Should the president be able to address school children

[tksensei]

Originally Posted by MMM

Yes, the president is responsible. He took responsibility and corrected the situation to satisfy conservative outcry.

American outcry.

[MMM]

Originally Posted by tksensei

Obviously there are hateful racists in this world and this country, but do you think any significant portion of those opposing his policies do so because of race, and if so what do you base this upon?

I didn't say they opposed his policies, I say they oppose his existence. And I think one racist is significant, but that probably isn't the answer you are looking for.

And where does the buck stop? At his office. He fixed the issue. Let's just remember where the buck started. It is that tiny point that people ignore when they say "Obama is trying to brainwash my child. Look at the questions he is asking."

Originally Posted by tksensei

American outcry.

None of the Americans I know were upset by it. Conservative outcry.

CNSNews.com - Revision: Education Dept. Changes Suggested Classroom Activities for Students Who Watch Obama’s Speech

[samurai007]

MMM, do you think the speech he gave and the assignments that went with it would have been 100% identical to what was given had there been no outcry? By your own admission, he "corrected" what we had already seen, and very likely changed things that we hadn't yet seen, right? Because of that scrutiny, he gave an innocuous speech. I very much doubt things would have been the same without that scrutiny. Isn't it the job of the opposition to keep those in power on the straight-and-narrow? I thought that was the rational given by all the rabid Bush-haters...

[samurai007]

Originally Posted by MMM

None of the Americans I know were upset by it. Conservative outcry.

CNSNews.com - Revision: Education Dept. Changes Suggested Classroom Activities for Students Who Watch Obama’s Speech

I'm an American, and you sort of know me, online anyway...

Or are you trying to say that "real Americans" weren't offended or worried, and that those who were are unpatriotic?

[MMM]

Originally Posted by samurai007

MMM, do you think the speech he gave and the assignments that went with it would have been 100% identical to what was given had there been no outcry? By your own admission, he "corrected" what we had already seen, and very likely changed things that we hadn't yet seen, right? Because of that scrutiny, he gave an innocuous speech. I very much doubt things would have been the same without that scrutiny. Isn't it the job of the opposition to keep those in power on the straight-and-narrow? I thought that was the rational given by all the rabid Bush-haters...

Any suggestion he would have given anything other than an apolitical speech is complete conjecture and is fishing for problems that aren't there. As I said before, a speech to children about health care or taxes or illegal immigration or anything other than children working hard in school would have been political suicide, and I am sure you can see that. So to answer your question, yes, I think it would have been pretty much the same.

And yes the president should be scrutinized and his actions should be watched closely, but to be accused of "brainwashing" and "indoctrination" by elected officials is not scrutiny, but is innappropriate, to say the least.

[MMM]

Originally Posted by samurai007

I'm an American, and you sort of know me, online anyway...

Or are you trying to say that "real Americans" weren't offended or worried, and that those who were are unpatriotic?

I hope that was sarcastic (it's hard to tell on the Internet)

You are an American and also conservative (unless I have misread your posts), so maybe I should have been more specific and said "conservative Americans"

You have probably seen me more than once here call out people that say things like "Americans are mean" or "Americans are [whatever]" when they are talking about the people in their school or hometown and they have never been outside of their home state.

I don't know of any left wing minded people that were opposed to "the question" so I think it is safe to say it was a conservative stance.

But do we really need to waste out time on this anymore? We can play semantics games all night long, but it isn't really an issue any longer.

[samurai007]

Originally Posted by MMM

I hope that was sarcastic (it's hard to tell on the Internet)

You are an American and also conservative (unless I have misread your posts), so maybe I should have been more specific and said "conservative Americans"

You have probably seen me more than once here call out people that say things like "Americans are mean" or "Americans are [whatever]" when they are talking about the people in their school or hometown and they have never been outside of their home state.

I don't know of any left wing minded people that were opposed to "the question" so I think it is safe to say it was a conservative stance.

But do we really need to waste out time on this anymore? We can play semantics games all night long, but it isn't really an issue any longer.

Yes, it was sarcasm. I know what you meant, but you left yourself wide open for that one...

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by samurai007

I'm an American, and you sort of know me, online anyway...

Or are you trying to say that "real Americans" weren't offended or worried, and that those who were are unpatriotic?

I know a certain 'unbiased journalist' who said just that when people criticized Bush Jr.

[samurai007]

You can probably expect a lot of things to be reversed now that power has switched hands. The Dems are now the establishment, the Reps are now the vocal opposition. I don't think conservatives will sink quite as far into the depths of hatred that the left had for Bush, but we will be strongly opposing his policies that we consider detrimental to our country and the world until he leaves office, which can't come soon enough IMO. Obama's talk of "bringing the country together" was a complete lie. Rather than govern from the center and reach out to conservative ideals, he is spending like a drunken sailor (no offense to drunken sailors), appointing radical socialist czars and racist SC judges, nationalizing businesses (and trying to do the same to health care), telling conservatives to sit down and shut up because he won. He has pissed away the political capital and goodwill that he had during his honeymoon period with his divisive actions, and I don't think he'll get it back again anytime soon unless he changes his ways.

[SSJup81]

Originally Posted by samurai007

MMM, do you think the speech he gave and the assignments that went with it would have been 100% identical to what was given had there been no outcry? By your own admission, he "corrected" what we had already seen, and very likely changed things that we hadn't yet seen, right? Because of that scrutiny, he gave an innocuous speech. I very much doubt things would have been the same without that scrutiny. Isn't it the job of the opposition to keep those in power on the straight-and-narrow? I thought that was the rational given by all the rabid Bush-haters...

I still find nothing wrong with it. I had to do assignments for Reagan and Bush Sr. I don't recall the adults around me getting upset over it. The Reagan thing, I had to write a letter for that. I don't remember the contents, just know I had to do it. What is the big deal to having a homework assignment to write letters to YOURSELF about how you can help the President? I interpreted this to mean how can you help by doing the things mentioned (how can you do well in school; how can you improve your grades, etc.). You're helping the President by becoming better students.