No Moral Equivalence Between Reagan and Bush Address to School Children and Obama Indoctrination

If Obama were sincere about making an unbiased comment to the children of America, he would have spoken on July 4th, or how about Memorial Day.

But instead, he chooses to “talk” to the school children at a time when he is way down in the polls, has had his Obamcare “reform” plan slammed, and has been peddling backward for several weeks.

Obama cannot hide his sinister motives even with his abhorrent lies. Obama is the kind of person children are lectured repeatedly to avoid. And, from the looks of it, most States, Counties, School Districts, and parents in America are going to do just that; they’re going to skip the Obama speech to schools — keep children away from Obama and socialism.

Do NOT play with Obama or his ilk.

@ AdrianS: Kids aren’t in school on July 4th, not even the summer schools ones. You know?

@ tarpon: So when Reagan and Bush did it that was liberal indoctrination too? Or do you mean to say that Democratic presidents shouldn’t get to do it since kids “get enough liberal indoctrination as is.”? Just curious.

This is all much ado about nothing, in my opinion. If the president, any president, were to break precedent and start doing this on a regular basis I’d say “Boo! Indoctrination!” This is apparently a bland “stay in school/education is good” speech, watching the stupid video is optional (so no need to keep the kids home) and even in the relatively liberal school district I’m in the administration is refusing to use the teaching aids since they didn’t get the chance to approve them first. So, whatever. Next!

Liberal? Not exactly. And spare me the lectures on blatant propagandizing. You know who does that? Um, politicians in general. Those come in all flavors. You know who gets pissed off by said blatant propagandizing? Right, the folks in the other party. Whatever.

My kids won’t be making posters with quotes from the president because our school district won’t be using the teaching aids. You know, like I said in my comment… My kids will see a speech from the president. Kind of like how I did when I was in school (Reagan). Big deal. Though, if that’s indoctrination I suppose it works, seing as how I voted for both Bushes (and even once for Bob Dole). Oh, and the kids are not exactly a captive audience since even viewing the stupid speech is optional. My point is that this is a whole lotta hoopla over something minor.

@SFC D.: “Optional” viewing for the speech? Yeah, I’ve heard that too. I can see it now. Poor Johnny gets beat up on the playground by the junior members of SEIU because he choose not to see the speech.

I’m glad you have no problem with this speech. I take it that if a Republican in future does the same thing, with teaching aides included, that you will also expresss your support.

We can count on that, right?

Obama the Ordinary
Krauthammer: How the conjurer of 2008 lost his magic and became just like any other politician.

By Charles Krauthammer (WashingtonPost.com…)
Friday, September 4, 2009

“What happened to President Obama? His wax wings having melted, he is the man who fell to earth. What happened to bring his popularity down further than that of any new president in polling history save Gerald Ford (post-Nixon pardon)?

The conventional wisdom is that Obama made a tactical mistake by farming out his agenda to Congress and allowing himself to be pulled left by the doctrinaire liberals of the Democratic congressional leadership. But the idea of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi pulling Obama left is quite ridiculous. Where do you think he came from, this friend of Chávista ex-terrorist William Ayers, of PLO apologist Rashid Khalidi, of racialist inciter Jeremiah Wright?”

Read the rest here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/03/AR2009090302859.html?hpid%3Dopinionsbox1&sub=AR

Schools to Big Brother Barack: Stay Out! (Time Magazine)

Excerpt: School districts in at least half a dozen other states have made similar decisions not to air the President’s talk. In one of those states, Minnesota, Republican Governor and possible 2012 presidential aspirant Tim Pawlenty called the speech “uninvited” and voiced concerns about its “content and motive.” One school superintendent in Arizona, James Murlless, while calling Obama’s education advocacy “well intended,” said he preferred his students see it “in their own homes under the supervision of their parents.” The Nationwide Tea Party Coalition, a fiscal watchdog group that has become a sort of clearinghouse for conservative grievances since the anti-health care reform movement began, has revved up a campaign called “Hall Pass On That,” urging parents to have their kids excused from watching the speech. In Oklahoma, state Senator Steve Russell rivaled Florida’s Greer for hyperbole, calling Obama’s talk “something you’d expect to see in North Korea or in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.”

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1920703,00.html?iid=tsmodule

Quote: In perhaps the most over-the-top performance, state Republican Chairman Jim Greer called it (Obama speech) an attempt to use “our children to spread liberal propaganda” and “President Obama’s socialist ideology.” — from Time Magazine Article.

I see the lefties are into their usual deep thought debate tactics. Hey your stupid, how about providing proof of “actual equivalency”?
You didn’t because there isn’t any. Put down the crack pipe and take your Clozapine already.
BTW it’s you’re. Way to display that leftist intellectual superiority.

All this school talk is an effort to change the subject from health care. The Obama administration knew this when they implemented it. They knew it would cause a furor. That was their goal. This is their modis operandi. Were Bush and Reagan’s speeches televised live? That is the difference. We don’t really know what he is going to say to the children.

We have had constant attacks every few days on the American way of life ever since this idiot was elected. It has been a constant barrage from which we have to defend our freedom. Has anyone noticed that some subjects that made us so angry have been forgotten? Someone should make a list of all the egregious statements and actions from this POS every day since January 20, 2009 to keep a running total of the stupidty of this administration. No, I take that back. Keep a list since November 4, 2008. That is when the media and the dems decided Obama’s term started and so did he with his office of the president elect.

@Dr. Sanford Aranoff: Thanks for your professional input on the matter.

As for “May I urge teachers and officials to ignore President Obama, and, in particular, not to keep any records of anyone not cooperating.” I would hope that no teacher would penalize a student for not cooperating but the matter of holding students “accountable” on how they intend to “help President Obama” as the lesson plans suggest is troubling.

More so, what’s to happen on the playground when junior members of labor unions get ahold of the student’s whose parent’s withdrew them from class? Will there be the same harassment and physical violence we’ve seen directed at protesters at the Town Hall meetings?

Even the Poll in Politico shows that Obama’s speech to the school children is a NO! 67% of the 35580 people that voted in this non-scientific poll by Politico(Obama’s propaganda news) agrees that the speech is not a good idea. Who is he listenting to? Who is giving him these stupit advices! And he cannot even realise that they are not helping! AdrianS is right..you need to tell them how to wipe!

@Aaron said: ” This whole idea about liberal indoctrination is just a myth propagated by conservatives “

Yeah, that’s why schools force kids to watch Al Gore’s movie “An Incovenient Truth” and teach it as if it were a fact.

There’s plenty more examples where that came from.

Obviously Aaron is falling so far off the leftward edge of reason that everything to the right of him, even communism, would seem conservative.

Not to stray too far from the original topic:

“Let me know how you’re doing. Write me a letter. I’m serious about this one. Write me a letter about WAYS YOU CAN HELP US ACHIEVE OUR GOALS.” – George H. W. Bush, October 2, 1991.

Mike’s America – Please supply evidence from peer reviewed scientific journals that refute the existence of human caused global warming – And no, you can’t just cop out and say “The scientists are all owned by the Left.”

Hard Right – I’m still looking for anything other than a personal attack, conjecture, and punch lines in your post. Thank you for proving my point about how conservatives NEVER actually make a rational logical argument and instead use personal attacks as to avoid all forms of intelligent conversation. You also made use of the other classic conservative tactic of jumping to insane conclusions without any logical path to get there. Please point out in my post where I said that all forms of criticism of Obama must be stopped. Also, please point out where I said that Liberal indoctrination is something that is okay in school. For example, it is not propaganda to teach that some Pilgrims dug up Indian graves and stole the valuables that were buried with them. That is fact. We have first hand primary source evidence of that. What did you learn about the Pequot wars in grade school. Did you learn about the slaughter of women and children by the British colonists? So, if you consider teaching these things “Liberal Indoctrination,” then fine. I consider it teaching of truth and fact. If that makes me morally superior, then fine. It seems to me that the conservative way around things is just to label it “liberal propaganda” and end the argument.

THANK YOU BOTH FOR BEING PRIME EXAMPLES OF HOW CONSERVATIVES WILL NEVER, EVER, ENGAGE IN AN ARGUMENT USING EVIDENCE, FACT, OR REASON. INSTEAD YOU WILL LOOK TO LABELS AND PERSONAL INSULTS.

Oh, yes, I almost forgot.

Please tell me the specifics of what you disagree with in the curriculum supplied by the Obama administration to coincide with the speech.

Saying that there is a curriculum, or that there are assignments along with the speech does not mean that anything in the speech or curriculum will be politically biased. If there is nothing in the speech or curriculum that you object to, then why do you object to it?

The only argument that I’ve heard regarding content is from Dr. Aranoff:

“In particular, American children need to understand the basic principles of our Founding Fathers and our Constitution. The idea is that the optimum society is one with individual freedom, property rights, justice, along with a weak central government that is limited to certain specific powers. American children need to understand that strong government control, such as Great Britain before our Revolution, or dictatorships in places like Venezuela, is harmful to both people’s pocketbooks as well as people’s spirits.”

This is a very short sighted statement. The constitution was created to create a stronger central government because the Articles of Confederation were too weak to protect people’s rights and effectively govern a country. America is very different today – That is obvious. The founding fathers created a government that was able to change to meet the needs of the people. There are expansions in our government both on the Left in the form of social programs and the Right in the form of executive power and authoritarianism that the Founding Fathers would never have imagined. (They never would have imagined that we’d start an unprovoked war or even build an Air Force for that matter.) To me, the principle of our founding fathers that is most relevant and important, both then and now, is that our government has a framework of HOW to decide things, not WHAT to decide. Our founding fathers original intent was to make slaves 3/5 of a person, but they created a document that was able to change with our changing nation. I’m not suggesting that our government is not too big or too small, or too authoritarian, or too Laissez-faire – just that we have a framework of how to decide those things now.

Sorry disappoint all the conservatives here, but I really am interested to know what you think, not just in throwing around personal attacks. Mike – I’m still waiting for a post from you that uses reason, logic and facts more than insults and conjecture.

Aaaron, you are a raging hypocrite. You come here and attack us with bigotted stereotypes and NO supporting evidence of your claims, then demand we debate you and provide proof of our beliefs. F off you mental case. We know providing facts is a waste of time when it comes to leftards like you. You are incapable of accepting any fact that does not fit your mindlessly left narrative–as you have proven.

@Aaron:

You made some statements in #25 that are correct. However, the things you neglect to say are glaring omissions.

The Founders did indeed replace the Articles of Confederation with the US Constitution in order to establish a gov’t structure that was somewhat stronger but also more complete.

The AoC did not contain components that were key to making the whole thing work.

Components such as no Executive Branch, no power to levy taxes, no power to regulate trade, and no power to establish a national currency, no way to settle disagreements between the states, etc.

The Founders wrote the AoC in order to try and establish a central gov’t with as little power as possible. The overall nature of the AoC reflected the Founders’ fear of a central gov’t with too much power.

The Constitution established the missing elements from the AoC but still maintained a fed gov’t which had restrained power.

The Founders also established a very clear process by which it was to be amended. That process is still in place and should be followed if the people wish to give more power to the fed gov’t.

You also neglected to mention the limitations that the Constitution sets on the fed gov’t. Specifically the fed gov’t only has the powers that are specifically enumerated to it. All other powers are relegated to the States or to the People. (See the 10th Amendment.)

It is my belief that the fed gov’t, over a period of time, has become too powerful and has become involved in areas which are clearly outside of their enumerated powers.

The People are finally waking up to the horror of the bloated, overreaching fed gov’t which the Founders were trying to avoid.

Hey mike – I was just quoting your misspelling. See your post #24. (OOPS!!!! – Apology accepted) If you want to be taken seriously, you should try to write one post without resorting to name calling. Try it.

As for the global warming debate, it is my assumption that neither of us is a scientist that studies climate change. So………..let’s trust the scientists that do this kind of thing for a living. I will concede that there is some evidence to discount man-made global warming, but you have to admit that a preponderance of the evidence suggests otherwise.

Hard right – once again falling into the standard “if you can’t come up with anything, just use insults” argument. You have not addressed any points I have made and have instead made wild assumptions and thrown around insults. Sorry man, but you’ve got to be able to do better than that.

@Aaron: #25 you state that the US started an unprovoked war. To which war are you referring?

@Aaron #34:

But the point remains that if Obama is speaking on a completely neutral subject then the bias in the materials is neutral. If his speech is liberal, or conservative, then the material’s bias would be the same. I teach music for grades 7-12. Because I’m liberal, does that mean I’m indoctrinating kids when I teach them about how to play a violin? My point is that the president, or any president for that matter, speaking to children does not constitute a form of indoctrination of any kind. It sounds like the problem most of you have with the speech is the involvement the white house has, but nobody has been able to support their claims that the speech is “liberal indoctrination.”

Aaron, if that’s all that is going on, then I have no problems with the President of the U.S. basically acting “presidential” and “inspiring”. But what were those lesson plans before the hoopla? What changes do you suppose have been made in the president’s speech tomorrow, in light of the uproar?

Political perspective, unfortunately, colors just about everything.

A number of things- such as the topic of man-made global warming- doesn’t strike many liberals as a political issue. You see it as incontrovertible “the debate is over” fact. Yet I have serious problems with school classrooms pushing the notion that we have to save the planet from ourselves, beyond common-sense practices of recycling and planting trees.

I don’t think there’s any devious plan of intentional liberal indoctrination of our school children by a “Dear Leader”. However, I do think there is an undercurrent enthusiasm for this particular president, as some sort of rock-star celebrity with cult-like JFK/MLK-induced stature.

Since you are a teacher, I’d be curious to know your take on:

Gotta go for now – but I’ll write more later – thanks Wordsmith for you video and questions – I’ll watch it later today.

but the fact remains that Iraq never attacked us and didn’t have the capability to do so.

Not through ICBMs and land invasion, but by means of terrorists as proxies, and the fear of wmds being passed to them. And Saddam had extensive ties to terrorism, including Islamic terror networks, of which he helped to train, fund, and provide safe-haven to.

And as for “never attacked us”, it remains that:

1)Saddam tried to have an American president assassinated
2)No-fly zones? Were we not shot at on a daily basis?
3)Somalia 1993 (which goes back to the link between Saddam and terrorism)?

I’m sure I left out something…

No peace treaty, btw. Just a cease-fire agreement whose provisions were disregarded almost immediately. Failure to enforce it led to 12 years of danger and defiance.

Post-war findings only make me believe that removing Saddam from power was just and correct action. Left in power with his murderous sons as inheritors, Saddam’s Iraq was a metastasizing threat to the world. The longer you wait to treat, the costlier down the road.

@Aaron: I guess you think we should have waited until iraq did attack us. I am glad you are not in charge.

Aaron: Sad part is that the people hurting most in this country, the rural poor, are the ones most hurt by the Conservatives rush to give away all power in this country to huge multi-national corporate interests and the ultra rich. (Kinda like how Reagan RAISED the payroll tax, but slashed taxes on millionaires.)

Wow… *leftist tangent alert! leftist tangent alert! Red light on aisle three!” LOL

Ya know, Aaron, you do hold yourself pretty well thru much of the debate. If you want to know my own opinions on the suggested student exercises to accompany the speech, you can read my comment on another thread.

But I must protest this horse manure of talking points. The “rush to give away all the power in this country” bit is hardly a GOP trait. And in fact is followed up quite adeptly by the left’s “rush to give away all the power” to the unions, side deals with pharma and insurance providers, banking institutions… just to name a few. And, in fact, I may add they seek unprecedented power for what is becoming America’s largest “corporation” with unbalanced power… the federal government.

So spare me your pious views of your party leaders. Their performance in the past, and today, indicates you do love fantasy.

And BTW, about that Reagan tax crticism…. oddly enough, after Carter mutiliated our economy in the same fashion that Obama seeks, Reagan’s economic policies worked. Problem with Obama is he, himself, needs to return to school for simple math. He could take 100% of everyone’s earnings, and it will not pay for what he is suggesting spending.

Do you think that Obama administration is more guilty of playing divisive politics than the last administration?

Yes.

President Bush did try to be a uniter not a divider. He tried to bring his same spirit of working with Democrats that he did as Texas governor. Washington turned out to be a very different place.

I actually wish that Obama would stop trying to get a bunch of Republicans on board and just push the legislation through already.

Fine. Convince the blue dogs, then.

It seems to me that he’s trying to reach out too much to the other side.

How is he reaching out? Other than to try and get an Olympia Snowe or two to rally around his politics; that’s his concept of “bipartisanship”. “You folks come rally around my agenda, because I won.”

Aaron points

….the only one who has stated their disagreement with Obama’s speech is Aye Chihuahua. I understand that you do not trust Obama. I would say that I have not heard anything to suggest that Obama’s speech will address any political viewpoints.

Your problem is you consider only “obama’s speech” and not the accompanying curriculum/student exercise suggested from this very same POTUS’s education appointee. Get your head out of your butt and realize that he and his appointees work in concert on an agenda. Also, most especially, that this POTUS is quite astute to hiding his own responsibility, and takes great care to conceal his own accountability thru his appointees. Loyality and “falling on the sword” is obviously a prerequisite to working for this admin.

I’ll pose this as a question: Do you think that Obama administration is more guilty of playing divisive politics than the last administration?

Yes, and to a far more stringent degree. He sets one “class” of Americans on another to fight his political battles. Where ya been? ACORN’s buses to the front lawns of AIG exec families? SEIC buses to townhalls? He not only encourages class warfare, he encourages mob mentality to intimidate. You, as an American, *should* rail against being used as not only a mindless puppet, but a weapon of intimidation, for political purposes.

And, yes I think that many Dems are in bed with big corporations, just like Republicans.

Congrats for that nanosecond of clarity.. which you then go on and “explain away”…. sigh

It is also not really accurate to say the Carter ruined the economy and Reagan got us out, just like it’s not really accurate to say that Bush ruined the economy and Clinton got us out. Economically, they are all very similar.

Keep your day job… an economic analyst you are not. Especially since you haven’t figured out that Clinton’s greatest economic achievement was keeping government out of the way of private enterprise financial booms.. even tho it was a “.com” bubble as opposed to a housing bubble… of which he and his admin contributed mightily.

MataHarley – You have obviously not read my previous posts regarding the curriculum. Again, it is more important for you to try to be insulting than to try to be intelligent.

In all those thousands of words did Aaron ever express an opinion on the propriety of the Dept. of Education sending out instructions that school children should write letters on how they will help Obama and be held “accountable” for those letters?

Or how about the dept. instructions to have the students make posters of Obama’s quotes??

Seems to me like we have another example of someone trying to distract readers from the key question here with a mountain of tangential and largely irrelevant side issues.

Frankly, that speaks much louder than the flood of words Aaron has unleashed.

Mike – see post #34. You are not having a good day…

Aaron: You have obviously not read my previous posts regarding the curriculum. Again, it is more important for you to try to be insulting than to try to be intelligent.

Obviously, I *have* read your previous posts. And, if you wish to be anal… which seems to be your specialty in a “wide definition” sort of way… “again” would mean that you have addressed *me*… not other commenters… prior to this moment. You have not. Obviously what I have provided in my two posts (neither of which you have responded prior to in substance other the above terse comment) seems to be beyond your ability to dissuade.

So let’s recap your “previous posts regarding the the curriculum” that you rely on for your insulting defense, shall we?

Aaron #25: Please tell me the specifics of what you disagree with in the curriculum supplied by the Obama administration to coincide with the speech.

Saying that there is a curriculum, or that there are assignments along with the speech does not mean that anything in the speech or curriculum will be politically biased. If there is nothing in the speech or curriculum that you object to, then why do you object to it?

I, speaking for myself personally, have already pointed out EXACTLY what the “specifics” are (via a linked thread comment) in the “curriculum supplied by the Obama administration to coincide with the speech”. Obviously they (Obama’s Dept of Education appointee and handlers) agreed with my assessment of their poor choice of curriculum since they are furiously backpeddling in the days prior to the speech release.

Aaron #34: PLEASE STATE WHAT IN THE CONTENT OF THE CURRICULUM FOR OBAMA’S ADDRESS YOU DISAGREE WITH, OR WHAT COULD BE CONSIDERED LIBERAL INDOCTRINATION.

I see it takes a while for reality to settle in for you. See above…

BTW, your comments inbetween added no substantial or cogent debate other than taunting Mike’s A on a typo. Oh yes, add your equally nebulous AGW arguments out of the blue.

Aaron again #34: Yes, the material talks a lot about what Obama said and even if it “inspires” you. But the point remains that if Obama is speaking on a completely neutral subject then the bias in the materials is neutral.

Discussing a child’s perception of their future… of which would be difficult to determine let alone hold “accountable” at that age… is hardly “neutral”. No child should be pressured into making career, political and community future decisions and being held accountable for the fruition of their futures at that age. Most especially under the guise/threat of “helping” your President.

Aaron… again #36 : You cannot say that it’s okay for the government to create an Air Force, but not a national health plan, if the 10th amendment is your test.

You really are Constitution challenged. Military and defense of the nation is a Contitutional mandate for the feds. Even with your argument (of which I agree that much of which has been done is *not* Constitutional… *if* anyone would actually advance that challenge thru the court system). However State’s rights have nothing to do with military, nor a CIC’s ability to dispatch those troops without a Congressional mandate of war. *Some*… and very few… powers are inarguable. And the existance of a US military and the powers of a CIC are unquestionably federal and Constitutional powers. And troop movement doesn’t require an act of Congress…. or the formal declaration of war.

Not so with a national health plan. And perhaps you miss how a federal health plan infringes on State’s rights to mandate their own state’s coverage specifics (as they do, which makes portability the Constitutional problem).

In short, your attempt to make that State’s rights template fit – most especially using the military as an example – falls considerably short of even the most basic Constitutional reality. The majority of your arguments actually fall into the Congressional seizure of wide abilities to tax under a very vague (and disputed) “general welfare” argument. And frankly, I’d like to see many of those issues get challenged and advance thru our court system.

Since the entire original topic of debate, you have forayed into every tangent possible to elude and dilute your original misconceptions. Yet you accuse me of a lack of “intelligence”? May I say, Aaron, that it takes somewhat a pyschophrenic mind to even attempt following your train of logic. And in the final, you sum up your entire acceptance of all nefarious deeds that go on as this…

To sum up, everybody knows that the government is bigger than it was 200 years ago, but the world and America is a very different place. The constitution provides a framework for how to decide and puts limits on what you can decide, but in order to be consistent in your thinking, ask yourself how much of what you approve that government does is really an enumerated power.

Well gee… why not just start out with that. We’d know the loon we have right off the bat. You have forever labeled your ill-train of thought as a child of the “living constitution” public education system. Two centuries ago to now, the Constitutional powers delegated to the feds and states remains constant. The only thing that has changed is lily livered citizens like yourself who “accept” abuses as part of the times, instead of demanding the abusers are held accountable.

Instead of fighting those that seize power, you fight your fellow citizens who aren’t as lazy as you are. Imagine what could happen if you turned your energies on who was the real enemy of your liberty instead.

Or would that forever mess up your battle for what entitlements you think the government owes you?

hmmm… exit at 8:45pm. My response at 8:36pm. Thanks for that link to the Big Zero’s speech, Aaron. Conclusive proof you did not read my own comment linked in my first of three posts on this thread, or you would see that I already not only linked the speech text, but the docTOC to the DOE curriculum in full as well. Mr. Curious you are not, I guess.

Either Mr. Aaron is sexist in with whom he will engage, lacking strength in his fingers to continue a cyber debate due to other activities, or unable to defend his “living Constitution” education. LOL

Yes… I have better things to do as well. As I said to Gaffa.. “lost causes are not my bag”.

MataHarley –

As far as the constitutional issue, I have addressed it. Where does it say in the constitution that there will be anything other than a militia, i.e. not a standing force, an army and a navy. As for “providing for the defense of the nation.” Look at article 1, section 8, clause 1.

“The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts, and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.”

How can you say that this allows for the federal government to provide for our defense and not our welfare through a national health plan? Defense and Welfare are two loaded words and cover a LOT of different things. I am not saying that I don’t think we should have an air force, or that its illegal to use troops without a declaration of war. I am saying, though, if you accept these things, then you cannot turn around and say that national healthcare or social security is somehow unconstitutional. As for defending against invasion, what kind of an invasion does that apply to? Does it mean solely a military one, if we expand it to things like biological warfare, can the government allow everybody to get medical attention.

So…would you say that Federal government has no right to enforce de-segregation in schools, and that should be left up to the states? And, yes, I do subscribe to the “living constitution” train of thought. AND SO DO YOU! You cannot pick and choose one issue to say be a strict constructionist and another to be liberal. Do you really want to dismantle everything that the government does that is not in the constitution?

Also, your point about states rights – I am only mentioning that because of the previous post about amendment #10. Obviously the states rights part applies to whether the power to create a universal health plan lies with the federal or state government.

As for the enemy of our personal liberty – What about someone who is in a terrible accident? Their life is forever changed, AND they have to loose everything because their insurance won’t cover them? The majority of bankruptcies caused by medical bills are from people that had insurance. You have to consider the OUTCOMES of a certain policy. If you want to object to a national health plan in principle, fine. I object in principle to people dying because they don’t go to the doctor because they know they can’t afford it. You can say that Medicare is unconstitutional, but would you force an 80 year old with a heart condition to go shop for his own policy? What is more important to you? We have different principles. You want to hold the government to the letter of the law, no matter what the outcome. My principle is this: “How can we best protect, defend, and help to ensure a better life for our citizens.” If you would rather deny people the ability to see the doctor and let people live on the street because they loose everything to medical bills in the richest nation on earth, fine. Al least you have your principles, right?

As far as being a “lost cause,” if you mean trying to get me to stop caring about people’s well being and just worry about the letter of the law, then yes, I am. If it makes me a socialist to care about the poor and disenfranchised, then yes, I am. And don’t kid yourself into believing that you actually care. Look at the HDI of other more socialist countries. Their people are healthier, their babies have a better survival rate, and they have a higher overall standard of living. As I said before, my principle is just different than yours. Mine is based on people, yours on laws.

Aaron, you are johnny come lately to the “general welfare” clause in Art 1, Sec 8. Instead of any of us having to repeat ourselves for yet another one who isn’t familiar with the founders/framers intent, and the ensuing legal battles, please read up our conversations with the Canuck, weeweemary who suffered from the same misunderstanding. It will save us all a lot of typing, and re-typing.

Yes, I know you are a “living constitution” type. Already said I recognize that. But do not assume I am of your ilk. Far from it. Do not miscontrue my financial inability to challenge all legislative decisions that I disagree with thru appellate courts to SCOTUS as tacit acceptance.

Gotta love all the emotional BS you end that response with. Indeed, all the hormonal/testosterone posts from top to bottom. Definitely not an analyst, but one guided by where ever your emotions take you for the moment.

You apparently show up here for the first times, have not have the interest nor wherewithall to explore with whom you cyber speak with reading a bit of the forums before leaping in to insert both cyber feet in your mouth. Do you do this when you first meet people as well? Just jump in ? Or do you try to get to know them by listening (reading) first? All is easily done by delving back into our archives… easily found via category in the “Categories and Archives” link across the top.

If you had, you’d find my numerous posts most especially on health care and Medicare. None of which I particularly wish to reiterate for you here. But I’ll give you a clue as to some of their content… and especially as one who is but years away from Medicare myself.

First of all, the 65+ haven’t much choice. We’ve been robbed of Medicare/SS taxes from our earnings since at least 1965. We’ve already paid for our Medicare long before we were allowed to tap into it. And as a matter of fact, you’re currently being robbed for your Medicare… it’s paying for the 12-15% on Medicare now, shafting providers in payments, and STILL in the hole. Now why do you think that making a “new age” Medicare for 65 and under is going to work when every working American contributes to Medicare now and it’s bankrupt by 2017?

Second of all… the 65+ haven’t much choice… again. Hall vs Sebelius. Another post. Read up on it, and get back to us. You’re too far behind the curve on this subject to waste much more time.

You’re little emotional heartbreaking stories and touchy feely rhetoric in no way relates to the legislation proposed… which isn’t “reform” and cutting costs, but “remaking” health care into a fiscal loser and quality killer. (again, check the dang archives….) You cite the “I care, but you’re heartless” mantra, and yet can’t effectively analyze what these bills actually mean over time. You simply believe rhetoric and emotion.

I believe facts, figures and history. What I believe we should do actually takes care of we ol’ folk and those in dire straights. What you believe we should do makes you feel good… until care and the economy go down the tubes. Unfortunately, by the time you wake up to the fact you’ve been duped… despite the warnings of the CBO, various economists and simple history, it’s too late. And you’ll truly have damaged those that you believe you wish to aid…. and even more.

So yes.. .you’re a lost cause because you reject facts and figures, and prefer to believe your emotions that you’re taking the moral high ground. When reality is presented that you cannot argue, you only cast silly notions about how those who disagree with you are cruel and uncaring. That’s not debate. That’s retreat by the uninformed.

Aaron #61:

I truly wish that I had the opportunity to reply to your overnight responses. They are full of curious, and completely refutable, points.

As Mata noted, virtually all of the issues you have raised have been raised and refuted in prior discussions here at FA.

The only thing I have time to address at the moment is this:

their babies have a better survival rate

What’s the old saying about lies, damned lies, and statistics?

This is a perfect example of that.

Here is some reference material for you to bring you up to speed.

And here.

And here.

And here.

And here.

For now that’s all I have time for at the moment.

With that, I am off to work on the ongoing front porch restoration and then, this afternoon, a fishing trip with all three of the children and our dog.

Such is the frustration and simultaneous joy of owning an old house.

Looks like you’re trying to be noticed. I guess it worked.

‘Indoctrinate’ kids? Really. You believe that? Do you live under a rock?

When you have a celebrity rock star messiah for a president, then yes, I have concerns about the cult-like worship:

That said, I thought the speech was presidential, with a great message for school kids.

It’s all political with the Obamatons. They can’t see it because to them it’s natural.

Do we need to remind them what a stink Dems raised when the first President Bush made a speech without the instructions to obey?

P.S. Word, good vid… It’s all about Obama and the cult of personality. I bet YOUCANTBESERIOUS was the first in line to chant praise for the dear leader.

QUESTION
(Allow 1 hour 45 minutes)

Compare & contrast the following three speeches made by three Presidents to schoolchildren. Which of these, if any, goes further in promoting their political beliefs and attempt to ‘indoctrinate’ the audience?

SPEECH A

Thank you all, and welcome to the White House, and thank you for coming. I want to congratulate all of you from John A. Holmes High School in Edenton, North Carolina, on your great achievements this year and on your upcoming graduation. And a special greeting to Rob Boyce, the principal of this fine school.

As you know, my remarks are being broadcast live over radio and television to high school students throughout the country. While I was in Tokyo at the economic summit, I found myself thinking about all of you, and I decided that when I got back it’d be good to report to you — share some thoughts that I’ve been having about the future.

In general, conditions in our country are about as bright as this very bright afternoon. I was worrying when I put that line in there that it might start to rain, and I’d have to say something else. We’ve been working to take an economy that was in bad shape and get it moving and growing again; take our national defense and make it first-rate again after a long period of decline; and to restore reason, respect, and reality to our foreign policy. And I think it’s fair to say that we’ve made a good deal of progress.

Only 5 years ago our economy suffered from high inflation, high interest rates, mushrooming government spending, and steadily increasing unemployment. A lot of people couldn’t find jobs, and people on fixed incomes were finding it harder to buy the basics, such as food and shelter. Well, we got inflation down, interest rates down, and our economy created over 1\1/2\ million new jobs just last year alone. The poor are now increasingly able to dig themselves out of poverty, and that’s been good economic news.

The good news in defense is that our Armed Forces, which were suffering from neglect and low funding, have now made a comeback. Morale is up in the services, and the quality of our men and women in uniform has never been better — and I mean never. As a matter of fact, we have the highest percentage of high school graduates in uniform today than we’ve ever had in the history of our nation, even back when we had the compulsory draft. In addition, our nation has encouraged a more realistic sense of defense needs.

In foreign affairs we’ve kept our friends close and the lines of communication with our adversaries open. We’ve tried to give the world the sense that the United States has a coherent and logical foreign policy that reflects our respect for freedom and our opposition to tyranny.
The point is that all we’ve done has had, and will continue to have, a direct impact on your lives. And the fact is, it’s your future, not ours. And all that we’ve done, we’ve done with an eye toward how it would impact you. We want to make your future better, because tomorrow belongs to you. And since you’re the leaders of tomorrow, I wanted to talk to all of you as a friend about the things you’ll have to do to ensure a prosperous nation and a peaceful world. And I’m sure that peace and prosperity must be at the top of your agenda for the future.

You have some special responsibilities ahead of you — very important responsibilities. America is back, yes, but we still face major challenges in the world. And it’s your generation that will have to accept the primary responsibility for tackling these challenges. It’s important that you’re fit for the future and that you be all that you can be. So, go for it! In the area of education you have a responsibility to try to learn and care about scientific and intellectual inquiry. The world is an increasingly competitive place. And if we’re to compete, we’ll have to do it with brainpower — your brainpower. So, keep learning and hit those books.

We have to remain economically competitive, and that means being aware of two things: first, what makes economies tick, and second, what works in other societies. We’ve been trying very hard in Washington to make America even more economically fit by really overhauling our entire tax structure. When we came into office, the top personal tax rate that the Federal Government could put on your income was 70 percent. Now, you can understand, I think, that if you were getting up in those brackets — there were 14 different tax brackets, depending on the amount of money in each bracket you earned. And when you could look and say, “If I earn another dollar, I only get to keep 30 cents out of it,” you can imagine the lack of incentive there. Well, we lowered it to 50 percent, and the economy really took off. Now we’re trying to lower it yet again so that families can keep more of their money and so the national economy will be lean and trim and fit for the future.

And it’s your generation that will defend freedom from its adversaries. The biggest contribution you can make to that quest is to become a good citizen. Good citizenship is vitally important if democracies are to continue. Good citizenship means trying to understand the issues and great questions of your day. It also means voting. To vote is to take part in this grand experiment called democracy in America. It’s your right and your responsibility to take part. Good citizenship also might mean considering going into teaching as a profession. There’s a teacher shortage, as you may know. You could help ease the situation and give to others the advantages you’ve been given if you become a teacher yourself. And it’s also important that you stay in school. That diploma counts. And I just want to personally congratulate those who have overcome some disadvantage and who stuck it out and will graduate this year.

And part of being a good citizen, part of being fit for the future so that you can meet America’s agenda for the future, is seeing to it that you live your life with a clear mind and a steady intellect. And that means saying no to drugs. Nancy has traveled across the country talking to young people like you. And many of them have talked to her about the allure of drugs, about the drug culture, and the kind of peer pressure that you come under to experiment and try out drugs. But when you come right down to it, drugs are just a dead-end street. They have nothing to offer you. I think you also ought to remember we only get one set of machinery. If you wear this set out, you can’t take it and trade it in someplace for a used one or a new one. So, what you do now and early in your life decides how able you’re going to be to enjoy yourself when you get to be my age.

And I want to tell you, I’m enjoying myself. I’ve talked to young people from China to Europe to the islands in the Caribbean. And let me tell you, they’re incredibly bright and talented, and they’re going to create quite a future for themselves. And you can’t keep up or catch up if you allow your mind to be clouded by drugs.

Well, that’s more or less what I wanted to say to you today. I’ll be talking to many young people over the next few months, and I’ll be expanding on certain points and amplifying certain themes. But for today, before your questions, I just want to let you know that I have been thinking about you very much. You are a special generation, and you’re facing special challenges. And the biggest is to be ready for a future that will prove to be demanding and exciting. Soon, we’ll enter the 21st century, a time that’ll have more than its share of great wonders. The next 10 or 15 years may well be the most exciting and challenging in the history of man. There’s the continuing revolution in technology, the possibility of curing diseases that have stalked us from the caveman era. There’s the marvelous conquest of space, a rich frontier whose riches we’ve barely glimpsed. And there’s the struggle between the democracies and those countries which are not democratic.

All of these possibilities bring with them questions. And it’s your generation that will have to answer them. That makes you all very important, indeed. You have much before you. And all I can say is that you’ve begun brilliantly. Continue to pursue excellence. Be proud of your country and its heritage, and be proud of yourselves, as we are proud of all of you.

SPEECH B

Thank you, Ms. Mostoller, and thanks for allowing me to visit your classroom to talk to you and all these students, and millions more in classrooms all across the country.

You know, long before I became President I was a parent. I remember the times that my kids came up with a really tough question or a difficult decision. I tried my best never to shut them down with a quick “no.” I would simply say those three magic words that made that problem disappear: “Ask your Mother.”

Let me tell you why I’ve made the trip up from the White House to Alice Deal Junior High. I’m not here to teach a lesson. You already have a very good teacher. I’m not here to tell you what to do or what to think. Maybe you’re accustomed to adults talking about you and at you; well, today, I’m here to talk to you and challenge you. Education matters, and what you do today, and what you don’t do can change your future.

Every day, we hear more bad news about our schools. Maybe you saw today’s headline, I don’t know if you had a chance to look at it, about the release of the new National Goals Report. Get the camera to come in and take a look at this for a moment. In math, for instance, this national report card shows that, nationwide, five of six eighth graders don’t know the math they need to move up to the ninth grade.

In spite of troubling statistics like this one, I don’t see this report, however, as just bad news, and I’ll tell you why. This report tells us a lot about what you know and what you don’t know. It gives us something to build on. It shows us our strengths and the weaknesses that we’ve go to correct. It sets forth a challenge to all of us: Work harder, learn more, revolutionize American education.

I know you’ve heard about stanines and percentiles, surveys and statistics, but here’s what all that fancy talk really means: Education means the difference between a good future and a lousy one. Reports don’t give us the right to make excuses. Our scores will tell us where we are and where we need to go.

I mentioned earlier the bad news we hear about schools today. But what we don’t hear enough about are the success stories. You know, all over America, thousands of schools do succeed, even against tough odds, even against all odds. Kids from all over the District of Columbia petition to get into Alice Deal School here because parents know this school works. It works because of teachers like the one standing over here, Ms. Mostoller, who decided at the age of 25 — maybe you all know this, but a lot of people around the country don’t — she decided at the age of 25 that she wanted to teach. She was standing in a supermarket checkout line when she saw a magazine ad about college. She went back to school, worked her way through in 7 years, waiting tables to pay tuition. She made it, and so can you.

This school here works because of students like the ones with me today, students like Rachel Rusch — where’s Rachel? Right there, okay — a member of Alice Deal’s award-winning “Math Counts” team. Rachel, you tell me if I’m wrong, but you and six other students in this class alone have taken part in the Johns Hopkins Talent Search. They took the college entrance exams on an experimental basis last year as seventh graders. Even in junior high, some of them scored well enough to get into college right now. So, let’s just put it on the line. You’ve got the brains. Now, put them to work — certainly, not for me, but for you.

Progress starts when we ask more of ourselves, our schools and, yes, you, our students. We made a start nationally now by setting six National Education Goals to meet the challenges of the 21st century. By the year 2000, at least 9 in every 10 students should graduate from high school. We should be first in the world in math and science. We need to regularly test student’s abilities. Every American child should start school ready to learn; every American adult should be literate; and every American school should be safe and drug-free. Reaching those goals is the aim of a strategy that we call America 2000, a crusade for excellence in American education, school by school, community by community.

But what does all this mean, you might say, what is he doing, what does this all mean for the students right here in this room? Fast-forward — 5 years from now. Unless things change, between now and 1996 as many as one in four of today’s eighth graders will not graduate with their class. In some cities, the dropout rate is twice that high or higher. Imagine: Out of a total of nearly 3 million of your fellow classmates nationwide, an army of more than half a million dropouts.

I ask every student watching today: Look around you. Count four students. Start with yourself. No one dreams of becoming a dropout, but far too many do. Which one of you won’t make it through school?

The fact is, every one of you can. Let’s make a pact then right here. Let’s work to see that 5 years from now, you and your friends will be more than sad statistics. Give yourself a decent shot at your dreams. Stay in school. Get that diploma.

Let’s go back to the future. In the fall of 1996, 5 years from now, nearly half of today’s eighth graders who get their diplomas will enter the working world. More than half the graduates will stay in school and become the college class of the year 2000.

The question each student watching today should ask is: Where will I be, where will I be 5 years from now? Will I be holding down a good job and maybe working toward a better one, or will I be out of school and out of work? Will I be on a college campus, or out running the streets?
Think about that tonight when you’re at a kitchen table doing some homework; while your parents are meeting your teachers like so many millions do this year at back-to-school nights all across our great country.

I’m asking you to put two and two together: Make the connection between the homework you do tonight, the test you take tomorrow, and where you’ll be 5, 15, even 50 years from now. You see, the real world doesn’t begin somewhere else, some time way down there in the distant future. The real world starts right here. What you do here will have consequences for your whole lives.

Let me tell you something, many of you may find very hard to believe this. You’re in control. You’re thinking: How can the President say that about kids like us when we don’t even have our driver’s license? But think about it, and you’ll see what I mean.

Think about drugs. You see films. You hear police experts and tough speakers from the outside. You get stern lectures from everyone: movie stars, athletes, teachers, parents, friends. But you know and I know that all the drug prevention programs, all the pledges, all the preaching in the world won’t pull you through that critical moment when someone offers drugs. At that moment, everything comes down to you. Yes or no, you’ve got to choose, and the answer will change your life. Your parents won’t make the decision. Your teachers won’t make the decision. Your friends won’t make the decision. It’s up to you. It takes guts to take control.

A sound body and a sound mind, they go together, as my friend, and he is a friend, Arnold Schwarzenegger says. He’s crossing the Nation talking with students about the importance of fitness. And real fitness means no drugs.

Studies show a decline in drug use, and that’s good, that’s encouraging, I think. And every student who draws the line against drugs really deserves credit for that. But drugs and violence continue to threaten every school, every small town and suburb in America. And as students, you have a right to be physically safe at school. You should never have to worry that a quarrel in the hallway will lead to gunfire in the playground. Fear should never follow you into the classroom.

If you have to take the long way home after school so you don’t cross paths with the gang hanging on the corner, if outsiders roam the halls of your school hassling kids, hassling students, you must take control. Go to your teacher, or go to your principal, or go to your parents, as difficult as it may be, go to the school board if you have to. Demand discipline. If good people chicken out, bad people take control. Together, we can — I really believe this — we can drive the drugs and guns and senseless violence out of our schools.

When it comes to your own education, what I’m saying is take control. Don’t say school is boring and blame it on your teachers. Make your teachers work hard. Tell them you want a first-class education. Tell them that you’re here to learn.

Block out the kids who think it’s not cool to be smart. I can’t understand for the life of me what’s so great about being stupid. If someone goofs off today, are they cool? Are they still cool years from now when they’re stuck in a dead-end job? Don’t let peer pressure stand between you and your dreams.

Take control — challenge yourself. Only you know how hard you work. Maybe you can fake, maybe, just maybe you can fake your way into a job, but you won’t keep it for long if you don’t have the know-how to get the job done. Maybe you can cram the week before that marking period ends, and turn that C into a B. But you can’t con your way past the SAT and into college. If you don’t work hard, who gets hurt? If you cheat, who pays the price? If you cut corners, if you hunt for the easy A, who comes up short? Easy answer to that one: You do.

You’re in control, but you are not alone. People want you to succeed. They want to help you succeed. Here at Deal, teachers like your outstanding teacher standing here with us today, Ms. Mostoller, from your principal, Mr. Moss, to your custodian, Mr. Francis. Right now in classrooms across this country, in the communities you call home, when things get tough, when answers are hard to come by, there’s a teacher, a parent, a friend or family member ready to help you. They want to see you make it.

If you take school seriously, you won’t have to settle for a job, just any job. You’ll have a career. If you make it your business to learn, one day you’ll be a better parent. You may not think about it now, but one day your children will want to look up at you and say, “I’ve got the smartest Mom and Dad in the world.” Don’t disappoint them.

Let me leave you with a simple message: Every time you walk through that classroom door, make it your mission to get a good education. Don’t do it just because your parents, or even the President, tells you. Do it for yourselves. Do it for your future. And while you’re at it, help a little brother or sister to learn, or maybe even Mom or Dad. Let me know how you’re doing. Write me a letter — and I’m serious about this one — write me a letter about ways you can help us achieve our goals. I think you know the address.

Now we’re going to walk over to the school auditorium to say hello to the rest of the student body. To all the students across the country who watched us here in this great classroom today, may I simply say thank you and good luck to you this school year.
And now, Ms. Mostoller, if you’ll kindly lead the way. Thank you all very much. Nice to be with you.

SPEECH C

The President: Hello everyone – how’s everybody doing today? I’m here with students at Wakefield High School in Arlington, Virginia. And we’ve got students tuning in from all across America, kindergarten through twelfth grade. I’m glad you all could join us today.
I know that for many of you, today is the first day of school. And for those of you in kindergarten, or starting middle or high school, it’s your first day in a new school, so it’s understandable if you’re a little nervous. I imagine there are some seniors out there who are feeling pretty good right now, with just one more year to go. And no matter what grade you’re in, some of you are probably wishing it were still summer, and you could’ve stayed in bed just a little longer this morning.

I know that feeling. When I was young, my family lived in Indonesia for a few years, and my mother didn’t have the money to send me where all the American kids went to school. So she decided to teach me extra lessons herself, Monday through Friday – at 4:30 in the morning.
Now I wasn’t too happy about getting up that early. A lot of times, I’d fall asleep right there at the kitchen table. But whenever I’d complain, my mother would just give me one of those looks and say, “This is no picnic for me either, buster.”

So I know some of you are still adjusting to being back at school. But I’m here today because I have something important to discuss with you. I’m here because I want to talk with you about your education and what’s expected of all of you in this new school year.

Now I’ve given a lot of speeches about education. And I’ve talked a lot about responsibility.
I’ve talked about your teachers’ responsibility for inspiring you, and pushing you to learn.
I’ve talked about your parents’ responsibility for making sure you stay on track, and get your homework done, and don’t spend every waking hour in front of the TV or with that Xbox.
I’ve talked a lot about your government’s responsibility for setting high standards, supporting teachers and principals, and turning around schools that aren’t working where students aren’t getting the opportunities they deserve.

But at the end of the day, we can have the most dedicated teachers, the most supportive parents, and the best schools in the world – and none of it will matter unless all of you fulfill your responsibilities. Unless you show up to those schools; pay attention to those teachers; listen to your parents, grandparents and other adults; and put in the hard work it takes to succeed.
And that’s what I want to focus on today: the responsibility each of you has for your education. I want to start with the responsibility you have to yourself.

Every single one of you has something you’re good at. Every single one of you has something to offer. And you have a responsibility to yourself to discover what that is. That’s the opportunity an education can provide.

Maybe you could be a good writer – maybe even good enough to write a book or articles in a newspaper – but you might not know it until you write a paper for your English class. Maybe you could be an innovator or an inventor – maybe even good enough to come up with the next iPhone or a new medicine or vaccine – but you might not know it until you do a project for your science class. Maybe you could be a mayor or a Senator or a Supreme Court Justice, but you might not know that until you join student government or the debate team.

And no matter what you want to do with your life – I guarantee that you’ll need an education to do it. You want to be a doctor, or a teacher, or a police officer? You want to be a nurse or an architect, a lawyer or a member of our military? You’re going to need a good education for every single one of those careers. You can’t drop out of school and just drop into a good job. You’ve got to work for it and train for it and learn for it.

And this isn’t just important for your own life and your own future. What you make of your education will decide nothing less than the future of this country. What you’re learning in school today will determine whether we as a nation can meet our greatest challenges in the future.
You’ll need the knowledge and problem-solving skills you learn in science and math to cure diseases like cancer and AIDS, and to develop new energy technologies and protect our environment. You’ll need the insights and critical thinking skills you gain in history and social studies to fight poverty and homelessness, crime and discrimination, and make our nation more fair and more free. You’ll need the creativity and ingenuity you develop in all your classes to build new companies that will create new jobs and boost our economy.

We need every single one of you to develop your talents, skills and intellect so you can help solve our most difficult problems. If you don’t do that – if you quit on school – you’re not just quitting on yourself, you’re quitting on your country.

Now I know it’s not always easy to do well in school. I know a lot of you have challenges in your lives right now that can make it hard to focus on your schoolwork.

I get it. I know what that’s like. My father left my family when I was two years old, and I was raised by a single mother who struggled at times to pay the bills and wasn’t always able to give us things the other kids had. There were times when I missed having a father in my life. There were times when I was lonely and felt like I didn’t fit in.

So I wasn’t always as focused as I should have been. I did some things I’m not proud of, and got in more trouble than I should have. And my life could have easily taken a turn for the worse.
But I was fortunate. I got a lot of second chances and had the opportunity to go to college, and law school, and follow my dreams. My wife, our First Lady Michelle Obama, has a similar story. Neither of her parents had gone to college, and they didn’t have much. But they worked hard, and she worked hard, so that she could go to the best schools in this country.

Some of you might not have those advantages. Maybe you don’t have adults in your life who give you the support that you need. Maybe someone in your family has lost their job, and there’s not enough money to go around. Maybe you live in a neighborhood where you don’t feel safe, or have friends who are pressuring you to do things you know aren’t right.

But at the end of the day, the circumstances of your life – what you look like, where you come from, how much money you have, what you’ve got going on at home – that’s no excuse for neglecting your homework or having a bad attitude. That’s no excuse for talking back to your teacher, or cutting class, or dropping out of school. That’s no excuse for not trying.

Where you are right now doesn’t have to determine where you’ll end up. No one’s written your destiny for you. Here in America, you write your own destiny. You make your own future.
That’s what young people like you are doing every day, all across America.

Young people like Jazmin Perez, from Roma, Texas. Jazmin didn’t speak English when she first started school. Hardly anyone in her hometown went to college, and neither of her parents had gone either. But she worked hard, earned good grades, got a scholarship to Brown University, and is now in graduate school, studying public health, on her way to being Dr. Jazmin Perez.
I’m thinking about Andoni Schultz, from Los Altos, California, who’s fought brain cancer since he was three. He’s endured all sorts of treatments and surgeries, one of which affected his memory, so it took him much longer – hundreds of extra hours – to do his schoolwork. But he never fell behind, and he’s headed to college this fall.

And then there’s Shantell Steve, from my hometown of Chicago, Illinois. Even when bouncing from foster home to foster home in the toughest neighborhoods, she managed to get a job at a local health center; start a program to keep young people out of gangs; and she’s on track to graduate high school with honors and go on to college.

Jazmin, Andoni and Shantell aren’t any different from any of you. They faced challenges in their lives just like you do. But they refused to give up. They chose to take responsibility for their education and set goals for themselves. And I expect all of you to do the same.

That’s why today, I’m calling on each of you to set your own goals for your education – and to do everything you can to meet them. Your goal can be something as simple as doing all your homework, paying attention in class, or spending time each day reading a book. Maybe you’ll decide to get involved in an extracurricular activity, or volunteer in your community. Maybe you’ll decide to stand up for kids who are being teased or bullied because of who they are or how they look, because you believe, like I do, that all kids deserve a safe environment to study and learn. Maybe you’ll decide to take better care of yourself so you can be more ready to learn. And along those lines, I hope you’ll all wash your hands a lot, and stay home from school when you don’t feel well, so we can keep people from getting the flu this fall and winter.

Whatever you resolve to do, I want you to commit to it. I want you to really work at it.
I know that sometimes, you get the sense from TV that you can be rich and successful without any hard work — that your ticket to success is through rapping or basketball or being a reality TV star, when chances are, you’re not going to be any of those things.

But the truth is, being successful is hard. You won’t love every subject you study. You won’t click with every teacher. Not every homework assignment will seem completely relevant to your life right this minute. And you won’t necessarily succeed at everything the first time you try.
That’s OK. Some of the most successful people in the world are the ones who’ve had the most failures. JK Rowling’s first Harry Potter book was rejected twelve times before it was finally published. Michael Jordan was cut from his high school basketball team, and he lost hundreds of games and missed thousands of shots during his career. But he once said, “I have failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed.”

These people succeeded because they understand that you can’t let your failures define you – you have to let them teach you. You have to let them show you what to do differently next time. If you get in trouble, that doesn’t mean you’re a troublemaker, it means you need to try harder to behave. If you get a bad grade, that doesn’t mean you’re stupid, it just means you need to spend more time studying.

No one’s born being good at things, you become good at things through hard work. You’re not a varsity athlete the first time you play a new sport. You don’t hit every note the first time you sing a song. You’ve got to practice. It’s the same with your schoolwork. You might have to do a math problem a few times before you get it right, or read something a few times before you understand it, or do a few drafts of a paper before it’s good enough to hand in.

Don’t be afraid to ask questions. Don’t be afraid to ask for help when you need it. I do that every day. Asking for help isn’t a sign of weakness, it’s a sign of strength. It shows you have the courage to admit when you don’t know something, and to learn something new. So find an adult you trust – a parent, grandparent or teacher; a coach or counselor – and ask them to help you stay on track to meet your goals.

And even when you’re struggling, even when you’re discouraged, and you feel like other people have given up on you – don’t ever give up on yourself. Because when you give up on yourself, you give up on your country.

The story of America isn’t about people who quit when things got tough. It’s about people who kept going, who tried harder, who loved their country too much to do anything less than their best.

It’s the story of students who sat where you sit 250 years ago, and went on to wage a revolution and found this nation. Students who sat where you sit 75 years ago who overcame a Depression and won a world war; who fought for civil rights and put a man on the moon. Students who sat where you sit 20 years ago who founded Google, Twitter and Facebook and changed the way we communicate with each other.

So today, I want to ask you, what’s your contribution going to be? What problems are you going to solve? What discoveries will you make? What will a president who comes here in twenty or fifty or one hundred years say about what all of you did for this country?

Your families, your teachers, and I are doing everything we can to make sure you have the education you need to answer these questions. I’m working hard to fix up your classrooms and get you the books, equipment and computers you need to learn. But you’ve got to do your part too. So I expect you to get serious this year. I expect you to put your best effort into everything you do. I expect great things from each of you. So don’t let us down – don’t let your family or your country or yourself down. Make us all proud. I know you can do it.

Thank you, God bless you, and God bless America.

After reading the speeches in their entirety, I think that it’s obvious which one is the most politically motivated.

I am not surprised that Bush’s speech was so good. For all the criticism that he got for his speaking skills and all credit that Reagan got for being a great communicator, I can’t even stomach listening to Reagan, but Bush I like to listen too. Bush’s speech is more “inspiring” while I think Obama’s speech is meant more to focus on the specifics of what you need to do to succeed in school.

After Bush 41 spoke, Congresswoman Pat Schroeder D-Colorado, called for Congressional investigations…didn’t hear any calls for investigations on Obama’s “schoochildren address.” So who is more over-reactionary?

Aaron: I guess the questions that I’m not hearing an answer to are:

How is the curriculum “liberal indoctrination” if the speech does not carry bias of any kind?

If students are asked to write letters to Obama or write quotes from the speech on the wall how is that liberal indoctrination if the subjects they are writing about do not have bias?

You can even base our answers on the original transcript of the curriculum.

So far – you have not shown HOW the curriculum is “liberal indoctrination.” All of the examples that you state in the original post only apply if the Speech carries some kind of bias.

Perhaps you aren’t hearing because you aren’t comprehending the definition of “curriculum”, Aaron. You mistakenly force link “the speech” to “the curriculum” as provided by the Dept of Ed in order to give it your stamp of approval. Let’s see if we can get you to wrap your mind around a different train of thought.

Curriculum is the course or exercises, or set of courses/exercises as presented by an educational institution. i.e. Dickens “Great Expectations” is not “curriculum. It is a novel by a great writer that (used to be) part of a list of required reading in many a HS. The curriculum would be what the teachers decided as student exercises to analyze that required reading.

Could teachers turn Dickens into indoctrination by their choice of exercises? Absolutely. Does this mean Dickens, himself, was engaging in indoctrination post-mortem? Nope… Dickens didn’t include lesson plans with his published novel.

Now I hesitate to compare Obama’s lackluster speech to Dickens… but as an base analogy, his speech is the “novel” or source to be analyzed in the student exercises. The DOE’s suggested *curriculum* was the offensive part (other than Obama’s persistent “I” and “me” as a mainstay of most his oratories).

But wait… Obama doesn’t come out with clean hands simply because his speech wasn’t indoctrination. His guilt in an obvious agenda (with their first attempt) is because the “curriculum” accompanying his speech comes from his own appointed Dept of Ed. (or, in the Dickens analogy, his novel published were it published with suggested curriculum/exercises)

He must take responsibility for their chosen “indoctrination” – not because of his speech content – but because the curriculum provided came from *his* selection of education officials.

Sorry, Post #78 should be addressed to Mata, not Mike

But.. Mike, did you do your reading?

Aaron – post #74 “As I have stated before, I think the Democrats were wrong to criticize Bush – he gave a great address and I only wish that we had worked harder to make the things that he talked about come true.”

Mike – post #76 “Perhaps Aaron would like to suggest that Dems hold hearings on Obama’s speech?”

Aaron: Weren’t you the one who accused some of us of just flinging insults instead of facts?

So, how do you justify saying: “Mike, you prove yourself to be a moron again….You just can’t keep yourself from looking like the joke that you are “ in a comment that you later edited?

Thanks for relieving me of ANY burden I might have to maintain a civil discussion with you.

Clearly, any attempt at that would be a waste of time.

You have FLOODED this thread and others with THOUSANDS OF WORDS and dare to demand we read and recall every single one?

What kind of pompous, self-important ass are you?

You are a big waste of time all the way around.

Frankly, I don’t take you seriously at all. You’re the joke here.

If you don’t discover some manners real quick you will find your comments are deleted.

This isn’t the first time Aaron. It better be the last.

BTW, a’hole… INRE this:

Aaron: I already know what you are going to say…its just a bunch of Liberal sob stories and emotional rhetoric. Tell that to the ones that are going through it. Of course, maybe you slough these kind of situations off because you just don’t give a damn.

Considering my age, you whippersnapper, most people I know.. including my 85 yr old mother and 94 yr old father, are on Medicare. And quite frankly, Obama’care would have killed them both years ago by denial of coverage.. .which is bout to happen with his upcoming cuts. What you know about Medicare coverage would maybe cover a pin head.

In keeping with the civility idea, Is it Okay to call people “a’holes” now?

Mata – I understand that you have offered solutions to cutting costs. I am not necessarily opposed to them.

What about offering a catastrophic policy to everyone, like Singapore?

I am under the impression that you feel that Medicare or government run insurance is not constitutional, is this not the case?

What about the fact that the majority of medical bankruptcies are for people with insurance? How can we realistically keep the insurance companies honest without a competitive government plan.

As to your comment about medicare knowledge – As I have mentioned before, My wife is a quadriplegic. The thing that you realize when you are dealing with an uncommon condition is that most people don’t know jack about your needs and how the system handles them. Unless you are in that kind of a situation, you do not have the kind of first had knowledge I have, nor I you. We have been constantly dealing with paperwork and fighting to get coverage for the past 4 years because medicare deals all the time with the elderly so they are used to it, but not so with the severely disabled.

Sorry Aaron. You’ve wasted enough of my time.

When you accuse me of not “caring” about most of my friends and family, you’re an a’hole. It fits. No apologies from me. Perhaps you should rethink your own rhetoric if you don’t like the response.

Again, if you READ thru the damn archives, you’d also know that suggesting offering insurance in separate tiers has also come up… ala a tax incentive medical savings account for everyone so they pay normal doctor visits and misc out of pocket (keeping costs down), a second tier for less catastrophic events (broken legs, minor surgeries, etc) and a third tier for the catastrophic.

No, I don’t think Medicare, Social Security or other welfare programs are Constitutional. However unless these are challenged via our court system by the very wealthy who can take it thru the appellate courts to SCOTUS, we’re stuck with it. Plus that, I’ve already been had/robbed for cash out of my paychecks for over 40 years. Give me my money back, and I’ll be happy to buy private insurance. Other than that, I want my cash back from social security and medicare because that’s the only way I’ll ever see it… if at all.

Buying into the “evil insurance providers” talking point again, I see. Did you know that your insurer has to pay 35-41% OVER costs of any procedures and services because government underpays for Medicare? Boy… making a killing buying products and services for almost one and a half times costs… duh

So I take it you and your wife are not thrilled with your government services…. this makes your previous arguments even more absurd, Aaron. You think it’s going to get better? Or have you considered that what you pine for is going to cut down on your coverage and reimbursements because the government will not view your wife via productive years and deny coverage for lack of cash. ala dealing with five patients having a heart attack, and only one defibrillator on hand. That results in eenie, meenie, minie moe decisions…

BTW, Aaron.. your battle about “moron” is with Mike’sA. We are all different people, and you may want to get rid of your “group think” and natural instincts to lump everyone in the class warfare in which your party regularly engages.

I’m not reprimanding you for your choice of words. You can say what you want, and I will respond in kind.

aaron: Obviously there is a difference between the curriculum and the speech – but to deny that the two are linked is just plain ignorant.

Read again… s-l-o-w-l-y… Aaron. I’ll make it easy for you and repeat it…

MataHarley: But wait… Obama doesn’t come out with clean hands simply because his speech wasn’t indoctrination. His guilt in an obvious agenda (with their first attempt) is because the “curriculum” accompanying his speech comes from his own appointed Dept of Ed. (or, in the Dickens analogy, his novel published were it published with suggested curriculum/exercises)

He must take responsibility for their chosen “indoctrination” – not because of his speech content – but because the curriculum provided came from *his* selection of education officials.

They are linked not by his speech content, but by the fact it was his appointees providing that political agenda as curriculum… his appointees, his responsibility. The common element for indoctrination is not the speech and curriculum, but Obama himself.

Mike, I’m not sure how many teachers embarked on that original study plan after the media kerfuffle. Would be interesting to know in the aftermath.

Were my granddaughter in my charge, I would have allowed her to view the speech, and denied the teacher any ability to collect anything from her as an ensuing exercise. And when she got home, I’d make sure I “undid” anything that teacher did. I personally think that hearing both perspectives would have been more valuable than simply isolating her from the offensive to begin with.

However it’s moot to me because the public spoke, the media passed on their voices… followed by Obama’s DOE retreat. I consider that success.

Wordsmith: That last paragraph is less amusing than it is illuminating. Obviously, we are dealing with one of those adovcates of social justice who’s sipped too much of the Kool Aid.

But as for Aaron’s statement that “It is important to mention the first Woman or African-American to do something because many times they faced a greater uphill battle to do those things.”

Sorry I missed that earlier in Aaron’s blizzard of bloviation.

I wonder if he had the same appreciation for Sarah Palin’s run for V.P. on the GOP ticket. That was a first for our side. Or did he only think it important when it was Geraldine Ferraro?

One question that I overlooked earlier: I wonder how old Aaron is?