-
Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
Principal Obama
- Thread starter mtlinscomb
- Start date
TooFarTampa
SoWal Insider
That one question in the lesson plan seems more like poor PR than anything else, not attempts at mind control or indoctrination. Everything else seems pretty standard.
In hindsight it appears that the greater problem is that no alarm bells seemed to go off about that one question, or about how the idea of a message from Obama "might" be received after a summer of discontent. The last thing I want for any administration is for it to be filled with people who just nod their heads at each other. That was a big problem during the Bush years, and I'd hate to see it continue with Obama.
But in general this has been way overblown. I am very sure that the speech was always intended to be another in a series of messages to the public. Similar messages (including his speech to the NAACP about personal responsibility and his Father's Day article in Parade) were praised widely, and for good reason. Most kids seem to like him; why not use that for a good message?
Here4Good
Beach Fanatic
It's unacceptable for citizens to ask themselves how they can help the President. Gotcha. We are all just onlookers, riders on the storm. No matter who it is, no matter what the agenda, we should all sit on our hands, because the President is a member of a political party that we may or may not be part of. All righty then. I guess we need to rewrite all of the Citizenship books. Wait, that's not necessary, we don't teach citizenship in schools anymore, because it is too controversial.
BTW, that's the ONLY ACTUAL PART of the DOE materials that I could find even slightly tilted towards the president. The rest of it was pretty much standardized lesson plan crap that is included in every lesson plan distributed by anyone.
Show me also where it says this is mandatory for all schools to participate in. Show me the line where their funding will be pulled if they don't show the President's speech. Show me the part where ANY school ANYWHERE does ANYTHING which is not part of the test-oriented curriculum that they don't allow parents to opt their kids out of.
When I was in grade school, President Kennedy told us all we were fat and lazy and to drop and give him 20. Well, not in so many words, but that's what he meant. I guess my parents should have protested that I was just big boned and that it was none of his business. (And BTW, I don't remember that test being optional, because I sure as hell would have opted out).
Show me the last President who gave a flip enough to address school kids on TV. REAGAN! Holy cats, that was like 20 years ago! I personally think addressing kids ought to be a no-brainer. Apparently, this flapdoodle is why nobody does it.
Pathetic was another adjective I should have included in my description of you.
Sam, I think you asked for it. Do you honestly believe that Wright is not a racist? If so, refute his point. But name calling does not really get us anywhere.
hereforgood and toofartampa:
I agree with the vast majority of what you say. I have no problem with the POTUS giving a speech to children about the values we all agree on: hard work and getting an education. But some staffer at the DOE went too far. We do not need to drag partisan plitics into our schools.
What I hope you can understand is the concern parents have when they see textbooks that call Columbus a war criminal and spend pages on the interment of Japanese in WWII and one or two paragraphs on America's role in ending the holocaust. Then they hear the President is going to speak to their child and lesson plans are being sent out that point towards a cult of personality ( the Presidents) They go crazy! Mess with me or my property, that is one thing, mess with my child, way bigger.
Maybe everyone will take a step back and try and fix the abuses.
I agree with the vast majority of what you say. I have no problem with the POTUS giving a speech to children about the values we all agree on: hard work and getting an education. But some staffer at the DOE went too far. We do not need to drag partisan plitics into our schools.
What I hope you can understand is the concern parents have when they see textbooks that call Columbus a war criminal and spend pages on the interment of Japanese in WWII and one or two paragraphs on America's role in ending the holocaust. Then they hear the President is going to speak to their child and lesson plans are being sent out that point towards a cult of personality ( the Presidents) They go crazy! Mess with me or my property, that is one thing, mess with my child, way bigger.
Maybe everyone will take a step back and try and fix the abuses.
thank you thank you thank you. amen.
Gidget
Beach Fanatic
View attachment 14258
View attachment 14259
I've attached menu of the proposed class room activities. See above. How how dastardly!!!!
The worse thing that can happen is for parents to tell their children how "evil" this is. Kids are smart. They can tell if this is a good thing. I read these goals to the daughter of a family who really does not like Obama. I took out references too Obama. Guess what? She thought the goals were great and was EXCITED to have them to help her with her long term plans. But when I told her it was Obama she was frightened to say she thought they were sound ideas becasuse she knew how her folks felt. Is this a good thing? I don't thik so.
Let it go - let the president help and encourage the youth of our country to do their homework, to set goals, etc.... We should all be jumping for joy!!
Geez :roll::roll:
G
View attachment 14259
I've attached menu of the proposed class room activities. See above. How how dastardly!!!!
The worse thing that can happen is for parents to tell their children how "evil" this is. Kids are smart. They can tell if this is a good thing. I read these goals to the daughter of a family who really does not like Obama. I took out references too Obama. Guess what? She thought the goals were great and was EXCITED to have them to help her with her long term plans. But when I told her it was Obama she was frightened to say she thought they were sound ideas becasuse she knew how her folks felt. Is this a good thing? I don't thik so.
Let it go - let the president help and encourage the youth of our country to do their homework, to set goals, etc.... We should all be jumping for joy!!
Geez :roll::roll:
G
Gerhart cries
Flashback 1991: Gephardt Called Bush's Speech to Students 'Paid Political Advertising'
By Noel Sheppard
Created 2009-09-03 10:45
As Barack Obama prepares a nationwide broadcast to America's students next Tuesday, it has been revealed that Democrats complained in 1991 when then President George H. W. Bush broadcast a speech from a Northwest Washington junior high school.
In fact, the House Majority leader at the time, Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.), said "The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students."
Such was reported [1] by the Washington Post on October 3, 1991 (h/t KY3 Political Notebook [2] via Chuck Todd):
House Democrats criticized President Bush yesterday for using Education Department funds to produce and broadcast a speech that he made Tuesday at a Northwest Washington junior high school.
The Democratic critics accused Bush of turning government money for education to his own political use, namely, an ongoing effort to inoculate himself against their charges of inattention to domestic issues. The speech at Alice Deal Junior High School, broadcast live on radio and television, urged students to study hard, avoid drugs and turn in troublemakers.
"The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students," House Majority Leader letter [3] concerning this event, one has to assume it's costing the Department a great deal of money.
Flashback 1991: Gephardt Called Bush's Speech to Students 'Paid Political Advertising'
By Noel Sheppard
Created 2009-09-03 10:45
As Barack Obama prepares a nationwide broadcast to America's students next Tuesday, it has been revealed that Democrats complained in 1991 when then President George H. W. Bush broadcast a speech from a Northwest Washington junior high school.
In fact, the House Majority leader at the time, Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.), said "The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students."
Such was reported [1] by the Washington Post on October 3, 1991 (h/t KY3 Political Notebook [2] via Chuck Todd):
House Democrats criticized President Bush yesterday for using Education Department funds to produce and broadcast a speech that he made Tuesday at a Northwest Washington junior high school.
The Democratic critics accused Bush of turning government money for education to his own political use, namely, an ongoing effort to inoculate himself against their charges of inattention to domestic issues. The speech at Alice Deal Junior High School, broadcast live on radio and television, urged students to study hard, avoid drugs and turn in troublemakers.
"The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students," House Majority Leader letter [3] concerning this event, one has to assume it's costing the Department a great deal of money.
Here4Good
Beach Fanatic
This, in fact, proves my point. The President addresses children, the opposition protests it, and life goes on. It's the American way.FActs are a stubborn thing.
Not, the opposition whips up wingnuts by telling them that the President is teaching their children socialism. This is not the American Way, nor is it intelligent discussion.