Should the president be able to address school children

[SSJup81]

I honestly don't get what the big deal is. Obama is giving a speech to encourage kids to stay in school and to work hard. Why people have a problem with that, and the assignment where the kids write letters TO THEMSELVES as to how they can help the President is beyond me. Who cares! It's the first day of school. It would probably be an exciting assignment for young kids as opposed to the generic, "How did you spend your summer vacation." junk. You know, the assignment sorta reminds me of the one used in that J-drama I saw a good while back called Triangle. The 4th graders had to write letters to themselves about what they wanted to be when they grew up or either about goals they wanted to achieve and all that. The assignment Obama is giving seems similar to me.

I know when I was a kid, I had to write a letter to Reagan (can't remember what about) and with Bush Sr., early 90s, I remember seeing, in school his going on about how drugs were bad and to stay away from them. I also remember my teacher giving us an assignment too, like what to do if offered drugs and all that. I was excited whenever anything dealing with the President was introduced to me when I was young. To me, it was like the President cared.

I think everyone is over-reacting who's against it. If anything, they should let the kids make up their own minds. I find it embarrassing (as an American) and disrespectful when we've had Presidents in the past make speeches to school-aged kids about education and drugs.

Edit: Just remembered something. Isn't the assignment optional?

[MMM]

Originally Posted by samurai007

I don't think the version they finally released was what he would have said had there been no uproar. He had to sanitize it, just like the homework assignment.

I love it. If there is nothing to tear Obama down about, just make something up!

Originally Posted by SSJup81

Edit: Just remembered something. Isn't the assignment optional?

That assignment has been eliminated.

[SSJup81]

Didn't notice my grammatical error. I meant to type "Wasn't the assignment originally optional?"

[seiki]

I read the speech and it really was not bad and over hyped. I hope it makes a difference on some people who are thinking of dropping out.

[Megabyte117]

Why can't he actually do something about education instead of simply talking about it?

[Ryzorian]

Like what? We spend more per student than any other nation on the planet and our kids just keep getting more and more ignorant. It isn't the money that's the problem it's the teaching. Private schools don't have near the poor performance as public schools. I went to one for several years as a middle schooler. Those private schools are hard as hell, with a much higher grade scale. They don't have a bell curve and they didn't go by 10% where 90 to 100 was an A, they went every 5%...so anything below a 75% was an F.

[MMM]

Originally Posted by Megabyte117

Why can't he actually do something about education instead of simply talking about it?

But people don't want him to even talk about it!

[solemnclockwork]

Originally Posted by MMM

It is the start of the school year. When is a better time to encourage children and young adults to learn? At the end of the school year is a little late.

Best to the president on Tuesday, and I feel sorry for the children that are not allowed to hear what he has to say to them.

You should know very well I did not specify a time. Even then, if it would have taken that long, then the faults on those who allowed to take that long (pretty much would be congress).

Really? So your putting yourself over the parents on how to raise there children. Your not in a position to judge others who feel a legitimate reason to be apart of there child's education. In a way, a parent who sees something (again, you should not have to be said but people have different views on subjects) that *may/not* influence there child in a way they don't belief is best for there child is there concern, NOT yours (Again this is not about how good the speech would be, so it doesn't need to be said how "great" it is for someone to speak to children on good points). You probably don't agree with what they are doing, but regardless of how you feel about the speech, a parent who is looking out for the best for there child would be good right? At the base that can said of what is going on here. Simply put, there is more then one level at play here (it's not as simple as being black-white). Would you hold then accountable when they are trying (in there view) to do what's best for there child?

Now the question is, are they honest about what they believe?

there is a reason why I put that into my first post. there is much to be said about a position that one holds in honesty, to which some may and some may not (my points are on those who are, wither you agree with them or not). Patronizing someone on those, does nothing more then polarize the situation even further. Even the people who you disagree with hold the view that inspiring children to do great is good. You can have a disagreement on how they should handle the situation to there children, but you cannot assume a moral high ground, when they may very well be trying to look out for there child, even when the fear may be unfounded.

Originally Posted by MMM

But people don't want him to even talk about it!

Respect is a issue here.

[MMM]

Originally Posted by solemnclockwork

You should know very well I did not specify a time. Even then, if it would have taken that long, then the faults on those who allowed to take that long (pretty much would be congress).

Really? So your putting yourself over the parents on how to raise there children. Your not in a position to judge others who feel a legitimate reason to be apart of there child's education. In a way, a parent who sees something (again, you should not have to be said but people have different views on subjects) that *may/not* influence there child in a way they don't belief is best for there child is there concern, NOT yours (Again this is not about how good the speech would be, so it doesn't need to be said how "great" it is for someone to speak to children on good points). You probably don't agree with what they are doing, but regardless of how you feel about the speech, a parent who is looking out for the best for there child would be good right? At the base that can said of what is going on here. Simply put, there is more then one level at play here (it's not as simple as being black-white). Would you hold then accountable when they are trying (in there view) to do what's best for there child?

Now the question is, are they honest about what they believe?

there is a reason why I put that into my first post. there is much to be said about a position that one holds in honesty, to which some may and some may not (my points are on those who are, wither you agree with them or not). Patronizing someone on those, does nothing more then polarize the situation even further. Even the people who you disagree with hold the view that inspiring children to do great is good. You can have a disagreement on how they should handle the situation to there children, but you cannot assume a moral high ground, when they may very well be trying to look out for there child, even when the fear may be unfounded.

Respect is a issue here.

solemnclockwork, I would enjoy your posts if they didn't completely misrepresent and distort both the spirit and the literal words I am saying.

But thank you for giving me insight into the mindset of someone who would believe such an incomprehensible notion to me that having the most powerful man in America (and maybe the world) speak directly to our sons and daughters to do their homework and stay in school is anything but a good thing.

The fact that my words can be so misconstrued makes it easy for me to understand why the president's good intentions have been twisted and turned into "indoctrination" and "brainwashing" by those that see the president's tongue as a serpent's and devil horns growing above his ears.

Your not in a position to judge others who feel a legitimate reason to be apart of there child's education.

Of course every parent should be a part of a child's education.
There is no need to be have a "legitimate reason". You are SUPPOSED to be a part of your child's education. Without the parents the child will probably fail.

In a way, a parent who sees something (again, you should not have to be said but people have different views on subjects) that *may/not* influence there child in a way they don't belief is best for there child is there concern, NOT yours (Again this is not about how good the speech would be, so it doesn't need to be said how "great" it is for someone to speak to children on good points).

Education is influence. Education influences children to explore, dissect, ask questions, get answers, come to conclusions, experiment, and to listen to all sorts of opinions and construct a belief system that fits ones worldview.

Education is not about shutting down voices we don't agree with. Education is not about shutting down voices of our leaders, like them or not. And Education is not about telling the person sitting in the most important office in the country that he isn't good enough to talk to my child.

a parent who is looking out for the best for there child would be good right?

Of course I agree with that. And blocking a child from hearing a message about staying in school, taking responsibility for themselves, doing their homework and respecting their teachers is the opposite of "looking out for the best".

Simply put, there is more then one level at play here (it's not as simple as being black-white).

I agree. There is another level at play here, and I think it has everything to do with being black or white.

Would you hold then accountable when they are trying (in there view) to do what's best for there child?

That's exactly what I am trying to do. Teaching children that people are not trustworthy and we shouldn't listen to what they have to say, even though we don't know what they have to say, is backwards thinking. Instead of "give him a chance" it's "DON'T give him a chance". Instead of allowing children to see more than one side, people are censoring multiple opinions. Instead of giving education and the benefit of the doubt, children and teens are being told "you are too stupid to listen to our leaders words".

I am not sorry, solemnclockwork, when I say you have no leg to stand on. The speech is out there. It is good. Conservative naysayers are backing down, saying children SHOULD listen to this speech. But it is sad that it is mostly too late. Teachers have been threatened, people have been called all kinds of names, and this becomes a black-eye on a valiant attempt by the president to do a good thing for children.

It's a real shame, too.

they may very well be trying to look out for there child, even when the fear may be unfounded.


So how is saying "the fear is unfounded" wrong?

Respect is a issue here.

Amen to that.

[Hyakushi]

I don't really find anything wrong with his message, with the whole "No KidLeft Behind" thing we kind of have to push our children now because they won't get anywhere with just a High School degree anymore. School mainly teaches children how to work as a group not just by themselves. You could learn everything you learn in school outside by yourself but in society you have to work with people you like and people you can't stand. Incouraging children to work together and learn how to communicate is really the only way we are going to get America out of this rut.

I would have a problem with it if he was saying that all war was fine or that he was god, something along those lines.

Obamas opinions are not going to be the only ones though, unless the children are quarintined and cut off from all outside influences.
Thats true brainwashing.
You can not fully brainwash people unless you are the only influence they listen to.
If there are way more than one then its just a choice to the individual.

What Obama is doing is just regular Propagandea .