http://www.docstoc.com/docs/10582301/Presi...eptember-8-2009

Look at these questions that they will be asking every student in America prior to the speech....

Sorry, but I don't get it...

I have a few ideas where you're trying to go with this, but I'm not sure exactly.

Looks like an exercise in redundancy.

Yeah.

I don't get it.

I think my feelings are well known around here about this President, but are we really to the point where we criticize him for making a speech to the children of this country. The President is supposed to be admired by the Children. Aren't school kids supposed to aspire to the highest goals including one day to be President? To imply he is trying to brainwash the children is a little extreme. Where was Bush on 9/11 when the planes were flying into the WTC?

I remember in school watching important Presidential speeches and other World events like shuttle launches and landings. That was part of learning about the World.

It is his pulpit and he gets to speak from it. If the Conservatives want to get their message out then freaking get a message and do it - but don't just knee-jerk blast the other guy when he is doing so – isn’t that what we were felt the Liberals were doing to Bush?

I am VERY Conservative, but I am getting tired of people trying to make a negative politicized connection to EVERYTHING the President does.

This isn't helping.

kids can't and shouldn't be expected to understand the policy decisions made at the highest levels of government. the office of the president is still something to be respected, even if you find the man deplorable.

there's nothing wrong with this as long as he's just planning to give an elementary school level inspiring speech about helping your community.

if he starts talking about the public option or something then maybe we have a problem.

kids are expected to chant "yes we can" and "health care now" so they can grow up to be future sheeple

I'm a libertarian. I don't think that anyone in elected office should have their opinions be trusted as correct just because they were elected.

When you tell a child, "Why is it important that we listen to XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX", are the children thinking, "I should listen respectfully and then make a decision about what they said"... or are the kids thinking "listen = believe".

I have no problem at all with Obama giving a speech to all the kids of America... I have a problem with this particular question and what he will say in the speech. If he keeps it strictly inspirational I'll be fine with it. I would have the exact same objections if Bush was in the White House. (of course the questions written for the teachers by the NEA or ed.gov would have been changed slighty...)

I'm sorry but at the elementary school age, parents have a great deal more to do with shaping children's world views than the President or the teachers to regardless of how pretty a speech they make or what exercises they do in school. To believe that somehow doing a educational exercise related to a Presidential speech is somehow going to radically change a child's viewpoint is bordering on the ridiculous. Com'on people, think about it. Do you even remember any Presidential speeches you heard in elementary school? Do you actually even remember any of the questions your teachers asked afterward? Only thing I remember particularly about the President when I was in grade school was when President Kennedy was shot. And that wasn't a speech.

I really dislike this general attitude that many people have. "Because your kids might not remember, it doesn't matter at all"...

It matters to tell kids that everything that anyone in government tells them is the truth. (they even went all the way down to mayor on that one)

Again, I have no problem with a strictly educational speech, given as inspiration.

Not exactly what I was trying to say though in some respects yeah I guess. What I was trying to say was at the elementary age level, parents have a great deal more influence than Presidents or teachers.
When I first became a Christian, there was a group in one of the churches in the area that went around looking for EVERY nitpicking thing they could find that could possibly be construed as evil particularly in the schools. There was never any innocent activity that they didn't find some way to twist into something that was subverting Christianity. I got sick of it and of them. So what I'm saying is to pick your battles to make sure they're actually meaningful and important enough to get into. Some stuff just isn't and I put this in that catagory.

Seeing as the contents o the speech are yet unknown, it's kind of hard to say what the kids will get from it. I do, howver, agree with questioning the phraseology of the document in the link. It could be construed as leading.

Look, I understand the whole idea of not brainwashing children. But in the development of children, it's important for them to have constants to cling onto. They need it as a part of their psyche. This is why having a stable household is important. You have to build things up before you can break them down. I support instilling a sense of respect for the office of the President of the United States in children.

Actually, I think there are far too few adults who have enough respect for the office (and yes, I realize that this includes Democrats who call Bush a Nazi).

This particular question list is extremely generic and is intended for PRE-K through 6th grade. It's just sent out to teachers as a general guideline for their ensuing discussion. Obviously it's up to a particular teacher to steer his discussion toward what is appropriate for their age group.

As a stepping point toward a discussion on the merits of revering the President, I guess this is interesting. But as an issue on its own, it seems pretty mundane and boring to me.


I'm really tired, and I realize that this post is in no way well written or cohesive, but I'm too lazy to go back and make it flow well or make sense, so deal with that.

Bush isn't smart enough to be a Nazi

Cheney, on the other hand, would have been a smashing Gestapo commander.

I'm pretty much anti-authority in everything, and this seems pretty innocuous.

Way less harmful than the art project at my kid's school where, before the election, all the kids had to draw a picture of Obama. Not of their favorite candidate, of Obama. Then the plastered the walls of the school with them.

How a teacher can find that appropriate or think that no parents woul have a problem with it just stuns me.

Obama had a bunch of teacher-oriented stuff during the campaign... conferences and what have you. I'm not surprised.

My school had a mock election in '96. I was 11 at the time, voted Perot. Clinton won in a landslide.

I laughed

Since this is still getting play I'm posting this link. Again, it's important to note that I totally fine with a strictly inspirational speech.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/articl...V9XVfQD9AG43GO0

Ray Peterson: [chanting] I'm not going to listen to this, I'm not going to here this now.
Art: Ray! Ray! Your chanting!
[points to book]
Art: Ray, unconscious chanting... your chanting!
Ray Peterson: [continues Chanting with fingers in ears]
Art: [chants] I want to kill everyone. Satan is good. Satan is our pal.
Art: Hey, once they get in here,
[points to Ray's head]
Art: its over pal.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/26744.html

it just breaks my heart to see the number of people michelle malkin has sway over. we are so goddamn screwed long-term.

I mean she's kinda hot though right?



I think a lot of the anger that's being shown toward this whole speech and lesson plan thing is actually just anger towards obama's other policies being projected toward this. this speech actually seems pretty innocuous but so many of the other things he's trying to push through are so polarizing and anger inducing to so many people that even the non-partisan things he attempts are going to draw ire since people are going to be looking for any little thing to jump on.

I think it would be a lot more clear if we knew exactly what was going to be said in the speech, but I'd imagine it really won't be anything political. if it is, he's an idiot and an ass (/chrozzo).

Really, you think?

yes

somehow, when George HW Bush did the same thing in 1991, we all survived. What a joke.

I would hope that one thing we can agree on is politics in school is bad. Can we agree on that? Our kids don’t need the President regardless of their party encouraging them to do a damn thing.



I would be thrilled if the schools would stick to just educating our kids…problem being that Teachers by nature tend to be left and the fact that they are Union...and sure they are getting screwed and the fact that teachers have no idea how to function in the business world is a large part of problem.

Stick to the educational material and we’ll all be better off.

Please site the lesson plan that accompanied Bush's speech

Thats the difference

fyp

Both the first Bush and Reagan gave addresses directly to students. This is so harmless. I'm embarrassed for the people against this. It's an opportunity for students to have the president speak directly to them. It's nice.

Now, I know why conservatives are so anti-marijuana. They are already paranoid enough.

You are so off the deep end, it's frightening.




This

agreed. I mean history class would've been a BREEZE.

It's important kids remain woefully underinformed about politics as children so they can grow up to be woefully underinformed adults like most Americans.

We did a mock debate as 5th graders for the 1992 election. I had to speak for George HW Bush even though both my parents were for Clinton (my father crossed over that time). I was in the minority of people who went to middle school in a very pro-GOP environment. Somehow I was able to make a speech for Bush without it "indoctrinating" me into conservative values. Just lucky, I guess.

I am sure at 3:30pm all those conservative parents will still have an opportunity to educate their children about how Obama was born in Kenya and wants to kill grandma.

it is the parents job to teach them... not the school

I have no problem with his little speech if it is do good in school, listen to your parents...

We will see...

I think it is much more of a parent's job to teach their children about sex ed and religion and yet no conservatives seem to have a problem with that.

He probably is off the deep end... but I totally agree with his post that you are talking about here. The difference IS the lesson plan. If they hadn't released that, this wouldn't even be news. They have even changed many of the obviously terrible questions. Why would they do that? The entire issue is the lesson plans... so I guess we have to disagree on this LLY. *tear*

But I mean, isn't the list of questions just a suggestion for lazy teachers to download? It's not like there are going to be people putting guns to teacher's heads, forcing them to instruct the students exactly as the lesson plan says (that would only happen in Glenn Beck's dystopic mind).

Also, he's the President of the United States. One of the perks of the job is to be a leader and to be a role model. Think of urban, African American students who come to school and see a (partially) black man addressing them directly as President of the United States, telling them to stay in school, study hard, etc etc.

The anger seems to come from the idea that, "He's a Democrat and he's broadcasting himself into schools! That's partisan unfairness!" He's not a Democrat. He's the President of the United States, who happens to be a Democrat.

I think the issue is content. I also think that Obama has brought this on himself. In such a short time we have never seen more spending, going back on promises, talking out the side of your mouth than we have with this president. People are concerned about what he is going to use this pulpit for.

I was not a fan of Bill Clinton or many of his decisions or policies, but I wouldn't have thought twice about him addressing our youth in this fashion.

This is a product of Obama's doing, the questions he wants the kids to answer and the undertones thrown out there that this is a campaign to get the youth of America to vote democrat once they turn 18.

It is also a product of the tactics that the Left have used for the past decade or so. Attacking EVERYTHING that comes from the opposition. No matter what the Republicans did, no matter what proposal they made, no matter what they said - 100% was attacked, even though they rarely had any counter-proposal or message to deliver of their own.

Problem is, it worked.

Now the Conservatives are adopting the same approach.

It helps that so much of what BHO and the Democrats are trying to cram through without any real debate is so offensive to so many. But I object to this knee-jerk demagoguery that lacks any sort of rational message or counter-proposal. It was wrong when the Liberals were doing it, and it is wrong for the Conservatives even if I agree with their motives and positions. The ends DO NOT justify the means.

I think it's great. Every child every year should have to sit through a speech by the president.

This should become a regular thing.

We can trust them not to politize this.

and for the teachers to be fair and balanced.

In fact should the president not feel like doing it, then the vice president should. I think Dick Cheney would have been awesome at this.

And I think we wouldn't have such a generation of pie in the sky idealist idiots who think Obama's ideas are based in reality.


If this works maybe we can expect Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid to also do this.

Regularly

FYP

lol did you see the mccain/palin rallies?

I hope you know I was kidding, I hate both halves of the one major party equally.

i did...i knew you were tweaking me. i just happened to watch the documentary pelosi's daughter did again yesterday. good gravy.

he's.....he's an arab. (mccain shakes head)

I wouldn't have any problem with the President of the United States addressing school children. And as for keeping politics out of schools, I'd like to see more IN schools. But probably not the way you all would think. For one thing, I'd like to see a requirement to take a speech/debate class for every student. Maybe they wouldn't all come out as public speakers but they might at least be able to get up in front of a group of people and not make fools of themselves. I don't know how many times, my kid's speech/debate background gave them a leg up on the competition in the job market. And in the debate portion, you learn how to debate both sides of an issue. It forces you to KNOW both sides which can only be good for kids. It certainly would help them to be more informed and also better at interviewing for jobs etc.

In my Senior Public School when I was in Grade 7 and 8 everybody had to prepare and present a speech to their class with the best from each class giving their speech to the whole school. I found it a lot of fun.

Well, here's what all the fuss is about:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/MediaResources/P...dSchoolRemarks/


Yup, totally justified. Thank you, annoying Republicans, for wasting my time.

You are missing the point - The White House & Department of Education should not be producing lessons plans for my local elected school boards

"get your homework done, and don’t spend every waking hour in front of the TV or with that Xbox. "



that's it. i'm running back to glenn beck, who doesn't need the president to tell him how to spell oligarchy.



pot odds, your "history" of how politics became attack politics is somewhat backwards, imo. i suggest you that read broken government, by john dean (a top ranking nixon advisor), a book on precisely this subject that reaches the precisely opposite conclusion.

those remarks seem pretty great to me. dare I say he's endorsing an American mindset?

and PLEASE with the lesson plan garbage. maybe it's been a long time for you, but I remember a few of the things I was taught in elementary school. I learned about how columbus fought an uphill battle to convince people that the world wasn't flat. I learned about how the pilgrims peacefully coexisted with the Native Americans. I learned about how George Washington couldn't tell a lie. I learned that evolution was just a theory, NOT fact.

then again, I'm from kansas...

"The statement "evolution is both a theory and a fact" is often seen in biological literature. This statement arises because evolution is used in two ways. In short, the word is ambiguous. The "fact of evolution" refers to the changes in the genetic material of a population of biological organisms over time, which are known to have occurred through scientific observations and experiments. The "theory of evolution" refers to the modern evolutionary synthesis, which is the current scientific explanation of how these changes occur. Misuse and misunderstanding of these terms have been used to construct arguments disputing the validity of the theory of evolution."

(Wiki)

And I suggest you read Silent Coup by Colodny and Gettlin so you would realize that John Dean orchestrated the Watergate coverup, lied to congress and blamed everyone else for the actions he started, covered up and then shifted the blame onto Nixon.

Might want to be sure about your authors before you believe everything they say.