam my twinkies :)
I dont hate/dispise you :) I just disagree with you on this thing ? maybe others who knows :) hehehehe
some of my best friends I dont agree with on everything
just want to make this clear I enjoy this kinda debate and try not to let it get to personal etc..
being a island guy I try to keep that attitude
I think things can get blown way out to quickly not being face to face I am taking this fun debate/argument like two buddies arguing at a BBQ kinda thing !!!
this is a great forum and a great place and dont want to bring it down with personal attacks etc.. so to you and others I am not pissed at anyone here just pissed at obama and his crew for trying to put a pry bar in the people of America which I think is one of his goals !
FlyAndFight
09-03-09, 14:42
I do not see why the question: "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?", is bad. Nowhere in the language of the question does it indicate that by "listening" you have to "conform, or agree". A good teacher could do a lot with this exercise and teach students how to disagree using facts and logic.
I do see peoples concern as I stated above, but I think it is blown out of proportion. Just like the Dem's blew George H.W.'s address to public schools in 1991 out of proportion!
Darn you guys jump to massive conclusions on here!
...
If it were just the POTUS, I wouldn't have a problem with it. And, for the life of me, I'm trying to find every reason to not be too alarmed about this. I would love to think that we are over reacting and would more than love to think that the POTUS could reach out and touch the soul of a school child and drive him or her to work harder and set goals, to be all that they could be. To be instilled with a sense of self worth, self responsibility and to know that all things are possible and that it starts with a good education.
But this is not just any POTUS, this is Barak Obama and more importantly Rahm Emanuel, and therefore they cannot be trusted with the souls of young children. We will be called scare mongers, haters, racists, etc. But like a child you don't have any concept of what "hot" is until the first time you touch that stove, regardless of what your mother might warn you of. We have been warned, and we have been burned. We know better now.
yeah :) they only changed the stuff I mentioned :)
basically taking out the president and putting in yourself :)
I think I have the 6th grade and older on my other computer if you want that let me know ?
Honu: thanks, I think I get the point. It is very disturbing. This alone as a single one time event may not raise any eyebrow. But his past actions and his radical beliefs are what bothering me.
But this is not just any POTUS, this is Barak Obama and more importantly Rahm Emanuel, and therefore they cannot be trusted with the souls of young children. We will be called scare mongers, haters, racists, etc. But like a child you don't have any concept of what "hot" is until the first time you touch that stove, regardless of what your mother might warn you of. We have been warned, and we have been burned. We know better now.
very well said !!!!!
OK to give you the benefit of the doubt :)
if critical engagement of information makes you intelligent ? yet the first place you heard about it was here ! then you are not seeking out and educating yourself very well are you !!!
and yet you jumped to conclusions I was in the wrong ! (talk about jumping to conclusions)
when you know nothing yet question me !! and made accusations I/we were wrong !
again not doing your own research asking others for source etc.. ? then telling stories of things that have nothing to do with this to try to justify your thoughts ?
(again not very good at doing your own research)
if you had done your own research properly you would have had my ORIGINAL GOV source and read the old and new docs !
as far as B&W ! well when its in print and I read it to me that is pretty darn clear !! and in this case it was truly B&W
sorry to sound jerky or whatever I am :) (I took this apology thing out of the obama playbook)
I do think these kind of things/issues get both sides on edge and touchy ! and I do feel this is what he wants to do is divide the people and get them on edge etc..
I am a mellow island guy but at the same time I am tired of having to constantly be on the watch these days there is enough with bad guys in the world I now have to worry about what the GOV is trying to do with our health care and business and banking and now our kids !!!!
and my wife is Canadian ! so I know the Canadian health care system very very well
her parents are from England and there are to many reasons to get into why they left that country !
even her dad can not believe what this guy is doing to our country !!!
Fair, but I don't spend my time looking for reasons to hate Obama. Thus me seeing it first on this site. I used this site to gather information to come up with my own conclusions. Your argument is basically like saying that books should call you stupid for reading them! As for me jumping to conclusions I don't think I have. This entire issue, the insanely reactionary mentality of the American public, and the last 9 years of this countries history (especially that of it's populace) still make me sick.
edited to add:
I'm not upset at all. You bring up good points, you called me out on some stuff, I will be honest and say I am so sick of the black and white of this country right now I don't pay as much attention as I should, you brought that up. Fair. Also fair to disagree. In fact that is my entire point. That is why I even responded to this in the first place. How else are we going to move forward as a nation if we don't actually start to friggen listen to one another!!!
We affected change!
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/03/parents-object-obamas-national-address-students/
Some Parents Choose Not to Allow Their Kids to Hear Obama's National Address
Regine Gordon, of Tampa, Fla., is among a growing number of parents across the country who are troubled by Obama's plan to address elementary, middle and high school students directly on Tuesday.
By Joshua Rhett Miller
FOXNews.com
Thursday, September 03, 2009
Regine Gordon doesn't want her 6-year-old son to hear from President Obama next week.
Gordon, of Tampa, Fla., is among a growing number of parents across the country who are troubled by the president's plan to address elementary, middle and high school students in an online speech Tuesday.
"It's a form of indoctrination, and I think, really, it's indicative of the culture that the Obama administration is trying to create," Gordon told FOXNews.com on Thursday. "It's very socialistic."
After writing letters to her congressman and school officials, Gordon said her son, David, will be allowed to participate in an alternative activity at Gorrie Elementary School during Obama's address, which comes on the first day of school for many children.
"I'm waiting to hear from his teacher, but I have told them to go ahead and I'd like [David] to go do something else," Gordon said. "It's kind of like going through the children to get to their parents. Children are very vulnerable and excited. I mean, this is the president. I think it's an underhanded tactic and indicative of the way things are being done."
But some parents won't be allowed to "opt-out" their kids everywhere. At least one school district, Tempe Elementary School District No. 3 in Arizona, is not permitting parents to pull their children out of class during Obama's speech.
"I have directed principals to have students and teachers view the president's message on Tuesday," Superintendent of Schools Dr. Arthur Tate Jr. said in a statement Thursday. "In some cases, where technology will not permit access to the White House Web site, DVDs will be provided to classes on subsequent days. I am not permitting parents to opt out students from viewing the president's message, since this is a purely educational event."
The White House said Wednesday that the president's address is intended to be an inspirational, pro-education message to all students at the beginning of the school year. But critics objected to the language of one of the lesson plans, for students in pre-kindergarten through grade 6, which suggested that students "write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president." Another assignment for students after hearing the speech was to discuss what "the president wants us to do."
The suggestion about writing letters has since been changed to: "Write letters to themselves about how they can achieve their short-term and long-term education goals. These would be collected and redistributed at an appropriate later date by the teacher to make students accountable to their goals."
White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said the changes to the language are intended to make the lesson plans clearer. He added that the speech the president's speech will not be a policy speech, but is intended to encourage kids to work hard and commit to school.
But that hasn't assuaged concerns of Michelle Moore of St. Louis, who says she's considering keeping her two daughters out of the classroom at Lindberg High School when Obama begins to speak.
"I have to sign permission slips for my kids to watch R-rated movies in school," Moore said, explaining that she felt parents were being blindsided by the president's address. "It was simply presented, 'Hey, we're going to do this, this is when it's going to air and you're going to show it to your kids.'"
Moore suggested that the speech be issued as a DVD to students so they can view it with their parents at home, adding that the first day of classes for many students will be a harried affair.
"That's their first day," she said. "I would think they have plenty of other things to do."
The idea of having Obama speak directly to children without so much as a permission slip being sent home just "makes you feel a little funny," said Beth Milledge of Winterset, Iowa. She said she plans on going to school with her 8-year-old son to watch the address with him.
"I want to know how it's being presented," she said. "I'm all for my child having respect for the president, but why wouldn't he show us the speech first and then go from there?"
Dana Loesch, spokeswoman for the Nationwide Tea Party Coalition, has started a campaign to ask schools to provide an alternative to the speech for parents who do not wish their children to experience a presidential address in school. Loesch has urged parents to contact schools directly to find out if the "partisan presentation" will air in their child's classroom.
"It went straight from the Department of Education right to the principals," Loesch told FOX News. "There's a lot of parents who have spoken to me [and] they've talked to their principals, and it kind of 'weirded' them out a little because this is also the first that protocol has been skipped."
Several school districts contacted by FOXNews.com, including those in Milwaukee and St. Louis, said individual teachers will decide whether to air the address in their classrooms.
"We're allowing teachers to decide," an Austin, Texas, school official told FOXNews.com. "But most of the kids will be at lunch. It's not going to be a big issue here."
In Austin, school district officials say a speech by any sitting president is worthy of "Americans' time, attention and consideration," according to a statement by the Austin Independent School District (AISD) to FOXNews.com. Teachers who believe the address will be beneficial to their students will allow viewing in the classroom.
"It is AISD's expectation that viewing of this Web address will vary by campus and by classroom," the statement continued. "Parents will be advised by their campus principals to alert the school if they have a specific desire to have their child included in, or removed from, the viewing of the president's remarks."
Parents in Milwaukee will have the option to remove their children by "simply informing the school of their preference," spokeswoman Roseann St. Aubin said.
Virginia Department of Education spokesman Charles Pyle told the Associated Press that a number of school divisions asked the agency for guidance this week after parents concerned with the address contacted local officials.
The department says it's up to districts to determine whether a school or class views the address, and teachers who choose to incorporate the president's speech into their lessons are also free to develop their own classroom activities, the Associated Press reports.
Other districts, including those in New York City and Boston, won't even have classes that day. Officials at the Philadelphia School District declined comment.
National Parent Teacher Association President Chuck Saylors told FOXNews.com the presidential speech is something that should have happened years ago.
Personally, I believe a wise NCO summed it up nicely:
The results of the polling in this country have told me everything that I need to know about half of my "fellow" countrymen.
They are now my enemy and I see zero difference between them and an Al Qaeda operative when it comes to changing this country for the worse.
Its not about Obama anymore. Its about a shift in how some Americans think about what America should be. In the end, this change in philosophy can only be settled with the bayonet.
And I continue to prepare.
My kid has already been in school for a week and a half, but my wife and I decided that we're probably keeping him home Tuesday.
However, my son is 9 and immune to their socialist propaganda anyway, so it could be amusing for him, but I like the idea of making a stamement by keeping him home that day.
Someone should make a "alternate" video to show kids staying home - one that talks about the original meaning of the Constitution, what rights and responsibilities there are with being truly "free", and outline the continued degradation of our liberties over the last few decades.
How else are we going to move forward as a nation if we don't actually start to friggen listen to one another!!!
Part of the problem is that there is no middle ground on many of these issues. I argue with people all the time when they say we need to "compromise" on things. Some issues are not up for compromise. When women were seeking the right to vote (justifiably, of course) there was no compromise. Would women have accepted limitations, like their vote only counting for 1/2 a man's or only married women having the right to vote? Of course not.
There are things that I am willing to compromise on, and there are things not open for discussion. Therefore, on those issues I have no reason to listen to folks with the opposite viewpoint. I consider their positions on many topics ridiculous, dangerous, uninformed, elitist, and offensive. I will not provide them with any forum to voice their opinion. They are of course free to do so, but I'm certainly not going to help them any more than they me.
So 'conservatives' are upset because a socialist will be speaking to their children at their socialist schools? The hypocrisy is amusing.
I left two messages for my school's principal regarding this speech. I recieved no response. I personally am all for someone's right to speech and feel Obama can and should say exactly his position on whatever subject he would like but not in the public school system. I don't feel the classroom is the place to be furthering a political agenda. If he's going to make an inspiring speech about staying in school, public service and responsibility to one's nation then I am all for it. Too many people don't have that anymore. Somehow I doubt the latter will be the case, so I will personally be attending the viewing of this speech in my son's school or I will be walking out of the building with him.
Submariner
09-05-09, 14:39
So 'conservatives' are upset because a socialist will be speaking to their children at their socialist schools? The hypocrisy is amusing.
"Conservatives", i.e. conservative statists, want to tax others to pay for their children's "free" education. They have, in fact, tithed their children to the state.
Who Will Inherit Your Money When You Die?
Gary North
Reality Check (August 21, 2009)
WHO WILL INHERIT YOUR MONEY WHEN YOU DIE?
"Tell me what country I will die in. I will never go there."
Men do not like to think about their inheritance. That's because of the word "die." This is why they delay writing a will. A will is like a road map to the border of the final country. "I will never go there."
But they will, with or without the map. Everyone knows this, but almost everyone who has not been diagnosed with a fatal disease assumes that he has at least five more years to live. For 4.9 years, this assumption is incorrect.
Some men hire a lawyer to draw up a will for them (cheap or free). The lawyer names himself as the executor (retirement income).
Other men hire a lawyer to draw up a living trust or revocable trust ($2,000 for computerized boilerplate).
One way or another, someone will inherit. The capital will be used by someone else for his purposes.
Most men think that their children will extend their posthumous legacy. Why should they believe this? Because they never ask themselves these questions.
1. Do my children think the way I do?
2. Why should they think the way I do?
3. Do I think the way my father did?
4. Do their spouses think the way I do?
5. What is the evidence that they do?
6. Are my children good with money?
7. What is the evidence that they are?
8. Are their spouses good with money?
9. What is the evidence that they are?
10. Will the money be worth anything?
11. What is the evidence that it will be?
The government understands inheritance far better than most parents do. The government has determined that it will impose an inheritance tax.
Rich men hire lawyers to devise ways around the inheritance tax. Less rich men think they will beat the inheritance tax altogether. That is for rich men to worry about, they think. They are wrong. So are the rich men.
THE REAL INHERITANCE TAX
The inheritance tax is to governments what the red cape is to a matador. It focuses the victim's attention away from the sword.
The inheritance tax begins to be collected early. It is collected by a special team of tax collectors. Like all tax collectors, their salaries are paid for by the taxpayers.
The government has purchased specially designed tax- collection vehicles, comparable to Brinks or Loomis armored cars. We see them on the road nine months a year. They are painted yellow. When their red lights are flashing, don't pass them. I have written about them here.
http://lewrockwell.com/north/north278.html
Government officials, unlike parents, understand that the secret of inheriting enormous wealth is to persuade the heirs to spend the money your way, not the deceased's way. The money is merely capital. The crucial factor is the will.
Human will.
This is why, in every nation, the government requires attendance at schools. It then taxes people to fund these schools. The handful of schools that it does not fund it regulates. The schools that it does not regulate are so few in number that the government ignores them.
This strategy was spelled out in detail by the scholar who is sometimes called the father of American central planning: Lester Frank Ward. His 1883 book, "Dynamic Sociology," presented the program. First, destroy all private education. Second, force parents to send their children to tax-funded schools. Third, filter out all objectionable ideas in the textbooks and classrooms.
Ward hated inequality. He hated inequality in intelligence. He wanted to equalize intelligence. He had a plan to do this.
The system of private education, all things considered, is not only a very bad one, but, properly viewed, it is absolutely worse than none, since it tends to increase inequality in the existing intelligence, which is a worse evil than a general state of intelligence would be. (Vol. 2, p. 588)
Society, through the State and through the public schools, must place teachers in charge, and these teachers must be independent of three groups: "parents, guardians, and pupils." (II, p. 590)
PARENTS SURRENDER CONTROL
At some point, parents surrender control over the content of their children's education. Some parents hold out longer than others.
Normally this takes place when the child reaches the age of six. Compulsory attendance laws take over. The parent must either send the child to a tax-funded school that his taxes pay for, or send him to a private school, or educate the child at home.
The first decision is easy and uncontroversial. The second is expensive in terms of money. The third is expensive in terms of the mother's time. If she works outside the home, she must quit in order to stay home and teach her children.
The father bows out at this point. He is only rarely involved in the education of his children. Farmers were the last to surrender this freedom in the late 19th century. Only Old Order Amish fathers still teach their sons today, at least after the sons graduate from the eighth grade. The states allow them to go home at this age. It took a Supreme Court case to give the Old Order Amish this exemption. ("Wisconsin v. Yoder," 1972).
The second decision -- putting the child into a private school -- is rarely resorted to. The parents assume that the school system is trustworthy, at the prevailing price. The parents at this point surrender to the New York City-based textbook publishing companies.
This is where New York and Washington take control over the inheritance. The goal is simple: to shape the agenda of the children. If they can do this, they gain the inheritance. The money flows down government-approved channels.
For over a century, they have gained this inheritance. This is by far the longest-term plan that the New York/Washington axis has -- the true axis of evil.
In Great Britain, it is one city: London. In France, it is one: Paris. In Germany, it is one: Berlin. In Japan it is one: Tokyo. In Russia, it is one: Moscow.
This system has led to the so-far unbreakable control over the West by bureaucrats. The heirs cannot think apart from a series of slogans. These slogans place limits on the terms of political discourse. These limits channel the forces of politics down approved paths. The debates take place within a framework that does not threaten the Powers That Be. It allows different factions of these powers to gain temporary control.
Let us consider a few of the more widespread slogans. These are inculcated in the textbooks, the state-accredited classrooms, and the media.
1. FDR saved capitalism from itself.
2. It is better to have a little inflation than a depression.
3. Deficits don't matter.
4. We owe it to ourselves.
5. Society's great complexity requires government planning.
6. If the government did not take action, poor people would starve.
7. Society needs a government-supplied safety net.
8. The U.S. Supreme Court has the final say.
9. The solution is more education.
10. Everybody deserves. . . .
11. Everyone should pay his fair share.
12. Criminals should pay their debt to society.
13. There oughta be a law.
Not one of these is true. All are either actively promoted by the public or at least grudgingly accepted.
The conservatives love this one. "Criminals should pay their debt to society." This is the first judicial step toward tyranny. It denies justice to the victim. It substitutes the State for the victim. The injured party is not the victim; rather, it is the State. The State therefore must tax the injured party to incarcerate the criminal.
Think "disinheritance of the victim."
What did Moses say?
If a man shall steal an ox, or a sheep, and kill it, or sell it; he shall restore five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep. If a thief be found breaking up [in], and be smitten that he die, there shall no blood be shed for him. If the sun be risen upon him, there shall be blood shed for him; for he should make full restitution; if he have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft. If the theft be certainly found in his hand alive, whether it be ox, or ass, or sheep; he shall restore double (Exodus 22:1-4).
This was a system of restitution. The thief owed his victim. If he could not pay, then he was to be sold into slavery and the sale price given to the victim.
This is exactly what the U.S. Constitution authorizes.
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction (13th Amendment).
Were you taught this in high school? For that matter, were you taught that the United States are plural Constitutionally? The text says "any place subject to their jurisdiction."
Filtered? Yes.
"The U.S. Supreme Court has the final say." True or false? With respect to "Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls" -- consuls? -- true. However, "In all the other Cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make" (Article III).
Were you taught this in high school? Or was this information filtered?
These judicial matters are not hidden. They are in plain sight. The Constitution is short and highly specific. These matters are right in front of our collective noses. But our collective noses no longer can conduct the famous smell test.
When you walk into a stranger's house, you can smell it. When you walk into your own, you can't.
The bureaucrats have employed a kind of ideological incense to keep the heirs from smelling confiscation in the air. Over time, even the parents no longer smell something fishy.
This is part of the most brilliant inheritance tax scheme of all time. It is working all over the world.
There is a model for it. We find it in the Bible.
And the king spake unto Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs, that he should bring certain of the children of Israel, and of the king's seed, and of the princes; Children in whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king's palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans. And the king appointed them a daily provision of the king's meat, and of the wine which he drank: so nourishing them three years, that at the end thereof they might stand before the king (Daniel 1:3-5).
When was the last time you heard a sermon on this passage, where the pastor identified the contemporary Babylonians and the contemporary Hebrews? As I like to say, "the one will be the first." The larger the congregation, the less likely the sermon.
The Apostle Paul spoke to the king in whose court he was accused. "For the king knoweth of these things, before whom also I speak freely: for I am persuaded that none of these things are hidden from him; for this thing was not done in a corner" (Acts 26:26).
The State's inheritance program is not openly revealed, but the institutional foundation of it has not been hidden in a corner. It is open. The victims defend it, for if they did not defend it, they would be faced with the personal cost of escaping from it.
CONCLUSION
R. J. Rushdoony had little patience with conservatives who complained about high taxes. "They have tithed their children to the State, and then they complain against how much the government is costing them." He thought all such tax protests would come to nothing. Well, not nothing, exactly. Mass inflation.
We live in a world where the tax collector is a matador. "Keep your eye on the red cape." Conservatives think they are making progress when they say, "No, no; keep your eye on the red ink."
Keep your eye on the yellow buses.
something I've found myself thinking back on ever since I first saw Ride With the Devil (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0134154/).
Mr. Evans: No, it won't Mr. Chiles. But my point is merely that they rounded every pup up into that schoolhouse because they fancied that everyone should think and talk the same free-thinkin' way they do with no regard to station, custom, propriety. And that is why they will win. Because they believe everyone should live and think just like them. And we shall lose because we don't care one way or another how they live. We just worry about ourselves.
Jack Bull Chiles: Are you sayin', sir, that we fight for nothin'?
Mr. Evans: Far from it, Mr. Chiles. You fight for everything that we ever had, as did my son. It's just that... we don't have it anymore.
So 'conservatives' are upset because a socialist will be speaking to their children at their socialist schools? The hypocrisy is amusing.
Could be independents getting upset. That group is where Obama is losing support now.
This has been making the rounds again, being shown in some schools; a number of parents are predictably pissed off. It's just plain creepy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqcPA1ysSbw
And on a somewhat related note, this should surprise no one (especially after the shenannigans in CA):
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090905/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_retirement_savings
rickrock305
09-06-09, 14:13
the outrage over this is just silly.
indoctrination? socialist? and they're calling it that before they've even heard the speech. enough said :rolleyes:
Submariner
09-06-09, 21:06
Mark LaRue posted this on LF:
Recently, a soldier insisted I read this ... I thanked him a few goosebumps later.
A Children's Story (http://home.comcast.net/~llefler/clavell.htm)
James Clavell's novels include "Shogun".
Anyhow, in light of next week's "Presidential Address To The Children", please forward Clavell's short story on to as many teachers as you have on your list.
M. LaRue
quote:
The Children's Story
by James Clavell
The teacher was afraid.
And the children were afraid. All except Johnny. He watched the classroom door with hate. He felt the hatred deep within his stomach. It gave him strength.
It was two minutes to nine.
The teacher glanced numbly from the door and stared at the flag which stood in a corner of the room. But she couldn't see the flag today. She was blinded by her terror, not only for herself but mostly for them, her children. She had never had children of her own. She had never married.
In the mists of her mind she saw the rows upon rows of children she had taught through her years. Their faces were legion. But she could distinguish no one particular face. Only the same face which varied but slightly. Always the same age or thereabouts. Seven. Perhaps a boy, perhaps a girl. And the face always open and ready for the knowledge that she was to give. The same face staring at her, open, waiting and full of trust.
The children rustled, watching her, wondering what possessed her. They saw not the gray hair and the old eyes and the lined face and the well-worn clothes. They saw only their teacher and the twisting of her hands. Johnny looked away from the door and watched with the other children. He did not understand anything except that the teacher was afraid, and because she was afraid she was making them all worse and he wanted to shout that there was no need to fear. "Just because THEY'VE conquered us there's no need for panic fear," Dad had said. "Don't be afraid, Johnny. If you fear too much, you'll be dead even though you're alive."
The sound of footsteps approached and then stopped. The door opened.
The children gasped. They had expected an ogre or giant or beast or witch or monster - like the outer-space monsters you think about when the lights are out and Mommy and Daddy have kissed you good night and you're frightened and you put your head under the cover and all at once you're awake and it's time for school. But instead of a monster, a beautiful young girl stood in the doorway. Her clothes were neat and clean, all olive green - even her shoes. But most important, she wore a lovely smile, and when she spoke, she spoke without the trace of an accent. The children found this very strange, for THEY were foreigners from a strange country far across the sea. They had all been told about THEM.
"Good morning, children, I'm your new teacher," the New Teacher said. Then she closed the door softly and walked to the teacher's desk, and the children in the front row felt and smelled the perfume of her - clean and fresh and young - and as she passed Sandra who sat at the end of the first row she said, "Good morning, Sandra," and Sandra flushed deeply and wondered, aghast, with all the other children, HOW DID SHE KNOW MY NAME? and her heart raced in her chest and made it feel tight and very heavy.
The teacher got up shakily. "I, er, I - good morning." Her words were faltering. She, too, was trying to get over the shock. And nausea.
"Hello, Miss Worden," the New Teacher said. "I'm taking over your class now. You are to go to the principal's office."
"Why? What's going to happen to me? What's going to happen to my children?" The words gushed from Miss Worden, and a lank piece of hair fell into her eyes. The children were agonized by the cut to her voice, and one or two of them felt the edge of tears.
"He just wants to talk to you, Miss Worden," the New Teacher said gently. "You really must take better care of yourself. You shouldn't be so upset."
Miss Worden saw the New Teacher's smile but she wasn't touched by its compassion. She tried to stop her knees from shaking. "Good-bye, children," she said. The Children made no reply. they were too terrified by the sound of her voice and the tears that wet her face. And because she was crying, some of the children cried, and Sandra fled to her.
The New Teacher shut the door behind Miss Worden and turned back into the room, cradling Sandra in her arms. "Children, children, there's no need to cry!" she said. "I know, I'll sing you a song! Listen!"
2
And she sat down on the floor as gracefully as an angel, Sandra in her arms, and she began to sing and the children stopped crying because Miss Worden never, never sang to them and certainly never sat on the floor, which is the best place to sit, as everyone in the class knew. They listened spellbound to the happy lilt of the New Teacher's voice and to the strange words of a strange tongue which soared and dipped like the sea of grass that was the birthplace of the song. It was a child's song, and it soothed them, and after she had sung the first chorus the New Teacher told them the story of the song.
It was about two children who had lost their way and were all alone in the great grass prairies and were afraid, but they met a fine man riding a fine horse and the man told them that there was never a need to be afraid, for all they had to do was the watch the stars and the stars would tell them where their home was.
"For once you know the right direction, then there's never a need to be afraid. Fear is something that comes from inside, from inside your tummies," the New Teacher said radiantly, "and good strong children like you have to put food in your tummies. Not fear."
The children thought about this and it seemed very sensible. The New Teacher sang the song again, and soon all the children were happy and calm once more. Except Johnny. He hated her even though he knew she was right about fear.
"Now," said the New Teacher, "what shall we do? I know, we'll play a game. I'll try and guess your names!"
The children, wide-eyed, shifted in their seats. Miss Worden never did this, and often she called a child by another's name. THE NEW TEACHER'LL NEVER KNOW ALL OUR NAMES! NEVER! they thought. So they waited excitedly while the New Teacher turned her attention to Sandra. Oh, yes, somehow she already knew Sandra's name, but how could she possibly know everyone's? They waited, glad that they were going to catch out the New Teacher.
But they were not to catch her out. The New Teacher remembered every name.
Johnny put up his hand. "How'd you know our names? I mean, well, we haven't had a roll call or anything, so how'd you know our names?"
"That's easy, Johnny," the New Teacher said. "You all sit in the same places every day. Each desk has one pupil. So I learned your names from a list. I had to work for three whole days to remember your names. A teacher must work very hard to be a good teacher, and so I worked for three days so that I could know each of you the first day. That's very important, don't you think, for a teacher to work hard?"
Johnny frowned and half-nodded and sat down and wondered why he hadn't figured that out for himself before asking, astonished that she had worked three days just to know everyone the first day. But still he hated her.
"Johnny. Would you tell me something, please? How do you start school? I mean what do you do to begin with?"
Johnny stood reluctantly. "We first pledge allegiance and then we sing the song -"
"Yes, but that's all after roll call," Sandra said, "You forgot roll call.
"Yes, You forgot roll call, Johnny," Mary said.
"First we have roll call," Johnny said. Then he sat down.
The New Teacher smiled. "All right. but we really don't need roll call. I know all your names and I know everyone's here. It's very lazy for a teacher not to know who's here and who isn't, don't you think? After all, a teacher should KNOW. So we don't need roll call while I'm your teacher. So we should pledge, isn't that next?"
Obediently all the children got up and put their hands on their hearts and the New Teacher did the same, and they began in unison, 'I pledge allegiance to the flag of -"
"Just a moment," the New Teacher said. "What does PLEDGE mean?"
The children stood openmouthed; Miss Worden had never interrupted them before. They stood and stared at the New Teacher. Wordless. And silent.
"What does ALLEGIANCE mean?" The New Teacher asked, her hand over her heart.
3
The children stood in silence. Then Mary put up her hand. "Well, PLEDGE is, ah, well, something like - sort of when you want to do something very good. You sort of pledge you're going to do something like not suck your thumb 'cause that makes your teeth bend and you'll have to wear a brace and go to the dentist, which hurts."
"That's very good, Mary. Very, very good. To pledge means to promise. And ALLEGIANCE?"
Mary shrugged helplessly and looked at her best friend, Hilda, who looked back at her and then at the teacher and shrugged helplessly too.
The New Teacher waited, and the silence hung in the room, hurting. then she said, "I think it's quite wrong for you to have to say something with long words in it if you don't understand what you're saying."
So the children sat down and waited expectantly.
"What did your other teacher tell you that it meant?"
After a long silence Danny put up his hand. "She never said nothing, miss."
One of my teachers at the other school I went to before this one," Joan said in a rush, "well, she sort of said what it all meant, at least she said some thing about it just before recess one day and then the bell went and afterwards we had spellin'."
Danny said, "Miss Worden - well, she never told us. We just hadta learn it and then say it, that's all. Our real teacher didn't say anything at all."
All the children nodded. Then they waited again.
"Your teacher never explained to you?" All the children shook their heads.
"I don't think that was very good. Not to explain. You can always ask me anything. That's what a real teacher should do." Then the New Teacher said, "But didn't you ask your daddies and mommies?"
"Not about 'I pledge.' We just hadta learn it," Mary said. "Once I could say it, Daddy gave me a nickel for saying it good."
"That's right," Danny said. "So long as you could say it all, it was very good. But I never got no nickel."
"Did you ask each other what it meant?"
"I askt Danny once and he didn't know and none of knowed really. It's grown-up talk, and grown-ups talk that sort of words. We just havta learn it."
"The other schools I went to," Hilda said, "they never said anything about it. They just wanted us to learn it. They didn't ask us what it meant. We just hadta say it every day before we started school."
"It took me weeks and weeks and weeks to say it right," Mary said.
So the New Teacher explained what allegiance meant. " ...so you are promising or pledging support to the flag and saying that it is much more important than YOU are. How can a flag be more important than a real live person?"
Johnny broke the silence. "But the next thing is - well, where it says 'and to the republic for which it stands.' That means it's like a, like a..." He searched for the word and could not find it. "Like well, sort of a sign, isn't it?"
"Yes. The real word is a SYMBOL." The New Teacher frowned. "But we don't need a sign to remind us that we love our country, do we? You're all good boys and girls. Do you need a sign to remind you?"
"What's REMIND mean?" Mary asked.
"It means to make you remember. To make you remember that you're all good boys and girls."
The children thought about this and shook their heads.
Johnny put up his hand. "It's our flag," he said fiercely. "We always pledge."
"Yes," the New Teacher said. "It is a very pretty one. She looked at it a moment and then said, "I wish I could have a piece of it. If it's so important, I think we should all have a piece of it. Don't you?"
"I've a little one at home," Mary said. "I could bring it tomorrow."
"Thank you, Mary dear, but I just wanted a little piece of this one because it's our own special classroom one."
Then Danny said, "If we had some scissors we could cut a little piece off."
"I've some scissors at home, Mary said.
4
"There's some in Miss Worden's desk," Brian said.
The New Teacher found the scissors and then they had to decide who would be allowed to cut a little piece off, and the New Teacher said that because today was Mary's birthday (HOW DID YOU KNOW THAT?) Mary asked herself, awed) Mary should be allowed to cut the piece off. And then they decided it would be very nice if they all had a piece. The flag is special, they thought, so if you have a piece, that's better than having just to look at it, 'cause you can keep it in your pocket.
So the flag was cut up by the children and they were very proud that they each had a piece. But now the flagpole was bare and strange.
And useless.
The children pondered what to do with it, and the idea that pleased them most was to push it out of the window. They watched excitedly as the New Teacher opened the window and allowed them to throw it into the playground. They shrieked with excitement as they saw it bounce on the ground and lie there. They began to love this strange New Teacher.
When they were all back in their seats the new Teacher said, "Well, before we start our lessons, perhaps there are some questions you want me to answer. Ask me anything you like. That's only fair, isn't it, if I ask you questions?"
Mary said, after a silence, "We never got to ask our real teacher ANY questions."
"You can always ask me anything. That ' 8 the fair way. The new way. Try me."
"What's your name?" Danny asked.
She told them her name, and it sounded pretty.
Mary put up her hand. "Why do you wear those clothes? Well, it's like a sort of uniform nurses wear."
"We think that teachers should be dressed the same. Then you always know a teacher. It's nice and light and easy to iron. Do you like the color?"
"Oh, yes," Mary said. "You've got green eyes too.
"If you like, children, as a very special surprise, you can all have this sort of uniform. Then you won't have to worry about what you have to wear to school every day. And you'll all be the same."
The children twisted excitedly in their seats. Mary said, "But it'll cost a lot, and my momma won't want to spend the money 'cause we have to buy food and food is expen Well, it sort of costs a lot of money."
"They will be given to you. As a present. There's no need to worry about money."
Johnny said, "I don't want to be dressed like that."
"You don't have to accept a present, Johnny. Just because the other children want to wear new clothes, you don't have to," the new Teacher said.
Johnny slunk back in his chair. I'M NEVER GOING TO WEAR THEIR CLOTHES, he said to himself. I DON'T CARE IF I'M GOING TO LOOK DIFFERENT FROM DANNY AND TOM AND FRED.
Then Mary asked, "Why was our teacher crying?"
"I suppose she was just tired and needed a rest. She's going to have a long rest." She smiled at them. "We think teachers should be young. I'm nineteen."
"Is the war over now?" Danny asked.
"Yes, Danny, isn't that wonderful! Now all your daddies will be home soon."
"Did we win or did we lose?" Mary asked.
"We - that's you and I and all of us - WE won."
"Oh!"
The children sat back happily.
Then Johnny's hatred burst. "Where's my dad? What've you done to my dad? Where's my dad?"
The New Teacher got up from her seat and walked the length of the room and the children's eyes followed her, and Johnny stood, knees of jelly. She sat down on his seat and put her hands on his shoulders, and his shoulders were shaking like his knees.
"He's going to a school. Some grown-ups have to go to school as well as children."
5
"But they took him away and he didn't want to go." Johnny felt the tears close and he fought them back.
The New Teacher touched him gently, and he smelled the youth and cleanness of her, and it was not the smell of home which was sour and just a little dirty. He's no different from all of you. YOU sometimes don't want to go to school. With grown-ups it's the same - just the same as children. Would you like to visit him? He has a holiday in a few days."
"Momma said that Dad's gone away forever!" Johnny stared at her incredulously. "He has a holiday?"
The New Teacher laughed. "She's wrong, Johnny. After all, everyone who goes to school has holidays. That's fair, isn't it?"
The children shifted and rustled and watched. And Johnny said, "I can see him?"
"Of course. Your daddy just has to go back to school a little. He had some strange thoughts, and he wanted other grown-ups to believe them. It's not right to want others to believe wrong thoughts, is it?"
"Well, no, I suppose not. But my dad never thought nothing bad."
"Of course, Johnny. I said WRONG thoughts not BAD thoughts. There's nothing wrong with that. But it's right to show grown-ups right thoughts when they're wrong, isn't it?"
"Well, yes," Johnny said. "But what wrong thoughts did he have?"
"Just some grown-up thoughts that are old-fashioned. We're going to learn all about them in class. Then we can share knowledge, and I can learn from you as you will learn from me. Shall we?"
"All right." Johnny stared at her, perplexed. "My dad couldn't have wrong thoughts. He just couldn't....
Could he?"
"Well, perhaps sometime when you wanted to talk about something very important to your dad, perhaps he said, 'Not now, Johnny, I'm busy,' or, 'We'll talk about that tomorrow.' That's a bad thought not to give you time when it's important. Isn't it?"
"Sure. but that's what all grown-ups do."
"My momma says that all the time," Mary said.
And the other children nodded, and they wondered if all their parents should go back to school and unlearn bad thoughts.
"Sit down, Johnny, and we'll start learning good things and not worry about grown-up bad thoughts. Oh, yes," she said when she sat down at her seat again, brimming with happiness, "I have a lovely surprise for you. You're all going to stay overnight with us. We have a lovely room with beds and lots of food, and we'll all tell stories and have such a lovely time."
"Oh, good," the children said.
"Can I stay up till eight o'clock?" Mary asked breathlessly.
"Well, as it's our first new day, we'll all stay up to eight-thirty. But only if you promise to go right to sleep afterward."
The children all promised. They were very happy. Jenny said, "But first we got to say our prayers. Before we go to sleep."
The new Teacher smiled at her. "Of course. Perhaps we should say a prayer now. In some schools that's a custom too." She thought a moment and the faces watched her. Then she said, "let's pray. But let's pray for something very good. What should we pray for?"
"Bless Momma and Daddy." Danny said immediately.
"That's a good idea, Danny. I have one. Let's pray for candy. That's a good idea, isn't it?"
They all nodded happily.
So, following their New Teacher, they all closed their eyes and steepled their hands together, and they prayed with her for candy.
The New Teacher opened her eyes and looked around disappointedly. "but where's our candy. God is all-seeing and everywhere, and if we pray, He answers our prayers. Isn't that true.?"
"I prayed for a puppy of my own lots of times, but I never got one," Danny said.
"Maybe we didn't pray hard enough. Perhaps we should kneel down like it' 8 done in church.
So the new Teacher knelt and all the children knelt and they prayed very, very hard. But there was still no candy.
Because the New Teacher was disappointed, the children were very disappointed. Then she said, "perhaps
6
we're using the wrong name." She thought a moment and then said, "instead of saying 'God,' let's say 'Our Leader.' Let's pray to Our Leader for candy. Let's pray very hard and don't open your eyes till I say."
So the children shut their eyes tightly and prayed very hard, and as they prayed, the New Teacher took out some candy from her pocket and quietly put a piece on each child's desk. She did not notice Johnny alone of all the children watching her through his half-closed eyes.
She went softly back to her desk and the prayer ended, and the children opened their eyes and they stared at the candy and they were overjoyed.
"I'm going to pray to Our Leader every time," Mary said excitedly.
"Me too," Hilda said. "Could we eat Our Leader's candy now, teacher?"
"Oh, let's, please, please, please."
"So Our Leader answered your prayers, didn't he?"
"I saw you put the candy on our desks!" Johnny burst out. "I SAW YOU... I didn't close my eyes, and I saw you. You had 'em in your pocket. We didn't get them with praying. YOU put them there."
All the children, appalled, stared at him and then at their New Teacher. She stood at the front of the class and looked back at Johnny and then at all of them.
"Yes, Johnny, you're quite right. You're a very, very wise boy. Children, I put the candy on your desks. So you know that it doesn't matter whom you ask, whom you shut your eyes and 'pray' to to God or anyone, even Our Leader -no one will give you anything. Only another human being." She looked at Danny. "God didn't give you the puppy you wanted. But if you work hard, I will. Only I or someone like me can GIVE you things. Praying to God or anything or anyone for something is a waste of time."
"Then we don't say prayers? We're not supposed to say prayers?"
The puzzled children watched her.
"You can if you want to, children. If your daddies and mommies want you to. But we know, you and I that it means nothing. That's our secret."
"My dad says it's wrong to have secrets from him."
"But he has secrets that he shares with your mommy and not with you, doesn't he?"
All the children nodded.
"Then it's not wrong for us to have a few secrets from them. Is it?"
"I like having secrets. Hilda and me have lots of secrets." Mary said.
The New Teacher said, "We're going -to have lots of wonderful secrets together. You can eat your candy if you want to. And because Johnny was especially clever, I think we should make him monitor for the whole week, don't you?"
They all nodded happily and popped the candy into their mouths and chewed gloriously. Johnny was very proud as he chewed his candy, he decided that he liked his teacher very much. Because she told the truth. Because she was right about fear. Because she was right about God. He'd prayed many times for many things and never got them, and even the one time he did get the skates, he knew his dad had heard him and had put them under his bed for his birthday and pretended he hadn't heard him. I ALWAYS WONDERED WHY HE DIDN'T LISTEN, AND ALL THE TIME HE WASN'T THERE, he thought.
Johnny sat back contentedly, resolved to work hard and listen and not to have wrong thoughts like Dad.
The teacher waited for them to finish their candy. This was what she had been trained for, and she knew that she would teach her children well and that they would grow up to be good citizens. She looked out of the window, at the sun over the land. It was a good land, and vast. A land to breathe in. But she was warmed not by the sun but by the thought that throughout the school and throughout the land all children, all men and all women were being taught with the same faith, with variations of the same procedures. Each according to his age group. Each according to his need.
She glanced at her watch....
It was 9:23.
the outrage over this is just silly.
indoctrination? socialist? and they're calling it that before they've even heard the speech. enough said
You are welcome to believe as you wish, Johnny.
rickrock305
09-08-09, 15:52
You are welcome to believe as you wish, Johnny.
its got nothing to do with what i believe. the facts are out there, the text of the speech has been posted. i guess telling kids to work hard is socialist indoctrination now?
so did your children come home from school today spouting socialist ideology? :rolleyes:
No, the speach doesn't have to be Socialist.......... it is the THOUGH that counts.
Please bear with me.
I have always heard that kids will eventually tend to vote the same way their parents do.... even if they go through a period in their voting life where they digress... eventually they tend to see their vote similar to their parents.
HOWEVER
I forget where it was, but I read a study that said that kids ALSO tend to vote the same party as the president that was in power at the time they were in grade school.
So, for example, When I was in elementary school Regan was the president. I always did have fond memories of him even before I gave a crap about anything beyond entertaining myself and avoiding homework.
Now here I am 25 years later ...voting conservative (not republican mind you).
I have noted that some people older than me that were in elementary school during, say, JFK, Carter... whoever.... this does tend to lend some credence.
So what I am saying is that there is some evidence that kids are impressionable.
As a parent you have a responsibility to straighten this out and overcome this propaganda.
...otherwise we may have a bunch of socialist elitist progressives running everything in 25 years.
I don't have a problem with the President giving his speech, I really don't even have a problem with the suggested lesson plan. If it truly opened up a debate for students that would be fine too, not that I see how kindergarteners are going to intelligently debate current issues. My problem with it is that so many teachers drink the Obama Kool-aid and I think the "discussion" afterwards would be something like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSwgerG34s0
Yet another reason for home-schooling.
its got nothing to do with what i believe. the facts are out there, the text of the speech has been posted. i guess telling kids to work hard is socialist indoctrination now?
so did your children come home from school today spouting socialist ideology? :rolleyes:
again since libs only can live in the past !!!
the facts are he was going to try to get away with something else !! the facts are in the original PDF !!!!!
the speech as it is now I am sure was fine and as I said I have no issue with a pep talk but I do have issues with post activities on how can you help me and put up quotes of mine etc..
BUT AGAIN !!!!! the original speech was not posted and his post work for students in the PDF are proof of his original intentions !!!
people screamed so they had to change things otherwise it would have been dif !!!!
rickrock305
09-09-09, 02:10
again since libs only can live in the past !!!
the facts are he was going to try to get away with something else !! the facts are in the original PDF !!!!!
the speech as it is now I am sure was fine and as I said I have no issue with a pep talk but I do have issues with post activities on how can you help me and put up quotes of mine etc..
BUT AGAIN !!!!! the original speech was not posted and his post work for students in the PDF are proof of his original intentions !!!
people screamed so they had to change things otherwise it would have been dif !!!!
those activities were only mere suggestions for teachers on how to get their students involved.
do you have any proof that there was an "original speech" vs the one that was delivered?
what exactly was he trying to "get away with"?
those activities were only mere suggestions for teachers on how to get their students involved.
do you have any proof that there was an "original speech" vs the one that was delivered?
what exactly was he trying to "get away with"?
First off, you are pretty naive if you can't see that one of the byproducts of this is to "spread the love of Obama". Kids are exposed to all sorts of things that "mold" them, just look how McDonalds grooms customers for life.
Second, the "other party", which I am NOT a member of either, would do the EXACT same thing. I also would not like that.
Third, such an expansive, thorough, and seemingly "mandatory" speech is NEW, and therefore SCARY. Anytime something like this goes to the next level there is always VALID concern, and their SHOULD BE. Being a mindless automaton and saying "OK, whatever you want Obama/Bush" is BAD for our country.
You can go ahead and drink your Obama Kool-Aid and the other guy can have a tall glass of Obama hate, but your naive "what could possibly be wrong with this" scares the crap out of me more than the other guys hate and skepticism.
In fact, people naive like that... in general...... scare the crap out of me.
Do not question, simply.................
http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o245/ick-xbox/Silly_pic/obama_obey.jpg
those activities were only mere suggestions for teachers on how to get their students involved.
do you have any proof that there was an "original speech" vs the one that was delivered?
what exactly was he trying to "get away with"?
its not worth it ????
rickrock305
09-09-09, 11:22
First off, you are pretty naive if you can't see that one of the byproducts of this is to "spread the love of Obama". Kids are exposed to all sorts of things that "mold" them, just look how McDonalds grooms customers for life.
that could be one of the byproducts. but what about the byproducts of inspiration, confidence, the will to succeed, etc., that this could instill in children?
Third, such an expansive, thorough, and seemingly "mandatory" speech is NEW, and therefore SCARY. Anytime something like this goes to the next level there is always VALID concern, and their SHOULD BE.
Its not new. Bush and Reagan both addressed school children.
Being a mindless automaton and saying "OK, whatever you want Obama/Bush" is BAD for our country.
Of course it is, and thats not whats happening in my case. There is plenty that Obama has done that I don't agree with. This speech isn't one of them.
It seems like the exact opposite around here, where anything Obama does must be bad because its him.
You can go ahead and drink your Obama Kool-Aid and the other guy can have a tall glass of Obama hate, but your naive "what could possibly be wrong with this" scares the crap out of me more than the other guys hate and skepticism.
Nobody's drinking any koolaid. And noone has yet to explain what is so wrong with this speech.
In fact, people naive like that... in general...... scare the crap out of me.
Do not question, simply.................
http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o245/ick-xbox/Silly_pic/obama_obey.jpg
apparently you feel the need to paint me into a little box so that you can address me in a way you're comfortable with. but your assumptions are entirely incorrect.
rickrock305
09-09-09, 11:23
its not worth it ????
nice cop out. i didn't expect you to actually have a valid reason.
For what it's worth, initial reports on the speech said that it would be an opportunity for kids to "learn more" about Obama, after which they would write letters explaining how he inspired them and these letters would later be used to hold them accountable to said inspiration.
When the controversy started, the lesson plan changed but the media also reported that the speech was being "rexamined". So, there's at least circumstantial evidence that the final speech was different than the original.
Its not new. Bush and Reagan both addressed school children.
I am saying that it is foohardy to just swallow this new development and assume that "this is business as usual, why so upset?"
I can't speak from experience, but if I recall my history correctly there were concerns over Franklin Roosevelt's (1933-1945) use of RADIO to reach a massive audience.
On Sunday night, March 12, 1933, 60 million Americans heard Roosevelt present his first "fireside chat." His calming voice and simple language helped all Americans understand complicated issues.....
Additionally when TV came along...I would assume there was discussion.... but I can't speak to particulars.
Harry S. Truman (1945-1953) was the first president to appear on television from the White House.
Certainly Regan, Bush and I assume others have spoken before.... but when has a president spoken on a massive scale only to school children with "lesson plans" of what to talk about after? I don't know about the rest of the country but as of today I believe 100% of classrooms in Pennsylvania have the ability to play this message live or broadcast it shortly after by recording to EVERY classroom... which is the objective here.
Seems to be a whole new level of "contact" to me.
Seems like something to be discussed and not simply "obeyed" without considering some of the exact questions raised here.
Here is a nice long run-on sentence....
We have massive distribution of a message to a very particular impresionable audience by a president making unprecendented changes to our fundamental structure surrounded by persions that upon a CASUAL inquiry make a person wonder what in the world is going on.... to say nothing of what has been uncovered by more thorough vetting of who this president chooses to associate with.
Seems like a justified concern to me.
03humpalot
09-09-09, 12:16
Personally, I believe a wise NCO summed it up nicely:
And I continue to prepare.
Amen brother,
remember when he first posted that. Godspeed B.
Personally, I believe a wise NCO summed it up nicely:
And I continue to prepare.
Prepare for what?!?!
Who is this imaginary army? Aren't the people you are talking about disagreeing with basically just liberals? The same liberals that hate guns so much that they don't know how to and would not use them?
Preparing to fight liberals would consist of putting on catchers gear and carrying a baseball bat.
Color me confused.
Rickrock,
Yeah, I was a bit harsh there. Sorry about that.
Personally I think two things have us in the current mess that has been brewing since Clinton all the way to today.
1. Care free "whatever" attitudes by people not paying attention and the "wiggle room" that gives leaders. {see Clinton, Bush, Obama, Pelosi, Barney Frank.....]
2. PERSONAL FINANCIAL IRRESPONSABILITY. People knew what they were doing when they bought houses they couldn't afford and over-spent their income.
When I see a "eh, whatever, no big deal" I am reminded of the genesis of our current situation.
Rickrock,
Yeah, I was a bit harsh there. Sorry about that.
Personally I think two things have us in the current mess that has been brewing since Clinton all the way to today.
1. Care free "whatever" attitudes by people not paying attention and the "wiggle room" that gives leaders. {see Clinton, Bush, Obama, Pelosi, Barney Frank.....]
2. PERSONAL FINANCIAL IRRESPONSABILITY. People knew what they were doing when they bought houses they couldn't afford and over-spent their income.
When I see a "eh, whatever, no big deal" I am reminded of the genesis of our current situation.
Yeah! There's no way that anyone that was in the mortgage lending business could have mislead people about the true cost of a house, exaggerated the tax benefits, hid the fine print, misrepresented the loans, collaborated with appraisers to artificially inflate the value of houses, or falsified documents to get loans approved that shouldn't have been. That could never happen!
I'm not saying that there weren't stupid people buying houses beyond their means, but to imply that everyone that has had trouble with their mortgage and lost their house was solely responsible for the mess is not only naive, it is plain incorrect.
With that said . . .
I do think that there needs to be an education emphasis on personal financial responsibility in our country.
lol. I have a friend in the mortgage business that did closings only. A mortgage company or broker would get a client... she would go out and close the deal as a notary on-site.
Her impression is that there were a lot of thieves in the mortgage business, but that the only people that they could find as victims were those buyers that were knowingly ignoring the facts, knowingly ignoring the small print, or knowingly using the mortgage market to delay the inevitable collapse.
Sure, there are exceptions to every rule... but these thieves and villins had a "partner in crime" almost every time.... and that partner was a person that was irresponsible financially.
I totally agree with you on the education piece... but we are an entitlement society now. Not sure how we can overcome that any longer. Protect me. Help me. Feed me. Entertain me. Give me a house. Protect me from everyone. Protect me from myself!
It is out of control. People need to fend for themselves, not suck of the teet of government. If a predatory lender gives you a deal that is too good to be true, then it isn't.
Doesn't take einstein to figure that one out.
http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o245/ick-xbox/avatars/recovery2.jpg
Yeah! There's no way that anyone that was in the mortgage lending business could have mislead people about the true cost of a house, exaggerated the tax benefits, hid the fine print, misrepresented the loans, collaborated with appraisers to artificially inflate the value of houses, or falsified documents to get loans approved that shouldn't have been. That could never happen!
.
and they'll get zero sympathy for me for trusting any of those mother****ers.
"oh, boo hoo, them evil BANKERS stole all my money". :rolleyes:
nice cop out. i didn't expect you to actually have a valid reason.
YAWN
you remind me of a kid I knew in 4th grade that thought he was so clever
Submariner
09-09-09, 15:39
and they'll get zero sympathy for me for trusting any of those mother****ers.
"oh, boo hoo, them evil BANKERS stole all my money". :rolleyes:
Except, the folks in Palm Beach and the like who invested with Bernie Madoff may still get a bailout from SIPC (your tax dollars as they can't cover it) 'cause they are special.
do some of you feel like you are having a conversation about this topic with a jackass??
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nh33bGAxl58
I'll let you guess who is who....
rickrock305
09-09-09, 19:31
I am saying that it is foohardy to just swallow this new development and assume that "this is business as usual, why so upset?"
i wouldn't say its "business as usual". Obama has been very adept at his use of the media, both TV and radio. More so than any other president thus far. And I'm sure this will continue to happen as technology evolves.
Certainly Regan, Bush and I assume others have spoken before.... but when has a president spoken on a massive scale only to school children with "lesson plans" of what to talk about after? I don't know about the rest of the country but as of today I believe 100% of classrooms in Pennsylvania have the ability to play this message live or broadcast it shortly after by recording to EVERY classroom... which is the objective here.
Seems to be a whole new level of "contact" to me.
yes, it is a whole new level of contact. its just the future coming into being. humans in general are on a whole new level of contact. for example, just look at what the internet did in getting information out of Iran about the election violence when all the media was blacked out. obama has been very savvy in exploiting this new level of contact.
Seems like something to be discussed and not simply "obeyed" without considering some of the exact questions raised here.
no, nothing should be obeyed without questioning it. which is why i hope parents would discuss the speech with their children, question what they got out of it, share their viewpoints, etc. not simply keep their children out of school. thats a silly, knee jerk response and doesn't help your children or anyone else.
Here is a nice long run-on sentence....
We have massive distribution of a message to a very particular impresionable audience by a president making unprecendented changes to our fundamental structure surrounded by persions that upon a CASUAL inquiry make a person wonder what in the world is going on.... to say nothing of what has been uncovered by more thorough vetting of who this president chooses to associate with.
Seems like a justified concern to me.
sure. me personally, I'm justifiably concerned about anyone addressing my child. but i think obama delivered a very positive and inspiring message with this speech.
Rickrock,
Yeah, I was a bit harsh there. Sorry about that.
not a problem, i didn't take it that way.
Personally I think two things have us in the current mess that has been brewing since Clinton all the way to today.
1. Care free "whatever" attitudes by people not paying attention and the "wiggle room" that gives leaders. {see Clinton, Bush, Obama, Pelosi, Barney Frank.....]
i agree, and would extend that past leaders to the fed, corporations, lobbyists, etc.
2. PERSONAL FINANCIAL IRRESPONSABILITY. People knew what they were doing when they bought houses they couldn't afford and over-spent their income.
we disagree a bit here, but thats another thread entirely.
When I see a "eh, whatever, no big deal" I am reminded of the genesis of our current situation.
i totally agree. i am all for questioning our leaders and being informed on what they're doing. but i take issue with the hysteria surrounding this, the cries of "socialism" and "indoctrination" before anything was known about the speech. its nothing but ridiculous paranoia. a lot different than questioning the content of the speech.
rickrock305
09-09-09, 19:37
YAWN
you remind me of a kid I knew in 4th grade that thought he was so clever
:rolleyes:
your personal insults only further illustrate your lack of a true point.
rickrock305
09-09-09, 19:38
America has never had such an anti-american president (To my knowledge), and THAT is what scares people about Obama talking "Directly" to their children.
how is Obama anti american?
parishioner
09-09-09, 19:55
I don't have kids but I don't believe it is the President's duty to talk to them about these sort of things. If I did have children, I believe it would be my job and my job alone, as a parent, to teach my kids these lessons. Whether Regan was giving the speech or Obama, its wrong.
parishioner
09-09-09, 20:05
how is Obama anti american?
He is a student of Reverend Wright and has been for over 20 years. He married him and is wife, baptized his children and considers him his mentor. Do not even begin to defend this. You do not associate with a man like this for 20 years if you do not share the same ideals. End of story.
Memory refresher: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hPR5jnjtLo
:rolleyes:
your personal insults only further illustrate your lack of a true point.
Speaking of which, what is yours?
I have noticed that you're here, on a firearms website, yet have never posted in a single thread having to do with firearms, and the vast majority of your posts are shit-stirring posts in political threads, which most often wind up locked and most often due to your shit-stirring.
So I'm curious, what is YOUR point in this thread? That people don't have the right to decide how and when their children are addressed and by who? That they are somehow automatically racist lunatics if they don't want someone that they consider to be, at best, misguided and immorally motivated?
and I'm also curious as to your point here in general. With no apparent interest in the true subject matter at hand, the M4 Carbine, why are you here?
rickrock305
09-09-09, 21:00
Speaking of which, what is yours?
that the outrage over this speech is ridiculous. that parents have never before chose to keep their children home from school because the president was speaking. its irrational.
i'm also questioning why. why is the president addressing students a bad thing? especially considering the subject matter of his speech.
I have noticed that you're here, on a firearms website, yet have never posted in a single thread having to do with firearms, and the vast majority of your posts are shit-stirring posts in political threads, which most often wind up locked and most often due to your shit-stirring.
i don't stir shit at all. i don't personally attack anyone unless it is in response to their attack on me. i try to keep my posts on topic and bring some alternate viewpoints to the discussion.
but once again, another thread has been turned into a discussion about me.
So I'm curious, what is YOUR point in this thread? That people don't have the right to decide how and when their children are addressed and by who? That they are somehow automatically racist lunatics if they don't want someone that they consider to be, at best, misguided and immorally motivated?
my point is that this is irrational paranoia and outright misinformation being spread. yes, you do have the choice. but i think to choose to remove your child from school over this speech is the easy way out, its a cop out. if you disagree with obama's politics, thats fine. but how can you disagree with the president telling kids to work hard in school, to aim high, to not give up? i think the responsible thing as a parent, regardless if you like Obama and his policies or not, is to let your children see the speech and discuss it with them. What lesson is it teaching them to remove them from the situation?
Racist lunatics? :rolleyes: I've never called anyone racist for disagreeing with Obama's policies.
and I'm also curious as to your point here in general. With no apparent interest in the true subject matter at hand, the M4 Carbine, why are you here?
I have plenty of interest in the subject matter at hand, I own an AR15 and a couple of handguns. But I'm certainly no firearms expert and I prefer to read and learn from others who are. Thats what brought me here to begin with.
rickrock305
09-09-09, 21:04
He is a student of Reverend Wright and has been for over 20 years. He married him and is wife, baptized his children and considers him his mentor. Do not even begin to defend this. You do not associate with a man like this for 20 years if you do not share the same ideals. End of story.
Memory refresher: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hPR5jnjtLo
i'm not even gonna go there.
i'm not even gonna go there.
Smart guy, you can't win that one ;)
but once again, another thread has been turned into a discussion about me.
so this is what its about ?? attention !!!!!
now I know why you are here ;)
and this thread is not about you its about a president that is destroying this country in some peoples eyes ! and even in his own words "fundamentally changing it" !!!!
I have a few questions ?
do you even have kids ? if not I think you are lost here until you have your own children you wont understand ! you may say you do but those with kids now what I am talking about !!! that until you have children you really dont understand what you will do for them !!!
are you in the military or trying to get in the military ?
look and read what I first wrote in this thread !!!
since I am the one that started it and saved the first PDF
I have no problem with the president giving a pep talk to kids
I do have a problem with the first PDF he had
since he got so much flak he changed the PDF and changed the length of the speech and what was to be said in the speech to match his new message my proof ! is the PDF itself and the ed.gov site that changed the information and the length of the speech on the page and the PDF !!!! so my source and proof is the gov site itself
his history is showed he says one thing to one crowd then another to another to fit what he thinks people want to hear !
the fact I have to watch what the gov is pitching to my child is scary and should not be in school !
this goes for any president ever !!!!! they should never do more than just a nice pep talk !!
the reason his speech did come out the way it did is because people like myself and others raised hell and he had to change things !!!! otherwise it would have been a dif speech
My personal opinion on this is that it's much to do about NOTHING. If anything, I think the whole "controversy" over his speech was stirred up by the left, to see if they could get the right all fired up over nothing, and categorize those who were against the President speaking to school kids as mere "alarmist", and irrational. I think they succeeded to a point.
I didnt have any issues with his speech, and feel that it is the parents responsibility to address anything they may have found objectionable with their own children.
Pick your battles folks. This one was nothing more than a waste of energy.
If schools were as independent as they should be, the president talking to kids, even all of the kids at once, wouldn't be that big a deal.
The problem is that his speech will be followed up by and reinforced by members of a union, one of the largest in the country, that was part of his largest group of supporters, "big labor." And they will be teaching to standards established by a department of Obama's own executive branch (thanks Bush).
The president wasn't shown at my kid's school, however, so any opinion of mine was moot.
rickrock305
09-10-09, 01:33
so this is what its about ?? attention !!!!!
now I know why you are here ;)
not at all. i'm here to discuss alternate viewpoints with people, and to learn about firearms.
its not my fault people focus their posts on me instead of the discussion at hand.
and this thread is not about you its about a president that is destroying this country in some peoples eyes ! and even in his own words "fundamentally changing it" !!!!
how is he destroying the country?
in case you haven't noticed, we need some BIG changes. not necessarily the ones Obama has brought about thus far, but things aint looking good for us right now.
I have a few questions ?
do you even have kids ? if not I think you are lost here until you have your own children you wont understand ! you may say you do but those with kids now what I am talking about !!! that until you have children you really dont understand what you will do for them !!!
yes, i do. in fact i'm a single father with sole custody. my daughter watched the speech and i discussed it with her that evening.
are you in the military or trying to get in the military ?
No, and no. I would really like to enlist actually, even went and took the ASVAB recently. But due to my status as a single father with no mother present in our lives I don't believe it would be fair to my daughter.
Curious, what does this have to do with anything?
I have no problem with the president giving a pep talk to kids
I do have a problem with the first PDF he had
since he got so much flak he changed the PDF and changed the length of the speech and what was to be said in the speech to match his new message my proof ! is the PDF itself and the ed.gov site that changed the information and the length of the speech on the page and the PDF !!!! so my source and proof is the gov site itself
his history is showed he says one thing to one crowd then another to another to fit what he thinks people want to hear !
the fact I have to watch what the gov is pitching to my child is scary and should not be in school !
this goes for any president ever !!!!! they should never do more than just a nice pep talk !!
the reason his speech did come out the way it did is because people like myself and others raised hell and he had to change things !!!! otherwise it would have been a dif speech
you have no idea what was in the speech before it was released. anything else is mere speculation.
but once again, another thread has been turned into a discussion about me.
Some might consider this a clue. ;)
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.